Agham Pangkatarungan: Decolonizing Forensic Science in the Filipino Context

Richard Jonathan O. Taduran, Ph.D.  |  14 August 2025

In the course of my work as a forensic anthropologist, I have seen firsthand how the pursuit of truth in the laboratory or at a crime scene can collide with the cultural norms we hold dear as Filipinos. Imagine an investigator asking a grieving family to consent to an exhumation for DNA testing. The evidence is clear, the science is sound—but the family refuses, fearing that disturbing the dead will bring misfortune. This is not ignorance; it is culture. Yet it illustrates a tension those of us in forensic science navigate daily: the conflict between deeply rooted traditions and the demands of empirical rigor.

If forensic science is, at its core, the application of science to matters of law, then its integrity depends on method, objectivity, and evidence. But in the Philippines, those pillars can be eroded by cultural traits that prioritize social harmony over confrontation, or deference over questioning. The challenge is to forge a forensic science that is both scientifically rigorous and culturally attuned. I call this Agham Pangkatarungan—a science of justice grounded in Filipino realities.

Culture and Scientific Rigor

Filipino society values pakikisama (harmonious relations), hiya (a sense of shame or propriety), and utang-na-loob (a debt of gratitude). In daily life, these are admirable qualities that maintain social cohesion. But in forensic practice, they can create problems.

Pakikisama can make investigators reluctant to challenge colleagues or superiors, even when they suspect errors in evidence collection or interpretation. Hiya can keep witnesses from speaking freely, especially when testimony might embarrass someone in their community. Utang-na-loob can lead to compromises in objectivity, where personal loyalty overrides impartial assessment of facts.

Then there are our spiritual and folk beliefs. In some cases, these are harmless cultural expressions; in others, they directly contradict forensic logic. If a death is attributed to “mystical” causes, there may be less urgency to pursue toxicology tests. If a victim’s family distrusts scientific procedures, valuable evidence can be lost forever.

If these cultural frictions existed in isolation, they might be easier to overcome. But they are compounded by the state of science education and literacy in the country.

Numbers on Science

In the 2022 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), Filipino 15-year-olds scored an average of 356 points in science—far below the OECD average of 485. Only 23% reached the baseline Level 2 proficiency (where students can at least interpret basic scientific data), compared to about 76% across OECD countries. Almost no Filipino students reached the top performance levels. In science, the Philippines ranked near the bottom of all participating countries.

IQ statistics, while controversial, offer another data point. One commonly cited estimate puts the average IQ in the Philippines at 81.64, though more recent figures suggest a higher value of 96.66. Regardless of the exact number, these measurements—flawed as they are—point to a persistent challenge in developing analytical reasoning skills at a national scale. Such scores reflect not innate ability, but environmental and systemic factors: the quality of education, nutrition, access to resources, and exposure to problem-solving from an early age.

The larger science and R&D picture is also sobering. The Philippines invests roughly 0.14% of GDP in research and development—far below the UNESCO-recommended 1% and the global average of around 2%. The country has about 188 researchers per million people (global average: over 1,000) and produces about 9 scientific articles per million people compared to a global average of around 176. In technological advancement rankings, the Philippines sits in the lower tiers, most recently 53rd in the Global Innovation Index.

When you combine these structural weaknesses with the cultural factors described earlier, it becomes clear why scientific thinking—especially in forensic contexts—faces an uphill battle.

Education and Scientific Thinking

The scientific method thrives on skepticism, replication, and the willingness to discard cherished beliefs in the face of new evidence. Yet Filipino cultural norms often prize agreement over argument, and respect for hierarchy over questioning.

Educational gaps only reinforce this. The World Bank has noted that nine in ten Filipino children aged 10 struggle with basic reading comprehension. Without this foundation, developing the higher-order reasoning skills required for scientific literacy becomes nearly impossible. This is not just a school problem; it is a national problem that affects everything from public health compliance to the acceptance of forensic evidence in court.

These patterns have deep roots. The colonial education systems we inherited prioritized rote learning, obedience, and religious instruction over critical inquiry. We may have gained independence, but the epistemological habits of deference remain.

Science of Justice

Agham Pangkatarungan—literally, “science of justice”—is my proposal for aligning forensic science with Filipino contexts without diluting its rigor.

• Methodological strength: Standardizing protocols, ensuring chain-of-custody integrity, and subjecting findings to peer review. Science must be reproducible and defensible.
• Cultural responsiveness: Training forensic practitioners to communicate findings in ways that respect local values and languages, and to work with community leaders rather than around them.
• Community engagement: Integrating community knowledge where appropriate, such as consulting indigenous interpretations of remains or artifacts, while making clear where scientific conclusions must take precedence.
• Educational reform: Embedding critical thinking and scientific literacy into curricula from early grades, and making science instruction more accessible in the mother tongue.
• Structural investment: Expanding forensic laboratories, equipment, training programs, and the pipeline for local forensic scientists. Without this infrastructure, cultural adaptation is moot.

Science and Justice

Justice is not possible without truth, and truth is not possible without the discipline of science. In forensic science, this is not an abstract philosophy—it is the practical reality that determines whether the innocent go free and the guilty are held accountable.

Agham Pangkatarungan is not about rejecting the scientific method; it is about rooting it in our soil so it can take firm hold. It is about building a forensic science that neither condescends to our culture nor capitulates to it, but engages it critically and respectfully.

If we can align the Filipino commitment to katarungan (justice) with the universal principles of agham (science), we can move beyond the binary of tradition versus method. We can build a forensic science that is not merely imported, but indigenized—rigorous in process, rooted in culture, and resolute in service of the truth.

Because in the end, justice without science is guesswork, and faulty forensics is justice frustrated. Together, science and justice are the twin pillars on which a fair and humane society must stand.