The Never Ending Democratization of the Philippines 81 is a public trust (O'Donnell 1998: 117). The strong president is able to engage in clientelism, corruption and patrimonialism. The vast powers of the executive enable him to encroach on the authority of the other branches and bodies of government. This paper acknowledges that accountability has three aspects—transparency, answerability, and controllability (Gloppen, Gargarella, and Skaar 2004: 1). Transparency and controllability are emphasized in this study. The aspect of answerability could be reinforced by transparency and controllability because the rigid standard of due process could be better served. Weak horizontal accountability leads to bad governance—opaque, unanswerable, and uncontrollable governance. This hinders the development of effective political institutions needed to address the country's chronic economic and social problems. Hence an emphasis of this study is to see how the constitutional principles of separation of powers and the system of checks and balances are practiced. Applicable laws implementing relevant provisions of the constitution will be looked into. Illustrative cases will be examined to nd out how constitutional principles have been modied in practice that consequently weakened horizontal accountability. In particular, the executive's military power and the power over the budget will be examined. The systemic reforms pushed by advocates of charter change need to be examined carefully. We must be aware of the consequences, most especially of the unintended ones, of the proposed fundamental revision of our charter. Hence, it is deemed in this study that the more prudent approach of incremental change through a more modest legislative agenda should be pursued instead. Recent developments show that litigation about fundamental issues concerning the boundaries of separation of powers is another feasible approach toward a more functional system of checks and balances. Analyzing the Impact of Executive Hegemony This paper argues that the strong position of the President or the executive hegemony relative to the legislature and the judiciary in the Presidential form of government weakens horizontal accountability and even threatens the very existence of this accountability such as in the case of executive coups (Diamond, Linz and Lipset, op.cit.: 39-42; also O'Donnell in Diamond and Plattner 1996: 94108). The strong President has military powers enabling him to rule by decree. Even in times when the executive is not exercising his military powers, his other powers enable him to encroach and diminish the authority of other state bodies which are unable to enforce accountability (O'Donnell 1998: 120). His other powers are not only legislative powers (see Croissant 2003: 68-98 for the analysis of his legislative power), but include the power over the budget. These powers have made the President's authority nearly ubiquitous in the entire state apparatus. The difculty of impeachment and the immunity from suits have made him almost above the law. Moreover, the President and his political