Position Paper: The Philippine Capital Debate — Why Tri-Capital May Be the Most Realistic Outcome
By Karl Garcia
I. Executive Summary
The debate over relocating the Philippine capital is often framed as a simple choice between Manila, Clark, Aurora, or Quezon. However, capital relocation is not primarily an infrastructure issue. It is a question of statecraft, national identity, and institutional design.
The Philippines’ political reality—strong regional elites, competing visions of development, and persistent inequality—suggests that the most plausible outcome is not a single capital, but a tri-capital system. This model would distribute the national government across Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao, serving as a compromise between centralization and federalism.
This position paper argues that tri-capital is not federalism, but federalism-lite: a politically realistic way to decentralize national presence without altering the unitary nature of the state.
II. The Strategic Rationale for Capital Relocation
Capital relocation is not merely a response to congestion or climate risk. It is a deliberate attempt to:
- rebalance national development
- reduce systemic risk
- reshape governance
- signal long-term national vision
Indonesia’s move to Nusantara demonstrates that capital relocation is statecraft, not construction. The Philippines must similarly articulate a compelling national rationale to avoid turning relocation into speculative development.
III. The Problem with Single-Capital Proposals
Single-capital relocation fails on several fronts:
A. Political Legitimacy
A capital in Luzon will be perceived as favoring Luzon. Visayas and Mindanao will see it as another example of Manila-centric policy.
B. Institutional Fragmentation
Government agencies resist relocation. Without legal anchoring and institutional reform, relocation becomes a partial move, with agencies remaining in Metro Manila.
C. Economic Sustainability
A capital cannot survive on government employment alone. It needs a diversified economic base, secure utilities, and strong social infrastructure.
IV. The Tri-Capital Model: A Realistic Compromise
A tri-capital system distributes national institutions across three regions:
- Luzon: administrative capital (executive functions)
- Visayas: legislative capital (Congress)
- Mindanao: judicial/constitutional capital (Supreme Court)
This model is attractive because it:
A. Addresses regional resentment
It prevents the perception that national power belongs only to Luzon.
B. Distributes development
It spreads infrastructure spending across regions, creating multiple growth centers.
C. Creates political feasibility
It is the most likely outcome given the Philippine political system, which rewards regional elites.
V. Tri-Capital Is Not Federalism
A tri-capital model is not federalism because it does not:
- create regional states
- redistribute legislative powers
- alter fiscal autonomy
- rewrite the constitution
Instead, it only redistributes national institutions, which is a limited and practical form of decentralization.
This is why it can be described as federalism-lite: it captures some benefits of federalism without its risks.
VI. Why I Am Not a Federalist
I remain opposed to federalism for the Philippines due to:
- risk of fragmentation
- political patronage and regional rent-seeking
- expensive and complex transition
- potential weakening of national unity
But I am not ideologically rigid. If evidence supports a better solution, I am willing to consider it.
Tri-capital is not a conversion to federalism. It is an acknowledgment that the country needs a new structure to balance national power.
VII. The Conditions for a Successful Tri-Capital System
Tri-capital will fail if it becomes symbolic. It will succeed only if anchored by:
A. Legal and constitutional clarity
National law must define the roles of each capital.
B. Strong institutional coordination
A permanent inter-capital council must coordinate budgets, security, and governance.
C. Unified digital government
A tri-capital system requires a strong e-government backbone to prevent fragmentation.
D. Phased implementation
A 15–20 year phased migration strategy is needed to avoid disruption.
VIII. The Most Plausible Philippine Outcome
Given the political realities, the most plausible outcome is a hybrid capital system, combining:
- Clark as a transitional or administrative capital
- Aurora or Quezon as the visionary capital
- Tri-capital functional division as a compromise
This does not represent failure. It represents a realistic compromise that balances regional equity with national stability.
IX. Conclusion
The capital debate is not about land. It is about power, identity, and governance.
The Philippines may not need a single capital.
It may need a tri-capital system—a compromise that offers regional inclusion, development balance, and political feasibility without becoming federalism.
This is not a shift in ideology. It is a commitment to pragmatic statecraft.
The Society of Honor by Joe America 
instead of federalism
why not have a capital in luzon visayas mindanao
not redundants but division of labor
Plus I aldo have the other opion laid down
Eastern luzon or New Clark
I dont really know but at the moment, we have glut of capital cities. in cebu, cebu city is capital, in leyte, it is tacloban city, bontoc for mt province, pagadian city for zamboanga del sur and before I forget, we have also divided palawan into 3parts, norte, sur and central, dabaw too, is now in 3parts.
studies have not come in yet indicative of how greatly people have benefited from the divisions made, except that it has apparently made easier for lgus to manage their areas of concern. meaning probly that they get more share of funds now that towns have been made into cities, and cities into super cities.
then new cities will need newly minted mayors and councillors too, and our election ballots will get longer to fill. but maybe that is progress.
This is good news
https://www.bworldonline.com/economy/2026/01/28/727127/transport-master-plan-attracts-five-bids/
so, 29yrs from now, in 2055 we shall see the blue print of the transport master plan. by then, technology would have made leaps, bounds and discoveries beyond our imagination. the world may well be so different from the world we have now, if climate change does not get the better of us.
in the meantime, we are stuck in traffic. singing dowah diddy diddy dum diddydo, she looked good, looked good, she looked fine, looked fine, she looked good, she looked fine, and I nearly lost my mind!
I do not even know if I am still alive by then.
We have lots of plans and lots of masters one of them will get it right.
yes, I am optimistic too, that they will get it right or lest one of them will get it right.
🤣😂🤣😂🤣🏆🍾
cheer up, joeam! we will still be here if not in body, in spirit.
Karl,
How would a tri-capital system not worsen the already existing fragmentation in government performance?
My idea is to not to have federalism picture this Malacanang in Luzon could be as is Batassan in Visayas and the Supreme Court in Mindanao. They just changed address. The Mania centric or Cebu centric or Davao centric governance would be avoided
This is a compromise to a federalist proposition, and a compromise for those who claim neglect.
Thanks for asking. Any better suggestion or should we live things as is where is?
“Any better suggestion or should we leave things as is where is?” – Karl G.
If you were to ask Kasambahay, he would say leave things as they are and just be a good neighbor. Even Batman would applaud the Philippine situation today.
Francis would say make us rich first, then everything else (including corruption) can be addressed.
Firstly, I am not convinced of the problem, i.e. “Imperial Manila.” If I am not mistaken, there are more non-Manileños in Imperial Manila (the government) than Manileños.
So I would say it is a matter of INTENT, not geography. I fear the Tri-State project will only alter geography, not INTENT of the politicians. If provincial Congressmen want attention from Manila (where oftentimes they and their families live) they should ask for it. As they say “MAKE SOME NOISE.”
As you know, I am a believer in the PH-Road system which has already begun. If how we Filipinos build a PH-Road is any indication, you can see how we would do building a Tri-Capital system. To state it clearly, we will do it poorly.
Meanwhile, I said “already begun.” Recently here at TSOH I have been advocating that a delegation be sent to Estonia to see if their X-Road impresses them. Then I said the Philippines should invite an Estonian delegation to come to the Philippines and see if their system will help.
Nobody in the Society alerted me to the fact that this had already been done! Here is the report I got from AI. I didn’t fact check it. You guys (hopefully) can let me know if it is accurate:
The Philippines didn’t just consult with experts; it has effectively treated Estonia as its primary “tutor” for the last few years. The E-Governance Act (RA 12254) is not just a coincidence—it is the direct fruit of a high-level bilateral partnership aimed at turning the Philippines into a “Digital Pearl of the Orient.”
1. The Great Delegation Exchange (2023–2025)
The exchange of ideas hasn’t just been a few emails; it has involved hundreds of top-level officials traveling back and forth.
Philippine Delegation to Estonia: In February 2025 (just months before RA 12254 was signed), a massive delegation of over 70 Philippine officials led by DBM Secretary Amenah Pangandaman and DICT Secretary Ivan Uy attended the Open Government Partnership (OGP) events in Tallinn, Estonia. They were there specifically to study how Estonia manages its “Digital Service Portfolio.”
Estonian Delegation to the Philippines: Estonia’s Ambassador, Mait Martinson, has been extremely active in Manila throughout 2024 and 2025. He has brought Estonian business delegations and technical experts from the e-Governance Academy (eGA)—the same organization that built Estonia’s X-Road—to meet with the DICT and help draft the roadmap for the Philippines.
2. The “E-Philippines” Roadmap
Estonia’s involvement isn’t just advisory; they are providing the “blueprint.” During the 2024–2025 consultations, the two nations focused on three specific areas that are now written into the law:
Cyber Defense: Learning from Estonia’s experience as a world leader in digital security (especially after their 2007 cyber-attack).
The “Once-Only” Principle: The law mandates that the government cannot ask you for the same document twice—a direct lift from the X-Road philosophy.
Digital ID Integration: The PhilSys (National ID) is being modeled to work exactly like the Estonian ID card, serving as the single “key” to open all government doors.
3. “Digital Bayanihan” Experts
Aside from Estonians, the Philippines has been consulting with a “Digital Cabinet” of international and local experts:
The World Bank and ADB: Providing the policy-based loans and technical audits to ensure the P777 billion digital budget isn’t wasted.
The Private Sector: Groups like the IT-BPM Council (the BPO industry) are heavily involved in the “IRR” (Implementing Rules and Regulations) of RA 12254 to ensure the tech is “business-friendly.”
Thank you. I am just setting this idea out and of course I am not closing my kind even temporarily like most debate teams do in advocating their position.
Thanks KB. Geography is fixed we do move a lot. Technology made the world smaller
The body of work at TSOH can be searched in a simplistic way by using the home page search box, and in a detailed way by asking AI to search joeam.com articles and comments on a given subject. I’ve not tried it, but you might be able to structure prompts to summarize, for example, what Francis or Edgar Lores or Irineo said about something.
Noted, thanks JoeAm!
The moving the Capital to the East or Tarlac was a decongestion move.
New Clark has yet to be proposed by Malacanang only Quezon was proposed as of now. Other regions or provinces and cities chances of saying why not move the capital to us is very very plausible imho and a tri capital proposal would address that scenario.
we pinoys move around a lot, we have the wanderlust, and may live in provinces but work in manila. technology has killed geography, we can now be in manila and other cities in few hours and air fares will soon be cheaper.
sa luzon po, people gravitate towards manila, makati, quezon city, etc, but come home to the provinces to celebrate occasions like christmas, undas, etc.
in visayas, people gravitate towards cebu, the city called queen of the south has gotten richer and there are jobs. and gwen the matriarch ungo is gone.
I dont know about mindanaw where mindanawans gravitate to, I hope not to the quarry where digong was rumored to have sent those who dont worship the ground he walks on. they are all idiots in mindanaw, haha! or terrorists, or liars, or chinese lovers, or barumbados, etc. and for them to be in manila the city they hated for being better from where they have come from, where they get better outcomes, untold experiences and eye openers, only for them to go back to mindanaw disillusioned, and whatnot, nope, they wont find what they are looking for in manila maybe because they cannot identify what it is they were looking for! the chicken or the egg.
in short po, geography dont really define or contain us. we are so mobile and our borders are permeable being archipelagic and that is maybe why we lose 26% of gdp due to archipelagic logistics.
“in short po, geography dont really define or contain us. we are so mobile and our borders are permeable being archipelagic and that is maybe why we lose 26% of gdp due to archipelagic logistics.” – Kasambahay
Personally, I think the 26% loss in GDP is a better problem to address than the “Imperial Manila” problem, especially since geography does not define or contain us.
And the wheels are already in motion to improve efficiency of archipelagic logistics. Laws like e-Governance Act and New Government Procurement Act are passed. Budget is approved and I understand World Bank and Asian Dev. Bank are involved in the financing and technical audits to be sure monies don’t go the way of the Flood Scandal.
Looks like Batman is patrolling Gotham City.
The moving the Capital to the East or Tarlac was a decongestion move.
decongestion as in traffic decongestion? if we can only get rid of so many illegal parkings where cars park by the roadside, making roads narrower than they already are, or vendors welling wares right on the street with trios of vendors, buyers and pedestrians weaving in and out where traffic should be. if we can only have better public transport system that often go around picking up and setting down passengers, if people leave their cars at home and use public transport instead.
and now that we have ex gen torre as head of traffic enforcers in metro manila, I’d put pressure on him to come up with miracle busting traffic ideas.
“..if people leave their cars at home and use public transport instead.” – Kasambahay
Back in the 70s, I picked up a Singaporean at the Manila International Airport. He told me that in Singapore, at that time, you could drive your private car into downtown area BUT you paid a very high price for the privilege. That helped with traffic congestion.
To take care of those who took public transportation, they made sure it was reliable, not like public transportation in Metro Manila, at least back in the 70s.
All common sense really, in my opinion. Your ideas about vendors, and pedestrians are also common sense.
all my traffic suggestions po have been previously suggested. it is just that our mmda, metropolitan manila development authority is summat wishy washy and mostly behaving like traffic props! run over even by motorists! their clearing operations are summat inconsistent and scant too that traffic violators including ventors pay them little attention, and fines here for violators are no deterrent. really, open air or semi enclosed public markets ought to be expanded to accommodate vendors and stall holders, so they dont need to hug the roadside. and since land for expansion are very costly and near impossible to obtain, public markets should go upward, maybe few stories high. with plenty underground parking.
but I will give newly appointed mmda manager nicolas torre time to acclimatize to his new role, and see what he can comes up with.
In contemporary discussions about transportation in the Philippines, cars are often demonized and framed as the villains of our urban landscapes. The narrative paints public transport as virtuous and bicycles as the saviors of our cities. However, these discussions overlook a crucial truth: the issue is not moral — it’s systemic.
### Cars in Context
Cars have become essential in the Philippines, not as luxuries, but as lifelines. The archipelago’s unique geography, with its fragmented job markets and informal economy, makes traditional commuting patterns impractical. For many, owning a car is not a choice but a necessity to navigate poorly planned urban environments.
### A Lost Automotive Heritage
The Philippines once had the groundwork for a thriving automotive industry, producing vehicles like the Jeepney and partnering with global brands for assembly. However, inconsistent policy and lack of commitment turned the nation into merely a consumer market, missing the chance to build a robust automotive ecosystem.
### Identifying the Real Problems
The congestion we face is symptomatic of a broader systems failure. Blaming cars without addressing inadequate governance results in solutions that disproportionately impact those already marginalized.
### Effective Strategies from Abroad
Countries like South Korea and various European nations are not demonizing cars; they are organizing their presence. Effective measures include:
1. **Park-and-Ride Systems**: Strategically placing parking away from urban cores can significantly ease congestion.
2. **Designated Freight Corridors**: Separating freight from daily commutes improves flow for everyone.
3. **Micro-Mobility Solutions**: Proper integration of smaller transport modes can ease the burden on major roads.
4. **Smart Land Use**: Consolidating jobs, homes, and services reduces the need for extensive travel.
### Cars and Climate: A Hard Reality
Focusing solely on banning cars overlooks a critical factor: inefficient transport systems increase emissions more than well-managed ones. To truly address climate change, we must enhance the efficiency of our transport networks.
### Conclusion
The Philippines does not need a war on cars; it needs a cohesive transport strategy that acknowledges their role while managing their impact. The car should not be vilified; chaos should. Our choices today — to govern our transport systems wisely — will shape the urban environments of tomorrow.
*The Philippines does not need a war on cars; it needs a cohesive transport strategy that acknowledges their role while managing their impact. The car should not be vilified; chaos should. Our choices today — to govern our transport systems wisely — will shape the urban environments of tomorrow.* – Karl
This response of yours comes right after Kasambahay’s suggestions on dealing with traffic congestion in the National Capital Region. I’m not sure if you read his suggestions, but it sure isn’t about a war on cars. He touches several other areas, too many to mention. His is a war on traffic congestion and he even mentions the poor job the MMDA has done.
But I don’t think citizens of the NCR have the will power to deal with the problem, so it might not be worth spending time on.
My excuse is, though KB did not mention war on cars, KB did mention leave cars at home, methinks this is almost a what if for now.
“but I will give newly appointed mmda manager nicolas torre time to acclimatize to his new role, and see what he can comes up with.” – Kasambahay
Great…I remember people saying that about Duterte when he got elected, and with Marcos, Jr.
Pinoys are resilient…and patient. The incompetents and plunderers rely on that.
There is a fine line between resilience and masochism.
“but I will give newly appointed mmda manager nicolas torre time to acclimatize to his new role, and see what he can comes up with.” – Kasambahay
I looked up the MMDA and it is not like the Metro Manila Authority that Imelda Marcos headed back in my day. It does not have enough authority.
I suspect that the best Nicolas Torre will be able to come up with is band-aid solutions when major surgery is what is needed.
The Philippines does not have the political will to solve the congestion problem in Metro Manila, so the country is stuck with it for the foreseeable future.
The mmc still exists but not much heard of because their is also aleague of mayors whichnis nationwide
A genuine park and ride would do methinks.
I am not yet done with transpo though I already covered a lot.
that is good too, park and ride but where can we get land? we seem to be running out of lands, precious city lands, let alone for parking. but if we do get parking, let it be multi storeys parking, to accommodate multitudes of cars at any given time.
my friend in australia said she bought a car park in a private multi storey parking building but she has no car and rent out her parking space and got herself a nice little earner.
When Nlua is finally passed it would no longer be about planning, but how to stitch up or unjigsaw a jigsaw puzzle.
my spatial management posts earlier tackled that, but not resolved since we do not have nlua or spatial planning in force and enforced.
“When Nlua is finally passed it would no longer be about planning, but how to stitch up or unjigsaw a jigsaw puzzle.” – Karl
Context of this statement of yours is the “Park and Ride” recommendation. While on the one hand you say “a genuine park and ride would do, methinks,” on the other hand you say we can’t do it because, as Kasambahay points out, we don’t have the space.
And that brings us back to one of the culprits – cars. Yet you did not want a “war on cars.” Seems like we are going in circles, eh? We really do not have a choice in some areas but to go to war on cars.
I’m afraid that because of no planning, we just screwed up in the vehicles vs. street space department. When I arrived here in the SF Bay Area in early 80s, the main freeway 101 was two lanes in each direction. Now it is at least four lanes in each direction, more in some areas where it is needed. But oftentimes Americans think ahead and allow extra land space for future growth. In the early 80s, the middle part of the freeway 101 had decorative plants. Now it is all concrete! But they planned ahead for that.
Still on the case with Freeway 101, the Americans did not plan that far ahead as there are stretches of the freeway where there are no shoulders for emergencies. They decided to just use them as traffic lanes and “bahala na” if there is an emergency. We do have car pool lanes, and that is a help.
Forget i said war on cars if it bothers you.
“Forget i said war on cars if it bothers you.” – Karl
Is that how we Filipinos solve problems? (rhetorical question)
I understand Nicolas Torre will have to deal with around 17 mayors! One can just imagine how round table discussions will go as they try to deal with traffic congestion in the Metro Manila Area, or any problems affecting the Area as a whole.
Arresting Duterte (which he did) was easie than dealing with the mayors
South Africa’s Three Capitals: A Deliberate Compromise
South Africa is the only country in the world with three official capital cities—a unique arrangement established in 1910 as part of the political compromise that formed the Union of South Africa. The goal was simple but strategic: balance power among the four former colonies and prevent any single region from dominating the new state.
Division of Government Functions
Each capital hosts a different branch of the national government:
Pretoria – Executive capital
Home to the President, the Cabinet, and most national government departments.
Cape Town – Legislative capital
Seat of Parliament, where national laws are debated and enacted.
Bloemfontein – Judicial capital
Location of the Supreme Court of Appeal (while the Constitutional Court sits in Johannesburg).
Preventing Fragmentation and Power Struggles
This unusual structure helped avoid early political fragmentation through:
Political compromise
Power was deliberately distributed to acknowledge the historical and cultural significance of the former British and Boer colonies—the Cape Colony, Transvaal, Orange Free State, and Natal.
Decentralization
Spreading state institutions encouraged regional development and reduced the risk of political and economic over-centralization.
Institutional interdependence
Although geographically separated, the branches of government remain legally and operationally linked, requiring regular coordination and movement of officials between cities.
A Rare Model
While a few countries divide capital functions between two cities—such as Sri Lanka (Colombo and Sri Jayawardenepura Kotte) and Bolivia (La Paz and Sucre)—South Africa remains the only country with a formal tri-capital system, making it a rare example of constitutional power-sharing through geography.
South Africa’s unique arrangement with three capital cities certainly raises important logistical and financial considerations. Here are some of the key challenges and costs associated with maintaining this tri-capital system in the modern era: Logistical Challenges
Financial Costs
Strategic Considerations
Conclusion
While South Africa’s tri-capital system has its challenges and costs, it serves as a model for balancing power among diverse regions and promoting regional development. The ongoing evaluation of logistics and finances can help optimize this unique governmental structure, ensuring it remains effective and equitable. Would you like to delve deeper into any specific aspect?
This is an example of a justified roadblock or non-obstructionist obstruction of a transfer to eastern luzon of the Metro
Same reasons why people do not want Kaliwa Dam.
The Kaliwa Dam project sits at the intersection of water security, environmental justice, and nation-building — and it exposes a deeper governance question confronting the Philippines: who bears the cost of development, and who enjoys its benefits?
At first glance, the dam responds to a genuine need: Metro Manila’s water demand is growing, and reliance on a single major source (Angat Dam) leaves the capital region exposed to shortages, especially during dry spells and El Niño years. Officials argue that without new sources like Kaliwa, households and industries could face serious scarcity within a few years.
But beyond this technical justification lies a pattern too familiar to observers of Philippine infrastructure: projects that concentrate benefits in and around Metro Manila while externalizing environmental and social costs onto rural peripheries.
Communities in Sierra Madre — where the Kaliwa Dam reservoir and its access roads cut across forests and ancestral lands — raise legitimate concerns. They fear displacement, loss of livelihood, and irreversible changes to ecosystems that have sustained them for generations. Some local governments have even passed resolutions opposing the project on human rights and environmental grounds.
This dynamic — infrastructure driven by central planners with insufficient regard for local consent and environment — is not new. It echoes long-standing critiques of how development is pursued in the Philippines: big projects with big externalities and too little local partnership or benefit sharing.
Indeed, Eastern Luzon’s resistance to Kaliwa is confused by some as obstructionism, yet it is more accurately a demand for inclusive decision-making and equitable development. Communities are not against progress — they want progress they help shape and from which they also benefit.
This governance deficit has broader implications. It undermines trust in public institutions, slows project implementation, and discourages investment. When people feel unheard and dispossessed, projects — even well-intentioned ones — become flashpoints rather than bridges to shared prosperity.
Ultimately, the debate over Kaliwa Dam is not about “dam vs. no dam.” It is about how the Philippines chooses to pursue development in the 21st century. Will it cling to centralized, extractive models that have deepened inequities, or will it embrace more participatory governance, where environmental protection and indigenous rights are integral to national planning?
If the goal is sustainable, resilient, and inclusive development, then the processes by which we build — and who gets a meaningful voice in them — matter as much as the structures we build themselves.
I’m pro-dam myself. They make great recreational lakes, power, and security.
In Oregon and CA, they demolished the old dam so eventually the Salmons will repopulate upstream again. And the dam was too old.
Dam if you do and dam if you don’t.
LOL, well, salmon are important, and dams come and go I suppose.
Like karma chameleon.
https://mb.com.ph/2026/02/02/umpisahan-nyo-na-ltfrb-urges-operators-firms-to-shape-up-amid-looming-crackdown-vs-run-down-puvs