Home⇛Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives⇛vol. 4 no. 7 (2026)

Structural and Cultural Barriers to Anti-Corruption: A Thematic Inquiry into the Philippine Political Landscape

Bismark D. Gumela | Aries Miranda

Discipline: social sciences (non-specific)

 

Abstract:

The devastating effect of systemic corruption shows the urgent need to understand why advanced legal frameworks fail to stop government wrongdoing. Studying this persistent implementation gap helps public administrators look past symbolic compliance and find real structural fixes that protect public funds. However, research on how informal political networks circumvent official legal systems is limited, as the topic is usually reduced to broad statistical measures. The main objective of this qualitative study was to examine how formal anti-corruption institutions handle the structural implementation gap in the Philippine government. Data were collected through a systematic analysis of academic literature (2012–2026) and official records, guided by the dual theoretical lens of Institutional Anomie Theory and Isomorphic Mimicry. The analysis revealed that the anticorruption system is blocked by four main issues: first, executive patronage controls oversight bodies, turning them into administrative "janitors" that protect political allies; second, a slow judiciary with massive case backlogs lets corrupt officials outlast legal battles; third, local governance is dominated by political dynasties that bypass regional checks and balances; and fourth, the cultural value of utang na loob (debt of gratitude) pressures public servants to choose personal loyalty over official duty. The findings suggest that public administrators must move past paper reforms and performative investigations that only mimic accountability for show. Furthermore, oversight institutions must protect anti-corruption leaders from political pressure, clear court backlogs, and separate government contracts from elite networks to build true institutional integrity



References:

  1. Ahmed, S.K., Mohammed, R.A., Nashwan, A., Ibrahim, R.H., Abdalla, A.Q., Ameen, B.M., & Khdhir, R.M. (2025). Using thematic analysis in qualitative research. Journal of Medicine, Surgery, and Public Health, 6(2), 100198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.glmedi.2025.100198
  2. Ajayi, O., & Adediran, Y.O. (2025). Corruption in Nigeria: A new paradigm for underdevelopment. Islamic University Journal of Social Sciences, 4(3), 610–631.
  3. http://journals.iuiu.ac.ug/index.php/iujss/article/view/853
  4. Amoroso, J., Regalado, A., & Melicor, R. (2020). New frontiers for Philippine criminal litigation | International Bar Association. https://tinyurl.com/476vhaur
  5. Argosino, F. (2025). Sandiganbayan’s 2025 conviction rate hits 47.49 %. https://tinyurl.com/rehaucep
  6. Aspinall, E., & Weiss, M. (n.d.). Mobilizing for elections: Patronage and political machines in Southeast Asia - Edward Aspinall, Meredith L. Weiss, Allen Hicken, Paul D. Hutchcroft. Google Books. https://acesse.one/gees0vh
  7. Atencia, E., & Galang, J. (2025). Justice delayed, justice denied. https://theguidon.com/2025/12/justice-delayed-justice-denied/
  8. Atienza, M.E. (2023). The Philippine judiciary: Strengthening the third branch of government (Discussion Paper Series 2023-04). https://twitter.com/upcids
  9. Barbabela, L. (2025). Judicial inconsistency and citizen anti-corruption demobilization: Evidence from Brazil. Government and Opposition, 60(1), 168–187.
  10. https://doi.org/10.1017/gov.2023.36
  11. Ballerda, A., Yanzon, G., & Fonbuena, C. (2024). 71 of 82 Philippine governors belong to political families. PCIJ.org. https://tinyurl.com/j7ecjnsa
  12. Batalla, E.V. (2020). Police corruption and its control in the Philippines. Asian Education and Development Studies, 9(2), 157–168. https://doi.org/10.1108/AEDS-05-2018-0099
  13. Batalla, E.V. (2024a). Strong presidents and grand corruption scandals in the Philippines. Public Administration and Policy, 27(3), 330–343. https://doi.org/10.1108/PAP-04-2024-0063
  14. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 328–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238
  15. Buendia, R. (2022). Examining Philippine political development over three decades after ‘democratic’ rule: Is change yet to come? Asian Journal of Political Science, 29(2), 169–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/02185377.2021.1916970
  16. Camasura., J.F. (2024). The Concept of isomorphic mimicry: A grand scheme of deception in Philippine political development. Medium. https://tinyurl.com/2z87nf6r
  17. Carranza, R. (2024). Economic actors and the limits of transitional justice: Truth and justice for business complicity in human rights violations. Google Books. https://l1nk.dev/0mqj7pg
  18. Castro, K. (2025). The ruling family: How political dynasties are destroying democracy in the Philippines. Democratic Erosion. https://tinyurl.com/yvbkmm8s
  19. Cheromoi, C., & Sebaggala, R. (2025). Squared pegs in round holes: Contextual challenges and media framing in Uganda’s anti-corruption fight. American Behavioral Scientist. https://doi.org/10.1177/00027642251394546
  20. Cornell Law School. (2025). corruption | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/corruption
  21. Davis, D.B., Mendoza, R., & Yap, J. (2024a). Corruption risk and political dynasties: Exploring the links using public procurement data in the Philippines. Economics of Governance, 25(1), 81–109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10101-023-00306-4
  22. Dressel, B., Inoue, T., & Bonoan, C.R. (2024). Justices and political loyalties: An empirical investigation of the Supreme Court of the Philippines, 1987–2020. Law & Social Inquiry, 49(2), 955–979. https://doi.org/10.1017/lsi.2022.103
  23. Dutta, S., & Dutta, S. (2026). The regional stabilizer: The protests of institutional resilience and fragmentation in South Asia. The Research Frontline - Journal, 1(1), 188–198. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18204504
  24. Garrido, M. (2025). A thousand years of corruption: A history of corruption and anti-corruption in the Philippines since 1946. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 67(3), 595–621. https://doi.org/10.1017/S001041752500009X
  25. Gregorio, A. (2025). Fully-digital, modern enforcement arm: Ombudsman bares digitalization strategy. ABS-CBN News. https://tinyurl.com/5ybpnhpc
  26. Guth, A. (2024). The Philippines: A social structure of corruption. Crime, Law and Social Change 2024 82:2, 82(2), 223–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-024-10140-2
  27. Hamada, Y., & Agrawal, K. (2023). Combatting corruption in political finance: Global trends, challenges and solutions. International IDEA. https://tinyurl.com/ys93b463
  28. Hutchcroft, P.D. (2014). Linking capital and countryside: Patronage and clientelism in Japan, Thailand, and the Philippines *.
  29. Jackson, D., & Amundsen, I. (2022). The flipside of corruption: When anti-corruption becomes politicised. https://tinyurl.com/mvkexxf5
  30. Jose, E., & Jocson, B. (2026). Voter’s dilemma within the culture of ‘Utang-na-loob’ in Philippine politics. https://philpapers.org/rec/JOCVDW
  31. Knox, C., & Peters, B.G. (2023). Political patronage in Asian bureaucracies. Political Patronage in Asian Bureaucracies, 311–329. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009208055.016
  32. Lalu, G. (2025). Two more incoming solons join Lakas-CMD; strength now at 110. https://tinyurl.com/54rhcjn5
  33. Lee, H. (2023). The importance of not being honest. Law and Literature, 35(2), 201–220. https://doi.org/10.1080/1535685X.2021.1991612
  34. Lim, W.M. (2025). What is qualitative research? An overview and guidelines. Australasian Marketing Journal, 33(2), 199–229. https://doi.org/10.1177/14413582241264619
  35. Lindberg, S., Lo Bue, M., & Sen, K. (2022). Clientelism, corruption and the rule of law. World Development, 158, 105989. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2022.105989
  36. MacDonald, L. (2011). One size doesn’t fit all: Lant Pritchett on mimicry in development. Center for Global Development. https://tinyurl.com/3n2nsc84
  37. Mason, P., Augustyn, M., & Seakhoa-King, A. (2010). Exploratory study in tourism: Designing an initial, qualitative phase of sequenced, mixed methods research. International Journal of Tourism Research, 12(5), 432–448. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.763
  38. Mendoza, R., Bulaong, O., Jr., & Mendoza, G.A. (2025). Anti-corruption reforms in the Philippines: Quo vadis? Millennial Asia, 16(3), 364–387. https://doi.org/10.1177/09763996251333209
  39. Mkhize, N. (2025). Plans without action? Politics and institutional challenges of anti-corruption reforms in the BRICS countries. Journal of Economic Criminology, 10(3), 100197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconc.2025.100197
  40. Mondez, T.E., & Cruz, J. (2024). Corruption and illegality in Asian investment arbitration: The Philippines. Asia in Transition, 22, 343–367. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-9303-1_13
  41. Montiel, C.J. (2024). Philippine political culture and governance. https://tinyurl.com/jnn9m5vp
  42. Morgan, H. (2022). Conducting a qualitative document analysis. Qualitative Report, 27(1), 64–77. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2022.5044
  43. Muhdiarta, U. (2025). Investigating the challenges of bureaucratic reform in developing countries: A case study approach. Ilomata International Journal of Social Science, 6(2), 689–702. https://doi.org/10.61194/ijss.v6i2.1687
  44. Murcia, A. (2026). Ombudsman ends ‘half-baked’ filings for swifter anti-graft trials. https://tinyurl.com/64kscr6d
  45. Murid Partaw, A., & Demerew, K. (2024). Institutional logic of fragile states: Afghanistan and South Sudan in comparative perspective. Journal of the Middle East and Africa, 15(4), 371– 395. https://doi.org/10.1080/21520844.2024.2415182
  46. Ndidiamaka Okoye, J., Nnenna Dorothy, O., & Chigozie Ojimba, C. (2024). Corruption in the Nigerian public sector: Causes, consequences and sustainable solutions. International Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Research and Studies, 4(5), 1109–1117. https://doi.org/10.62225/2583049x.2024.4.5.3374
  47. Neverio, N. (2025). Best Anti-corruption practices implemented by the Philippine government since the creation of 1987 Constitution. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5627270
  48. Office of the Ombudsman. (1989). Republic Act No. 6713: Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees. https://tinyurl.com/2vsmwj2w
  49. Patinio, F. (2025). Ombudsman suspends 16 DPWH personnel over flood control mess. Philippine News Agency. https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1259101
  50. Portugal, M.A., & Alves de Moraes, E. (2025). Operation Car Wash: Uncovering corruption pathways in the Brazilian construction industry through bid law blind spots. Public Integrity, 27(4), 369–387. https://doi.org/10.1080/10999922.2024.2316492
  51. Pritchett, L., Woolcock, M., & Andrews, M. (2012). Looking like a state: Techniques of persistent failure in state capability for implementation. GSDRC. https://tinyurl.com/42us8u9f
  52. Quimpo, N.G. (2025). [OPINION] Major corruption scandals and cases from 1989: Where are they now? https://tinyurl.com/9vmydzee
  53. Riambon, E., Dayag, J., Canaya, R., & Tindowen, D.J. (2025). Issues and challenges affecting the conduct of criminal investigation procedure. International Journal of Social Science Research and Review, 8(4), 210–221. https://doi.org/10.47814/ijssrr.v8i4.2598
  54. Sakib, N.H., & Mollik, M.M. (2023). Patterns of corruption during COVID-19 in Bangladesh. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3380296/v1
  55. Senate of the Philippines. (2013). An Act defining and prohibiting the establishment of political dynasties “The Anti-Political Dynasty Act.”
  56. Shukri, S. (2024). Najib Razak. In: Elite Populism and Malay Political Leaders in Malaysia. Palgrave Studies in Populisms. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-6301-6_6
  57. Skarbek, D. (2020). Qualitative research methods for institutional analysis. Journal of Institutional Economics, 16(4), 409–422. https://doi.org/10.1017/S174413741900078X
  58. Teehankee, J. (2012). The Philippines. Political Parties and Democracy, 187–205. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137277206_11
  59. Teehankee, J., & Calimbahin, C.A. (2022). Patronage democracy in the Philippines: Clans, clients, and competition in local elections. 345.
  60. Tsanis, K., & Stouraitis, V. (2026). Unraveling institutional logics, institutional context and perceived corruption: Findings from Sub-Saharan African MNE subsidiaries. Thunderbird International Business Review, 68(1), 89–105. https://doi.org/10.1002/tie.70010
  61. Valarini, E. (2023). Organizational crime in Brazil: The Petrobras case. In: Pohlmann, M., et al. Organizational Crime. Organization, Management and Crime - Organisation, Management und Kriminalität. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-38960-4_15
  62. Yeboah-Assiamah, E., Asamoah, K., Bawole, J.N., & Musah-Surugu, I.J. (2016). A socio-cultural approach to public sector corruption in Africa: Key pointers for reflection. Journal of Public Affairs, 16(3), 279–293. https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.1587
  63. Yu, E. (2021). Controlling political dynasties in the Philippines: A breach or a promotion of freedom? https://tinyurl.com/2zak5vap
  64. Zreik, M. (2024). Financial misreporting and corporate governance lapses: A deep dive into the 1MDB scandal in Malaysia. In R. Hasan (Ed.), Cases on Uncovering Corporate Governance Challenges in Asian Markets (pp. 178-201). IGI Global Scientific Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684-9867-5.ch009

Tools


Copyright © 2026  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic