Transparency and accountability under the first year of Marcos

The first year of the Marcos administration is over. As expected, there were many assessments of how the president spent his initial year in office. One of the areas that bear looking into is governance. What has Marcos done in terms of fostering transparency and accountability?

In an occasional paper I wrote for the Stratbase ADR Institute last April, I explored the idea of an early assessment by comparing the Marcos administration to its preceding governments and their first years. From this comparison, a few observations can be gathered which can assist us in providing a more objective review of how transparency and accountability have progressed in the first year.

First is the socio-political context by which the Marcos administration operated in when it began. The most glaring issue that welcomed the administration was the economic and social turmoil that came as a result of COVID-19. The halting of economic activity and the subsequent disruption of supply chains not only in the Philippines but all over the world brought to the fore issues of high inflation, low pay, lack of employment and poverty, according to a Pulse Asia survey conducted last March. Interestingly, the concern on graft and corruption came in fifth. 

This shows that while graft and corruption are present in the minds of the public, this pales in comparison other, more pressing economic issues that came as a direct result of the pandemic. 

This is in contrast to the two administrations before him. Numerous grand corruption allegations hounded the Arroyo administration that came before former President Benigno Aquino III, and so running under a platform of good governance with the campaign slogan “Kung Walang Kurap, Walang Mahirap” was an effective strategy in garnering public support. 

The same thing can be said about former President Rodrigo Duterte. A general perception of elitist and exclusionary politics along with a rampant crime under PNoy propelled former mayor from Davao into the presidency with the slogan “Change is Coming,” coupled with lofty promises of ridding the country of crime, corruption and illegal drugs after only six months. 

There are a few similarities and differences that we can gather from this picture. 

While there are stark differences in the socio-political environment between President Marcos and the past two administrations, the reform agendas of these three presidents had one thing in common: they all responded to the context that lay before them. However, as a result of this response, one other difference emerges—there is seemingly an apparent lack of strong-anti corruption messaging in the current administration. 

This isn’t to say that anti-corruption reforms are not present. One interesting way to view this is that these anti-corruption reforms were reframed in a way so as to push for transparency and accountability rather than strong anti-corruption statements. These reforms can be found in some of the President’s identified priorities, namely in digital transformation initiatives and budget reform, among others.

Digitization is a current trend in not just the Philippines, but in ASEAN countries in general as a way to promote government transparency. It is also an anti-corruption measure, as digitizing services promotes less people-to-people interaction in service delivery where informal transactions could proliferate, such as bribes. 

The Marcos administration has prioritized the digital transformation agenda by declaring it as a legislative priority and allotting a total of P24.13 billion for ICT-related expenditures for the year 2023 alone. Marcos himself continually reiterated his desire for majority of government services to be done online. All these show the enormous priority of using ICT (information and communications technology) as a means to achieve good governance.

Another aspect would be on budget reforms. Executive Order No. 29 was signed last June 1 which further strengthened the integration of public financial management information systems. Beyond that, one other legislative priority to reform the public management system is the Progressive Budgeting for Better and Modernized (PBBM) Governance Bill which is part of the priorities identified under the Legislative Executive Development Advisory Council (LEDAC). 

While this measure has yet to be passed in both houses, institutionalizing the cash-based budgeting system among other budgetary reforms would allow for more prudent use of government financial resources and at the same time enhance the quality and efficiency of services within program and project funding. 

There are other areas of policy continuity that can be identified, such as the Open Government Partnership and the Freedom of Information bill. All these show a willingness of the Marcos administration to address anti-corruption albeit through a different route. 

Nonetheless, despite the abundance of reforms, there still is a need for a strong anti-corruption message coupled with more directed anti-corruption programs in the years to come. While pursuing transparency and accountability through the said reforms are vital, the current government must also portray its willingness to actively address and fight against corruption within the government. 

President Marcos may take a different route from his predecessors, but the need for a strong stance against corruption through his term will continue to remain the same. We hope to see it in the years moving forward.

Mashan Bernice “Shanice” Espiritu is the policy and regulatory manager of think tank Stratbase and co-convenor of Democracy Watch, Philippines. She holds a Masters’ degree in Public Policy with a specialization in Integrity and Anti-Corruption Policy under the Australian National University.