Reports that the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) is considering revoking the pensions of retired military officers involved in seditious activities or disinformation against the government have sparked a debate in the wake of unrest tied to the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) flood control scandal.
The idea of imposing sanctions against retirees allegedly stoking destabilization needs to take into account the basic principle of due process. Without clear evidence and fair proceedings, this proposed policy could simply become a tool for political retribution. Due process means going through a thorough investigation, likely through the Ombudsman or by filing cases in court.
Yet, if the allegations against certain retired officers are true to begin with, the hypocrisy is undeniable. Those retired military officials enjoy lavish pensions — fully funded by taxpayers without personal contributions — thanks to policies from Rodrigo Duterte’s administration that favored the military with generous perks.
As it stands, the Military and Uniformed Personnel (MUP) pension system is financially unsustainable. Unlike civilian public servants under the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) or private workers via the Social Security System (SSS), MUP retirees contribute nothing yet receive pensions up to nine times higher than SSS and GSIS pensioners who had to pay through salary deductions.
The MUP pension budget is projected to reach ₱217 billion in 2026, a 50% jump from 2025, outpacing spending on education or health. Civilian workers, meanwhile, face contributory schemes with far leaner benefits, sparking resentment among teachers, nurses, and other public servants who work under less favorable conditions.
The administration is facing an important policy crossroads. Revoking pensions for proven sedition could deter threats, but this should be paired with a reformed MUP pension system. Bills have been filed in the House seeking to make it a contributory system where actual contributions by active personnel may be matched by government funds, and where pension hikes are subject to a cap to ease fiscal pressure.
Such reforms would align MUP benefits with civilian systems. Sanctions must follow transparent legal processes, and reforms must balance equity with fiscal responsibility. The government should ensure that honest public service is rewarded while betrayal faces just consequences.
