End Philippine patronage politics

The ongoing investigations and scandals regarding the flood control corruption have revealed the basic weaknesses in the Philippine political system. While it is true that certain DPWH personnel have been terminated and cases have been filed against some contractors, the glaring omission is that the so-called “big fish” have not been touched and are allowed to go on with their normal lives. It may be difficult to believe that the senators and congressmen who have been accused of being the real culprits by being the authors of the budget insertions are still serving as full-fledged members in Congress. In fact, some of the accused are actually sitting in committees entrusted to investigate the anomalous flood control projects. This may seem impossible to believe but it is true.

There is really a present pressing need to organize an independent commission. However, as of this writing, the presidential Executive Order on the investigative commission has been issued but the members have not yet been named. The initial names that have been floated seem to be the ideal persons with the qualifications of integrity and judicial knowledge required. There are rumors that there is difficulty on finding the right persons who are willing to accept this difficult assignment. If this is true, this is a very tragic situation where we cannot find three people with the integrity, intelligence and courage out of a population of nearly 120 million.

However, I want to remind my readers that as I wrote in a previous column, if we do not address the root causes of corruption, this will recur again in the future, even if we put people in jail. We have to remember that during the term of President Noynoy Aquino, he was able to put even some senators in jail. However, a few years later, under another administration, these same senators were able to be released and eventually were reelected to the Senate.

The rot in the Philippine political system is that it is still dominated by patronage, which has not declined but rather, transformed. Historically, Philippine politics have been dominated by longstanding bonds of mutual obligation between family dynasties and their clients.

This has now been overshadowed by more instrumental short-term exchanges of benefits of cash, services and other freebies, especially during electoral campaigns. These newer practices are often managed by family dynastic networks, political machines and political brokers that mediate between the politician and the voters. Many times, even state resources are used to achieve short-term political goals.

A fairly recent publication on this topic that is extremely worth reading is the book “Patronage Democracy in the Philippines: Clans, Clients and Competition in Local Elections.” This is a comprehensive, empirically grounded anthology edited by Prof. Julio C. Teehankee and Cleo Anne A. Calimbahin (Bughaw, Ateneo de Manila University Press). Teehankee is professor of political science and international studies at De La Salle University, where he has served as chair of the Political Science department and International Studies department, and dean of the College of Liberal Arts. He has appeared as a political analyst for several local and international media outlets.

Calimbahin is associate professor at the Political Science department of DLSU who completed her PhD in political science at the University of Wisconsin as a Fulbright fellow.

The book is actually composed of 10 case studies of different localities, including the provinces of Isabela, Iloilo, Lanao del Norte, Camarines Sur, Cebu and the cities of Makati, Manila, Caloocan, Cebu and Bacolod.

In the book, some chapters and sections acknowledge that “warlordism and violence may have lessened in recent times. However, many of the analyses in the different chapters have concluded that the role of coercion, threats and intimidation in elections has lessened and has been replaced by the increase in benefit distribution and the strengthening of patron-client ties.”

From the case studies, it shows that as the Philippine economy has become more urbanized and modern communications, especially social media, have expanded, new forms of political patronage have emerged. Short-term material incentives and benefits timed around elections have increased.

According to Teehankee: “While former Makati mayor Jejomar Binay adopted Nemesio Yabut’s machine politics, he avoided the coercive style of his predecessor. In the 1990s, the defeat of mayor Macario Asistio in Caloocan by actor Rey Malonzo, and the retirement and subsequent death of mayor Pablo Cuneta in Pasay after five decades in power, effectively ended warlordism in Metropolitan Manila.”

While patronage politics still dominates most of the Philippines, the increase in urbanization has seen the rise of a few reform-minded city mayors known for their managerial reformist technocratic approach to local governance. Some of the more well known personalities are Leni Robredo of Naga City, Vico Sotto of Pasig and Benjamin Magalong of Baguio City.

Any attempt to reform Philippine political institutions needs to address root causes of a corrupt Philippine political environment. One major task is to combat the persistence of patronage democracy.

*      *      *

Email: [email protected]