- Posted April 10, 2014 by
Phl senator: Ask court to reconsider RH law
"I humbly believe that after due consideration, the Supreme Court will find that the presumption of constitutionality in favor of the law, and of good faith in favor of Congress, will be sufficient to convince the Court that all eight provisions are not unconstitutional," Santiago said.
Santiago said that the following principles in statutory construction mandate judicial affirmation of the eight provisions:
The RH law enjoys a presumption of constitutionality, based on the respect of the judiciary for the legislature.
The presumption of constitutionality dictates that doubt should be resolved in favor of the law; and that the Supreme Court should reconcile the law with the Constitution.
With respect to the provisions that did not pass muster, the Court should have granted to Congress the presumption of good faith and the presumption that legislative determination of factual issues is correct.
Santiago said that under the law, the burden of proof lies on the party who alleges unconstitutionality.
"In the eight provisions, the petitioners failed to discharge the burden of proof. It is not entirely clear what quantum of proof was applied by the Court to overcome the presumption of constitutionality," she said.
"I support with full enthusiasm the move to file motions for reconsideration. I am fairly confident that a more exhaustive study of the principles of constitutional law will support a reconsideration of all eight provisions," Santiago said.