The source of our inertia

With all due respect to Manila Archbishop Gaudencio Rosales, his comment comparing amending the Constitution to ‘changing horses in midstream’ should be answered likewise. It may be that the good archbishop does not like ‘changing horses in midstream’ but there are people who might think otherwise, especially if the horse you are riding on is dying and will not bring you safely to shore. Unless, of course, you see nothing wrong with the horse even if it is weakening and losing breath. Therefore the argument should be centered on the condition of the horse. If the ‘condition of the horse’ we are riding on translates to the present system of politics and governance, I believe that many will disagree with the Cardinal.

There are enough Filipinos who know and understand that something is wrong with the horse but are disabled from thinking for themselves. It is a kind of mental block fostered through generations in the story of the Philippines. One does not think for oneself, authorities do and they have the power of sanction on those who would think independently and differently. That is the problem with the Rosales statement. It is very much in the tradition of Church encroaching on the territory of the state that has been the bane of the development of the Philippines. This is a problem that can be traced as far back as the Spanish colonial period when the country was governed through the friars. It is an unfortunate tradition that we have been unable to shake off despite many years of independence. It continues to this day. The Church wields power on the state by the sheer authority of religion. Our national heroes, primarily, Jose Rizal fought against this shortcoming of abdicating the right to think for oneself. He paid a high price for that refusal. I thoroughly agree with the Cardinal that ‘government officials should change their attitudes, values and moral disposition.’ That after all is the Church’s expertise. When we speak of the moral renewal of individuals, I will concede to the Church. That has been its remit for centuries and no institution has had more expertise than it has when talking of morals.

But I am concerned when the Church speaks on authority about a matter of governance, especially constitutional amendment that would restructure government when it has been demonstrated to have failed. There is no ambiguity here. It is a matter for the state. This does not mean that the Church should have nothing to say about the well-being of its constituencies. In an ideal world, or even in more mature countries, a statement like the one made by Cardinal Rosales would have been taken in stride, no more than an opinion in a democratic country. But not so with Filipinos who think with the persisting handicap of their colonial background. It is still true to say that with most Filipinos, when the Church speaks, it speaks ex-cathedra. That is the source of our inertia and what separates us from other peoples in Asia who have galloped to progress.

Church and State is a framework that has been adopted to delineate their respective areas of responsibility but also how to understand how religion and government are related. The problem arises when issues overlap and both institutions make claims on the same constituencies. In the Philippines, two issues come to mind – population and capital punishment.

* * *

INDIA’S EXAMPLE. As for those who say that constitutional reform will not change us, I’d like to use the example of India. In a recent interview with Ambassador Navrekha Sharma she was asked whether she thought a unicameral parliamentary government under a federal system would work here as it did in India. What she said is instructive for those who say that constitutional reform will not change things. She said, "The switch to a federal parliamentary form of government in the Philippines or anywhere else for that matter can work but only over a period of time. When we started to rule ourselves 57 years ago, India, too, did not have a robust system of political parties. Indeed there was only one political party, the Congress, in comparison to which all other parties were insignificant. Over time, cadre and issue based parties came up in opposition to the Congress and eventually, Congress was toppled from its supreme position. Today, Congress is back in power not by itself but as the largest party in a coalition. The best thing one can say about parliamentary democracy is that while it can often be messy, it does widen the base of political power. And, over time, allows room for growth and improvement.

* * *

SOMETHING MORE THAN LIP SERVICE. While on exile in London, we found out about other countries’ policies towards their migrant workers. Particularly interesting at the time was Turkey’s negotiations with Germany for a surcharge to cover the cost of education of the migrant workers. In effect, developing countries like Turkey and the Philippines are subsidizing developed countries when their citizens migrate to other countries to work. This is especially true of our nurses who are said to be in demand and have been migrating to countries like the UK and the US after they have finished schooling in the Philippines. One report said "the Philippines exports 15,000 nurses a year, and it’s estimated that 1 in 10 Filipinos now works abroad." Maybe the OWWA or whoever is in charge of our overseas workers should look into that especially when it comes to nurses. They are in demand and we would be negotiating from a position of strength if we were to tuck in the education cost of each Filipino nurse that goes abroad.

* * *

THE INTERNATIONAL MEDIA ENVIRONMENT SUMMIT. Here’s something interesting for environmentalists. News World International sent word that there is to be a global event to be held in Sarawak, Borneo. November 30th - December 2nd 2005. The gathering will tackle issues facing the media’s coverage of the environment. Early key supporters include the United Nations Development Program and the Asia-Pacific Broadcasting Union and WWF. "Nature CAN be cruel , as the Tsunami shows, but it is most of the time benevolent and when it IS benevolent it should be cherished more and understood better. That is one of the greatest challenges facing this planet’s media whether in print, broadcast or on the World Wide Web " wrote Richard Peel, chairman, News World International. If you cover the environment or want to see that coverage improved, or if you care about the message, you cannot afford to miss this international conference, held on the fringes of the rainforests of Borneo. Does media coverage reflect the urgent nature of environmental issues? Are audiences getting the message? Do the media have a special responsibility to alert the world to the threats facing everyone on this planet regardless of race, culture or politics? News World provides a neutral platform to debate internationally important topical dilemmas.

* * *

E-mail: [email protected]