By Democrito C. Barcenas
Sun Star Cebu
Sun Star Cebu
ARTICLE II Sec. 26 of the 1987 Constitution is explicit: “The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law.”
As OIC mayor of Makati in the aftermath of the 1986 People Power Revolution, Jejomar Binay, like all other newly-appointed local officials at that time, fought hard for the approval of the 1987 Constitution.
Binay then was against political dynasties when his principles still prevailed as he railed against the Marcos and Romualdez political dynasties.
How times have changed and how power has corroded and corrupted the idealism of men!
In a complete 360 degree-turn from his anti-dynasty stand while he was still a poor and struggling politician in Makati, Vice-President Binay now defends political dynasties with all vehemence:
“I don’t believe in prohibiting dynasties. Why should there be a law to prohibit someone who is qualified from running when the people want him elected?” (PDI issue of November 10, 2012)
Prohibition
The Constitution unequivocally prohibits political dynasties although it leaves to Congress the duty to define them. The constitutional mandate is clearly made to direct the State to guarantee equal access to opportunities for public office.
One need not be a political scientist to conclude that concentration of too much political power in a few families is not conducive to the growth of real democracy.
The old refrain that it is up to the people to decide whether to empower or not political clans ignores the reality that elections in this semi-feudal society, unlike in the USA and in Europe, are not usually decided by issues but are determined by money, patronage, and electoral bribery which only powerful political dynasties can provide.
In banning political dynasties, the framers of the Constitution saw the need to level the playing field in our election contests.
They could not have imagined a vice-president with a daughter as incumbent congresswoman representing a district in Makati, which is governed by his mayor son, and a daughter aspiring to be a senator of the Republic.
Or in the case of Cebu, where a father who is a congressman has a daughter who is the provincial governor, a son who is also a congressman, another son who is the incumbent mayor of a southern municipality, and another son who is the vice-mayor of an adjoining town who is aspiring to be the mayor of the said town in the coming elections.
Shelved bill
On Dec. 10, 1987, the Senate passed Senate Bill No. 82 authored by Sen. Tito Guingona prohibiting the establishment of political dynasties. The House, dominated by powerful and unscrupulous political clans shelved the bill.
Today, twenty-five years after the adoption of the Constitution, Congress has yet to pass an anti-dynasty bill.
Powerful politicians and dominant political families will continue to establish their hold on their turfs by fielding their wives, children, and grandchildren in the electoral contests in open defiance to the spirit of the Constitution.
Monopoly of political and economic power in the hands of a few ruling dynasties is an
invitation to plutocracy.
invitation to plutocracy.
Two political parties, Kapatiran and the Social Justice Society, have launched a people’s initiative for the passage of a national law prohibiting political dynasties.
We must support such patriotic move!—Democrito C. Barcenas
No comments:
Post a Comment