Philippines - Political

Parties
Political parties play
important roles in
modern democracies.
Ideally, they aggregate
interest demands and
educate the polity on
the vital issues of the
day. They serve as
vehicles for stability
and good governance
as they help in
resolving societal
conflicts. Patronageridden and personalityoriented parties
characterize the
countrys politics. Thus,
they are unable to
aggregate demands of
the electorate and fail
to serve as a
mechanism to educate
the public on vital
development issues.
This then leads to a
political system
dominated by the elite.
Some scholars blame
this on the institutional
design transported by
the Americans at the
turn of the 19th
century that privileges
the landed and
educated.
Consequently, political
parties have often been
used by the elite to
further their interests
and build big one-party
coalitions even after
the Marcos leadership.

Political parties grew in

profusion after the
Marcos martial law
regime (1972-81) was
ended. There were 105
political parties
registered in 1988. As
in the pre-Marcos era,
most legal political
parties were coalitions,
built around prominent
individuals, which
focused entirely on
winning elections, not
on what to do with the
power achieved. There

was little to distinguish

one party from another
ideologically, which
was why many Filipinos
regarded the political
system as irrelevant.

Party organizations are

relatively weak in the
Philippines and are
overshadowed by the
influence of
personalities. On the
surface, party politics
are alive and well in
the Philippines. There
are over 100 political
parties registered with
the Commission of
Elections (COMELEC)
and literally hundreds
of unregistered parties
-- mostly very small -operating in the
country. These parties
represent views across
the political spectrum.
That said, given the
entire mosaic of
Philippine politics,
parties basically serve
as bit players
compared to the role
that personalities play.

In fact, parties
primarily service the
needs of political
personalities, who have
gained influence
usually due to their
family links. During
periods of national
campaigns, the larger
political parties
sometimes gain
strength due to their
association with
powerful personalities
who can give
patronage in exchange
for votes and support.
Party influence tends to
recede dramatically,
however, after the
election takes place,
when the money dries
up and attention totally
focuses on the
personality in power.

During the run-up to

the May 2004, for
example, President
Arroyo's Lakas
Christian Muslim
Democrats (LakasCMD) Party gained a
certain degree of
influence as it
organized rallies and
other events for the
president. Its influence
receded after the
election, however.

The larger national

parties have focused
on party-building
activities, but with
limited success. LakasCMD and several other
parties have
participated in
workshops in Manila
and elsewhere meant
to encourage such
institution-building
activities as ways to
increase membership,
develop party
platforms, implement
standardized funding
mechanisms, and
facilitate rule-based
decision-making among
members. Opposition
senators Edgardo
Angara and Jinggoy
Estrada both
introduced 2004
legislation to reform
the party system by
limiting party
switching, among other
proposals. Their bills
languished in
committees, however.
Teal commitment
among politicians to
these reform efforts
remained elusive. Even
Lakas -- the largest of
the national parties -- is
understaffed,
underfunded, and overreliant on the wealth of
a few single
benefactors to be truly
effective as a national
political organization.

Philippine political
parties' impact rises
dramatically during
campaign season,
when their ability to
connect funds to
candidates comes into
play. Parties aim to field
pairs of candidates that
represent the strongest
combinations of broad
public visibility and
winning personality.
Individual parties may
coalesce and back a
common presidential
candidate to increase
that person's chances
of winning, and some
candidates may opt to
become vice
presidential running
mates if not drafted as
their party's standard
bearer, reducing the
need for large sums.

The cost of running a

presidential campaign
in the Philippines is
heavily determined by
the cost of television
and radio advertising,
which accounts for a
significant portion of
campaign costs.
Campaign spending
law limits expenditures
to approximately 135
million pesos per
candidate but, in the
2007 elections, a
majority of viable
candidates exceeded
this amount by 25 to
50 percent. Actual
campaign costs can hit
USD 60 million or more
per candidate, enough
to discourage
candidates without
access to the deep
pockets of Manila's
business elite.

There are alliances as

well for the local races,
but candidates
generally run under
individual parties. In

many localities,
candidates run
unopposed, but in
others candidates from
two or more of the proAdministration coalition
parties are competing
against each other.

Senate Race - 2007

The pro-Administration
"Team Unity" and the
"Genuine Opposition"
fielded slates of
candidates for the 2007
Senate race, with a
small "third force" not
identified with either
camp.

The pro-Arroyo TEAM

(Together Everyone
Achieves More) Unity
(TU) had the strong
advantage of a well
oiled and funded party
machinery organized
from the national down
to the local level. Lakas
has maintained its
strategic alliances with
other major parties,
including Kabalikat ng
Malayang Pilipino
(KAMPI) or "Partner of
the Free Filipino"
(founded by President
Arroyo), the Liberal
Party-Atienza wing, the
Nationalist People's
Coalition (NPC), and
Laban ng
Demokratikong Pilipino
(LDP) or "Fight of the
Democratic Filipino."
Also, the team had a
strong field network,
controlling a majority of
local government
seats.
The Genuine
Opposition slate was
the compomise
handiwork of the
fractious opposition,
which nonetheless
agreed to consolidate
forces to prserve an
opposition-dominated

Senate and continue

the fight against the
Arroyo administration.
Obsrvers saw the
Estrada camp's effort
to flex its remaining
political muscle and
noted that some
canddates have quietly
condoned past
attempts to overtrow
the Arroyo government,
while others played a
active role in the ouster
of Estrada himself.
Benigno "Noynoy"
Aquino III, son of the
late Benigno "Ninoy"
Aquino, Jr. and former
President Corazon
Aquino, vowed to
continue his parents'
fight for democracy,
minus his father's fiery
eloquence and his
mother's influential
moral leadership.
***Because the states
wrote and ratified the
Constitution that way.
Congress did not create
itself.
Congress is responsible
for making enabling
laws to make sure the
spirit of the
constitution is upheld
in the country and, at
times amend or change
the constitution itself.
In order to craft laws,
the legislative body
comes out with two
main documents: bills
and resolutions
The Congress makes
laws.

Despite promises made

by presidential
candidates, the
President has no direct
power to pass any
LEGISLATION. This very
important power lies
solely with the House
of Representatives and
the Senate.

The People's Influence

Americans elect their

Senators and
Representatives. One
very important
question posed by a
democratic
government involves
how elected
representatives should
behave once sworn into
office. Should members
of Congress reflect the
will of the people, or
should they pay
attention to their own
points of view, even if
they disagree with their
constituents? Many
considerations
influence the voting
patterns of members of
Congress, including the
following:
Constituents' Views.
Members of Congress
often visit their home
districts and states to
keep in touch with their
CONSTITUENTS' views.
They also read their
mail, keep in touch with
local and state political
leaders, and meet with
their constituents in
Washington. Some pay
more attention than
others, but they all
have to consider the
views of the folks back
home. Completely
ignoring one's
CONSTITUENCY would
be foolhardy if the
politician hoped at all
to be reelected.
Party Views. Congress
is organized primarily
along party lines, so
party membership is an
important determinant
of a member's vote.
Each party develops its
own version of many
important bills, and
party leaders actively
pressure members to
vote according to party
views. It is not

surprising that
Representatives and
Senators vote along
PARTY LINES about
three-fourths of the
time.
Personal Views. What if
a Representative or
Senator seriously
disagrees with the
views of his
constituents on a
particular issue? How
should he or she vote?
Those who believe that
PERSONAL VIEWS are
most important argue
that the people vote for
candidates whose
judgment they trust. If
the people disagree
with their decisions,
they can always vote
them out of office.
The Nature of
Democratic Discourse

GRIDLOCK can occur

when the legislative
branch of Congress and
the executive branch of
the President are led by
different political
parties. Coming to
agreement on new
legislation during these
periods of divided
government can prove
difficult. American
voters can become
frustrated by the
inability of their leaders
to move forward.
Yet this expectation for
a smoothly running
government
contradicts the very
nature of democratic
discourse. How can
representatives resolve
the differences if they
do not discuss them,
argue about them, and
eventually take sides
on a solution? The
nature of democratic
discourse is to hear
from everyone,
hammer out
compromises, and

make decisions based

on the process.

Voters may think of

their own
Representatives or
Senators as good
people fighting the
corruption and selfish
greed of the others.
Incumbent candidates
often encourage this
thinking like by
claiming to have
"saved" the district
from disaster through
their good works. It
helps them win
elections.

Despite all the

complaints about
divided government,
Americans seem to
prefer it based on their
voting patterns. Since
1981, the same party
has controlled the
presidency, the House,
and the Senate for only
two years. Divided
government prevents
any one party from
moving too quickly with
their legislative
agenda. Perhaps this
cautious approach to
new legislation is
exactly what Americans
want.
Justice delayed is
justice denied Justice
delayed and justice
denied means that if
justice is not carried
out right away timely,
then even if it is carried
out later it is not really
justice because there
was a period of time
when there was a lack
of justice.Justice is
something meant to be
handled at the present
moment. Without
justice system there
can be no state worth
the name.

Many a times I keep

thinking, Is law blind or
it lacks its own eyes
and ears to know the
facts?
Today there are more
than 3.2 crore cases
pending in high court
and lower court in India
and mine is one among
them. I never knew the
meaning of law and
justice till I knocked the
doors of the court. To
my surprise experts are
still not able to define
Law despite
brainstorming sessions
of centuries. They
could only say law is
what law it is and It is
what it is. Those
unhappy with the
frequent irrationality of
law like me say law is
a jealous mistress and
law is a absolute
mockery. Looking to the
complicated nature of
laws sometimes I feel
law is Greek. One more
concept is that law
itself is blind hence,
those who implement
law need a deeper
insight for proper
application to achieve
right results and proper
justice.
The goddess of law and
justice has also been
depicted with blind
folded eyes. The lady
justice has her eyes
covered, has a scale in
her hand and holds
sword in the other.
However, her ears are
open to listen to both
the parties and
perceive the facts of
the case without any
subjective intervention.
This depiction of the
statue with bind folded
eyes is purposeful and
this acquired blindness
has a meaning. Judges
should not judge by
seeing things with their
own eyes. In that case,
they may behave like a

witness and such an

attitude may bring
subjectivity. They are
required to do justice
after hearing the
parties. Hearing is for
impartiality and seeing
is subjectivity as per
the genesis of justice.
But I wonder do judges
understand the
meaning of this justice
lady or they are blind
folded with their
flattering ego and
power.
One more perception
about law is that no law
can be so adequate
which can perceive and
comprehend all
probable situations and
the complexity of
human nature.
Different justifications
for different situations
make it impossible for
any law to be
universally acceptable
as just and reasonable.
It is for the judges to
decide which side
weighs heavier as per
the merits of the case.
Judges are humans and
it is possible for
humans to err and
subjectivity can
enhance the error
hence this concept of
objectivity has been
imbibed. And most of
the times the error is
too costly for the
person who is innocent
and not guilty.
Delay in delivery of
Justice and its
repercussions
Let us first understand
what is the meaning of
this saying Justice
delayed is justice
denied. Justice should
be delivered at the
right time. If it is not
delivered at the right
time, it either may lose
importance or may
become meaningless.
Justice is denied when

there is an inordinate
delay. Let us
understand what in
meant by inordinate
delay. It means that
any delay which does
not convince any man
of normal prudence
about delivery at a
proper time, is a delay.
Avoiding delay does not
mean rushing for
justice. Undue haste
may also be denial of
justice. It is therefore
said that Justice
rushed is justice
crushed. But most
often justice is rushed
when the judges are
bribed and is delayed
too for the same
reasons.
Let us first take an
example of a civil case
regarding delays in
delivery of justice
Suppose a case for a
claim by an old man is
pending. If the claim is
not awarded at the
right time, he may die
natural death in some
time due to age. Any
delivery of justice after
his death will be
meaningless for him.
We may take another
example of a young
man fighting for
possession of his
workplace. He may lose
work and can be
rendered without
employment for a
longer time and gets
frustrated. Nation has
killed the enthusiasm
of a young man and
may be he renders
himself as a hopeless
case himself.
Let us take two
examples of criminal
cases. We may take
one example of delay.
The offender gets bail
and is enjoying life as
usual and may case
threats to the life of the
witnesses. A rape

victim gets mentally

tortured when she finds
that the rapist is
enjoying the loopholes
of law and procedure
and she loses hope.
Many such victims
have committed
suicide. Justice delivery
after her death is
meaningless for her.
Take one more example
of a lady fighting a
custody case to meet
her son and the time
taken is so long that by
the time justice is been
given the child is
capable enough to look
after the parents and
his childhood is lost .
Why Justice gets
always or say most of
the time delayed?
There are many
reasons for inordinate
delays in justice
delivery system. The
first is that the whole
system has been
inherited from the
British system which
takes long time in
following the
procedures. A close
look at the Civil
Procedure Code is a
marvelous example of
the procedures
followed before the
actual decision comes.
It has a very complex
and lengthy procedure
which invites excuses
for delay and scopes
for revisions for minor
deviations at various
stages. Secondly, the
infrastructure is not
properly equipped to
take care of the
elaborate procedures.
Thirdly, India has a
very low ratio of judges
as compared to the
ratio of population of
the western countries
whereas we have
adopted the western
legal culture. Fourthly,
the accountability of

the judges at all levels

is not adequately
defined and ensured.
Besides these, there
are many reasons that
cause one or the other
delay in delivery of
justice to the affected.
Many of the litigants
still await justice to be
delivered while for
some the decision by
the court might lose
every meaning, as it no
longer can be
rewarding for them.
Justice should be
expedited not hurried
Series of discussions
and brainstorming take
place in every country
across the globe to find
ways to speed up the
justice delivery system.
Some of the significant
outcomes of
deliberations are being
implemented while a
lot of improvement
needs to be done. What
is left over is a hope
that Justice will be
done, and we live in
that hope and die in
that hope.
JUSTICE DELAYED IS
JUSTICE DENIED

Justice delayed is
justice denied is an old
saying. It means that if
timely justice is not
provided to the
sufferer, it loses it
importance and
violates human rights.
The Indian judicial
system still lives in old
age. It has been
observed that a
number of cases are
pending in courts for a
very long time. It is
reported that more
than 34 lakh cases are
pending for disposal in
the High Courts and
the number of cases
pending in the

subordinate courts has

crossed two crores.
Former Chief Justice of
India Honble Mr.
Justice B.N. Kirpal
remarked, In lower
courts a judicial official
presides over eighty
cases per day on an
average, out of which
seventy are
adjourned. Victims
have to go through a
harrowing time while
seeking justice. We
often hear about such
justice being delivered
either after the death
of justice seeker or at
that time when it has
become redundant and
useless for him. This
approach of justice
delivery system brings
forth a pathetic
situation prevailing all
around.
In the Uphaar case it is
shocking to observe
that it took six years to
establish that the 59
people died because of
criminal negligence on
the part of the cinema
management and the
Delhi government. It
was clear from day one
that nobody would
have died had
proprietors of the
cinema hall followed
safety rules but
because the wheels of
Indian justice move at
the pace of our
national vehicle the
bullock cart it took six
years for justice to be
done. And, now Ansal
family has appealed in
Honble Supreme Court
against the judgment
of Honble Delhi High
Court. And it can be
surely anticipated that
the justice is really
done by this apex
court.
There are three
enemies of the
administration of
justice: uncertainty,

delay and costs.

Uncertainty and delay
both create a feeling of
confusion and
uneasiness in the
minds of the litigants,
although lawyers and
judges seldom realize
this. It is important that
the sufferer must get
timely justice. In
addition to this
complicated and
expensive legal
procedure, justice is
delayed more often
than not.
Speedy trial is the
essence of criminal
justice and there can
be no doubt that delays
in trial by itself
constitutes denial of
justice. It is prejudice to
a man to be detained
due to delay in trial.
Speedy trial is an
integral and essential
part of the fundamental
right of life and liberty
enshrined in Article 21
of the Constitution of
India. In United States,
also speedy trial is one
of the constitutionally
assured rights.
European Convention
on Human Rights too
provides that everyone
arrested or detained
shall be entitled to trial
within reasonable time
or to be released
pending trial.
Moreover, the
procedure should be
reasonable, fair and
just in each proceeding
involving persons
fundamental rights.

The time has come

when we should think
seriously over the
multiplicity of appeals
and evolve a suitable
process to avoid delay.
With a view to provide
quick justice to the

people, fast track

courts have been
established throughout
the country. The 11th
Finance Commission
has recommended the
establishment of 1,734
additional courts known
as Fast Track Courts for
speedy trial of sessions
and other cases. As, on
February 28, 2002
-1015 Fast Track Courts
had already been set
up throughout the
country. Undoubtedly,
it has been proved that
fast track justice is the
need of our. And this
time, a fast track court
of Jodhpur to conduct
the expeditious trial in
the rape case of a
German tourist by two
auto rickshaw drivers
became the medium of
this fast justice. This
judgment further shows
the sincerity of our
judicial system in
making justice
available to the poor
victims as early as
possible so that the
victim do not undergo

the same physical as

well mental trauma of
that unforgettable
criminal torture in the
name of getting justice.
Judgment delivered by
the Additional District
Judge Jodhpur is
considered to be one of
the quickest court
verdicts. As a result, on
the rape that took
place on May 11, 2005
fast track court of
Jodhpur made history
by delivering its verdict
on June 1 i.e. within 21
days of the incidence
and awarded a
sentence of life
imprisonment to the
two accused.
It is true that some
amendments have
been made in civil laws
to give relief to parties;
still laws should be
amended, so that
parties may get relief
immediately. O.8 R. 1 of
CPC is an appreciable
measure to mitigate
the chances of
unnecessary delay

which usually happens

in civil matters. Civil
cases should be heard
day to day and should
not be adjourned over
and over again. The
number of courts
should be increased in
proportion to increasing
in population. We hope
that these measures
will certainly prove
helpful in quick justice
in our society.

This old adage tells a

tale that there would
be no meaning of
justice if it is not given
at appropriate time. At
the same time, it
reveals that when
justice cannot be given
on time, what would be
the use of such a
complex enormous
system erected for this
well entrenched value.
And, further, from
where the machinery
will come to realise the
concept of rule of law
in reality? There are
many such issues

which want serious

pondering over this
relevant issue.

Civil Procedure
Code,1908 Order 8
Rule 1 The defendant
shall, within thirty
days from the date of
service of summons on
him, present a written
statement of his
defence.
[Provided that where
the defendant fails to
file the written
statement within the
said period of thirty
days, he shall be
allowed to file the
same on such other
day, as may be
specified by the Court,
for reasons to be
recorded in writing, but
which shall not be later
than ninety days from
the date of service of
summons.]