As the EDSA 86 anniversary draws near, I'm going to say some important things. First and foremost, I don't dismiss what EDSA 86 did and its legacy to the world. However, what I'm going to highlight is that EDSA 86 should never be a reason to go against charter change or constitutional reform. It would be a time talk more about why the Marcos Regime was a terrible time to be alive! People like Raissa Espinosa-Robles may talk a certain degree of truth about the Marcos Regime. However, Mrs. Robles is also spreading half-truths such as the "Marcos Parliament".
I would like to review this quote that the Inquirer gave, as spoken by Mrs. Robles:
Who is the most likely candidate for President Duterte’s Prime Minister and successor under the parliamentary-federal government being hatched by his administration?
It is former Sen. Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr., according to veteran journalist Raissa Robles.
Speaking at a forum at the University of the Philippines School of Economics, Robles, a correspondent for the South China Morning Post and author of the book “Marcos Martial Law: Never Again,” said the son of the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos was the likely choice of Duterte, a “Marcos loyalist and admirer of the strongman.”
“Who do you think Duterte’s Prime Minister and successor is likey to be? Most probably Ferdinand ‘Bongbong’ Marcos,” she said on Friday.
Robles cited a remark made by Marcos during the vice presidential debate in April last year, in which he disclosed something that he said Duterte had told him.
“Mayor Digong said, if the problem of crime is not solved in three to six months, he will give the presidency to Bongbong. He didn’t say he will give it to Senator Alan (Cayetano),” Marcos said. Cayetano was then Duterte’s running mate.
Marcos, who lost to Vice President Leni Robredo but is contesting her electoral victory, was the running mate of the late Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago.
Robles drew parallels between Duterte’s and Marcos’ brand of leadership, noting how the President seemed keen to undermine the legacy of the 1987 People Power Revolution that toppled the Marcos dictatorship.
“Why does the Duterte administration look at Edsa that way? Perhaps because Edsa is all about making abhorrent leaders accountable and booting them out if they abuse their power. Perhaps because President Duterte is a Marcos loyalist, and an admirer of the strongman,” she said.
It seems the President’s dream is “to bring back various aspects of the Marcos rule,” she added.
Under the planned parliamentary-federal model that was presented recently to Congress leaders, the government would have a “dual executive,” Robles said, quoting University of Santo Tomas assistant professor Edmund Tayao.
This means the President would be directly elected by the people for a five-year term and be able to run for reelection for another five-year term.
“At the same time, there would be a Prime Minister who is a member of Parliament who will serve as head of government. He will be elected by fellow members of Parliament. He will run the day-to-day operations of government,” Robles said.
She said such a setup was a copy of the Marcos-Cesar Virata tandem, “where Marcos was a strong president and Virata was the workhorse Prime Minister who ran the government.”
“Under such a setup, what you will have is a very strong President without checks and balances,” she said.
The Cesar Virata card (read about that here) is often used to oppose the move to go from presidential to parliamentary. In fact, I found this screenshot on Facebook (I will not show the person who shared this to protect his/her privacy). I would like to share this serious disinformation:
What's with the "I could go on." Does she think younger people aren't smart enough to do some online research or library research? Thailand is still under a constitutional monarchy. Myanmar was run under military junta. A Google search and some diligent screening would prove people wrong. Is this woman that arrogant to admit that she could be wrong? Does Mrs. Robles think that she's right because she's got long expertise?
I must wonder if Mrs. Robles has even read what Lee Kuan Yew said about Cesar Virata
Has she even read From Third World to First written by the same person? As I read it, I actually landed on more proof as to why the Philippines never had a parliamentary form of government!
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 already described by LKY as bluntly as possible. A real prime minister saw a prime minister in name only. Virata was even considered to succeed Marcos as president! How is it that a prime minister is selected to become a presidential successor? Virata met LKY in Singapore. Virata was an executive assistant, like prime ministers in a presidential environment. South Korea is presidential with parliamentary features.
If we're going to really look into any parliamentary system with a president, the president is purely ceremonial. Benigno Simeon "Ninoy" A. Aquino Jr. even mentioned those facts! Marcos altered the provisions a lot that there was no room for a parliamentary system! "We had a parliamentary form of government without a parliament!" is a "nice way" of saying, "It was a sham and a hoax." Ninoy and Salvador "Doy" Laurel even showed Marcos' lack of legitimacy. Those details are indeed crucial. I wonder if Mrs. Robles cherry picks or she just couldn't see those details? Raising up Virata isn't going to convince me, because LKY knew what he saw. Virata was a nonstarter, a first class administrator but no political leader. The prime minister is supposed to be a political leader!
Has Mrs. Robles even read Singapore Legal Advice and other sources from parliamentary countries?
 |
| Liputan6.com |
What are the role and powers of the Singapore President?As stated on the Istana’s official website, the President plays 3 crucial roles: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.
The president would be purely ceremonial. The prime minister is the head of government. If Mrs. Robles made some further readings, she'd probably discover that it's never easy to become the next prime minister in Singapore either! We have these seven steps to follow:
- 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
Ramos knew well the difficulties of trying to govern with strict American-style separation of powers. The senate had already defeated Mrs. Aquino's proposal to retain the American bases. The Philippines had a rambunctious press but it did not check corruption. Individual press reporters could be bought, as could many judges.
Ramos tried to reform the constitution. However, that attempt was meant with rambunctious behavior. I remember getting afraid of charter change, fearing another Marcos-style dictatorship in the process. What was hardly mentioned in school was that there was the need to have another constitution, after Marcos was overthrown. The 1973 Constitution of the Philippines had to be replaced. Even more, people need to realize that not even Corazon S. Cojuangco-Aquino intended the 1987 Constitution to be forever constitution of the Philippines either!
Unfortunately, one may consider Mrs. Robles to be rambunctious, or difficult to control. I'm not saying Mrs. Robles should just shut up all the time. There are some valid things she spoke about the rule of Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr.. However, to say that the Marcos Years were under a parliamentary government is downright wrong. It's because the data already shows that the Philippines was still presidential, despite having parliamentary features.
Mrs. Robles herself may be offended by LKY's statement. LKY even mentioned that the Philippine press was boisterous that could be easily bought. LKY's statement is true as it's easy to buy the press. Partisan politics can be seen in the press. However, we can see this Tweet by Mrs. Robles:
Maybe, maybe not, that Mrs. Robles holds a grudge against LKY. However, one may not be able to deny that she's a microcosm of the Philippine press. After all, think of how the press already declared the suspects of the Chiong Sisters Case and the Vizconde Massacre Case without realizing the truth. Hubert Jeffry P. Webb was willing to undergo a DNA test but it was denied by a biased judge. Francisco Juan "Paco" G. Larrañaga wasn't allowed to testify. Public opinion was formed by a rambunctious press. I remember already seething and wishing that the Chiong 7 would be executed. However, I found out that the Supreme Court made a mistake. I found out that Paco was really in Manila when the crime happened in Cebu.
It's hypocritical for Mrs. Robles to talk about LKY and Singapore to be lucky. Come on, if she paid more attention to details, LKY already exposed Virata to be a nonstarter and no leader at all! Did she even bother to do more research on LKY? Did she bother to do more research on the roles of the Singaporean president? Unfortunately, her being rambunctious may have prevented her from doing more research. Then again it's possible Mrs. Robles is guilty of cherry picking things to suit her own rambunctious narrative.