Duterte administration ‘fared well’ in legislative reforms – Ateneo study

President Rodrigo Roa Duterte. Image from PCOO/FILE

MANILA, Philippines — Backed by a supermajority in both the Senate and House of Representatives, the Duterte administration can lay claim to being the third most productive in the post-Edsa revolution era in terms of passed legislation.

But this feat was overshadowed by the fact that the “quantitatively impressive but qualitatively inadequate legislative performance” failed to improve the lives of Filipinos.

This was the main finding of a new report by researchers Michael Yusingco, Ronald Mendoza, Gabrielle Ann Mendoza and Jurel Yap for the Ateneo School of Governance’s “Duterte @ 5: The Administration by the Numbers.”

The series of reports assess Mr. Duterte’s track record as he enters his sixth and final year as President and are being published in connection with his upcoming State of the Nation Address.

The study noted that compared to the five previous presidents post-Edsa revolution, the Duterte administration passed a yearly average of 139 laws—third to the administrations of former Presidents Fidel Ramos (178) and Corazon Aquino (155).

Some of the laws passed by Congress under Mr. Duterte were the law on rice tariffication, the Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion Act (TRAIN law or Republic Act No. 10963), the Corporate Recovery and Tax Incentives for Enterprises Act (CREATE Act or RA 11534), and the Coconut Farmers and Industry Trust Fund Act (RA 11524), which returns the funds collected during martial law to coconut farmers.

There were also “notable [pieces of] legislation” on social development, particularly on health and education, the study said. These included the Universal Health Care Act (RA 11223) and the law on universal access to tertiary education (RA 10931).

Misleading

However, “a mere listing of laws passed can be misleading because the relative importance of these different laws in the reform agenda could vary significantly,” the researchers pointed out.

More specifically, it was important to contextualize the government’s “quantitatively impressive but qualitatively inadequate legislative performance,” they added.

The study said that overall, Mr. Duterte’s administration “fared well” in terms of passing legislative reforms compared to previous administrations. However, like the past governments, it still “fell short of producing systematic change.”

The bulk of the laws passed, it noted, was “particularistic” or those that allocated funds for the development of municipalities, towns and districts. Others established schools or fishery areas while several changed the names of provinces and streets.

“Since these tend to serve narrow constituencies at the local level, particularistic laws are less controversial and are often treated as bargaining chips in bicameral negotiations for programmatic policies in the Philippines,” it said.

The study also observed that the President failed to take advantage of his supermajority in Congress, saying that despite “his unprecedented influence, it seemed as if he was unable or unwilling to fulfill the bold reforms promised.”

Few priority bills

When he ran for president in 2016, Mr. Duterte, now 76, promised a shift to a federal form of government and the revival of the death penalty. But bills in support of both languished in Congress.

Surprisingly, he also had the lowest number of priority bills passed—10 in the 17th Congress and only six in the 18th Congress—thus putting into question “the viability and strength of the alliance itself,” the study said.

Antiterror law

On the other hand, the President’s outsized executive influence on Congress could be seen in the swift passage of the controversial antiterror law despite broad public outrage.

Yusingco noted that Congress had even approved this ahead of the Bayanihan law that was supposed to alleviate the pandemic’s worst consequences on the economy.

“Our lawmakers who are supposed to represent the interest of the people, sometimes or more often, would disregard their constituency and put more weight on what the President is directing them to do,” Yusingco said. “[The antiterror law] is an example of our lawmakers giving more weight to the directive of the President than the sentiment of their constituents.”

Overall, Mr. Duterte’s legislative productivity “cannot be said to have responded to what we ultimately need as a nation… to improve our lives,” he added.