Strengthening the legislature and democracy in the Philippines

The study's authors are cautiously optimistic. Filipino administrative systems are well-established; legislative debate is recorded and published fairly quickly; plenary sessions and committees are open and operate under widely accepted rules of order, and, while they need to strengthen their lobbying skills, advocacy groups are already adept at forming coalitions, publishing newsletters, and running press conferences. A sociopolitical role for NGOs was formalized in the 1987 Constitution and widely accepted in society. The press, by regional standards, is open and free, balanced, and effective. There are also grounds for pessimism, however. Although presidential power has declined from the days of Marcos, the legislature is still subordinate to the President, whose selection of sectoral representatives to the House has been slow; additionally, electoral reform has stalled and patrimonial and dynastic biases remain. The report concludes that the Philippines requires at least three types of donor programming for institutional strengthening: standard institutional support, support for legislative partners, and pursuit of crucial legislation. Lessons learned for legislative strengthening elsewhere in the region are offered: the significance of context (other countries may require more basic assistance, such as computer installation and skills training for legislative transcribers, than the Philippines required); the need for donors to remain flexible in terms of programming and analysis; and the importance of sharing information on successes between groups and countries.