The document discusses political dynasties in the Philippines and the proposed "Anti Dynasty Bill". It defines a political dynasty as the concentration of power among related persons through public office. Political dynasties have historically been linked to corruption and abuse of power. The bill aims to curb dynasties' excessive power and influence in order to promote democratic values and public order. Examples of infamous political dynasties in the Philippines include the Marcoses, Estradas, and Ampatuans, whose names have been associated with graft, corruption, and violence. The bill seeks to address issues like voters choosing candidates based on familiar surnames rather than merit.
The document discusses political dynasties in the Philippines and the proposed "Anti Dynasty Bill". It defines a political dynasty as the concentration of power among related persons through public office. Political dynasties have historically been linked to corruption and abuse of power. The bill aims to curb dynasties' excessive power and influence in order to promote democratic values and public order. Examples of infamous political dynasties in the Philippines include the Marcoses, Estradas, and Ampatuans, whose names have been associated with graft, corruption, and violence. The bill seeks to address issues like voters choosing candidates based on familiar surnames rather than merit.
Original Description:
a position paper about the current situation of philippines about political dynasties
The document discusses political dynasties in the Philippines and the proposed "Anti Dynasty Bill". It defines a political dynasty as the concentration of power among related persons through public office. Political dynasties have historically been linked to corruption and abuse of power. The bill aims to curb dynasties' excessive power and influence in order to promote democratic values and public order. Examples of infamous political dynasties in the Philippines include the Marcoses, Estradas, and Ampatuans, whose names have been associated with graft, corruption, and violence. The bill seeks to address issues like voters choosing candidates based on familiar surnames rather than merit.
The document discusses political dynasties in the Philippines and the proposed "Anti Dynasty Bill". It defines a political dynasty as the concentration of power among related persons through public office. Political dynasties have historically been linked to corruption and abuse of power. The bill aims to curb dynasties' excessive power and influence in order to promote democratic values and public order. Examples of infamous political dynasties in the Philippines include the Marcoses, Estradas, and Ampatuans, whose names have been associated with graft, corruption, and violence. The bill seeks to address issues like voters choosing candidates based on familiar surnames rather than merit.
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 2
ANTI DYNASTY BILL
What is anti dynasty bill?
Anti Dynasty bill is a bill against political dynasties and was sponsored by Senator Francis N. Pangilinan, chairperson of the Senate committee on constitutional amendment and revision of codes. The bill defines political dynasty as the concentration, consolidation, and/ or perpetuation of public office and political powers by persons related to one another within the second degree of consanguinity or affinity. Throughout the Philippines history, the political dynasty has taken on a negative connotation. Often linked to problems like graft, corruption, and abuse of power, it has taken on a detrimental role to society. Perhaps the most infamous of all would be the political dynasty of the Marcos family. Alleged to have embezzled between US$5 billion and US$10 billion from the Philippines, transfarency international has ranked Ferdinand Marcos at second on a list of the world’s most corrupt political leaders of the past to decades; surpassed only by former Indonesian President Suharto. Names like the Estradas/Ejeratos and the singson families have also linked the image of the political dynasty to allegation of graft and corruption. Luis “Chavit” Singson, governor of the province of Ilocos Sur, alleged that he had personally given Estrada the sum of 400 million pesos as pay off from illegal gambling profits such as “jueteng”, as well as 180 million pesos from the government price subsidy for the tobacco farmer’s marketing cooperative. Singson’s allegation caused an approar across the nation, which culminated in Estrada’s impeachment trial by the house of representatives In November 19, 2000. A more recent example, would be that of the Ampatuans’, whose name has been thrust to the limelight after the event of the “Maguindanao Massacre” where 58 individuals consisting of their family rival’s, the Mangudadatus, relatives and some journalists were shot and killed preventing them from filing their patron’s certificate of candidacy. Families linked to political dynasties flood the news with allegations of all sorts of crime ranging from corruption, theft, murder and even rape. Regardless of whether these are proven or unproven, it all translates into the tarnished and dirty image that the political dynasty holds in today’s society. This is exactly what Michel Foucault talks about in the spectacle of the scaffold wherein there is a display of an excessive use of power through torture. As Foucault mentions, there are three criterions where punishment must follow in order to fall under the category of torture. The first being, that it must manifest pain ona center degree, that could be seen in the example of the francois damiens’ torture. The second being that such pain is regulated in a way that suffering is maximized rather than imposing death immediately because this suffering would insure a more effective notice of change on the offenders part. Last but not least, perhaps the most important would be that tortures marks the individual and that it should serve as a spectacle. Torture making the individuals means that there is a reclaiming of the sovereign by the ruler and that the marketing of the execution as a spectacle would serve as a public display of the ruler’s sovereignty. Such a public execution seeks to reach out to the whole society by letting the thought of punishment run through their consciousness making them aware of the total power of the sovereign, them serving as his subjects. The context of the logic of torture is that there is contempt for body, wherein the body serves a possession of the sovereign. There is a political need for the sovereign to display his power which will serve as a recognition of his dominance over his subjects. In addition, this display power actually runs through an internal organization of politicization and serves as a disciplining factors towards order. As Foucault mentions how the enlightenment period called torture as an atrocity “atrocity as one of those that best designates the economy of public torture in the old penal practice. (Foucault 1997) Furthers, he states that “insofar as being the crime before everyone’s eyes In all its severity, the punishment must take the responsibility for this atrocity: it must bring to light by confessions, statements, inscription that make it public, it must reproduce it in ceremonies that apply it to the body of the guilty person in the form of humiliation and pain. Atrocity is that part of crime that the punishment turns back as torture in order to display it in the full light of day. (Foucault 1977) inlight of michel foucaults study power, he show how the display of excessive power can serve as a negative connotation towards disciplining society. In relation to the existence of political dynasties, their displays of excessive power by means of running private armies or reliance on coercion in order to established and maintain their power, could very well serve as a detriment to public order as well as to their own existence. This is where Vladimir lenins theory on organization can come into play because power alone in a democratic society, especially excessive power, canclush with the values of democracy while power coupled with proper organization could compromise with the said values. Organization, furthermore, would tweak how power is distributed, dispersed and used on the sovereign’s subjects. In the case of political dynasties where power is seen to be a tool used For political domination, power alongside organization can produce an effective dynasty, which operates on behalf of and for the public rather than for itself and its interests. Therefore, political dynasty in the Philippines should be prohibited because it adversely affects the progress of out country. POLITICAL DYNASTY actually, many filipino voters are shading the names in the ballots during elections, not because they know the personality and background of a specific candidate, but rather the surname sounds familiar. Another instance is, they are satisfied with the “catchy” advertisemets of these candidates. Our country, the Philippines, has been is a system like this for decades, and it is called the political dynasty. Political dynasty is very evident in our country .