Pulse Asia Research, Inc. is pleased to share with you some findings on the Performance and Trust Ratings of the Top National Government Officials and Key Government Institutions from the September 2016 Ulat ng Bayan national survey. We request you to assist us in informing the public by disseminating this information.

The survey fieldwork was conducted from September 25 – October 1, 2016 using face-to-face interviews.

Among the key developments which dominated the headlines in the days leading up to the fieldwork for this survey and during the actual conduct of the interviews are the following:

1. The initial testimony before the Senate Committee on Justice and Human Rights of Mr. Edgar Matobato, an alleged hitman belonging to the so-called Davao Death Squad, wherein he linked President Rodrigo R. Duterte to the extrajudicial killing of about 1,000 criminal suspects and political opponents of the President while he was serving as mayor of Davao City from 1988 to 2013;

2. President Duterte’s statement that he does not know Mr. Matobato personally; the denial made by Davao City Paolo Duterte that he ordered the killing of a businessman as alleged by the hitman; and the remarks of Presidential Spokesperson Ernesto Abella that the President and his administration continue to be committed to their anti-drug campaign amidst various controversies;

3. The concern expressed by various international bodies, primarily the United Nations (UN),  and foreign leaders over the increasing number of drug-related deaths in the country since President Duterte assumed office on 30 June 2016; groups such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have called for an investigation into the serious allegations against President Duterte; the invitation extended by the President to leaders of the UN and the European Union to a debate on human rights and extrajudicial killings even as he maintained that the country’s police and military forces are not involved in the drug-related killings;

4. The apology issued by President Duterte to the Jewish communities around the world when he referred to the Holocaust and Adolf Hitler in connection with his ongoing campaign against drugs; the President clarified that he mentioned Hitler only because some of his critics have likened him to the Nazi leader as a result of his approach to his war on drugs;

5. The removal of Senator Leila de Lima as chairperson of the Senate Justice and Human Rights Committee which is looking into the extrajudicial killings in the country which have occurred since President Duterte took office; Senator Richard Gordon assumed the post left by Senator de Lima; President Duterte’s vow to continue his campaign to ‘kill all drug lords’ no matter what the findings of the Committee will be;

6. The investigation at the House of Representatives into the proliferation of drug syndicates and illegal drugs at the National Bilibid Prisons (NBP) as well as the reported links of Senator de Lima, while she was Justice Secretary, to drug lords who supposedly gave her millions in campaign funds for her senatorial bid in the May 2016 elections; Senator de Lima  said she will not attend the hearing which, she claimed, is only being done to persecute her publicly;

7. The release of another list by President Duterte which contains the names of 40 local judges and some Chinese nationals who are reported to have links to illegal drugs; prior to this, the President stated that he would need an extension of six (6) months on the deadline of three (3) to six (6) months he imposed on himself to deal with the problem of illegal drugs in the country, the extent of which he was not aware of until he became president;

8. The approval in principle by the House Committee on Transportation of the proposal to grant emergency powers to President Duterte to enable him to address the worsening traffic situation in Metro Manila while at the Senate, the Committee on Public Services conducted its hearings on the matter and is set to come up with a draft bill in November 2016;

9. The accusation made by Senator Alan Peter Cayetano against the Liberal Party (LP)  to the effect that the Senate testimony of Mr. Matobato is part of a grand plan to oust President Duterte and have Vice-President Maria Leonor G. Robredo assume the presidential post; similarly, Communications Secretary Martin Andanar said he has heard unverified reports regarding a plan by some Filipino-Americans to oust President Duterte by January 2017; the Vice-President and the LP assured the public that they continue to support the reforms being initiated by the current administration;

10. The commemoration of the signing of Presidential Decree (PD) 1081 by then President Ferdinand E. Marcos, with various protest actions being held in different parts of the country; President Duterte said he is not inclined to declare martial law in order to help resolve serious problems in the country such as illegal drugs;

11. The passing away of former Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago on 29 September 2016 after losing her battle against lung cancer; and

12. In the economic front, the depreciation of the local currency against the American dollar which, according to Budget Secretary Benjamin Diokno, is due to the strengthening of the dollar as a result of the impending increase in interest rates by the US Federal Reserve System and not because of several controversial pronouncements made by President Duterte; and the slippage in the country’s rating in the Global Competitiveness Report by 10 notches.

As in our previous Ulat ng Bayan surveys, this nationwide survey is based on a sample of 1,200 representative adults 18 years old and above. It has a ± 3% error margin at the 95% confidence level.  Subnational estimates for each of the geographic areas covered in the survey (i.e., Metro Manila, the rest of Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao) have a ± 6% error margin, also at 95% confidence level. Those interested in further technical details concerning the survey’s questionnaire and sampling design may request Pulse Asia Research in writing for fuller details, including copies of the pre-tested questions actually used.

Pulse Asia Research’s pool of academic fellows takes full responsibility for the design and conduct of the survey, as well as for analyses it makes based on the survey data. In keeping with our academic nature, no religious, political, economic, or partisan group influenced any of these processes.  Pulse Asia Research undertakes Ulat ng Bayan surveys on its own without any party singularly commissioning the research effort.

For any clarification or questions, kindly contact Dr. Ana Maria Tabunda, Research Director of Pulse Asia Research at 09189436816 or Ronald D. Holmes, Pulse Asia Research President at 09189335497 or via email (ronald.holmes@gmail.com).

[divider /]

Three (3) of the top five (5) officials of the Philippine government receive majority approval and trust ratings in September 2016

 Most Filipinos approve of the quarterly performance of President Rodrigo R. Duterte (86%), Vice-President Maria Leonor G. Robredo (66%), and Senate President Aquilino L. Pimentel III (61%). Appreciation is the plurality sentiment toward the work done by Supreme Court Chief Justice Maria Lourdes A. Sereno (46%). As for House of Representatives Speaker Pantaleon D. Alvarez, he registers virtually the same approval and indecision ratings (43% versus 42%). These officials’ disapproval ratings range from 3% for President Duterte to 11% for Supreme Court Chief Justice Maria Lourdes A. Sereno. With regard to indecision, it is most marked toward the performance of House Speaker Alvarez (42%) and least manifest in the case of President Duterte (11%). (Please refer to Table 1.)

Across geographic areas and socio-economic classes, both President Duterte and Vice-President Robredo post majority approval ratings (80% to 93% and 82% to 88% for the President and 58% to 69% and 65% to 71% for the Vice-President, respectively). Senate President Pimentel, meanwhile, has majority approval scores in most geographic areas (59% to 65%) and all socio-economic groupings (59% to 74%). The exception is in the Visayas where the lawmaker registers a near majority approval figure (49%). (Please refer to Table 2.)

The only majority approval rating of House Speaker Alvarez is given by Mindanaoans (63%). On the other hand, the lawmaker records nearly the same approval and indecision figures in the other geographic areas (33% to 40% versus 39% to 49%) and in every socio-economic class (40% to 45% versus 39% to 42%). In Supreme Court Chief Justice Sereno’s case, her only majority approval score is registered in Mindanao as well (51%). Indecision toward the latter’s work is the predominant sentiment in Class ABC (51%). Half of those in Class E (50%) have a positive assessment of the Supreme Court Chief Justice’s quarterly performance. The latter posts almost the same approval and indecision ratings in the other geographic areas (42% to 46% versus 36% to 42%) and in Class D (46% versus 39%).

In terms of trust ratings, President Duterte (86%), Vice-President Robredo (65%), and Senate President Pimentel (55%) are all trusted by most Filipinos. Virtually the same trust and indecision figures are obtained by House Speaker Alvarez (41% versus 45%) and Supreme Court Chief Justice Sereno (44% versus 42%). The distrust figures of these government officials vary from 3% for President Duterte to 10% for Vice-President Robredo, House Speaker Alvarez, and Supreme Court Chief Justice Sereno. Indecision levels range from 11% for President Duterte to 45% for House Speaker Alvarez. (Please refer to Table 3.)

Trust is the majority sentiment toward President Duterte (81% to 96% and 85% to 88%, respectively), Vice-President Robredo (55% to 72% and 60% to 72%, respectively), and Senate President Pimentel (51% to 62% and 54% to 62%, respectively). As for House Speaker Alvarez and Supreme Court Chief Justice Sereno, their only majority trust scores are granted by Mindanaoans (59% to 53%, respectively). Additionally, House Speaker Alvarez receives almost the same trust and indecision scores in the Visayas (32% versus 42%) and each socio-economic class (39% to 42% versus 42% to 46%). At least half of those in the rest of Luzon (50%) and Metro Manila (56%) are unable to say whether they trust or distrust the lawmaker. On the other hand, most of those in Class ABC (52%) are undecided about the trustworthiness of Supreme Court Chief Justice Sereno while practically half of Metro Manilans (49%) express the same sentiment. In the rest of Luzon, the Visayas, and Classes D and E, basically the same trust ratings and indecision figures are posted by the Supreme Court Chief Justice (41% to 45% versus 37% to 47%). (Please refer to Table 4.)

Public opinion concerning the trustworthiness of President Duterte, Vice-President Robredo, and Senate President Pimentel are essentially unchanged during the period July to September 2016. Even the decrease in the President’s trust rating (-5 percentage points) and the similar gain in the Senate President’s own trust score (+5 percentage points) are deemed marginal in nature in light of the survey’s overall error margin of +/- 3 percentage points. (Please refer to Table 5.)

In contrast, there are notable changes in the ratings of House Speaker Alvarez and Supreme Court Chief Justice Sereno. Both of these officials experience improvements in their trust ratings (+17 and +9 percentage points, respectively). Additionally, indecision toward House Speaker Alvarez’s trustworthiness eases at this time (-13 percentage points) while distrust in Supreme Court Chief Justice Sereno becomes less pronounced during this period (-9 percentage points).

Across geographic areas and socio-economic classes, hardly any changes are recorded by President Duterte, Vice-President Robredo, and Senate President Pimentel. The only exceptions are the decline in the Vice-President’s indecision figure in Mindanao (-14 percentage points) and the increase in the indecision rating of the Senate President in Metro Manila (+13 percentage points). Meanwhile, House Speaker Alvarez enjoys gains in his trust ratings in most geographic areas and socio-economic classes (+15 to +25 and +16 to +20 percentage points, respectively). Conversely, the latter’s indecision ratings in practically all geographic areas and socio-economic groupings go down (-14 to -19 and -13 to -16 percentage points, respectively). As for Supreme Court Chief Justice Sereno, her trust ratings go up in the Visayas, Mindanao, and Class E (+13 to +15 percentage points) and her distrust ratings decline in Classes D and E (-9 to -15 percentage points).

All three (3) key government institutions enjoy majority approval ratings but only two (2) of them have majority trust scores; these institutions’ performance ratings remain virtually constant between July and September 2016 but there are significant changes in their trust figures during this period

The Senate, the House of Representatives, and the Supreme Court enjoy small majority approval ratings in September 2016 (51% to 58%). These entities also register essentially the same overall indecision figures (34% to 39%) and disapproval scores (8% to 10%). The Senate posts majority approval scores in every geographic area (52% to 65%) and Classes D and E (57% to 61%) while it obtains almost the same approval and indecision figures in Class ABC (46% versus 42%). As for the House of Representatives, it registers majority approval ratings in the Visayas (53%), Mindanao (63%), and Classes D and E (52% to 55%). In Metro Manila, the rest of Luzon, and Class ABC, the Lower House posts nearly the same approval and indecision scores (38% to 48% versus 42% to 45%). In the case of the Supreme Court, it has majority approval ratings in the Visayas (58%), Mindanao (54%), and Class E (53%). Half of Metro Manilans (50%) and those in Class D (50%) are appreciative of the Supreme Court’s work while the judicial body records basically the same approval and indecision ratings in the rest of Luzon and Class ABC (45% to 46% versus 44% to 45%). (Please refer to Table 6.)

These figures recorded by these key government institutions at the national level and across geographic areas and socio-economic classes are virtually the same as those obtained by Pulse Asia Research in July 2016. The only exceptions to this observation are the increase in the indecision rating of the House of Representatives in Metro Manila (+14 percentage points) and the rise in the Supreme Court’s indecision figure in Class D (+8 percentage points). (Please refer to Table 7.)

The predominant sentiment toward the Senate and the House of Representatives is one of trust (57% and 52%, respectively). Half of Filipinos (50%) also trust the Supreme Court. Levels of indecision regarding these institutions’ trustworthiness range from 35% for the Senate and 43% for the Supreme Court. All these institutions have single-digit distrust ratings (6% to 7%). Between November 2014 and September 2016, these institutions experience improvements in their national trust ratings (+9 to +20 percentage points). Conversely, their distrust scores go down during this period (-8 to -9 percentage points). Indecision about the trustworthiness of the Senate and the House of Representatives eases at this time (-13 and -10 percentage points, respectively). (Please refer to Tables 8 to 9.)

 Majority trust ratings are enjoyed by the Senate in each geographic area (52% to 70%) and Classes D and E (57% to 61%). Half of those in Class ABC (50%) cannot say if they trust or distrust the Senate. Meanwhile, the Lower House posts majority trust scores in the Visayas (52%), Mindanao (65%), and Classes D and E (52% to 53%) but it has basically the same trust and indecision figures in Metro Manila (46% versus 45%), the rest of Luzon (46% versus 45%), and Class ABC (41% versus 46%). In the case of the Supreme Court, most of those in Metro Manila (52%), the Visayas (56%), Mindanao (54%), and Class E (51%) express trust in the judicial body. Half of those in the rest of Luzon (50%) express indecision about the latter’s trustworthiness while half of those in Class D (50%) trust the Supreme Court. Essentially the same of those in Class ABC either trust the latter (49%) or are ambivalent regarding its trustworthiness (43%). (Please refer to Table 8.)

Gains in trust are recorded by the Senate in all geographic areas (+13 to +33 percentage points) and Classes D and E (+22 to +23 percentage points). Similarly, the House of Representatives enjoys improvements in its trust ratings in the rest of Luzon (+15 percentage points), Mindanao (+34 percentage points), and Classes D and E (+18 to +19 percentage points). The only significant increase in the Supreme Court’s trust rating occurs in Class D (+9 percentage points). With regard to indecision about these entities’ trustworthiness, it eases in the Visayas (-17 percentage points), Mindanao        (-29 percentage points), and Classes D and E (-13 to -16 percentage points) in the case of the Senate. As for the Lower House, ambivalence toward its trustworthiness becomes less pronounced in the Visayas (-14 percentage points), Mindanao (-28 percentage points), and Class D (-11 percentage points). The only other notable movements during this period are the decline in the distrust ratings of the Senate in the rest of Luzon (-13 percentage points) and of the House of Representatives and Supreme Court in Class D (both at -8 percentage points). (Please refer to Table 9.)