Support anti-family dynasty bill

There is a revolutionary bill that has been introduced in the Philippine Senate that has not been given appropriate public awareness and attention. This is Senate Bill No. 2730, which is titled “An Act Defining and Prohibiting Political Dynasties, Providing Penalties Therefore and for Other Purposes.” The shorter title is the “Anti-Political Dynasty Law.”

It is worth reviewing the definition of terms as described in the bill.

“Political dynasty” refers to the concentration, consolidation or perpetuation of political powers related to one another.

“Political dynasty relationships” refers to the situation where a person who is the spouse or a relative within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity or affinity of an incumbent elective official holds or runs for an elective office simultaneously with the incumbent elective official within the same city and/or province or as party-list nominee or occupies the same office immediately after the term of office of the incumbent elective official.

“Fourth civil degree of consanguinity or affinity” refers to the relationship between two people who descend from a common ancestor and are four steps or degrees apart on a consanguinity chart, whether legitimate or illegitimate, full or half-blooded, including their spouses.

This bill, if enacted into law, will prohibit the related persons as defined from holding or running for any elective office.

In 1987, then president Corazon Aquino convened a Philippine Constitutional Assembly. The result was a new Constitution which was ratified in a nationwide plebiscite. In that Constitution, Article II, Sec. 26 states: “The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law.”

However, after 37 years, the Philippine Congress has not passed any legislation that provides for a definition of “political dynasty.” This has rendered that constitutional clause impossible to implement because of this lack of definition. Perhaps the present Congress is controlled by family dynasties and it is not surprising that they have failed to pass the necessary legislation to implement this constitutional ban on political dynasties.

Initially, there were political analysts who believe that the introduction of term limits for all elected offices in the 1987 Constitution would be sufficient to open the political system to more competition.

However, our experience the past 37 years show that this has not happened. Political dynasties circumvent the intention of term limits by running for another office and fielding a family member to replace them, thereby maintaining family control. In the few instances where family dynasties are defeated in electoral contests, they are usually replaced by another family dynasty.

In the proposed Senate bill, the Explanatory Note cites two studies. The first is a Harvard Academy research in 2011 and the second is a 2013 study by Tusalem, Rollin and Pe-Aguirre. The title of the second study is “The Effect of Political Dynasties on Effective Democratic Governance: Evidence from the Philippines.”

I have read both studies. In the second study of Tusalem, et al., it examines whether provinces dominated by family clans have a positive or detrimental effect on good governance. The findings show that provinces dominated by family clans are less likely to experience good governance in terms of infrastructure development, spending on health, the prevalence of criminality, full employment and the overall quality of government.

The study leads to the conclusion that political dynasties have damaging effects in the areas they govern. These provinces may have higher pork barrel but they use the resources allocated to their provinces primarily to maintain economic and political dominance.

The Harvard Academy research was written by Pablo Querubin. One of his findings based on a dataset of local elections from 1988 to 2019 shows that the number of governors with at least one relative in office making them a dynasty increased by 39 percent from 41 percent in 1988 to 80 percent in 2019. The percentage of mayors belonging to a dynasty increased from 26 percent in 1988 to 53 percent in 2019.

My personal conclusion is that the number of elected officials of dynastic families went down during the presidency of Corazon Aquino. However, the number of elected officials belonging to dynasties rapidly increased after she stepped down from the presidency.

The proposed Senate bill clearly defines family dynasty and its enactment will definitely lead to the weakening of political dynasties.

I am wondering why this bill has not been given a priority status. Clearly, the dominant family dynasties in Congress today will do all they can to block the bill. It will therefore take public pressure from other groups like NGOs and the Church to literally pressure our senators and congressmen to enact the bill into a law.

The proponent of the bill is Senator Padilla. I do not know whether his influence is strong enough to have the bill passed. However, I personally feel that Senate Bill No. 2730 must pass if we ever hope for a truly democratic country.

Political dynasties have concentrated power in a small set of families that benefit a very narrow set of interests. Those who oppose the perpetuation of family dynasties must raise their voices in support of Senate Bill No. 2730.