What good is an institution that does much harm, has lost its way, and many of whose members steal from the people, circumvent the law, cause divisiveness and discord, pursue their vested interests, and entrench themselves further in power?
Clearly, far from good.
Nowadays, this is an apt description of the Philippine Senate: far from good.
The Philippine Senate has become a cumbersome institution that is expensive to maintain, adds an unwanted layer to the bureaucracy and hinders efficient and good governance. And now it is a showcase of criminal behavior in the highest places.
A Senate was not even supposed to be part of our present government structure.
The Committee on Amendments and Transitory Provisions of the 1986 Constitutional Commission that drafted our 1987 Constitution favored a unicameral legislature, not a bicameral legislature with an “Upper House” and a “Lower House.” Plenary voting, however, reversed the committee decision by the slimmest of margins—a tie-breaking vote cast by Commissioner Jose B. Laurel Jr. for a bicameral system.
At its best, an Upper House is supposed to provide national representation and serve as a counterbalance to district representation (the Lower House) that may have less depth and discernment and may have a parochial perspective because it has a narrower constituent base. The Senate or Upper House is supposed to have a bigger, nationwide constituency.
In recent history, however, the Lower House has shown itself to have a superior strategic perspective, greater management acumen and sharper investigative ability than the Upper House. The Senate had to play catch-up to the House of Representatives’ groundbreaking “Quad Comm” investigations into fund misuse (particularly by the Office of the Vice President Sara Duterte); the trade in illegal drugs and the network of well-connected protectors who made it thrive; extrajudicial killings and the police rewards system that supported and encouraged them; and Philippine offshore gaming operations (or Pogos) and the slew of serious crimes they engendered, from human trafficking to online scams.
The Quad Comm hearings showed in great detail plunder and murder involving the highest officials of the country, including top law enforcement officers. No Senate investigation before or after matched the scope and depth that the House’s inquiry achieved. This is not surprising, considering the current character and composition of the Senate.
No Philippine institution shows more dynastic character than the Senate, where there are four sibling or half-sibling pairs, making up eight out of 24 members or a full one-third of the entire chamber, illustrating everything that is wrong with Philippine politics.
Moreover, almost half of all the senators are in conflict with the law. First is Bato dela Rosa, now a fugitive wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for crimes against humanity. Likely to be issued soon with an arrest warrant by the ICC for the same charge is Bong Go. Already in jail is Jinggoy Estrada, facing graft and plunder charges for the third time in his political career. The senators expected to be charged with plunder soon are Joel Villanueva and Rodante Marcoleta. Others facing possible charges are Chiz Escudero (plunder and graft), the siblings Mark and Camille Villar (insider trading), Alan Peter Cayetano (obstruction of justice, usurpation of authority) and the ex-convict Robinhood Padilla (obstruction of justice).
How did we come to this pass? Why are these persons in office?
Poor voter education? The likely culprit of which is our poor educational system that promotes functional illiteracy and a culture that accepts corruption as a way of life and mistakes shallow celebrity for competence?
The lack of a strong two-party system that emphasizes ideology and platform, not personality? We have even worsened our multiparty system with the execrable abuse of the party-list system, allowing more power-hungry politicians to ply their influence and fortify their economic interests.
Parliamentary malfeasance is not a modern phenomenon. In the birthplace of parliamentary democracy, England, self-interest and amorality reigned centuries ago. The speech of soldier-statesman Oliver Cromwell when he dissolved the English Parliament in 1653 eerily rings true of our Senate today (slightly edited for clarity): “It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place, which you have dishonored by your contempt of all virtue, and defiled by your practice of every vice; you are a factious crew, and enemies to all good government; you are a pack of mercenary wretches…Is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you? Is there one vice you do not possess? You have no more religion than my horse; gold is your God; which of you have not bartered your conscience for bribes? Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the Commonwealth?
“You sordid prostitutes, have you not defiled this sacred place, and turned the Lord’s temple into a den of thieves, by your immoral principles and wicked practices? You are grown intolerably odious to the whole nation; you were deputed here by the people to get grievances redressed, are yourselves become the greatest grievance…”
Our Senate, riven by rivalry and hardly functional, has lost its reason for being.
If there are any amendments to be made in our 1987 Constitution, the abolition of this Upper House that has sunk so low should be at the top of the list. CS
