Roma Drug v. Regional Trial Court
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: On August 14, 2000, a raid was conducted on Roma Drug, a sole proprietorship of Romeo Rodriguez, pursuant to a search warrant. Several imported medicines, including Augmentin, Orbenin, Amoxil, and Ampiclox, were seized. These medicines were imported directly from abroad and not purchased through the local authorized distributor, Glaxo SmithKline (formerly SmithKline Beecham Research Limited). Roma Drug was one of six drug stores raided around the same time upon the request of SmithKline. Procedural History: The NBI filed a complaint against Rodriguez for violation of Section 4 (in relation to Sections 3 and 5) of Republic Act No. 8203 (Special Law on Counterfeit Drugs - SLCD), which prohibits the sale of counterfeit drugs, including "unregistered imported drug product." Rodriguez challenged the constitutionality of the SLCD during the preliminary investigation. Assistant Provincial Prosecutor Celerina C. Pineda recommended charging Rodriguez, which was approved by Provincial Prosecutor Jesus Y. Manarang. The Petition: Petitioners filed a Petition for Prohibition seeking to stop the RTC of Guagua, Pampanga, and the Provincial Prosecutor from further prosecuting Rodriguez. They also sought to declare Sections 3(b)(3), 4, and 5 of the SLCD unconstitutional, asserting violations of the equal protection clause, Section 11, Article XIII (availability of essential goods), and Section 15, Article II (right to health) of the Constitution. A temporary restraining order was issued.
Issue(s)
Whether the prosecution of petitioner Romeo Rodriguez for violation of the Special Law on Counterfeit Drugs (R.A. No. 8203) is still warranted in light of the subsequent enactment of the Universally Accessible Cheaper and Quality Medicines Act of 2008 (R.A. No. 9502). Whether Sections 3(b)(3), 4, and 5 of R.A. No. 8203 are unconstitutional for allegedly contravening the equal protection clause, Section 11, Article XIII, and Section 15, Article II of the Constitution.
Ruling
The petition is GRANTED in part. A writ of prohibition is ISSUED commanding respondents from prosecuting petitioner Romeo Rodriguez for violation of Section 4 of Rep. Act. No. 8203. The Temporary Restraining Order dated October 15, 2001, is made PERMANENT.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of whether prosecution is still warranted under R.A. No. 8203: The Court held that the prosecution of petitioner Romeo Rodriguez is no longer warranted due to the passage of Republic Act No. 9502, the "Universally Accessible Cheaper and Quality Medicines Act of 2008." Section 7 of R.A. No. 9502 amends Section 72 of the Intellectual Property Code, unequivocally granting third persons the right to import drugs or medicines whose patents are registered in the Philippines by the owner of the product. This right to import is available to any government agency or any private third party. The Court found that R.A. No. 9502 did not expressly repeal any provision of the SLCD, but its classification of "unregistered imported drugs" as "counterfeit drugs" and the corresponding criminal penalties are irreconcilably in conflict with R.A. No. 9502, which grants an unqualified right to import such drugs. When a subsequent enactment covers a field of operation coterminous with a prior statute and there is an irreconcilable conflict, the latest legislative expression prevails. Therefore, the prior law yields to the extent of the conflict, nullifying the reason and purpose of the earlier act, thus rendering the prosecution of petitioner unwarranted. On the constitutionality of the assailed provisions of the SLCD: Although the Court found the issue mooted by R.A. No. 9502, it noted that had it proceeded to directly confront the constitutionality, the provisions would have been placed in doubt. The SLCD, as written, criminalizes the importation of unregistered drugs regardless of purpose, even if the medicine is life-saving and out of stock in the Philippines. It does not accommodate situations where patients urgently need drugs not available locally or when family members wish to import them for ill loved ones. The law was seen as discriminating against poor Filipinos who cannot afford to travel abroad to purchase less expensive medicines. Furthermore, it would criminalize doctors on medical missions who bring their own pharmaceutical drugs, as they would be unable to invoke the "personal use" exemption. The Court observed that the SLCD equates importers of such drugs, often motivated by altruism, with malevolent individuals profiting from altering or counterfeiting drugs, despite the SLCD being a malum prohibitum offense. The Court concluded that the challenged provisions apparently proscribed a range of constitutionally permissible behavior, and R.A. No. 9502 reversed this course by allowing a sensible and compassionate approach to the importation of pharmaceutical drugs vital to the constitutionally recognized right to health.
Main Doctrine
The enactment of Republic Act No. 9502 (Universally Accessible Cheaper and Quality Medicines Act of 2008) renders the prosecution of individuals for selling unregistered imported drugs under Republic Act No. 8203 (Special Law on Counterfeit Drugs) no longer tenable, as the former law grants an unqualified right to import such drugs, creating an irreconcilable conflict with the latter.