Political dynasties are also known as Philippine political landscape.

They are typically

characterized as families that have established their political or economic dominance in a province
and have coordinated efforts to move on to involvement in national government or other positions of
national political prominence. Political dynasties usually have a strong, consolidated support base
concentrated around the province in which they are dominant. Members of such dynasties usually
do not limit their involvement to strictly political activities, and have been found participating in
business or culture-related activities."
Political dynasties started emerging after the Philippine Revolution when the First Republic of the
Philippines was established. With the decline of Spain's economic power and international prestige
in the 19th century, the expansion of British and American influence around the world, and the
political current of emergent nationalism among the children of the economically enfranchised
bourgeois, the power of the peninsulares', or Spanish-born aristocracy declined propitiously.
Following the defeat of the Spanish in the Spanish–American War, the surviving members of
the Spanish or Spanish-sanctioned landholding elite and the newly ascendant merchant elite, who
were mostly foreign expatriates or of Chinese origin, formed a de facto aristocracy to replace the
power vacuum the Spanish had left.
Aristocracy survived and prospered under the American colonial regime, and remained a permanent
fixture in Philippine society even following the independence of the Philippines was finally confirmed
following the devastation of the Philippines under the Japanese occupation of the Philippines during
World War II. Over the years, political dynasties continued to adapt, as newer dynasties emerged to
fill power vacuums left behind by the extinction of older dynasties. The majority of the available
positions in Philippine government are currently held by members of these political dynasties.
Notable Philippine political dynasties include the Aquino, Marcos, Arroyo, Binay, Duterte, and Roxas
families." There has been a lot of debate regarding the effects political dynasties have on the political
and economic status of Philippine society. Despite the negative reaction of the populace towards
political dynasties and the association between dynastic activities and corruption,[1] it is only
prohibited in the members of the youth-oriented Sangguniang Kabataan.

When does a political family become a political dynasty? A political dynasty is

established in two instances. First, when an elected government official is
succeeded by a member of his household up to the first degree of
consanguinity or affinity. Second, when several members of a family occupy
various positions in government simultaneously.

There are 250 political families who control the country, 56% of whom come
from old political elites like the Osmeñas, Roxases and Magsaysays and 44%
emerged after the 1986 Edsa Revolution.

In the Senate, 16 out of the 24 members belong to political dynasties as are

70% of the members of Congress. An audit of their statements of assets and
liabilities reveal that lawmakers who belong to political dynasties increase
their net worth by an average of 39% after every term while those who do not
belong to dynastic families increase their wealth by less than 10%.

Among local governments, 73 out of 80 provinces are controlled by political

dynasties. Statistics show that the average incidence of poverty in provinces
controlled by political dynasties is a staggering 29.15% while those not under
dynastic control stands at only 18.91%. Abject poverty is at 2.31% in dynastic
bailiwicks and only 1.96% in non dynastic localities.

The numbers suggest that political dynasties exacerbate the incidences of

poverty rather than improve them. This assertion is further supported by the
inherent consequences of political dynasties as described below.

INHERENT CONSEQUENCES OF DYNASTIES

On Governance: When members of the same family occupy multiple
positions within a city or municipality, most are likely to consolidate power in a
pseudo monarchial manner. In such a setup, the preservation of power
becomes the priority, even more important than social and economic
development itself. Painful reforms and unpopular but necessary decisions
are avoided as they erode political equity. Adoption of populist policies
become the norm at the cost of stunted development.

Political dynasties are more likely to utilize their budgets doling out
scholarships, funeral aid and basketball courts rather than investing in social
development programs, economic initiatives and infrastructure.

These dynastic families are easily recognized — they operate in areas where
“tarpaulin politics” is prevalent. Politicians who grab credit by posting their
names and faces on every corner via tarpaulin banners is a tell tale sign of a
poorly managed dynastic territory.

On Fair Elections: It is just as easy for a dynasty’s family member to win an

election as it is difficult for new talent to penetrate.

Within the disposal of dynasties are formidable political machines, funds and
the many advantages of being the incumbent. The playing field is skewed to
the dynasty’s favor. This unfair advantage dissuades aspiring public servants
from throwing their hat in the proverbial ring. In effect, it decrease the level of
political participation among the populace. Dynasties monopolize power by
depriving others from a fair opportunity to serve.

This is why we have 21-year-old scions becoming mayors and governors

while the man with a doctorate degree in public governance is edged out.
Political dynasties cause a brain drain of talent among elected officials.
On Competence: Capabilities, values and work ethic rarely improve from
generation to generation, especially within powerful families enjoying comfort
and positions of influence. More often than not, the second generation simply
emulates the habits of the first. New ideas are stifled due to inbreeding of
management practices while bad habits are magnified. That said, it can be
argued that the quality of governance deteriorates over time in dynastic
bailiwicks.

On Generation of Wealth: By virtue of their elected positions, political

dynasties are able to wield influence, consolidate economic resources and
use their political machineries to take advantage of business opportunities.
These opportunities may come in the form of lucrative government contracts
or power brokering deals. Whether over or under the table, political dynasties
enjoy an undue advantage in generating wealth.

On Check and Balance: Most developed nations like South Korea have two
sets of elite — the political elite composed of high level civil servants and
technocrats and the economic elite composed of captains of industries and
business owners. Their interests are never made to intersect as doing so
causes conflicts of interests. These nations have strong institutions capable of
disciplining one or the other should their actions go against national interest.

In the Philippines, the political and economic elite are one and the same (most
of the time). This is why policies and decisions are often laced with self-
interest.

On Economic Inequality: Political dynasties are of the elite class, if not by

stature then by virtue of their net worth. Their continued persistence in our
political system strengthens the sway of the elite over the poor. The
disenfranchised continue to be the subjects while the elite consolidate their
supremacy.

Culture of Dependence: The concentration of political and economic power

among a few families benefits a minute segment of society while leaving out
the greater majority. It institutionalizes economic inequalities and perpetuates
a culture of dependency between the elite and the poor. It comes as no
surprise that the provinces with the most established political dynasties are
also poorest.
THE 1987 CONSTITUTION
Article II, Sec. 26 of the 1987 Constitution is very clear in its intent. It says,
“the state shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service and
prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law.”

In theory, the constitution prohibits political dynasties. However, it still lacks an

enabling law that defines what a dynasty is and its repercussions.

Congress has had the duty to enact an enabling anti-dynasty law since 1987
but failed to do so for self-serving reasons. There have been 32 attempts but
not one has passed the committee level of the House.

The public has waited 31 years for an enabling law, an unreasonable time to
wait. Legislators, past and present, have conspired to betray the Constitution
for self-interest.

After 31 years, political dynasties have entrenched themselves deeply in our

political system. As a result, our institutions have become weaker, reforms are
slow to implement, corruption is rife, incompetence is tolerated and partisan
politics is the name of the game in the halls of power.

As citizens, there is not much we can do but resist political dynasties. The
power is still in our hands, as voters. Resist the dynasties and vote for the
aspiring, qualified candidate. Its about time we change our cast of leaders. Its
about time we infuse new talent.

“What do people get in the process?”

Familiar names in politics dominated the candidacies filed by aspirants for the May 2019
senatorial and local elections. Imee Marcos, Imelda Marcos, Bam Aquino, Sonny
Angara, Mar Roxas, Serge Osmenã, the Binays, the Estradas, the Romualdezes, the
Dutertes, the Villars, the Cayetanos, to name a few. It is as if the Philippines had been
in a time warp for the last 30 years, perhaps longer, 50 years.
In the last half century, the seven presidents came from only five families. To think that
the Philippines has 25-million families, in a population exceeding 106 million—the 12th
largest on earth.
I blame the Cory Aquino Constitution of 1987 which broke up the two-party system that
dated back to the mid-1930s. The Nacionalista Party and the Liberal Party alternately
provided the political leaders of this country in the half century before 1986. During the
reign of the NP and LP, the Philippines was a prosperous country, the second richest in
Asia, after Japan. The Philippines was exporting ten times more than either Taiwan,
Hong Kong, and South Korea. The peso could buy 50 US cents.
The Cory Constitution ushered in the so-called multi-party system to accommodate
parties that could not break the two-party system, specifically the Communist Party of
the Philippines and its allied parties and movements.
The same Constitution banned dynasties but left to Congress to enact a law to effect
the ban. Being dominated by dynasties, Congress failed to enact an anti-dynasty law.
The Cory Constitution had a backup anti-dynasty provision—the so-called term limits.
Hence, presidents can serve only one term, of six years. Senators can serve two
consecutive terms of six years each, for a total of 12 years. Local government officials—
congressmen, governors, and mayors are limited to three terms of three years each, a
total of nine years.
Instead of curbing dynasties, the term limits encouraged dynasties, thus creating an
even bigger monster—monopoly dynasties.
So you have the spectacle of two brothers running for senator at the same time; a family
running for senator, governor, and congressman at the same time; a candidate running
for mayor and a sibling running for vice mayor, with still another sibling running for
congressman—and all three are unopposed.
In business, monopolies are an abomination and largely illegal. People hate business
monopolies or duopolies like the case of Smart and Globe, but not in the case of ABS-
CBN and GMA Network. Why do you think the Philippines has the world’s second
slowest internet? Why do people complain about bad service, not to mention bad
signals?
In politics, however, monopolies are a source of family or clan pride (“public service is a
tradition”) a badge of honor (“the people love us, you know,” as if the people had any
choice), and, most revolting of all, legal and constitutional.
The dynastic monopolies have morphed into political monarchies ruling large cities,
large provinces, major regions, and indeed, the entire archipelago. This is democratic
inclusion in reverse—a rule by no more than 100 families over the world’s second
largest archipelago, 12th largest consumer market, and one of the most dynamic
economies in Asia.
What has been the impact of dynastic rule by these 100 political families?
Is it a coincidence that the Philippines has one of the worst income equality ratios in the
world, that it is the only major country that failed to solve its poverty after the entire
world solved its poverty in 2015, that in ASEAN, it has the highest poverty incidence,
the highest unemployment rate, the highest inflation rate, the highest interest rates, and
the lowest level of foreign investments?

Play

Thirty years ago when the Cory Constitution took effect, there were 20-million poor
Filipinos. Today, three decades later there are still 20-million poor Filipinos. Probably
 more, because a survey says 52 percent of families (or 53-million Filipinos) claim they
are poor.
The destruction of the two-party system produced two effects—one, a series of corrupt
and incompetent governments, and two, corrupt and incompetent elections.
Under the two-party system, the NP and the Liberal Party LP contested the presidency.
To capture Malacañang, the presidential palace, the NP and LP must first capture the
Senate from where most of our presidents came before 1965. To capture the Senate,
the NP and the LP must field the best and the brightest minds of each region.
Thus, you had the likes of Marcos from Northern Luzon, Ninoy Aquino and Jose Roy for
Central Luzon, Jose W. Diokno and Lorenzo Tañada for Southern Luzon, Jovito
Salonga and Arturo Tolentino for Metro Manila, the Osmeñas from Cebu, and one or
two firebrands from Mindanao.
Movie actors must play the rules of the party convention. The parties financed unknown
but talented candidates — like the bar topnotchers. Seven of Philippine presidents
were bar topnotchers. During their time the Philippines was the most dynamic economy
in Asia. So competence does count.
In the first Senate elections after 1986, without a two-party system, you had the funny
situation of a subdivision in Quezon City (La Vista) having four senators, and the entire
Mindanao island (which makes up 40 percent of our land area) without a single
senator. No wonder the Filipino Muslims now want their own sub-state.
With the Cory Charter, corrupt and incompetent elections came about because with the
destruction of the two-party system, the system of poll watchers was abolished.
Under the old system, the NP and LP were each represented in the three-man precinct-
level poll body. No precinct election return could be cleared without the signatures of
three people—the NP, LP and the teacher representative. The poll watchers were
funded by the government.
Today, a presidential candidate must finance the salaries of poll watchers. If there you
are 80,000 precincts, you hire 80,000 watchers. Multiply that by two —because the
count takes two days and the watchers must be relieved to rest. So you have 160,000
watchers. Pay P500 per day for each of the 160,000 watchers.
A viable presidential candidacy will require a budget of P3 billion. If you are a well-
known actor like Joseph Estrada, you can even save money, as he did in 1998.
Where will the candidate get huge sums of money? From two sources: One, donations,
and two, from years of corruption (kickbacks, overpriced projects, shady deals with
gambling, drugs, kidnapping and other syndicates) while in public service.
When you get huge sums from donors, you become beholden to them. You are their
minion.
When you raise money from rackets, you become greedy, heartless and conscience-
less. Because a president elected through corrupt means has to accommodate so many
vested interests, he or she deliberately becomes incompetent. Because in the
presidency, incompetence (often mistaken as honesty) is a valid excuse.
What do people get in the process? Corrupt and deliberately incompetent governments. A nagging
poverty and the two longest-running insurgencies in the world—by the communists and the Muslim
separatists.

TURNING POINT: Political Dynasty,

Corruption and Poverty
By
WILLIAM R. ADAN
-
DECEMBER 7, 2018 2:52 PM
Want create site? With Free visual composer you can do it easy.
NAAWAN, Misamis Oriental (MindaNews/ 07 December) – Political dynasty is about the
ownership and the control in the distribution of power and the economic benefits of a politically
defined area. A dynastic family would not allow a competitor in this enterprise and would use all
means to entrench itself in power. Electoral posts are thus appropriated to members of the
family.

Corruption is the guiding spirit of politics and governance in the area. The dynasty to remain in
power shoos away opponents from political contests either by allocating to them lower posts
or in buying them out. In some cases the family will install a pseudo opposition just to have a
semblance of democracy in their turf. If some guys refused to yield and would still contest the
dynasty, then the ultimate move is to buy the voters.

In some cases, not only the voters would be bought but the election officials as well that oversee
the electoral contests.

In some wild hotspots in the country, political dynasties maintain an army of goons to tip the
electoral contests to their advantage by harassment or liquidation of political opponents and
followers.

The rise and entrenchment of political dynasty is one of the hazards in adopting a federal system
of government. This is inevitable in the current condition of the country where regions or areas
to constitute member federal states are economically and politically uneven.

The economically and/or politically disadvantaged federal states are likely to be taken over by
corrupt powerful families and thus will become poorer than ever.

Indeed, under the present circumstances, a federal system of government will make the rich
richer and the poor poorer. This imbalance and social injustice threatens gravely the peace and
security of the nation.

(MindaViews is the opinion section of MindaNews. William R. Adan, Ph.D., is retired professor
and former chancellor of Mindanao State University at Naawan, Misamis Oriental, Philippines)

I disagree Yes, I do.

 Political dynasties are evidence of a systemic problem - they put pay to the lie of equality
of opportunity. The simple fact is that being a member of an advantaged class (and
senior politicians definitely counts as an advantaged class) means that your children
have access to substantive opportunities that less advantaged children will not have.

That’s no reason to hold it against the individuals (assuming that there has not been
unacceptable nepotism etc).

No, because instead of serving the people, they focus on how to perpetuate themselves in power and I also believe that there
are a lot of talented people who want to serve the public that should also give the opportunity to serve.

Read more on Brainly.ph - https://brainly.ph/question/1824233#readmore

I am against political dynasty, especially in the Philippines, my home country. Government position has become a
business rather than a public trust. Wives, daughters, sons, nieces, nephews, everyone in the family are running
for government office even though they do not have the experience and the capacity to handle their
responsibilities. Such a shame. Again, a 3 year term is too long for a bad politician but too short for a good leader.

Letter to the editor: How to end political

dynasties
+
AA
-
JONATHAN UNCHUAN
October 24, 2018

A FORMER teacher and good friend of mine, Rhoderick John Abellanosa, wrote an opinion
column tackling the issue of political dynasties and though his column wasn't what made me
think about this issue, it was his column that made me want to write about it myself. I bounced
my ideas off of his and while the solution I offer isn't perfect, it's one I think has some merit.

To solve a problem, political dynasty we usually look at two things - the cause and the effect.
Take a leaking roof. The cause if obviously the poor condition of the roof itself. The effect is that
water enters the house and can cause damage to your property. We can opt to address the cause
by plugging up the leak or replacing the roof which would make the most sense. Or we could opt
to address the effect and put an umbrella inside the house to make sure the leak doesn't cause a
slipping hazard.

political dynasty

Our problem with the issue on political dynasties is we see their existence as a cause we need to
plug up to avoid their adverse effects. My take on this issue is that political dynasties is that it is
an effect, the cause of which is what we need to address. Consider how many political dynasties
start off. I'll illustrate below and you decide if the thing I painted is close to reality. I'll be using
hypothetical couple Boy and Girlie and the hypothetical city of Lungsud.

Boy, the mayor of Lungsud City, is married to Girlie.

Girlie does not have much interest in politics. She found it dirty and wanted no part of it.

During Boy's last term as mayor, he realizes there isn't a more suitable replacement to his
leadership. Either that or he simply doesn't want to give up the power he's grown accustomed to
for his past three terms (that's nine years).

He may have engaged in some shady dealings which he needs to cover up. Enter the brilliant
idea of asking Girlie to run in his stead while he runs as her vice-mayor.

If Boy is popular enough, Girlie gets enough support to win and now you have the mayor and
vice-mayor positions held by the same couple.

Girlie now enjoys her power and decides to stick to politics.

The more I think about it the more I'm convinced that political dynasties are born out of the
Filipino palusut attitude. Whatever law we put forth addressing political dynasties, the Filipino
will find a loophole in it. Plus, let's face it. Pushing for an anti-dynasty law to come from
politicians who come from political dynasties is never happening. A genius law comes from
looking like it serves these monkeys when in fact it serves the people more.

My proposal? It might be time for the Philippines to consider lifting term limits for local
positions including congressional seats. In my view, what harm does it do to cities if good
mayors stay in power longer? Lifting term limits also removes the incentive for family members
from going into politics as the main politician in the family is still able to run for the position
legally.

Now, I admit I could be totally wrong on this front and this could erupt into total chaos but it
makes sense to me the most. I remember a former senator defend his poor performance as a
lawmaker by saying the Philippines already has a lot of laws. He was mocked then but there may
be some wisdom in his words. Many laws are good. Some are bad. Some are outdated. And a lot
need revision. I think the laws on term limits need some revision.

As it so happens, a draft of the new constitution does remove term limits from congressmen only.
From my personal observation of Philippine politics, this rule needs to extend to mayoral races
as well since they are the ones that usually spawn these political dynasties.

That's my take on this matter. Whatever the case, it would be beneficial to the Filipino people to
see the end of political dynasties but the mechanism by which we end them should make sense as
well.

The Philippines Must Break the Power

of Political Dynasties
Posted on December 1, 2014 by Beatriz Paterno

Democratic systems are no strangers to political dynasties. In the United States, some well-
known families have been in politics for generations—the Kennedys held an impressive 64-
year streak in Congress until 2011 (and staged a comebackonly two years later), and earlier
this month George P. Bush won the race for Texas Land Commissioner, carrying on the
political legacy of his father Jeb Bush, his uncle George W. Bush, and his grandfather
George H.W. Bush. Although the idea of political royalty inheriting power seems to cut
against equal opportunity, members of such families have been revered throughout history.
But political dynasties present a much greater threat to democracy when they control a
majority of power in the country. In the Philippines, one studyestimated that political
dynasties comprised up to 70% of the last Philippine Congress (compared to 6% of the last
U.S. Congress). During the last election, one notorious political clan had 80 members
running for office. Indeed, Philippine political clans have evolved into the most efficient (and
at times, deadly) means of monopolizing power. Various members of the same family often
cycle through the same congressional, gubernatorial, and mayoral seats in their home
province, and it’s not unusual to see an electoral race pitting two members of the same
family against each other. In many ways, the dynastic culture of politics has removed
meaningful choice from the voters, and exacerbated the pervasiveness of corruption in
government.
A possible solution is before the Philippine Congress right now—the Anti-Political Dynasty
Bill. This bill would prohibit any spouse or first-degree relation (including parents, siblings,
and children) of an incumbent elected official from seeking elected office. Although
individuals may run once their relative’s term is up, they may not immediately succeed that
relative in the same elected office. (The bill would have a enormous effect on the upcoming
2016 elections—Vice President Jejomar Binay, who has already announced his candidacy,
and whose daughter’s term in the Senate runs until 2019, would be precluded from running
for President.) At first blush, the bill may seem antidemocratic, as it (temporarily) suspends
the rights of many individuals to seek elected office. Still, in the Philippines, where the
concentration of political power has bred such a strong culture of corruption, certain rights
may need to be sacrificed. It is a drastic problem in need of a drastic solution.
There are several reasons why Congress should pass this bill and limit the influence of
political families:
 First, political dynasties corrupt the system of checks and balances. One recent
example is Vice President Binay, who, for the past few months, has been under
investigation by a Senate Blue Ribbon Committee for alleged corruption. One might
question how effective the investigation will be given that Binay’s two daughters are
members of Congress. The problem is even more pronounced in smaller localities. By
packing every major office, it’s quite easy for clans to organize local militias, siphon
off public funding, and perpetuate their rule by cycling through the ranks.
 Second, the centrality of dynasties to politics lowers the costs associated with
committing corrupt acts. Even if they face corruption or other criminal charges,
political actors can continue to reap the benefits of power by having spouses or
children take their seats. After one representative was found guilty of murdering the
sons of his political rival, his seat in the House was taken over by his wife, ensuring
that the family name remained relevant long enough for him to seek reelection after the
appellate court cleared him of all charges.
 Third, the continued success of political families despite corruption charges
undermines the rule of law, and perpetuates a system of corruption in government.
Well-intentioned individuals are deterred from seeking office, leaving positions open
to individuals who view government as an opportunity to amass more wealth and
power.
These issues have plagued Philippine politics for countless generations—in fact, the framers
of the 1987 Constitution called upon Congress to pass a law to inhibit the power of political
clans. Article II, Section 26 of the Constitution states that “[t]he State shall guarantee equal
access to opportunities for public service, and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined
by law.” Because the provision is not self-executing, however, it has remained largely
meaningless for the past three decades.

And there is a particular reason that the anti-dynasty bill should be passed now. Enacting an
anti-dynasty law is no small task for a Congress overrun with the very families it seeks to
preclude from office. But after 27 years, efforts to pass such a law have come further than
ever before, perhaps in part because of widespread public support the bill garnered after one
of the largest corruption scandals in recent memory. For the first time ever, the
bill reached the House plenary session, and a Senate version was discussed during a
committee hearing weeks later. In his Fifth State of the Nation Address, the President stated
that he would immediately sign the Act if it successfully made it through Congress.
Although this bill is quite controversial, it would go a long way toward addressing the highly
corrosive nature of political dynasties, and provide opportunities for talented, energetic
individuals to challenge the current state of Philippine politics. It’s important that
Congress—and the electorate—seize this political moment to ensure the passage of the bill.

Opinion: How To End Political Dynasties

Benjamin G. Maynigo

Vice President Jejomar Binay (second from left) and Senator Nancy Binay (center) (Source: nancybinay.net)

I n a civilized society, the citizenry relies on laws to govern human behavior

and to protect them from abuse by those in power. The evils of economic
monopolies are checked by the existence of anti-trust or restraint of trade laws.

Statutes and administrative regulations expressly prohibit the appointment by

certain public officials of relatives either by affinity or by consanguinity
within certain degrees, or nepotism. This prohibition seeks to prevent the
concentration of power among relatives as well as to avoid conflicts of interest
at the expense of public welfare. Cronyism as a practice between and among
close friends both in government and business is frowned upon for similar
reasons.

So it was not surprising when men and women appointed by then-

revolutionary President Cory Aquino included in the new Constitution, as
ratified by the Filipino people, a provision prohibiting political dynasties.
Unfortunately, either by design (meaning, avoidance of responsibility) or
through negligence, they left it to the legislature to define political dynasty. Of
course, for 27 years after it was called upon to pass an enabling law, Congress
has refused to do it.

“People’s Initiative is what former Supreme Court Chief Justice

Art Panganiban defines as the ‘ultimate weapon of the people to
negate government malfeasance and misfeasance …’”
How hard is it to define terms like “political dynasty”? There are actually
primary sources such as nepotism laws and even secondary ones that Black’s
Law Dictionary to refers to. The obvious reason for Congress’ inaction:
Passing enabling legislation to ban dynasties would conflict with the interest
of many of its members. They cannot afford to risk losing the built-in political
and economic powers that they currently enjoy.

According to electoral records and a data analysis made by GMA News

Research, there are many political families that have held on to a post either as
congressman, mayor or governor for at least two decades, uninterrupted. The
same research finds that “when their scions’ fresh terms end in 2016, at least
55 political families will have each controlled an elective post for 20 to 40
years straight.”

In one town in Ilocos Norte, one political clan will have governed it for 43
uninterrupted years by 2016.

(L-R) Senator Jinggoy Estrada, Manila Mayor Joseph Estrada and Senator JV Ejercito (Source: rappler.com)
GMA News Research also reports that at least nine political families will each
have held a post for more than 30 years uninterrupted; and 45 other political
clans will have similarly ruled for more than 20 years straight by 2016.

This has to stop! The Cory Constitution is quite clear and states in no
uncertain terms, “The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for
public service and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law.”
(Section 26 of Article II).

People’s Initiative

Since Congress cannot be expected to pass the enabling law, another

Constitutional provision can be used to do it. Fortunately, the people can
directly exercise legislative powers as provided under Sections 1 and 32,
Article VI of the Philippine Constitution. With 10 percent of the registered
voters nationally (5.2M est.) including at least 3 percent (4,500 est.) per
congressional district signing a petition, the enabling law could be passed.

A new law now allows overseas Filipinos to vote on plebiscites, referenda and
initiatives. So this campaign could unite Filipinos abroad and encourage
them to register and participate actively. Their signatures can be counted
toward the 10 percent requirement.
(L-R) Ilocos Norte Governor Imee Marcos, Senator Bongbong Marcos, Ilocos Norte Congresswoman Imelda
Romualdez Marcos and Irene Marcos Araneta (Source: icij.org)
People’s Initiative is what former Supreme Court Chief Justice Art
Panganiban defines as the “ultimate weapon of the people to negate
government malfeasance and misfeasance … a democratic method of enabling
our people to express their will and chart their history. Initiative is an alternative to
bloody revolution, internal chaos and civil strife. It is an inherent right of the people—
as basic as the right to elect, the right to self-determination and the right to individual
liberties.”

I consider it People Power without going to the streets, using the pen as a
weapon. It could be a way for the sovereign people to take back some of the
powers that they delegated to public officials and government agencies.

Definition

I suggest the following definition:

“Political dynasty shall exist when a person who is the spouse of an incumbent
elective official or relative within the second civil degree of consanguinity or affinity of
an incumbent elective official holds or runs for an elective office, whether national or
local, simultaneously with the incumbent elective official immediately after the term of
office of the incumbent official. It shall also be deemed to exist where two (2) or more
persons who are spouses or are related within the second civil degree of consanguinity
or affinity run simultaneously for elective public office.”

A “spouse” refers to the legal and common-law wife or husband of the

incumbent elective official.
Maguindanao Governor Esmael "Toto" Mangudadatu and his brother, Congressman Zajid "Dong"
Mangudadatu (Source: Minda News)
“Within the second civil degree of consanguinity or affinity” refers to the
relatives of a person who may be the latter’s brother or sister, whether of full
blood or half-blood, direct ascendant or direct descendant, whether
legitimate, illegitimate or adopted, including their spouses. It further refers to
grandparents, grandchildren, uncles and aunts, first cousins, nephews and
nieces, including their spouses, of the referred person.”

“Running for an elective office” is deemed to commence upon the filing of the
certificate of candidacy by a candidate with the COMELEC.

“Holding an elective office” is deemed to commence from the moment the

public official takes his oath of office.
 Current prohibition regarding the appointment of spouses and relatives to
certain positions in government goes as far as fourth civil degree, so this
proposal is a more liberal provision. Nepotism as provided for in Section 13,
Article VII is also a constitutional mandate except that it is specifically
defined.

Senator Bam Aquino and Kris Aquino (Sources: official photo of Senator Bam Aquino and mb.com.ph)
This battle against political dynasty is what I consider fighting a good
fight. If won before 2016, it could result in some undesirable consequences
for many prominent political families. Let me cite some examples:

1. With the election of Bam Aquino as senator for a term of six (6) years, first
cousin Kris Aquino will not be able to run for any position in 2016. So with
cousin Len-Len Aquino Oreta, who ran unopposed as mayor in Malabon;
uncle Henry Cojuangco, who is a congressman; and another cousin Kit, who
was elected vice-governor in Tarlac.

2. With the election of Nancy Binay as senator for a term of six (6) years, her
father vice president Jojo Binay will not be able to run for any position
including the presidency in 2016. So with sister Congresswoman Abby Binay;
and brother Makati Mayor Junjun Binay. VP Jojo Binay can still run for
president if Senator Nancy Binay resigns. The mayor and congresswoman
will be ineligible to run.

3. Senator Bongbong Marcos is due for reelection in 2016. So are Ilocos Norte
Congresswoman Imelda Romualdez Marcos; Ilocos Norte Governor Imee
Marcos; Leyte Congressman Ferdinand Romualdez; Tacloban Mayor Alfred
Romualdez; and Alfred’s councilor-wife Cristina. The Anti-Dynasty Law
would allow only ONE (1) of them to run.

4. With the reelection of Senator Alan Cayetano for another six-year term,
current Senator Pia Cayetano will be disqualified from running for any
position in 2016. Taguig Mayor Lani Cayetano will likewise be disqualified to
run in 2016.

5. Senator JV Ejercito Estrada also got elected for a new term of six (6) years.
This would disqualify former president and now Manila mayor Joseph
Estrada and current Senator Jinggoy Estrada from running for any position in
2016. So with San Juan Mayor Guia Gomez and Laguna Governor ER Ejercito.

6. In Maguindanao, the Mangudadatu clan has Toto Mangudadatu as governor;

his brother Dong as congressman; and another brother Toy as Autonomous
Region assemblyman. The clan also boasts four new mayors and a couple of
vice mayors within its ranks. The Anti-Dynasty law would prohibit all who
are related to each other within the second civil degree of consanguinity or
affinity except ONE.

Senators Alan Peter Cayetano and Pia Cayetano (Source: yahoo.com)

Of course, the data analysis of GMA News Research as described above
would drastically change.

All these possible shocking changes should explain why the battle is no
cakewalk or dance of the roses. We expect these political overlords to protect
and perpetuate their power and wealth, which they have enjoyed for
generations. So, they will fight this to the end—from petition to actual
referendum or plebiscite. They have succeeded in stopping it in Congress so
far.

But we have the “ultimate weapon.” The required investment is minimal but
the rewards are great and the return is extremely high.

The only way to remove political dynasties

AS I WRECK THIS CHAIR - William M. Esposo (The Philippine Star) - November 6, 2012 - 12:00am
After the unnecessary hysteria over the RA 10175, otherwise known as
Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, many of our countrymen have picked up
a new issue to raise their blood pressure. This issue, that is now in vogue just
as the election campaign season has opened, is the scandalous increase and
expansion of political dynasties.

Of course, there are valid reasons for us to worry about the increasing number
of expanding political dynasties. In the old days, political dynasties would
confine their monopoly of power to select positions. This had expanded
through the years. Now, the political dynasties are taking over all key positions
in the local areas where they thrive. They would want the Governor’s seat, the
Congressional seat and the mayoralty post of the most important city of the
province. There are valid reasons to suspect that their goals are directed at
monopolizing both economic and political powers in their area.

The old political families established the dynasties. Now, newcomers to the
power game from the world of showbiz, entertainment and boxing are also
seeking to form local dynasties. We have descended from bad to worse. We
may have a great president right now who’s successfully transforming the
country towards positive change and meaningful reform. However, we must
wonder where we will go after President Benigno S. Aquino III (P-Noy) steps
down when his term expires.
With so many political dynasties holding choice positions, expect them to want
to elect a president from among their ilk. They’ll certainly oppose the
candidacy of a committed reformer because that threatens the status quo,
their preying ground.

Are we helpless in preventing or even removing these political dynasties? Of

course not! The problem is the people who want to do something about these
dynasties are barking at the wrong tree and raising the wrong issues.

The political dynasties do not equate to a legal problem. In principle, there is

nothing wrong with political dynasties and that’s why in the US they celebrate
political dynasties like those of the Kennedys of Massachusetts. For so long
as Filipinos vote freely, nobody can question the emergence of political
dynasties. That’s the reality.

Therefore, wailing on top of your voices at Congressmen and Senators to craft

an anti-dynasty bill is counterproductive and unrealistic. In the first place, what
can you expect from Congressmen and Senators who are part of political
dynasties or are harboring ambitions to form their own political dynasties?
They’ll shoot down your proposed bill. That’s like expecting Manny V.
Pangilinan to recommend that you subscribe to Globe or Ramon Ang to
recommend that you fill up your gas tank with Shell.

The reality is this — the political dynasties that are now spreading like a
dreaded plague have been created by our under informed and under
educated Filipino voters. The political dynasties did not make the political
dynasties — the under informed and under educated voters did. The voters
have the power to create as well as end political dynasties and so it’s with the
voters that we should work out anti dynasty measures.

The dangerous spread of political dynasties would appear to be concomitant

to the deterioration of information and education levels in the country. The top
rating television primetime newscasts have to share a good part of the blame
for this sorry state of the public mind. Greed for more ad revenues had
transformed public service into “news” that merely panders to people’s thirst
for scandal, showbiz, crime and conflict. The top TV primetime newscasts
became the tabloids of the broadcast media. Nothing intellectual, mostly
sensual — the Filipino public mind was driven to this pathetic state.

Raising public consciousness to the downside of political dynasties would

have been made much easier if TV would fulfill its public service commitment
for being awarded a franchise. Instead of doing that, it’s precisely TV that
even promoted the rise of political dynasties that emerged from showbiz and
boxing. It’s high time that the government ordered a review of all these TV
franchises. Along with the annual review, the government should promulgate
a clearer definition of public service so that TV networks can be better guided
in deserving the trust of a franchise. In the US and in Australia, they have
annual reviews and the TV networks are nervous when these are about to be
conducted.
Media cooperation would be a major component of the task to reduce the
extent and clout of political dynasties but we must also do our share of the
task. We have to go down there and pick them up ‑ the under informed and
under educated ‑ or they’ll continue to bring us all down unwittingly.

There is no escaping our responsibility to raise all of our countrymen who fall
under the category of under informed and under educated. When we do not
address their problem, we pay the high cost of their social condition. We pay a
lot for their health care, their free housing, their free this and free that ‑
really it would have been cheaper and easier for us if went down there and
brought them up.

Options to stop political

dynasties
By: Artemio V. Panganiban - @inquirerdotnet
Philippine Daily Inquirer / 08:34 PM November 24, 2012

“The state shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service, and prohibit
political dynasties as may be defined by law,” so the Constitution (Art. II, Sec. 26)
solemnly declares. Despite repeated clamor, this provision of our Charter, like its many
other “principles and state policies,” remains unimplemented to this day. How then can
this provision be enforced and political dynasties ended, or at least regulated? There are
four possible options: legislative, judicial (and quasi-judicial), sovereign and political.

Legislative action. The “no-brainer” option is for Congress to enact a law defining what
a political dynasty is, what offices (elective and nonelective) are covered, who may
enforce the prohibition, and other details. While some senators and congressmen have
perfunctorily filed bills covering these topics, not one has been seriously deliberated
upon. To my knowledge, no such bills have been reported for second reading in the
Senate or the House of Representatives.
ADVERTISEMENT

Realistically, such measures cannot be expected to be approved at this time. After all,
many legislators have relatives—parents, children, siblings, and even grandparents—
who serve simultaneously in Congress and in other offices.

Tired of waiting for congressional action during the last 25 years, some citizens have
filed judicial petitions to compel the Commission on Elections to enforce the
constitutional prohibition by denying due course to certificates of candidacies of close
relatives.
Judicial and quasi-judicial actions. However, I think these petitions are legally
untenable because the Comelec cannot legislate. Note that the Constitution prohibits
political dynasties, “as may be defined by law.” True, the Comelec has the power to
issue rules and regulations. However, such rules merely implement statutes. Without a
law defining political dynasties, implementing rules have no leg to stand on.

How about a judicial petition for mandamus to compel legislative action? I am afraid
such recourse would also be iffy because courts can command the execution only of a
purely ministerial act, which jurisprudence defines as “a simple, definite duty… a
precise act accurately marked out… If the law imposes a duty but gives the officer
[upon whom it is imposed] the right to decide how or when it shall be performed, the
duty is discretionary and not ministerial.”

Under this test, I doubt that courts will direct Congress to pass an enabling law since the
duty is not clearly defined and precisely marked out.

Obviously, the constitutional ban on dynasties is not “self-executing,” unlike, for

instance, the term limits on congressmen (three consecutive terms) and senators (two
consecutive terms). Here, the courts and the Comelec can disqualify candidates using
the bare, but clear, certain and specific constitutional limits without need of an enabling
law. Otherwise stated, unlike the dynasty ban, term limits are self-executory.

Sovereign action. Probably frustrated by legislative inaction, Comelec Chair Sixto

Brillantes Jr. promised to start a people’s initiative for an antidynasty law. Now, this is
very novel. No law in our country has been approved via a people’s initiative.

However, there had been two unsuccessful attempts to change our Constitution via this
process. In Lambino vs Comelec (Oct. 25, 2006), the Supreme Court struck down a
people’s initiative to convert our presidential system to parliamentary on the ground,
among others, that an initiative can be used only for simple and easy-to-comprehend
matters, not for changing “basic principles, or several provisions” which “a deliberative
body with recorded proceedings is best suited to undertake.”

Although this ruling involved Charter change, I believe that, by analogy, the same
reason stopping a Charter revision can be used to restrain a people’s initiative for an
antidynasty law. Being controversial, such a proposed law will need a deliberative body
in which the proposal can, to borrow the language of the Lambino decision, be “drafted,
defined, articulated, discussed and agreed upon in a mature and democratic debate.”
ADVERTISEMENT

Political action. The fourth option, political action, may be the most doable under the
present circumstances. Simply stated, let the people decide by voting down candidates
who belong to the same family. Those who believe in this proposition can form political
movements like the “Kamag-anak sa Politika Aayawan Lahat,” or “Kapal.”

Others may use television, radio, newspapers, Internet and social media like Facebook
and Twitter. US President Barack Obama effectively used the social media in his
reelection bid. His young campaign organizers penetrated the voting population so
systematically and so effectively, converting what was predicted to be a close poll into
a one-sided Electoral College triumph.

If indeed our people want to stop members of political dynasties from occupying
government positions simultaneously, they can demonstrate their will in the 2013
elections by voting down the “magkakamag-anak.” Should such a message be evident
in the elections, I am sure relatives in other branches of government will also be foiled.

Let the 2013 elections then be a sort of referendum on the issue. Let the people speak
loudly through their ballots. Let the antidynasty advocates take this challenge. And if
they win, the new Congress will surely heed the people’s mandate by promptly enacting
a law defining and banning political dynasties.