Corruption in the Philippines

The Philippines suffers from widespread corruption, which developed during the Spanish colonial period. According to GAN Integrity's Philippines Corruption Report updated May 2020, the Philippines suffers from many incidents of corruption and crime in many aspects of civic life and in various sectors. Such corruption risks are rampant throughout the state's judicial system, police service, public services, land administration, and natural resources.

Examples of corruption in the Philippines include graft, bribery, cronyism, nepotism, impunity, embezzlement, extortion, racketeering, fraud, tax evasion,vote buying, lack of transparency, lack of sufficient enforcement of laws and government policies, and consistent lack of support for human rights.

Researchers have proposed that corruption and poor governance as among the causes of poverty in the Philippines.

The Philippines signed the United Nations Convention against Corruption on December 9, 2003, with the Senate ratifying the convention on November 6, 2006. In 2012, the Senate declared that National Anticorruption Day shall be celebrated yearly on December 9.

Perceived decline and resurgence
Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index scores a list of countries on a scale from 0 ("highly corrupt") to 100 ("very clean"), then ranks them by score. The country ranked first is perceived to have the most honest public sector. In 2012, President Benigno Aquino said that, according to Transparency International, the factors driving the progress in the Philippines' Corruption Perception Index scores at that time were improved government service and reduced red tape. Between 2012 and 2014, the Philippines's score rose from 34 to its highest-ever score of 38.

A November 2020 Transparency International survey of nearly 20,000 citizens from 17 countries, surveyed mostly between June and September 2020, showed that Filipinos have more confidence in their government's tackling of corruption than their Asian neighbors, although they also believe corruption in government remains a big problem. 64% of Philippine respondents thought that corruption had decreased in the last 12 months, while 24% believed that it had increased. This was better than the average across Asia, where only 32% believed that corruption had decreased and 38% said that it had increased.

In contrast, Transparency International reported the Philippines as a "significant decliner" in score for the region in 2021 and 2022; the country dropped to a score of 33 in those years from its 2014 high of 38. The 2023 Corruption Perceptions Index scored the Philippines at 34. When ranked by score, the Philippines ranked 115th among the 180 countries in the 2023 Index. For comparison with worldwide scores, the best score was 90 (ranked 1), the worst score was 11 (ranked 180), and the average score was 43. For comparison with regional scores, the highest score among Asia Pacific countries was 87, the lowest score was 15 and the average score was 45.

Plunder, graft, and malversation
The Anti-Plunder Law (Republic Act 7080) was signed into law after the dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos was toppled in the 1986 People Power Revolution. The law was filed in the Senate by Senator Jovito Salonga and in the House of Representatives by Representative Lorna Verano-Yap. The measure was signed into law by President Corazon Aquino in 1991. Salonga said that previous laws against corruption "were clearly inadequate to cope with the magnitude of the corruption and thievery committed during the Marcos years".

In 1997, the first plunder case was filed against tax official Dominga Manalili. She and two others were convicted of plunder in 2001 by the Quezon City Regional Trial Court for diverting P260 million of tax payments to unauthorized bank accounts.

In 2001, former President Joseph Estrada and incumbent San Juan Mayor Jinggoy Estrada became the first elected officials to be charged with plunder. Joseph Estrada was accused of pocketing P4 billion in jueteng bribes and excise taxes from tobacco. He was convicted of plunder by the Sandiganbayan anti-graft court in 2007 and later pardoned by President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.

In 2012, the Philippine Office of the Ombudsman filed a P366-million plunder case against Arroyo over the alleged misuse of intelligence funds assigned to the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office. In 2013, Arroyo and Janet Lim Napoles were charged with plunder over the Malampaya fund scam.

In 2014, incumbent senators Bong Revilla, Jinggoy Estrada, and Juan Ponce Enrile along with Janet Lim Napoles were charged with plunder before the Sandiganbayan for allegedly pocketing kickbacks in the pork barrel scam.

As of 2016, there have been 33,772 cases of corruption filed before the Sandiganbayan. Of these, 10,094 are malversation cases and 7,968 are graft cases.

Stolen wealth of the Marcos family
The total amount of the fortune that the Marcos family stole during the dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos is estimated at $10 billion. The Supreme Court of the Philippines has issued three separate rulings ordering the Marcoses to return the wealth stolen from the country.

Corruption in the police service and armed forces
The Police System of the Philippines poses a high risk of corruption, with the Philippines National Police (PNP) considered to be one of the most corrupt institutions within the country. There are several reports of national police officers and members of the military engaging in criminal activities such as extortion, corruption and involvement in local rackets. Private businesses also report that they cannot solely rely on the support of the police and half of them choose to pay for private security.

According to CNN Philippines, Police Commissioner Sombero was under investigation in a corruption case for allegedly facilitating a PHP50 million bribe from gambling tycoon Jack Lam, who tried to bribe immigration authorities to release approximately 1,300 Chinese nationals who were working in his resorts illegally.

Corruption in the judicial system
Corruption in the Philippine judicial system is also a major problem. Bribery and irregular payments in return for favorable judicial decisions are quite common. Although judicial officials are independent by law, rich and powerful groups and individuals wield control and influence over the judicial system and influence the outcomes of civil and criminal proceedings. Financial investment dispute often take an unnecessarily long time due to staffing shortages, lack of resources, and corruption in the court system. The low salaries of judicial officials help exacerbate the problem of bribery in exchange for favors. The judiciary is also criticized for making non-transparent and biased judicial decisions.

P6 million bribery case
On May 24, 2024, the National Bureau of Investigation arrested a Pasay City Regional Trial Court, Branch 108, employee In flagrante delicto accepting a P6 million bribe for a favorable ruling in a civil case. The suspect confessed that his acts were upon the “Presiding Judge” Albert T. Cansino's order. The case originated from an anonymous extortion complaint emailed to the Judicial Integrity Board.

CJ Alexander Gesmundo directed Office of the Court Administrator Raul B. Villanueva to submit a report and recommendation on May 27.

In the administrative proceeding docketed as "A.M. No. 24-05-21-SC", the High Tribunal ordered a 90 calendar days preventive suspension of Judge Albert T. Cansino and OIC, Acting Court clerk Mariejoy P. Lagman. Both were entrapped of bribery with the use of five P 1,000 marked bills and P 6 million boodle money. “In addition to the money, a copy of the order bearing the judge’s signature on the civil case was also confiscated,” the SC confirmed.

In the separate criminal investigation, the NBI Cybercrime Division, Chief Jeremy C. Lotoc said that the cases will be filed with the DOJ against Clerk Lagman for graft, direct bribery, and violation of the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees. The Department of Justice in a Resolution dated May 24 charged Mariejoy Lagman for the crimes of direct bribery (Article 210, Revised Penal Code), including violations of Section 3(b), R.A. No. 3019, and Section 7(d), R.A. 6713. Judge Cansino, however, will be subject to the regular preliminary hearing under the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure.

Political nepotism and cronyism
The Philippine political arena is mainly arranged and operated by families or alliances of families, rather than organized around the voting for political parties. Called the padrino system, one gains favor, promotion, or political appointment through family affiliation (nepotism) or friendship (cronyism), as opposed to one's merit. The padrino system has been the source of many controversies and corruption in the Philippines.

According to the Civil Service Commission (CSC), nepotism is a form of corruption or abuse of authority that violates Article IX (B), Section 2 (2) of the Constitution that states that "Appointments in the civil service shall be made only according to merit and fitness to be determined, as far as practicable, and, except to positions which are policy-determining, primarily confidential, or highly technical, by competitive examination." Nepotism favors a few individuals and compromises fairness in the hiring and promotion process in government.