'Unfavorable ruling on RH Law, a veto of people's will'

MANILA, Philippines - Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr. has warned the Supreme Court (SC) declaring the Reproductive Health (RH) Law unconstitutional will be "a veto against the will of the majority of the our people."

Belmonte made the statement amid speculations that the Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health Law may lose in the judicial review before the High Court.

"While I fully respect the integrity, impartiality and independence of the Supreme Court, we must also consider that passage of this law took 13 years and about four months. It was realized despite pressure from religious groups and other sectors who worked just as hard to raise their issues against the measure," Belmonte said.

He also said that Congress is the constitutionally mandated branch to make laws while the judicial review falls under the SC mandate.

"I am sure that like us in the House, they have seen the majority public sentiment on this issue which was also reflected in numerous surveys," he added.

Belmonte said that what is now contained in these so-called petitions against the RH Law were given ample time to be heard, discussed and debated upon during the pendency of the measure in the legislative branch.

"Remember that we have 289 House members who are individuals representing a broad spectrum of society. They are representatives directly elected to articulate what majority of their constituents want. Therefore the resulting law is a product of this painstaking process and is a democratic compromise," he said.

Belmonte said that he is very well aware of the arguments of anti-RH proponents that led to the petitions.

"Each of these views has already been openly taken up numerous times before enactment and yet it has now become a law. Therefore, the anti-RH argument is now a minority view. We must therefore respect the desire of the majority which is to exercise their freedom of choice," he said.

Belmonte said that while he respects all views on the matter, including those of various religious groups, both chambers of Congress fairly weighed all these aspects carefully in crafting the law.

"We must remember that Congress is tasked not with being judges of morality, but with safeguarding the legal rights of our people. The Constitution guarantees individuals in a democracy this legal right to choose for themselves, including how they perceive their roles as responsible parents and the methods they choose to employ to sustain their reproductive health," he said.

The RH law is not at all about the promotion of abortion, for it clearly states that having an abortion is illegal, Belmonte said.

"It is in fact a law that ends the paternalistic treatment of women, and is supportive of their right to choose. It is a law that may even greatly reduce if not eradicate the tens of thousands of illegal abortions that are going on yearly in the country today, further endangering the lives of women and mercilessly killing their yet unborn children," he said.

For Belmonte, the SC will now be faced with the tough decision of whether to confirm or deny a law that went through the rigors of over 13 years of debate and all requirements prior to enactment.

"It also opens the question of jurisdiction and of mandates as well as the role of the State to safeguard the health, and most essentially the freedom of its people to choose for themselves and for their families," he said.

"I have faith the Supreme Court will take these essential matters into account in coming up with a decision that benefits the vast majority, just as we in Congress have done our role at responding to the majority's urgent need for this law," he added.

Congress enacted the RH Law in Dec. 19, 2012 but the High Court delayed its implementation in Mar. 31, 2013 in light of the petitions by several anti-RH advocates.