One cannot help but be guardedly optimistic regarding political and economic prospects in the second semester, given recent political developments. The latter, of course, include the Senate’s decision this week to go along with the President and the House in scrapping the August elections at the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM).

A concern is that putting off the polls can raise the risk level relative to political and economic stability, particularly in some parts down south, and consequently, adversely impact on the general investment climate and business confidence. Regional and national economic growth in the second half can be compromised.

Perhaps President Aquino is confident he can pull things off at the ARMM because the region voted mostly in his favor in May 2010; areas around it (Regions 9-13) mostly went to Estrada and Binay. But at this point, can anybody predict with certainty that nobody will capitalize on the emerging situation to again incite violence down south?

Imagine how Mindanao Muslims and ARMM residents feel about being denied their right to determine their own political destiny by delaying their chance to elect their own leaders; worse, their political future was decided by Christians from the north.

What if Islamic fundamentalists decide to capitalize on the emerging situation to argue that the government was never really interested in promoting peace, stability and autonomy in Muslim Mindanao? Can this lead to resurgence in violence for private rather than public interest?

It seems misguided to allow such risks just so the government can save some money by “synchronizing” the election schedule or that because the government believes the ARMM to be a “failed experiment,” or because the Aquino administration is looking at mitigating the alleged corruption of the ARMM by the previous powers that be.

One wonders how the President’s late mother, Cory Aquino, would feel about her son’s decision to deny Mindanao Muslims their right to vote their own leaders and determine their own political fate, particularly in the next two years. The ARMM was established in 1990 under her watch, pursuant to the 1987 Constitution that she herself supported.

Also during Cory’s time, her administration saw it fit to quickly restore the people’s right of suffrage. Thus, soon after assuming government control through a popular revolt in February 1986, a constitutional commission was quickly established to draft a new Charter so that elections could be held as soon as possible.

And as the new Constitution was approved in 1987, elections for legislative representatives (Senate and House) were held in May 1998. And for the purpose of “synchronizing” future polls, under the provisions of the 1987 Constitution, the 8th Congress would last for an unprecedented five years or until June 30, 1992.

From 1986 to 1988, officers in charge (OICs) were likewise appointed to assume control over local governance, if only to ensure continuity in public service, and to avoid the problems usually created by political leadership vacuum. The prevailing circumstances at the time were obviously unprecedented, and thus, required extraordinary measures.

At present, there doesn’t seem to be enough justification to scrap the August election at the ARMM and appoint OICs meantime. After all, any selection process for OICs will never be truly inclusive, participative and transparent. There will always be winners and sore losers in such cases, and what the latter are capable of doing as a form of redress is anybody’s guess.

Neither can one imagine how the Senate vote can be considered “a great step toward systemic reform” in the ARMM, as claimed by the Palace. Aside from pushing back the local election to 2013, the congressional decision does not exactly address any particular structural or systemic problem in ARMM governance. It was, in fact, bold for the Palace to have claimed that the Senate vote “also signifies the willingness of our leaders to join the people in the straight and righteous path toward genuine, meaningful change.” The Palace had also argued that “only through synchronization can true democracy—unencumbered by patronage and transactional politics—be felt in the ARMM.”

But if the ARMM is truly a failed experiment, then moving the elections to a later date will not exactly fix anything. Invariably, for the ARMM to succeed, it will not just be a matter of changing leaders but changing structure through reforms. But there is nothing on the table to indicate that beyond the poll delay, the ARMM law will be amended to address structural issues.

This same argument applies to Mr. Aquino. It is highly doubtful that he alone, by assuming leadership, will make things better for the country. The more important consideration is the quality of reforms that he will put in place while president. These reforms will improve the present political structure to one that can meet the needs of the country.

And in pursuing his administration’s goals, the President should keep to his promise not to engage in “patronage and transactional politics.” Sadly, one cannot help but suspect this was precisely what transpired as the President moved to convince the Senate and House to junk the August ARMM polls.

Comments to This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it