ABSTRACT
The Philippine government used the law as a tool in its pandemic response to mixed effects. On the one hand, the government was able to provide some emergency social ameliorations, institutionalize online and remote work conditions, and respond to developments in the pandemic. More successful, however, was how the government employed the tools of the constitution to justify its strongman approach of curtailing rights and liberties. For a virus such as COVID-19, exercising the government’s strong arm to curtail the freedom to travel and gather can save lives. However, an authoritarian approach to a health crisis can only work if coupled with responsive action on emerging social issues – which would undoubtedly crop up as people’s lives and trade’s flow are interrupted – and strategic future-thinking for recovery. Lockdowns also need to be married to efficient government action in controlling outbreaks, employing tracing mechanisms, and planning for vaccine deployment. Because this was not done in the Philippines, we are not better post-Covid.
