The Never Ending Democratization of the Philippines 91 Carolina Hernandez describes the country's security sector as being composed of 1) the core security forces (AFP and PNP, intelligence services and CAFGUs), 2) the security management and oversight bodies (the President as commanderin-chief, the national security council, national intelligence and coordination agency, congressional committees, executive departments (DND, DILG and ofce of the Presidential adviser on the peace process), justice and law enforcement bodies, and societal institutions (Hernandez 2009). Her study examined ve dimensions as part of the Security Sector Reform Index, namely: 1) principles of democratic governance; 2) extent of knowledge and awareness, and capacity of oversight institutions; 3) performance record of the security sector; 4) SSR programs and initiatives; and 5) contribution to conict prevention and peace building (Ibid). Her study shows that the core and oversight bodies of the security sector are vested with powers and duties. Their lack of material and competent manpower, however, prevent these bodies in the performance of their duties. The work of the legislative, executive, and judicial oversight bodies are below standard. “There are far too many instances of abuse, misuse, and lack of observance of applicable law, rules and regulations in the exercise of these powers” (Ibid.) B. Weak Horizontal Accountability and Employment of Delegative Authority It has been observed that the restoration of democratic institutions in our country's “redemocratization” has been supercial (Rebullida in Morada and Encarnacion Tadem 2006: 208). Indeed, contrary to the belief that presidential governments organize three co-equals and coordinate branches of government, the presidency is actually dominant vis-a-vis the Congress and the Supreme Court and other state bodies. O'Donnell describes the features of delegative democracy to include the direct election of the President by the people as the basis of his or her mandate to rule as he or she sees t. Given this mandate, the president is supposed to rise above partisan politics and unite the fractious groups that divide the country under his or her popular movement. In this context, the president is the epitome of the entire country who should be given free rein in formulating and implementing his or her program of government. The other branches of government like the legislature and the judiciary are mere obstacles to his or her mandate. O'Donnell declares that “accountability to such institutions appears as a mere impediment to the full authority that the President has been delegated to exercise” (O'Donnell in Diamond and Plattner 2009: 37). The strong president enables the executive to encroach on the authority of the Congress and the Supreme Court as well as the authority of other state bodies thus weakening horizontal accountability. Moreover, these same powers encourage employment of delegative authority and their abuse, thus placing the rule of law in jeopardy. In this section, the actual practice of separation of powers and system of checks and balances allowed the executive