WEEKS 14-15: THE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF PHILIPPINE GOVERNMENT

HISTORY OF PHILIPPINE GOVERNMENT AND CONSTITUTIONS

A. Precolonial Philippines

In his annotations of Antonio De Morga’s Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas (1609), Jose Rizal expounded that, far from
the general belief that the early Philippine society was uncivilized and barbaric, “indigenous civilization flourished in
the archipelago before the arrival of the Spaniards…” (Ileto, 1979:83). What these remarks of Rizal amounted to
was the fact that a level of civilization have already engulfed the archipelago, and this could be seen in the level of
social organizations and political institutions established by natives through their customs. However, some early
thinkers and colonizers who have looked under the prism of western political and economic paragon of
development dismissed these institutions unqualified for the standard of civilization. The community of precolonial
Philippines was politically undeveloped (Endriga, 1979), due primarily to the non-existence of dichotomy between
public and private interest, but it does not mean that it was uncivilized and barbaric.

In order to understand the growth of social forces, and institutions of the early Philippine society, one should look at
the early river-based settlements of the natives for it largely shaped not only their way of life, but also the kind of
political system they have established. To quote the historian, Oliver Wolters (1999) from Abinales and Amoroso’s
book, State and Society in the Philippines (2018): “Every Center was a center in its own right as far as its
inhabitants were concerned, and it was surrounded by its own groups of neighbors” (Wolters, 1999:17). As an
archipelago, the settlements at river mouth, such as that of Manila, were particularly strategic (Abinales &
Amoroso, 2018:21). These locations gave early settlers the opportunity to control the entry of the upcoming goods,
thereby monopolizing the wealth indispensable to sustain a community. However, since communities in the
precolonial Philippines were widely dispersed and have specific characters and identities of their own, the
protection of the settlement requires a sophisticated level of social organization “mobilized through kinship ties
”(Abinales & Amoroso, 2018:22). The people capable of giving such protection were the so-called big man in
anthropological studies, or called as “Datu” or also referred to as “rajah”. The legitimacy of a chief rested
secondarily on customs, and primarily on his capacity to preserve the community, and win wars against other
chiefs. Thus, in Weberian scholarship, the authority of a datu rested, other than on inheritance, but more on his
charisma. Moreover, unlike in some early European kingdoms, dynasties were difficult to establish in this period,
because power could be claimed by anyone with merits and talent. Albeit, a chief wanted his son to inherit his
position and power, anyone could challenge this through battle and war.

The state-government was referred to as the “barangay”. The chief datu, or rajah was maker and implementer of
laws, The chief’s power was also emphasized on the realm of military, and decided on the fields of commerce,
politics, religion, and judiciary. However, since each settlement “was a center in its own right as far as its
inhabitants were concerned”, the power of a chief varies from each settlement. As Jose Endriga (1979) argued:

There are communities in which the datu had been described as possessing almost absolute authority, and he
exercised the function of judge as well as of legislator. In some other barangays, the datu merely functioned as
leader of his peers. He did not legislate, but only executed the received law, and had not judicial power.

In communities where the datu assume the role of a judge, sanctions and punishment differed to each level of
crime of committed. Most crimes such as criminal and civil cases were punished with a fine, often a heavy one
inflicted on the criminal’s whole family (Abinales & Amoroso, 2018:30). In grave offense where the penalty was
death, the condemned could ask for commutation to servitude (Endriga, 1979:245). In the field of commerce, the
datu “maintained the port-providing safety, facilities, and provisions to traders-he collected harbor fees” (Abinales &
Amoroso, 2018:22).

B. Spanish Colonial Period

Immediately, by the arrival of “conquistador” and first Governor General Miguel Lopez de Legazpi, the Philippines
became a crown colony of Spain, through Mexico, from 1565 to 1821, under the administration of the Council of
Indies headed by the Viceroy of Mexico. During this period, Las Leyes de Indias were the laws that were
implemented in the Philippines. When Mexico declared its independence in 1821, Spain started to directly rule the
Philippines, and continued on until 1898. In 1834, the Philippines was opened by Spain to world trade.

From the beginning of the colonization, revolts rose in the fight for freedom against oppression, maladministration
and injustice. The Cavite Mutiny of 1872, which implicated the three secular priests Mariano Gomez, Jose Burgos
and Jacinto Zamora (Gomburza) to the allegation of rebellion, and which eventually led to their execution, has
pushed forward the Propaganda Movement. The Propaganda was a reform movement for the Philippines that was
initiated by the Filipino enlightened middle class, called as “Ilustrados” in Europe. Jose Rizal, its greatest
propagandist and leader, wrote the novel “Noli Me Tangere” which would be instrumental in the launching of the
Philippine Revolution. Rizal established in the Philippines upon his arrival in 1892 the civic association, Liga
Filipina. Upon the arrest and exile of Rizal, the Liga Filipina was dissolved. Its end saw the founding and rise of the
Kataas-taasan, Kagalang-galangang Katipunan ng Mga Anak ng Bayan, or commonly known as Katipunan. In
August of 1896, its leader, Supremo Andres Bonifacio started the Philippine revolution, the call for the separation of
the Philippines from Spain.
 C. Constitution of Biak-na-Bato (1897)

The Katipunan revolution led to the Tejeros Convention where, at San Francisco de Malabón, Cavite, on 22
March 1897, the first presidential and vice-presidential elections in Philippine history were held—although only
the Katipuneros (members of the Katipunan) were able to take part, and not the general populace.

On 1 November 1897 at Biak-na-Bato in the town of San Miguel de Mayumo in Bulacán, as the tide of war and
negotiation ongoing, Aguinaldo declared the Biak-na-Bato republic. The republic’s constitution was draffted by
Isabelo Artacho and Felix Ferrer. The new established republic was to have a constitution mainly borrowed from
Cuba, supreme council (see chart below for the officers) and centralized government, but instead, the
revolutionary leadership departed from these aims, and consented a truce and exile in Hong Kong (Abinales, &
Amoroso, 2018:113). This political gesture evoked different interpretations from pundits of Philippine history.
Whether this acceptance was a strategic move of revolutionary leadership, or a capitalistic, opportunistic venture
is still under critical dialogue. The spectrum of historians are polarized, nationalist historiography interpreted the
acceptance in congruence to the latter, or in a tone that the middle class betrayed the revolution, especially that
the leaders and mediator came from the ambivalent class of principalia, and ilustrado.

The revolutionary leadership and the mediator of the Pact of Biak-na-Bato became main target, and threw their
historical relevance in an equivocal, if not insignificant, position. As one of the great Philippine historian, Resil
Mojares (2006), quipped in his introduction to Pedro Paterno’s—the mediator of the pact—life, “History has not
been kind to Pedro Paterno…Paterno has sunk to insignificance has to do in part with his politics. Nationalist
historiography has cast him as symbol of the class that betrayed the Philippine Revolution. Reduce to a
convenient sign (Traitor to the Revolution or, kindly, Peacemaker, Father of the Malolos constitution)…” (Mojares,
2006:3). On the other hand, the national artist, Nick Joaquin (1977) deviated from the narrative of nationalist
historiography, and interpreted the signing of the pact more on the psychological depths of Aguinaldo, and his
innate awareness to his educational deficiency towards his own intellectual betters, thus deferring to them the
most crucial decision in the most pivotal junctures of the Philippine history: “Had he remained simply of Kawit—a
country squire, a small-town mayor, a small merchant—his deficiencies would not have mattered; but when
catapulted onto the national…stage his own guilty consciousness of those deficiencies was bound to result in a
most equivocal attitude towards his intellectual betters: a mixture of deference, awe, resentment, suspiciousness
and hostility.” (Joaquin, 1977:111)

Officers of the Supreme Council of Biak-na-

Bato Emilio Aguinaldo — President

Mariano Trias — Vice-President

Antonio Montenegro —Secretary of Foreign

Affair Isabelo Artacho —Secretary of the Interior

Emiliano Riego de Dios —Secretary of War

Baldomero Aguinaldo —Secretary of the Treasury

Cited from Renato Constatino, The Philippines: A Past Revisited, 1975, 191

Nevertheless, although the pact was signed, it did not completely end the resistance. More and more
communities joined to the banner of independence and military clashes continued (Golay, 1998:220).

A. The Malolos Constitution (1898)

On February 15, 1898 the Philippines was involved in the war between the United States and Spain. When the war
reached its conclusion which manifested in Spain’s admission of defeat, neither the two combatants or powerful
states recognized the legitimacy of the Filipino revolutionaries who had declared independence on June 12 (Abinales,
& Amoroso 2018:113), despite the fact that it was a hard earned victory by the Filipinos, and the Americans sent its
forces only when fortune and odds were in their favor. Historical accounts came from different spectrum of
interpretation of the revolution found their unison in this critical juncture in which apparently Americans employed
trickery and deceit, because a divided victory in Manila was impermissible. In his prosaic biographical account of
Emilio Aguinaldo, Nick Joaquin (1977) criticized him for his failure to act as a good and clever political leader at one
of the most pivotal ages in the history of the Philippines, failing to navigate geopolitically between the two states, and
putting too much faith and trust in the words of an American without any assurance. Consequently, the bidding time
tactic of the Americans succeed, and from the ranks of Gen. Thomas Anderson, Gen. Francis V. Greene, Gen. Arthur
MacArthur came three waves of American reinforcement in a total of 10,964 men and 740 officers (Constantino,
1975:208). From then on, the Americans seized the critical moment for Filipino Independence. This historical tragedy
could be seen in General Noriel who “burst into tears upon seeing the American flag hoisted over what had been an
insurgent advance position, but his troops had no power now to reclaim what they should never have retreated from.”
(Joaquin,1977):
The anti-Spanish alliance between American and Filipinos have concluded in a bitter ending with the United States’
purchased of the Archipelago from Spain in a sum of $20 million in December 1898. The Philippines came under a
second colonial power (Abinales, & Amoroso 2018:113) which became a catalyst for The Philippine-American war
leading to the establishment of Malolos Republic with an established constitution. The creation of Malolos constitution
was not an easy consensus to the framers as they struggle to what direction the revolution should take: military
dictatorship or republican. Drew heavily from the constitution of France, Belgium, and some South American republics
(Constantino, 1975:277), the framers favored a republican government, thus making the Malolos constitution as the
first republican constitution in Asia. The newly created constitution provided a detailed Bill of Rights, secularism—the
separation of church and state— and a supremacy of a unicameral legislative branch. For the historian Cesar Majul
(1960), these details was the reflection of “the aspiration of Filipinos based on their past experiences with oppression
from a colonial government” (Majul, 1960: 170), but upon closer examination of the constitution, circumstance, and the
profiles of the framers, one could see the burgeoning social stratification which hitherto haunt the Philippine society
wherein there is an apparent polarization, and detachment of sympathy across different classes. The contradiction
was that a constitution which was established to embrace the pillars of liberalism, yet still not democratic in a way that
the franchise was limited to men of high social standing and education.This was unsurprising since those who
composed the congress were from elite and middle class: Pedro A. Paterno, President; Benito Legarda, Vice
President; Gregorio Araneta, first Secretary; and Pablo Ocampo, second Secretary (Constantino, 1975:211).

Moreover, although it was decided that the constitution shall have a republican government, the level or the amount
of power between the executive and legislative branch was still debated. The so called Black Cabinet of Aguinaldo,
Apolinario Mabini threw his hat on the former, he believed that a strong president, or even a “politico-miliitary dictator”
was the more effective set up of the government since war need a quick and decisive decision-making. On the other
hand, the principalia and ilustrado, put their card on the latter, afraid that the government might degenerate into (to
use the words of Felipe Calderon) “oligarchic republic, in which the military element, which was ignorant in almost its
entirety, would predominate…”. In the ensuing critical dialogue between Mabini, and officials of the congress, the
latter won the debate. Although Mabini in his part, attempted to propose midway amendments “to give the president
various emergency power to legislate when Congress was not in session, to arrest members who acted against the
state, to veto bills approved by even two-thirds of the legislature, and to dissolve Congress in the event of
disagreement between the Congress and cabinet” (Abinales & Amoroso, 2018:116). Unsurprisingly, the
congressional committee rejected these proposals and call for Mabini’s resignation.

This debate between the extent of power between the executive and legislative branch foreshadows the succeeding
contests over the most effective way to govern Philippine society, especially amidst the times of crisis when the state
was menaced by rebellion or imminent invasion (Abinales, & Amoroso 2018:116). In her latest book, Chasing
Freedom: The Philippines’ Long Journey to Democratic Ambivalence (2022), Adele Webb called this as Democratic
Ambivalence: “the simultaneous and sustained holding of oppositional feelings about democracy…the situation in
which individuals, or indeed public, are neither singularly committed to democracy, nor singularly in favor of non-
democratic politics” (Webb, 2022:6).

B. Early American Occupation

“When an American thinks about the problems of government building,” Huntington (1968) argued, “he directs
himself not the creation of the authority and the accumulation of power but rather to the limitation of authority and the
division of power.” Face with the need to design a political system, the United States general formula is that
governments should be based on free and fair elections (Huntington, 1968). In the early 20 th century, this western-
centric developmental approach was implemented by the American government in the Philippines through different
commissions whose reason for existence was to modernize the political system of the colony through the prism of
American experiences, principles, structures, and procedures:

“At the same time, the Commission should bear in mind, and the people of the Island should be made plainly to understand,
that there are certain great principles of government which have been made the basis of our governmental system which we deem
essential to the rule of law and the maintenance of individual freedom…that there are also certain practical rules of government
which we have found to be essential to the preservation of these great principles of liberty and law, and that these principles and
these rules of government must be established and maintained in their island for the sake of their liberty and happiness however
much they conflict with the customs or laws or procedure with which they are familiar.”

- President William McKinley’s instruction to the Taft Commission, April 7, 1900

The instruction of President McKinley’s to the Taft Commission led to the establishment of representative
system in the Philippines from local up to the national level. Municipal election was held in peaceful areas in
December 1901, followed by the Philippines’ first election for provincial governors in February 1902 (Abinales, and
Amoroso, 2017). According to Abinales and Amoroso (2017), by mid-1903 1035 municipal governments and 31
provincial governments had been created. This led to the next major political phase which was legalized by the
Philippine Bill 1902—mandated the creation of a bicameral legislature with the Philippine Commission as the Upper
House and the Philippine Assembly as the Lower House—the 1907 election of representatives to the Philippine
Assembly. However far from successfully creating a modern polity with impersonal government, and highly
centralize, strong state, the introduction of election led to the creation of political bailiwick ripe of patronage
network.
In order to win a local or national seat, a candidate first deployed what the historian Alfred Mcoy termed as “kinship
network”: seeking a political support from family, friends, and even business associates. Party affiliation was also a
major source of political machinery. During this period, it was the Nacionalistas who had consolidated the ideological
upper hand, thus, being a member of this party often ensured electoral victory (Abinales, and Amoroso, 2017).
Another important source was the Americans who served as patrons in their favored client or candidate into the
Philippine Assembly. Indeed, looking at the profile of the two leading politicians of this period, Manuel Quezon and
Sergio Osmenas, both of them relied on patronage network with Quezon who rose quickly from petty provincial
bureaucrat to provincial governor by heavily relying with his friendship to American constabulary chief Harry Bandholtz
who played a crucial role in his election as Tayabas Representative to the Philippine Assembly. Osmena, on the other
hand, relied initially on his connections with prominent Americans and Filipinos. He became a governor of Cebu in
1906 due to the endorsements of Governor-General Cameron Forbes and former governor Taft. In his bid to the
Philippine Assembly, he joined the Partido Nacionalista and won the election.

On a more positive note, according to the historian Salamanca (1984), the Philippine Assembly served as an
indispensable instrument in political socialization, and of nation building. However, far from creating a full-fledged
political socialization that would foster national consciousness across different social forces, what the Philippine
Assembly formed was, according to Benedict Anderson (1998), the consciousness of the ruling class. This formation
of a national elite out of the gathered local power holders was another step in the realization of the Philippines as it is
today (Abinales, & Amoroso, 2017:137).

As Filipino learned the nuts and bolts and potentiality of the political system introduced by the Americans, they grew
more eager to expand their power by trying to encroach other government post such as the executive. They did this by
passing laws that ultimately aim to criticize the policies of the Philippine Commission, and to scrutinized the executive
body headed by the governor-general (Jenista Jr, 1971). Alas, their efforts where hampered by Commissioner Taft
through the used of his veto, but, as Abinales and Amoroso argued (2017), for every defeat the Filipino legislators
learned a lesson:
By the time Forbes became governor general in 1909, Quezon and Osmena were adept at combining legislative attack
with “the game of favors and political back-scratching”—a game deeply familiar to their American mentors (Abinales & Amoroso,
2017: 139).

It was in late 1912 with the victory Democrats against the Republican in U.S. election which gradually expanded the
power of the Filipino politicians largely because the former was highly in concurrence to grant the colony self-
government sooner and this could only be done by allowing the Filipino official to hold other government office. To do
this, they sent Francis Burton Harrison as the new governor-general. More importantly, it must be remember that the
appointment of Harrison was largely due to the hard lobbying of Quezon to the American government as a resident
commissioner for the Philippines in U.S. House of Representatives. In 1916, the American congress ratified the
Philippine Autonomy Act, commonly known as the Jones law, which aimed to place in the hand of the Filipinos “as
large a control of their domestic affairs as can be given them.” Through this law, the Philippine Commission was
abolished and transferred its obligations and functions to the upper house of the new bicameral legislature.

C. Commonwealth and The 1935 Constitution

In lated 1935, elections for the commonwealth president, vice president, National Assembly were held. The
ascension of Manuel Quezon to power was largely due to the fear spread by the revolt. This reaction was capitalized
by the Nacionalista party to boost the odds of Quezon in presidency by creating its political slogan: “Quezon or Chaos”.
The political machinery of Nacionalista party was vastly superior to its opponents, and 68 percent of Filipino voters
threw their cards on Manuel Quezon for president.

Quezon was the first president who took seriously the project of making the Philippine state strong even to the
point of making heavy handed or tight-fisted tactic to ensure the obedience of politicians and state forces to his goals.
He was fond of using carrot and stick in dominating the legislature by bribing them with state largesse and threatening
their policy proposals with a veto ((Abinales & Amoroso, 2017: 153). He also ordered the creation of a commonwealth
army and ensured its allegiance to him by appointing officer he could trust, and one of them was his business partner
General Douglas MacArthur. He also keep his patronage to local official by making them happy through the creation of
new cities and supporting tax exemptions for coconut oil (Abinales & Amoroso, 2017: 154).

One of the most important policies of Quezon was his Social Justice program “which would breakup the landed
estates and distribute them to farmers, introduce social welfare measures as as the eight-hour working day and a
minimum wage rate, expand the rights of workers and peasants and their access to the court, and created
resettlement program to move families to Mindanao (Gopinath, 1987). All these reform measures were passed in the
congress attesting to his capacity as a strongman president and expand further Quezon’s popularity. .

The 1935 Constitution was also written in 1934, approved and adopted by the Commonwealth of the
Philippines (1935–1946) and later used by the Third Republic of the Philippines (1946–1972). It was written with an
eye to meeting the approval of the United States Government as well, so as to ensure that the U.S. would live up to
its promise to grant the Philippines independence and not have a premise to hold onto its "possession" on the
grounds that it was too politically immature and hence unready for full, real independence.

The original 1935 Constitution provided for unicameral National Assembly and the President was elected to a
six-year term without re-election. It was amended in 1940 to have a bicameral Congress composed of a Senate
and House of Representatives, as well the creation of an independent electoral commission. The Constitution
now granted the President a four-year term with a maximum of two consecutive terms in office.

D. The Second Republic (1943)

On December 08, 1941, the Japanese launched an air raid on the military bases in the Philippines. This
surprise attack which simultaneously happened within hours of their military attack on Pearl Harbor, caught off-guard
the ill-prepared Filipino-American forces. Military resistance was launched by the Filipino and American forces, but
was later defeated by the overwhelming military superiority of the Japanese invaders. The retreat of General
Douglas MacArthur together with President Manuel Quezon and Sergio Osmena to Australia and later to the United
States signaled the victory of Japanese government and their brief occupation of the Philippines.

In 1943, the independence of the Philippines was granted by the Japanese and created the Second
Republic. The 1943 Constitution was drafted by the Preparatory Committee appointed by the Philippine Executive
Commission, the body established by the Japanese to administer the Philippines in lieu of the Commonwealth of the
Philippines which had established a government-in-exile.The Preparatory Committee for Philippine Independence
tasked with drafting a new constitution was composed in large part, of members of the prewar National Assembly
and of individuals with experience as delegates to the convention that had drafted the 1935 Constitution. Upon
approval of the draft by the Committee, the new charter was ratified in 1943 by an assembly of appointed, provincial
representatives of the KALIBAPI, the organization established by the Japanese to supplant all previous political
parties. Upon ratification by the KALIBAPI assembly, the Second Republic was formally proclaimed (1943–1945).
José P. Laurel was appointed as President by the National Assembly and inaugurated into office in October 1943.
Laurel was highly regarded by the Japanese for having openly criticized the US for the way they ran the Philippines.

However, the creation of the Second Republic and the willingness of most Filipino politicians to collaborate
with the Japanese have met with plethora of criticisms and new expectations. Some followed the examples of
neighboring Southeast Asian states in bolstering the anti colonial nationalist movements to push for independence.
Others wanted to rejuvenate the nationalism of the Philippine revolution aborted by the American through
introduction of nationalist programs such teaching and writing in Filipino languages, restoring the Philippine
Revolution to the national history books, and developing the parts of perspective of the Philippines as part of Asia
(Abinales & Amoroso, 2017:160). President Laurel on the other hand chose to keep his faith with Quezon’s directive
of collaboration, defending his position by arguing that the collaboration served as a good deterrent to the abuses of
the Japanese against Filipinos. Moreover, he also believed that the new regime opened a space for long-
suppressed “anti-imperialist” sentiments (Abinales & Amoroso, 2017:160).

As the war continued and stirred not in favor to the Japanese government, Laurel was abandoned by his
colleagues who were more concerned with their own preservation, and lose his position as the president of the
puppet government. When General Doughlas MacArthur returned with massive military forces, a one-month battles
was commenced in Manila which resulted at the cost of thousands of deaths to all involved countries. Moreover,
Manila was catastrophically devastated. Eighty percent of it was destroyed, making it the second most damaged city
in the war after Warsaw (Steinberg, 1967). After the Filipino-American forces won the war, Osmena attempted to
prosecute the officials who had collaborated with the Japanese. Alas, his attempt faltered as Gen. MacArthur
protected the collaborators who were his friends and business associates. After the dissolution of the Second
Republic, the elite survived, and these elites ushered a new political era which would, to some extent, alter the
economic and political make-up of the Philippines.

E. The Third Republic (1946 - 1964)

The five postwar Philippine presidents inherited a weak state recovering from the ravage of world war II. The
state was economically vulnerable and fragile, local bosses and landlords have de facto authority to some areas of the
archipelago through their private armies and sheer wealth. In addition, added fuel to the problem was the ongoing
radicalization of the urban and rural peasants brought initially to some extent by the effective guerrilla warfare of the
Hukbong Bayan Laban sa Hapon, or Hukbalahap. When landed elites in the northern part of Manila fled amidst the
war, the Hukbalahap became the new source of authority and endowed peasants with a taste of brief popular
democracy. Later on, the rebels renamed itself as the Hukbong Mapagpalaya ng Bayan (People’s Liberation Army, or
HMB), and changed its counter offensive against the government. This change of counter offensive of the rebels must
be understood both in domestic and international factors: the failure of the government to restore the economy and
rampant corruption, and the ensuing cold war between the Communist dictorial USSR and Capitalist democratic United
States of America in which the ideology of the former further equipped the rebels with political narrative and further
radicalized them.
These were the challenges faced by the Third Republic presidents and its precisely through this combination of
domestic and international problems where the five presidents (Roxas, Quirino, Magsaysay, Garcia, and Macapagal)
based their local and international policies. Each with their own shared of successes and failure. The frequent
interventions of the United States must also be added to the picture as the success of the regime of most post war
presidents heavily depended on their patronage, and their commitment to contain the growth of Communism in the
Philippines.

Manuel Roxas

As the first president of the Third Republic, the administration of Manuel Roxas was too challenging in a way
that there was an enormous pressure to rejuvenate the economy of the Philippines which suffered from the onslaught
of war. Added fuel to the fire was the emergence of a fledgling nation-state where state power was not centralized and
the source of authority were divided to land lords, warlords, and radical groups. The United State rubbed an addition
salt to the wound of economy by demanding the Roxas administration to ratify a free trade treaty also known as, The
Bell Trade Act of 1946 which heavily favored the American entrepreneurs granting them parity rights to land ownership,
and rights to exploit the natural resources of the archipelago. Nationalist scholars together with, quite surprisingly,
liberal and conservative scholars condemned this treaty (I,e., Doronila, 1992; Golay, 1961). The other demand of the
United States was to sign a military agreement which gave U.S. military bases the right to stay in the Philippines for
ninety-nine years. Roxas was heavily pressured because in order to receive the rehabilitation funds of $620 million (400
million was allocated for property damage compensation; 120 million for the reconstruction of roads; and the remaining
100 million for surplus military property. However, since the Bell Trade Act contravenes to the Philippine Constitution,
an amendment was passed through national plebiscite which successfully gained an approval to the electorate,
attesting to the good will Filipinos felf for the United States (Abinales & Amoroso, 2017: 171).

However, free trade and the disbursement of war reparation damage benefited only small sector of the economy
mainly Americans and Fipino exporters. Spoil system and cronyism were also rampant with the administration
disbursing funds mainly to those closest to the regime. The upshot of this pervasive corruption led to a balance of
payment crisis, capital flight, and inflation. By 1949, the economy was on the brink of collapse. The urban
unemployment led the organization of labor, and the Communist-controlled Congress of Labor Organization to clamor
support for the poor and criticize the ongoing American and landlord forces in the government (Abinales & Amoroso,
2017: 173). In April 1948, Roxas suddenly died due to heart attack. The death of the president further exacerbated the
fear that the republic was on the brink of collapse. Roxas was succeeded by his vice president and successor, Elpidio
Quirino who was less popular and mostly seen as inadequate in dealing with pressing political and economic concerns
of the country.

Elpidio Quirino

Fortunately for Quirino’s regime was the growing unrest mainly from the lower class and the slow radicalization
of peasants which put forward political narratives closely resembling Stalinist Russia. This alarmed U.S. president Harry
S. Truman and his advisers. They were persuaded that free trade between two countries with unequal economic
capacities would not improve the status of the Philippine economy. The U.S. president then approved the
implementation of the Philippine government of a series of import and exchange control to stem capital drain (Golay,
1977:95). Unfortunately, what was supposed to be an emergency solution was looked at by the Philippine economic
planners to begin import substitution development (Doronila, 1992). Additional assistance was provided by the U.S. to
contain the Philippines from the ideology of Communism, this led them to pledged $250 million in loans and credits.
This promised was crucial because president Quirino’s government face a serious popular challenger from the PKP-led
Huk uprising (Abinales & Amoroso, 2017: 173).
The administration of Quirino had its share of success and failures. On the professional governance, The
National Economic council and the Buget Commission were effective tools determine the course of economic
development under the new import substitution policy (Doronila, 1992). Central bank also helped to stabilized the
economy by tightly supervising import licenses and American dollar allocations. The upshot was the creation of viable
manufacturing sector whicc greatly reduced the economic reliance of the Philippines on imports. In addition, when
Quirino became presiden in 1948 annual tax revenue as 329 million pesos. By the end of his term, the annual tax
revenue greatly increased to 655 million pesos (Abinales & Amoroso, 2017: 178). Thus, Quirino beat the low
expectations of the general populace ti his administration.
However, this economic success of Quirino was overshadowed by corruption, and political malaise such as the
emergence of new cronies ushered by the import and currency regime. Just like Roxas, Quirino was also accused of
extending favors to his patronage network, and tolerating corruption in the congress. This grim image of Quirino stuck
throughout his term and became the harbinger of his defeat when he ran for re election in 1953. He was
overwhelmingly defeated by his former secretary, Ramn Magsaysay.

Ramon Magsaysay

Unlike his two predecessors who relied more on patronage network, Ramon Magsaysay’s source of political
machinery came from different levels of social forces: from the professional military officers, professional associations,
the CIA, the catholic church, anticommunist labor, to the lowest of socioeconomic strata such as the peasant
associations. This popularity was due primarily to his reformist political principle, and his humble profile who came from
a provincial lower class family, and the first non-lawyer to ran for the highest position of the land. These overwhelming
diversified sources of political support across the cleavages of the Filipino society made Magsaysay distinguished
himself from his predecessors as a nontraditional politician and “a man of the people”. In order to ensure his victory,
these social forces set up the National Movement for Free Elections (NAMFREL) which served as an election watchdog
to guard against electoral fraud and fair vote counting.
After he won in the election, Magsasay did not deviate from his political principles and vigorously pursued social
and politcal reforms. Due to his charismatic popularity and huge acceptance and support from both the house of the
U.S. Congress, most of his policies were effectively implemented and succeeded. He successfully passed the Republic
Act 997 which increased the powers of the executive office; a law to effectively manage the national budget; and a five
year national plan to generate 1.7 million jobs (Abinales & Amoroso, 2017: 179). He also created a new government
office, the Presidential Assistant for Community Development (PACD), which fundamentally helped the farmers by
granting them government assistance. The PACD was to also able to received extensive support from smaller
presidential agencies which provided agricultural extension services and farmer’s easy access to markets. Non
governmental governmental organizations such as the Philippine Rural Reconstruction Improvement Society (PRIS),
and the Philippine Rural Reconstruction Movement (PRRM). And to complete the success of the Magsaysay’s projects
was the financial assistance of the American officials by providing a start-up capital of $ 4.2 million and pledging an
additional $42.5 million to keep the projects continue (Monk, 1990).
However, before all the completion of his projects and the potential political backlash to his regime ripe,
Magsaysay was killed in a plane crash in May 1957. Carlos P. Garcia, who was his vice president assume the
continuation of his office and later won his own presidential term.

Carlos P. Garcia

Unlike Magsaysay, Garcia was lack sufficient charisma to mobilize support across different social forces so he
reverted to the old school patronage network. Just like the other politicians such as Osmena, Carlos P. Garcia relied on
the machinery of political party to defeat his political nemesis, some of them were reformist allied of Magsaysay. He
joined the Nacionalista Party to accomplished this goal. The most important national policies of Garcia was the Filipino
First Policy which aimed to assert more Filipino presence, if not totally take over, to the economy of the Philippines. Not
surprisingly,this policy resulted in a highly polarized respond wherein the main opposition came from the of foreign
business establishment handled by the Americans; and from the Chinese and Chinese-Filipino who deemed that the
nationalist policy was a discriminatory project to evict them from the retail trade.
The Filipino First Policy had its shared of success and failures. As for the success of the policy, the imposition of
import controls catapulted the economic growth of the Philippines:

“…the economy had experienced 40.8 percent growth in manufacturing, 17.2 percent growth in agriculture and 34.5
percent growth in mineral exploitation. Under Garcia’s Filipino First Policy, domestic industries numbered about five thousand in
1960; the Filipino share of new investment rose to 88 percent.” (Abinales & Amoroso, 2017:182).

It was now possible, according to Constantino (1978), to talk of the Philippines having a “modest industrial base”
and a more diversified economic elite.

However, although economic growth successfully take off, nonetheless the fairness or the social equity between
the upper, middle, lower class remained unaddressed as the nationalist policy mainly benefited the elite.The
destablization of Garcia’s administration came largely upon the discovery of massive corruptions, bribery, and
fraudulent transactions. Nationalist leaders, whom Garcia owed his patronage network, received easy access to dollar
allocations and credits, import privileges, and tax exemption. Moreover, those who have been offended and
discriminated by the policy became more vocal in their protests. Additional ramification of these discoveries led to an
attempt of coup d etat from the military and initiation of impeachment proceedings in the Congress. Carlos Garcia, like
his predecessors Roxas and Quirino, ended his term remembered as one those administrations repleted of corruption.
He ran for reelection in 1961, but soundly defeated by his Liberal party rival, the poor boy from Lubao, Diosdado
Macapagal.

Diosdado Macapagal

In his bid to presidency, Macapagal promised to deviate from nationalist policy of his predecessor and promised
to open the economy to world trade. He also encouraged the return of foreign investment, and committed his
administration to improved state in performing a more meaningful role in economic development. In order to achieve his
promises, Macapagal established the Program Implementation Agency (PIA), tasked with creating and implementing a
comprehensive national economic development plan. The PIA was a powerful tool in implementing currency decontrol,
and agricultural exports received a temporary boost from the peso’s devaluation (Abinales & Amoroso, 2017: 185).
However, the most challenging aspect in achieving Macapagal’s promises was the entrenched family-owned
conglomerates who diversified in some areas of new exports and industries. One of the most entrenched families was
the Lopez family who owned sugar, media, and power utilities. A heated battle between Macapagal and Lopez family
ignited with the president losing his ground due to employment of the Lopez family of their patronage network in the
congress. The congress in turn accused the president of dictatorial tendency and refused to support his projects.
Among the twenty-six “socioeconomic bills Macapagal sent to Congress, only three became law (Abinales & Amoroso,
2017: 185).
The exposure of government corruption hampered Macapagal’s reform effort. Just like Roxas, Quirino, and
Garcia, Macapagal ended his term known for massive corruption than for his effort to make economy of the Philippines
more competitive in the world trade. He was defeated in 1965 presidential election by his rival, Ferdinand Marcos Sr
who promised to do better in modernizing the country.
E. The 1973 Constitution

The 1973 Constitution, promulgated after Marcos' declaration of martial law, was supposed to introduce a
parliamentary-style government. Legislative power was vested in a National Assembly whose members were
elected for six-year terms. The President was ideally supposed to be elected as the symbolic and purely
ceremonial head of state from the Members of the National Assembly for a six-year term and could be re-elected
to an unlimited number of terms. Upon election, the President ceased to be a member of the National Assembly.

During his term, the President was not allowed to be a member of a political party or hold any other office.
Executive power was meant to be exercised by the Prime Minister who was also elected from the Members of
the National Assembly. The Prime Minister was the head of government and Commander-in-Chief of the armed
forces. This constitution was subsequently amended four times.

On 16–17 October 1976, a majority of barangay voters (Citizen Assemblies) approved that martial law should be
continued and ratified the amendments to the Constitution proposed by President Marcos.

The 1976 amendments were:

 an Interim Batasang Pambansa (IBP) substituting for the Interim National Assembly
 the President would also become the Prime Minister and he would continue to exercise legislative powers
until martial law should have been lifted.

The Sixth Amendment authorized the President to legislate:

Whenever in the judgment of the President there exists a grave emergency or a threat or imminence thereof, or
whenever the Interim Batasang Pambansa or the regular National Assembly fails or is unable to act adequately
on any matter for any reason that in his judgment requires immediate action, he may, in order to meet the
exigency, issue the necessary decrees, orders or letters of instructions, which shall form part of the law of the
land.

The 1973 Constitution was further amended in 1980 and 1981. In the 1981 amendments, the false parliamentary
system was formally modified into a French-style semi-presidential system:

 executive power was restored to the President;

 direct election of the President was restored;
 an Executive Committee composed of the Prime Minister and not more than fourteen members was
created to "assist the President in the exercise of his powers and functions and in the performance of his
duties as he may prescribe;" and the Prime Minister was a mere head of the Cabinet.
 Further, the amendments instituted electoral reforms and provided that a natural born citizen of the
Philippines who has lost his citizenship may be a transferee of private land for use by him as his
residence.

In actual practice, while the 1973 Constitution was ideally supposed to set up a true parliamentary system, the
late President Marcos had made use of subterfuge and manipulation in order to keep executive power for
himself, rather than devolving executive powers to the Parliament, as headed by the Prime Minister.

The end result was that the 1973 Constitution - due to all amendments and subtle manipulations - was merely
the abolition of the Senate and a series of cosmetic text-changes where the old American-derived terminologies
such House of Representatives became known as the "Batasang Pambansa" (National Assembly), Departments
became known as "Ministries", cabinet secretaries became known as "cabinet ministers", and the President's
assistant - the Executive Secretary - became known as the "Prime Minister."

F. "The 1986 Freedom Constitution"

Following the EDSA People Power Revolution that removed President Ferdinand E. Marcos from office, the new
President, Corazon C. Aquino issued Proclamation No. 3 as a provisional constitution. It adopted certain
provisions from the 1973 Constitution and granted the President broad powers to reorganize this government
and remove officials from office, and mandated that the president would appoint a commission to draft a new
constitution.

Background of the 1987 Constitution

In 1986, following the People Power Revolution which ousted Ferdinand E. Marcos as president, and following
on her own inauguration, Corazon C. Aquino issued Proclamation No. 3, declaring a national policy to implement
the reforms mandated by the people, protecting their basic rights, adopting a provisional constitution, and
providing for an orderly translation to a government under a new constitution. President Aquino later issued
Proclamation No. 9, creating a Constitutional Commission to frame a new constitution to replace the 1973
Constitution which took effect during the Marcos martial law regime. Aquino appointed 50 members to the
Commission.

The members of the Commission were drawn from varied backgrounds, including several former congressmen,
a former Supreme Court Chief Justice (Roberto Concepción), a Catholic bishop (Teodoro Bacani) and film
director (Lino Brocka). Aquino also deliberately appointed 5 members. After the Commission had convened, it
elected as its president Cecilia Muñoz-Palma, who had emerged as a leading figure in the anti-Marcos
opposition following her retirement as the first female Associate Justice of the Supreme Court.

The Commission finished the draft charter within four months after it was convened. Several issues were
heatedly debated during the sessions, including on the form of government to adopt, the abolition of the death
penalty, the continued retention of the Clark and Subic American military bases, and the integration of economic
policies into the Constitution.

The ConCom completed their task on 12 October 1986 and presented the draft constitution to President Aquino
on October 15, 1986. After a period of nationwide information campaign, a plebiscite for its ratification was held
on February 2, 1987. More than three-fourths of all votes cast, 76.37% (or 17,059,495 voters) favored ratification
as against 22.65% (or 5,058,714 voters) who voted against ratification. On 11 February 1987, the new
constitution was proclaimed ratified and took effect.

G. Significant Features of the 1987 Constitution

The Constitution establishes the Philippines as a "democratic and republican State", where "sovereignty resides
in the people and all government authority emanates from them" (Section 1, Article II).

Consistent with the doctrine of separation of powers, the powers of the national government are exercised in
main by three branches — the Executive branch headed by the President, the Legislative branch composed of
Congress and the Judicial branch with the Supreme Court occupying the highest tier of the judiciary.

The President and the members of Congress are directly elected by the people, while the members of the
Supreme Court are appointed by the President from a list formed by the Judicial and Bar Council.

As with the American system of government, it is Congress which enacts the laws, subject to the veto power of
the President which may nonetheless be overturned by a two-thirds vote of Congress (Section 27(1), Article VI).

The President has the constitutional duty to ensure the faithful execution of the laws (Section 17, Article VII),
while the courts are expressly granted the power of judicial review (Section 1, Article VIII), including the power to
nullify or interpret laws. The President is also recognized as the commander-in-chief of the armed forces (Section
18, Article VII).

The Constitution also establishes limited political autonomy to the local government units that act as the
municipal governments for provinces, cities, municipalities, and barangays. (Section 1, Article X) Local
governments are generally considered as falling under the executive branch, yet local legislation requires
enactment by duly elected local legislative bodies.

The Supreme Court has noted that the Bill of Rights "occupies a position of primacy in the fundamental law".
Many of these guarantees are similar to those provided in the American constitution and other democratic
constitutions. The scope and limitations to these rights have largely been determined by Philippine Supreme
Court decisions.

Whether these provisions may, by themselves, be the source of enforceable rights without accompanying
legislation has been the subject of considerable debate in the legal sphere and within the Supreme Court. The
Court, for example, has ruled that a provision requiring that the State "guarantee equal access to opportunities to
 public service" could not be enforced without accompanying legislation, and thus could not bar the disallowance
of so-called "nuisance candidates" in presidential elections.

Bibliography:

Abinales, P., & Amoroso, D. (2018) State and Society in the Philippines. Quezon city: Ateneo De Manila
University Press
Constantino, R., & Constantino, L. (1975) The Philippines: A Past Revisited. Quezon City: Talab Pub.
Services
Constantino R., & Constantino, L. (1978) The Philippines: The Continuing Past. Quezon City: Foundation
for Nationalist Studies, 1978.
Doronila A., (1992). The State, Economic Transformation, and Political Change in the Philippines, 1946-
1972. New York: Oxford University Press
Endriga, J. (1979) Historical Notes on Graft and Corruption in the Philippines. Philippine Journal of Public
Administration, Vol. XXIII, Nos, 3& 4, p. 273
Gospinath, A. (1987) Manuel L. Quezon: The Tutelary Democrat. Quezon City: New Day Publisher
Huntington, S. (1968) Political Order in Changing Societies. New York:Yale University Press
Joaquin, N. (1977) A Question of Heroes. Mandaluyong City: Anvil Publishing
Mojares, R. (2006) Brains of the Nation: Pedro Paterno, T.H. Pardo de Tavera, Isabelo de los Reyes, and
the Production of Modern Knowledge. Quezon City: Ateneo De Manila University Press
Majul, C. (1960) Mabini and the Philippine Revolution. Quezon City: University of the Philippine Press
Steinberg, D., (1967). Philippine Collaboration in World War II. Manila: Solidaridad, 1967
Webb, A. (2022) Chasing Freedom: The Philippines’ Long Journey to Democratic Ambivalence. Quezon
City: Ateneo De Manila University Press
Wolters, O.W. (1999). History, Culture, and Region in Southeast Asian Perspectives. Rev. Ed. Ithaca, NY:
Cornell Southeast Asian Program
  PREAMBLE

We, the sovereign Filipino people, imploring the aid of Almighty God, in order to build a just and humane society and
establish a Government that shall embody our ideals and aspirations, promote the common good, conserve and develop our
patrimony, and secure to ourselves and our posterity the blessings of independence and democracy under the rule of law and
a regime of truth, justice, freedom, love, equality, and peace, do ordain and promulgate this Constitution.

ARTICLE II: DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES AND STATE POLICIES

PRINCIPLES

SECTION 1. The Philippines is a democratic and republican State. Sovereignty resides in the people and
all government authority emanates from them.
Explanation:
 The Philippines, is a democratic and republican state.
a) A republican government is a democratic government by representatives chosen by the people at
large. The essence therefore, of a republican state is indirect rule.
b) It embodies some features of a pure or direct democracy such as initiative, referendum, and recall.
 Manifestations of a democratic and republican state:
a) The existence of a bill of right;
a) The observance of the rule of majority;
b) The observance of the principle that ours is a government of laws, and not of men;
c) The presence of election through popular will;
d) The observance of the principle of separation of powers and the system of checks and balances;
e) The observance of the principle that the legislation cannot pass irrepealable laws;
f) The observance of the law on public officers;
 Sovereignty implies the supreme authority to govern, thus the Filipino people, being sovereign people
have the right to constitute their own government, to change it, and define its jurisdiction and powers.
SECTION 2. The Philippines renounces war as an instrument of national policy, adopts the generally
accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land and adheres to the policy of peace,
equality, justice, freedom, cooperation, and amity with all nations.
Explanation:
 The declaration refers only to the renunciation by the Philippines of aggressive war, not a war in defense of
her national honor and integrity. Thus, when provoked and attacked the Philippines can retaliate and engage
into war.
 The doctrine of incorporation is the automatic adoption of international law as part of the law of the
Philippines.
 The Philippines seeks only peace and friendship with her neighbors and all countries of the world, regardless
of race, creed, ideology, and political system, on the basis of mutual trust, respect, and cooperation.
SECTION 3. Civilian authority is, at all times, supreme over the military. The Armed Forces of the
Philippines is the protector of the people and the State. Its goal is to secure the sovereignty of the
State and the integrity of the national territory.
Explanation:
Supremacy of civilian authority over the military is -
 Inherent in a republican system. As a republican government, it is that civilian authority is above the military
and is internationally recognized. This is a traditionally accepted principle as one of the separation of powers
which is significant during periods of martial law or suspension of the writ of habeas corpus. (Article III, Sec.
15; Art. VII, Sec. 18)
 It is a safeguard against military dictatorship. To safeguard the abuses of the military civilian government like
the republican and democratic government has the authority to appoint and control the military, like the
President who is the Commander-In-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines.
SECTION 4. The prime duty of the Government is to serve and protect the people. The Government may
call upon the people to defend the State and, in the fulfillment thereof, all citizens may be required, under
conditions provided by law, to render personal military or civil service.
 Prime duty of the Government
Defense of the State by the people against foreign aggression …the government may call upon the people to
defend the State. For self-preservation and to defend its territorial honor and integrity, the Philippines can
engage in a defensive war.
Military and civil service by the people
1. Defense of State performed through an army. The joint obligations of the government and the people
cannot be performed without an army. It is apparently clear that an army should be organized, thus,
military and civil service.
2. Compulsory. Compulsory is the compulsion of citizens to render military, or civil service. Any citizen
recruits cannot refuse to render military or civil service according to law.
3. Personal. Personal means rendering of service not through another.
4. By Law. This point to preventive arbitrariness on the part of public officials to render military or civil
service.
SECTION 5. The maintenance of peace and order, the protection of life, liberty, and property, and the
promotion of the general welfare are essential for the enjoyment by all the people of the blessings of
democracy.
SECTION 6. The separation of Church and State shall be inviolable.
Under ART. II, Sec. 6 of the Philippine Constitution, “The separation of Church and State shall be inviolable.”

Principle of separation of the Church and State. - The principle simply means that the Church is not to
interfere in purely political matters or temporal aspects of man’s life and the State, in purely matters of religion
and morals, which are the exclusive concerns of the other.

• The State shall have no official religion; The State cannot set up a church, whether or not supported with
funds; nor aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another; Every person is free to
profess belief or disbelief in any religion;
• Meaning of “establishment of religion clause. - Every religious minister is free to practice his calling; and
the State cannot punish a person for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs. Preamble –
The command that Church and State be separate is not to be interpreted to mean hostility to religion.
• Respect of religion. - Our Constitution and laws exempt from taxation, properties devoted exclusively to
religious purposes; No hostility towards religion.
• The use of public money or property is not prohibited when a priest, preacher, minister, or dignitary as
such is assigned to the armed forces, or to any penal institution, or government orphanage or leprosarium;
Thursday and Friday of Holy Week, Christmas Day and Sundays are made legal holidays because of the
idea that their observance is conducive to beneficial moral results; and the law punishes polygamy and
bigamy, and certain crimes against worship are considered crimes against the fundamental laws of the
State.

SECTION 7. The State shall pursue an independent foreign policy. In its relations with other states the
paramount consideration shall be national sovereignty, territorial integrity, national interest, and the
right to self-determination.

Explanation:
 Foreign policy is a set of guidelines followed by a government of a country in order to promote its national
interest through the conduct of its relations with other countries.
 Foreign policy therefore is an instrument of domestic policy. As constituted in our constitution, the State has
to pursue an independent foreign policy, but limits its dependency from another.
 Formulation and conduct of foreign policy. - The president formulates our foreign policy principally with the
help of the Department of Foreign Affairs.
 Pursuit of an independent foreign policy. - An independent foreign policy means one that is not subordinate
or subject to nor dependent upon the support of another government. In general, our basic foreign policy
objective is to establish friendly relations with all countries of the world regardless of race, religion, ideology
 and social system and to promote as much beneficial relationship with them particularly in economic and
trade activities.
 Paramount consideration. - In its relations with other states, the paramount consideration of the Philippines
shall be national sovereignty, territorial integrity, national interest, and the right to self-determination.

SECTION 8. The Philippines, consistent with the national interest, adopts and pursues a policy of
freedom from nuclear weapons in its territory.

Explanation:
 The Philippines, as a ratifier to the Biological Weapons Convention, bans all production and import of
biological weapons in the country. It also signed the Southeast Asian Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty,
thus promoting a nuclear-weapons-free Southeast Asia.

SECTION 9. The State shall promote a just and dynamic social order that will ensure the prosperity and
independence of the nation and free the people from poverty through policies that provide adequate
social services, promote full employment, a rising standard of living, and an improved quality of life for
all.

Explanation:
 All the advanced countries that had achieved a developed status had undergone the same process of
economic development. The core of this process is the training, education and full employment of its people.
SECTION 10. The State shall promote social justice in all phases of national development.

Explanation:
 In the fulfillment of this duty, the State must give preferential attention to the welfare of the less fortunate
members of the community, those who have less in life.

SECTION 11. The State values the dignity of every human person and guarantees full respect for human
rights.

Explanation:
 …the individual enjoys certain rights which cannot be modified or taken away by the lawmaking body.”
These rights are protected or guaranteed because of the belief in the inherent dignity and basic moral worth of
every human person.
SECTION 12. The State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect and strengthen the family
as a basic autonomous social institution. It shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the
unborn from conception. The natural and primary right and duty of parents in the rearing of the youth for
civic efficiency and the development of moral character shall receive the support of the Government.

Explanation:
 Right to life of unborn from conception. According to the Catholic Moral Code, the unborn child is already
considered a human being and subject to human rights. It is the obligation of the State to protect the unborn
child.
 This provision of the Constitution is a preventive measure of the possibility of abortion being legalized by
future legislation.
SECTION 13. The State recognizes the vital role of the youth in nation-building and shall promote and
protect their physical, moral, spiritual, intellectual, and social well-being. It shall inculcate in the youth
patriotism and nationalism, and encourage their involvement in public and civic affairs.

Explanation:
 The youth as future leaders. - The youth are the backbones of the Philippine society and comprise the great
majority of our people and therefore is the concern of the State to promote and protect their well-being. It
could not be denied that today’s youth are more informed and articulate and politically informed.

SECTION 14. The State recognizes the role of women in nation-building, and shall ensure the
fundamental equality before the law of women and men.

Explanation:
 Women participation in nation-building. - It is generally accepted that the role of women both in business and
politics cannot be over-emphasized. It must be recalled that Filipino women during the past decades
especially during the colonization days took active part in nation-building, much more the current events that
women played an important role in politics.

SECTION 15. The State shall protect and promote the right to health of the people and instill health
consciousness among them.
Explanation:
 Right to health. - Since people are the basic social unit of government, it is the obligation of the State to
promote and protect the right of the people to health. Healthy people mean productivity and consciousness to
their participation in nation-building. (Article XIII, Secs. 11-13)

SECTION 16. The State shall protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced and healthful
ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature.

SECTION 17. The State shall give priority to education, science and technology, arts, culture, and sports
to foster patriotism and nationalism, accelerate social progress, and promote total human liberation and
development.

Explanation:
 Specially, the State shall protect and promote the right of all citizens to quality education at all levels.
 Towards this end, the Constitution provides the exercise of academic freedom. Academic Freedom, in
Lovejoy’s Encyclopedia of Social Sciences, is the freedom of the teacher or research worker in higher
institutions of learning to investigate and discuss the problem of his science and to express his conclusions,
whether through publication or in the instruction of students, without interference from political or
ecclesiastical authority, or from administrative officials of the institution in which he is employed, unless his
methods are found by qualified bodies of his profession to be clearly incompetent or contrary to professional
duties.

SECTION 18. The State affirms labor as a primary social economic force. It shall protect the rights of
workers and promote their welfare.

Explanation:
 The State shall afford full protection to labor, local, and overseas, organized and unorganized, and promote
full employment and equality of employment opportunities for all. It shall guarantee the rights of all workers to
self-organization, and peaceful concerted activities, including the right to strike in accordance with law. They
shall be entitled to security of tenure, humane condition of work, and a living wage. They shall also participate
in policy and decision-making processes affecting their rights and benefits as may be provided by law.
 The State shall regulate the relations between workers and employers, recognizing the right to labor to its just
share in the fruits of production and the right to enterprises to reasonable returns of investments and to
expansion and growth.
SECTION 19. The State shall develop a self-reliant and independent national economy effectively
controlled by Filipinos.

Explanation:
 Economic development is the ultimate goal of the State. - In the declaration, Section 19 outlines the
constitutional guidelines in the development of the economy as a policy in order to achieve economic self-
reliance, independent national economy and effective Filipino control of the economy. (Article XII, National
Economy and Patrimony, Sec. 1)

SECTION 20. The State recognizes the indispensable role of the private sector, encourages private
enterprise, and provides incentives to needed investments.

Explanation:
 The Public-Private Partnership (PPP) can be broadly defined as a contractual agreement between the
Government and a private firm targeted towards financing, designing, implementing and operating
infrastructure facilities and services that were traditionally provided by the public sector. It embodies optimal
risk allocation between the parties – minimizing cost while realizing project developmental objectives.

 PPP offers monetary and non-monetary advantages for the public sector. It addresses the limited funding
resources for local infrastructure or development projects of the public sector thereby allowing the allocation
of public funds for other local priorities. PPP is geared for both sectors to gain improved efficiency and project
implementation processes in delivering services to the public.
SECTION 21. The State shall promote comprehensive rural development and agrarian reform.
Explanation:
 This is the Constitutional basis of the present Agrarian Reform Program started by former Pres. Corazon
Aquino known as CARP (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program) aimed at promoting “social justice and
industrialization.”
SECTION 22. The State recognizes and promotes the rights of indigenous cultural communities within
the framework of national unity and development.

Explanation:
 “Cultural minorities” refers to that groups of Filipinos with cultural inferiority. This is so because these groups
had shied away from civilization of Philippine society.

SECTION 23. The State shall encourage non-governmental, community-based, or sectoral organizations
that promote the welfare of the nation.

Explanation:
 NGO activities include, but are not limited to, environmental, social, advocacy and human rights work. They
can work to promote social or political change on a broad scale or very locally. NGOs play a critical part in
developing society, improving communities, and promoting citizen participation.
SECTION 24. The State recognizes the vital role of communication and information in nation-building.
Explanation:
 A national policy on information and communication for development provides a necessary conceptual and
institutional framework for the coordination and integration of technical and social interventions undertaken by
institutions ranging from agricultural extension to education and health ministries, from NGOs such as
women’s resource groups and human rights activists, to private sector interests such as chambers of
commerce or banks.
 An approach that considers information and communication as a «sector» for development planning would
also help to rationalize investments as well as provide a basis for integrating information and communication
interventions within national development strategies.
SECTION 25. The State shall ensure the autonomy of local governments.
Explanation:
 Pursuant thereto, Congress enacted RA 7160,[227] otherwise known as the "Local Government Code of
1991" (LGC), wherein the policy on local autonomy had been more specifically explicated as follows:
 Sec. 2. Declaration of Policy. – (a) It is hereby declared the policy of the State that the territorial and political
subdivisions of the State shall enjoy genuine and meaningful local autonomy to enable them to attain their
fullest development as self-reliant communities and make them more effective partners in the attainment of
national goals. Toward this end, the State shall provide for a more responsive and accountable local
government structure instituted through a system of decentralization whereby local government units shall be
given more powers, authority, responsibilities, and resources. The process of decentralization shall proceed
from the National Government to the local government units.
 (c) It is likewise the policy of the State to require all national agencies and offices to conduct periodic
consultations with appropriate local government units, nongovernmental and people‘s organizations, and
other concerned sectors of the community before any project or program is implemented in their respective
jurisdictions. (Emphases and underscoring supplied)

SECTION 26. The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service, and prohibit
political dynasties as may be defined by law.

Explanation:
 In a democratic system of government, it is a constitutional policy that prohibits political dynasties. This is so
because when political dynasties exist there is no equal access to opportunities for public service.

SECTION 27. The State shall maintain honesty and integrity in the public service and take positive and
effective measures against graft and corruption.

Explanation:

SECTION 28. Subject to reasonable conditions prescribed by law, the State adopts and implements a
policy of full public disclosure of all its transactions involving public interest.
Explanation:
 The essence of democratic system of government is that the people have the right to examine all government
transactions. In a society like ours, where democratic principles are adhered to all transactions by the
government which involve public interest must be publicly presented and discussed to the Filipino people.