A Head Of State And Head Of Government

One of the biggest fears of the parliamentary system was the whole idea of "Gloria forever" and "Duterte forever" which is not the case of a parliamentary Philippines -- it's more of the fear of the unknown than anything else. Do people really know who's who in a parliamentary? We have a monarchy-parliamentary and a presidential-parliamentary. South Korea may be mainly presidential but it has a prime minister appointed by the president to assist in running the state. The aim of a parliamentary Philippines is to have a duly-elected president and members of the parliament  together with a prime minister elected by the parliament. 

I remembered this scene from G.I.Joe cartoon when Serpentor was finally conceived as a replacement for Cobra Commander. Although Cobra Commander like most cartoon Big Bads (though he was demoted in Season Two in favor of a more entertaining stupid villain in Serpentor) -- he did come up with a plan that could have had COBRA in better hands than the U.S. government. Cobra Commander suggested that Serpentor can be a sterling symbol that stands with the power of COBRA (Head of State) while the former made important decisions (Head of Government). Serpentor rejected said proposal. In the G.I.Joe comics -- Serpentor wasn't meant to replace Cobra Commander. Rather, Serpentor was created as COBRA's unifying Head of State (Cobra Emperor) while Cobra Commander was to act as its Prime Minister -- something that didn't last because Serpentor wanted both positions for absolute power. Such incident caused said organization to topple down badly. 

So how do we define the Head of State and Head of Government. Here's what CoRRECT Philippines has to say in said article:

To figure out the root cause, we have to go back to the basic definition of the roles of head of state and head of government. The head of state’s role is defined as being the chief representative of the state and the people of the state. As such, the head of state is considered as a unifying figure, not identified with any political affiliation whatsoever.

Then, there is the head of government, whose role is defined as being the country’s chief executive who executes laws and formulates policies for the state’s well-being. At times, these laws and policies are subject to opposition. Factoring as well the fact that the head of government position is more political in nature, the head tends to be a divisive figure, especially among those who oppose his/her policies or his/her political affiliation, though by default the opposition tends to be in the minority.

Now one could go back to the late 90s with Fidel V. Ramos. I remembered that one of my greatest fears was a repeat of the Marcos dictatorship. The bigger issue was that the 20 years of Marcos but the quality of life during that time. Now, one could consider that would have Ramos succeeded in pushing for a parliamentary government -- the Philippines could have had both a Head of State and Head of Government to help divide and delegate the work more efficiently and effectively. 

I remembered how Ramos the would-have-been Mahathir Bin Mohamad of the Philippines would have he succeeded in charter change or constitutional reform. He had wanted Jose De Venecia to succeed him. As much as one could consider De Venecia as "boring as f***" in many instances yet I admire said man for possessing more intelligence than I could possess. De Venecia lacks charisma but he has the qualities that could make him a good Prime Minister even if he lacks the charisma to be a unifying figure. However, the presidential elections had him defeated by Joseph Ejercito-Estrada. 

Would have the Philippines gone parliamentary - Erap himself could have served as a unifying figure for Filipinos while De Venecia could serve as the people's head of government. For what he lacked in intelligence - he makes it up for his ability to be a unifying figure. It could have worked better if the Philippines had Erap as the Head of State and De Venecia as the head of government. Maybe, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo would have been the Deputy Prime Minister of the Philippines and perhaps we could have had Richard Gordon or Miriam Defensor-Santiago as the head of the Minority Bloc. It should be noted by now that intelligence doesn't automatically translate into influence as evidenced by both Erap and De Venecia. Not every intelligent person have the ability to lead. Leadership requires a certain degree of intelligence though it's the influence that they need more.

The same could've been done last 1986 after the Marcos Years ended. The late Corazon C. Aquino was symbolic at best. That's what she could've been during the EDSA Revolution - a symbol for the fight against dictatorship. However, Fidel V. Ramos himself was the one who was more qualified to make important decisions. It could've worked this way. Cory herself would have been installed as teh Philippines' symbolic head of state as a unifying figure to bring Filipinos out of the darkess of the Marcos regime. Ramos himself could've served as the prime minister of the Philippines as its head of government.

_________

One can consider this in the system overhaul. The Philippines will still have presidential elections and parliamentary elections. Filipinos will still get to vote for the Head of State to serve as their unifying figure (ex. Manny Pacquiao). The ruling party selects its prime minister. The opposition bloc chooses its opposition leader. The Prime Minister doesn't hold absolute power either because the Parliament has both the Majority Bloc and Minority Bloc in several debates while working towards a feasible solution for the country.