No SC order for Marcos to undergo drug test

The Supreme Court has not ordered President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. to undergo a hair follicle drug test or submit a medical certificate. 

Instead, it only directed Executive Secretary Ralph Recto and other Palace officials to comment within 10 days on a petition filed on April 10 by the United People’s Initiative (UNI) compelling Malacañang to disclose Marcos’ health condition and asking that he take the drug test.

Political Outlook made the false claim in a Facebook post on April 14 featuring an infographic that included a black and white photo of Marcos alongside the UNI petition. Its caption reads:

“BREAKING NEWS | Hinimok ang Korte Suprema na atasan si Pangulong Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. na sumailalim sa hair follicle drug test at magsumite ng medical certificate (The Supreme Court has been urged to order President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. to undergo a hair follicle drug test and submit a medical certificate).

The Supreme Court had not yet acted on UNI’s petition when Political Outlook made the claim. It was only on April 22 that the court, sitting en banc, directed Recto and other Palace officials to comment. A press briefer from the Supreme Court said:

The SC, without necessarily giving due course to the petition, directed respondents to comment within a non-extendible period of 10 days from receipt of notice.

In filing the complaint, UNI cited Section 12 of Article VII of the 1987 Constitution in demanding information about the President’s state of health. The provision states:

In case of serious illness of the President, the public shall be informed of the state of his health. The Members of the Cabinet in charge of national security and foreign relations and the Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, shall not be denied access to the President during such illness.

But Assistant Professor Gene L. Pilapil of the University of the Philippines Diliman Political Science Department said in an email this clause can only be invoked when the President is proven seriously ill. 

“The assumption of serious illness is that the president could no longer function (near-death scenarios such as comatose or advanced cancer). A walking, exercising President is far from it. Drug use, even if true, is not a serious illness,” he said.

On April 13, President Marcos sought to dispel rumors of his illness by jogging with the members of the Malacañang Press. 

Pilapil also said while any Filipino citizen can file a complaint against the President under Section 2, Article XI of the 1987 Constitution, removal can only be pursued through impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes or betrayal of public trust. 

“Presidential immunity is indirectly assumed by the 1987 Constitution through, among others, Section 1 of Article VII where the executive is the President and therefore must function unhindered by lawsuits during his term. Except via impeachment in Article XI which is still not a lawsuit.” he said.

This doctrine has been upheld in cases involving former president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. In 2009, the Supreme Court reiterated that a sitting president enjoys immunity from suit. 

Former Justice Secretary Leila De Lima also said in a 2015 statement that the President has to be protected from suits so he can concentrate on running the government.

“He cannot be left attending to personal lawsuits left and right, instead of performing his job as the President,” she said.

Created on Oct. 16, 2024, Political Outlook posts political content in the form of quote cards. Its April 14 post had garnered 3,200 reactions, 678 comments and 552 shares within seven hours of posting. (GO)