The Philippine response to COVID-19 has been termed as one of the world's longest and most

stringent lockdowns. Entire regions and cities were placed under lockdown, transportation was

limited, and masks and social isolation were rigidly enforced. Violations were dealt with

repercussions. The government relied largely on the police and military to maintain order and

guarantee that all health regulations were followed. As a result, some observers and scholars have

labeled the government's response as "draconian," "militarized," or "police-centric."

Social distance and lockdown measures in the Philippines are not adequately nuanced. Contact

tracing procedures have not progressed as rapidly as testing and treatment. There is a lack of

leadership, with certain members of the Inter-Agency Task Force focused only on regulating people

movement. There are also significant policy communication gaps: several government and police

employees were unpunished for breaking regulations, while numerous citizens were imprisoned for

not wearing masks.

Despite this, the Philippines' four-pillar policy response to the pandemic included social protection

assistance for the disadvantaged, including displaced and overseas Filipino workers, as well as an

emergency cash assistance program. It also increased resources for front-line medical professionals,

as well as economic measures including credit guarantees for small enterprises and monetary

measures. To increase liquidity, policy rates were cut five times in 2020. A bill was passed in

September to offer further fiscal help to hard-hit industries like agriculture and services, such as

transportation and tourism.

Furthermore, the government budget for 2021 is paying its way out of the crisis by continuing to boost

infrastructure spending. However, the budget prioritizes national defense and the maintenance of

peace and order over health and social welfare. The government is also planning legislation to

decrease business taxes and rationalize incentives, but several economists are concerned about the

initiative's timing, as well as the state's inability to accomplish such complicated change.

Despite differing opinions on the sufficiency of fiscal policy responses, there is unanimous consensus

that a successful economic recovery is dependent on adequate management of the health issue,

which the government is still failing to achieve.