Remembering Ninoy's Words, "We Had a Parliamentary Form of Government WITHOUT a Parliament!"

-


Some people on Facebook continually spread the lie, "Parliamentary will never work because the Marcos Sr. years were a parliament!" The idea is incredibly stupid when you realize some old information that they probably ignored. It's a shame that some boomers refuse to surf the Internet to find decades-old information that would prove it otherwise. Come on, are they even too lazy to order Third World to First written by the late Lee Kuan Yew and only use it to criticize the Marcoses? 

With the late Benigno Simeon "Ninoy" A. Aquino Jr., I really must highlight that he actually spilled out much truth in this speech done in Los Angeles in 1981:
And so my friends, we started with an American-type constitution, we move to a British-type constitution. We had a parliamentary form of government without a parliament. Until 1978, we did not have a parliament. And yet, we were supposed to be a parliamentary from of government. And Mr. Marcos said, “I declared martial law to save democracy.” But by saving democracy, he killed it.

And so my friends, it was not until 1978 that the Batasan was convened. Now, what do we hear? Mr. Marcos once again, is up again to his new tricks. He said, “I lifted martial law but I think we should now elect a president by direct vote.” But there is not such thing. Under the new constitution now, the president is purely ceremonial. Tagabukas lang ng pinto, tagatanggap lamang ng credential ng ambassador. (Translation: The one who opens the door, the one who receives the credentials). Purely ceremonial elected by parliament, he is not elected by the people. The power of the government under a parliamentary system lies within the Prime Minister. And the Prime Minister must be elected by parliament, and this prime minister may be removed from office, if there is a vote of no confidence. That is the British type. So what did Mr. Marcos do in 1976? He amended the constitution and said, “I, Ferdinand Marcos, as Prime Minister/President, may dissolve parliament, but parliament cannot dissolve me.” And then he said, “Parliament may legislate, but if I think they’re not doing their job, I will also legislate.” So now we have two parliaments, Mr. Marcos and parliament. And it’s costing us 300 million to have that tuta (puppy) parliament, what’s the use? If Mr. Marcos is doing all the legislation, why keep these 200 guys? So what do they do? They change the name of the street of Divisoria. They change the name of a school. But when it comes to public decrees, like Public Order Code 1737, only Mr. Marcos signs it. And so we have a situation, where we have a man who can dissolve parliament, but parliament cannot dissolve him. And under the Amendment No. 6 of the 1973 constitution, Mr. Marcos is a president-for-life. And now, all of a sudden, two weeks ago, sabi niya, “I have lifted martial law but I now want to go to the Filipino people, and I want their mandate of 8 years. I will defend martial law. Anybody who oppose it can oppose me. I want to go to the people and get their mandate.” But how can you get the mandate? There’s no such thing in the constitution. Sagot ni Marcos, “Let us amend it.” So now, we are going to amend again the constitution. And so we ask Mr. Marcos, but what form of government will we have? “Ahh,” sabi niya, “I want a president with powers.” What happened to the parliamentary British? Forget it. Let us now go to France. Let us have a French model. And so my friends, it is like the odyssey of Jules Verne “80 Days Around the World”. We started with America. We went to England. Now we are going to France. Under the new proposal of Mr. Marcos, we will now have a president and a prime minister. But the prime minister will be appointed by the president. And this president now will be all powerful. It will not be the American type; it will be the French type. And I suppose two years from now, when he gets tired of that, he will go to the Russian type, whatever that is. And so he announced, “I will take anybody, including Aquino.” And so, I was not inclined to oblige him, but then he added, “Pero,” sabi niya, ‘”hindi pwede si Aquino, underage.” And so naturally I went to the book, I said how come I was underage? I thought I was already 48, because the rule before, to become President of the Philippines in 1935, all you had to do is to be 40 years old. And so I looked at the book, tama nga naman si Marcos, they’ve increased the age to fifty. Kapos na naman ako ng dalawa. Of course, Mr. Marcos said, “Pero kung talagang gusto ni Aquino (But if Aquino really wants); if he really wants to come home and to fight me, I will oblige him. I will also have the constitution amended for him.” So I told Mr. Marcos and his people, “Forget me, Mr. President. I am through with your politics. Hindi na po ako kako sasama sa inyong kalokohan. (I'm not involved in your foolishness). Nagtayo kayo ng isang lapian, ang pangalan KBL, Kilusan ng Bagong Lipunan, mali po kako ‘yan, Kilusan ng mga Bingi at Loko-loko. (I decided to create my organization with the name KBL. Movement of the New Nation. Wrong. It means Movement of the deaf and the crazy). Hindi na ako kako sasama diyan. (I'm not joining it). Ako’y tapos na, I told them. I am through with politics, I said. I would just want to live in peace now. But I wrote Mr. Marcos and I told him, “While it’s true Mr. Marcos,” I said, “that after my 8 years in prison I have lost appetite for office, I am no longer seeking the presidency of this land, I’m not seeking any office in this country, but believe me,” I said, “When I tell you, that while I have vowed never to enter the political arena again, I shall dedicate the last drop of my blood to the restoration of freedom and the dismantlement of your martial law.”

The details that Aquino Jr. gave had given details needed as to why the Marcos "parliament" wasn't really a parliament. Yet, you've got some stubborn boomers who still insist that the Marcos years were a real parliament (read here). To outline the details presented by Aquino Jr., here's why we couldn't be a real parliamentary system:

  1. How can the Philippines have a parliamentary government that has no parliament? 
  2. At one point, Marcos Sr. was both president and prime minister at the same time. That's a far cry from parliamentary countries with presidents where the president is purely ceremonial? A trip to Singapore today will reveal that Halimah Yacob is pretty much a national symbol of unity. 
  3. How can Marcos Sr. be running a real parliament if he's making it, "I can dissolve parliament but parliament can't dissolve me?" That's really ridiculous because a real parliamentary government can kick out a prime minister through a vote of no confidence. 
  4. Marcos Sr. later made the presidential office "all-powerful" and Cesar Virata was nothing more than a state executive. 
  5. In short, the whole constitutional amendment was pretty much 80 Days Around the World. 
The way LKY described Virata really hits how the latter was not even a leader to the Filipino people:

As soon as all our aides left, I went straight to the point, that no bank was going to lend him any money. They wanted to know who was going to succeed him if anything were to happen to him; all the bankers could see that he no longer looked healthy. Singapore banks had lent US$8 billion of the US$25 billion owing. The hard fact was they were not likely to get repayment for some 20 years. He countered that it would be only eight years. I said the bankers wanted to see a strong leader in the Philippines who could restore stability, and the Americans hoped the election in May would throw up someone who could be such a leader. I asked whom he would nominate for the election. He said Prime Minister Cesar Virata. I was blunt. Virata was a nonstarter, a first-class administrator but no political leader; further, his most politically astute colleague, defense minister Juan Ponce Enrile, was out of favour. Marcos was silent, then he admitted that succession was the nub of the problem. If he could find a successor, there would be a solution. As I left, he said, “You are a true friend.” I did not understand him. It was a strange meeting.

With medical care, Marcos dragged on. Cesar Virata met me in Singapore in January the following year. He was completely guileless, a political innocent. He said that Mrs. Imelda Marcos was likely to be nominated as the presidential candidate. I asked how that could be when there were other weighty candidates, including Juan Ponce Enrile and Blas Ople, the labor minister. Virata replied it had to do with “flow of money; she would have more money than other candidates to pay for the votes needed for nomination by the party and to win the election. He added that if she were the candidate, the opposition would put up Mrs. Cory Aquino and work up the people’s feelings. He said the economy was going down with no political stability.

Virata was even considered to succeed Marcos Sr. at one point. Yet, LKY saw Virata as someone who was a nonstarter, a first-class administrator but he was no political leader. LKY led the Singapore parliament for a long time and knew what it was to be a prime minister. LKY was a starter, a first-class administrator, and the political leader of Singapore. In short, LKY wasn't impressed with Virata's title as prime minister. Any country can have a prime minister and still be a presidential country.

In this information age, much older information that we may have never found in our history textbooks can be found. Today's news is tomorrow's history. We can get more access to better books through the Internet. I can go to the Internet to look for a good book. I can now order good books from Shopee or Lazada. I can't rely too much on my past civics and culture books. New information is generated daily even from the decades past. It's like how I ended up knowing that both Hubert Webb and Paco Larrañaga were both innocent of the crimes they were falsely accused of. 

It's time to let these old pieces of information fly. The gossip was the Marcos Sr. years were a parliamentary system. The truth is it wasn't even a real parliamentary form of government. 

Popular posts from this blog

Was Cesar Virata's Position as "Prime Minister" the Best Proof That a Parliamentary System Won't Work in the Philippines?

-
Image
Kahimyang Project It's often said by some of the now-old folks that the Philippines was once under a parliamentary system. I had some insults from a close-minded political scientist, some former dancer of an OFW, and others whenever I said, "We must shift to the parliamentary system!" They would say, "Look stupid! We already had a parliamentary system back in the Marcos Years!" I ask for the proof and they keep using Cesar Virata. By using insults, they start to make me doubt their credibility. It's because insults and other forms of Ad Hominem attacks are often the favorite tools of sore losers .  I would like to give this an example. One of their best sources is Cesar Virata. At first, it sounds like, "Okay, we had a parliamentary system." However, we must take note that not every country that has a prime minister, is under a parliamentary system. Some of them are still presidential in nature with parliamentary features . I wonder if Mrs. Raissa
Read more

Shifting to the Parliamentary System is Better than Banning Political Dynasties

-
Image
Some Filipinos who are totally against charter change (or constitutional reform) always use political dynasties as an excuse. It's not enough that some of them should keep saying that economic charter change will mean "selling the Philippines to foreigners". Please, if they realize it, developed countries allow 100% FDI ownership--allowing foreigners to own 100% of their business . Back on the topic, I would like to discuss political dynasties and why they're not necessarily bad . Some people keep talking about the anti-political dynasty law--that is one per family. It might be because they still think the first Marcos Administration was a parliamentary system. Please, evidence has been gathered that it was never a parliamentary system, to begin with (read here )!  It's easy to talk about political dynasties. Some people were citing President Ferdinand "Bongbong" R. Marcos Jr. as a member of a political dynasty. Some people also cite the Dutertes. I even
Read more

REAL TALK: The Liberal Party of the Philippines Can ONLY Become The Genuine Opposition Under A Genuine Parliamentary Constitution

-
Image
PhilStar It's difficult to talk with people who are still comfortable with what they already know, right? However, the term Dilawan need not be drowned in negativity, but it can be drowned in negativity if the brand gets marred in a popularity-based political system. The Philippines currently uses the presidential system. If we were in a parliamentary system right now--chances are Ferdinand "Bongbong" R. Marcos Jr. wouldn't be prime minister due to the difficulty involved as explained in  " How to Become Singapore's Prime Minister, Explained in 7 Steps ". That means all candidates would need to do the following: Study and specialize Wait for the call Tea sessions and panels Take a test Perform well as an MP Win the trust of your peers Prepare for office The Dilawans can call themselves the genuine opposition, march in their proud yellow t-shirts, and more. However, under a presidential system, there's no real opposition, and the platform of any party
Read more

Rare Interview Footage of Ninoy Aquino and Doy Laurel in Japan, Reveal Marcos Years Were NEVER a Legitimate Parliamentary System

-
Image
People who are afraid of shifting to a parliamentary system tend to use the Marcos Years as proof. Fearmongers on Facebook are still up to their old tricks, using the Marcos Years to say, "No to cha-cha!" Never mind that a new constitution had to be written after 1986. If anything, Article XVII was inserted in the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines because it was never meant to be set in stone. Also, the 1973 Constitution of the Philippines was illegal .  Here's a video of the late Benigno Simeon "Ninoy" A. Aquino Jr. and the late Salvador "Doy" Laurel. The words of Laurel here show the problem of Marcos' "parliament". Marcos' "parliament" lacked legitimacy . Where was the sporting chance of the Opposition? If it was a real parliamentary system, Ninoy would've been leading the Opposition in weekly debates against the Marcos-led government. That is if the late Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. was the prime minister. If Cesar Vir
Read more

Lee Kuan Yew and Mahathir Mohamad: Just a Matter of Strong Leadership Without a Good System?

-
Image
Jakarta Globe It's very easy to talk about how we need character change only, not a charter change. I say that having a charter change (better termed constitutional reform ) will lead to character change. The old saying of some boomers goes, "It's common sense that nothing is wrong with the system, just the people running the system." However, when I ask something like, "If that's so then why do other nations have better leaders? What about Mahathir Mohamad and Lee Kuan Yew?" Their answer is, "Well, that's proof that the system isn't defective, it's just the leader." This can also come from people who believe what Atty. Hilario G. Davide Jr. said that there's nothing wrong with the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines, that it's the "best in the world". The arguments are clearly illogical at best . Some say that the parliamentary system worked in Malaysia and Singapore because those heading it aren't corrupt. T
Read more

The Vizconde Massacre and Trial by "Trust Me Bro"?

-
Image
As Christmas approaches, another case worth revisiting for history vs. gossip is the Vizconde Massacre. I watched Crime Investigation Asia uploaded on YouTube. I wrote about the documentary Give Up Tomorrow -- a documentary that explores the irregularities while pursuing justice for the late Chiong sisters, Jacqueline Jimenea Chiong and Marijoy Jimenea Chiong. I feel compelled to write about the Vizconde Massacre. For more than 10 years, I used to believe that Hubert Jeffry Pagaspas Webb, son of Freddie Webb, was guilty. It turns out that according to Crime Investigation Asia --it was really a trial by gossip . In my case, I want to call it a trial of Trust Me Bro.  I still read comments about how footage of Hubert in the States could've been "easily tampered". Yet, those who comment haven't presented the evidence. I guess if I asked for their evidence, they'll just say, "Trust me bro!" Granted, photo editing was still in its infancy back then so how cou
Read more

Was the Late John Regala Interviewed by the Directors of "Give Up Tomorrow"?

-
Image
The passing away of John Regala hit today. I remembered a film called Animal (2004) in  which the original title was originally Butakal meaning male pig. Regala starred as Jaco Lozano--an obvious caricature of Juan Francisco Gonzales Larrañaga aka Paco. Strangely enough, neither the Larrañagas nor the Osmeñas were heard to have ever filed a case against the late director Toto Natividad. Instead, it was the Chiong family that filed a lawsuit against Natividad. I did write about  whether or not Natividad himself was interviewed by the directors of Give Up Tomorrow . As mentioned, there was over 400 hours worth of footage and over 100 interviews done . Both Marty Syjuco and Michael Collins may have interviewed not only Natividad, the late Tony Calvento but also Regala himself since he played the film's main antagonist . In 2018, we had an incident when Niño Muhlach apologized to Paco for the portrayal in The Calvento Files . Apparently, Niño himself wasn't interviewed but was prob
Read more

Trust Me Bro: The 1987 Constitution is the Best in the World!

-
I may be no lawyer or constitutionalist but it's time to use common sense . I'm afraid common sense is hardly taught or even encouraged in schools. Right now, I want to do this provocative entry to ask, "Fact or gossip: Is the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines the best in the world?" Yes, you read that right. Hilario G. Davide Jr. said that last 2018 and I'm still laughing at it. I've decided to write this common-sense post to actually contest the idea that, "The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines is the best in the world."  I'm laughing at some things Davide Jr. had said such as, "It' is the only institution in the world where the public office is a public trust." However, this man is terribly wrong because, around the world, we see the doctrine where public office is a public trust. Thomas Jefferson also said that public office is public trust -- way before Davide Jr. was born into the world! I really laughed at their claim o
Read more

Ifugao OFWs in Taiwan and Discovering More About One's Common Austronesian Roots

-
Image
I was doing some research on Taiwan finding out that the natives are indeed Austronesians . It seems that Indonesians and Malaysians may have also settled in Taiwan aside from the Philippines. A look at Mt. Alishan and Banaue Rice Terraces have a similarity. Taiwan has its famous tea terraces. Banaue has its famous rice terraces. Both are cultural heritages that must be preserved! I soon found an article which Ifugao OFWs in Taiwan. Not surprisingly, these Ifugao OFWs can point out several things that are pretty similar. An article called " A Gotad Picnic With Ifugaos Living in Taiwan " would tell of Armand Camhol, an Ifugao OFW, who met with other Ifugaos in Taiwan. Gotad is a thanksgiving festival for the Ifugaos. The News Lens International Edition What was noted by Armand at the end of the article is: The people of Ifugao value hospitality, and as a symbol of friendship, they shared their holiday with their invited guests, who, in return, sang, joined the dances, and made
Read more

Can Anti-Reformists Prove to the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy That the Marcos Regime was a Real Parliamentary?

-
Image
The previous comparison of the CoRRECT Movement was between the late businessman John Gokongwei Jr. and Hilario Davide Jr., a public policy expert. The comparison is pretty much apples and oranges which is why Kishore Mahbubani, founder and former dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (LKYSPP) would make more sense. It's not enough to say something. If the source is just merely Merkado CTTO (read here ) then I have every right to doubt it. I tried asking for empirical evidence  they have that the 1973 Constitution of the Philippines was a parliamentary government. The only evidence they have was that there was a prime minister and his name was Cesar Virata. However, further details reveal that Virata was a non-starter and a no leader. From Third World to First , Virata was even considered a candidate to replace the late Ferdinand E. Marcos, a president with powers . A challenge that I want to pose to people who still insist that the Marcos Years were indeed under a parli
Read more