Tuesday, October 25, 2005

Snapping The Nation Again

There is now once more, a call to sidestep the constitutional mode of transition by way of a snap election. It boggles me that we give back our trust so easily to something that had shown to be apparently flawed and fragile, that is, our election system. Isn't that the main thing why we want the President to step down? Remember, if somebody else win that snappy election, or if GMA herself would win again that out-of-the-blue contest, could we trust again any election results? I guess not. Not so soon. There would always be accusations of cheating again, and again and again and there would be tons of tons of "evidences" that would be linedup again in the halls of the Senate or the Supreme Court trying to declare who really won or who really got away with cheating. Remember also that we would wallowing once more in a muddy situation that we had such a bad experience with or a not-so-pleasant encounter with in the past. In 1986, the nation stood breathless before an unprecedented snap election, amidst massive boycotting and rampant violence and election fraud. And when the results came out, no one had believed it and then we drove the dictator out of office by the voices of the street, by the first ever and original People Power. it turned out rather well---having rid of an autocrat---but it was too messy.

Now whose to say that a snap election is good for us right now? And can we trust the COMELEC now to bring us the right election results?

The proposition is just to complicated if not too messy and outrightly laborious. It is basically so devoid of legal basis that we'd actually appear like some messy banana republic whose constitution is so worthless that it is being replaced so frequently just like replacing a mini-skirt.

I thought we were all gearing and desiring a parliamentary system of government, where federalism could give the people a whole lot of autonomy and self-determination with regards to their locality or provinces? Why not stick with the plan? Patience is a virtue, you know.
Share:

3 comments:

  1. I just want to quote what Mareng Winne wrote some time back..

    "AT THE BOTTOM of the last page of the 27-page "Primer on Local Governments in a Federal System" (published by the Local Government Development Foundation and presumably funded by the German foundation Konrad Adenauer Stiftung), one reads the following:

    "Preconditions of effective parliamentary system are:

    "a. Strong viable political parties

    "b. Credible electoral system

    "c. Efficient and functional bureaucracy."

    It is painfully clear that none of these conditions obtains in the country today. But even the least discerning citizen will realize that these are also preconditions for an effective presidential system. Which can only mean that shifting from a presidential to a parliamentary system will lead to more effective governance only if these conditions are in place. On the other hand, if these three conditions are in place, why change?"

    I believe that it's not the system that's to blame, but the ones in power. That's why I'm all for a snap elections. We just have to do a better job keeping our elected officials in line.

    ReplyDelete
  2. To jorge: There is just one thing that a parliamentary system could really benefit us and that is the flexibility of the position of the Head of State, where he/she could be brought down or replaced just about anytime. In that sense, we don't need no more people power or worse a coup in order to change the government.

    ReplyDelete

  3. Online jobs -data encoder . Part time/full time
    You can earn while enjoying time with your family and love ones.
    for more details, kindly visit http://www.unemployedpinoys.com/

    to get started., Email me at besbremisana@yahoo.com

    ReplyDelete