Northwestern University

COLLEGE OF LAW
Laoag City

In partial fulfilment of the requirements in

RESTORATIVE JUSTICE SYSTEM
(Midterm)

“ F E DE RA LI SM I N T H E P HI LI PP I N E S ”

A Term Paper

Submitted by:

ROZANNA BIANCA T. PASTOR

L.L.B – IV

Submitted to:

ATTY. MANUEL F. AURELIO (Ret. Pros.)

Dean/Professor

March 8, 2017
A.Y. 2017-2018
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
Preliminary Remarks 3

I. Federalism: What is it?

Definition and Concept.
Typology of Federalism.
Common Features/Basic Principles
The Principle of Subsidiarity.

II. Federalism in the World.

III. Federalism in the Philippines.

Unitary versus Federal Government
Attempts to Change the Current System
2018 Sub-Committee House Proposal

IV. Weighing the Consequences: Advantages &

Disadvantages of Federalism

V. Conclusion: Are We Ready?

VI. References

2
 PRELIMINARY REMARKS
The Philippines is currently under a unitary form of
government – this means that the central government is the highest
governing power. It is lead by the President as the head of state and
the government and exercises general supervision over local
governments which are dependent on the national government. It
receives a large part of every region’s income and redistributes it,
often disproportionately so. The Constitution has concentrated
political powers and authority on the national government and
autonomous regions, provinces, municipalities and barangays can
only exercise powers and enact policies that the central government
chooses to delegate to them.

Federalism is a type of government wherein sovereignty is

constitutional divided between the national government and
subdivisional governments such as states and provinces. It divides
the country into several autonomous states with a national
government. The autonomous states are even further divided into
local government units – having main responsibility in developing
their local industries, public health and safety, education,
transportation and culture. These states have more power over their
finances, policies, development plans and laws. The United States,
Switzerland, Germany, Australia, Canada, India, Malaysia and Brazil
are examples of countries with a federalist form of government.

Being an archipelago of 7, 107 islands, it has been a struggle to

deliver and provide consistent service to the public especially to
remote areas. The never-ending conflict in Mindanao; the growing
rate of poverty in most regions; inadequate social services, the
systemic graft and corruption in government, the immaturity and
gullibility of the electorate majority; strident cry for cultural
recognition; social inequality and the instability of political systems
are just some of the troubles that the country is plagued with. These
reasons have pushed many of our country’s leaders especially
President Rodrigo R. Duterte to view that a shift to federalism would
ultimately resolve them.

Federalism is a proposed system of administration in the

Philippines and a revision of the current 1987 Constitution. Recently,
there is much discussion and debate surrounding the current
administration’s bid for a federalist shift. Clearly, advocates of

3
federalism have splintered into various groups pushing for their own
respective agendas1.

Notwithstanding the numerous advantages and benefits of

federalism articulated by its proponents, it cannot be disregarded
that federalism does not come without any defects. Moreover, despite
the many discussion as to the pros and cons of a federal government
Would a federal government improve the life of an ordinary Juan
dela Cruz?

This paper attempts to present both sides of the coin in the

hope of providing information and insight that will prove useful to
the ordinary citizen in considering his stand. Ultimately, it seeks to
resolve whether or not a change from a traditional unitary Republic
to a Federal Republic of the Philippines will solve the current
problems of the country and benefit the Filipino Citizen. After all, it
all boils down to making the lives of the Filipinos much better than
the current political system.

1
Tiquia, Ma. Lourdes, Why Shift to Federalism?, The Manila Times, January 16, 2018

4
 FEDERALISM: WHAT IS IT?

Definition and Concept.

The most famous definition of federalism is the shortest one. In

his 1987 book, Exploring Federalism, Daniel J. Elazar, states that the
simplest possible definition of Federalism is “self-rule plus shared
rule.”

“Self-rule” and “Shared Rule” are two widely used notions to

define, describe and classify federal political systems. The concept of
“self-rule” refers to autonomy and extends to the power and freedom
of sub-national units to decide, finance and implement their own
policies independent of the national government but exclusively
restricted on its territory. By contrast, Shared Rule refers to the
participation of the sub-state nations or regions in decision-making
processes at the centre, for example through territorial representation
or intergovernmental forums which allow regional governments to
participate and co-decide on national policies.

In his 1975 article “Federalism” in Handbook of Political

Science, Volume Five, William Riker defines Federalism as “a
political organization in which the activities of government are
divided between regional governments and a central government in
such a way that each kind of government has some activities on
which it makes final decisions.”

Federalism is concerned with the sharing of sovereignty

between one national government that encompasses all of a country
and several lower “states” or regional governments that make up that
country.2 Unlike a unitary form of government, sovereignty in federal
governments is “constitutionally split” or “non-centralized” between
at least two territorial levels so that units at each level have final
authority and can act independently of others in some areas. It is a
combination of a central government (i.e. the federal government)
with regional governments in a single political system. As an effect,
citizens have political obligations to, or have rights secured and
protected by, two authorities.

A current definition of federalism is provided by the

International IDEA in its 2015 primer “Federalism” which states that
2
UPSIO, “Federalism: A go or a no?”, May 12, 2016 (http://halalan.up.edu.ph/viewpoints/by-experts/288-
federalism-a-go-or-a-no)

5
“Federalism is a form of government that establishes a
constitutionally specified division of powers between different levels
of government.”

Federalism deals with the division of powers among different

levels of government and certain powers are reserved for both the
federal and regional levels. Typically, the federal government has the
final say on matters such as national defense, foreign relations and
monetary policy whilst the regional or state governments have the
last word on areas such as agriculture, education and health, among
others, limited however in their respective jurisdictions.

In other words, federalism is basically a system of government

in which the same territory is controlled by two levels of government.
Generally, an overarching government governs issues that affect the
entire country, and smaller subdivisions govern issues of local
concern. Both the national government and the smaller political
subdivisions govern issues of local concern. Both the national
government and the smaller political subdivisions have the power to
make laws and both have a certain level of autonomy for each other.3

The essential thought behind federalism can be very simply

stated: The relations between states should be conducted under the
rule of law. Conflict and disagreement should be determined through
peaceful means rather than coercion or war. Federalism is a political
theory and ideal. It is concerned with the control and proper use of
power. It deals with the reality of authority in government, and by
strictly defining where, how and by whom such power will be
exercised; it protects the people from the excesses of rulers. It
requires a settled constitution, the division of powers and democratic
temper in the citizens to enable it to function properly.4

Typology of Federalism.

Federal systems may be categorized according to: (1) Process of

adoption of federalism; and (2) distribution of powers and functios
between the federal government and state or local governments.
According to the process of adoption of federalism, there may be (a)
“Born” federations wherein the federal structure and distinct entities
at the foundation of the country played a major role in the
development of the political and fiscal structure of the country such

3
Cornell University Law School Legal Information Institute.
4
Buchanan, James (2001). Federalism, Liberty and the Law. Collected Works, V ol. 18

6
as in Canada, Switzerland and India; and (b) countries that “became”
federations, i.e. federalism was adopted in order to preserve the
nations and enhance peaceful co-existence among distinct
communities (e.g. South Africa); and (c) countries where federalism
was “thrust upon them”, i.e. federalism became a desparate attempt
to keep a nation alive by weakening the central government.5

Additionally, federal systems can be classified into: (1)

Cooperative federalism wherein both the federal and the state
governments share responsibilities in certain areas or services to
ensure the operation of national programs throughout the country6.
Examples of countries with this type of federalism are Ethiopia,
Germany, South Africa, United Arabs Emirates, United States,
Venezuela and Yugoslavia. (2) Competitive federalism wherein the
federal government has a reduced role in state or local government.
On the other hand, state or local governments have an increased role
in managing their own affairs. Examples of countries with this type
of federalism are the Pakistan, Belgium, Austria, Brazil, Micronesia,
Switzerland and UK. (3) Coercive federalism where the federal
government continues to “direct” both national and state policy.
Laws of state or local governments may be presented by the federal
government. An example is Nigeria which has a federal military
government and finally, (4) Permissive federalism where the federal
system is almost like a unitary system. The state or local governments
have only those powers and authorities permitted to them by the
federal government

Common Features and Basic Concepts.

In spite of the diversity of federal models, there are features

and principles that are common among them. These are (1) division
of powers and autonomy; (2) participation of constituent units in
federal decision making; (3) recognition of diversity; (4) fiscal
federalism; and (5) constitutional supremacy.

1. Division of Powers and Local Autonomy.

A basic feature of federalism is that powers between the federal

government and the constituent units of the federation. These powers
are defined in the federal constitution and cannot be arbitrarily

5
Filippov, Mikhail, Peter C. Ordeshook, and Olga Shvetsova (2004). Designing Federalism: ATheory of Self
sustainable Federal Institutions
6
Kymlicka, Will (2001). "Minority Nationalism and Multination Federalism"

7
changed but would require the consent of the constituent units before
taking effect.

Decentralization is a distribution of powers between the

central and the state governments. It includes the dispersal of
administration and governance in different sectors and areas. The
distribution of powers between the centre and constituent units is
indispensable for its existence. Secondly, for administrative
efficiency, the central government grants autonomy to provincial
governments. Thus, the division of powers between the centre and
the units is indispensable. Generally, the division of powers is made
in such a way that matters of national importance are given to centre
and matters of regional interest be given to provincial governments.
These range of powers of one government cannot be encroach upon
by the other.

Foreign relations, defence, communications, currency and

coinage, foreign trade, grant of citizenship to foreigners on
completion of certain conditions, are given to the central government.
Matters like supervision of local government, education, jails, police,
co-operation, agriculture, health and sanitation, medical, etc., are left
with the regional or state governments. There is no hard and fast rule
for the division of subjects but in every federation the division takes
place according to the circumstances of that country.

The state government usually have a degree of executive and

legislative power. Most states are usually ruled by a Chief Executive
and have a legislative assembly. For example, in the United States,
states elect a governor and a legislative assembly which make laws
for the state. The same is true for states in Australia, India and Russia,
among others.

And since most states are autonomous, they usually have a

source of revenue that is independent of the national government.
Thus, states can set up taxes on their own.

2. State Participation at Federal Decision making.

As a consequence of the division of powers, federalism creates

two kinds of governments having different interests and rights. There
is therefore, a need for the protection of these interests and rights
which can only be done when there is a bicameral legislature – two
houses representing two interests. Normally, the Lower House
represent the interests of the nation and Upper House represents the

8
interest of the provinces/states. Representation in the Lower House
is typically based on representation while for the Upper House, the
principle of parity is followed that is whether a state is small or large, it
will have equal number of seats. This method is followed in the USA
and Pakistan.

A bicameral legislature is also a basic feature of a federalist

state. Bicameralism is rooted in the principle that constituent units
must have a say in federal policy making. The principle argues that
constituent units must have a venue where they could propose
legislation on matters concerning their own level as against the
national nature of legislation.

3. Recognition and Accommodation of Diversity.

Multi-cultural communities form most federations. The mixture

of ethnicities, religions and cultural backgrounds and traditions
demands for recognition of diversity and the guarantee of
preservation and development of cultures. Federalism is particularly
relevant for unitary countries considering it as a solution for
lingering ethnic conflicts or inequalities that seek to eliminate its
territorial integrity.

4. Fiscal Federalism.

The lifeblood of every country is the pool of resources that are

available to its government to foster the right conditions for
development and a better quality of life. In federalism, fiscal
resources are governed by a complicated regime of separate taxing
powers for the federal government and constituent units, as well as, a
system of transfers or grants by which the federal government shares
revenue to lower levels of government.

Another feature of fiscal federalism is equalization. Almost all

federations exercise fiscal equalization—”that is, a redistribution of
revenues (usually from federal governments but sometimes also from
richer constituent units) to poor constituent governments in order to
ensure that all constituent governments can provide comparable or
equal levels of public services at comparable levels of tax costs to
citizens” (Kincaid 2005).

Today, fiscal equalization has somewhat evolved from being an

equity tool to a means of keeping poorer constituent units within the

9
federation, eventually strengthening national unity.

5. Constitutional and Judicial Supremacy.

A federation is an agreement between two or more sovereign

states to create a new state in which each will exercise specific
powers. This agreement is in the shape of the constitution. For a
federal system to survive there must be respect for the constitution
and its extensions, since it is the covenant that binds the constituent
units together.

The constitution defines and explains the powers and the

jurisdiction of each government. For this purpose the constitution is
considered to be the supreme law in the federation. No central or
provincial, which is against the constitution, can be enforced.
Similarly if a change is desired in the constitution, it must be
according to the method provided by the constitution.

In order to make a clear division of powers between the centre

and the units, a written constitution is indispensable. The centre and the
units have full faith in the constitution which is considered as the
highest law of the land and any act violating the Constitution is
declared illegal.

The constitution should be rigid so that the centre as well as the

units may not amend it arbitrarily. A special procedure is adopted to
amend the constitution. This procedure is very complicated. The
reason is that the constitution is considered a sacred document and
both the centre and the states (units) agree that there should be very
few amendments so that the stability of the constitution is
maintained. The process of the amendment of the constitution should
make it binding that no amendment is to be given effect without the
consent of both the Parliament and state legislatures.

Furthermore, despite there is a clear mention of the powers of

centre and the units in the Constitution, there is a possibility that any
dispute relating to the jurisdiction can arise in future - there being a
dual government in a federal state. In the event of such disputes both
the central and the state governments will interpret the constitution
in their own way. Therefore, free and impartial judiciary should
interpret the Constitution impartially in order to settle the dispute of
jurisdiction etc.

10
 Freedom and supremacy of the judiciary is essential so that the
centre or the states may not have the decisions in their favour by
exerting any sort of pressure on it. Only a free and supreme judiciary
will be able to give decisions independently and will be in a position
to win the confidence of both the centre and the state. Thus the
stability of the federation depends upon the establishment of a free
and supreme judiciary.

The Principle of Subsidiarity.

The most important aspect of a federal system is that it

recognizes that there are different types of political issues which need
different types of institutions to deal with them. Some affect only a
local area; others are more widespread in their scope.7 In a federal
system, the power to deal with an issue is held by institutions at a
level as low as possible, and only as high as necessary. This is the
famous principle of subsidiarity

The principle of subsidiarity is an organizing principle which

states that matters ought to be handled by the smallest, lowest or
least centralized component authority. From a political standpoint, it
stipulates that the decision-making power should rest as close as
possible to those it affects rather than by a central authority8 and the
right to make decisions should first and foremost rest with the
individual.

Applied to the organization of the state, the principle holds that

the government should undertake only those initiatives which exceed
the capacity of individuals or groups acting independently. It is
based upon the autonomy and dignity of the human individual, and
holds that all other forms of society, from the family to the state and
the international order, should be in the service of the human person.

In other words, it means that the state shall take action only if
and insofar as the objectives of the proposed action cannot be
sufficiently achieved by the communities and can therefore, by
reason of the scale or effect of the proposed action, be better achieved
at the State level.

7
Stepan, Alfred, 1999, "Federalism and Democracy: Beyond the U.S. Model."
8
Daly, Lew (2010-01-08). "God's Economy". The Financial Times. Retrieved 2018-03-06.

11
 FEDERALISM IN THE WORLD

Many countries have adopted Federal systems, especially so

when a new nation is being carved out of several culturally and
ethno-linguistically diverse regions, each with their own political
interests and concerns.

Among the 196 countries in the world, twenty six countries

currently have a federal system of government namely: Argentina,
Brazil, Canada, Mexico, Saint Kitts and Nevis, United States of
America, Venezuela, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina,
Germany, Switzerland, India, Iraq, Malaysia, Nepal, Pakistan,
Russian Federation, United Arab Emirates, Australia, Micronesia,
Comoros, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Somalia, South Sudan and Sudan.

Should the Philippines shift from unitary to a federal form of

government, as President Rodrigo Duterte pushes for, we will be the
27th country with such setup.

Federalism is one of the recognized solutions in resolving

territorial distribution of power in geographically huge countries like
the USA, Canada, Brazil, Australia and Mexico9 The need to reconcile
and accommodate diverse cultural and ethnic characteristics of the
people of these countries required the decentralization of power so
that each unit is granted the privilege to exercise governance
according to their needs.

Religious differences also paved the way for countries like

India to adopt a federal system while countries like Belgium
proclaimed itself as a federation to bridge the language gap between
three groups – the French-speaking Wallonia and the Dutch-speaking
Flanders and Brussels.10

Aside from the need to resolve and balance ethnic, cultural and
religious diversity in a country, adoption of a federalist system was
also a consequence of the existence of an external threat or the desire
to be more effective in the international sphere because it secures
military and economic advantages while retaining and encouraging
ethnic diversity.

9
Heywood, A (2002). Politics Second Edition. New York: Palgrave
10
Ibid.

12
 It is for this reason why the United States established itself as a
federalist county. It felt vulnerable hence adopted federalism to
fortify itself. While it has undergone numerous transitions from one
type of federalism to another, the type of federalism that the United
States presently embracing is one which signifies a strong
“intergovernmental relations”11 characterized by two levels of
government exercising direct authority simultaneously over people
within its territory. Dual citizenship exists and individuals can claim
a wide range of rights and privileges from both the state and national
government. Each state also has its own constitution and like the
national government, state governments are divided into legislative,
executive and judicial branches. In each state, there are state senators
and representatives, state court systems and like the President of the
entire country, a governor as the chief executive of a state.

In comparison, German Federalism is based on

interdependence, not independence. It rests on the idea of
cooperation between levels. The governing norm is solidarity but the
operating principle is subsidiarity, i.e. the decision making should be
taken to the lowest feasible level. In other words, the central
government offers overall leadership but delegates the
implementation to the lower levels. States or (Länder) are expected to
contribute to the success of the whole and, in exchange, they are
treated with respect by the central government. Moreover, as
implementing agents, provinces participate in approving bills
directly affecting them through the upper chamber of parliament
called the Bundesrat12.

On the other hand, the European Union version of federalism

encourages multilevel governance.13 The powerful European Court of
Justice adjudicates disputes between levels of governments and court
decisions apply directly to the citizens and must be implemented by
member governments. Citizens of European Unions are free to reside
anywhere within the Union’s territory.

Altogether, it is clear that countries adhere to different types of

federalism in response to their respective and specific needs.

11
Drake, F. D. & Nelson, L.R. (2001). Civic Intelligence and Liberal Intelligence in the History Education of
Social Studies Teachers and Students. Bloomington, Indiana: ERIC Clearing House.
12
Hague, R. & Harrop, M. (2002). Comparative Government and Politics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
13
Ibid.

13
 FEDERALISM IN THE PHILIPPINES

The Philippines is an archipelago stretching 1, 839 km from

north to south off the southeast coast of Asia. It is composed of 7, 107
islands divided into three major island groups namely Luzon,
Visayas and Mindanao. These are further divided into 17 regions, 81
provinces, 145 cities, 1,489 municipalities and 42, 036 barangays. It
has a total population of 106,512,074 as of March 3, 201814.

It contains a diverse range of ethnic groups, the largest being

Tagalog, Cebuano, Ilocano, Bisaya, Hiligaynon, Bikol and Waray.
There are more than 175 ethno-linguistic groups with its own mother
tongue, culture, tradition, beliefs and identity.

According to the Komisyon ng Wikang Filipino, there are 135

ethnic languages in the Philippine archipelago spoken by their
respective ethno-liguistic group, except for the national Filipino
language spoken by all ethnic-linguistic groups. Most of these
languages have several varieties (or dialects) totalling over 300 across
the archipelago.

Aside from being culturally diverse, the Philippines is also rich

in religion heavily influenced by its history as part of the Spanish
Empire. The Philippine Statistics Authority in October 2015 reported
that 80.58% are Roman Catholics, 10.8% were Protestant and 5.57%
were Islamic.

At present, the Philippines has a democratic government in the

form of a constitutional republic with a presidential system. It is
governed as a unitary state with the exception of the Autonomous
Region in Muslim Mindanao, which is largely free from the national
government.

Unitary versus Federal Government

The shift from a unitary to a federal government has been a

recent hot topic in political circles. Although there have been
attempts to change the current system, it was during the 2016
presidential campaign that Rodrigo Duterte launched a nationwide
campaign promoting a charter change for federalism. And now that

14
Philippine Population. Retrieved March 6, 2018 from www.worldometers.infor/world-
population/philippines-population/

14
he is president, he is more than ever determined to push for such a
change and has since then become a serious and national debate.

But before we undertake the idea of a Federal form of

government, it should first be understood how the current system
works and how it would work under a new form of government.

Basically, a unitary form government is defined as a system of

political organization wherein all or substantially all of the governing
power resides in a centralized government. The central government
merely delegates authority to subnational units and channels to them
policies for implementation.

A unitary system, therefore, is one where all of the government

authority and power is vested in a central government who has the
sovereign power and the delegation of authority to local or regional
units are controlled by stipulations in a Constitution and its
implementing laws. Some of the notable nations having this kind of
system are the United Kingdom and France.

The Philippines has a democratic form of government. Section 1

Article II of the 1987 Constitution expressly provides that “the
Philippines is a democratic and republican State. Sovereignty resides
in the people and all government authority emanates from them.”
Democracy is a form of government which is directed according to
the will of the people, and a republic is a representative government,
run by and for the people.15

In other words, the Philippines is both a democratic and a

republican country. Democratic because we exercise and recognize
that as citizens, we are empowered to choose the people who would
govern us and lead us, while as a republican government, we entrust
the management of the state in the hands of a few people. Also, ours
is a presidential form of government such that power is equally
divided among its three branches: executive, legislative and judiciary
which form the very basis of the principle of separation of powers.

Whereas, Federalism is a system in which political authority is

divided between a general or national government which concerns
itself on matters of national concern such as military and diplomatic
relations and regional or state governments that carry on public
activities that most directly affect its citizens. Under a federal system,
there are powers exclusively reserved by either the central or state
15
Cruz, Isagani A. (2002). Philippine Political Law, Quezon City: Central Lawbook Publishing Co., Inc., 52.

15
government. Yet, there are powers and functions that are shared by
both governments especially those that require utmost consideration
such as those relating to the right of life and liberty.

Much of the deliberations in Congress is centered on how federalism

is advantageous to the Philippines vis-a-vis the current autonomy
exercised by local government units expressly granted by the Local
Government Code of 199116.

Although the Local Government Code provides an apparent

system of decentralization in the government, it is however limited. It
has even been referred to as a “dead end” by its major proponent,
Senator Pimentel, because of the resistance from those who used to a
centralized structure of government. The conflict between having a
unitary system while upholding local autonomy and decentralization
proved challenging and hence gave rise to the federal movement.

Federalism will not solve all of the problems the Philippines is

presently facing, however many believe that it is a chance to fill up
loopholes and erroneous functions found in the current system.

Attempts to Change the Current System.

The concept of Federalism in the Philippines was proposed as

early as the Philippine Revolution by Emilio Aguinaldo and
Apolinario Mabini by dividing the islands into three federal states.

Proposals from a unitary to a parliamentary form of

governments were also traced back to the Ramos Administration.

In the 21st century, one of the first proponents of federalism in

the Philippines is University of the Philippines professor Jose Abueva
who argued that a federal form of government is necessary to more
efficiently cater to the needs of the country despite its diversity17.

In 2005, then President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo created the

2005 Constitutional Commission led by Abueva during her
incumbency in order to study the existing system and study the
changes from a presidential-unitary to a parliamentary-federal.
However, speculations that Arroyo would use the amendment to

16
Republic Act No. 7160, effective January 1, 1992
17
Brillantes, A. B.; Moscare, D. (2002). "Decentralization and federalism in the Philippines: Lessons from
the global community"

16
extend her term resulted in protest against the administration for
constitutional reform.

In 2008, Senator Aquilino Pimentel Jr. proposed Joint

Resolution No. 10 which would revise 14 of the 18 articles of the 1987
Constitution and the addition of two new articles. It sought to adopt
a federal bicameral form of government. creating eleven (11)
autonomous regions thus establishing eleven centers of finance and
development in the archipelago. The proposal would result in the
creation of eleven states and one federal administrative region. I

On May 7, 2008, Rep. Monico O. Puentavella filed House

Concurrent Resolution No. 15 which supported Senate Resolution
No. 10. But unlike the Pimental proposal, Puentavella included an
option of holding a constitutional convention but excluded the
people’s initiative mode. The Joint Senate Resolution called for the
creation of 11 federal states in the country, by convening the
Congress into a constituent assembly for the purpose of revising the
Constitution to establish a federal system of government.

Beginning 2014, then Davao City mayor Rodrigo Duterte

launched a nationwide campaign promoting a charter change for
federalism believing that it will facilitate better delivery of services to
the people.18 He also saw that the current system was “antequated”19.

Movements for federalism were further intensified since the

draft of the Bangsamoro Basic Law submitted by President Benigno
Aquino III to the Congress in September 10, 2014 which, if approved,
would establish Bangsamoro as an autonomous region with its own
parliamentary government and police force.

In May 2016, President-elect Duterte stated that a plebiscite on

the proposed federal shift would be held in two years20. On
December 7, 2016, Duterte signed Executive Order No. 10 creating a
consultative committee to review the 1987 Constitution.

In 2017, House Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez’s for a federal

Philippines called for 14 states: 7 in Luzon, 2 in Visayas and 5 in
Mindanao. He also proposed that the capital of the Philippines under
a federal government should be somewhere in Negros island saying
18
Duterte wants cha cha for federalism. Date Retrieved March 6, 2018 from http://news.abs-
cbn.com/nation/10/06/14/duterte-wants-cha-cha-federalism
19
"Duterte says gov't system antiquated, opens federalism summit today. Retrieved March 6, 2018 from
www.mb.com.ph
20
Inquirer, Philippine Daily. "Duterte: Polls on federalism in 2 yrs”. Retrieved March 6, 2018.

17
that it would be accessible to all people from the three island groups
while he added that the state's territory does not have to be
contiguous.21

In February 2018, Alvarez reiterated that he shall input an

indigenous state in the Cordilleras in Luzon and an indigenous state
in Mindanao, whatever federal set-up is approved by the President22.

2018 Sub-Committee House of Representatives Proposal.

The 2018 Sub-Committee 1 of the House of Representatives

Committee on Constitutional Amendments proposed that a federal
Philippines would comprise of five states – Luzon, Visayas,
Mindanao, Bangsamoro and Metro Manila.

Under the 2018 House Sub-committee 1 proposal, each state

shall have its own State constitution, adopt its name, and choose a
capital, flag, anthem and seal. Each state shall have a unicameral state
assembly with legislative powers and a premier exercising executive
powers.23

It also proposes an equalization fund which shall comprise an

unconditional, general purpose block grant and conditional and
matching grants as an incentive for state governments. State
governments shall be entitled to at least 50 percent of the proceeds of
the utilization and development of the national wealth including
sharing the same with the inhabitants by way of direct benefits.24

The proposed Federal charter retains the position of the

President, who would act as head of state, and who shall be elected
by direct vote of the people for a term of five (5) years with 1 re-
election and introduces the position of a Prime Minister, who would
be the head of the government, who shall be elected by a majority of
all the members of the Parliament from among themselves. 25

The proposed Parliament shall consist of the Federal Assembly

as the national legislative department and the Senate as the
legislative body representing the regions.

21
Arguilas, Carolyn (28 March 2017). "Alvarez' federal Philippines: 14 states, Negros as seat of central
gov't". MindaNews. Retrieved 6 March 2018
22
http://mindanao.politics.com.ph/alvarez-wants-separate-state-indigenous-peoples
23
https://ptvnews.ph/5-states-proposed-ph-federal-charter/. (16 January 2018) Retrieved 6 March 2018.
24
Ibid.
25
Ibid.

18
 The proposal has been however hit by massive criticism due to
general lumping and a lack of representation. According to the
proposal, politicians will have 'more than' two consecutive terms,
making them eligible to run for office with no term limit.26 The
proposed charter also weakens the Senate because under the said
proposal, Senators cannot initiate laws but only concur and reject
bills created by the Federal Assembly.27

Nonetheless, the proposal is still subject to deliberations during

the Constituent Assembly proper.

Are we ready?

Supporters of the federal movement believe that the

Philippines will benefit from the transition. However, the question of
the country’s readiness must be qualified. We also need to
understand what the push for federalism aims to solve.

As a political solution, decentralization is a step towards the

right direction. By bringing in powers of the central government to
local units, it promotes not only meaningful but a genuine autonomy.
It brings more responsibility to the leaders to be effective and
introduce innovations for legislation and governance. Pres. Duterte
also believes that federalism will solve the crisis in Mindanao and
their desire to have complete and genuine autonomy over their
ancestral lands without being removed from the jurisdiction of the
Philippines.

As an economic solution, that aims to address the inequalities

in the Philippines, the push for federalism is a marginal solution at
best and totally irrelevant to the bigger picture – poverty.

One of the main problems of the country and probably the most
popular question among its citizens is “Can Federalism solve
poverty?” Supporters believe that federalism will encourage people
to be more involved in their production of goods and economic
activities because without resources, their state cannot survive.

26
Colcol, Erwin (16 January 2018). "Proposed federal charter divides PHL into 5 states". GMA News.
Retrieved 6 March 2018
27
Santos, Elmor & De Guzman, Chad (9 January 2018). “Proposed Charter for Federal PH weakens Senate,
eyes prime minister. www.cnnphilippines.com. Retrieved 6 March 2018.

19
 With respect to the people, creating a balance in the system
and harmony among the people is one of the challenges of the
transition to Federalism. Under the current system, Filipino people
are indifferent towards politics, only participating during the election
season. Moreover, many of the electorate choose their leaders based
on popularity and winnability but do not necessarily look into a
candidate’s capability, leadership skills, knowledge, moral
upbringing and fortitude. In other words, many Filipinos, especially
the poor, are politically immature and see election as a way to earn
extra money by selling their votes.

Another is the curiosity from the people as to how the

conceptual, legal and technical level of understanding of federalism
can be brought down to the masses. This poses a challenge since not
everyone might be not able to grasp at the concept while there others
who do not care. A transition to federalism would require
participation from the people and their engagement is essential to its
effectivity. The Filipino mindset that is “bahala na” and adherence to
the popular view, is an indicator than the citizens may not be ready
for a different form of government which demands more
responsibility from the citizens. The people are so used to depending
on the national government that they do not realize their significance
in nation-building.

As to our political leaders, most of them come from wealthy

and affluent families. Being so, they represent the sentiments the
sentiments of their class rather than the poor and marginalized.
Turncoatism is also a common practice among political leaders.
Politicians in our country switch parties almost every election. Many
join political parties not because of its platforms or principles but on
other several factors such as finances, winnability and network. This
character of our politicians is an indicator of their political
immaturity and thus are not fitted to take on another form of
government. For a politician to be mature, he must represent the
ideals and principles he believes in even if it will cost him his post.
Sadly, this is absent in most of the country’s leaders.

There is also the issue of political dynasties in the country.

Federalism without safeguards will empower political dynasties
according to retired Chief Justice Reynato Puno28. The retired chief
magistrate said passing an anti-political dynasty law before shifting
to a federal form of government will certainly be a good safeguard

28
Quintos, Patrick. (January 17, 2018). Federalism without safeguards to empower political dynasties: ex-
CJ Puno. Retrieved March 7, 2018. (www.news.abs-cbn.com)

20
against the feared domination of powerful families under the
proposed new charter.29

Ateneo School of Government Dean Ronald Mendoza shares

the same view saying that regardless of form, a government would
fail if it does not have strong institutions, inclusive economy, and
freedom from monopolies.30

On the other hand, there are those who see federalism as a way
of breaking political dynasties. Professor Maria Ela Atienza, of the UP
Diliman Department of Political Science, believes that federalism will
break political dynasties especially at the regional level. She
acknowledges that while federalism can open up the system to more
dynastic influences, she sees the creation of regional governments in
a federal set up as a way of “widening the playing field”.

Finally, a shift to federalism involves amending our

Constitution. It remains to be seen how the current administration
would push its advocacy for federalism even further. Duterte would
have to contend with calling for a constitutional convention, asking
Congress to convene as a constituent assembly, or leading a People’s
Initiative to formally start the process of charter change. Even after
that he would need to have his proposal ratified by all voters in a
referendum.31

29
Ibid.
30
Ibid.
31
Supra note 2.

21
 WEIGHING THE CONSEQUENCES
(Advantages & Disadvantages of Federalism)
What are the consequences of embracing a federal form of
government? What are the benefits that will be derived from
federalism? Is the federal system of government better than the
unitary system of government? Is the Philippines ready for such a
change in government? Do we have enough resources to effect such
change? Will this really resolve the conflict in Mindanao and unite
our people or will it just make matters worse and break up the
country which may even lead to civil war?

These are just some of the many questions an ordinary citizen

should ask himself before deciding whether or not he is for or against
a federal government. Hence, it is important that to weigh both the
pros and cons of a federal government.

ADVANTAGES OF FEDERALISM

The argument for a Federal Philippines – for dividing powers

between the national and state governments (and further dividing
state powers among many types of local governments) – centers on
the advantages of decentralization, which are as follows:

1. Federalism permits diversity.

Every province has its own political, social and economic

problems peculiar to the region itself owing to geographical and
cultural differences. Under a federalist form of government, states are
empowered to make their own decisions.

Local governments may deal directly with local problems

because they are in close proximity and are in better position to
understand these problems. They can establish policies that may not
be adopted nationwide but which cater to its’ own unique problems,
situations, geographical, cultural, social and economic contexts.
Federalism allows local units to create solutions to their own
problems instead of relying on a distant national government.

A federal system will also help preserve a region or locality’s

cultures and tradition. Each state will be more inclined to have their
own identity to differentiate themselves from other states. In effect,
22
citizens will be more state-centric, enriching local language and
culture. It will give rise to cultural diversity and social plurality
without sacrificing national unity which will benefit the nation as a
whole.

2. Federalism helps manage conflict.

Permitting states and communities to pursue their own policies

reduces the pressures that would build up in Metro Manila if the
national government has to decide on everything. Federalism permits
citizens to decide on many things at a state or local level and avoid
battling over single national policies to be applied uniformly
nationwide.

3. Federalism promotes specialization and competition.

Because states are able to both make their own decisions and
retain income they have to fund these decisions, it’s possible that
federalism to promote specialization and competition. This affects
both the national government and the states.

Since the national government turned over certain

administrative powers to the regional governments, it can now
funnel its resources more intensively towards issues assigned to it
such as foreign policy, defense, currency and taxation. Likewise,
states are now more able to nurture their individual strengths and
selling points because the people who make the decisions and
provide for their funding are the people who are personally involved
in the state’s development.

These self-reliant states will compare their growth to that of the

growth of other states which will hopefully foster friendly
competition between states and motivate states leaders and its
citizens to help raise the quality of life and economic development for
everybody involved.

4. Federalism improves efficiency through fiscal autonomy.

With 17 regions, 81 provinces, 145 cities, 1,489 municipalities

and 42, 036 barangays, governing the nation from Metro Manila is
overwhelming. Moreover, it has proved to be ineffective – being a
source of bureaucracy, red tape, corruption, delays and controversy
in every government activity.

23
 Through fiscal autonomy for state governments, federalism will
more evenly distribute the country’s wealth. It also gives state
governments more power over funds and resources. In 2015, 35% of
the national budget went to metro manila even if it represents only
14% of the population.

At the moment, local governments can only collect real estate

taxes and licensing fees. In federalism, they can retain more of their
income and are required remit only a portion to the state government
they fall under. Local resources will be directed to the state’s actual
issues and not merely for the improvement of the capital state. They
can spend money on programs and policies without waiting for the
approval of the national government.

Federalism also lessens dependence on Metro Manila because

regions work independently of Metro Manila for most concerns. For
this reason, when there is political mayhem in the Capital, other
regions that have nothing to do with the chain of events will not be
paralyzed. They will no longer find themselves waiting for resources
that only the national government can release.

5. Federalism will improve governance in the state or local levels.

Federalism encourages political participation and allows more

people to run for and hold political office since they will not only be
governed by the national government but also by their respective
state..

In the present situation, people do not really show any interest

about members of the senate because people cannot relate with them.
In fact, most candidates rely on popularity in the provinces on their
bid for a seat in the senate. People are more invested on local
elections because local officials due to proximity and are directly
affected by their policies of the local government unit.

Due to the widespread decentralization, state governments will

no longer have any excuse for delays in services and projects that, in
present situations, are often blamed on bureaucracy in the Capital.

With Federalism, election of public officials at a state level will

be improved since citizens have more a direct stake in the outcome.

24
In turn, public officials may be more rigorously checked in their
activities leading to less corruption and more accountability.

Citizens will be more involved and mindful of whom they elect

in the state government and thereby strengthening the people’s value
for democracy.

6. Federalism is a possible solution to the Mindanao conflict.

President Duterte and others supporters of the federal

movement view federalism as a solution to the present Mindanao
conflict, instead of implementing the BBL. According to Duterte,
“nothing short can bring peace in Mindanao.” This is likely a
reference to the many revisions the BBL has undergone and the
number of years it has been in Congress.

The creation of a state of Bangsamoro within the a federalist

system may address concerns of separatists who crave more
autonomy over the administration of Muslim Mindanao.

DISADVANTAGES OF FEDERALISM

Despite the numerous advantages of a federal form of

government, it also has the following drawbacks.

1. Federalism may bring more division than unity.

Healthy competition among states can lead to alienation –

creating rivalries and promoting regionalism that some say already
challenges the sense of unity in the country. It could enflame
hostilities between ethnic groups in the country.

Federalism also allows special interests to protect privileges.

Segregationists may use the argument of “states’ right” to avoid
federal laws designed to guarantee equality and prevent
discrimination.

2. Uneven wealth distribution and development among states.

25
 Some states may not be as ready for autonomy as others. A
major concern is that while some states may progress faster, others
may devolve faster. Some may not be as rich in natural resources as
others. Regions differ in natural resources and also the ability to raise
revenue different in various regions. Regions which are performing
well would definitely become even more powerful and forceful
because of opportunities but less performing regions would remain
stagnant because of fewer opportunities because most of these
opportunities are already in the hands of the well-performing ones.

It allows the benefits and costs of government to spread

unevenly. For example, some states may spend more on education
than others and that taxes in some states will be higher than others.

It creates disadvantages in the poorer states and communities

which generally provide lower levels of education, health and social
services, police protection and environmental protection as compared
to wealthier states. Hopefully, the proposed Equalization Fund will
help poorer states since the fund will use a portion of the tax
collected from rich states to be given to poorer states.

3. Confusing overlaps in jurisdiction and prevents uniformity of

the laws.

Unless powers and responsibilities of the national and state

governments are clearly and distinctly stated in the Constitution,
ambiguities can lead to conflict and confusion.

Federal system likewise prevents uniformity of laws and

policies for the countries. The reason for this is that every federal unit
remains independent and has the right to adopt any policy or any
law. The federal government does not have the authority to interfere
in the affairs of the federating unit. The result is that there is as many
laws and policies as the number of federating units. This also creates
problems for the people who have to go to other provinces from time
to time. This is the case with the USA where every state has its own
policies and its own laws. This has created a lot of problems for the
people of that country.

Due to an increase in power and authority, federalism allows

local leaders to frustrate national policy and obstruct actions on
national issues. They can obstruct not only civil rights policies
but also polices in areas such as energy, poverty and pollution.

26
Further, although federalism reduces conflict at the national level,
there is a possibility that serious national issues may be ignored.

4. Local political clans may gain more power and influence.

Political dynasties swell in various regions of the Philippines.

Oppositors believe that federalism will not dismantle well-
established political clans, rather there is a high probability that they
would become more powerful and influential.

According to Professor Aries Arugay of UP Diliman

Department of Political Science, federalism can aggravate the
problem of political dynasties. He is particularly concerned with how
local political dynasties can have more consolidated regional power
so they can wield national influence. He explains that:

“Local political dynasties might be more empowered, and

instead of regions we’ll have fiefdoms, although we see that
now…Kung mas maraming tao sa isang region, and if a
political dynasty can mobilize it, maybe that’s the way that
they can [emerge as] national or federal government-level
dynasties,”(If a region is considerably populated and a
political dynasty can mobilize it, maybe that’s the way that
they can [emerge as] national or federal government-level
dynasties.)32

The same view is shared by Ateneo Professor Emmanuel De

Guzman. De Guzman. In a study he conducted by, he argued that the
local autonomy granted by the present Local Government Code gave
local dynasties opportunity to conspire with the National
Government Agency functionaries who are suppose to check these
powers. 33

He believes that local autonomy provided local clans with

additional resources to secure the personal loyalty of their henchmen
and paint a philanthropic persona. More importantly, the provisions
of the LGC strengthen a dynasty’s capacity for unilateral control of
provincial power. He claims that:

32
UPSIO, Federalism: A Go or a No? (12 May 2016) Retrieved March 7, 2018 from
(http://halalan.up.edu.ph/viewpoints/by-experts/288-federalism-a-go-or-a-no)
33
Emmanuel C. De Guzman, ‘The Local Government Code and the Reconstitution of Power in a
PhilippineMunicipality’, In The Loyola Schools Review Vol.1, (Quezon City, Office of Research and
Publications, ADMU, 2001),

27
 “This allows the dynasty to corner provincial infrastructural
projects for itself by farming out contracts to dummy
corporations or by directly selling contracts to private
corporations. The clan cunningly utilizes the proceeds of
these shadowy transactions to maintain a formidable private
army composed of armed thugs and goons who freely roam
the province without fear of arrest, conviction or
punishment34”

With Federalism, established political clans will have greater

control over the LGU’s resources and finances more than it can have
in the Local Government Code. Hence by analogy, it is likely to result
in further entrenchment of local political clans.

5. Federalism is expensive and un-economical, and the shift is

impractical.

Federalism is an expensive and uneconomical system. The

reason for this is that there is duplication of the works. This increases
the expenditure and results in wastage of time and energy. So it is not
suitable for small and or states.

As to the transition, a shift would involve a significant

amendment to the Constitution and would entail billions of pesos to
set up a state government and the deliver state services. States will
also have to spend for the elections of their officials.

6. Danger of Secession.

In Federalism there is always a danger of the federating units

breaking away from the federation. This is what happened in the
USA in 1860's when the southern states started civil war to break
away from the federation. Similarly in the very recent past East
Pakistan broke away from federation and became Bangladesh.
Kosovo and Russian federating units' case are other examples.

34
Ibid. Here, De Guzman was referring to his observations about the particular research site he studied.
However, thisis likely the same scenario that occurs in other areas dominated by clans.

28
 CONCLUSION: Making the Choice

Since the birth of the Republic, federalism has remained in the

fringes of constitutional development and political discourse. It has
been carried in political platforms but has always been viewed
sceptically by nationalists who see it as a way to break up a nation.
Designing a federal system is not a very easy task. Besides its
basic principles, federalism is very customizable. The peculiarities of
a country would define the different features of its own brand of
federalism. It would be useful to seek out relevant models but these
models would only serve as guideposts since a country’s federal
system should reflect the unique conditions of its society.
Federalism is not a cure-all to the Philippines’ problems such as
poverty and hostilities in the some parts of the country; nor is it a
perfect system; but it may answer a problem that has plagued the
country for generations which the antiquated unitary system has
failed to solve over the years – the recognition of differences
between its constituent units and the unequal distribution of
wealth and services in the country
Decentralization, autonomy, decongestion and diversity are the
promises of a federal government. Nevertheless, it is important to
stress that the shift should not be done in haste. It is not a race to the
finish line. The transition might be a painstaking and radical task but
it is not impossible. However, it will require real dedication from
both the government and support from the people to make it
meaningful and operative.
More importantly, it is imperative to stress that people, in
making the choice, should recognize that any form of government
will ultimately amount to nothing if our leaders are incompetent and
incapable of properly utilizing the powers and resources given to
them.
The transition to a federal government requires an elevation of
the electorate to a higher level of political consciousness. The citizen
must, more than ever, abandon the populist approach, make a
conscientious effort towards electing quality leaders who will further
the nation’s interest and not merely their pockets.
In the end, the ultimate goal of any form of government is to
improve the lives of its citizens through quality leadership and
sustainable development.

29
 REFERENCES

Abueva, Jose V. (2005). Charter Change for Good Governance:

Towards a Federal Republic of the Philippines with a Parliamentary
Government. Kalayaan College Institute of Federal-Parliamentary
Democracy; Marikina City.
Acosta, Mabelle E., Du, Kelvin John M., Tongo, Karmela.
(November 18, 2013). Federalism in the Philippines: Why Adopt a Federal
Form of Government and Steps for Transition. Ateneo de Davao College
of Law.
Arguilas, Carolyn (28 March 2017). "Alvarez' federal
Philippines: 14 states, Negros as seat of central gov't". MindaNews.
Retrieved 6 March 2018.
Brillantes, A. B.; Moscare, D. (2002). "Decentralization and
federalism in the Philippines: Lessons from the global community"
Colcol, Erwin (16 January 2018). "Proposed federal charter divides
PHL into 5 states". GMA News. Retrieved 6 March 2018
Cruz, Isagani A. (2002). Philippine Political Law, Quezon City:
Central Lawbook Publishing Co., Inc.

Mendoza, Vincete V. (10 October 2016). Why Federalism is not the

answer. Retrieved March 7, 2018 (www.rappler.com)

Montes, Raphael N. Jr.; Federalism and Multiculturalism

Understanding Federalism. Retrieved 7 March
2018.(www.localgov.up.edu.ph)

Quintos, Patrick. (January 17, 2018). Federalism without

safeguards to empower political dynasties: ex-CJ Puno. Retrieved
March 7, 2018. (www.news.abs-cbn.com)

Santos, Elmor & De Guzman, Chad (9 January 2018). “Proposed

Charter for Federal PH weakens Senate, eyes prime minister”. Retrieved 6
March 2018. (www.cnnphilippines.com)
Viray, Joseph Reylan Bustos, Federalism: Issues, Risks and
Disadvantages. 45th National Rizal Youth Leadership Institute
sponsored by The Order of The Knights of Rizal, December 18, 2007,
Teachers Camp, Baguio City.

30