At the moment, there is no specific sport tribunal in the Philippines for sports-related issues. How sports-related issues are handled depend on the rules and regulations of each National Sports Association (NSA), including the grievance procedure, grounds and appeal process—some NSAs even have its own dispute resolution arm within the Association.

A dispute resolution body outside the NSA is the Philippine Olympic Committee. The Philippine Olympic Committee (POC) is the body in charge of the country’s involvement and participation in the Olympic Games, with the goal of developing, furthering and protecting the Olympic Movement in the Philippines. It has an independent mediation and arbitration body to resolve any institutional and/or sports-related disputes arising within the POC, or between the POC and its members, outside the ordinary Courts.

The Philippine Dispute Resolution Chamber (PDRCI) also offers sports dispute resolution services via arbitration and mediation. The service started in 2021, with its rules for Sports Arbitration and Sports Mediation available in its website. ILC Law Partner Mickey Ingles assisted in developing the rules.

Under the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of the Philippines, the following cannot be subject to arbitration:

(a) labor disputes covered by the Labor Code;

(b) the civil status of persons;

(c) the validity of a marriage;

(d) any ground for legal separation;

(e) the jurisdiction of courts;

(f) future legitime;

(g) criminal liability; and

(h) those which by law cannot be compromised.

There is no specific Statute or Code that fully embodies sports law in its entirety in the Philippines. The guiding principle of Philippine sports law is the Constitution, particularly Article XIV, Section 19 (1) and (2), to wit:

SECTION 19. (1) The State shall promote physical education and encourage sports programs, league competitions, and amateur sports, including training for international competitions, to foster self-discipline, teamwork, and excellence for the development of a healthy and alert citizenry.

(2) All educational institutions shall undertake regular sports activities throughout the country in cooperation with athletic clubs and other sectors.

However, these provisions are not self-executory and would need specific laws to carry out its mandate.

Despite the absence of a specific Statute or Code on sports law, laws of general application are applicable to the practice of sports in the country, such as contract law, labor law, intellectual property, taxation, immigration and citizenship law, criminal law, and torts, among others.

There are also more specific statutes that govern different specific sports situations, such as the Student-Athletes Protection Act (SAPA) and the National Athletes and Coaches Benefits and Incentives Act (NACBIA).

Other than legislation, sports law is, to a certain extent, codified in the rules and regulations of NSAs, leagues, clubs, and athletic associations. While these are not “laws” per se, these do have the force of law as to its binding effect on stakeholders like officers, members, players, and officials.

The Philippines recognizes the need for more statutes supporting sports law, as seen in the many pending bills related to sports. A key development is House Bill 4175, championed by Olympians Maxine Esteban, Ernesto Obiena, and Gold Medalist Hidilyn Diaz, with the help of ILC Law. The House Bill was introduced in Congress in September 2025. This bill seeks to protect national athletes and members of the national training pool by ensuring due process rights in any proceeding involving national athletes and by mandating NSAs to be more transparent in their rules and selection processes.

Two key national sports authorities in the Philippines are the Philippine Sports Commission and the POC.

The Philippine Sports Commission (PSC) was created by virtue of Republic Act No. 6847. It is the primary policy-setting and implementing agency of the Philippines, attached to the Office of the President. Its three-fold mandate is to (1) promote and develop all national amateur sports, with great emphasis on grassroots participation; (2) encourage wide participation of all sectors, government and private, in such goal of promoting and developing amateur sports in the country; and (3) augment government appropriations for sports promotion and development.

As the country’s main policy-setting and implementing agency for sports, the PSC has numerous legally-mandated sports-related functions, such as establishing relationships with inter-NSAs, developing and maintaining sports facilities around the country, and coordinating with various local government units (LGUs) and officials for sports development programs and initiatives within their respective jurisdictions.  The PSC is also mandated to spearhead the search for exceptional Filipino athletes by setting up a screening committee to select members of the Philippine Sports Hall of Fame.

While its main function is to impose policies to enhance sports participation and performance, the PSC also operates as the main governmental funding source for sports-related matters in the country. It has played a key role in the Philippines’ hosting of various international tournaments, such as the FIBA World Cup in 2023, the FIVB Men’s Volleyball World Championship in 2025 and the inaugural FIFA Futsal Women’s World Cup in 2025.

On the other hand, the POC, as previously discussed, is the body in charge of the Philippines’ participation in the Olympic Games, which includes the promotion of the Olympic Movement in the Philippines. It serves as the final arbitrator of all intra-NSA conflicts and disputes. Any final decision of the POC may be submitted exclusively by way of appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Switzerland.

A government agency that likewise has oversight powers in sports is the Games and Amusements Board (GAB). GAB has the power to exercise supervision and regulation over the operation and conduct of specific professional sports, such as basketball, volleyball, boxing, wrestling, among others. It has the power to fully enforce laws, rules and regulations governing the conduct of all professional sports and games locally, including the activities of professional athletes, game officials and officiating sports personnel, to issue and revoke permits or licenses, and to initiate, undertake, hear and decide any investigation on any violation of its rules and regulations concerning professional sports.

There is no specific Statute or Code that fully embodies sports law in its entirety in the Philippines. The guiding principle of Philippine sports law is the Constitution, particularly Article XIV, Section 19 (1) and (2), to wit:

SECTION 19. (1) The State shall promote physical education and encourage sports programs, league competitions, and amateur sports, including training for international competitions, to foster self-discipline, teamwork, and excellence for the development of a healthy and alert citizenry.

(2) All educational institutions shall undertake regular sports activities throughout the country in cooperation with athletic clubs and other sectors.

However, these provisions are not self-executory and would need specific laws to carry out its mandate.

Despite the absence of a specific Statute or Code on sports law, laws of general application are applicable to the practice of sports in the country, such as contract law, labor law, intellectual property, taxation, immigration and citizenship law, criminal law, and torts, among others.

There are also more specific statutes that govern different specific sports situations, such as the Student-Athletes Protection Act (SAPA) and the National Athletes and Coaches Benefits and Incentives Act (NACBIA).

Other than legislation, sports law is, to a certain extent, codified in the rules and regulations of NSAs, leagues, clubs, and athletic associations. While these are not “laws” per se, these do have the force of law as to its binding effect on stakeholders like officers, members, players, and officials.

The Philippines recognizes the need for more statutes supporting sports law, as seen in the many pending bills related to sports. A key development is House Bill 4175, championed by Olympians Maxine Esteban, Ernesto Obiena, and Gold Medalist Hidilyn Diaz, with the help of ILC Law. The House Bill was introduced in Congress in September 2025. This bill seeks to protect national athletes and members of the national training pool by ensuring due process rights in any proceeding involving national athletes and by mandating NSAs to be more transparent in their rules and selection processes.

Two key national sports authorities in the Philippines are the Philippine Sports Commission and the POC.

The Philippine Sports Commission (PSC) was created by virtue of Republic Act No. 6847. It is the primary policy-setting and implementing agency of the Philippines, attached to the Office of the President. Its three-fold mandate is to (1) promote and develop all national amateur sports, with great emphasis on grassroots participation; (2) encourage wide participation of all sectors, government and private, in such goal of promoting and developing amateur sports in the country; and (3) augment government appropriations for sports promotion and development.

As the country’s main policy-setting and implementing agency for sports, the PSC has numerous legally-mandated sports-related functions, such as establishing relationships with inter-NSAs, developing and maintaining sports facilities around the country, and coordinating with various local government units (LGUs) and officials for sports development programs and initiatives within their respective jurisdictions.  The PSC is also mandated to spearhead the search for exceptional Filipino athletes by setting up a screening committee to select members of the Philippine Sports Hall of Fame.

While its main function is to impose policies to enhance sports participation and performance, the PSC also operates as the main governmental funding source for sports-related matters in the country. It has played a key role in the Philippines’ hosting of various international tournaments, such as the FIBA World Cup in 2023, the FIVB Men’s Volleyball World Championship in 2025 and the inaugural FIFA Futsal Women’s World Cup in 2025.

On the other hand, the POC, as previously discussed, is the body in charge of the Philippines’ participation in the Olympic Games, which includes the promotion of the Olympic Movement in the Philippines. It serves as the final arbitrator of all intra-NSA conflicts and disputes. Any final decision of the POC may be submitted exclusively by way of appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Switzerland.

A government agency that likewise has oversight powers in sports is the Games and Amusements Board (GAB). GAB has the power to exercise supervision and regulation over the operation and conduct of specific professional sports, such as basketball, volleyball, boxing, wrestling, among others. It has the power to fully enforce laws, rules and regulations governing the conduct of all professional sports and games locally, including the activities of professional athletes, game officials and officiating sports personnel, to issue and revoke permits or licenses, and to initiate, undertake, hear and decide any investigation on any violation of its rules and regulations concerning professional sports.

Presidential Decree No 483 (P.D. 483) criminalizes game-fixing, match-fixing, point-shaving, and game machination in the Philippines, which are punishable with imprisonment for a period of up to six (6) years. As part of GAB’s power over professional sports in the Philippines, it is also tasked to investigate game-fixing in professional sports and mete out sanctions against erring players and coaches. Moreover, the sports governing bodies or the NSAs handle integrity issues through their own internal disciplinary mechanisms, without prejudice to criminal prosecution under P.D. 483.

Sports betting is legal in the Philippines, as long as the sports betting activity or operation is registered with the PAGCOR.

The sports governing bodies or the NSAs typically follow the betting-related rules and guidelines of their respective international federations as regards betting-related offenses of athletes.

The Philippines has not signed or ratified the Macolin Convention.

There is no specific institution tasked with safeguarding the integrity of sports across the Philippines.

However, the POC is tasked to establish and govern safeguarding policies and to implement mechanisms to ensure a safe, supportive and healthy environment for athletes. Within the POC, there are various committees that oversee safeguarding matters, such as Gender Equality, Medical and Doping, Safe Sport, and Ethics. The POC likewise has an Athlete’s Commission, which serves as the link between POC and Filipino athletes. It likewise serves as the consultative and advisory body for these athletes.

POC is guided by its own Code of Conduct, which adapts the Olympic Movement, including the Olympic Movement Medical Code, and the principles of Olympism.

In terms of doping, the Philippine National Anti-Doping Organization (PHI-NADO) is the institution dealing with anti-doping in the Philippines, Established by the PSC as an independent organization, the PHI-NADO is the country’s accredited anti-doping organization under World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and the South East Asian Regional Anti-doping Organization. It follows the WADA Code.

Corruption, in general, is governed by Title VII of the Revised Penal Code and special statutes such as the Anti‑Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees, Plunder Act, Presidential Decree No. 46 prohibiting public officials and employees from receiving gifts, and the New Government Procurement Act.

In general, private individuals can be held criminally liable if they conspire with public officials. If no public officials are involved, these private individuals can still be held criminally liable under other laws such as fraud, estafa or swindling. They may also be held civilly liable for violating the Philippine Competition Act.

More specifically in sports, P.D. 483 imposes criminal liability for a violation thereof, which includes point-shaving, game-fixing and similar machinations. Private individuals may be held liable under this law.

There is no specific law regulating fan behavior in the Philippines. Instead, fan behavior is regulated by the terms and conditions of the ticket and subject to the rules of the venue owner. In big events, events organizers often coordinate with the local government for crowd control and security in public spaces outside the venue (such as public roads), while maintaining its own complement of security within the premises of the venue (such as in the concourse of an arena or within the dome itself).

If fan violence erupts, recourse can be made to the Revised Penal Code which has various crimes involving violence. For example, Physical Injuries Inflicted in a Tumultuous Affray is a possible crime when one is injured by a chaotic and disorganized fight of more than four people.

Corporations are the most popular vehicles for ownership of professional sports clubs. Corporations offer shareholders the benefit of limited liability and potential investors the structural integrity and confidence of an entity that is subject to government regulation. Corporations must be registered with the SEC, and only upon registration is it granted existence by operation of law.

Of course, owners also have the option to establish sole proprietorships and business partnerships. However, corporations are still the most robust framework to own and govern a professional sports club.

In terms of foreign ownership, the President of the Philippines regularly issues the Foreign Investment Negative List (FINL), which shows which industries have a limitation or prohibition on foreign ownership. In the 12^th FINL, there is no prohibition against foreign ownership of a team.

Multi-sport ownership in the Philippines is a common practice in the Philippines. For example, in the Philippine Basketball Association, the biggest professional basketball league in the country, the league is dominated by two factions—the San Miguel group and the MVP group. The San Miguel group is composed of teams owned by San Miguel Corporation, such as the San Miguel Beermen, Barangay Ginebra San Miguel, and Magnolia Hotshots. On the other hand, the MVP group is composed of teams owned by Manny V. Pangilinan, including TNT Tropang Giga, Meralco Bolts, and NLEX Road Warriors.

The MVP group of companies likewise own teams in the Premiere Volleyball League, the professional volleyball league in the Philippines, namely the PLDT High Speed Hitters and Cignal HD Spikers.

Some companies also own teams in both men’s and women’s leagues, including Rebisco, which owns the Creamline Cool Smashers and Choco Mucho Flying Titans in the women’s league, and Criss Cross King Crunchers in the men’s league.

Apart from the MVP group of companies, another example of a company that owns sports teams across different sports is Capital 1, which owns a volleyball team and a football team.

There are no mandatory national provisions in the Philippines that govern athlete representation. Instead, the Civil Code provisions on agency relationships govern. Under the Civil Code, a contract of agency occurs when a person binds himself to render some service or do something in representation or on behalf of another, with the consent of the latter. It is valid and binding by mere consent and does not require any form. The contract of agency may even be oral, except in instances where the law states otherwise, such as when the sale of immovable property is involved.

In terms of possible conflict of interest situations, it is important to note that the sports agent-athlete relationship is a fiduciary relationship, with the law imposing on the agent a duty of loyalty to one’s athlete client. Hence, if a conflict of interest arises, agents must, in all cases, choose the interest of the client before their own. If not, they will expose themselves to potential monetary damages.

A contract of agency is generally revocable at will because it is mainly based on the principal’s trust and confidence in his or her agent. A sports agent may withdraw from the agency by notifying the client-athlete

There are no national statutes that specifically cover the participation of transgender athletes in competitive sport in the Philippines.

The Safe Spaces Act is the governing statute that protects individuals from gender-based sexual harassment, which includes anything that threatens one’s sense of personal space and physical safety. This includes the utterance of misogynistic, transphobic, homophobic and sexist slurs.

As of this writing, there are no publicized or public rules in Philippine sports concerning the participation of transgender athletes.

There is no specific Statute or Code that governs e-sports in the Philippines.

In terms of governance, the Philippine Electronic Sports Organization (PESO) is the recognized NSA for e-sports in the Philippines. As an NSA, it is mandated to develop e-sports.

Of interest is the Games and Amusements Board (GAB) Resolution No 2017-21, series of 2017, entitled “Guidelines Governing the Conduct of Electronic Sports (E-Sports) in the Philippines”. Said resolution provides that professional e-sports players must have a license, and that there can be no tournament, competition, or game of Professional E-Sports without first obtaining a permit from GAB. It also provides that all professional Filipino E-Sports players who shall join, participate, or compete in E-Sports tournaments or competitions abroad must first secure written authority from GAB prior to said tournament or competition.

The leading sports law case of recent years is the 2024 Supreme Court Case of Guiao v. PAGCOR, PSCO, and the Office of the President (“Guiao”). In this case, professional basketball coach Yeng Guiao filed a petition questioning why PAGCOR had not been remitting 5% of its gross income to the PSC’s National Sports Development Fund (NSDF), as mandated by the PSC Law. The NSDF serves as a significant treasure pot that finances national sports and events in the Philippines.

Guiao questioned why the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office was not remitting its own mandated share 30% from the proceeds of sweepstakes or lottery draws during the year to the PSC.

The Supreme Court ruled for Guiao and against both PAGCOR and PCSO. PAGCOR was ordered to account and remit the full amount of 5% of its gross income per year from 1993 up to the present. PCSO had to account and remit to the PSC the 30% representing the charity fund of the proceeds of six sweepstakes or lottery draws per year from 2006 onwards.

The case has wide-ranging implications because the estimated accrued remittances from PAGCOR and PCSO amount to billions of pesos.

There are two sports law topics that are relevant to the Philippines.

The first topic is rights protection in international events.

International sports events are becoming the norm in the Philippines. In 2023, the country was the site of the FIBA Basketball World Cup. And in 2025 alone, the Philippines is hosting two key world championships: the FIVB Men’s Volleyball World Championship and the inaugural FIFA Futsal Women’s World Cup.

Essential to these international sports events is crafting and implementing a robust rights protection program to protect the organizers, sponsors, participants, and the fans. Unfortunately for the Philippines, rights protection legislation is sparse. There is no national law criminalizing scalping or ticket-touting—with local governments to their own devices to adopt their own ordinances. There is also no legislation against ambush marketing, with tangential recourse only to the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines.

Due to the lack of legislation, it is therefore essential and crucial for international sports events organizers (such as international federations and their local organizing committees) to engage local counsel to sift thru ordinances, government agency issues, and tangential legislation to craft a rights protection program from scratch. Further, close coordination with the government, local police, venue owners, and the local organizing committee months in advance is a must.

The second topic is the pending House Bill 4175.

As mentioned earlier, House Bill 4175 was introduced to set minimum standards of due process for NSAs to comply with. This House Bill was borne out of the experience of multiple national athletes being summarily dismissed or sanctioned without the benefit of any explanations from their respective NSAs. This common and sad experience has unfortunately constrained some athletes to leave the Philippines altogether, representing other countries in international competitions instead.

Aside from laying down rules on due process and transparency, House Bill 4175 also seeks to improve the lot of national athletes and national training pool members by mandating safeguarding policies across all sports, providing free medical insurance, and granting post-career support through education and skills training.

While the future of Philippine sports is hopeful given the Guiao case and House Bill 4175, whether these will change things on the ground where it really matters remains to be seen.