EN BANC
G.R. No. 235891. September 20, 2022
PRINCESS SHERISSE A. ABINES, PAUL ANDREI A. ABINES, SHANE NICOLE A. ABINES, AND RALPH CHRISTIAN A. ABINES (REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER ZEN* J. ABAIGAR); JAM MICHAEL S. ALANO (REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER MARILOU S. ALANO); BERNARD C. ALVIAR (REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER SHERLY C. ALVIAR); RUBY A. ANDRADE (REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER ROSABELITA A. ANDRADE); CHERRY LYN N. AZARIAS (REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER EMELISA N. AZARIAS); CRISTAN M. BALLETA (REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER ANGELITA MONTE); IAN LHENOCKS B. BALUNSAY (REPRESENTED BY HIS GRANDMOTHER PERPETUA B. BAJARO); LUIS EMMANUEL A. BERNARDO (REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER MICHELLE A. BERNARDO), KAYLA DENICE L. BONGANAY AND ASHLEY SALAR (REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER ANGELITA SALAR); REISAL JAMES BONGANAY, RAFAEL JOSH BONGANAY, AND RUSSEL JACOB BONGANAY (REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER REALYN BONGANAY); HEARTLYN B. BOMBITA AND LEANN B. BOMBITA (REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER ANGELITA B. BOMBITA); DANIEL S. BOZAR (REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER MARINA S. BOZAR); BABY LYKA BUENO (REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER NANCITA G. BUENO); DENMARK BUEZA, JOMALLYN BUEZA, JODELLYN BUEZA, APRILDELYN BUEZA, AND DEZZIERY BUEZA***** (REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER JOCELYN BUEZA); GERALD R. CAMPOS (REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER ZENAIDA R. CAMPOS), ALYSSA L. CORTEZ AND WILSON L. CORTEZ (REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER MA. VICTORIA CORTEZ); JESSA MAE V. CORTEZ (REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER MELBA A. VELO); GIECEL M. ESPIRITU AND MAC RALDGIE M. ESPIRITU (REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER MARICEL M. MORALES), KIM E. ESTARDO (REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER LOLITA E. ESTARDO); CHRISTIAN JAY E. FERNANDEZ (REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER CHINKY E. FERNANDEZ); EDGIE G. FRIAS, EDGIELYN G. FRIAS, AND EMILY G. FRIAS (REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER AGUEDA FRIAS); CRYSTAL MAY E. GABAS AND ANGEL MAY E. GABAS (REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER EVANGELINE E. GABAS); RENZ S. GALLERO AND RAYEN S. GALLERO (REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER NORLYN S. GALLERO); JANIAH DENISE O. GABRIEL (REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER JANET GABRIEL); MAE BEATRIZ S. GIME, RJ S. GIME, AND JENNY ROSE S. GIME (REPRESENTED BY THEIR GRANDMOTHER OLIVA A. BAYONA,****** ROCHELLE MAY V. GRANDE (REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER MELDEA L. VILLA); KJ PAUL GUEVARRA AND MA. KAYE GUEVARRA (REPRESENTED BY RICK GUEVARRA); ALEYA SAM GOMEZ MAGDARAOG (REPRESENTED BYHERMOTHER KRISTEL MAY GOMEZMAGDARAOG), MARIALOURDES A.MONCADA (REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER MARY JANE A. MONCADA); LORENCE V. NAGWE (REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER LORNA NAGWE); JESSAREN M. PADUA, JHASSIE MAE M. PADUA, AND JHESSICA MHAE M. PADUA (REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER MARITES T. MAYUGA); SUNNY ROSE PAPIONA (REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER SALVACION PAPIONA); JANINA S. PESTAÑO (REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER MARICEL S. SANTOS); RHIAN A. PRECILLA (REPRESENTED BY JUDITH ABINES); JESON M. REX, ELLAIN M. REX, AND JOVIELYN M. REX (REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER ROSEMARIE M. REX); PRECIOUS SHAKIRA E. REYES AND PRECIOUS LADY BELLE E. REYES (REPRESENTED BY THEIR GRANDMOTHER LOLITA ESTARDO); AIRA B. RICAFRANCA (REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER CHRISTINA BALLETA); SHANILLE A. ROGA******* (REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER IRISH G. AUSEJO); RANJEL TERCIAS (REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER ANGELINA T. MEDOLLAR); RONELLYN B. TROGUE (REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER NELLY O. TROGUE); JAY V. VALLENTE AND JEAN V. VALLENTE (REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER ELSTER V. VALLENTE); ROLLY JOHN N. YBERA AND MARK ANTHONY N. YBERA (REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER MARITES N. YBERA); HON. EMERENCIANA A. DE JESUS; HON. ARLENE D. BROSAS; JOAN MAY E. SALVADOR (IN HER CAPACITY AS SECRETARY-GENERAL OF GABRIELA NATIONAL ALLIANCE OF WOMEN); AND MADELLA T. SANTIAGO (IN HER CAPACITY AS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE ASSOCIATION FOR THE RIGHTS OF CHILDREN IN SOUTH EAST ASIA – ARCSEA), Petitioners, v. DR. FRANCISCO T. DUQUE III (IN HIS CAPACITY AS THE SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH), DR. LYNDON L. LEE SUY (IN HIS CAPACITY AS THE PROGRAM DIRECTOR OF THE DOH-NATIONAL CENTER FOR DISEASE PREVENTION AND CONTROL), NELA CHARADE G. PUNO, RPH (IN HER CAPACITY AS THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION), HON. LEONOR MAGTOLIS BRIONES (IN HER CAPACITY AS THE SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION), HON. CATALINO S. CUY (IN HIS CAPACITY AS THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT), Respondents.
D E C I S I O N
LEONEN,***J.:
The requirements of legal standing ... [is] "built on the principle of separation of powers, sparing as it does unnecessary interference or invalidation by the judicial branch of the actions rendered by its co-equal branches of government." In addition, economic reasons justify the rule. Thus:In Falcis III v. Civil Registrar General,81 the Court clarified that while the rule admits of exceptions for suits filed by taxpayers, legislators, or concerned citizens, parties must still claim some kind of injury-in-fact:
chanroblesvirtuallawlibraryA lesser but not insignificant reason for screening the standing of persons who desire to litigate constitutional issues is economic in character. Given the sparseness of our resources, the capacity of courts to render efficient judicial service to our people is severely limited. For courts to indiscriminately open their doors to all types of suits and suitors is for them to unduly overburden their dockets, and ultimately render themselves ineffective dispensers of justice. To be sure, this is an evil that clearly confronts our judiciary today.Standing in private suits requires that actions be prosecuted or defended in the name of the real party-in-interest, interest being "material interest or an interest in issue to be affected by the decree or judgment of the case[,] [not just] mere curiosity about the question involved." Whether a suit is public or private, the parties must have "a present substantial interest," not a "mere expectancy or a future, contingent, subordinate, or consequential interest." Those who bring the suit must possess their own right to the relief sought.80 (Citations omitted)
For concerned citizens, it is an allegation that the continuing enforcement of a law or any government act has denied the party some right or privilege to which they are entitled, or that the party will be subjected to some burden or penalty because of the law or act being complained of. For taxpayers, they must show "sufficient interest in preventing the illegal expenditure of money raised by taxation[.]" Legislators, meanwhile, must show that some government act infringes on the prerogatives of their office. Third-party suits must likewise be brought by litigants who have "sufficiently concrete interest" in the outcome of the dispute.82 (Citations omitted)Here, petitioners have legal standing based on the direct injury they sustained for being inoculated with Dengvaxia. These petitioner-children's health and welfare are at stake. They are directly affected whether or not the petition will be granted.
The doctrine that requires respect for the hierarchy of courts was created by this court to ensure that every level of the judiciary performs its designated roles in an effective and efficient manner. Trial courts do not only determine the facts from the evaluation of the evidence presented before them. They are likewise competent to determine issues of law which may include the validity of an ordinance, statute, or even an executive issuance in relation to the Constitution. To effectively perform these functions, they are territorially organized into regions and then into branches. Their writs generally reach within those territorial boundaries. Necessarily, they mostly perform the all-important task of inferring the facts from the evidence as these are physically presented before them. In many instances, the facts occur within their territorial jurisdiction, which properly present the "actual case" that makes ripe a determination of the constitutionality of such action. The consequences, of course, would be national in scope. There are, however, some cases where resort to courts at their level would not be practical considering their decisions could still be appealed before the higher courts, such as the Court of Appeals.Thus, while this Court shares original and concurrent jurisdiction with lower courts, litigants are not at liberty to invoke this Court's jurisdiction at the first instance. Direct invocation of this Court's original jurisdiction should be allowed only for exceptional reasons which are clearly and specifically pleaded by a party. In People v. Cuaresma:88chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
The Court of Appeals is primarily designed as an appellate court that reviews the determination of facts and law made by the trial courts. It is collegiate in nature. This nature ensures more standpoints in the review of the actions of the trial court. But the Court of Appeals also has original jurisdiction over most special civil actions. Unlike the trial courts, its writs can have a nationwide scope. It is competent to determine facts and, ideally, should act on constitutional issues that may not necessarily be novel unless there are factual questions to determine.
This court, on the other hand, leads the judiciary by breaking new ground or further reiterating — in the light of new circumstances or in the light of some confusions of bench or bar — existing precedents. Rather than a court of first instance or as a repetition of the actions of the Court of Appeals, this court promulgates these doctrinal devices in order that it truly performs that role.
In other words, the Supreme Court's role to interpret the Constitution and act in order to protect constitutional rights when these become exigent should not be emasculated by the doctrine in respect of the hierarchy of courts. That has never been the purpose of such doctrine.87 (Citation omitted)
This concurrence of jurisdiction is not, however, to be taken as according to parties seeking any of the writs an absolute, unrestrained freedom of choice of the court to which application therefor will be directed.... A direct invocation of the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction to issue these writs should be allowed only when there are special and important reasons therefor, clearly and specifically set out in the petition. This is established policy. It is a policy that is necessary to prevent inordinate demands upon the Court's time and attention which are better devoted to those matters within its exclusive jurisdiction, and to prevent further over-crowding of the Court's docket.... Indeed, the removal of the restriction on the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals in this regard, supra — resulting from the deletion of the qualifying phrase, "in aid of its appellate jurisdiction" — was evidently intended precisely to relieve this Court pro tanto of the burden of dealing with applications for the extraordinary writs which, but for the expansion of the Appellate Court's corresponding jurisdiction, would have had to be filed with it.89chanRoblesvirtualLawlibraryNevertheless, this Court has discretionary power and it can assume jurisdiction over petitions filed directly before it when warranted.90 GiosSamar summarized the exceptions:
(1) when there are genuine issues of constitutionality that must be addressed at the most immediate time;In all these exceptions, the questions presented to this Court must be purely legal, regardless of the petition's transcendental importance. There should be no dispute and question with respect to the facts.92chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
(2) when the issues involved are of transcendental importance;
(3) cases of first impression;
(4) the constitutional issues raised are better decided by the Court;
(5) exigency in certain situations;
(6) the filed petition reviews the act of a constitutional organ;
(7) when petitioners rightly claim that they had no other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law that could free them from the injurious effects of respondents' acts in violation of their right to freedom of expression; [and]
(8) the petition includes questions that are "dictated by public welfare and the advancement of public policy, or demanded by the broader interest of justice, or the orders complained of were found to be patent nullities, or the appeal was considered as clearly an inappropriate remedy."91chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
"[T]he legislature has no authority to execute or construe the law, the executive has no authority to make or construe the law, and the judiciary has no power to make or execute the law." The principle of separation of powers and its concepts of autonomy and independence stem from the notion that the powers of government must be divided to avoid concentration of these powers in any one branch; the division, it is hoped, would avoid any single branch from lording its power over the other branches or the citizenry. To achieve this purpose, the divided power must be wielded by co-equal branches of government that are equally capable of independent action in exercising their respective mandates. Lack of independence would result in the inability of one branch of government to check the arbitrary or self-interest assertions of another or others.99 (Citations omitted)Nevertheless, the separation of powers does not intend a detachment of the three branches.100 The Constitution provides for a system of checks and balances to ensure that there is coordination among the branches of the government.101chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
The Supreme Court should not be thought of as having been tasked with the awesome responsibility of overseeing the entire bureaucracy. Unless there is a clear showing of constitutional infirmity or grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, the Court's exercise of the judicial power, pervasive and limitless it may seem to be, still must succumb to the paramount doctrine of separation of powers.108 (Citation omitted)The Judiciary cannot take part in the execution of laws.109 Courts cannot claim superiority on matters involving another agency's technical expertise.110chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
It is the policy of the courts not to interfere with the discretionary executive acts of the executive branch unless there is a clear showing of grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. Mandamus does not lie against the legislative and executive branches or their members acting in the exercise of their official discretionary functions. This emanates from the respect accorded by the judiciary to said branches as co-equal entities under the principle of separation of powers.Only in highly exceptional cases does this Court grant mandamus to compel actions involving judgment and discretion. Even then, the Court can only order a party "to act, but not to act one way or the other."114chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
In De Castro v. Salas, we held that no rule of law is better established than the one that provides that mandamus will not issue to control the discretion of an officer or a court when honestly exercised and when such power and authority is not abused.113 (Citation omitted)
Section 6. Means to carry jurisdiction into effect. — When by law jurisdiction is conferred on a court or judicial officer, all auxiliary writs, processes and other means necessary to carry it into effect may be employed by such court or officer; and if the procedure to be followed in the exercise of such jurisdiction is not specifically pointed out by law or by these rules, any suitable process or mode of proceeding may be adopted which appears comfortable to the spirit of the said law or rules.The Rules contemplate situations where environmental law enforcement may be inadequate. A judicial component may be required to settle questions on the propriety of the agency's action or inaction.127 The rationale of the rules explains:
Environmental law highlights the shift in the focal-point from the initiation of regulation by Congress to the implementation of regulatory programs by the appropriate government agencies. Thus, a government agency's inaction, if any, has serious implications on the future of environmental law enforcement. Private individuals, to the extent that they seek to change the scope of the regulatory process, will have to rely on such agencies to take the initial incentives, which may require a judicial component. Accordingly, questions regarding the propriety of an agency's action or inaction will need to be analyzed.128chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrarySimilar to special civil actions for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus, the Rules of Procedure on Environmental cases require that the petition should be sufficient in form and substance; otherwise, it may be dismissed outright.129 In Dolot v. Paje:130chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
Sufficiency of substance, on the other hand, necessitates that the petition must contain substantive allegations specifically constituting an actionable neglect or omission and must establish, at the very least, a prima facie basis for the issuance of the writ, viz.: (1) an agency or instrumentality of government or its officer unlawfully neglects the performance of an act or unlawfully excludes another from the use or enjoyment of a right; (2) the act to be performed by the government agency, instrumentality or its officer is specifically enjoined by law as a duty; (3) such duty results from an office, trust or station in connection with the enforcement or violation of an environmental law, rule or regulation or a right therein; and (4) there is no other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the course of law.131 (Citation omitted)When a writ of continuing mandamus is issued and the judgment has attained finality, the court "retains jurisdiction over the case to ensure that the government agency concerned is performing its tasks as mandated by law and to monitor the effective performance of said tasks."132 In essence, the writ is a "command of continuing compliance with a final judgment."133 The judgment will be satisfied only upon the final return of the writ when the court deems that the judgment has been fully implemented.134chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
The Court cannot "substitute its judgment for that of said officials who are in a better position to consider and weigh the same in the light of the authority specifically vested in them by law." Since the Court has "no supervisory power over the proceedings and actions of the administrative departments of the government," it "should not generally interfere with purely administrative and discretionary functions." The power of the Court in mandamus petitions does not extend "to direct the exercise of judgment or discretion in a particular way or the retraction or reversal of an action already taken in the exercise of either."137 (Citations omitted)Substantially, a petition for the issuance of a writ of continuing mandamus involves a government office or officer who "neglects the performance of an act which the law specifically enjoins" and the writ commands this office or person "to do an act or series of acts" to satisfy the law.138chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
Mandamus lies to compel the performance of duties that are purely ministerial in nature, not those that are discretionary, and the official can only be directed by mandamus to act but not to act one way or the other. The duty being enjoined in mandamus must be one according to the terms provided in the law itself. Thus, the recognized rule is that, in the performance of an official duty or act involving discretion, the corresponding official can only be directed by mandamus to act, but not to act one way or the other.140 (Citations omitted)Litigants must establish the breach committed by the government office or officer by alleging and substantiating the acts falling within the law which it neglected. This is satisfied when they identify the parameters and end-goals which the law allows. It involves proving before the courts the inability of the government agency or officer to perform this duty and the irreparable damage that will result from this inaction.
Endnotes:
* "Lea J. Abaigar" in some parts of the Petition, but signed as "Zen Abaigar" in the Verification.
** On official business.
*** Designated as Acting Chief Justice per Special Order No. 2194.
**** On official business.
***** "Dezziery Bueza" in some parts of the Petition but signed as "Dezznery Bueza" in the Verification.
****** "Oliva A. Bayona" in some parts of the Petition but signed as "Olivia A. Bayona" in the Verification.
******* "Shanelle A. Roga" in some parts of the Petition but signed as "Shanille A. Roga."
1 RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CASES, rule 8, sec. 1.
2 Dolot v. Paje, 716 Phil. 458 (2013) [Per J. Reyes, En Banc].
3 Rollo, pp. 3-54.
4 The World Health Organization describes Dengvaxia as "a live recombinant tetravalent dengue vaccine, based on the yellow fever 17D vaccine strain, given as a 3-dose series with 6 months between each dose. The vaccine has 4 components, encoding for antigens of the four dengue virus strains. Dengvaxia is the first dengue vaccine to be licensed. Licensure means that a national regulatory authority reviewed all of the data on the vaccine, found that the benefits outweigh the risks, and permitted the company to have a marketing authorization to sell the product in that country."
5 RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CASES, rule 8, sec. 1.
6 Rollo, pp. 6-7.
7 Id. at 460.
8 Id. at 525.
9 Id. at 460.
10 Id. at 460-461.
11 Id. at 461.
12 Id.
13 Id.
14 Id.
15 Id. at 462.
16 Id. at 462, 532.
17 Id. at 462-465.
18 Id. at 463-464.
19 Id. at 464.
20 Id.
21 Id.
22 Id. at 464-465.
23 Id. at 465.
24 Id. at 3-54.
25 Id. at 167-210.
26 Id. at 415-438.
27 Id. at 453.
28 Id. at 456-485.
29 Id. at 520-569.
30 Id. at 466.
31 Id.
32 Id. at 467.
33 Id.
34 751 Phil. 301 (2015) [Per J. Leonen, En Banc].
35 Rollo, pp. 467-468.
36 Id. at 467-468.
37 Id. at 468-469.
38 Id., citing several provisions of the 1987 Constitution, namely:
Article II, Section 15: The State shall protect and promote the right to health of the people and instill health consciousness among them.
Article XIII, Section 11: The State shall adopt an integrated and comprehensive approach to health development which shall endeavor to make essential goods, health and other social services available to all the people at affordable cost. There shall be priority for the needs of the underprivileged sick, elderly, disabled, women, and children. The State shall endeavor to provide free medical care to paupers.
Article XIII, Section 12: The State shall establish and maintain an effective food and drug regulatory system and undertake appropriate health manpower development and research, responsive to the country's health needs and problems.
Article XV, Section 3(2): The State shall defend: .... (2) The right of children to assistance, including proper care and nutrition, and special protection from all forms of neglect, abuse, cruelty, exploitation, and other conditions prejudicial to their development[.]
39 Id. at 471-472, citing Presidential Decree No. 603, art. 3, which provides:
Article 3. Rights of the Child. - All children shall be entitled to the rights herein set forth without distinction as to legitimacy or illegitimacy, sex, social status, religion, political antecedents, and other factors.
(1) Every child is endowed with the dignity and worth of a human being from the moment of his conception, as generally accepted in medical parlance, and has, therefore, the right to be born well.
....
(3) Every child has the right to a well-rounded development of his personality to the end that he may become a happy, useful and active member of society.
....
(4) Every child has the right to a balanced diet, adequate clothing, sufficient shelter, proper medical attention, and all the basic physical requirements of a healthy and vigorous life.
(5) Every child has the right to be brought up in an atmosphere of morality[.]
....
(8) Every child has the right to protection against exploitation, improper influences, hazards, and other conditions or circumstances prejudicial to his physical, mental, emotional, social and moral development.
(9) Every child has the right to live in a community and a society that can offer him an environment free from pernicious influences and conducive to the promotion of his health and the cultivation of his desirable traits and attributes.
....
(11) Every child has the right to an efficient and honest government that will deepen his faith in democracy and inspire him with the morality of the constituted authorities both in their public and private lives.
Article 11. Promotion of Health. - The promotion of the Child's health shall begin with adequate prenatal and post-natal care both for him and his mother. All appropriate measures shall be taken to insure his normal total development.
It shall be the responsibility of the health welfare, and educational entities to assist the parents in looking after the health of the child.
40 Id. at 470, citing Article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which provides:
1. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health.
2. The steps to be taken by the States Parties to the present Covenant to achieve the full realization of this right shall include those necessary for:
(a) The provision for the reduction of the stillbirth-rate and of infant mortality and for the healthy development of the child;cralawlawlibrary
(b) The improvement of all aspects of environmental and industrial hygiene;cralawlawlibrary
(c) The prevention, treatment and control of epidemic, endemic, occupational and other diseases;cralawlawlibrary
(d) The creation of conditions which would assure to all medical service and medical attention in the event of sickness.
Article 24 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child states:
1. States Parties recognize the right of the child to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health and to facilities for the treatment of illness and rehabilitation of health. States Parties shall strive to ensure that no child is deprived of his or her right of access to such health care services.
2. States Parties shall pursue full implementation of this right and, in pat1icular, shall take appropriate measures:
a. To diminish infant and child mortality;cralawlawlibrary
b. To ensure the provision of necessary medical assistance and health care to all children with emphasis on the development of primary health care;cralawlawlibrary
c. To combat disease and malnutrition, including within the framework of primary health care, through, inter alia, the application of readily available technology and through the provision of adequate nutritious foods and clean drinking-water, taking into consideration the dangers and risks of environmental pollution;cralawlawlibrary
d. To ensure appropriate pre-natal and post-natal health care for mothers;cralawlawlibrary
e. To ensure that all segments of society, in particular parents and children, are informed, have access to education and are supported in the use of basic knowledge of child health and nutrition, the advantages of breastfeeding, hygiene and environmental sanitation and the prevention of accidents;cralawlawlibrary
f. To develop preventive health care, guidance for parents and family planning education and services.
3. States Parties shall take all effective and appropriate measures with a view to abolishing traditional practices prejudicial to the health of children.
4. States Parties undertake to promote and encourage international co-operation with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of the right recognized in the present article. In this regard, particular account shall be taken of the needs of developing countries.
41 Id. at 475.
42 Id. at 475-477, citing:
Executive Order 102, Section 1: Mandate. Consistent with the provisions of the Administrative Code of 1987 and RA 7160 (the Local Government Code), the DOH is hereby mandated to provide assistance to local government units (LGUs), people's organization (PO) and other members of civic society in effectively implementing programs, projects and services that will:
a) promote the health and well-being of every Filipino;cralawlawlibrary
b) prevent and control diseases among populations at risks;cralawlawlibrary
c) protect individuals, families and communities exposed to hazards and risks that could affect their health; and
d) treat, manage and rehabilitate individuals affected by disease and disability.
Republic Act No. 9711, Section 5: To carry out the provisions of this Act, there is hereby created an office to be called the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the Department of Health (DOH). Said Administration shall be under the Office of the Secretary and shall have the following functions, powers and duties:
(a) To administer the effective implementation of this Act and of the rules and regulations issued pursuant to the same;cralawlawlibrary
(b) To assume primary jurisdiction in the collection of samples of health products;cralawlawlibrary
(c) To analyze and inspect health products in connection with the implementation of this Act;cralawlawlibrary
(d) To establish analytical data to serve as basis for the preparation of health products standards, and to recommend standards of identity, purity, safety, efficacy, quality and fill of container;cralawlawlibrary
(e) To issue certificates of compliance with technical requirements to serve as basis for the issuance of appropriate authorization and spot-check for compliance with regulations regarding operation of manufacturers, importers, exporters, distributors, wholesalers, drug outlets, and other establishments and facilities of health products, as determined by the FDA;cralawlawlibrary
...
(h) To conduct appropriate tests on all applicable health products prior to the issuance of appropriate authorizations to ensure safety, efficacy, purity, and quality;cralawlawlibrary
(i) To require all manufacturers, traders, distributors, importers, exporters, wholesalers, retailers, consumers, and non-consumer users of health products to report to the FDA any incident that reasonably indicates that said product has caused or contributed to the death, serious illness or serious injury to a consumer, a patient, or any person;cralawlawlibrary
(j) To issue cease and desist orders motu prop[r]io or upon verified complaint for health products, whether or not registered with the FDA: Provided, That for registered health products, the cease and desist order is valid for thirty (30) days and may be extended for sixty (60) days only after due process has been observed;cralawlawlibrary
(k) After due process, to order the ban, recall, and/or withdrawal of any health product found to have caused the death, serious illness or serious injury to a consumer or patient, or is found to be imminently injurious, unsafe, dangerous, or grossly deceptive, and to require all concerned to implement the risk management plan which is a requirement for the issuance of the appropriate authorization;cralawlawlibrary
(l) To strengthen the post market surveillance system in monitoring health products as defined in this Act and incidents of adverse events involving such products;cralawlawlibrary
(m) To develop and issue standards and appropriate authorizations that would cover establishments, facilities and health products;cralawlawlibrary
(n) To conduct, supervise, monitor and audit research studies on health and safety issues of health products undertaken by entities duly approved by the FDA;cralawlawlibrary
(o) To prescribe standards, guidelines, and regulations with respect to information, advertisements and other marketing instruments and promotion, sponsorship, and other marketing activities about the health products as covered in this Act;cralawlawlibrary
(p) To maintain bonded warehouses and/or establish the same, whenever necessary or appropriate, as determined by the director-general for confiscated goods in strategic areas of the country especially at major ports of entry; and
(q) To exercise such other powers and perform such other functions as may be necessary to carry out its duties and responsibilities under this Act.
43 Rollo, pp. 478.
44 Id.
45 Id. at 479.
46 Id. at 483.
47 Id.
48 Id. at 483-484.
49 Id. at 41.
50 Id. at 479-480.
51 595 Phil. 305 (2008) [Per J. Velasco, Jr., En Banc].
52 Rollo, p. 480.
53 Id. at 520-569.
54 Id. at 536-539.
55 Id. at 538.
56 Id. at 539.
57 G.R. No. 217158, March 12, 2019, [Per J. Jardeleza, En Banc].
58 Rollo, pp. 538-539.
59 Id. at 542-543.
60 Id. at 543.
61 Id. at 546.
62 Id. at 543.
63 Id. at 546.
64 Id. at 547-564.
65 Id. at 548-549.
66 Id. at 550.
67 Id. at 551-553.
68 Id. at 552.
69 Id. at 554-555.
70 Id. at 556.
71 Id. at 557.
72 Id. at 558.
73 Id. at 561.
74 Id. at 563.
75 The Provincial Bus Operators Association of the Philippines v. Department of Labor and Employment, 836 Phil. 205, 249 (2018) [Per J. Leonen, En Banc]. (Citation omitted)
76 Pangilinan v. Cayetano, G.R. No. 238875, March 16, 2021, [Per J. Leonen, En Banc]. (Citation omitted)
77 Id.
78 The Provincial Bus Operators Association of the Philippines v. Department of Labor and Employment, 836 Phil. 205, 249 (2018) [Per J. Leonen, En Banc]. (Citation omitted)
79 Id. at 205.
80 Id. at 249-250.
81 G.R. No. 217910, September 3, 2019, [Per J. Leonen, En Banc].
82 Id.
83 The Provincial Bus Operators Association of the Philippines v. Department of Labor and Employment, 836 Phil. 205, 238 (2018) [Per J. Leonen, En Banc]. (Citation omitted)
84 Id. at 239. (Citation omitted)
85 Falcis III v. Civil Registrar General, G.R. No. 217910, September 3, 2019, [Per J. Leonen, En Banc].
86 751 Phil. 301 (2015) [Per J. Leonen, En Banc].
87 Id. at 329-330.
88 254 Phil. 418 (1989) [Per J. Narvasa, First Division].
89 Id. at 427.
90 Confederation for Unity, Recognition and Advancement of Govermnent Employees v. Abad, G.R. No. 200418, November 10 2020, [Per J. Leonen, En Banc].
91 Gios-Samar, Inc. v. Department of Transportation and Communications, G.R. No. 217158, March 12, 2019, [Per J. Jardeleza, En Banc], citing The Diocese of Bacolod v. Commission on Elections, 751 Phil. 301 (2015) [Per J. Leonen, En Banc].
92 Id.
93 RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CASES, rule 8, sec. 1 provides:
Section 1. Petition for continuing mandamus. - When any agency or instrumentality of the government or officer thereof unlawfully neglects the performance of an act which the law specifically enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station in connection with the enforcement or violation of an environmental law rule or regulation or a right therein, or unlawfully excludes another from the use or enjoyment of such right and there is no other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law, the person aggrieved thereby may file a verified petition in the proper court, alleging the facts with certainty, attaching thereto supporting evidence, specifying that the petition concerns an environmental law, rule or regulation, and praying that judgment be rendered commanding the respondent to do an act or series of acts until the judgment is fully satisfied, and to pay damages sustained by the petitioner by reason of the malicious neglect to perform the duties of the respondent, under the law, rules or regulations. The petition shall also contain a sworn certification of non-forum shopping.
94 Angara v. Electoral Commission, 63 Phil. 139, 156 (1936) [Per J. Laurel, En Banc].
95 Id. at 156.
96 Id.
97 Anak Mindanao Party-list Group v. Executive Secretary, 558 Phil. 338, 353 (2007) [Per J. Carpio Morales, En Banc]. (Citation omitted)
98 721 Phil. 416 (2013) [Per J. Perlas-Bernabe, En Banc].
99 Id. at 534-535.
100 Angara v. Electoral Commission, 63 Phil. 139, 157 (1936) [Per J. Laurel, En Banc].
101 Id. at 157.
102 Ople v. Torres, 354 Phil. 948, 966 (1998) [Per J. Puno, En Banc].
103 Id.
104 Id. at 967. (Citation omitted)
105 Id.
106 CONST., art. VIII, sec. 1.
107 456 Phil. 635 (2003) [Per J. Ynares-Santiago, First Division].
108 Id. at 648.
109 Belgica v. Ochoa, 721 Phil. 416, 534 (2013) [Per J. Perlas-Bernabe, En Banc].
110 See J. Leonen's Dissenting Opinion in West Tower Condominium Corp. v. First Phil. Industrial Corp., 760 Phil. 304, 352 (2015) [Per J. Velasco, Jr., En Banc].
111 Knights of Rizal v. DMCI Homes, Inc., 809 Phil. 453, 534 (2017) [Per J. Carpio, En Banc].
112 Id.
113 Id. at 533.
114 Id. at 534. (Citation omitted)
115 595 Phil. 305 (2008) [Per J. Velasco, Jr., En Banc].
116 Id. at 322-325.
117 Id. at 343.
118 Id.
119 1 SCC 226 (1998).
120 4 SC 463 (1987).
121 Metropolitan Manila Development Authority v. Concerned Residents of Manila Bay, 595 Phil. 305, 343 (2008) [Per J. Velasco, Jr., En Banc].
122 Id. at 348.
123 Id. at 352.
124 RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CASES, rule 1, sec. 4(c).
125 RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CASES, rule 8, sec. 1.
126 Dolot v. Paje, 716 Phil. 458, 472 (2013) [Per J. Reyes, En Banc].
127 PHILIPPINE JUDICIAL ACADEMY, RATIONALE TO THE RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CASES at 76,
128 PHILIPPINE JUDICIAL ACADEMY, RATIONALE TO THE RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CASES at 76,
129 Abogado v. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, G.R. No. 246209, September 3, 2019 [Per J. Leonen, En Banc].
130 716 Phil. 458 (2013) [Per J. Reyes, En Banc].
131 Id. at 472.
132 Id. at 473.
133 Id.
134 Id.
135 See Philippine International Trading Corporation v. Presiding Judge Angeles, 331 Phil. 723, 748 (1996) [Per J. Torres, Jr., Second Division].
136 Knights of Rizal v. DMCI Homes, Inc., 809 Phil. 453, 532 (2017) [Per J. Carpio, En Banc].
137 Id. at 532.
138 RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CASES, rule 8, sec. 1.
139 806 Phil. 1019 (2017) [Per J. Caguioa, En Banc].
140 Id. at 1037.
141 PHILIPPINE JUDICIAL ACADEMY, RATIONALE TO THE RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CASES at 41, <available at https://philja.judiciary.gov.ph/files/learning_materials/A.m.No.09-6-8-SC_rationale.pdf>cralawlawlibrary
142 Rollo, pp. 479-480.
I agree with the ponencia that this Petition ought to be dismissed for insufficiency of substance. Petitioners' resort to a petition for mandamus under Rule 65 is untenable, there being no law that mandates the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Departments of Health (DOH), Education (DepEd), and the Interior and Local Government (DILG) to grant petitioners' prayers in relation to the immunization program. The actions sought from respondents are clearly subject to Executive discretion, which the Judiciary has no power to compel. Neither can a writ of continuing mandamus be issued as their prayers do not arise from a violation or enforcement of an environmental law.
- Publicly disseminate, on a regular basis, the report of the task force created and designated to monitor and review the schoolbased immunization program involving Dengvaxia and to submit the same to the House of Representatives and Senate Committees on Health;cralawlawlibrary
- Conduct further study and review on the safety and efficacy of Dengvaxia, which should be open to the public and subject to review by independent medical experts;cralawlawlibrary
- Create a registry or list of all those who had been inoculated with Dengvaxia;cralawlawlibrary
- Provide free medical services to all inoculated children and monitor any adverse effects caused by the vaccine;cralawlawlibrary
- Provide free medical treatment and hospitalization to inoculated children if they suffer from a Dengvaxia-related illness; and
- Conduct initial and free consultations of inoculated children in all areas covered by the program.
Sec. 3. Coverage. – The mandatory basic immunization for all infants and children provided under this Act shall cover the following vaccine-preventable diseases:
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
(a) Tuberculosis; (b) Diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis; (c) Poliomyelitis; (d) Measles; (e) Mumps; (f) Rubella or German measles; (g) Hepatitis-B; (h) H. Influenza type B (HIB); and (i) Such other types as may be determined by the Secretary of Health in a department circular.x x x
The Court must uphold Executive discretion in the conduct of the vaccination program |
The release of a copy of the master list of students and individuals who were vaccinated with Dengvaxia ®, which contains sensitive personal information to the requesting (sic), to any requesting public, could constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.The Court may likewise take judicial notice that the DOH issued several Administrative Orders (A.O.) to implement policies that address the petitioners' appeals.
We urge the DOH to be circumspect in releasing information relating to sensitive personal information of individuals. It should do so only if it is satisfied that such release is authorized under law and adheres to data privacy principles, and reasonable and appropriate security measures are in place for the protection of said data. In order to fulfill its own mandate, the DOH collects the health information of Filipinos, who should be able to trust that their information will be protected and used only for the purpose by which they are collected.41chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
As for the FDA, the ponencia notes that it has been studying and reviewing the safety and efficacy of Dengvaxia, and coordinating with the manufacturer for periodic safety reports and alerts on possible issues, in keeping with its mandate for post-market surveillance for health products.42chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
- A.O. No. 2018-0004 (February 9, 2018), Interim Guidelines on the Surveillance of Adverse Events among Dengvaxia Vaccinees (AEDV Surveillance), directing health facilities and health professionals from both the public and private sectors to cater to and manage individuals who have received at least one (1) dose of Dengvaxia and have thereafter experienced adverse events.
- A.O. No. 2018-0005, (Februa1y 13, 2018), Interim Guidelines on Dengue Diagnosis, R ferral and Management for Dengvaxia Vaccinated Individuals, to provide technical guidance to health workers on the diagnosis, referral, and management of Dengvaxia-vaccinated individuals who acquire dengue infection.
- A.O. No. 2018-0006 (February 20, 2018), Interim Guidelines for Specimen Collection, Initial Testing, Storage, Packaging and Transport for Confirmatory Testing of Cases from Surveillance of Adverse Events among Dengvaxia Vaccinees (AEDV) and Designation of Sub-National Laboratories and Partner Testing Laboratories to address several challenges in the collection, storage, and transport of specimens resulting from confusion regarding the protocol for the same; it likewise identified several subnational laboratories to augment the capacity of the Research Institute for Tropical Medicine, which serves as the National Reference Laboratory for Dengue and other arboviruses, and central laboratory for confirmatory testing.
- A.O. No. 2018-0007 (February 28, 2018), Interim Guidelines on Investigating Deaths related to Dengvaxia Immunization, to institute standard operating procedures in the conduct of autopsy and in the investigation of deaths associated with Dengvaxia vaccines (it was subsequently amended by A.O. 2018-0007-A, in June 2018).
- A.O. No. 2018-0008 (March 1, 2018), Interim Guidelines Risk Communication for Dengue/Dengvaxia Immunization Concerns, which covers the delivery of key messages on immunization, dengue prevention, and actions undertaken by the DOH, and outlines the strategies and tools that shall be utilized to address public concerns about Dengvaxia vaccination and rebuild the public's trust in the vaccination program of the DOH.
- A.O. No. 2018-0010 (March 14, 2018), Interim Guidelines on Health Financing for Medical Needs of Dengvaxia Vaccinees, on 14 March 2018, which allowed for the identification and profiling of vaccinees in Regions III, IV-A, and the NCR, where the vaccine was first introduced, and outlines the health financing and payment mechanisms for the medical needs of vaccinees, to ensure their timely and equitable access to healthcare services.
The writs of mandamus and continuing mandamus cannot issue |
In this case, the petitioners, apart from citing the scope of the agencies' powers and functions, have failed to point to specific provisions of the law where the supposed duties are purportedly required.RULE 8
WRIT OF CONTINUING MANDAMUS
SECTION 1. Petition for continuing mandamus.—When any agency or instrumentality of the government or officer thereof unlawfully neglects the performance of an act which the law specifically enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station in connection with the enforcement or violation of an environmental law rule or regulation or a right therein, or unlawfully excludes another from the use or enjoyment of such right and there is no other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law, the person aggrieved thereby may file a verified petition in the proper court, alleging the facts with certainty, attaching thereto supporting evidence, specifying that the petition concerns an environmental law, rule or regulation, and praying that judgment be rendered commanding the respondent to do an act or series of acts until the judgment is fully satisfied, and to pay damages sustained by the petitioner by reason of the malicious neglect to perform the duties of the respondent, under the law, rules or regulations. The petition shall also contain a sworn certification of non-forum shopping. (emphasis supplied)
It thus behooves the Court to put the heads of the petitioner-department-agencies and the bureaus and offices under them on continuing notice about, and to enjoin them to perform, their mandates and duties towards cleaning up the Manila Bay and preserving the quality of its water to the ideal level. Under what other judicial discipline describes as "continuing mandamus": the Court may, under extraordinary circumstances, issue directives with the end in view of ensuring that its decision would not be set to naught by administrative inaction or indifference. In India, the doctrine of continuing mandamus was used to enforce directives of the court to clean up the length of the Ganges River from industrial and municipal pollution.Again, assuming that the respondents have a duty to perform the acts prayed for by the petitioners, unlike in the Manila Bay46 case, records do not bare neglect on the part of the respondents, nor any indicia that the respondents will renege on their obligations once this Court issues a directive. Thus, even if we disregard the fact that this case involves a public health issue, and not an environmental one, or any other issue under any other related law, rule, regulation, or right, the Petition must still fail. The extraordinary circumstances prevailing in Manila Bay47 are not present here. There is no basis for the Court to extend the application of the writ of continuing mandamus to the public health issue before us, based on the attendant facts and circumstances.x x x
In the light of the ongoing environmental degradation, the Cou1t wishes to emphasize the extreme necessity for all concerned executive departments and agencies to immediately act and discharge their respective official duties and obligations. Indeed, time is of the essence; hence, there is a need to set timetables for the performance and completion of the tasks, some of them as defined for them by law and the nature of their respective offices and mandates.
The importance of the Manila Bay as a sea resource, playground, and as a historical landmark cannot be over-emphasized. It is not yet too late in the day to restore the Manila Bay to its former splendor and bring back the plants and sea life that once thrived in its blue waters. But the tasks ahead, daunting as they may be, could only be accomplished if those mandated, with the help and cooperation of all civic-minded individuals, mandated, with the help and cooperation of all civic-minded individuals, would put their minds to these tasks and take responsibility. This means that the State, through petitioners, has to take the lead in the preservation and protection of the Manila Bay.
The era of delays, procrastination, and ad hoc measures is over. Petitioners must transcend their limitations, real or imaginary, and buckle down to work before the problem at hand becomes unmanageable. Thus, we must reiterate that different government agencies and instrumentalities cannot shirk from their mandates; they must perform their basic functions in cleaning up and rehabilitating the Manila Bay. We are disturbed by petitioners' hiding behind two untenable claims: (1) that there ought to be a specific pollution incident before they are required to act; and (2) that the cleanup of the bay is a discretionary duty. (emphasis in the original; citations omitted)45cralawredlibrary
Thus, every Petition for a Writ of Continuing Mandamus should clearly allege (a) the serious and systemic inability of respondents to meet their constitutional or statutory obligations to protect and preserve the environment despite repeated demands, (b) convincing circumstances that the non-issuance of the writ will result in irreparable damage to our ecology within the scope provided in our rules, and (c) specific, measurable, attainable, realistic and timebound objectives that have rational relation to the irreparable damage sought to be avoided.48cralawredlibraryI wholeheartedly agree with the statement in the ponencia that "judicial relief to health and environmental rights should always be based upon reasonable scientific as well as established and sufficient bases." This should, of course, be viewed in light of the precautionary principle in the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases, and should not be construed as imposing a higher standard. The precautionary principle allows the court to err on the side of caution in the absence of scientific certainty. The Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases provide:
In conclusion, I wish to emphasize that the antecedents of the government's vaccination program and the foregoing discussions clearly evince that the Judiciary has no authority to interfere in the Executive's implementation and administration of the vaccination program. Therefore, I concur in the erudite ponencia, subject to the foregoing discussions.RULE I
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section 2 (f) Precautionary principle states that when human activities may lead to threats of serious and irreversible damage to the environment that is scientifically plausible but uncertain, actions shall be taken to avoid or diminish that threat.x x x RULE 20
PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE
Section 1. Applicability.—When there is a lack of full scientific certainty in establishing a causal link between human activity and environmental effect, the court shall apply the precautionary principle in resolving the case before it. The constitutional right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology shall be given the benefit of the doubt.
Section 2. Standards for application.—In applying the precautionary principle, the following factors, among others, may be considered: (1) threats to human life or health; (2) inequity to present or future generations; or (3) prejudice to the environment without legal consideration of the environmental rights of those affected.49cralawredlibrary
Endnotes:
1 Decision, p. 11.
2 465 Phil. 860-985 (2004).
3 ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, sec. 2.
4 Id.
5 Id., sec. 3, viz: "Section 3. Powers and Functions. - The Department shall:
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary(1) Define the national health policy and formulate and implement a national health plan within the framework of the government's general policies and plans, and present proposals to appropriate authorities on national issues which have health implications;6 WHO, Vaccines and Immunization, https://www.who.int/health-topics/vaccines-and-immunization?adgroupsurvey={adgroupsurvey}&gclid=Cj0KCQjwrs2XBhDjARIsAHVymmRyAmzcubjxEGvdAiOZ8VQI3FrywRPJRV7YVpLlw_YUUIwOLllJWDIaAunlEALw_wcB#tab=tab_l (accessed last August 10, 2022).
(2) Provide for health programs, services, facilities and other requirements as may be needed, subject to availability of funds and administrative rules and regulations;
(3) Coordinate or collaborate with, and assist local communities, agencies and interested groups including international organizations in activities related to health;
(4) Administer all laws, rules and regulations in the field of health, including quarantine laws and food and drug safety laws;
(5) Collect, analyze and disseminate statistical and other relevant information on the country's health situation, and require the reporting of such information from appropriate sources;
(6) Propagate health information and educate the population on important health, medical and environmental matters which have health implications;
(7) Undertake health and medical research and conduct training in support of its priorities, programs and activities;
(8) Regulate the operation of and issue licenses and permits to government and private hospitals, clinics and dispensaries, laboratories, blood banks, drugstores and such other establishments which by the nature of their functions are required to be regulated by the Department;
(9) Issue orders and regulations concerning the implementation of established health policies; and
(10) Perform such other functions as may be provided by law."
7 UNICEF on Immunization, https://www.unicef.org/immunization (accessed last August 12, 2022).
8 WHO Vaccines and Immunization, https://www.who.int/health-topics/vaccines-and-immunization?adgroupsurvey={adgroupsurvey}&gclid=Cj0KCQjwrs2XBhDjARIsAHVymmRyAmzcubjxEGvdAiOZ8VQI3FrywRPJRV7YVpLlw_YUUIwOLllJWDlaAunlEALw_wcB#tab=tab_l (accessed last August 10, 2022).
9 US Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, Vaccines and Immunizations, Immunization: The Basics, https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/imz-basics.htm (accessed last August 12, 2022).
10 Id.
11 US Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, Vaccines and Preventable Disease, Measles. Mumps, and Rubella, Vaccination: What Everyone Should Know, https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/mmr/public/index.html#:~:text=One%20dose%20of%20MMR%20vaccine%20is%2093%25%20effective%20against%20measles,(weakened)%20live%20virus%20vaccine (accessed last August 12, 2022).
12 US Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, Vaccines and Preventable Disease, Polio Vaccine Effectiveness and Duration of Protection, https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/polio/hcp/effectiveness-duration-protection.html#:~:text=Two%20doses%20of%20inactivated%20polio,polio%20vaccine%20(tOPV)%2C%20or (accessed last August 12, 2022).
13 US Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, Vaccine Safety: Overview, History, and How the Safety Process Works, https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/ensuringsafety/history/index.html (accessed last November 21, 2022).
14 Pollard AJ, Bijker EM. A guide to vaccinology: from basic principles to new developments, Nat Rev Immunol, 2021; 21(2):83-100.doi: 10.1038/s41577-020-00479-7, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7754704/ (accessed last August 10, 2022).
15 World Health Assembly Resolution WHA.27.57 (May 23, 1974).
16 Providing for Compulsory Basic Immunization for Infants and Children Below Eight Years of Age. Presidential Decree No. 996. (September 22, 1976).
17 PRES. DEC. No. 996, Providing for Compulsory Basic Immunization for Infants and Children Below Eight Years of Age (September 16, 1976).
18 PRES. DEC. No. 996, sec. 2.
19 Id. sec. 5.
20 Id. sec. 6.
21 PRES. PROC. NO. 6, series or 1986, Implementing A United Nations Goal on Universal Child Immunization by 1990.
22 Id.
23 Reyes, MSG, Dec, EC, and Ho, BL, Vaccination in the Philippines: experiences from history and lessons for the future, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8115747/ (accessed last August 8, 2022).
24 PRES. PROC. Reaffirming the Commitment to the Universal Child and Mother Immunization Goal by Launching the Polio Eradication Project.
25 REP. ACT NO. 7846 (1994). An Act requiring compulsory immunization against Hepatitis B for infants and children below eight years old, amending for the purpose Presidential Decree No. 996, December 30, 1994.
26 Department of Health, National Immunization Program Manual of Operations, pp. 30.
27 Ulep, VGT, & Uy, J, An Assessment of the Expanded Program on Immunization (EPI) in the Philippines: Challenges and Ways Forward, Philippine Institute for Development Studies, Discussion Paper Series No. 2021-04, February 2021, https://pidswebs.pids.gov.ph/CDN/PUBLICATIONS/pidsdps2104.pdf (accessed last August 8, 2022).
28 Department of Health, National Immunization Program Manual Operations.
29 WHO Joint News Release, WHO, UNICEF and partners support Philippine Department of Health's polio outbreak response, 9 September 2019,
https://www.who.int/philippines/news/detail/19-09-2019-who-unicef-and-partners-support-philippine-department-of-health-s-polio-outbreak-response (accessed last August 8, 2022).
30 WHO Joint News Release, WHO, UNICEF laud end of polio outbreak in the Philippines, 11 June 2021, https://www.who.int/philippines/news/detail/11-06-2021-who-unicef-laud-end-of-poliooutbreak-in-the-philippines (accessed last August 8, 2022).
31 REP. ACT NO. 9155 (2001), sec. 3. Lapsed into law on August 11, 2001, without the President's signature, pursuant to Sec. 27(1), Article VI of the Constitution.
32 Cawad v. Abad, 764 Phil. 705-764 (2015), Dacudao v. Secretary of Justice, 688 SCRA 109, 123, (2013) citing ABAKADA Guro Party List v. Purisima, 584 Phil. 246, 283 (2008).
33 Cawad v. Abad, 764 Phil. 705-764 (2015).
34 International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications, Inc. v. Greenpeace Southeast Asia (Philippines), G.R. Nos. 209271, 209276, 209301 & G.R. No. 209430 (Resolution), July 26, 2016.
35 Id.
36 Belgica v. Ochoa, 721 Phil. 416-732 (2013).
37 Id.
38 Department of Environment and Natural Resources v. DENR Region 12 Employees, 456 Phil. 635-648 (2003).
39 Biraogo v. Philippine Truth Commission of 2010, 651 Phil 374-773 (2010).
40 Id.
41 Press Release: Privacy Commission cautions DOH on sharing of Dengvaxia master list, 6 March 2018, 11:00 AM GMT+0800 Last Edit: November 11, 2021, https://www.privacy.gov.ph/2018/03/privacy-commission-cautions-doh-on-sharing-of-dengvaxiamaster-list/ (August 15, 2022).
42 REP. ACT NO. 9711, sec. 5.
43 A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC (2010).
44 595 Phil. 305-352 (2008).
45 Id.
46 Id.
47 Id.
48 Decision, p. 5.
49 A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC (2010).
cralawredlibrary