So The Philippine Opposition Admire Shinzo Abe's Resignation But Don't Want Constitutional Reform?

Here's a recent post of former Solicitor General, Pilo Hilbay, in his statement regarding the resignation of former Japanese prime minister Shinzo Abe. Pilo states a truth that actually rings a huge bell BUT only if he would support constitutional reform. I don't really care if the Liberal Party will become the dominant party again under Leni Loud Robredo - that's as long as we're under a parliamentary system. However, it was known that #OtsoDiretso was still against reforms. I don't know exactly why they are still propagating the amendments are supposed to be about "keeping Duterte in power".  The same lie was also propagated back during the Arroyo Administration as the"Gloria Forever" constitution. I don't mind if Hilbay remains anti-Duterte as long as, like the late Carlos Celdran, he will fight for constitutional reform. Celdran was anti-Duterte through and through but he acknowledged that the system is defective. The question is will Hilbay as well as the current Philippine Opposition ever acknowledge that the 1987 Constitution is NOT the best in the world? 

Do they know what shaped Abe to be the leader he is or all those countries where they raise against President Rodrigo R. Duterte? New Zealand where the former health minister puts Francisco Duque to shame? Parliamentary! Singapore? Parliamentary! While the others are presidential but they have parliamentary features. However, I think the current Philippine Opposition is still against parliamentary because of fears of "another Marcos". Yet, the Yellowtard "hero" Ninoy Aquino revealed that the Marcos Years were a mock parliamentary. Ninoy revealed many important points about the mock parliamentary where Marcos was indecisive about constitutional reforms. Marcos' parliamentary had him both as president and prime minister which is NOT allowable in the British Westminster form of parliamentary. Any talk about parliamentary as a government where there's no election or less democratic is bogus. It's because the parliamentary system while not having any fixed term doesn't mean the end of elections. Also, parliamentary term limits are only limited when a person is no longer capable of sitting as an official.

What does the Philippine Opposition need to see? It's that the parliamentary system has better check and balance. Begging people to vote straight for #OtsoDiretso will no longer be necessary because the eight members will be automatically part of the Liberal Party. Parliamentary elections vote straight and the counts will determine the Government from the Opposition. If PDP-Laban wins because of Duterte's popularity and if Liberal Party wins because of the need of check and balance - you will get a better opposition. In fact, the real problem of the current opposition is that the presidential system has silenced them. A parliamentary system's Opposition will have better chances of keeping the Government accountable.

How will the parliamentary system shape up leaders? It would mean that there will be resignations because parliamentary impeachments are really humiliating. In a parliamentary system, the Parliament's loss of confidence in any member can result in the impeachment of any person. This process is called a vote of no confidence. A parliamentary Philippines would've not needed two EDSAs. For one, Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. would have been voted out of office if it was a real British Westminister form of parliamentary. Joseph "Erap" Estrada himself would've also been voted out of his office for his stupid remarks or when he was caught gambling. 

The Philippine Opposition should just stop arguing against constitutional reforms. In fact, they better start off by removing unnecessary economic restrictions. Want to decentralize? Go for a federal form of government. Want a real opposition? Then shift to parliamentary!