2
T he history of constitutionalism in Japan and the Philippines is characterized by continuity and change. Both countries are among the first in the Asian region to have adopted constitutions in the early stages of their respective state-building. The Meiji Constitution of 1889 abolished feudal rule in Japan and signified Japan’s initial drive towards modernity. On the other hand, the short-lived Malolos Constitution of 1899 represented the peak of the anti-colonial struggle against Spanish rule in the Philippines. The annexation of the Philippines as an American colony and the defeat of Japan in the Second World War ushered an exogenous influence in the constitutional development of both countries. The Americans largely influenced the circumstances upon which both the 1935 Philippine Constitution and the 1947 Japanese Constitution were drafted under foreign occupation. Nonetheless, the adoption and promulgation of both constitutions represented continuity rather than ruptures from the past. Constitutions, Constitutionalism, and Parchment Institutions The interplay between continuity and change is a central concern in the resurgence of studies on the theoretical and policy applications of constitutionalism and constitutional design. One trend in the new literature is to identify the characteristics that make a constitution durable, stable, and more likely to survive. The emerging literature on new constitutional research expresses this concern in two ways. On one hand, recent studies on constitutional stability and continuity identify the characteristics that make a constitution durable, thus, more likely to survive. On the other are works that raise questions of how and why constitutions change or even fail. The new literature on constitutionalism has largely drawn from the resurgence of institutionalism (and it variants) in political science. Institutionalism seeks to determine the impact of political institutions upon individuals and the interaction between institutions and individuals. Political institutions, such as constitutions, are essentially formal and often legal components of the state machinery that employ explicit and usually enforceable rules and decision-making procedures. Constitutions can be treated as “parchment institution,” which Carey (2000, 735) defines as “formal rules of political contestation that are written down somewhere as laws, regulations, constitutions, and so forth.” Origins: Legacy of Path Dependencies Historical legacies of the past, more often than not, largely shape present-day constitutionalism. Institutional choices made in the past may continue to impact on current constitutional Constitutional Continuity and Change in Japan and the Philippines by Julio C. Teehankee Ph.D. processes in two ways: first, in shaping the goals that political actors pursue; and second, in structuring power relations among them, privileging some while marginalizing others. Following the argument of March and Olsen (2006, 12) that “institutions are the legacy of path dependencies, including political victories and compromises. Massive failure is [also] an important condition for change,” this section will compare the success of the 1889 Meiji Constitution in paving the way for modernization in Japan; and the failure of the 1899 Malolos Constitution to liberate the Philippines from colonialism. The influence of these historical legacies would bear its mark on latter constitutional developments. The initial experience of Japan and the Philippines in constitutional development came in the heels of great political transformations. After centuries of isolation under the Tokugawa Shogunate, the Meiji Constitution was promulgated to address “the demand of modernizing Japan by establishing a parliament and independent judiciary, and adopting the various aspect of Western constitutionalism.” (Kobayashi 1999, 5) In the case of the Philippines, the Malolos Constitution signified the apex of its anti- colonial struggle and aspiration for nationhood. “From now on,” Aguinaldo (1898) declared, “we are no longer insurgents . . . From now on, we are republicans, that is, men of law with whom all countries may fraternize with mutual respect and affection... that we be recognized and admitted as a free and independent nation . . .” Both countries embraced constitutionalism as a requisite for recognition and participation in the international community. However, their initial attempt at constitutional development was momentarily disrupted with the rise of militarism in Japan and the defeat of the revolutionary movement in the Philippines. Modern constitutionalism in the Philippines and Japan has largely been shaped by exogenous influence as both Asian countries adopted their constitutions under American occupation. First, the Americans transplanted its constitutional model and design to its former colony through the promulgation of the 1935 Philippine Constitution. By 1946, the Philippines gained independence under that charter after forty-eight years of American colonial rule. Secondly, the victorious Americans, in the aftermath of the Second World War, “imposed” a new constitution on defeated Japan. The 1947 Constitution of Japan came into effect fifty-eight years since the promulgation of its first modern constitution in 1889 during the Meiji era. Since then, the Japanese Constitution has become the world’s oldest unrevised constitution after over fifty years in existence. Meanwhile, the collapse of the 1935 Philippine Constitution in 1972 ushered in fourteen years of authoritarian rule. The current 1987 Constitution, the country’s fourth charter in a hundred years, restored institutional continuity with the previous 1935 Constitution. POLITICS
