Real news, not fake. Old story actually. Since our independence in 1946, corruption has grown (much faster than our disappointing PSE for that matter — but that’s another story), draining national resources anchored to weak, poorly-governed institutions. Low corruption index scores, widespread procurement anomalies, and opaque budget processes show that the traditional tools of audits and investigations cannot counter a bureaucracy built on silos and patronage.
This is where artificial intelligence (AI) governance becomes a necessity. Enough of conformance alone. That’s a given. It’s time for AI governance to perform!
Arguably the most important position is that of DICT (Department of Information and Communications Technology) Secretary Henry Aguda, thankfully a capable gentleman with morally-upright values and, with the digital mind proven with his success in UnionBank’s digitalization journey, RESULTS in the DICT Masterplan will be realized to address our corruption plague.
What trends then are in store for the country’s newest department and its approach to good AI governance? From a benchmark perspective, it is now obvious that a modern anti-corruption framework requires an integrated public-data backbone. Countries like Singapore, Denmark and New Zealand demonstrate that when public-sector digital systems are unified, transparent, and continuously monitored, corruption loses its hiding places. Their digital governance models — interoperable national systems, secure cloud infrastructure, synchronized audit trails, and public-access portals — are the foundation that allows AI tools to detect irregularities, map relationships, and ensure accountability — all towards preventing and killing corruption in real time.
In the Philippines, the closest equivalent building blocks lie in the DICT’s E-Government Masterplan (EGMP), the Government Cloud, the National Government Data Center (NGDC), and the new E-Governance Act, which mandates systems and standardized digital services across agencies and LGUs (local government units). These are essential technical components for future AI-driven oversight. However, unlike Singapore’s deeply integrated national digital backbone or Denmark’s seamless public-data infrastructure, the Philippines still faces fragmented agency systems, inconsistent data standards, uneven cybersecurity maturity, and limited enforcement power for DICT to compel compliance. New Zealand’s model of transparent, cross-agency data synchronization shows what is possible when interoperability becomes a national discipline; the Philippines is only beginning this journey. For AI governance to work, the country must strengthen DICT’s mandate, accelerate cloud and data-center integration, enforce interoperability, and correct legacy fragmentation — because AI can only govern effectively if the underlying digital ecosystem is complete, secure and continuous.
From this foundation, AI can then perform its primary governance role: scanning procurement flows, budget releases, payroll entries, project spending and asset declarations to detect anomalies that human auditors cannot see at scale. For example, AI models can identify unusual bid patterns, inflated project costs compared with baseline regional data, and hidden relationships between contractors and political actors. They can flag ghost employees, improbable fund transfers, or lifestyle–salary mismatches — all in real time. What makes AI powerful is not just speed but pattern recognition: corruption often hides in repeating behaviors, which machine-learning algorithms can expose long before human investigators notice.
But technology alone cannot break entrenched corruption. AI tools must be embedded within independent institutions. A proposed Independent Anti-Corruption AI Commission, insulated from both Congress and the Executive, should be empowered to act on AI-generated alerts, initiate investigations, coordinate with CoA (Commission on Audit), AMLC (Anti-Money Laundering Council), and the Ombudsman, and publish transparent integrity reports. Independence is essential because if AI findings can be politically suppressed or ignored, the entire architecture collapses.
Gaps remain: cybersecurity vulnerabilities, uneven LGU digital readiness, leadership turnover, and limited authority to enforce interoperability. Strengthening DICT through stable leadership, expanded enforcement power, and legislative support will determine whether the digital backbone can support long-term AI governance.
To expedite reform, the Philippines must implement these five national priorities:
1. Integrate all agency digital systems under EGMP, Government Cloud, and the NGDC.
2. Deploy AI-driven anomaly detection in procurement, budgeting, payroll, and asset disclosures.
3. Establish an Independent Anti-Corruption AI Commission with full investigatory autonomy.
4. Empower DICT to enforce interoperability and cybersecurity standards across national agencies and LGUs.
5. Launch a public transparency portal showing AI-generated integrity indicators, case dispositions, and improvements.
If executed with good governance in mind, AI governance can provide the Philippines with its first truly systemic, real-time, and incorruptible oversight mechanism. It is a silver bullet and is essential for a government finally capable of governing itself.