For this issue, I want to write about aspects of a democratic political system as practiced in the Philippines. Partly because the local station of Radio Bombo invited me to an interview on the topic of selecting candidates for local positions for the May 2025 elections, this is an interesting topic as I recall my subjects in Political Science at the University of the Philippines, Diliman, Quezon City.
To give this write-up some focus, I posed two questions: (1) What is democracy? and (2) How are political leaders selected in a system controlled by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)?
The answers will illuminate what I see as the Philippine brand of democracy. The standard description of a democracy is this: Democracy is a system of government in which power is vested in the people. It is characterized by free and fair elections, the protection of individual rights and freedoms, the rule of law, and the principle that all citizens have equal political participation and influence.
The answer to the second question is this: In the CCP leaders are chosen through internal party elections and appointments rather than through direct public voting. Local leaders are elected at lower levels, but higher-level officials are appointed by their superiors.
We compare these features and apply them to the local political setting.
Are our elections free and fair? It is free because there are many safeguards to ensure no one is intimidated, the list of voters is accessible to candidates, there are party watchers inside the precinct, and the electronic system of voting ensures fast results.
If there is vote-buying, does this practice destroy the freedom to choose and violate the exercise of the right to vote without expecting a reward?
Many argue that buying votes divests the voter of his freedom to choose and makes the election unfair because only those with the money to buy votes will win. In other words, vote-buying is contrary to democratic principles. To put it bluntly, buying votes is not aligned with a democratic system of governance.
In the elements of the CCP style what is noticeable is that at higher levels, the choice of leaders is by appointment, not through an election by the people done directly by them with one voter having one vote.
Therefore, rampant vote buying diminishes the value of our democratic system.
But a hybrid Philippine-style political system has come out, neither purely democratic nor is it CCP style. It copies elements from both, as further illustrated below.
The dominant party or parties present only one set of candidates after a series of negotiations and instructions. The voters are left with candidates with virtually no opposing candidates; if there are, these candidates have no chance of winning. They have other motivations, which exclude winning.
Voting is done by consensus among the top political leaders. Yes, there is still an election to satisfy the requirements of democratic- leaning Constitution but it is like people go to the polls already knowing who is going to win (Some people find this funny and, therefore, there is no need to go to the polling precincts. It is commonly viewed as a waste of time).
Elections become farcical and synonymous with laughable. The act of voting becomes ministerial. Of course, that is matched by a system of giving money and other rewards so that the number of votes is convincing proof of the existence of democracy.
My conclusion is that in our current style of elections, we see democracy grinding to a screeching halt. We are, however, able to pick up the pieces and restart the engine of democratic governance, after an election. Thanks to a multi-party system that provides opportunities for democracy to recover whatever it lost in an election.
#WeTakeAStand #OpinYon #OpinYonNews #OpinYonColumn #ColumnbyAttyJunieGoSoco #IAmBack