The Political Constitution of 1899

(Music fades in)

Today, we’re going to engage in a very rare game. The sort of endeavor that isn’t entirely fair to its participants but something that underlies the study of history. To understand the full implications of what did happen, we do need some vague understanding of what could have been had a certain action, inaction, or intervention not occurred. But to fully engage in the what-if game, as I call it, is to taunt oneself. After all, you can never truly know what might have happened, and all you can do is taunt yourself with seemingly better outcomes. And yet, in certain instances, more tangible evidence exists regarding what other outcomes could have been had things gone differently.

When it comes to the political history of the Philippines, I’ve mentioned in the past that the final product--the one that gave the island nation independence--was a model that was heavily influenced by that of the United States. In many ways, it was seemingly designed to replicate the US model fairly well, which might make sense to you or it might not. With the US being the colonial power and being the one who offered eventual independence under a certain set of terms, it definitely seemed inevitable. 

When I discussed this in past episodes, I somewhat dismissed the idea of an alternative. Particularly when it came to those who have fought for independence in what must have felt like other lives--as in their lives before World War II- or even before the US took possession of the Philippines from Spain. Obviously, they would have their thoughts, opinions, and preferences. That is their right. But given the circumstances they found themselves in, how could there ever be an alternative?

When considering the historical moment, one isn’t exactly wrong to think that way. But if you go just a few years back in history, you can see what might have been. Because there was a constitution devised by Filipinos, influenced by Spanish history, yes, but still written in Spanish by Filipino hands.

Specifically, Felipe Buencamino, a man who remains a mystery to me, and Felipe Gonzales Calderon y Roca, a Filipino lawyer, politician, and intellectual who came to be known as the ‘Father of the Malolos Constitution.’ Beyond his name and the fact that he was seemingly a brilliant legal mind, I can’t offer you too much more than that. While his memoirs are available through online archives, they are written entirely in Spanish, and I was having trouble getting through them. Also, I should definitely focus on the Constitution at the heart of this episode because that would definitely make sense. 

(Music fades out and new music fades in)

If you remember, in the last episode, I pretty much implied that there was a sense of urgency about getting the constitution done and a new government formed. Spain was on the outs, and the whole point of that war was independence. For the most part, the Philippines could get by with a sort of benevolent dictatorship out of convenience, but even the guy in charge was ready to not be a dictator anymore. 

And so, what happened was something some people might want to call a “corners being cut” situation. Instead of a complete reimagining of what politics could or should be, the two men writing the constitution turned to the canon text that was available to them. In some ways, there was no need to entirely reinvent the wheel. However, the Philippines was trying to fight for independence from Spain who had also provided the only form of government they had known in this reality brought upon them by colonialism. Now, there needs to be a string of episodes in which I--even begin--to explain how life was fundamentally altered by the presence of the Spanish. For now, I can only say that it was a new reality. One that had, hitherto, entirely been governed by Spain. The Philippines hadn’t gone through a period of great political uncertainty--the kind that comes with changing hands as often as they would later in history--when this constitution, formally known as the Political Constitution of 1899, was written. And so, the colonial government ended up providing them access to the well from which the revolutionaries first drank. 

The Spanish Constitution of 1812 can be seen as an influence, and many other former colonies of Spain borrowed from that source. However, Calderon y Roca writes in his memoirs--that I was able to access and test my high school Spanish classes on--that he drew from the examples set by Belgium, Mexico, Brazil, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and Guatemala who he thought had more similar societal circumstances to what the Philippines did than what Spain had. 

(Music fades out and new music fades in)

But of one particular influence was the French Constitution of 1793 and its notion not just of popular sovereignty but a returning of sovereignty to the people, which is more technically known as a retroversion of sovereignty. Now, I was fortunate enough to study political science at college, so I do have an understand means, but if you were not, to briefly explain what popular sovereignty is first--it’s the principle that the authority of a state and/or the government that represents it has to be initially created by and then further sustained by the consent of the people who live in that nation. 

If you live in a colony or if you are ruled by a blood-defined nobility, that state affairs isn’t defined by your acceptance of or consent to it. You might be okay with it, and you might have genuine reasons for it. But that’s more of a happy accident of fate and many around might not share that opinion. For you, it’s a matter of convenience not consent. And so, much like the French masses tried to do, the Political Constitution of 1899 tried to reassert this principle. It was a rejection of the colonial elites asserting their wills where they were not welcome.

(Music fades out and new music fades in)

Related to that was an assertion of natural rights and the civil liberties extending from them. If you remember Noli Me Tangere or Jose Rizal and the grievances he listed out, hopefully believing reform was a solution only to die for his beliefs, you know a bit about this. The Filipino people were subject to the whims of the various government and church officials that were given power over them, but these were people who had their own motivations, faults, and predilections that were not considered or screened for. There were no notions of rights for the Filipinos. Obligations to them were casual thoughts or suggestions often ignored. And yet, obedience to their rulers was nonnegotiable. 

Much of this document was a not-so-subtly veiled correction of their situation. Which includes a separation of church and state defined by Title II, Article 5.

That may seem a bit puzzling to you, because I have said before that to be Filipino is to be Catholic. And in many ways, Catholicism is intertwined with the Filipino identity. But when it was intertwined with politics, it wasn’t a part of their culture, so much as it was leverage to gain and keep control. Often to destructive ends. 

(Music fades out and new music fades in)

Other parts of the constitution will be more familiar to us in current day. There were three distinct parts of the constitution’s government: the legislative, the executive, and the judicial. There is this sense in which they kind of kept a balance amongst themselves but not in the same sort of ‘checks and balances’ that was written into the US Constitution. For one, the executive branch is further restrained by being directly responsible to the legislative branch. And to explain that simply, the executive branch has to answer to and account for their actions to the legislature when a certain set of issues come up, on an annual date, or when it is asked of them. 

But while the concepts in the constitution are familiar, the language is different. But still familiar. Instead of calling their legislative branch a parliament, this political constitution uses the term ‘Assembly’ in the French style, you could say. What others called a cabinet is the ‘Council of Government’ headed by a ‘President of the Council of Government’ instead of a prime minister. Ministers are ‘Secretaries’ and members of parliament are described in this constitution as ‘Representatives.’

And as an added guide, guard, or failsafe against the executive branch or complete anarchy--either way works--the Malolos Constitution included The Permanent Commission: seven members of the National Assembly empowered to make decisions with the National Assembly is in recess.

(Music fades out and new music fades in)

Despite the haste in which it had to be devised, it was a well-thought out constitution that built upon the entire canon of constitutional studies. It almost had a certain artistry about it, in fact, which makes it an under discussed achievement if there ever was one.

(Music fades out and new music fades in)

This has been a production of Miscellany Media Studios with music licensed from the Sounds like an Earful music supply. Thanks for listening! Find more information about our shows at miscellanymedia.online or follow us on Twitter @miscellanymedia for updates on current and future projects.

(Music fades out)