Maritess and Maita Lopez Emerge as Key Voices in First Philippine Holdings Board Battle — But Who Really Controls the Lopez Business Empire?
MANILA, Philippines — November 10, 2026 — The long-running dispute surrounding the Lopez business empire has brought renewed attention to two influential family members: Maria Teresa “Maritess” Lagdameo Lopez and her daughter, Maria Margarita “Maita” Lopez Lichauco.
The two women emerged as important figures behind the director nominations at First Philippine Holdings Corporation (FPH), according to company disclosures reported by Bilyonaryo on August 17.
Their involvement adds another dimension to a corporate governance struggle involving competing interests within one of the Philippines’ most established business families.
Maritess, the widow of former Meralco chairman and Philippine ambassador Manuel “Manolo” Lopez, and Maita were both involved in shaping the list of candidates for FPH’s September 25, 2026 annual stockholders’ meeting.
The development was significant because FPH sits within the wider Lopez corporate structure, with interests spanning energy, infrastructure, property and media.
But the nominations also raised a bigger question: how much influence do different family members and major shareholders have over the leadership of the business empire?
The September election has since taken place, and official company disclosures now provide a clearer picture of the board that emerged from the contest.
Maritess and Maita Lopez Take Different Roles in the Board Nomination Process
According to FPH’s disclosures cited in the August 17 Bilyonaryo report, Lopez Holdings Corporation, which held 60.67% of FPH’s voting stock at the time, nominated the regular director candidates, with the exception of Social Security System nominee Diana Pardo-Aguilar.
The nominations were made upon the recommendations of Lopez Inc. president Federico “Piki” Lopez and Maritess Lopez.
Maita separately nominated candidates.
The distinction is important because the filing identifies the people involved in the nomination process but does not specify which individual recommended each regular candidate.
FPH did not publicly identify the individual preferences behind every regular-director nomination.
As a result, it would be inaccurate to assign specific candidates to Maritess, Maita or Piki without additional documentary evidence.
Nevertheless, the involvement of the mother-and-daughter tandem attracted attention because both had previously figured in disagreements over the future direction of the Lopez business group.
Who Are Maritess Lopez and Maita Lopez Lichauco?
Maritess Lopez is the widow of Manuel “Manolo” Lopez, a prominent business executive and former Philippine ambassador to Japan.
Manolo Lopez also served as chairman of Manila Electric Company, commonly known as Meralco, and held important positions within the wider Lopez business network.
Their daughter, Maria Margarita “Maita” Lopez Lichauco, is another member of the family whose involvement in the corporate dispute has drawn attention.
The two women have been associated with different positions concerning the group’s leadership.
Maritess previously submitted a separate proposed list of directors for FPH.
Maita, meanwhile, was among the family members reported to have supported efforts to remove Federico “Piki” Lopez as president of Lopez Inc.
However, the available disclosures do not establish that the two women were pursuing identical strategies or that every nomination reflected a coordinated position.
Their participation should be understood within the wider context of competing shareholder interests and corporate governance decisions.
Lopez Holdings’ 60.67% Voting Stake Makes It Central to the Election
One of the most important figures in the FPH board dispute is Lopez Holdings Corporation.
At the time covered by the August 17 report, Lopez Holdings controlled approximately 60.67% of FPH’s voting stock.
That substantial ownership position gave the holding company significant influence in the director nomination process.
The board election involved 18 candidates competing for 15 director positions.
The regular-director candidates included several incumbent executives and directors, alongside newcomers.
Among the incumbents were:
- Federico R. Lopez
- Benjamin R. Lopez
- Francis Giles B. Puno
- Richard B. Tantoco
- Emmanuel Antonio P. Singson
- Mercedes Lopez-Vargas
- Miguel Ernesto L. Lopez
- David O. Chua
Newcomers included Roderico V. Puno and Lee Benjamin Z. Lerma.
Diana Pardo-Aguilar was the Social Security System nominee.
The independent-director contest also attracted attention.
Longtime FPH executive and shareholder Esmeraldo C. Amistad backed four incumbent independent directors: Jaime I. Ayala, Stephen T. CuUnjieng, Cielito F. Habito and Cirilo P. Noel.
Meanwhile, minority shareholder Joseph Alvin Tan nominated former Energy Secretary Jose Rene D. Almendras, former APC Group president Evelyn R. Singson and Jose Ramon R. Garcia.
The nomination process demonstrated how different shareholders and stakeholders were seeking representation within the company’s governance structure.
Why the Lopez Family Dispute Matters to FPH
The board election did not happen in isolation.
It took place amid a broader disagreement involving different branches of the Lopez family and their respective interests in the business empire.
One of the central figures was Federico “Piki” Lopez, who served as FPH chairman and chief executive and held leadership positions across other Lopez Group companies.
A group associated with former ABS-CBN chairman Eugenio “Gabby” Lopez III had previously sought changes in the leadership of Lopez Inc.
The dispute involved questions about corporate control, executive leadership and the future direction of businesses connected to the family.
The situation became more complicated following the sale of Gabby Lopez’s family branch’s stake in Lopez Inc. to businessman Ramon S. Ang in August 2026.
That transaction changed the ownership landscape at the holding-company level.
However, ownership changes at Lopez Inc. should not automatically be treated as direct changes in FPH’s shareholding or board composition.
The companies have separate corporate structures and their own disclosure requirements.
For investors, understanding these distinctions is essential when evaluating the effects of family ownership transactions on listed companies.
The September 25 Election: What Actually Happened?
The August nominations were only the beginning of the story.
FPH eventually held its annual stockholders’ meeting on September 25, 2026.
The company’s regulatory filing and published voting results show that Federico R. Lopez and the other incumbent regular-director candidates secured election.
Roderico V. Puno and Lee Benjamin Z. Lerma also won board seats.
The four incumbent independent directors—Jaime I. Ayala, Stephen T. CuUnjieng, Cielito F. Habito and Cirilo P. Noel—were elected as well.
The election results also showed that the two remaining independent challengers, Evelyn R. Singson and Jose Ramon R. Garcia, did not secure seats.
Former Energy Secretary Jose Rene D. Almendras had withdrawn his nomination before the election.
But another development followed immediately after the stockholders’ meeting.
According to Bilyonaryo’s September 25 report, Lerma resigned after winning a board seat.
FPH disclosed that his resignation had been decided by and agreed with the company’s major stockholder.
Victor Emmanuel B. Santos Jr. subsequently filled the vacancy.
The unusual sequence added another development to an already closely watched corporate election.
Importantly, FPH did not publicly establish that Lerma’s resignation was connected to the earlier disagreements between family members.
The reason should therefore not be presented as a confirmed consequence of the Lopez family dispute.
What the Election Reveals About Corporate Governance
The September election provides a useful example of how ownership, nominations and voting rights interact in Philippine publicly listed companies.
A substantial shareholder may have significant influence over the candidates presented for election.
However, the nomination process, voting procedures and director qualifications remain subject to corporate laws, securities regulations and applicable governance requirements.
For companies with concentrated family ownership, the challenge is balancing shareholder influence with effective oversight and accountability.
Investors also need to understand the distinction between regular directors and independent directors.
Independent directors are expected to exercise objective judgment and help protect the interests of the company and its shareholders.
Their independence is particularly important when companies face related-party transactions, strategic disagreements or competing shareholder interests.
The FPH election therefore attracted attention not simply because of the family names involved, but because of what the outcome could mean for corporate decision-making and investor confidence.
The Bigger Picture: ABS-CBN and the Wider Lopez Business Restructuring
The developments at FPH also need to be viewed alongside other changes involving Lopez-linked companies.
ABS-CBN Corporation, another major business associated with the Lopez family, has been pursuing a substantial financial restructuring.
In August 2026, ABS-CBN announced plans to raise ₱6 billion in new equity through investments involving I&C Holdings Corporation and Lopez-related investment entities.
The company’s shareholders approved important elements of the investment and corporate restructuring program on September 30.
The transaction involved three Lopez family investment vehicles—Crème Investment Corporation, Mantes Corporation and Presta Holding Company—alongside Lopez Inc. and outside investor I&C Holdings.
The capital-raising plan is separate from the FPH board election.
However, both developments illustrate the broader changes taking place across companies associated with the Lopez business network.
For additional background, WWC One Media has examined the new investors entering ABS-CBN, the company’s ₱6-billion capital plan and the broader financial restructuring facing the media business.
These related developments should not be interpreted as proof that the FPH board election and ABS-CBN’s investment transactions were part of one coordinated corporate transaction.
Each company has its own shareholders, board decisions and regulatory disclosures.
What Investors Should Watch Next
The September 25 election resolved the immediate contest for FPH’s board seats, but it did not necessarily end the wider debate over leadership and influence across the Lopez business group.
Several issues remain relevant to investors.
1. Board independence and oversight
The performance of independent directors will remain important in assessing the quality of FPH’s corporate governance.
2. Shareholder influence
The relationship between Lopez Holdings, Lopez Inc. and other shareholders remains central to understanding how major corporate decisions are made.
3. Leadership stability
Investors will continue to monitor changes involving Federico Lopez and other senior executives across Lopez Group companies.
4. Related corporate transactions
Developments involving First Gen, ABS-CBN and other companies within the wider business network could affect investor perceptions, although each transaction must be assessed independently.
5. Transparency and regulatory disclosures
Official filings, voting results and board announcements will remain the most reliable basis for evaluating changes in ownership and corporate control.
The Bottom Line: A Board Election That Revealed More Than a List of Nominees
Maritess Lopez and Maita Lopez Lichauco’s involvement in the FPH director nomination process highlighted the influence of different family members in a major Philippine business group.
Their participation came during a period of significant ownership and leadership changes involving the wider Lopez corporate network.
The September 25 election ultimately returned Federico “Piki” Lopez and several incumbent directors to the FPH board, while also bringing in new candidates.
Lerma’s immediate resignation after winning a seat added another unexpected development.
For shareholders, the most important issue is not simply which family member supports which candidate.
It is whether the resulting board can maintain effective oversight, protect shareholder interests and provide stable leadership for one of the country’s established business groups.
The Lopez business empire continues to evolve as ownership arrangements, board representation and corporate strategies change.
But with the September election completed, the next question is no longer who made the nominations.
It is whether the new board can maintain investor confidence while the wider Lopez family business landscape continues to change.
