6-year term for president may not be good, Jica laments
TOKYO—The six-year nonextensible term for Philippine presidents may be an obstacle to the country’s development goals, according to a senior official of the Japan International Cooperation Agency (Jica).
“One could say it is a difficulty that the administration will change after six years, and there could be cases where the whole [development] strategy changes” under a different administration, said Jin Wakabayashi, director of Jica’s Southeast Asia and Pacific department.
He cited the challenge of transitioning from one president to the next one every six years, and maintaining consistency in development strategies.
“Individual projects might be affected, which might work as a demerit to the country as a whole when it comes to installing important infrastructure,” he told the Inquirer in an interview here on Monday.
Jica is Japan’s development arm that gives out loans and aid to developing countries.
A strategic economic and security partner, Japan has been the Philippines’ top provider of official development assistance (ODA) for decades.
Wakabayashi, whose office handles Jica’s Philippine projects, stressed the importance of consistency and coherence in the implementation of development projects funded through aid packages or grants.
But he would not say whether he recommended a return to the old system of the Philippine president being entitled to a four-year term with a chance at reelection.
The 1987 Constitution limits the presidential term to a six-year term with no extension. DJ Yap
