Thursday, 08 March 2012 13:01
People wonder why other cities are more developed, advanced, and progressive than others; attractive and extraordinarily appealing ports of call to travelers and tourists; popularly preferred as investment, commercial, and industrial sites; and perceived as ideal places to establish residences and retirement habitats. The answer lies in the manner by which the three co-equal and independent branches of government dispense and perform their respective legally mandated functions, duties, and responsibilities.
If each branch functions at its utmost level of efficiency and effectiveness in perfect synergy with the two other branches without one dictating or undermining the normal operations of the other and only the highest public service and interest as their common aim and concern, we can only expect the best and fastest in terms of progress and development from this rare breed of power holders in our political system.
Unfortunately, in our kind of democracy, this trinity of equal power and independence exists only conceptually. At the level of actual operation, the one that is given the highest public attention, interest, importance, and functionally lords over the entire machinery of government is the executive branch. The other two branches just play the supporting cast. Agreeably or disagreeably, in practice, the Executive is the Primus Inter Pares. Even in terms of media coverage or exposure, the Executive always gets the widest and brightest limelight while the judiciary is seldom seen and heard.
This irregular but regularly observed and demonstrated dominance of the Executive over the Judicial and Legislative branches is most prevalent and marked in our country where the twin problems of grinding poverty and massive ignorance still hound.
These two crippling societal afflictions are also the major causes why wrong choices in the exercise of the right of suffrage are committed repeatedly by the electorate who is collectively upheld as the ultimate source of governmental power or institutionalized authority in a democracy.
In a country whose electorate is still generally afflicted with inadequate education and chronic economic destitution, those candidates with huge stockpiles of financial resources enjoy the greatest advantage over their less economically endowed opponents.
These financially hard-up and less- educated voters are easily tempted to accept any quid pro quo for their votes even for a temporary relief from their day-to-day struggle for survival. The vote-money rate of exchange is dictated by the bid of the richest candidate running for the highest executive position at every level of government. “Free choice” in our elections is no longer in vogue, literally out of fashion.
If there are people who still exercise their right of suffrage without any monetary consideration, these are the fast-vanishing exceptions.
If you sold your votes last elections, it is almost a certainty that you will sell them again to the highest bidder in 2013.
Considering the fact that almost all the prices of commodities are skyrocketing at present, how much do you think will be your fair market price? By the way if you sell your vote, don’t expect morally upright, competent, qualified, honest, and dignified public servants in the three branches of our government. It’s even an anomaly to expect progress and development. What you sell is what you get, no more, no less.
- 11/03/2012 00:00 - 25 Easy Ways to Cut 100 Calories
- 09/03/2012 12:55 - Is Corona morally fit for the job?
- 09/03/2012 12:54 - South China Sea – Asia’s Tinderbox
- 09/03/2012 12:50 - Warning signs of depression
- 09/03/2012 12:49 - State of Education in the division of Tawi-Tawi
- 08/03/2012 13:00 - Separatists' armed struggle
- 08/03/2012 12:58 - BFAR not capable to stop blast fishing
- 08/03/2012 12:58 - PNoy rebuffed by underlings
- 07/03/2012 14:05 - KAKAMPI MO ANG BATAS.SYNDICATED, ENGLISH AND FILIPINO. 06 MARCH 2012
- 07/03/2012 14:02 - Is Diet Soda Addictive? By Lisa Collier Cool