SC junks petition to stop purchase, use of Sinovac jabs

MANILA – The Supreme Court (SC) has dismissed a petition asking the government to stop the purchase and use of the Sinovac Covid-19 vaccine.

A 17-page decision dated May 11 and written by Associate Justice Jhosep Lopez junked the petition filed by the former Boac, Marinduque mayor, Pedrito Nepomuceno, who sought to compel the National Task Force (NTF) Against Covid-19 to observe the usual rules of the Food and Drugs Administration (FDA) on the acquisition, procurement and use of Covid-19 vaccines and for the FDA to issue a cease and desist order on the procurement and use of Sinovac, in particular.

Named as respondents were President Rodrigo Duterte, Health Secretary Francisco Duque III, and NTF Chief Implementer Secretary Carlito Galvez Jr.

“As the law has expressly excluded the conduct of clinical trials and exempted its procurement from the general rules of the bidding process, the Court cannot step in to add another layer of requirement before the procurement of Covid-19 vaccines, and their use, specifically those granted with EUA (Emergency Use Authorization),” the court ruled.

The SC likewise emphasized that the President is “not a proper party to be sued” as the Chief Executive cannot be sued while in office.

“This Court holds, and reminds litigants once again that an incumbent President of the Republic of the Philippines cannot be sued in any proceeding. With executive power solely vested in the President of the Philippines, he should be freed from any distraction that would imperil the performance of his duties as mandated by the Constitution. Thus, presidential immunity from suit shields President Duterte from facing any complaint or petition during his tenure,” the court stated.

The decision added that under the principle of hierarchy of courts, the SC can only handle “questions of law” and not “questions of fact”.

“A challenge to the efficacy of the Sinovac vaccine is a question of fact that is beyond the scope of this Court’s jurisdiction. To go into the details of a vaccine’s efficacy would require the presentation of its clinical trial results and a comparative analysis of the various results of the other vaccines in order to determine the acceptable standard of what an effective Covid-19 vaccine should be. However, it is a settled rule that the Supreme Court is not a trier of facts,” the court said.

“Complementing this rule is the doctrine of hierarchy of courts, which requires a party to file the appropriate petition in the proper court, especially when the petition calls for an examination of the factual issues raised in the petition,” the ruling further stated.

The court said the issuance of an EUA precludes the need for the completion of the conduct of clinical trials and that as long as the conditions are met, any vaccine given an EUA may now be administered in the Philippines.

“In evaluating the known and potential benefits of the drug or vaccine and its potential risks, as a factor in granting an EUA, the FDA takes into consideration the results of tests from abroad in addition to the tests done in the Philippines. The FDA, thus, gathers sufficient material information before it issues an EUA in favor of a vaccine. In the case of Sinovac vaccine, while many doubts its efficacy, it is not within the office of this Court to issue an order compelling the government to conduct further tests before the same can be distributed to the Filipino people. Notably, the FDA already granted an EUA in favor of Sinovac on February 22, 2021,” the court added.