The comparison is useful precisely because it shows that frequent constitutional change is not the cause of instability so much as a symptom of unresolved struggles over political power. Thailand has had about 20 constitutions/charters since 1932, many after coups; the Philippines has kept its 1987 Constitution essentially unchanged for over 35 years, yet both remain politically volatile. What Thailand’s churn shows Thailand’s repeated rewrites were often attempts by competing forces—military, monarchy-aligned elites, elected governments, and mass movements—to lock in a favorable political settlement. The 1997 “People’s Constitution,” the 2007 post-coup charter, and the 2017 military-era constitution each embodied different rules, but none created durable democratic legitimacy. In other words, Thailand changed the **rules** frequently, but the underlying conflict—over who controls elected government, the military, and unelected institutions—remained unresolved. The 1997 order ended in ...
The Philippines does not lack talent, young people, entrepreneurs, natural resources, or policy ideas. Its deeper problem is that the country often struggles to turn plans, budgets, and reforms into reliable public services, productive jobs, resilient infrastructure, and long-term national capability. The visible crises—floods, blackouts, corruption scandals, inflation, debt, and political instability—are symptoms of a larger system. At the center is a governance-and-accountability gap: public money is allocated, agencies announce programs, projects begin, but the results too often fail to reach the people who need them. The core failure: a capability gap The Philippines’ most dangerous hidden failure mode is not simply corruption or debt. It is the difficulty of converting public spending into durable capability. The Philippine Institute for Development Studies argues that the country’s development constraints come not mainly from a lack of policies or resources, but from fragmented i...