NOVEMBER 20 — The Philippines is entering a moment of reckoning. A massive flood-control corruption scandal—now formally charged by the country’s ombudsman—has exposed the scale of governance failures rippling across Manila.
The first set of charges, filed against former lawmaker Elizaldy Co and several public-works officials, involves a “grossly” substandard road-dyke project in Oriental Mindoro. This project was meant to prevent flooding in one of the country’s most vulnerable provinces.
Instead, it became a symbol of how public money, public safety, and public trust were simultaneously compromised.
This scandal arrives at the worst possible time. The Philippines is set to assume the Asean Group Chairmanship in 2026 and host a full calendar of Asean and Related Summits.
These responsibilities require institutional confidence, political stability, and credible leadership.
Yet the unfolding corruption cases reveal systemic weaknesses that undermine Manila’s readiness to lead the region at such a crucial juncture.
The charges filed are not marginal offences. They include falsification of documents, improper use of public funds, and outright violations of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. These are serious breaches.
They cut to the heart of government accountability. In a country that endures some of the world’s deadliest typhoons and floods, corruption in flood-control infrastructure is not merely bureaucratic misconduct — it is a violation of the public’s right to safety and survival.
The political impact has been swift and fierce. Public anger is mounting. Trust is plunging. Oversight institutions are scrambling to restore order. Meanwhile, investigations are expanding, drawing in more current and former officials. The governance crisis is widening at precisely the moment when Manila needs to demonstrate stability and readiness.
The implications for Asean are immediate. The Chairmanship is not symbolic. It is the engine that steers regional dialogue, economic cooperation, and diplomatic engagements with major powers. Hosting Asean and Related Summits requires a stable bureaucracy, coherent coordination among ministries, predictable decision-making, and the ability to host delegations responsibly and securely. Corruption scandals jeopardise all of these.
If the Philippines is preoccupied with internal investigations, prosecutions, and institutional paralysis, it will struggle to fulfil the heavy diplomatic responsibilities the Chairmanship demands. A distracted chair cannot maintain Asean’s agenda. A weakened chair cannot effectively convene high-level dialogues. A compromised chair will struggle to reassure dialogue partners that Asean remains stable and cohesive.
The lesson from Thailand’s 2009 Asean Summit disaster hangs heavily over the region. When political unrest overran the Pattaya venue, forcing leaders to evacuate by helicopter, Asean’s credibility suffered. Thailand’s domestic turbulence spilled into the regional arena, showing how national instability can derail regional diplomacy in minutes. The Philippines must avoid a similar collapse.
The strategic implications go far deeper. The Philippines is a treaty ally of the United States, a key security partner of Japan, and an increasingly important actor for South Korea, Australia, India, Canada, and the European Union. All rely on Asean-led platforms to engage constructively with South-east Asia. A weak Philippine Chairmanship will slow these processes. It will impede discussions on maritime security, food security, climate resilience, digital regulation, cybersecurity, and supply-chain cooperation.
Japan and South Korea, which work closely with Asean through the East Asia Summit and Asean Plus Three frameworks, depend on stable Asean Chairs to anchor their regional engagement. The United States, which now sees the Philippines as a top strategic partner under its Indo-Pacific Strategy, will be concerned if domestic instability in Manila erodes the effectiveness of Asean-led diplomacy. If summit agendas stall or coordination collapses, it affects more than Asean — it affects the region’s entire strategic architecture.
Delay in ending corruption, therefore, is not just a domestic problem. It has regional consequences. Every month of hesitation undermines Manila’s institutional credibility. Every sign of impunity erodes confidence among Asean partners. Every escalation of scandal feeds the narrative that the Philippines cannot lead at a time when leadership is urgently needed.
To course-correct, Manila must act decisively. The corruption cases must be prosecuted transparently and without political interference. Oversight institutions must be empowered, not constrained. Public-spending mechanisms must be audited comprehensively. Government agencies must demonstrate that they can implement reforms with urgency, not reluctance.
Ending endemic corruption is not optional — it is existential. It is necessary for national credibility, regional leadership, and strategic trust. Without a firm crackdown, the Philippines risks becoming a compromised Asean Chair at a moment when Asean needs a strong one. The ongoing governance crisis threatens not only Manila’s domestic standing but also the effectiveness of the region’s diplomacy with major powers.
The Philippines stands before a crucial test. If it confronts corruption head-on, it can lead Asea with renewed legitimacy and confidence. If it delays, hesitates, or treats this scandal as routine politics, the consequences will be felt from Manila to Washington, Tokyo, Seoul, Brussels, and beyond.
The region is watching closely. The stakes for the Philippines — and for Asean — could not be higher.
*Phar Kim Beng is Professor of Asean Studies and Director, Institute of International and Asean Studies (IINTAS), International Islamic University of Malaysia. Luthfy Hamzah is a Research Fellow at IINTAS.
**This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
