Philippines election violence threatens local democracy and stability

As election-related violence persists in the Philippines, fears grow over how political power, impunity, and clan rivalries fuel bloodshed.

Kerwin Espinosa (right), son of the late mayor Rolando Espinosa, removes his bulletproof vest during a Senate drug hearing at the Senate building in Manila on November 23, 2016. Photo by Noel Celis/AFP

By Anna Fadiah and Hayu Andini

The issue of Philippines election violence once again casts a shadow over the country’s fragile democratic process. For aspiring local leaders like mayoral candidate Kerwin Espinosa, running for office can mean risking not just one’s political future but one’s life. Earlier this month, Espinosa was shot in the chest while preparing to address a rally in Leyte province. The bullet went through his torso and exited through his arm, leaving him bloodied but alive.

This act of political aggression is not isolated. The Commission on Elections (Comelec) has documented 46 incidents of election-related violence between January 12 and April 11, 2025, in the lead-up to the May 12 midterm elections. The grim tally includes fatal attacks on a city council hopeful, a village chief, and even a polling officer.

Although Comelec insists the death toll—reportedly “fewer than 20” candidates—is lower than in previous elections, observers warn that the normalized presence of violence during campaign season exposes the dangerous nexus of power, money, and impunity in local Philippine politics.

Why political office is worth killing for

At the core of this crisis is the immense influence granted to local government officials. Holding a mayoral seat, for instance, means overseeing police departments, distributing jobs, and deciding how national tax funds are spent. Danilo Reyes, a political science professor at the University of the Philippines, explained how this authority becomes an attractive prize—and sometimes a deadly one.

“Local chief executives have discretion when it comes to how to allocate the funding, which projects, priorities,” Reyes said. That authority makes political positions worth fighting—and even killing—for.

The situation is compounded by the reality that the rule of law weakens the farther one moves from Manila. In more remote provinces, political dynasties and warlord clans often wield unchecked power. Cleve Arguelles, CEO of Manila-based WR Numero Research, said many of these elites maintain private armies and patronage networks.

“Local political elites have their own kingdoms, armed groups and... patronage networks,” Arguelles said. “The stakes are usually high in a local area where only one family is dominant or where there is involvement of private armed groups.”

A culture of confrontation and impunity

Without strong national institutions to resolve disputes or enforce accountability, violence becomes a common means of settling political rivalry.

“In the absence of strong institutions to mediate disagreements,” Reyes said, “confrontational violence becomes the go-to.”

The shooting of Kerwin Espinosa is a case in point. On April 10, while waiting for his turn to speak at a campaign event, a shooter fired at him from a distance of about 50 meters. Police later said seven officers were being investigated for involvement in the attack, though convictions in such cases remain rare.

Comelec spokesperson John Rex Laudiangco said the commission is tracking these cases as they move through regional court systems. Still, no exact data on successful prosecutions was shared.

From 2018 to 2022, the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data project found that perpetrators were never identified in 79 percent of violent attacks on local government officials.

National politicians are often reluctant to press for investigations, Reyes explained, because their election victories often hinge on alliances with local strongmen.

“The only way you can ensure national leaders win positions is for local allies to deliver votes,” he said. “There are convictions but very rarely, and it depends on the potential political fallout on the national leaders as well as the local leaders.”

Arguelles called this arrangement a “grand bargain,” where national leaders tolerate violence and corruption in local jurisdictions as long as their allies can deliver electoral victories on the national stage.

Trouble in Mindanao

Just three days after the attack on Espinosa, another act of election violence occurred in the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (BARMM). A district board candidate and his driver were hospitalized after an ambush.

Election-season bloodshed has plagued BARMM for decades, often fueled by clan rivalries, militant groups, and the presence of private armies. Comelec responded by assuming “direct control” over two municipalities—Buluan and Datu Odin Sinsuat—after a municipal election officer, Bai Maceda Lidasan Abo, and her husband were gunned down.

Comelec’s expanded power now allows it to directly supervise election officials and law enforcement in high-risk areas. Top police officials in the two municipalities were removed for “gross negligence and incompetence” after allegedly ignoring requests for security reinforcements for the murdered Comelec officer.

Still, Laudiangco admitted the suspensions are only temporary and will last until the winners of the May 12 elections are sworn in.

Election security plan under scrutiny

Comelec insists that its security strategy is working. According to Laudiangco, the agency’s current approach is based on “a tried and tested security plan” and includes cooperation between police, military, and election authorities.

But even the best-laid plans can falter in a culture where politics is deeply personal and often familial. In many rural areas, candidates are members of rival families living in close quarters. The resulting tensions can quickly escalate into violence.

“You have a lot of closely related people in one given jurisdiction,” Laudiangco said. “That ensures polarization. It becomes personal between neighbors.”

He added, “We all know Filipinos are clannish—that’s our culture. But we’re improving slowly.”

A broken cycle or a permanent feature?

Whether Philippines election violence can truly be reduced in the long run remains an open question. Comelec points to its reforms and enhanced coordination with law enforcement as signs of progress. Still, observers are skeptical about long-term change in a system where power is so tightly interwoven with wealth, kinship, and coercion.

Until national leaders take a firmer stand against local violence—and until the justice system can hold perpetrators accountable—the bloodshed may continue. As long as political office remains a gateway to power and riches, some will continue to believe it’s worth the cost, no matter the human toll.

For now, candidates like Kerwin Espinosa must weigh their ambitions against the ever-present threat of violence—a reality that casts a long and chilling shadow over democracy in the Philippines.