DOH asks SC anew to lift TRO on contraceptive implants | Inquirer News
Close  

DOH asks SC anew to lift TRO on contraceptive implants

/ 07:00 PM October 10, 2016
Supreme-court-building inquirer

Supreme Court. INQUIRER FILE PHOTO

The Department of Health (DOH) on Monday asked the Supreme Court to reconsider its September decision denying the lifting of the restraining order on the procurement, selling, distributing, dispensing and administering and promoting contraceptive implants.

In a 47-page motion for reconsideration, the DOH through Solicitor General Jose Calida, also urged the high court to reverse its order for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to review whether certain contraceptive drugs and devices are abortifacients or non-abortifacients.

ADVERTISEMENT

“If carried out, the SC decision could result in over 900 additional maternal deaths every year arising from almost one million unintended pregnancies that could have been addressed by the full implementation of the Family Planning Program,” Population Commission executive director Juan Antonio Perez said.

“Those who opposed the law in the legislative arena are now trying to reverse the judgment of history through backdoor judicial dilatory tactics, but the millions of Filipinos who stand to benefit from the law will surely bring all of this to an end,” Perez added.

FEATURED STORIES

A restraining order was issued in July last year by the high court’s second division following a petition filed by the Alliance for the Family Foundation Philippines Inc. (Alfi) that claimed that the Department of Health’s (DOH), in implementing Republic Act 10354 or the Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health Act of 2012 (RH Law), disregarded due process and committed a grave abuse of discretion.
Alfi also wants a blanket restraining order not just for hormonal contraceptive ‘Implanon’ and Implanon NXT’ but other similar products.

The DOH, through the Office of the Solicitor General, told the high court that the restraining order should be lifted because the restraint would result in the depleted supply of contraceptive drugs and devices in both accredited public health facilities and in the commercial market.

It added that government funds will also go to waste because huge quantities of ‘Implanon’ and ‘Implanon NXT’ will expire and yet still in government warehouses.

But the high court said the Food and Drugs Administration (FDA) has to conduct a hearing on Alfi’s opposition to the said drugs.

“To lift the TRO (temporary restraining order) at this time would be to grant a motion for execution before a trial. The Court emphasized that the TRO did not mean that the FDA should stop fulfilling its mandate to test, analyze and scrutinize and inspect drugs and devises,” high court’s Information Chief Atty. Theodore Te said at a press conference.

The high court explained that the subject of the TRO is the granting of certification or recertification of contraceptive drugs without giving Alfi the opportunity to air its objections. Also covered by the TRO is the distribution and administration of Implanon and Implanon NXT and similar contraceptives until they are determined to be safe.

In 2014, the high court ruled that the RH Law is “not unconstitutional.”

In its ruling, it declared unconstitutional eight of the law’s provisions.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.
Read Next
Don't miss out on the latest news and information.

Subscribe to INQUIRER PLUS to get access to The Philippine Daily Inquirer & other 70+ titles, share up to 5 gadgets, listen to the news, download as early as 4am & share articles on social media. Call 896 6000.

TAGS: Department of Health, Family Foundation Philippines Inc., Food and Drugs Administration, Office of the Solicitor General, Population Commission, Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health Act of 2012, Solicitor General Jose Calida, Supreme Court
For feedback, complaints, or inquiries, contact us.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and
acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.



© Copyright 1997-2022 INQUIRER.net | All Rights Reserved

We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. By continuing, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. To find out more, please click this link.