ARTICLE 19. The Troika shall be elected by Parliament from among its members, by secret ballot, and a majority vote of all the members of Parliament. The election shall take place at the beginning of one administration of six years.
Each party represented in Parliament with not less than 10% of its members shall nominate three candidates for President. By a system of elimination and subsequent secret voting, the one receiving the highest number of votes, with a majority, shall be proclaimed President. Subsequently, using the same procedure, the Prime Minister will be elected, and lastly the Speaker of Parliament.
During the election process, the Parliament shall be closed to outsiders and all means of communications disconnected with the outside world, and the session shall continue until the election of the Troika is terminated and properly proclaimed by the Chief Magistrate of the Constitutional Tribunal. In the first election of the Troika under this Constitution, the session shall be presided over by the three highest ranking members of the Supreme Court. A similar system shall be followed in the election of the Troika in the five States.
EXPLANATORY NOTES
This is a very controversial provision, for by it, the leadership in the Federal Government and in the five States shall not be vested in one single person. The election of the three leaders in each of the six governments (the Federal Government and the five States) will not be accomplished through direct voting by the people.
In the 1934-1935 Constitutional Convention, the illustrious Delegate Rafael Palma proposed the indirect election of the President from among the members of the Unicameral legislative body. Unfortunately, he was a voice in the wilderness, as there was a strong sentiment in the Convention to have the President elected directly by the people.
The system of government being proposed differs from the recently approved 1981 amendments to the Constitution in the matter of leadership for the Federal and State Governments. We must consider the fact that under the Marcos Constitution of 1981, there was a President, a Prime Minister, and a Speaker of the Legislative Assembly. The difference lies in our desire to upgrade the powers of the Prime Minister and those of the Speaker, so that, together with the President, we shall have a triumvirate of leaders none of whom are directly elected by the people, but selected by Parliament from among its members.
The procedure being proposed is similar to the election of a Pope under the Conclave system. It is by secret ballots and during election time, the members of Parliament are completely enclosed in the Legislative Hall without any communication with the outside world to avoid any influence on the election.
Therefore, from the moment the election starts, the Parliament cannot have any recess and will have to continue its session within the confines of the Halls of Parliament. If necessary, a recess can take place but without the members of Parliament being allowed to leave the confines of the meeting hall where food is to be served to them.
Irrespective of parties, the three candidates receiving the largest number of votes will be declared President, Prime Minister and Speaker of Parliament, respectively.
In the explanatory note of Article 18, possible objections to the concept of a collective leadership composed of a Troika had been considered. A one-man leadership is defective because no leader is perfect. If we study possible leaders that a country has or can produce, it will not be difficult to pinpoint defects of any of the contenders to constitute the Troika, whether in the Federal or State levels.
Hardly anyone can fully satisfy the ideals that we all cherish in a perfect leader. Let us review all our past presidents since our Independence and none of them could pass the test of a perfect leader. But it is less difficult to select three leaders, each one of them with some defects, but the three of them combined, are stronger than any one of them without the support of the other two.
The unity of the country can best be achieved by the united front of three leaders representing different sectors of the country and with different capacities of leadership.
The Filipino is a race that can produce many leaders. There is no dearth of leadership but, sad to say, a perfect leader is hard to find. Such a perfection can best be obtained by selecting three leaders in the Federal Government and in each one of the five States.
The indirect election of our leaders by all electors of the Republic has the following advantages:
- Electoral frauds in the election of the President by the entire electors of the country are difficult to redress. We do not recall any presidential election protest that could finally be decided by the Supreme Court within the four year term of office of the President.
- The excessively high election expenses needed by a campaign in all the far nooks and corners of the country will be avoided. Those expenses have been increased after every election. The political gimmicks introduced in one presidential election constitute a precedent that had to be followed in the next. Sad to say, candidate Ramon Magsaysay, who had unlimited financial support from a secret agency of a friendly State, made his presidential election expenses unprecedentedly high.
- A presidential candidate has always promised one thing during his campaign speeches, but did exactly the opposite of what he promised once in office. Both candidates Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Delano Roosevelt promised the mothers of America not to bring the U.S. into a war. And they did exactly the opposite. Franklin Delano Roosevelt promised to balance the budget, but he reneged on that promise, as he saw the importance of raising America from the doldrums of a national crisis. Candidate Lyndon Johnson opposed the hawkish policy of his opponent Barry Goldwater only to escalate the Vietnam war without Congressional sanction. Nixon as a candidate promised to end the Vietnam War, but he was the one who extended the war to Cambodia without the knowledge of Congress.
- A presidential candidate has to be careful not to antagonize in his statements the views of any important sector of the electorate. His speeches are generally with double meaning. Mr. Carter was very proficient in not displeasing the black electorate in his promises to strengthen the dignity of human rights. As a President he kept in line all members of Congress. (To be continued/PN)
