Less and less Filipinos are smoking, according to the Global Adult Tobacco Survey (GATS)! 👏🏻 The number of Filipino adult smokers has significantly dropped, according to the latest GATs conducted in 2021. This means 2.2 million Filipinos have decided to quit smoking since 2009.

The Court is now in session for the continuation of the #PHILHEALTHOralArgs LISTEN to the live audio stream: YouTube: https://t.co/huhE22Nf1K Facebook: https://t.co/Yt32EYJkSe

Atty. Solomon Hermosura argues that the Philhealth remittance to the national treasury, in compliance to the DOF circular, is lawful because the fund transferred is not a reserve fund. Therefore, he states that it does not violate the UHC law.

SolGen. Guevarra: The Special Provision and the DOF Circular 003-2024 are the government’s common sense approach.

SolGen. Guevarra: The said transfer was a temporary measure to address concerns on fund availability for important govt programs and projects.

Ms. Zy-za Suzara: Absence of transparency in the Bicameral, and absence of defined limits makes this possible precedent susceptible to abuse.

Dr. Bev Ho: Due to massive premium increases, there was generous benefit expansion coverage. The UHC Act was an enabling law for PhilHealth to shore up resources for aggressive benefit expansion.

Atty. Sonny Matula: The DOF circular attempts to rewrite a statutory law. It violates the UHC and the One Fund Policy Principle, worse the Constitutional Prohibition on the Transfer of Appropriation.

Atty. Sonny Matula: The UHC law states that no portion of the philhealth reserve fund should accrue to the national govt fund. Not even as a budget patch. But the DOF believes that "No" is just a polite suggestion.

Atty. Calleja: Special provisions of the 2024 GAA violate the general prohibition of the constitution. DOF circular usurps executive power by transferring appropriations, an act reserved only to the executive.

Atty. Tanquieng, counsel for petitioners, discussed that transferring appropriations violates the UHC Act's earmarking provisions. She states, "Taking away of funds is a retrogressive measure."

Atty. Ocampo, counsel for petitioners, expresses concern regarding the rider provision as it goes against the foundational aspect of our democratic process.

Atty. Colminares: ... independence of the nation and free the people from poverty through policies.

Atty. Colminares: This is not merely an issue of unprogrammed funds, budget deficits, or public funds diverted to UA. This is also related to Art 2, Sec. 9, the state’s ability to provide a just and dynamic social order that will ensure prosperity... [cont.]

Atty. Colminares: The small Committee failed to make its deadline to amend the House Bill 8980. Question is whether or not Congress can increase the appropriations, including UA submitted by the President under the NEP.

Atty. Neri Colminares, counsel for petitioners, presents issues on the timeline of the approval of the GAA of 2024. He argues that the Unprogrammed Appropriations is part of the appropriation that cannot be increased.

Atty. Distor-Guinigundo argues to strike down issuances as it violates the prohibition in the 1987 Constitution, it is unconstitutional to transfer special funds, and the UHC act prohibits the transfer of reserve funds back to the national treasury.

Atty. Distor-Guinigundo continues that Philhealth's mandate to make essential goods, health, and other services affordable is far from being fulfilled.

Petitioners' presentation begins with Atty. Distor-Guinigundo with the argument that Philhealth only covered 10% of Filipinos' healthcare expenses. Filipinos are then left to cover 44% of their expenditures.

Legal counsels of petitioners, respondents, and intervenors are currently presenting themselves in court #PhilhealthOralArgs

LIVE UPDATES | Oral arguments on the Issue of Philhealth Budget Transfer to the National Treasury. #PhilhealthOralArgs Tune in the live audiostream: https://t.co/FZw23uoLEQ