Transparency International recently revealed that the Philippines fell six places to 120th out of 182 countries and territories in the latest edition of its Corruption Perceptions Index.
Last year was the country’s worst placement since the comparable historical data dating back to 2012, as the Philippines grappled with a corruption scandal that slowed economic growth and weighed on investor and consumer confidence, Business World reported.
The country’s score, which stood at 32 out of 100 (a higher score being better), fell to a record low, well below the global average of 42 and the Asia-Pacific average of 45.
The ongoing war of words between Executive Secretary Ralph Recto and Batangas Rep. Leandro Leviste is not helping the public’s and the world’s perception about the country.
In a speech on the House floor, Leviste alleged recently that CWS Party-list Rep. Edwin Gardiola funded the campaign of Recto’s wife, Batangas Gov. Vilma Santos, in the 2025 elections and that Leviste was invited to join a scheme where Recto would use his Cabinet post to profit from public works projects.
Leviste said that if this is legitimate, then it is but proper for Recto to be transparent about his wealth and to clarify whether Gardiola’s campaign spending is linked to his role as a contractor in Batangas.
The House of Representatives later approved a motion to strike Leviste’s entire speech from the records due to a lack of evidence to support the allegations.
The STAR reported last Thursday that lawmakers from Batangas have filed a House resolution condemning what they describe as baseless, malicious, and irresponsible the allegations made by Leviste against Recto.
In the resolution, House members from five out of the province’s six legislative districts acknowledge that members of Congress are protected by parliamentary freedom of speech and debate, but that privilege is meant to help legislators discharge their public trust and not act as a shield for speculation, insinuation, or reckless statements.
They said that deliberately airing unverified allegations in a privileged forum constitutes a grave misuse of legislative authority and undermines the integrity of the House as an institution.
Leviste, according to The STAR report, admitted during the plenary exchanges that he had not personally verified his claims and that he was relaying information from unnamed Batangas politicians. His broader remark accusing lawmakers of vote buying also drew sharp objections from his colleagues, including Mamamayang Liberal Party-list Rep. Leila de Lima, who demanded that he withdraw his claim that all House members are involved.
Recto, for his part, claimed in a statement that it was Leviste who tried to woo him with P400 million to convince the latter’s opponent in the 2025 elections to back out of the race. The executive secretary likewise alleged that Leviste offered P1 billion to his family to persuade Santos-Recto to withdraw from the gubernatorial race so that Leviste could run in her place.
Recto said he turned down both offers and that attempts to link him to Gardiola are misleading. He also insisted that Leviste is doing this to bury his P24-billion debt stemming from his so-called ghost solar projects.
He added that in a distorted mindset, everything becomes for sale – people, honor, position.
It is a brutal assessment, but one that captures a growing concern in Philippine politics: the commodification of governance.
When influence can be bought, when loyalty can be negotiated, when even elections can be engineered through financial muscle, the system stops being democratic in spirit, even if it remains so in form.
The allegations point to more than individual misconduct. They suggest a framework in which money is not just a resource but a weapon.
And that is dangerous.
Because once everything has a price, nothing has value.
Whether proven in court or not, the narrative itself is instructive. It reflects a growing anxiety among citizens: that elections are becoming less about choice and more about capacity – who can spend more, deploy more, influence more.
That is not the democracy Filipinos fought for.
The challenge now is not just to react to these allegations, but to confront the mindset behind them.
To reject the idea that power can be bought and sold without consequence.
Because if we accept that premise, we accept a future in which governance belongs not to the people but to the highest bidder.
And that is a future worth resisting.
Members of Congress should also keep in mind what the Supreme Court said: that the speech or debate clause in our Constitution did not turn our senators and congressmen into super citizens whose spoken words or actions are rendered absolutely impervious to prosecution or civil action; that the Constitution conferred the privilege on members of Congress not for their private indulgence but for the common good.
“Indeed, the privilege of speech or debate, which may enable reckless men to slander and even destroy others, is not a cloak of unqualified impunity; its invocation must be as a means of perpetuating inviolate the functioning process of the legislative department,” the High Court emphasized.
For comments, email at maryannreyesphilstar@gmail.com