Skip to main content

The 1986 Snap Elections Would Also Disprove the Myth of the "Marcos Parliament"



Anti-charter change proponents love to use Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. among their reasons, to defend their stand. The argument is that "charter change must be evil" because Marcos used it--a fallacy of Guilt by Association. Please, even Atty. Maria Leonor Gerona-Robredo's supporter Andrew James Masigan supports charter change! Now, we must look at Marcos and remember another significant event. It's the 1986 snap elections and why it's also proof that we never had a parliamentary form of government.

February 7, 1986, was when Marcos declared snap elections. Two years before the snap election, Marcos even declared that the Philippines was never a parliamentary government under him:
The adoption of certain aspects of a parliamentary system in the amended Constitution does not alter its essentially presidential character. Article VII on the Presidency starts with this provision: ‘the President shall be the Head of State and Chief Executive of the Republic of the Philippines.’ Its last section is an even more emphatic affirmation that it is a presidential system that obtains in our government. Thus: all powers vested in the President who, by virtue of his election by the entire electorate, has an indisputable claim to speak for the country as a whole. Moreover, it is he who is explicitly granted the greater power of control of such ministries. He continues to be the executive, the amplitude and scope of the functions entrusted to him in the formulation of policy and its execution leading to the apt observation by LASI that there is not one aspect of which that does not affect the lives of all.

True, there was a prime minister named Cesar Virata. However, the words of the late Lee Kuan Yew already said in his book From Third World to First the following on Virata:

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. 

Marcos nominated Virata as a possible president. Virata's job as prime minister wasn't the same as the prime minister of a parliamentary system. More on Marcos' declaration also had this paper for Virata:

The Prime Minister may advise the President in writing to dissolve the Batasang Pambansa whenever the need arises for a popular vote of confidence on fundamental issues, but on a matter involving his own personal integrity. Whereupon, the President may dissolve the Batasang Pambansa not earlier than seven nor later than fourteen days from his receipt of the advice, and call for an election on a date set by him which shall not be earlier than forty-five nor later than sixty days from the date of such dissolution.

In the parliamentary system, the president is purely ceremonial. As Benigno Simeon "Ninoy" Aquino Jr. said in his speech in Los Angeles, the president is just there to open the door. The way Ninoy detailed things before his death, already proved that there was no parliamentary system (read here). Marcos had already made Virata as nothing more than a personal adviser. LKY's words calling Virata as a non-starter, a first-class administrator but no leader, is based on experience. Some say parliamentary works in Malaysia and Singapore, because of much lesser corruption and the supposed absence of stupid voters. However, we need to realize for the nth time, the Constitution is the operating system of the country. The Constitution restrains the behavior of politicians, which in turn, will also restrain the behavior of the citizens!

If the Philippines was truly under a parliamentary system, why in the world is Virata even considered a candidate for president? Even more, Marcos had a running mate with Arturo Tolentino. Maria Corazon "Cory" S. Cojuangco-Aquino ran with Salvador "Doy" Laurel Jr. as her vice president. Doesn't this look like a presidential election? Marcos already admitted it. Ninoy already admitted it. Doy even mentioned the lack of legitimacy with Marcos' reign. There were no meaningful elections since Marcos declared martial law in 1972! There was really no parliamentary system. Otherwise, Marcos could've been ousted when he was supposedly prime minister and president. There's no such arrangement in any legitimate parliamentary system! 

True, there was a parliament. Just because there was a parliament and a prime minister, doesn't mean that it was a parliamentary form of government. Taiwan is a presidential form of government with a parliament. True, Marcos and Tolentino were declared "winners" (but documentation of cheating was really there). However, what kind of "opposition" was there in parliament anyway? Parliamentary elections vote by parties--not by candidates!

By virtue of Resolution No. 38, signed on February 15, 1986, Ferdinand Marcos and Arturo Tolentino were proclaimed by the Batasang Pambansa as winners of the snap elections. This announcement was met with public outrage. Fifty opposition members of parliament walked out in protest. The next day, Corazon Aquino and Salvador Laurel held a “Tagumpay ng Bayan” (People’s Victory) rally at the Quirino Grandstand in Luneta Park, Manila. Aquino called for a civil disobedience campaign through strikes and the boycott of companies owned by Marcos cronies. Among these were the major newspaper companies, San Miguel Corporation, and several banks, including the Philippine National Bank. In less than a week, a total of Php1.78 billion had been withdrawn from crony banks. People all around the country had heeded Aquino’s call.

Sadly, some people still try to insist on the same myth. They have a cognitive dissonance with the matter. Are they too lazy to do research in the information age? Come on, one can also buy research papers online. Some people are still stuck in the comfort zone of the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines. Never mind that  the very words of Cory even said these:

You must define and protect our individual freedoms and rights; you must decide how our different institutions of state will relate to each other. Do not be distracted by political debates and matters of policy that do not belong within your constitution-making exercise. You are here appointed, by the people’s wish, to write a constitution; you are not here as elected politicians.

Bear in mind that you shall be pondering, debating and writing a constitution not only for our contemporaries with their present concerns, but also for succeeding generations of Filipinos whose first concerns we cannot presume to know beforehand. Future Filipinos must always be free to decide how to address these concerns as they arise. Even the wisest cures for present maladies should not be imposed on succeeding generations that will have their own unique problems and priorities.

True and long-lived constitutions, a wise justice has told me, should be broad enough to be able to meet every exigency we cannot foretell and specific enough to stoutly protect the essentials of a true democracy; in short, open-ended documents that will always be relevant. Remember that constitutional changes are not safe or easy to come by. Our first attempt at constitutional revision was followed by a dictatorship. And this, our second endeavor, was preceded by a revolution.

Future Filipinos and their legislatures and Supreme Courts can best assess and address the challenges they will meet if they enjoy the widest latitude of thought and action. In writing a constitution have the fullest confidence that the wisdom of our race is exhausted in us. Our race has grown in wisdom over time. I believe it will continue to do so.

Yours is indeed no easy task. On the other hand, depending on the result, yours will be no small glory. Our people have suffered much.  

Remember Marcos was elected as a president with powers. In a parliamentary system, there are presidential elections (for the head of state, if the country has no monarchy, like Singapore) and parliamentary elections. Was there even a single parliamentary election during Marcos' reign? There was none. Instead, Marcos was ousted as a president with powers. In short, the snap elections also disprove the myth of a "Marcos parliament".

Popular posts from this blog

[OPINION] Why Do Some Filipino Boomers (Some Are EVEN Fact-Checkers) Insist that the Marcos Years Were Under a "Parliamentary System"

  This is a screenshot I got on Facebook. The Tweet is courtesy of Raissa Espinosa-Robles, who I hear is a marites or a gossiper. I'm not denying that there are some truths in what she said. It's true that the Marcos Years have their well-documented human rights abuses. However, Mrs. Robles still continues to insist in the myth of a parliamentary system under Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr.'s regime. It's not just Mrs. Robles but also some Filipino boomers who keep saying, "Are you crazy? We had a parliamentary system under Marcos."  I could show them some evidence like Marcos' severe lack of legitimacy to disprove the parliamentary systme. I even wrote about the snap elections because Marcos was a president with powers (read here ). Under a parliamentary system, the president is purely ceremonial. The president is just a door opener and credentials receiver! Benigno Simeon A. Aquino Jr. and Salvador "Doy" Laurel both challenged the legitimacy of Marcos...

The Late Benigno Simeon "Noynoy" Cojuangco Aquino's Chinese New Year Proclamation

It's disheartening that the Facebook page Tuloy Lang Tayo (which fortunately only has 358 followers) said that Chinese New Year should be discredited. The page is also supportive of Atty. Maria Leonor "Leni" S. Gerona-Robredo. Does the owner of the page even know that the late Benigno Simeon "Noynoy" C. Aquino was the person who declared Chinese New Year, a holiday?  The Asia Society gives this detail on Noynoy's declaration: It was the very first time that the Chinese New Year was celebrated in the Philippines as a special non-working holiday which gave the opportunity to both Chinese-Filipinos and Filipinos in the country to enjoy the celebration. This became possible because of the Proclamation declared by President Benigno S. Aquino III , stating that this "is a manifestation of our solidarity with our Chinese-Filipino brethren who have been part of our lives in many respects as a country and as a people." Further details from Asia Society als...

Real Talk: Chinese Filipinos ARE Still Filipinos

It's the Chinese New Year once again. Some  ignorant people have their ill feelings towards Chinese Filipinos, never mind the long history of Chinese immigrants who have become Filipinos. A simple classroom history lesson to a Google search, will tell us what it meant to be a Filipino.  What does it mean to be a Filipino?  It's often said that Filipino is more of a nationality than a race. Here's the definition of what it means to be a Filipino: 1 : a native of the Philippine Islands 2 : a citizen of the Republic of the Philippines 3 : the Tagalog-based official language of the Republic of the Philippines Filipino adjective  According to the current constitution, these define what makes one a Filipino: Section 1. The following are citizens of the Philippines: [1] Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of this Constitution; [2] Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines; [3] Those born before January 17, 1973, of Fili...

The "Star Witness" Davidson Rusia

It's Time to Free Paco Now   Comparing one's perspective when one was in high school vs. the present can be a daunting thing. For example, I could get told that, "Maybe the person wants to be friends with you already. Maybe he realized that you were only teenagers and your fight was nothing more than a childish quarrel." As a 13-year-old who got into the case--I once admired what Davidson Rusia did. However, after hearing that Paco Larrañaga was innocent--I was really shocked. Yes, Paco was really in Manila when the crime happened (read here ). Why was David even allowed to testify when he wasn't even qualified? That's what the documentary Give Up Tomorrow highlighted. Atty. Florencio Villarin, who may be retired now due to his advanced age, also stated that in Case Unclosed. A lot of people were interested in what he had to say. At first, I thought Paco was wrongly tagged along with guilty people. However, what Solita Collas-Monsod said in Give Up Tomorrow , ...

Learn the Facts, Not Gossip, from Reading Lee Kuan Yew's "From Third World to First"

The Straits Times I could remember ordering the book From Third World to First ( sometime after electricity and Internet connection got restored) in January. I wanted a copy of the book but it's that hard to secure. So, I used Shoppee to order the book shipped from Indonesia . There's so much misinformation that I read on Facebook about Singapore. No, I'm not just talking about using the late Flor Contemplacion as an excuse. Instead, it's all about Singapore's development. I felt that my best "Christmas Gift" (it was bought with my savings, not given) was having a copy of this book. It was written by none other than the great statesman, the late Lee Kuan Yew, the father of Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.  There are a lot of misconceptions about Singapore's progress. Some people have written on Facebook gossip about Singapore's progress. These are the following gossips I could read on Facebook such as: Singapore only opened to foreign di...

Indigenous Dance in Dayuan District, Taiwan

In the quest to know more about Southeast Asia's indigenous people--Taiwan can become a hit destination. This would look like a group of Filipino indigenous dancers but they're from Taiwan. This long dance number may show how the Taiwanese government may have been treating indigenous tribes better than the Philippines. One article I wrote was about how some Filipino natives now have to travel to Taiwan to learn indigenous weaving .  Just watching this video makes me think of what the  Inquirer  cited about Taiwanese indigenous people: TAIPEI—In communities of the indigenous Amis tribe across Taiwan,  locals say lima for five, pito for seven and mata for eye, just like Filipinos . In southern Taiwan’s Alishan mountain,  the Tsou tribe calls the community’s meeting hut a kuba, strikingly similar in design to the Philippines’ kubo . Whether in language, architecture or way of life, links among indigenous peoples of the Philippines and Taiwan are undeniable, with...

Why I Think Banning the Mention of Hitler on Facebook is STUPID

Getty Images It's crazy how reporting a comment with the word "Hitler" can get anyone banned. For example, this is what I found on Quora : They should be allowed. there are quotes of his that are not in praise of hitler but showing how he thought so that people are critical of their current leaders . For example, here’s a quote by him “ How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think.” This is a perfect example of why Hitler quotes should be allowed; to show how dictators think and how people should be critical. Yes, he started a giant war and murdered people but censoring what he said will only help the next dictator start more wars and murder more people because people forgot about Hitler . This is why the First Amendment is so important: it’s about communication and freedom so that we all make better decisions in the future. I just told someone that Adolf Hitler seized the means of production and I got a strike. Like what? I wonder what ...

The Paternity of Sergio Osmeña Sr.

More than 10 years ago while I was a college student, I remembered one of the topics raised was who in the world was the father of the late Sergio Osmeña Sr.? I remembered my Humanities subject while I studied at the University of San Carlos (USC) during my summer classes. I immediately took summer classes after I finished my associate's degree and proceeded to take my bachelor's degree in business administration. We had a field trip at Casa Gorordo in Cebu where one of the curators said, "Just who was his father?" There was a wild guess it was the late Pedro Lee Singson Gotiaoco. The Freeman I heard from someone, back in college, that neither Tomas Osmeña nor the late John Gokongwei Jr. admits to being related to each other. Gokongwei Jr. is a great-grandson of Gotiaoco. A Sunstar article about Juana Osmeña  mentions this one about the past 145 years ago which may verify their mutual claims: SCIENCE has settled almost a century-and-a-half-old mystery -- history and g...

The Chiong Sisters' "Still Alive" Conspiracy Theory Was Around Last 2005?

No, the girls below are not the same people above. Granted, I never saw Give Up Tomorrow nor realize that Juan Francisco G. Larrañaga aka Paco was innocent  until 2018. I was shocked to realize, from a friend, that he was with Paco on the night of the crime. From the New Scientist website, it talks about how innocents die without DNA tests . Hubert Jeffry P. Webb's life was wasted because of one foolish judge's decision not to grant a DNA test of the semen sample found in the late Carmela Vizconde's body. Here's a very interesting excerpt that points out the conspiracy theory that either one (or both) of the Chiong sisters may still be alive: Conspiracy theories surround the case. A policeman who worked on the case said last week he thought Larrañaga was innocent. Only one body was found, which was identified as Marijoy’s, but there are serious doubts about whether it is in fact her – even from the original trial judge . What’s more, there are rumours that one or both s...