The case against the Sangguniang Kabataan (SK)

By ANTONIO MORALES
July 24, 2007

The Background

The upcoming SK elections has encouraged a number of new young voters to register so they could exercise their right of suffrage. Since 1992, the SK elections have been truly training grounds for nasty electoral processes. No one can dispute the fact that it has been used as extension of the dirty politics of the local politicos. The precursor of SK is of course the Kabataang Barangay (KB) of Marcos. Under the Local Government Code of 1991 primarily authored by Nene Pimentel, a staunch nemesis of Marcos, the SK was nothing but an institutionalized KB.

The Arguments Against SK

I will focus my arguments against SK on the following grounds:

1. It is not necessary;
2. It is not beneficial; and,
3. It is not practical.

Necessity of SK: Do we need the SK for youth empowerment?

The SK is supposed to be the training ground for future leaders. The framers of the 1991 Local Government Code thought that the SK would be an excellent avenue for creating better leaders. I would say that it is not necessary for a leader to be in SK to be a good leader. It does not follow, or it is non sequitor, that once you are involved in SK that you become a better leader. Leadership training is available in far better settings like in schools, churches, or other institutions other than the government like scouting. The idea that our youth are not getting enough leadership training because there is no organization like the SK is simply hilarious.

Another reason why the SK was instituted is the fact (or I would say the myth) that it could "initiate policies, programs, or projects for the development of the youth in their respective political territories." It is so good as a sound byte or as an oratorical piece but never as a blueprint for reality. The real world says that it is the local political warlords or barangay chieftains that dictate whatever programs the SK can have to benefit them and not to benefit the youth in the area of their responsibility. More often than not, SK projects are limited to signs, basketball courts, lamp posts, flowering pots, and the like. They simply mimic what their elders can do and do not venture into projects that would truly benefit the youth.

Are there reading centers or mini-libraries in their barangays? Nope. That won't be popular. Are there literacy or tutorial programs to benefit the disadvantaged? Nope. That won't be politically sound. Are there citizenship or civic training so young people could become better citizens? Nope. That won't be well attended. Are there tie-ups with the TESDA and other government institutions for technical or vocational training for young people? Nope. That would be too serious. If what the SK can do is to display in a barangay sign the names of the chairman, kagawads, secretary, and treasurer, then definitely there is no need to have an SK. The barangay council could do what they could do.

Beneficiality of SK: Does our youth benefit from SK?

Qui bono? Who benefits from having SK? The youth? To some extent yes but that answer should be qualified. Yes, the youth who are elected into the SK would reap the rewards but not the youth in general. In a way, it benefits those in power but not their constituents. Why? An SK kagawad or chairman receives honoraria for attending SK sessions. The SK chairman who is elected, through the help of the politicos, to become president of the municipal/city/provincial federation sits as an ex-officio member of the municipal/city/provincial council/board with all the perks and powers of a regular member of the said council/board. Qui bono? The selected few reaps the manna from the 1991 Local Government Code while the rest of the youth in their respective barangays are left in the dark.

Another bunch of unscrupulous people that will benefit from the SK are the local politicos who will have a new network of political operatives from among the SK people. The SK, though apolitical by creation of law like the barangay, is simply a front of contending politicos. Politicians finance the election of their wards in the hope that the wards will deliver the votes or resources in the future when the need arises.

In the end, the spirit of the law to have the youth benefit from the SK will never materialize. Only a few will benefit from the system while the majority will never be able to enjoy the very purpose of the creation of SK which is to bring good programs and projects for the youth, the fair hope of the motherland.

Practicality of SK: Is it cheap to have SK?

Since 1992, billions of pesos coming from scarce government resources have been spent to cover for the elections of SKs in practically all barangays in the Philippines, whether urban or rural. SK officials receive remuneration for attending SK sessions from barangay funds. SK receives a 10% apportionment from the barangay budget. With that, they spend their share for their pet projects that are not necessary, not beneficial to the youth, and simply a drain to the coffers of the government.

The upcoming synchronized SK and barangay elections would cost 3 billion pesos. To say the least, it is not cheap to elect SK officials and keep their perks. Nene Pimentel, principal author of the 1991 Local Government Code, must have made a big blunder when he inserted the provisions on SK.

In closing, the 15-year SK experiment should have galvanized noble members of congress to abolish the SK because it is simply not living up to its expectations. It has failed miserably. Instead of spending billions of pesos to run these mock youth councils, the government should focus on strengthening the public elementary and high schools so it could produce better leaders than what we currently have. A government run by cheats and incompetents is not a good model for training future leaders. Abolish SK! Strengthen the public schools!