Philippines Table of Contents
Democratic institutions were introduced to the Philippines by the
United States at the beginning of the twentieth century. The apparent
success of these imported practices gave the Philippines its reputation
as "the showcase of democracy in Asia." Before 1972 the
constitutional separation of powers was generally maintained. Political
power was centralized in Manila, but it was shared by two equally
influential institutions, the presidency and Congress. The checks and
balances between them, coupled with the openness of bipartisan
competition between the Nacionalista and Liberal parties, precluded the
emergence of one-person or one-party rule. Power was transferred
peacefully from one party to another through elections. The mass media,
sensational at times, fiercely criticized public officials and checked
government excess.
Marcos inflicted immeasurable damage on democratic values. He offered
the Filipino people economic progress and national dignity, but the
results were dictatorship, poverty, militarized politics and a
politicized military, and greatly increased dependence on foreign
governments and banks. His New Society was supposed to eliminate
corruption, but when Marcos fled the country in 1986, his suitcases
contained, according to a United States customs agent, jewels, luxury
items, and twenty-four gold bricks. Estimates of Marcos's wealth ran
from a low of US$3 billion to a high of US$30 billion, and even after
his death in 1989, no one knew the true value of his estate, perhaps not
even his widow.
If Marcos had been merely corrupt, his legacy would have been bad
enough, but he broke the spell of democracy. The long evolution of
democratic institutions, unsatisfactory though it may have been in some
ways, was interrupted. The political culture of democracy was violated.
Ordinary Filipinos knew fear in the night. An entire generation came of
age never once witnessing a genuine election or reading a free
newspaper. Classes that graduated from the Philippine Military Academy
were contemptuous of civilians and anticipated opportunities for
influence and perhaps even wealth. Marcos's worst nightmare came true
when Corazon Aquino used the power of popular opinion to bring him down.
Aquino inherited a very distorted economy. The Philippines owed about
US$28 billion to foreign creditors. Borrowed money had not promoted
development, and most of it had been wasted on showcase projects along
Manila Bay, or had disappeared into the pockets and offshore accounts of
the Marcos and Romualdez families and their friends and partners. Many
Filipinos believed that they would be morally justified in renouncing
the foreign debt on grounds that the banks should have known what the
Marcoses were doing with the money. Even Cardinal Jaime Sin declared it
"morally wrong" to pay foreign creditors when Filipino
children were hungry. Aquino, however, resolutely pledged to pay the
debt. Otherwise, the nation would be cut off from the credit it needed.
Although the Philippines could pay the interest on the debt every year,
it could not pay the principal. This never-ending debt naturally
inflamed Filipino nationalism. A Freedom From Debt Coalition advocated
using the money to help the unemployed instead of sending the hard
currency abroad.
More about the
Government
of the Philippines
.
Source:
U.S. Library of Congress
|