Belmonte to SC: Voiding RH law a veto on people’s will

Angela Casauay

This is AI generated summarization, which may have errors. For context, always refer to the full article.

Belmonte warns the decision on the case 'would have deep and far-reaching implications for the country'

APPEAL. Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr warns the SC against declaring the RH law as unconstitutional. File photo by Rappler

MANILA, Philippines – Declaring the reproductive health (RH) law as unconstitutional would be “a veto against the will of majority of our people.”

Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr issued this statement on Tuesday, February 11, amid reports that the Supreme Court law is likely to declare the RH law unconstitutional.

The SC decision on the case “would have deep and far-reaching implications for the country,” Belmonte warned.

“Remember that we have 289 House members who are individuals representing a broad spectrum of society,” the Speaker said. “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.”

The controversial measure took over 13 years to pass. After rigorous debates that lasted until the late hours of the evening, Congress finally approved the historic bill in 2012 despite lobbying from the Catholic Church. Soon after President Benigno Aquino III signed it into law, a total of 15 petitions questioning its constitutionality was lodged before the Supreme Court by mostly Catholic groups.

Justices ended oral arguments for the RH law in August 2013, but Belmonte said the arguments raised during the SC debates had already been addressed in the debates in Congress. 

“Each of these views have already been openly taken up numerous times before enactment and yet [the measure] 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,” Belmonte said. (READ: SC ends RH law arguments; what happens now?)

The two biggest debates in the Supreme Court over the RH law revolved around two questions: Are contraceptives abortifacients? And, is there a need for the law?

Belmonte said the law “clearly states” that having an abortion is illegal, noting that the final decision on the issue must be based on legality and not on morality. 

“We must remember that Congress is tasked not with being judges of morality, but with safeguarding the legal rights of our people,” he said.

Read Rappler’s coverage of the oral arguments:

LIVE BLOG: Day 1; Day 2; Day 3; Day 4; Day 5

#RHlaw: We are not doctors, justices say 

Sereno: SC may not be best forum for RH

Chief justice takes up cudges for RH law

Justice Abad compares pro-RH petitioners to Hitler

RH law ‘gone berserk,’ critic tells SC 

 Rappler.com


Add a comment

Sort by

There are no comments yet. Add your comment to start the conversation.

Summarize this article with AI

How does this make you feel?

Loading
Download the Rappler App!