The Supreme Court on Thursday decided&nbsp;to reject petitions that questioned the constitutionality of regulations issued by the Inter-Agency Task Force for the Management of Emerging Infectious Diseases (IATF) in the Philippines.
The Court unanimously dismissed the petitions because they violated the principle of the hierarchy of courts.
"In its Resolution in the cases of G.R. No. 258619 (Montemayor, Jr. v. Inter-Agency Task Force on COVID and Emerging Infectious Diseases [IATF], et al.), G.R. No. 258746 (Passengers and Riders Organization [Pasahero], Inc., et al. v. Duque III, et al.) and G.R. No. 260327 (Perlas III, et al. v. The Inter-Agency Task Force for the Management of Emerging Infectious Diseases [IATF], et al.), the Court unanimously voted to dismiss the consolidated petitions for violation of the doctrine of hierarchy of courts," the SC's statement read.
The petitioners raised concerns about the legality of various measures implemented by the IATF, local government units, and government agencies in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.&nbsp;
These measures included resolutions, guidelines, memorandums, and ordinances related to COVID-19 protocols and restrictions.
One specific measure, IATF Resolution No. 148-B, requires eligible employees who work on-site to either get vaccinated against COVID-19 or undergo regular testing at their own expense, among other requirements.
The petitioners argued that these measures violated their right to life and liberty, hindered their freedom to travel, discriminated against those without private vehicles, and unfairly targeted the unvaccinated.
The Court determined that resolving these issues involved complex technical and scientific matters that should be examined in a lower court through a comprehensive legal process.

you might like

SC rejects petitions challenging IATF's COVID-19 regulations