THE reported recall petition against incumbent Mayor Quirino Boncayao Jr. in Baao, Camarines Sur presents an interesting test case of sorts in the province. Without meaning any negative imputations on the parties involved, please consider the following observations:

        A reading of the deliberations on electoral reforms during the constitutional convention formed to draft the new Philippine Constitution after the 1st People Power revolution, as well as interpretive decisions by the Philippine Supreme Court, offers interesting information. This gives us a useful context in considering the recall petition involved here. The main underlying reasons, among others, for the proposed reforms including the recall provision, include: to end, if not at least lessen, the emergence of political dynasties in the Philippines; to attract more Filipinos to offer themselves for public service; and to widen the pool/reserve of able and qualified people in the national and local levels from which the people may select its leaders.

        In fairness to the incumbent mayor, both the letter and spirit of the aforementioned electroal reforms seem to be partial to his cause. Consider: he is a novice public servant, barely out of the 1st year of a 3-year term; he just came from the private sector after a successful stint as a professional executive in an agro-industrial corporation; he is not an heir or a member of an established political dynasty in the province or Rinconada; and this is his first ever elective position.

        The electorate of Baao has hardly had sufficient time, we think, to form a reasonable basis in judging the performance of the new mayor or a chance to review or pass judgment on the soundness of the mayor’s policies and projects. “Loss of confidence” seems to be so broad a basis to form a genuine ground to initiate a recall petition. Another round of elections will entail use of public funds, and costs to the challengers, that would otherwise be better spent in the discharge of governance by the incumbent. After all, the 2010 regular elections is just around the corner. The Baao electorate can always pass judgment on him at that time granting that he runs again.

        It surely is not a good incentive for new entrants into the political arena to see that barely a year after the election, a well-financed and well-organized political machinery not necessarily in the present case, can disrupt and force an elected official into another round of costly political exercise. In our opinion, allowing this recall petition, at least in this unique case, seems contrary to all the aforementioned rationale underlying the letter and spirit of the electoral reforms envisioned by the new Philippine constitution.

RICARDO B. MARASIGAN
marasiganlaw@starpower.net