Department of Justice(DOJ)

Hi! I just want to hear your response and action to which guidelines: national or local regarding Implementation of Alert Level System we will follow.

I just want to forward my message from the Office of the President.

July 19, 2022

TO: OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
      IATF-EID
      DILG
      OTHER NATIONAL INSTRUMENTALITIES/AGENCIES CONCERNED

Greetings!

In connection with my last letter of concern and clarification (Code No. PCC-GDP-06-25-2022-086), I had received 2 different answers from IATF DOH through the Secretariat and from LGU-Antique through the Provincial Legal Officer. Their answers are attached to this email.

I just want a direct and clear answer from the Office of the President who supervises the IATF-EID which I know has the higher authority on this regard and has the wide scope with the existing laws, guidelines, resolutions and other matters related to this issue and have the power to direct such interpretation to its subordinates.

To explain further, IATF-DOH answers me with the reference to the Guidelines on the Nationwide Implementation of Alert Level System for COVID-19 Response issued June 4, 2022 in regards to gatherings specifically with religious meetings whom my concern primarily centered which states under Alert Level 2: 
"The following establishments, or activities, shall be allowed to operate, or be undertaken at a maximum of 50% indoor venue capacity for fully vaccinated individuals and those below 18 years of age, even if unvaccinated, and 70% outdoor venue capacity. Provided that all on-site workers/employees of these establishments, or organizers of activities are fully vaccinated against COVID-19 and MPHS shall be strictly maintained. Provided further, that there is no objection from the LGU where these activities may take place..."

I just want to express my understanding or interpretation about the said National reference. The term shall indicate mandatory or obligatory. If I interpret it, as I know, National supervises Local Government Units, National has higher authority than Local. Is it wrong to follow the National Guidelines if there is an existing Provincial Executive Order where it conflicts with one another concerning gatherings?

To continue, with respect to Provincial EO which are commendable for being proactive for the safety of our Province, the Provincial Legal Officer patiently answers and explains to me their side. He quoted Section 1, Paragraph 10 of the National Guidelines which states:"Notwithstanding the provisions under the different alert levels as set forth under this Guidelines, the IATF may, in exceptional circumstances, suspend the application of the rules or adopt rules applicable to a different alert level, in order to address the Covid-19 situation in a region, province, city, or municipality."

To take up, he said: "On July 6, 2022, Governor Rhodora J. Cadiao of the Province of Antique issued Executive Order No. 88, Series of 2022, An Order Amending Executive Order No. 32-D, Series of 2022. Section G, Paragraph 10 of Executive Order No. 88 provides that in-person religious gatherings are allowed to be undertaken at a maximum of fifty percent (50%) indoor venue capacity for fully vaccinated individuals five (5) years old and above, and seventy percent (70%) outdoor venue capacity. Said policy was recommended by the Antique Inter-Agency Task Force (IATF) to encourage unvaccinated Antiquenos to get vaccinated. Noteworthy, the Province of Antique is still on Alert Level 2 because of its low vaccination rate. As of today, the Province of Antique has 83 active Covid-19 cases. 
To summarize, only vaccinated individuals five (5) years old and above are allowed to attend in-person religious gatherings in the Province of Antique. The same policy should be applied in the Municipality of Caluya because said town is also under Alert Level 2."

Personally, I want to highly and deeply  thank and commend our Provincial Officers in regards to the health and safety of our Province. I understand the main reason why they set that policy, quoting again: " Said policy was recommended by the Antique Inter-Agency Task Force (IATF) to encourage unvaccinated Antiquenos to get vaccinated."

To re-examine Section 1, Paragraph 10: "Notwithstanding the provisions under the different alert levels as set forth under this Guidelines, the IATF may, in exceptional circumstances, suspend the application of the rules or adopt rules applicable to a different alert level, in order to address the Covid-19 situation in a region, province, city, or municipality." What is the further explanation on this part of the general guideline? Looking back, we are on an island where COVID case is 0 or very rare to have a case. Is it applicable to make new rules in general to apply in the Province with respect to Alert Level? As we know, different areas, specifically municipalities  have different situations in regards to COVID. Another question in regards to the said general guideline: Could that mean that LGU can adopt a rule that is less stricter than the National Guidelines and less stricter than lower Alert Level? For example, if 0 Covid Case for many months, regardless of age and vaccination status, an individual can attend gatherings with respect to Minimum Public Health Standard. What can you say about that?

I also want to quote Section 5, Paragraph 1: "Intrazonal and interzonal movement shall be allowed. However, reasonable restrictions may be imposed by the LGUs, which should not be stricter as those prescribed under higher alert levels and subject to the oversight, monitoring, and evaluation of their respective RIATF."
The question on the said situation in our municipality: Is Provincial EO reasonable on our behalf? My constructive comments that can be considered by the President and other National Officials specifically the IATF-EID specially new alert level system and guidelines will be considered and be made:
1. Be specific what rules can be changed in the Alert Level System guidelines.
2. If possible, if not against the Constitution and other existing laws and Government Codes, let the National give free hand to the Municipal-LGU to adopt reasonable rules to its subordinate, not the Provincial-LGU in general because Municipal-LGU knows the situation better.
3. Be reasonable to the restrictions in general and in specific areas.
4. Be reasonable to the guidelines in the areas where COVID is 0 for many months or very rare.
Just suggestions to be considered. 

Looking forward to getting a direct and clearest answer from the Office of the President and National IATF-EID in regards to my main concerns and queries. Open for recommendations, suggestions, comments from your office/s in this matter. Hoping to get your response before this month ends as possible. Thank You very much!

Truly Yours,

REMAR RESULTAN

Attached file in connection with my last reply

August 11, 2022

Dear Remar Resultan,

We want to clarify what kind of assistance or information do you seek from the DOJ?

Thank you,

FOI Receiving Officer

In connection with my letter, I just want to clarify to which guidelines we will follow in regards with the Implementation of the Alert Level System: National or Provincial? Please review the letter and the files attached. Thank you.

Hoping to hear from you soonest, if possible, today. Thank You.

Is there any update?

Pa-update naman po...

May sagot na po ang IATF DOH. Ayon po sa sagot na malinaw sa NATIONAL ang guidelines at iyon po ang susundin. Follow up question ko na lang po if iniinsist ng LGU na susundin ang Provincial Guidelines ng Implementation of Alert Levels may kinalaman sa religious gatherings? Ano po ang masasabi ninyo?

Any update/s po?

September 1, 2022

Dear Remar,

This matter is better addressed to the DOH and not the DOJ.

Thank you,

FOI Receiving Officer