The story unraveling at Vibal Group, Inc. — the largest and oldest educational publisher in the Philippines — isn’t just about family rivalry or corporate squabble. It is an illustration of how those who strive for corporate honesty and accountability can be blamed and fired for integrity.

Vibal Publishing House was co-founded in 1953 by husband Hilarion and his wife Editha Vibal. For more than seven decades, the company has been an anchor of Filipino education, serving Philippine private and public schools with the textbooks, workbooks, and supplementary materials they publish. 

When Hilarion Vibal died in 1971, it was his wife who continued the work, transforming Vibal Group into the country’s largest textbook publisher. Sadly, though, the family matriarch died in 2020 without leaving any significant plan to guide the company’s management team. That vacuum created a bitter battle for control among her six children, centered particularly on three sisters who owned majority shares in the multi-billion peso group of companies.

Now enters Maria Kristine Mandigma, the first CEO of Vibal to come from outside the family. Her forensic review of the  company’s accounts revealed troubling signs of questionable supplier transactions, payment flows that didn’t match known deliveries, and control gaps that prevented verification. These were no small accounting mishaps. They pointed out risks that, if not mitigated, could jeopardize the integrity of the organization’s finances.

Mandigma reported the fraud to the board and recommended that her findings be disclosed to regulators, a good company governance practice based on laws. But Mandigma was instead fired in September 2025, and those whose names had been stamped on the audit retained their position. This all happened after the family sidelined the company’s rightful president, Hilarion and Esther’s son Gaspar Vibal.

Feud out in the open

Mandigma complained to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which then accused the company of fraud and retaliation against whistleblowers. The SEC proposed the prosecution to issue a charge of corporate fraud and syndicated estafa based on the defendants’ own response. Another criminal complaint at the Department of Justice (DOJ) is pending to give the case some of its gravitas.

Those findings implicated the three sisters:

·  Nila Vibal Mata: she was alleged to have stepped into the position of company president and ratified Mandigma’s ouster. Among the three sisters, she is reported to be the most operationally active in the current control structure.

·  Aida Vibal Gutierrez: according to public records, she claims to be a majority shareholder and a board-level principal, though less visible in day-to-day management activities.

·  Stella Vibal Lawson: she was classified as a majority shareholder and seems to be aligned with the same controlling bloc, exercising power mainly at the ownership and board level.

Together, the three comprise the controlling shareholder group referred to in the SEC complaint. Crucially, this is also a governance distinction: though only one arguably holds an executive title (president), all three are accused of exercising effective control over board activity as well, including the firing of top officers and the handling of audit findings.

Labor courts

The internal corporate struggle spilled over into the labor courts, too. 

The National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) ruled that Mandigma’s firing was illegal and ordered her reinstatement. When government officials went to enforce the NLRC order, however, armed guards used their weapons to prevent workers from leaving company grounds, creating a standoff requiring police intervention and arrest. It was only then that Mandigma was able to walk into her Vibal office in peace.

The Vibal conglomerate’s woes are not unique. 

What this tells us is a deeper, systemic issue prevalent in Philippine business: laws created to protect whistleblowers and hold corporate leadership accountable can exist on paper but fail in practice. This is particularly true when it comes to family-run private companies, where there is often resistance to transparency and accountability through the exercise of power. Vibal Group’s involvement in public education and technology, despite its private status, means its governance failures threaten public interest. This intersection with public service makes the company’s internal issues a matter of broader concern.

A major player

To grasp the importance of this issue, one must first recognize the sheer size of the risk. 

Vibal Group isn’t some marginal business. As indicated in the public procurement records throughout 2024 alone, jointly with Vibal Foundation, Inc., the firm garnered a total of P342.53 million in contracts from the Department of Education, including P101.12 million for reading materials and additional contracts amounting to P50.95 million, P30.53 million, P42.29 million, P54.50 million, and P63.13 million. 

These transactions took place inside the Department of Education procurement structure under Vice President Sara Duterte as education secretary. Vantage Point is raising this point more of an institutional reminder of just how deeply Vibal is enmeshed in a centrally administered public procurement regime.

These are not merely revenues but commitments of execution. A company dealing with P300 million–P400 million in procurement flows has to finance production, logistics and nationwide delivery upfront, leaving tens to hundreds of millions of pesos tied up in receivables and inventory. In that system, the auditor is not marginal, but foundational — the first line of defense to make sure revenues match actual transactions and payments reflect economic reality. 

What Mandigma flagged — unverified supplier transactions and payment flows inconsistent with delivery — goes directly to that function. If even a fraction of a P342.53 million cycle is compromised, the effects cascade: cash meant for operations is depleted, supplier payments are delayed, and contract execution is put at risk.

The concerns are further consolidated by financial signals, even in pieces. A P342.53 million procurement footprint grounds the company’s operating scale and a 2023 enforcement action against the company for failure to remit declared withholding taxes points to liquidity strain — returns filed, obligations acknowledged, payments not made.

Even small distortions in a system carrying hundreds of millions of pesos add up: a 10% leakage on a P300 million–P400 million base translates into an estimated P30 million-P40 million of cash displacement. Viewed in that perspective, the audit was not an internal dispute but a financial stress signal — and the decision to remove Mandigma transforms it into a governance failure, raising the more fundamental question of whether the company still has the capacity to detect irregularities at all.

The rulings from the SEC and the DOJ within the next couple of months will serve as a crucial litmus test for the actual efficacy of Philippine corporate reforms. They will determine whether regulatory bodies can truly enforce investor protections against powerful, influential family-controlled business interests. Alternatively, they will highlight if the personal and professional risks for whistleblowers exposing such corruption remain high and long-lasting.

Will rigorous executive audits permanently damage a company’s reputation? The Vibal Group situation, involving allegations of massive financial fraud and contentious leadership disputes, could influence the evolution of corporate governance and public confidence in institutions that impact millions of Filipino lives.

As the SEC and courts weigh in, all eyes should stay on the Vibal case as a leading indicator of corporate accountability and ethical practices in the Philippines. (I will tackle the Vibal case again in my next newsletter)

I welcome your views on these and other issues where decisions made in power shape the country’s economic future.

Below are previous Vantage Point pieces you might have missed: 

– Rappler.com