Speech delivered by Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno (Ret.), chairman, Consultative Committee to Review the 1987 Constitution, before the 46th General Assembly of the Association of Foundations, May 8, 2018, Diamond Residences, Makati
Conclusion
Two: The Con-com will enshrine the most basic of the socioeconomic rights of the poor in the Bill of Rights of our Constitution. The 1987 Constitution merely enumerates the socioeconomic rights of our people in its Declaration of Policies. It failed to make them enforceable or demandable against the State. They are mere paper rights.
The solution, therefore, is to include these socioeconomic rights as parts of our Bill of Rights. By doing so, these socioeconomic rights can be demanded by the poor against the government just as civil and political rights can be demanded from the government. The most basic of these socioeconomic rights are the right to health, education and housing. Other countries have done this to help the poor of their people, like India, South Africa and states within the United States. We ought to do no less for our people.
Third, the Con-com brought the axe down on political dynasties. One principal defect of the 1987 Constitution is it allowed political dynasties to bloom. Look at how the 1987 Constitution dealt with political dynasties. On one hand, it banned political dynasties. On the other, it said the ban will be made by Congress. By this act, the 1987 Constitution perpetuated political dynasties. Congress cannot be expected to prohibit dynasties because it is controlled by dynasties. From 1987, it is now 2018. We have no law prohibiting political dynasties. The Philippines now holds the most number of political dynasties—the world record. We are now the capital of political dynasties in the world.
We have prohibited political dynasties. Under our ban:
- No member of a political family may succeed in an elective post a relative within the second degree of consanguinity and affinity—whether at the national, regional or local level.
- No two members of a family within the second degree of consanguinity or affinity may run for more than one position in the government.
We will never attain true democracy until and unless we eliminate these political dynasties, for in a true democracy political power cannot be the monopoly of a few but should be in the hands of the many. The government must be run on the basis of merits and not by reason of genetics. More important, political dynasties must be prohibited because they cause the poverty of our people. This conclusion is backed up by fool-proof studies of the experts.
Fourth, we shall break up monopolies in business to help the poor. Like political power, economic power cannot be held by just a few. The wealth of the nation cannot be monopolized by a small elite. If we allow that monopoly, economic progress will not trickle down to the poor and the indecent gap between the rich and the poor will never be narrowed down to a decent degree.
The Con-com agreed to:
- Ensure free and fair competition in trade and industry and all commercial activities;
- Establish and guarantee equal legal conditions for all economic activities; and
- Prohibit agreements that are anticompetition, including anticompetitive mergers and acquisitions.
Fifth, the Con-com is reconfiguring our party-list system of political representation. The party-list system is intended to assure representation of the marginalized sector in our legislature. We all know how our party-list was prostituted. This time around, you can be sure the poor, through the party-list system, will really have an effective voice in our halls of Congress.
I started with the fact that we are a rich nation, and yet year in and year out for so many decades now, our nation has been rated as a failing democracy. There is only one explanation for these democracy deficits—our unitary government that has monopolized all governmental powers. The consequence is poverty to our people.
In their best-selling book Why Nations Fail, authors Acemoglu and Robinson, after an exhaustive scholarly study on the origins of power, prosperity and poverty, put forward the conclusion that nations fail due to wrong distribution of power. Let me conclude by quoting them:
“The political institutions of a society are a key determinant of the outcome of this game…. They determine how the government is chosen and which part of the government has the right to do what. Political institutions determine who has power in society and to what ends that power can be used. If the distribution of power is narrow and unconstrained, then the political institutions are absolutists. Under absolutist political institutions, those who can wield this power will be able to set up economic institutions to enrich themselves and augment their power at the expense of society. In contrast, political institutions that distribute power broadly in society and subject to constraints are pluralistic…inclusive political institutions. Vesting power broadly would tend to uproot economic institutions that expropriate the resources of the many, erect entry barriers, and suppress the functioning of markets so that only a few benefit.”
That, ladies and gentlemen, is the secret why nations fail: not because of geography, not because of resources, not because of people, not because of leaders—but because of wrong distribution of political and economic power. This is the reason for our shift to federalism.
Thank you and God bless us.