Unlike some of his predecessors, President Aquino has been a driving force behind controversial but necessary structural and anti-corruption reforms, Rood said. The continuation of the high-level engagement suggests that these reforms may indeed have a chance to bear fruit, he added. The Philippines has an uneven path in building democratic institutions. Three decades after the 1986 People`s Power Revolution, which ended the dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos, the country seems to have made an electoral habit of swinging power between populist and reformist presidents. In 2016, it was the turn of a populist leader, but instead of perpetuating an arm-to-arm narrative, Rodrigo Duterte reinforced the latent fear of many Filipinos pitting virtuous citizens against unscrupulous criminals. Duterte has referred to Davao — the city he served as mayor of for more than two decades — as Exhibit A. With unconventional methods of government, Duterte was able to transform Davao from the murderous capital of the Philippines into a haven for peace and order. Becoming president has allowed him to intensify these efforts. “It`s going to be bloody,” he warned the nation. National constitutions are basic guidelines for the organization of governance structures and the establishment of agreed legal principles.
Over time, reforms or revisions offer countries the opportunity to enshrine or expand gender equality provisions. This is in line with the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, which calls on signatory states to enshrine the principle of gender equality in their constitutions. They should also take action to implement this principle in all aspects of their legal systems, including by amending discriminatory laws, enacting laws that promote gender equality and women`s empowerment, and ensuring that legal practice respects women`s rights. The policies and rhetoric of the war on drugs have far-reaching implications. They create fragile and abusive democratic institutions. Three important problem areas deserve to be highlighted. The war on drugs is not just Duterte`s historical policy. It also serves as the organizational logic for his reign. The result of the president`s rhetoric is the culture of impunity in the police. Decades of efforts to institutionalize democratic control over the security forces are being undermined, where a new generation of police officers is being socialized into an irresponsible institution where police offers that suspects killed in drug raids have been hailed as heroes and rewarded with promotions. A greater role is also given to former military generals sitting in key centres of power, including the task force responsible for controlling the pandemic.
The military`s growing power is further legitimized by laws such as the Anti-Terrorism Law, which expands the definition of terrorism and legalizes detention without charge for 14 days. These developments illustrate, among other things, the extent of authoritarian practices to limit the prospects for accountability and democratic control of the security forces. The war on drugs is not just Duterte`s historical policy. It also serves as the organizational logic for his reign. A nation at war justifies authoritarian practices because due process is a slow process and protests by “bleeding-hearted liberals” obstruct the president`s law-and-order agenda. First, the war on drugs has established the security of social issues. Coercive institutions such as the police are at the forefront of social policy implementation. The fight against the problem of illicit drugs was a clear example of this, as the Philippines was bucking the global trend of treating drug abuse as a public health issue rather than a law and order issue. An important focus of UN Women`s work on constitutions and legal reforms is to support national partners in mainstreaming gender equality principles. We also help promote consensus on the implementation of reforms so that they become a living reality for women. First, proponents of participatory governance deserve to be supported at the local level, but this must go beyond the idealization of individual leaders.
The successes discussed above are not the result of a single hand of heroic politicians, but rely on a cadre of professionalized and dedicated civil servants who not only have the technical skills to deal with the day-to-day problems of local government, but also the sensitivity to listen and engage with the feedback of ordinary citizens. A critical space for reform therefore rests on the normalization of this public service ethic and on a focus on collective achievements, rather than on the glorification of individual leaders. There are two ways to answer this question. A pessimistic answer is yes, all these developments signal the normalization of authoritarian practices. The path to democratization in the Philippines has long been undermined by the refusal of political elites to institutionalize reforms that enhance political competition and accountability. One could argue that President Duterte is simply a beneficiary of the clan politics that have long defined electoral democracy in the Philippines. With political families dominating all sectors of government, including Duterte`s own family in Davao City, there is little room for alternative voices – whether in the form of opposition parties, social movements or civil society groups – to offer credible democratic projects that can resist the political machinery of political elites benefiting from the Duterte regime. But that`s not all. As the Philippines witnesses the intensification of authoritarian practices, there is room for democratic action that facilitates participation and creative forms of co-governance. These serve not only to push back against authoritarian practices, but also to develop democratic projects that correspond to the Philippines` youthful, global and digital participatory cultures.
This introduction highlights these democratic expressions as opportunities for reform and concludes by examining ways to expand these anti-authoritarian practices into the rest and after the Duterte regime. • Any act or omission, including through a law, policy, administrative measure or practice, that directly or indirectly excludes or restricts women in the recognition and promotion of their rights and in the access to and enjoyment of opportunities, advantages or privileges; Finally, the expansion of the election campaign remains a challenge for the Philippines. Great efforts to educate voters will be in vain if voters are left with a narrow field of candidates to choose from. The discourse on voter blame does little to deepen democratic practice. Advocating for party building and reform is still relevant today, as is a more serious recognition of the cultural actors who shape citizens` views on democracy and politics. While celebrities and influencers have been vilified as insignificant voices in politics, it should be noted that some of the most successful, albeit short-lived, campaigns against authoritarian practices, particularly disinformation, are supported by the supporters of these cultural actors, who are key vectors in guiding public debate. This introduction characterizes the authoritarian practices of Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte`s administration and its legacy for liberal democracy in the country. She argues that the policies and rhetoric of the Duterte administration`s war on drugs have created fragile democratic institutions vulnerable to abuse of power.