16 75 RPRHA, supra note 10 at sec. 9; See, e.g. Domini M. Torrevillas, Postinor Fights for Life, PHILSTAR GLOBAL (2002), available at https://bit.ly/2JE4doD (The drug Postinor—a levonorgestrel-only pill recognized by the WHO as an essential drug—was previously approved in 1999 by the state party for survivors of sexual violence but it was de-listed from the Philippine registry of drugs by the FDA in 2001). 76 Rape victims told: Oral contraception may prevent pregnancy, SUNSTAR (July 2016), available at https://bit.ly/2LJ8FDe. 77 ESCR Committee, Concluding Observations: Philippines, para. 51, U.N. Doc. ESCR/C.12/PHL/CO/5-6 (2016) [hereinafter ESCR Committee (2016)]. 78 Id. 79 Human Rights Council, Report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review: Philippines (36th Sess., 2017), para. 133, U.N. Doc. A/HRC/36/12 (2017) [hereinafter Report of the Working Group on the UPR: Philippines]. 80 CEDAW, Summary of the Inquiry, supra note 3 at para. 52. 81 Id., at para. 52. 82 PHIL. REVISED PENAL CODE (Act No. 3815), arts. 256-259 (1930) [hereinafter REV. PENAL CODE]. 83 Id. 84 THE CONSTITUTION OF THE PHILIPPINES, 1987, art. II, sec. 12. 85 Imbong v. Ochoa, supra note 26. 86 Lawrence B. Finer and Rubina Hussain, Unintended Pregnancy and Unsafe Abortion in the Philippines: Context and Consequences, GUTTMACHER INSTITUTE (2013). 87 Senate Bill No. 1227: An Act to ordain and institute a new Criminal Code of the Philippines, repealing for that purpose Act No. 3815 otherwise known as the Revised Penal Code, and other related law, and for other purposes, introduced by Senator Leila de Lima, sec. 53 in relation to sec. 25 (October 2016), available at https://bit.ly/2l3FDCS (The bill proposed to impose a penalty for individual performing abortion without violence and with consent of woman ranging from more than one year to six years and fine equivalent to 10 to 20 times [in multiples of five] the average daily income or fine only of 50 to 100 times [in multiples of ten] the average daily income or 5 to 10 times the value of the property, whichever is higher). 88 Id. (The bill proposed to impose a penalty of imprisonment ranging from more than 10 days to one year and fine equivalent to one to 10 times the average daily income or fine only of 10 to 50 times [in multiples of ten] the average daily income or 1 to 5 times the value of the property, whichever is higher or community service). 89 Id. 90 REV. PENAL CODE, supra note 82, art. 259. 91 Rep. Act No. 10951: An Act Adjusting the Amount or the Value of Property and Damage on Which a Penalty is Based and the Fines Imposed Under the Revised Penal Code, Amending for the Purpose Act No. 3815, Otherwise Known as “The Revised Penal Code” as Amended (August 2017), available at https://bit.ly/2K9eudh. 92 CEDAW, Summary of the Inquiry, supra note 3 at para. 51. 93 Office of the President, Philippine Commission on Women, Letter from Ms. Emmeline Verzosa, Executive Director of PCW, to Mr. Geronimo Sy, Assistant Secretary of the Department of Justice (July 22, 2014), available at https://bit.ly/2Jzykli. 94 Id. 95 LET OUR VOICES BE HEARD, supra note 11 at 29. 96 THE CONSTITUTION OF THE PHILIPPINES, 1987, art. II, sec. 12. 97 Imbong v. Ochoa, supra note 26. 98 THE CONSTITUTION OF THE PHILIPPINES, 1987, art. II, secs. 1, 5, 9, 11, 14, 15, art. XIII, secs. 1, 11, 12, 14. 99 ALFI v DOH, supra note 12. 100 Id. 101 Id. (The petitioners in this case cited the principle of prudence that “should there be the slightest iota of doubt regarding questions of life and respect for human life, one must try to be on the safe side” and interpreted it to be “applicable in matters affecting and related to the right to life of the unborn”). 102 Resolution of Both Houses No. 08: Resolution of both Houses constituting the Senate and the House of Representatives, 17 th Congress, into a Constituent Assembly to propose revision of the 1987 Constitution by adopting a federal form of government and for other purposes (August 2016) available at https://bit.ly/2HIWnbz. 103 PDP-Laban, Proposed Amendments to the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines, art. II, sec. 12 (2017), available at https://bit.ly/2JMZZ1n. 104 ESCR Committee (2016), supra note 77 at para. 51. 105 Id., at para. 52. 106 Report of the Working Group on the UPR: Philippines, supra note 79 at para. 133. 107 CEDAW, Summary of the Inquiry, supra note 3 at para. 52. 108 Id. 109 THE MAGNA CARTA OF WOMEN, ACT NO. 9710, sec. 17(7) (2009). 110 RPRHA, supra note 10 at sec. 3(j). 111 Admin. Order No. 0041: National Policy on Prevention and Management of Abortion Complications (November 2016), available at https://bit.ly/2jeVC09 [hereinafter 2016 PMAC]. 112 CEDAW, Summary of the Inquiry, supra note 3 at para. 52. 113 Admin. Order No: 0003: National Policy on the Prevention of Illegal and Unsafe Abortion and Management of Post-Abortion Complications (February 2018), available at https://bit.ly/2jeVC09 [hereinafter 2018 PMAC]. 114 Aya Tantiangco, New Health Security Duque ‘not read’ to discuss RH Law implementation – POPCOM, GMA NEWS ONLINE (2017), available at https://bit.ly/2JNq9Be. 115 2016 PMAC, supra note 111 at 6-7. 116 Id. 117 Id., at 4. 118 CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS, Forsaken Lives: The Harmful Impact of the Philippine Criminal Abortion Ban, 65-67 (2010); see also, CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS, DOCUMENTATION REPORT: FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION ON POSTABORTION CARE (2014), on file with the Center for Reproductive Rights. 119 2016 PMAC, supra note 111 at 3. 120 2018 PMAC, supra note 113 at 2.