ON THE MATTER OF ANTI POLITICAL DYNASTY ISSUE
The Constitution has a provision for anti-political dynasty and it is a principle that should govern everyone. While technically, there should still be a law that would define and qualify such constitutional provision, the essence is there already: political dynasty is unacceptable and illegal.
Senator Panfilo M. Lacson, five years ago, discussed it in his proposed bill on said concern. He said that,
“Article 11, Section 26 of the 1987 Constitution provides that “the state shall guarantee
Equal access to opportunities for public service, and prohibit political dynasties as may be
Defined by law. ”
“Political dynasties have made positions in government subject to inheritance and results
In the proliferation of small monarchies all over the country. Seeing the malevolence created by
Political dynasties, the 1987 Constitution mandated the legislature to prohibit political dynasties
In order to effectively put a stop to the monopoly of certain families to public office.
During the debates in the Constitutional Commission of 1986, Commissioner Sarmiento
Explained the rationale of this provision in the following manner:
“By including this provision, we widen the opportunities of competent, young, and
Promising poor candidates to occupy important positions in the government.
While it is true we have government officials who have ascended to power despite
accident of birth, they are exemptions to the general rule. The economic standing
of these officials would show that they come from powerful clans with vast
economic fortunes. ”
Senator Lacson further qualified it. Thus,
“The proposed measure seeks to prohibit the spouse or persons related within the
second degree of consanguinity or affinity, whether legitimate or illegitimate, full or half blood
of an incumbent public official seeking re-election from holding or running for any elective
office in the same municipality/city, legislative district and/or province in the same election or
occupying the same office immediately after the term of office of the incumbent elective official.
Additionally, it also prohibits two or more persons who have political dynasty
relationship from running simultaneously for an elective office within the same municipality, legislative district and/or province, even if neither is so related to the
incumbent public official.”
Lacson has since been subjected to harassments and various persecutions.
As it were, the forthcoming election seems to ignore the constitutional prohibition. Various technical objections have rented the air to discourage discussion. It is as if there was nothing in the Constitutional that could forbid those affected to impose their absurd beliefs. And indeed. Even Comelec could not make any ruling because of technical issues. There is no law specifying the details of how it should be carried out.
Hence, for quite a time since the 1987 Constitutional provision has gone into print, not even a resolution has been passed on this matter.
Except for a crusading spirit that pushes this concern into the consciousness of the people, no one seems to care at all.
To date, there is only one person who intends to make it a principal issue. And against the silence of almost everyone, Ricardo L. Penson is trying to reach out.
He despises a monarchical setting for Philippine governance because it is anathema to development. It depresses economy and divides the prosperous and the struggling majority. In other words, it merely allows the enrichment and empowerment of a few to the disadvantage of the entire citizenry.
Penson is nowhere within the attentive impression of the people because he is up against a monolithic power.
But Penson is correct and history will teach this lesson as it constantly reminds why the Filipino is still poor, with token representation and unable to attain what is just, fair and proper for them.