In a two-page en banc resolution, the high court reversed its earlier decision denying the petition of the Pharmaceutical and Health Care Association of the Philippines (PHAP) to stop the implementation of revised rules and regulations of the Milk Code.
In its petition, the PHAP, composed of health care companies that produce and distribute pharmaceutical, medical and nutritional products, said the revised implementing rules and regulations went beyond the provisions of the Milk Code.
Specifically, the petitioners are complaining about Section 4 (f), which imposes an absolute ban on advertising, promotions or sponsorships of breastmilk substitutes intended for infants and young children.
"These prohibitions are not found in the Milk Code and are therefore patently beyond the provisions of the same," the petitioners said.
The petitioners argued that the Milk Code only regulates advertising and promotional activities and materials and limits such regulation to breastmilk substitutes intended for infants or babies aged 0 to 12 months old but do not impose an absolute ban on advertising.
They added that this is unconstitutional as it impairs the right of the people to access information.
PHAP said the revised rules also illegally provide exclusive breastfeeding for infants aged 0 to six months, and declared that there is no substitute or replacement for breastmilk though the Milk Code actually recognizes the fact that infant formula may be a proper and possible substitute for breastmilk in certain instances. — Jose Rodel Clapano