Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
MEANING OF GOVERNANCE
Governance in General
The word governance came from the Latin verb gubernare, or more originally from the Greek
word kubernaein, which means to steer. Basing on its etymology, governance refers to the
manner of steering or governing, or of directing and controlling, a group of people or a state.
Governance is essentially related to politics, in that politics is often defined as the art of
governance. Just as politics talks about governments, institutions, power, order, and the ideals of
justice, governance also deals with the public sector, power structures, equity, and ideals of public
administration. Nevertheless, they are distinct from each other in the sense that politics is broader
than governance. Traditionally, the study of politics entails the concept of the good life and the
ideal society, which are so broad they include a web of subjects and every possible form of
government. The study of governance, on the contrary, is generally attuned to the concept of
democracy, and on how the government and the civil society arrive at a decision in meeting their
needs.
Definition of Governance
Governance is commonly defined as the exercise of power or authority by political leaders for the
well-being of their countrys citizens or subjects. It is the complex process whereby some sectors of
the society wield power, and enact and promulgate public policies which directly affect human and
institutional interactions, and economic and social development. The power exercised by the
participating sectors of the society is always for the common good, as it is essential for demanding
respect and cooperation from the citizens and the state. As such, a great deal about governance is
the proper and effective utilization of resources.
Governance and Government
Governance is traditionally associated with government. In literatures, they are often used
interchangeably. But in the 1980s, political scientists broadened the meaning of governance as
including, not just government actors, but also civil-society actors.[1] Today, governance includes
three sectors: the public sector (state actors and institutions), the private sector (households and
companies), and the civil society (non-governmental organizations). These three sectors are said
to work hand in hand in the process of governance. This new use of the term focuses on the role of
networks in the achievement of the common good, whether these networks are
intergovernmental, transnational, or international.[2] In other words governance is broader than
government in that other sectors are included in it.
Many authors also distinguish the two by associating government with control and domination,
and governance with decentralization and relational management. On the one hand, government
refers to a central institution which wields power over its subjects. It is the instrument patterned
after the model of command and control, the government being in command over the affairs of
the people. On the other hand, governance is closely associated with the concept of
decentralization of power and the need for inter-sectoral management. Governance is based on
the realization that the government cannot do everything for the people, so that in order to survive
the state should not only rely on government but also on the other sectors of the society.
Thus, under the current trend, there is a need to move from the traditional hierarchical exercise of
power by the government to the new notion of a dispersed and relational power in governance
from government to governance. To govern should now mean to facilitate or regulate, not to
dominate or command.
Importance of Studying Governance
From the information learned in the discussion of governance, the people, most especially the
citizens, will be aware of the need for good governance. Consequently, such awareness should
move them to action. For their continued empowerment and sustainable development, they have to
know how to fight for their rights by knowing what to expect from Philippine governance. Thus,
what will follow is an exposition of the basic concepts of governance, the ideal type of governance,
and the status of the Philippines vis--vis the indicators of good governance.
More fundamentally, the need for participation is a recognition of the limits of a verticalized
system of governance. A verticalized system, or the top-down approach, refers to a state or
government monopoly both of powers and responsibilities. While the government is still the most
potent actor in the process of governance, the participation of other sectors is already a necessity
because of the always evolving complexity and ever growing needs of the societies, especially in
the financial sphere. What should now be utilized is the so-called horizontal system where the
government works hand in hand with other sectors of the society. The different sectors are
considered partners of the government in attaining development goals. Governance should no
longer be government monopoly but government management or inter-sectoral participation.
Participation in representative democracies may either be direct or indirect, and recommendatory
or actual. It could be indirect and recommendatory because in principle the form of government is
based on delegation of powers. In the Philippines, which possesses features of both direct and
indirect democracy, indirect participation is done through public consultations or hearings, while
direct participation is through elections, initiatives and referendums.
The management of highly complex societies and of their ever growing needs requires a
participatory form of governance by diffusing power. The move for decentralization is a response to
this as it widens the base of participation and allows local government units to exercise
governmental powers directly within their respective districts. Service delivery is enhanced
because of the proximity of local government units to their constituents, and because of the linking
which happens between the national government and regional concerns.
Participation is one of the strengths of Philippine governance. The 1987 Philippine Constitution is
replete of provisions dealing with relational and inter-sectoral governance. The Local Government
Act of 1989 was borne out of the need for decentralization in Philippine governance. As such,
these and other related legislations may be considered as normative standards for good
governance.
Rule of Law
Democracy is essentially the rule of law. It is through the law that people express their will and
exercise their sovereignty. That the government is of law and not of men is an underlying
democratic principle which puts no one, however rich and powerful, above the law. Not even the
government can arbitrarily act in contravention of the law. Thus, good democratic governance is
fundamentally adherence to the rule of law.
Rule of law demands that the people and the civil society render habitual obedience to the law. It
also demands that the government acts within the limits of the powers and functions prescribed by
the law. The absence of rule of law is anarchy. Anarchy happens when people act in utter disregard
of law and when the government act whimsically or arbitrarily beyond their powers. In more
concrete terms, rule of law means peace and order, absence of corruption, impartial and
effective justice system, observance and protection of human rights, and clear, publicized, and
stable laws.
What the law seeks to promote is justice. When there is dearth of legislation for curbing social
evils, or even if there is, but the same is ineffectual or unresponsive, and when there is no faithful
execution of the law, then justice is not attained. When the justice system is biased and
discriminatory, when it favors the rich and the influential over the poor and lowly, or when the legal
processes are long, arduous, unavailable or full of delays, then justice is not attained. Then when
the actors of governance can minimize, if not eliminate, these injustices, then there is said to be
rule of law.
Rule of law also requires that laws are responsive to the needs of the society. Archaic or irrelevant
laws must be amended or repealed to cater to modern demands.
The Philippines does not fare well in this aspect of good governance. In spite of being one of the
oldest democracies in the region, the Philippines ranked as last among seven indexed Asian
countries according to the World Justice Project Rule of Law Index. Generally, the reasons for
ranking last are lack of respect for law, pervasive and systemic corruption in the government,
and circumvention of the law. Lack of respect for law is generally caused by distrust on the
integrity of law enforcement agencies. Order and security are compromised and criminal justice is
rendered ineffectual.
Systemic corruption has long been a problem in the Philippines that like a malignant tumor it keeps
on sucking the life out of the country. Allegedly, it is the key officials in the government who direct
the perpetration of this crime. What became clear from a long string of corruption and plunder
cases is the true motive of many aspiring politicians money. The huge amount of money spent
during election campaigns are but mere investments for a more profitable return during their term
in office.
In addition, the justice system is flooded by legal practitioners who are experts at circumventing the
law. Circumvention happens when there is compliance with the letter of the law but violation of its
spirit and purpose. Due to technicalities, for instance, highly paid lawyers can find ways for their
rich and powerful clients to evade the law. Although apparently there is observance of law, it is only
superficial as the real end of the law is forfeited. As such, there is a concomitant violation of
fundamental rights of the people and ineffective administration of justice.
Nevertheless, the Philippines has exerted efforts in promoting the rule of law. The series of cases
filed against high ranking officials, previous Presidents, members of the judiciary, and high profile
persons for graft and corrupt practices prove one thing clearly: the honest drive of the current
administration to clean the government from corrupt traditional politicians. In addition, legislations
were made to hasten the legal process. The Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 2004 (R.A.
9285), for instance, seeks to unclog the court dockets by promoting a speedy, efficient, and less
expensive resolution of disputes. The Judicial Affidavit Rule issued by the Supreme Court in 2013
also lessened to a great extent the time and expenses of litigation.
Effectiveness and Efficiency
Good governance requires that the institutions, processes, and actors could deliver and meet the
necessities of the society in a way that available resources are utilized well. That the different
actors meet the needs of the society means that there is effective governance. That the valuable
resources are utilized, without wasting or underutilizing any of them, means that there is efficient
governance. Effectiveness (meeting the needs) and efficiency (proper utilization of resources) must
necessarily go together to ensure the best possible results for the community.
Concretely, effectiveness and efficiency demands enhancement and standardization of the quality
of public service delivery consistent with international standards, professionalization of
bureaucracy, focusing of government efforts on its vital functions, and elimination of redundancies
or overlaps in functions and operations, a citizen-centered government, and an improved
financial management system of the government.[6]
Public service delivery, especially of front-line agencies, must promptly and adequately cater the
needs of the citizens. Doing so requires simplified government procedures and inexpensive
transaction costs. Cumbersome procedures and expensive costs trigger corruption and red tape.
Red Tape refers to the disregard for timeframes in procedures by government agencies through
procrastination in public service delivery or under-the-table or unofficial transactions.[7] To further
curb such possibilities, the government agencies must comply with their citizens charter and use
up-to-date information and communications technology to reduce processing time. There must also
be coordination among various government agencies to eliminate redundant information
requirements.
Professionalism in Philippine bureaucracy requires competence and integrity in civil service.
Appointments to civil service must be depoliticized and must be based solely on merits.
Effectiveness and efficiency also demands that the programs and objectives of the various
government agencies are aligned with individual performance goals. The increases in
compensation are likewise necessary for the economic well-being, sustained competence and
boosted morale of the civil servants.
Although still insufficient, efforts were made to attain effectiveness and efficiency in Philippine
governance. The Anti-Red Tape Act of 2007 (ARTA), for instance, was passed to require the setting
up of Citizens Charter for a simplified procedure and to facilitate governmental transactions. Also,
Good governance demands that the actors must give preferential attention to the plight of the poor.
Laws must be geared towards this end and the society must actively participate in the promotion of
the same.
The Philippine Government has done extensive efforts in promoting equity and inclusiveness. The
Constitution makes it as one of its state policies the promotion of social justice. Pursuant to this,
the Congress has enacted social legislations like the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law which
aims at freeing the farmer tenants from the bondage of the soil. Also, representation in the
Congress, under the party list system, is constitutionally mandated to have sectoral representation
of the underprivileged. Gender and Development programs are in the process of being integrated
with the various structures and institutions in the country. But legislation is one thing;
implementation is another. It is in the faithful implementation of these laws that the country failed.
Inequality is especially felt in the justice system, electoral system, and even in the bureaucracy
itself.
Consensus Oriented
Governance is consensus oriented when decisions are made after taking into consideration the
different viewpoints of the actors of the society. Mechanisms for conflict resolution must be in place
because inevitably conflict that will arise from competing interests of the actors. To meet the
consensus, a strong, impartial, and flexible mediation structure must be established. Without such,
compromises and a broad consensus cannot be reached that serves that best interest of the whole
community.
Fundamentally, democratic governance is based on the partnership of the actors of the society in
providing public services. Decisions-making must therefore entail recognition of their respective
interests as well as their respective duties. The essential of governance could never be expressed
in a unilateral act of policy making by the public sector or other dominant sectors. Public hearings
or consultations in arriving at a consensus are therefore inherently necessary in the process of
governance.
Among the things done by the Philippines in promoting a consensus oriented governance are: (1)
creation of a wide-based of representation in the Congress; (2) a two-tiered legislature or
bicameralism which subjects legislation to the evaluation of national and district legislators; and (3)
necessity of public hearings or consultations of various governmental policies and actions.
Accountability
Accountability means answerability or responsibility for ones action. It is based on the principle
that every person or group is responsible for their actions most especially when their acts affect
public interest. The actors have an obligation to explain and be answerable for the consequences
of decisions and actions they have made on behalf of the community it serves.
Accountability comes in various forms: political, hierarchical, and managerial accountability.
Political accountability refers to the accountability of public officials to the people they represent.
Hierarchical accountability refers to the ordered accountability of the various agencies and their
respective officers and personnel in relation to their program objectives. Managerial accountability
refers to employee accountability based on organization and individual performance. A system of
rewards and punishment must be in place to strengthen the processes and institutions of
governance.
The Philippines in the recent years had endeavored to comply with the requirements of
accountability. It had put in action the concept of political accountability as it held answerable erring
public officials involved in graft and corruption and for acts contrary to the mandate of the
constitution. It had also strengthened parliamentary scrutiny through legislative investigations and
creation of special committees exercising oversight functions. The Office of the Ombudsman,
considered as the public watchdog, has become ever so active in investigating and prosecuting
graft and plunders cases. Citizens Charter, as required by ARTA, was also an important tool in
promoting professional public service values. In this area, Philippine governance has done
relatively well.