What is wrong with political dynasties?

By NICOLE CURATOOctober 1, 2012 6:02pm

Recent surveys for the 2013 senatorial elections paint a familiar picture: many top-ranked candidates are either re-
electionists or relatives of incumbent or former politicians. This, once again, prompts a discussion on political dynasties,
whether this is an issue that should concern voters in the upcoming elections or something that can be accepted as part
of our representative democracy.

In principle, there is nothing wrong with political dynasties. In practice, however, its prevalence exemplifies the
exclusionary power structure in the Philippines, where local elites continue to exert considerable influence in our country.
Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile has said in an interview that dynasties have existed since politics was invented.
Dynastic politics is not unique to the Philippines, he added, citing the example of the Kennedys and Roosevelts in
the United States. Following the footsteps of one’s parents or relatives is not in itself unacceptable so why should politics
be any different?

Part of the answer lies in the historic character of electoral politics in thePhilippines. Dante Simbulan’s pioneering study
described thePhilippines as an elite democracy where elections have been institutionalized to manage intra-elite
competition. Elections have formalized the process of political succession through a periodic democratic exercise which
can be easily manipulated for selfish ends. Elite rule is legitimized through this process by giving the illusion that the
public has the power to choose its leaders, even though the pool of electable candidates is generally limited to a set of
individuals with familiar surnames.

Based on this analysis, one can make an argument that political dynasties are mere post-colonial legacies. To this extent,
Enrile is correct – that dynasties have existed since the beginning of Philippine politics. They are social realities that can
be traced to the emergence of a cacique class from the Spanish colonial era and, in several cases, the creation of new
elites under the Marcos regime. These de facto nobilities are able to stay in power by addressing the needs of their
constituents through the strategic distribution of patronage masking as “public service” and the maintenance of compadre
ties. To put it crudely, dynastic politicians are not entirely to blame, given that they too are products of the principalía’s
evolution into the modern day elite.

To accept this as part of our contemporary reality, however, is to be oblivious of political dynasties’ abuse of our weak
democratic structures. One of the main promises of representative democracy is its commitment to future redistribution of
material wealth and political power that were accumulated through historic injustices. What’s wrong with political dynasties
is that instead of working towards the creation of equitable political structures, they have further strengthened the barriers
to political inclusion of traditionally disenfranchised citizens such as peasants, workers, indigenous and other minority
groups. In his research, Pablo Querubin has found a causal effect between winning elections and having relatives in
office. In particular, “individuals who win their first race by a small margin” are “four times more likely to have relatives in
office in the future” compared to “individuals who run but lose by a narrow margin and never serve.” These findings are
revealing in that they expose how relatives of previous incumbents exclusively benefit from the political investments of
their predecessors which, in turn, consolidates disproportionate political power in a few families.

This is particularly troubling because in the Philippines, political power is closely linked to economic power. It is unlike
other countries that have a distinct political class of civil servants and technocrats that are relatively autonomous from
oligarchic interests and, in the case of South Korea, can discipline economic elites. Instead, as John Sidel argues,
politicians in the Philippines have “monopolistic control over both coercive and economic resources within given territorial
jurisdictions or bailiwicks.” Consequently, concentration of political power among a few families benefits a narrow set of
economic interests over a period of time, institutionalizes economic inequalities and perpetuates a culture of dependency
between an economically/politically dominant patron and an otherwise disenfranchised client. It is not accidental that
provinces with established political dynasties are also among the poorest.

The trend of political dynasties has also served to limit the liberating potential of democratic politics. It undermines the
principle of political equality in its most basic form through the principle of one person, one vote. While this right is often
qualified by saying that voters usually end up choosing between tweedledum and tweedledee, virtually unopposed
political dynasties do not even make room for tweedledee. The seeming inheritability of political positions is reminiscent of
an oppressive absolutist state, where citizens are mere subjects that have no choice but to affirm the dictates of a ruling
family rather than active citizens that are able to shape their political destiny.

By making this argument, I do not mean to discredit dynastic politicians who, through their actions, have expressed
commitment to reform Philippine politics. Congressman Erin Tañada has been at the forefront of institutionalizing
transparency through the Freedom of Information Bill. Senator Pia Cayetano has strengthened the system of rights
through the Magna Carta for Women and the RH bill. Senator TG Guingona has been the champion of participatory
modes of governance in budget reform. It is indisputable that some dynastic politicians have a good track record of
advocating progressive policies but these individual achievements have done little in dismantling the structures that
perpetuate political exclusion in a representative democracy. It is only when a person who has worked up the ranks in a
political organization can stand an equal chance of being elected with a candidate with a political last name can we
consider dynasties as fair practices in a democratic process.

So where do we go from here? A viable option is to strengthen alternative political spaces for the public to organize and
secure meaningful inclusion in the political process. Electoral politics has become so crowded with dynastic politicians,
requiring mechanisms for citizen participation that are relatively independent of electoral politics. Political scientists
describe this as “democracy from below” or the practice of democracy through people’s organizations, non-government
organizations, social movements, new political parties and social networks that oppose elite politics and espouse new
politics.

Indeed, Philippine politics has been historically driven by bottom-up struggles for social justice and accountability.
Grassroots political activities have ousted presidents, raised wages, and guarded ballot boxes. Hopefully, these
democratic impulses eventually translate to systemic reform where the citizenry can effectively enforce democratic control
over its politico-economic elites. That way, to paraphrase candidate Bam Aquino’s hubristic statement, Aquinos don’t have
to become President every time there’s a political crisis. –

Political Dynasties in the Philippines: In My Opinion

Wednesday, November 21, 2012

Next year’s Philippine midterm elections are fast approaching and it paints an all too-familiar image once again:
candidates that are either re-electionists or relatives of political families running for available seats.

For decades, talk regarding political offshoots has been going on for decades. And after decades and decades of botched
attempt on clearly defining what a ‘political dynasty’ is, this predicament led me to ask: Is this something permissible,
alarming, or should it be accepted as part of the Filipino political culture?

Political dynasties usually crop up from a good forerunner who is loved by his or her constituents. After the forerunner’s
term, it is then ‘passed on’ to other members of the family reminiscent of empires where there is a succession of
hereditary rulers. While this trend is not unique to Philippine politics, this phenomenon is widely evident in this democracy
of ours. Flicking through the list of the senatoriables and other aspiring politicians would let you know what I mean.

Checking out our country’s fundamental law, the Constitution gives us light regarding this matter. Article II, Section 26
states that: “The state shall guarantee equal access to public service and prohibit political dynasty as may be defined by
law.” [emphasis supplied].

A much less skill in statutory construction is needed to infer the provision’s gist: The clear intent of the framers of the
Constitution is to prohibit political dynasties and it is the duty of our law-making bodies to define the same. The Congress
is given the discretion in defining political dynasty but not the discretion on when to enact the same. Various anti-political
dynasty bills were introduced in the Congress time and again but those were simply set aside and forgotten to be pushed
through. We still don’t have enabling laws up to this point that prohibit individuals from the same family or clan to run for
an elective position despite the explicit clamor of charter.

On the other hand, pro-political dynasties (apparently composed of people from those political families) contend that it is
not about the number of politicians from the same clan but their integrity and track record in public service. “It would be
better to have a family of politicians in the government with clean track record than a single government official who is so
corrupt”, says Senator Alan Peter Cayetano, in an AksyonTV interview. “It would be wrong or unfair for them to say that
they are against all dynasties”, he adds. The son of the former statesman Renator Cayetano has a point. His sister,
Senator Pia Cayetano would also concede, I suppose.

Name recall is the name of the game for the political pedigrees. People vote those people who they ‘already know’ and
backed by the resources of an outgoing family member, chances of losing in the political race are slim. Dynasties do not
level the political playing field and concentrate political power among few political heads. Political dynasty drags our
country down because politicians will protect and prioritize their own family interests. The public interest becomes a
distant next.

In order to win, a lot of means are employed to secure the elective posts. The use of violence and overspending are just
two of the strategies most political empires utilize. This legal loophole allowed most of these powerful families to abuse
their authority and waylay a locality’s resources.

Well, you may ask how the party-list system is faring. Party-lists, that system of proportional representation in which
voters choose among parties representating marginalized sectors, should help offset the dynasty-dominated Congress but
they don’t. Instead of counter-acting with the evils of the political dynasties, the party-lists became another avenue for
those former politicians to “serve for life”. We rarely see people from the farming sector, the fisheries sector, the laborers,
or from the teachers; we instead see leaders from same political families.

A careful scrutiny of the political parties would help us understand that democracy is absent in these political parties. The
center of our parties are ‘leaders’ coming from political families themselves. Clearly, electoral and political party reforms
are needed. We need a wiser electorate that would revolutionize the landscape of Philippine politics coupled with the
guidance of our statutes.

But at the end of the day, it is ultimately the Filipino people who will decide if they will deem certain families as simply
“political dynasties” or “families with a legacy of public service”. Still, the coming elections are reflections of the cultural
value of close family ties… as evidenced by their political ‘family reunions’.

Prohibition of Political Dynasties

Posted 436 days ago

Our Political Platform No. 45

Apply to everyone the Constitutional ban against relatives of incumbent government officials up to the third degree from
seeking public office simultaneously or succeeding the former, and to make it unlawful for any member of the Senate or
the House of Representatives to run for another office without first resigning from his/her current position six months
before the elections.

1987 Constitution

“The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service and prohibit political dynasties as may be
defined by law” (Art. II, Sec. 26).

“The Congress shall give highest priority to the enactment of measures that protect and enhance the right of all the people
to human dignity, reduce social, economic, and political inequalities, and remove cultural inequities by equitably diffusing
wealth and political power for the common good” (Art. XIII, Sec. 1).

Kapatiran sets stage for first-ever initiative on anti-dynasty law

On 26 April 2012, Kapatiran set the stage for the long-overdue fruition of a Constitutional provision and mandate on the
State to prohibit political dynasties when it formally wrote the Commission on Elections seeking the latter’s approval on
the form of a Petition for the enactment of a national legislation, the Anti-Dynasty Act (subsequently renamed Prohibition
of Political Dynasty Act), through a people’s initiative.

Seven months later, Comelec’s promulgation of the prescribed form, contained in En Banc Minute Resolution No. 12-1059
dated 27 November 2012, opened the door to the first-ever, concrete expression of a people’s sovereign will through an
initiative to directly enact a law, as so embodied under Article VI, Section 32 of the Constitution and made operative by RA
6735 or the Initiative and Referendum Act of 1989.

Republic Act No. 6735 affirms and guarantees in part the power of the people under a system of initiative to directly
propose and enact a national law.

Upon the registration of a petition signed by at least 10% of the total number of registered voters, of which every
legislative district must be represented by at least 3% of the registered voters therein, an election or plebiscite for the
purpose shall be called not earlier than 45 days but not later than 90 days from the date of Comelec’s certification of
sufficiency on the petition.

To ensure compliance on the prescribed form, which R.A. 6735 mandates Comelec to determine, Kapatiran sought the
necessary promulgation of the form of the petition before it embarked on and enjoined all Filipinos and organizations of
good will to participate in what could well be a nationwide signature gathering process.

In 1997, the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP), in itsPastoral Exhortation on Philippine Politics,
wrote: ”Our Constitution describes public office as a public trust meant for the good of civil society at large. Yet many a
politician looks at it as a means of enrichment and a source of influence and power for self- and family-enlargement. It
hence easily becomes considered and actually treated as some sort of private property to be passed on from one
generation to another in the manner of a feudal title–the perpetuation of power that is at the base of so-called “family
dynasties.” In this manner no distinction is made between public funds and private money.”

Section 26, Article II of the 1987 Constitution states, ”The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public
service, and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law.”

Section 1, Article XIII thereof also mandates Congress to give highest priority to the enactment of measures that protect
and enhance the right of all the people to reduce political inequalities, and remove cultural inequities by equitably diffusing
political power for the common good.

Despite these provisions, political dynasties have been a present staple in Philippine political arena.

Many have pointed that such oligarchy is the root problem of all the corruption in government.

Many have called for the Congress to pass the Anti-Dynasty Law, but the needed bill has been passed over by each
Congress since 1987.
On 28 January 2013, the CBCP, in a pastoral letter entitled ‘PROCLAIM THE MESSAGE, IN SEASON AND OUT OF
SEASON (cf. 2 Tim 4:2): A Pastoral Letter of the CBCP on Certain Issues of Today,’ declared: “We support initiatives by
the lay faithful to pass an enabling law against political dynasties through the people’s initiative which the Constitution
provides.”

Norman Cabrera, secretary-general of Kapatiran, stressed: “This is a first in the history of R.A. 6735, which affirms the
principle that sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them. The first may be
difficult to organize and undertake but, if we as a people shall succeed, the next ones should be easy. What Filipinos
need to do is to exercise this right, to make this law work for them, and to take affirmative action where Congress has
failed, then, now and in the future.”

Let’shavean‘Anti-PoliticalDynastyMovement’
By Neal H. Cruz
Philippine Daily Inquirer
9:33 pm | Sunday, November 4th, 2012

“The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service and prohibit political dynasties as may be
defined by law.”—1986 Constitution

The Constitution is very clear. Only a little common sense is needed to understand it. The State shall prohibit political
dynasties to allow others (those who do not belong to political dynasties) to become public servants. The trouble is the
framers added the phrase “as may be defined by law.”
The constitutional provision needs an implementing law. The other trouble is, laws are written and passed by members of
Congress many of whom are themselves members of political dynasties. Decades after the passage of the Constitution,
we still have no defining law banning political dynasties.
The Senate committee on electoral reforms, chaired by Sen. Koko Pimentel, a member of the Pimentel political clan of
Mindanao, is pussyfooting around the definition of “political dynasty” even if the ordinary Filipino already knows what it is.
We have many, too many, political dynasties around us at present. And like a locust plague, they are multiplying rapidly.
In almost all provinces, cities and municipalities, as well as in the national arena, political dynasties are fielding family
members as candidates in next year’s elections. It is as if the political families are in a hurry to put relatives in political
positions before a law is passed banning them.
Even boxer and neophyte congressman Manny Pacquiao is already starting his own political dynasty. He is fielding his
wife, Jinkee, as candidate for vice governor of his adopted province of Sarangani. Very soon, we may have Mommy D as
nominee of a party-list group of senior citizens or of ballroom dancers.
People thought that Pacquiao, not being a traditional politician, would bring reforms to the House of Representatives, or at
least be different from most of the congressmen(women) there who think only of themselves. Alas, they were mistaken.
Pacquiao learned very quickly all the bad habits of his peers. He is absent from Congress for long periods most of the
time while training for his upcoming boxing bouts from which he earns millions of US dollars. Yet he continues to collect
his salaries and allowances, including his pork barrel, although he is not working for them. Lowly government employees,
who live a hand-to-mouth existence, are subjected to the “no work, no pay” policy, but highly paid members of Congress
like Pacquiao, although multimillionaires (but who pay very little income taxes unlike Pacquiao), collect their salaries and
allowances although they are absent.
Pacquiao has not passed a single legislation; neither has he participated in congressional debates, but he already is
building his own political dynasty. Manny (rhymes with “money”) probably thinks that, by virtue of being a multi-millionaire,
he has the right to start his own political dynasty although he has not yet proven that he bears the seeds of good public
servants.
With many members of Congress—both senators and congressmen(women)—belonging to political dynasties, it is not
likely that Congress will pass an enabling law to the constitutional provision. Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago—happily
one of the few who don’t belong to political dynasties—has filed an anti-dynasty bill in the Senate but, as stated earlier,
the committee on electoral reforms is nitpicking on it. And even if such a bill manages to squeak through, most likely it
would be watered down by amendments and become toothless and worthless.
So what do we, the citizens, the “bosses” of our public servants, do to give meaning to the Constitution and to free
ourselves from the clutches of long-entrenched political families? The Commission on Elections is cowardly shirking its
duty. It claims it cannot implement the constitutional provision because there is no enabling law.
Yet the Comelec, as argued by businessman Luis Biraogo in a petition filed before the Supreme Court, “is vested with
implied powers to make a definition of political dynasties and the ministerial duty to prohibit them.” A more courageous
Comelec can do the above and let the politicians run to the Supreme Court, and leave the latter to settle the issue.
Biraogo argued that political dynasties are prohibited by the Constitution “because they are inherently bad.” Biraogo also
asked the high tribunal to enforce the constitutional ban on political dynasties.
A more courageous Supreme Court can issue a decision banning political dynasties and let the politicians argue against
it. But, alas, we have a Supreme Court and a Comelec that would rather run away and cover their balls than perform their
duties.
So it is left to us ordinary citizens to enforce our Constitution. After all, we are the “bosses” of all the high and mighty in
government. We should not vote for any member of political dynasties in next year’s polls and thereafter. Only when the
political dynasties are wiped out will we achieve true freedom from the clutches of politicians.
For if we do not do anything to save ourselves, the Philippines will descend into the situation similar to the one that befell
Medieval Europe when it was divided into fiefdoms ruled by royal families that enslaved their people and warred against
one another, using the lives and blood of their people.
We already have the beginnings of it. Philippine provinces, cities and municipalities are now ruled by warlords and political
dynasties and will likely remain so if we do not do something about it.
Like the Anti-Epal Movement, groups should form an Anti-Political Dynasty Movement around the country to educate the
voters and persuade them to kick out members of political dynasties for the good of the nation.