ASoG’s brand of education is the marrying of theory and practice where academic knowledge is used in order to solve practical problems of our time. It tries to achieve that balance between the realm of ideas and the concrete realities that ideas must contend with to make a difference in real time, real space.
Our approach to change and development is what we call a mosaic approach where scattered efforts and actors working towards change and development are facilitated by the School to come together as pieces of the puzzle that if put together would form an alternative picture of the country.
This seminar serves as another classroom of ASoG. It will be a microcosm of what we endeavor to achieve all over the country.
Our premise why dynasties are problematic in democracy is it undermines accountability since decisions that affect the public are made in private sphere (the family). Hence, our working definition of political dynasty is it exists when members of a (nuclear) family occupies seats that have direct mandate to check and balance each other and have legal authority over other means of accountability. It is a state of political monopoly that cancels out checks and balance mechanisms.
A chapter by La Viña and Aceron in the book, Agenda for Hope: Democratizing Governance. This chapter proposes a movement for nation-building among reformist leaders from the different local government units (LGUs), the bureaucracy, the citizens’ groups, and even among the circles of some modernizing elites, that would develop a system of synergy and interdependence to be able to connect their efforts, share a common vision for the country, and eventually execute a coordinated strategy of capturing power at the national level.
Twenty-five years after its ratification, the 1987 Constitution has survived serious attempts to change it during the presidencies of Fidel Ramos, Joseph Estrada, and Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. What were the reasons for the attempts and why did they fail? For persons and organizations with valid reasons to explore Charter Change, what are the available options? What is a systematic way to explore and pursue it? These are some of the questions this book examines and answers.
G-Watch Localization aims to engage the local level to develop a G-Watch application that is attuned to local context and realities. It takes into account the decentralized policy context, the situation and condition of citizen participation in local governance, the nature and practice of the local government unit and the backdrop of socio-cultural realities prevalent and strong at the local area like primacy of kinship, prevalence of patronage and machismo, to name a few. It situates itself in the areas of monitoring and evaluation which remains weak despite the mandated avenues for citizen participation due to sheer lack of resources for it, the lack of capability and its seeming lack of urgency in comparison to other concerns.
The implication on this seemingly innocent case of misallocation of projects is arguably a vicious cycle of social injustice where those who in need are further deprived because of their condition of un-having, of not having project pre-requisites such as roads, electricity, land, numbers; while those who have enough or have more are given more because of the condition of having, of being accessible, conducive and having the numbers that bring votes.
The key of the past not repeating itself is us. We know this in our hearts and it is great that there are a lot of us who have taken the challenge of being the difference to make a difference. If we factor in ourselves and be one of the variables that will change the tide, then perhaps, change has a chance. In doing so, we need to dare ourselves to be more. This is the clear lesson from history. We need to do our part and yes, there are good signs that we will.
The news that the FOI Bill failed was frustrating, but it should serve as a wake up call. Not only that we must make power accountable, we must reconstitute power; for as it is now, the power configuration in our society only allows limited reforms and hardly any radical changes. Important legislations that deepen democracy by giving more power to the people and making the exercise of power more accountable like the FOI Bill will hardly have a chance and our toil to make a difference will be more of the same without making any difference in the existing power structure. This is why it is most critical that while we continue our governance work now, we do not lose sight of the important task of developing our political party system, continuing the political engagement with the new administration and creating a reform-oriented context for the next elections through electoral reform and political education.
The spirit of Bayanihan is what this project tries to revive, the spirit of being part of a community, of cooperation, of caring for others. This is what we try to reclaim—the meaning of Bayanihan that has evolved from a simple act of neighbors carrying a whole house of a relocating family to a process of nation-building through people’s empowerment and good governance.
This is a message that says everything is not lost after all. There are shimmers of light, patches of green, light at the end of the tunnel or however you call it that means there is hope. EDSA 1 and 2 were acts of Bayanihan. The fights against social injustice are acts of Bayanihan. And though sporadic, they continue even up to present.
This paper aims to put together the thinking, discussions and debates of the reform-minded societal groups on the proposed Political Party Reform Bill based on the activities initiated by the Ateneo School of Government (ASoG) with support from the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung in the Philippines.
This provides reflection paper on the Partisan Civil Society discussion series, arguing the case for political party building in the Philippines.
This chapter will search for an aspect of political parties that can explain the mal-development of party politics in the country, and can provide a feasible point of reference for party reform measures.
This paper explores the pros and cons of a people’s initiative, by revisiting the attempts of PIRMA and Sigaw ng Bayan, and examining the barriers to making it operational and applicable.
Paradoxically, the Maguindanao Massacre gives the country a unique opportunity to address a long-time problem that was not a monopoly of one region or ethnic community. With this massacre, we crossed the line and the country is now on the brink of being a failed state. With this massacre, we are seeing a scale of brutality and evil that we have not seen before. We have seen political and media assassinations and we have experienced massacres of farmers and workers – but not with these targets (women, lawyers, journalists, bystanders and passersby) and not in these numbers. Lines were crossed in Maguindanao and we must all work together, and work very hard, to pull the country back from those lines. Otherwise, the consequences are unimaginable with political clans all over the country possibly believing that they too can act with impunity.
The way forward is to change the country from the base, place by place, island by island. The integration and unity must be achieved with respect to the diversity and plurality of struggles; but a conscious effort is needed by the leaders of these initiatives to connect their struggles and execute a coordinated strategy of taking power at the national level.
Once this political machinery of reform movements in the Philippines wins power, it has both the broad social base and moral ascendancy to bring a developmental and democratic state, which can effectively lead the process of nation-building. This is a formidable challenge, but it has to be done. By building on the basics, we will change the Philippines.