![[logo.jpg]](http://www.fes.org.ph/uploads/images/logo.jpg "[logo.jpg]"){kind=logo}
![[3.JPG]](http://www.fes.org.ph/uploads/images/3.JPG "[3.JPG]")
![[1.JPG]](http://www.fes.org.ph/uploads/images/1.JPG "[1.JPG]")
![[2.JPG]](http://www.fes.org.ph/uploads/images/2.JPG "[2.JPG]")
![[4.JPG]](http://www.fes.org.ph/uploads/images/4.JPG "[4.JPG]")
![[5.jpg]](http://www.fes.org.ph/uploads/images/5.jpg "[5.jpg]"){kind=small}
ABSTRACT
(This abstract is included as Foreword in the publication
Among cha-cha-induced upheaval, the two parties carrying the administration merge to create a formidable force for the 2010 elections. Yet, they have no presidential candidate within their own ranks and are desperately looking for an outsider to adopt as the party's standard-bearer. A boxing champion decides that it is time for him to form his own political party. There is neither a platform nor a reason to join it except for riding the bandwagon of his sporting popularity. In the middle of a Congressional term, a Supreme Court decision makes the House of Representatives scramble for office space. In an instant, 33 new members of Congress have been admitted, a significant number of them not knowing whom they represent.
Even a year before the next electoral exercise, the Philippine political party system displays its peculiarities to the interested public. Striking is the absence of the central function of political parties, which is to transmit the ambitions and aspirations of the citizens and their organized groups to the political decision-makers and the state. Political parties are commonly ascribed to perform the functions of representation, elite recruitment, goal formulation, interest articulation and aggregation, socialization and mobilization and organization of government.
This may be a view of political parties that is centered on European models of political (party) systems, where membership-based, programmatically oriented political parties dominate the political arena to such an extent that commentators lament about the so-called "party democracy". While the excesses of such a system may lead to a sclerotic and bureaucratic hegemon in channeling access to political power, the reality of many parties even in Europe is characterized by declining membership, a disenchanted electorate and competition in the form of small issue-based movements or initiatives. This reality makes it even clearer that parties do need to shape up and open themselves to the participation of citizens. If they fail to do so, the quality of democracy and, concomitantly, the stability and performance of the political system suffers.
This view is shared by many politicians, advocates and observers also in the Philippines. The absence of an intermediary level between citizens and state allows for a greater degree of arbitrariness, personality-based politics, political turncoatism, and the dominance of economic and financial power of individual political actors. If the political party system (mal-)functions in such a way, apathy, mistrust or even frustration among citizens may spread, thus endangering the gains of a democratization process. It is clear that this is a serious danger to a democratic system - making it one of the major challenges of Philippine politics today.
In its mission to facilitate political dialogue and the exchange of ideas from different perspectives, the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung has been working with Philippine stakeholders to address the perceived structural deficiencies of the party system of the country. Over the past decade, round tables, studies, workshops and conferences have identified the reasons for weaknesses and proposed solutions for the strengthening of the party system. The intent of this publication is to share this discourse, which has been limited to a rather small number of interested persons, with a broader audience. We notice that such "technical" discussions often generate little attention in the media. Yet, an identifiable party system may go a long way in solving some of the structural impediments to progress in the country.
Hence, we would like to offer the reader different perspectives - from the academe, reform advocates and legislative staff - on the challenges which political parties are facing, the efforts undertaken to strengthen their position within the political system and the gaps that still need to be addressed. The following papers do not claim to represent the whole possible spectrum of analytical approaches. Rather, they share perspectives, from academics, observers and advocates.
Joy Aceron, Instructor at the Political Science Department of the Ateneo de Manila University and Program Coordinator of the Ateneo School of Government, suggests an institutional approach to close the deficits of the party system. On the one hand, she argues, the form of government and the electoral system significantly shape the party system. International experiences show that a parliamentary form of government with an electoral system displaying proportional representation elements enhances the role of political parties. On the other hand, Aceron calls for a political party law that defines more clearly functions of political parties and its funding sources.
Julio C. Teehankee is an Associate Professor of Comparative Politics and Development Studies, and Chair of the International Studies Department at De La Salle University, Manila. His contribution offers a deeper insight into how two political parties strive to overcome what is commonly described as a central weakness of Philippine politics - the linkage between the state and citizens. His examples reflect on reform efforts within political parties in the country and how they aspire to open for citizens' active participation and to offer programmatic policy choices.
Jean Encinas-Franco, a former director of the Senate Economic Planning Office (SEPO) and now faculty member of the Department of International Studies at Miriam College, provides a perspective from legislators. The author recalls the debates about the proposed legislation on political parties in the Senate and reflects about its possibilities to be enacted. On substantial items, she suggests, among others, to incorporate a definite funding source in the political party reform bills, to incorporate gender aspects in the operation of parties, and to clarify the role of COMELEC in implementing the new laws.
The contribution by Joy Aceron and Glenford Leonillo summarizes the outcomes of the discussions and debates of reform-minded groups on strengthening political parties. These so-called reform advocates principally agree that the proposed Political Party Reform Bill with its intended regulations on political turncoatism, party registration and state subsidy of political parties is a step in the right direction. While specific points such as the role of party-lists and the disbursement formula of the state subsidy would require more thorough discussion, these advocates also see this legislative initiative as being one part of a broader reform effort.
While the upcoming 2010 elections may prevent the passing of any bills on political parties in the short term, the political contest is expected to again bring to the fore systemic challenges that will have to be institutionally addressed at some time. At the same time, the contributions of this book make it clear that the challenges run deeper, and ultimately citizens themselves need to stake their claim on either existing parties or by forming new ones.
The Friedrich Ebert Stiftung would like to thank all contributors and partners who we have had the privilege to cooperate with on this topic over the years. A special thanks goes to Ms. Judith Kroll for her relentless support without which this booklet would still not be complete.
Mirko Herberg
Resident Representative
Friedrich Ebert Stiftung Philippine Office
