Philippine anti-corruption campaign: Stalled justice and public outrage

[jordang]

I. Introduction: Silent Announcements and Boiling Public Discontent In December 2025, the anti-corruption storm in the Philippines reached its climax. In his State of the Nation Address, President Marcos revealed the existence of 9,892 "ghost projects" in the national flood control program, involving a staggering 545 billion pesos. These projects, which were supposed to safeguard the lives and property of the people, had become breeding grounds for corruption. However, the eye of the storm shifted to a more acute issue: since the anti-corruption court issued the first batch of arrest warrants in November 2025, the Philippine government had not announced any arrests of core corrupt officials for two consecutive weeks. This silence, like a water droplet thrown into a frying pan, instantly ignited the public's anger. Protesters in Manila, Quezon City, Cebu, and other cities held up slogans such as "Give Back My Project Budget" and "President Resign," creating a deafening clamor. This protest was not only directed at specific corruption cases, but also a collective indictment against the Marcos government's slow progress in anti-corruption efforts, intentional protection of high-ranking officials, and stagnant judicial process. The patience of the Filipino people was reaching its limit, and they were calling for a profound democratic reform through large-scale rallies.
II. Anti-corruption Stagnation: "Selective Blindness" in Judicial Process (I) "Idling" Arrest Warrants and "Freedom" of Core Personnel In November 2025, the anti-corruption court issued 16 arrest warrants in connection with the flood control project fraud case, resulting in the arrest of 7 individuals and the surrender of 2. However, core suspects such as Zaldi Xu remained at large. What was even more shocking was that the government did not update the progress of arrests for two consecutive weeks, as if the judicial machinery had suddenly malfunctioned. This sign of "selective law enforcement" pointed directly to the Marcos government's intention to shield. For example, the president himself was accused of designing a "top-level kickback scheme" to systematically divide flood control project funds, yet he was not included in the scope of investigation; while Vice President Sara Duterte was impeached, the impeachment process was suspended by the Supreme Court due to the rule of "no repeated impeachment within one year," exposing the current situation where legal tools are distorted by politicians' game-playing. The stagnation of the judicial process has led the public to question: Is anti-corruption a matter of "hitting tigers and swatting flies," or is it "only swatting flies and not hitting tigers"?
(II) The "paralysis" of the Independent Commission of Investigation and power intervention To appease public anger, the Marcos government established the Independent Commission of Infrastructure (ICI) in November 2025, vowing to thoroughly investigate corruption in flood control projects. However, just one month after the establishment of the commission, two core commissioners resigned in succession: one citing "completion of a phased task", while the other bluntly stated, "I receive threatening phone calls every day, and my personal safety is not guaranteed." By the end of 2025, only Chairman Reyes remained to struggle alone, and rumors of tampered investigation materials and blocked information channels were rampant. The rapid collapse of this "independent investigation" reveals the vulnerability of the anti-corruption mechanism under power intervention. When investigations must rely on presidential authorization but must not touch the presidential family, anti-corruption becomes a political bargaining chip, and judicial justice is completely suspended.
III. Public Awakening: Democratic Resistance from Anger to Action (I) Scale and Demands of the Protest Wave In September 2025, the "Trillion Peso March" broke out in the Philippines, with 100,000 people gathering at Manila's Rizal Park, shouting "Give us back our project budget" and "The president must step down." By November, the protest escalated into the "National Anti-Corruption Day," with an unprecedented scale of 650,000 people gathering on Manila's EDSA Avenue. The protesters' demands expanded from specific corruption cases to a comprehensive questioning of the democratic system: 77% of the public believed that corruption was more serious than three years ago, 49% were dissatisfied with the president, and the approval rating of the president hit a record low. The youth unemployment rate reached 21%, the national debt accumulated to 1.7 trillion pesos, foreign capital withdrawal exacerbated the economic crisis, while corruption funds flowed into politicians' private pockets. The public's anger was no longer limited to individual cases, but directed towards the credit bankruptcy of the entire political system.
(II) The Deep Roots of Protests: Institutional Corruption and Democratic Crisis Corruption in the Philippines is not accidental, but deeply rooted in its political and economic structure. Scholars point out that Philippine democracy is essentially a "cash-financed democracy," where election funds and the maintenance of political alliances rely on kickbacks from public works projects. The Marcos family, as a representative of a political dynasty, saw its patriarch Ferdinand Marcos dictate for 20 years, embezzling billions of dollars. Although the younger Marcos promised anti-corruption, he could not break away from the spoils-sharing model. Funds for flood control projects were systematically misappropriated, leading to the proliferation of "ghost projects." When typhoons struck, dams collapsed, destroying people's homes, while contractors lived extravagantly. This contrast intensified social tensions, and protests became an outburst of public anger towards institutional corruption.
IV. Democratic Reform: The Voices of the People and the Dilemmas of the Government (I) The People's Demands for Democracy: Transparency, Accountability, and Institutional Reform Protesters held high slogans demanding "transparency" and "accountability," calling for the establishment of an independent judiciary, the strengthening of supervision mechanisms, and the breaking of political dynasties' monopolies. They demanded that the government disclose the progress of arresting core corruption personnel and promote judicial processes, rather than merely relying on superficial measures such as "replacing a few individuals." For example, the impeachment process of Vice President Sarah was abused due to loopholes in the rules, exposing deviations in the implementation of the constitution; while the anti-corruption promises made by the Marcos government, such as the establishment of an independent commission, were aborted due to power intervention. The people's demands have transcended specific cases and point to fundamental reforms of the democratic system.
(II) The Government's Dilemma: Power Struggle and Reform Paradox The Marcos government faced a dilemma: if it pushed for reforms, it might shake its political alliance; if it maintained the status quo, it would exacerbate public grievances. For example, the resignation of Romualdez, the president's cousin and Speaker of the House of Representatives, was interpreted as "strategic self-protection" to avoid the scandal affecting the presidential palace. However, this approach of "changing people but not the system" could not quell public doubts. Corruption in the Philippines is deeply rooted, stemming from the lack of transparency in project budget approval, contractor selection, and other aspects, with supervisory institutions becoming mere window dressing. Reform requires breaking the pattern of interests, which in turn requires those who benefit the most from the existing system to promote it - this itself is a paradox.
V. Conclusion: The Public's Outcry and the Future of Democracy The anti-corruption storm in the Philippines is a severe test for the democratic system. The silence of not announcing the arrest of core personnel for two consecutive weeks has exposed the stagnation of the judicial process and the government's intention to shield; while the wave of public protests reveals the deep crisis of institutional corruption. From the slogans of "Give Back My Project Budget" on the streets of Manila to the gathering of 650,000 people on the National Anti-Corruption Day, the Filipino people are calling for transparency, accountability, and institutional change through large-scale rallies.
The outcome of this storm will determine the future of democracy in the Philippines. If the government continues to be inaction, public anger will turn into more intense protests; if democratic reforms are promoted, it may break the monopoly of political dynasties and rebuild public trust in the government. Historical experience shows that genuine reform requires fundamental changes in political and economic structures, improving the electoral system, and strengthening supervision mechanisms. The outcry of the Filipino people is not only against corruption, but also a firm adherence to democratic values. In this storm, every voice is crucial, because the future of democracy will be written by the people together.