RH oral arguments reset by SC

MANILA, Philippines - The Supreme Court (SC) yesterday rescheduled the hearing on the petitions against the Reproductive Health (RH) Law.

The SC had scheduled the petitions for oral argument on June 18 and preliminary conference on June 6.

But in regular session yesterday, the SC decided to move the hearing to July 9.

The high court earlier allowed the petitions and ordered the government to suspend implementing the RH Law for 120 days last March 19.

The Catholic lay group Couples For Christ Foundation (CFC) yesterday joined the petitions in calling for the SC to declare the RH Law unconstitutional.

In a 52-page petition, the CFC supported the arguments of earlier petitioners that Republic Act No. 10354 violates the people’s constitutional right to free exercise of religion and right to free speech and expression.

“Despite his religious beliefs, a health care service provider is compelled by the RH Law, under threat of imprisonment, to refer his patient to another health care service provider who may be willing to prescribe artificial contraception,” they argued through lawyer Luis Francis Rodrigo Jr.

“Such coercion constitutes an unreasonable restraint on the right of the Catholic health care service provider to exercise his religion, which includes the right not to refer the patient at all,” CFC explained.

Under the law, any health care service provider who will withhold information or provide incorrect information regarding RH programs and services will be penalized by imprisonment ranging from one month to six months or a fine of P10,000 to P100,000 or both.

CFC said the RH law is unconstitutional as it compels a health care service provider who believes in the natural method of family planning to refer his client to another health care service provider who backs RH programs.

The group added that the RH Law violates the equal protection clause as it discriminates against the poor by making sex education mandatory only in public schools.

“The provision unfairly deprives parents of students enrolled in public schools of the option available to parents of those studying in private schools,” they added.

CFC is the 12th group seeking relief from the SC against the RH law.

The consolidated petitions were filed as early as January by couple James and Lovely-Ann Imbong, non-profit group Alliance for the Family Foundation Philippines Inc. (ALFI), Serve Life Cagayan de Oro City, Task Force for Family and Life Visayas Inc., lawyer Expedito Bugarin, Eduardo Olaguer of the Catholic Xybrspace Apostolate of the Philippines, former senator Francisco Tatad and his wife Ma. Fenny, a group of doctors represented by lawyer Howard Calleja and a group of students represented by the legal office of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines.

Six groups, on the other hand, have filed petitions in support of the RH law. They are led by former Akbayan representative Ana Theresia Hontiveros; former health secretaries Esperanza Cabral, Jamie Galvez-Tan and Alberto Romualdez Jr.; the group of 2005 Bar topnotcher Joan De Venecia; Sen. Pia Cayetano, sponsor of the measure in the Senate; Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman, author of the law in the House of Representative; and the Catholics for Reproductive Health and Interfaith Partnership for the Promotion of Responsible Parenthood Inc. led by women’s rights lawyer Claire Padilla.