Magna Carta of Women. Signed into law in August 2009, the Philippine Magna Carta of Women incorporates key principles of CEDAW into national law and guarantees women’s right to health.25 The Magna Carta of Women mandates the state to provide “comprehensive, culture-sensitive, and gender-responsive health services and programs covering all stages of a women’s life cycle and which address[] the major causes of women’s mortality and morbidity . . . .”26 It also provides for women’s access to family planning and post-abortion care.27 Notwithstanding its provision specifying that any existing legislation in conflict with its contents is deemed repealed, modified, or amended, EO 003 was neither reviewed nor treated as invalid after the passage of the Magna Carta of Women. What is the inquiry procedure under OP-CEDAW? • The inquiry procedure is a mechanism whereby the CEDAW Committee investigates grave or systematic violations of CEDAW committed by a state party. • A state may be subject to inquiry if it has ratified both CEDAW and the OP-CEDAW and has recognized the competence of the Committee. National reproductive health law. At the time of the inquiry request, the Philippines had seen numerous failed attempts to pass a national reproductive health law.28 Republic Act No. 10354, otherwise known as the Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health Act of 2012 (RPRH Act), was finally enacted on December 21, 2012.29 It provides for universal access to contraception, reproductive and sexuality education, post-abortion care, and maternity care, and requires the Department of Health (DOH) to procure and distribute a wide range of modern forms of contraception.30 Less than a month after the RPRH Act was signed into law, a petition questioning its constitutionality was filed; and in subsequent months, 13 more such petitions were filed.31 On April 8, 2014, the Supreme Court upheld the law’s constitutionality.32 The law is now effective but yet to be fully implemented. Similar to the Magna Carta of Women, the RPRH Act provides that existing legislation inconsistent with its provisions be deemed repealed, modified, or amended. However, in response to a petition questioning the constitutionality of EO 003, a trial court failed to revoke EO 003 and instead declared the petition a “moot point” as a result of the passage of the RPRH Act.33 [See box on the Osil case, p. 8.] Criminal abortion ban. Under the country’s penal code, abortion is a crime, and there are no clear exceptions regarding when it may be legally performed.34 Complications from unsafe abortions are a notable cause of maternal death in the country, with a substantial number of women forced to rely on pregnancy termination to control their fertility in the absence of access to contraceptives.35 The barriers to safe abortion procedures created by the criminal ban, including the accompanying stigma, have exacerbated rates of maternal mortality and has exposed women seeking postabortion care to threats, harassment, physical abuse, and discrimination.36 III. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and the Optional Protocol Discrimination against women means “any distinction, exclusion or restriction made on the basis of sex which has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by women, irrespective of their marital status, on a basis of equality of men and women, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field.” —CEDAW, article 1 CEDAW, an international treaty affirming women’s fundamental human rights to substantive equality and nondiscrimination, was ratified by the Philippines on August 5, 1981, and entered into force on September 4, 1981.42 “I did not use any family planning method before. But when I wanted to, everything was banned, which made it very difficult for us. If family planning was available at that time, I would not have been forced to have an abortion.” —Yayo, 36 years old, mother of eight The Optional Protocol to CEDAW (OP-CEDAW), which provides for two procedures (individual communications and inquiries) enabling individuals or groups of individuals to seek redress for the violations of rights recognized in CEDAW, was ratified by the Philippines on November 12, 2003, and entered into force on February 12, 2004.43 [See sidebar entitled What is the inquiry procedure under OP-CEDAW, p. 4 and How is an inquiry conducted by the CEDAW Committee?, p. 6.] Ban on misoprostol. In 2002, the Food and Drug Administration (then the Bureau of Food and Drugs) issued a circular prohibiting the distribution, sale, and use of misoprostol “in the interest of public health and safety.”37 The circular contained a warning to “all drugstore owners, pharmacists, consumers and all others concerned” against the drug’s dispensation and use.38 The ban is contrary to the World Health Organization’s inclusion of misoprostol in its Model List of Essential Medicines for the “management of incomplete abortion and miscarriage” and the “[p]revention and treatment of postpartum haemorrhage . . . .”39 De-listing of emergency contraceptives. In 2001, the DOH unilaterally banned Postinor, an emergency contraceptive that is an important method of protection for survivors of sexual violence.40 The ban, based on the claim that Postinor is an abortifacient, has been maintained despite findings by both the World Health Organization and a DOH technical committee that Postinor is not an abortifacient and should be re-listed.41 4 CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS ACCOUNTABILITY FOR DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN IN THE PHILIPPINES 5