Published 12 December 2025, The Daily Tribune
The Supreme Court, in a recent landmark ruling penned by Justice Amy Lazaro-Javier, has declared as unconstitutional the sweeping or transfer of PhilHealth funds to the National Treasury. More than a fiscal pronouncement, it is a constitutional affirmation: public health funds are not mere entries in government accounting—they are lifelines, intended to heal, protect, and save Filipino lives.
At the core of the decision lies a simple truth: PhilHealth funds exist for one purpose—healthcare. They are not general revenue. They are trust contributions, paid for by workers, employers, and the government, designed to ensure medical support when illness strikes. When government sweeps these funds into the Treasury, the State disrupts the delicate social contract between the citizen and the health system.
Justice Javier’s opinion underscores this. The appropriation of PhilHealth reserves into the Treasury violates the Constitution, for it deprives members of the benefits they paid for without due process. These funds are earmarked, not subject to open-ended reallocation. To treat them as disposable fiscal margins is to treat people’s health as secondary. But health, as the Court reminds us, is wealth, and the protection of health is a constitutional priority—not a budgetary afterthought.
The ruling strengthens the principle that wealth is health, too. The nation prospers when citizens are well. A productive workforce is built on healthy bodies. Families rise when no illness forces them into debt.
The case is a response to a history we know too well—when PhilHealth faced controversies over misuse, overpricing, and delayed reimbursements that left hospitals struggling and patients stranded. The Court’s message is firm: accountability is not optional, and public health cannot be hijacked by fiscal expediency. As Justice Javier wrote, public funds earmarked for health insurance cannot be repurposed merely to balance books or to cover unrelated expenditures.
This decision is a reset button. It compels government to respect contributory health funds as trust funds, not as free-floating public resources. It also calls on PhilHealth to raise its standards of stewardship: transparent accounting, efficient benefits delivery, fair reimbursements to hospitals, and responsive systems accessible to every Filipino.
The ruling resonates at a time when pandemics, emerging diseases, and the daily costs of healthcare remind us that illness can strike anyone, anytime. In such moments, people cling to PhilHealth as a safety net. That net must not have holes. It must not weaken because funds were siphoned for other purposes.
From a constitutional law standpoint, this ruling enriches jurisprudence on earmarked funds, the limits of legislative power, and the doctrine that specific-purpose funds cannot be absorbed into the general fund absent a clear constitutional basis. It is a victory for social justice, for the marginalized worker paying monthly premiums, for the senior citizen relying on dialysis coverage, and for the parent worried about a child’s surgery.
But beyond the legal triumph is the human triumph. Health is wealth—and wealth must serve health. A nation that protects its health funds protects its people. A government that shields PhilHealth resources secures the dignity of every Filipino who falls sick and needs care.
The Court has spoken. Now execution must follow. The ruling demands vigilance, reforms, and a renewed commitment to public health. For in the end, no treasury is richer than a nation of healthy citizens.
For more of Dean Nilo Divina’s legal tidbits, please visit www.divinalaw.com. For comments and questions, please send an email to cad@divinalaw.com.
