Will Philippines’ new bill entrench the political dynasties it aims to curb?

A long-delayed bill meant to curb political dynasties in the Philippines – where powerful families dominate elected offices from Congress to local government – has moved closer to becoming law, but critics say the measure could end up protecting the clans it claims to restrain. The House of Representatives approved the measure in early June, a rare advance for an anti-dynasty law, nearly four decades after the 1987 constitution directed Congress to define and prohibit political dynasties. Lawmakers have never enacted the national legislation needed to give that provision force. The new bill was sponsored by House Speaker Faustino “Bojie” Dy III and House Majority Leader Ferdinand Alexander “Sandro” Marcos, President Ferdinand Marcos Jnr’s eldest son – both members of prominent political clans. It was pushed through a chamber dominated by political families. House Bill 8389 bars close relatives – including parents, children, siblings, grandparents and grandchildren – from simultaneously holding elective posts in the same jurisdiction, such as governor, district representative or mayor. Critics say that does not go far enough to stop families from spreading power across different levels of government. The bill now moves to the Senate, where related anti-dynasty proposals have also advanced, setting up further debate over whether Congress will deliver a genuine curb on clan politics or settle for what opponents call a diluted reform. Its passage came amid mounting public outrage over alleged corruption-linked flood control projects associated with dynastic clans last year and against the backdrop of a political system in which powerful families dominate electoral posts nationwide. A report in May 2025 by the Philippine Centre for Investigative Journalism found that 71 out of 82 governors who won in last year’s midterm elections belonged to political families, while more than 80 per cent of 254 district seats nationwide continue to be held by members of political dynasties. A coalition of private-sector, civic and electoral reform groups, including the Makati Business Club, Management Association of the Philippines and Parish Pastoral Council for Responsible Voting, has slammed the bill as a pro-dynasty measure that would further concentrate political power among a small number of families. “This is not reform but protection of dynasties and making sure there are no reforms. Political dynasties crowd out independent candidates, concentrate public resources within family networks, and have kept whole provinces in poverty across generations, while allegations of rampant corruption remain unabated,” the groups said in a statement. Sandro Marcos defended the measure, saying the version passed by the House was the most acceptable to lawmakers and that more stringent provisions would have lost support. Entrenching dynastic power While the bill may regulate “the most visible forms of dynastic politics”, analysts including Jan Robert Go say they do not think it “dismantles the deeper structure of dynastic power”. Go, an associate professor of political science at the University of the Philippines Diliman, told This Week in Asia that the bill narrowed the definition of a prohibited political dynasty instead of addressing the broader concentration of power among families in government. “For me, the most contentious provisions are the second-degree limit, the weak treatment of cross-level dynasties and the absence of a strong ban on succession and seat-swapping,” he said. “Many dynasties can still operate through relatives outside the second degree, through different levels of government, or through planned succession.” Cleve Arguelles, a political scientist from De La Salle University Manila, said the most alarming provision was the same-level restriction, “which treats dynastic politics as a problem of office allocation rather than political power concentration”. Arguelles said under the bill, a political family would cease to be considered a dynasty as long as its members occupied different levels of government. “Under this framework, a family could simultaneously produce a senator, a governor, a district representative, a mayor, and several local officials and still remain largely compliant with the law,” he said. “Decades of political science research has consistently shown that dynasties derive their advantage not only from holding identical offices but more importantly from controlling networks of resources, name recall, patronage systems, and local political machines across multiple levels of government.” Arjan Aguirre, an assistant political-science professor at Ateneo de Manila University, warned that the bill’s failure to address political succession was another major concern. He noted that the measure did not clearly prohibit a term-limited incumbent from effectively passing an elective office to a spouse, child, sibling or another close relative. “Instead of fundamentally reducing dynastic politics, it may simply regulate some of its forms while leaving many of its most entrenched practices untouched,” Aguirre said. With the next national election due in 2028, observers said the bill could affect some sibling candidacies, but would do little to prevent families from redistributing candidates across offices, levels of government and jurisdictions. Go warned that if a weak anti-dynasty law were passed, strengthening it later could become difficult because political families were already deeply embedded in the system. “Instead of becoming a transition towards stronger reform, the law may become the settled standard that dynastic politicians can comply with while preserving their power,” he said. While a genuine anti-dynasty law remains legally feasible in the Philippines, observers warn it will be politically difficult because so many lawmakers come from dynastic families. “For an anti-dynasty law to be meaningful, it has to cover not only simultaneous office-holding, but also succession, seat-swapping, cross-level control, party-list capture, and the use of proxies in addition to strong enforcement by the Commission on Elections,” Go said. Aguirre urged reforms including strengthening political parties, improving campaign finance regulations, lowering barriers to entry for new candidates and expanding voter access to information. “Political dynasties thrive in environments where political competition is weak and access to public office is concentrated among a small number of families. A meaningful reform agenda must therefore address both dynastic succession and the broader institutional conditions that allow dynasties to flourish,” he said. For Arguelles, true reform could be achieved only through “extraordinary public pressure” that raised the political costs for dynasties. “Dynasties will not reform themselves. It is up to the public to force them to.”

Will Philippines’ new bill entrench the political dynasties it aims to curb?

.css-1c6uqr6{color:inherit;font-weight:inherit;font-size:inherit;font-family:inherit;line-height:inherit;overflow-wrap:break-word;}Critics say the bill does not address political power concentration in government or the conditions that allow dynasties to flourish

Critics say the bill does not address political power concentration in government or the conditions that allow dynasties to flourish