RH law and its IRR's constitutionality

The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Reproductive Health Law, except
for parts of Section 7, 17 and 2 of the controversial measure, and some provisions in its
implementin! rules"

#hile preservin! the core of the law $ re%uirin! the state to deliver the full ran!e of
family plannin! services to the pu&lic $ the SC decision limits the scope of its covera!e"

'n Section 7 of the law, the power of the !overnment to o&li!e private hospitals and those
owned &y reli!ious !roups to refer patients to other facilities that offer reproductive
health services was struc( down"

)nother provision in the same section that allows minors to avail of family plannin!
services without parental consent if they have already !iven &irth or suffered a
miscarria!e was also declared unconstitutional"

Essence of law upheld
*onetheless, the essence of the law em&odied in Section 7, which re%uires the state to
provide family plannin! services, includin! artificial contraceptives, was upheld"
Section 7 of Repu&lic )ct 1+,- .)ccess to /amily 0lannin!1 states that 2all accredited
pu&lic health facilities shall provide a full ran!e of modern family plannin! methods,
which shall also include medical consultations, supplies and necessary and reasona&le
procedures for poor and mar!inali3ed couples havin! infertility issues who desire to have
children"4
't also states that hospitals 2shall immediately refer the person see(in! such care and
services to another health facility which is conveniently accessi&le"4
The provision further states that no person, except minors, shall &e denied information
and access to family plannin! services, whether natural or artificial" 5inors can also
access family plannin! methods if their parents or !uardians !ive them a written consent
for it"
Penalties withdrawn

'n Section 2 of the law and its implementin! rules, the followin! provisions were
declared unconstitutional6
penalties for health care providers who fail to disseminate RH information or refer
patients not in an emer!ency and life threatenin! case to another health care
service provider, re!ardless of his or her reli!ious &eliefs7
punishment for !overnment health wor(ers who refuse to support RH pro!rams or
provide RH services to patients, re!ardless of his or her reli!ious &eliefs7
penalties for health service providers that re%uire parental consent from minor
patients who are not in an emer!ency or serious situation7
allowin! a married individual, not in an emer!ency or life8threatenin! case""" to
under!o reproductive health procedures without the consent of the spouse
The hi!h court also nullified portions of Section 17 on the renderin! of pro8&ono
reproductive health services that 9affect the conscientious o&:ector in securin! 0hilHealth
accreditation"9
Definition of contraceptive
'n addition to some sections of the law, the use of the %ualifier 9primarily9 in the
definition of 9a&ortifacient9 and 9contraceptive9 in Section "+1.a1 and .:1 of its
implementin! rules and re!ulations .'RR1 was also removed"
These 'RR sections define a&ortifacient as a dru! that 9primarily9 induces a&ortion, and
contraceptive as a family plannin! method that does not 9primarily9 destroy the ovum"
The SC ruled that the use of 9primarily9 in &oth sections contravened Sec" -.a1 of the RH
Law and violates Section 12, )rticle '' of the Constitution, which reco!ni3es the sanctity
of family life"
Unanimous
The ;ustices voted unanimously to uphold the constitutionality of the RH Law, Te said"
The decision was penned &y )ssociate ;ustice ;ose 5endo3a"
Te added that the 1- petitioners have 1, days to file a motion for reconsideration"
He declined to say whether the SC decision had effectively lifted the indefinite status %uo
ante order a!ainst the controversial measure, sayin! the court has not yet made a
cate!orical statement on the matter"
)s soon as the court spo(esman uttered the words 9not unconstitutional,9 RH law
supporters ea!erly awaitin! the decision, includin! former )(&ayan party8list Rep" Risa
Hontiveros and cele&rated 5anila tour !uide Carlos Celdran, erupted in cheers"
9't was !reat to hear the words <not unconstitutional,<9 Hontiveros said" She added that her
!roup would still &e studyin! the possi&ility of as(in! the SC to reconsider its decision on
the RH law portions declared as unconstitutional"
)fter the announcement, Hontiveros and other RH Law advocates marched down to the
0eople<s 0ar( where they continued their cele&ration &y chantin!, sin!in!, and dancin!"
DOH reaction
'n a press statement, Health Secretary =nri%ue T" >na said the SC rulin! si!nified 2a hu!e
victory4 for advocates and supporters of the RH law"

2This has &een an ama3in! day for family plannin! advocates in the 0hilippines as we
saw a hu!e victory with the decision of the Supreme Court to uphold the constitutionality
of the Responsi&le 0arenthood and Reproductive Health )ct,4 >na said"
He added that the ?epartment of Health .?>H1 is prepared to implement the provisions
of the RH law that were not struc( down in the SC decision, >na said"
2The ?>H reco!ni3es that true victory in improvin! health outcomes usin! the R0RH
Law, as ori!inally passed or as modified, will only &e within reach with proper
operational implementation,4 he said"
2#e need everyone@s help $ whether pro8RH or anti8RH4 to &etter the health of every
/ilipino, >na said"
Prayer vigil
=arlier in the day, red shirt8clad RH Law critics $ led &y Catholic Aishops Conference of
the 0hilippines< /ather 5elvin Castro $ held a prayer vi!il inside the Aa!uio Cathedral
&efore marchin! toward the SC compound"
Similarly, supporters of the RH Law from )(&ayan party8list and 0urple 5ovement for
RH Law simultaneously held their own protest march to the SC"
Castro told reporters that while they would respect an SC decision a!ainst them, they will
not let 9the !ospel teachin! &e compromised"9
9The church is not afraid to !o throu!h the same thin! and :ust &e re:ected &y human
courts" )n! totoon! &attle !oes &eyond RH and that is to win &ac( the hearts of the
youn!,9 he said"
9#ith or without the law .anyway1, contraceptive users naman an! (a&ataan" .Baya1
mala(i an! tatra&ahuhin n! sim&ahan,9 he added"
16 years in the making
Si!ned &y 0resident Aeni!no )%uino ''' in ?ecem&er 2+12, the RH law see(s to provide
improved pu&lic access to natural and artificial family plannin! options, &etter maternal
care, and youth education"
The Catholic Church has stron!ly opposed the law, which was first introduced in
Con!ress 1C years a!o"
Dnder the law, the !overnment will promote pro!rams that allow couples to have their
desired num&er of children with due consideration to the health of &a&ies and women"
Resources will also &e made availa&le to parents in accordance with their personal and
reli!ious convictions"
't also aims to inform youn! people &etween the a!es of 1+ to 1E years old a&out
reproductive health issues and responsi&le teena!e &ehavior, amon! other thin!s"
However, the Supreme Court issued on 5arch 1E, 2+1 a 12+8day status %uo ante order
a!ainst the law<s implementation, with a vote of 1+8,"
The five who dissented were Chief ;ustice 5aria Lourdes Sereno and )ssociate ;ustices
)ntonio Carpio, 5ariano del Castillo, =stela 0erlas8Aerna&e, and 5arvic Leonen"
The SF) order was extended indefinitely in ;uly 2+1, with a vote of G87"
Ready to implement
5alacaHan! deferred from commentin! on the hi!h court<s decision since parts of the law
were still declared unconstitutional"
9#e would have to wait for the entire decision,9 deputy presidential spo(esperson )&i!ail
Ialte said durin! a press &riefin! Tuesday"
Aut she said the !overnment has &een ready to implement the law from the day it was
si!ned &y the 0resident"
9So that would &e the J:o& of theK ?epartment of Health and ' understand that, yes, they
have &een puttin! it off, or at least, &ecause of its compliance to the TR> that was
issued,9 Ialte said"

The 0hilippine Commission on #omen .0C#1, meanwhile, said in a statement released
Tuesday it was happy a&out the SC decision"
9't has &een a lon! &attle for women<s ri!hts to &e protected and fulfilled" The 0C#
is optimistic that with the implementation of the Responsi&le 0arenthood and
Reproductive Health .R0RH1 Law, issues of poverty, hi!h infant and maternal deaths,
and teena!e pre!nancies will &e addressed,9 it said" with reports from im!erly
"ane #an and $!arra %ateo&R'"&(&H'&)*&+, (%* -ews