Our failed presidential system

BACKBENCHER

Rod. P. Kapunan

03/31/2009

Had it not been for the overstaying President who bears the mark of a questionable mandate, there is no valid reason for us to advocate a parliamentary system of government. I say this because if our presidential system is perfect, then the one who is sitting on top would not have succeeded in rigging the results of the 2004 presidential elections; would not require billions of pesos for those power-hungry politicians to throw away just to make sure they win in an election; and we would not be having a rambunctious democracy that has made this country incomparably corrupt and notoriously violent. It would be like joining Mrs. Arroyo in that caravan to perpetually keep her in power.

To start with, the government of Mrs. Arroyo stands as the best illustration of a malfunctioning presidential system. Many of those opposed to a parliamentary system are, however, objecting. Not that they are against it, but because it is this government that will stand to benefit, which means an extended stay of the President many doubt was ever elected by the people.

Yet, for its failings, many blame those in charge for the political chaos we now suffer, forgetting it is the form of government and its mechanism that failed. Corrupt people can be found anywhere, and if they managed to penetrate, it is because that system has failed. So today, in every branch of government, practically one would have no difficulty in detecting a crook, a criminal, a clown, a demagogue, a self-righteous, and all variety of borderline characters. The truth is the present form of government is now perceived as a haven for people acting as though they have a covenant with the devil.

If we refuse to play the role of a political sycophant it is because we happen to identify ourselves with the opposition. But this is not without limitations — that we can never go along in keeping a system that made us miserable. We would be afflicted with bi-polarity if we pretend not to know what is going on around us. For instance, who would want to serve this country when it would require him to spend between P2 to P6 billion just to make sure he gets the position for which he aspires. Even if that winning candidate would stay 20 years in office he would not be able to get back the amount he spent based alone on the remuneration, including the adjustments, for the office he sought to be elected.

At one time Sen. Manny Villar was quoted as saying that it would require a presidential candidate to have a war-chest of more than P1 billion to aspire, and said he has it. When Villar said that, he just stated the truth that if reduced to statistics, only one percent of the one percent of one percent of our people would qualify to run for President. Stated differently, our presidential election has become an election among the plutocrats, and many of the voters only go for candidates willing to offer them the highest bid. Unfortunately, for the price, many of our voters are willing to sell their votes. They do not see from among the candidates one who is exceptionally brilliant to justify his domineering impulse to lead us.

More than that, the image being presented to the public by their PR and media handlers reflect the huge amount that flows out the campaign funds of these aspirants. As early as today people shy away from candidates they see as encountering financial difficulties. In other words, these plutocrat candidates or candidates brokered by plutocrats are able to project their artificial good image because of money.

Nobody will disagree that only a person can commit shenanigans in government. But that could be avoided if we opted for a better system. In a parliamentary system, the people need not wait for the Prime Minister or his Cabinet to commit graft to be removed. A slight mistrust would suffice to withhold from his government that crucial vote of confidence.

In our case, what makes us pathetic is that the presidential system is being defended by the very purveyor of morality — the Church. Such is ironic for while it sees corruption in government it tags as evil, it wants to keep that system which has been serving as our Petri-dish for corruption. More than that, it helped install the leader who has ruthlessly taken advantage of the system to stay beyond the term provided for in the Constitution the clerics themselves designed to maintain their influence on people they could better command obedience if they remain poor and ignorant.

Indeed, the acuteness of our political schizophrenia has become pervasive and malignant. Surely, we cannot say that these scalawags in government are the residual by-products of a different system. But if we have a parliamentary system, demagoguery is less likely to proliferate. The choice of the voters is narrowed down to candidates in their district. In which case, candidates are likely to be known, including their mental capacity to comprehend on what they are supposed to do once elected. Paradoxically, to aspire for a higher position would require another process of voting by their peers. While are not saying there would be no corruption in selecting a new Prime Minister, the amount, if any, will be much less than it would take for an ambitious candidate to become president in this country that has a dysfunctional democracy.

(E-mail at rodkap@yahoo.com.ph).

Back to top

For comments about this website:Webmaster@tribune.net.ph
The Daily Tribune © 2006