A MEMBER of Gising Maharlika Freedom fighters is doused with water by firemen during their protest at Liwasang Bonifacio in Manila last Jan. 11. The group calls to stop mandatory vaccination by the government as it affects their livelihood and mobility. — PHILIPPINE STAR/MICHAEL VARCASarly this week, a national official argued for the constitutionality of mandatory vaccination by referring to a provision of the 1917 Administrative Code, as well as a 1936 Supreme Court ruling.
“Sec. 1054. Persons liable to vaccination. — Every person in the Philippine Islands shall submit to vaccination when thereunto lawfully required, unless he shall furnish satisfactory evidence either by a certificate from a physician or vaccinator, or otherwise, to effect that he is immune from the disease of smallpox. Such vaccination shall be performed gratis.”
The issue instead was simply the proper interpretation of the aforementioned two 1917 Administrative Code provisions, for which Justice Claro Recto’s dissent was the correct one: If a person “can produce such certificate, his obligation to present himself for vaccination ends.” And even then, the 1917 Administrative Code does not really absolutely compel people to be vaccinated. A person can choose to be unvaccinated if one can “furnish satisfactory evidence either by a certificate from a physician or vaccinator, or otherwise, to the effect that he is immune from the disease of smallpox.” Otherwise, like in the Jacobsen case, one need only pay a fine .
Jemy is a conservative, anti-SOGIE, Covid-denier lawyer. What did I even expect from reading such crap article lol. Sayang 5 mins reading.