wo decades after the People Power movement toppled the Marcos dictatorship, the Philippines finds itself in a de-mocratic recession. Widespread corruption, marred elec-

tions, extrajudicial killings, and low public support for political in-stitutions all threaten one of Southeast Asia’s few democracies. What accounts for this democratic deficit? While structural, institu-tional, and societal forces are all to blame, equally significant has been a misguided focus on “good governance” over democracy, re-sulting in the public’s alienation from the political process. To pre-vent the current democratic downturn from becoming a descent into

authoritarianism, the Philippines must enact a se-ries of wide-ranging reforms. At a minimum, it must ensure credible elections, find peaceful means to resolve its violent conflicts, and expand political participation to all sectors of society.

—Jose Luis Gascon, July 17, 2007

“T

”

Democratic Recession in the Philippines: What Went Wrong?

By Chito GasconReagan-Fascell Democracy Fellow

17 July 2007National Endowment for Democracy

Please note that the views expressed in this presentation represent the opinions and analysis of the speaker and do not necessarily reflect

those of the National Endowment for Democracy

Presentation OutlineBasic Facts and Context of the Situation

Consideration of Some Key Flashpoints

Assessment and Analysis

Prospects and Recommendations

The objective of the presentation is to describe current democratic recession in the Philippines— from the standpoint of a democracy

activist — in order to explain some possible reasons for this occurrence, and to encourage constructive dialogue that can lead to the articulation

of some workable solutions..

“When you have complex problems in a complex country, you are going to have complex answers to them; you are going to have complex points of view”

- Brian Joseph* Director for South & Southeast Asia

National Endowment for Democracy

*remarks made on 28 June 2007 on the occasion of his first trip to the Philippines on a NED Assessment Visit

First, a Quick History Lesson: ‘There are certain great principles of government which have been made the basis of our governmental system, which we deem essential to the rule of law and the maintenance of individual freedom . . . and that these principles and these rules of government must be established and maintained in their islands for the sake of their liberty and happiness, however much they may conflict with the customs or laws of procedure with which they are familiar’ -President William McKinley to the Philippine Commission headed by William Howard Taft on 7 April 1900

‘to fit the people themselves to maintain a stable and well-ordered government affording equality of right and opportunity to all citizens’-William Howard Taft defining the US avowed policy during his address on the occasion of the 1907 inauguration of the Philippine Assembly

“…our very first exercise in nation building.”

- Observation made by writer, editor, and historical researcher Kevin Baker in an essay appearing in American Heritage Magazine 54 #4

‘Prior to American colonial rule, it is important to note, the Philippines had no significant experience with national-level democratic institutions or national-level political parties… Although it is indeed true that the Philippines is the Asian country with the most enduring experience with democratic institutions, one must also conclude that its democracy got off to a decidedly inauspicious start’

- Conclusions made jointly by Joel Rocamora, PhD and Paul Hutchcroft, PhD in an academic article

Basic Political Facts (pre-1996)85M+ people in 7,100 islands in Southeast Asia 350 years of Spanish ruleAmerican rule during the 1st half of the 20th centuryPrior to & immediately after WWII a political system was adopted essentially patterned after the USWidespread poverty, inequality, and injusticeInternal armed conflicts (ideological/ethnic/religious)Authoritarian rule (1972-1986)1986: democratic breakthrough, bumpy transition1986-1996: political reforms under Aquino; economic reforms under Ramos

Complex in its ContrastsThe good news is the Economy, YET it also highlights some

of the interesting dynamics of the situation:

Economic Stability-Political Instability, Some Growth-Little Equity, Capital In-Flow -Human Resource Out-FlowGeneral Observations by Habito:

The ‘half full – half empty’ Philippine economy• Tapering inflation / improved fiscal position of the government

/ surging overseas remittances / political conflict continues• Over 5% growth, BUT still slower than the region• Per capita income now over $1400; self-rated poverty is high• 2 out of 3 not bad: prices & income versus jobs

‘Economic Tango’• A case of good economics taking a back seat to other

considerations, in matters that profoundly affect the public welfare

• ‘One senses here a disturbing return to Marcos-era economics’

The Democratic Project A harbinger of democratic change on the crest of theThird Wave

PEOPLEPOWER as a modality for effecting transition from dictatorships

‘Turning Tables in the World’ – democracies vs non-democracies

The challenge of consolidation; the problem of backsliding, recession, or backlash

A more sobering reality in Southeast Asia –Is this trend spreading to the few ‘hold-out’ democracies in the region?

INDONESIA -----

INDONESIA -----

INDONESIA -----

The Downturn: The Last 10 YearsAsian financial crisis in 1997Attempts at changing the rules (CHACHA)

Ostensibly to guarantee continuity of reform effortsPerceived as an effort to perpetuate those in power

Emergence of populist politics & candidates1998 Presidential Elections – ERAP phenomenonBad governance, scandals, corruption

Counter-reaction by the entrenched elitesEDSA 2 (promised reforms/urban-based/middle class)Manipulation of electoral & legal processes (2004+)

Erosion of trust in key institutions (elections /courts)Breakdown of consensual politics /public alienation Resort by some to extra-constitutional efforts (Oakwood)

Context of the Chronic Crisis:A Political Stalemate (déjà vu?)

Crisis of LegitimacyBreach in the constitutional frameworkUnresolved Questions about 2004 Elections

Politics of SurvivalTransactional politics‘Scorched earth’ tactics / authoritarian streakStrong executive - weakening checks & balances

PolarizationPublic demonstrations / calls for resignationResurgence of rebel activity

Politicization of the Security ForcesInvolvement in partisan activityDiscontent within the ranks / reality of mutinyTotal war policy

Why Democracy is in Danger+ Weak rule of law (abuse of power, corruption,

impunity, violence, etc)+ Poor economic performance (poverty,

inequality, injustice) + Ethnic & religious divisions+ Weak & ineffective political institutions (parties,

parliaments, systems of horizontal accountability)

+ Weak constraints on authoritarian leaders (civil society, international actors)

BAD GOVERNANCE

(Diamond)

Some Flashpoints for ConsiderationThe Processes of Political Participation

Credibility and integrity of electionsDominance of dynasties (‘bossism’)Weakening of intermediary institutions

Rule of LawSustaining leadership within the court systemFighting the hydra: combating systemic corruptionCulture of violence & defense of human rights

Armed Conflict & Security ForcesRebel activity & peace effortsCivilian control vs militarization of civilian authority

The Institutional FrameworkEnsuring mechanisms of accountabilityThe reform agenda (what, when, why, & how?)

• Charter change / procedural & substantive aspects• Possibility of hijack

Catholic Bishops’ Statement (CBCP)January 2007

“ These coming elections in May 2007 are especially important. Many of our current political problems, which have hindered fuller economic development and social justice, especially for the poor, can be traced to unresolved questions concerning the conduct of past elections. As a nation, we cannot afford yet another controversial exercise that further aggravates social distrust and hopelessness.”

1. Some Considerations on Political Institutions

The Results of the Mid-term ElectionsNo substantial improvement in administration of the election BUT a marked improvement in public vigilance

Election-related fraud (a legacy of cheating)

Election-related violence

Politicization of security forces

Paradox: virtual hegemony of the ruling coalition at the local level YET failure to deliver votes in the Senate

The Senate vote as a more accurate barometer of public sentiment (unequivocal victory for the opposition) Final tally: [7-2]-380% win for the ruling parties in the House (at least 70 seats; approximately 1/3 were uncontested by the opposition)Some cracks in the façade of unity (LAKAS vs KAMPI) / Opposition Too

Emergence of a new generation of national leaders

As the dust settles…The Integrity of the Electoral Process

Electoral process continues to remain vulnerable to manipulation. Unacceptable levels of election-related violence; security forces either unable or unwilling to control itThe COMELEC as an institution must be reformed top-to-bottom!

The Dominance of Political Dynasties (Bossism)Political clans entrenched in the political system since 1986Strengthened ties between national leadership & local clansIn the House, despite 49% first-term, 75% will be from dynastiesOver 80% of provinces controlled by dynasties

The Weakening of Intermediary InstitutionsCSOs: divided & under-funded; advocacy NGOs are particularly weakPolitical parties: underdeveloped & weak; new constraints in the PLVery little aggregation, mediation, and synergy between these actors

2.Rule of Law

Independence of the Judiciary• The Supreme Court is perceived as a critical last bastion for

defense of democracy and has thus far (on the whole) resisted pressure

• The last 3 Chief Justices (including the incumbent) have exercised leadership of the Court to safeguard Civil Liberties

• Question remains for how long given the appointment process• Judicial independence less of a reality below the SC level

Fighting the Hydra: Combating Systemic Corruption• Institutionalized corruption has entrenched the power structure

and stymied reform efforts • Gains in one area are lost in another• Anti-corruption agencies exhibit similar weaknesses as the

COMELEC

Culture of Violence & Defense of Human Rights• Different forms of violence is unabated & law enforcement is weak• Marked increase in human rights violations (EJK & ED in particular)

The Political Context of Extra-Judicial Killings and other Human Rights Violations in the Philippines

No senior civilian or military official has ever been held accountable for serious human rights violationsThere exists an aggravated culture of impunity amidst a prevailing culture of violenceThe continuing political crisis is a backdrop for understanding the current spate of outrages against international standards

Politics of polarizationPolitics of fear

3. The Armed Conflict & Security Forces

Some Concerns Regarding the Security ForcesRenewed politicization (out of barracks)Militarization of civilian authorityA historical anti-left biasCurrently being exploited by ideological forcesUndeclared policy of ‘looking away’Some cleavages but as yet not seriousWeak mechanisms for civilian oversight

Some Concerns Regarding the Armed LeftA long history of armed conflict (disciplined/well organized)An ethic of struggling against the system rather than working within the system (politics of exclusion)Existing social, economic, and political conditions are conducive to hard left-oriented politicsA ‘peace process’ without an end (tactical rather than strategic commitment by the contending parties)

Some Concerns On the Mindanao ConflictA long standing, multi-faceted conflict that requires intervention at the national & community levelsA communal dialogue process involving all stakeholders is essential to resolving it

Need for Workable Solutions to Different Conflicts

Without jeopardizing operational concerns at guaranteeing human security in affected areas, peace processes have to be pursuedUltimately, some key questions are justice, inclusion, empowerment and participation

Security Sector Reform cannot be postponed

4. The Institutional Framework

Amidst the crisis of institutions, reforms are being actively pursued across the political spectrum to the point that it will not be a matter of if but when for Cha Cha. Challenge is to proceed while guaranteeing accountabilityCha Cha as the Panacea?

Real danger of hijacking for selfish ends (with precedent!)

Cha Cha in order to be viable:At the right time, for the right reasons, thru the right process, & championed by right advocates (broad buy-in)Should address the institutional weaknesses of the current political system (electoral systems, allocation of power, accountability mechanisms, central & local competencies)

Charter Change (Cha Cha) & the Crisis in Democratic Institutions?

Possible Explanations for the Current Democratic RecessionConjunctural

Crisis of legitimation & the search for equilibriumAbsence of a consensus for democracy

StructuralPolitical economy of neo-patrimonialism

Behavioral (Socio-Psychological)Attitudes about democracy, particularly of a key driving force: the ‘Middle’

A Reassertion of the Developmentalist Model

Criteria for LegitimacyForms of Non-

legitimate Power

i. conformity to rules (legal validity)

illegitimacy (breach of rules)

ii. justifiability of rules in terms of shared belief

legitimacy deficit (discrepancy between rules and supporting beliefs, absence of shared beliefs)

iii. legitimation through expressed consent

delegitimation (withdrawal of support)

The Crisis of Legitimation3 periods of similar crises in modern Philippine political history:+1969-1973 – resulted in authoritarian consolidation+1983-1986 – resulted in democratic restoration +2001-present – currently being contested (search for / manufacturing of)(Teehankee)

How People View DemocracyDeclines in the Philippines (2001 to 2005)

Democracy is always preferable - 64% to 51%

Democracy is suitable for our country - 80% to 57%

Satisfaction with way Democracy works - 54% to 39%

Reject authoritarian “strong leader” - 70% to 59%

(Diamond, 2007)

“Few Filipinos believe that there is democratic governance in the Philippines; the big majority nationwide (82%) is comprised by Filipinos who either acknowledge oligarchic politics or say they are uncertain about the character of the country’s political regime.” - PULSE ASIA 2006 Survey Report

‘StateCapture’

ByVested Interests

Political Finance

High-Risk / Low-Investment Economic & Political Environment

Concentration of Wealth

inEconomic

Elites

Concentration of Power

in Political Elites

Self-aggrandizement Accumulation of Resources

Control of Electoral & Political Processes

Rent-Seeking Behavior &

Transactional Politics

Marginalization of the

Poor & Powerless

The Grand Alliance of Certain Economic & Political Elites

The Vicious Double Cycle of ‘State Capture’(Speaker’s Model of the Philippine Political Economy described in Hutchcroft’s ‘Booty Capitalism’ )

The Middle Force Dilemma: Democratic Revolution versus Good Governance

Middle forces: socially coherent, culturally & intellectually dominant, politically ascendant segment of the population.Democracy was restored in the Philippines through ‘democratic revolutions’ with prominent roles by middle forces‘Middle forces’ often small (about 15% of the population) BUT concentrated in the urban areas and the capital (up to 40%)Those democratic rules were ‘broken’ in EDSA 2 when procedural democracy was sacrificed in the name of good governanceIronically, the same discourse was earlier used to combat authoritarianism (Cause-Oriented / Moral Force)What makes these powerful social movements threaten the democratic order they help create?

(Thompson’s Assessment of Recent Philippine and Thailand Experience )

The Middle Force Trajectory

Failed reformism after restoration of democracy leads to disenchantment & demobilizationFear that democracy will threaten good governance leads to return to insurrectionism Elections dominated by either traditional politicians or populists seen as threats to good governance

Neo-patrimonialism, economic & moral crisis can cause the middle force to turn against the democratic project

Capable of toppling dictators but not of winning elections (‘People Power’ as a viable modality to fight bad governance BUT less so to guarantee good governance)

Democratic revolution failure of reform populist challenge renewed mobilization/insurrectionary reaction

Lessons & Non-LessonsOther democratic developing countries that have

NOT exhibited middle force insurrectionism (e.g. India & Costa Rica) have showed:

1. Integrity of electoral process (Parliamentarianism not necessarily superior to presidentialism)

2. Depoliticization of, not flirtation with, military,3. Stable political parties (often highly dynastic)4. Integration of poor through symbolism & social

programs5. Toleration of ‘legal left’, and decentralization and

autonomy for minorities (armed groups confronted, but legal radical groups accepted in democratic process)

Conclusion: Central Question

In the Philippine context, how can democratic politics further good governance and both mobilize society at the local level and attain development outcomes at a national level?Where governance is effective, innovations are

possible; but the spread of innovation is slow and uneven (pockets!)Underdevelopment creates conditions that entrench bad governance, particularly as a result of the double phenomenon of middle class out-migration and patronage politics in the poorest areas / periphery (re: Hutchcroft, et al)

Political Will: The Essential Condition

Is the commitment of a country’s rulers to democratic and good governance reforms, and their readiness to incur the costs necessary to adopt and implement these reforms? In badly governed states, the central challenge is to generate the political will to improve governance, control corruption, and generate real development.

(Diamond)

Toward Promoting Full DemocracySome principles to inform a reform strategy:

Build and strengthen inclusive, empowering and sustainable institutions in the political, economic and cultural realmsDefend the hard-won victories of earlier democratic struggles, form consensus around democratic processes, & broaden constituencies for theseDeepen democracy not just in current formal but elitist character, but to one that ensures genuine popular participationAny major change in political structures should not benefit those presently in power (arms length), & must involve national dialogue and public education

Reflection – Need for Political EngagementFor international actors, its important to consider Diamond’s 12 point Principles of ActionWithin the Philippines, domestic stakeholders need to act in order to foster trust in democratic process

Elections and election administrationDemocratic institutions (parties and parliaments)Democratic processes (oversight and rule of law)

A need to renew & reinvigorate civic engagement in politics (partisan & non-partisan)Defend, deepen, & widen the political space for effective participationSupport the emergence of democratic leaders & championsNurture and strengthen constituencies as well as energize communities for sustained advocacy of reforms

Recommendation - Search for Common GroundIn the Immediate to Medium Term:

Build Foundations for the Next GovernmentAn opportunity to step back from the brink & to prevent an escalation of hostilitiesCritical to sustain economic growth and reduce public desperationInitiate credible political, electoral, and administrative reforms to reduce imperfections in the political process and ensure credible elections in 2010 that will help return stability and achieve some equilibrium

Alternative Attitudes to the Result:Best outcome

• Administration focuses on reforms rather than survival• Administration agrees to compromise for the common good

Worst outcome • Administration views its partial win as endorsement of its policies• The rebuke of administration intensifies political hostilities

Some Initial Steps to Restore Credible Elections

Clean-up the institutions and systems for election administrationImprove the capacity of the COMELECComplete full automation of elections ahead of 2010Consider other mechanisms to further reduce opportunities for human intervention / human error in the counting & tabulation processSeparate election adjudication & election disputes resolution from elections management functionsEnforce election laws fully (particularly on campaign contribution & expenditure) coupled with a vigorous anti-corruption effortProsecute to the fullest extent all violators of election lawsSupport civic-education and voter’s education effortsInstitutionalize and sustain citizen’s oversight mechanismsInitiate law reform legislation (party law / political finance)Rationalize the mobilization of election officers to include citizensEnsure civilian control over security forces, including citizen oversight

Some Other Necessary First StepsNeed to restore a consensus for democracy in the run-up to the 2010 General Elections through among others:

Improve mechanisms for public accountability (CHR/Senate) and a sustained effort at addressing corruption (OMB/PAGC)

Political party development, strengthening, and consolidation

Allow alternative candidates to emerge with distinct platforms and visions of governance

Promote mechanisms for the political representation of the marginalized and disenfranchised sectors of society in a process that is linked to the larger political transformation agenda (political reforms towards constitutional reform)

Sustain economic growth and spread its benefits Pursue a reform agenda in social expenditure with a

sharper focus on safety nets (education, health, water, food security)

Reduce drivers of political polarization, e.g. violence & exclusion (address impunity)

“You have spent many lives and much treasure to bring freedom to many lands that were reluctant to receive it. And here you have a people who won it by themselves and need only the help to preserve it.”

- President Corazon C. Aquino

Address to the US Congress 18 September 1986

All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men (and women)

to do nothing- Edmund Burke

* In fact it is possibly the commonest political quote you will find anywhere on the World Wide Web. It is used to warn of the encroachments of government, and to warn that governments do not do enough…It is

always quoted with considerable reverence, and is made to stand as one of the unassailable truths about the need for freedom of action in

democratic societies (www.tartarus.org)

One Final Story…

Much Thanks!Marc Plattner & Sally Blair as well as the other helpful staff at the International Forum for Democratic Studies, DRC and the Journal of DemocracyRyan White, my ever so patient Research AssociateAll the wonderful people at NED & The Core InstitutesThe input from academics: Robin Broad (AU), Paul Hutchcroft (UWis-M), Larry Diamond (Stanford), Scott Mainwaring (Notre Dame), Paolo Carozza (Notre Dame), Mark Thompson(FAU-EN), Benjie Tolosa(Ateneo), Tony La Vina (Ateneo), Julio Teehankee (DLSU), Joel Rocamora (IPD) & Mario Taguiwalo (NIPS)And the many insights from the many conversations with members of the Washington DC Policy Community: at State, the Hill, DRL, USAID, Think Tanks, and NGOs