Wednesday, August 31, 2011

10 laws have the same provisions as RH bill - Senator Vicente Sotto


10 laws have the same provisions as RH bill - Sotto


By Marvin Sy
(The Philippine Star) Updated August 30, 2011 12:00 AM




MANILA, Philippines - In going all out against the
proposed Reproductive Health (RH) bill, Senate Majority Leader Vicente
Sotto III showed that there were at least 10 laws and executive
issuances that already contained all the objectives envisioned by the
measure.








For two straight days, Sotto took on the sponsors of the RH bill in
the Senate, Pia Cayetano and Miriam Defensor Santiago, both lawyers and
strong advocates of women’s rights and welfare.








While the initial arguments centered on the issue of contraceptives
and their supposed use as abortifacients, which the sponsors claimed was
practically an issue of religious beliefs, Sotto’s interpellation
focused on his claim that the bill merely repeats provisions already
found in existing laws.








Sotto has been arguing that the Department of Health (DOH) is already
implementing various programs on reproductive health and has the
funding necessary to fulfill this mandate, so coming up with yet another
law to do the same thing would be unnecessary.








He took up the six objectives of the RH bill and showed that there
were several laws that were enacted in the past to fulfill them.








The RH bill has the following objectives: to save the lives of
mothers and the unborn; provide Filipinos with information on
reproductive health so they can make informed and intelligent decisions;
provide access to health care facilities and skilled health
professionals before, during and after delivery; address HIV and other
sexually-transmitted diseases; provide access to different family
planning methods; and institutionalize age and development appropriate
reproductive health education.








According to Sotto, there are laws that go back to the Marcos
administration and some authored by the current sponsors that are meant
to address all those objectives of the RH bill.








The most prominent of these laws is Republic Act No. 9710 or the
Magna Carta of Women, which Sotto noted already addresses all six
objectives of the RH bill.
























He also cited R.A. 8504 or the Philippine AIDS Prevention and
Control Act of 1998, R.A. 9262 or the Anti-Violence Against Women and
Children Act, R.A. 7875 or the National Health Insurance Act of 1995 and
R.A. 9501 or the Cheaper Medicines Act as containing various provisions
related to the objectives of the RH bill.








Presidential Decrees 603 or the Child and Youth Welfare Code and 965
which requires applicants for marriage licenses to receive instructions
on family planning and responsible parenthood were laws that have been
around since the Marcos administration.








Administrative Order 2008-0029 of the DOH provides the strategy to
rapidly reduce maternal and neonatal mortality and remains in place to
this day.








The current administration has continued its support for these
objectives by approving the appropriations in the national budget and
through the issuance of executive orders to ensure these are achieved.








Sotto noted that the 2011 General Appropriations Act contains
P153.978 million for health promotion, another P232.919 million for
health human resource development and P7.116 billion for the health
facilities enhancement program.








This is on top of the conditional cash transfer program of the
Department of Social Welfare and Development which requires its
recipients to get prenatal care, assisted childbirth by skilled or
professionals, attendance in family planning sessions and regular
preventive health check ups and vaccines for children zero to five years
of age.








President Aquino, who has thrown in his support behind the RH bill,
has also issued Administrative Orders 2010-0010 or the revised policy on
micronutrient supplementation to support achievement of 2015 Millennium
Development Goal targets to reduce under-five and maternal deaths and
address micronutrient needs of other population groups; and 2010-0036
also known as the Aquino health agenda, achieving universal health care
for all Filipinos.








Sotto added that there are other programs that exist for the purpose
of reproductive health such as the women’s health and safe motherhood
project and the family planning program of the DOH.








He said that even the Local Government Code contains a provision for
local government units to provide their own basic services and
facilities, including primary health care and maternal and child care.








The Labor Code provides incentives for family planning while R.A.
7883 or the Barangay Health Workers Benefits and Incentives Act of 1995
provides health education, training of barangay health workers,
community building and organizing.








Sotto admitted that there is much to be desired as far as the
enhancement of health facilities are concerned but the government is
getting there already.








“The DOH is the best argument against RH bill because they are
practically doing everything that the RH bill wants to do. This is
already in place, no debates, no problems, no additional funding needed
because it’s all there,” Sotto said.








“There is no need for the RH bill. Health Secretary (Enrique) Ona
said it clearly, with or without the bill, they are doing it
(reproductive health programs),” he added.








Santiago argued that there is no law prohibiting the repeat of what an existing law already states.








“There is no prohibition against redundant provisions in different
bills. Plus, it could be possible that one bill is general in nature
while the RH bill is specific in nature, and the rule of statutory
construction is when one bill is general in nature and another is
specific in nature, the courts will uphold the law that is specific in
nature,” Santiago said.








“So, in effect, even if there were similar or identical provisions,
that is simply an insurance that when the bill is brought to court, the
Supreme Court will be persuaded by the position because the bills
succeeding each other are repetitions of each other, meaning to say the
lawmakers have very strong opinions about a certain provisions in the
bill,” she added.








No comments:

Post a Comment