Happening Now: Updates on SC Oral Arguments

chito liban

Happening now: our brother Atty. Chito Liban is presenting his case that the #RHLaw violates religious freedom.

Updates from the Official Twitter account of the Supreme Court:

  1. Brion poses a hypothetical about the conscientious objector–what if there is no RH provider accessible, would objector not be compelled?

  2. Liban insists that the challenge to the RH law is about the future and our posterity; a contraceptive mentality affects future generations.

  3. Brion asks if the RH law is consistent with “tuwid na daan” (elicits some laughter); Liban says no.

  4. Brion asks if it is worth pursuing the RH law considering all its faults; Liban says no, the good points in the RH law already in other laws

  5. Brion asks if promiscuity is part of filipino culture; Liban says no, describes it as a shame.

  6. Brion asks about culture, particularly filipino culture; Liban describes filipino culture as old fashioned.

  7. Liban: a contraceptive mentality will not strengthen the family; Brion: is the RH law then an anti-family law; Liban: yes.

  8. Brion asks what is the effect of contraceptives on morality; Liban says it promotes a contraceptive mentality, encourages promiscuity.

  9. Liban cites study linking use of contraceptives to increased risk of cancer.

  10. Brion asks what other hidden costs, other than economic costs, Liban would cite.

  11. Liban, responding to Brion’s query about gov’t strategy, says that gov’t is flooding the country with contraceptives.

  12. Brion asks what is transcendentally important about the petitions; Liban emphasizes that it is about protecting future generations.

  13. Liban cites spending public funds for a possibly void law that would justify standing as tax payer. Brion points out need for direct injury.

  14. J. Brion asks Liban about his use of certiorari and asks if there are issues of transcendental importance that may justify the relief.

  15. Experiencing some problems with net access; apologies for the delay in the tweets.

  16. J. Abad points out that sec. 9 of the RH law declares the contraceptives as safe and non-abortifacient.

  17. J. Abad takes Liban through the constitutional protection of the mother and the unborn; cites that these are connected rights. Liban agrees.

  18. J. Abad asks about 3 ways of preventing life; says abortion is one way and emphasizes that abortion is prohibited by RH law. Liban agrees.

  19. Liban cites studies relating use of contraceptives with cancers and other illnesses;cites the duty of State to promote public health.

  20. Liban: mandatory sex education in public schools is discriminatory and usurps the primary role of parents in rearing their family.

  21. Liban emphasizes that the compulsion to refer puts him in a position where he is forced to either obey the law or follow his religion.

  22. Liban discusses the conscientious objector provision within the context of a Catholic conscientious objector.

  23. Liban: 80% of the RH law is about contraception; talks about the law compelling contraception notwithstanding religious beliefs.

  24. Atty. Luisito Liban will present arguments for 20 mins on various civil rights implications of the RH Law.

  25. Clerk of Court En Banc calling the cases and for appearances; all 15 members of the Court are in attendance.

  26. Oral arguments in Imbong v. Ochoa (consolidated cases) about to start.

  27. ORAL ARGUMENTS in IMBONG vs. OCHOA (Consolidated Petitions; RH LAW CHALLENGE) resume at 2PM, 23 July 2013, (cont) http://tl.gd/n_1rlgq5n