PHILIPPINE POLITICS AND

GOVERNANCE

 CONTENT STANDARD

In this lesson, the students will be able to demonstrate an

understanding of the historical background of Philippine
democratic politics, the executive, the legislative, the judiciary, and
decentralization and local governance.

 PERFORMANCE STANDARD

The students will be able to explain the roles of different political

institutions.

 MOST ESSENTIAL LEARNING COMPETENCIES

At the end of the lesson, the students will be able to:

1. Analyze the evolution of Philippine politics and governance;
2. Analyze the roles and powers of the executive branch of the
government;
3. Differentiate the roles and responsibilities of the Philippine
Senate and the House of Representatives; and
4. Analyze the roles and responsibilities of the Philippine
Judiciary.

HISTORY OF DEMOCRATIC POLITICS IN

THE PHILIPPINES AND INSTITUTIONS
AND PROCESSES OF GOVERNMENT
INTRODUCTION
The Philippines is among the first Asian countries to challenge colonial control and to attempt and
successfully established republican democratic order on January 23, 1899. However, its efforts toward
democratization were thwarted by external influences. The US and Japan from 1899 to 1946, for instance,
prevented Filipinos from any sustained experimentation with democratic politics (Miranda 1997, ix-x).
To date, the Philippines is not just the most democratic country among democracies in Asia but has also
the longest experience with democratic institutions. As Paul Hutchcroft and Joel Rocamora (2003, 259)
put it:
No country in Asia has more experience with democratic institutions than the Philippines. Over more than
a century-from the representational structures of the Malolos Republic of 1898 to the political tutelage of
American colonial rule, from the cacique democracy of the post-war republic to the restoration of
democracy in the People Power uprising of 1986—Filipinos know both the promise of democracy and the
problems of making democratic structures work for the benefit of all.

Philippine democracy has developed and, in certain ways, decayed over a span of a century, covering six
constitutions and three organic acts. These are:
1. The 1899 Malolos Constitution of the first Philippine Republic which was the first Asian democracy
to be established, during the Philippine. Revolution that culminated in Asia-ending the more than
300 years of Spanish colonial rule in the Islands;

2. President McKinley's Instructions to the Second Philippine Commission on organizing and

establishing civil government, including local governments, and the civil liberties of the Filipinos:

3. The US Philippine Bill of 1902 that served as the organic act of the Philippine Government until
August 1916, and which authorized the establishment of the Philippine Assembly that came into
being in 1907;

4. The US Philippine Autonomy Act of 1916 or Jones Law that enlarged Filipino self-rule by the
establishment of the all-Filipino Philippine Legislature, among other ways, and promised
independence following the establishment of a stable government by the Filipinos;

5. The Tydings McDuffie law that led for the promulgation of the 1935 Philippine Constitution for the
Commonwealth (1935-1946) and the Republic of the Philippines (1946-1972), that was drafted by
Filipinos approved by the American President, and finally ratified by the Filipino electorate, as
authorized by the US Congress;

6. The 1943 Constitution of the Philippine Republic" under the Japanese occupation (during which
many officials collaborated with the Japanese while other officials of the Philippine Commonwealth
went underground and its President and Vice-President were in self-exile in the US);

7. The 1973 Marcos Constitution that was adopted under President Ferdinand Marcos's authoritarian
rule which lasted from September 21, 1972 to February 25, 1986, a period over 13 years;

8. The 1986 Aquino Freedom Constitution under which President Corazon Aquino ruled in the year
following the EDSA revolution while a new constitution was being drafted and ratified; and
9. The 1987 Constitution that goes much further than any constitution in defining the institutions,
functions, and purposes of Filipino democracy, and under which President Corazon Aquino led the
government and the nation in reestablishing Filipino democracy (Abueva 1997, 4).

Describing the development of democracy in the country as "a history of political discontinuity and
instability" (Abueva 1997, 6). Jose Abueva identified three important junctures in the country's
history that brought about these discontinuity and instability

First, by American colonialism that aborted the fledgling Filipino democracy under the Malolos
Constitution and instituted a "colonial democracy" largely ran by Filipinos under US sovereignty;

Second, by Japanese colonialism and the Japanese-sponsored Philippine Republic in World War II
and Japan's Greater East Asia Co Prosperity Sphere; and

Last, by the imposition of authoritarian rule by President Marcos in 1972, thus ending Filipino
democracy under the Republic of the Philippines that began on July 4, 1946 when the Filipinos
regained their independence from the United States (Abueva 1997, 6).

These three important junctures are used as the organizing framework for discussing the
development of democratic politics in the Philippines. The following discussion, therefore, highlights
both the effects of colonial rule on the country's democratic project (first and second junctures) as
well as the dynamics of regime change from democratic to authoritarian rule (third juncture).

However, the discussion of the Philippine democratic politics will not be complete if the transition
from authoritarian rule under Marcos back to democracy after his ouster from the presidency in 1986
is not included. Hence, the discussion in this chapter is divided into three parts.

The first part discusses the American colonial rule and Japanese occupation and their effects on the
country's democracy project. The second part examines the presidency of Ferdinand Marcos and
authoritarian rule in the Philippines. The third part focuses on the transition back to democracy
beginning in 1986.

It is important to note that what actually took place in the Philippines in the wake of the EDSA
People Power revolution in 1986 was the beginning of a re-democratization and not democratization
given that democratic structures and processes were already in place in the Philippines prior to the
imposition of authoritarian rule by Marcos. The use of democratization and not re-democratization
would not capture the salience of the more than a century-old political project of the Philippines
toward democracy.

Activity 1: Can You Spot the Difference?

Instruction: The table contains some provisions of the Constitution of the United States of America
and the 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines relating to the three branches of
government namely, the legislative, executive, and judicial. Compare and contrast these provisions
and identify the similarities and differences between the Philippines and the United States.
 Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Powers
in the Philippines and the United States
The Constitution of the The 1987 Philippine
United States Constitution
Legislative Branch Article 1 Section 1. All Article VI Section 1. The
legislative powers herein legislative power shall be
granted shall be vested in a vested in the Congress of the
Congress of the United States, Philippines which shall consist
which shall consist of a Senate of a Senate and a House of
and House of Representatives. Representatives, except to the
extent reserved to the people
Section 2. The House of by the provision on initiative
Representatives shall be and referendum.
composed of Members chosen
every second Year by the Section 2. The Senate shall be
People of the several States, composed of twenty-four
and the Electors in each State Senators who shall be elected
shall have the Qualifications at large by the qualified voters
requisite for Electors of the of the Philippines, as may be
most numerous Branch of the provided by law.
State Legislature.
Section 3. No person shall be a
No Person shall be a Senator unless he is a natural-
Representative who shall not born citizen of the Philippines,
have attained to the Age of and, on the day of the election,
twenty five Years, and been is at least thirty-five years of
seven Years a Citizen of the age, able to read and write, a
United States, and who shall registered voter, and a resident
not, when elected, be an of the Philippines for not less
Inhabitant of that State in than two years immediately
which he shall be chosen. preceding the day of the
election.

Section 3. The Senate of the Section 4. The term of office

United States shall be of the Senators shall be six
composed of two Senators years … No Senator shall
from each State, chosen by the serve for more than two
Legislature thereof, for six consecutive terms.
Years; and each Senator shall
have one Vote. Section 5. (1) The House of
Representatives shall be
No person shall be a Senator composed of not more than
who shall not have attained the two hundred and fifty
age of thirty years, and been members, unless otherwise
nine years a citizen of the fixed by law, who shall be
United States, and who shall elected from legislative
not, when elected, be an districts apportioned among
Inhabitant of that State for the provinces, cities, and the
which he shall be chosen. Metropolitan Manila area in
accordance with the number of
their respective inhabitants,
and on the basis of a uniform
and progressive ratio, and
those who, as provided by law,
shall be elected through a
party-list system of registered
national, regional, and sectoral
parties or organizations.

(2) The party-list

representatives shall constitute
twenty per centum of the total
number of representatives
including those under the party
list. For three consecutive
terms after the ratification of
this Constitution, one-half of
the seats allocated to party-list
representatives shall be filled,
as provided by law, by
selection or election from the
labor, peasant, urban poor,
indigenous cultural
communities, women, youth,
and such other sectors as may
be provided by law, except the
religious sector.

Section 6. No person shall be a

Member of the House of
Representatives unless he is a
natural-born citizen of the
Philippines and, on the day of
the election, is at least twenty-
five years of age, able to read
and write, and, except the
party-list representatives, a
registered voter in the district
in which he shall be elected,
and a resident thereof for a
period of not less than one year
immediately preceding the day
of the election.

Section 7. The Members of the

House of Representatives shall
be elected for a term of three
year… No member of the
House of Representatives shall
 serve for more than three
consecutive terms.
Executive Branch Article II Section 1. The Article VII Section 1. The
executive Power shall be executive power shall be
vested in a President of the vested in the President of the
United States of America. Philippines.

He shall hold his Office during Section 2. No person may be

the Term of four Years, and, elected President unless he is a
together with the Vice natural-born citizen of the
President, chosen for the same Philippines, a registered voter,
Term… able to read and write, at least
forty years of age on the day of
No Person except a natural the election, and a resident of
born Citizen, or a Citizen of the Philippines for at least ten
the United States, at the time years immediately preceding
of the Adoption of this such election.
Constitution, shall be eligible
to the Office of President; Section 3. There shall be a
neither shall any person be Vice-President who shall have
eligible to that Office who the same qualifications and
shall not have attained to the term of office and be elected
Age of thirty five Years, and with and in the same manner
been fourteen Years a Resident as the President. He may be
within the United States. removed from office in the
same manner as the President.
Section 4. The President, Vice
President and all civil Officers Section 4. The President and
of the United States, shall be the Vice-President shall be
removed from Office on elected by direct vote of the
Impeachment for, and people for a term of six
Conviction of, Treason, years… The President shall not
Bribery, or other high Crimes be eligible for any reelection.
and Misdemeanors. No person who has succeeded
as President and has served as
such for more than four years
shall be qualified for election
to the same office at any time.

No Vice-President shall serve

for more than two consecutive
terms.

Article XI Section 2. The

President, the Vice-President,
the Members of the Supreme
Court, the Members of the
Constitutional Commissions,
and the Ombudsman may be
removed from office, on
impeachment for, and
 conviction of, culpable
violation of the Constitution,
treason, bribery, graft and
corruption, other high crimes,
or betrayal of public trust.
Judicial Branch Article III Section 1. The Article VIII Section 1. The
judicial Power of the United judicial power shall be vested
States, shall be vested in one in one Supreme Court and in
supreme Court, and in such such lower courts as may be
inferior Courts as the Congress established by law.
may from time to time ordain
and establish. The Judges, both Section 10. The salary of the
of the supreme and inferior Chief Justice and of the
Courts, shall hold their Offices Associate Justices of the
during good Behaviour, and Supreme Court, and of judges
shall, at stated Times, receive of lower courts shall be fixed
for their Services, a by law. During their
Compensation, which shall not continuance in office, their
be diminished during their salary shall not be decreased.
Continuance in Office.
Section 11. The Members of
the Supreme Court and judges
of lower courts shall hold
office during good behavior
until they reached the age of
seventy years or become
incapacitated to discharge the
duties of their office.

In what ways are the Philippines and American government systems similar, and in what ways are they
different?
Executive Power
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Legislative Power
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Judicial Power
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________

COLONIAL RULE AND THE DEMOCRACY PROJECT IN THE PHILIPPINES

MARCOS AND AUTHORITARIAN RULE IN THE PHILIPPINES

GUIDE QUESTIONS:
1. Who was Ferdinand Marcos?
2. How did he become so powerful in Philippine politics?
3. What were the effects of his declaration of martial law on the democratic institutions and
processes in the country?
Abinales (2004, 156) described Ferdinand Marcos as representing a new breed of Filipino politicians
when he became President of the Republic of the Philippines in 1965 and got reelected in 1969. Unlike
his predecessors, Marcos did not base his powers exclusively on control of land and vital export crops.
Rather, he combined control over his local bailiwick, the llocos region, with connections established in
college as a member of an elite fraternity. His alleged war record as a leader of an anti-Japanese guerrilla
group gave a further boost to his political career and therefore, set him apart from many fellow politicians
who collaborated with the Japanese.
Whereas the old-style cacique power was based on the genealogy of mestizo supremacy-trom private
wealth to state power, from provincial bossism to national hegemony, Marcos centralized the old
decentralized power order. He formed a single privatized National Constabulary, a personal Army, a
client Supreme Court to replace dozens of privatized "security guards," private armies, and pliable local
judges, respectively (Anderson 2004).
But what really set Marcos apart from other postwar leaders was his ability to combine the aditional use
of patronage with more modern mechanisms of winning elections and sustaining power, for example,
vote buying, electoral fraud, and a modicum of coercion. He also used the media. Through all these, he
won the presidency (Abinales 2004).
Lacking the political and economic capital of older elite families, Marcos turned to the state and the
various modes of acquiring state power, Marcos moved to take control of what he regarded as essential
agencies of the state. He exploited the state, not the hacienda of the old oligarchy (Abinales 2004). For
instance, he centralized economic planning, with handpicked, American-educated technocrats who were
amply funded by the president's office (Abinales 2004). Marcos also courted the Armed Forces of the
Philippines (AFP) by integrating the military into his presidential national development program, and as a
result, expanded the military's operations and received special support and patronage from Marcos
(Hernandez 1979, 160-1 cited in Abinales 2004),

Marcos also undermined the Philippine Congress which he depicted as a major obstacle to the goals of
reform and development. Abinales 2004, 158) described how Marcos undermined Congress in this way:
Marcos began to develop a national network parallel to and immune from congressional influence by
opening direct links between himself and the rural masses" (Stauffer 1975, 32). He revived old executive
agencies and sent their personnel directly to towns and municipalities over the heads of local politicians.
Use of the military in the infrastructure program was a prime example; Marcos cited an urgent need for
civic action to divert army money and personnel to road-building (Caoili 1986, 21).
In doing all this, Marcos required neither congressional approval nor allocation. To sidestep Congress'
power to impede the release of funds, Marcos created his own financial base, obtaining funds from both
internal and external sources. Monies were then concentrated in the Presidential Arm for Community
Development (PACD), which became the symbol of Marcos's commitment to national growth (Spence
1979, 327),
Gleeck (1987, 67 cited in Abinales 2004) noted that Marcos became more confrontational with Congress.
He vetoed laws it passed for its own benefit, for example, increasing congressional allowances, and
exposed congressional members' lack of moral rectitude, for instance, the protection of politicians'
children involved in criminal activities. Congress in turn questioned Marcos over policy, for instance, his
broken promise not to send Filipino troops to Vietnam, and exposed corruption and venality committed
by the president. The conflict between Marcos and the Congress escalated after Marcos's reelection to the
presidency through massive fraud and coercion.
Marcos declared Martial Law in 1972 using the discourse of a national crisis due to threats coming from
the communists, on the one hand, and the conservative extremists within the traditional oligarchy, on the
other hand Marcos extended such discourse to justify martial law claiming that the traditional methods of
democratic government and politics were unable to cope with the crisis (Timberman 1991).
The declaration of Martial Law caused immediate and unprecedented curtailment of civil liberties in the
Philippines, and at the same time, the end of democracy in the country.
Marcos closed down the Congress and most newspapers and radio and television stations; he ordered the
arrest and indefinite detention of hundreds of political leaders, journalists, and publishers, including
delegates to the Constitutional Convention who were critical of him. With the military as his principal
partner in the dictatorship, he wielded overwhelming power for over 13 years.
By his unrestrained and intimidating use of power, he forced the judiciary, the bureaucracy, the local
governments, and the populace into submission to his one-man rule. The Supreme Court as a whole
quickly lost its customary independence and became the visible legitimizer of his actions in the rare
instances when these were challenged. Under the Marcos "national security" or garrison state, human
rights violations were rampant, the victims were helpless, and the perpetrators were not held to account
(Abueva 1997, 7).
Martial law centralized all state powers in Marcos's hands. According to Abinales (2004), the ultimate
purpose of Marcos was to centralize state power for patrimonial reasons, and that state centralization
became his weapon to destroy his enemies, both national and provincial oligarchs. The interlacing of
patrimonial intent and state centralization besT describes the Marcos regime.
Alfred McCoy (2010. 17) described Marcos's political rule during the martial law period in this way:
... his regime rested upon a coalition of rent-seeking families noi unlike those that had dominated electoral
politics before martial law Backed by an expanding military and an influx of foreign loan capital that
eventually totalled USD 26 billion, Marcos effectively centralized political power in the archipelago for
the first time since the late 1930s, making once-autonomous provincial politicians supplicants and
reducing the political process to place intrigues.
During the early years of the new regime, Marcos used his Martial Law powers to punish enemies among
the old oligarchy, stripping them of assets and denying them the political access needed to rebuild.
Simultaneously, he provided his retinue of kin and cronies with extraordinary financial opportunities,
creating unprecedented private wealth."
Instead of using his broad Martial Law powers to promote development, Marcos expanded the role of
rents within the economy. A study of how rents operated under Marcos by economists from the
University of the Philippines revealed that Marcos resorted to the following instruments, namely, "the
issue of exclusive rights to import, export, or exploit certain areas, the collection of large funds which are
then privately controlled and expropriated, and the preferential treatment of certain firms in an industry
for purposes of credit or credit restructuring" (De Dios 1984, 40-1 cited in McCoy 2010).
Marcos's use of violence along with his economic mismanagement which plunged the country to
economic decline and failing physical health eroded his authority after 1978. The erosion of his authority
and the worsening economic conditions of the country put his regime in chaos, producing a crisis of
legitimacy of his regime that snowballed into an organized opposition by the elite and the mass against
his authoritarian government. McCoy examined the source of Marcos's mismanagement of the economy
and how it led to his downfall.
Marcos became increasingly reliant upon courtiers to deliver the blocs of provincial votes that he would
need for a new mandate. Since the basis of crony wealth was accidental personal ties to the president
rather than economic acumen, most, though not all of these family-based conglomerates proved unstable.
Plagued by mismanagement and corruption, these corporations collapsed with spectacular speed when the
economy began to contract after 1981. As Marcos provincial political machinery withered, he suffered
sharp reverses in the 1984 and 1986 elections, producing a crisis of legitimacy for his regime (McCoy
2010. 18).
The Marcos regime eventually came to an end in the wake of the EDSA People Power Revolution in
February 1986. The ouster of Marcos paved the difficult way for a return to democratic rule in the country
under its new president, Corazon C. Aquino-daughter-in-law of one of the most prominent collaborators
with the Japanese during the Japanese occupation and the mother of the President, Benigno Simeon
Aquino Ill (2010-2016). Who would have thought that twenty-nine years after, Aquino's son, would be
the fifteenth President of the Philippines.

Activity 2: Ferdinand Marcos: Up Close and Personal

Instruction: Watch the video documentary titled "Batas Militar,’ or Martial Law which can be accessed
online through YouTube link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SG2Mx7Y5vzc.
Batas Militar is an almost two-hour (1:56:26) documentary about the Martial law period in the
Philippines. It talks about former President Ferdinand Marcos, the events that led to the declaration of
Martial law in the Philippines, the changes that happened after the declaration of Martial law, and the key
issues and problems associated with Martial Law in the Philippines.
Another video documentary that you must watch as a supplemental material to Batas Militar is the "Life
under Marcos: A Fact-Check by the ABS-CBN News. The video documentary can be accessed online
through the YouTube link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRhltGGIJCg. The documentary runs for
six minutes and twelve seconds (6:12).
After watching the two video documentaries, answer the following questions.

Questions Responses
Who was Ferdinand Marcos?

(Marcos's personal and professional background,

his abilities and skills, and his program of
government)
Why did Marcos declare Martial Law in 1972?
(The justifications/reasons given by Marcos for
the declaration of Martial Law in 1972)
What are the impacts of Martial Law in the
country?

(The effects of Martial Law on the society in

general, and on the government in particular.)
Was the Marcos government a dictatorship?
Why or why not?

(The excesses and abuses of the Marcos

government)

Activity 3: Did You Know? Facts About the EDSA Revolution

Instruction: You must read and watch about the EDSA Revolution. This activity has two parts, and both
parts provide you with a bird's view of the People Power Revolution or the EDSA Revolution that to
place in 1986. The first part introduces you to 29 EDSA-related far as compiled by Alixandra Caole Vila
in her newspaper article published online in Philippine Star at the link: http://www.philstar.com/news-
feature/2015/02/25/1425819/29-interesting-facts-about-edsa-revolution.
The second part requires you to watch a video documentary about the People Power Revolution in 1986,
titled, "The Philippines EDSA Revolution' February 22, 1986." eye
Part 1: Search and read each of the 29 EDSA-related facts and identify which strikes you most, and
explain why.

What EDSA-related fact strikes me most, and why?

_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Part 2. Watch the video documentary titled, The Philippine Edsa Revolution February 22, 1986. The
video documentary is a six-minute and fifteen-second (6:15) reporting of the chronology of events
surrounding the EDSA Revolution in 1898 by Jim Laurie for ABC News through the David McClure
Brinkley’s “ABC New This Week” Program.
Jim Laurie is an American veteran journalist and broadcaster while Dvid McClure Brinkey was an
American newscaster for NBC and ABC from 1943 to 1997. The video documentary can be accessed
online from through the link http://datab.us/-zHGBrCIID8#The%20Phiippines%20”Edsa
%20Revolution”%20February%2022%201986.
After watching the video documentary, create groups of five students each, and then discuss within the
group the video documentary by focusing on the following questions:

Who were the key players involved in the EDSA Revolution or in 1986?
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________

What has been the roles in and contributions of the various key players to the revolution or uprising?
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________

What are the issues surrounding the revolution or uprising?

_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Who or what were the contending forces or groups, and what were the areas of disagreement between
these contending forces?
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________

What prevented bloodshed in the EDSA Revolution in 1996?

_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
THE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT
GUIDE QUESTIONS:
1. Which branch of the government do you think is most effective in exercising its powers and
performing its duties and functions, and why?
2. Why do you think the other branch or branches of government is/are not as effective as the one
you chose?
No country in Asia has experienced democracy more than or in the same way as the Philippines. For over
more than a century, the Philippines has had experimented with democratic institutions and processes
from the representational structures of the Malolos Republic of 1898 to the "colonial democracy" under
US sovereignty, and from the cacique democracy of the postwar republic to the restoration of democracy
in the People Power uprising of 1986 (Hutchcroft and Rocamora 2003; Abueva 1997).
The Philippines' experimentation with democracy was punctuated by the breakdown of the rule of law"
during the Japanese occupation interlude and the emasculation of "Filipino democracy" under Marcos's
authoritarian rule. With such a political history of discontinuity and instability (Abueva 1997), it is no
wonder why the Philippines has had rich experience with diverse forms of government institutions and
processes-under democratic and authoritarian regimes, constitutional and revolutionary governments, as
well as presidential and parliamentary systems.
The rich political history of the country meant a rich constitutional history as well. Beginning from the
Commonwealth period when the country became self-governing in 1935, the country has had four
constitutions defining and legitimating our government institutions' roles, powers, and responsibilities.
These are the 1935 Constitution, the 1973 Constitution, the 1973 Constitution (revised in 1981), and the
1987 Constitution.
Both the 1935 and 1987 Philippine Constitutions provided for a presidential system of government. The
1987 Constitution, however, goes much further in defining democratic institutions and processes in the
country. The 1973 Constitution provided for a parliamentary government and its revised form for a
semipresidential. It is important to note, however, that the 1973 Constitution's provisions that would have
established a parliamentary system of government in the Philippines were never implemented due to the
Martial Law regime then in place.

Activity 4: Compare and Contrast

Instruction: Compare and contrast the powers of the executive, legislative and judicial branches of
the Philippine government based on the 1987 Philippine Constitution. Using the Venn diagram
below, first, identify the exclusive powers of A the executive branch, B the legislative branch, and C
the judicial branch of the government. Next, identify the powers that both A and B, B and C and C
and A are responsible for. Finally, identity that power that is common to all three branches of the
government.

Executive Legislative

Judiciary

THE PRINCIPLE OF SEPARATION OF POWERS AND THE SYSTEM OF CHECKS-

AND-BALANCES
GUIDE QUESTIONS:
1. What is the difference between presidential and parliamentary systems of government?
2. How does the 1987 Philippine Constitution enshrine the principle of separation of powers and the
system of checks-and-balances in the government?
THE PRINCIPLE OF SEPARATION OF POWERS AND THE SYSTEM OF CHECKS-AND-
BALANCES IN THE PHILIPPINE GOVERNMENT

Executive Branch Legislative Branch Judicial Branch

Executive Law enforcement or The President's power The Supreme Court
Execution to appoint officers may rule on the
Power (Art. VII. Sec. 1) whose appointments constitutionality or
are vested in him/her validity of any treaty,
by the Constitution international or
requires the consent of executive agreement,
the Commission on law, presidential
Appointments, decree, proclamation,
members of which are order, instruction, or
members of the regulation (Art. VIII
Congress (Art. VII, Sec. 5).
Sec. 16 of the 1987
Philippine
Constitution)

The President's
suspension of the
privilege of the writ of
habeas corpus or
proclamation of martial
law in the country or
any part thereof in case
of invasion or rebellion,
when the public safety
requires it, by virtue of
his power as
Commander in Chief,
may be revoked by the
Congress (Art. VII,
Sec. 18).

The President's power

to grant amnesty is
subject to the
concurrence of a
majority of Congress
(Art. VII, Sec. 19).
No treaty or
international agreement
that the President has
concluded shall be
valid without the
concurrence of at least
two-thirds of all the
members of the Senate
 (Art.

VII, Sec. 21), The

Congress has the power
to pass appropriations
recommended by the
President (Art. VII.
Sec. 22).
Legislative Power (Art. The President can veto Lawmaking The Supreme Court
VI, Sec. 1) every bill passed by the may rule on the
Congress (Art VI. Sec. constitutionality or
27(1) as well as any validity of any treaty,
particular item or items international or
in an appropriation executive agreement,
revenue, or tariff bill law presidential decree,
(Art. VI Sec. 27(2)) proclamation, order
instruction, or
regulation (Art. VII.
Sec. 5 (2)
Judicial Power The President can By virtue of its Law interpretation and
(Art, VIII, Sec. 1) nullify a conviction lawmaking power, the application
made by the judiciary Congress can define,
in a criminal case by prescribe, and
pardoning the offender apportion the
(Art VII. Sec. 19) jurisdiction of the
various courts (Art.
VIII, Sec. 2). It may
also increase the
appellate jurisdiction of
the Supreme Court but
only with the latter's
advice and concurrence
(Art. VI, Sec. 30).