Separation of powers is a principle deeply ingrained in constitutional law. Also called the system of checks and balances, this doctrine grants certain powers to the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government as a way of balancing and checking each other.
In the presidential form of government, power is equally divided among the three branches, whereas in the parliamentary system, powers of the executive and legislative branches are intertwined because they are made up of the same elected officials.
The Philippines is a democratic republic under the presidential system and therefore, our three branches of government are co-equal. The power of legislation is vested in Congress, composed of the Senate and the House of Representatives; execution of laws is the mandate of the President, his or her Cabinet, and the local government units; while the Supreme Court and the lower courts handle the settlement of judicial or legal controversies.
A controversial issue involving the executive and legislative branches has hampered the work of the lower congressional chamber, particularly the passage of the 2021 national budget. For several weeks now, the camps of Speaker Alan Peter Cayetano and Rep. Lord Allan Velasco have been feuding over the speakership post.
Under the term-sharing agreement forged by President Rodrigo Duterte in July 2019, the turnover is supposed to take place this month. But last Sept. 30, Cayetano’s offer of resignation was rejected by majority of his colleagues voting 184-1 with nine abstentions. This came after the two congressmen and their allies visited Malacanang to seek the President’s counsel. Velasco’s group emerged from the meeting with an announcement that Oct. 14 will be the handover date, which was belied by Cayetano’s side.
Marinduque Gov. Presbitero Velasco, the father of Rep. Velasco, defended his son from allegations about a plot to unseat Cayetano prematurely. Gov. Velasco held a media briefing to assure the public that his son is an honorable man who will honor the gentleman’s agreement. In other news reports, Rep. Velasco explained why he had kept his silence over the past 15 months while waiting for his turn at the speakership. Then why is his father speaking for him?
This is not surprising though, as gleaned from an article written by investigative journalist Marites Vitug in December 2009. She discussed the impropriety of a magistrate’s involvement in partisan activities during his son’s congressional run, and further elaborated on it in a book titled Shadow of Doubt: Probing the Supreme Court published in 2010.
At that time, Gov. Velasco was still an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. Vitug said the justice had solicited support for his son from several local officials in Marinduque, which he denied. Despite Vitug’s publication of his denial, he sued her for libel – becoming the first-ever sitting Supreme Court justice to file a libel case against a journalist. Later he withdrew the charges reportedly out of compassion for Vitug before his retirement from the country’s highest tribunal.
During the 2013 mid-term elections, a disqualification case was filed by the younger Velasco against Rep. Regina Ongsiako Reyes who won against him in the race for Marinduque’s lone congressional seat. He contested her victory on the ground that she is a US citizen. When the case reached the Supreme Court, it was decided in his favor.
Reyes’ camp alleged that Justice Velasco influenced the high court’s decision even though he inhibited himself from his own son’s case. The legislature did not implement it immediately and waited until the House Electoral Tribunal decided to disqualify Reyes, allowing Rep. Velasco to take his seat in the last five months of the 16th Congress.
Meanwhile, 100 years after its separation from Quezon (formerly Tayabas) province, Marinduque has remained among the poorest provinces in the Philippines. The Velascos need to focus their attention on addressing the widespread poverty in their constituency. Yet the father’s controversial past is beginning to haunt the son’s bid to become the country’s fourth most powerful public official.
Insisting on the term-sharing will only invite questions about the constitutionality of executive interference in legislative affairs, and may even open a Pandora’s box involving all three co-equal branches.