Pharmaceutical and Health Care Association of The Philippines
Pharmaceutical and Health Care Association of The Philippines
PHILIPPINES V. HEALTH SECRETARY AND ORS. Constitutionality of the provisions of the RIRR. The Court partially granted the
petition, declaring certain provisions of the RIRR that prohibited the
advertising and promotion of breastmilk substitutes and provided for
Philippines administrative sanctions not found in the Milk Code in contravention of the
Milk Code, and therefore null and void.
Title:
Pharmaceutical and Health Care Association of the Philippines v. Health Court reasoning:
Secretary and Ors. The Court considered whether certain international instruments are part of
the law of the Philippines. The Court noted that the CRC does not contain
Court:
specific provisions regarding the use or marketing of breastmilk substitutes.
Supreme Court of the Republic of the Philippines
Instead, the relevant provisions are contained in the ICMBS and various
Date: WHA Resolutions. The ICMBS had been transformed into domestic law
9 October 2007 through local legislation, the Milk Code, and consequently it is the Milk Code
that has the force and effect of law in the Philippines, and not the ICMBS per
CRC Provisions: se. However, the Milk Code did not adopt the provision in the ICMBS
Article 24: Health and health services absolutely prohibiting advertising of breastmilk substitutes, but instead
Other International Provisions: created the Inter-Agency Committee to regulate such advertising. By
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights contrast, the subsequent WHA Resolutions specifically prohibiting
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women advertisements and promotions of breastmilk substitutes have not been
Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted as domestic law. Moreover, such Resolutions do not form part of
International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes (ICMBS) customary international law. Instead, they may constitute “soft law” or non-
binding norms, principles and practices that influence state behavior (such as
Domestic Provisions: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights).
Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines 1987
Executive Order No. 51 (Milk Code) On the issue of whether the the RIRR is in accordance with the Milk Code,
Administrative Order (A.O.) No. 2006-0012 entitled, Revised Implementing the Court found that sections 4(f) and 11 (prohibition on the advertising and
Rules and Regulations of Executive Order No. 51, Otherwise Known as The promotion of breastmilk substitutes) and 46 (providing for administrative
“Milk Code,” Relevant International Agreements, Penalizing Violations sanctions that are not found in the Milk Code) went beyond the DOH’s
Thereof, and for Other Purposes (RIRR) authority and contravened the Milk Code, and were therefore null and avoid.
The Court found that the rest of the provisions of the RIRR are consistent
Case Summary: with the Milk Code. Finally, the Court dismissed the petitioner’s argument
Background: that the RIRR is unnecessary and oppressive, and offensive to the due
This case concerns a petition challenging the validity of a Department of process clause of the Constitution insofar as it amounts to a restraint of
Health (DOH) Administrative Order (RIRR), claiming that it contained trade, because trade must be subjected to some form of regulation for the
provisions, including a ban on the advertising of breastmilk substitutes, that public good and public interests must trump business interests.
were not constitutional and went beyond the scope of the law it was
supposed to implement (Milk Code). The Milk Code gave effect to the
International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes (ICMBS), a code
adopted by the World Health Assembly (WHA). The WHA had since adopted
several Resolutions to the effect that breastfeeding should be supported,
promoted and protected.