The Commission on Human Rights said the “no vaccination, no ride” policy in Metro Manila restricts the exercise and enjoyment of fundamental rights.
CHR spokesperson Atty. Jacqueline De Guia said the policy would restrict Filipinos’ access to essential services, although there is no total ban on travel.
“The reality is that ordinary Filipinos continue to rely on public transportation in attaining basic needs, such as for food, work, and accessing health services,” De Guia said.
“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 added.
CHR said the “no vaccination, no ride” policy is valid since it assured the public that it would not deny public services.
“However, given the new order… 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.
No vaccination, no ride policy restricts enjoyment of fundamental rights – CHR
The CHR cited Human Rights Committee’s General Comment No. 27 on the freedom of movement which said, “It is not sufficient that the restrictions serve the permissible purposes; they must also be necessary to protect them,” the commission said in a statement.”
“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,” the comment read.
CHR added imposed restrictions on the unvaccinated should be in accordance with the law.
“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,” De Guia said.
“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,” it added.