CASE DIGEST TOBI - CASE DIGEST - PHARMACEUTICAL Vs Duque

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 2

CASE DIGEST TOBI

Friday, November 15, 2013

CASE DIGEST : PHARMACEUTICAL Vs Duque


G.R. No. 173034 October 9, 2007 PHARMACEUTICAL AND HEALTH CARE
ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner, vs. HEALTH SECRETARY FRANCISCO
T. DUQUE III; HEALTH UNDER SECRETARIES DR. ETHELYN P. NIETO, DR.
MARGARITA M. GALON, ATTY. ALEXANDER A. PADILLA, & DR. JADE F. DEL MUNDO;
and ASSISTANT SECRETARIES DR. MARIO C. VILLAVERDE, DR. DAVID J. LOZADA,
AND DR. NEMESIO T. GAKO, respondents.

FACTS : Named as respondents are the Health Secretary, Undersecretaries, and Assistant
Secretaries of the Department of Health (DOH). For purposes of herein petition, the DOH is
deemed impleaded as a co-respondent since respondents issued the questioned RIRR in
their capacity as officials of said executive agency.1Executive Order No. 51 (Milk Code) was
issued by President Corazon Aquino on October 28, 1986 by virtue of the legislative powers
granted to the president under the Freedom Constitution. One of the preambular clauses of
the Milk Code states that the law seeks to give effect to Article 112 of the International Code
of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes (ICMBS), a code adopted by the World Health
Assembly (WHA) in 1981. From 1982 to 2006, the WHA adopted several Resolutions to the
effect that breastfeeding should be supported, promoted and protected, hence, it should be
ensured that nutrition and health claims are not permitted for breastmilk substitutes.In 1990,
the Philippines ratified the International Convention on the Rights of the Child. Article 24 of
said instrument provides that State Parties should take appropriate measures to diminish
infant and child mortality, and ensure that all segments of society, specially parents and
children, are informed of the advantages of breastfeeding. On May 15, 2006, the DOH
issued herein assailed RIRR which was to take effect on July 7, 2006.

Issue: . Whether Administrative Order or the Revised Implementing Rules and Regulations
(RIRR) issued by the Department of Health (DOH) is not constitutional;

Held: YES

under Article 23, recommendations of the WHA do not come into force for members,in the
same way that conventions or agreements under Article 19 and regulations under Article 21
come into force. Article 23 of the WHO Constitution reads:
Article 23. The Health Assembly shall have authority to make recommendations to Members
with respect to any matter within the competence of the Organization
for an international rule to be considered as customary law, it must be established that such
rule is being followed by states because they consider it obligatory to comply with such rules

Under the 1987 Constitution, international law can become part of the sphere of domestic
law either

By transformation or incorporation. The transformation method requires that an international


law be transformed into a domestic law through a constitutional mechanism such as local
legislation. The incorporation method applies when, by mere constitutional declaration,
international law is deemed to have the force of domestic law.

Consequently, legislation is necessary to transform the provisions of the WHA Resolutions


into domestic law. The provisions of the WHA Resolutions cannot be considered as part of
the law of the land that can be implemented by executive agencies without the need of a law
enacted by the legislature

Tobi at 11:07 AM

Share

No comments:

Post a Comment

‹ Home ›
View web version

About Me
Tobi
View my complete profile

Powered by Blogger.

You might also like