Ateneo de Zamboanga University

La Purisima Street, Zamboanga City

THE TULFO PHENOMENON AND ITS IMPLICATIONS ON THE PHILIPPINE

JUSTICE SYSTEM

Adona, Shiela Marie B.

Agustin, Aizel S.

Arado, Dersly Lane Q.

Atilano, Alysa Micah A.

Brillantes, Carmelita G.

Carpio, Natalie Faye B.

November 2020
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Introduction ………………………………………………………………….. . 3

II. Review of Related Literature ………………………………………………… 4

III. Methodology ………………………………………………………………… 6

IV. Analysis ………………………………………………………………………. 7

V. Alternative Solutions …………………………………………………………. 11

Appendix ………………………………………………………………... ……… 14

Bibliography ……………………………………………………………………... 15

2
I. INTRODUCTION

The Philippine Justice System first emerged during the Spanish regime with King
Philip II establishing ​Real Audiencia ​de Manila,​ a rudimentary form of a court system that
addresses legal issues and executes administrative functions. Following its primitive
predecessor is the more sophisticated Supreme Court of the Philippine Islands promulgated
by the Second Philippine Commission by the virtue of Act No. 136. In its essence, the
Supreme Court of the Philippines is the paramount judicial body to undertake Philippine
jurisprudence. With one chief justice and fourteen associate justices, the Supreme Court is set
out to solve controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable
(Art. VIII Sec. 1 (2), 1987 Philippine Constitution)​. Amidst this league of professionals
comes a one-man show favored by the mass to play the crime-fighting heroine due to its
vigilante approach in resolving legal disputes. Raffy Tulfo in Action (RTIA) which started as
a radio program hosted by namesake Raffy Tulfo features a pseudo-court trial where
complainants are faced off vis-a-vis the accused on air. Jettisoning from the airwaves to
secure a bigger audience, RTIA has come to be the now celebrated youtube channel bagging
over sixteen million subscribers and a whole lot of criticisms.
The criminal justice system in our country is composed of five stages: investigation
and arrest, pretrial activities, trial, sentencing, and corrections, and every stage has comparing
measures that must be thoroughly evaluated to guarantee that every individual's entitlement
to fair treatment is met. However, with the prevalence of nepotism and partisanship at the
judicial level the underprivileged turn to Tulfo, a man who settles legal disputes in just a
matter of an episode or two. The show typically starts with the plaintiff narrating their
grievances with Tulfo jabbing sardonic remarks to taunt reaction from the accused, after both
parties have given their sides he then proceeds to contact key persons and solicits for advice;
this is where it gets problematic as Tulfo, when not given the prompt action that he warrants,
goes on a vitriolic tirade against the person whom he expects to comply with his demand for
what he guarantees is justice delivered with an iron fist. Investing heavily on Filipino’s love
for drama, Tulfo continues to play Robinhood, a macho man who favors the poor and
powerless. This kind of branding sells to millions of Filipinos as evidenced by his legion of
fans who informally inaugurated him as the icon of Philippine justice, marking the genesis of
the “Tulfo Phenomenon.” This enigma of a show yielded several controversies as critics
claim that Tulfo impugns the legal authority of the country’s justice system by encouraging a
method of shortcuts and neglect of due process. This criticism, however, unveils another

3
perspective of the story; as poor people submit themselves to Tulfo with the reasoning that no
other institution will offer them prompt justice, a dysfunctional framework of the country’s
judicature is revealed.
With this matter developing into a conundrum, we take into question the impact of the
Tulfo Phenomenon on the Philippine justice system: should Raffy Tulfo in Action continue to
tie loose ends for the country’s judiciary, or are the ramifications too grave that this
phenomenon must be put to an end?

II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

A civil case is formally filed by a person against another individual or organization

that has allegedly violated the rights or caused harm to the former. Both parties could agree to
resolve the dispute through disciplinary action or monetary settlements (​Guide to Filing a
Civil Case in the Philippines​). In the process of the preliminary investigation, once the City
Prosecutor has reviewed the submitted Complaint-Affidavit, a subpoena is sent to the accused
obligating them to be present in court during the scheduled date and time to file a
Counter-Affidavit. This is a significant phase because it is when the prosecutor decides
whether there is enough reason to file a case against the accused. If there is insufficient
evidence, the prosecutor will dismiss the complaint (​How to File a Criminal Case in the
Philippines​). On the other hand, appealing a case to Raffy Tulfo begins by lining up on the
streets of Mandaluyong amongst hundreds of hopeful individuals seeking quick justice, and
what replaces the five-step due process is a filmed melee between the plaintiff and the
accused.
According to Celso S. Bravo, the Philippine Government has organized and
established institutions that serve to maintain peace and order. These institutions are
responsible for preventing crimes, enforcement of laws, and apprehension and prosecution of
those who violate the law. The Philippine justice system is divided into two (2) categories
namely (1) the formal justice system and (2) the informal justice system
(ombudsman.org.ph). The formal justice system includes the courts, the police, corrections,
or prison officials. The informal side of the justice system on the other hand involves the
councils of elders, indigenous justice dispensation practices, and other local arbitration
mechanisms. With the absence of surface complexity, informal justice systems are more
accessible to the poor.

4
 The Philippine Justice system has its problems and issues. These are the reasons why
the poor and the disadvantaged chose the informal side of the justice system. One of the
factors that are common in this field is financial setbacks. Hiring a private lawyer which can
meticulously cater to the case is burdening to most, especially the underprivileged plaintiffs.
Furthermore, additional fees are collected during the filing of cases. These fees collected by
the judiciary further decreases the possibility of the poor to pursue justice and will further add
to the burden.
Michael Anderson’s “Access to Justice and Legal Process: Making Legal Institutions
Responsiveto Poor People in LDCs” states the reluctance of the poor and the disadvantage in
using the law as a contributing factor to the expansion of extrajudicial systems. Their
reluctance may be rooted in the social stigma of getting involved with the courts and the
police. Other members of the community see litigation as making trouble as Anderson adds,
“a closer analysis reveals that for the poor, the decision to avoid contact with the legal system
is less a symptom of parochial traditionalism than it is a rational response to the opportunities
and risks which the legal system presents”. There is also a growing mistrust by the poor and
the disadvantaged of the judicial system as a whole. They view the law and consequently the
entire legal system as not truly catering to their needs but rather, they see the legal system as
a tool of oppression by the wealthy members of society and by the government.
Another factor could be institutional imbalances and biases. The way the justice
system conducts its processes can also serve as a factor that will inhibit the poor and the
disadvantaged to engage or participate in the judicial system. This simply means that how the
dispensation of justice is being done further alienates the poor and the disadvantaged from the
judicial system. More often than not, the laws that are being made in countries are not of the
vernacular or the native tongue. The laws are commonly written in English and because of
this, the disadvantaged, oftentimes the poor, do not understand these laws. Also, how the
justice system is made to operate is very formal and that it is commonly shrouded in mystery.
The poor may not understand these processes and this in turn becomes a target for abuse by
some lawyers. For this reason, many resorts to the informal way of acquiring justice.
Court-associated delays are another common problem that most countries are facing.
Perhaps, this is the most common reason why people prefer to file a complaint at Raffy
Tulfo’s show because he demands immediate action from the “defendant.” Due to the
excessive amount of delays in the dispensation of justice attributed to the lack of
infrastructure, funding, personnel, and even competent judges, the trust of the people in the
judicial system decreases thus making them wary of seeking and pursuing legal proceedings.

5
 The Rule of Law Index is an annual report done by the World Justice Project (WJP).
They gather information on 128 countries’ respective justice systems. According to their
latest report, in the overall scoring of a country’s adherence to the law, the Philippines ranks
91st among 128 countries. We also sit on the 64th rank for the absence of corruption, 107th
rank for Fundamental Rights, 97th for Order and Security, 92nd on Civil Justice, and 112th
for Criminal Justice (World Justice Project, 2020). To support those statistics, Lao (2019)
presents “While there are a fair number of free legal assistance groups in the country, the
odds remain stacked against the poor. In 2017, the average lawyer in the Public Attorney’s
Office handled 458 cases and assisted 5,794 clients.” This might be one of the reasons why
Raffy Tulfo appeals to the public because he presents on-the-spot solutions to the
complainants. His way of “trial by publicity” and getting “instant justice” makes it appealing
to the masses instead of relying on judicial procedures which are supposed to administer
justice according to law.
Raffy Tulfo became such a phenomenon that even when his “Aksyon Center”, under
the management of News5, was temporarily closed to the public and stopped accepting cases
due to COVID-19, some social media users were left despaired. One social media user stated
“Maraming tatamaan ng Tulfo withdrawal symptom” and another said, ​“Kawawa naman
ang mga ordinaryong api na sa Tulfo lang umaasa.” ​His service-oriented programs and
hard-hitting commentaries have prompted ordinary Filipinos to turn to him and air personal
and legal concerns instead of going to court (Malasig, 2020). According to Social Blade
(2020), a website that tracks social media statistics and analytics, the channel “Raffy Tulfo in
Action” garners 16.5 million subscribers to date which is approximately 15% of the Filipino
population and 7 billion total views. With these statistics, he ranks 3rd among the most
influential Youtube pages in the Philippines.

III. METHODOLOGY

This paper utilized a qualitative approach in gathering primary data from a series of
interviews and discussions from a legislator, a law student, and 3 pre-law students,
respondents were labeled with codes to ensure confidentiality. The participants were chosen
considering their knowledge of the current state of the Philippine justice system and the legal
due process. Due to the limitations from the current pandemic, gathering the participants was
made online by sending an invitation via email. Semi-structured interviews were conducted

6
through Zoom and Google Meet for 30 minutes each participant wherein they were asked
seven researcher-made questions crafted for the specific purpose of generating their own
views on the issue. The interviews were transcribed and content analysis was done which
involved categorizing and discussing the meaning of certain claims and arguments conveyed
by each participant. Relevant existing data from internet sources and video interviews were
also added and analyzed to support their claims and arguments. SWOT
(Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats) analysis is utilized in the synthesis and
conclusion as it promotes ​full awareness of all the factors revolving the phenomenon.

IV. ANALYSIS

On Tulfo’s “instant justice”

R04, a law student, states that Tulfo’s “instant justice” is fragile for the reasons, (1) it
is extrajudicial and so it does not hold any bearing when presented in court, (2) the solutions
he offers are short-term and unsustainable. R05, a legislator, adds that it gives false hope that
it could be the substitute helpline of the judicial authority in addressing the legal needs of the
people. R02, a Political Science student, claims that Tulfo downplays legal disputes into
entertainment scoops to satisfy the target audience and is a manifestation of a weak and faulty
justice system. R01, another pre-law student, expressed that Tulfo offers temporary solutions
based on his own subjective opinions because he is allowed to execute retribution even
without the proper credentials of a law enforcer.

On the program’s popularity

R02 believes that the Filipino’s attachment to real-life dramas is the key to the
program’s success since it presents legal disputes in a manner that is akin to storytelling with
the use of exaggeration. R04 reasons that the program gained attention out of people’s
desperation to seek a last resort due to their experience of being denied access to formal
justice. R05 adds that what makes the program attractive to the Filipinos is the mirroring of a
“macho image” of a male who can solve problems like a father, a man, like Raffy that listens
to both sides and reprimands people.

On Raffy Tulfo as an icon of Philippine justice

R05 claims that Tulfo’s methods belittle arbitrators and mediators that are dedicated
to their jobs and that there are more people deserving of recognition such as the traditional

7
indigenous leaders as well as arbitrators that work for justice without cameras pointing at
them. R04 states; “​I thank him but I don’t agree. I thank him for standing for our country and
showing how ugly our justice system is,” they then interject that branding Raffy Tulfo as an
icon of Philippine justice is a slap to the face of the legal system as this subverts its role as the
paramount provider of justice. R01 expresses that the likes of Tulfo takes advantage of a
dysfunctional justice system and pivots the odds on their way to gain recognition for
themselves, feeding on the misfortunes of the underprivileged without the intention of
genuinely helping.

On bypassing due process

R02 believes that people tend to avoid following the due process of filing a case
because the system favors those with influence and high social status, thereby making it seem
impossible for ordinary citizens to achieve justice following the due process. With Tulfo’s
image patterning a philanthropist, the poor and underprivileged sees a bigger chance of fair
treatment even with the absence of formality. R03 explains that even with Tulfo’s drastic
execution of the law, he gets the job done immediately whereas a case filed following due
process would stay stagnant and stale in the congested courts. R05 credits the instantaneous
results that Tulfo delivers; ​“instant justice is attractive justice to the short-minded people
who want justice,” however, she emphasizes that Tulfo's program should not replace a court
instead it needs to act as a supplement system that serves to deliver complaints to the proper
channels.

Hypothetically, if placed as an ordinary citizen needing legal assistance, would you

follow the lengthy due process or turn to Tulfo for instant justice?

If identified as a citizen with no extensive knowledge of the type of justice they

deserve, R02 would resort to Tulfo instead of following due process as they reason that not
having the understanding of something as tedious as formal case filing results in people
opting for informal justice. R03 believes that without connections and the leverage of social
standing, the probability of achieving swift justice following due process is very slim.
However, R04 argues that with trial by publicity as a consequence, they would rather follow
the due process as Tulfo’s method involves public probing that may result in humiliation and
harmful psychological effects to the parties involved. R05 shares the same sentiments as they
claim that Tulfo’s program shows a blatant disregard for the dangerous repercussions of

8
exposing the complainants to public scrutiny as she states; ​“Do you even care about the
couple you see on the show? You don’t, you just listen. We just interfere and listen. But you
don’t care about their children, and the trauma they have, the children who are embarrassed
to even go outside due to their experience.”

On providing remedy
R02 strongly suggests that to address this type of extrajudicial program, dismantling
of the system that perpetuates and strengthens this culture of justice should premier the
solutions. R03 claims that termination of the show is not propitious, however, a compromise
must be done by providing services that do not incite public scrutiny to circumvent trial by
publicity. Citing the absence of backlash from the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, R04
believes that the program is to carry on provided that they exercise maximum caution in
voicing libelous statements. For R05, the show is not sustainable and the optimal course of
action to strengthen the justice system is by institutionalizing movements and organizations
that genuinely aim for reformation.

SWOT Analysis

Strengths:
● Raffy Tulfo in Action is a popular national television program that settles real-life
disputes of ordinary Filipinos pro bono.
● The show is widely available on multiple platforms (i.e, Youtube, Facebook, etcetera)
and are easily accessible to a large number of Filipinos, thus raising awareness on
contemporary/real-life problems to the mass majority.
● Provides immediate response
● The show reveals the current condition of the justice system of the Philippines.
○ Inaccessible for the people belonging to the lower classes
○ Numerous cases become pending in congested courts.
○ There is a prevalence of bribery and nepotism.

Weaknesses:
● The show encourages trial by publicity, endangering the parties involved to public
humiliation. RTIA has a segment where online comments from the audience are read
on air which sometimes includes derogatory remarks.

9
 ● Raffy Tulfo lacks the proper credentials to execute legal mediation. Alternative
Dispute Resolutions (ADRs) are to be performed by mediators accredited by the
Office of Alternative Dispute Resolution (OADR) as mandated in the Philippine
Department of Justice, Department Circular No. 049.
● Lapses from his subjective judgment bear dangerous repercussions. Such as in the
case of Melita Limjuco, the accused who was threatened to have her teacher’s license
revoked by Raffy Tulfo due to his misinterpretation of Republic Act No. 7610 or the
child abuse law.
● The show offers solutions that are not sustainable. There are instances where Tulfo
encourages amicable settlements to marital disputes, notwithstanding adultery and
abuse.
● Civil liability or criminal liability cannot be demanded in the event of an injurious
lapse of judgment from Tulfo, for he is neither the government nor an agent of the
government.
● The show does not provide post-trial stability that should protect the victims from
reprisal and double jeopardy on the part of the accused.

Opportunities:
● The show can develop to be a formal supplementary annex of the court to address
minor legal cases, thereby allowing easement in the congested courts do
● Formation of programs dedicated to promoting and strengthening public legal
education
● Formation of programs dedicated to the safeguarding of mental health protection of
victims
● Better acknowledgment and support of mediators, arbitrators, indigenous community
leaders, and NGOs that work towards the pursuit of justice

Threats:
● The show trivializes the role of legally authorized arbitrators and mediators
● The phrases ​“Ipapa-Tulfo kita”​ as well as the other accusatory and threatening
remarks orated on the show are libelous and can be grounds for a legal case against
the show due to its
● The show is frail to the possible violation of civil rights, particularly the right to
self-incrimination. The show does not provide legal counsel to the accused while

10
 coercing them into stating their fault in the absence of a legal counsel, breaching
Section 17, Article III of the 1987 Constitution.
● The show exploits and capitalizes on the struggles of the Filipino citizens as
evidenced by the monetization of every episode that the show produces.

Conclusion
The Tulfo phenomenon will continue to eclipse the formal justice system in the aspect
of public approval and we cannot condemn the mass for doing so. The people will persist to
seek for informal justice because of their thirst for a platform of service that validates their
place in society, notwithstanding the repercussions of informality. Until the paradigm of the
Philippine justice system is reformed into one that advocates the poor, and until the judiciary
wears the blindfold of Maat, the existence of Raffy Tulfo in Action will continue to be the
bastion of hope for the Filipino people.

V. ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS
On the basis of a thorough analysis, the researchers propose the following alternative
solutions:

Amelioration of Free Legal Aid

The majority of the respondents agreed that Tulfo justice becoming a phenomenon is
accredited to the expeditious settlement of legal disputes that the show offers as opposed to
the tedious filing of cases following the due process. The prevalence of attraction to
extrajudicial fix can be curb by intensifying the implementation of the provisions mandated
by the Republic Act No. 9999 or the Free Legal Assistance Act of 2010. Making the public
aware of their right to free legal assistance is also imperative in ensuring that legal disputes
be handled through proper channels. According to the United Nations’ Handbook on
Ensuring Quality of Legal Aid Services in Criminal Justice Processes (2019), the state must
undertake the following obligations to ensure quality and accessible legal aid for the citizens:
● Allocate the necessary human and financial resources to the legal aid system
● Consider establishing a national legal aid body or authority to provide, administer,
coordinate and monitor legal aid services, including quality
● Establish quality standards for legal aid providers
● Provide adequate training, necessary support, and supervision of legal aid provider

11
 ● Intervene when lawyers’ conduct is incompatible with the interests of justice or when
they are manifestly failing to perform

Establishment of a nonpartisan justice system that homogenizes social classes

The preference of the public to lean towards informal justice such as Tulfo’s show instead of
following due process is a manifestation of a dysfunctional justice system. The reliance of the
public for Tulfo to solve disputes is a sign that the government cannot efficiently deliver its
judiciary function to the Filipinos, and the root cause of the dissatisfaction of the
​ he frailty of deviant
underprivileged is the prevalence of bribery or the “​lagay system.” T
judges and lawyers to bribe disenfranchised ordinary citizens to their rights of fair justice,
Makabenta (2017) states that “employing corrupt or bad lawyers is fundamentally the root of
most problems, and maybe this explains why the Philippines by law ensures that foreign
lawyers cannot be employed so that only corrupt Filipino lawyers are employed.” A lawyer’s
biggest business asset is their integrity and measures should be done to avoid compromising
integrity. Employing the best lawyers for the public, who will not tolerate any corruption and
ensure that it does not happen, will rebuild the masses’ trust in the legal system of the
Philippines.

Promotion of low-cost, high quality legal services

According to the World Justice Project and the United Nations (UN), 80% of
Filipinos who need legal assistance do not receive it. The UN also discovered that there is
only 1 lawyer for every 2,200 Filipinos when it should be 1 lawyer for every 250 Filipinos
(asialawportal.com). To address this problem, the government must put an effort to initiate
economical legal innovations. One prime example is the Legal Tree, a legal tech startup and
social enterprise founded by Jason Arteche, whose goal is to make legal service inexpensive
and convenient through the use of technology. Legal Tree is an online platform that connects
potential clients and lawyers with features such as a directory of nearest lawyers and law
offices, create personal or business documents (contracts and affidavits) within minutes, and
“Ask an Attorney” service where a lawyer with the right specialization will contact the
complainant for consultation. Using Legal Tree, consultations are completed within 1 to 2
days only with a fixed affordable price. The Philippine government should be more

12
enthusiastic about investing in these kinds of innovations to ensure a dynamic response to the
turbulent changes in the justice system.

Recognizing the importance of indigenous tribal leaders as arbitrators

Remote areas of the Philippine Islands and several other culturally-concentrated lands
are still practicing traditional justice, whereby executive, legislative, and judicial functions
are shouldered by a tribal or community leader. Such as the case in the towns of Barira and
North Upi in the province of Mindanao whose justice systems pattern indigenous methods of
conflict resolution. In an interview of United Nations–African Union Mission In Darfur
(UNAMID), Eltoum Dabaka, the chief of the Bani tribe in Sudan testified that tribal leaders
are more efficient in delivering justice in their community as they are well enculturated with
the traditions, customs, and behaviors of their subjects (2015). In the Philippine context, the
same holds as the country is geographically diverse, and social customs greatly vary in every
region. The Philippine government should work closely with organizations such as the
Commission of Indigenous Peoples for Mediation and Conflict and other NGOs that aim
towards peace-building and conflict resolution through indigenous methods.

Upholding Human Rights

Lack of knowledge and awareness of their human rights makes the people trust
informal dispute resolution such as Tulfo’s “instant justice” more than the established judicial
system of the country. Article II of the 1987 Philippine Constitution mandates the teaching of
human rights in Philippine schools. After the EDSA Revolution in 1986, Executive Order No.
27, s. 1987 entitled "Education to Maximize Respect for Human Rights" was issued. These
mandates were the bases for the issuance of the Department of Education, Culture and Sports
(DECS) Order No. 61, s. 1987 on the ​"Inclusion of the Study of Human Rights and
Accompanying Responsibilities in the School Curricula at All Levels."​ Since then, human
rights concepts have been integrated into different subject areas (Lansangan-Losaria, 2018).
Alienation of the people from basic human rights results in ignorance-driven
reliability on mainstream dispute resolution programs such as Raffy Tulfo in Action, and too
much of this can destroy the integrity of our judicial system. The continuous deprivation of
fair and formal justice to ordinary Filipinos causes them to find comfort in a quick fix which

13
in turn blinds them from the fact that they deserve so much more than a short-term,
romanticized justice. Toleration of this kind of underhanded service is a betrayal of the
hard-fought democracy of our country and so, bound by blood and duty, we must demand the
state to uphold the human rights of every Filipino citizen without fear or favor.

APPENDIX

INTERVIEW QUESTIONS:
1. What are your thoughts on the “Tulfo Justice”?

2. How do you think the program has grown into what it is today?

3. Raffy Tulfo is being informally inaugurated as the icon for Philippine justice. What

are your thoughts on this and do you think he deserves this kind of glorification?

4. Why do you think people turn to Tulfo instead of following due process?

5. What if, hypothetically, you are an ordinary Filipino citizen in need of legal

assistance, would you rather traverse a longer route following due process or turn to

Tulfo for instant justice?

6. Do you think this Tulfo phenomenon is becoming an issue in need of a remedy? If

yes, what solutions can you suggest?

7. Do you think that the Tulfo phenomenon is a sign of a dysfunctional justice system?

14
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

​Bravo, C. S. (n.d.). ​Philippine Criminal Justice System.​ Retrieved October 26, 2020
from ​https://www.unafei.or.jp/publications/pdf/RS_No90/No90_22PA_Bravo.pdf

A Constitutional History of the Supreme Court of the Philippines.​ (2019, February 11),
Retrieved October 27, 2020, from http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/387/

​ The Judicial Branch.​ (n.d.). Retrieved October 27, 2020 from

https://www.ombudsman.gov.ph/UNDP4/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Primer_Access_to_jus
tice.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1XgAyuLr3xSdv7131rTKrrEeWamAzEHTIquzylU7V72JuKTiH1d4b
W6Vg

Anderson, M. (2003). ​Access to justice and legal process: Making legal institutions
responsive to poor people in LDCs. R​ etrieved October 27, 2020 from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/239802655_Access_to_justice_and_legal_process_
Making_legal_institutions_responsive_to_poor_people_in_LDCs

World Justice Project. (2020). ​Rule of Law Index 2020​. Retrieved October 27 from
https://worldjusticeproject.org/sites/default/files/documents/WJP-ROLI-2020-Online_0.pdf

Lao, G. (2019, November 19). ​The Tulfos are the face of Philippines Justice and that
should bother us.​ Retrieved October 27, 2020 from
https://news.abs-cbn.com/ancx/culture/spotlight/11/10/19/the-tulfos-are-the-face-of-philippin
e-justice-and-that-should-bother-us

Socialblade. (2020). ​Raffy Tulfo in Action’s Youtube Stats.​ Retrieved October 27, 2020
from
https://socialblade.com/youtube/channel/UCxhygwqQ1ZMoBGQM2yEcNug

15
 ​ uide to Filing a Civil Case in the Philippines​. (n.d.). Retrieved October 28, 2020, from
G
DS Law: https://www.duranschulze.com/guide-to-filing-a-civil-case-in-the-philippines/

How to File a Criminal Case in the Philippines.​ (n.d.). Retrieved October 28, 2020, from
Nicolas & De Vega Law Offices:
https://ndvlaw.com/how-to-file-a-criminal-case-in-the-philippines/

Malasig, J. (2020, March 2020). ​Raffy Tulfo’s Aksyon Center’ won't be accepting cases for
the meantime due to COVID-19. ​Retrieved November 5, 2020 from
https://www.google.com.ph/amp/s/interaksyon.philstar.com/entertainment/2020/03/10/16394
5/raffy-tulfo-aksyon-center-closed-covid19/amp/

Makabenta, Y. (2017, April 27). ​Lawyers, lawyers everywhere, but not enough rule of
​ etrieved November 9, 2020 from
law. R
https://www.manilatimes.net/2017/04/27/opinion/columnists/topanalysis/lawyers-lawyers-ev
erywhere-not-enough-rule-law/324305/

Mangubat, E. (2015, May 14 ). ​Can you afford a lawyer?​. Retrieved November 9, 2020
from
https://cebudailynews.inquirer.net/56676/can-you-afford-a-lawyer#:~:text=In%20the%20low
er%20courts%2C%20a,or%20P2%2C000%20per%20hour.

Making legal services simple and affordable in the Philippines.​ (2020, June 29). Retrieved
November 9, 2020 from
https://asialawportal.com/2020/06/29/making-legal-services-simple-and-affordable-in-the-phi
lippines-an-interview-with-jason-arteche-owner-and-founder-legal-tree/

​Philippines 2019. ​(n.d). Retrieved November 11, 2020 from

https://www.amnesty.org/en/countries/asia-and-the-pacific/philippines/report-philippines/

Lansangan-Losaria, N. (2018) ​The Human Rights Education Program of the Department

​ etrieved November 11, 2020
of Education, Culture and Sports (DECS) of the Philippines. R
from
https://www.hurights.or.jp/archives/human_rights_education_in_asian_schools/section2/1998
/03/the-human-rights-education-program-of-the-department-of-education-culture-and-sports-
decs-of-the-phi.html

SyCip, Hernandez, & Gatmaitan. (2013). ​Mediation in 16 Jurisdictions Worldwide​. Retrieved

November 16, 2020, from
https://www.syciplaw.com/Documents/ME2013%20Philippines.pdf

Philippine Daily Inquirer. (2019, November 29). ​Tulfo Justice​. Retrieved November 16,
2020, from https://opinion.inquirer.net/125563/tulfo-justice

https://www.unodc.org/documents/justice-and-prison-reform/HB_Ensuring_Quality_Legal_
Aid_Services.pdf

16
(UNODC), U. N. (2019). ​Handbook on Ensuring Quality of Legal Aid Services in Criminal
Justice Processes Practical Guidance and Promising Practices .​ Vienna: English, Publishing
and Library Section, United Nations Office at Vienna.

https://www.culturalsurvival.org/news/philippines-traditional-justice-system-used-resolve-co
nflicts

Philippines: Traditional justice system used to resolve conflicts.​ (2020). Retrieved November
17, 2020, from Cultural Survival:
https://www.culturalsurvival.org/news/philippines-traditional-justice-system-used-resolve-co
nflicts

https://unamid.unmissions.org/conflict-resolution-%E2%80%A2-community-leaders-contrib
ute-sustainable-peace

Mahady, M. (2015, February 15). ​CONFLICT RESOLUTION • Community Leaders

Contribute to Sustainable Peace​. Retrieved November 17, 2020, from UNAMID:
https://unamid.unmissions.org/conflict-resolution-%E2%80%A2-community-leaders-contrib
ute-sustainable-peace

17