BY RAYMOND AFRICA and ASHZEL HACHERO
THE Senate on Monday night agreed to repeal a number of punitive provisions in the Bayanihan to Heal as One Act (Bayanihan Act) amid reports of abuses and discrimination in the implementation of the law, which Congress approved in a special session to give President Duterte additional authorities to handle health and economic impacts of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic.
The amendment was proposed by Senate minority leader Franklin Drilon who cited reports of blatant cases of abuses in the enforcement of section 6 of the Bayanihan Act.
“I thank the Senate committee on finance chaired by Sen. (Juan Edgardo) Sonny Angara for adopting my amendment to repeal section 6 of the Bayanihan law given what we saw as serious cases of abuses and inequity in the implementation of the law,” Drilon said in a statement.
“The repeal of section 6 will avoid the notion that the Bayanihan Law is anti-poor because it is the poor and the vulnerable that are victims of the inequity in its implementation,” he added.
Section 6 punishes various offenses with imprisonment of two months or a fine of not less than P10,000 but not more than P1 million, or both, to be determined by the court. The offenses include LGU officials disobeying national government policies, hospital owners who refuse to operate in accordance with the directive of the President; hoarding, profiteering, price manipulation, product deceptions, cartels, etc.; refusal to prioritize and accept essential contracts for materials and services, refusal to provide grace periods to loan payments, spread of fake news, and failure to comply with reasonable limitations on the operation of certain transportation sector.
No member of the Senate opposed the proposal during the deliberation of the measure on Monday night.
“The repeal of Section 6 will not affect the intent and objectives of the law, which is a health measure more than anything else,” Drilon said, adding that the new Bayanihan law, or the proposed Bayanihan to Recover as one Act, will no longer include the section.
In pushing for the repeal of the section, Drilon pointed out that the acts enumerated were already punishable under existing laws, among them the provision against hoarding, profiteering, injurious speculation, manipulation of prices, product deceptions, and cartels, which he said are already punishable under the Price Act, and the Universally Accessible and Cheaper and Quality Medicines Act.
In the case of individuals or groups creating, perpetuating or spreading false information regarding the COVID-19 crisis on social media and other platforms, Drilon said this is already sanctioned under the Cybercrime Law.
On Monday night, Sen. Juan Edgardo Angara endorsed Senate Bill No. 1564 which seeks to extend the validity of the Bayanihan law for another three months. The law is set to lapse on June 24.
Once signed into law by President Duterte, Senate Bill No. 1564 will be known as the “Bayanihan to Recover as One Act.”
Under the measure, the President will be granted the same flexibility to realign budgets provided under the Bayanihan Act. It likewise proposes to establish a standby fund of P236 billion, of which P25 billion would be allocated for cash-for-work programs; P50 billion for capital inclusion of the Land Bank of the Philippines, Development Bank of the Philippines, and the Philippine Guarantee Corp.; P30 billion for the Department of Health for its COVID-19 programs; P50 billion to support repatriated overseas Filipino workers, health workers, and affected workers in the tourism industry and other critically-impacted industries in both formal and informal sectors.
The fund will also be used to help the agri-fisheries sectors and enable the transportation and tourism departments to aid ailing enterprises.
Angara said the only way the proposed measure will be approved before Congress takes a sine die break on June 5 is if the President certifies it as urgent so they can do away with the constitutional requirement of having three days between readings.
“Still up in the air because we need the certification to pass it this week and we need the House approval of a similar measure, too,” Angara said.
LEGAL CHALLENGE
A former law school dean yesterday questioned before the Supreme Court (SC) the legality of the Bayanihan law and several presidential issuances imposing the enhanced community quarantine (ECQ) in several provinces and cities in the country as a safeguard to protect the people against the novel coronavirus.
Former Laguna State Polytechnic University (LSPU) law school dean Jaime Ibanez said there is a need for the SC to annul the Bayanihan law as it granted President Duterte legislative authority beyond what was necessary and proper to meet a declared policy as shown by the phrase “for other purposes” in the said law.
Ibanez also said that the law was unconstitutional insofar as the imposition of the ECQ is concerned.
“It is an undue delegation of legislative power and usurpation of the same, especially when the President issued Proclamation 929 last March 16 declaring a state of calamity in the entire country and Proclamation 922 issued on March 8 declaring a state of public health emergency for six months,” Ibanez said in his petition for certiorari and prohibition.
In the same petition, Ibanez also asked the SC to annul the Omnibus Guidelines in the implementation of community quarantine and Executive Order 112 imposing the ECQ.
“The President has no authority to issue Omnibus Guidelines to implement the community quarantine in the entire country.Such powers to make or legislate laws cannot be delegated,” he said, adding that it is also violative of the due process and equal protection clause in the Bill of Rights of the Constitution.
He added the Omnibus Guidelines imposing the quarantine violates the constitutional right to travel as it was “overbroad, unreasonable and arbitrary.”
At the same time, Ibanez argued that since the law was void, the Inter-Agency Task Force on Emerging and Infectious Diseases (IATF) has no authority to issue guidelines on the implementation of quarantine in Metro Manila and the rest of the country. This, he said, was a clear case of grave abuse of discretion in excess of jurisdiction.
“The IATF has no power to define the law on quarantine, sets its own parameters and restrictions and invent the modified enhanced community quarantine according to its own bizarre definition,” he said.
He added the IATF also violated due process and the equal protection clause when it quarantined all individuals, including those who have no COVID-19, when the law categorically stated that only those who are positive, persons under investigation or monitoring should be placed under quarantine.
The government starting on June 1 eased the more than two-month lockdown in Metro Manila and other areas to GCQ while others have been placed under MGCQ.