Senate’s anti-political dynasty bill closer to Constitution, analysts say

By Kaela Patricia B. Gabriel and Adrian H. Halili, Reporter

CONGRESS should adopt a more stringent version of the anti-dynasty measure, analysts urged, noting the Senate bill is more aligned with the 1987 Constitution than the House bill over its broader and clearer provisions, including on politicians’ de facto relatives.

“[The Congress should] adopt the stringent version of the anti-dynasty bill. If there would be negotiations, the compromise bill should be a result of a principled settlement,” Dennis C. Coronacion, chairman of the University of Santo Tomas (UST) Political Science Department, said in Facebook Messenger chat as he as described House Bill No. 6771 as “diluted.”

Two separate versions of the anti-political dynasty bill, both seeking to bar second-degree relatives from holding public office, were under plenary deliberation before the Senate and House adjourned for a six-week break.

The Senate’s version sought to bar overlapping terms in national and local offices, prohibit relatives from occupying positions across party-list groups and elective posts, and prevent immediate succession by disallowing a spouse or family member from taking over right after an incumbent’s term. These provisions are all absent in the House’s version.

He said Congress should adopt an anti-political dynasty bill that bans relatives up to the fourth degree of civil relations.

Mr. Coronacion added that the House of Representatives (HoR) has been an obstacle to the immediate enactment of the anti-political dynasty bill.

“The House is making its enactment more difficult by adopting the weak and watered-down anti-dynasty bill of Speaker Faustino ‘Bojie’ G. Dy III and Cong. Ferdinand Alexander ‘Sandro’ A. Marcos III, and delaying the process,” he said.

The House bill also still allows dynasties to “thrive and persist” in effect, Eric Daniel C. de Torres, who teaches political science at UST, said in a separate Messenger chat.

“The version from the HoR won’t change anything as it focuses on the restriction of family members holding multiple offices simultaneously but would still allow the succession of family members, their rotation and possible substitution.”

He added the Senate bill addresses de facto partners of politicians, unlike the House version, which is silent on illegitimate relationships.

“The Senate version in my view is more formidable because it addresses the spouses and children that are either legitimate or illegitimate,” Mr. de Torres said.

“More importantly, the inclusion of the nominees from the party-list groups that I always argue that already becomes an extension of dynastic family by the propagation of regional party-list in accordance with the votes they muster on a particular province.”

Joy Aceron, convenor-director of Government Watch, added that lawmakers can include a provision that staggers the ban on relatives, with provisions on review and amendment every after five years as political dynasties may adapt to undermine democratic reforms.

“This is why a periodic assessment is key. This will determine if we need to expand regulation or redefine it based on the law’s impact and how the dynasties adapt,” she said in a Facebook Messenger chat.

Ms. Aceron said that political education remains crucial to involve people in the reform process and to avoid the people and communities from getting abused by dynasties.

CHECKS AND BALANCES
Congress should also adopt an anti-dynasty bill that prevents families from occupying government posts meant to check and balance each other, Ms. Aceron said, to strengthen accountability measures.

“Posts in government that are supposed to check and balance each other must not be occupied by the same family or personal network,” she said in a Facebook Messenger chat.

Ms. Aceron said it is vital for Congress to determine what institutions will have the capacity and resources to enforce the measure.

“Just like any regulations, enforcement spells all the difference. So, what institutions will enforce, their capacity and resources and their ability to mobilize the public and other stakeholders would be crucial,” she said.

Meanwhile, Edmund S. Tayao, president and chief executive officer of Political Economic Elemental Researchers and Strategists, said the anti-dynasty bills filed in the House and Senate would be best complemented by reforms in the country’s political party-list system.

Mr. Tayao said the measure may pass as a piece of legislation but will not solve the country’s electoral problems.

“The solution is not in operationalizing the anti-political dynasty provision in the 1987 Constitution, but in establishing a real political party,” Mr. Tayao said via telephone.

He noted that other countries, such as the US, also have political dynasties, but it is balanced by standards imposed by their party-list system on their nominees.

“The difference between these countries that have political dynasties is that even if they are sons of previous presidents or related to prominent political leaders, they go through the same rigorous process before they can run for election,” Mr. Tayao added.

The anti-political dynasty bill, which has been included in the Marcos administration’s priority measures, is expected to be passed once Congress resumes session in May and before the President’s fifth State of the Nation Address.

A measure seeking to abolish political dynasties has long been pushed in Congress but has repeatedly faltered over a lack of support from a Legislature dominated by political families.

Eight of 10 lawmakers belong to dynasties, according to a report by the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism.