The Basis of the Republic

The Basis for Government

All rights reserved

We, as individuals, are FREE. Man was free before he formed societies, and before he became the subject of those who rule. It took man eons, tears, TONS of blood, and sweat to realize and remember that he is naturally free.

Fast forward to the present, we, as free men, wrote in our Constitution the following words: sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them.¹ Let that sink in for a moment.

Done? Good.

Now let me explain what those words mean.

Understand that the phrase "in the people" refers to the individual. So, YOU are the source of government's legitimacy and its political authority.² This is because YOU are free, and all men are equal. As EQUALS, no one can govern another man unless the latter consents to being governed. In this country, the agreement to be governed by those governing is evidenced by our Constitution.

Do you now understand the implications of sovereignty residing in YOU? Nope?

Let me spell it out for you.

In this State, we created government³ by limiting the exercise of our inalienable natural rights⁴ to to life, liberty, and property so we can enjoy whatever remains of those rights.⁵ We gave it powers to pursue the common good, that is for the protection and advancement of our natural rights, which we now call human rights.⁶ As such, the individual has every right to control how he is being governed by exercising all of his rights found in the Constituion.⁷

The same basis for government also defines the limit of its powers.⁸ Thus, in order to properly limit the individual's human rights, there must exist a constitutionally sound law, or indicated in the Constitution itself. Otherwise, the deprivation of human rights amount to government oppression and tyranny.

Should the government undermine the reason for its creation then we can exercise our right to overthrow it;⁹ which in turn is the basis for the Second Amendment of the USA Constitution.¹⁰ But on our side of the pond, we all agreed to... errhmmm... be unarmed.¹¹ Essentially, should a tyrant come our way, we will be the lame ducks in his shooting gallery, or be a facing the wall, kneeling down in a shaddy basement, or laying down on pavement with a cardboard.

Que horror!

Anyways, it should be very obvious then that freedom is VERY fragile. It can easily be snuffed out by a number of things, from coup de etats to fascist governments.¹²

As a demonstration of how fragile freedom is, a certain misinformed portion of the Philippine population are clamoring to end criminality by using whatever means is necessary. They believe in the unjustifiable ideology that the natural rights of the innocent carries more weight than the human rights of the "undesirables".¹³ They would even go so far as to say that protecting the life of a single innocent justifies the DEATH of a million "undesirables", as well as riling up the misinformed mob to JUST burn the houses of these "undesirables".

Clearly, the misinformed do not see the "undersirables" as their equals, thus, the latter are NOT entitled to human rights.¹⁴ In other words, they see the "undesirables" as sub-humans.¹⁵

(I am pretty sure Thomas More just turned in his grave.)

These misinformed "innocents", if you could call them that, cheer and defend those who parrot their idiology. An ideology which is so diametrically opposed to the very basis of OUR government!

Sad. Scary.

Source: 1) Tolentino v. COMELEC, 465 Phil. 385 (2004); 2) North Cotabato v. The Republic of the Philippines Peace Panel on Ancestral Domain, 589 Phil. 387 (2008); 3) Republic v. Sandiganbayan and Major General Ramas, and Dimaano, 454 Phil. 504 (2003); and 4) Manila Memorial Park, Inc. v. Secretaries of the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) and the Department of Finance (DOF), G.R. No. 175356, December 03, 2013

1Section 1, Article II, 1987 Constitution of the Philippines

2It is a basic postulate of our democratic system of government that the Constitution is a social contract whereby the people have surrendered their sovereign powers to the State for the common good. (Marcos v. Manglapus, 258 Phil. 479, 504 (1989)); See also the discussion of Puno, J. In Tolentino v. COMELEC, 465 Phil. 385 (2004)

3Government is but an element of the state. You can be a country in the Middle East, without respect for man's inherent equality, and still be a state.

4So called because these rights exists even without a state or government.

5See Puno, C.J.'s discussion in the sources

6"To obviate the danger that the government would limit natural liberty more than necessary to afford protection to the governed, thereby becoming a threat to the very natural liberty it was designed to protect, people had to stipulate in their constitution which natural rights they sacrificed and which not, as it was important for them to retain those portions of their natural liberty that were inalienable, that facilitated the preservation of freedom, or that simply did not need to be sacrificed." - Republic v. Sandiganbayan and Major General Ramas, and Dimaano, 454 Phil. 504 (2003)

7Free Expression, and Suffrage to name a few.

8See also the Bill of Rights, and other sources of constitutional rights under the 1987 Constitution; Secretary of Justice v. Hon. Lantion, 379 Phil. 165 (2000) where the Court ruled that: "The individual citizen is but a speck of particle or molecule vis-à-vis the vast and overwhelming powers of government. His only guarantee against oppression and tyranny are his fundamental liberties under the Bill of Rights which shield him in times of need."

9"Third and finally, individual subjects have a right of last resort to collectively resist or rebel against and overthrow a government that has failed to discharge its duty of protecting the people's natural rights and has instead abused its powers by acting in an arbitrary or tyrannical manner." - Republic v. Sandiganbayan and Major General Ramas, and Dimaano, supra.

10I often muse at how hard it took us to recover our freedoms. Weird that the only safeguard we have against its infringment is the TRUST we have for those in power, and our Constituional Rights.

11In this State, only those who are financially capable AND willing to go through the eye of a needle are legally armed. On the other hand, the government and the unlawful elements are armed to the teeth.

12Our current crop of "rebels" are terrorists, and they do not care about your way of life. Who among you can remember Pol Pot, or the dastardly acts of Chairman Mao, Stalin, and Che Guevarra? How about the on going human rights violations of the Middle Eastern States on its own people?

13Or the scum of soceity a.k.a. criminals

14SS is that you?

15 See the writings of St. Thomas Aquinas on the traditional natural law theory.