1.

What is Psychological Incapacity?

concomitantly must be assumed and discharged by the parties to the

marriage. (Navarro, Jr. v. Cecilio-Navarro, G.R. No. 162049, April 13, 2007)

According to Article 36 of the Family Code of the Philippines, A marriage

contracted by any party who, at the time of the celebration, was psychologically
incapacitated to comply with his obligations of marriage, shall likewise be void even if
such incapacity becomes manifest only after its solemnization.
The Psychological Incapacity under Article 36 contemplates an incapacity or inability
to take cognizance of and to assume basic marital obligations, and is not merely the
difficulty, refusal or neglect in the performance of marital obligations or ill will. It
consists of:

3.

(a) A true inability to commit oneself to the essentials of marriage;

a)
The burden of proof to show the nullity of the marriage belongs to the plaintiff.
Any doubt should be resolved in favor of the existence and continuation of the
marriage and against its dissolution and nullity.

(b) The inability must refer to the essential obligations of marriage, that is, the
conjugal act, the community of life and love, the rendering of mutual help, and the
procreation and education of offspring; and
(c)

The inability must be tantamount to a psychological abnormality.

It means that if one of the parties is psychologically incapacitated to comply with his
obligation as a spouse, then the marriage is void from the very beginning. That is why
the legal remedy is to petition the court for nullity of the marriage.

How can I establish that there is Psychological incapacity in my marriage?

The Supreme Court had laid down the guidelines for the interpretation and application
of Article 36:

b)
The root cause of the psychological incapacity must be: (a) medically or
clinically identified, (b) alleged in the complaint, (c) sufficiently proven by experts and
(d) clearly explained in the decision.
c)
The incapacity must be proven to be existing at the time of the celebration of
the marriage.
d)
Such incapacity must be also shown to be medically or clinically permanent or
incurable.

2.
When can the ground of Psychological Incapacity be used in the nullity
of marriage?

e)
Such illness must be grave enough to bring about the disability of the party to
assume essential obligations of marriage.

The term psychological incapacity to be a ground for the nullity of marriage under
Article 36 of the Family Code, refers to a serious psychological illness afflicting a
party even before the celebration of marriage. (Republic v. Cabantug-Baguio, G.R.
No. 171042, June 30, 2008)

f)
The essential marital obligations must be those embraced by Articles 68 up to
71 of the Family Code as regards the husband and wife as well as Articles 220, 221,
and 225 of the same Code in regard to parents and their children.

These are disorders that result in the utter insensitivity or inability of the afflicted party
to give meaning and significance to the marriage he or she has contracted. (Toring v.
Toring, G.R. No. 165321, August 3, 2010)

Psychological incapacity must refer to no less than a mental (not physical) incapacity
that causes a party to be truly incognitive of the basic marital covenants that

g)
Interpretations given by the National Appellate Matrimonial Tribunal of the
Catholic Church in the Philippines, while not controlling or decisive, should be given
great respect by our courts.
h)
The trial court must order the prosecuting attorney or fiscal and the Solicitor
General to appear as counsel for the state. No decision shall be handed down unless
the Solicitor General issues a certification, which will be quoted in the decision, briefly
stating therein his reasons for his agreement or opposition, as the case may be, to
the petition.

(Republic v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 108763, February 13, 1997)

6.
Would the above instances be enough to prove the existence of
psychological incapacity?
4.
What are the elements of the Psychological Incapacity, for the marriage to
be annulled?

The incapacity of the spouse must such that, that it prevents him from complying with
the essential marital obligations as stated in the Family Code, like:

The elements of Psychological incapacity are:

(a) Grave It must be grave or serious such that the party would be incapable of
carrying out the ordinary duties required in a marriage;
(b) Juridical Antecedence It must be rooted in the history of the party antedating
the marriage, although the overt manifestations may emerge only after the marriage;
and
(c) Incurable and Permanent It must be incurable or, even if it were otherwise,
the cure would be beyond the means of the party involved. (Dimayuga-Larena v.
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 159220, September 22 2008)
The Supreme Court held that psychological incapacity should refer to a mental
incapacity that causes a party to be truly incognitive of the basic marital covenants
such as those enumerated in Article 68 of the Family Code and must be characterized
by gravity, juridical antecedence and incurability. (Santos v. Court of Appeals,
G.R.No. 112019, January 04 1995)

(a) To procreate children based on the universal principle that procreation of children
though sexual cooperation is the basic end of marriage;
(b) To live together under one roof for togetherness spells the unity in
marriage (Article 68 of the Family Code)
(c) To observe mutual love, respect and fidelity, for love, sexual comfort and loyalty
to one another are the basic postulates of marriage (Article 68 of the Family Code
of the Philippines)
(d) To render mutual help and support for assistance in necessities, both temporal
and spiritual, is essential to sustain the marriage. (Article 68 of the Family Code of
the Philippines)
(e) To jointly support the family for the spouses are joint administrator in the
partnership. (Article 70 of the Family Code of the Philippines)
(f) Not to commit acts which will bring danger, dishonor or injury to each other or to
the family for the safety and security of the family at all times is a primordial duty of
the spouses. (Article 72 of the Family Code of the Philippines)

5.

How is Psychological Incapacity usually manifested?

Some of the instances below are manifestations of Psychological Incapacity are:

7.
Would the presentation of an expert witness be enough to prove the
existence of the psychological incapacity in my marriage?
(a) The refusal of one spouse to live, dwell or cohabit with the other spouse after
marriage, without any fault at all from the aggrieved spouse;
(b) By the deliberate refusal to give support to the other spouse, or their common
children;
(c) When marriage is unbearable due to compulsive gambling, alcoholism, drug
addiction or violent jealousy of the spouse.

The presentation of expert proof in cases for declaration of nullity of marriage based
on psychological incapacity presupposes a thorough and an in-depth assessment of
the parties by the psychologist of expert, for a conclusive diagnosis of a grave, severe
and incurable presence of psychological incapacity. It is indispensable that the
evidence must show a link, medical or the like, between the acts that manifest
psychological incapacity and the psychological disorder itself. (Suazo v. Suazo, G.R.
No. 164493, March 12, 2010)

The incapacity should be established by the totality of evidence presented during

trial. (Bier v. Bier, G.R. No. 173294, February 27, 2008)

some psychological illness existing at the time of the celebration of the

marriage. (Marable v. Marable, G.R. No. 178741, January 17, 2011)

8.
Is there a need for that the party alleged to be psychologically
incapacitated has been personally examined by a physician or psychologist?

The intention of the law is to confine the meaning of psychological incapacity to the
most serious cases of personality disorders clearly demonstrative of an utter
insensitivity or inability to give meaning and significance to the marriage. (Santos v.
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 112019, January 04, 1995)

The Supreme Court held that, although there is no requirement that a party to be
declared psychologically incapacitated should be personally examined by a physician
or psychologist, there is a need to prove the psychological incapacity through
independent evidence adduced by the person alleging such disorder. (Bier v. Bier,
G.R. No. 173294, 27 February 2008)
Furthermore, the Supreme Court held that there is no requirement that the
defendant/respondent spouse should be personally examined by a physician or
psychologist as a condition sine qua non for the declaration of nullity of marriage
based psychological incapacity. What matters is whether the totality of evidence
presented is adequate to sustain a finding of psychological incapacity. (Marcos v.
Marcos, G.R. No. 136490, October 19 2000)
Correspondingly, the presentation of expert proof presupposes a thorough and indepth assessment of the parties by the psychologist or expert, for a conclusive
diagnosis of a grave, severe and incurable presence of psychological
incapacity. (Ngo Te v. Yu-Te, G.R. No. 161793, 13 February 2009)

9.

Proving that a spouse failed to meet his or her responsibility and duty as a married
person is not enough; it is essential that he or she must be shown to be incapable of
doing so due to some psychological illness.
(Yambao v. Republic, G.R. No. 184063, January 24, 2011)

11. My husband started showing signs of being psychologically incapacitated

about 4 years ago. However, we had been married for 15 years, and all that
time, he was the perfect husband. Can I use the ground of psychological
incapacity in my petition for nullity of my marriage?
No. The psychological incapacity must be proved to have been existing before the
marriage. If after the marriage, the ground of psychological incapacity cannot be
used. The Supreme Court had repeatedly pronounced that the root cause of the
psychological incapacity must be identified as a psychological illness, with its
incapacitating nature fully explained and established by the totality of the evidence
presented during the trial.

When does the action or defense for declaration of nullity prescribe?

The action or defense for the declaration of absolute nullity of marriage does not
prescribe, regardless of whether or not the marriage was celebrated before or after
the effectivity of the Family Code.

12. I have not been getting along with my wife for quite a while now. Can I
allege psychological incapacity as a ground for filing an annulment case
against her?

10. My husband wouldnt help me in the chores around the house, saying
those are a womans job. Can I use the ground of psychological incapacity in
my petition for annulment against him?

No you cannot. What the law requires to render a marriage void on the ground of
psychological incapacity is downright incapacity, not refusal or neglect or difficulty
much less ill will. The mere showing of irreconcilable differences and conflicting
personalities does not constitute psychological incapacity. (Republic v. Court of
Appeals, G.R. No. 108763, 13 February 1997)

No. It bears stressing that psychological incapacity must be more than just a
difficulty, refusal or neglect in the performance of some marital obligations.
Rather, it is essential that the concerned party was incapable of doing so, due to

13. If there is any doubt in my case for nullity of my marriage, how would the
court resolve the case?
The Supreme Court held that the Constitution sets out a policy of protecting and
strengthening the family as the basic social institution and marriage as the foundation
of the family. Marriage, as an inviolable institution protected by the State, cannot be
dissolved at the whim of the parties. In petitions for the declaration of nullity of
marriage, the burden of proof to show the nullity of marriage lies on the plaintiff. Any
doubt should be resolved in favor of the existence and continuation of the marriage
and against its dissolution and nullity. (Republic v. Cabantug-Baguio, G.R.No.
171042, 30 June 2008)

14. What will happen to the children if the petition for nullity of marriage has
been granted on the ground of psychological incapacity?
The children will still be considered legitimate. Children of marriages void under
Article 36 (psychological incapacity) and under Article 53 (second marriage without
delivery of legitime to children of the first marriage) are considered legitimate, as an
exception to the general rule.

(SANTOS)
Definition of Federalism

A system of government which has created, by written agreement, a central and

national government to which it has distributed specified legislative (law-making)
powers, called the federal government, and regional or local governments (or
sometimes called provinces or states) to which is distributed other, specified
legislative powers. (Duhaime's Law Dictionary)

Potential Arguments

Political Dynasties
o Article 2 Section 26 states: The State shall guarantee equal access
to opportunities for public service and prohibit political dynasties as
may be defined by law.
o 4 bills created related to political dynasties but none approved

Senate Bill 2649 (latest by Miriam Santiago)

House Bill 172

House Bill 837

House Bill 2911

Concentration of power by political dynasties with a bad track record
o Studies show that members of the Congress belong to dynasties
and hold office for consecutive terms limiting opportunities for other
potentials:

70% of Congress are from Political Dynasties (Querubin

2012)

40% of 15th Congress belong to Political Dynasties

(Ronald Mendoza 2012)

94% of local governments are ruled by political dynasties

(http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2013/03/01/914637/miri
am-philippines-worlds-political-dynasty-capital)
o Poverty rates in provinces ruled by political dynasties are high:

10 of the poorest provinces are ruled by political dynasties

(http://www.canadianinquirer.net/2014/05/13/top-10poorest-provinces-ruled-by-political-dynasties-caloocansolon/)

Defense

Political Dynasties
o Right to vote and be voted for (equal access of opportunity)

When we prevent members of political dynasties to run for

election we will contradict the following:

Article 2 Section 26 does not define what a

political dynasty is. It lacks the enabling law to
implement it.
Set qualifications provided by the constitution for
political positions does not include limitations for
members of political dynasties such as but not
limited to Article 6 Section 3 and 6, Article 7
section 2 and 3
Article 5 Section 1: Suffrage may be exercised by
all citizens of the Philippines, not otherwise
disqualified by law, who are at least eighteen
years of age, and who shall have resided in the
Philippines for at least one year and in the place
wherein they propose to vote, for at least six
months immediately preceding the election. No
literacy, property, or other substantive
requirement shall be imposed on the exercise of
suffrage. Additional limitation on the right of
people to decide who to vote.

Concentration of power by political dynasties with a bad track record:

o Political dynasties neither reduce nor increase poverty. Political
reforms should be in place to increase knowledge and eliminate
poverty (Ronald Mendoza 2013)
o Philippine Statistics Authority - Poverty Statistics clearly show that
political dynasties are not related to poverty.

Southern leyte 36.4% to 30.4% (Mercado Clan)

Leyte 31.9% 39.1% (Lucy Torres, Richard Gomez and

Lucy Torres brother)

Biliran 20.7% down to 15.2% (Espina Clan)

Eastern Samar 59.4% down to 40.1% (Petilla Clan).

(http://www.nscb.gov.ph/ru8/)

Great Testing ground for new policies and programs:

o Right to Education

Article XIV Section 18 Constitution -State shall protect

and promote the right of all citizens to quality education at
all levels, and shall take appropriate steps to make such
education accessible to all:

4.6 M children ages 12 to 15 will not be able to

attend school due to shortage of public schools
(http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2013/05/28/94
7199/classroom-shortage-keep-4.6-m-youthsout-school)

2013 statistics by PSA states that there were

about 4 million out of school youth in 2013.
12.4% of which is from ARMM
(https://psa.gov.ph/content/out-school-childrenand-youth-philippines-results-2013-functional-

literacy-education-and)
o

Right to Health Care:

Article XIII Section 11 Constitution -The State shall adopt

an integrated and comprehensive approach to health
development which shall endeavor to make essential
goods, health and other social services available to all the
people at affordable cost. There shall be priority for the
needs of the under-privileged, sick, elderly, disabled,
women, and children. The State shall endeavor to provide
free medical care to paupers.

Save the children report states that chronic

malnutrition or stunting rate for children under-5
years old has significantly increased to 33.5%
from 30.5 in 2013. Dr ArmadoParawan further
said that children born to the poorest mothers are
thrice likely to suffer
fromstunting(http://www.savethechildren.org.ph/a
bout-us/media-and-publications/pressreleases/media-releasearchive/years/2016/philippines-faces-worstchronic-malnutrition-rates-in-10-years)

According to the 2013 Food and Nutrition

Research Institute National Nutrition Survey,
close to 12,000 children in ARMM have 9 times
more likelihood of dying because of Severe Acute
Malnutrition.
(http://www.unicef.org/philippines/reallives_24596
.html#.V9VLhvl96aE)

Provinces of Catanduanes and Bicol has the

highest Malnutrition Rate in the Philippines
(http://www.manilatimes.net/2-provinces-in-bicolregion-have-high-malnutrition-rate/218398/).
Access to Courts (Justice Delayed is Justice Denied)

Article II Section 11 Bill of Rights - Free access to the

courts and quasi-judicial bodies and adequate legal
assistance shall not be denied to any person by reason of
poverty.

Prisoners waiting for their case hearings for

almost 10 to 15 years urging them to request
assistance from the Supreme Court
(http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/543797/
news/regions/pampanga-inmates-seek-sc-helpover-slow-justice-system)

Obvious cause of delayed justice here is

undoubtedly the lack of courts and/or the many
existing vacancies in our courts not only in far
flung areas but also in urban

centers(http://www.philstar.com/opinion/2013/06/
07/951059/justice-delayed)
Sample cases
o GR No. 123346
o GR No. 134385
o GR No. 148767

Increase participation of people

o Increase government employment opportunities

The benefits of federalism or placing regions under

regional governments whereby executive, legislative
and judicial powers are decentralized to state or regional
governments and further decentralized to provincial, city
and municipal and barangay governmentscould jibe well
with the reform and development agenda of agricultural
modernization, rapid industrialization and employment
creation to bring economic progress to various regions of
the country. (http://www.mb.com.ph/preparing-forfederalism/)

Important is the number of citizens who can participate in

the public decision making of the state
(https://www.law.berkeley.edu/files/Rubinfeld.Inman_Feder
alism.pdf)

(CARIO)
1) Decentralized governance is also related to the principle of subsidiarity: problems
should be attended to at the lowest level in which they can be solved, by the people
directly concerned, without elevating the problems for decision at higher levels. In
short, the Estados can materialize proposed projects without the bureaucratic hassle.
(Abueva, 2005)
2) Composed of several islands, the highly centralized unitary form of government is
ineffective in dealing with contingencies in far-flung parts of the country. (Alex B.
Brillantes & Moscare, 2002) Hence, fast response on calamities is to be expected
since the local government which is directly affected by the same can quickly attend
to the emergency needs of their people.Such fast response can be attributed not only
because of its proximity to the area but also because of their reinforced preparedness
and response capabilities.
3) Federalism is particularly relevant for unitary countries considering it as a solution
to their lingering ethnic conflicts or inequalities that seek to eliminate its territorial
integrity.(Montes, 2014)
4) The administration and power is concentrated in Manila which results to inequitable
development among the different regions.(Alex B. Brillantes & Moscare, 2002)
Federalism can solve this dilemma since decentralization will not only shift the focus
of fiscal capacity of the state to the capital (NCR) but will also allocate enough funds
for each local governments priority concerns.

References
Abueva, J. V. (2005, June 29). Some Advantages and Disadvantages of Federalism
And Parliamentary Government for the Philippines. Retrieved September 04,
2016, from http://pcij.org/blog/wp-docs/Abueva-Federalism.pdf
Alex B. Brillantes, J., & Moscare, D. (2002, July 1). Decentralization and Federalism
in the Philippines : Lessons from Global Community. Retrieved September 4,
2016, from
http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/eropa/unpan032065.
pdf
Montes, R. N. (2014, January 29). Understanding Federalism. Retrieved September
4, 2016, from
http://localgov.up.edu.ph/uploads/1/4/0/0/14001967/montes_understanding_f
ederalism.pdf

(ISIDRO)
What is federalism?
It is a form of government where sovereignty is constitutionally shared between a
central governing authority and constituent political units called states or regions.
In basic terms, it will break the country into autonomous regions with a national
government focused only on interests with nationwide bearing: foreign policy and
defense, for example.
The autonomous regions or states, divided further into local government units, will
have primary responsibility over developing their industries, public safety, education,
healthcare, transportation, recreation, and culture. These states will have more power
over their finances, development plans, and laws exclusive to ther jurisdiction.
The central government and states can also share certain powers.
How is it different from what we have now?
We presently have a unitary form of government. Most administrative powers and
resources are with the national government based in Metro Manila. It's Malacaang
that decides how much to give local government units. The process is prone to
abuse, with governors and mayors sometimes having to beg Malacaang for projects
they believe their communities need.
How local government units spend their budget has to be approved by the national
government.
In federalism, the states will have the power to make these decisions with little or no
interference from the national government.
Examples of federal countries: United States, Canada, Australia, Brazil, India,
Malaysia.
ADVANTAGES

Locals decide for themselves.

Regions have their own unique problems, situations, geographic, cultural, social and
economic contexts. Federalism allows them to create solutions to their own problems
instead of distant Metro Manila deciding for them.
The states can establish policies that may not be adopted nationwide. For example,
liberal Metro Manila can allow same-sex marriage which the state of Bangsamoro,
predominantly Muslim, would not allow. In the United States, some states like
Colorado and Washington have legalized recreational marijuana even if other states
have not.
This makes sense in an archipelago of over 7,000 islands and 28 dominant ethnic
groups. For decades, the national government has been struggling to address the
concerns of 79 (now 81) provinces despite challenges posed by geography and
cultural differences.
With national government, and thus power, centered in Metro Manila, it's no surprise
that development in the mega city has spiralled out of control while other parts of the
country are neglected.

More power over funds, resources.

Right now, local government units can only collect real estate tax and business permit
fees. In federalism, they can retain more of their income and are required to turn over
only a portion to the state government they fall under.
Thus, local governments and state governments can channel their own funds toward
their own development instead of the bulk of the money going to the national
government. They can spend the money on programs and policies they see fit without
waiting for the national government's go signal.

Promotes specialization.

The national and state governments can specialize in different policy domains. With
most administrative powers now with the regional governments, the national
government can focus on foreign policy, defense, and other nationwide concerns, like
healthcare and taxation.
States have more autonomy to focus on economic development using their core
competencies and industries. The state of Central Luzon can focus on becoming an
agricultural hub. The state of Mimaropa, home to Palawan, can choose to use ecotourism as its primary launch pad.

Possible solution to the Mindanao conflict.

The creation of the state of Bangsamoro within a federalist system may address
concerns of separatists who crave more autonomy over the administration of Muslim
Mindanao.

Decongestion of Metro Manila.

Through fiscal autonomy for state governments, federalism will more evenly distribute
the country's wealth. In 2015, 35% of the national budget went to Metro Manila even if
it represents only 14% of the Philippine population.

Lessens dependence on Metro Manila.

When there is political upheaval in Metro Manila, other regions that have nothing to
do with the chain of events are left waiting for the resources that ony the national
government can release. With federalism, regions work independently of Metro
Manila for most concerns.

Brings government closer to the people.

If detractors say federalism will only make local political dynasties more powerful,
supporters give the argument that, in fact, it will make all local leaders, including
those part of political dynasties, more accountable to their constituents. State
governments will no longer have any excuse for delays in services or projects that, in
the present situation, are often blamed on choking bureaucracy in Manila.
Assuming more autonomy for regions leads to economic development, there will be
more incentive for Filipinos to live and work in regions outside Metro Manila. More

investors may also decide to put up their businesses there, creating more jobs and
opportunities to attract more people away from the jam-packed mega city.

Encourages competition.

With states now more self-reliant and in control of their development, they will judge
themselves relative to how their fellow states are progressing. The competitive spirit
will hopefully motivate state leaders and citizens to level up in terms of quality of life,
economic development, progressive policies, and governance.
How the Philippines would look when federal
In some proposals, there will be 10 or 11 autonomous states. Senator Aquilino
Pimentel Jr envisioned 11 states plus the Federal Administrative Region of Metro
Manila.
Here's how the Philippines will look like as laid out in Pimentel's 2008 Joint Resolution
Number 10.
Cost of federalism
Shifting to federalism won't come cheap. It would entail billions of pesos to set up
state governments and the delivery of state services. States will then have to spend
for the elections of their officials.
Attempts at federalism in PH
There was an attempt during the administration of President Gloria Macapagal
Arroyo. One of her campaign promises was to reform the 1987 Constitution.
A consultative commission she created recommended federalism as one of the goals
of the proposed charter change. But the attempt failed because of opposition from
various sectors who believed Arroyo wanted to use the reform to extend her term
limit.
(Note that shifting to a federal government does not necessarily mean an extension of
term limits for the sitting president. Such an extension would only take place in a shift
to a parliamentary government.)
In 2008, Pimentel Jr and Bacolod City Representative Monico Puentevella filed joint
resolutions to convene Congress into a constituent assembly with the goal of
amending the constitution to establish a federal form of government.
http://www.rappler.com/nation/politics/elections/2016/120166-federalism-pros-consexplainer

(HALE)
BIGGER AUTONOMOUS STATES FIRST by Chito Gavino III

2.

Contiguousness; and

3.

Culture

by Federal Philippines
Federalism is based on dual sovereignty of the Federation and the States. In the
Federal Republic every Estado is an autonomous regional component of the Federal
Republic.

The writer, on the other hand, recommends a Two-Step Determination of

Autonomous States to ENSURE economic viabilities of these States with Minimum of
financial risk for both the Federal / National government and State governments.
Here is my proposed initial or first eight States:

-oOoAs I have written in one of my previous articles, the first priority in an honest-togoodness Charter Change (Cha-Cha) thru a Constitutional Convention (Con-Con) is
the shift from highly centralized Unitary System to a highly decentralized Federal
System. The main reason, for this is to dismantle Manila Imperialism and achieve
more effective and efficient governance. When we adopt a Federal System, we must
carefully divide the Philippines into several autonomous States. The question then is:
How many States will compose a federalized Philippines?
In the book of Dr. Jose V. Abueva titled, Charter Change for Good Governance
published by the Citizens Movement for a Federal Philippines (CMFP), eleven States
has been proposed. These are:

1.

Bangsamoro (ARMM) with 5 provinces;

2.

Davao Region and Central Mindanao with 8 provinces;

3.

Western and Northern Mindanao with 12 provinces;

4.

Visayas and Palawan with 17 provinces;

5.

Bicol and Southern Luzon with 15 provinces;

1.

Bangsamoro (ARMM) with 5 provinces;

6.

Metro Manila (NCR) with 13 cities and 4 adjacent municipalities;

2.

Davao Region and Central Mindanao with 8 provinces;

7.

Central Luzon with 7 provinces; and

3.

Western and Northern Mindanao with 12 provinces;

8.

Cordillera and Northern Luzon with 15 provinces

4.

Central-Eastern Visayas with 10 provinces;

5.

Western Visayas and Palawan with 7 provinces;

6.

Bicol with 7 provinces;

7.

Southern Luzon with 8 provinces;

8.

Metro Manila (NCR) with 6 provinces;

9.

Central Luzon with 7 provinces;

10. Cordillera (CAR) with 6 provinces; andNorthern Luzon with 9 provinces;

The criteria adopted in this proposed division are:
1.

Economic Viability

Yes, the criteria of Economic Viability and Contiguousness are initially given more
importance.
After 15-20 years, the Second Step will take place. This means that Congress or the
New Parliament will mandatorily review these eight States and see if there will be a
need to divide one or more of these States into a maximum 9to avoid
gerrymandering) of two. Of course, the same three criteria mentioned earlier will
guide said review. No need for another Cha-Cha to do this for Congress or the New
Parliament Constitution.
This Two Steps approach will end once and for all questions about economic
viability of some States. This also shows that if we really desire for a Federal Republic
of the Philippines in the earliest time, WE CAN DO IT ONE CHA-CHA. No more of
this grassroots/constituent-initiated transition as proposed by the controversial
Consultative Commission (Con-Com) which is actually a design to delay the adoption
of a Federal System in the country. No more of this two Cha-Chas before a federal
system is finally adopted. Of course sufficient time must be allocated in this regard.
No undue rush on Cha-Cha thru Con-Con.

We are aware that some smaller areas would like to become immediately as
autonomous States such as Palawan, Cebu, SoCSarGen (South Cotabato,
Saranggani and General Santos), etc. To be honest, such position somehow presents
some serious negative reactions especially from anti-federal people which use this
argument that some federalists are creating their own fiefdoms. That is why we
appeal to these federalists to sober up a little and support our Two Steps strategy.
Those places I mentioned can later on pursue this matter after we gained more
experience and improved the countrys economic standing in implementing the
federal system. How about it guys?
The powers appropriately vested in the autonomous State government must be
clearly specified in its State Constitution. These are:
1.

Education

2.

Health

3.

Infrastructure and Public Works

4.

Agriculture

5.

Industry

6.

Police

7.

State Judicial System

8.

Communication and Transportation

9.

Custom and Taxation

10. Others

FEDERALISM: New Hope for Mindanao and the Philippines

by Federal Philippines | 11:05 AM in |
By SYLVIA OKINLAY-PARAGUYA, Chairperson, MINCODE
WE ARE for a federal form of government. This commitment has been enshrined in
our advocacy since we converged in 1991 as the broadest and largest grouping of
cooperatives, people's organizations, non-government organizations and nongovernment individuals. It is within the context of political parity and economic equity
the twin goals of genuine people's development-- that firmed up our commitment
for a federal republic of the Philippines. The interrelatedness of political stability and
economic empowerment are clearly manifested as we assist and work with the
communities in the six regions, as well as in the 25 provinces in Mindanao. Such
relationship can also be gleaned from the national development perspective: between
Mindanao and the central government in Manila.
Federalism as a Peace Option
Our collective quest for peace is anchored on the results of the talks between the
government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front, between the government and
National Democratic Front, and between the government and the Revolutionary
Proletariat Movement in Mindanao. While we remain optimistic on the mainstream
peace process, greater people's participation in the peace talks must also take place.
One of the most important developments contributing to the shift in the world political
paradigm from a centralized government to federalism has been the demonstrated
utility of federal arrangements in peace-making. In a world well advanced in its
movement toward federalism as the new paradigm for interstate and intergroup
relations, we must expect it also to offer considerable promise for peace-making. As
federalists, we work hard to find ever better ways to utilize and apply federalism to the
cause of peace.

1.

Provinces / Chartered Cities

2.

Component Cities / Municipalities

There is a certain justification for this seeming truth in that "federal" is a loaded term,
one that, more than simply describing arrangements and institutions, has to do with
serious principles, real attitudes, binding relationships, specific expectations with
regard to mutual trust, in short, the will to federate. Even if the discussion of federalist
political culture is relatively not new on the political science agenda, the sense that
federalism can only succeed where such political culture exists sufficiently also
figures into this equation. Even less expressed is the expectation that federalism has
at least one of its major roots in the idea of federal liberty, that is to say, liberty to do
that which is mutually agreed upon in the founding compact or its subsequent
constitutional modifications. Without federal liberty as an accepted principle neither
freedom nor responsibility can develop properly.

3.

Barangays

One of the ways to overcome the deficiency seems to be by widening the sphere to

The autonomous State will have this local government set-up:

Autonomous State
Local Government Units as before:

be encompassed by the solution. This is necessary for federal peace-making to take

place, in some cases from the very first. For example, efforts to bring together two
separate units are inevitably problematic not only because it is easy for every issue to
turn into a zero-sum game with one side winning and the other losing, but it also is
difficult to transform develop or transform issues into ones in which both sides win. It
is true that in some cases when both sides are losing sufficiently, widening the sphere
helps them come together to control their losses.
No matter what form federalism takes, how federal institutions are designed, and
what federal principles are emphasized, it is generally clear by now that where there
is a positive attitude toward federalism and a will to build a federal system, where the
political society involved rests on sufficient trust, sufficiently widespread to allow the
many leaps of faith that must be taken to make federalism work, where political
culture is either favorable or at least open to federal arrangements, where all of this
leads to a wider understanding of liberty as federal liberty, then federalism has a good
chance of succeeding when used for peace-making. It may have almost as good a
chance if most of those elements are present and some chance even if one or two of
them is. But it seems quite clear that without any, the chances of success are
extremely limited.
Federalism and the Right to Self-Determination
Asserting and reclaiming their self-determination is essential among Lumad and
Bangsamoro peoples.
The Lumad peoples have persistently expressed their own preference for selfdetermination, having seen that their absorption into the unitary political system has
brought about the establishment and solidification of a threat to their very own
existence and the integrity of their distinct cultures.
The Bangsamoro have their own distinct identity and vested interest that must be
respected and cannot be satisfied by a continued subscription to political uniformity.
With the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao, the central government has
allowed, albeit grudgingly, a departure from the stranglehold of central authority. The
passage of the Local Government Code in 1991 further chips away powers from
central authority; the local government units from the regional autonomy to the
barangay are able to exercise greater self-determination.
The right to decide and choose that is best for one's self is a sacred right that cannot
be taken away from any individual and citizen. Those deprived of this right are also
unable to fulfill their aspirations for the future.
Under a federal set up, greater powers will be devolved to the local citizenry, making
grassroots participation more meaningful and broaden the powers of the citizens over
the state.

Self-determination comes in many forms. In the political sphere, it comes in the form
of semi-independent units. In the Philippines: sitio, barangay, municipality, province,
regional autonomy, nation. Self-determination grows with increased political
autonomy or the ability to stand on one's own feet. In the political history of the world,
greatest autonomy to political units is experienced by the states of a federal state.
The more obvious advantage is greater power-sharing between the national or
federal government and the state/local government. Since the states will have their
own legislatures, real decision-making is brought closer home to the people. This is
the immediate consequence of the political re-structuring. But, in fact, the citizens can
push further to ensure that in the federal constitution and the state laws, greater
people participation in the decision-making process is institutionalized.
Federalism and Diversity
This year's Human Development Report of the United Nations Development
Programme highlights cultural diversity. At our end, we also delight in UNDP's 2004
report because that has been our general advocacy for Mindanao: that we promote
respect and understanding among the diverse and unique groups of people whether
they are Lumad, Bangsamoro or Christian settlers.
Diversity and development might seem to sit oddly together. But they are intimately
linked, and the report seeks to show that they are not related in the way many people
assume. The UNDP's press release says unambiguously that there is no evidence
that cultural diversity slows development, and dismisses the idea that there has to be
a trade-off between respecting diversity and sustaining peace. In countries like the
Philippines, and in regions such as Mindanao, there is enough to argue that indeed
diversity plays an important role in development given the composition of the ethnic
groups: 13 ethnolinguistic groups representing the Bangsamoro people, 18
ethnolinguistic groupings of the Lumad, and the settlers who are Ilonggo, Ilocano,
Cebuano, Boholanon, and so on.
The not too obvious but significant advantage of federalism is its ability to address the
demands of a pluralistic society, meaning one that has a mixture of populations of
diverse cultures and ethnolinguistic identities. This is nowhere more pronounced than
in Mindanao, with its Moro population of about 4 million and the Lumads numbering
about 2 million, altogether making about 40% of the total Mindanao population.
It is noted that only in a federal structure of government it is possible to properly and
correctly rule such a society in such a manner as to accommodate the distinctiveness
of each nationality while orchestrating them all towards the common national goal
which comprehends their diversities.
Federalism and Fiscal Management
Although there is a need to establish correlation, it has been noted that the most of
the politically stable and economically advanced countries in the world follow a
federal set-up. These include Germany, the United States of America, Canada,
Australia, Brazil, Mexico, Austria, Argentina, and closer to home, India and Malaysia.

It is interesting to note that seven of the top twelve countries in the world in terms of
per capita income in 1997 were federal, while six of the top 12 in gross domestic
product were likewise federal, while six of the top 12 in gross domestic product were
likewise federal.
Assuming that we are under a federal structure, would the economic crisis faced by
the nation today be isolated in Manila only? It is definitely possible.
Decentralized fiscal systems offer more potential for improved macroeconomic
governance than do centralized fiscal systems, because they require greater clarity
about the roles of various players and decision-makers and-to ensure fair play-greater
transparency in rules governing interactions.
Challenges of globalization usher in fiscal reforms in developing countries. Among
federalist countries, the following are noticeable:
Monetary policy is best entrusted to an independent central bank with a mandate for
price stability.
Fiscal rules accompanied by gatekeeper intergovernmental councils or committees
provide a useful framework for fiscal discipline and coordination of fiscal policy.
The integrity and independence of the financial sector contribute to fiscal prudence in
the public sector.
To ensure fiscal discipline, government at all levels must be made to face the financial
consequences of their decisions.
Societal norms and consensus about the roles of various levels of government and
limits to their authority are vital to the success of decentralized decision-making which
can happen only under a federal structure.
Tax decentralization is a prerequisite for sub-national access to market credits.
Higher-level institutional assistance may be needed to finance local capital projects.
An internal common market is best preserved by constitutional guarantees.
Intergovernmental transfers in developing countries undermine fiscal discipline and
accountability while building transfer dependencies that cause a slow economic
strangulation of fiscally disadvantaged regions.
Periodic review of jurisdictional assignments is essential to realign responsibilities
with changing economic and political realities.
Finally, and contrary to a common misconception, decentralized fiscal systems offer
more potential for improved macroeconomic governance than do centralized fiscal
systems.
The New Hope for Mindanao and the Philippines
Indeed the federal system is worth looking into as a more ideal set-up for Mindanao
and the Philippines. More importantly, it is one system that may be able to effectively
address the current and peculiar situation of Mindanao not only as a victim of neglect
but also as a unique island-region that harbor three peoples of diverse backgrounds,

customs, culture, traditions, and social systems. More specifically, it is a political

option that may help prevent a stalemate that can lead to another Mindanao war.
Clearly, what Mindanao needs is unity in diversitynot integration, not assimilation-or
at least harmony in diversity. Admittedly, a federal system is friendlier to this idea than
the unitary and centralized system that we have.
Sources:
1. MINCODE Development Agenda: A Socio-Cultural and Political Approach to
Mindanao Peace and Development. 2003.
2. B.R. Rodil. Suitability of the Federal System in Mindanao. Undated.
3. Rey Magno Teves. A Federal Republic of the Philippines. Undated.
4. Rey Magno Teves. Impasse Breaker: An Islamic State Within a Federal
Philippines? Intersect. Intersect. September 1999.
THE GAINS OF BUSINESS IN A FEDERAL SYSTEM
by Federal Philippines | 5:23 PM in business, federalism, mindanao, philippines
by Antonio R. Santos, Sr.
Just recently, the President of the Philippines called for the expediency to amend the
1987 Constitution. In the eyes of our President, it is high time that we should be
sensible of our countrys malady, and, therefore, undertake the necessity of some
speedy and powerful remedy. We in the Mindanao business community think that no
other alternative is more compelling.
It can be recalled that on September 2004, the pro-active Mindanao business
community, through the Mindanao Business Council (MBC), presented the Mindanao
Action Agenda to Her Excellency Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo during the 13th Mindanao
Business Conference (MinBizCon). As an expression of support to the present
administration, we have collectively committed to the quest for the private sectors
important role in the pursuit for just, equitable, and lasting peace in the island.
One of the private sector commitments under the Mindanao Action Agenda is the shift
to a federal form of government. To help achieve this goal, the MBC and the local
chambers of commerce together with Kusog Mindanaw as the lead non-government
organization, commit to pursue local empowerment under a federal set-up through
the establishment of the multi-sectoral Mindanao Coalition of Cities for Transparent
and Accountable Governance.
There is certainly a great economic force behind this advocacy. Regional disparities
with respect to population size, per capita income, administrative capacity and social
needs, do not allow for simple solutions. And so it is important thresh out the issues
affecting regional development in the context of the proposed reform to a federal
state.

Investments and Federalism

In the first place, the new system should give due consideration to sustainable and
equitable socio-economic development through the promotion of inter-state and intraregional cooperation. Thus, policies on trade and investment will be re-evaluated and
planned according to the regions capacity to produce as well as the demand in the
local, national and/or international market.
For the business sector, this means an increased concentration on local industries,
diversified quality products and greater trade benefits from regional policies.
Consequently, businessmen will have a more conducive and competitive business
environment and investors will be able to make investment decisions over the longerterm. A well-grounded model country that dashed for economic growth is Malaysia.
The success of the Malaysian Government is partly because of diversification of its
manufacturing base, diversification of its export markets, and strengthening of its
industrial capabilities. In particular, Ipoh, which is in the heart of the tin mining region
and close to the rice bowl sections of West Malaysia, is served by trading firms
specializing in mining and rice farming equipment and supplies. Businesses
specializing in mining and rice farming equipment and supplies and trading centers
having countryside marketing facilities are also a significant source of revenue for the
locality.
Taxation and Federalism
In the second place, a federal form of government results in greater autonomy to
revise taxation policies. Since local governments are semi-autonomous entities within
the state framework, review of rates is faster and more reflective of the cost of
services that a particular region provides. And even though tax rates in general are
linked to a broader political process, a federal system would devise and take into
consideration the fairer calculation of rates beneficial to all parties involved within the
region. The right of the federal government to levy taxes shall, as Hamilton puts it,
contain in their own nature a security against excess. They prescribe their own limit,
which cannot be exceeded without the end proposedthat is, an extension of the
revenue. Following the politico-economic by Brennan and Buchanan (Brennan,
Geoffrey And James M. Buchanan (1977): Towards a Tax Constitution for Leviathan.
Journal of Public Economics 8: 255-273) federalism leads to lower tax burden. The
mobile factors that are capital and labor render a mobile tax base in the federal
states. This induces the positive force of taxes that matches local situations.
Practically, a federal system in relation to taxation translates to savings for
investment, which drives economic growth and prosperity.
Simplified Bureaucracy
Lastly, the decentralized decision making structure provides greater proximity to the
people and forces the governments to be more responsive to its citizens' (the
business sectors) preferences. Economic development is achieved through intersectoral dialogue and equitable distribution of wealth that render significant
improvements in local infrastructure. There would be more access to local resources,
e.g. developing better privileges to local contractors for infrastructure projects.
Also, a direct impact of a strong link between the government and the business sector
opens broad spectrum of business support services in an effort to achieve a
consolidated approach when representing the viewpoint of private enterprise in its
relations with the government. This would allow the development of small businesses
to be competitive with large businesses in any industry. Through direct involvement
and community action, we see rapid development and the proliferation of our

interests.
With these advantages it can hardly be supposed that the adverse position would
have an equal chance for a favorable issue.
Why a Federal System of Government in the Philippines?
by Federal Philippines | 11:57 AM in charter change, federalism, indigenous
people, ip, mindanao,moro, peace and development, philippines |
The Philippines' present unitary and centralized form of governance is a remnant of
its colonial past. It continues to be used as a tool for domination and control; hence
the basic issue of inequality still remains to be solved. It has become inutile,
unresponsive and irrelevant, and has spawned patronage politics, underdevelopment,
poverty and unresponsive governance. These are the specters that continue to haunt
and threatened the Filipino people as a nation.
To sustain the country's integrity and sovereignty, the centralized government needs
to be corrected via a structural change. In a federal system, powers shall be
transferred from the central government in Manila to the regions. Contrary to fears
that this will dismember the country, the federal system will foster closer dialogue and
interaction between the people and the regional leaders because the center of power
is physically closer and accessible to poeple.
A Federal Form of government emphasizes local initiative over national intervention in
domestic affairs. This form of government encourages local peoples to take active
participation in the local level. In this set-up, the unique cultural and geographical
realities of the different regions in the country can be responded accordingly.
Subsidiarity may also be understood as any assistance offered by a higher social
entity to lower social entities for the enhancement of the latters initiative, freedom and
responsibility.
Every Catholic must be aware that the principle of subsidiarity is a very important
principle of social philosophy of the Catholic Church. Thus, every Catholic is called
upon to pursue, defend and promote this social doctrine of our Church.
Our former Pope John Paul II once wrote on the subject: It is impossible to promote
the dignity of the person without showing concern for the family, groups, associations,
local territorial realities; in short, for that of economic, social, cultural, sports-oriented,
recreational; professional and political expressions to which people spontaneously
give life and which make it possible for them to achieve effective social growth. On
the basis of thisall societies of a superior order must adopt attitudes of help
(subsidium) therefore of support, promotion, development with respect to lower
order societies.In this way, intermediate social entities can properly perform the
functions that fall to them without being required to hand them over unjustly to other

social entities of a higher level, by which they would end up being absorbed and
substituted, in the end seeing themselves denied their dignity and essential place.
Clearly our good Pope envisioned the danger and evil of the possible abuses of the
people by a higher level social organization. Thus, it is not good to stipple the
creativity of people at the lower level of social organizations for they have
something original to offer to the community. Thats why the principle of subsidiarity
is very essential to our Churchs social teachings. Thats why it is a very important
principle in our Churchs organization itself. Hence, every Catholic must know and
understand this matter, and exert their own efforts for the attainment, protection and
promotion of this principle in our own society.
But, and a big BUT at that, the opposite is happening in our country. This indeed is
very unfortunate, more so that great majority of the Filipinos are Catholics! We better
wake up and wise up. Hear this well: The principle of subsidiarity is opposed to
certain forms of centralization, bureaucratization, and welfare assistance and to
unjustified and excessive presence of the State in public mechanisms. By intervening
directly and depriving society of its responsibility, the Social Assistance State leads to
a loss of human energies and an inordinate increase of public agencies, which are
dominated more by bureaucratic ways of thinking than by concern for serving their
clients, and which they are accompanied by an enormous increase in spending! An
absent or insufficient recognition of private initiative in economic matters also and
the failure to recognize its public function, contribute to the undermining of the
principle of subsidiarity, as monopolies do as well. This statement is taken from the
book Conpendium of the Social doctrine of the Church (2004).
This Unitary System of government we have ever since we got our independence is
wreaking havoc to our people to the point that presently our nation is now in
crisis. The evil that this highly centralized and bureaucratic government brought
about to our country can never be overemphasized. The sad part is that majority of
the Catholic Filipinos do not have a clear idea of the root cause of our predicament as
a people. Thats why we do hope that this article would be a help in their
enlightenment.
There is only one way to really address the above problem and that is to shift to a
Federal System of government which is governed by the principle of subsidiarity
resulting to a highly-decentralized government. Thats the reason why we, members
of the Citizens Movement for a Federal Philippines (CMFP) who are strongly
advocating for the shift to a Federal System of government for many years now are
very passionate anent the federalism issue. We are very much aware that we must
dismantle this obsolete and unjust highly centralized Unitary System in our country for
the good of our people. Thats why we appeal to our fellow Filipinos especially
Catholics to support the CMFPs advocacy on federalism which is guided by the
principle of subsidiarity in line with the social doctrine of the Catholic Church.

YES TO CHA-CHA AFTER GLORIA

by Federal Philippines | 12:10 PM in cha-cha, charter
change, federalism, Gloria, governance,philippines |
Charter Change should take place after we elect our new leader in 2010. (Speaker
Prospero Nograles)

In the March 13, 2008 issue of the Philippine Star, it was reported that Speaker
Nograles reiterated his previous stand on the issue of Charter Change or Cha-Cha to
dispel the allegation that the proposed merger of Lakas CMD and KAMPI, both proadministration political parties, is designed for another Cha-Cha. While Speaker
Nograles wants Cha-Cha thru Constitutional Convention (Con-Con) immediately after
the 2010 elections, he also rightly suggested that Con-Con delegates be elected
likewise in the 2010 elections for the government to economize among other valid
reasons.
Well, as we pointed out earlier, Cha-Cha thru Con-Con immediately after the 2010
elections and Con-Con delegates simultaneously elected with the new president in
2010 is also the stand now of Lihuk Pideral Mindanaw. Actually, this is one of the
issues we, members of the nationwide Citizens Movement for a Federal Philippines
(CMFP), will tackle this April 4, 5, and 6 in our scheduled Cebu meeting. We are
confident that CMFP will likewise officially adopt this practical stand.
Furthermore, we learned that there are other active groups too in the Philippines who
expressed same position anent this question on Cha-Cha. These groups are the
newly organized 2010-2016 Movement, and Go-NEGOSYO MOVEMENT OF RFMs
Jose Conception.
Thus, it is safe to say that Cha-Cha thru Con-Con immediately after the 2010
elections and Con-Con delegates simultaneously elected with the new president in
2010, is gaining ground among well-meaning Filipinos. Thus, we request especially
Malacaang, Congress, our different religious leaders, civil society, NGOs, POs, etc.
to please ponder on this logical proposition and strongly support such stand for the
good of all.
Weve said this before and we are saying it again that to properly address the crises
besetting our country, we must ASAP undertake Genuine Social Transformation
(GST). Said GST involves two major reforms namely: 1) Reform in People; and 2)
Reform in Structures/Systems/Institutions. Honest-to-goodness Cha-Cha thru ConCon is about the latter reform. National Moral Renewal (NMR), Values Formation and
Character-building, plus attitudinal change and mind-setting are about the former

reform. We must pursue both reforms at the same time. We cannot have one without
the other.
Apropos Cha-Cha, what is the number one reform should we adopt? In revising our
present flawed Constitution, we must firstly reform our obsolete and highly centralized
government structure called Unitary System. We must shift to a highly decentralized
structure known as Federal Systems.

What are the advantages of doing this meaning to shift to a Federal System? Well,
to some of the advantages are:
1. Free our countrysides from the imperialistic hold of Metro Manila.
2. Promote balance Development.
3. Dismantle the Mother of Political Patronage.
4. Apply the principle of subsidiarity in governance by assigning functions,
authorities and funds to local governments which they can effectively and
efficiently exercise thus bringing the government closer to the people.
5. Minimize graft and corruption.
6. Finally solve the Mindanao Conflict.
7. Release the creative and competitive spirit of our people while promoting
initiative and independence.
Hence, we appeal to all of you to heartily support genuine Cha-Cha thru ConCon immediately after the term of President Gloria and convince Congress especially
Senate President Manuel Villar and Speaker Nograles to pass a law now setting the
election of Con-Con delegates together with the presidential elections in the
2010. How about it guys?

(BERNAL)
Federalism in the Philippines.
Philippines is a standing example of a state that acquire the basic
foundations of a federal state. A federal system adapts well with a heterogeneous
society. Just like the Philippines, other countries are faced with the problem of being a
heterogenous state. However, Philippines was not able to cope with the
modernization and was left behind. Other countries have found ways to make
democracy work despite some serious cleavages e.g. United Kingdom (Sodaro,
2011). Federalism is one of the ways mentioned by Michael Sodaro, a country riven
by many religions, languages and ethnicity can be managed to maintain free speech,
regular elections and other core features of being a democratic state in which it
guarantees the development and preservation of these precious cultures. Social
polarizations make it difficult for a democratic state to flower and mature. A state that
has a bicameral legislature just like the Philippines is a basic feature of federalism
thus Philippines can be compared to a person that is wearing a slipper that is
intended for the other foot. It would also be much easier for the grass roots
governance to adhere to the entreaties of the people. A centralized government would

have a hard time handling and regulating the local government which might lead to
the deficiencies of the government in handling other affairs such as international
affairs. Though it would be a long time to change into a federal state, it would be
beneficial for the Philippines in the long run. We are not saying that we need to
imitate the features of other neighboring countries that have a federal government.
What the Philippines need is to establish its own version of a federal state that should
be rooted to its characteristics. According to Jose V. Abueva, Professor Emeritus of
Political Science of U.P diliman, federal system will greatly improve our governance
and gradually be able to develop greater human and institutional capabilities for good
governance which first, it would solve our problems and meet our challenges and
achieve our goals as a nation. Second, it would bolster our ability to develop and we
shall be able to reform faster. And lastly, we could now sustain the development of
modernization in the country. In the end, it is better off that we let go of the present
form of government for us to be able to see the difference. We shall continue to feel
the discrepancies of yesterday if we would not adhere and face the problems of
tomorrow.