Conclusion

Formal institutional mechanisms do exist in Philippine laws and legal institu­tions. There is, however, a chasm between these oft-affirmed democratic pro­cedures, on the one hand, and the realities of Philippine life, on the other.

The liberal provisions in the Constitution yield to the daily, incessant pressure from power groups, including the influential Catholic Church. Equality before the law, respect for liberty and privacy and separation of church and state are made to �walk... in synodal cadence'^[1240] with doctrines of the dominant church, which ironically uses these very same provisions to justify why the law must reflect its teachings.

The Constitution says one thing and the Government can simply do something else as it has in the Manila contraceptive ban, despite the express constitutional grant of entitlement to spouses and individuals. Similarly, the legal preference for the husband's decisions over those of the wife in the administration of marital property and in the exercise of parental authority continues despite the consti­tutional declaration of equality before the law of men and women. Mercifully, these are among the laws discriminatory to women that Congress must amend or repeal within three years from the coming into effect of the Magna Carta of Women.^[1241]

There, too, is hope in the hortatory language of more recent legislation that elaborates on the values embodied in the Constitution. This, together, with the introduction of institutional mechanisms, education and the greater role given to civil society might just be what is needed to ensure that soon, when we speak of the Philippines as a democratic state and of sovereignty residing in the people, these will refer to citizens, women and men alike, enjoying the fruits of a democracy without discrimination.