ASEAN AT THE CENTER: CAN IT TURN DIALOGUE INTO ACTION?

Why regional influence needs legal authority, shared responsibility, and effective institutions

*Dr. Rodolfo John Ortiz Teope, PhD, EdD, DM

When I served as a municipal councilor of San Mateo, Rizal, I chaired the Committee on Transportation and, by virtue of that position, also headed the Municipal Transportation Regulatory Office. Our office issued tricycle franchises and settled disputes involving routes and operations. In one hearing, three Tricycle Operators and Drivers’ Associations, or TODAs, argued over claims to exclusive routes. Each objected to other associations picking up passengers within its claimed service area. Kabuhayan ang ipinaglalaban ng bawat grupo. Pero kailangan ding isipin ang pasaherong naghihintay ng masasakyan.

Those hearings required more than giving everyone time to speak. Our office had regulatory authority to address the dispute, consider franchise conditions, and settle issues within its mandate. Pakikinig was essential, but so was a clear process for reaching a decision. That experience taught me the importance of connecting dialogue with institutional authority and responsibility.

Now add one hypothetical element: two large transport companies offering the TODAs financing and partnerships, each seeking preferential access. One association favors the first, another prefers the second, and the third wants both. The opportunities become greater, but so does the difficulty of agreeing on common terms. In this analogy, the TODAs represent ASEAN member countries with competing claims over boundaries and jurisdiction. Their disagreement over where each group may pick up passengers offers a familiar starting point for a more complex question: how competing claims over boundaries, sovereign rights, and jurisdiction can be resolved through an agreed legal process. The two companies represent external powers such as the United States and China, whose competing offers and interests can influence the choices of individual members. My regulatory role raises a further question: what agreed institution can help resolve disputes when the parties cannot find common ground themselves?

That is where ASEAN Centrality becomes a practical concern. It involves ASEAN’s role in bringing countries together, shaping regional agendas, and organizing cooperation. Maintaining that space matters. When competing powers continue talking, there remains an opportunity to manage differences peacefully. Yet occupying a central position does not automatically give ASEAN control over outcomes. Mahalaga ang may lugar sa mesa. Mahalaga rin kung gaano kalaki ang naipaglalaban natin doon.

Strategic agency means being able to turn that position into meaningful choices and collective action. Can members identify shared priorities, commit resources, and follow through? Can they negotiate with external partners while preserving room to decide for themselves? Medyo mabigat pakinggan ang termino, pero simple ang tanong: kaya ba nating magpasiya at kumilos nang magkakasama kahit may pressure mula sa labas?

The difficulty deserves an honest assessment. ASEAN members have different economic needs, security relationships, and domestic priorities. An investment that one government welcomes may create concern elsewhere. Some issues affect particular members more directly than others. These differences do not disappear because leaders stand together for a photograph. Ang pagkakaisa ay kailangang buuin sa mga interes na tunay nilang kayang pagtulungan at panindigan.

As an academician and a practitioner of public safety, I look for the person behind the policy. For the Philippines, discussions of regional stability bring to mind a fisherman’s family worrying about his safety in the West Philippine Sea, an exporter depending on overseas orders, or a worker whose employment depends on a functioning supply chain. Hindi kailangang kabisado nila ang salitang geopolitics para maramdaman ang epekto nito. Ang geopolitics ay may mukha, may pamilya, at may hapag-kain na maaaring maapektuhan.

This is why ASEAN’s legal foundations deserve serious attention. Members need clarity about what they have agreed to do, which institutions have authority to act, and what responsibilities remain with national governments. Legal commitments must be supported by capable personnel, reliable funding, and workable procedures. Kapag malabo kung sino ang kikilos at saan kukunin ang kakayahan, madaling mauwi sa paghihintayan ang magandang kasunduan.

My experience in local regulation leads me to favor stronger, clearly mandated dispute settlement arrangements within ASEAN. The question should be how existing mechanisms can be made more usable and effective, and where members might agree to strengthen them. Sovereign states would have to define the disputes covered, the process for submitting them, and the effect of any resulting decision. They could also agree on timelines and procedures for monitoring compliance. Hindi maaaring basta ipagpalagay ang kapangyarihan ng isang regional body. Kailangang malinaw kung anong awtoridad ang ipinagkaloob dito at anong obligasyon ang tinanggap ng mga kasapi.

Such a body would address matters within its agreed jurisdiction. It would not, by itself, settle disputes involving an external power that had not accepted the process. But a dependable means of resolving differences among members could help ASEAN negotiate from a more coherent position. Mas mahirap ipagtanggol ang sama-samang interes kung ang sariling hindi pagkakasundo ay walang maaasahang paraan ng pag-aayos.

Consensus also requires patience and practical preparation. It helps members support decisions they will be expected to implement. But urgent problems continue while governments deliberate. Where members already agree on cooperation, they should establish clear procedures in advance, within their accepted commitments and domestic laws. Hindi dapat sa gitna pa ng problema nagsisimulang magtanungan kung sino ang tatawagan at sino ang may pananagutan.

Consider cooperation against transnational scams. Building on existing arrangements, participating agencies could strengthen designated contact points, agree on targets for acknowledging urgent requests, and clarify how information may lawfully be shared. A response target would not guarantee an investigation’s completion; it would ensure that a request reaches someone responsible. Progress could be reviewed through response times, completed referrals, and assistance delivered to victims, with privacy and due process protected. May tatawagan, may sasagot, at may malinaw na susunod na hakbang.

Cooperation of this kind would not resolve maritime disputes or erase strategic differences. It could, however, demonstrate that agreed regional priorities produce useful results. Trust becomes easier to sustain when commitments are honored. Hindi kailangang malutas ang lahat nang sabay-sabay upang mapatunayang may saysay ang sama-samang pagkilos.

We must also be realistic about external power. Stronger ASEAN institutions would still operate alongside countries with far greater military and economic resources. Internal unity cannot guarantee that those powers will accommodate ASEAN’s preferences. It can strengthen the region’s bargaining position and help members resist arrangements that unnecessarily narrow their choices. Pakikipagkaibigan sa iba’t ibang bansa should allow cooperation without surrendering independent judgment.

For me, this gives centrality a clear purpose. ASEAN should use its diplomatic position to widen its members’ options, strengthen their capacity to cooperate, and make regional commitments more dependable. Leaders should be able to explain what was agreed, who will act, and how progress will be assessed. Hindi kailangang kabisado ng mamamayan ang bawat kasunduan. Karapatan nilang malaman kung ano ang naitutulong nito sa kanila.

I return to those transportation hearings in San Mateo, Rizal. Every driver had a livelihood to protect, and every passenger had somewhere to go. That human purpose should remain at the heart of regional cooperation. Sa dulo ng bawat pagpupulong, may mga taong naghihintay pa ring makauwi. Dapat may maaasahan silang higit sa susunod na pagpupulong.

_________________________________________________________

Dear Reader,

I invite you to explore my complete collection of published books now available on Amazon. Whether you are seeking in-depth analysis, strategic insights, or engaging narratives, my catalog covers a range of essential topics designed to inform, inspire, and provoke thoughtful discussion.

You can browse all my current titles, read excerpts, and order your copies directly through my official Amazon Author Page: 

Click this Image to View:

Thank you for your continued support and interest in my work. If you enjoy any of the titles, leaving a review on Amazon would be greatly appreciated as it helps bring these ideas to a broader audience.

Warm regards,

Dr. Rodolfo John Ortiz Teope

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

*About the author:

Dr. Rodolfo “John” Ortiz Teope is a distinguished Filipino academic, public intellectual, and advocate for civic education and public safety, whose work spans local academies and international security circles. With a career rooted in teaching, research, policy, and public engagement, he bridges theory and practice by making meaningful contributions to academic discourse, civic education, and public policy. Dr. Teope is widely respected for his critical scholarship in education, management, economics, doctrine development, and public safety; his grassroots involvement in government and non-government organizations; his influential media presence promoting democratic values and civic consciousness; and his ethical leadership grounded in Filipino nationalism and public service. As a true public intellectual, he exemplifies how research, advocacy, governance, and education can work together in pursuit of the nation’s moral and civic mission.

VIEWS: 1.02M

SANDRO MARCOS: AN OPPORTUNITY TO DELIVER LASTING DEVELOPMENT

Examining Ilocos Norte’s proposed infrastructure funding through public need, political realities, and accountability.

*Dr. Rodolfo John Ortiz Teope, PhD, EdD, DM

A bigger development budget can become a bigger opportunity to improve people’s lives.

That was not my first reaction when I encountered reports about the proposed infrastructure allocation for Ilocos Norte’s first district, represented by Congressman Sandro Marcos. Noong una kong nabasa ang ilang bahagi ng ulat ng People’s Budget Coalition, nagalit ako at naghinala. After the flood control controversies and revelations about alleged ghost projects, mahirap makakita ng bilyon-bilyong allocation nang hindi nangangamba.

But after reviewing the reported allocations and available budget information more carefully when I visited a friend in the House of Representatives and gave me a PDF copy of the budget appropriations, I began to see possible justifications worth hearing. Kaya kong kilalanin na maaaring kulang ang una kong pagtingin. Fairness requires a willingness to reconsider an initial judgment when further information warrants it.

As a professor of Doctrine Development, Business and Public Administration who continues to lecture by invitation, with a strong background in finance, economics, and accountancy, I recognize that substantial development needs can require substantial funding. Ngunit hindi sapat ang malaking pangarap lamang. Kailangang makatwiran ang gastos at malinaw ang pakinabang sa mamamayan.

Reports place the proposed additional public works allocation at roughly ₱4.4 billion under the House version of the 2027 national budget. Malacañang has said the projects remain subject to review. These are proposed appropriations; their inclusion does not establish that the money has already been released or spent.

Mahalaga ang pagkakaibang iyon. May pagkakataon pang suriin at ayusin ang mga panukala bago maging aktuwal na paggasta ang mga numero sa papel.

That funding could support meaningful district development if the projects address demonstrated needs at reasonable costs. Better roads can connect farmers to markets. Reliable bridges can improve access to hospitals and schools. Properly planned infrastructure can encourage investment and livelihoods.

Para sa magsasakang nababawasan ang kita dahil sa mahal na transportasyon, malaking bagay ang maayos na kalsada. Para sa pamilyang kailangang makarating agad sa ospital, mahalaga ang ligtas na tulay. These everyday realities deserve a place in the budget discussion.

Congressman Sandro Marcos deserves the opportunity to explain the development program behind the proposed increase. The presentation should identify project locations, intended beneficiaries, credible cost estimates, and readiness for implementation. Kung matagal nang kulang ang imprastraktura o may pakinabang na aabot sa karatig na komunidad, dapat makita ang batayan.

Some readers, especially those critical of the administration, may disagree with giving the proposal this consideration. That is understandable. Ngunit ang patas na pagsusuri ay nangangailangan ng pare-parehong pamantayan, kahit hindi natin gusto ang politikong makikinabang sa magandang resulta.

Political influence over budget distribution is neither new nor uniquely Philippine. Elected representatives advocate for constituents, negotiate support, and seek funding for their priorities. Within constitutional limits, such negotiations can form part of representative government.

Economists Jeffrey Clemens and Stan Veuger found that partisan alignment helped predict differences in United States pandemic relief allocations following the 2021 political transition. Sa Pilipinas, tinalakay ng Philippine Institute for Development Studies paper na Federalism: Prospects for the Philippines ang Congressional Initiative Allocations na nakukuha sa pamamagitan ng political negotiation, kasabay ng pagsusuri sa pagiging patas at mahusay ng pamamahagi ng pondo.

These studies help explain the political context. They do not establish why Sandro’s district received its proposed increase, nor do they prove that the increase is justified.

Ang pagkilala sa realidad ng pulitika ay hindi pahintulot sa anumang pag-abuso. Public need must still justify the result.

The historical comparison also requires care. Reports citing DPWH confirmation placed infrastructure allocations for Paolo Duterte’s district at approximately ₱51 billion over 2020 to 2022, during his father’s presidency. That figure covers three years, while Sandro’s disputed amount concerns proposed additional funding for one year. They cannot be treated as directly equivalent.

Hindi depensa sa kasalukuyan ang ginawa noon. Pero hindi rin makatarungang magpalit ng pamantayan depende sa apelyido. Both deserve examination through the same questions of need, cost, legality, and public benefit.

Equal allocations do not necessarily produce equitable development. Districts differ in population, geography, disaster exposure, existing infrastructure, and the regional importance of their projects. A larger allocation may be reasonable when these differences warrant it.

Gayunman, limitado ang pera ng bayan. Kailangang timbangin ang panukala laban sa agarang pangangailangan ng ibang lugar. Bakit dito, bakit ganito kalaki, at bakit ngayon? Those questions give proponents an opportunity to demonstrate the proposal’s merit.

Our constitutional safeguards also matter. The Supreme Court’s Belgica ruling invalidated personal lump-sum allocations for legislators and arrangements allowing their intervention in budget execution beyond legitimate congressional oversight. Advocacy during budget deliberations must respect that boundary.

Ang pondong ito ay para sa mga proyekto ng pamahalaan. Hindi ito personal na pera ng sinumang kinatawan, at ang pagpapatupad ay dapat manatili sa mga ahensiyang may legal na pananagutan.

Let the Senate examine the proposal and require supporting records. Bicameral deliberations should allow citizens to see proposed amendments and final reconciliation documents. Transparency can help sound projects earn public confidence and expose weaknesses while correction remains possible.

Pagkatapos ng pag-apruba, susunod ang mas mabigat na pagsusulit: procurement, konstruksyon, inspeksyon, pagbabayad, at pagkumpleto. Ang kalsada ay dapat madaanan. Ang tulay ay dapat ligtas. Ang ipinangakong pakinabang ay dapat maramdaman.

For Congressman Sandro Marcos, this is an opportunity to demonstrate that effective district advocacy can go hand in hand with transparency and responsible spending. A clear explanation and openness to scrutiny could strengthen confidence in the development goals he champions.

Makatarungang magtanong, ngunit makatarungan ding makinig bago humusga. If the projects meet documented needs at reasonable costs and deserve priority, they merit support. Kung may kulang, ayusin; kung walang sapat na batayan, baguhin o alisin.

The best outcome would be a development program that Sandro Marcos can explain with confidence and his constituents can experience with pride. Ang tunay na tagumpay ng mas malaking badyet ay mas magaan na buhay para sa mamamayan.

_________________________________________________________

Dear Reader,

I invite you to explore my complete collection of published books now available on Amazon. Whether you are seeking in-depth analysis, strategic insights, or engaging narratives, my catalog covers a range of essential topics designed to inform, inspire, and provoke thoughtful discussion.

You can browse all my current titles, read excerpts, and order your copies directly through my official Amazon Author Page: 

Click this Image to View:

Thank you for your continued support and interest in my work. If you enjoy any of the titles, leaving a review on Amazon would be greatly appreciated as it helps bring these ideas to a broader audience.

Warm regards,

Dr. Rodolfo John Ortiz Teope

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

*About the author:

Dr. Rodolfo “John” Ortiz Teope is a distinguished Filipino academic, public intellectual, and advocate for civic education and public safety, whose work spans local academies and international security circles. With a career rooted in teaching, research, policy, and public engagement, he bridges theory and practice by making meaningful contributions to academic discourse, civic education, and public policy. Dr. Teope is widely respected for his critical scholarship in education, management, economics, doctrine development, and public safety; his grassroots involvement in government and non-government organizations; his influential media presence promoting democratic values and civic consciousness; and his ethical leadership grounded in Filipino nationalism and public service. As a true public intellectual, he exemplifies how research, advocacy, governance, and education can work together in pursuit of the nation’s moral and civic mission.

VIEWS: 1.28M