Skip to main content

Is the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines, the Only Constitution That Institutionalizes, "Public Office is a Public Trust"?

 

It's time to revisit one of the favorite people for people against constitutional amendments or reforms, namely Atty. Hilario G. Davide Jr. (read here). Yes, the same guy who was also related by marriage to Mrs. Thelma Jimenea-Chiong. Davide's school of thought is in the "uniqueness" of the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines as if it's the "best constitution in the world". Davide would mention that the 1987 Constitution is the only one he knows would be the best. A shame really that Davide himself, like Kishore Mahbubani, was once a United Nations representative, and he's saying such stuff. 

Article XI of the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines writes this in Section 1:

Section 1. Public office is a public trust. Public officers and employees must, at all times, be accountable to the people, serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty, and efficiency; act with patriotism and justice, and lead modest lives.

Okay, I get it. However, the problem is in the claim that only the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines has it. With the incident where outgoing Japan Prime Minister Fumio Kishida--I was urged to read into the Constitution of Japan, which is older than the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines. Here's the preamble of the Constitution of Japan, which came even before the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines, which went into effect on May 3, 1947:

We, the Japanese people, acting through our duly elected representatives in the National Diet, determined that we shall secure for ourselves and our posterity the fruits of peaceful cooperation with all nations and the blessings of liberty throughout this land, and resolved that never again shall we be visited with the horrors of war through the action of government, do proclaim that sovereign power resides with the people and do firmly establish this Constitution. Government is a sacred trust of the people, the authority for which is derived from the people, the powers of which are exercised by the representatives of the people, and the benefits of which are enjoyed by the people. This is a universal principle of mankind upon which this Constitution is founded. We reject and revoke all constitutions, laws, ordinances, and rescripts in conflict herewith.

Although stated differently, the Constitution of Japan still institutionalizes the doctrine that public office is a public trust. It states this differently by focusing on the government as the sacred trust of the Japanese people. People who still quote Davide on Facebook need to look at the constitutions of other countries. 

A person born way before Davide was, already said something similar, and it's Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson was a framer of the American Constitution, which has been amended 27 times! In Executive Order 12674, we can also read this part proving Davide wrong again: 

Public service is a public trust, requiring you to place loyalty to the Constitution, the laws, and ethical principles above private gain.

From the Accountability Round Table, David Solomon also emphasizes that the public office is a public trust. Once again, one should credit Jefferson than Davide for that thought! This is something Solomon wrote about the public office as a public trust:

This heading encapsulates two concepts used by judges and commentators to describe the obligations and duties of those elected or appointed to public office – that is, members of parliament, officials and others who discharge public duties. The first – public office as a public trust – is favoured by some judges who take the word ‘trust’ in its strictly legal sense, involving fiduciary obligations under equitable doctrines. Former Chief Justice of the High Court, Robert French has referred to the ‘public trust metaphor’, saying the notion of public office as a public trust is an old one, ‘borrowed … from the principles of equity which define the duties of trustees’.[1] The second – public office is a public trust – uses ‘public trust’ as a special kind of trust, involving obligations not necessarily the same as those that arise with private trusts. This is not to say that the ‘public trust’ is not a legal concept: as will be shown below, it is the basis on which successful criminal prosecutions have been brought against some politicians in recent years, most notably, the former NSW Minister, Eddie Obeid.

I'll share some thoughts from the Public Service Division of Singapore. I bet Mahbubani would probably facepalm if he knew Davide said such stuff. Here's a quote that Singapore also believes that the public office is a public trust which was written last 2013, before Davide said it in 2018:

The Government emphasises very strongly the integrity of the Public Service and the public’s trust in public officers. We expect public officers to uphold the highest standards of integrity and professionalism. The Government is thus concerned about the recent spate of cases involving public officers. Although the statistics do not show an uptrend, we are concerned that these cases should not undermine public confidence, or convey the impression that standards have slackened over time. This is why we are prosecuting the cases vigorously.

It would show that several opponents of constitutional reform in the Philippines, tend to have very limited sources. Is it trying to keep up with having a Pinoy Pride Constitution or what? Are they using Davide like some all-knowing and all-powerful source? Why are they so limited to Davide and the Monsod couple? It's easy to shoot me down and say, "Shut up! You're not a constitutionalist." We're already in the digital age or the information age. Today, you can either subscribe for information or get whatever free information is available. I ordered From Third World to First on Shopee last 2022. Why are these people still stuck on quoting Davide et al on social media? 

To further shoot Davide's arguments against amending the 1987 Constitution, Jefferson also said: 

The question Whether one generation of men has a right to bind another, seems never to have been started either on this or our side of the water… (But) between society and society, or generation and generation there is no municipal obligation, no umpire but the law of nature. We seem not to have perceived that, by the law of nature, one generation is to another as one independant nation to another…

On similar ground it may be proved that no society can make a perpetual constitution, or even a perpetual law. The earth belongs always to the living generation…

Every constitution, then, and every law, naturaly expires at the end of 19. years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force and not of right.

We've seen people live and die. If I'm going to count the number of dead ex-presidents from Emilio Aguinaldo up to when I was in high school, not so many. Maria Corazon S. Cojuangco-Aquino and Fidel V. Ramos were still alive when I was in school. Now, both Mrs. Aquino and Ramos have joined the list of dead former presidents. Benigno Simeno C. Aquino Jr. died in 2021. Times change and as Jefferson wrote, there can be no perpetual constitution. That's why the U.S. Constitution has been amended 27 times! What about the 1987 Constitution? It wasn't even meant to be the "forever constitution". That's why Article XVII exists! 

As Davide is saying things, his dying relevance isn't because of his age. Instead, it's because Davide refuses to make adjustments when necessary (read here). In Tagalog, I'd say it is, "Tumatanda pero walang pinagtandaan." In short, it's growing old but never learning anything! 

Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

A Critical Review of "The Flor Contemplacion Story"

VIVA Films uploaded The Flor Contemplacion Story  on YouTube last  February 13, 2024, at 9:00 A.M.. Yes, I didn't notice it since I saw it before, and it was one incredibly awful film.  The film has been remastered into HD to fit with the times. However, in the age of social media and the like, any old piece of truthful information can be later revealed. It's not about the age of the information but the truthfulness of it. In this information age, one can easily upload any undiscovered truth in the past. That also includes that one of Cebu's bad boys in the past, Francisco Juan "Paco" G. Larrañaga, was  innocent of the crime involving the Chiong sisters. In 2018, VIVA Films also released a movie called Jacqueline Comes Home which I may watch and review. Though I've already seen Give Up Tomorrow, which has been more objective since there was evidence that Paco was indeed in Manila and that real perpetrators haven't been found. Normally, the best way to rev...
Read more

Revisiting the "Iconic" Torture Scene in "The Flor Contemplacion Story"

Flor Contemplacion has been dead for more than a decade. However, we still have had 30 years of Flor Contemplacion Crybabies spreading fake news about her "innocence" . The sentiment was pretty much that Flor was innocent, there was some hatred for Singapore going on, and the narrative was that Flor was a saint. I thought about this torture scene (not available in the free edition  on VIVA Films' YouTube channel), but it's available if you either rent or buy the film on YouTube Movies. It's probably because of the Terms and Conditions that YouTube allows for free-for-all movies. You can rent the movie for PHP 180.00 (SD) if you don't want to own the film, but want to see the uncut experience. It's still that clear despite being SD.  For some indicators, if you want to see the paid  movie vs. the free movie, here are some differences between the free movie from VIVA Films vs. the paid version: 1:27:01 timemark (free movie) is also found in 1:27:01--1:27:02 ...
Read more

The Fate of the Late Flor Contemplacion's Family

PEH.ph Updated: March 5, 2026 Some time ago, I wrote a critical review of the movie called The Flor Contemplacion Story . I rewatched it because it was uploaded on YouTube by VIVA Films themselves. The fate of the family of the late Flor just got worse. After the rightful execution --I'll share whatever data I got from the Internet. Take note that I'm just another writer, not a big-time historian. So what really happened? One "sequel" to the movie was given in Magpakailanman (Whenever) on GMA-7. It was when Flor's only daughter, Russell Contemplacion, who got pregnant at 17 years old with her estranged, irresponsible partner, gave the details of what happened. Unlike the "hit movie", the episode showed that her father, Efren, her brothers Sandrex and the twins Jonjon and Joel (who starred as themselves in the film) got into shady dealings. Sandrex even died in jail on September 1, 2012, though the cause may not have been revealed until this very day. It...
Read more

Better Think Twice Before Defunding the Police

There are stupid people on Facebook who always say, "Defund the police!" Think about defunding the police? Well, this video from San Francisco shows just how "wonderful" society can get when you defund the police. The call to defund the police has been called because of abusive cops . I'm not going to deny that there are abusive cops. However, the profession of a policeman as well as the government having the function of police is another. Are we going to abolish the government entirely because of some corrupt politicians?  We need to get the facts straight about what happens when the police is defunded . Those who are calling to abolish the police have no idea what they're getting themselves into. Yet, we've got fools such as the gossiping Facebook page, the Philippine Anti-Fascist League (which I heard is spearheaded by a bitter youth and some rebellious youths) even made this very stupid diagram... The police are needed to protect all the cups. Don...
Read more

What's the Use of Complaining About Celebrities and Political Dynasties Running for Politics While DEFENDING Presidential and Rejecting Parliamentary?

2025 is just around the corner for the midterm elections . People keep emphasizing the need to "defend the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines" for any amendments whatsoever. If that were true then we really need to remove Article XVII entirely if the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines was meant to be set in stone (read here ). Several camps whether it's PDP-Laban supporters, Liberal Party of the Philippines supporters, Uniteam supporters, etc.--I can expect social media mudslinging at its finest . I keep talking about the need to amend or even replace the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines. However, they keep acting like it's the best constitution in the world, they cite Atty. Hilario G. Davide Jr. (and others like the Monsods) to idolatrous levels , and when I talk about the parliamentary system--I can expect the whole, "Boohoo! It will never work because we already tried it under Marcos! The proof was Cesar Virata!" However, I wrote a refute on that ...
Read more