Adj.1.

barred - preventing entry or exit or a course of action; "a barricaded street"; "barred doors"; "the blockaded harbor" barricaded, blockaded obstructed - shut off to passage or view or hindered from action; "a partially obstructed passageway"; "an obstructed view"; "justice obstructed is not justice" 2.barred - marked with stripes or bands marked - having or as if having an identifying mark or a mark as specified; often used in combination; "played with marked cards"; "a scar-marked face"; "well-marked roads" In the Philippines, it is normal for a politician's son, wife, brother, or other kinsman, to run for the same or other government office. It is commonly describe as political dynasty. There are many politicians of today monopolize the politics on their respective provinces, like the Josons of Nueva Ecija, Magsaysay and Gordon of Zambales, Roman and Garcia of Bataan, Singson of Ilocos Sur, Garcia and Osmena of Cebu, Zubiri of Bukidnon, Cojuangcos, Aquinos, Marcoses, etc. In Bohol we have Cajes, Garcia, Lim, Aumentado, etc. In my own opinion, political dynasty has its advantages and disadvantages. One of the advantages is that sons or members of the bloodline running in government position have enough background on politics and well-versed in governance. They are used-to in leading people. It has many advantages especially if the family has a good track in their services and maintains integrity in their office. But the disadvantage of having this system is the tendency of harboring power. The thirst for dominion will ruin not just the government but its people. Fame and popularity of the family will surely find them a good place in the government office. It leaves a narrow road for those able and gifted leaders whose clan has never been heard. What puts Filipino people in jeopardy regarding this political dynasty lies in the saying whatever the tree, so is the fruit. If corruption finds its way in the family, it is not impossible in the next generation who will inherit the power. So far in the Philippines, political families who stick with their integrity and set as an example to Filipinos are very rare. Political killings due to political family influence are very alarming. The frustrating part is that Filipinos never learn its history. They happily vote for the popular candidate with its plunder and public trust betrayal records (Estrada, Arroyo,etc).

----Recent surveys for the 2013 senatorial elections paint a familiar picture: many top-ranked candidates are either re-electionists or relatives of incumbent or former politicians. This, once again, prompts a discussion on political dynasties, whether this is an issue that should concern voters in the upcoming elections or something that can be accepted as part of our representative democracy. In principle, there is nothing wrong with political dynasties. In practice, however, its prevalence exemplifies the exclusionary power structure in the Philippines, where local elites continue to exert considerable influence in our country.

Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile has said in an interview that dynasties have existed since politics was invented. Dynastic politics is not unique to the Philippines, he added, citing the example of the Kennedys and Roosevelts in the United States. Following the footsteps of ones parents or relatives is not in itself unacceptable so why should politics be any different? Part of the answer lies in the historic character of electoral politics in the Philippines. Dante Simbulans pioneering study described the Philippines as an elite democracy where elections have been institutionalized to manage intra-elite competition. Elections have formalized the process of political succession through a periodic democratic exercise which can be easily manipulated for selfish ends. Elite rule is legitimized through this process by giving the illusion that the public has the power to choose its leaders, even though the pool of electable candidates is generally limited to a set of individuals with familiar surnames. Based on this analysis, one can make an argument that political dynasties are mere post-colonial legacies. To this extent, Enrile is correct that dynasties have existed since the beginning of Philippine politics. They are social realities that can be traced to the emergence of a cacique class from the Spanish colonial era and, in several cases, the creation of new elites under the Marcos regime. These de facto nobilities are able to stay in power by addressing the needs of their constituents through the strategic distribution of patronage masking as public service and the maintenance of compadre ties. To put it crudely, dynastic politicians are not entirely to blame, given that they too are products of the principalas evolution into the modern day elite. To accept this as part of our contemporary reality, however, is to be oblivious of political dynasties abuse of our weak democratic structures. One of the main promises of representative democracy is its commitment to future redistribution of material wealth and political power that were accumulated through historic injustices. Whats wrong with political dynasties is that instead of working towards the creation of equitable political structures, they have further strengthened the barriers to political inclusion of traditionally disenfranchised citizens such as peasants, workers, indigenous and other minority groups. In his research, Pablo Querubin has found a causal effect between winning elections and having relatives in office. In particular, individuals who win their first race by a small margin are four times more likely to have relatives in office in the future compared to individuals who run but lose by a narrow margin and never serve. These findings are revealing in that they expose how relatives of previous incumbents exclusively benefit from the political investments of their predecessors which, in turn, consolidates disproportionate political power in a few families. This is particularly troubling because in the Philippines, political power is closely linked to economic power. It is unlike other countries that have a distinct political class of civil servants and technocrats that are relatively autonomous from oligarchic interests and, in the case of South Korea, can discipline economic elites. Instead, as John Sidel argues, politicians in the Philippines have monopolistic control over both coercive and economic resources within given territorial jurisdictions or bailiwicks. Consequently, concentration of political power among a few

families benefits a narrow set of economic interests over a period of time, institutionalizes economic inequalities and perpetuates a culture of dependency between an economically/politically dominant patron and an otherwise disenfranchised client. It is not accidental that provinces with established political dynasties are also among the poorest. The trend of political dynasties has also served to limit the liberating potential of democratic politics. It undermines the principle of political equality in its most basic form through the principle of one person, one vote. While this right is often qualified by saying that voters usually end up choosing between tweedledum and tweedledee, virtually unopposed political dynasties do not even make room for tweedledee. The seeming inheritability of political positions is reminiscent of an oppressive absolutist state, where citizens are mere subjects that have no choice but to affirm the dictates of a ruling family rather than active citizens that are able to shape their political destiny. By making this argument, I do not mean to discredit dynastic politicians who, through their actions, have expressed commitment to reform Philippine politics. Congressman Erin Taada has been at the forefront of institutionalizing transparency through the Freedom of Information Bill. Senator Pia Cayetano has strengthened the system of rights through the Magna Carta for Women and the RH bill. Senator TG Guingona has been the champion of participatory modes of governance in budget reform. It is indisputable that some dynastic politicians have a good track record of advocating progressive policies but these individual achievements have done little in dismantling the structures that perpetuate political exclusion in a representative democracy. It is only when a person who has worked up the ranks in a political organization can stand an equal chance of being elected with a candidate with a political last name can we consider dynasties as fair practices in a democratic process. So where do we go from here? A viable option is to strengthen alternative political spaces for the public to organize and secure meaningful inclusion in the political process. Electoral politics has become so crowded with dynastic politicians, requiring mechanisms for citizen participation that are relatively independent of electoral politics. Political scientists describe this as democracy from below or the practice of democracy through peoples organizations, non-government organizations, social movements, new political parties and social networks that oppose elite politics and espouse new politics. Indeed, Philippine politics has been historically driven by bottom-up struggles for social justice and accountability. Grassroots political activities have ousted presidents, raised wages, and guarded ballot boxes. Hopefully, these democratic impulses eventually translate to systemic reform where the citizenry can effectively enforce democratic control over its politico-economic elites. That way, to paraphrase candidate Bam Aquinos hubristic statement, Aquinos dont have to become President every time theres a political crisis. GMA News

Nicole Curato, PhD is Assistant Professor in Sociology at University of the Philippines Diliman. She was previously a postdoctoral fellow at the Australian National University and is the current Associate Editor of Manila Review.

CASTAGATING POLITICAL DYNASTY The disadvantages of political dynasticism outweighs its advantages. The only advantage obviously is a familys tradition of having practiced integrity in public service that brings to its young breed of leader heirs the same brand of control. But how many among them possess this virtue? In Philippine politics, families who attach themselves to this noble virtue are indeed very rare, just like searching for a needle in a hay stack. But the disadvantages are too many to ignore, which people especially voters should take note of. In one of the articles about political dynasty written in August 2012, the author made mention of the following to wit; But the disadvantage of having this system (political dynasty) is the tendency of harboring power. The thirst for dominion will ruin not just the government but its people. Fame and popularity of the family will surely find them a good place in the government office. It leaves a narrow road for those able and gifted leaders whose clan has never been heard of. What puts Filipino people in jeopardy regarding this political dynasty lies in the saying whatever the tree, so is the fruit. If corruption finds its way in the family, it is not impossible in the next generation who will inherit the power. Despite the non-formulation yet of an enabling law that will put into action the law on political dynasty which they themselves try to hold back for obvious reasons, common sense and prudence dictates that if you are a man of integrity and high ideals just like what you are projecting as a leader, your actions should be in accordance to what the supreme law of the land states. Doing otherwise should be interpreted as violative of the law and require sanctions from no less than the people who are victims of the so called monopolies of power, who make public service as their own personal enterprise with the end in view of attaching their whole clan to power till kingdom come. The voters silent outrage has suddenly been manifested by such political malpractice. It has become apparent that they are out to castigate these candidates

to show their exasperation of the kind of melancholic leadership these politicians are out to display. In elections, the voters are king and should display their supremacy by way of castigating these types of candidates. It is only by acting as one can we change the face of Philippine politics and bring back the glory of our country once dubbed as the pearl of the orient seas. As bullish as can be The countrys financial market and the capital market as a whole has remained bullish, an offshoot of strong macroeconomic fundamentals displayed by the Philippine economy in 2012. The November report of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) stated that corporate bonds issuances reached P248.3 billion, up by 27.2 percent from P194.3 billion recorded in the same period of the previous year (2011). What is encouraging about this accomplishment is the fact that these moneys generated from bond sales are used for either operational or expansionary purposes. As such, it increases the countrys economic activity which in turn creates income and employment and increases the standard of living of the people. Inflation remained at an ideal level of 3.2 percent last year, indicating that prices of commodities in the market remained stable. The countrys benchmark, the stock market has reached twenty record highs, an indication of increased local and foreign market interest and confidence in the local bourse. This signifies interest in the local market which practically is a prelude to Foreign Direct Investment (FDI). Consumer and investment spending was expected to continue until the second quarter of the year (2011) brought about by essential expenditures like the forthcoming midterm elections. Unless otherwise controlled and the monetary authorities taking proper actions, inflation rate is expected to accelerate to about 56 percent because of the increase of currency in circulation brought about by massive election spending. All of these put together should generate employment and reduce unemployment, which up to now seems to hinder our countrys full economic recovery and turnaround. But all in all, these are aftermaths of the countrys strong macroeconomic fundamentals complemented by the Presidents highly trusted leadership; the country is most definitely on its way to economic prominence.

EXAMPLE OF POLITICAL DYNASTY

A good example at the national level is the Macapagal-Arroyo dynasty political dynasty:

Diosdado Macapagal Philippine President (1961-65) Cielo Macapagal - Salgado (daughter of Diosdado ) -Pampanga Vice Governor ( 198892; 1995-98) Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (daughter of Diosdado) Philippine President (2001-present)

Mikey Arroyo (son of Gloria) reelected Rep. 2nd District, Pampanga; former vice governor, Pampanga. Diosdado Dato Arroyo (son of Gloria) Rep. , 1st District, Camarines Sur; Ignacio Iggy Arroyo (Glorias brother in law) reelected Rep. , 5th Dist. Negros Occidental.

Who are the political dynasties in Mindanao?

Samples of past and present well-entrenched political dynasties in various parts of Mindanao are the following (by province):

Lanao del Sur Alonto, Lucman, Adiong, Dimaporo, Macarambon, Dimakuta Lanao del Norte Badelles, Lluch, Cabili Sultan Kudarat Mangudadato Cagayan de Oro City Emano General Santos City Antonino Zamboanga City Lobregat, Lorenzo Zamboanga del Norte Adaza, Ubay, Carloto, Jalosjos Zamboanga del Sur Sagun-Lim, Enerio, Amatong, Cerilles Tawi-Tawi Jaafar Camiguin Romualdo Misamis Occidental Chiongbian, Ramiro Misamis Oriental Pelaez, Baculio Saranggani Chiongbian, Amatong Sulu - Amilbangsa, Rasul, Abubakar, Ututalum, Tulawie Surigao Norte Navarro, Barbers, Ecleo Surigao Sur Falcon, Pimentel-Serra , Ty Agusan del Sur Paredes, Amante, Plaza Bukidnon Fortich, Zubiri, Acosta

Compostela Valley Caballero Cotabato Pendatun, Mastura, Datumanong , Matalam, Mangilen, Sinsuat Davao City Garcia, Lopez, Duterte Davao del Norte Del Rosario/Garcia, Sarmiento Davao del Sur Bautista, Cagas Davao Oriental Almario/Zosa, Palma Gil

The Caraga Region composed of the two Agusan provinces and Butuan City is said to be the center or capital of political dynasties in the Philippines which practically compete only among themselves for all congressional and local positions for the past 50 years or more . Studies made by academics and journalists for instance, identify no less than 10 members of the Plaza political clan holding and monopolizing political power from congressional seats, governorship, down to mayors, councilors and barangay chairs held by wife, sons, daughters, nephews, in-laws, etc.

It's final: SC won't compel Congress to enact anti-political dynasty law

The Supreme Court has ruled with finality against compelling Congress to pass a law that would have set in motion a Constitutional provision banning political dynasties. Supreme Court public information chief Theodore Te told reporters that the magistrates have rejected the two motions one filed by a group led by former Vice President Teofisto Guingona Jr and another by senatorial candidate Ricardo Penson asking it to reverse its earlier dismissal of their petition against political clans. "The Supreme Court en banc denied with finality the motion for reconsideration filed by Ricardo Penson and Sen. Guingona in relation to their petition to compel Congress to enact an antipolitical dynasty law," Te said.

Guingona petition In its main petition, Guingona's group asked the high court to order Congress to create an enabling law for Article II, Section 26 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, which states that "[t]he State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service, and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law." In a 26-page petition for mandamus, Guingona's group said the court has the authority to compel Congress by way of mandamus, especially since passing an enabling law against political dynasties is considered "ministerial because it is a constitutional command." The other petitioners were Dante Jimenez of the Volunteers Against Crime and Corruption, Leonard De Vera, Eduardo Bringas, Vicente Velasquez, and Raymundo Jarque. The petitioners cited a 1987 bill against political dynasty introduced by Guingona, who was then a senator. The bill passed the Senate with 16 votes in favor, three opposition, and one abstention. The bill, however, never went past the House of Representatives. The petitioners said they were "appalled by Congress' inaction... Every bill in Congress against political dynasties was stifled by congressional inaction." Penson petition Meanwhile, Penson said in his own petition that the "political and economic life" of the country's 90 million Filipinos "continue to be controlled and/or dictated upon by four political clan alliances." He also cited a study by the Asian Institute of Management and Konrad Adenauer Stiftung Foundation on political dynasties showing that 70 percent of jurisdiction-based members of Congress belong to political dynasties. Penson said the Supreme Court had previously ruled that "failure to perform a duty for a long period of time is both a violation of the right to procedural and substantive due process." Penson noted several bills on political dynasties have been filed but none has been enacted so far. "The introduction has thus become illusory and merely promotive of false hopes," he said. He added that the non-passage of an enabling law against political dynasties has resulted in "an abrogation of their sacred duty, which unless remedied, the constitutional provision will continue to remain pure rhetoric and the noble objectives behind its institution merely illusory." A bill against political dynasty, filed by Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago, is pending before the Senate. A counterpart bill was filed by Rep. Teddy Casio at the House of Representatives. Denied MR

The high court had dismissed a similar petition filed by Louis "Barok" Biraogo in October last year. Biraogo's motion for reconsideration was junked last January for lack of merit. In the motion for reconsideration it filed last February 22, Guingona's camp said it became "more confused" when the Supreme Court junked its original petition against political dynasties. In its ruling on February 5, however, the Supreme Court en banc said it could not compel Congress to pass such a law against political dynasties because it would violate the principle of separation of powers among the three branches of government. Guingona's group responded: "With all due respect to the Honorable Court, but the petitioners are really confused with the import of its En Banc resolution. Much as they want to understand and thereafter be satisfied with the resolution, they cannot with all candor, do it because it created more issues and questions to their minds instead of cerebrally being satisfied with the merit of the resolution." They said they were asking the high court not to "usurp" the powers of Congress, but to simply determine whether Congress violated the Constitution with its "inaction" in creating an enabling law against political dynasties. "There should be a commensurate move to give effect to its pronouncement and this move is to require Congress to follow the Constitution! This is not an encroachment or usurpation per se but rather the enforcement of the will of the People as mandated by the Constitution! THIS IS TRUE DEMOCRACY! (sic)," Guingona's camp said. The group also argued that the doctrines cited by the high court to justify the dismissal of their petition, namely Alejandrino vs Quezon 46 Phil 83 (1924) and Tanada vs Cuenco (1957), were decided long before the 1987 Philippine Constitution was ratified. KBK, GMA New