Is the Parliamentary System "Non-Democratic" Because People Don't Vote for the Prime Minister?

-

It's crazy but some people say that a parliamentary system isn't democratic for this reason--it's because people don't vote for the prime minister. They argue that people will vote for the parties but the prime minister isn't voted by the people. It's different from the presidential system where the president is voted by the people. However, I'm afraid that the presidential system is very prone to mob rule. Meanwhile, I wrote why the parliamentary system would be more democratic than the presidential system. I'm also getting tired of similar people who still believe that the first Marcos Administration was a parliamentary. It had a parliamentary without a parliament, which means it was a fake.

The office of the prime minister

However, becoming prime minister has never been easy. It has seven rigorous steps that are not found in the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines. How can we expect better leaders if the system itself is lacking? Sure, the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines isn't completely flawed. However, by not revising the necessary weaknesses (such as excessive restrictions) then it's really not as good as it should be. Even the first step really sounds intimidating, which is why people should see that it may have allowed President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. to sit in power, despite his questionable claim of a Harvard degree:

Step 1 

In order to become the prime minister, one needs to be an elected Member of Parliament (MP) and a member of the majority party. Considering that the PAP has formed the government, and has won every election since 1959, this article is going to assume that it is easier to rise to power with the PAP. 

But before even entering politics, certain factors increase the probability of success for someone with ministerial aspirations. A recent study of Singapore’s current ministers and their educational background found out that a typical minister is one who has:

  • Studied at an Independent or SAP secondary school
  • Went to Raffles, National JC or Hwa Chong for their tertiary studies
  • Read business or economics as an undergraduate
  • Gained a postgraduate degree, most commonly at the Harvard Kennedy School

Hence, candidates that follow this route seem to have a statistical advantage. 

In addition to this, the government’s dominant status and its access to the Public Service Commission – which gives out Singapore’s most prestigious scholarships – allows it to recruit scholars into politics. Mr. Lee Kuan Yew conceded as much, saying that “a person who has done well in Singapore’s scholarship system will eventually be spotted and headhunters from the party will look for him”. This focus on educational attainment seems to be grounded in the belief of Singaporean vulnerability. In other words, for a country where prosperity is “a result of a continuing act of will” the PAP believes that educated and capable leaders are able to come up with plans and measures to cope with a unique set of problems. An article in the Economist also contends that the PAP avoids the types of corruption seen in other one-party dominant states precisely because it constantly recruits, and in the process turfs out established figures “ruthlessly”.

One could complain all they want that the late Miriam P. Defensor-Santiago or Jose de Venecia were the best presidents, the Philippines ever had. Those people would never win by a popularity vote. Instead, we had the likes of Joseph Marcelo Ejercito aka Joseph Estrada who won instead of the more competent de Venecia. Estrada himself was a college dropout. That means the chances of Estrada becoming prime minister are very low. However, even if Estrada did finish college, read business and economic books in Ateneo de Manila, and may have gained some studies, he would still not last long. One can imagine if he faced off against de Venecia as the Opposition Leader. De Venecia may have wiped the floor out on Estrada for answering foolishly. Estrada may have already been removed by a vote of no-confidence.

Liputan6.com

For the Singapore-style parliamentary, people will elect the president. Whenever I read about the late Maria Corazon Cojuangco-Aquino, she was more fit as a symbolic head of state. Mrs. Aquino was the national symbol of unity for the EDSA Revolution. If it wasn't for the presidential system, EDSA-pwera would've never happened. In Singapore, the prime minister is selected by the symbol president, from the very dominating party:

The Head of State of Singapore is a President who is directly elected by the people, following fundamental constitutional changes in 1991. The President possesses certain veto powers over the government which the President can exercise with discretion in certain circumstances. Outside of those areas where the Constitution permits the President discretionary powers, the President must act according to Cabinet advice.

The Executive comprises the Cabinet, which is responsible for the general direction of the Government and accountable to Parliament.

The Legislature comprises the Parliament and is the legislative authority responsible for enacting legislation. More information on the history of Parliament, Parliament House and activities of the House can be obtained from its web site.

The Judiciary's function is to independently administer justice. The Judiciary is safeguarded by the Constitution.

The Prime Minister of Singapore is appointed by the President of Singapore under Article 25 of the Constitution. The President, acting on the advice of the Prime Minister, also appoints other Ministers from among the Members of Parliament.

The Prime Minister is the effective head of the executive branch of government. The Prime Minister chairs the Cabinet, which is constituted under Article 24 of the Constitution. The Cabinet is the central decision-making body of the executive government. It is an organ of state and central to Singapore's system of government. In practice, all significant decisions or actions taken by the Executive are first discussed and collectively agreed by Cabinet.

In Singapore's case, the president continues to do this according to the Singapore Legal Advice:

Ceremonial role: As the Head of State, the President officiates at state events, and represents Singapore on the global stage in cultivating and enhancing relationships with other countries. 
Community role: The President may lend weight to and promote social and charitable causes, as well as attend community events. 
Constitutional role: The President has powers provided for under the Constitution which he or she may exercise. These powers can be classified into 3 categories, namely, financial powers, powers concerning the appointment of key office holders, and miscellaneous powers.

Other positions don't get the direct vote of the people, not just prime ministers

If you're reading a boat or an airplane, none of the passengers ever vote for the captain or the pilot. If I ride a boat, the captain is promoted based on his or her competency, not because the passengers voted for him. The captain is promoted based on his or her knowledge and competency in navigation. I wonder what people will have to say if they can't vote for the captain. Maybe, they'll say that it's a totally different issue.

The Philippines, being predominantly Catholic, may want to notice that voting for the next Pope isn't a direct vote by Catholics themselves. I was born during the reign of the late John Paul II. In college, I sat through the papacy of the late Benedict XVI. The Papal Conclave voted for Benedict XVI. When Benedict XVI resigned, the Papal Conclave's final votation was for Francis, the incumbent Pope. I was wondering why some Filipino Catholics are saying it's not democratic if it's not a direct people's vote. Never did Filipino Catholics cast their ballots for the next Pope! So why are they protesting at the idea that the prime minister is not by direct vote? 

In the corporate setting, the chairman of the Board of Directors is never voted by all the employees. Only shareholders with voting rights can vote for the chairperson. If certain employees are subject to the employee shareholder status--only they can vote. If not, the other employees who aren't in that status have no voting rights. Maybe, a branch manager can have a voting right but not yet for those who have just started working. Also, customers of a certain corporation have no voting rights either. I can eat in Jollibee all I want but I'll never have voting rights. I have to be a shareholder of Jollibee, in order to have that right!

With these in mind, why are some people scared that the prime minister isn't voted by the people and only the parties into the parliament? 

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