Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 7



Course Code :
Course Title:
Course Credit:
Course Classification
Course Prerequisite

Social Science 5
Politics and Governance with Philippine Constitution
3 units


An introduction to the basic concepts and tenets of political science focusing on politics,
governance and government. The course also tackles the 1897 Philippine Constitution-the fundamental
law of the republic. The course is focused on providing the interpretations on the constitution specifically.
The executive branch, the Legislative Branch, the Judicial Branch and Bill of Rights. This is a three unit
course in the Philippine education system mandated by the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) for
the tertiary level.
At the end of the semester, the student are expected to manifest the following competencies:
Demonstrate a thorough understanding of the provision on the constitution by developing an
analysis paper on the function of the branches of government and right of the people.

Analyze the basic concepts, principles, doctrines applied in the existence of the state.


Internalize and exercise general rights and constitutional rights enshrined in the law.


Classify competently the branches of government and the constitutional commissions.


Demonstrate the spirit of intellectual maturity by subscribing to the principles of the state.


Show interest in the development of the fundamental law of the land and its concepts.


Manifest the application of the rights and duties of the citizens


Keep patriotism, nationalism and love to the citizenry and the state.



A.Vision- Mission Program Objectives, Course Requirements ,School Policies, Grading System
B. The nature of a State, Politics, Government and Governance
Define state, government and governance, Describe through historical timeline how state existed
and the political evolution
C. Models and characteristics of various forms of government
The Republic Utopia
Differentiate government as to various types
Create a statement how a state is being governed based on certain conditions
Describe the Republic and Utopia as models of governance.
Analysis using pictures Lecture using Power point presentation Oral recitation One page
reaction paper about the good features presented by each models.
D. The 1987 Philippine Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines
Relate the significance of the 1937, 1973 and 1987 Constitution of the Republic
Recite the Preamble of the Philippine Constitution and locate the National Territory of the
Philippines in a Map. Oral Recitation Locating the Philippine Territory
in a map by groupings Reaction paper about the importance of revising a constitution Group
Presentation Rubric
The National Territory Bill of Rights Family Code Suffrage Provisions and Amendments
Locating the national territory of the Philippines in the Map by identifying intercontinental shelve, inland
water, marine water and air space

Discuss basic rights being enjoyed by a typical students Reporting discussion (Integrated method)
Reflective Reaction
The branches of the Government Executive
Legislative Judiciary
Discuss the system of balance within the branches of the government Giving insight how system of
check and balance prevails in the government One Page reaction paper on the significance of the
system of check and balance in the government
The Executive Branch and the different departments
Create a report describing how a typical department perform its function for the general welfare of the
Presentation of the different departments of the government and their initial function Report
presentation Rubrics
The Legislative Branch
The Upper House / House of Senate The Lower House / House of Representatives
Differentiate the two houses of the legislature and identify personalities occupying such position
Create a table showing the members of the House of |Senate and Representatives
Profiling an incumbent Senator or Congressman
The Judiciary its role and function
Trace the development of the Judiciary as an independent branch of the government Concept mapping
and Timeline presentation Reaction paper on the impeachment case of CJ Renato Corona
The Commissions of Election
Describe the role of the Commission on Elections in the Government Interactive discussio Critiquing case
studies based on Election related activities
The Commission on Audit and the Commission on Appointment
Describe the role of the Commissions in the Government, Interactive discussion, Critiquing case studies
based on , Election related activities and appointment s of government officials
Land Reform and the Comprehensive Land reform program of the Philippines
Determine the principle underlying in the CARP program as a social responsibility Lecture / Group
Case analysis Reaction paper on the Hacienda Luisita case focusing on the decision as a social
Accountability of Public Officers and Revisiting Philippine History and the course of National
Criticize the dynamic function and role of a Public Official in Nation
Building , Brainstorming/Reporting, Case Analysis on the Citizens Charter as a form of Good
governance, Presentation of Output rubrics
Profile of the Philippine President
Discuss the period wherein poverty has been remediated thru sound government effort, Group
presentation, Report Presentation Rubrics
Prelim , Midterm, Pre-finals and finals


Class Standing
(Short-30%, long 20%)








Project (Seatwork, Assignments)

VI. Grading System:



PG = ( CAx2)+PX
FG = PG1+PG2+PG3+PG4
CA = short quizzes (30%) + Long Quizzes (20%) + Attendance (10%) + Participation (20%) +
Behavior (10%) + Project (10%)
Grade Point
98 100
unauthorized withdrawal
95 97
authorized withdrawal
92 94
89 - 91
86 88


80 - 85



74 79



67 - 73
60 66
failed due to absences


no credit
no grade


et al 2004

Politics, Governance & Government with Philippine Constitution by Roman R Danning

Reference Books:
Costales, Rodrigo D. et al. (2010). Politics and governance: history, government and
constitution. Manila: Rex Book Store
Diaz, Christine L. (2009). The other Philippine history textbook: precolonial Philippines to the
revolution, book 1. Pasig City: Anvil Publishing, Inc.
Diaz, Christine L. (2009). The other Philippine history textbook: the American period to the present,
book 2. Pasig City: Anvil Publishing, Inc.
Garcia, Carlito D. (2009). Philippine government and constitution. Mandaluyong City: Books Atbp.
Publishing Corp.
Ocampo, Ambeth. (2009). 101 stories on the Philippine revolution. Pasig City: Anvil Publishing Inc.
A History of the Filipino People by Zaide
Essentials of Constitution by Sison, Carmela V. 2005
Adventures in Political Science by R. E Agpalo


Monday, June 14, 2010

syllabus of political science
for my political science class, the assignment is the entire part I for next meeting

Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila

(University of the City of Manila)
Intramuros, Manila
College of Liberal Arts
Politics and Governance with Philippine Constitution Christian E. Rivero
Second Semester, SY 2009-2010 Department of Humanities

Course Description
The course is an introduction to the concepts, theories and principles of political science, types of political
systems, development of political institutions and the processes involved in a larger international world
system. The course specifically provides an understanding on Philippine government and politics as it
gives highlights on studying and examining the development, organization and operation of the Philippine
political system with special emphasis on the Philippine Constitution. Likewise, the course will also deal
with the current issues confronting the students taking the course.
Course Objectives
1. Provide the students with the theories and principles in the course of political science;
2. Provide the students with the knowledge on the development, organization and operation of the
Philippine government;
3. Strengthen the students' awareness on the formal structure for political participation and their role as
citizens of the country;
4. Provides the students with the understanding on the importance of public opinion and the emergence
of the civil society;
5. Reinforce the students' understanding on the constitution as the basis of all political institutions and
Course Content
I. Nature of Politics and Governance
Nature of Politics and Governance Definition of Political Science
Scope of Political Science
Political Science and Its Related Fields
II. State and Its Elements
Meaning of the State
Theories on the Origin of the State Elements of the State
State Distinguished from Nation
Inherent Powers of the State Rights and Obligations of the State
III. Government and Political Ideology
Definition of Government
Forms of Government
Best Form of Government
Concept and Definition of Ideology Popular Kinds of Ideologies
IV. Constitution
Nature and Concepts of the Constitution Meaning of the Constitution
Purposes and Functions of the Constitution Classification of the Constitution
Requisites of a Good Written Constitution History of the Philippine Constitution
V. Bill of Rights
Political Rights
Civil Rights
Social and Economic Rights Rights of the Accused
VI. Citizenship
Concepts of Citizenship
Kinds of Citizens
Citizens and Aliens Distinguished Modes of Acquiring Citizenship
Loss of Citizenship
Duties and Responsibilities of Citizens
VII. Suffrage and Election
Nature of Suffrage
Right of Suffrage in the Philippines Kinds of Election in the Philippines Qualification of Voters
Disqualification of Voters
Absentee Voting
VIII. Political Parties and Interest Groups
Definition of Political Party
Functions of Political Parties Definition of Interest Group
Interest Groups in the Philippines
IX The Philippine Government
Principle of Separation of Powers Principle of Checks and Balance Legislative Branch of the Government
Executive Branch of the Government Judicial Branch of the Government Local Government in the
X. International Relations
Definition of Foreign Policy
Requirements of a Foreign Policy International Relations
Definitions of International Law Importance of International Law United Nations Organizations

Any Book on the Constitution of the Philippines
Posted by cris at 1:31 AM


WHAT IS POLITICS? Towards an understandable and acceptable meaning Politics, politika in the
language of contemporary Ilokano, Ibaloi, Tagalog and other Filipinos, traces its roots from politic (adj.)
modeled on Aristotle's ta politika --"affairs of state," from politique (Middle French 14c.) "political," from
Latin politicus "of citizens or the state, civil, civic," from Greek politikos "of citizens or the state," from
polites "citizen," from polis "city." (Online Etymology Dictionary, 2012) In day-to-day conversations among
different groups of people (i.e., teachers, students, bystanders, public utility vehicle drivers, some Igorot
elders, religious sects, etc.), the usage of the term politika may mean many things. Perhaps you have
heard, read, or might have uttered, narugit ti politika or marumi ang politika (lit. translation: politics is
dirty). Is it so? Or are you (and maybe most of us) referring to politico or politicians (like the senator,
governor, barangay captain) who might have been rumored to be corrupt, or involved in bribery, or
masterminded the killing of a political rival, or amassed unimaginable amount of money from illegal
activities? Hence, we may ask: Is politika or politiko dirty? If you have heard some elders in your
community conversing during wakes or delivering some kind of talk (bilinadvice) during weddings, you
might have overheard comments like: Nalaing sisya ay manpolitika (lit. translation: Hes good at politics);
Politiha kari etan a esel (lit. translation: That talk is politics). Is the term politics as used in this context
the same in meaning as used in the preceding paragraph above? Here is a simple story narrated to me
by my brother: Nunta kasal nen Margie chi ili tayo, kaman-iistorya era sot enkedahay. Kuwan nu sahey,
En-aharak koma niman a davi nem man-nepnep met! Sebat nu karait to: Sing to?Eg met man-uchan.
Eg met manmikis pay? Ebayyag a ninemnemnem cha no nganto e piyan na esden no inkuwan da nu
pilmiron nan-asel. I piyan ton esden gayam, angken eg da en-ahad tep paramay regla nen kadvwa to.
Kuwanet nu mantet-tetneng: Ara! Politiha gayam etan. (lit. translation: During the wedding of Margie in
our hometown, a group of elders were telling stories. An old man said: I would like to go home but there
is a heavy downpour. Surprised, his companions reacted: How can that be? It is not raining. Its not even
drizzling. It took a while for the other elders to understand what the old man meant by his statement.
What the old man was trying to convey is that, there is no sense of going home because his wife is
menstruating. Those listening to the conversation of the old men commented: Ara![expr.] That [talk] was
all politics. ) (J. Sagandoy, personal communication, June 10, 2012) So, which politics then are we
attempting to understand? Is it the politics in the context of the phrase, narugit ti politika or the politics in
the comment, Ara! Politiha gayam etan. For sure, politics is not new to many of us. Perhaps, some of
you are indifferent to politics because it is something not interesting. Certainly, others may argue that
politics is not their cup of tea. Now, if you detest being with politicians because of the popular image that
they project (i.e., liars, greedy, corrupt, having no conscience), you are not alone. Here is a story of a
former barangay captain who, after serving one term, decided not to be re-elected despite the prodding of
his constituents. 2 Ada maysa nga kapitan ti barangay nga nagkuna nga madi nan kanu nga nga
agkapitan manen gapu iti mangmangeg na nga sao dagiti tattao ijay lugar da. Kas iti maysa nga aldaw, idi
a naawat na iti honorarium na kas kapitan, napan gimmatang iti bangus nga sida na. Idi padama nga agpritprito iti bangus, usto met nga adda limmabas nga tao a nagkuna, Umm, nabanglo ti sida ni kapitan
ah. Dayta jay kupit na. Nu pay haan nga nag-unget jay kapitan iti nangeg na, napanunot na nga nga
kasjay gayam ti pagarup dagiti umili iti politico. Isu nga idi nalpas ti term na nga kapitan, uray nu pilipiliten
dagiti kakadwa na nga tumaray manen, kunana nga napinpintas ti maki-kontrata iti project ta haan nga
ibaga dagiti tattao nga kupkupiten na ti kuwarta ti umili. (lit. translation: Theres one barangay captain who
said that he no longer wanted to be reelected because of things that people say against him. For
instance, one day, after receiving his honorarium, he went to buy milk fish and cooked it. While he was
frying the fish, someone incidentally passed by [his house]. The passerby commented: Umm, the
Kapitans viand smells good. Thats his pilferage. Although the Kapitan was not irked by what he heard,
he realized that people have a bad notion about politicians. Hence, when his term was over, even if his
friends were persuading him to go for reelection, he decided not to run for office again. He claimed that it
is better to work as contractor of some projects so people would not think that he is stealing the
communitys money [taxes]. (J. Sagandoy, personal communication, June 10, 2012) Politics, indeed,
elicits varied opinions among varied groups. From Aristotle, a Greek philosopher who wrote the book(s)
Politics to the very ordinary man on the streets, politics has evolved in its usage and meaning. At this
point, I would like to present selected ideas (definitions or descriptions) of politics, which might expand
our understanding of the term. Let us start with Aristotle. Aristotle did not write a dictionary definition of the
term politics, but his exposition of the polis (Greek word for city from which we come up with terms like
politics or policy) in his book Politics gives us an idea of how politics work. It is clear that all partnerships
aim at some good, and that the partnership that is most authoritative of all and embraces all the others
does so particularly, and aims at the most authoritative good of all. This is what is called the city or the
political partnership. (Aristotle, c. 350 B.C.E./1984, p. 35) The partnership arising from [the union of]
several villages that is complete is the city. It reaches a level of full self-sufficiency, so to speak; and while
coming into being for the sake of living, it exists for the sake of living well. Every city, therefore, exists by
nature and that man is by nature a political animal. He who is without a city through nature rather than
chance is either a mean sort (beast) or superior to man (god)That man is much more than a political
animal than any kind of bee or herd of animal is clearand man alone among the animals has speech

For it is peculiar to man as compared to the other animals that he alone has a perception of good and bad
and just and unjust and other things; and partnership in these things is what makes a household and a
cityThat the city is both by nature and prior to each individual, then, is clear. For if the individual when
separated [from it] is not self-sufficient One who is incapable of participating or who is in need of
nothing through being selfsufficient is no part of a city, and so is either a beast or a god. (Aristotle, c. 350
B.C.E./1984, p. 35-37) It is interesting to note that Aristotles polis goes beyond our common
understanding of what a city is (e.g. Baguio City). Perhaps, when you think of a city, you imagine of tall
buildings, crowded markets, entertainment, concrete roads, cars of many sorts. But have you thought of a
city as partnership between and among interdependent individuals? Such partnership, Aristotle cleverly
explains, is made possible because of the nature of man to be a political animalsomeone who,
endowed with reason and speech, participates with 3 the affairs of the city. By reason of the necessity to
live well, the villages enter into a partnership, which in turn, propels the city to be self-sufficient in want
and needs. Aristotle would further expand the understanding of what the polis is by saying: a state [city]
is composite, like any other whole made up of many parts; these are the citizens [polites], who compose
it. A citizen, Aristotle defined, possesses a special characteristic, that is, he shares in the administration
of justice, and in offices. (c. 350 B.C.E./2009) He further writes: He who has the power to take part in the
deliberative or judicial administration of any state is said by us to be citizens of that state; and, speaking
generally, a state is a body of citizens sufficing for the purposes of life. (Aristotle, c. 350 B.C.E./2009,
Book III, Part I, par. 3) To be sure, Aristotle qualified that the citizen he was defining is: best adapted to
the citizen of a democracy[government of the many]; but not necessarily to other states. For in some
states the people are not acknowledged, nor have they any regular assembly, but only extraordinary
ones; and suits are distributed by sections among the magistrates. (Aristotle, c. 350 B.C.E./2009, Book III,
Part I, par. 2) The key idea in being a citizen is participation and in the days of the old Athenians, this
was direct participation in the general assembly, in which a citizen was accorded the right to express his
ideas through open speech and in which, he too, exercised his right to choose. Initially, we could then say
that politics is participation. The next idea that I would like to present comes from Bernard Crick (1962).
Citing Aristotles political thoughts, Crick wrote: Politics, then, can be simply defined as the activity by
which differing interests within a given unit of rule are conciliated by giving them a share in power in
proportion to their importance to the welfare and the survival of the whole community The political
process [of conciliation] is not tied to any particular doctrine. Genuine political doctrines, rather, are the
attempt to find particular and workable solutions to this perpetual and shifty problem of conciliation. (p. 17)
The key word in the preceding paragraph is the activity of conciliation. Of course, for conciliation to take
place there must be some kind of diversity, of plurality, of differences regarding how the world works. The
end of conciliation, Crick implies, is not to be of one mind, rather it is for the continuity or survival of the
whole community. The activity of conciliation, which is politics, Crick further expounds: is a process of
discussion, and discussion demands, in the original Greek sense, dialectic. For discussion to be genuine
and fruitful when something is maintained, the opposite or some contrary case must be considered or
better maintained by someone who believes it. (p. 28) Crick argues that politics is a way of ruling divided
societies without undue violence. It is through politics that free men are given the freedom to act. Without
politics, Crick contends, there is no freedom. Crick reiterates: 4 Politics is simply when they [differing
interests] are conciliatedthe solution to the problem of order which chooses conciliation rather than
violence or coercion, and chooses it as an effective way by which varying interests can discover that level
of compromise best suited to their common interest in survival. Politics allows various types of power
within a community to find some reasonable level of mutual tolerance and support. (p. 25) The third idea
on politics emanates from Harold Dwight Laswell who, in 1936, wrote a book titled Politics: Who Gets
What, When, Howa work whose title later served as the standard lay definition of politics
(Encyclopdia Britannica, 2012). Laswell, in his the opening chapter of the book, contends that politics is
the study of influence and the influential; the influential are those who get the most of what is there to get.
The who in the books title refers to the elitewho gets the most and masswho gets the rest. What
(is there to get) may refer to available valuesclassified as deference, income, safety. Available values
may also be divided according to skill, class, personality, attitude. When and how refer to the situations
and methods involved in the getting and perhaps, maintaining of available values. Rephrasing Laswells
politics for todays consumption, Dye (2002) defined politics as deciding who gets what, when, and
how. It is an activity by which people try to get more of whatever there is to getmoney, prestige, jobs,
respect, sex, even power itself. Dye further expounds: The who are the participants in politicsvoters,
special-interest groups, political parties, television and the press, corporations and labor unions, lawyers
and lobbyists, foundations and think tanks, and both elected and appointed government officials, including
members of Congress, the president and vice president, judges, prosecutors, and bureaucrats. The what
of politics are public policiesthe decisions that governments make concerning social welfare, health
care, education, national defense, law enforcement, the environment, taxation, and thousands of other
issues that come before governments. The when and how are the political processcampaigns and
elections, political reporting in the news media, television debates, fund raising, lobbying, decision making
in executive agencies, and decision making in the courts.(p. 3) To encapsulate what politics is all about,
let me present texts lifted from Heywoods (2007) Politics. The author defines politics as: (1) the art of
government; (2) public affairs; (3) compromise and consensus; and, (4) power. As the art of government,
politics is the exercise of control within society through the making and enforcement of collective
decisions. As such, to study politics is in essence to study government, or, more broadly, to study the
exercise of authority. US political scientist David Easton (1979, 1981 as cited by Heywood) contends that
politics encompasses the various processes through which government responds to pressures from the
larger society, in particular by allocating benefits, rewards or penalties. This view of politics, Heywood

writes, offers a highly restricted view of politics, hence: Politics is therefore practiced in cabinet rooms,
legislative chambers, government departments and the like, and it is engaged in by a limited and specific
group of people, notably politicians, civil servants and lobbyists. This means that most people, most
institutions and most social activities can be regarded 5 as being outside politics. Businesses, schools
and other educational institutions, community groups, families and so on are in this sense nonpolitical.
(p. 5) Essentially, therefore, the view of politics as art of government excludes people who are out of the
government offices and agencies. This view of politics might even be reduced to party
politicsrestricted to those state actors who are consciously motivated by ideological beliefs, and who
seek to advance them through membership of a formal organization such as a political party. As public
affairs, politics points to the division between an essentially public sphere of life and what can be thought
of as a private sphere. This view of politics coincides with the notion of political and non-political as
mentioned in politics as art of government. The table below might help us better understand the publicprivate divide. Public Private The State: apparatus of government Civil Society: autonomous bodies like
businesses, trade unions, clubs, families, and so on Public realm: politics, commerce, work, art, culture,
and so on Personal realm: family and domestic life Politics as public affairs, Hannah Arendt (1958 as cited
by Heywood) argued, is the most important form of human activity because it involves interaction
amongst free and equal citizens. It thus gives meaning to life and affirms the uniqueness of each
individual. Arendts view; however, is in contrast with by liberal theorists (thinkers who are against
political interference in private lives). Such liberal theorists prefer civil society over the State on the
reason that private life is a realm of choice, personal freedom and individual responsibility, hence, they
attempt to narrow the realm of the political, commonly expressed as the wish to keep politics out of
private activities such as business, sport and family life. Politics as compromise and consensus sees
politics as a particular means of resolving conflict: that is, by compromise, conciliation and negotiation,
rather than through force and naked power. This view of politics is advanced by Crick (see pages 3-4). To
reiterate, this view of politics is based on resolute faith in the efficacy of debate and discussion, as well
as on the belief that society is characterized by consensus rather than by irreconcilable conflict. Critics,
however, say that Cricks view applies mostly to western pluralist democracies: in effect, he equated
politics with electoral choice and party competition. Obviously, Cricks view is not much of help when we
try to understand one-party states or military regimes. Politics as power is both the broadest and the
most radical. Rather than confining politics to a particular sphere (the government, the state or the public
realm) this view sees politics at work in all social activities and in every corner of human existence.
Adrian Leftwich (2004 as cited by Heywood) says that: politics is at the heart of all collective social
activity, formal and informal, public and private, in all human groups, institutions and societies. In this
sense, politics takes place at every level of social interaction; it can be found within families and amongst
small groups of friends just as much as amongst nations and on the global stage. (p. 10) 6 Politics as
power is emphasized in Laswells exposition of politics (see page 4). Heywood, expounding Laswells
ideas, writes: From this perspective, politics is about diversity and conflict, but the essential ingredient is
the existence of scarcity: the simple fact that, while human needs and desires are infinite, the resources
available to satisfy them are always limited. Politics can therefore be seen as a struggle over scarce
resources, and power can be seen as the means through which this struggle is conducted. (p. 11) It might
be said that politics as power is at the heart of Feminist and Marxist political thoughts. Among feminist
circles, Heywood argues, politics has become all too important because traditionally, women have been
political outcasts in the past. Hence, we often hear and see feminists fight or struggle with the maledominated arena of politics. Marxists, on the other hand, conventionally viewed politics as the apparatus
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------References: Aristotle. (2009). Politics. (B. Jowett, Trans.). Retrieved June 11, 2012, from Classics.mit.edu
website: http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/politics.3.three.html (Original work published c. 356 B.C.E.)
Aristotle. (1984). The politics. (C. Lord, Trans.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Retrieved June
id=mEwLXFyp0ccC&hl=tl&source=gbs_navlinks_s (Original work published c. 350 B.C.E.) Crick, B.
(1962). In defence of politics. [pdf version] London, England: Weidenfeld and Nicolson (Downloaded from
http://archive.org/details/indefenceofpolit00incric) Dye, T.R. (2002). Politics in America. 5 th ed. [pdf
http://hssadv.prenhall.com/chapters_2005/dye/pdf/ch01.pdf) Heywood, A. (2007). Politics. 3rd ed. [pdf
http://www.palgrave.com/PDFs/0230524974.pdf) Laswell, H.D. (1936). Politics: Who gets what, when,
how. [pdf version] New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc. (Downloaded from
http://www.policysciences.org/classicworks.cfm) Politics. (2012). Online Etymology Dictionary. Retrieved
term=politics&allowed_in_frame=0 Politics: Who Gets What, When, How. (2012). In Encyclopdia
Britannica. Retrieved from http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/679251/Politics-Who-Gets-WhatWhen-How Suggested Reading [foundational politics]: Clayton, E. (2005). Aristotle: Politics. In Internet
Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Website: http://www.iep.utm.edu/aris-pol/#H7