The 7th eminent person

The accolades for Rep. Edcel C. Lagman have been numerous, and the most important, so far, is his conferment as 7th Eminent Person of the Forum for Family Planning and Development, Inc. The Eminent Person award has been conferred previously on six prominent individuals who have contributed to the empowerment of people and the improvement of the quality of life.

The six other holders of the award are former President Fidel V. Ramos, former Prime Minister Cesar E.A. Virata, Washington Z. Sycip, Dr. Mercedes B. Concepcion, Oscar M. Lopez and Loida Nicolas Lewis.

Forum president Benjamin D. de Leon revealed some little known facts about the 7th Eminent Person. Like when he was in the elementary grades, he sold newspapers and lottery tickets because he wanted to help his parents. He struggled with a reading problem as a boy but persevered and eventually excelled in his studies, graduating always with high honors.

Edcel became a lawyer in 1966, set out to be a corporate lawyer but later switched sides and became a labor lawyer who fought for the rights of common workers. He ran for Congress as representative of the 1st district of Albay where he served for three terms, from 1987 to 1998, and again from 2004 until the present. Even outside the court of justice, Ben de Leon told an impressive group of respected Reproductive Health advocates, Edcel continued to champion the cause of workers at the House of Representatives. He was also known for initiating the laws for land reform and cheaper medicines as well as against enforced and involuntary disappearance and against the death penalty. “But it was in the fight for the passage of the Reproductive Health Bill that he became larger than life for us. Like all of us here, perhaps the biggest challenge for the Forum over the years is the struggle for its passage. If we all felt the pressure of frustration and the roller coaster of emotions, no one felt it more than the principal author. . . If Congressman Lagman did not lead our fight for the RH Bill, the advocacy for its passage would have dragged longer or worse, the measure would not have passed.”

In his acceptance speech, Congressman Lagman said contrary to some people’s belief, the RH law that had been passed is ”not a watered-down” version. “As a mater of strategy, I did not dispute the claim of critics as well as the news accounts in media that the RH bill had been watered-down due to the various amendments the authors have accepted during outside plenary consultations which were incorporated in the substitute bill in the House of Representatives.

“By my silence I wanted the critics to believe that the bill has been watered-down’ so that the would desist from further opposing the measure. On hindsight, I have realized that the critics would persist in opposing the bill even if only a coma or exclamation point remained of the bill.

“The truth is, in its final form, the RH law has retained its pristine formulation and original policy orientation. We have not accepted any amendment which would derogate or diminish the essence of the bill. In the House of Representatives we have not succumbed to a ‘killer amendment.’”

That the bill’s critics will not stop at not getting the RH Act enforced is the filing of six petitions before the Supreme Court contesting the constitutionality of the RH law. The critics’ arguments question the RH Act as violating the “right to life,” infringing on the people’s ”right to health,” offending freedom of religion, and negating the basic and primary right of parents to develop their children’s moral character.

The first three of the above arguments are readily answered, so we deal with the contentious “right to life issue.”

Lagman said that “the very constitutional provision invoked by the petitioners, which is Sec. 12 of Art. II, provides that the State shall protect ‘the life of the unborn from conception.’ Clearly, before conception, there is no life to protect. Conception has been defined by medical authorities as the implantation of the fertilized ovum in the woman’s uterus. Conception is synonymous with pregnancy.”

“Verily, in the earlier stages of the reproductive process like ovulation and fertilization, there is no life to protect.

“It is in these prior stages before conception where contraception plays its role by preventing ovulation and fertilization. Accordingly, no life  is impaired. No human life is imperiled.

“The genesis of Sec. 12 of Art. II of the 1987 Constitution started with the proposal to include in section 1 of the Bill of Rights the provision that the ‘right to life’ extends to the fertilized ovum.’ This proposal was not constitutionalized. It was rejected in favor of the present provision which guarantees the life of the unborn from conception, not before conception, not before conception where there is no life yet to safeguard.”

 â€œThe explicit intention of the framers of the 1987 Constitution, in protecting the life of the unborn from conception is to prevent the Congress and the Supreme Court from legalizing abortion. The RH law does not legalize abortion. In fact, it acknowledges that abortion is illegal and punishable and is not a family planning option or method.”

The bottom line, said Lagman in his message, “is to ensure an effective, speedy and faithful implementation of the RH law.”

“We have an outstandingly good law which deserves a successful and errantless implementation. We, who have shepherded the enactment of the Reproductive Health Law must oversee its faithful implementation.”

*      *      *

My recent column on senatorial candidate Sonny Angara’s bill seeking the increase in teachers’ salaries drew a response from school teacher James Hubahib of Cebu City. His letter says:

“It is really true Madam that the salary received by us is not enough to support our family’s needs and give our children the essential things like good food and good education.

“Please allow me to share with you that even our ATM through which we receive our monthly salary, is being pawned to lending institutions to secure money for the teachers’ families.

“Hence, I would like to thank Congressman Angara for his House Bill 395 as raising teachers’ salaries will improve our living conditions.”

*      *      *

Our friends playing at the Philippine Navy Golf Club in Taguig City, Metro Manila, are enthusiastically endorsing the candidacy of Nora Camunjal, a likeable food and beverage attendant at the facility’s restaurant. Nora is running for councilor of Lamitan City, Basilan. A criminology graduate of Basilan State College, Nora decided to run for office “to help people.” If elected, she will sponsor ordinances to secure educational materials for children, put up classrooms and a health center and promote the Reproductive Health Law. She said she is running under the banner of the Liberal Party, and has received the endorsement of regular golfer Congressman Rodolfo Biazon.

Nora’s husband, Dennis Ahiri is also running for office, i.e., as a member of the Basilan Provincial Board. Dennis, a Yakan like Nora, has a political science degree from the Universidad de Zamboanga. He is running as an independent candidate, and wants to promote transparency in all government transactions. He is a small-time businessman.

To Nora and Dennis, our best wishes.

*      *      *

Email:dominitorrevillas@gmail.com