CHINA has an essentially interventionist policy in the Philippines. Peking takes extra efforts to interfere in Philippine internal affairs mainly to influence the flow of public policies to its favor. For instance China adheres to its Ten-Dash-Line theory to insist that it controls almost the entire South China Sea. The Philippines does not like it. It considers it as fiction. Manila does not believe that the theory has historical or legal basis to stand.
China’s interventionist policy is observed the way Peking has supported candidates, who are sympathetic to China’s assertion of control over South China Sea, including parts of the West Philippine Sea. The Philippines maintains it effectively controls the West Philippine Sea because it constitutes part of its 200-mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). As such, the Philippines enjoys maritime entitlements over its EEZ. This is being recognized by international law, including the United Nations Conference on the Laws of the Seas (UNCLOS), a multilateral pact of which the Philippines is one of the signatory-nations.
At the moment, no official documents support the assertion that China somehow intervened in the 2025 midterm elections. But it does not mean it is the end of everything. The election results contain what could be considered anomalous data that lead to the suspicion that China could have done some allegations of intervention in the Philippine electoral system. A little time, perhaps, could lead to the discovery of supporting evidence of its intervention here.
It could be said that China has the technical savvy to interfere by changing the actual results of the country’s automated election system to boost the candidates it supports. It could hack the election system to pad or deducts votes on certain candidates. Moreover, China could provide the cash or wherewithal to influence the outcome of the Philippine elections. Rodrigo Duterte’s political victory in the 2016 elections was a case in point.
The results of the 2025 senatorial elections are the first object of intense curiosity. Senators Bong Go and Bato dela Rosa are known pro-China stalwarts in Philippine politics. Include Rep. Rodente Marcoleta, who had spoken to justify and support China’s incursions into Philippine territory. Sen. Francis Tolentino is a pro-China lawmaker, but he flopped on his official stand. One day, he was pro-China, but on the next, he was against China. Lately, he appeared to have rejoined the Duterte camp, the political family that fully supports China.
These are the official results of the first three in the senatorial election; Bong Go, 27, 119, 679; Bam Aquino, 20,971-398; and Bato dela Rosa, 20, 772, 644. Rodente Marcoleta obtained total votes of 15,157, 060 landing sixth overall and besting Ping Lacson (7th) with votes of 15,081,819; and Tito Sotto, 14,806,403. Francis Tolentino lost miserably and landed 25th with votes of 7,692,432. But Tolentino has a totally different story.
The suspicious story comes from the difference between Bong Go and Bam Aquino’s votes that reached 6,138,281 votes. Also, the difference between Bam Aquino and Bato’s appeared dubious – only 198,954 votes. Where in this world would Bong Go get his votes, when the areas he dominated were in Mindanao. In most of Luzon and even the Visayas, Bam Aquino dominated the senatorial race. Did the voters in Mindanao only vote Bong Go and Bato in their ballots? Besides, Bong Go does not have the winning face that could inspire voters to vote for him.
There are reasons to believe that the votes for Bong Go and Bato were padded to make it appear that they dominated the senatorial race. The same thing could have been extended to Rodente Marcoleta, who bested Ping Lacson and Tito Sotto. But it should be stressed that no document exists to support allegations that China could have been behind the vote padding and deductions. But it does not mean that China is clean. Some future forensic examinations could lead to some discoveries.
This could be an object of scrutiny by scholars, who possess expertise to examine official data on votes. Something conclusive could be asserted late this year or next year. That is upon completion of the ongoing audit of the election results.
Because Francis Tolentino flipped flopped on his stand concerning China, he landed dead last among the 12 senatorial candidates of the pro-administration Alyansa ng Pagbabago. Tolentino, it should be noted, was among the biggest spenders of the senatorial bets. His expenditures on political advertisements, as documented by the authoritative Nielsen Ad Intelligence, could have reached almost P2 billion.
But the irony was that lesser known Heidi Mendoza, who did not have political advertisements and who spent just P2.5 million in personal funds, landed 21st with total votes of 8,745,517. She was ahead by 1,053 075 votes over Francis Tolentino, who landed a dismal 25th with 7,692,432 votes. There were assertions that Peking could have punishd Francis Tolentino for his flip flopping ways. This is something that could be documented in the future.
At the moment, the official election results stay as election data. But a deeper study by whoever comes with the rightful alchemy of technical savvy and public interest and concern could come out with some interesting future insights on China’s alleged participation and involvement in Philippine domestic affairs to boost its national interest here. Who knows?
