Critics of the administration often wail that circumstances are gradually converging and collectively moving the country away from democracy. They say democracy is in peril. They cite the lack of independence among both chambers of the legislature where a super majority rules at the House of Representatives — one borne out of turncoatism, defections and illicit marriages of convenience. They also cite a glaring imbalance at the Senate, created in part by an incredibly anemic opposition party.

Where democratic debate is founded on representative diversity and principles forged through open fora, in contrast, what we are cursed with at the House of Representatives is subterfuge, wheeling dealing and horse-trading. With the recent power grab at the most inopportune time, that is glaringly evident.

At the Senate there is less of the unprincipled duplicitous kind that fuels coups. There the opposition are merely impotent, anachronistic and irrelevant stragglers of a lost presidential war. Their fiscalizing is feeble and often absent of credibility especially when matched against the incompetence and corruption-laden administration that they were once part of Benigno Aquino III.

Their most vocal is a twice-failed putschist, a confirmed traitor to the Constitution he’s sworn to uphold and protect and whose intellectual caliber is constantly revealed in every word he utters. He replaced their former firebrand who is now languishing in a prison cell after being accused of complicity in the illegal drug trade.

As for the rest, most were beneficiaries of an illegal Pavlovian presidential pork barrel fund, malversed from legitimately budgeted uses, virtually stolen and insidiously transferred to the itching paws of legislators that they might sit, roll-over, beg and bark as their benefactor bids.

The bungling buffoonery of their halcyon days under Aquino not only continues to curse every move they take but the colossal corruption slowly unravelling from when they were the ruling party robs them of any credibility they might still have.

This is the quality of the Congress inflicted on us by the often whimsical if not careless exercise of our suffrage rights and duties. As unfortunate as that is, these elected officials were still democratically vetted and voted through the electoral system that legitimizes each of them.

It is against this unfortunate backdrop that we analyze the accusation of critics that democracy is imperiled.

If democratic choice is imperiled it is not jeopardized at the Executive Branch. Rodrigo R. Duterte is a clear example of how democratic the electoral processes are. His continuing approval ratings and popularity show its sustainability. He ran against the odds, the moneyed candidates, the political patronage system of long established political parties, their nationwide machinery and – most important these days – he ran against a well-funded multimillion peso public relations and publicity stunt-focused campaign.

Democracy is likewise not imperiled at the Judiciary. By removing a pretender through the clearly democratic processes written into the statutes governing the qualifications necessary for the Supreme Court, did we not just uphold law versus the whimsical exercise of power by a former President who chose to disregard it?

By raising integrity to the level of a requisite applied on an ousted Chief Justice we imposed a strict adherence to judicial tradition and democratic collegiality not only within the High Court itself but on the appointing authority who might recklessly wield powers sans checks and balances.

These democratic ideals however cannot be said to found the leadership now ruling the Lower House.

If democracy is in peril today. We know all-too well who imperils it.