Media release: 23 August 2002

Constitutional Amendments? It Depends

Mahar Mangahas
Social Weather Stations
The attitudes of Filipinos towards constitutional change can be either positive or negative, depending on
what kind of amendments are proposed.
Inquiring into some specific proposals, the 2nd Quarter 2002 Social Weather Survey found that:
1. the public leans towards Yes to the idea of creating regional governments to replace the provincial
ones;
2. the public is divided on the idea of federating such regional governments; and
3. the public is also divided on the parliamentary idea of having the legislature control the government.
In addition, the SWS survey found 74% preferring a Constitutional Convention over Congress to draft any
amendments, and 76% admitting to having little or no knowledge of the Constitution.
Replace provincial with regional governance? Maybe Yes.
The first specific proposal tested in the survey is for the first local-government level to be the region rather
than the province, such that the next local-government level becomes the city/municipality. It was
described as follows:
Question: At present, the highest local government is that of the province; under it are the city and
municipal governments. Since there are many provinces, the power of a provincial government compared
to the national government is very small. Thus some are proposing to create a regional government for
[name of Respondent's region] to replace the provincial governments. Therefore there would be elections
for the officials of [name of Respondent's region] who would administer and make laws for the whole
region.
To this idea, which would tilt the balance of power away from the national government and towards local
governments, the SWS survey found a favorable plurality of 42% (Definitely Good 15% + Probably Good
27%), an unfavorable minority of 22% (Probably Not Good 12% + Definitely Not Good 10%), and the
balance of 36% Undecided.
Federate the regional governments? A Toss-up.
The second idea for constitutional change was probed this way:
Question: In case there would be regional governments throughout the country, do you Strongly Agree,
Somewhat Agree, Feel Undecided, Somewhat Disagree, or Strongly Agree that the system of
government in the Philippines should be made FEDERAL, or don't you know enough about the federal
system?
To this idea, opinions were 20% favorable (Strongly Agree 6% + Somewhat Agree 14%) and likewise 20%
unfavorable (Somewhat Disagree 7% + Strongly Disagree 13%). The Undecided were 20%, and 40%
said they did not know enough about the federal system.

These results indicate that Filipinos are more open-minded about federalism now than two years ago,
when the 2nd Quarter 2000 Social Weather Survey had responses of 14% favorable (Strongly Agree 4%
+ Somewhat Agree 10%), 28% unfavorable (Somewhat Disagree 6% + Strongly Disagree 22%), 19%
undecided, and 39% not knowing enough, to a closely-similar question: If there would be Autonomous
Regions in the entire Philippines, do you Strongly Agree etc. that the system of government in the
Philippines should be made FEDERAL, or don't you know enough about the federal system?
Have Parliament Control the Executive? Also divided.
The third idea was about the parliamentary principle that the majority political party in the legislature
should automatically have control over the executive:
Question: At present, a bill needs to be approved by the Senate, the House of Representatives, and the
President. If the party controlling the Senate, the party controlling the House, and the party of the
President are different, many arguments come about that might block the programs of the administration.
Some propose that the legislature have only one house, and that the head of the party controlling the
legislature should also be the head of the government; they call this a PARLIAMENTARY system. Do you
Strongly Agree, etc. with their proposal?
On this item the SWS survey found support of 30% (Strongly Agree 8% + Somewhat Agree 22%) and
opposition of 33% (Somewhat Disagree 17% + Strongly Disagree 16%), with 37% Undecided, implying a
Net Agreement of -3 which is hardly significant.
This new finding of a division of opinion on parliamentary control over the executive contrasts sharply with
the consistent finding in previous SWS polls of strong public rejection of the proposal to replace the
present direct election of the President with a system where the leader of the majority political party in the
Parliament automatically becomes the chief executive.
It demonstrates that the public can disagree with one feature of a typical Parliamentary system, i.e.,
indirect election of the chief executive, and at the same time agree with another feature, namely the
coordination of legislative and executive decision-making.
Definitely Yes to a Constitutional Convention
When asked to choose between having a Constitutional Convention or Congress to frame proposed
amendments to the Constitution, 74% chose the convention, 21% chose Congress, 2% were amenable to
either, and 2% said that they were opposed to any amendment whatsoever.
(The new SWS survey excluded the third option of citizens' initiative since it has not figured in current
public discussions about constitutional amendments. In the 1st Quarter 1999 Social Weather Survey, 50%
preferred a convention, 32% chose citizens' initiative, and only 18% chose Congress.)
Ignorance of the Constitution
When asked to describe the extent of their knowledge of the Constitution, 3% chose the answer
Extensive (Malawak), 21% said Partial but Sufficient (Bahagya ngunit sapat) 60% said Little (Kaunti), and
16% said Practically None (Halos wala).
Thus three out of four Filipinos readily admit that they need to be better informed about the Constitution.
Concluding remarks

Those who favor Constitutional reform do not help their cause by being silent or vague about what
changes they have in mind.
When an average person is asked whether she/he favors constitutional change that is unspecified, the
prudent answer has to be No.
Survey background
This report is based on the 2nd Quarter 2002 Social Weather Survey of 1,200 statistically representative
households, conducted over May 17 to June 3, 2002, for an error margin of 3% at the 95% confidence
level.
The survey items in this report were not commissioned, and were inspired by the book Towards a
Federal Republic of the Philippines with a Parliamentary Government by 2010, edited by Prof. Jose
V. Abueva (published by Kalayaan College, Marikina City, 2002).
They were chosen so as to break new ground in opinion polling about charter amendments, rather than
for a comprehensive appraisal. For instance, the idea that not only the national government, but also the
local governments, should be made parliamentary was not included, but may be polled in a future survey
round.
Although Prof. Abueva is a Board Member of SWS, he had no role in the survey. The responsibility for
designing the survey questions and forming the conclusions in this report are mine.
The Social Weather Surveys are supported by subscribers, who have no proprietary rights over the data.
SWS is releasing this report at this time as a public service, after completion of briefings to subscribers
about the 2nd Quarter Social Weather Survey.
The SWS webpage at http://www.sws.org.ph may be consulted for more information, including SWS
official releases to media and a list of SWS public reports. SWS's email addresses
are sws_info@sws.org.ph and sws885@mozcom.com. Address of the SWS Office and Survey Data
Library: #52 Malingap Street, Sikatuna Village, Quezon City, 1101, Philippines.

(https://www.sws.org.ph/pr082302.htm)

In addition, Pulse Asia published in the same year their survey regarding public support towards the
proposed Charter Change. Their report stated that four out of 10 Filipino adults or 42 percent of all
respondents opposed the amendment. Meanwhile, 25 percent were still undecided and 33 percent were
in favor.
Pulse Asia furthered that from 2006 to 2009, there was no significant change of sentiment against Charter
Change, but indecision increased by six percent.
(http://panaynewsphilippines.com/2016/01/29/my-spin-unorthodox/, Jun Escalona)

42% of Pinoys oppose Charter change

By Helen Flores | Updated March 26, 2009 - 12:00am
MANILA, Philippines - A recent survey conducted by Pulse Asia showed that four in 10 Filipino adults or
42 percent oppose Charter change (Cha-cha).
The non-commissioned survey, conducted from Feb. 2 to 15, showed that 33 percent of respondents are
in favor of amending the 1987 Constitution while 25 percent are undecided on the matter.
The survey likewise revealed that most Filipinos or 57 percent know little about the 1987 Philippine
Constitution.
Pulse Asia said that between November 2006 and February 2009, the overall percentage of those against
Cha-cha remains constant but there is a slight drop in the level of support for constitutional amendments
(-6 percentage points), which is matched by an increase in the level of public indecision on the issue (+6
percentage points).
Pulse Asia said big pluralities to small majorities (42 percent to 56 percent) across geographic areas and
socio-economic groupings are against constitutional amendments now.
The exceptions are in Mindanao where indecision is the predominant public sentiment (41 percent) and
Class E where almost the same percentages are either against or supportive of charter change (40
percent versus 37 percent).
Headlines ( Article MRec ), pagematch: 1, sectionmatch: 1
And while there is an increase in the percentage of Visayans against constitutional amendments (+21
percentage points), a drop is recorded in Mindanao (-16 percentage points), Pulse Asia said.
The survey also showed that almost two out of every three Filipinos or 64 percent are of the view that it is
not appropriate to have Charter change at the present time a view shared by majorities (60 percent to
70 percent) in all geographic areas and socio-economic groupings.

Across geographic areas and socio-economic classes, 27 percent to 42 percent are open to amending
the 1987 Constitution in the future while 24 percent to 40 percent are against Charter change at any time,
Pulse Asia said.
The Pulse Asia survey found that economic improvement is the top reason cited by those favoring Charter
change while those opposed to amending the 1987 Constitution think it is good enough and would like to
avoid any chaos that may arise from changing the countrys supreme law.
Another often-mentioned reason is that Charter change would help eradicate corruption in the country
(20.7 percent citing at the national level and 15.1 percent to 25.2 percent citing across geographic areas
and socio-economic groupings).
The reason cited by around one in ten (11.9 percent) of those favoring Charter change is that
constitutional amendments would help improve the laws in the country. Bigger percentages of those in
Mindanao (19.3 percent) and Class ABC (19.7 percent) cite this as their reason for supporting Charter
change now. The other reasons are mentioned by less than 10 percent while 5.8 percent are unable to
say what their reasons are for favoring constitutional amendments.
Meanwhile, the top reasons cited by those against Charter change are: (1) to avoid chaos in the country
(16.7 percent); (2) there is no need to amend the 1987 Constitution because it is good enough (16.4
percent); (3) to prevent term extensions for government officials (11.5 percent); (4) to prevent extending
the term of office of President Arroyo (10.8 percent); and (5) the belief that constitutional amendments will
not change the economic conditions in the country anyway (10.7 percent).
These reasons are mentioned by practically the same percentages across geographic areas and socioeconomic groupings, Pulse Asia said.
The survey also found out that four in five Filipinos (81 percent) are not in favor of extending the term of
office of national and local elective officials, and 77 percent do not support moves to allow elective
officials to run in the elections as many times as possible.
Both proposals are opposed by considerable to overwhelming majorities across geographic areas and
socio-economic classes (68 percent to 92 percent), with non-support being most pronounced in Metro
Manila. In contrast, these proposed changes to the 1987 Constitution have the support of 19 percent and
23 percent of Filipinos, respectively.
As for the proposal to allow foreigners to own residential and industrial lands, majorities ranging from 81
percent in the rest of Luzon and Class E to 90 percent in Metro Manila are against this proposed
amendment.
Meanwhile, the latest survey showed that 59 percent of Filipinos do not agree with proposals to shift to
parliamentary and federal systems of government.
Majorities at the national level (59 percent) and across geographic areas and socio-economic classes (52
percent to 63 percent) are not in favor of shifting to a parliamentary system of government. An exception

is in Mindanao where this sentiment is expressed by less than a majority (47 percent), although this is still
the predominant public sentiment on the matter in this geographic area.
On the other hand, almost the same percentages are either in favor of such a shift or express
ambivalence on the proposal (21percent versus 20 percent).
The survey revealed that support for a parliamentary system is most pronounced in the Visayas (29
percent) but least notable in Class ABC (14 percent) while levels of indecision range from eight percent
among Visayans to 31 percent among Mindanaoans.
Between March 2006 and February 2007, Pulse Asia observed a 12-percentage point drop in the level of
support for a parliamentary system while the level of indecision goes up by seven percentage points.
Across geographic areas, preference for a parliamentary system becomes less pronounced in Metro
Manila and the rest of Luzon (-15 to -21 percentage points).
Across all socio-economic classes, there is less preference for a parliamentary system now than in March
2006 (-11 to -17 percentage points), Pulse Asia added.
Lack of support for a shift to a federal system of government is the predominant public sentiment at the
national level and in all geographic areas and socio-economic groupings (47 percent to 66 percent).
Amid the revival of talks concerning Charter change, nearly six in 10 Filipinos (57 percent) report having
little knowledge about their Constitution.
Meanwhile, 25 percent of Filipinos say that they know enough about the 1987 Constitution, 16 percent
admit to having almost or completely no knowledge at all, and only three percent claim to know a lot.
For the most part, the February 2009 figures do not differ significantly from those obtained by Pulse Asia
in 2003, 2005, and 2006, it said.
Filipinos favoring the constitutional convention mode to amend the 1987 Constitution outnumber those
supportive of the constituent assembly option (69 percent versus 31 percent).
Sixty-nine percent of Filipinos agree that convening a Constitutional Convention to amend the 1987
Constitution is better than convening Congress into a constituent assembly to accomplish the same task
a mode preferred by 31 percent of Filipinos.
Small to big majorities (59 percent to 74 percent) across geographic areas and socio-economic groupings
favor a constitutional convention over a constituent assembly, with those in Class D (73 percent) and the
rest of Luzon (74 percent) being most supportive of the constitutional convention mode. On the other
hand, support for a constituent assembly is most pronounced in Class E (37 percent) and the Visayas (41
percent).

Like previous Pulse Asia surveys, this nationwide survey is based on a sample of 1,200 representative
adults 18 years old and above. It has a plus or minus three percent error margin at the 95 percent
confidence level.
Palace welcomes result of survey
Presidential adviser on political affairs Gabriel Claudio welcomed the results of the Pulse Asia survey on
charter change as a public reaction well taken.
Claudio said that the countrys legislators were probably mindful and cognizant of the reaction of the
public on charter change, which he said could be the reason why the efforts to amend the Constitution are
not making any progress.
If you notice, three months ago, it was already 20 votes shy. Its not moving forward, Claudio said.
Claudio said that he has met with the leaders of the House including House Speaker Prospero Nograles,
Majority Leader Art Defensor and the Presidents son and Pampanga Rep. Juan Miguel Mikey Arroyo
and all of the discussions have been on the preparations for the 2010 elections.
Senate to raise Cha-cha to SC
Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile said the Senate would bring the Charter change issue before the
Supreme Court if the House will push through with it without the Senates participation.
Well have to take it to the SC if they will disregard the Senate and treat the Senate as a matter of
numbers, Enrile said.
You have to remember that we are a bicameral Congress. The Congress of the Philippines is composed
of two houses, the Senate and the House. One without the other is not the Congress of the Philippines.
Isnt that clear? Enrile told reporters yesterday.
I understand that the proposal of Speaker Nograles is to amend the economic provisions. I dont think
they are going to touch on the political provisions of the Constitution, especially the structure of
government. But even the economic provision at this time will be difficult to pass. Youll require a lot of
studies, a lot of discussions, a lot of debates on the issues that will come by, Enrile explained.
Administration congressmen claimed yesterday that President Arroyo has nothing to do with their efforts
to amend the Constitution.
Deputy Speaker Simeon Datumanong said the effort by allies of the President in the House to propose
constitutional amendments is their own initiative.
The House is mandated to act and decide on any Charter change proposal. The Palace has nothing to
do with our action or decision on any Cha-cha proposal, he said.

Several House members have pointed to Mikey Arroyo as one of the Palace allies who have been
soliciting signatures for a resolution seeking to convene Congress as a constituent assembly (con-ass) to
do Cha-cha.
Baguio City Rep. Mauricio Domogan urged administration critics to stop pointing to the Presidents sons
as the leaders of the Cha-cha drive. With Christina Mendez, Jess Diaz, Delon Porcalla, Ding
Cervantes, Edu Punay, Evelyn Macairan
(http://www.philstar.com/headlines/451705/42-pinoys-oppose-charter-change)

Are Filipinos ready for federalism?

The campaign pushing Davao Mayor Rodrigo Duterte to run for president in 2016 rides on the advocacy
for the Philippines to shift to a federal form of government. But supporters of the extremely popular mayor
seem to think that the shift can happen easily, as if it were as simple as changing outfits.
Unfortunately, this is not the case.
For many countries, such as the United States, Malaysia, Australia and Germany, federalization was
actually a state-building effort. Each began as a loose collection of disparate political entities that
gradually, and with painful upheavals, transformed themselves into a unified nation-state through the
process of federalization.
It would essentially be the reverse in our case. Consequently, we face a much harder, more complicated,
and possibly harsher version of federalization. It is thus disconcerting that purported advocates of
federalism seem oblivious to the gravity of this sociopolitical reform. They quickly harp on the promise of
enhanced local autonomy without even considering the readiness of the local leadership to assume the
big responsibility of local governments under federalism, as if the fitness of the current crop for this form
of government were already a given.
Note that one of the most important lessons in the discourse on the proposed Bangsamoro Basic Law is
the recognition of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao as a failed experiment. The lesson being:
Increasing the autonomy of local governments will ultimately amount to nothing if local leaders are
incompetent and incapable of properly utilizing expanded powers and resources.
In fact, the overdependence of local government executives on the Internal Revenue Allotment and the
continued existence of central-government largesse, or pork barrel funds, signify the stark reality that the
development perspective of local leaders has not reached the level of sophistication necessary to sustain
a federal government structure.
Political dynasties constitute the unequivocal proof that the quality of our local leaders is still below par as
far as federalism is concerned. According to a groundbreaking study by the Asian Institute of
Management Policy Center in 2012 titled An Empirical Analysis of Political Dynasties in the 15th
Philippine Congress, lower standards of living, lower human development, and higher levels of
deprivation and inequality persist in the communities governed by political dynasties.
It would thus not be unfounded to conclude that federalizing with political dynasties still firmly entrenched
in power would actually condemn the affected communities to perpetual poverty. It would certainly be
justified to be concerned that federalizing with the quality of local leadership still at an untenable state
would only make socioeconomic development more inequitable than it is. With these trepidations in mind,
it is indeed very difficult to conceive of Filipinos as primed and ready for federalism.
Still I maintain that the switch to a federal form of government is a constitutional reform that we can all
rally behind. But we have to disabuse ourselves of the idea that the switch will be as effortless as turning
on a light switch.

Indeed, the primary task in the pursuit of this goal is to improve the quality of local leadership. Ardent
believers of federalism can actively push for the enactment of these pieces of legislation: the Anti-Political
Dynasty Law, the Freedom of Information Act and the Political Party Development Act of 2014.
There are other ways of uplifting leadership standards for our governors and mayors.
Nevertheless, these three laws are particularly vital because they impose structural reforms that can
instigate drastic improvements to the way local governance is currently conceived and delivered.
However, I must emphasize, too, that the transition to federalism also requires the elevation of the
electorate to a higher level of political consciousness. First and foremost, Filipinos must have a clear
understanding of what this massive sociopolitical undertaking entails. And the best way to commence with
this task is to abandon the populist approach that some supporters of federalism are taking.
The obvious danger here is that rhetoric and sound bytes, while good for catching the medias attention,
could make a caricature of the advocacy and thus diminish its potency.
I suggest a clinical and academic approach that would facilitate a circumspect and level-headed
discussion on federalization among all sectors of Philippine society. Accordingly, I envisage a community
congregation organized for such a purpose through the barangay-assembly apparatus and moderated by
genuine promoters of federalization.
Admittedly, dissecting the intricacies of federalism does not exactly fall within the powers of the barangay
assembly under the Local Government Code (LGC). But this mechanism is still the most convenient way
to gather ordinary citizens and give them the opportunity to speak out and be heard. After all the LGC
itself considers the barangay a forum wherein the collective views of the people may be expressed,
crystallized and considered.
The desired result is for all Filipinos between Batanes and Tawi-Tawi to see themselves not as passive
observers in the sidelines but as continuing stakeholders in the establishment of federalism in the country.
Michael Henry Ll. Yusingco, a practicing lawyer, is the author of the book Rethinking the Bangsamoro
Perspective. He conducts research on current issues in state-building, decentralization and
constitutionalis

Read more: http://opinion.inquirer.net/83276/are-filipinos-ready-for-federalism#ixzz3zAga1JL3

Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook
http://code-ngo.org/home/images/stories/pdf/Constitutional_Reform_and_Federalism.pdf
http://www.scribd.com/doc/98249474/Position-Paper-on-Federalism-in-the-Philippines#scribd (Brillantes
Moscare)
Administration.Brilliantes, Alex Jr. and Moscare, Donna. (2002). Decentralization and Federalism in
thePhilippines:
Lacdao, Dona Dee. (2010). Cordillera Autonomy. Available

Brilliantes, Alex Jr. and Moscare, Donna. (2002). Decentralization and Federalism in
thePhilippines:Lessons from Global Community. International Conference of the East West Center. pp. 1-13.Carlos, Clarita
and Lalata, Dennis. (2010). Democratic Deficits in the Philippines: What is to be Done?Makati: Konrad Adenauer
Foundation.Congress of the Philippines. (1991). Local Government Code of 1991.Constitutional Convention of 1986. (1986).
Article 10: Local Government. In: The 1987
Constitution.Decentralization in the Philippines. (2010). Available: http://www.scribd.com/doc/

26605926/%EF%82%A7-Decentralization-in-the-Philippines-%EF%82%A7-Local. Last accessed 11 May 2012.DP Decentralization Program (2011). Political Decentralization: Advocating Participatory Governance. Available:
http://www.decentralization.org.ph/. Last accessed 11
May 2012.Heywood, Andrew. (2002). Chapter 8. In: Heywood, Andrew Politics. New Hamps
hire: PalgraveFoundations.Kincaid, John. (2001). Economic policy-making: advantages and
disadvantages of the federal model.Paris: UNESCO.Lacdao, Dona Dee. (2010). Cordillera Autonomy.
Available:http://www.scribd.com/dlacdao/d/44273115-Cordillera-Autonomy. Last accessed 11 May 2012.Merriam-Webster.
(2012). Decentralization. Available: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/decentralization. Last accessed 11 May
2012.Nath, Vikas. Political Decentralisation a complementary rather than a substitution approach. London:London School of
Economics.Pimentel, Aquilino, Jr. (2002). Why Adopt the Federal System of Government? Available:
http://www.nenepimentel.org/speeches/. Last accessed 11 May 2012.Rodriguez, Agustin. (2011). Rethinking
Federalism In the Light of Social Justice. Manila: Code NGO.Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. (2003). Federalism.
Available:http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/federalism/. Last accessed 11 May 2012.Suzuki, Y. and Uchimura, H. (2009).
Measuring Fiscal Decentralization in the Philippines. Chiba, Japan:Institute of Developing Economics, JETRO.World Bank
and Asian Development Bank. (2005). Decentralization in the Philippines.
http://nationalparalegal.edu/conLawCrimProc_Public/Federalism/WhatIsFederalism.asp

Harvard University; Federalism and the Welfare State; Herbert Obinger et al.; May 2004

REFERENCES

History of Federalism (www.sparknotes.com)

Federalism in Practice (www.sparknotes.com)

Federalism- Advantages and Disadvantages (www.sparknotes.com)

Herbert Obinger (2004). The Effects of Federalism. www.ehow.com/info

Brad Forenza, MSW. Federalism and Social Welfare Policy--The Case Study of
TANF .www.socialworkers.com

Arianne Caryl N. Casas. Duterte Explains Federalism Concept.

http://archive.sunstar.com.ph

Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Oxford English Dictionary

Carving the next Chapter of Federalism in the

Philippines(http://cdpi.asia/cdpi/speecher.php)

The bigger picture- What is federalism? (www.edgedavao.net)

Sylvia Okinlay-paraguya. Federalism: New hope for Mindanao and the

Philippines.http://www.balaymindanaw.org/bmfi/essays/2004/ibingfederalism.html