[OPINION] Cha-Cha to consolidate authoritarian rule, not reforms

With less than two years before the next presidential elections, many are wary how politics will be shaped in President Duterte’s playbook. As the saying goes, the only way to beat crazy is do something crazier. (READ: [OPINION] Is Cha-Cha Duterte’s vaccine?)

The renewed push by DILG for a charter change initiative, purportedly egged on by a resolution from the League of Municipalities of the Philippines, would lead to a precipitous fall into the steep ravine of constitutional authoritarianism. 

DILG’s rationale about the pandemic unraveling how unequal economic development across regions is a grave problem is a no-brainer. But amending the Constitution now is a much graver problem than it being the solution. For sure, Duterte’s economic managers don’t want another warning from credit ratings agencies that would lead to a downgrade. With the country in recession and budget deficits blowing over the roof, charter change is definitely off their radar.

The recent Supreme Court ruling on the Mandanas case affirming the errors in the computation of the Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA), as mandated under Sec. 284 of the 1991 Local Government Code, is reason enough not to tinker with the Constitution. As a result of this ruling, the IRA in 2022 will be increased by P225.3 billion to reach P1,102.7 billion or equivalent to 0.9% of GDP. Now, why would the LMP tinker with the Constitution if they are assured of a windfall come 2022?   

What the LGUs should fear is that the President under Sec. 284 of the LGC, may declare an unmanageable public fiscal deficit to cut the IRA shares of the LGUs by up to a maximum of 10% from the present level.  The pandemic and political instability ensuing from charter change can lead to such scenario. So, why would LGUs push that panic button?

The passage of the draconian Anti-Terror Law is Duterte’s way to consolidate and extend executive power over the judiciary, having subverted Congress into meekly following him. The Supreme Court’s decision on the cases filed against the new law would be a litmus test on the judiciary’s independence. 

Congress subservience to Duterte is magnified by its rejection of the ABS-CBN franchise renewal, despite no violations found during public hearings and surveys showing 75% of Filipinos want its franchise renewed. With Cha-Cha now being played, it’s a given that Congress will dance to its beat, despite popular opinion historically against moves to change the Constitution. 

The COVID-19 pandemic gave Duterte emergency powers to turn the national budget into a huge discretionary fund.  For him, it does not matter how effectively it was used, what’s important is control over its disposal.  Despite vast powers at his disposal, Duterte has not “flattened the curve” as COVID-19 cases have risen and could overwhelm our healthcare system. It’s reflective of bad governance trumped by lies and incorrigible incompetence precariously propped by uneasy economic fundamentals.  

Duterte, however, is neither an economist nor an ideologue, which sees things from an “others” perspective. Duterte, being a narcissist, is always about him and unveiling a plan of moving our country towards a regime of constitutional authoritarian populism during a pandemic, is making everyone wary and agitated.  

Authoritarianism is a form of government characterized by strong central power and limited political freedoms. Political scientists have many typologies and variations of authoritarian forms of government. Its source of power comes from illegal power grabs, ascension through the ballot, to that of creating a legal façade.   

Authoritarian regimes are non-democratic, bordering on being totalitarian. 

Fascism was the first wave of authoritarianism. It is a regime or movement that exalts nation and race, above the individual, having a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader. The breakdown of democracies in the 1930s and the rise of anti-democratic demagogues that are fascists like Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, among others. 

While the West rode on the benefits of Keynesian post-War economics, the second wave of authoritarianism came about through military dictatorships espousing nationalist ideologies in breaking away from colonial rule. The dictator Marcos rode on that wave of Filipino nationalism, called “Maharlika,” but with the military and US imperialism supporting his dictatorship under the Cold War era.  

In the early 1990s, author Francis Fukuyama declared the victory of Western liberal democracy as the “end of history” following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Cold War. But such declaration was short-lived as democracy went into a slippery slope after that. 

In general, democracy is a highly contested space. Representative democracy historically is preferred by the elites and populists want direct democracy. But right now there is a blur, as autocrats could wield both instruments of democracy. Electoral democracy is described by Robert Dahl as “polyarchy,” namely clean elections, freedom of association, universal suffrage, an elected executive, as well as freedom of expression and alternative sources of information. 

The third wave of authoritarianism could be “autocratization,” defined as the arbitrary and repressive exercise of political power that restricts the space for public contestation and political participation in the process of selecting leaders. It can be characterized as the substantial decline of core institutional requirements for electoral democracy and the gradual concentration of power in the executive. 

Political scientist Nancy Bermeo calls this “executive aggrandizement” in a democratic backslide or state-led debilitation or elimination of the political institutions sustaining an existing democracy. This happens when elected executives weaken checks on executive power one by one, undermining institutions and weakening the political opposition.

Authoritarian populist regimes, on the contrary, are not pluralists as they try to divide society between the “us” (people) and “them” (elites). Its core element is the protection of the people against several “threats” created by the leader and represented in the establishment or elite. Thus, Duterte invoking a fight against the oligarchy is pandering to such dichotomy.

A Constitution is seen by authoritarian populist regimes as giving them a solid legal basis for continuity. It also preserves their reforms and protects their personal and proprietary interests after leaving power. Yet their capacity to achieve these goals through Constitution-making is always limited. Autocrats must be able to mobilize sustained popular and partisan support, not just relying on the military and police. A Constitution forced upon the people will be rejected, thus propping an illegitimate and unstable regime.

Research around the world show that democracy is in crisis, though an uptick of resistance has been noted. This was the gist of the Varieties of Democracy or V-Dem 2020 report as well as the 2018 Freedom House report. In a similar vein, analysts Mark A. Graber, Sanford Levinson, and Mark Tushnet, pointed out that constitutional democracy appears in trouble throughout the world. 

The authors observed that we now have a sustained surge of more autocratic politics, and that this wave is fundamentally different from previous waves of autocratization – mainly because it is more gradual and employs deception. However, they cautioned that because it is gradual, democratic actors could remain strong enough to mobilize resistance. This happened in South Korea in 2016, when mass protests forced parliament to impeach the president. 

In the V-Dem Institute’s 2020 report, they pointed to surges in “autocratization” but observed that resistance is growing. In Thailand, thousands of young protesters are mobilizing against the military junta after the latter announced a state of emergency in March to fight COVID-19 but wielded it as a political weapon while the economy is sputtering.  

The Duterte government’s failure to address the COVID-19 pandemic and abuse of power are now being rejected by the people. Already, the CBCP now led by Bishop David in a pastoral letter is gathering the faithful and business groups like the Makati Business Club have expressed their rejection of Duterte’s policies, including a charter change push. The momentum is now shifting and history favors the bold. – Rappler.com

Tom Villarin is former congressman of Akbayan Party List in the 17th Congress. He authored the law Institutionalizing the 4Ps and the Safe Spaces Act, co-authored the Universal Health Care Law, Expanded Maternity Leave Law, Free Tertiary Education in Public Schools, and the vetoed Anti-Contractualization Law, among others.