Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 152 views

    Nepomuceno V Duterte

    Uploaded by

    Vince Q. Matutina
    This document summarizes a petition filed against the Philippine government regarding its plans to procure and distribute Sinovac vaccines. The petitioner argues the Sinovac vaccine has not undergone proper trials in the Philippines and expresses doubts about its efficacy. However, the court finds it does not have jurisdiction to examine factual claims about a vaccine's efficacy. It also notes the petitioner failed to demonstrate any legal issues warranting the court's intervention or that the government's actions violate any laws or constitutional provisions. Therefore, the court denies the petition as it cannot interfere with the government's procurement of COVID-19 vaccines which has been exempted from normal requirements by laws and regulations.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Nepomuceno V Duterte

    Uploaded by

    Vince Q. Matutina
    152 views1 page
    This document summarizes a petition filed against the Philippine government regarding its plans to procure and distribute Sinovac vaccines. The petitioner argues the Sinovac vaccine has not undergone proper trials in the Philippines and expresses doubts about its efficacy. However, the court finds it does not have jurisdiction to examine factual claims about a vaccine's efficacy. It also notes the petitioner failed to demonstrate any legal issues warranting the court's intervention or that the government's actions violate any laws or constitutional provisions. Therefore, the court denies the petition as it cannot interfere with the government's procurement of COVID-19 vaccines which has been exempted from normal requirements by laws and regulations.

    Original Title

    Nepomuceno v Duterte

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document summarizes a petition filed against the Philippine government regarding its plans to procure and distribute Sinovac vaccines. The petitioner argues the Sinovac vaccine has not undergone proper trials in the Philippines and expresses doubts about its efficacy. However, the court finds it does not have jurisdiction to examine factual claims about a vaccine's efficacy. It also notes the petitioner failed to demonstrate any legal issues warranting the court's intervention or that the government's actions violate any laws or constitutional provisions. Therefore, the court denies the petition as it cannot interfere with the government's procurement of COVID-19 vaccines which has been exempted from normal requirements by laws and regulations.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    152 views1 page

    Nepomuceno V Duterte

    Uploaded by

    Vince Q. Matutina
    This document summarizes a petition filed against the Philippine government regarding its plans to procure and distribute Sinovac vaccines. The petitioner argues the Sinovac vaccine has not undergone proper trials in the Philippines and expresses doubts about its efficacy. However, the court finds it does not have jurisdiction to examine factual claims about a vaccine's efficacy. It also notes the petitioner failed to demonstrate any legal issues warranting the court's intervention or that the government's actions violate any laws or constitutional provisions. Therefore, the court denies the petition as it cannot interfere with the government's procurement of COVID-19 vaccines which has been exempted from normal requirements by laws and regulations.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Facts

    Before this Court is a petition for writ of mandamus filed by Pedrito Nepomuceno (petitioner) against
    respondents President Rodrigo Duterte, Health Secretary Fran,cisco Duque, and Gen. Carlito Galvez, Jr.
    (Ret.), as Chief Implementer of the National Task Force against COVID-19 (respondents), seeking to
    compel respondents to observe the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) rules on the acquisition,
    procurement and use of drugs, particularly on the issue of trials and procurement and use of COVID-
    19 vaccines, namely, the Sinovac vaccines and for them to properly observe the procurement law.
    Petitioner likewise prays for the DOH FDA to issue a Cease-and-Desist Order for the purchase and use
    of the Sinovac vaccine, and for it and all other COVID-19 vaccines to undergo the required trials in the
    Philippines before they are given the go signal for emergency and/or regular use. 1 At the core of the
    petition is the concern raised by petitioner over the plan announced by the national government to
    procure vaccines produced by Sinovac (Sinovac vaccine) for distribution and administration to the
    Filipino people in order to contain the spread of infection brought about by the Severe Acute
    Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-Co V-2), which causes the corona virus disease of COVID-
    19. This is despite reports raising doubts on the efficacy of the Sinovac vaccine and the absence of a
    concrete study on how it really fares in addressing the COVID-19 disease.
    ISSUE
    whether n R.A. 11494 is constitutional or not
    whether is E.O. 121 constitutional or not
    R.A. 11525 is being impose on sinovac
    HELD
    It is not amiss to point out that petitioner's direct resort before this Court is improper. A challenge to
    the efficacy of the Sinovac vaccine is a question of fact that is beyond the scope of this Court's
    jurisdiction. To go into the details of a vaccine's efficacy would require the presentation of its clinical
    trial results and a comparative analysis of the various results of the other vaccines in order to
    determine the acceptable standard of what an effective COVID-19 vaccine should be. However, it is a
    settled rule that the Supreme Court is not a trier of facts. 17 Complementing this rule is the doctrine
    of hierarchy of courts, which requires a party to file the appropriate petition in the proper court,
    especially when the petition calls for an examination of the factual issues raised in the petition. In the
    case of a petition for mandamus, Section 21 of Batas Pambansa Bilang (B.P.) 129 grants the regional
    trial court original
    Petitioner failed to point out any question of law worthy of consideration by this Court. He also failed
    to present any circumstance or nature of the question raised in the petition that would fall in any of
    the exceptions for which the legality of the actions taken by the respondents may be thoroughly
    examined. As discussed, the petition failed to comply with the requisites of a petition for mandamus,
    in addition to the infirmities that failed to take into account well-established principles in law and
    jurisprudence. As the judicial branch of the government tasked to interpret laws, settle actual
    controversies, and keep every government office within the scope of their authority, it is not within
    the office of the Court to go beyond what the law requires, including those involving the procurement
    of COVID-19 vaccines. As the law has expressly excluded the conduct of clinical trials and exempted its
    procurement from the general rules of the bidding process, the Court cannot step in to add another
    layer of requirement before the procurement of COVID-19 vaccines, and their use, specifically those
    granted withEUA.

    You might also like