What the law says about student-athletes protection, and why it needs to change
Following the tragic deaths of Ateneo basketball players Rene Baterbonia and Divine Adili during a team building activity in Aurora, concerns about student-athlete safety have come to the forefront.
While initial police findings pointed to an accidental drowning and ruled out foul play, multiple agencies have opened parallel investigations into the incident.
Beyond the possible administrative lapses and criminal liability, the public has raised concerns about the protection and safety of student-athletes in situations like these.
The PSC-led Sports Stakeholders’ Panel is pushing major reforms in Philippine sports governance. It announced support for the proposed Sports Coaching Act, which seeks to regulate the coaching profession through mandatory licensing, registration, and continuing professional development. The group also pledged to implement standardized safety standards, risk management measures, and emergency response systems across all levels of sports.
In the upper chamber, Senator JV Ejercito has filed Senate Bill No. 2269 (the Student-Athletes Comprehensive Protection Act of 2026). The measure makes student-athlete safety a strict legal responsibility—rather than a discretionary choice—for schools, coaches, and athletic associations during official events. Senator Christopher “Bong” Go previously filed a similar bill.
What the law says about student-athlete protection
The Republic Act No. 10676, or the Student-Athletes Protection Act, safeguards student-athletes by limiting residency requirements for transferees and banning schools from retaliating against them. While it allows schools to provide benefits and incentives such as scholarships, allowances, lodging, and medical support, it strictly prohibits excess incentives to prevent commercialization.
Violations can lead to DepEd or CHED to sanction schools, athletic associations, and their officials for violations, including fines ranging from P100,000 to P1 million and suspension from athletic competitions.
However, RA 10676 does not expressly provide for the liability of school authorities in cases involving accidents or injuries suffered by student-athletes.
Why it needs to be amended
Sports lawyer Mickey Ingles explains that the SAPA does not actually cover the safety and welfare of student-athletes in the physical and mental health sense, but it was enacted to address two specific issues: unreasonable residency requirements of transferees and commercialization by schools.
"Hence, it is silent when it comes to safety and welfare," he told PhilSTAR L!fe.
He further points out that SAPA also does not clearly define the legal duties and liabilities of stakeholders in relation to off-campus activities such as team building or training camps.
"To determine the legal responsibilities of schools, athletic programs, and coaches for off-campus events, one must refer to the laws on torts and damages in the Civil Code, not the SAPA," he added.
In a Facebook post, Atty. Alberto Agra, a sports-law-for-all advocate, also pointed out that the SAPA fails to define safe sports, penalize unsafe practices, prescribe standards for coaches and school officials, or establish clear accountability for sports injuries, abuse, or death.
When asked if the issue lies in SAPA’s provisions or its enforcement, Ingles explained that it is "not really a SAPA issue or even an enforcement of SAPA issue," because the law simply does not cover safety. He noted that SAPA is "really lacking in that respect," leaving accidents to be governed by Civil Code rules on torts and damages.
"For example, coaches have the duty to exercise the diligence of a good father and exercise reasonable care, which, at its most basic, requires coaches to protect his or her players from foreseeable risks," he explained. "Schools may also be held vicariously liable for the negligence of the coach, if the coach is an employee of the school."
Because of this, Ingles stressed the need to amend SAPA, saying that while "resort to the Civil Code is still available," it is not enough. He emphasized that a revised law imposing a "clear and minimum standard of care" would be helpful.
"It will send a strong message and also be helpful in providing guidance... having more explicit provisions in the SAPA to provide mental health support will be vital. We've actually helped draft a bill that was introduced in the House last year... so this can be a helpful template," he added.
In his own proposal, Agra stressed that safe sports must be mandated, creating an environment that protects participants' health, safety, dignity, and well-being. His amendment also calls for a national registry of school coaches and sports officials, alongside standards for their accreditation and continuing education.
In additional documents sent to L!fe, Agra discussed the Safe Sport framework, which is anchored on four pillars: physical safety, psychological safety, anti-harassment and anti-abuse measures, and athlete well-being. He noted that these principles ensure that athletes train and compete free from harm, exploitation, and misconduct.
Agra also emphasized that the coach-athlete relationship must be legally recognized as fiduciary—meaning coaches hold positions of absolute trust and authority, obligating them to always act in the best interests of their athletes.
"Fiduciary relationship creates a trustor-trustee relationship between the trustor (student-athlete) and the trustee (coach). Trustors entrust their development, well-being, welfare, and even their future on their trustees. The trustee therefore is accountable to the trustor," he explained to L!fe.
Agra also shared a proposed Coaches' Code of Ethics, which defines coaches as mentors and custodians of athlete welfare. The code emphasizes professionalism, integrity, respect, accountability, and clear boundaries, requiring coaches to prioritize athletes' safety, development, and well-being.
Coaches must also avoid bullying, hazing, harassment, discrimination, intimidation, retaliation, exploitation, and all forms of violence. It also mandates that training methods are appropriate to an athlete's age, skill level, medical condition, and safety needs, explicitly banning practices that are reckless, humiliating, punitive, or unnecessarily dangerous.
"There is no definition of Safe Sports under any Philippine Law. A definition under the law (SAPA) will inform all stakeholders and duty-bearers of their rights and entitlements, and obligations/ responsibilities/accountabilities, respectively. I am advocating a broad/comprehensive definition because some may only espouse a narrow/restrictive view," he added.