CAVESTANY,LESTER_issue Paper_limited Participation of Cso in Loc Gov

1

Limited Participation of the Civil Society in the Local Government Councils

ISSUE PAPER: LIMITED PARTICIPATION OF THE CIVIL SOCIETY

IN THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT COUNCILS

Cavestany, Lester G.

Ateneo School of Government

Master in Public Management

Modern Management for Local Governance

Prof. Aurma M. Manlangit

Prof. Mary Jane C. Ortega

January 2013

2


Table of Contents

Chapter 1 – Background .................................................................................................................3

Chapter 2 –Problem Statement ....................................................................................................8

Chapter 3 – Discussion and Analysis ............................................................................................10

Chapter 4 – Recommendations and Conclusion ..........................................................................16

Bibliography ................................................................................................................................20

3


4


The module on Modern Management in Local Governance, under Professor Aurma M.

Manlangit and Mayor Mary Jane C. Ortega, culminates with this Issue Paper about the Limited

Participation of the Civil Society in the Local Government Councils. As stated in the syllabus,

the course aims to provide the students with not just a working knowledge on local governance

in the Philippines, but also current and emerging concepts in the practice of good governance.

Before we delve into the details of the issue, it would be good to briefly review the key

concepts we have learned from the class discussions and through the assigned readings to help us

understand why the issue concerning the Limited Participation of the Civil Society in the Local

Government Council is a critical dimension of good governance. These related concepts include

the following:

1. New Public Management

2. Decentralization

3. Local Government Code of 1991

4. Issues in Local Governance

New Public Management

New Public Management (NPM) is a philosophy of public administration that fuses the

concepts of New Institutional Economics (which refers to the introduction of market incentives

into government service such as competition) and managerialism (which refers to the adoption of

private sector methods in government activities). (Tillah, 2005)

Shifting the focus from public administration, NPM encompasses the reform agenda in

most OECD countries since the late 1970s, introducing organizational and managerial changes in

the public sector. (Androniceanu, 2007)

5


Citing Tillah (2005), Prof. Manlangit enumerated the following NPM initiatives:1

deregulating the economy and privatizing state-run corporations

making the private sector the engine of economic growth

shrinking the size of the bureaucracy

a government that focuses on policy-making, rather than service-delivery, and

catalyzing other sectors to get involved in service delivery (i.e. steering versus

rowing)

empowering the citizens, and redefining them as customers

decentralization of national governments

Decentralization and R.A. 7160

Decentralization is referred to as the “systematic and rational dispersal of power,

authority and responsibility from the central government to lower or local level institutions.”

(Pomeroy, 2003)

Prof. Manlangit discussed the three degrees or aspects of decentralization consisting of

the following:

a) deconcentration - shifting of administrative workload from central government to lower

level of central government. The central government continues to retain, in varying

degrees, the power to control and direct its recipient.

b) devolution - carries the highest degree of decision-making independence and involves

relinquishing certain functions to subnational governments. From central government to

local government (the territorial and political subdivision of the state)

1 NPM Application in the LGU Powerpoint Presentation

6


c) de-bureaucratization - From central government to private sector; involves harnessing of

the private sector and NGOs in the delivery of services thru contracting out; PPP and

joint ventures

Mandated by the Constitution, Congress enacted Republic Act 7160, or the Local

Government Code (LGC) of 1991, which provides for the implementation of de-concentration

and devolution strategies to address the so-called “Imperial Manila” syndrome. Imperial Manila

refers to the over-concentration of administrative and political power in the nation’s capital. And

since the implementation of the R.A. 7160, political and administrative functions have been

devolved to the local government units, including field health and hospital services; social

services; community-based forestry projects; public works funded by local funds; the school

building program; facilities development for tourism; telecommunications and housing projects

(for provinces and cities only); enforcement of the national building code; reclassification of

agricultural lands; and agricultural extension and on-site research. (Tillah, 2005) The Local

Government Code also institutionalizes and strengthens civil society participation in the different

local development councils such as the Local Development Council, the local health board and

the local school board, and even the local Sanggunian.

Issues in Local Governance

The LGC has been in effect for more than 20 years and although its vision of local

governments that “enjoy genuine and meaningful local autonomy to enable them to attain their

fullest development as self-reliant communities and make them more effective partners in the

attainment of national goals”2 is yet to be fully realized, there are now numerous examples of

2 Section 2, Republic Act 7160

7


innovations and best practices in the provinces, cities, municipalities and barangays that have

been empowered by the decentralization revolution in our democratic nation. And in the process

of implementing and reviewing the LGC, there are several issues that need to be addressed,

including the clarification of intergovernmental relations, the fulfillment of the devolved

functions, and the utilization of the decentralized powers, and the development of local

capabilities (Brillantes, 1996)

Professor Manlangit enumerated the following issues in local governance:3

1. Structural inefficiency-powers have greatly expanded , but institutional infrastructure

remains the same

2. Three year term of office-fairly an expensive way to exercise suffrage, undermines the

ability of local officials to effectively govern

3. Fiscal and financial autonomy

4. Limited capacity: Do they have enough resources and capacity to carry our their

functions?

5. Accountability-no mechanism

6. Limited participation in local councils. The councils have yet to convene; trust

relationship of civil society and LGUs

This paper deals with the abovementioned issue regarding the limited participation of the

citizens and civil Society in the local government councils. The next chapter deals with the crux

of the issue, while in Chapter 3, the issue is discussed and analyzed. Finally, this issue paper

ends with recommendations and conclusions in Chapter 4.

3Prof. Aurma M. Manlangit, NPM Applications in the LGU Slideshow Presentation

8


9


Republic Act 7160, or the Local Government Code (LGC) of 1991, provides the policy

framework for the direct participation of the civil society, especially through people’s

organizations (PO’s) and non-government organizations (NGO’s) in local governance. Their

involvement in the local councils takes actual form through the following:

a) representation in the local Sanggunian of each municipality, city and province - –

b) participation in the local development council

c) participation in the local school board

d) participation in the local health board

e) representation in other local bodies: the Local Prequalification, Bids and Awards

Committee; and Local Peace and Order Council

Despite the explicitness of the provisions of the Local Government Code regarding the

direct and actual participation and representation of the civil society in the local councils, there

have been several hindrances to their full implementation which brings us to the central issue in

this paper: the limited participation of the civil society in the local government councils. In the

next part, this issue will be discussed and analyzed.

10


Never doubt that a small group of

thoughtful, committed citizens can change

the world; indeed, it's the only thing that

ever does.

- Margaret Mead

CHAPTER THREE

DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

11


The Local Government Code envisions a vibrant civil society involvement in the local

government. However, the mainstreaming of representatives from non-government organizations

and people’s organizations has not been fully implemented in the following areas:

1. representation in the local Sanggunian of each municipality, city and province –

Aside from the elected local officials, including the councilors (board

members at the Sangguniang Panlalawigan), and the representatives of the

barangays and the Sangguniang Kabataan, the Local Government Code requires

that sectoral representatives should be included as regular members. The LGC

further provides that the Comelec shall promulgate the rules and regulations to

effectively provide for the election of such sectoral representatives from the

women’s sector, the workers, and another one from the urban poor, indigenous

cultural communities, disabled persons, or any other sector as may be determined

by the Sanggunian concerned.4

Agra (1997) recounts the legal imbroglio regarding the holding of the

election of sectoral representatives for the local sanggunians. There were attempts

in 1992 by the Comelec to hold the first elections of sectoral representatives on

March 26, 1993 for the city and municipal levels and on April 16, 1993 for the

provincial governments. But on March 11, 1993, Comelec suspended the

scheduled elections by virtue of Resolution No. 2575. Comelec revived the

attempt in January 1995 for the sectoral representatives to be synchronized with

the national-local elections of May 1995. But this effort was again stalled by a

provision of Republic Act No. 7887 which apparently requires an enabling law

from Congress before the election of sectoral representatives can be held. Several

4 Section 41(c) of the Local Government Code

12


bills from both the House of Representatives and the Senate have been filed for

the said elections, but none have been enacted. And we are still awaiting the first

elections of sectoral representatives in the local councils.

2. participation in the local development council

Each local government unit, from the provincial, city, municipal and down

to the barangay level has its own development council to assist the corresponding

Sanggunian in setting the direction of economic and social development, and

coordinating development efforts within its territorial jurisdiction.5 The LGC

requires that in addition to the government officials, the local development

councils must have representatives from non-governmental organizations

operating in that locality, and they shall constitute not less than one fourth (1/4) of

the members of the fully organized council. Furthermore, these representatives

must be chosen from the accredited non-governmental organizations by

themselves and among themselves.6

Having civil society representatives in the LDC’s is an ideal that is

challenged by present-day political realities. Dolores S. Corro (2006) shared

the results of the survey of the Mindanao Coalition of Development NGO

Networks, revealing that many LGU’s, especially in Mindanao, have not even

convened their LDC’s yet. And there are others that have convened it only at the

beginning of the three-year term, but have not had further meetings, in violation

of the LGC that requires them to meet at least once every six (6) months or as

often as may be necessary. Moreover, there are no clear sanctions for LGUs that

5 Section 106 of the Local Government Code 6 Section 108 of the Local Government Code

13


do not follow the provisions on the LDC. The lack of disincentives is also a

possible reason as to why some LGUs have not complied with the required one-

fourth of the membership of the LDC coming from the civil society. The

unwillingness to convene the LDC and to include civil society representatives can

be attributed to the non-consultative style of leadership of the local chief

executive.

Gonzales (1997) also reports that another reason that could stall the

participation of the representatives from the civil society in the LDC is the slow

and/or preferential accreditation of POs and NGOs. It has to be remembered that

the LDC representative from the civil society must come from the accredited non-

government organizations in the locality. And it is the local Sanggunian that

approves their accreditation.

3. participation in the local school board

Aside from the Local chief executive, school superintendents, the chairman of the

education committee of the local council, the treasurer, and the representative of the

Sangguniang Kabataan, the following representatives shall be included in the local

school boards, whether at the provincial, city or municipal level:

a) the president of the local federation of parents-teachers association

b) the duly elected representative of the local teachers' organization

c) the duly elected local representative of the non-academic personnel of public

schools

14


The participation of civil society in the local school board is pretty

straightforward. Teachers, parents, and non-academic personnel have their own

mechanisms of choosing their officials and representatives.

4. participation in the local health board and other local special bodies, such as the Local

Prequalification, Bids and Awards Committee; and Local Peace and Order Council

Aside from the local chief executive, the representative from the

Department of Health, the local health officer, the chairman of the committee on

health of the local sanggunian, there must also be a representative from the private

sector or non-governmental organizations involved in health services in the

locality concerned, whether in the province, city or municipality

The participation of civil society in the Local Health Board and in the

LSB’s could be hindered by the previously mentioned political reasons. It could

also be possible that the LHB and LSB’s are inoperative. And since there are

neither incentives for compliance nor clear sanctions for violations, the local chief

executives, who are not consultative, are not forced to convene them. On the side

of the civil society representatives, their role is often recommendatory and since

they were appointed by the local chief executive to be in the LSB’s, they are

expected to be supportive of what the governor or mayor wants.

Citing Tordecilla and Tumbaga, Gonzalez (1997) gives the additional problem of the

existence of a pervasive culture of mistrust between LGUs and NGOs/POs, based largely on a

15


lack of knowledge and understanding. Local governments have been wary of inviting their new

people into the system, or have been suspicious of the intentions of NGOs and POs.

More than twenty years have passed since the LGC mandated the significant

representation of the civil society in the various local councils, especially in the Sanggunian, the

Local Development Council, the Local School Board, the Local Health Board, and other Local

Special Bodies. But today, the problem of limited civil society participation in the local councils

still persists. It is a problem that is looking for answers and solutions.

16


17


Having understood the issue of the limited participation of the civil society in at hand, we

can now discuss some recommendations on how we can address it.

As the dimensions of good governance continue to spread around the political spheres in

our country, the participatory and consultative styles of leadership will be further propagated.

Local chief executives will begin to see that public participation, through representation of the

various sectors in the planning and implementing stages of their programs, is a boon to their

respective local governments. The representatives can play an important role in spreading the

news to the constituents about the LGU-led developments in their area and even the leadership

traits of the local officials. The best practices of Naga City in the area of participatory

governance are worth studying and emulating. Under the leadership of then-Mayor Jesse

Robredo, the Sangguniang Panlungsod passed the “Empowerment Ordinance of Naga City in

1997." This Empowerment Ordinance mandates the city to create a "People's Council" consisting

of duly accredited NGOs and POs in the city. This Council appoints NGO representatives to

local special bodies of the city government and they participate in the planning, implementation

and evaluation of the programs, projects and activities of the City Government, votes at the

committee level meetings of the Sangguniang Panlungsod, and acts as the people's

representatives in the exercise of their constitutional rights to information on matters of public

concern and of access to official records and documents. (Robredo, 2000) In the local school

boards, Robredo is known to have pioneered what he called “re-engineering the local school

boards” by increasing the participation of parents and community leaders, creating positive

results especially in the expanded development of Alternative Learning Systems and Alternative

Delivery Modes Programs. It was this kind of trust and partnership with the civil society that

made him win the Ramon Magsaysay award for Good Governance in 2000 for “giving credence

18


to the promise of democracy by demonstrating that effective city management is compatible with

yielding power to the people.” (Chiu & Tan, August 21, 2012)

Legislative amendments to the LGC is also something that can be considered since

Section 521 of the LGC provides for the mandatory review of the LGC at least once every five

years, with the primary objective of providing a more responsive and accountable local

government structure.

As regards the election of sectoral representatives in the local councils, there must be

pressure from the civil society organizations in the various districts for their congressmen to pass

the enabling law for the elections.

Agra (1997) however argues, that even without the enabling law, the Local

Government Code clearly gives the Comelec the mandate to hold such elections. So we can also

put pressure on Comelec to do their duty.

Speaking of duty and the pressure to do it, the local chief executives must also be

required to convene the Local Development Council and the other local councils and bodies and

to ensure that the civil society representative are given their rightful place on the table, as

provided for by the Local Government Code. And should NGO accreditation be a problem in the

Sanggunian because of red tape or politicking, then accreditation powers should also be given to

national agency or the Philippine Council for NGO Certification.

Gonzalez (1997) cites the following additional areas that promote people’s participation

in local governance:

1. Other local councils: Agrarian Reform Councils, Fisheries and Aquatic Reform Councils,

and People’s Law and Enforcement Board.

2. Mandatory Consultations and Public Hearings

19


3. System of Recall

4. Local Initiatives and Referenda

As decentralization continues to flourish in in the Philippines, it is important to promote a

transparent, accountable and most especially, participatory local government, not just in the

national, provincial, city or the municipal levels, but more importantly, down to the barangay

level. Since the barangay is the primary planning and implementing unit of government policies,

programs, projects and activities in the community, and is a forum wherein the collective views of

the people may be expressed, crystallized and considered.

Echoing the New Public Management principles of empowering the citizens, and

redefining them as customers, President Aquino emphasized that in his administration, “Kayo

(the people) ang boss ko,” when he took his oath of office. This declaration was well-received

because it meant that it’s not the public officials who are the bosses, but the people. It

emphasized the need to establish the role of the citizenry and the civil society, through the NGOs

and POs, in the development of our country, both at the local and national levels.

20


BIBLIOGRAPHY

Agra, A. C. (1997). Local Sectoral Representation: A Legal Analysis. Associates in Rural

Development, Inc./ Governance and Local Democracy Project.

Androniceanu, A. (2007). New Public Management, a Key Paradigm for Reforming Public

Management in Romanian Administration. ADMINISTRAŢIE ŞI MANAGEMENT PUBLIC ,

154-161.

Brillantes, A. B. (1996). Decentralization, Devolution and Democratization: Old Concepts,

Contemporary Applications. Kasarinlan , 83-88.

Chiu, P. D., & Tan, K. J. (August 21, 2012, August 21). Jesse Robredo: Good Governance Guru

and Ideal Family Man. Retrieved January 2013, from GMA News:

http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/270596/news/nation/jesse-robredo-good-governance-

guru-and-ideal-family-man

Gonzales, R. P. (1997, December). Case Studies of Decentralization: Philippines. SDA Technical

Consultation on Decentralization . Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural

Development.

Mindanews. (2006, October 26). Retrieved January 2013, from Mindanews:

http://www.mindanews.com/c3-news/2006/10/26/lack-of-sectoral-representation-in-lgus-hit/

Pomeroy, R. (2003). "The Government as a Partner in Co-Management.". In J. N. D.C. Wilson,

The Fisheries Co-Management Experience: Accomplishments, Challenges and Prospects.

London: Kluwer.

Robredo, J. M. (2000). City Strategy And Governance: The Naga City Experience. Singapore:

East Asia Urban and City Management Course.

Tillah, M. (2005). Globalization, Redemocratization and the Philippine Bureaucracy. Philippine

Institute for Development Studies , 7.

Image credits:

Julius Caesar: http://www.wheninkrunsout.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/julius-caesar-

300x225.jpg

Margaret Mead: http://www.usconsulate.org.hk/pas/kids/images/mead.jpg

Albert Einstein: http://www.hetemeel.com/einsteinform.php

Jesse Robredo - http://edicio.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/unfinished-revolution.jpg

http://www.wheninkrunsout.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/julius-caesar-300x225.jpg

http://www.wheninkrunsout.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/julius-caesar-300x225.jpg

http://www.usconsulate.org.hk/pas/kids/images/mead.jpg

http://www.hetemeel.com/einsteinform.php

http://edicio.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/unfinished-revolution.jpg

Documents

CAVESTANY,LESTER_issue Paper_limited Participation of Cso in Loc Gov