Is the Philippines ready for a pandemic?

(Poor communities are badly hit by coronavirus as Duterte places the entire
archipelago under a state of calamity)

By Joseph Peter Calleja

Commuters wearing protective masks wait for public transport vehicles in Quezon
City, Philippines, 12 February 2020.

The world is being ripped apart by the Covid-19 disease which has hospitalized over
341,000 people and killed nearly 15,000 worldwide, according to latest reports.

Borders are being sealed to prevent transmission. Community quarantines are

prevalent causing panic buying among those who have purchasing power. But many
daily wage earners, even if they panic, have nothing to buy.

This is the predicament of many Filipinos. A 2018 report by the Philippine

Statistics Authority (PSA) estimated17.6 million Filipinos live below the poverty
threshold of 10,727 pesos (US$215). The figure is the average family income for
2018. The average monthly food threshold for a family of five was estimated at
7,528 pesos (US$150), says the report.

These families are daily commuters. They ride buses and jeepneys to get to work.
They also comprise the sector that is badly being hit by Covid-19.

The government has implemented measures to contain the spread of the disease and to
cushion its effect on local businesses and workers. President Rodrigo Duterte has
placed the entire archipelago under a "state of calamity," which allows him and
local government units wide latitude to utilize and appropriate funds in efforts to
combat Covid-19.

The president also placed the entire National Capital Region (NCR) under mandatory
enhanced community quarantines. Metro Manila has already declared a 24-hour
quarantine.

But are these enough to defeat the unseen enemy?

The battle against Covid-19 is not merely a legal or political battle. It is, first
of all, a medical concern. And the Philippines is not yet ready to fight a battle
with a pandemic of this magnitude.

Extreme community quarantines affect the transport of medical professionals and

health workers going to hospitals. Many were not able to go to work during the
first few days of the lockdown. It took days for the government to set up pickup
points from where trucks and buses could take frontline staff to hospitals. The
ordeal does not end here.

According to a 2018 healthcare report, the ratio of hospital beds per population is
only 1:800 in the nation's capital, with almost 13 million inhabitants.

The report adds that the Philippines only has 101,688 hospital beds in 1,223
hospitals nationwide. Therefore, if only a slight fraction of the country's 107
million people was infected by the virus, hospitals would be jam-packed.

The availability of medical equipment is another issue. There's a severe shortage

of ventilators and test kits. Covid-19 patients use ventilators once the virus
affects their respiratory systems. With other medical conditions that need
ventilators like patients with pneumonia or stroke, how will the government provide
equipment to the public?

In Quezon City, for example, mayor Joy Belmonte sent three Covid-19 patients home
due to lack of isolation rooms in the hospitals where they were supposed to be
confined. Many were disturbed. The patients came from urban poor communities.
Sending them home poses a greater threat to their respective communities.

By statistics alone, the Philippines is not ready for a pandemic.

Private individuals have called for donations through social media to gather masks,
hand sanitizers and packed meals to be donated to doctors and nurses. Many have
donated to foundations and charities to aid medical practitioners defeat the virus.

Now that the virus has started to spread in provinces and throughout the entire
archipelago, one can only hope and pray that the country's medical system will
remain steadfast despite the gargantuan task of isolating and testing Covid-19
patients.

Three doctors have already succumbed to the virus. A number are in critical
condition. With the number of deaths increasing, how can a developing country
defeat this virus? One can only hope and pray that at least, if infected, he or she
has still reason to live.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Command Theory of Law

1. Source of Law - The person who gives the law - Entity whose will is expressed

He did not call this king, president, congress

a law to be a valid law the source must be an entity

Ex: Passing of Law

2. Quality of the Subjects

Ex: Filipinos

3. Objects - Acts characterized by circumstances of subjects whether the acts are

in accordance to the law

Whether an act is legal or according to the source

Ex: Crimes

4. Extent or Content - General principle - It must applied with a certain bounds,

cannot be used universally

Ex: Territoriality

5. Aspects of the Law - Manners or Various manners which the will is applied/
Spirit of the law why the law is given

Aspects refers to motive or ratio or reason

There must be a reason or spirit or justification behind it for a law to be applied

ex: JJDeliquency Act

6. Force - Bringing motives into play / corroborative appendage

ex: Why certain laws are passed/ International law

7. Expression - Nature of the signs/ expressions made known/ Remedial aspect of law
- Actual text of the law - Letters are the expression

ex: Inquest proceedings/ Remedial Law

Proximity/Purity/Extent

Jurisprudence - Science of jury

Expository JD - Apply the law as it is not as it ought to be

Sensorial JD -

Sovereign political identity

Positive Law - is relation of law and subjects

Positive Morality - Human conducts that does not need legislation

An obligation is not always enforceable - according to positive morality

Concept of Sovereign - Independent political entity

Sovereign is no other than the people

3 Elements of a Command - John Austin

1. There has to be Wish or Desire concieved by a rational being over the subjects
(punishment to the subjects)
2. There has to be Evil to be incurred by the latter in case the latter does not
comply to the will or wish of the sovereign (Element of Force)
3. Expression or intimation of the wish or other signs

Law has nothing to do with morality

Comments and Criticisms

1. Impression of Law - Something that is abusive it misleads austin the model of

law

2. Gunman Example - A person with a gun, pokes gun to another person

ex: Bank Gunman and Teller - Satisfy 3 elements of Law

- Sovereign (Desire or Will) Person to get cash from bank
- Threat of punishment to the subject or subject if not follow the will of the
sovereign (patay siya sabog ulo nya)
- Expression (Declaration of holdup)

Is that LAW? Is that still the definition of LAW? Nawawala concept ng justice

Source of law is the criminal act??? It is absurd!

3. Austin deduces law simply as a wish of the sovereign - Naging wish nalang siya -
Prone to abuse can be capricious and whimsical.
Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court any judicial body or
agency having quasi judicial commits grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or
excess in jurisdiction act can be struck down as being capricious and whimsical.

Austin tends to confuse the obligation with law - Law is an obligation but not all
obligations can be classified with law

In STATCON many laws are struck down - Did not pass the stringent test or over
broad

4. Evil or Sanction - Not everything needs coercion - In order to be a law,

punishment or threat is not an essential element - Napaka punitive if you will
treat punishment as an essential element of law

There are law or certain laws that do not have punishment

Ex: Wills or Succession / Property Laws /

1. Very strict definition of law - By including element of punishment

2. Laws qualify as laws but does not have punishment or threat

Austin: Laws must be expressed All laws must be made known to the public - Tanada v
Tuvera = Positive Law

5. Limits of requirement of generality

Austin = Generality applies to acts not to persons but this is a mistake (laws
govern persons and acts)

6. Austin focuses on desire or act (PERO KULANG YUN, NAWAWALA YUNG ELEMENT NG
SUBJECT)
*Persons must not be neglected

7. Concept of Sovereignty - Presupposes no change in the sovereign = WHAT IF

SOVEREIGN CHANGES? DOES IT MEAN LAW CEASES?

CRITICISM ON AUSTIN'S THEORY

1. What happens to the sovereign ? - There's a problem in the continuity of the

sovereign (WALA NG SOURCE EH)

AUSTIN = WALANG MORAL LAW

2. Do laws become obsolete if they are repealed or annulled?

This law is no longer law

AUSTIN'S THEORY CANNOT ACCOUNT (LACKING) IN TERMS OF CHANGE OF SOVEREIGNTY -

DESPITE THE ABSENCE OF THE SOVEREIGN
- Internation Law governs even though there's no sovereign

Austin's Theory is incomplete!!!

3. Limit of the Sovereign's Power

- For AUSTIN SOVEREIGN POWER IS ABSOLUTE AND SUPERIOR TO EVERYONE ELSE (Siya talaga
yung King/Diyos/Batas whatever he wills or desires)
As long as will is desired and expressed, it is a valid law. (MERON BANG GANUNG
SOVEREIGN)

Is there such thing as sovereign that has an absolute power? IN REALITY WALANG
GANUN! IN ACTUALITY EACH SOVEREIGN IS GOVERNED BY FACTORS OTHER THAN HIS WILL

Ex: President governed by the Constitution

People - Executive and Judiciary
Concept of Checks and Balances
Power of Impeachment
Petition of Certiorari

There is no such thing as absolute power! (AUSTIN'S DEFINITION IS FAULTY)

Even kings have advisors

4. The NON-SEPARABILITY OF THE SOVEREIGN'S POWER

Austin portrayed power as UNITARY / ISOLATED MANNER - It cannot be shared and only
resides within the sovereign (NAPAKA GAHAMAN NG SOVEREIGN, DI LANG NAMAN IKAW
SHARED YAN DIBA?)

In reality Sovereign's power is SHARED (Doctrine of Separation of Powers)

5. LOCATION OF THE SOVEREIGN (KUNG SINO YUNG ACTOR SIYA YUNG SOVEREIGN)

Ex: Who is the sovereign, is it in the congress, SC, executive? Austin tries to
give us a simplistic model in locating a sovereign (person that gives person or
punishment) - WRONG!

Sovereignty is distributed and is difficult to locate - IN A COMPLEX PERSPECTIVE

Sovereignty resides in Legis, Judi, Exi

Sovereign vs Legislative (PHILIPPINE SET-UP) SHARED ALSO WITH EXECUTIVE and

JUDICIAL

CHAPTER 3 KELSEN CRITICIZED AUSTIN (LEGAL POSITIVIST)

- Reduced changes Austin's theory of law
- Impossible to attain or contextualize in reality - SOBRANG ACADEMIC AND IDEAL
(CANNOT BE APPLIED IN REALITY)
- Not Legal philosophy is done thru John Austin's theory because it is very ideal
and should be discarded (BUT GOT POINTS AND USED IT)

1. What is the contribution of Kelsen - The study of law must be pure not in
describing the source or the threat but knowing how it ought to be applied
(APPLICATION OF LAW - HOW - NOT ON DESCRIPTION) DEBUNKING DESCRIPTIVE APPROACH =
KELSEN rather PRESCRIPTIVE - Study of law to know the subject and how the law
should be applied by the subject to the subjects (APLLICATION) Known as POLITICS

- The reason why Austin fell in idealism and cannot be applied, because his study
of law is descriptive (MALING PERCEPTION) PAG DINESCRIBE DI MO TALAGA MAAAPPLY

2. You need to study POLITICS (wag lang theory-theory) or not only reading of
books, needs practice

Ex: Can you be a good lawyer by only reading books? NO! You must know how the law
operates, how the law is practiced by those people that are moving around you
(legal system)
3. The methodology consisted all phenomena so as to arrive in the adequate
definition of law

Austin's Definition TOP - DOWN or PYRAMID APPROACH that branched out BUT THIS IS
WRONG!

IT SHOULD BE INVERTED PYRAMID

KNOW DIFFERENT LAWS, EXTRACT ELEMENTS, KNOW THE COMMON GROUNDS, AND ARRIVE TO THE
PURE MEANING OF LAW

SHOULD KNOW WHAT'S COMMON WITH ALL LAWS - Science and cannot question moral
concerns or issues because science cannot answer questions of morality.

LET'S TALK ONLY ABOUT LAWS

* WHAT DID KELSEN SEE?

1. Law has an element of COERCION - Needs to be followed/obeyed - Law operateds

based on Coercion and Threats
Kelsen saw that people follow out of good will but rather fear of punishment of the
law
(BAKIT NAGING LAW? KASI SUMUSUNOD EH TAKOT!)

In fact Law and Justice are different aspects but must concern with law

Justice can be set aside because people only follow the LAW - Wittgenstein's
Interpretation

Stop asking yourself what is justice, all bewitchments of language.

Wittgentstein - DONT THINK BUT LOOK FOR MULTIPLE RELATIONSHIPS OR SIMILARITIES

BETWEEN LAWS - Focuses on pragramatic application of the LAW.

LAW IS SOMETHING THAT IS PRAGMATIC!

******************** TO BE CONTINUED ***************************

DAY 5 and 6