SC junks plea to extend medical assistance for ‘Dengvaxia kids’

By Joel R. San Juan @jrsanjuan1573

THE Supreme Court has junked the petition for mandamus filed by 70 children through their parents and guardians, together with Gabriela party-list group, seeking to compel the government to provide free medical services and treatment to children inoculated with the controversial Dengvaxia vaccine.

In a 28-page ruling penned by Associate Justice Marvic Leonen, the Court’s en banc held that granting the petition for mandamus would violate the principle of separation of powers between the three branches of the government—the Legislative, Executive and Judiciary.

“ Mandamus does not lie unless the acts to be performed are enjoined by law. The duty of respondent-government agencies to perform the acts must be clearly provided for by law. Neither petitioners nor this Court can order respondent-government owned agencies how to perform their functions with respect to any immunization program; otherwise, this Court will effectively usurp the power and prerogatives of the Executive in their enactment of their programs,” the Court declared.

L ikewise, the SC explained that it does not have supervisory powers over Executive departments and agencies.

These administrative agencies possess the competence, experience, and specialization in their respective fields. On the other hand, this Court does not have the expertise to resolve these technical issues,” it added.

Furthermore, the Court pointed out that a petition for a writ of mandamus is a remedy intended to compel a government agency to perform its obligation to protect and preserve the environment.

“Clearly, the petition for a writ of continuing mandamus before this Court does not involve any ecological right nor does it alleges any right involving protection of the environment or he ecology. It mainly invokes alleged violations on the right to health,” the SC explained.

Thus, petitioners cannot resort to this kind of writ. Even if it does, the petition must be dismissed for insufficiency of substance. The acts sought by petitioners to be performed are not enjoined by law as a duty. They are ministerial acts,” it added.

I n their petition, Gabriela, the Association for the Rights of Children in Southeast Asia (ARCSEA) together with the mothers and guardians of 70 children administered with the vaccine are demand- ing the government to provide free services, including, but not limited to, medical check-ups, consultations, medical treatment and blood tests to those vaccinated.

T hey added that these free medical services should continue until it would have been determined and declared by competent medical and/ or scientific experts that the health threats brought by the Dengvaxia, anti-dengue vaccine, have been minimized or eliminated.

T he petitioners also asked the SC to direct the respondents—the Department of Health, Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) and Department of Education—to create a registry of children who were administered with the vaccine to facilitate the delivery of free health-care services.

A side from these, the petitioners are asking the Court to compel the respondents to publicly disseminate on a regular basis the report of the task force created and designated to monitor and review the schoolbased immunization program involving Dengvaxia and submit the same to the House of Representatives and Senate Committee on Health for monitoring.

T he petitioners said the government agencies should monitor children in all villages and regions who were administered with the vaccine.

However, the SC said the petitioners failed to raise scientific and empirical bases to support the petition. It noted that no studies and research were presented to show that the Dengvaxia vaccine failed to satisfy health standards.

“ There are no sufficient scientific grounds proving grave error in the Food and Drug Administration’s and the Department of Health’s approval and distribution of the vaccines,” the SC stressed.

Furthermore, the SC said the respondents have already met the relief being sought by the petitioners.

It noted that in their memoranda, the respondents claimed that they have been disseminating public information regarding the immunization program of the DOH. L ikewise, the DOH has submitted their reports to Congress, while the FDA has been studying and reviewing the safety and efficacy of Dengvaxia.

T he DOH also told the Court that it has also been monitoring the children inoculated with Dengvaxia and has offered medical services to them for free.

T he SC added that a master list of children given Dengvaxia was also created but due to privacy concerns, it cannot be released to the public as advised by the National Privacy Commission.

Vittorio V. Vitug