In the Advent of NCov, should the Government Ban the Entrance of Chinese within the Philippine

Jurisdiction?

Should we allow Chinese people to enter in our country? No, the reality is that virus does not
discriminate based on parameters such as language, regional identity, and political position.
first of all the virus is come from China.
The rampant spread of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), first
identified in Wuhan, Hubei, China, has stirred panic and an unwelcoming
sentiment towards Chinese people across the world.
1

 Hong Kong, where a social movement triggered by an extradition bill to China

has been ongoing since June, 2019, is at the forefront of this crisis. One
example is Kwong Wing Catering, a pro-movement restaurant chain, which in
a Facebook announcement on Jan 28, 2020, said it would only serve English
or Cantonese-speaking but not Mandarin-speaking customers as a public
health measure.
2

 The Facebook post garnered the third most supportive reactions and
interactions since the Facebook page's inception in September, 2019.
Although the three languages are officially recognised in the Special
Administrative Region (SAR) of China, about 90% of the population in Hong
Kong speak Cantonese. Mandarin, on the other hand, is the most common
language in mainland China. Mandarin is also the official language in Taiwan.
The Facebook post was then updated a day later to clarify that they welcome
patrons from Taiwan, despite 16 Taiwanese people confirmed to have 2019-
nCoV, as of Feb 8, 2020.
3

• View related content for this article

This anti-Chinese sentiment can be traced back to the general public's

discontent with the Hong Kong Government's declining autonomy due to
Beijing tightening up its control over the territory, and it was exacerbated by
the government's delayed public health response, which fell behind Macau,
the other SAR of China, in handling the 2019-nCoV crisis.
4

 As a result, some of the public health precautionary strategies are self-
initiated by the community in attempts to influence the government's policies;
for instance, health-care staff held a strike to press for a total border closure,
which the government was reluctant to endorse. However, we should be
cautious about the possibility that public health measures, however well
intended, can be tainted by sentiment that is fuelled with prejudice against a
certain group of people. If left unexamined, this sentiment could give rise to
measures that do not target the real issue accurately and adequately,
undermining the effectiveness of any interventions.
Although people generally believe they have a predictive model that can
identify high-risk disease carriers, thus justifying their position to alienate
anyone associated with mainland China, the reality is that virus does not
discriminate based on parameters such as language, regional identity, and
political position. Moreover, it can be argued that bias against a certain group
of people on the basis of a limited set of probable confounded factors might
lead to shame, stress, and stigma that prevent true carriers from reporting
their condition to official bodies and receiving timely health-care attention. In
the face of a public health crisis at a globalised scale, ethical consideration is
far from being purely intellectual—it is at the core of any effective measure.
We declare no competing interests.

References
1. 1.

o Rich M

As coronavirus spreads, so does anti-Chinese sentiment.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/30/world/asia/coronavirus-chinese-racism.html
Date: Jan 30, 2020
Date accessed: January 31, 2020
View in Article 

o Google Scholar

2. 2.

Kwong Wing Catering Facebook post.

https://www.facebook.com/116149449769292/posts/180459973338239?sfns=mo

Date: Jan 28, 2020

Date accessed: January 31, 2020

View in Article 

o Google Scholar
 3. 3.

o Johns Hopkins Center for Systems Science and Engineering

2019-nCoV global cases.

https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299
423467b48e9ecf6
Date accessed: February 8, 2020
View in Article 

o Google Scholar

4. 4.

o Chow H

China coronavirus: Hong Kong government falling behind Macau in handling

public health crisis.
https://www.scmp.com/comment/letters/article/3048194/china-coronavirus-hong-kong-
government-falling-behind-macau
Date: Jan 30, 2020
Date accessed: January 31, 2020
A nervous nation wonders if and when President Duterte will emerge from his weekend
break to preside over a crisis meeting called belatedly to plot moves to nip the spread of
the deadly novel Coronavirus (nCoV) four days after the Philippines recorded its first
case.

The epidemic, described by the World Health Organization as a global emergency, has
given the Duterte administration the distinction of recording the first death outside China
where the contagion started in December in Wuhan, Hubei province.

The lone local fatality was a 44-year-old male Chinese who died on Feb. 1. He was the
traveling companion of a 38-year-old Chinese woman, who arrived from Wuhan on Jan.
21 from Hong Kong.

Duterte is under pressure to fend off accusations that his response to the public health
crisis has not been proactive enough, allegedly slowed down by his being overly careful
not to offend China with, say, a travel ban.

As we write this, we still have to receive reports of President Duterte coming out of his
reported rest and addressing the nation to assure Filipinos of resolute well-studied
measures to contain the creeping nCoV epidemic.

The acute respiratory disease outbreak has put Duterte to the test. He is seen as not
proactive enough, slow to react to emergencies, as well as more concerned about not
displeasing Chinese than looking after the welfare of Filipinos.
When the death toll mounted in the region, mainly in Hubei, Duterte downplayed the
contagion. He hesitated to stop mainland Chinese flocking to the Philippines even when
it was clear that some of them could be asymptomatic virus carriers.

It is jarring to see a national leader who mouths love of country putting fealty to
foreigners above concern for the safety and welfare of his people.

As we await word about his meeting the inter-agency task force on the nCoV crisis –
announced by Sen. Bong Go, the President’s occasional spokesman, press secretary
and photographer – we see a government strategy taking shape that includes:

• The limited ban on foreigners arriving from Hubei has been made total to cover all
aliens who have been in mainland China, including the Special Administrative Regions
of Hong Kong and Macau, in the last 14 days.

• Filipinos and holders of permanent resident visas are exempted from the ban but they
have to undergo a 14-day quarantine during which they must stay home, wear
protective masks, observe precautionary measures and report any symptom or sign of
infection.

• Filipinos are banned, until a notice to the contrary when the crisis is over, from
traveling to China and its Special Administrative Regions.

In crowded urban centers, meanwhile, there is an air of unease over the possible
spread of the virus in public places such as malls, cinemas, campuses, markets and
restaurants. What is being done to reduce possible contamination?

How do we protect people who take buses, light rail trains, taxis and UV Express
vehicles where passengers breathe the same confined air? Contamination is likely if
any of the passengers has the virus.

As the government started to enforce the ban, hundreds of foreigners, mostly Chinese,
were held at the Ninoy Aquino International Airport terminals until they could be flown
back to their airports of origin.

The confusion amid the stranding of international travelers would have been avoided or
minimized if the ban were announced earlier and airports and airlines informed in
advance.

The question is also being asked if Filipinos and permanent alien residents flying back
to the Philippines from nCoV-free areas but are transiting through China, Hong Kong or
Macau will be covered by the ban and quarantine rule.

Travel to and from the Philippines transiting through any point in China will be affected.
Revising itineraries to exclude layovers or transit stops in China will dampen the
business of international airlines.
The repatriation and quarantine of travelers, including Filipinos in China, will require the
building or setting aside of adequate facilities and the training of competent personnel to
look after them. This will eat into the government budget.

We are talking only of steps being taken by the Philippines. Some other countries are
taking their own public health countermeasures, including the banning of travelers who
have been to China in the past two weeks.

Issues over passengers transiting in China because of technical or market requirements

may have to be discussed industrywide. Should passengers who are merely transiting
(and not going outside the airport) in China be exempted from the ban?

Once a Filipino on a multi-leg trip disembarks to take a connecting flight in Hong Kong,
for instance, will the ban apply because he has set foot on Chinese soil even just for an
hour or so in transit?

Plane personnel, including pilots and cabin crew, may require special treatment,
otherwise their situation would wreak havoc on airlines’ personnel management.

Filipinos flying to or from Manila and the United States may be forced to fly Philippine
Airlines merely because PAL, unlike many of its competitors, has long-haul flights
across the Pacific (actually the polar route) without touching any airport in-between.

Many airlines have suspended flights to China. Aside from complying with government
bans, the airlines actually have no choice because there have been few passengers
going to China after the nCoV outbreak. Why fly an almost empty plane?