Authoritarian but not dictatorial

“President Duterte’s government operates under a Constitution drafted long before he became president. Although he advocates a federal government, he has been consistently lukewarm about amending the charter during his incumbency.

When President Rodrigo Duterte saved Filipino consumers from the inequity Manila Water Company Inc. and Maynilad Water Services Inc. wanted to enforce upon them, he proved that he is the protector of the Filipino people.

Through the President’s tough stance, taxpayers were spared the burden of shouldering the P11 billion award a Singapore arbitration court ordered the Philippine government to pay to Manila Water and Maynilad. The two concessionaires later waived the arbitration award rendered in their favor.

Had it been somebody else in Malacañang, taxpayers would have been told to accept reality. For one, ex-President Fidel Ramos advised President Duterte to comply with the arbitration award. The onerous concession agreements with Manila Water and Maynilad were signed when Ramos was president.

After more than 30 years of mismanagement in Malacañang, it is a relief to know that the nation now has a president who protects his people and who looks after their welfare, without fear of criticism from the political opposition and vested interest groups.

President Duterte would not have been able to prevail had he not asserted his authoritarian disposition as president and backed it up with firm, decisive action.

One proof in this regard is that for the first time since Ferdinand Marcos was president, the local communists and the drug lords are in real fear of the government. Even drug dependents serving in public office have yielded to the President’s anti-narcotics campaign.

Adding to President Duterte’s success as an authoritarian leader is the immense public acceptance he continues to enjoy as indicated in the recent independent surveys.

There is also the reality that most Filipinos lack discipline and comport themselves properly only under a strict government.

Indeed, President Duterte is an authoritarian leader but he is not the dictator his critics accuse him to be.

A dictator acts in any way he wants to. There is no check against the dictator’s abuse of power, and fundamental freedoms are curtailed. In a dictatorship, courts are powerless and the supremacy of the Constitution is inexistent.

The government under President Duterte has none of those dictatorial features.

President Duterte’s government operates under a Constitution drafted long before he became president. Although he advocates a federal government, he has been consistently lukewarm about amending the charter during his incumbency.

Congress alone decides how much money President Duterte’s administration may spend every year. His fiscal woes are mitigated by his power under the Constitution to veto line items in the budget, and the support of his political allies in Congress.

Citizens can challenge the validity of official acts of President Duterte before the Supreme Court. For example, his decision to place Mindanao under martial law, which is authorized under the Constitution, was questioned in the Supreme Court. Although the Court upheld the President, there were dissenting opinions registered by some justices.

The Office of the Ombudsman is open and functioning. Citizens are free to sue erring officials of the Duterte government.

Press freedom is not curtailed in the Philippines. Anti-administration media are not subject to censorship even if they continue to be critical of President Duterte.

Non-renewal of the legislative franchise of ABS-CBN is not an affront to press freedom. The Constitution vests in Congress the discretionary power not to renew any legislative franchise, and in the president the discretionary power to veto any draft legislative franchise Congress sends to him for his signature.

Online journalist Maria Ressa and her news site Rappler are not in trouble with the law because they were critical of President Duterte.

Ressa is facing libel raps filed by a businessman over a report Rappler published long before Duterte became president.

The Securities and Exchange Commission is investigating Rappler only because it allowed foreign involvement in its finances, which is in violation of the constitutional ban against alien ownership and management of mass media in the Philippines.

Sen. Leila de Lima is currently in jail not because she is critical of President Duterte but because the Department of Justice obtained evidence implicating her in the illegal drug trade in the national penitentiary during her tenure as Justice secretary. Her case is pending in court but she gets occasional furloughs.