1 day ago
6
Upgrade to High-Speed Internet for only ₱1499/month!
Enjoy up to 100 Mbps fiber broadband, perfect for browsing, streaming, and gaming.
Visit Suniway.ph to learn
Old age is one defining feature of our national political landscape. It complements other factors, especially fat and overstaying political dynasties, that enable the rule of mostly senescent patriarchs and their children at the expense of sidelining young, non-dynastic voices.
This is not to say that all aging politicians are wicked, nor do young politicians from fat dynasties necessarily advance the welfare of the youth. Yet, when they and their family members normalize their possession of political power over time — through the corruption-plagued systems of Sangguniang Kabataan (Youth Council) and party-list, for example — the opportunity for independent, youthful politics is constrained to its limits.
Gerontocracy is bad not only because it uncovers the rule of old, mostly men, but also, as in the case of the United States, it shows how the massive accumulation of power and wealth over the years by the old can, as a consequence, curtail the prospects of the young.
We are, of course, no stranger to the rule of old and powerful in national politics alone.
The average age of elected Philippine presidents since the 1986 People Power revolt is 59, which is remote from the constitutional requirement of at least 40 years old.
Rodrigo Duterte was on the extreme at 71. Ferdinand Marcos Jr., Fidel Ramos, and Joseph Estrada were in their early 60s when they took office (while Noynoy Aquino III was already the youngest at 50). In the Senate, the average age of incumbent senators is 60. As in the presidency, this figure is nowhere near the constitutional requirement of at least 35 years old. Those on the end of the spectrum include senators Panfilo Lacson at 78, Tito Sotto at 77, and Rodante Marcoleta at 72.
But unlike the American experience, a more visible impact of gerontocracy and dynasties on Philippine politics has to do with how politicians and officials use age to weaken accountability, inclusivity, and institution.
Escaping accountability
First, agedness is a common alibi used to defy complete accountability.
When presidents and officials are tried for heinous crimes such as extrajudicial killings and plunder during or after their terms of office, they invoke by default the age-induced conditions of cognitive impairment and poor health. To earn sympathy from the court and the public, many of them appear in wheelchairs or claim to require special medication when facing arrest warrants.
The 80-year-old Duterte, attempting to discredit his crimes against humanity at the International Criminal Court (ICC), believed that he was unfit to face trial given his poor cognitive condition and other medical ailments like Buerger’s disease and a muscle disease. As this motion delayed the pre-trial hearing, the prosecution team, upon the sensible assessment of medical experts at the ICC, concluded that “while frail and elderly, Mr. Duterte nevertheless possesses the necessary capacities to meaningfully exercise his procedural and fair trial rights.”
The late senator Juan Ponce Enrile, who was charged with plunder and corruption in 2014, was detained under hospital arrest at the Philippine National Police due to age and health concerns. He was 90 years old. In June this year, the former public works and highways secretary Manuel Bonoan, was 80 years old when put under hospital arrest for cases of plunder and graft. He claimed that he was suffering from various illnesses including chronic renal disease, hypertension, and diabetes. Using the legal appeal of Enrile who was granted bail for humanitarian grounds, Bonoan maintained that “advanced age and ill health requiring special medical attention were considered sufficient grounds to justify the grant of provisional liberty.”
Second, gerontocratic rule widens the gap between the vision of the old and the eclectic interests of the young.
A legislature ruled by many senescent politicians may not necessarily reflect the changing preferences of the youth through impactful policymaking.
While the Filipino youth aged 15 to 24 shared a common interest in sports, the environment, religion, and socio-civic activities, the number of laws passed in relation to these areas was dismal, based on the Senate’s own record.
The current Congress (2025-2028) has yet to pass laws that will improve the state of sports and recreation, the environment, and religious and socio-civic participation among the youth. The laws passed thus far are standard and administrative in nature, which nonetheless matter. These included the national budget and the granting of Philippine citizenship to two individuals.
In the previous Congress (2022-2025), which was also composed of many gerontocratic and dynastic legislators, three laws covered the institution of local high schools for sports in Baguio City, Municipality of Bagac in Bataan, and Baybay City in Leyte. Not a single law was passed that could significantly address the environmental, religious, and socio-civic interests of the youth. Aside from standard-like laws, others included the protection of caregivers, teaching allowance for teachers, and the banning of illegal offshore gaming operations which chiefly benefit the young adults.
Let the young rule
And third, gerontocracy is detrimental to democratic institutions.
Only slightly than a quarter of Filipinos trust their national leaders. Yet half trust the ability of media and civil society organizations to address systemic corruption. This indicates that the public, notably the young, is cautious but reasonable enough to put their faith in the workings of democratic institutions amid crises.
While the Philippines is not the only country that distrusts its predominantly aging leaders, there are ways by which trust in government agencies and the bureaucracy can be regained.
One ideal way is to halt and penalize the practice of corruption, which includes the acceptance or provision of bribes, misuse of public funds, and nepotism. 97% of Filipinos said that corruption in government is widespread, and, if this is not disturbing enough, 59% thought it is a normal part of politics.
Gerontocracy is partly to blame for perpetuating the legacy of corruption in government, as it, among other things, discourages young, non-dynastic voices from taking on meaningful roles in institution-building.
If the public can rally behind media and civil society free from the influence of decrepit dynasties, there is no reason to lose sight of the potential of independent young voices to help resist gerontocracy. – Rappler.com
Jefferson Lyndon D. Ragragio is an associate professor of media and democracy at the Department of Science Communication, University of the Philippines Los Baños.
