halls, the agency’s auditors operate under spatial proximity to LGUs whose transactions they are meant to audit. This arrangement, while administratively convenient, exposes COA personnel to political pressure and coercion, undermining impartiality. It also symbolically reinforces the perception that accountability remains an internal bureaucratic exercise rather than a public right. These structural weaknesses disempower women, persons with disabilities, Indigenous Peoples and other marginalized groups who lack the technical expertise, time or resources to navigate audit processes. Without accessible audit outputs, communities cannot meaningfully assess whether budgets reach programs that address unpaid care work, gender­based violence or livelihood insecurity. A reimagined accountability system must therefore move beyond the passive release of audit reports to institutionalize participatory audit mechanisms at both national and local levels. This entails expanding CPA membership beyond accredited CSOs to include community clusters, women’s collectives and grassroots networks, ensuring representation across vulnerabilities. Spatial and procedural independence must be safeguarded, perhaps through the relocation of COA offices to neutral public spaces and the creation of community-facing dissemination channels that translate audit results into accessible, actionable information. 5.3. Tokenistic Gender and Development Framework The GAD framework in the Philippines, while formally institutionalized under the Magna Carta for Women(RA 9710), has often been reduced to fiscal compliance rather than functioning as a transformative tool. Weak accountability mechanisms on local spending patterns not only permit but incentivize misuse. As studies note, when accountability systems are weak or lack adequate controls on local spending, shortages in funding result in the chronic underpayment of local public officials, fostering an environment where petty bribery becomes normalized as compensation(Juco et al., 2024). This dynamic is evident in the persistent misuse of the GAD budget. The most recent publicly available report on GAD was released in 2018, making a new edition already seven years overdue. The report highlighted widespread practices of misallocation, including the use of GAD funds for honoraria or ceremonial activities rather than substantive programs that advance women’s rights and empowerment(Commission on Audit, 2018). Instead of incentivizing impact-oriented initiatives, the system rewards perfunctory reporting that masks the absence of gendered transformation in governance. As a result, the GAD framework has become tokenistic: present on paper but detached from the lived realities of women and vulnerable groups. Without deeper inspection of how GAD plans are designed, funded and monitored, the framework risks entrenching inequality by legitimizing the appearance of gender mainstreaming while perpetuating business-as-usual governance. 5.4. Patriarchal Attitudes Legal and procedural frameworks in the Philippines, while formally aligned with international gender equality standards, often fail in practice because they collide with entrenched cultural norms. As Lee(1986, p. 77) argues,“… folk norms that are incongruent with legal norms motivate or force people to deviate from legal requirements”. This tension between law and culture reveals that the mere proliferation of gender-responsive legislation is insufficient; policy effectiveness must be evaluated against the social systems within which it operates. Patriarchal attitudes remain the most pervasive cultural barrier. Women are still largely perceived through restrictive roles—caretakers, dependents or moral guardians—rather than as autonomous political and economic actors. Firmase and Prieto-Carolino(2021) found that women in barangays were typically assigned committee work that was considered stereotypically feminine, such as Barangay Health Workers and Barangay Nutrition Scholars. Only 4 per cent occupied a top position in the barangay. Furthermore, these positions are voluntary, receiving only a negligible honorarium, not a salary, despite their crucial role in public health, illustrating how women’s contributions and care work are undervalued in the system(Hartigan-Go et al., 2025; Querri et al., 2020). These cultural framings constrain women’s access to decision­making spaces, delegitimize their authority and normalize their exclusion. The acceptance of abuse and hierarchy also drives the persistence of gender-based violence, which Rodriguez(2025) identifies as a major factor in the lack of political will to advance gender equality initiatives. Cultural barriers intensify inequalities across governance spaces. At the community level, traditional dispute settlement processes often privilege male authority, sidelining formal legal remedies. At the institutional level, even gender focal point systems mandated under the Magna Carta of Women can be reduced to token compliance when local leaders view gender mainstreaming as secondary to“more pressing” development priorities. At the policy level, legal provisions may be formally adopted but diluted through implementation practices shaped by cultural resistance. Legal frameworks cannot be understood or reformed in isolation of their social context. Rodriguez(2025) emphasizes the importance of interrogating patriarchal norms within households, communities and institutions in addressing hindrances to gender policy implementation. Cultural norms toward gender are structural determinants of governance outcomes. Claiming Power and Reshaping Governance: A Feminist Framework for the Philippines 17