GR 204829; April 8, 2014;

Imbong
vs
Ochoa

Facts: On December 21, 2012, Congress enacted the RH Law. (RA 10354). RH Law is a
modernization initiative intended to reinforce and improve existing laws on contraception,
women's health, and population control. Petitioners argue that it violates women's rights to health
and the sanctity of life, both of which the state is required to protect and promote. However,
advocates of the RH law doubt the constitutionality of the subject petitions' facial challenge,
stating that the RH Law cannot be challenged "on its face" because it is not a speech-regulating
instrument. Shortly after, opponents from various social groups attempted to challenge the RH
Law's legality. Meanwhile, the RH-IRR for enforcing the disputed legislation became effective.
Following that, the Court issued a Status Quo Ante Order enjoining the effects and execution of
the challenged Act.
Petitioners argue that the RH Law is invalid because it violates Section 26(1) of Article VI of the
Constitution, which establishes the one subject-one title norm. They claim that the challenged
statute violates constitutional due process standards by concealing its actual purpose,
notwithstanding its support for reproductive health and responsible parenthood, that to operate as
a population control measure. Respondents, on the other hand, contend that the RH Law is not a
birth or population control strategy, and that the ideas of "responsible parenting" and
"reproductive health" are inextricably linked.

Issue: Whether or not the RH Law may be challenged "on its face" because it does not
regulate speech that breached the Constitution's one subject-one title provision.

Ruling: NO. The Court believes that the RH Bill is primarily a population control
measure, despite attempts to portray it as a reproductive health bill. The RH Law's wording is
intended to reduce the population of the nation. While professing to save lives and maintain the
wellbeing of our women and children, it pushes contraception goods. As was already mentioned,
the RH Law places a strong emphasis on the importance of giving Filipinos—particularly the
poor and disadvantaged—access to information about the complete spectrum of modern family
planning methods and products. Whether they are natural or technological, these family planning
techniques clearly have the goal of avoiding conception.