SC ends 'start of life' doubts, rejects solon's theory

MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court decision on the Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health (RH) Law resolves questions on when life starts and preserves the principle of no-abortion in the measure.

"The undeniable conclusion is that a zygote is a human organism and that the life of a new human being commences at a scientifically well-defined moment of conception, that is, upon fertilization," the ruling, penned by Associate Justice Jose Mendoza, stated.

In upholding the controversial law, the high court rejected RH principal author Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman's view that life begins when the fertilized ovum implants in the womb.

"The court cannot subscribe to the theory advocated by Hon. Lagman that life begins at implantation ... This theory of implantation as the beginning of life is devoid of any legal or scientific mooring," the high court said.

The ruling resolves open-ended debates on the start of life in the congressional sessions while the RH bill was being deliberated on.

It also settles questions raised by the magistrates to petitioners during the oral arguments on the legality of act, signed by President Benigno Aquino III in 2012.

The tribunal cited past cases, legal documents, transcription of discussions among constitutional commissioners in 1986 as well as established medical records.

Abortion, abortive contraceptives outlawed

The RH Law, meanwhile, was upheld on the promise that it protects the fertilized egg as a minute human being.

"A reading of the RH Law would show that it is in line with this intent and actually proscribes abortion," the document stated, adding that abortion is a crime under Article 256 of the Revised Penal Code.

The court, however, ruled unconstitutional a provision under the RH Law's Implementing Rules and Regulations redefining "abortifacient" contraceptives as only those that "primarily" induce abortion.

Declaring this clause invalid, the court said that the authors of the rules "gravely abused their office."

"There is a danger that the insertion of the qualifier 'primarily' will pave the way for the approval of contraceptives which may harm or destroy the life of the unborn from conception/fertilization in violation of Article II, Section 12 of the Constitution," it explained.

The magistrates stressed that contraceptives available in the market cannot in any way have an abortive effect.

"The undeniable conclusion is that contraceptives to be included in the [Philippine National Drug Formulary System] and the [Essential Drugs List] will not only be those contraceptives that do not have the primary action of causing abortion or the destruction of the fetus inside the mother's womb ... but also those that do not have the secondary action of acting the same way," the ruling stated.