Review restrictions vs unvaxxed–IBP | Joel R. San Juan

The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) has called on government policy-makers for Covid-19 pandemic to review the various restrictions being implemented against unvaccinated people as these tend to violate their constitutional rights.

1/24/2022 8:16:00 AM

The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) has called on government policy-makers for Covid-19 pandemic to review the various restrictions being implemented against unvaccinated people as these tend to violate their constitutional rights.

THE Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) has called on government policy-makers for Covid-19 pandemic to review the various restrictions being implemented against unvaccinated people as these tend to violate their constitutional rights. The IBP was particularly referring to the “no vaccine, no ride policy” and the “no vaccine-stay home…

THE Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) has called on government policy-makers for Covid-19 pandemic to review the various restrictions being implemented against unvaccinated people as these tend to violate their constitutional rights.The IBP was particularly referring to the “no vaccine, no ride policy” and the “no vaccine-stay home policy” of the government, which, it said, may encounter legal hurdles for being unreasonable.

The group also questioned the legal basis for threatening unvaccinated individuals with arrest. While these restrictions are intended to protect public health during this pandemic, the IBP said these also restrict an individual’s right to travel or movement which is guaranteed under the Constitution except for three considerations—national security, public safety or public health.

Read more: BusinessMirror »

[EDITORIAL] Si Presidente Marcos at ang salamin ng kasaysayan

Sana'y nanalamin ka at ang namasdan ay isang lingkod-bayan Read more >>

IBP asks: ‘Why restrict movement of unvaxxed persons without law on mandatory vaccination?’The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) took up the cudgels for the country’s unvaccinated persons against policies and local ordinances which restrict their movements “despite lack of law” on mandatory vaccination against COVID-19. Why they penalized the unvax when those policies and ordinances are baseless and in confict with RA no.11525 sec. 12. That vaccine is full of lies and they should get a refund coz it is not working. CONTROL

IBP asks: ‘Why restrict movement of unvaxxed persons without law on mandatory vaccination?’The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) took up the cudgels for the country’s unvaccinated persons against policies and local ordinances which restrict their movements “despite lack of law” on mandatory vaccination against COVID-19. Why they penalized the unvax when those policies and ordinances are baseless and in confict with RA no.11525 sec. 12. That vaccine is full of lies and they should get a refund coz it is not working. CONTROL

New Zealand to impose restrictions after Omicron community spreadNew Zealand will impose mask rules and limit gathering from midnight on Sunday after a cluster of nine cases of the COVID-19 Omicron variant showed community transmission from the North to South islands. Deadly vaccine side effect! Bakit ayaw niyo ibalita? Tinurokan ng sinovac ayan ang resulta nanigas ang mga kamay at binti at hirap huminga kng kyo hndi pa ng pavaccine maisipan pb nyo mgpaturok kng ganito ang mkta nyo ako hndi na. jekkipascual bakit di mo kausapin pamilya niya? Trust the plan. More big pharma please. Booster 5

New Zealand PM Jacinda Ardern cancels her wedding amid new Omicron restrictionsNew Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Arden has cancelled her wedding as the nation imposes new restrictions to slow the community spread of the COVID-19 Omicron variant, she told reporters. Lucky guy, he can reconsider his decision ....or maybe he already was and this is an alibi for her to use. Yung Dumper rep, can't relate. 😬 Naku prime minister baka idemanda ka ren!!!!!!!

LPA to cross Mindanao; public warned vs flash floods, landslidesLPA to cross Mindanao; public warned vs flash floods, landslides READ:

Sputnik V COVID-19 vaccine recipients retain more antibodies vs. Omicron —studyA study by Russian and Italian scientists showed that those who received a shot of the Sputnik V COVID-19 vaccine retained more antibodies against the Omicron coronavirus variant as compared to those who received a dose of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine. Then why are Russians refusing to take it. sputnik supremacy 🤘🤘🤘🤘

0 THE Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) has called on government policy-makers for Covid-19 pandemic to review the various restrictions being implemented against unvaccinated people as these tend to violate their constitutional rights. The IBP was particularly referring to the “no vaccine, no ride policy” and the “no vaccine-stay home policy” of the government, which, it said, may encounter legal hurdles for being unreasonable. The group also questioned the legal basis for threatening unvaccinated individuals with arrest. While these restrictions are intended to protect public health during this pandemic, the IBP said these also restrict an individual’s right to travel or movement which is guaranteed under the Constitution except for three considerations—national security, public safety or public health. “The IBP understands that vaccination remains the primary scientific way out of this Covid-19 pandemic. In fact, the IBP strongly supports the vaccination drive of the government. What we cannot understand is why unvaccinated persons are treated in a manner that appears to be in violation of their constitutional rights,” it explained. It also noted that the constitutional provision on how the right to travel may be limited was interpreted by the Supreme Court in the case of Genuino vs. Secretary De Lima, which held that there must be an explicit provision of statutory law or the Rules of Court providing for the impairment. Not sufficient HOWEVER, the IBP noted that Republic Act (RA) 11332 (An Act Providing and Prescribing Procedures on Surveillance and Response to Notifiable Diseases, Epidemics and Health Events of Public Health Concern and Appropriating Funds Therefor), RA 11469 (Bayanihan To Heal As One Act), RA11494 (Bayanihan To Recover as One Act) and RA 11525 (Covid-19 Vaccination Program Act of 2021) don’t contain provisions allowing the limitation of an unvaccinated individual’s right to travel or movement. “At present, there is no law that requires individuals to undergo compulsory vaccination against Covid-19. Existing laws pertaining to pandemic or epidemics of communicable diseases and vaccination do not contain provision that can be used as legal basis to compel individuals to be vaccinated against Covid-19,” the IBP said. While the IBP said it recognizes “that the ‘no vaccine, no ride policy’ and ‘no vaccine-stay home policy’ contain exceptions, such as religious beliefs, medical conditions, work and accessing essential services for goods, these are not sufficient to address the legal questions that may be raised against these policies. Legal questions THE lawyers’ organization raised three legal questions, such as: whether individuals can be legally compelled to be vaccinated with anti-Covid-19 vaccines; whether the national government, through the Department of Transportation (DOTr) and its attached agencies, can legally issue a so- called “no vaccine, no ride” policy on public transportations; and, whether local government units (LGUs) can issue ordinances to enforce the so-called “no vaccine, stay-home” policy. “Assuming for the sake of argument that the DOTr ‘no vaccine, no ride’ order is an administrative regulation, then it is in the nature of a delegated legislative authority. In that situation, the IBP submits that this delegation of legislative authority is invalid because it is not clear under what law the delegation is contained.” “As to the LGU’s ‘no vaccine-stay home’ ordinances, it is also not clear under what law these ordinances were issued,” the IBP stressed. The IBP also pointed out that even the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) came out with an advisory that employees cannot be compelled to be vaccinated against Covid-19. It noted that the most an employer can do is to require its employees to present a negative RT-PCR test every two weeks, at the employees’ expense. “Thus, the IBP is at a loss as to the legal basis for threatening unvaccinated individuals with arrest,” it said. Unfair, unreasonable THE IBP described the two policies as “unfair” and “unreasonable” considering that more or less 54 million Filipinos have only been vaccinated against COVID-19, which leaves “about half of the Philippine population unvaccinated. It added that there are not enough vaccines to inoculate the remaining unvaccinated citizens and an overwhelming majority of individuals who are aged 17 years or younger have not yet been vaccinated. Likewise, the IBP said an overwhelming majority of individuals, aged 17 years old and younger, have also not yet been vaccinated. It also lamented that there was no sufficient data at the level of the LGUs or barangays on the number and identities of those who have received vaccinations or those who have not yet been vaccinated. “We therefore urge the government both national and local to take a second hard look at these policies in order to uphold the rule of law which the IBP is duty bound to support,” the IBP said.