The Commission on Human Rights (CHR) expressed “grave concern” over the “No Vaccine, No Ride” policy of the Department of Transportation (DOTr) as it slammed the policy as a “restriction to the exercise and enjoyment of the fundamental rights of Filipinos.”
The DOTr had announced that it will enforce the policy while the National Capital Region (NCR) is under COVID Alert Level 3.
CHR Spokesperson Jacqueline Ann de Guia, on Wednesday, Jan. 12, said the commission previously recognized the validity of the national government’s “no vaccine, no labas” policy since there was an assurance that the said restriction will not result in the denial of public services such as using public transportation.
“CHR fears that, while there is no direct prohibition on the right to travel with the ‘no vaccine, no ride’ policy in public transport for the unvaccinated, this policy effectively restricts the exercise and enjoyment of fundamental rights,” De Guia said.
She pointed out that “the hard truth is that ordinary Filipinos continue to rely on public transportation to access basic needs, such as for food, work, and accessing health services.”
“With the DOTr‘s ‘no vaccine, no ride’ policy, even those exempted under this policy may be restricted in accessing essential goods and services for having no or limited access to private vehicles,” she lamented.
She cited the Human Rights Committee’s General Comment No. 27 on the freedom of movement: “It is not sufficient that the restrictions serve the permissible purposes; they must also be necessary to protect them. Restrictive measures must conform to the principle of proportionality; they must be appropriate to achieve their protective function; they must be the least intrusive instrument amongst those which might achieve the desired result; and they must be proportionate to the interest to be protected.”
De Guia said the CHR urges the government to constantly review restrictions to the unvaccinated to ensure that they are legal measures; necessary for the protection of public health; consistent with other recognized rights; and proportional to their aim of protecting public health.
“Relevant to this discussion is the provision in the 1987 Constitution wherein restriction of the liberty of movement in the interest of national security, public safety, or public health should be provided by law,” she stressed.
“Without a law detailing the precise parameter for the restriction of rights, the policy restricting rights runs into the danger of being sweeping and overly broad that assaults even personal liberties,” she added.
She said the CHR is one with the government in urging the public to get inoculated by educating them about the many benefits of the vaccine and its potent role in addressing the COVID-19 pandemic.
But, she added, the CHR urges the government to utilize positive encouragement in encouraging the public to get the jab against COVID-19, and “not to resort to fear or force just to achieve population protection against the dreaded disease.”