Sec.

9 Article II of the 1987 Constitution states that:

The State shall promote a just and dynamic social order that will ensure the prosperity

and independence of the nation and free the people from poverty through policies that provide

adequate social services, promote full employment, a rising standard of living, and an improved

quality of life for all.

Section 10 Article II of the 1987 Constitution also states:

The State shall promote social justice in all phases of national development.

The above provisions are part of State polices that the government must adhere to in

order to build a just and humane society that promotes common good as stated in the current

Constitution’s preamble. The government is the institution that oversees the daily task of running

the State and protecting the inherent rights of the people living within and its citizens outside of

its physical territory. It must initiate legislations that will help alleviate the living conditions of

its constituents.

It is with this Constitutional mandate that the government through the Department of

Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) adopted the poverty alleviation program that the

World Bank and other international institutions have funded since the 1990s for countries in

Latin America and Africa: the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps) or more commonly

known by its global name, Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT).

1
What is Conditional Cash Transfer?

Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT) is a poverty alleviation program funded by the World

Bank and other international institutions. The program gives beneficiary households cash grants

to be used for health and education related expenses. It is a monthly cash subsidy that the

beneficiary household receive for a period of five years, as long as they meet the requirements

for staying in the program.

CCT was first used in Latin American and African countries as part of their poverty

reduction program. The success garnered from the program in countries such as Brazil and

Mexico were enough to merit the spread of the program to other parts of the world. CCT is not

only adopted by third world countries but is also adopted by metropolitan cities in first world

countries where the problem of poverty is glaring, such as New York City in the United States of

America.

In the Philippines, the official CCT program is dubbed as the ‘Pantawid Pamilyang

Pilipino Program’ or 4Ps. 4Ps started on 2009 and is currently on its fifth year. According to the

DSWD FAQ on its website, CCT is a rights-based and social development program of the

national government that aims to reduce poverty by providing conditional cash grants to poor

households to improve their health, nutrition and education especially for children aged three to

2
fourteen years old included in the beneficiary family. The program aims to break the

intergenerational cycle of poverty among poor households.1

How does CCT work?

4Ps have two primary objectives which are social assistance and social development.

Social assistance is defined as providing cash grants to the poor to alleviate their immediate

needs, while social development is the goal of breaking the intergenerational cycle of poverty

through investments in human capital. These objectives are in line with the government’s

Millennium Development Goals which are to eradicate extreme poverty and hunger, achieve

universal primary education, promote gender equality, reduce child mortality and promote

maternal health.2

The program aims to help the poorest of the poor of the society by giving monthly

conditional cash grants for a period of five years, provided that the requirements of staying

within the program is met.

Eligible households are chosen from municipalities and provinces that were previously

determined by DSWD as those areas where the bottom of the social financial triangle mostly

hails from. DSWD employs the use of a targeting system called National Household Targeting

1
Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program, FAQ for the general public available at
http://pantawid.dswd.gov.ph/images/stories/briefernew.pdf (last accessed September 2013)
2
The Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program available at http://pantawid.dswd.gov.ph/index.php/about-
us?showall=1 (last accessed September 2013)

3
System for Poverty Reduction (NHTS-PR) through the Proxy Means Test (PMT). There are

three important requirements for choosing the beneficiary household, namely:

 Households that were classified as poor based on the NHTS-PR assessment.

 Households that have a pregnant woman and/or children aged zero to fourteen at the time

of the assessment.

 Households that agree to meet the set conditions specified in the program. 3

Once the eligible household is identified, the coordinators of the program set assemblies

and seminars on the inner workings of the program to help the beneficiaries understand the perks

and responsibilities attached to the conditional cash grants. Families are officially registered and

after the initial payment, DSWD conducts visits and background checks to verify if the

household had complied with the conditions needed to be retained in the program. The second

and succeeding payments will be given if the family was able to comply with the program

requirements.4

An eligible household can receive a maximum amount of one thousand four hundred

pesos (P1400) per month, based on the number of family members who are aged three to

fourteen years. The cash grant is broken down into:

 A fixed monthly health grant of five hundred pesos (P500)

 An education grant of three hundred pesos (P300) per child aged zero to fourteen,

maximum of three children per household.5

3
The Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program available at http://pantawid.dswd.gov.ph/index.php/about-
us?showall=1 (last accessed September 2013)
4
Ibid.
5
Ibid.

4
 Cash grants are disbursed through the cash card system of Land Bank of the Philippines

or other remittance systems such as Gcash and over the counter withdrawals through accredited

rural and cooperative banks. A beneficiary household may enjoy the program for five years as

long as they comply with the conditions of the program. Non-compliance may become a basis

for removing the household from the official list.6

As of this writing, the following are the set conditions that a beneficiary household must

adhere to in order to retain their participation status in the program:

 Pregnant women must avail pre- and post-natal care and be attended during childbirth by

a trained health professional

 Parents must attend Family Development Sessions (FDS)

 Zero to five year old children must receive regular preventive health check-ups and

vaccines

 Three to five year old children must attend day care or pre-school classes at least 85% of

the time

 Six to fourteen year old children must enroll in elementary or high school and must

attend at least eighty-five percent (85%) of the time

 Six to fourteen year old children must receive de-worming pills twice a year

6
The Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program available at http://pantawid.dswd.gov.ph/index.php/about-
us?showall=1 (last accessed September 2013)

5
A Step to the Right Direction

Ever since the program started in 2009, there were a lot of good reviews and response

from those who directly benefitted from the program. As the cash grant addresses the immediate

needs of the household and the assurance of additional monthly income for the beneficiaries, the

program is thus by far, one of the most successful poverty alleviation program that the

government introduced.

As 4Ps focuses on health and education, some of the immediate results can be seen

through a boost of the number of children undergoing immunization programs and the low

absenteeism rates in public schools where most of the 4Ps recipient household resides.

The neo-liberal approach that CCT takes to address the provision of basic social services

also helped communities overcome ongoing conflicts. As the program reaches places and

provinces that are most often disregarded, recipients who are most likely to be influenced to join

anti-government groups are having second thoughts in pursuing the said path. This is mainly due

to the fact that being an active insurgent removes a household from the list. Faced with two

choices, being an insurgent or receiving a monthly allowance from the government, the most

logical and beneficial choice will be the latter of the two. Households who are residing in areas

where the purchasing power of a thousand and four hundred pesos is higher compared to those

living in the metro are the ones who gains maximum advantage in sticking with the program. 7

7
Shahani, Lila R., Why Conditional Cash Transfer Works? available at http://www.dswd.gov.ph/2013/07/why-
conditional-cash-transfers-work/ (last accessed October 2013)

6
 4Ps provides immediate relief for the family’s immediate needs; this is one of the reasons

why the program sustains its success rate. It is an innate characteristic of human nature to seek

the comforts of life, therefore, activities that seek to remedy and sustain financial constraints

without the need to work oneself to the bone is embraced with open arms.

4Ps is a program that caters to the human desire to seek comfort through the easiest

means possible, and as long as it sustains this pattern, the program’s success rate will never

wane.

Another good point that is attributed with 4Ps is it will serve as a way to fuel economic

growth and lessen patronage politics. The Philippines is a country whose manpower resources

are the main source of the country’s economic sustainability. The country thrives on human

capital for economic growth. If the government cannot sustain the health and educational needs

of its most important economic resource at the earliest stage possible, then creating jobs will be a

moot point. 4Ps main thrust is for the protection of the future generation’s social development.

Investing in the country’s future human capital is a must and the most logical route to take. One

cannot hope to produce future nurses, doctors, lawyers or engineers if the younger generation do

not have the means to receive continuous primary education. 8

CCT focuses on the health and educational welfare of the children of the household. The

bulk of the cash grant comes from the allowance allotted for the education of the children. Due to

this, more children opt to attend classes as they now have the means to buy basic necessities for

8
Mendoza, Ronald, Why We Should Support the 4Ps, available at
http://pantawid.dswd.gov.ph/index.php/resource-materials/334-by-ronald-u-mendoza-re-posted-from-
rapplercom (last accessed October 2013)

7
their school needs. CCT ensures that children from poor families will have equal access to

universal primary education which will hopefully, progress to secondary and tertiary school.

Since CCT is one of those government programs that is evaluated for its impact and is

one of the most transparent programs of the government, traditional politicians will have little to

no means of using CCT in the practice of patronage politics. It is a sad reality that most of the

Filipinos who are classified as the poorest of the poor depend on the cash dole-outs that

politicians use as bribe in exchange for our right to suffrage. 4Ps might actually be the program

that has the means to ‘emancipate’ those in the lowest socio-economic class from the hold of

patronage politics.9

As Ronald Mendoza pointed out in his article (see footnote), politicians are not the only

ones addicted to pork barrel, most of the poor families are addicted to pork barrel as well. Due to

their socio-economic constraints, poor families will actively and continuously seek the support of

politicians unless a systematic, fair and evidence based social protection system is implemented

that will help the poor and low income families escape the never ending cycle of poverty trap.

The table below that Ronald Mendoza created is a good summary of the pros and cons of

4Ps systematic and evidence based program vis-à-vis patronage politics that is rampant in the

country since time immemorial.

9
Ibid.

8
 4Ps vs. Patronage Politics Comparison Table10

Legal Issue

Does the implementation of conditional cash transfer or 4Ps violate Section 2 Article XIII

and Section 9 Article II of the 1987 Constitution?

10
Mendoza, Ronald, Why We Should Support the 4Ps, available at
http://pantawid.dswd.gov.ph/index.php/resource-materials/334-by-ronald-u-mendoza-re-posted-from-
rapplercom (last accessed October 2013)

9
Doubts and Questions of Legality: On the concept of common good and social justice

4Ps is a highly lauded program with a continuous success rate in the five years it has been

in existence. With all of the good outcomes that the program had produced so far, one cannot

help but think that it is too good to be true.

From the start of the program in 2009, the program has expanded to accommodate the

needs of more than three million households registered under the program. The program’s

expansion is positively correlated with its budget allocation. One of the first contentions against

the legality of the program is thru its steadily increasing budget allocation.

In G.R. No. 195770, former Senator Aquilino Pimentel Jr., together with Sergio Tadeo

and Nelson Alcantara questions the P21 billion budget allocations that DSWD provided for 4Ps

in 2011. The argument is that the P21 billion CCTP budget allocations under the DSWD in the

GAA FY 2011 violates the provisions of Article II Sec. 25 and Article X Sec. 3 of the 1987

Constitution in relation to Sec. 17 of the Local Government Code of 1991 by providing for the

recentralization of the national government in the delivery of basic services already devolved to

the LGUs.

Since the LGUs are tasked with directly providing policies that will address the basic

social needs of their constituents, the petitioners contend that the implementation of the program

through DSWD which is a national agency encroaches upon the LGUs local autonomy. In an en

banc resolution of the Supreme Court, the petition was dismissed stating that:

10
 “Indeed, a complete relinquishment of central government powers on

the matter of providing basic facilities and services cannot be implied as the

Local Government Code itself weighs against it. The national government is,

thus, not precluded from taking a direct hand in the formulation and

implementation of national development programs especially where it is

implemented locally in coordination with the LGUs concerned.

Every law has in its favor the presumption of constitutionality, and to

justify its nullification, there must be a clear and unequivocal breach of the

Constitution, not a doubtful and argumentative one. Petitioners have failed

to discharge the burden of proving the invalidity of the provisions under the

GAA of 2011. The allocation of a P21 billion budget for an intervention

program formulated by the national government itself but implemented in

partnership with the local government units to achieve the common national

goal development and social progress can by no means be an encroachment

upon the autonomy of local governments.”11

There is no encroachment of local autonomy nor is there a recentralization of budget. The

law is clear when it comes to budget allocations and program implementations of Local

Government Units. The same is true with the LGUs role in the implementation of programs for

social services in cases where the funding was appropriated from the GAA allocation of the

national agency that spearheaded said project. The Supreme Court emphasized this in their
11
G.R. No. 195770, July 17, 2012

11
decision citing and clarifying the categorical exceptions of Section 17 (c) of the Local

Government Code, where the current disbursement and allocation scheme of 4Ps anchors its

authority from. The Supreme Court stated:

“In order to fully secure to the LGUs the genuine and meaningful

autonomy that would develop them into self-reliant communities and

effective partners in the attainment of national goals, Section 17 of the

Local Government Code vested upon the LGUs the duties and functions

pertaining to the delivery of basic services and facilities, as follows:

SECTION 17. Basic Services and Facilities. –

(a) Local government units shall endeavor to be

self-reliant and shall continue exercising the powers and

discharging the duties and functions currently vested upon

them. They shall also discharge the functions and

responsibilities of national agencies and offices devolved to

them pursuant to this Code. Local government units shall

likewise exercise such other powers and discharge such

other functions and responsibilities as are necessary,

appropriate, or incidental to efficient and effective

provision of the basic services and facilities enumerated

herein.

(b) Such basic services and facilities include, but are

12
 not limited to, x x x.

While the aforementioned provision charges the LGUs to take on the

functions and responsibilities that have already been devolved upon them

from the national agencies on the aspect of providing for basic services and

facilities in their respective jurisdictions, paragraph (c) of the same provision

provides a categorical exception of cases involving nationally-funded

projects, facilities, programs and services, thus:

(c) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (b)

hereof, public works and infrastructure projects and other

facilities, programs and services funded by the National

Government under the annual General Appropriations Act,

other special laws, pertinent executive orders, and those

wholly or partially funded from foreign sources, are not

covered under this Section, except in those cases where the

local government unit concerned is duly designated as the

implementing agency for such projects, facilities, programs

and services. (Underscoring supplied)

The essence of this express reservation of power by the national

government is that, unless an LGU is particularly designated as the

implementing agency, it has no power over a program for which funding has

13
 been provided by the national government under the annual general

appropriations act, even if the program involves the delivery of basic

services within the jurisdiction of the LGU.”12

On the other hand, most of the detractors of 4Ps argue that the program is an advocate of

dependency and not of the good kind. The practice of doling out cash grants is no different from

the practice of patronage politics as the beneficiaries are of understanding that the system is one

that they can rely on for extra cash. The provisions set by the program in maintaining a

household’s standing in the program are simple and easy to follow. It is no hardship for the

recipients to comply with these set conditions, who will in turn receive the cash grants with little

difficulty. There is no win-loss situation for a recipient and the budget allotted to alleviate their

living conditions comes from the taxes of the working middle to low income class who slaves

away at work to earn money for their daily needs.

The above situation is a classic example where the practice of common good becomes

vague and selective. There is no justice and equality when those who are working themselves to

the bone to earn their keep are taxed heavily by the government in order to provide for those who

are recipients of 4Ps. One must also bear in mind that the program uses a system to determine

who should be the receiver of the cash grants. It is a selective process in itself; there are no

guarantees that all those below the accepted poverty line are given the chance to enjoy this

program.

12
Ibid.

14
 Most of the non-supporters believe that the best way to help bridge the financial situation

of the country is to create more jobs for the Filipino people. As what one of the passages of the

Bible says, teach the people how to fish and not give them fish.

One of the loopholes of the programs is the eligibility requirements it presented as well.

Education as one of the tenets behind the implementation of the program has its own

shortcomings. Providing subsidies for the primary educational needs of the children will be for

naught if the parents can no longer sustain the foundations through the secondary and tertiary

level. One should keep in mind that good paying jobs require at least a high school diploma, and

that for one to land a management level employment – a college degree is a must.

4Ps has no provision to sustain educational cash grants until the college level, because the

minimal cash grant that the program gives cannot keep up with the reality of the high cost of

education for secondary and tertiary education.

The program itself only lasts for five years, there are no set guidelines yet if the current

recipients can retain their standing in the program after their five year stint had lapsed. If the

household had become dependent on the program for their main income, once they are no longer

recipients of the cash grants, the program might actually be more of a hindrance than of help.

Section 9 Article II of the 1987 Constitution which is one of the basic provisions for the

implementation of these policies works against the program. It is stated that the government

15
should free the people from poverty through policies that provide adequate social services,

promote full employment, a rising standard of living, and an improved quality of life for all.

4Ps falls under the basic definition of social services; however, one must not disregard

the next two stipulations after social services: promote full employment, a rising standard of

living and an improved quality of life. These three provisos are related to one another, a rising

standard of living and improved quality of life is a direct effect of employment. Getting a job is

the first step as it is a better means to sustain ones financial needs. Employment promotes self

reliance and gears away from the concept of dependency that 4Ps indirectly advocates.

Furthermore, the Constitutional mandate on the promotion of social justice questions the

legality of the implementation of 4Ps. Section 10 of Article II of the 1987 Constitution laid down

the foundation of promotion of social justice as a State policy. However, Section 2 of Article

XIII of the 1987 Constitution further clarified what and hows of promoting social justice when it

stated that: “The promotion of social justice shall include the commitment to create economic

opportunities based on freedom of initiative and self-reliance.”

It is imperative emphasize the phrase ‘commitment to create economic opportunities

based on freedom of initiative and self-reliance’. It means that the government in its capacity

must ensure that economic opportunities are present for its citizens to take part of. The implies

that while the State has the duty create economic opportunities and provide for a person’s basic

social needs, an individual has the obligation to equip oneself with the necessary skills and

16
knowledge to gain productive employment, work or livelihood without having to depend on the

State or the community for his basic social needs.13

Self-reliance and freedom from dependency on ones community or State is one of the

primary components of social justice. Self-reliance promotes ones sense of self-worth and

individuality. Gaining productive employment helps not only an individual’s living conditions

but the country’s economic situation as well.

One must bear in mind that the promotion of social justice does not aim for the total

eradication of poverty; rather it hopes to reduce the social, economic and political inequalities.

Social justice is not social or economic equality, because inequality will always exist as long as

social relations depend on personal or subjective proclivities.14

The end of social justice measures or programs should be to assure that those who are

less favoured in life should have more in law.15 As a mandate imposed by the Constitution, it

requires the adoption of the State of measures that guarantee the right of all the people to equal

opportunities in all aspects of human endeavours and equal sharing of the fruits of social and

economic development with special emphasis to measures and policies that ameliorate the

standard of living of the underprivileged groups.16

13
De Leon, Hector S. and De Leon Jr., Hector M, Textbook on the Philippine Constitution, p. 582, 2011 edition
14
Ibid, p. 585.
15
Ibid, p. 581.
16
Ibid, p. 580 – 581.

17
 Social justice however should not be construed as a valid excuse to use in violation of

another individual’s rights. Charity and social justice cannot be used to trample upon the rights

of others or to commit an injustice against the more fortunate classes to improve the lot of the

less fortunate ones. Society has the duty to defend the poor against the rich, but it also requires a

responsibility to protect the rights of the rich against the poor.17

Tongue-in-cheek: A surface assessment

The provisions of the Constitution mandate that the State should ensure that the basic

social needs of its constituents should be addressed. It also mandates that the State should

promote social justice in its implementation of policies. Subsidies have always been a basic

means of addressing the issues of poverty alleviation. However, with the ongoing CCT

program’s increasing budget allocation for the sustenance of the poorest of the poor which are

taken from the taxes of the working class, one cannot help but post the following questions: At

what point should the State subsidies stop? Are subsidies the real solution to the current

situation?

Poverty and socio-economic imbalance have been a long running problem in our

country. 4Ps is just one of the programs that were created as a poverty reduction measure. It is by

far the most successful and well accepted by the masses. It aims to reduce the glaring gaps

between the steps of the current socio-economic ladder of the country. It offers a quick fix that

immediately deals with the instant needs of the household recipient. It can also be viewed as an

easy additional income for those who are currently enjoying the program.
17
Ibid, p. 585.

18
 Despite the five year successful track record of the program, there are shortcomings that

the government should take in consideration for the furtherance of the program. One of the most

glaring shortcomings is the program’s failure to sustain the educational grants through the

secondary and tertiary level of education. As stated before, primary education is important but

the government should also focus on helping the recipients of the current program secure means

to send their children to high school.

The current set up and thrust of the educational system to the K to 12 programs should be

a focal guide in their development of the 4Ps structure. It does not necessarily have to be in the

form of cash grants as what the current system have but rather a form of subsidy through free

snacks or lunch and school supplies would suffice.

Another point to consider is the limited and fixed availment period of the program. Five

years is a short term especially for those who have children below fourteen years of age and

availed of the cash grants when their children were around three to five years of age. If the

household had already developed dependency on the monthly government stipend to help them

get by for their daily needs, removal from the program after their five year stint might prove to

be a hard adjustment for the household.

4Ps is a quick fix and it is only a matter of time before the question of its sustainability

and legality will be questioned once more. 4Ps while it addresses the basic social and immediate

needs of the household do not promote self-reliance and freedom of initiative, which in this case

19
prove to be the better part of the equation as it answers the issues of poverty from the root cause.

It is therefore contrary to some constitutional provisions and do not fully adhere to the mandate

that the Constitution asks for.

The contention of creating more jobs vis-à-vis giving cash subsidies to poor families is

still the best way to reduce the socio-economic gaps in our current social ladder. The

Constitution is clear in its mandate of self-reliance and freedom of initiative in creating economic

opportunities for the people within its jurisdiction. There will always be inequalities so long as

the interaction between individuals remains subjective and personal in nature.

The dynamics of the relationship between the State and its constituents is a two-way

street. One that is mutually beneficial between the parties concerned. It is likewise bound with

duties and obligations that each party must adhere to. The State is tasked with the duty to create

economic opportunities for its people. Equal opportunities in securing a job that will help sustain

an individual and a household’s financial stability is a State’s duty to its people. The individual

therefore has an obligation to equip themselves with the right skills and knowledge to secure a

well paying employment that the State created.

Social justice is one of the State policies that the country promotes but it should not be

mistaken as a reasonable means of taking advantage of the preferential treatment for those who

have less in life. Mutual respect is a must. The practice of an individual’s rights must not

encroach upon another’s rights. Otherwise, it would end up in injustice and inequality which are

the opposite of the desired results of social justice.

20
References

De Leon, Hector S. and De Leon Jr., Hector M, Textbook on the Philippine Constitution, p. 582,
2011 edition

G.R. No. 195770, July 17, 2012

Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program, FAQ for the general public available at
http://pantawid.dswd.gov.ph/images/stories/briefernew.pdf (last accessed September 2013)

The Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program available at

http://pantawid.dswd.gov.ph/index.php/about-us?showall=1 (last accessed September 2013)

Mendoza, Ronald, Why We Should Support the 4Ps, available at

http://pantawid.dswd.gov.ph/index.php/resource-materials/334-by-ronald-u-mendoza-re-posted-
from-rapplercom (last accessed October 2013)

Shahani, Lila R., Why Conditional Cash Transfer Works? available at

http://www.dswd.gov.ph/2013/07/why-conditional-cash-transfers-work/ (last accessed October
2013)

21