Serving justice

The Supreme Court recently ruled that PDAF was unconstitutional. But the claim that this was a major defeat for patronage politics and corruption is unrealistic and betrays a misunderstanding of the true nature of politics, both electoral and dictatorial. The SC ruling, is at best, a minor victory against corruption.

Political patronage is the use of government resources to reward individuals or organizations for their political support. This is a game that politicians all over the world, including the United States , Germany and Canada, continue to play until today.

When the candidate of a political party wins an election, the newly elected official has the right to appoint a certain number of persons to jobs in government. The ideal appointee is a person who is competent and honest. But necessarily there must be an assurance of cooperation, loyalty and trust. The person must also be one who agrees with the political agenda of the victor. These are the same qualities corporate CEOs look for in appointing senior executives.

It is when political patronage results in incompetent and dishonest officials being appointed that this practice results in corruption.

When P-Noy was elected, he appointed persons who were political sympathizers like Corazon Soliman to DSWD, Cesar Purisima to Finance, Dondon Paderanga to NEDA, Jess Robredo to DILG, Gil de los Reyes to DAR, and Sonny Coloma to Presidential Communications. At the same time, however, these persons had records of unquestioned integrity and were considered experts in their respective fields.

Then there were those whose loyalty to the political agenda could be trusted because they shared a common vision with P-Noy like Br Armin Luistro of DepEd and Leila de Lima of Justice. But these were also personalities of unquestioned integrity and competence in the fields of Education and Justice respectively.

But there are political analysts who believe that political appointments can be justified based on their larger purpose. For example, in European politics, cabinet positions are offered, many times, as an exchange for political support.

For example, Chancellor Merkel of Germany is offering cabinet positions to members of her principal oppositionists, the Social Democratic Party, in exchange for their votes to re-elect her as chancellor.

I have been asked whether the appointment of Vice President Jojo Binay as Housing Czar and the appointment of Mar Roxas as DILG head are political accommodations or examples of patronage politics at the highest levels?

I keep hearing that P-Noy is a political neophyte. But I find it interesting to note that every presidential aspirant being talked about for 2016 is either in P-Noy’s cabinet or is his political ally.

This administration is the most unified democratic government after Enrile and Honasan resigned (or was terminated) from the Corazon Aquino government. That was when the government had to face down several Honasan-led coup attempts.

In this country, just like in the United States, it is at local level — from governor to mayor to barangay chair — that patronage politics is most widespread. Local politicians claim that patronage is a way of maintaining a strong political organization by offering campaign workers rewards.

The dispute over the distribution of relief goods in Leyte is the worst face of patronage politics. For example there is the story of four towns where the mayors are allegedly hoarding relief goods. By the way, one of the four is the mayor of Javier, Leyte. I seem to recall there was a radio interview that said the children of the mayor of Javier, Leyte had sent a helicopter to fly the mayor out of town a few days after the typhoon. This seems to be too much of a coincidence.

The American Center for Public Integrity claims that “President Obama has followed the time honored practice of rewarding campaign contributions with cushy jobs in government and other benefits.”

However, there are some who believe that patronage is acceptable to a certain extent. In the USA, a Civil Service Commission was created which advocated a merit system for the selection of government employees. This was also meant to reduce patronage politics. By 1980, almost 90% of federal positions had become part of the civil service system.

However, by 1978 the US Congress took another look at patronage issues. The concern was that government officials were becoming too independent and unresponsive to elected officials. A Civil Service Reform Act replaced the Civil Service Commission with the Office of Personnel Management under the closer control of the President and gives him greater discretion in reassigning top officials to departments and agencies.

The delicate balance of power among the three branches of government must be maintained. The Janet Napoles-Enrile alleged scam is clear proof that both the executive and legislative branches, under corrupt leadership, can become sources of large scale corruption. The alleged Arlene scandal is also proof that the Judiciary is prone to corruption.

The only road to institutionalizing the Rule of Law is by winning the war against corruption. Judicial rulings will not stop corruption. Instead, it is convictions and the jailing of corrupt officials that the judiciary should give the people.

It took only days for the Supreme Court to rule on the constitutionality of PDAF. Then why are there no convictions on the Ampatuan massacre after four years? Why is the alleged Fertilizer Fund scandal under Jocjoc Bolante still crawling in the Second Division of the Sandiganbayan?

How long will it take to convict the perpetrators and the mastermind of the multibillion pork barrel scandal? It is only by convicting and jailing the “big fishes” that can win the war against corruption.

We hear a lot about our people lacking faith and trust in our justice system. The judiciary must earn the faith and trust of the Filipino people, not with empty promises or inadequate rulings, but by serving  justice. As they say, justice delayed is justice denied.

When will the judiciary start convicting and jailing the big fishes?

*      *      *

Email: [email protected]