A Senate panel is keen on passing the bill prescribing fixed terms for the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) chief of staff and other key officers in the military.
Senate Bill No. 1785, or “An Act Strengthening Professionalism and Continuity of Policies and Modernization Initiatives of the AFP” primarily aims to give key officials of the military ample time and security of tenure in order for them to develop, test and implement reforms and long-term plans to strengthen and modernize the AFP.
Senator Richard Gordon (Senate of the Philippines / MANILA BULLETIN FILE PHOTO)
Senator Richard Gordon, vice chair of the Senate committee on national defense, said passage of the bill into law would ensure continuity in leadership and excellence in the AFP.
“The practice of ‘revolving door’ in the appointment of the Chief of Staff of the AFP is inimical to public interest because it hinders continuity and stability in the leadership of the AFP and allows for political patronage and accommodation promotion that favors personalities over the security and defense of the nation,” Gordon pointed out during the first hearing of the Senate panel on the bill.
“Thus, such practice must be prevented,” said the senator who is also the proponent of the measure in the upper chamber.
Gordon’s bill proposes a three-year fixed terms for the AFP Chief-of-Staff; Vice Chair of the Junior Commissioned Officers (JCOS); Chiefs of the Philippine Army, Philippine Navy and Philippine Air Force; Commander of the Joint Forces Command; Commandant of the Philippine Marine Corps; Commander of the Special Operations Command; and Commander of the Cyber Security Command.
The bill also proposes to adjust the age of compulsory retirement for military personnel and to ensure implementation of merit-based promotion and attrition system that will assure AFP of continuous pool of qualified and effective leaders.
Senate minority leader Franklin Drilon welcomed Gordon’s initiative of reintroducing the measure saying it is “timely and essential” as it can help solve the government’s problem regarding its “unfunded retirement liability.”
“Since 1986, this issue has cropped up regularly…but it was always swept under the rug until the 15th Congress. And unfortunately, the bill was vetoed,” Drilon said during the virtual hearing.
As far as he is concerned, Drilon said the amount and the budget allocated for the retirement of AFP officials is bigger than the government’s regular budget for personal services.
“That is why the ability of the government to fund the modernization program of the AFP is affected by this large unfunded retirement liability,” the Senate minority chief pointed out.
Department of National Defense (DND) Secretary Delfin Lorenzana also expressed his support for the bill, saying he was one of the military officials who was batted for a longer period for an AFP chief of staff way back in 1987.
Lorenzana said that due to the mandatory retirement age for military officials, which is at 56 years old, AFP commanders have limited time to effect necessary reforms within the institution.
“So it is not conducive to good leadership because of the constant changing of commanders, and we are aware that if we change commanders, there is also changes in the policies,” Lorenzana told the Senate panel during the hearing.
Gordon agreed saying that since 1987, there have been 35 AFP chiefs –of-staff “who all served for an average of a year only.”
He said this is “extremely short” compared to other countries in Asia such as Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore where military commanders are serving for at least three and a half years.
“The current system appears to limit the President’s choices to officers whose retirement draws near, which gives a perception that the selection is politically-driven,” Gordon noted.
“These key officers constitute the core-leadership of the AFP or holds positions that requires specialized skill and expertise. However, oftentimes, by the time an officer is qualified to be appointed to these positions, they are already in their 50s, nearing the compulsory retirement age,” he said.