Skip to main content

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


Some people on Facebook continually spread the lie, "The parliamentary form of government 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

The Three Drug Mules Executed in China Last January 30, 2011

Al Jazeera Today is March 30, 2026. It has been 15 years since the execution of the three drug mules. Their names are Sally Ordinario-Villanueva, Ramon Credo (who was cremated in China shortly after his execution), and Elizabeth Batain (whose face was never revealed, perhaps due to the loved ones requesting more privacy). Contrary to what one might think, the three drug mules weren't a trio. Instead, they were three separate cases that just happened to be scheduled to die on the same day.  They weren't a trio. They had a temporary reprieve when  former vice president Jejomar Binay tried to save them . Villanueva, together with Ramon Credo and Elizabeth Batain, was scheduled to be executed last month but got a reprieve after Vice President Jejomar Binay traveled to China and personally appealed to Chinese authorities. BBC   News even gave such a short news report, that I felt compelled to copy/paste the whole time as a reference here: Philippine Vice-President Jejomar Bin...

Mahatma Gandhi's Use of Tax Evasion, as a Form of Protest?

The 40th anniversary of the 1986 EDSA Revolution came last month. Benigno Simeon "Ninoy" A. Aquino Jr. said these words: "According to Gandhi, the willing sacrifice of the innocent is the most powerful answer to insolent tyranny that has yet been conceived by God and man." Basically, EDSA 1986 can't claim to be all too unique. Ninoy had made Gandhi an inspiration. The dictatorship of the First Marcos Administration may be over . However, the Philippines is still stuck in another dictatorship called the dictatorship of the Filipino First Policy . It does sound stupid, but even without Marcos or foreign colonization (please stop mistaking foreign investment with foreign invasion ), there's still some oppression to fight. You can think about decades of overly high taxes and restrictions on foreign investments.  Now, we need to look at the historical context in which Gandhi's "tax evasion" occurred. According to a Jagran Josh   article written by ...

Wrong Assumption: Those Who Wish to Reform the 1987 Constitution are Automatically Marcos Loyalists and Diehard Duterte Supporters

Orion Perez Dumdum, founder of the CoRRECT Movement was featured in the INQUIRER.net page. It's no surprise that there would be detractors every now and then. Some people still believe that the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines is "inviolate". If that were so then why does Article XVII exist that the constitution is open for amendments ? It's no surprise that some idiot alleged that Orion is actually a Marcos supporter. The arguments by the anti-reforms are basically Nom Sequitur and Ad Hominem . The use of personal attacks and illogical conclusions are common argument flaws. In fact, one just needs to understand the poor Filipino logic . I remember all the stupidity going on. It's funny such people accuse me of Ad Hominems while doing Ad Hominems themselves! What I'd like to focus on is the Nom Sequitur. Its definition is: 1 : an inference (see inference sense 1) that does not follow from the premises (see premise entry 1 sense 1) specifically : a fallacy...

The EDSA Revolution of 1986 Would've Never Happened if People were Stuck in Nostalgia

  It's something that I read crybaby comments online where people are saying, "Making EDSA a special working day is making us forget the glory of EDSA." Please, let me remind people that even 10 years later , neither the late Lee Kuan Yew's birthday nor his death anniversary has become a national holiday in Singapore! Singapore simply honored LKY's birthday by working on that day. I was laughing at the toxic Facebook page called We Are Millennials. What truly made me think that these people are stuck in nostalgia is that EDSA 1986 would never have been possible if the Filipinos were stuck in nostalgia . I remember talks about how the first Marcos administration was built on these two pillars. The first pillar was information control . The other pillar was toxic positivity. I remember back in 1995 when the social studies teacher talked about how he thought that Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. was a "good president" due to the long holidays. However, the holidays ...

How a Deaf Beethoven, Composed Wonderful Music That Survived Beyond His Grave

  A composer who was deaf? That's really something to think about. Ludwig Van Beethoven gradually lost his hearing. It may have been caused by a lack of knowledge about lead poisoning at that time. The ZME Science gives this interesting detail on how Beethoven coped with his gradual hearing loss: Despite living in pain, Beethoven did not give up. However, he had a helping hand. In order to continue composing and playing music, Beethoven stumbled across a physical phenomenon that is central to hearing: bone conduction . At the time, scientists understood very little about how human hearing works. But despite the fact that his ears left him, he could still hear himself playing music by placing one end of a wooden stick onto his piano and clenching on the other end with his teeth. When notes were struck, the vibrations from the piano were transferred to his jaw, and from there directly to his inner ear. Miraculously, he could hear again! Bone conduction was born. Sound is nothing mor...