Judge won’t issue TRO vs int’l RH forum

MANILA, Philippines—A Pasay City judge has declined to issue a temporary restraining order against an international youth conference on reproductive health that is now going on at the Philippine International Convention Center, saying the Pro-Life Philippines Foundation’s petition for a TRO lacked merit.

According to Judge Petronilo Sulla Jr., Pro-Life, which claimed that the four-day event was encouraging abortion, failed to clearly prove that the organizers of the 7th Asia Pacific Conference on Reproductive and Sexual Health Rights “committed or allowed the commission of some acts probably in violation of the plaintiff’s rights.”

Sulla wrote in his resolution that the conference, which started last Tuesday, cannot properly constitute a violation of law, particularly the Revised Penal Code on abortion and on decency.

It was not shown by the plaintiff that abortion is being practiced, tolerated or encouraged in that conference, he said.

Academic discussion

“To the mind of the court, the conference is in the nature of academic discussion on the subject of abortion by a large number of participants mainly foreigners, with the end in view of providing awareness to all concerned, on reproductive and sexual health rights,” Sulla said in his decision.

He also noted that the holding of such a conference does not violate any penal or nonpenal law of the country, “in the absence of concrete evidence that specific acts of abortion or attempt to commit the same or acts offensive to morality or decency are being perpetrated by the organizers or participants thereat, in the course of the conference.”

The judge explained that it is the commission of overt acts of a particular crime like abortion or offenses against decency which the law punishes, but not the free discussion or exchange of ideas by the participants on a particular topic like abortion.

Former Albay representative Edcel C. Lagman, one of the authors of the Reproductive Health Law, submitted an opposition to the issuance of a TRO, arguing that discussions on abortion issues like a campaign on decriminalizing abortion, access to post-abortion services, and access to safe and medical abortion cannot be equated with abortion itself.

In its petition, Pro-Life asked the Pasay City court to cut short the event saying that if the defendants are not enjoined, their actions will result in offenses against decency, good customs and public policy.

Unfounded

But the judge said that while the court understood the concerns of prolife advocates, Pro-Life’s apprehensions were “unfounded.”

“The court cannot properly restrain the valid acts of defendants, though plaintiff perceives them to be violative of their advocacy. No right of the plaintiff was violated by the acts of the defendants herein so there is no legal basis to issue the restraining order, even temporarily, as prayed for,” Sulla said in his decision.

Pro-Life president Eric Manalang in a statement called on all prolife allies to brace for more legal battles “because no one else will speak for the unborn but those who respect the life and rule of the law under our prolife Constitution.”

The court order scheduled the case for hearing on Feb. 26 where, Manalang said, Pro-life will argue on the full implications of the event and the accountability of the respondents for allowing the hosting of “abortion advocacy” at the PICC despite abortion being illegal in the Philippines.