At the same time though, the groundswell of opposition building up in recent years prior to 2021 has begun to gain traction with the progressive sectors fighting disinformation and even the legislature pushing back against state corruption and the perceived mismanagement of the pandemic. In the last quarter of 2021 coinciding with the filing of candidacy by aspirants to national position for the 2022 elections, we see authoritarian rule garbed in ambivalent populism largely being exposed and opposed layer by layer. In five years, the period is by far the biggest breakthrough in terms of open public resistance against the politics of the status quo. The interlude provided us with a fertile ground to consolidate the people’s social and political gains in history and clear the way for a return to an egalitarian set up. This includes launching participatory peoples’ movement and strengthening national cooperation to work for and install governance that is inclusive, transparent, accountable and participatory-the first prerequisite to reviving and institutionalizing enduring respect for human dignity and the defense of human rights by the state. The opportunity to bounce back politically has been a crucial development for all pro-democracy and pro-human rights sectors including the CHR. In the last five years, the tendency to disfavor and even assail positions and actions that run counter to the brand of governance adopted and exercised by the executive leadership and its political allies has been prevalent. At several points during the 6year term, attempts to edge out the CHR as a National Human Rights Institution (NHRI) and to relegate its roles into the sidelines (along with others actively criticizing unpopular policies including by the Office of the Vice-President) has been markedly observable. We note that in 2017, the House of Representatives gave the agency a measly budget of Php 1,000.00 following politically-provoked deliberations. This was challenged by the opposition and progressive lawmakers who maintained that the “absurd sum” was tantamount to “abolishing” the Constitutional body, and that the lower house had “no such power” to do so. It was the Senate which restored the budget to the CHR citing deadlock for the current year in the General Appropriations Act. The Senate referred to an impasse in enactment of the budget law as the difficult implication and consequence of what was apparently a case of budget discrimination. Regardless of the political odds surrounding the last 5 years, the CHR showed notable resilience. In an auspicious legislative turn-about, it later even received increases in funding in the last 5 years under the term of the 5th Commission. Its total budget in 2021 stood at Php 883 million which is reflective of and in accordance with the institution’s very competent performance. As the year 2021 signals the closing stages of the 5th Commission, we witness a national movement made up of ordinary citizens rising for political reforms, participatory and representative governance, and human rights-centric rule of law beginning to galvanize and spread. We stand before the panorama of a people being stirred and initiating coordinated actions to establish governance that is competent, transparent, accountable and genuinely representative of the people as well as the national interests. For the CHR, the task at hand is to defend its mandate and bolster its work for the people as duly commissioned under the Philippine Constitution. It is more crucial now than ever for government and its citizens to review commitments and reinvigorate support for National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) as one of the key mechanisms for human rights protection systems. The basis for this commitment and support cannot go any further than the international human rights standards including the UN Paris Principles which states: “NHRIs act as a bridge between civil society and the state, linking the responsibilities of states to the rights of citizens. NHRIs protect and promote human rights by: “handling individual complaints of human rights violations; identifying protection gaps in national human rights systems and providing recommendations on how to address them; conducting human rights education; and engaging with international human rights mechanisms. They connect national laws to regional and international human rights treaties, by co-operating with international human rights protection and promotion organizations.” They also monitor and encourage government compliance to international HR standards and instruments the latter has agreed upon and entered into with international counterparts. Likewise, there has never been a 6