Lagman: SC TRO on contraceptive implants pierced 'heart and soul' of RH Law

A lawmaker on Friday rued the continued implementation of the stay order issued by the Supreme Court (SC) on the use of contraceptive implants in the government's family planning program.

"While there is no direct injunction against the implementation of the RH Law, the Supreme Court has pierced the heart and soul of the RH Law by making the certification, procurement and access to contraceptives more difficult and cumbersome," Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman, the main author of the Reproductive Health Law, said in a statement.

Lagman was reacting to a newspaper report quoting SC spokesman Theodore Te as saying that there is no temporary restraining order (TRO) stopping the implementation of the RH Law or any of its provisions.

Te reiterated this in his Twitter post, where he posted a link to the decision of the SC Second Division in August last year keeping the June 2015 TRO it issued in favor of pro-life group Alliance for the Family Foundation Philippines (ALFI).

Is there a TRO against the RH Law? No.
Read https://t.co/yMqzfhxMSW, especially pp. 21-22 in relation to pp. 16-17.

— SCPIOChief (@SCPIOChief) January 12, 2017

  In its decision, the SC said it could not lift the TRO because the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has yet to conduct a hearing on ALFI's concerns that contraceptive implants, particularly the brands Implanon and Implanon NXT, have abortifacient features.   

Lagman, however, said the high court "practically derailed" the enforcement of the law "so much so that by 2018 contraceptive supplies are expected to dry up."

"Supreme Court spokesman Theodore Te was splitting hairs when he reiterated that the high court did not derail the implementation of the Reproductive Health Law (RA 10354)," he said.

Lagman added that Te failed to explain that the decision even expanded the coverage of the TRO to include the certification and re-certification of all contraceptives to be used under RA 10354, including those which have been "traditionally certified for decades as safe and non-abortifacient."

"All that is required pursuant to Section 9 (of the RH Law) is a 'certification from the FDA that said product and supply is made available on the condition that it is not to be used as an abortifacient'," he said.

"The findings of administrative agencies like the FDA are accorded highest respect and adherence by superior courts because of the former’s acknowledged expertise."

The Office of Solicitor General earlier urged the high court to lift the TRO, arguing the registration and re-certification of contraceptive implants is under the FDA regulatory and administrative power and that the decision would have "dire consequences" for the public.

"The TRO is a major stumbling block for the government to reduce maternal and newborn deaths in the country, decrease poverty, and uplift the lives of Filipinos by providing information and access on the full range of modern family planning methods," it added.

The OSG also asked the SC to elevate the case to the 15-member en banc.—KBK, GMA News