ILOILO City – Which should prevail – personal liberty or the police power of the state? The Sangguniang Panlungsod unanimously approved an ordinance restricting the movement and access to services of people not vaccinated against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This may be challenged in court.
As more local government units (LGUs) adopt ordinances restricting the movement of unvaccinated individuals despite warnings that these curtail personal liberty, Ilonggo Senate minority leader Franklin Drilon raised the possibility that it will be brought to the Supreme Court.
Restricting the movement of unvaccinated individuals could be defended as an exercise of the inherent police power of the State to protect public health. However, according to Drilon, whether such is a reasonable exercise of its constitutional power is a matter for the courts to decide.
“It’s a clash between personal liberty and the police power of the state,” according to the veteran senator and former justice secretary.
Both are constitutional rights guaranteed by the Constitution, he stressed.
“The right of the national government, under its police power, to protect the general welfare, including the health of the people, is as much applicable to the LGUs,” Drilon said.
LGUs may assert that it is part of their duty to protect public health, he added.
Drilon also cited the general welfare clause as sufficient authority for the government to implement measures for the “maintenance of peace and order, the protection of life, liberty, and property, and promotion of the general welfare.”
However, Drilon pointed out that the issue is not settled worldwide even in the most sophisticated and most established democracies in this world.
“This has to be resolved by the courts,” he said. “I encourage those who are opposed to this to go to the Supreme Court and have this settled once and for all.”
Drilon said he is willing to listen to expert advice from the medical field whether a law is needed to make vaccination mandatory to achieve herd immunity.
“As a lawyer, I am open to debates on that. This is not settled worldwide. I am open to it and I will rely on expert advice from the medical field,” Drilon said. “Let’s see where it will end. This is an open question not only in Iloilo, not only in the Philippines, but worldwide.”
VACCINE HESITANCY
Meanwhile, Drilon sees that vaccine hesitancy as a major reason for the country’s low vaccination rate.
Drilon cited a recent report published by the World Bank’s Philippine office that claimed that “vaccination continued to lag regional peers” in the Philippines.
World Bank’s findings is bolstered by another study by Goldman Sachs which showed that the Philippines was among Asia-Pacific’s laggards in mass vaccination, with only 54 percent of its population fully vaccinated as of Jan. 13, while China has a vaccination rate of 90 percent; Singapore, 89 percent; South Korea, 87 percent; Australia, Japan, and Vietnam, 80 percent; Malaysia and Taiwan, 79 percent; New Zealand, 78 percent; Thailand, 73 percent; Hong Kong, 67 percent; India, 65 percent, and Indonesia, 63 percent.
“The vaccine hesitancy is a major factor in a very low vaccination rate, if we have enough supply as the government is claiming,” he said.
“While there is no mandatory vaccination, I think it is the duty of the Acostas of this world, especially PAO chief Acosta being in government office, to follow government policy,” Drilon said.
Drilon had earlier called the Malacañang to bar Public Attorney’s Office schief Persida Acosta from going to work physically as she endangers the life, health and safety of her co-workers at the PAO. He added that Acosta’s attitude does not augur well for the government’s efforts to increase the vaccination rate in the country./PN
