No one is threatening a coup either, except perhaps against Speaker Jose de Venecia Jr. Poor JDV looks like he got royally shafted in this deal. I won’t say by whom, but he’s no babe in the treacherous woods of Philippine politics and I’m sure he has his own suspicions.
President Arroyo is enjoying a break with her family in Hong Kong, looking far from disappointed over the defeat of an initiative that would have led to a diminution of her powers.
If ordinary folks are greeting the defeat of the initiative with a yawn, not bothering to read the ponente of either Antonio Carpio or Reynato Puno, it is because initiative proponents failed to make a compelling case for Charter change.
So the Supreme Court – and not just Antonio Carpio, as the spindoctors would have us believe, thumbed down the initiative. So what? It may be now or never for JDV, but for the nation?
Had Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban sided with Puno’s group and the dissenters had become the majority, the case would have been remanded to the Commission on Elections for review. This is the same Comelec that can always be relied upon not to count votes properly and to become embroiled in scandal after scandal, whether it’s vote rigging or corruption.
Administration rah-rah boys should not wring their hands too passionately over this lost prospect. Otherwise people might suspect a deal has been struck with Benjamin Abalos’ discredited Comelec for Round 2 of the initiative.
Those sound arguments, especially the economic ones that could bring in more investments and improve our global competitiveness, were buried in the focus on the shift to a parliamentary system.
Charter change proponents could not even sell the people’s initiative on the argument that it would lead to the abolition of the non-performing Senate — a cause that would have been appealing to the public. All that the proponents could sell was the abolition of both chambers of Congress, with all senators whose terms end in 2010 and incumbent congressmen sitting in the interim parliament.
That prospect looked too much like the same dog with a different collar, with new power blocs that would be in a rush to make hay while the sun shines as soon as they are at the nation’s helm.
If you have the same useless, grandstanding faces in parliament, what was the point of changing the Constitution?
At the height of efforts to unseat Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo last year amid accusations of cheating, lying and stealing, the shift to a parliamentary system would have offered a graceful exit for the embattled President, through a power sharing scheme or a possible cut in her six-year term.
Remember that the President herself made noises about her willingness to cut short her term if Charter change paved the way for it.
But that moment is past, with the fragmented opposition unable to seize the moment and present a viable alternative to the status quo.
Today the President is riding high on good macroeconomic figures, a strong peso (though bad for exporters and overseas workers), and the latest good news yesterday — an upgrade in Moody’s credit outlook for the country. The folks at Moody’s aren’t swayed by Cha-cha setbacks.
Even global markets are cooperating, with crude oil prices softening and local pump prices going down by an average of 50 centavos per liter almost every week.
With the second attempt to impeach her tossed out the window by her House allies (in exchange for her support for Cha-cha and the initiative?), the President is secure from fresh ouster moves for another year.
Such changes I believe President Arroyo would genuinely support. As Malacañang officials pointed out yesterday, the President has long supported Charter change if it would lead to economic and fiscal reforms, the death of insurgency and the development of so-called super regions to reduce poverty.
She has been less enthusiastic about the proposed shift to a parliamentary system — a plan that clearly does not envision her sitting as the prime minister and head of government.
Those who are selling the parliamentary system as a more stable form of government suffered a setback after the coup in Thailand, which saw prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra being hounded out of office while he was in New York.
Doubters also remember the way Japan, with its parliamentary system, changed its prime ministers at the drop of a hat before Junichiro Koizumi came along. The Japanese government remained stable throughout those changes not because of its form of government but because of its professional bureaucracy, which functions efficiently even with frequent leadership changes. That kind of bureaucracy we don’t have.
After Joseph Estrada, the idea of having the nation’s leader being chosen by his or her peers, who know each other’s capabilities well, rather than by an uninformed electorate that can’t tell reel from real life holds strong appeal.
But Cha-cha proponents need better packaging of their ideas. The people’s initiative came to be associated too much with the old ways of Philippine politics, another version of the usual power play.
People simply couldn’t see how having two leaders sharing power — the headstrong woman being downgraded to a largely ceremonial role as head of state and a prime minister wielding executive power as head of government — could bring order to an already chaotic situation.
And if the Supreme Court decided to derail the Cha-cha train, ordinary folks could only shrug and tell the proponents: better luck next time.