Peoples Fear is not into the Government, but the Law Itself

(Rule of the Law and Fear of the Government)

by Vanessa Yvonne A. Gurtiza
Introduction
The orthodox notion of the rule of law, at least in the Philippines, is the existence of
institutions such as the judiciary and the courts and their ends. The rule of law has a universal
meaning, which primarily says that government in all its actions is bound by rules fixed and
announced beforehand.
However, the rule of law continues to face challenges given the complexity of
institutions, agencies, rule makers, decision or policy makers, and citizens. The complexion of
agencies, policy-making, and users engagement in the rule of law is influenced and shaped by
their own understanding on the rule of law and its principles. The rule of law is sometimes
overlaps by the mob rule which over-empower peoples rights beyond laws and government
affairs. From this, if the matters of law are advocate through the will of the people, that
proposal says that there is no need for the judiciary. Judgments will be decided by a referendum
instead of the courts. The Philippine Constitution becomes just a piece of paper because
constitutional issues should be left to decision by popular vote instead of the law itself. Indeed,
adherence to the rule of law is not so strong at this. The notion of vox populi is too powerful
that it can manipulate the government. The voice of the people should be bound of boundaries
and limitations that cannot cease the rule of law.
The rule of law should still be the basis and the basic principle of all actions and
movements of every individuals and groups. This study enables us to understand the essence of

rule of law as a tool of the government in establishing a community with social order, peace, and
promotes and protects justice and ones dignity and rights.

Statement of the Problem

Specifically, this study sought to answer whether or not the fear of the government is a
response to community social and generalized attitude toward an effective implementation and
obedience of the laws in society.
Objective/ Significance of the Study
This paper aimed to assess fear of the government as a key in upholding the rule of law.
Scope and Limitations of the Study
The study covers the concept of rule of law, its application and implementation in the
Philippine setting, its relevance in governance, and to clarify the notion regarding on fear of the
government.
Conceptual Framework
Concept of Rule of Law
In democracies, the use of arbitrary power is considered anathema to the rule of law.
Fundamentally, constitutional limits on power, a key feature of democracy, requires adherence to
the rule of law. Indeed, the rule of law could be defined as the subjugation of state power to a
country's constitution and laws, established or adopted through popular consent. This is the

meaning of the commonly cited phrase "a government of laws, not men," made famous by John
Adams, the second president of the United States (http://oll.libertyfund.org/quote/127).
Amsterdam Law School (2016) also added that the rule of law means that everyone
institutions, states and individuals must abide by the law. However, in a rapidly globalizing
world, traditional legal safeguards may change or cease to matter at all. The rule of law needs to
adjust to the changing world.
According to Wouters and Bournay (2013), the rule of law mainly served as a principle to
discard the unbridled, unaccountable royal power of the Monarchs. The rule of law implies
that the society is governed by law and that the ruler can only make his decisions according to
the law while also being submitted to the law, himself. It functions therefore as the ultimate
barrier against the rule of man, the arbitrary power of the ruler as well as unlawful violence. It
furthermore provides the citizens with concrete instruments to force state organs to act in the
limits set by the law.
Under such a system, law should be supreme to the capricious authority of any
individual. The rule of law is the supreme check on political power used against people's rights.
Without the regulation of state power by a system of laws, procedures, and courts, democracy
could not survive.
Although the rule of law protects the majority from arbitrary power and tyranny, it should
also protect the minority both from arbitrary power and the "tyranny of the majority". Without
the rule of law, there is likely to be either a dictatorship or mob rule. Some revolutionary thinkers
have extolled mob rule as the highest form of political and social justice. In reality, however,

mob rule has meant violence and political chaos, which are the very same conditions that often
give rise to dictatorship, the exercise of arbitrary power, and the denial of individual rights.
Few would dispute the desirability of establishing and maintaining the rule of law across
the globe. Finding common agreement on the precise meaning of this concept, however, is less
easy to achieve. Frequently invoked and promoted in the discourse of legal practitioners,
lawmakers, and development experts alike, the semantic content of the term rule of law is not a
constant but instead depends upon who uses it and to what purpose.
The maintenance and promotion of the rule of law is of fundamental importance for the
human dignity and well-being of people everywhere, providing the foundations for good
governance, an effective economy and a fair society, and affecting the daily lives of people
around the world. Its relevance extends across a wide range in the affairs of people and states: in
the laws of armed conflict; laws outlawing corruption and governing constitutional affairs; in
energy and environmental rights; the respective roles and powers of the various arms of
government and agencies at national, regional and international level; the independence of the
judiciary; and in human rights.

Rule of Law in the Philippine Context

In the Philippine context, the Department of Justice defines rule of law as a principle of
governance in which all persons, institutions and entities, public and private, including the State
itself, are accountable to laws that are publicly promulgated, equally enforced and independently
adjudicated, and which are consistent with international human rights norms and standards. It
requires, as well, measures to ensure adherence to the principles of supremacy of law, equality

before the law, accountability to the law, fairness in the application of the law, separation of
powers, participation in decision-making, legal certainty, avoidance of arbitrariness and
procedural and legal transparency (https://www.doj.gov.ph/philippine-development-forum.html).
The Department of Justice also added that the rule of law framework in the Philippines
includes constitution, as the highest law of the land; a clear and consistent legal framework, and
implementation thereof; strong institutions of justice, governance, security and human rights that
are well structured, financed, trained and equipped; transitional justice processes and
mechanisms; and a public and civil society that contributes to strengthening the rule of law and
holding public officials and institutions accountable (https://www.doj.gov.ph/philippinedevelopment-forum.html).
The Philippines regards an integrated notion of laws which means that the rule of law is
not just defined by the absence or presence of the laws, but also by the extent to which these laws
are prepared or are set for operationalization. There may be numerous laws and rules that define
the conduct and norms of government and the community, but the sheer volume of articulated
laws does not necessarily translate into effective governance.
On the contrary, some laws pose difficulty in providing stability or continuity to the
substance of the law if there is poor consistency among related or similar laws. Consistency
refers to the character of the laws that define the stability, regularity, and uniformity of related
laws. One should find ease in interpreting related laws and the law should at all times prove to
pose no difficulty in seeing its substance. Enforceability refers to the articulation of the laws that
prepares law practitioners and actors to put the laws into effect. This includes the substance of
the law that enables it to be fully obligatory and compulsory.

However, upholding rule of law in the Philippines is a complicated, labor-intensive

exercise. The two principles namely, consistency and enforceability, seems lacking when it
comes to law enforcement. There is very little evidence that Filipinos are capable of living by the
rule of law. The society is quite extraordinary in the sense that simple rules and regulations
whether on the road or in the work place are for the most part ignored. This is because each
individual has this baseless sense of being more important than everybody else. It is why you
people tend to violate simple rules and regulations like jaywalking because of the notion that
they will not be caught of doing it because a lot of people are doing the same thing. City
ordinances on the use of road markings are among the simplest of guidelines. But in the
Philippines, even the simplest guidelines are not followed. In this light, it is easy to see why the
Philippines simply cannot progress because of the unique nature of Filipinos apathy to their own
laws. In other words, Filipinos in general tend to put their own interest first before other people.
Despite of this, in todays new administration, the newly elected leaders of the country
assures to bring forth a country grounded on the principles of protecting and strengthening our
democratic institutions, and on decency, integrity, justice, empathy, competence, peace and order
especially in Mindanao, and respect and adherence to the rule of law.
Just like on the Philippine arbitration case against China, the Philippines invoked the
United Nations commitment to the rule of law in support of an imminent decision by an arbitral
tribunal in The Hague constituted to hear the Philippines case on the South China Sea/West
Philippine Sea disputes. And now, it has finally been decided that the Philippines has exclusive
sovereign rights over the West Philippine Sea (in the South China Sea) and that Chinas ninedash

line

is

invalid,

according

to

the

United

Nations

(UN) Arbitral Tribunal

(http://globalnation.inquirer.net/140358/philippines-arbitration-decision-maritime-dispute-south-

china-sea-arbitral-tribunal-unclos-itlos). This implies that no matter how powerful a country is,

the rule of law will always prevail and supreme. Thus, on this case, the rule of law in the
international context was applied.
Indeed, applying the principle of rule of law will achieve justice in all circumstances.

Law as a Powerful Tool of the Government, not of Politicians

Rule of law constitutes legitimacy and authority to government. According to Cruz
(2015), a constitution without legitimacy will not be respected by the people, and thus its
principles cannot be upheld. If there is no constitutional check on the misuse of power, a corrupt
judiciary or police force can manipulate the laws to their advantage, incompetent lawyers cannot
adequately represent their clients, and so on. As Dugan (2004) believes that some form of
legitimacy tends to be needed to maintain control. In the legal system, for example, some people
obey the laws simply because they believe in the rule of law and the appropriateness of the state
making and enforcing the laws. In fact, if the majority did not accept this, it would take massive
amounts of time, weaponry and energy to enforce it. Thus the rule of law itself is sufficient for
the vast majority of "law abiding," citizens. Beyond this, it is largely their support that allows the
state to enforce the law on those who do not accept its legitimacy.
Laws support the framework of the government. Without laws, the government is
paralyzed in handling its constituents. Politicians, specifically the legislators, are the one who
make laws, and the government is the institution who implements those laws. The government
plays a vital role of keeping the purpose of laws alive. Laws are useless if it is not applied in
monitoring every ones actions and businesses, regardless of status, religious beliefs, etc.

Politicians always rely on laws to pursue their political aims. Politicians typically want to
improve society, and they use law as an instrument of change. Law is a powerful tool, but, like
any tool, it has inherent limitations. First, law is not self-executing. It needs to be implemented.
Governments and legislatures need to have regard to political and social practicalities. The
reality is that the law, while a powerful tool, like any other instruments imposes its own limits on
what can be achieved. To be effective, it must be reasonably comprehensible, general, and
normally prospective only, and must not make excessive demands of people or offend important
values and interests in ways which will either undermine the legitimacy of the law itself or
threaten the ability of law-enforcers to make it effective.
With the military about to play a more active role in law enforcement operations
especially in the neutralization of the illegal drugs trade, newly-appointed Armed Forces of the
Philippines (AFP) chief-of-staff Lt. Gen. Ricardo Visaya assured the public that they will be
guided by the rule of law and values while performing these operations. This action is President
Rodrigo

Dutertes

campaign

in

eradicating

criminality

in

the

country

(http://www.update.ph/2016/07/military-to-uphold-rule-of-law-in-helping-in-law-enforcementoperations/7009). From this, the countrys success in implementing the rule of law requires the
cooperation of all sectors of society and their habitual obedience.
Belton also notes another factor necessary to achieve the rule of law, namely the will of
society

to

enforce

basic

(http://democracyweb.org/node/63).

principles

of

equality,

fairness,

and

justice

Fear of the Government Means Fear of the Laws

According to Machiavelli (1513), since love and fear can hardly exist together, if we
must choose between them, it is far safer to be feared than loved. From this, the people who
have the effrontery to rule us, who call themselves our government, understand this basic fact of
human nature. They exploit it, and they cultivate it. Whether they compose a warfare state or a
welfare state, they depend on it to secure popular submission, compliance with official dictates,
and, on some occasions, affirmative cooperation with the states enterprises and adventures.
Without popular fear, no government could endure more than twenty-four hours. Hume (n.d.)
taught that all government rests on public opinion, but that opinion is not the bedrock of
government. Public opinion itself rests on something deeper: fear.
The perception of people that government exert some degree of coercive power to
implement the law must be change. The rule of law does not reduce the freedom of action. The
government need their citizens to perceive that they have the right to do so. The fear of the
government is a misconception that the government will abuse the use of laws. The government
should gain public trust in order to eradicate the concept of fear of government. From this,
people must not be afraid if they did not do anything in violation of the laws. They should not be
afraid of the consequences from the laws in which the government is applying as long as a
person is innocent from doing it. As the principle, the law may be harsh but it is still the law,
the government is just a mere instrument of applying the laws, not as a tool of gaining power and
creating injustice.

People should not be afraid of the government nor the laws. Because those laws will
served as their armor in protecting their rights and the government will served as the shield to
make those laws possible of protecting the people.
Sources
Adam,

J. (1763). Novanglus no. VII.

http://oll.libertyfund.org/quote/127

Retrieved

on

July

25,

2016

from

Amsterdam
Law
School
(2016)
Retrieved
on
July
25,
2016
from
http://www.uva.nl/en/research/content/the-international-rule-of-law/the-internationalrule-of-law.html
Bolton (n.d.) Retrieved on July 25, 2016 from http://democracyweb.org/node/63
Cruz,

E.
(2015)
Retrieved
on
July
25,
2016
http://www.philstar.com/opinion/2015/12/20/1534594/rule-law-vs-mob-rule

from

Department of Justice. Definition of rule of law. Retrieved on July 25, 2016 from
https://www.doj.gov.ph/philippine-development-forum.html
Dugan

M.
(2004)
Retrieved
on
July
http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/legitimacy

25,

2016

from

Hume, D. (n.d.) Of the first principles of government. Retrieved on July 26, 2016 from
http://www.constitution.org/dh/pringovt.htm
Machiavelli, N. (1513) The prince
Militarys Role in Law enforcement. Retrieved on July 26, 2015
http://www.update.ph/2016/07/military-to-uphold-rule-of-law-in-helping-in-lawenforcement-operations/7009

from

Philippine Artbitration Case against China. Retrieved on July 26, 2016 from
http://globalnation.inquirer.net/140358/philippines-arbitration-decision-maritime-disputesouth-china-sea-arbitral-tribunal-unclos-itlos
Wouters, J. and Bournay, M. (2013) The international rule of law: european and asian
perspectives.
Retrieved
on
July
26,
2016
from
http://fr.bruylant.larciergroup.com/resource/extra/9782802746447/R%CE
%92DI_N_13_2_web%20intro.pdf

Conclusions/ Recommendations
From the following analysis, the strict implementation of the rule of law indicates the
governments seriousness in carrying out its responsibilities and obligations in a democratic
environment, while extracting from the citizens the needed cooperation through compliance with
existing laws and public policies.
Based on the conclusion, the following recommendations are drawn: there should be
strengthening on the oversight bodies of laws, have an effective and speedy resolution of cases in
courts and quasi-judicial bodies, reducing the cost of litigation, avoid law suits involving
government contracts, enhance the integrity and competence of justices, judges, court personnel
and all other officers of the judiciary and quasi-judicial bodies, increase resources for justice
sector agencies and quasi-judicial bodies, improve access to justice of all sectors of society
particularly the vulnerable groups, promote the use of alternative dispute resolution,
institutionalize existing justice sector coordinating mechanism and lastly, enhance citizens
access to information and participation in governance.