Local Governments and Devolution in the Philippines (1)

DECENTRALIZATION AND DEMOCRATIZATION

In the later part of the 20th Century there has been a dramatic shift in the manner governments around the world managed their their states. Instead of having a centralized centralized form of government, most nation nation-state now somehow adopts the idea of shifting some of the national or central powers to the local government units. This shifting of powers is called Decentralization. Decentralization is the transfer of planning, decision decision making, or administr administrative ative authority from the central central government government to its field organizatio organizations, ns, local governments, and nongovernmental organizations as defined by Rondinellei and Cheema. According to de Guzman and Padilla, decentralization is the dispersal of authority and responsibility and the allocation of powers and functions from the center or top level of government to regional bodies or special purpose authorities, or from the national to the sub national levels of government.

Decentralization is a strategy used by the government towards democratizing the political system and accelerating the attainment of sustainable development”1 for the reason that it will promote or allow fuller participation of the citizens in government affairs and will give the local governments and the communities a more active role in the economic, soci social al and polit politica icall deve develo lopm pmen entt

2

. Gove Govern rnme ment nt furt furthe herr assu assume mess that that thro throug ugh h

decentralization “development would be more responsive to the needs of the people and would create opportunities in the regions, promote employment and economic activities and as well strengthen people’s participation in the affairs of the government”3.

Different forms of decentralization can be distinguished primarily in terms of the extent of authority transferred and the amount of autonomy. Decentralization may take the form of devolution devolution and deconcentratio deconcentration. n.

Deconcentrat Deconcentration ion involves involves the “redistrib “redistribution ution of

administrative responsibilities only within the central government”4. It is not a transfer of 1

Philippine Politics and Governance: An Introduction. Edited: Morada, Noel. Tadem, Teresa.

2

Decentralization Decentralization Towards Democratization ann Development in the Asian Pacific Region: Eastern Regional Organization for Public Organization (EROPA). edited; De Guzman, Raul. Reforma, Mila. Bookman Printing House, Manila, 1993. p 5 3 Decentralization Decentralization Towards Democratization ann Development in the Asian Pacific Region: Eastern Regional Organization for Public Organization (EROPA). edited; De Guzman, Raul. Reforma, Mila. Bookman Printing House, Manila, 1993. p 3 4


1

pow power er from from the the cent centra rall gove govern rnme ment nt but but mere merely ly to “del “deleg egat atee such such powe powers rs and and responsibilities to the hierarchical levels, primarily to facilitate the administration of nati nation onal al prog progra rams ms and and serv servic ices es,, and and this this appr approa oach ch is othe otherw rwis isee refe referr rred ed to as administrative decentralization”5. Administrative decentralization can take effect without the necessity of legislation but with the issuance of an executive or administrative order. Althoug Although h the local local units units now have have respon responsib sibili iliti ties es bestow bestowed ed to them, them, they they are still still supervised and controlled the central government; therefore all transactions cannot be done unless approved by the central government. They are not to decide on their their own.

Deconcentration is the assignment of functions to ad hoc bodies and special authorities created in the region to render technical assistance on regional development. This could be done in different ways: 1) the shifting of the workload from a central government ministry or agency headquarters to its own field staff located in offices outside the national capital. 2) The transfer of some decision-making discretion to field staffs but with with guide guideli line ness set set by the the cent centra rall mini minist stry ry.. 3) Loca Locall admi admini nist stra rati tion on,, in whic which h all all subordinate levels of government within a country are agents of central authority, usually the executive branch6.

Another form of decentralization is delegation or the transfer of some functions to semiautonomous organization not directly directly under the control of the central government. Often these organizations have semi-independent authority to perform their responsibilities and may not even be located within the regular government structure7. This form is more defi defini nite tely ly exte extens nsiv ivee

than than

admi admini nist stra rati tive ve

decon deconce cent ntra rati tion on..

Exam Exampl ples es

are are

publ public ic

corporation, regional planning and development authorities, multi purpose and single purpose functional authorities and special project implementation units.

Devolution, on the other hand, “seeks to create or strengthen strengthen independent levels or units of government through giving them certain functions or create units of government that 5

Decentralization Decentralization Towards Democratization ann Development in the Asian Pacific Region: Eastern Regional Organization for Public Organization (EROPA). edited; De Guzman, Raul. Reforma, Mila. Bookman Printing House, Manila, 1993. p 4 6 7

Philippine Politics and Governance: An Introduction. Edited: Morada, Noel. Tadem, Teresa. Philippine Politics and Governance: An Introduction. Edited: Morada, Noel. Tadem, Teresa.

2

are outside its control8. It is also called as “political decentralization and involves the transfer of power, responsibility and resources for the performance of certain functions from the national to the local governments”9. Its fundamental characteristics are: a. Local governm government ent units units (LGU’s (LGU’s)) are autono autonomou mous, s, indepen independen dentt and clearl clearly y percei perceived ved as a separate level of government over which central authorities exercise little or no direct control. b. LGU’s have clear and legally recognized geographical boundaries within which they exercise authority and perform public functions. c. LGU’s have corporate status status and have the power power to secure secure resour resources ces to perfor perform m the functi function. on.

Lastly Lastly,, d.

Devolution implies the needs to develop local governments as institutions. This is an arra arrange ngeme ment nt in whic which h ther theree is reci recipr proca ocall rela relati tions onshi hip p betw between een cent centra rall and and loca locall governments. governments. The LGU’s has the ability ability to interact reciprocall reciprocally y with other units in the system of government of which it is part.

Lastly, Nongovernmental Organizations (NGO) and Community Organizations is used to “dec “decong onges estt the the gover governm nmen entt by mobi mobili lizi zing ng the the NGOs NGOs and and COs COs for for plan planni ning, ng, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of government programs which will make governm government ent action actionss more more respon responsiv sivee to the needs needs and demand demandss of those those who truly truly deserve government assistance and may minimize graft and corruption while injecting cause-orientedness in the bureaucracy”10

There are mixed motives and causes of the shift to decentralization worldwide, primarily politically driven. Some commonly sited reasons are democratization increases efficiency and economic growth, improves supply and delivery of local services, vested interests of national politicians, preservation of national political systems in the face of growing local demands and general failure of centrist ce ntrist experiments.

8


9

Decentralization Decentralization Towards Democratization ann Development in the Asian Pacific Region: Eastern Regional Organization for Public Organization (EROPA). edited; De Guzman, Raul. Reforma, Mila. Bookman Printing House, Manila, 1993. p 4 10 Decentralization Decentralization Towards Democratization ann Development in the Asian Pacific Region: Eastern Regional Organization for Public Organization (EROPA). edited; De Guzman, Raul. Reforma, Mila. Bookman Printing House, Manila, 1993. p 4

3

In the case of the Philippines, of the four given forms of decentralization, devolution is the prevalent form of decentralization used by the government.

Decentralization and democratization tend to reinforce each other; decentralization is a factor in increasing democratization while successful decentralization can only take place with democratic process. To a certain extent, that is what the devolution and the local autonomy is all about: unleashing the creative powers and resources at the local level towards the general objective of developing of self-reliance and lessen dependence upon the cent centrral gove goverrnmen nmentt whi which aft after all all has has been been one one reaso eason n for for the stat tate of underdevelopment of local government unit in the Philippines. Indeed, local governments in the Philippines are undergoing a fundamental structural and ideological transformation as a result of the devolution in 1991. This transformation will be better appreciated within the context of decentralization, democratization and local empowerment.

THE TH E

EVOL EVOLUT UTIO ION N

OF

PHI PHILI LIPP PPIN INE E

LOCA LO CAL L

GOVER OVERNM NMEN ENTS TS

AND

CENTRA CENTRALL- LOCAL LOCAL RELATI RELATIONS ONS:: FROM FROM PRECOL PRECOLONI ONIAL AL BARANG BARANGAY AY TO THE 1991 LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE

4

Although it is commonly assumed that the decentralization process in the Philippines is a complete break from the overly centralized past, evidences show that “the so-called landmark LGC of 1991 is not an abrupt break from the past but a result of a long struggle for decentralization and local autonomy. autonomy.11” According to Hutchcroft, scholars viewed the Philippine public administration as “over centralized because they tend to concentrate far more attention to formal structures of authority than on informal networks of power”12. But looking back in time, “before the arrival of Arab traders, scholars and the Spaniards in the sixteenth century, everything was local.”

“The “The ances ancesto tors rs of the the Fili Filipi pinos nos esta establ blis ishe hed d an indi indige geno nous us and autonomous political institution known as the barangay, which was composed of some thirty thirty to one hundred households. Some of these small-scale political units were clustered together, but most of them ‘had not attained a level of political organization above and beyond the kinship principle.”13

When When the Spanis Spanish h coloni colonizer zerss came, came, they they introd introduce uced d “a centra centraliz lized ed system system with with the Spanish governor-general as the supreme authority in all matters” 14 with the “subnational barrio) remained as basic officials acting as his agents”15. The barangay (renamed as barrio) admini administr strati ative ve units units but other other ties ties of local local governm government ent were were added: added: “the “the pueblos (municipalities), cabildos (cities), and provincias (provinces).”16 Local discretion in the governance of local affairs was allowed only towards the end of the Spanish regime. “The Maura Law of 1893 sought reforms in the local government system by granting greater local autonomy to towns and provinces in Luzon and Visayas and by allowing local local citize citizens ns to select select some some of their their offici officials als.” .”17

11

But But becau because se of the the Phil Philip ippi pine ne

Philippine Politics and Governance: An Introduction. Edited: Morada, Noel. Philippine Politics and Governance: An Introduction. Edited: Morada, Noel. 13 Philippine Politics and Governance: An Introduction. Edited: Morada, Noel. 14 Philippine Politics and Governance: An Introduction. Edited: Morada, Noel. 15 Philippine Politics and Governance: An Introduction. Edited: Morada, Noel. 16 Philippine Politics and Governance: An Introduction. Edited: Morada, Noel. 17 Philippine Politics and Governance: An Introduction. Edited: Morada, Noel. 12

5

Tadem, Teresa. Tadem, Teresa. Tadem, Teresa. Tadem, Teresa. Tadem, Teresa. Tadem, Teresa. Tadem, Teresa.

Revolution Revolution which shortly followed followed in 1898, these reforms did not make much impact at all.

According to Tapales, the Spanish period had impacts, however, on the development of local governments in the Philippines.

“First, indigenous activities were supplanted by putting in place an alie alien n syst system em of loca locall gove govern rnme ment nt..

Seco Second nd,, a high high degr degree ee of

centralization in the capital of Manila in Luzon came to characterize nati nation onal al-l -loc ocal al rela relati tions ons for for anot another her cent centur ury y afte afterr the the Span Spanis ish h colonization. Third, the divide-and-rule divide-and-rule policy of Spanish colonizers, their concentration of all political activities in Manila and the ensuing neglect of the other regions outside Manila, and the curtailment of many elements of internal trade strengthened regionalism and the other regions’ contempt for the center, which remain strong until today. Four Fourth th,, at the the end end of Spani Spanish sh rule rule,, ther theree were were stil stilll area areass in the the Philippines that considered themselves not part of the emerging nation at all all whic which h was was beca becaus usee the the Span Spania iard rdss were were unsu unsucc cces essf sful ul in consol consolida idatin ting g all the islands islands under under their control. control.

And finally finally,, the

Spanish period left local elite that would continue to play important role roless in the decade decadess ahea ahead. d.

The The datu datu in the Phili Philipp ppin ines es were

incorporat incorporated ed into the Spanish colonial colonial regime. regime. They were dependent dependent upon upon Span Spanis ish h patr patron onag agee and and supp suppor ortt but but they they also also exer exerci cise sed d considerable powers in the local areas.”18

In 1898, against the backdrop of the Philippine Revolution against Spain, the first but short lived Philippine Republic under the Malolos Constitution was established. Officials were elected on a popular basis and "decentralization" and "administrative autonomy" were among the rallying cries of the period.19 The Malolos Constitution which served as 18

Philippine Politics and Governance: An Introduction. Edited: Morada, Noel. Tadem, Teresa. Alex B. Brillantes, Jr. , Decentralization, Decentralization, Devolution and Development in the Philippines, UMP-Asia Occasional Paper No. 44, 1999

19

6

the framework of the Philippine Philippine revolution revolutionary ary government, government, provided provided for the creation creation of municipal and provincial assemblies, autonomous local units, and popular and direct elections.20

The American occupation of the Philippines (1902-1935) saw the promulgation of a number number of polici policies es promot promoting ing local local autonom autonomy. y. These These includ included ed the organi organizat zation ion of municipal municipal and provincial provincial councils based on general general suffrage. suffrage. Other pronouncement pronouncementss indicative of the thrust towards local autonomy included the following: the Instructions of President McKinley to the Taft Commission; the incorporation of the City of Manila (Act 183 of the Philippine Commission in 1902); the establishment of the Moro Province (act 787 in 1903); the organization of provincial governments (Act 1396 in 1905); and the extens extension ion of popular popular contro control, l, like like the elimi eliminati nation on of appoint appointive ive member memberss from from the provincial board.21 The American colonial period began with an emphasis on local selfgovernm government ent with the aim of building building democra democracy cy from below. below.

Munici Municipal pal and then

provincial elections were first introduced before national elections. However, American admini administr strator atorss discov discovere ered d that that Filipi Filipino no elites elites who came came to fill fill posts posts in munici municipal pal governments “where regularly ‘mishandling public funds’ by voting all available revenue to pay for their own salaries.”22 Concerned with inefficiency and corruption in local governance, Americans tinkered with the liberal democratic system they introduced by moving moving toward toward centra centraliz lizati ation on to preven preventt the “evils “evils”” of unrest unrestric ricted ted and “untut “untutore ored” d” Filipino rule. While the United States attempted to institute a new system, it ended up preserving preserving much of the informal power structure structure and in ruling through the ilustrado ilustrado and cacique classes. Like their Spanish predecessors and other colonial regimes in South East Asia, American American administrat administrators ors allowed the cooperative cooperative elements elements of the Filipino Filipino elite an increasingly larger role in government for expediency purposes. But in the process, they turned a blind eye on the local elite who “enriched themselves at the expense of the peasants and increased their traditional power within the local communities.23

20


21

For the extensive and detailed discussion of these various initiatives, see Laurel, op cit., pp.289-293

22


23

7

In spite of the enactment of the above-mentioned policies purportedly supportive of local autono autonomy, my, the Ameri Americans cans mainta maintaine ined d a highly highly centra centraliz lized ed polit politico ico-ad -admin minist istrat rative ive structure. Largely because of security considerations, local affairs had to be under the control of the Americans.

The Commonwealth period (1935-1946) saw local government in the Philippines placed under the general supervision of the President as provided for under Article VII Section II of the the 1945 1945 Const Constit itut utio ion. n. Addi Additi tion onal ally ly,, the the Pres Presid iden ent, t, by stat statut ute, e, could could alte alterr the the jurisdictions of local governments and in effect, create or abolish them.24 Ocampo and Panganiban note that the constitutional con stitutional provision limiting the President's power to general supervision was a compromise measure substituted for the stronger guarantee of local autonomy proposed during the constitutional convention. President Quezon preferred to appoint the chief officials of cities and would brook no "democratize nonsense".25

During the 1934 – 1935 Constitutional Convention, emerging Filipino leaders were group into two camps: those who favor stronger local government, and those who consider state control more important than local governments. The second group won. Thus, the 1935 Constit Constituti ution on had no separa separate te articl articlee on local local governm government ents, s, in contras contrastt with with the two succeeding constitution of the Philippines. In addition, the 1935 Constitution formally created a very powerful Philippine president. Thus, the trend during the Commonwealth per perio iod, d, the the tran transi siti tion onal al gover governm nmen entt befo before re the the gran granti ting ng of inde indepe pende ndence nce,, was was centralization. Aside from the state-control bias of the 1935 Constitution, some writers also attribute attribute the centralization centralization trend to the strong leadership leadership style of President President Manuel Quezon. Quezon believed that under a unitary system, the national chief executive should control all local offices. The result was that central supervision rapidly increased and was personally exercised by the president to a degree previously unheard of. However, as Hutchc Hutchcrof roftt noted, noted, Quezon Quezon was primar primarily ily concer concerned ned with with centra centraliz lizing ing control control over patro patronage nage resour resources ces.. Thus, Thus, he achieve achieved d great great succes successs in establ establish ishing ing centra central-l l-loca ocall relations aimed at electoral objectives rather than promoting ad ministrative effectiveness.

24

Ocampo and Panganiban, op. Cit., p. 5

25

Brillantes Cit.

8

Formal centralization continued during the brief Japanese occupation (1942 – 1945). As in the case of the Spanish and American colonization of the Philippines and especially since there was a world war going on, an even greater degree of central control was imposed on local governments by the occupying power through a national government where where Filipi Filipinos nos collab collabora orator tors, s, still still from from the local local elites elites that that coopera cooperated ted with with the Americans, held positions.

Philippine political independence was granted by the Americans in 1946. The first local autonomy act (RA 2264) was enacted in 1959, entitled, "An Act Amending the Laws Gover Governi ning ng Local Local Gove Govern rnme ment ntss by Incr Increa easi sing ng thei theirr Auto Autono nomy my and and Reor Reorgan ganiz izin ing g Provincial Governments". This act vested in city and municipal governments greater fiscal, fiscal, planning and regulatory regulatory powers. powers. It broadened the taxing taxing powers of the cities cities and municipalities within the framework of national taxing laws. laws.26

The year 1959 also saw the passage of landmark legislation legislation as afar as local autonomy autonomy is concern concerned. ed. The Barrio Barrio Charter Charter Act (RA (RA 2370) 2370) sought sought to trans transfor form m the barrio barrios, s, the smallest political unit of the local government system into quasi-municipal corporations by vesting them some taxing powers. Barrios were to be governed by an elective barrio council. Less than a decade later, the "Decentralization Act of 1967" (RA 5185) was enacted. It further increased the financial resources of local government and broadened their decision-making powers over ove r administrative (mostly fiscal and personnel) matters. matters.27

More specifically, the Decentralization Act provided that it will: Grant local governments greater freedom and ampler means to respond to the needs of their people and promote prosperity and happiness to effect a more equitable and systematic distribution of governmental power and resources. To this end, local governments henceforth shall be entrusted with the performance of those functions that are more properly administered in the local level and

26 27

Brillantes Cit. Brillantes Cit.

9

shall be granted with as much autonomous powers and financial resources as are required in the more effective discharge of their responsibilities.28

By any measure, the imposition of martial law in 1972, which abolished local electi elections ons and vested vested in the dictator dictator the powers to appoin appointt offici officials als who were were beholden to him, was a great setback for the local autonomy movement in the Philippine Philippines. s. Notwithst Notwithstanding anding the highly centralized centralized dictatori dictatorial al set-up, set-up, the 1973 Marcos Constitution rhetorically committed itself to a policy of local autonomy:

The State shall guarantee and promote autonomy of local government units, especially the barrio, to ensure their fullest development as self-reliant communities.29

The document likewise constitutionalized the taxing powers of local government units thus: Each local government government unit shall have the power to create its own sources sources of revenue and to levy taxes subject to limitations as may be provided by law. law.30

However, the President continued to exercise "supervision and control" over the loca locall

gover governm nmen ents ts..

The The

autho authori rita tari rian an gover governm nmen entt

prom promul ulga gate ted d

the the

Loca Locall

Government Code of 1983 (Batas Pambansa Bilang 337) which reiterated the policy of the State to guarantee and promote the autonomy of local government units to ensure ensure their their fulles fullestt develop development ment as self-r self-reli eliant ant commun communit ities ies and make make them them effective partners in the pursuit of national development. development.31

Obvi Obviou ousl sly, y, genu genuin inee auto autono nomy my could could not be real realis isti tical cally ly impl implem emen ente ted d unde underr the the authoritarian regime.32

28

Ibid. Brillantes cit. 30 Ibid. 31 Ibid. 32 Ibid. 29

10

From the granting of formal independence in 1946 until 1972, the general trend had been toward toward the decent decentral raliza izatio tion. n. Until Until 1950, 1950, nation national al executi executive ve departm department entss made made all administrative appointments at the provincial and municipal levels. However, they were generally made in consultation with the local political elite. A number of laws passed by Congress gave greater autonomy to local government through the grant of additional powers powers or the lessen lessening ing of nation national al control control on local local affair affairs. s. Signif Significa icant nt legisl legislati ative ve enactments include the Local Autonomy Act (Republic Act RA 2264), the Barrio Charter (RA 2370, later amended by RA 3590), and the Decentralization Act of 1967 (RA 5185). The Supreme Court also contributed to the cause of local autonomy by moving away t a liberal liberal to a narrower narrower interpretation interpretation of constituti constitutional onal power of the president president to supervise supervise local governments. The decentralization trend culminated in the inclusion of a separate article on local government in the draft of the new constitution and the draft Integrated Reorganization Plan (IRP). The draft constitution contained provisions guaranteeing local government autonomy, local power to create their own sources of revenue and to levy taxes, greater citizens’ draft IRP, meanwhile, strengthened the regions. But under the draft law, LGUs were still supervised through the office of the President and the various departments.33

Furthermore, central-local relations in the Philippines before the declaration of martial law in 1972 differed from other developing Asian countries that were characterized by the widespread phenomenon of tight central control at the time. According to Friedman, this this differ difference ence sprang sprang from from the country country’s ’s coloni colonial al herita heritage ge and reflec reflected ted formal formal,, structural, alternatives, albeit unaccompanied by new conceptions of government. Before the the 1970s 1970s the the Phil Philip ippi pine ness alre already ady had cons consti titu tuti tion onal ally ly diff differ erent entia iate ted d prov provin inci cial al gover governm nmen ents ts and and a vari variet ety y of elect elected ed gover governi ning ng bodi bodies es and and offi offici cial alss at the the city city,, municipal, and barrio levels. Friedman continued that while financial resources needed for governing were always always lacking, lacking, “a complicated complicated and politically politically influenced system of grants” made the Philippine local government system more autonomous than in other Asia Asian n count countri ries es.. Whil Whilee this this type type of syst system em gener generat ated ed its its own own benef benefit itss as well well as

33


11

problems, “the potential for continued development” that is not discernible everywhere in Asia existed in the Philippines.

After the 1896 EDSA People Power Revolution toppled the Marcos dictatorship, the Philippine government headed by Corazon Aquino renewed its commitment to greater decentralization as a means of attaining its development goals and objectives. This was expressed in the goals of the new administration’s development program (“the Policy Agenda Agenda for People People Orient Oriented ed Develo Developme pment” nt”). ). The progra program m stated stated that that the role role and struct structure ure of govern governmen mentt would would be guided guided by the key organi organizat zation ional al princi principle pless of decentralization, among others. The administration’s commitment to achieving greater decentraliz decentralization ation was further further reinforced reinforced by the extensive provision on local autonomy in the 1987 Constitution. Article 2 (Declaration of Principles and State Policies), Section 25, says: says: “The “The State State shall shall insure insure the autonom autonomy y of local local govern governmen ments. ts.”” There There is also also a separate State shall insure the autonomy of local government (Article 10) that is more extensive than its counterpart in the 1973 Constitution. Article 10 has the following very important provisions: 1. Creation of autonomous regions in Muslim Mindanao and the Cordillera. 2. Granting LGUs the power to create their own sources of revenue and to levy taxes which shall be automatically released to them. 3. Providing local governments with a just share of the national taxes which shall be automatically released to them. 4. Entitling local governments to an equitable shares in the proceeds of the utilization and development of the national wealth within their respective areas. 5. Providing for regional development councils for other similar bodies composed of local government officials, regional heads of departments and other government offices, and representatives from NGOs within the region for purposes of administrative decentralization to strengthen the autonomy of the units thereon and to accelerate the economic and social growth and development of the units in the region. region.34

34


12

The provis provision ion of the 1987 Consti Constitut tution ion would would serve serve as the legal precedent precedent for the enactment in 1989 of two laws creating autonomous regions in Muslim Mindanao and the Cordilleras. Then, in 1991, after almost five years of debate in Congress, the Local Government Code or RA 7160 was enacted. This law is by far the most focused on devolution and democratic decentralization in the country. It is also considered the most important piece of legislation to emerge from the Aquino administration.

The 1991 LGC is a product of both external factors, although internal factors play a stronger role in terms of the actual contents of the legal basis as well as the dynamics of its implementation. Decentralization has been carried out not solely for the traditional publ public ic admi admini nist stra rati tion on argum argumen ents ts but, but, more more impo import rtan ant, t, in ligh lightt of its its demo democr crat atic ic dimensions and other political considerations. There are mixed motives and a conjuncture of political factors in the decision to undertake decentralization. First, there are practical and administrative reasons. For decades and peaking with Marcos’s dictatorship, a formal centralized structure failed to deliver services. This failure is especially relevant in a divers diversee archip archipela elago go of thousa thousands nds of island islands. s. In additio addition, n, overly overly centra centraliz lized ed formal formal mechanisms limited prospects for development in the countryside.

Second, The Philippines undertook decentralization after the overthrow of Marcos for ideali idealisti sticc reason reasons. s. Presid President ent Aquino, Aquino, civil civil-so -socie ciety ty groups groups,, variou variouss league leaguess of local local governments, and some national legislators genuinely felt that decentralization and local autonomy were more than administrative innovations. They were tools toward achieving democratiza democratization tion and vice versa. The Code was meant to be centerpiece centerpiece of a government that came into power by overthrowing ov erthrowing a dictatorship.

Finally, Finally, political political leaders leaders also have personal personal reasons reasons for undertaking undertaking decentraliz decentralization. ation. Obvious Obviously, ly, tradit traditiona ionall local local polit politici ician an saw the new benefi benefits ts they they would would reap reap from from devolution. More important, subject to the new constitution’s imposition of term limits, members of the House of the Representatives were motivated by a desire to assume local government positions in the failure in an environment where significant powers and finances have been devolved to LGUs. In terms of timing of the Code’s approval, many 13

legislators were also motivated by a desire to get reelected or get elected to higher positions in the coming elections.

Philippine politico-administrative history is replete with examples of tensions between a highly centralized governmental structure and the demands for autonomy among the various component local units: at one level, there is an imperative for a dominant and assertive leadership necessary for the consolidation and even the very survival of a weak state; at another level, there is demand among component local institutions for autonomy from the central government in order to enable them to become more responsive to situations obtaining locally and, paradoxically, strengthen a weak state.

35

Earlie Earlierr histor historica icall attemp attempts ts to decent decentral ralize ize power power and author authorit ity y to local local instit instituti utions ons

through various means are testimony to the fact that the problem of overcentralization is one that has been recognized - but continued to persist - through the years. For instance, the decentralization of administrative authority (but conspicuously unaccompanied by pol polit itic ical al decen decentr tral aliz izat atio ion) n) was was a hall hallma mark rk of the the Marc Marcos os dict dictat ator orsh ship ip.. A Loca Locall Government Code was in fact enacted in 1983. But these attempts at decentralizing gover governm nmen entt rema remain ined ed simp simple le admi admini nist stra rati tive ve form formal alis isms ms.. Powe Powerr conti continue nued d to be concentrated in Manila with local units heavily dependent upon central government. In fact, before the enactment of the Code, local governments were beginning not only to be restive but also assertive, demanding that the umbilical cord that tied them to Manila be seve severe red d

beca becaus usee

this his was was the root root caus causee

behi behind nd thei theirr

stun stunte ted d

gro growth wth

and and

underdevelopment.

With Philippines' archipelagic nature, it is no wonder that the Philippine government had made lots of experiments to find the most suitable way to govern the country. The reinforcement of a centralized and decentralized government varied from the pre-colonial barangay to the 1991 Local Government Code. A lot of factors triggered such trend variation. Aside from the country's geographic nature, which hindered the successful consolidation of all islands under the control of one government, the public officials were 3514

Brillantes, Cit.

14

not yet properly trained or educated on the implementation of government's policies and procedures to prevent unethical acts such as corruption and red tape. Despite of this, decentr decentrali alizin zing g the govern governmen mentt has been the best best option option to effect effectivel ively y implem implement ent government's programs and policies, wherein the provinces, cities, municipalities and barangays of the nation enjoys local autonomy which are then generally supervised by a central government.36And because of a greater degree of accountability, responsiveness and participation, effective decentralization can make a big difference by making the provision of local (social and economic) services more efficient, equitable, sustainable and cost-e cost-effe ffecti ctive. ve. Through Through commun community ity partic participa ipatio tion n in decisio decision n making making,, planni planning, ng, implementat implementation ion and monitoring monitoring and backed by appropriate appropriate institutions institutions and resources, resources, it can go a long way in improving the quality of life, particularly of the poorer and marginalized sectors of the population, thereby alleviating pov erty.

THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT SYSTEM AND CHANGES BROUGHT ABOUT THE 1991 LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE

3615

15

The passing of RA 7160 or the Local Government Code (LGC) contain five major features features which gave noteworthy noteworthy supremacy to those local government government units (LGUs). (LGUs). It transfers the responsibility for the delivery of various aspects of basic services plus some regulatory and licensing powers to the local governments. It also increases the financial resources available to LGUs, lays down the policy framework for the direct involvement of civi civill

soci societ ety, y, most most espe especi cial ally ly nonnon-go gove vern rnme ment nt orga organi niza zati tion onss

and and

peop people le’s ’s

organizations in the process of local governance, and encourages LGUs to be more entrepreneurial.37 Thes Thesee are are as foll follow ows: s: 1.) 1.) the the code code devo devolv lves es or tran transf sfer erss the the resp respon onsi sibi bili lity ty for for the the deliv deliver ery y of vari various ous aspe aspect ctss of basic basic serv servic ices es to the the loca locall governments. Most significant devolved services include health, agriculture, environment and natural resources, social services and public works funded by local funds. 2.) The code trans transfer ferss certai certain n regula regulator tory y and licens licensing ing powers powers to local local governm government ents. s. These These includ includee reclas reclassif sifica icatio tion n of agricu agricultu ltural ral lands, lands, enforc enforceme ement nt of environ environmen mental tal laws, laws, inspection inspection of food products products and quarantine, quarantine, enforcement enforcement of National National Building Building Code, operation of tricycles, processing and approval of subdivision plans, and establishment of cockpits and holding of cockfights. 3.) It increases the financial resources available to LGUs by broadening their taxing powers, providing them with specific share from the national wealth exploited in their area, and increasing their automatic share from national taxes.4.)It lays down the policy framework for the direct involvement of civil society, most specially NGOs and Pos, in the process of local governance – some degree of debureaucretization. These openings for civil society are meant to promote not only popular participation but also local accountability and transparency. Finally, 5.) The code encourages the LGUs to be more entrepreneurial by providing them with opportunities to enter into joint ventures with the private sector, engage in the BOT arrangements, float bonds, and obtain loans from local private institution and the like. In a sense, the code encourages them to be less reliant on the national government instead generate their own resources but still the President has the authority to exercise general supervision over the LGU delegated to the DILG – the successor of the pre – martial department of local government and community development. More specifically, this could be done through the following: First, sectoral representation in local legislative councils, particularly those 37


16

represents represents women, worker, and other sectors as determined determined by the specific Sanggunian. Sanggunian. ( either either sanggu sanggunia nian n panlal panlalawi awigan, gan, panglu panglungs ngsod, od, sanggun sanggunian ian kabataa kabataan n and the like); like); second, through allocation of specific seats for NGO and PO representative in local special bodies (like the local development council, the local health board, and the local school board);third, participation in political exercises like plebiscite, referendum, and recall recall.; .; and lastly lastly,, involv involveme ement nt in the planni planning ng and implem implement entati ation on of develop developmen mentt programs. programs. Moreover, the present present local government government unit creates criteria according to the 1991 Local Government Code. The country has existing levels on the local government which has an elected set of chief executive and members of a legislative body called sanggunian sanggunian as well as bureaucracy bureaucracy.. The levels of the government include the provinces, cities, municipalities, and the village-level barangay.

38

This shows that there exists an

established administration on the local sector. However, in the case of cities, higherincome cities are autonomous and classified as highly urbanized or chartered cities, while the the rest rest are are comp compon onent ent citi cities es that that,, like like the the muni munici cipal palit itie ies, s, are are under under provi provinc ncia iall supervision.39 When a city is already considered as a highly-urbanized one, it becomes independent to the provincial government. However, when it has not yet reached the level of being a chartered city, then, it still remains under the authority of the provincial government.

DEVOLUTION’S IMPACTS, ISSUES AND CHALLENGES

“Local government indeed plays a central role in any democratizing polity. For one, being in the frontline, they are regarded by many citizens as the government. If local 38 39


17

governments fail and are unresponsive to the basic needs of the people then government to those people is a failure, regardless of the grandiose plans and visions it has. The increased role of governments in the democratizing polity may also be seen within the context of global trends and development. The rapid breakdown of many centralized inst instit itut utio ions ns has has led led to the the obse observ rvat atio ion n that that the the “cen “cente terr cann cannot ot hold hold”. ”. Whil Whilee the the implementation of the code may not have been a smashing success, it may be rightfully claimed that it has not been a failure either. A high point in the battle for devolution was the presidential veto of the proposed bill to recentralize health services. If anything, this maybe a major indicator of the current leadership’s political will to follow through the devolution process. The support of the various concerned agencies to increase the LGU’s absorptive capacities, through the preparation of guidelines and even developing various capability capability programs programs with appropriate appropriate institution institution also augurs well for devolution.” devolution.” The most most controv controvers ersial ial issue issue in decentr decentrali alizati zation on is implem implement entati ation on in the real real world. world. It presents problem which are as follows: first is that a significant number of LGUs “refuse and hesitate to accept the devolved functions and services for reasons such as limited financial resources to maintain and sustain the operations of the offices charged with the functions and delivering the devolved services”40. For example the health practitioners, practitioners, they are now the responsibilities of the LGUs and be compensated with accordance of the Magna Carta involving involving heath services services41 Next are the problems which have something to do with personnel management, because some of them do not want to be directly under the control and supervision supervision of the local executives, executives, especially especially those devolved devolved personnel personnel from the national agencies. According to the Legaspi there are concerns on to what extent the basic services and functions which includes financial allocations from the national government and support facilities be transferred to the LGU’s because it is not clearly defined. Indeed there are things to be settled until it can be said that the decentralization in the country is successful.

“However, it is important that the devolution process not be romanticized and seen as the end-all and panacea for all our problems. National government certainly still plays a 40

Decentralization, Decentrali zation, Autonomy Autonom y and the Local Government Code: The Challenge of Implememtation . edited; Legaspi, Perla. Local Government Center ,College of Public Administration, University University of the Philippines and Ford Foundation. Philippines, 1995. p 2 41 Philippine Politics and Governance: An Introduction. Edited: Morada, Noel. Tadem, Teresa.

18

critical role in the overall development process. The preparation and development of standards, redistribution of resources and identification of projects and activities that national government can finance given its unique capabilities and perspectives still are areas where it has some comparative advantage and therefore demonstrate competence”42.

42

Democritization: Democritization: Philippine Perspectives. Miranda, Felipe. University of the Philippines Press. Diliman, Quezon City, 1997, p. 98,99

19

Local Governments and Devolution in the Philippines (1)

Recommend Documents