Dear UP: Your Own Research Supports Charter Change
The University of the Philippines (UP), our country's top institution of higher learning, recently came out with a discussion paper that has lit up the reform movement. On initial reading, the paper seems to doubt or warn against constitutional revisions—especially those on economic liberalization and structural reform in governance.But here's the twist: if you read the paper closely, it actually supports the call for constitutional change.
Let's discuss why.
The Paper Doesn't Oppose Charter Change—It Reinforces It
Contrary to some media analyses, the UP discussion paper is not an argument against constitutional liberalization. It rather emphasizes the imperatives of:- A Parliamentary-Federal system, and
- Open Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) policies
So let’s stop pretending this paper undermines the reform movement. It confirms what we’ve known all along—that systemic change is necessary if the Philippines is ever to escape the economic and political stagnation we’ve been trapped in since 1987.
Why the Current Constitution Holds Us Back?
Here's the uncomfortable truth: the 1987 Constitution is architecturally a relic and essentially defective. It has yielded a government plagued by:- Name-recall politics over competence
- Patronage appointments, stifling merit-based leadership
- Executive-legislative gridlock, preventing long-term policy consistency
- Policy inconsistency, courtesy of non-renewable six-year presidential terms
- Weak system of accountability, restricted to politicized impeachment
- Red tape and bloated bureaucracy, discouraging local and foreign investors
What Other Countries Did Right—and Why We Should Learn from Them
South Korea, Japan, and China are typically referred to as economic miracles. But let's be real about how they achieved this.Prior to opening up their markets to global competition, they constructed well-established, centralized developmental states. They possessed:
- Long-term planning
- Policy consistency
- Effective governance frameworks
- Strong system of accountability
In political science, this has been called a "fragile state." Gunnar Myrdal advocated developmental states that employ state power not for the enrichment of elites, but to spur inclusive growth. This takes the strength of institutions—something that the 1987 Constitution simply does not enable us to construct.
A Call to the University of the Philippines: Lead, Don't Stall
UP, you are an intellectual beacon. But with great power comes great responsibility.Rather than doubling down on fear or vagueness, you might help spearhead a rational, fact-based debate about constitutional reform—not put it off with stale fears and reused talking points.
The hysteria about term extensions, foreign ownership of land, or alleged "loss of sovereignty" has been dismantled repeatedly. The actual threat is keeping a system that still rewards incompetence, fosters corruption, and hinders our country's progress.
 |
| UP official website |
The Bottom Line: Let's Be Honest
If you take your own research seriously, then you'll have to confess: Charter Change is not a political power grab. It is a nation-building necessity.So to the scholars and economists of UP: this is not a criticism of your scholarship. It's an appeal to put it to use.
Support constitutional reform—not for any political faction, but for the future of the Filipino people.
Final Thought
The Philippines cannot be a prosperous state with an impotent 1987 Constitution.If we desire genuine change, it's not enough that we have better leaders. We need better systems. Systems that make people accountable, pay attention to competence, invite investment, and effectively deliver services.
That will not happen under the 1987 Constitution.
It's time we face that reality—and move on.
UP's Academic Paper: https://econ.upd.edu.ph/.../ind.../dp/article/view/1552/1037
No comments:
Post a Comment