Why federalism is in fashion

Even more than shifting to parliamentary government, the issue of whether the country should go federal was a contentious issue. But as it was with the debate on parliamentary form of government, it was the different levels of understanding and background that provoked the heated debates.

There were those among us, Chairman Jose Abueva, Lito Lorenzana, Rey Magno Teves, Emily Marohambsar and the rest of the Mindanao contingent, who were steeped in the advocacy for federalism. They have been working on the study of federalism for years. They view the issue as a solution to the problem of Mindanao. Indeed rebel groups MNLF and the MILF and other Muslim leaders have made it known that a federal arrangement may be the answer to the war in Mindanao. As a federal state, the Muslims become politically empowered but remain within the ambit of the Filipino nation and the cause of secession will be blunted.

At the time when I left the meeting Friday night, the Concom federalists and traditionalists (who propose a strengthened local autonomy instead) were still locked in negotiations on how to reconcile their differences. Curiously the traditionalists some of whom were against a shift to parliamentary government were also those who were against any shift to federalism. I suspect fear of change was behind this reluctance to adopt anything new and untried.

Let me say that although there were differences on how to meld the two positions, there was unanimity that federalism will not happen overnight. It will be developed through a transition period (there was also a debate on just how long this period will be stated in the proposed revision).

* * *

There is however an aside that needs to be clarified. Some Concom members accused the federalists of being under foreign influence. It was asked why studies on federalism were being funded by foreign foundations. The simple answer is that this is not only true in the Philippines but also in the rest of the world. Federalism has become fashionable as a political idea that can answer prevalent contemporary problems: ethnic conflict and big governance. If a unitary system is better understood this is because most countries have unitary systems. The Philippines is one of them. Power is held mostly at the national level while very little power is given to political subdivisions, such as provinces, counties, parishes, or towns. This is a drawback to colonial times. Provinces are beholden, as it has often been said to ‘imperial Manila’ and this is the primary reason why the rest of the country is underdeveloped.

So it is not just the Mindanao conflict that might benefit from a federal arrangement. A meaningful sharing of power between political sub-units and the central authority (national government) may be the answer to the country’s underdevelopment. We have a local government code but it has worked in patches. Under the local authority code it is still up to the central government to decide the future and development of provinces. Even if the revenue has been raised through its resources, provinces depend on the national government. We have nightmarish stories of how these allocations are divided.

A federal system in which the national government shares its power, with the smaller political subdivisions may address this inequity. The United States, Canada, Australia, Brazil, Belgium and India in varying degrees are examples of federal systems. Federal systems are chosen for different reasons. Like democracy and freedom there is no such thing as an ideal state of federalism. It depends on the concerns of particular nations: size is one, diversity of the political subdivisions (that is often the source of ethnic conflicts is another). The United States is said to be a combination of both. Its size would make a unitary system unwieldy, and the diverse interests of the states made confederation impossible. Nations like Switzerland have a population split by language, and despite its small size, found federalism to be a better choice than the others.

There is no denying the complexity of federalism. Some countries have banded together to exchange information among more developed federal nations, those less developed and those who would like to learn more about it. The Philippines comes under the third. Federalist advocates in the Philippines and elsewhere are often invited to conferences and receive funding for studies.

There is an International Association of Centers of Federal Studies (ICAFS). It is an association of Centers and Institutes throughout the world with interests in independent research and publications about political, constitutional, legal, administrative, fiscal, economic, historical and philosophical issues to the political systems which have federal features. The Association was established to further the study and understanding of federal principles and patterns in all their variety.

Then there is also the Forum for Federations which has held annual conferences in Switzerland, Canada and more recently Belgium to which I and several others, including my publisher’s wife and co-columnist, Preciosa Soliven, were invited. Next year’s conference will be in India (I bet you did not know it was federalist!) Let me add that Nigeria, a country once wracked by ethnic and religious conflicts participated actively in Belgium’s conference and impressively shared its progress with the federalist experiment.

* * *

LETTER: From time to time I receive email from writers using pseudonyms. I read them but I put them on file. I have made an exception with this one which comes from a Filipino overseas entitled " Filipinos for Better Philippines, where do we go from here? He or she says, "Time calls for change and/or amend our constitution; Change the attitude of our public servants and put an end to systemic corruption in our national life." Corrupt and collusive practices are deeply embedded in the Philippines’ traditional personalistic system of governance. Influenced by extensive patronage networks, the bureaucracy feeds on cumbersome and opaque procedures that allow for too much discretion. A sophisticated culture of corruption provides disincentives for non-corrupt behavior, where individuals or companies that speak out against corrupt behavior fear negative treatment from government agencies. The institutional mechanisms for monitoring and reducing corruption are weak."

We must have one common agenda for now; CHARTER CHANGE. I encourage everyone to share their opinion and views on the matter.

* * *

My e-mail is cpedrosaster@gmail.com