Decentralization, local autonomy and federalism: A History of Struggle

Diversity as history Our nation’s history before colonization showed that we were then comprised of maritime harbor states that flourished in trade with our Asian neighbors as far away as the present-day Middle East.

These small nations have various settlements outside the harbor center called the balangays ruled by tribal datus or chieftains that are usually allied with them especially in repulsing invaders from the sea. In northern Luzon, various ethno-linguistic tribes in the Cordillera mountain ranges had their own system of governance and culture different from the lowland and maritime states.

Hinduism, Confucianism and Islam also had a great influence in these early settlements from rajahnates, sultanates, and extensions of Chinese dynasties.

The arrival of the Spanish conquistadores in 1521 gradually consolidated these maritime kingdoms under a colonial military government aided by a crusading Church imposing Christianity among the native inhabitants. It was only the Mindanao sultanates that successfully repulsed the Spanish colonizers. These sultanates exercised sovereignty over most of mainland Mindanao and the Sulu archipelago.


After more than 300 years, the Spanish colonial government ceded power to the emerging imperialist power, the United States of America, by the turn of the 20th century. Less than a hundred years ago, the US introduced a centralized system of government, constitutional democracy, Western educational system, colonial military and police force, and reinforced subservient economic elites to have hegemony over the country.

A revolution against Spanish rule in 1896 established the short-lived Philippine republic that was later brutally suppressed by US colonial forces.

In Mindanao, the independent sultanates now called the Moros were slowly decimated at a far greater cost in human lives than US military campaigns in the rest of the country. Though outgunned, the Moro resistance continued even after Mindanao was made part of the Philippine republic in 1935 when the US granted commonwealth status and later independence to the Philippine state in 1946.

The emerging Philippine republic has its umbilical cord uncut from the US since the grant of independence. Its political, economic, and military apparatus were dictated upon by the US such that all elected presidents were wholly subservient to US policies.

The Marcos dictatorship came at a time of the Cold War when the US supported military regimes in the supposedly Free World to stem the tide of communist insurgencies and nationalist revolts.

The people power revolution of 1986 that ousted the Marcos dictatorship signaled a paradigm shift in democracy struggles around the world that later saw the end of the Cold War with the collapse of the Soviet Union and much of eastern Europe’s military regimes brought down by people power like Poland and Czechoslovakia. However, these tectonic shifts also occurred with the rise of neo-liberalism that dictated the course of globalization with the advent of advances in science, information technology, communications and transportation.


Decentralization: getting the short end of a bargain The 1986 EDSA revolution brought hopes that the highly centralized system of governance will give way to a more decentralized form of government if not a federal system.

Even if the ‘people power’ revolution was physically manifested in Metro Manila when thousands surrounded Camps Crame and Aguinaldo as well as Malacanang forcing the dictator to flee, many in the provinces supported the revolution against the dictatorship and wanted to get a fair share of development denied under the Marcos regime.

While debates in a Constitutional Commission tasked to draft a post-dictatorship charter ensued over a bicameral or unicameral legislature, the bias however was still for a unitary government regardless of form, i.e. presidential or parliamentary.

From a two-party system, the ConCom proposed a multi-party system to enhance greater political participation and representation. They also put in place the party-list system of representation along with district representatives for Congress, except the Senate whose members are elected at large. A single-term presidency was also instituted as a reaction to incumbents using the vast resources of the state for their re-election thus perpetuating themselves in power.

The argument against shifting to a federal form of government then was that the country was in transition from dictatorship to democracy and needed space to build institutions and to put empowerment mechanisms in various levels of governance.

Thus, the constitution mandated the development of participatory democracy, local and regional autonomy, NGO-PO participation, and active citizenship. The 1987 Constitution wanted to put in autonomy and centralized governance together with the policy of decentralization as a bargain. Congress then enacted the 1991 Local Government Code after going through stiff resistance from local elites and power holders.

However, it limited what can be decentralized --- and only through the process of devolution. While granting local government units some leeway in governance especially frontline basic service delivery, much of the powers, resources, authority, and responsibility were retained by the central government. Fiscal autonomy was limited to local business taxes, imposition of fees and charges for specific income-generating activities conducted within the LGU’s jurisdiction.

The central government too exercises full control over police, public safety and security matters leaving LGUs to funding concerns but not direct supervision. Obviously, what was foremost in the minds of many is the fear that greater decentralization or autonomy to local levels of government would exacerbate political patronage and warlordism.

The argument then was to have a strong central state that is empowering and can decimate local political dynasties and warlords through reform measures that will address poverty and promote people’s participation. After 25 years of devolution, many LGUs are still dependent on national revenue allocations and doleouts from the central government.

Greater local autonomy in terms of a bigger share of the Internal Revenue Allocation (IRA), share in the budget of national agencies, DILG control of LGUs’ expenditure prerogatives, fiscal space, among others, are nagging complaints that have stifled local autonomy.

On the other end, without programmatic political parties that vie for elective national posts, leaders rely on their popularity and the vote-generation machinery of local warlords that expect largesse after elections from these national politicians. Also, the much-needed measures on political reforms like a party financing law, amendments to the party list system of elections, and the constitutional mandate for an anti-dynasty law did not happen.

Thirty years after EDSA 1, economic realities and demographics show that only provinces and cities within or near Metro Manila enjoy favored status and got tremendous benefits from infrastructure and other development interventions from the central government. Voting wise, the Luzon-NCR corridor practically emerges as the dominant segment in electing senators and a President. The Visayas and Mindanao areas play second fiddle and provide the ‘swing votes’ for national politicians.

Bangsamoro and Cordillera autonomy With deepening conflict and poverty in Mindanao, the Bangsamoro quest for their own identity and way of governance brought hundreds of lives lost and millions worth of damage to property and lost opportunities to the young.

In northern Luzon, the peoples of the Cordilleras through Fr. Balweg and the CPLA pursued peace negotiations with the Cory Aquino government after detaching their struggle from the CPP-NPA-NDF who are against autonomy.

The 1987 Constitution, however, ‘constitutionalized’ what can be otherwise achieved broadly in a peace process. So two autonomous regions were established by Congressional fiat – Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao and Cordillera Autonomous Region.

The MNLF rejected the ARMM as they wanted the 1978 Tripoli Agreement be put in place where 13 ‘undivided’ provinces form part of their homeland.[2] Under President Fidel Ramos, he courted the MNLF with a promise to develop Mindanao under the BIMP-EAGA.[3] The MNLF under Misuari acceded in 1996 to a two-step peace deal for autonomy: taking control of the autonomous regional government immediately and a five-year transition for getting the original 13 provinces for autonomy under the 1978 Tripoli Agreement.

On the other hand, the other revolutionary group, the MILF also started talking peace with government. But the all-out war policy against the Bangsamoro by President Estrada ended the peace deal and triggered another war that continued even after his eventual ouster.

A peace deal under President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo in 2008 would have provided for a Bangsamoro state under ‘ancestral domain’ claim that would happen under a charter change scenario.

In a parallel move, a joint resolution of Congress (Senate Resolution 10 filed by Sen. Koko Pimentel and Rep. Monico Fuentebella) for a shift to a federal form of government was submitted.

However, the Supreme Court voided the 2008 peace deal and the parallel move for a shift in government was shelved.

In 2010, President Noynoy Aquino succeeded the Arroyo government and pursued peace with the MILF leading to the signing of a Comprehensive Agreement on the Bangsamoro.

Again, this agreement tried to skip around the ‘constitutionalized autonomy’ provision and recognized the setting up of a parliamentary form of government in the Bangsamoro and provisions of power sharing with the central government incorporated in the proposed Bangsamoro Basic Law.

But this deal has to pass through Congress that again did not fully support the measure until it adjourned. Given all these peace initiatives, what can be gleaned is the basic demand for self-governance and recognition of their identities and cultures that are distinct from the Philippine state.

Aside from these two regions, we still have to address the demands of our indigenous peoples having control over their ancestral domains and self-governance. While government enacted the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA) that conforms to the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, its implementation is far from being satisfactory.

Rise of the periphery The election of a local city mayor from Mindanao whose major policy agenda is a shift to federalism shows that indeed those in the periphery of the central government is fed up with the promise of getting their fair share of government’s resources and involvement in shaping national policies.

While it can be argued that Mayor Duterte’s (now President-elect) slick campaign focused on anti-criminality bordering on the absurd was effective to whip up broad support, the main message of the ‘change is coming’ would eventually boil down to the proposed shift to federalism.

While our country has emerged economically from the doldrums, massive poverty still exists especially in rural areas. Inequality in incomes and access to work have worsened cutting across regions and among urban and rural divides.

While economic growth reached unprecedented heights under the PNoy administration, this has not trickled down. Overcrowding, traffic congestion, lack of shelter, and in-migration to the National Capital Region made the capital an unbearable sight to behold and to live in.

The rise of crime and criminality spawned by weak law enforcement and corruption became a major issue that President-elect Duterte capitalized on thus earning protest votes from the capital that catapulted him to the presidency.

The election of Duterte to the presidency came as a big shock to many who were conditioned that being presidentiable has something to do with bearing and proper decorum.

The Aquino government confidently pursued a campaign for its presidential bet on an image of a clean government with a track record of no malfeasance, solid academic credentials, broad and long experience working in government, and the promise of continuity in economic growth and governance reforms.

But the electorate had other things in mind as it dispelled such notions when it elected a trash-talking, perceived human rights violator, incoherent candidate whose claim to fame was that of making Davao a ‘no man’s land’ for criminals.

Yet with subtlety, Duterte rode on a distinct platform that promises dramatic changes --- from eradicating (later lessening) criminality within six months to making a shift from unitary to a federal form of government which he had long espoused as a mayor and regional figure in Mindanao.

Coming of age Federalism is a form of government where sovereignty is shared between a central governing authority (i.e. federal government) and constituent political units called states or regions for that matter. It will break the country into autonomous regions with a national government focused only on interests with national bearing: foreign policy, external defense, currency and monetary system, customs and tariffs, national judiciary, as examples.

There are powers that can be co-shared between the federal government and the states or regions especially those affecting utilization of natural resources, police matters, municipal waters, addressing climate change, environmental protection, inter-state infrastructure development, etc.

Citizenship is afforded to all members of the federation equally and travel across states will be unhampered. The autonomous regions or states, divided further into local government units, will have primary responsibility over developing their industries, public safety, education, healthcare, transportation, recreation, and culture.

These states will have more power over their finances, development plans, and laws exclusive to their jurisdiction. Some states would have liberal views while others will opt for a more conservative one like having religion and governance go together (i.e. Bangsamoro).

Existing national laws that apply to the states or regions can be strengthened or even expanded.

However, a federal system is not without its potential conflicts. Because each state government has its own system and styles of governance, citizens all over the federation will be experiencing different levels of welfare and enjoyment of the public good.

The competencies, efficiency, and accountabilities of each state government will also not be the same and may create disunities and conflicts. A policy exercised and implemented across different states may differ in magnitude, like fines on traffic violations and penalties for criminal offenses.

Uneven development will happen if resource-poor, conflict-affected, and disaster-challenged states will be left unto themselves.

Finally, there will be constant disagreements and occasional conflicts between the state and federal government over their exercise of power and enforcing its authority. There will be challenges to the proposed shift in government, as it will not happen overnight

The status quo including the business elites would have second thoughts of having to deal with so many players, though the layers of bureaucracy might still be the same. Also, the fear that warlords will be further entrenched would have to be looked into.

Unity amidst diversity and the democratization of power are evolving constantly especially with the advent of social media and our own electronic voting system that has vastly shortened the time of vote counting and canvassing. By removing the centralized structures that impose dependency and stifle local initiatives, thus providing greater freedom and domestic rule, a federal system will greatly increase the capacity of the locals to engage their state or regional government to deal with the self-perpetuating problems of chronic poverty, lack of basic service delivery and infrastructure development, far-off and unreachable central government of which help comes late, if they come at all.

For Akbayan, the proposed shift to a federal and parliamentary system of government is a big opportunity NOT to be missed.


[1] Tom S. Villarin, AKBAYAN Partylist Representative

[2] Pres. Marcos and the MNLF signed a Libya-brokered deal in 1978 where the latter downgraded their demand from independence to autonomy. Marcos however unilaterally implemented the agreement and provided two autonomous administrative regions in western and central Mindanao.

[3] Brunei-Indonesia-Malaysia-Philippines (BIMP) – East Asia Growth Association (EAGA), an economic trade alliance among ASEAM member states that are neighbors in southern Philippines.