ERCOF.org Economic Resource Center For Overseas Filipinos Resources

THE POLITICAL PARTICIPATION OF OVERSEAS FILIPINOS IN A TROUBLED PHILIPPINE DEMOCRACY

By DR. JORGE TIGNO

Paper presented at the forum titled
Overseas Filipinos and the 2004 Elections
19 March 2004 – Manila Pavilion
Organized by the OFW Journalism Consortium and the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung

Introduction and Background

This presentation will, first, provide some degree of academic clarity as to the nature and meaning of politics that emanates from the discipline of Political Science; second, briefly discuss the general dynamics of the Philippine political system and why it can be considered a “troubled democracy;” and, third, enumerate the many ways by which political participation occurs as well as who can or should participate. In discussing these points, some theses are also forwarded significant to the overseas Filipino migrant sector and their participation in the country’s governance process.

The Nature of Politics

The available scholarly literature would define politics or things political in very dry and unappealing ways. Politics as the authoritative allocation of scarce resources or about who gets what, when, and how, certainly has pretty much the same level of intellectual seduction as a cabbage! Journalists, on the other hand, have much better success at making their definition of politics more appealing and seductive, especially to a non-academic audience. Politics for non-Political Scientists is often associated with controversy, corruption, conspiracy, and government impotence.

Related Information

Politics is not all that bad. It certainly gives a bad reputation to those of us who teach it. Unfortunately, the dominant perception is that it is. This is the reason why prominent writers like Vaclav Havel would write about “Anti-Political Politics” and young, activist-inspired politicians would refer to their strategy as “new politics” in order to distinguish themselves from the traditional politicians or “trapos” as they are known in the Philippines. However, we must not shrug politics aside simply because we imagine it to be an immoral and ineffective process of governance. This is certainly not the case particularly for those of us who do teach it to our students. The bottom line is that it is not bad or immoral to be a political animal. This is my first thesis.

The second impression that most people have about politics is that it’s a game played only by those who can afford to do so, i.e., that it is an elitist process. More specifically, it is a venture reserved mainly for the rich who know the law (or lawyers). Again, the more scholarly literature shows that politics is not a spectator sport for those unfamiliar with laws. Politics is not reserved to lawyers. Indeed, the best teachers and writers on the discipline of Political Science today are not lawyers (at least as far as the most prominent universities in the country and throughout much of the world are concerned). This leads me now to my second thesis – anyone can be political.

Being political, however, is different from being a politician. Being political refers to a genuine advocacy or concern for issues that impact upon society (the polis refers to the community). This implies a strong sense of civic responsibility and not just a concern for narrow, selfish interests that, in turn, can motivate political action.

Philippine Democracy

I would now like to comment on the topic that has been assigned to me. In a way, am glad to know the organizers used “troubled democracy” to refer to the system that prevails in the Philippines. A more brutal term would have been “failed democracy.” Still, being a “troubled” political system, there is reason to be concerned.

Philippine democracy is problematic in that it is not truly democratic. This is my third thesis. Despite the reestablishment of apparently democratic institutions, the Philippines still exhibits features that would indicate the trend of moving away from (and not towards) democratic consolidation. The 1987 Constitution, for instance, actually and essentially provides for a very strong Chief Executive despite provisions to the contrary. Although Congress reserves the right to approve the budgetary appropriations of the Executive Branch, the President has the power to release (or withhold) such resources. Pork barrel funds, for instance, although allowing for congressional discretion, is still left in the judgment of the President as to when such funds can be released and to whom – this is actually politics gone bad! This kind of discretionary power can break the political will of any member of Congress.

The 1987 Constitution provides for a system of party-list representation but the system itself is not proportional. The two percent “floor” minimum is incompatible with the maximum “ceiling” of only three representatives for party-list organizations. This is one major reason why party-list representation continues to be very limited even after the passage of RA 7941 or the Law on Party-List Elections.

But even as there are reasons to be frustrated about the democratic (or undemocratic) nature of our political system, there are also good reasons to be hopeful. One reason to be hopeful about Philippine democracy is the passage of the Overseas Absentee Voting Act (RA 9189). The law essentially opens a new avenue for the migrant sector to be political, i.e., to participate in the discussion, formulation, and implementation of policies affecting not just their immediate constituency but the rest of the country as well.

However, one wonders why it is only now that such an overseas absentee voting measure has become law. It is possible that the party in power may not really want such a measure to be passed because it may empower Filipinos overseas who may decide to vote overwhelmingly for the opposition given their criticisms of government. Opponents to the overseas absentee voting law are also afraid that the administration may also engage in massive cheating for overseas voters.

Political Participation and the Filipino Migrant Sector

Although it does not always have to be that way, politics is about government and about managing the affairs of the “republic” (res and publica, i.e., matters that pertain to the public). There are several ways by which government can be managed and influenced in such a way as to impact on the national ordinances that emanate from it. This is the fourth thesis of my presentation. Political action need not necessarily be predominated by one form or medium.

Based on the implied objectives of this morning’s Forum of finding a place for overseas migrants in the May 2004 elections in particular and to explore different avenues that would manifest the political strength of the migrant sector in general, there are several ways by which government may be induced or influenced or compelled to issue national ordinances for the benefit of a particular sector or constituency. Political advocacy can be asserted either from within or outside government. Demonstrations and other forms of mass (but non-violent) actions are expressions of political advocacy outside of government. Inside the governmental structure, political espousal for certain issues and constituencies can take the form of lobby groups and political parties.

Although there is a very thin line dividing the two, lobby groups are organizations that, essentially, merely try to influence public leaders while political parties are those that directly vie for public office by selecting and campaigning for individual candidates and ideologies. Rather than campaign for individual candidates, however, some political parties choose instead to campaign for specific but large constituencies like women, the youth, the elderly, the professionals, or some other groups that perceives itself as politically marginalized. This is the kind of political action that party-list organizations represent.

Party-list organizations, in general, derive their strength primarily from their sector-based constituencies. Correspondingly, there are many ways for party-list constituencies to support their organization. One way is by their conscientious payment of organizational dues in order to sustain the party-list organization. Another way is to volunteer for party activities such as mass mobilizations, voter education programs, fund-raising drives, among others. Still another way for members to support their organization is by participating in activities that would promote and project the party to the members of the larger community (i.e., even those who do not belong to the sector) by way of campaigning for their party. In addition to promoting the objectives of the party to the larger society, there is also the actual political act of voting for the party organization during elections. Finally, another way is to become part of the party leadership and to seek public office in the name of the party organization and its principles. This brings me now to the fifth thesis – mass party members play an important role in ensuring the sustainability and political success of the party organization not just in terms of simply voting for the party’s candidates during elections but also in making sure that the organization is able to occupy actual formal positions of political power. Once they occupy positions in government, party members may also seek seeking appointments to non-elective public positions (e.g., cabinet secretaries or directors of government corporations, bureaus, and line other agencies).

Actively seeking representation in governmental bodies (whether by elective or appointive means) is just one process by which sectors can formally participate in governance. However, it does not always follow that higher popular or sectoral representativeness will lead to better governance effectiveness in general and effectively addressing the interests of the sector that is represented in particular. It is also possible that the extent of political participation that is rendered may not be substantive enough in order for effective governance to take place. For instance, with the implementation of the 1991 Local Government Code (RA 7160), non-governmental organizations and peoples’ organizations (NGOs and POs) are given the mandate the participate in local governance by way of their membership in the local legislative councils (the sanggunians), the local development councils, and other local special bodies. However, their actual participation in certain local government units (LGUs) throughout the country has not been that effective and substantial. In some cases, NGO and PO representatives are rarely consulted by LGU officials. In other cases, their representatives are consulted but only superficially or nominally. The same thing may happen to the overseas migrant sector.

Concluding Statements

Party list organizations need to provide for strategies that can sharpen the political awareness of specific sectors towards effective and substantive political participation. They need to be looked at not just as electoral targets but as agents of change. The extent to which political groups are able to sharpen the political awareness of concerned sectors may be measured in terms of the extent of political participation of that sector.

It can be said that the overseas absentee voting law has the potential to empower the millions of overseas migrants by way of political enfranchisement. Allowing them to vote in Philippine elections can provide them the opportunity for effecting political change in the country. Their experience abroad as well as their economic status can allow them to make substantive contributions to improving the political system. Indeed, with elections in the country determined by a margin of a few hundred thousand votes, the overseas migrant vote is seen as a decisive electoral bloc that can make or break a candidate.

However, the overseas migrants themselves may not be fully appreciative of the very high and very promising potentials on their part for effecting radical and genuine political change. Of the estimated 7.5 million Filipinos overseas, only 302,360 registered in 85 registration centers worldwide. There were 124,862 registrants from the Middle East and Africa, 24,851 from Europe, 10,376 in the United States, South America and Canada, and 85,576 registering in Hong Kong.

This low turnout may be attributed to a number of factors. The Commission on Elections (COMELEC) attributes the low turnout (at least for those registering in the US and Canada) to the 3-year residency affidavit to be executed by immigrants in order to qualify to vote for the 2004 national elections. Presidential candidate Raul Roco, on the other hand, blames COMELEC itself for its failure to adequately explain and disseminate the rules. Nevertheless, COMELEC still considers the registration exercise a “success” in that they had effectively lowered their expectations from their original target of 2.5 million to around 400,000.

Political parties that would like to tap into the potential of the migrant vote would first have to convince the migrants themselves to exercise this political right. Establishing a common platform or political agenda is certainly in the right direction. This means coming up with a common organizational expression as well so that the political participation that does occur will not be dispersed and diluted.