Jürgen Habermas assigns civil society groups ‘to bear a good portion of the normative expectations, especially the burden of a normatively expected democratic genesis of law’. This article looks at concrete attempts in the Philippine constitution to provide structures so that these groups can carry out the role Habermas envisages for them, and examines whether such attempts are sufficient to enable said groups to intervene in the political process as effectively as he expects of them.
AratoA (1998) Procedural law and civil society: Interpreting the radical democratic paradigm. In: RosenfeldMAratoA (eds) Habermas on Law and Democracy: Critical Exchanges. Berkeley: University of California Press, 26–35.
2.
BartlettS (2002) Discursive democracy and a way of life. In: HahnLE (ed.) Perspectives on Habermas. Chicago: Open Court, 367–386.
3.
BrillantesAB (1997) State-civil relations in policy-making: Civil society and the executive. In: WuiMSLopezGS (eds) State-Civil Society Relations in Policy Making: Philippine Democracy Agenda. Quezon City: Third World Studies Center, 21–32.
4.
CarrollJJ (1994) Civil society revisited. Intersect8(6): 10–11.
5.
CarrollJJ (1997) The development of democracy: The Philippine experience. Manila Chronicle.
6.
ChevignyPG (2002) Law and politics in Between Facts and Norms. In: HahnLE (ed.) Perspectives on Habermas. Chicago: Open Court, 309–322.
7.
ClarkeG (1994) Non-governmental organizations and political institutionalization in the Philippines. Philippine Journal of Public Administration3: 197–223.
8.
ClarkeG (1998) The Politics of NGOs in South-East Asia: Participation and Protest in the Philippines. London: Routledge.
9.
CohenJAratoA (1992) Civil Society and Political Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
10.
De LeonH (2005) Textbook on the Philippine Constitution. Quezon City: Rex Publishing Company.
DryzekJS (1990) Discursive Democracy: Politics, Policy, and Political Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13.
EatonK (2003) Restoration or transformation? Trapos versus NGOs in the democratization of the Philippines. The Journal of Asian Studies62(2): 469–496.
14.
FerrerMC (1997) Civil society: An operation definition. In: DioknoMSI (ed.) Democracy and Citizenship in Filipino Political Culture: Philippine Democracy Agenda. Manila: Third World Studies Center, 5–15.
15.
HabermasJ (1996) Between Facts and Norms: Contribution to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy (trans. RehgW). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
16.
IszattNT (2004) Legislating for citizens’ participation in the Philippines. In: AntlövH. (eds) Citizen Participation in Local Governance: Experiences from Thailand, Indonesia, and the Philippines. Quezon City: Institute for Popular Democracy, 37–85.
17.
LeydetD (1997) Habermas’s decentered view of society and the problem of democratic legitimacy. Symposium1(1): 35–48.
18.
LinzJStepanA (1996) Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
19.
PaezPAV (1997) State-civil relations in policy-making: Focus on the legislative. In: WuiMALopezGS (eds) State-Civil Society Relations in Policy Making: Philippine Democracy Agenda. Quezon City: Third World Studies Center, 33–80.
20.
PascualD (1990) Organizing people power in the Philippines. Journal of Democracy1: 102–9.
21.
PuseyM (1987) Jürgen Habermas. Chichester: Ellis Horwood.
22.
RasmussenD (1994) How is valid law possible?Philosophy & Social Criticism20(1): 21–44.
23.
RodriguezAMG (2002) The limits to legislating democracy: A sketch for a study on the possibility of legislating discourse. Philippine Studies50(1): 93–112.
24.
Rosario-BraidFVictorianoRO (1987) NGOs and popular democracy. In: Rosario-BraidF (ed.) Development Issues: Constitutional Response. Manila: Calero Press, 53–56.
25.
SillimanGSNobleLG (1998) Introduction. In: SillimanGSNobleLG (eds) Organizing for Democracy: Non-Governmental Organizations, Civil Society, and the Philippine State. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 3–25.
26.
StaatsJL (2004) Habermas and democratic theory: The threat to democracy of unchecked corporate power. Political Research Quarterly57(4): 585–594.
27.
StaAna F (2002) Afterword: NGOs face bigger challenges. Public Policy6(2): 91–107.
28.
WuiMALopezGS (1997) State-civil society relations in policy-making. In: WuiMALopezGS (eds) State-Civil Society Relations in Policy-Making: Philippine Democracy Agenda. Quezon City: Third World Studies Center, 1–20.
