Hom | Abou | Senator | Committee | Secretari | Legislativ | Publication | Gallery

e
t
s
s
at
e
s
Document
s
Press Release
August 4, 2016
0

Senate Centennial Lecture Series

Keynote Speech by
Hon. Aquilino "Koko" Pimentel III
Senate President

News

Thursday,
August 4

Pa
ngilinan
urges
Duterte
to
upgrade
antiquat
ed
justice
system
in
response
to
killings,
files
resolutio
n to
convene
JJELACC

S
enator
Gatchalia
n
Commen
ds
Duterte
for
Prioritizin
g ROTC
Revival

Le
garda
Lauds
Enactme
nt of
Integrate

Recto Room, 2nd Floor, Senate of the Philippines

Good morning to all!

Allow me to begin by thanking Senate Secretary Lutz Barbo and
Director Ronald Golding of the Senate Economic Planning Office for your
kind invitation for me to speak today at the third installment of the Senate
Centennial Lecture Series.
I am glad that you have invited me to speak about "Federalism" not
only because it is the hottest issue in town nowadays but because at no
other time in our history has this dream been closer to reality. President
Rodrigo Duterte campaigned and won on a platform of federalism and we
in PDP Laban have been advocates of federalism since our party was
founded in 1982 by Sen. Nene Pimentel, among others. In fact, federalism
has been part of our party's platform since its inception in the early 80s.
More importantly, the debate on the appropriate form of government
for our country has been fought since the beginning of our Republic. As
early as the 1890s, our national hero himself Jose P. Rizal advocated for a
federal form of government for our country. In his seminal work, The
Philippines A Century Hence, Rizal wrote that the country would probably
adopt the "freest government" and he predicted that the "islands will
probably declare themselves a federal republic."
While Rizal was a federalist, Andres Bonifacio, on the other hand, was a

unitarian. Therefore, this debate is nothing new and the discussion on

decentralization, devolution and local autonomy has been alive and well
for more than a century.

d History
Act

G
atchalian
: Senate
Energy
Committ
ee to
Investiga
te Power
Price
Rigging

Pi
mentel
father
and son
open
federalis
m
informati
on drive

Tr
anscript
of
Ambush
Interview
of Senate
President
Aquilino
"Koko"
Pimentel

Ke
ynote
Speech
by Hon.
Senate
President
Aquilino
"Koko"
Pimentel
III during
the
Senate
Centenni
al
Lecture
Series

Pa
ngilinan
supports
DSWD
plan to
give 40kg rice
bags to
CCT
beneficia
ries

B
am seeks
to help

So, let me begin my talk by discussing our experience with

decentralization and how the adoption of the federal system of
government maybe the next logical step for us to take after 25 years of
devolution of certain central government powers to the local governments.
I will also speak about the French system of government that our President
has proposed for our country.
Briefly, our experience with decentralization or devolution has
generally been positive. Since the Spanish colonial era up to the American
Occupation and all the way to the years of our independence as a Republic
in 1946 our system of governance had always been highly centralized or
unitarian. All power belonged to "Imperial Manila." This system of
government has stunted economic development and heightened tensions
among the people in the impoverished areas of the country, particularly in
the Moro dominated areas of Mindanao.
Then, in 1990 the landmark Local Government Code was introduced by
Tatay, Sen Nene Pimentel, and was passed by Congress and made
effective in 1991. Since then, certain powers of government like those that
pertain to health, agriculture, and social welfare, and snippets of power
over education, environment, tourism and to some extent, police had been
devolved to and exercised by local governments.
Under the Local Government Code of 1991, local autonomy would now
mean less reliance on the national government, including the "allotments"
given by Imperial Manila, and increased reliance on internally-generated
resources, or resources jointly generated with other institutions be they
other LGUs or private institutions.
Before the adoption of the Local Government Code, the taxes of the
nation and the revenues accruing to the government from natural
resources like geothermal plants, gold, copper and iron mines, and timber
had been monopolized by the central government. With the adoption of
the Code, these were now mandated to be shared between the central
government and the local government units.
Because of the devolution of certain central government powers to the
local governments and the compulsory sharing of central government
taxes and revenues derived from natural resources between the former
and the latter, the local governments are now able to provide many of the
basic services that they used to rely on the central government to deliver.
Moreover, the Code gave LGUs the power to create their own sources of
revenues and to levy taxes, fees, and charges, thus allowing them to
become self-reliant communities.
Today, more and more roads are constructed or repaired by the local
governments through their local engineering offices. More and more
schools and teacher needs are provided by the local governments (through
the local school boards). More and more health services are delivered by
local governments (through the local health boards). More and more
agriculture and social welfare services are delivered through locally
organized agriculture and social services offices.

In a word, more and more socio-economic activities are now

undertaken by local governments than ever before.
While some local governments failed to deliver on the promised
development for one reason or another, nonetheless by and large there
has been a huge leap in the delivery of basic services to our people since
the devolution of certain powers, finances and resources from the central
government to the local governments.
Having seen what devolution can accomplish, there is no turning back.
In fact, local governments now want more. They want at least 50% of the
taxes and revenues collected by the central government. They want more
powers over the police, tourism, trade, and development issues in general.
In fine, local governments want to raise the ante in the matter of powertax-and-revenue sharing with the central government in order to spur
more growth and development across the country. Notwithstanding what
the Code was able to accomplish, much remains to be done. Our country is
still mired in poverty and underdevelopment. A separatist rebellion is still
raging in Mindanao and a communist insurgency lives on in the
countryside. And more and more of our young people are flocking to
foreign shores to earn a living because our economy has not grown
enough to provide jobs for our growing labor force. While our GDP has
grown considerably in the past 10 years, the rich just keeps getting richer
and the vast majority of our people who are poor, even poorer.
Clearly, the highly centralized and unitary system that we have had for
more than a century has resulted in an imbalance in the distribution of
resources among LGUs. And most importantly, it has hampered the speedy
development of most areas in our country, particularly those in the
countryside. This has to change.
Nothing shows the yearning for change in this country more than the
election of our first Mindanaoan President who lamented about the
"erosion of the people's trust and confidence in government and its
leaders" in his inaugural address to the nation.
The problem, we submit, is our highly centralized form of government
and the solution, we submit, is the adoption of the federal system. We
believe that the only way to bring about equitable development in our
country is for the central government to share power - political and
economic - with local governments across the nation.
Federalism is derived from the Latin word foedus meaning "covenant."
A covenant signifies a partnership or marriage wherein individuals or
groups consent to unite for common purposes without giving up their
fundamental rights or identities, thus giving birth to a federal society.
A federal society is one which recognizes the diversity that exists
among the people. Indeed, federalism is a form of government made
necessary by certain diversities in society. For a diverse and multi-cultural
country such as ours with 7,100 islands spread across our great
archipelago, federalism provides a system wherein national unity is
maintained while at the same time recognizing and protecting the diversity
of Philippine society.

graduate
s secure
jobs
through
Trabaho
Centers

R
ecto: PH
jails
packed 4
times
their
capacity;
Digong
urged to
free sick,
old
prisoners
news
archives...

In federalism, sovereignty is constitutionally divided between a central

governing authority and constituent political units, like states or provinces.
Each level of government usually has its particular jurisdiction; areas of
public policy in which it alone has final authority, unless it decides to share
it with the other. Simply put, federalism can be viewed as a system that
accommodates both self rule of the constituent unit and shared rule at the
federal level. While there is no single model of a federal system in the
world, there are common attributes that characterize federal systems:
1. Distribution of powers between central and constituent units;
2. The participation of constituent units in central decision-making;
3. The constitutional autonomy of constituent units;
4. Accommodation of diversity;
5. Fiscal equalization; and
6. Intergovernmental instruments.
For me federalism rests on the principle that the smallest unit of
government knows what is best for the needs of its constituents. Decisions
should therefore be made by the local governments because they know
best who need help and how to help them. Since the beginning of my
career, I have always believed that greater autonomy must be granted to
the far flung regions of our country that are neglected and left behind in
economic development.
This is a vision I share with President Duterte who recognized that with
federalism, the wishes and aspirations of the various groups, tribes, and
peoples in Mindanao would be addressed.
Thus, aside from expanding the powers and increasing the resources
and finances to local governments, the next logical, and perhaps the only
peaceful, legal and constitutional avenue left open to those who wish to
lay down the foundations for a just and lasting peace in Mindanao, which
will also speed up the economic development of the entire country, is for
us to adopt a federal system of government.
May I, however, strongly emphasize that under a Federal system we
will be one country. There will only be one constitution. One armed forces.
One flag and anthem. One central bank. One monetary system. One
foreign policy. And One public education system, among others. There will
only be one federal republic with states and local governments under it.
My tatay, Sen. Nene Pimentel, has proposed 11 states under our
Federal Republic and he has, in fact, already proposed a constitution for
our new government. He will elaborate more about his proposal later.
In his SONA, the President proposed the French Model which is a hybrid
presidential-parliamentary system while others have proposed the pure
Parliamentary system of the United Kingdom and the Presidential-Federal
system of the United States. There are also others who propose the

Parliamentary-Federal systems of Canada and Germany, among others.

Since we are, more or less, somehow familiar with the US and British
models since we have been exposed to these systems through the media,
allow me to speak about the French system of government being proposed
by the President.
Unlike the American political system and the British political system
which essentially have existed in their current form for centuries, the
current form of the French system is a much more recent construct dating
from 1958 and today's Fifth Republic. The current system - which gives
substantial power in the President - is a response to the political
weaknesses of the pre-war Third Republic and post-war Fourth Republic.
Following a political crisis over France's colonial war in Algeria, Charles de
Gaulle took power under a new constitution which gave the President new
executive powers; making the post uniquely powerful in European politics.
Under the French system, the head of state is the President and the
head of government is the Prime Minister. The government under the
leadership of the PM directs and decides the policies of the nation and is
responsible or accountable to the French Parliament. As in other
parliamentary systems, the French Parliament can dismiss the government
with a motion of censure. But the similarities end there.
In the past, the President was a largely ceremonial and powerless
position but the constitution of the current Fifth Republic greatly increased
the President's powers. Consequently, the Presidency today is easily the
most powerful position in the French political system.
His duties include heading the armed forces, appointment of the Prime
Minister, power to dismiss or dissolve the National Assembly, chairing the
Council of Ministers (equivalent to the Cabinet), appointing the members
of the highest appellate court and the Constitutional Court, chairing the
Higher Council of the Judiciary, negotiating all foreign treaties, and the
power to call referenda, but all domestic decisions must be approved by
the Prime Minister. The President also has a very limited form of
suspensive veto.
The term of the President is five years and he can seek a second term
and normally secures it, but two Presidents of the Fifth Republic have failed
a re-election bid: Valery Giscard d'Estaing and Nicolas Sarkozy.
While he may just be the second highest official, the Prime Minister is
nonetheless also powerful. The head of the government is the Prime
Minister who is nominated by the majority party in the National Assembly
and appointed by the President for an indefinite term. The Prime Minister
recommends Ministers to the President, sets out Ministers' duties and
responsibilities, and manages the daily affairs of government. He issues
decrees and is responsible for national defense.
The Council of Ministers or the Cabinet is headed by the Prime Minister
but chaired by the President. The total size of the ministerial team is
typically 30-40. The members of the Council are called Ministers, while the
junior ministers are known as Secretaries of State - the reverse of the

nomenclature in the British political system.

In the French system, the relationship between the President and the
Prime Minister is critical. It is not always the case that these two
individuals come from the same political party and when they are of
different political persuasion (as was the case in 1986, 1993 and 1997),
the two figures must practice a process of 'cohabitation'.
France has a bicameral legislature. The lower house is called the
National Assembly while upper house is called the Senate. The lower
house has 577 seats representing single-member constituencies. The 2.5
million French people living abroad have the opportunity to vote in one of
11 constituencies grouping areas of the world together. Members serve
five year terms.
Members of the National Assembly are directly elected in a two-stage
voting system. A candidate who receives more than 50% of the vote in the
first round is elected. However, if no candidate receives 50%, there is a
second round which is a run-off between all those first round candidates
who secured more than 12.5% of the votes in that first round. This is held
one week later.
The National Assembly tends to specialise in scrutinising day-to-day
government operations. In cases of disagreement with the Senate, the
position of the National Assembly prevails.
The Senate, on the other hand, has a total of 348 seats: 323
representing mainland France, 13 representing French overseas territories,
and 12 representing French nationals abroad. Many French Senators are
also high-level local officials. The Senate has limited powers compared to
the National Assembly. They tend to specialize in constitutional matters
and foreign affairs including European integration.
Members of the Senate are indirectly elected by an electoral college of
88,000 made up of city councilors and local officials. Members serve a sixyear term and one-half of seats come up for election every three years.
Just like us, France uses a civil legal system; that is, law arises
primarily from written statutes; judges are not to make law, but merely to
interpret it. The basic principles of the rule of law were laid down in the
Napoleonic Code. The highest appellate court in France is called the Cour
de Cassation and the six chief judges are appointed by the President.
Unlike the supreme courts in other countries (such as the US), it does not
have the power of judicial review.
The power of judicial review is vested in a separate Constitutional
Court which is a unique creation of the Fifth Republic. The court consists of
nine members: one appointment made by each of the President, the
President of the Senate, and the President of the National Assembly every
three years for a nine-year, non-renewable term. This contrasts with the
US system where the President makes all appointments to the Supreme
Court but then the appointments are for life.
Although there have been recent moves to decentralisation, France is
still one of the most centralised major countries in Europe and the world.

France is not a federal state. That is the French system. But what model do
we pattern our proposal for the change in the form and system of
government? I propose that we adopt the best features of the
governments in Europe, North America, Australia and even Malaysia and
adapt them to our needs. We should not also close your eyes to the newly
emerging federations in South America and Africa. I am sure that their
experiences will be a big help in crafting a federal government responsive
to our needs.
Since under the federal system we will be empowering our local
governments, we need provide them the needed resources to be able to
fulfill their mandate. Towards this end, we propose to increase the revenue
share of local governments to as high as 70-80% of all government
revenue. This is consistent with our belief that local governments deserve
a bigger share of government resources since they are in a better position
to address the needs of their constituents. To address the reality that not
all states have the same resources and financial standing, there shall be
an equalization fund administered by the federal government which shall
be made available to states states should they need assistance.
Thus, we must act now. There is no time to lose. If we want to speed up
progress and economic development and lay the basis for a just and
lasting peace in Mindanao, we must go federal.
Towards this end President Duterte has tasked PDP Laban to take the
lead in advocating for a federal system of government in our country. In
compliance thereto, the party convened our leaders from across the
country in a Conference on Federalism and Charter Change to consult
them about moving forward in building a Federal Republic. We have also
convened Study Groups composed of experts, scholars, and practitioners
to help us craft our party position.
Federalism's complex nature demands careful study. Scholars contend
that there is not one model in the world that fits all. Each country must
discern its own version of federalism according to peculiar conditions of
their societies. Therefore, it is important to learn from the experiences whether good or bad - of existing federations.
We do not see federalism to be the cure-all to all our problems. In fact,
there is no cure-all to all our nation's ill. Federalism is not a perfect system;
but it may be the answer to the country's lingering problems rooted in our
country's multi-cultural nature. Maybe it is time to recognize the Filipino
identity as a "diversity of identities" and not one single monolithic artificial
construct. I submit that it is the recognition of differences that make
communities prepared to embrace a common identity with others.
In the end, federalism is not the only step after devolution but it is the
next logical step, if the Philippines chooses to further decentralize. And
since we should, the decision should be well-informed, well-thought of, and
participatory. In the ultimate analysis, federalism is a covenant that is
made by citizens, and ultimately the decision to federalize should reflect
the will of the people who choose to unite amidst their diversity.
Thank you.

 Senate of the Philippines. All rights reserved.

Job Openings | Contact Info | RSS Feeds

| Search | Site Map