CARTOON BY: AARON PAUL C. CARIL
EDITORIAL
Voters’ dilemma: When Philippine elections offer no choice
Philippine elections are often a colorful spectacle, with crowded rallies and
hopeful candidates vying for attention. But beneath the surface lies a troubling reality: a
growing number of candidates running unopposed. This trend raises serious questions
about the competitiveness of elections and the true extent of voter choice. When the
ballot offers no alternative, democracy’s core principle—the power to choose—is
compromised, leaving citizens with little say in who governs them.
The upcoming May 2025 midterm elections highlight this issue starkly. In Negros
Occidental, records from the Commission on Elections (Comelec) show twenty
candidates running unopposed for key positions, including congressional representatives
and mayors. Eastern Visayas reports sixty uncontested races, while Central Luzon has
fifty-eight unopposed candidates. Even in Bohol, ten mayoralty seats remain
uncontested. Although some candidates challenge the incumbents in Bohol, their
political machinery is no match against the incumbents, who can marshal all possible
government resources in the guise of public service. These numbers paint a picture of a
political landscape where choice is becoming increasingly rare.
The recent HNU Bohol Poll 2025 survey results show a troubling statistic with the
frontrunner having a huge lead. As in the past, the results mirror the most probable
election day scenario. One major cause is probably the people’s lack of viable options
among the candidates. It is not a duel among heavyweights in terms of performance,
where the incumbents are pitted against a challenger who offers a better solution.
Cristina Jayme Montiel’s research on Philippine political culture, published on the
Office of the Ombudsman’s website, sheds light on the roots of this problem. She
describes a system deeply influenced by patronage politics and personalism, where
politicians are expected to act as patrons, providing favors and resources to their
constituents. This dynamic discourages challengers who lack the resources or
connections to compete. Political dynasties, bolstered by familial ties and local
networks, further entrench this system, leaving little room for outsiders to challenge the
status quo.
Other factors exacerbate the lack of competition. Benjamin R. Punongbayan, in
his Grant Thornton article titled “Why PHL elections are not competitive”, highlights the
role of vote buying and the immense financial resources required to run a campaign.
Dominant political groups often complete their slates strategically, consolidating power
and preempting challenges. In Bohol, for example, the “Abante Bohol” slate contrasts
sharply with the opposition’s lack of gubernatorial candidates, showcasing the strategic
maneuvering of political elites.
The consequences of unopposed races are far-reaching. Without competition,
elected officials face less pressure to be accountable to their constituents. The absence
of alternative platforms stifles public discourse and innovation, perpetuating the
dominance of political dynasties. While Montiel identifies a “progressive new politics”
focused on principle-based governance, its adoption remains limited in the face of
entrenched traditional practices.
Ultimately, the rise of unopposed candidates signals a troubling erosion of voter
choice. When elections offer no alternatives, the democratic process is weakened,
leaving citizens disenfranchised. Addressing this issue requires a concerted effort to
challenge deeply rooted cultural norms and promote transparency, accountability, and
genuine competition in the political arena. Only then can the Filipino voter reclaim their
voice and strengthen the democratic fabric of the nation.