CEDAW/C/SR.36 English Page 13 63. Ms. OESER said there seemed to be a discrepancy between the statement made at the current meeting that all the provisions of the Convention formed part of Philippine law and Mr. Moreno-Salcedo's remark that those provisions of the Convention which were not incorporated into the country's legislation were complied with in practice. Furthermore, it was not sufficient to say that the principles of international law were reflected in Philippine legislation: principles differed from legislative provisions. She agreed with Ms. Caron that the remarks made by Mr. Moreno-Salcedo were an insult to the Committee, the Convention and the many women who were actively involved in political life. 64. Ms. SMITH asked whether women were participating in the Government's formulation of the new family law. She agreed with other speakers about the tone of Mr. Moreno-Salcedo's remarks and said that she doubted that Philippine women were entirely satisfied to exercise their influence only through their husbands. She wondered, moreover, if there was really no women's liberation movement in the Philippines. 65. Mr. NORDENFELT recalled Mr. Moreno-Salcedo's remark that harmony among the sexes and the traditional allocation of labour, privileges and duties was the backbone of Philippine society. If that statement reflected official policy, it would appear that the Philippines was not complying with its obligations under the Convention. He, too, had found Mr. Moreno-Salcedo's remarks offensive to the women and the men who were working to achieve equality of the sexes. The meeting rose at 1 p.m.