SOGIE BILL

A new bill has emerged as a less contentious alternative to the proposal penalizing gender-based
discrimination in predominantly Catholic Philippines.

Versions of the bill have been filed in both chambers of Congress, covering other forms of
discrimination, not just those based on one’s sexual orientation and gender identity or expression
(SOGIE).

It also seeks to eliminate discrimination based on “age, racial or ethnic origin, religious belief or
activity, political inclination or conviction, and social class.”

Discrimination against “marital or relationship status, disability, HIV status, health status or medical
history, language, and physical features” are covered as well.

But former human rights chief Loretta Ann Rosales said the SOGIE bill “should not be pitted
against” the more comprehensive anti-discrimination measure.

“The SOGIE bill is an anti-discrimination bill... both can be passed,” said Rosales, who authored the
SOGIE bill in the House of Representatives nearly 2 decades ago.

 SOGIE: Hard questions over bill vs gender-based discrimination

EXCEPTIONS

A number of colleagues have expressed openness to Sen. Juan Edgardo Angara’s version, which
contains clear “exceptions” based on religious freedom and job qualifications, unlike the SOGIE bill.

Sen. Nancy Binay earlier told a committee hearing how she used to be a victim of discrimination as
well because of her skin color.

 Not just 'SOGIE': Bullied for her skin, Binay seeks 'universal' anti-discrimination bill

Angara cited concerns by some senators that the SOGIE proposal might be “so absolute that it
doesn’t leave room for religious expression, among other things.”

Under his bill, a Catholic school exclusive to girls, for instance, may not be compelled to accept
transgender persons under an exception to “avoid injury to the religious sensitivities of adherents.”

“We cannot insist, we cannot demand entrance in that school because that’s the way the school wants
to run itself,” Angara told ABS-CBN News.

The bill also provides businesses the elbow room to pick employees based on “genuine occupational
qualifications.”

It also exempts from liability a supposed discriminatory act “done in good faith.”

CLASS LEGISLATION?

But anti-SOGIE bill groups are still keeping a close eye on the Angara proposal, citing contentious
provisions and terminologies.
Malacañang earlier said President Rodrigo Duterte would certify a general anti-discrimination bill as
urgent, not a specific SOGIE measure.

 Palace bats for general anti-discrimination bill

Rizalito David, executive director of Prolife Philippines, said there was no need for either bills.

“All the rights being given under the proposal are already provided in other laws that cover all
citizens,” he told ABS-CBN News, saying the SOGIE bill would give “special rights” to LGBT
people.

Rosales insisted that the SOGIE bill was not a “class legislation,” noting that international human
rights instruments also covered specific groups such as children and persons with disabilities.

“That is very specific. But you do not call that class legislation,” she said.

TERMINOLOGIES

Like the SOGIE bill, the Angara proposal distinguished among gender identity, gender expression,
and sexual orientation, terms critics considered as highly subjective, making the SOGIE bill
“ambiguous and difficult to implement.”

“We cannot say that this particular bill is better than the other bill without a thorough study,” said Jan
Lumanta, legal counsel of the pro-life group, Filipinos for Life.

“We will see to it that all terminologies must be properly defined.”

Both the Angara and SOGIE bills defined “stigma,” saying it would result in discrimination when not
acted upon.

Stigma is a “dynamic process of devaluation that significantly discredits an individual in the eyes of
others,” according to the senator’s proposed Comprehensive Anti-Discrimination Act.

VIOLENCE

Like “stigma,” said Lumanta, “violence” as mentioned in the SOGIE bill was not specific and could
mean physical, mental and emotional violence.

“Who would determine that?” he told ABS-CBN News.

Lumanta cited a hypothetical case of a man who identifies as a woman but was referred to as “sir”
instead of “ma’am.”

The reference, he said, might be interpreted as an act of discrimination “promoting stigma” on the
person under the SOGIE bill.

“Will that be considered as mental violence because you felt you had been discriminated against
because you were called by not by your preferred reference?”
POSITION PAPER ON SOGIE BILL

Sogie bill is a

In the Preamble of the Philippine Constitution, it says, “We the sovereign Filipino people,
imploring the aid of Almighty God….”
An LGBT who is Anti- “Anti-SOGIE Discrimination Bills”
RYAN B. CAPITULO, M.D., FPOGS, FIFEPAG
Yes, I am an LGBT. And yes, I strongly oppose Senate Bill 935 (Anti-Discrimination Bill) and House
Bill 4982 (SOGIE Equality Bill) for three reasons.
FIRST: There is no need to pass these proposed bills given that there are already many existing
laws that safeguard the rights of every citizen against discrimination: (1) The 1987 Constitution of the
Republic of the Philippines, (2) Presidential Decree No. 442 “Labor Code of the Philippines,” (3)
Republic Act No. 386 “Civil Code of the Philippines,” (4) Republic Act No. 3019 “Anti-Graft and
Corrupt Practices Act,” (5) Republic Act No. 6713 “Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public
Officials and Employees,” (6) Republic Act No. 3815 “The Revised Penal Code of the Philippines,”
(7) Republic Act No. 7877 “Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995,” including the (8) Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. There are victims of discrimination for being ilocano or kapampangan
or bisaya, but do we need an Anti-Ilokano or Anti-Kapampangan or Anti-Bisaya Discrimination Act?
There are victims of discrimination because of their height, but do we need an Anti-Short Stature
Discrimination Act? There are victims of discrimination because they are fat, but do we need an Anti-
Obese Discrimination Act? These existing laws ensure that any form of discrimination is avoided.
There is no need for additional laws in this regard. Republic Act No. 9710 “The Magna Carta of
Women” is in no way similar to any of the proposed bills on Anti-SOGIE Discrimination. While this
law affirms the rights of women and seeks to eliminate discrimination, it does not impose penalties
that foster a sense of entitlement and undue advantage.
SECOND: We do not need an Anti-Discrimination or SOGIE Equality law because Filipinos are
inherently accepting of lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgenders. Our society is innately tolerant of
LGBTs. Proof of this would be the many Filipino LGBTs who are very successful in their respective
fields: business, trade, media, education, fashion, healthcare, law, I.T., science and technology, arts,
show business and even politics. The election of the honorable representative of the first district of
Bataan, Rep. Geraldine B. Roman, is yet another validation. The Philippines has also consistently
been recognized as one of the gay-friendly countries in the world and one of the gay-friendliest in
Asia. In many households and families all over the country, LGBTs are accepted and loved, with
many serving as primary breadwinners and caregivers. As an LGBT, I never experienced
discrimination growing up, whether in school or at work. I can say that I am where I am now because
of hard work, discipline, God-given intelligence and prayers.

THIRD: These proposed bills, when enacted into law, may be used as instruments to stifle or violate
our freedom of religion and freedom to live out our faith. Allow me to elaborate by posing these
questions: What will happen to a seminary or convent that will uphold Church laws by refusing
admission to a transgender who wants to study and become a priest or nun? What will happen to
parishes and Catholic universities that will not allow or recognize LGBT organizations in keeping with
their mandate to abide by Church doctrines? What will happen to “all boys” or “all girls” Catholic
schools that will not accept transgender children as students because this would go against the
catechism they teach? What will happen to Catholic and Christian offices or companies like
bookstores, travel agencies, radio stations, television networks or religious organizations that will not
hire LGBT employees because it violates their faith-based beliefs? What will happen to a Muslim
school (madrasah) that pledges obedience to the Quran and hadith and will not enrol transgender
students who desire to be an imam? What will happen to a Jewish school that will not accept LGBT
students applying to be a rabbi since Orthodox Judaism prohibits it? What will happen to churches of
other denominations that will not employ LGBTs as pastors in compliance with their biblical beliefs?
In all of these possible scenarios, the proposed bills may be used to take legal action against
churches, mosques, temples, religious communities and faith-based organizations resulting in fines
of up to 500,000 pesos or imprisonment of up to 6 years. Proponents of the bill have always
asserted that ensuring non-discrimination for LGBTs on the basis of their sexual orientation and
gender identity will not diminish or encroach on the rights of others. But the penal provisions of the
proposed law say otherwise. Surely, we cannot expect the followers of the great religious traditions
of the world to change their doctrines to accommodate a law that will violate their fundamental right
to freely practice the very religion that they uphold. Forcing organized religion to set aside or modify
its tenets is as absurd as forcing LGBTs to change their sexual orientation and gender identity.
As an LGBT, as a Catholic, as a man of faith, as a Filipino, I urge the Senate and the House of
Representatives NOT to pass Senate Bill 935 and House Bill 4982.

Despite the renewed calls of the LGBTQ community for Congress to pass the Sexual Orientation and Gender
Identity or Expression (SOGIE) bill due to the experience of transwoman Gretchen Diez, not all of those who
identify to be among its members have the same sentiment.

Ryan Borja Capitulo, an obstetrician and gynecologist, shared his views on the bill that seeks to criminalize
discrimination against persons identifying as members of the LGBTQ community.

He cited three main concerns in a fairly popular post on Facebook.

Existing laws against discrimination

Citing two versions of the bill in the legislature—House Bill 4982 or the “SOGIE Equality Act” and Senate
Bill 935 or the “Anti-Discrimination Act“—Capitulo argued that the bills are not necessary since there are
already existing laws that “safeguard the rights of citizens against discrimination.”

“There are victims of discrimination because of their height, but do we need an Anti-Short Stature
Discrimination Act? There are victims of discrimination because they are fat, but do we need an Anti-Obese
Discrimination Act?” he pointed out.

Capitulo enumerated laws in the Philippines that supposedly ensure “any form of discrimination is avoided.”

 The 1987 Philippine Constitution

  Labor Code of the Philippines
 Civil Code of the Philippines
 Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act
 Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees
 Revised Penal Code of the Philippines
 Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995
 The United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Capitulo added that the Philippines’ Magna Carta for Women likewise “seeks to eliminate discrimination” but
falsely claimed that it “does not impose penalties.”

Under the Magna Carta, private individuals or private entities who violate certain provisions are bound to be
“liable to pay damages” to the offended.

The SOGIE bill, meanwhile, imposes anywhere from fines to imprisonment for offenses of discrimination.

The Philippines is a ‘gay-friendly’ country

Capitulo also argued that the SOGIE bill is not necessary since the Philippine society is “innately tolerant of
LGBTs” or lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transexuals.

He mentioned the election of the country’s first transgender lawmaker, Rep. Geraldine Roman (Bataan), is
proof of such acceptance.

Capitulo then added that he has never experienced discrimination “growing up, whether in school or at work.”

However, a 2018 survey released by the Philippine LGBT Chamber of Commerce and research firm Cogencia
reveals that local companies are not yet accepting of LGBTQ members in their policies.

It ‘violates’ people’s freedom of religion

Capitulo also expressed his fear that the SOGIE bill might be used to “stifle or violate” people’s freedom of
religion and their freedom to live out their faith.

“What will happen to a seminary or convent that will uphold Church laws by refusing admission to a
transgender who wants to study and become a priest or nun?” he asked.
“What will happen to parishes and Catholic universities that will not allow or recognize LGBT organizations
in keeping with their mandate to abide by Church doctrines?” Capitulo added.

“What will happen to Catholic and Christian offices or companies like bookstores, travel agencies, radio
stations, television networks or religious organizations that will not hire LGBT employees because it violates
their faith-based beliefs?” he asked.

Capitulo mentioned that under the proposed measure, such scenarios would merit religious communities and
faith-based organizations to be legally penalized for perceived discrimination.

Under the bill, violators can be sanctioned for up to P500,000 and be imprisoned for up to six years.

“We cannot expect the followers of the great religious traditions of the world to change their doctrines to
accommodate a law that will violate their fundamental right to freely practice the very religion that they
uphold,” Capitulo said.

Last week, Senate President Tito Sotto revealed that the SOGIE bill has “no chance” of passing in the upper
chamber “if it transgresses on academic freedom, religious freedom and women’s rights.”

He made the remark following a public hearing on the proposed measure’s passage that was initiated by
the Senate Committee on Women, Children, Family Relations and Gender Equality headed by Senator Risa
Hontiveros.

Hontiveros, for her part, argued in a Facebook post that the bill “will not penalize people who practice
religious or academic freedom.”

She added that it “will not dictate churches on their teachings or hiring process” as well.

Some enforced anti-discrimination laws outside the

Philippines
Other countries have certain laws that specifically prohibit discrimination against sexual orientation and
religion or belief, among others.
In the United States, discrimination against certain employees and applicants of a job is criminalized
under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The said law prohibits discrimination based on a person’s race, color, religion, national origin, physical and
mental disability, reprisal and sexual orientation.

In Australia, it is prohibited to discriminate based on a person’s gender, sexual orientation, marital or

relationship status (including same-sex couples), familial responsibilities and pregnancy under the Sex
Discrimination Act 1984.

The United Kingdom’s Equality Act 2010 protects people from discrimination based on their age, disability,
gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion and belief, sex
and sexual orientation. — Artwork by Uela Altar-Badayos