9.

7
VOLUME

PHILIPPINES
UNDER
DUTERTE:

A NEW

ERA
OCCASIONAL

PAPER

JULY 2016

OCCASIONAL PAPER JULY 2016

02

PHILIPPINES UNDER
DUTERTE:
A NEW

ERA

DUTERTE ADMINISTRATION
Duterte has also captured the greatest number of votes in
Philippine presidential elections history. Though Duterte's share of total votes
represented only a plurality, in a single-round, it represented nothing short of a
landslide victory. And this has, quite unsurprisingly, given him tremendous political
capital heading into his first 100 days of honeymoon period in office.

The country just witnessed the inauguration of its

16th president. It was an historic event on multiple
levels. The new president, Rodrigo Duterte, is the
first from the southern island of Mindanao, a frontier
region full of promise yet racked by decades-long
insurgencies and ethnic conflicts, which has been
historically marginalized in mainstream Philippine
politics. Partly raised in Southern Leyte and hailing
from one of Central Visayas most prominent
political clans, Duterte credibly and proudly carries
the torch for the Philippines two peripheral regions.
Unlike any of his predecessors, Duterte saw himself
catapulted from provincial politics, as the celebrated
(yet controversial) mayor of Davao City, to the helm
of the Republic of the Philippines. Other Filipino
presidents were either senators or key cabinet

ministers -- high-visibility positions that help with

establishing a nationwide profile -- before throwing
their hat into the presidential race. Duterte simply
circumvented this rite of passage, building on his
image as a no-nonsense mayor, who fearlessly takes
on daily challenges of governance and is constantly
in tune with the murmurings of his constituency.
Duterte has also captured the greatest number of
votes in Philippine presidential elections history
(16,601,997 votes), trouncing his closest rival -Manuel Mar Roxas, an anointed successor who
benefited from the gargantuan machinery of the
incumbent -- by a whopping 6.6 million. Though
Dutertes share of total votes represented only a
plurality (39 percent), in a single-round, first-pastthe-post system, it represented nothing short of a

C 2016 ADRiNSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

Image Credit: fernantadeo.deviantart.com

* The views and opinions expressed in this Paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Institute.

OCCASIONAL PAPER JULY 2016

03

landslide victory. And this has, quite unsurprisingly,

given him tremendous political capital heading into his
first 100 days of honeymoon period in office.

democratic mechanisms as the only legitimate

means of change, which prevents a genuine
transformation in capitalist relations.

But do elections and the change of guard at the upper

echelons of the state even matter? Writing for the journal
Les Gupes in the mid-19th century, Jean-Baptiste
Alphonse Karr, a prominent French novelist lamented,
The more things change, the more they stay the same
(plus a change, plus cest la mme chose). His despair
was surely born out of Frances tortuous transition
through a violent revolution (1789) and the ensuing Reign
of Terror (1793-1794), Napoleonic rule, and the return of
the Ancien Rgime after the Battle of Waterloo (1815),
which would, by another turn of events, fall at the hands
of Napoleon III, who established another age of empire
like the Bourbons and dictatorial rule like his uncle.

Writing for The Jacobin, Dutch activist Alex de Jong

derisively describes recent Filipino leaders as essentially
the many faces of the same formula: the perpetuation of a
neo-liberal political economy, which preserves the interest
of the ruling class at the expense of the impoverished
masses. Recent presidents, the argument goes, are
either liberal-democratic proponent of the system or,
as allegedly in the case of Duterte, a more
authoritarian iteration.

Reflecting on the immutability of oppressive conditions

in capitalist societies, particularly in the West and more
contemporaneously among the emerging markets,
radical thinkers have been generally dismissive of
democratic elections. If voting changed anything,
theyd make it illegal, argued Emma Goldman, Americas
foremost feminist in the early-20th century. Writing for The
London Review, Philosopher Slavoj Zizek recently went so
far as arguing that it is the institution of democracy [that]
is the [true] enemy of genuine reform. For Zizek,
it is the democratic illusion, the acceptance of

C 2016 ADRiNSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

For radical thinkers, elections are inherently designed

to perpetuate existing power relations while paying lip
service to vox populi -- a dangerous illusion that blocks
mobilization for systemic reform. A more nuanced
understanding of the Philippines recent history,
however, suggests otherwise: there have been some
perceptible changes, which could pave the way
for more structural changes in the long-run.
On Dutertes part, beyond just any other authoritarian
neo-liberal, he represents a left-leaning populist, who
could very well bring about some elements of muchneeded change into the system. As Filipino Sociologist
Walden Bello points out, Duterte realizes that theres
a great deal of expectations. And to be able to deliver

on those, he will have to bend the neoliberal rules.

This could entail, Bello argues, mov[ing] away from the
conservative managements straitjacket that [he has]
right now, with more focus on redistribution,
particularly through land reform and the revival of
the manufacturing sector, and greater state
role in steering the national economy.
More than a question of personal conviction, this is a
matter of political exigency, since Duterte has largely won
by promising radical change (real change) on the
back of a political insurgency. As Bello puts it, Theres
no way that hes going to be able to deliver on these
expectations without having to bend these rules.
A fair assessment, however, would suggest that change,
albeit in a more gradual and reformist manner, has already
come to the Philippines. And it is precisely this element
of change that has emboldened the Filipino people to
demand even more. Thus, the Philippines is confronting
more of a revolution of expectations than an antiestablishment revolt. This is the reason behind the
Duterte administrations decision, under its eight-point
economic agenda1, to continue the macro-economic
legacy of its predecessors, preserving the gains of
recent past, while promising transformative change
in other areas of the economy, particularly public
infrastructure, land reform, and mining.

www.stratbase.com.ph

OCCASIONAL PAPER JULY 2016

04

The Aquino Legacy

Similar to Duterte, Benigno Aquino III came to
power on the back of massive popular support. In
fact, he enjoyed even a higher share of total votes
(42.08 percent) with an almost three times higher
net trust rating (74 percent) than his successor (26
percent). The latest Pulse Asia survey suggests
that Aquino has stepped down from office with
the highest trust rating (52 percent) of any of his
predecessors, making him one of the most
popular outgoing leaders in the democratic world.
Despite his many mishaps, from the Mamasapano
tragedy to frequent breakdowns in the public
transportations infrastructure, Aquino stepped out
of office almost as popular as he stepped in. For
sure, he has a legion of critics, some with politicallymotivated agenda. One columnist, a stalwart of
the Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo administration, went
so far as describing Aquino as the countrys worst
president ever, who supposedly put the Philippines
a decade back in building a modern, prosperous
nation-state that uplifts the welfare of all its citizens.
(Most likely, these scathing remarks were laid down
in response to Aquinos efforts, sometimes hamfisted, to go after former government officials on the
grounds of corruption and abuse of power.)
A vast majority of Filipinos would disagree with
such a trenchant assessment of the outgoing
president. And some would even go so far as
describing Aquino as the best Philippine

president in recent history. This is a point of

view that is particularly common among
global media, investors, and partners.
Taking note of the Philippines economic dynamism
in recent years, Steve Forbes, in a salutary speech,
told Aquino upon the conclusion of his term to
come to the [United States] and give us some of
the 6-percent growth rate that the country has
generated in the last few years. (Of course, the
flattering remark comfortably ignored the fact
that America and the Philippines are on
significantly different levels of development).
Last year, the Philippines was 4th fastest economy
in the world. In the first quarter of this year, it was
-- thanks to an uptick in election-related spending -the fastest-growing economy in Asia. There has also
been an element of institutional development. Under
Aquino, the country leapfrogged in major economic
indices such as economic competitiveness (World
Economic Forum) and economic openness
(Heritage Foundation), signaling the greater and
more auspicious integration of the Philippines into
the global economy. The Philippines has
transformed from a developing country into
a full-fledged emerging market.
In fact, under Aquinos stewardship, the Philippines
experienced its highest average Gross Domestic
Product (GDP) growth rate (6.26 percent) in the
past half-a-century (see figure 1), far higher than the
Marcos (3.43 percent) and Estrada administrations

C 2016 ADRiNSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

Image Credit: cnnphilippines.com

www.stratbase.com.ph

OCCASIONAL PAPER JULY 2016

05

(2.3 percent). Recent growth rates were even higher than

post-recovery administrations such as Cory Aquino (3.85 percent),
Ramos (3.75 percent), and Arroyo (4.46 percent). Thanks to the
countrys economic performance in recent years, the Philippines
has dispensed with its notoriety as the sick man of Asia, instead
embracing various accolades such as Asias new tiger economy
or Asias rising star, whether one looks at the assessment of
the World Bank or Wall Street financial institutions.
Of course, these figures should be placed within a context. First of all,
not all presidents enjoyed similar amount of years at the helm of the
state. Some were in power for two decades, as in Ferdinand Marcos,
others barely beyond two years, as in the case of Joseph Estrada.
Moreover, various administrations inherited divergent economic
conditions from their predecessors. Aquino, for instance, benefited
from the sound macro-economic reforms of his predecessors.
Meanwhile, the Fidel Ramos and Arroyo administrations suffered
from external shocks, the Asian Financial Crisis (1997-98) and
the Great Recession (2007-08), respectively.

And then there is the factor of inclusiveness and the minimal relevance
of GDP growth -- as eloquently exposed by Nobel-laureates such as
Joseph Stiglitz -- as far as genuine national development indicators
are concerned. Despite high growth rates under Aquino, the country
still suffers from rising income inequality, double-digit poverty rates,
and Southeast Asias highest unemployment rate.
The quality of growth, as leading development agencies such as the
Asian Development Bank have reiterated, is simply sub-optimal, failing
to create sufficient amount of well-paying jobs for the countrys large
labor force. It is no wonder then that the Philippines, which
has among the worlds youngest populations, has failed to
optimize its demographic dividend, seen by others
as more of a demographic burden.
Above all, recent economic growth was more a product of
serendipitous convergence of auspicious factors -- from the shift
of global investors focus to second-tier emerging markets to the
explosion of liquidity in money markets due to incessant quantitative
easing (QE) in the West -- than the conscious policy decisions of the
Aquino administration. In short, the value-added element of
Aquinos macroeconomic policy should not be overstated.

Figure 1. Growth Rates under Philippine Administration (Marcos to Aquino)

Source: BUSINESS WORLD (2015)

C 2016 ADRiNSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

www.stratbase.com.ph

OCCASIONAL PAPER JULY 2016

06

Aside from institutionalizing sound

macroeconomic policy, which has
been aided by steady hands at the
Department of Finance (Cesar Purisima)
and the Philippine Central Bank (Amando
Tetangco Jr.), the Aquino administration
has also been credited for kick starting
anti-corruption initiatives to cut red tape,
suppress bureaucratic graft, and restore
confidence in state institutions. The first
few years saw determined and partlysuccessful efforts to impeach Arroyo-era
holdovers in the Supreme Court and the
Ombudsman office, paving the way for a
potential conviction of the former president.
The anti-corruption initiatives reached a
critical stage when several high-profile
senators were placed under corruption
investigations, leading to their removal
from the upper-house. It didnt take long,
however, for the Aquino administration
to confront accusations of lopsidedness
and inefficacy in its good governance
maneuvers. This was most pronounced
when the Supreme Court declared the

C 2016 ADRiNSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

controversial Disbursement Acceleration

Program (DAP) as partly unconstitutional,
lending fuel to accusations that the
government was illegally using discretionary
funds. In response, Aquino lashed out
at the countrys highest court, though
it abolished the DAP without pressing
ahead with any investigations into possible
misconduct among the leadership of the
Department of Budget and Management.
There were also accusations of corruption
levied against other high-level officials.
The growing impression among the public
was that Aquino was shielding his own
inner circle members from anti-corruption
investigations. The bigger problem,
however, was efficacy. Not a single highprofile suspect was put in jail, while Senator
Juan Ponce Enrile, who was accused of
massive corruption while in office, managed
to post bail and return to the chambers as
a leading opposition member. Major indices
such as the Transparency Internationals
Corruption Perceptions Index indicate only
minimal improvement in recent years. In

2015, the Philippines ranked 95th out

of 186 countries, with paltry score of
35/100 in terms of transparency and
accountability in state institutions.

but his argument main argument stands:

If there is no corruption, there will be
no poverty (Kung walang kurap,
walang mahirap).

Nonetheless, the Aquino administration

should be lauded in this regard. His
greatest contribution is ideational, making
the fight against corruption a centerpiece
of the national political discourse. His
administration may not have been as
successful as it wished it stamping out
corruption, but his successors, beginning
with Duterte, have had to embrace it
as a core policy agenda.

Of course this reductionist dictum tends

to obfuscate the complex factors that lead
to poverty, not to mention the empirical
evidence that corruption-infested countries
like China and Indonesia have economically
outperformed the Philippines, but it has, at
the very least, injected a measure of hope
and conviction into Philippine politics.

Aquino rekindled a national yearning

for combating what many not long ago
considered as a ubiquitous aspect of
Philippine politics -- too entrenched to
confront and too endemic to root out.
He transformed a relatively technocratic
issue into a populist rhetoric by attaching
poverty and all the countrys predicaments
to a singular issue: corruption. His Daang
Matuwid mantra may have lost its luster,

The astonishing defeat and poor

performance of some high-level officials,
who have been accused of massive
corruption, in the latest elections is
a testament to the strength of the
anti-corruption rhetoric of the Aquino
administration. It is this discursive revolution
that stands as Aquinos greatest legacy.

www.stratbase.com.ph

OCCASIONAL PAPER JULY 2016

07

Grievance Politics
In Political Order in Changing Societies (1968)
Harvard University Professor Samuel Huntington
provided a persuasive account of why, rather
counter-intuitively, rapidly developing countries in
the post-colonial world are most susceptible to
political breakdown or/and autocratic takeover. The
process of modernization, Huntington surmised,
isnt a straightforward path, where all good things
go together: It is highly possible that economic
development will come at the expense of social
instability or breakdown of state institutions.
In particular, Huntington warned about the
prospects of political decay once governments
fail to live up to expectations and to accommodate
rising demands from an increasingly more mobilized
and assertive populace amid a period of economic
boom. Soon, aspirational middle class or/and
charismatic populists will take the initiative to
challenge the system in favor of radical reform.
Paradoxically, therefore, just when economic
conditions seem most fortuitous and social
forces are most empowered, political
breakdown becomes highly likely.
In many ways, this is precisely what happened in the
case of the Philippines. As mentioned, the economic
boom during the Aquino administration was far
from inclusive. Wealth was being generated on an
unprecedented scale, but it failed to significantly
trickle down the socio-economic ladder. According
to the World Bank, the forty richest families
swallowed up 76 percent of newly-created growth,

C 2016 ADRiNSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

the highest rate of growth concentration in

Asia. Their capital stock increased by 37.9
percent, jumping by $13bn during the
year 2010-2011 to $47.4bn.
The Aquino administration proved particularly
unpopular in the vote-rich National Capital Region
(NCR), the ultimate swing state. Towards the
end of its term, Aquino had a net zero approval
rating. He became a liability for his party-mates,
who vied to replace him: Aquinos endorsement of
any candidate carried in Metro Manila a negative
26 points baggage. And this largely explains why
Mar Roxas performed poorly in the area, while his
running-mate, Leni Robredo, had to spend months
in the area to bolster her numbers with minimal
reference to her party ties to the president.
The traffic congestion and public transportation
mayhem in Manila was particularly devastating for
the incumbent. According to the 2015 Global Driver
Satisfaction Index, Metro Manila now has the worlds
worst traffic congestion. This is largely because, in
the words of The Economist, Manilas transport
plans have been terribleamong the most
foolish adopted by any great city. In spite of the
governments promise to revamp the countrys basic
infrastructure, increasing infrastructure spending
as a share of the GDP to around 5 percent,
the capital has suffered frequent breakdown in
the Metro Rail Transit (MRT) system, the main
transportation means for millions of mainly workingclass commuters, not to mention an embarrassing
blackout in the countrys international airport, which
has become, even more embarrassingly, a site

of planted bullet modus operandi against

mostly elderly, foreign visitors.
Meanwhile, political institutions remained ossified,
captured by political dynasties and vulnerable
to whims of special interest. Studies show that
around 178 political dynasties dominate 73 out of
a total of 81 provinces in the country. The grip of
political dynasties on the Philippines elected offices
dwarfs even that of Latin Americas, the worlds
most unequal continent, which has a very similar
colonial and post-colonial institutional legacy. In
the Philippines, political dynasties occupy a vast
majority of elected legislative positions (70 percent),
an astonishing number even when compared to
Argentina (10 percent) and Mexico (40 percent).
There was also the element of personal touch.
Among many Filipinos, there was this perceived
insensitivity on the part of Aquino himself, who
throughout various crises, particularly during the
aftermath of Haiyan super storm and Mamasapano
tragedy, proved intransigent rather than apologetic.
Since the downfall of the Marcos dictatorship,
the ruling elite has promised peace, prosperity
and rule of law to the people. But for many, these
have been nothing but empty promises. The
Mindanao peace process is in limbo, just as Islamic
State (IS) affiliates carve out territories across the
conflict zone; maritime borders are under assault
by revanchist neighbors who operate with de
facto impunity; key sectors of the economy are
dominated by a few well-connected conglomerates
and business families; bureaucratic corruption and

www.stratbase.com.ph

OCCASIONAL PAPER JULY 2016

08

endemic criminality is still too quotidian to ignore;

and rural poverty and food insecurity still afflict the
countryside. Millions of Filipinos are still toiling in
most difficult working conditions abroad, while
many more are, out of sheer desperation,
setting their sights on distant horizons far
away from domestic woes.
Against the backdrop of broken promises and rising
expectations, particularly among the small but
burgeoning middle class, a new form of grievance
politics took over the nation. It wasnt rage against
the Aquino administration as much as what
could be called as cacique democracy fatigue
-- an exasperation with the liberal elite, who have
dominated the post-Marcos regime.
This provided a fertile ground for populists and
demagogic figures to step into the picture. No less
than Ferdinand Bong Bong Marcos Jr., who lost
the vice-presidential race by a whisker, was able
to tap into rising public anger and frustration by
presenting himself as an effective leader who will
usher in a mode of governance (supposedly) as
decisive and effective as his fathers.
The tough-talking, foul-mouthed mayor of Davao
City was more successful. Showing little respect
for the mainstream elite and the establishment in
general, Duterte astutely recognized an historic
opportunity to step up and contest the highest
elected office. As Karl Marx eloquently put it, we
cannot always choose the vocation to which we
believe we are called. Our social relations, to some
extent, have already begun to form before we are in

C 2016 ADRiNSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

Image Credit:wsj.com

www.stratbase.com.ph

OCCASIONAL PAPER JULY 2016

09

a position to determine them, but it is ultimately

up to individuals to carve out their historical
role out of a given historical condition.

which were at the heart of his opponents sustained

attacks during the three presidential debates. He
never managed to overcome them.

Duterte also benefited from the pitfalls of his

opponents, who spent considerable time
undermining each other while -- ignoring the
provincial mayor as a glorified nuisance (not until
the last month of campaigning when Duterte
began to lead in the surveys).

Meanwhile, Senator Grace Poe, who dominated the

race for months, faced not only concerns over her
lack of relevant executive experience and eligibility,
but, towards the end of the race, alienated a
growing number of her supporters by floating
in the orbit of controversial oligarchs as well as
former president Estrada, who endorsed her
for the top office amid much fanfare.

Duterte, a scion of one of the Philippines oldest

political clans, turned his perceived outsider status
into a source of strength. He constantly portrayed
himself as the underdog, a provincial mayor from
Mindanao with limited resources and campaign
machinery. At some point, he even suggested
calling it quits due to financial constraints. It didnt
take long before he presented himself as the
anti-establishment candidate, who needed the
support of the ordinary folks to take on the
national oligarchy in imperial Manila.
A few months before the elections, Vice President
Jejomar Binay was still widely considered the top
contender in the race. He could boast about his
Makati model and nationwide machinery, laid
down over years of meticulous patronage politics.
But he was undermined by corruption scandals,

C 2016 ADRiNSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

As for Mar Roxas, the quintessential technocrat

and liberal democrat, he made the crucial mistake
of presenting himself as a de facto referendum on
the incumbent amid a climate of grievance politics.
He was also at the receiving end of vicious attacks
by Duterte, Binay, and, to a lesser degree, Poe,
with respect to his competence as an executive,
particularly during his stints as interior as well as
transportation and communications secretary. His
decent electoral performance among the poorest
demographic (class E) shows that charisma wasnt
his biggest problem. Duterte, quite ably, managed
to portray his opponents as either corrupt, or
puppet of the oligarchy, or simply too incompetent
to become a head of state.

Meanwhile, Duterte, leveraging his own media savvy

as well as a social media blitzkrieg powered by a
wide volunteer-based network across the nation,
portrayed himself as a capable, decisive, simpleliving political outsider, who could address the
countrys predicaments head-on. Dutertes brand of
populism also allowed him to reach out to various
socio-economic classes and regions. To the middle
classes and the rich, he promised rule of law by
adopting a zero-tolerance approach to criminality.
To Metro Manila, he promised a swift solution to the
traffic congestion. To the Ilocano ethnic-linguistic
class, he professed his admiration for the late
Marcos and forged a de facto alliance with the
Marcoses. To the masses, many of which relish his
spontaneous story-telling style, Duterte promised a
caring, humble and accessible form of governance.
Embracing his political outsider status, despite
hailing from one of the countrys oldest political
clans, Duterte presented himself as the voice of the
marginalized, the leader of a revolt of the periphery
against an uncaring center. He promised more
political autonomy and fiscal resources to Visayan
and Mindanao regions, ending the reign of
imperial Manila. It proved a winning formula.

www.stratbase.com.ph

OCCASIONAL PAPER JULY 2016

10

Unique Opportunity: Policy Proposals

To liberal democrats, and many of the Philippines key
international partners, Dutertes strident rhetoric and
illiberal-populist tendencies have been a source of concern.
During the election campaign, no less than the outgoing
president, Benigno Aquino, described Duterte
as essentially a proto-dictator.
The appeal of populist leaders such as Duterte, as Indian
essayist Pankaj Mishra succinctly explains, lies in offering
not so much despotic authority as a new relationship
between the rulers and the ruled. Their electoral prowess
is due to how they shrewdly grasped a widely felt need for
a new mode of sincere, dedicated leadership, as well as a
more energetic way of involving the masses in politics.
The new president also exhibits an uncanny pragmatism
and reassuringly hands-on style of leadership that may
prove decisive to taking the Philippines -- in the words of
his main rival, Mar Roxas, during his latest speech in the
Makati Business Club -- from short pants to long pants.
Taking a page out of his own experience as mayor of
Davao, Duterte, during his inauguration speech, called
for enforcement of contracts, respect for their sanctity,
reduction of red tape, and regulatory predictability. These
were music to the ears of the business community, who
were eager to see more of Duterte the pragmatic than
his more well-known foul-mouthed outbursts.
[A]ll men of sense, one of Americas most imaginative
founding fathers, Alexander Hamilton, once argued, will

C 2016 ADRiNSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

agree in the necessity of an energetic executive. Many

hope and are optimistic that Duterte is and will remain as
an energetic executive. The country is currently in a critical
stage of development, vulnerable to middle income trap.
It lingers on the cusp of economic breakout, which
demands structural reforms that will unleash
the countrys greatest potentials.
What [emerging markets] experiences underscore is that
political cycles are as important to a nations prospects
as economic ones. Crises and downturns often lead to
a period of reform, which can flower into a revival or a
boom, emerging markets guru Ruchir Sharma argued, in
an influential essay for Foreign Affairs, cautioning booming
economies against policy complacency. But such success
can then lead to arrogance and complacency and the
next downturn. The boom of the last decade seemed to
revise that script, as nearly all the emerging nations rose
in unison and downturns all but disappeared.
Duterte could provide the political foundation for economic
transformation. The newly-installed presidents cabinet
selection reveals his emphasis on loyalty, technocratic
competence, and pragmatic aggregation of key members
of previous administration. He has assembled a credible
economic team, composed of one of the countrys leading
economists and business minds, which has boosted market
confidence in the Philippines. The Duterte administrations
economic agenda reveals its commitment to stick with the
macroeconomic policies of his predecessors.
He may not be fully familiar with macroeconomics, but

Duterte knows who to entrust in technocratic matters.

To know ones limitations is a sign of good leadership
in itself. Under Duterte one can expect more speedy
and widespread infrastructure development, given his
emphasis on expediency, openness to large-scale Chinese
infrastructure investments, and eagerness to bridge
the development gap between poorer regions such as
Mindanao and the industrialized Luzon -- potentially his
greatest legacy as the first Mindanaon president.
Transportation Secretary Arthur Tugade will most likely
employ emergency powers to speed up approval of public
infrastructure projects to address traffic mayhem in the
capital, which is costing the country P 2.4 billion every
single day and may turn Metro Manila unlivable if it is not
effectively addressed in the short-to-medium-run. Budget
Secretary Benjamin Diokno has also revealed plans to
decongest the capital by developing nearby hubs such as
Clark and Subic. By passing Freedom of Information
(FOI) through executive order, the Duterte administration
can strike a balance between transparency and
expediency in ramping up infrastructure projects.
Cognizant of the necessity for ensuring inclusive
development, Duterte has offered several cabinet positions
to leftist-progressive stalwarts, who will be in charge
of ministries overseeing agriculture and land reforms,
environment and natural resources, and labor and
employment. It is, however, important for Duterte to keep
his team of rivals cabinet in line, especially given the
well-known policy differences among some of his cabinet
ministers, ranging from issues such as mining and

www.stratbase.com.ph

OCCASIONAL PAPER JULY 2016

11

labor rights to the handling of peace negotiations

with communist rebels.
The Duterte administration should focus on, per advice of
leading development agencies and economies, reviving the
agriculture and manufacturing industries, which are crucial
to reducing poverty and creating sustainable employment
opportunities. The current structure of the Philippine
economy is too dependent on an import-driven retail, lowto-medium-end services, real estate development, and
remittances from Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs).
As economists such as Joe Studwell have argued, the
Philippines is ignoring the development strategy of Asias
industrialized states, which relied on a sequential and
synchronized development strategy that, first, focused on
creating mass-based household agricultural sector, which,
in turn, provided the foundations for light manufacturing,
before moving to heavy industries and/or high-tech
innovation as they climbed the ladder of development.
The Philippines has ignored what Harvard economic
Dani Roderik calls the manufacturing imperative.
Land reform, micro-financing, and infrastructure support
for impoverished farmers is key to reducing rural poverty
and creating food security in the country. As for the
manufacturing sector, the Duterte administration should
cut red tape, reduce restrictions on greenfield investments,
expand basic infrastructure, and address the perennial
problem of high utility costs (among the highest in the
Asia-Pacific region) by enhancing regulatory supervision,
contemplating strategic subsidies to key industries, and

reviewing legislations such as the EPIRA Law, which

has led to dramatically higher electricity costs without
significantly improving accessibility and reliability.
The clincher, however, is Dutertes comprehensive war
on crime and drugs. Winning on the back of astonishing
campaign promises -- namely, eliminating (alter
downgraded to suppressing) crime within three to six
months the new administration is under tremendous
pressure to deliver swiftly or risk alienating its support
base. It is an initiative that has been treated
with guarded optimism, so far.
On one hand, Duterte is and should focus on empowering
the law enforcement agencies to more effectively undertake
their high-risk profession. Reforms could come, and this is
already underway in some form, in terms of calibrated salary
hikes, improved training and better equipment, injection of
meritocracy into the promotion process, disciplining and
dismissal of corrupt officers, the overhaul of the creaking
penitentiary system. Thanks to Dutertes uncompromising
rhetoric, the Philippine National Polices morale is already at
an historic high, which explains why they have stepped up
operations against organized crime in the past month.
It is, however, extremely important for Duterte to seek
greater patience from the public (as Tugade has done on
the traffic issue), avoid short cuts, and operate within the
boundaries of law when it comes to his war on crime and
drugs. In fairness to him, during his inauguration speech,
the new president tried to reassure his critics with respect
to his commitment to the constitution and the countrys

democratic institutions. This was a laudable gesture.

Duterte will maintain broad-based popular support so long
as he shows results -- even if not as astonishing as his
seemingly unrealistic campaign promises -- and sticks to
the letter and spirit of the law. Otherwise, he risks
alienating key sections of the civil society, church,
global partners and the liberal elite.
Dutertes landslide election victory has handed him a
supermajority support in the Philippine Congress, a crucial
factor if and when the new president moves ahead with
amending certain provisions of the constitution, whether
to create a federal-parliamentary system, chip away at
restrictions on foreign investments, and allow, to diffuse
tensions in the South China Sea, joint development
agreements in contested maritime borders. Over the next
few years, Duterte will also appoint the bulk of the Supreme
Court justices, giving him tremendous influence on the other
(constitutionally) co-equal branch of the government.
In this sense, Duterte is the most powerful president in the
post-Marcos regime. And this provides him tremendous
amount of political capital to introduce urgent reforms to
accelerate and deepen national development.

endnotes
1
The first point in Dutertes economic agenda explicitly states, continue
and maintain the current macroeconomic policies, a recognition of the necessity to
preserve and nod to recent gains under the Aquino administration.

Image Credit:trending.ph

C 2016 ADRiNSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

www.stratbase.com.ph

9.7
VOLUME

ABOUT
Richard Javad Heydarian
Richard Javad Heydarian is an Assistant Professor in political science at
De La Salle University, and, most recently, the author of Asias New
Battlefield: US, China, and the Struggle for Western Pacific (Zed, London).
He is an Opinion Writer for Aljazeera English, and a regular
contributor to Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative of the
Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS).

Stratbases Albert Del Rosario Institute

is an independent international and strategic research
organization with the principal goal of addressing the
issues affecting the Philippines and East Asia
9F 6780 Ayala Avenue, Makati City
Philippines 1200
V 8921751
F 8921754
www.stratbase.com.ph
C 2016 ADRiNSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

Image Credit:zeibiz.com