13 CEDAW Committee, Inquiry Report, supra note 4, para. 46. Id., para. 39. 15 Id., para. 33. 16 Id., para. 33. 17 Id., paras. 44-45. 18 Id., paras. 42-43. 19 Id., paras. 32, 49. 20 CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS ET AL., IMPOSING MISERY: THE IMPACT OF MANILA'S CONTRACEPTION BAN ON WOMEN AND FAMILIES (2007), see Annex 1; CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS, FORSAKEN LIVES: THE HARMFUL IMPACT OF THE PHILIPPINE CRIMINAL ABORTION BAN (2010) [hereinafter CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS, FORSAKEN LIVES], see Annex 2; CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS, ACCOUNTABILITY FOR DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN IN THE PHILIPPINES: KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE CEDAW COMMITTEE'S SPECIAL INQUIRY ON REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS (2015), see Annex 3. 21 CEDAW Committee, Inquiry Report, supra note 4, para. 33. 22 Id., paras. 33-34. 23 PHILIPPINE STATISTICS AUTHORITY ET AL., PHILIPPINES NATIONAL DEMOGRAPHIC AND HEALTH SURVEY 2013, at 64 [hereinafter NDHS 2013]. 24 Id., at 65. 25 NATIONAL ECONOMIC AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME, THE PHILIPPINES: FIFTH PROGRESS REPORT MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS (2014) [hereinafter NEDA AND UNDP, FIFTH PROGRESS REPORT] (There is a steady increase─in 2003, the contraceptive prevalence rate was 49%, which increased to 51% and 55% in 2008 and 2013, respectively─but it has not been sufficient to reach the 63% target). 26 NATIONAL STATISTICS OFFICE ET AL., PHILIPPINES NATIONAL DEMOGRAPHIC AND HEALTH SURVEY 2003, at 94. 27 NDHS 2013, supra note 23, at 83-84. 28 State party Report, supra note 1, para. 142. 29 DEMOGRAPHIC RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION ET AL., THE 2013 YOUNG ADULT FERTILITY AND SEXUALITY STUDY IN THE PHILIPPINES. KEY FINDINGS, at 13-14 (2014) (Findings indicate a rise in teenage pregnancies from 6.3% to 13.6%). 30 NDHS 2013, supra note 23, at 53; NATIONAL STATISTICS OFFICE ET AL., PHILIPPINES NATIONAL DEMOGRAPHIC AND HEALTH SURVEY 2008, at 50. 31 See CEDAW Committee, Inquiry Report, supra note 4, para. 13. 32 CEDAW Committee, Concluding Observations: Philippines, supra note 5, para. 28. 33 Id., para. 28. 34 CEDAW Committee, Inquiry Report, supra note 4, para. 9. 35 Id., para. 46. The State party committed violations under articles 2(c), (d), (f), 5, 10(h), 12, 16(1)(e) of the Convention. 36 CEDAW Committee, Inquiry Report, supra note 4, para. 51 (d). 37 Id., para. 52 (a). 38 Id., paras. 23-24. 39 Id., paras. 51 (b), (h). 40 Dr. Benjamin Yson, acting City Health Officer of Manila, has acknowledged and apologized for the denial of reproductive health services and violations against women but does not see a need for overturning laws and policies restricting access to contraceptives. See Press release, Center for Reproductive Rights, City of Manila Health Official Apologizes for the Denial of Reproductive Health Services and Violations Against Women (June 30, 2015), http://www.reproductiverights.org/press-room/city-of-manila-health-official-apologizes-for-the-denialof-reproductive-health-services-and-violations-against-women. 41 Lourdes E. Osil et al. v Office of the Mayor of the City et al., Regional Trial Court, Sp. Proc. No. 09-121259 (Oct. 7, 2014) [hereinafter Osil v Manila, RTC]. 42 State party Report, supra note 1, para. 129. 43 An Executive Order Declaring Sorsogon City as a Pro-Life City, Exec. Ord. No. 3, (2015) (Phil.). 44 Ana P. Santos, Why do some pro-life groups hate women so much?, RAPPLER (Aug. 18, 2015), http://www.rappler.com/views/imho/102575-pro-life-groups-women. 45 CEDAW Committee, Inquiry Report, supra note 4, paras. 14, 17, 28. 46 Id., para. 51 (a). 47 Id., para. 51 (b). 48 Id., para. 51 (c). 49 RPRHA, supra note 8, sec. 2; MCW, supra note 8, sec. 2. 50 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH (DOH) ET AL., THE FIRST ANNUAL CONSOLIDATED REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RESPONSIBLE PARENTHOOD AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH ACT OF 2012 (R.A. NO. 10345) at 79 (2014) (Phil.) [hereinafter DOH, IMPLEMENTATION REPORT]. 14 11