AFTER weeks of excruciating debates, the Philippine Congress reached a verdict to pass the Reproductive Health (RH) bill on Dec. 17.
Voting 13-8 in favor of the bill, the Senate approved Bill No. 2865 on its third and final reading. The House of Representatives meanwhile, voted 133-79 to pass the measure also on its third reading, increasing the gap from last week’s 113-104.
Presidential spokesperson Edwin Lacierda, acknowledged the vote on RH bill as a “historic vote” since the measure has been pending in the legislative mill for more than a decade.
“We are confident that positive, meaningful engagement between the different branches of government will continue. We thank our senators and congressmen who voted for access to information and care. They have made it even clearer: The people now have the government on their side as they raise their families in a manner that is just and empowered,” Lacierda said.
Lacierda hailed legislators for fulfilling their duties with honor saying that they “crafted a law that can truly address the needs of the people.”
However, a day after its approval, the RH Bill faces another barrier, thanks to its major opponents, Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile and Senate Majority Leader Vicente Sotto III.
Averting Sen. Pia Cayetano’s list of members of the senate panel for the bicameral conference committee (whose task os “to reconcile the conflicting versions of the bills,” and which include senators Alan Peter Cayetano, Ferdinand Marcos Jr., Teofisto Guingona III, Francis Pangilinan and Sotto), Sotto said that Sen. Pia Cayetano’s action violates the rules of the senate, pointing out that a final version of the bill (inclusive of all amendments) is not yet available and that according to Rule 12, Section 35, the Senate President “shall designate the members of the Senate panel in the conference committee with the approval of the Senate.”
“We have until January (to finish this). Why the railroading?,” Senate President Enrile said before Tuesday’s plenary session.
“In a bicameral conference, we normally produce the matrix of the two bills with the disagreeing provisions, since we don’t have the clean copy yet, how can that be done? Let’s follow the rules of the house,” Enrile added.
To which Cayetano responded: “It has been the practice of the Senate that the chair is given the privilege of appointing the members. It is my prerogative as chair to select the members. I find it absurd and contrary to what we are trying to do, which is to do our job, to be asked to delay the process, which I would like to continue.”
“I am quite offended, I have never heard of a chair being imposed upon not to call a bicameral conference committee. There is nothing out of the ordinary and out of procedure being done and I am offended because this is a measure that the majority floor leader does not like, again steps are being taken to delay the process. I humbly ask that you honor my request, in the same way that you have honored the requests of all other chairpersons. I am appealing to his honors to allow tradition to take place. This is a custom that we have followed. Why would you want to throw the book at me now?,” Cayetano further said.
Sen. Franklin Drilon intervened, saying that Cayetano can push through with her scheduled meeting but only as a “pre-bicam” one, and that it would not be considered as an official bicameral conference committee hearing so it wouldn’t go against the rules. The purpose of the said meeting between the two panel heads is to go over various conflicting provisions in the two versions and to find ways to compromise.
Cayetano welcomed the Drilon’s suggestion, but called for an assurance from Sotto (who is the chairman of the committee on rules) to take up the proposed people on her list to be the members of the panel.
Sotto stated that he wanted to be in the panel to make sure that the Senate version (with all of the amendments accepted) would be defended in the bicameral conference committee hearings. He admitted his distrust for pro-RH members of the panel and their ability to defend the Senate version of the bill.
Meanwhile, the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) said they will support a plan by anti-RH bill lawyers to question the measure before the the Supreme Court.
“I know that a group of Catholic lawyers has a plan to make an appeal before the Supreme Court because it’s against the Constitution… against religious freedom,” Antipolo Bishop Gabriel Reyes said.
“The Constitution states that the government should protect the family and marriage. The RH bill is against the goodness of family and the stability of marriage,” he added.
Members of CBCP also accused President Aquino of dictatorship, after he certified the RH bill last week as an urgent measure.
While Monday night’s verdict can be considered a milestone, the RH Bill is not quite out-of-the-woods yet at this juncture.
If anything, it has amplified the discord between the bill’s proponents and opponents even more.
But before the final battle can commence, fairness should be practiced across the board. The last thing we need is a power play among our government leaders and another bout with unnecessary rhetoric.
Despite our differences, we all seek a better life for Filipinos. There has never been a disagreement about that desired destination. What we differed was on is how to get there. This disagreement has always been put to test, a process we call democracy.
The passage of the RH bill would be a good start.
(AJPress)
