As the 2025 midterm elections loom, discussions about governance and politics often focus on candidates and their platforms. However, beyond the politicians whom people vote for, there is another powerful force shaping the country’s direction: corporate backers and wealthy individuals who influence policies through campaign financing, lobbying, and business interests.
In the Philippines, major corporations and business tycoons play a significant role in elections. Campaigns are costly, and many candidates rely on funding from the private sector. This financial backing gives businesses a stake in government decisions, as elected officials may feel pressured to support policies favorable to their donors.
Beyond direct contributions, lobbying is also crucial. Corporations, industry groups, and influential business figures push for legislation that benefits their economic interests, often securing regulatory advantages, tax breaks, or large government contracts.
Observers point to several examples, one of which is the rise and fall of the Philippine Offshore Gaming Operators (POGOs). Initially praised for their economic benefits, these firms showed their true face, their operations linked to crime and corruption. Despite concerns, the government continued to defend them until escalating security issues led to an abrupt shutdown order by the Marcos administration in 2024.
Similarly, Chinese firms involved in Manila Bay reclamation projects, including the blacklisted China Communications Construction Company (CCCC), raised alarms over environmental and national security risks, leading to the suspension of multiple projects.
These cases highlight how corporate interests can drive policy decisions, sometimes at the expense of broader public welfare.
Some also cite the NBN-ZTE broadband deal as an example of how corporate and political interests can intertwine at the highest levels of government. The contract between the Philippine government and Chinese firm ZTE Corporation was marred by allegations of bribery, overpricing, and political favoritism. The scandal resulted in high-profile investigations and public outrage, showing how business influence can lead to corruption and the misallocation of public funds.
Countering excessive corporate influence requires stronger campaign finance laws, transparency measures, and public participation. Stricter limits on political donations, mandatory funding disclosures, and independent oversight of government contracts can curb undue influence.
Civil society and media play important roles in ensuring that economic power does not override democratic decision-making. While businesses will always shape governance, ensuring that policies serve the broader public interest remains key to a fair and functioning democracy.
