SC entertained doubt when it stopped RH law, says Justice Leonen


Associate Justice Marvic Leonen. INQUIRER FILE PHOTO

MANILA, Philippines—The Supreme Court has entertained doubt instead of clarifying it when it stopped the government from implementing Republic Act 10354 or the Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health Act of 2012, the Supreme Court’s youngest magistrate and latest Aquino appointee said.

In his dissenting opinion, Associate Justice Marvic Leonen said the high court should have listened to the debates of the pro and anti-RH Law before deciding whether to stop its implementation or not. Leonen is one of the 5 justices who dissented against stopping its implementation.

“I concede that we all cherish the same values congealed in constitutional provisions mandating the right to life albeit perhaps with its many incarnations. I also concede that we are still open to reasoned argument even as we may have tentative views on the law and how it squares with the Constitution. However, what we entertained was a doubt…we should have first clarified that doubt rather than to have acted on it,” Leonen said.

He pointed that a law enjoys the presumption of constitutionality unless there is clear proof that it runs counter to the Constitution.

“The presumption of constitutionality holds especially for this controversial piece of social legislation…,” Leonen said pointing out that the best way to exercise judicial prudence is wait for both the pro and anti-RH to file their respective comments, he said.

“Our Constitution expects us to be more deliberate in the heat of vociferous public debate that occasionally wades into issues of morality and conscience. We need to have all arguments laid out before us so that we can ruminate and discuss among ourselves how these square with our Constitution and our jurisprudence. The restraint we should impose on ourselves is not passive irresponsibility. It is constitutional duty,” Leonen said.

Voting 10-5, the high court stopped RH Law implementation for 120 days while a debate on the validity of the law will be conducted on June 18.

Get Inquirer updates while on the go, add us on these apps:

Inquirer Viber

Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.

  • EmmanuelGomez

    when man made rules and laws.. is it not made to have the finality of such law. everything is subject to debate..look at this guy.. try God’s laws it is final.

    • magsasakasanayon

      which God’s Laws? the God of the ancient Egyptians? the Sumerians? the Jews? the Hindus?

      • EmmanuelGomez

        which ever you like .. there is only one. if you have plenty .. you must be in the institution of the insane.

      • magsasakasanayon

        of course. typical response of a moron.

      • EmmanuelGomez

        ohh name calling now.. typical..

      • magsasakasanayon

        not at all. i’m merely referring to the level of your IQ. don’t be hurt. it’s all right.

      • EmmanuelGomez

        yeah right.. ..that’s the usual thing morons would say.

      • brunogiordano

        Paano naging isa lang. Parang galing ka sa ibang planeta.

        Dito sa MUNDO isang katutak na GOD mayroon na lahat LIKHA ng mga tao.

        Karamihan ginagamit ng mga RELIGIOUS SCAMMERS sa PANLOLOKO ng mga SUCKERS na tao.

      • EmmanuelGomez

        dude tao ka. you can ascertain what is right and wrong. you dont understand them don’t join them..

    • Ari Putan

      What about God’s law on circumcision?
      Can I enter the kingdom if supot ako?

      • EmmanuelGomez

        yes.. my friend.. you can ..but God will Circumcise you himself. .. :)

      • Ari Putan

        Hahahaha…i like it..:)

      • EmmanuelGomez

        cool dude ehehe

    • brunogiordano

      GOD na LIKHA lamang din ng TAO????

      RH law ay batas pantao at hindi kailangan ang batas ng GOD na LIKHA din ng TAO.

      • EmmanuelGomez

        it wasn’t about RH..RH is being debated right? point ko is ..laws of man are not final..

      • EmmanuelGomez

        try ..thou shall not kill.. RH bill… are not perfect.. make it clear and perfect.. para wala ng debate.

      • HarryK

        Thou shalt not kill.

        Tell that to Hussein, Bush, Netanyahu, Blair, Gaddaffi, Assad, Hu Jin Tao, ……….people everywhere are being legally slaughtered for every possible reasons.

  • KarlosRegaza

    Trash RH Law!

  • noreligionhavefaith

    religion = the greatest story ever told!

  • Sultan Kirat

    Irony of ironies. Saint Sereno the Pious lays aside her halo and votes with the life-hating secular humanists from Team Dedbol, her political patrons. And in the meantime the Carpio loyalists are making their power felt. Are they planning to pressure Her Holiness to resign, like Pope Benedict, or banish her to the hinterlands of minority opinion? This display from the Supreme Court shows that “judicial independence” has lain dormant long before Corona. Politics and personalities run the show, like everything in our government.

  • ChinaObserver

    I counter that it is rather the law that has been implemented, enforced, and has existed for a given amount of time that has the presumption of constitutionality not the law that is just coming to birth. The non existence of a certain law is deemed better than the enforcement of a new law that can be found to be unconstitutional later. The 10 justices acted rightly.

  • isidro

    The presumption of unconstitutionality was present in the manifesto of those who oppose RH law including doubt. Justice Leonen should respect SC procedures including its constitutionality.


    Si Leonen mukhang nuno sa puntod kaya siguro walang kaluluwa …. eeeewwwwww…

  • kilabot

    justice leonen, the gay lion, also has doubts about his sexuality.

    let’s test him.
    justice leonen, do you consider anus a sex organ like dick and pusi?

    • Pope

      a good question to ask your favorite priest as well?


    Ang isang bagong justice, nagma-magaling galingan, kala nya mas magaling pa sya sa mga veteranong justices ng SC. Hindi pa mainit sa upuan, kung ano ano na ang sinasabi. Too little knowledge is a dangerous thing bata. Di man lang ng judge ito sa MTC or RTC. Kaya hindi alam ang processo. Diretcho SC, express lane. Hay naku naman.

  • eufems

    TAMA guys! Atakihin natin ang personalidad ni Leonen sa halip yung mga puntong iniharap niya. Napakahusay na paraan ng pag-aargumento.

    Kudos sa mga tutol sa sinabi ni Leonen pero sa paraang lohikal ginawa ang pag-analisa. Hindi yung inakusahan lang siya ng pagmamagaling at pagiging bakla.

  • wakats

    Justice Leonen, the presumption of constitutionality has been negated by the 10-5 voting – and you belonged to the minority – meaning majority members of the SC did not entertain doubt when it stopped the RH law.

    You lost your first case – it’s that simple….

  • Edgardo Mendoza

    cbcp bishops gus2 mag parami ng batang hubo supreme court kanggaroo court ignoramus! hahahahhaha amazingggggggg

To subscribe to the Philippine Daily Inquirer newspaper in the Philippines, call +63 2 896-6000 for Metro Manila and Metro Cebu or email your subscription request here.

Factual errors? Contact the Philippine Daily Inquirer's day desk. Believe this article violates journalistic ethics? Contact the Inquirer's Reader's Advocate. Or write The Readers' Advocate:

c/o Philippine Daily Inquirer Chino Roces Avenue corner Yague and Mascardo Streets, Makati City,Metro Manila, Philippines Or fax nos. +63 2 8974793 to 94


editors' picks



latest videos