REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH BILL & THE PRESIDENTIABLES

By LOVENIA P NACES
Associate Professor
Department of Religious Studies
Xavier University, Cagayan de Oro City

The Reproductive Health Bill (HB5043) hugs the headlines again recently because Noynoy Aquino and Gilbert Teodoro stood by their principles regarding the need to curve population growth in the Philippines, ergo, their need to support the RH Bill. Apparently, these Presidentiables who only underscore “responsible parenthood” as reason for supporting the RH Bill missed a lot points. I would like to bring their attention to the following objectionable provisions (and there are many, many more!) of the Bill as far as employer-employee relationship is concerned:

It imposes unjust obligations upon employers RH Bill Section 17. Employer’s Responsibilities:

….All Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBAs) shall provide for the free delivery by the employer of reasonable quantity of reproductive health care services, supplies and devices to all workers, more particularly women workers. In establishments or enterprises where there are no CBAs or where the employees are unorganized, the employer shall have the same obligation.

This is a coercive provision. Business establishments, government and non-government institutions are already burdened with existing operational costs. Additional services mentioned above will further deplete the institutions’ limited resources. Besides, if birth control on the part of the employees is voluntary (per provision of RH Bill) and a private decision, why should employers or institutions be coerced to provide contraceptive services?

2. It imposes stiff penalties upon employers for violating the sexual and reproductive health and sexual rights of their employees.

RH Bill Sec 22. Penalties – The proper city or municipal court shall exercise jurisdiction over violations of this act and the accused who is found guilty shall be sentenced to an imprisonment ranging from one (1) month to six (6) months or a fine ranging from P10,000 to P50,000 or both such fine and imprisonment at the discretion of the court.

If the offender is a juridical person, the penalty shall be imposed upon the president, treasurer, secretary or any responsible officer.

An offender who is an alien shall, after service of sentence, be deported immediately without further proceedings by the Bureau of Immigration.

An offender who is a public officer or employee shall suffer the accessory penalty of dismissal from the government service.

Comments:

1. For such a big and wide range of scope of penalty, the RH Bill is giving the city and municipal court to decide over the lives of people in relation to reproductive health-related cases? This Bill trivializes our justice system!

2. This implies imprisonment of heads of schools, institutions and business establishments, etc., for violating sexual and reproductive health rights of their employees. This implies further that the goods and services offered by business establishments will become more expensive because the contraceptive budget will be added to the operational cost., e.g., schools will have to increase tuition fees to accommodate the contraceptive budget of school employees; business establishments will have to pass on to their customers the cost of contraceptive services, etc. Therefore, aside from EVAT, customers will have to bear the new “contraceptive tax” imposed by private establishments.

3. Government officials/employees will lose their jobs and lifetime social security for violating the reproductive health rights of their constituents. One’s career born out of natural talents and special aptitude, carefully nurtured by hard work and scholarship is gravely imperiled by unmet contraceptive demands. This makes jobs and careers as disposable as contraceptives! What a mockery of career development and justice!

4. If this RH Bill promotes people’s rights to “satisfying and safe sex life ad freedom when to reproduce” [Sec 4 (c)], then why should it penalize people who are not party to their decision to engage in sex? A twin brother of right is responsibility. Sexually active people should pay for their own “safe supplies of reproductive services, methods and devices…” I would rather have my taxes used for building schools and education of the Filipinos.

Needless to say, when this Bill is passed into law, a new serious conflict will surface: Employer vs. Employees; Superior vs. Subordinates, etc., emanating from coercive law on mandatory contraceptive services fully funded (by all institutions concerned) with stiff penalties for violators thereof (e.g., imprisonment, fine and dismissal from job) in the name of reproductive and sexual rights.

We are asking the legislators, then, and those seeking high positions in the Philippine government – – especially the Presidentiables – – to review more carefully the details and implications of the provisions of the Reproductive Health Bill. Definitely, such Bill suffers from numerous moral, constitutional and legal infirmities. Therefore, this should not be passed into law as it is written in the present form.  We, Filipinos, deserve laws that truly promote the common good and protect our total well-being – – and we expect such a pronouncement from Noynoy Aquino and Gilbert Teodoro.

Back to Homepage

Share your Comments or Reactions

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments