Of family political dynasties

In last week’s filings of the Certificate of Candidacies (COCs) for the May 2025 elections, there were many cases of four to seven family members submitting their COCs for national and various local positions. These got the attention of the voters, especially the netizen voters, that the joke “kasambahay na lang and hindi nag-file ng COC” went viral. While Family Political Dynasties (FPDs) are not new and unusual in the Philippines, the blatant display of this practice for the coming elections elicited criticisms/objections and a movement to vote against family members of FPDs.

There have always been FPDs in the Philippines due to geographic and historical reasons. The separate/disparate islands were conveniently dominated by strong families that evolved into their economic dominance on a relatively small group of people. Tribal traditions also made it practical to have the dominant family become the ruling family who also takes care of the needs of the people. The advent of democracy, the improved living conditions and education, brought in the ideas of equality, fraternity, and liberty, blunted the perpetuation of monarchies, royalties, and bloodline succession, This also happened in European and Asian countries with royal families that are now more symbolic than real politic.

In the over hundred years of Philippine democracy, there are FPDs that exist and some have lasted for generations. The longest FPD in the Philippines would probably be in La Union which is now in its fourth generation, then in Central Luzon and Southern Luzon in its third generation. In the Visayas and Mindanao FPDs are most only in their second generation.

Some of the factors that determine/affect the stability and longevity of FPDs are the capability and number/size of the family, the economic resources of the family, and the governance practices of the family. More than the quantity of the family members, it is the quality and competence of the members that are vital in succeeding in/into political positions. The economic/financial resources of the family cannot be totally sourced from politics, but also from businesses to replenish/augment and maintain/enlarge political influence. An FPD depending only on political largesse has to contend with changing alliances and shifting political conditions that will eventually dry up some sources.

Eventually, it is the governance practices of the family that will determine the viability, stability, and longevity of an FPD. The definition of the membership in the family including the inner circle is important as it also distributes the power and influence. Justice and fairness is always at play to avoid dissension, and these require transparency and accountability. These are all good governance practices that are done by successful long-lasting family business corporations.

If we look at the FPDs that have disappeared or did not last long, the lack or diminishing of talented family members would be the proximate cause. It could be the waning interest of some family members in politics, or the political separation from the FPD due to disagreements and governance issues. Then, there is the capacity issue of how many in or how much of the family can be optimally carried politically which means some will have to be dropped from the FPD. Eventually, it is bad governance that causes the downfall.

FPDs are on a declining trajectory. As experienced in Europe, including Eastern Europe, and Asian countries that have become democracies, FPDs don’t go beyond the second generation. Only autocratic totalitarian governments in Eastern Europe, the Middle East, North Korea, and maybe Russia and China can last more than two generations.

The advances in information technology and social media are disadvantageous to FPDs as it promotes equality and liberty, and exposes the frailties and incompetence of families. The global trend of smaller families, and the higher mortality rates of politicians will constrict family succession in all countries and even in communist autocratic countries.