Health officials dismayed by blocking of Milk Code rules

Philippine and international health officials on Wednesday were dismayed over the Supreme Court’s decision to temporarily block tighter rules on advertising breast milk substitutes. In a two-page resolution, the Supreme Court ordered the Department of Health not to implement the revised 1985 Milk Code’s implementing rules and regulations (IRR), wich bar milk companies from promoting and advertising infant formula using the image of children or parents as their covers. The Supreme Court thus reversed its earlier decision not to grant the request by pharmaceutical for a temporary restraining order (TRO) on the imposition of the IRR. “It is very disheartening," said Health Secretary Francisco Duque. “We are shocked and dismayed that the Supreme Court would take such a position….that due process was not adhered to," said Nicholas Alipui, country representative of the United Nations Children’s Fund (Unicef), which is campaigning for the implementation of the exclusive breastfeeding for infants until six months. “It’s dismaying that the highest body in terms of law would take a position contrary to the very fundamental right of every child to breastfeed," Alipui added. The high court last June denied the petition for a TRO filed by the Pharmaceutical Health Care Association of the Philippines (PHCAP) demanding not to implement the IRR of the revised Milk Code. The IRR imposes fines of as low as P10,000 for the first offense to P1 million for the fifth offense. It IRR was approved 18 years after the Milk Code was signed into law in 1986. Duque said reversing their decision was “very unusual" for the Supreme Court. Under the new IRR, milk companies cannot claim that infant formula is better than breast milk because it undermines breastfeeding. The TRO was issued against Health Secretary Francisco Duque III; health undersecretaries Ethelyn Nieto, Margarita Galon, Alexander Padilla and Jade Del Mundo and assistant secretaries Mario Villaverde, David Lozada and Nemesio Gako. Among the petitioners against the IRR were phameceutical giants such as Abbot Laboratories, Wyeth Philippines, Mead Johnson, Astrazeneca Pharmaceuticals, Bayer Philippines, Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline, and Mercury Drug Corporation. The high tribunal also ordered the PHAP to post a bond amounting to P500,000 to the High Court within five days. The petitioners said the revised IRR of the Milk Code is “unconstitutional" because, in effect, it amended Executive Order 51. They said that the amendment of any law is a legislative function. The pharmaceutical companies said enforcement of the revised IRR will unavoidably affect the investment and expansion plans of key milk manufacturers in the country as they may opt to cut down their current productions due to the new restrictions. “As a result thereof, the milk industry may be forced to curtail the employment of highly-skilled medical representatives who contribute to providing accurate, useful and scientific information pertaining to formula milk and other personnel of the various milk manufacturers," the petitioners said. They added the revised IRR of the Milk Code impairs the right of the people to access to information. “It even encroaches upon the legitimate and lawful exercise by citizens of their property rights, thereby unreasonably interfering with lawful business without due process of law," they said. The Unicef’s Alipui earlier said the penalty which was raised from P10,000 to P1 million under the revised IRR for milk companies found violating is not a deterrent since this companies even spent millions to promote milk products through advertisement. “I think for the milk companies that is not a big deal. I mean they just spent P2.5 billion for advertising for milk products in the country in the last six months so I have thought that perhaps a stiffer penalty would be reasonable," Alipui had told reporters. -