PHILIPPINE POLITICS AND

GOVERNANCE

 CONTENT STANDARD

In this lesson, the students will be able to demonstrate an

understanding of the historical background of Philippine
democratic politics, the executive, the legislative, the
judiciary, and decentralization and local governance.

 PERFORMANCE STANDARD

The students will be able to explain the roles of different

political institutions.

 MOST ESSENTIAL LEARNING COMPETENCIES

At the end of the lesson, the students will be able to:

1. Analyze the evolution of Philippine politics and
governance;
2. Analyze the roles and powers of the executive
branch of the government;
3. Differentiate the roles and responsibilities of the
Philippine Senate and the House of Representatives;
and
4. Analyze the roles and responsibilities of the Philippine
Judiciary.
 HISTORY OF DEMOCRATIC POLITICS IN
THE PHILIPPINES AND INSTITUTIONS
AND PROCESSES OF GOVERNMENT
INTRODUCTION

The Philippines is among the first Asian countries to challenge colonial control and to
attempt and successfully established republican democratic order on January 23, 1899.
However, its efforts toward democratization were thwarted by external influences. The US
and Japan from 1899 to 1946, for instance, prevented Filipinos from any sustained
experimentation with democratic politics (Miranda 1997, ix-x).

To date, the Philippines is not just the most democratic country among democracies in
Asia but has also the longest experience with democratic institutions. As Paul Hutchcroft
and Joel Rocamora (2003, 259) put it:

No country in Asia has more experience with democratic institutions than the Philippines.
Over more than a century-from the representational structures of the Malolos Republic
of 1898 to the political tutelage of American colonial rule, from the cacique democracy
of the post-war republic to the restoration of democracy in the People Power uprising of
1986—Filipinos know both the promise of democracy and the problems of making
democratic structures work for the benefit of all.

Philippine democracy has developed and, in certain ways, decayed over a span of a
century, covering six constitutions and three organic acts. These are:

1. The 1899 Malolos Constitution of the first Philippine Republic which was the first Asian
democracy to be established, during the Philippine. Revolution that culminated in
Asia-ending the more than 300 years of Spanish colonial rule in the Islands;

2. President McKinley's Instructions to the Second Philippine Commission on organizing

and establishing civil government, including local governments, and the civil liberties
of the Filipinos:

3. The US Philippine Bill of 1902 that served as the organic act of the Philippine
Government until August 1916, and which authorized the establishment of the
Philippine Assembly that came into being in 1907;

4. The US Philippine Autonomy Act of 1916 or Jones Law that enlarged Filipino self-rule
by the establishment of the all-Filipino Philippine Legislature, among other ways, and
promised independence following the establishment of a stable government by the
Filipinos;
5. The Tydings McDuffie law that led for the promulgation of the 1935 Philippine
Constitution for the Commonwealth (1935-1946) and the Republic of the Philippines
(1946-1972), that was drafted by Filipinos approved by the American President, and
finally ratified by the Filipino electorate, as authorized by the US Congress;

6. The 1943 Constitution of the Philippine Republic" under the Japanese occupation
(during which many officials collaborated with the Japanese while other officials of
the Philippine Commonwealth went underground and its President and Vice-
President were in self-exile in the US);

7. The 1973 Marcos Constitution that was adopted under President Ferdinand Marcos's
authoritarian rule which lasted from September 21, 1972 to February 25, 1986, a
period over 13 years;

8. The 1986 Aquino Freedom Constitution under which President Corazon Aquino ruled
in the year following the EDSA revolution while a new constitution was being drafted
and ratified; and

9. The 1987 Constitution that goes much further than any constitution in defining the
institutions, functions, and purposes of Filipino democracy, and under which President
Corazon Aquino led the government and the nation in reestablishing Filipino
democracy (Abueva 1997, 4).

Describing the development of democracy in the country as "a history of political

discontinuity and instability" (Abueva 1997, 6). Jose Abueva identified three
important junctures in the country's history that brought about these discontinuity and
instability

First, by American colonialism that aborted the fledgling Filipino democracy under
the Malolos Constitution and instituted a "colonial democracy" largely ran by Filipinos
under US sovereignty;

Second, by Japanese colonialism and the Japanese-sponsored Philippine Republic

in World War II and Japan's Greater East Asia Co Prosperity Sphere; and

Last, by the imposition of authoritarian rule by President Marcos in 1972, thus ending
Filipino democracy under the Republic of the Philippines that began on July 4, 1946
when the Filipinos regained their independence from the United States (Abueva
1997, 6).

These three important junctures are used as the organizing framework for discussing
the development of democratic politics in the Philippines. The following discussion,
therefore, highlights both the effects of colonial rule on the country's democratic
project (first and second junctures) as well as the dynamics of regime change from
democratic to authoritarian rule (third juncture).

However, the discussion of the Philippine democratic politics will not be complete if
the transition from authoritarian rule under Marcos back to democracy after his
ouster from the presidency in 1986 is not included. Hence, the discussion in this
chapter is divided into three parts.

The first part discusses the American colonial rule and Japanese occupation and
their effects on the country's democracy project. The second part examines the
presidency of Ferdinand Marcos and authoritarian rule in the Philippines. The third
part focuses on the transition back to democracy beginning in 1986.

It is important to note that what actually took place in the Philippines in the wake of
the EDSA People Power revolution in 1986 was the beginning of a re-democratization
and not democratization given that democratic structures and processes were
already in place in the Philippines prior to the imposition of authoritarian rule by
Marcos. The use of democratization and not re-democratization would not capture
the salience of the more than a century-old political project of the Philippines toward
democracy.

Activity 1: Can You Spot the Difference?

Instruction: The table contains some provisions of the Constitution of the United States
of America and the 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines relating to the
three branches of government namely, the legislative, executive, and judicial.
Compare and contrast these provisions and identify the similarities and differences
between the Philippines and the United States.

Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Powers

in the Philippines and the United States
The Constitution of the The 1987 Philippine
United States Constitution
Legislative Branch Article 1 Section 1. All Article VI Section 1. The
legislative powers herein legislative power shall be
granted shall be vested in vested in the Congress of
a Congress of the United the Philippines which shall
States, which shall consist consist of a Senate and a
of a Senate and House of House of Representatives,
Representatives. except to the extent
reserved to the people by
Section 2. The House of the provision on initiative
Representatives shall be and referendum.
composed of Members
chosen every second Section 2. The Senate shall
Year by the People of the be composed of twenty-
several States, and the four Senators who shall be
Electors in each State shall elected at large by the
have the Qualifications qualified voters of the
requisite for Electors of the Philippines, as may be
most numerous Branch of provided by law.
the State Legislature.
Section 3. No person shall
No Person shall be a be a Senator unless he is a
Representative who shall natural-born citizen of the
not have attained to the Philippines, and, on the
Age of twenty five Years, day of the election, is at
and been seven Years a least thirty-five years of
Citizen of the United age, able to read and
States, and who shall not, write, a registered voter,
when elected, be an and a resident of the
Inhabitant of that State in Philippines for not less
which he shall be chosen. than two years
immediately preceding
the day of the election.
Section 3. The Senate of
the United States shall be Section 4. The term of
composed of two office of the Senators shall
Senators from each State, be six years … No Senator
chosen by the Legislature shall serve for more than
thereof, for six Years; and two consecutive terms.
each Senator shall have
one Vote. Section 5. (1) The House of
Representatives shall be
No person shall be a composed of not more
Senator who shall not than two hundred and
have attained the age of fifty members, unless
thirty years, and been otherwise fixed by law,
nine years a citizen of the who shall be elected from
United States, and who legislative districts
shall not, when elected, apportioned among the
be an Inhabitant of that provinces, cities, and the
State for which he shall be Metropolitan Manila area
chosen. in accordance with the
number of their respective
inhabitants, and on the
basis of a uniform and
progressive ratio, and
those who, as provided by
law, shall be elected
through a party-list system
of registered national,
regional, and sectoral
parties or organizations.

(2) The party-list

representatives shall
constitute twenty per
centum of the total
number of
representatives including
those under the party list.
For three consecutive
terms after the ratification
of this Constitution, one-
half of the seats allocated
to party-list
representatives shall be
filled, as provided by law,
by selection or election
from the labor, peasant,
urban poor, indigenous
cultural communities,
women, youth, and such
other sectors as may be
provided by law, except
the religious sector.

Section 6. No person shall

be a Member of the
House of Representatives
unless he is a natural-born
citizen of the Philippines
and, on the day of the
election, is at least
twenty-five years of age,
able to read and write,
and, except the party-list
representatives, a
registered voter in the
district in which he shall be
elected, and a resident
thereof for a period of not
less than one year
immediately preceding
the day of the election.
 Section 7. The Members of
the House of
Representatives shall be
elected for a term of
three year… No member
of the House of
Representatives shall
serve for more than three
consecutive terms.
Executive Branch Article II Section 1. The Article VII Section 1. The
executive Power shall be executive power shall be
vested in a President of vested in the President of
the United States of the Philippines.
America.
Section 2. No person may
He shall hold his Office be elected President
during the Term of four unless he is a natural-born
Years, and, together with citizen of the Philippines, a
the Vice President, registered voter, able to
chosen for the same read and write, at least
Term… forty years of age on the
day of the election, and a
No Person except a resident of the Philippines
natural born Citizen, or a for at least ten years
Citizen of the United immediately preceding
States, at the time of the such election.
Adoption of this
Constitution, shall be Section 3. There shall be a
eligible to the Office of Vice-President who shall
President; neither shall have the same
any person be eligible to qualifications and term of
that Office who shall not office and be elected
have attained to the Age with and in the same
of thirty five Years, and manner as the President.
been fourteen Years a He may be removed from
Resident within the United office in the same manner
States. as the President.

Section 4. The President, Section 4. The President

Vice President and all civil and the Vice-President
Officers of the United shall be elected by direct
States, shall be removed vote of the people for a
from Office on term of six years… The
Impeachment for, and President shall not be
Conviction of, Treason, eligible for any reelection.
Bribery, or other high No person who has
succeeded as President
 Crimes and and has served as such for
Misdemeanors. more than four years shall
be qualified for election
to the same office at any
time.

No Vice-President shall
serve for more than two
consecutive terms.

Article XI Section 2. The

President, the Vice-
President, the Members of
the Supreme Court, the
Members of the
Constitutional
Commissions, and the
Ombudsman may be
removed from office, on
impeachment for, and
conviction of, culpable
violation of the
Constitution, treason,
bribery, graft and
corruption, other high
crimes, or betrayal of
public trust.
Judicial Branch Article III Section 1. The Article VIII Section 1. The
judicial Power of the judicial power shall be
United States, shall be vested in one Supreme
vested in one supreme Court and in such lower
Court, and in such inferior courts as may be
Courts as the Congress established by law.
may from time to time
ordain and establish. The Section 10. The salary of
Judges, both of the the Chief Justice and of
supreme and inferior the Associate Justices of
Courts, shall hold their the Supreme Court, and
Offices during good of judges of lower courts
Behaviour, and shall, at shall be fixed by law.
stated Times, receive for During their continuance
their Services, a in office, their salary shall
Compensation, which not be decreased.
shall not be diminished
during their Continuance Section 11. The Members
in Office. of the Supreme Court and
judges of lower courts
 shall hold office during
good behavior until they
reached the age of
seventy years or become
incapacitated to
discharge the duties of
their office.

In what ways are the Philippines and American government systems similar, and in what
ways are they different?

Executive Power

_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Legislative Power

_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Judicial Power

_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
 COLONIAL RULE AND THE DEMOCRACY PROJECT IN THE PHILIPPINES

MARCOS AND AUTHORITARIAN RULE IN THE PHILIPPINES

GUIDE QUESTIONS:

1. Who was Ferdinand Marcos?

2. How did he become so powerful in Philippine politics?
3. What were the effects of his declaration of martial law on the democratic
institutions and processes in the country?

Abinales (2004, 156) described Ferdinand Marcos as representing a new breed of Filipino
politicians when he became President of the Republic of the Philippines in 1965 and got
reelected in 1969. Unlike his predecessors, Marcos did not base his powers exclusively on
control of land and vital export crops. Rather, he combined control over his local
bailiwick, the llocos region, with connections established in college as a member of an
elite fraternity. His alleged war record as a leader of an anti-Japanese guerrilla group
gave a further boost to his political career and therefore, set him apart from many fellow
politicians who collaborated with the Japanese.

Whereas the old-style cacique power was based on the genealogy of mestizo
supremacy-trom private wealth to state power, from provincial bossism to national
hegemony, Marcos centralized the old decentralized power order. He formed a single
privatized National Constabulary, a personal Army, a client Supreme Court to replace
dozens of privatized "security guards," private armies, and pliable local judges,
respectively (Anderson 2004).

But what really set Marcos apart from other postwar leaders was his ability to combine
the aditional use of patronage with more modern mechanisms of winning elections and
sustaining power, for example, vote buying, electoral fraud, and a modicum of coercion.
He also used the media. Through all these, he won the presidency (Abinales 2004).

Lacking the political and economic capital of older elite families, Marcos turned to the
state and the various modes of acquiring state power, Marcos moved to take control of
what he regarded as essential agencies of the state. He exploited the state, not the
hacienda of the old oligarchy (Abinales 2004). For instance, he centralized economic
planning, with handpicked, American-educated technocrats who were amply funded
by the president's office (Abinales 2004). Marcos also courted the Armed Forces of the
Philippines (AFP) by integrating the military into his presidential national development
program, and as a result, expanded the military's operations and received special
support and patronage from Marcos (Hernandez 1979, 160-1 cited in Abinales 2004),

Marcos also undermined the Philippine Congress which he depicted as a major obstacle
to the goals of reform and development. Abinales 2004, 158) described how Marcos
undermined Congress in this way: Marcos began to develop a national network parallel
to and immune from congressional influence by opening direct links between himself and
the rural masses" (Stauffer 1975, 32). He revived old executive agencies and sent their
personnel directly to towns and municipalities over the heads of local politicians. Use of
the military in the infrastructure program was a prime example; Marcos cited an urgent
need for civic action to divert army money and personnel to road-building (Caoili 1986,
21).

In doing all this, Marcos required neither congressional approval nor allocation. To
sidestep Congress' power to impede the release of funds, Marcos created his own
financial base, obtaining funds from both internal and external sources. Monies were then
concentrated in the Presidential Arm for Community Development (PACD), which
became the symbol of Marcos's commitment to national growth (Spence 1979, 327),

Gleeck (1987, 67 cited in Abinales 2004) noted that Marcos became more
confrontational with Congress. He vetoed laws it passed for its own benefit, for example,
increasing congressional allowances, and exposed congressional members' lack of
moral rectitude, for instance, the protection of politicians' children involved in criminal
activities. Congress in turn questioned Marcos over policy, for instance, his broken
promise not to send Filipino troops to Vietnam, and exposed corruption and venality
committed by the president. The conflict between Marcos and the Congress escalated
after Marcos's reelection to the presidency through massive fraud and coercion.

Marcos declared Martial Law in 1972 using the discourse of a national crisis due to threats
coming from the communists, on the one hand, and the conservative extremists within
the traditional oligarchy, on the other hand Marcos extended such discourse to justify
martial law claiming that the traditional methods of democratic government and politics
were unable to cope with the crisis (Timberman 1991).

The declaration of Martial Law caused immediate and unprecedented curtailment of

civil liberties in the Philippines, and at the same time, the end of democracy in the
country.

Marcos closed down the Congress and most newspapers and radio and television
stations; he ordered the arrest and indefinite detention of hundreds of political leaders,
journalists, and publishers, including delegates to the Constitutional Convention who
were critical of him. With the military as his principal partner in the dictatorship, he wielded
overwhelming power for over 13 years.

By his unrestrained and intimidating use of power, he forced the judiciary, the
bureaucracy, the local governments, and the populace into submission to his one-man
rule. The Supreme Court as a whole quickly lost its customary independence and
became the visible legitimizer of his actions in the rare instances when these were
challenged. Under the Marcos "national security" or garrison state, human rights violations
were rampant, the victims were helpless, and the perpetrators were not held to account
(Abueva 1997, 7).

Martial law centralized all state powers in Marcos's hands. According to Abinales (2004),
the ultimate purpose of Marcos was to centralize state power for patrimonial reasons,
and that state centralization became his weapon to destroy his enemies, both national
and provincial oligarchs. The interlacing of patrimonial intent and state centralization
besT describes the Marcos regime.

Alfred McCoy (2010. 17) described Marcos's political rule during the martial law period in
this way:

... his regime rested upon a coalition of rent-seeking families noi unlike those that had
dominated electoral politics before martial law Backed by an expanding military and an
influx of foreign loan capital that eventually totalled USD 26 billion, Marcos effectively
centralized political power in the archipelago for the first time since the late 1930s,
making once-autonomous provincial politicians supplicants and reducing the political
process to place intrigues.

During the early years of the new regime, Marcos used his Martial Law powers to punish
enemies among the old oligarchy, stripping them of assets and denying them the
political access needed to rebuild. Simultaneously, he provided his retinue of kin and
cronies with extraordinary financial opportunities, creating unprecedented private
wealth."

Instead of using his broad Martial Law powers to promote development, Marcos
expanded the role of rents within the economy. A study of how rents operated under
Marcos by economists from the University of the Philippines revealed that Marcos resorted
to the following instruments, namely, "the issue of exclusive rights to import, export, or
exploit certain areas, the collection of large funds which are then privately controlled
and expropriated, and the preferential treatment of certain firms in an industry for
purposes of credit or credit restructuring" (De Dios 1984, 40-1 cited in McCoy 2010).

Marcos's use of violence along with his economic mismanagement which plunged the
country to economic decline and failing physical health eroded his authority after 1978.
The erosion of his authority and the worsening economic conditions of the country put his
regime in chaos, producing a crisis of legitimacy of his regime that snowballed into an
organized opposition by the elite and the mass against his authoritarian government.
McCoy examined the source of Marcos's mismanagement of the economy and how it
led to his downfall.

Marcos became increasingly reliant upon courtiers to deliver the blocs of provincial votes
that he would need for a new mandate. Since the basis of crony wealth was accidental
personal ties to the president rather than economic acumen, most, though not all of
these family-based conglomerates proved unstable.

Plagued by mismanagement and corruption, these corporations collapsed with

spectacular speed when the economy began to contract after 1981. As Marcos
provincial political machinery withered, he suffered sharp reverses in the 1984 and 1986
elections, producing a crisis of legitimacy for his regime (McCoy 2010. 18).

The Marcos regime eventually came to an end in the wake of the EDSA People Power
Revolution in February 1986. The ouster of Marcos paved the difficult way for a return to
democratic rule in the country under its new president, Corazon C. Aquino-daughter-in-
law of one of the most prominent collaborators with the Japanese during the Japanese
occupation and the mother of the President, Benigno Simeon Aquino Ill (2010-2016). Who
would have thought that twenty-nine years after, Aquino's son, would be the fifteenth
President of the Philippines.

Activity 2: Ferdinand Marcos: Up Close and Personal

Instruction: Watch the video documentary titled "Batas Militar,’ or Martial Law which can
be accessed online through YouTube link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SG2Mx7Y5vzc.

Batas Militar is an almost two-hour (1:56:26) documentary about the Martial law period in
the Philippines. It talks about former President Ferdinand Marcos, the events that led to
the declaration of Martial law in the Philippines, the changes that happened after the
declaration of Martial law, and the key issues and problems associated with Martial Law
in the Philippines.

Another video documentary that you must watch as a supplemental material to Batas
Militar is the "Life under Marcos: A Fact-Check by the ABS-CBN News. The video
documentary can be accessed online through the YouTube link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRhltGGIJCg. The documentary runs for six minutes
and twelve seconds (6:12).

After watching the two video documentaries, answer the following questions.

Questions Responses
Who was Ferdinand Marcos?

(Marcos's personal and professional

background, his abilities and skills, and his
program of government)
Why did Marcos declare Martial Law in
1972?
(The justifications/reasons given by
Marcos for the declaration of Martial Law
in 1972)
What are the impacts of Martial Law in the
country?

(The effects of Martial Law on the society

in general, and on the government in
particular.)
Was the Marcos government a
dictatorship? Why or why not?
 (The excesses and abuses of the Marcos
government)

Activity 3: Did You Know? Facts About the EDSA Revolution

Instruction: You must read and watch about the EDSA Revolution. This activity has two
parts, and both parts provide you with a bird's view of the People Power Revolution or
the EDSA Revolution that to place in 1986. The first part introduces you to 29 EDSA-related
far as compiled by Alixandra Caole Vila in her newspaper article published online in
Philippine Star at the link: http://www.philstar.com/news-feature/2015/02/25/1425819/29-
interesting-facts-about-edsa-revolution.

The second part requires you to watch a video documentary about the People Power
Revolution in 1986, titled, "The Philippines EDSA Revolution' February 22, 1986." eye

Part 1: Search and read each of the 29 EDSA-related facts and identify which strikes you
most, and explain why.

What EDSA-related fact strikes me most, and why?

_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Part 2. Watch the video documentary titled, The Philippine Edsa Revolution February 22,
1986. The video documentary is a six-minute and fifteen-second (6:15) reporting of the
chronology of events surrounding the EDSA Revolution in 1898 by Jim Laurie for ABC News
through the David McClure Brinkley’s “ABC New This Week” Program.

Jim Laurie is an American veteran journalist and broadcaster while Dvid McClure Brinkey
was an American newscaster for NBC and ABC from 1943 to 1997. The video
documentary can be accessed online from through the link http://datab.us/-
zHGBrCIID8#The%20Phiippines%20”Edsa%20Revolution”%20February%2022%201986.

After watching the video documentary, create groups of five students each, and then
discuss within the group the video documentary by focusing on the following questions:
Who were the key players involved in the EDSA Revolution or in 1986?

_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________

What has been the roles in and contributions of the various key players to the revolution
or uprising?

_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________

What are the issues surrounding the revolution or uprising?

_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Who or what were the contending forces or groups, and what were the areas of
disagreement between these contending forces?

_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________

What prevented bloodshed in the EDSA Revolution in 1996?

_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
 THE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT

GUIDE QUESTIONS:

1. Which branch of the government do you think is most effective in exercising its
powers and performing its duties and functions, and why?
2. Why do you think the other branch or branches of government is/are not as
effective as the one you chose?

No country in Asia has experienced democracy more than or in the same way as the
Philippines. For over more than a century, the Philippines has had experimented with
democratic institutions and processes from the representational structures of the Malolos
Republic of 1898 to the "colonial democracy" under US sovereignty, and from the
cacique democracy of the postwar republic to the restoration of democracy in the
People Power uprising of 1986 (Hutchcroft and Rocamora 2003; Abueva 1997).

The Philippines' experimentation with democracy was punctuated by the breakdown of

the rule of law" during the Japanese occupation interlude and the emasculation of
"Filipino democracy" under Marcos's authoritarian rule. With such a political history of
discontinuity and instability (Abueva 1997), it is no wonder why the Philippines has had
rich experience with diverse forms of government institutions and processes-under
democratic and authoritarian regimes, constitutional and revolutionary governments, as
well as presidential and parliamentary systems.

The rich political history of the country meant a rich constitutional history as well.
Beginning from the Commonwealth period when the country became self-governing in
1935, the country has had four constitutions defining and legitimating our government
institutions' roles, powers, and responsibilities. These are the 1935 Constitution, the 1973
Constitution, the 1973 Constitution (revised in 1981), and the 1987 Constitution.

Both the 1935 and 1987 Philippine Constitutions provided for a presidential system of
government. The 1987 Constitution, however, goes much further in defining democratic
institutions and processes in the country. The 1973 Constitution provided for a
parliamentary government and its revised form for a semipresidential. It is important to
note, however, that the 1973 Constitution's provisions that would have established a
parliamentary system of government in the Philippines were never implemented due to
the Martial Law regime then in place.

Activity 4: Compare and Contrast

Instruction: Compare and contrast the powers of the executive, legislative and
judicial branches of the Philippine government based on the 1987 Philippine
Constitution. Using the Venn diagram below, first, identify the exclusive powers of A
the executive branch, B the legislative branch, and C the judicial branch of the
government. Next, identify the powers that both A and B, B and C and C and A are
 responsible for. Finally, identity that power that is common to all three branches of the
government.

Executive Legislative

Judiciary

THE PRINCIPLE OF SEPARATION OF POWERS AND THE SYSTEM OF CHECKS-AND-

BALANCES

GUIDE QUESTIONS:

1. What is the difference between presidential and parliamentary systems of

government?
2. How does the 1987 Philippine Constitution enshrine the principle of separation of
powers and the system of checks-and-balances in the government?

THE PRINCIPLE OF SEPARATION OF POWERS AND THE SYSTEM OF CHECKS-AND-BALANCES

IN THE PHILIPPINE GOVERNMENT

Executive Branch Legislative Branch Judicial Branch

Executive Law enforcement The President's The Supreme Court
or Execution power to appoint may rule on the
Power (Art. VII. Sec. officers whose constitutionality or
1) appointments are validity of any
vested in him/her treaty, international
by the Constitution or executive
requires the agreement, law,
consent of the presidential
Commission on decree,
Appointments, proclamation,
members of which order, instruction, or
are members of the regulation (Art. VIII
Congress (Art. VII, Sec. 5).
Sec. 16 of the 1987
Philippine
Constitution)

The President's
suspension of the
privilege of the writ
of habeas corpus
or proclamation of
martial law in the
country or any part
thereof in case of
invasion or
rebellion, when the
public safety
requires it, by virtue
of his power as
Commander in
Chief, may be
revoked by the
Congress (Art. VII,
Sec. 18).

The President's
power to grant
amnesty is subject
to the concurrence
of a majority of
Congress (Art. VII,
Sec. 19).
No treaty or
international
agreement that the
President has
concluded shall be
valid without the
concurrence of at
least two-thirds of
all the members of
the Senate (Art.
 VII, Sec. 21), The
Congress has the
power to pass
appropriations
recommended by
the President (Art.
VII. Sec. 22).
Legislative Power The President can Lawmaking The Supreme Court
(Art. VI, Sec. 1) veto every bill may rule on the
passed by the constitutionality or
Congress (Art VI. validity of any
Sec. 27(1) as well as treaty, international
any particular item or executive
or items in an agreement, law
appropriation presidential
revenue, or tariff bill decree,
(Art. VI Sec. 27(2)) proclamation,
order instruction, or
regulation (Art. VII.
Sec. 5 (2)
Judicial Power The President can By virtue of its Law interpretation
(Art, VIII, Sec. 1) nullify a conviction lawmaking power, and application
made by the the Congress can
judiciary in a define, prescribe,
criminal case by and apportion the
pardoning the jurisdiction of the
offender (Art VII. various courts (Art.
Sec. 19) VIII, Sec. 2). It may
also increase the
appellate
jurisdiction of the
Supreme Court but
only with the latter's
advice and
concurrence (Art.
VI, Sec. 30).