Page 1 of 7

Tampus, Mary Grace G.

LLB124A (Legal Research)
LLB-1, EH409MC

PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE:
A REQUIREMENT AND NOT AN OPTION
In every democratic country, election process is very important for it will determine the person
or persons who will represent and be expected to carry out the welfare and the interests of the
countrys citizens. It is therefore important for every citizen to be crucial and be elaborately
censorious in making an informed and wise decision in electing the person or persons who will
have the reins in steering the country to progress and development and as to upholding the
general interests of the citizenry.
Therefore, in every election period it is important that every citizen will scrutinize every
electoral candidate to governmental positions, specifically to scrutinize the platforms laid out by
the said candidates since it serves as their link to their promise to the citizens that they will
uphold the principles of good governance and rule of law. More importantly, people have to be
critical in scrutinizing those candidates vying for the most coveted position: the presidential
position. To enable citizens to be censorious on the intent of the candidates through their
platforms, we have the whole election process which consists of: political campaigns, political
talks, political rallies, political advertisements and televised debates providing candidates to lay
down their beliefs as well as their plans for the country.1
In the Philippines, however, all election activities except political debate is adopted. It is only
the political activity in the election process that has not been practiced specifically presidential
debates to this date. Although we have a history of one presidential debate during the 1992
elections but thats it, no other presidential debates held after. Now that May 2016 elections is
fast approaching, there are some movements as to bringing back presidential debates through
Republic Act 9006 or the Free and Fair Elections Act allowing Commission on Elections
(COMELEC) to require national television and radio networks to sponsor presidential and vicepresidential debates.2 However is it sufficient enough to invite the presidential candidates to the
said debates? How about when they refuse to participate? How then will the citizens scrutinize
the said candidate when attending to such event is only optional and not obligatory?
Which is why the main focus of this paper is to discuss on the importance of presidential debates
to be incorporated in the election process activities here in the Philippines not only to make it
optional or voluntary participation of the aspiring candidates rather to make it obligatory through
the passage of the Presidential Debate Bill as introduced by Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago.
To fully discuss and tackle on the topic, this paper will talk on (1) a brief discussion on the
history of presidential debates juxtaposing it to its history here in the Philippines, (2) its

Page 2 of 7

influence and effect to countries utilizing it, and (3) application of presidential debate in the
Philippine setting.
PROVENANCE OF PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES
Presidential Debates were actually born American. Sufficing to say, it was said to have actually
started during 1858 in Illinois with Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas as well as with
Wendell Wilkie versus Franklin Roosevelt though it has been reported that it happened two years
before the men actually started running as president through the provision of Communications
Act of 1934 requiring national candidates to have an equal exposure in the media.
The next presidential debate happened on 1948 which marked the beginning on broadcasted
presidential debates which was a radio transmission debate with Thomas Dewey and Harold
Strassen in Oregon. The first televised presidential debate was held on 1956 between Estes
Kefauver and Aldai Stevenson. It was only in 1960 where presidential debates were formally
acknowledged and it was a televised presidential debate between Richard Nixon and John F.
Kennedy upon the belief of both candidates that it will increase their exposure to gain the favor
of the Americans through a televised face-off debate for four times. In the said debates, they
discussed the most controversial issues. However, no televised presidential debates were held
during 1964, 1968, and 1972 elections. It finally made a comeback in 1976 between the then
incumbent President Gerald Ford and Governor Jimmy Carter where they debated on domestic
issues and an international policy and since then it has been made customary to hold presidential
elections in the United States during elections.3
Juxtaposing the history of presidential debates into the Philippine setting, our history of it lies on
the 1992 presidential elections between Miriam Defensor-Santiago, Juan Ponce Enrile, Imelda
Marcos, and Santiago Dumlao who were the only present candidates for the said debate. It was
the only presidential debate held in the Philippines since it was not preceded anymore up until
now where movements spear-headed by the COMELEC on the grounds of exacting
accountability among presidential candidates of their campaign promises.

INFLUENCES AND EFFECTS ON PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES

A presidential debate is a rhetorical event with candidates as contestants discussing and arguing
on salient opposing propositions to gain the viewers or the audiences adherence.4 These debates
have actually became a compulsory exercise to some western countries and have now even
influenced the Eastern countries such as Indonesia and South Korea in holding the said event to
provide an effective political communication. Presidential debating has effectively spread across
countries which has been used as a tool in determining the most effective candidate by the
citizens as electorates and by the candidates as an avenue to persuade the citizens to vote for
them. It is the political event which provides a good avenue for citizens to assess the character as
well as the competency in resolving questions which are of transcendental importance or to
simply put, the salient issues which are of great importance to the society. It does not mean
however that this rhetorical event is an efficient and sole assessment to a candidates character.

Page 3 of 7

This paper rather simply suggests that holding presidential debates is an effective means of
filtering out candidates thoughts and ideas over an important issue and if such ideas are of worth
to the audiences who are to vote for them. It is also a great venue for citizens to clarify certain
platforms of a candidate which might be impossible to do during a political campaign or political
talk which is locally known in the Philippines as miting de avance and it is undeniable also that
upon holding such rhetorical event, the media will take on an important role in the midst of such
events for the audience to compare and contrast among the candidates which is exactly the goal
of holding campaign: to carry across the citizens and of the voting population their message and
their goals for the countrys future.
It has been identified that there are four specific situations in which voters find debates useful: (a)
when at least one of the candidates is relatively unknown, (b) when many voters are undecided,
(c) when the race appears close, and (d) when party allegiances are weak. Voters in a primary
campaign season, therefore, are more likely to be seeking information that introduces them to
potentially unknown candidates and information that helps clarify often subtle differences among
primary campaign rivals (Chaffee, 1978).5
A specific effect of holding presidential debates is for the citizens to gain assurance as well as to
confirm the citizens preference over a certain candidate of their choice. It has been held that one
primary reason why a citizen watches a presidential debate is to cheer for who they are already
rooting for. It has been an avenue for citizens to be assured that they have made the right choice
in supporting such candidate. It increases issue knowledge and additionally influence perception
of a candidates character. In some cases though, it may lead for a citizen to alter his/her
perceptions over a candidate which may lead him/her in changing the candidate he/she will
support for. It may be due to the mismatched or clashing principle presented during the debate
which is different from that of the viewing citizen.
Political debates also reinforce the opinions of citizens. Not only does it confirm a citizens
preference of candidates but it also reinforce a citizens voting behavior. It arouses an interest to
citizens watching the said political debates into immersing into a political discussion or discourse
among the other citizens and increase the interest and participation in the voting process which
may then reduce political cynicism. It can then be concluded that the aim of political debates
revolve mainly to encourage citizens to exercise their right to vote. It also helps those citizens
who are undecided on who to vote to make a decision based from ones assessment of candidates
in the debates. Similarly, several studies have been conducted which gave results stating that
exposure to candidates televised debates positively affects citizens' democratic attitudes and
behaviors. It was positively concurred that debate viewing also may activate a number of latent
civic and democratic tendencies, including enhancing citizens sense of political efficacy,
interest on the ongoing campaign and likelihood of voting; and encouraging citizens to seek
additional campaign information following debate viewing and greater participation in a
campaign through activities such as talking to others about preferred candidates. It may not
specifically alter the voting preference but then again the goal of every election process is to
engage every citizen to participate in it which is considerably also the main effect of conducting
presidential debates. In the United States, from which the presidential debates originate, it has

Page 4 of 7

been shown that such debates are actually not game changers however, it encourages the
American citizens to initiate discourse among one another through post-debate analysis. In
Indonesia however, the question as to when the presidential debates will be held is of prime
importance as it may efficiently affect peoples voting preference.
Over-all, although it may not alter specifically on the voting preference or that the presidential
debates may not prove to be an effective game changer, holding presidential debates proves to be
an effective tool in generating political discourse and citizen participation in the electoral process
in the countries who adopt presidential debates.
JUXTAPOSING PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES IN THE PHILIPPINE SETTING
Philippines is said to be the loudest democracy in Southeast Asia and trails of evidence of such
title is based on political campaigns held during election period where it has been likened to that
of a fiesta where campaigns utilized by political parties consist of plastering colorful campaign
paraphernalia and political parties with singing candidates. In the modern times, the same
methods and efforts are practiced by political parties as well as those independent candidates and
it has now invaded the media. From Villars Nakaligo ka na ba sa dagat ng basura to Aquinos
Daang Matuwid, Philippine campaigning revolves on catchy song tunes and witty taglines with
the aim of probably to become a household name. In political talks or as locally known miting de
avance of political parties, there is dancing and singing and to attract more audience a celebrity
is dragged into the scene which may lead into the conclusion that Philippine campaigning banks
on familiarity and popularity for Filipinos to vote for them. Through these types of campaigning
it may be noticed from a glance that candidates who have bigger budget than other candidates
also have a bigger chance in winning most especially in the modern times. Candidates promoted
themselves on television and radio and since it was seen as that being unfair to those candidates
who dont have a big budget to fund for campaigning, Free and Fair Elections Act (RA 9006)
came into view where it required broadcasting companies to allocate Comelec Time and Space
for candidates to promote themselves.
However, with all of these political advertisements in which the goal is mostly on familiarization
these methods of campaigning are not effective campaign methods. If candidates utilize such
methods in campaigning, how then will the citizens exact accountability for the candidates once
they are elected into office? If the candidates wants to be voted as well as to gain the trust from
the citizens then it would be better if we incorporate political debates into the election process
with the aim of filtering candidates as to who can really be that candidate who can provide the
interests of the society as well as bring the country to development.
This paper wants to offer a lot of reasons as to why presidential debates needs to be incorporated
into Philippine campaigning, however, this paper will specifically provide at least three reasons:
(1) Promote fair campaigning, (2) engage Filipino citizens in political discourse and to increase
voting participation, and to empower the right of Filipino citizens to information on matters of
public concern.
Fair Campaigning

Page 5 of 7

Televised political advertisements are now becoming one of the most popular campaign methods
used by politicians however it becomes disadvantageous to other candidates especially those who
dont have grand budget for campaigning. Although RA 9006 is being implemented to allocate
Comelec Time for candidates to equally campaign with the rest of the candidates, it is still not
enough considering that some candidates have better campaigning artillery than others. It is
inevitable that parties may be categorized into weak and strong parties and with Philippines
traditional campaigning methods it would be easy to determine who will win on campaigns since
in an environment with weak parties and a volatile public opinion, any politician with popularity
and money can easily campaign their way to success. Therefore, if presidential debates is to be
incorporated into Philippine campaigning methods then it would be a fairer method of
campaigning since popularity will not matter if a candidate will not be able to lay down a
platform worth the audiences attention. Through political debates, the citizens will be able to
compare and contrast the candidates, especially those of presidential candidates, on who has a
better insight in resolving an issue. Through this, the citizens will gain an insight as to the
aspirant candidates character as well as critical thinking.
Filipino voter participation, discourse and assertion of the right to information on matters of
public concern
Political cynicism has marred Philippine politics. Filipinos nowadays believe that the politicians
elected to governmental positions are all corrupt from the lowest to the highest position most
especially with the highest position which is that of the President. Rallies and picketing abound
asking the President from position and such to step down from their posts with reasons saying
that the person elected in said position is corrupt and such. There are even a lot of Filipinos who
express their disinterest to Philippine politics saying that the Government is swarmed with
corrupt politicians and that it is hopeless to hope that there is change. Who do you think then is
to be blamed with electing a President inefficient in the eyes of the Filipino? Its none other than
the Filipino people themselves who voted for that president. Now with the upcoming Philippine
elections, it is better for the citizens to properly and as wisely as they can to vote for candidates
of good reputation and of high level of competency in governing most especially of that of the
Presidential position so that there will be no regrets later. Instead of just basing reasons of voting
such and such candidates to governmental positions through advertisement campaigns and of
popular jingles, it would be better for the Filipino electorates to be as wise and as informed as
they can this time which is why this paper vehemently suggests of presidential debates to take
place this upcoming elections.
Yes, the COMELEC has made efforts in making presidential debates happen but what about the
next elections? More importantly, conducting presidential debates does not assure the Filipino
citizens that every presidential candidate will attend to such event just like what happened during
the 1992 elections where not every candidate participated into the debate. Therefore to ensure
that the Filipino citizens will have the chance to scrutinize the aspirant candidates as well the
candidates platforms, it is urgent and important to not only hold presidential debates but to make
it obligatory to every aspiring candidate to attend to such public discourse in that way, Filipino
people will have the chance to scrutinize, to probe, and to be elaborately censorious in choosing
the candidate to vote for. Moreover, it is actually a right for Filipino citizens to be as critical in

Page 6 of 7

their choice on who to vote because in the end, they will be the ones who will reap the benefits if
they elect a Presidential candidate who will carry out the welfare and the interests of the whole
Filipino citizenry. Furthermore, Article 3 Section 7 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution gives the
Filipinos the right to information on matters of public concern which reinforces the right to
suffrage. A well-informed Filipino voter as to the credentials, competence, and as to the
character of the candidates will be able to carefully choose the candidate who will hopefully
fulfill his campaign promise to the citizens and this is exactly what the Presidential Debate Bill
(Senate Bill no. 1797) hopes to achieve. Through presidential debates or as to political debates
per se, the Filipino citizens will be able to get the right information in choosing their future
leaders. As held in the influences and effects of debates above, holding presidential debates gives
a two-way benefit, not only are the electorates benefited but also the candidates themselves to
clearly relay their message and to have the opportunity to clear the allegations or the doubts
casted by the electorates to them.

CONCLUSION
It is now time for the Filipinos to step up the game of excellently choosing their future leaders. It
is time to abandon the bandwagon voting and independently assess the aspiring candidates most
especially with the candidates who are vying for the presidential position and one way of doing it
is to hold presidential debates not only through optional attendance but through obligatory
attendance to all the candidates where the Filipino citizens can scrutinize and form decisions on
their own on who to vote not because of the influence of family members or of mutual friends or
through ridiculous campaign advertisements but based upon their own judgments.

Page 7 of 7

REFERENCES:
1

Sanusi, B.O, et.al, Influence of Televised Presidential Debate on the Electoral Performance of
Candidates in the 2011 election in Lagos State
2

Dioquino,
Rose-an,
COMELEC
to
hold
presidential
debates
in
2016:
http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/532049/news/nation/comelec-to-hold-presidentialdebates-in-2016
3

Tevi, Troy, When and How did Presidential Debates Start:

http://www.washingtonian.com/blogs/capitalcomment/politics/when-and-how-did-presidentialdebates-start.php
4

Carlin, Diana Prentice, A Defense of the Debate in Presidential Debates, Journal of the
American Forensic Association Volume 25 (1989)
5

Mckinney, M., & Warner, B. (2013). Do Presidential debates matter? Examining a decade of
campaign debate effects (Vol. 49, pp. 238-258).
6

Isotalus, P. (n.d.). Election Debate is Always News.

Barbaros, C. (n.d). Exploring Televised Political Debates: Strategies and Issues (pp. 141-148)

Republic Act 9615: Rules and Regulations Implementing RA 9006

Eisner, K. (1993). Non-Major Party Candidates and Televised Presidential Debates: The Merits
of Legislative Inclusion (University of Pennsylvania, Vol. 141: 973)
10

Benjamin R. Warner & Mitchell S. McKinney (2013) To Unite and Divide:

The Polarizing Effect of Presidential Debates, Communication Studies, 64:5, 508-527
11

Senate Bill 1797: Presidential Debate Bill

12

Hedman, E., Sidel, J. (2000). Philippine Politics and Society in the Twentieth Century:
Colonial legacies, post-colonial trajectories (Routledge, London and New York)