ABSTRACT
This chapter explores the dynamics of governance and health security during the COVID-19 pandemic, with comparisons to HIV in the early years. It is also a tale of two different Presidencies with radically different styles of governance. The response to HIV in the 1990s was swift and decisive, the President and Health Secretary invoking science to prohibit mandatory testing and isolation, and encourage civil society participation in the formulation of public policy. In contrast, COVID-19 resulted in one of the world's longest lockdowns. Pre-existing social inequities were left untouched: the absence of unemployment benefit, congested living conditions and weak public health facilities. There was corruption in the procurement of health commodities and a scandal in the use of the Government's scarce health insurance funds. COVID-19 was weaponised through policies formulated by a committee composed largely of retired military personnel, and an Anti-Terror Act was passed, allowing arrests without warrants. The Act also legitimised red-tagging (accusations of communist affiliations), which was used against individuals and organisations that spoke out against corruption and inefficient health services, as well as those who organised self-help projects. The Philippines’ experience offers important lessons for future health crises, particularly in respect of governance and civil society participation.
