Presidential prerogative

Under a unitary Presidential system of government like ours, the President or Chief Executive is undeniably the most powerful government official, mainly because of her appointing authority. No other government official except the President is empowered by law to make appointments to as many government positions. To be sure, the President has the power to appoint even members of the Judiciary. In exercising this power, the President usually has the sole prerogative to choose her appointees especially in the Executive Department. A President has the greatest leeway in selecting the team who will run the government machinery. She may accept or reject the recommendations of any person or group. No one can question her choice because she is supposed to be answerable only to the people who will accordingly judge her come election time depending on the capability and performance of her appointees.

The only limitation is with respect to appointments in the Cabinet, the military and certain diplomatic positions that require confirmation by the Congressional Commission on Appointments. Likewise, the President can appoint members of the Judiciary only from among the list of nominees submitted by the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC).

This political and legal reality about the Chief Executive’s appointing power looms large every onset of elections. Usually a number of incumbent officials occupying important government posts tender their resignations to run for elective public office. Such moves appear to be purely voluntary on their part as they are just opting to seek other avenues of public service. On closer scrutiny however, they are actually political maneuverings aimed at firming up the hold on power through the exercise of the Presidential appointing authority. Incumbent officials occupying important posts may not really be interested to run for elective public office especially if they are performing their jobs well. However, they are "coaxed" to do so for a number of other purely political reasons and practical considerations. First is to have more allies in other branches or instrumentality of government because of their "winnability." Second is to give the office they would vacate to persons recommended by groups or political parties with bigger political influence as part of political horse-trading. Third is to make as many government posts available as paybacks for past support "above and beyond" the call of duty.

Resignations intended to provide the President a chance to improve governance usually happen after, not before elections. It is only after the elections that an Administration can gauge the people’s assessment of its performance. In the US, when the Republican Party of President Bush got a shellacking at the polls apparently because of voter dissatisfaction on his overall performance as President, some Cabinet members resigned to give Bush a chance to improve his lineup and change his policies especially on the Iraq war. Bush clearly got his people’s message and chose to do something about it.

Apparently, the Philippines do not follow the American example. Here, the President exercises the power of appointment to revamp the Cabinet or change the members of the official family in preparation for the desired election results rather than in reaction to the election outcome.

The recent appointments to the Cabinet and other top government posts, as well as the roster of prospective appointments already announced, show that the motivations are more political rather than improvement of governance. Some appointees may indeed have the proper credentials and competence but their political affiliations and actuations readily reveal that gratitude for loyalty and past support more than qualifications are the primary reasons for giving them juicy positions.

Easily noticeable is the Congress connection of the Cabinet appointees with the Lower House contributing most of them in the persons of Executive Secretary Ermita, Justice Secretary Gonzalez, Education Secretary Lapus, Budget Secretary Andaya, Presidential Chief of Staff Defensor, Finance Secretary Teves and former Solicitor General Nachura. Waiting in the wings are several other "graduating" Congressmen like Salceda, Libanan, Pichay and Salipuddin who are also slated to assume other juicy government positions after their stint in the Lower House. Their stand on various controversies in the Lower House affecting this administration seems to be enough justification for their present or promised positions. Even in the Supreme Court, there are two former Congressmen in the persons of Justices Tinga and the recently appointed Justice Nachura. Maybe the Lower House is really laden with talents but I am sure that there many others from the private and professional sectors who are equally talented or more qualified, but with the existing criteria for appointment, their chances of being appointed are almost nil.

There is also a Military component in the Cabinet. It may be small but they handle strategic departments like Transportation and Communications headed by former PNP Chief Mendoza, National Defense now manned by another former PNP Chief Ebdane Jr. who used to head the Public Works Department, and Environment and Natural Resources under former AFP Chief Angelo Reyes Jr. These departments are apparently more civilian in nature but the background of these three military men and their roles in EDSA II readily explains why they are occupying such important positions.

Of course, as earlier pointed out, it is the President’s prerogative to choose her team that will help her run the affairs of the government. No one can tell her whom to appoint or who are more qualified. The people can only express their approval or disapproval come elections in May this year.

E-mail at: [email protected] or [email protected]