By Kenneth Christiane L. Basilio, A reporter
CIVIL ORGANIZATIONS must continue to press Congress to pass an anti-monopoly bill after a House committee passed a weak version, analysts said at the weekend, noting that the measures are still being debated and not finalized.
The parties should mount a pressure campaign on the version of the administration reform bill they see fit to be passed, as analysts have noted that while signing remains an option, it could be expensive and time-consuming.
“The process is very demanding,” Ederson DT. Tapia, a professor of political science at the University of Makati, said in a Facebook Messenger chat. “It requires millions of verified signatures and nationwide mobilization.”
“With a change that directly affects entrenched political interests, organizing that level of support can be very difficult,” he added.
Congress is currently weighing bills aimed at curbing political dominance, with a Senate bill barring second-degree relatives from serving or succeeding immediately awaiting debate, and a recently approved House measure that analysts say is weak as it still allows families to hold seats at all levels of government.
President Ferdinand R. Marcos, Jr. made limiting political sovereignty a priority after public criticism over the misappropriation of billions of pesos in congressional district funds earmarked for Public Works projects, making it part of his governance reform agenda.
The version passed by the House is not surprising since many lawmakers themselves are from the political dynasty, which leads to a weak situation, said Anthony Lawrence A. Borja, professor of political science at De La Salle University.
“It is cheap but not surprising since it is the only version that the ancestors can get as lip service to the constitution, and the low costs they are charged for resisting the monarchy,” he said in a Facebook interview. “Given the loopholes, it will legitimize the dynasties.”
Such a bill has long been floated in Congress but has repeatedly failed due to lack of support in a legislature dominated by political families. Eight out of ten lawmakers are members of the royal family, according to a report by the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism.
“The House bill fails to provide a comprehensive framework and leaves gaps in curbs on political sovereignty,” said Rona Ann V. Caritos, executive director of the Legal Network for Truthful Elections, in a Facebook interview.
He said the move by the House would still allow royal families to retain political control at most levels of government, with members allowed to hold offices in the national, congressional and local units.
It also fails to cover party hierarchy and does nothing to prevent rapid succession of relatives, which allows the monarchy to advance power, he added.
“If the ban only applies to a very limited set of family relationships or election situations, many dynastic systems will continue to be possible,” said Mr. Tapia.
Ms. Caritos said the relevant anti-dynasty law “generally conforms” to the Senate’s version, but the group is “focused on effective and quick implementation methods related to the prohibition of political dynasties.”
He said the Electoral Commission should be empowered to enforce compliance with the ban on anti-political sovereignty through the use of summary administrative remedies through motu proprio action and allow registered voters to file petitions.
A grassroots initiative to enact tougher anti-politics laws is “impossible,” Ms. Caritos said, but added that the battle remains in Congress where measures are still being debated.
Several groups called for tougher measures against political dynasties, including chambers of commerce that wanted a wider area to limit the power of a few families. They called for the banning of fourth-degree relatives and are organizing a petition drive to pass it if current efforts fail.
The coalition, which included the Makati Business Club, the Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry and the Management Association of the Philippines, recommended that lawmakers pass a bill that clearly prohibits the exchange, exchange and exchange of relatives between prohibited relatives to exceed the time limits.
