The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) has formally asked the Supreme Court to dismiss a petition seeking to compel President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. to undergo physical and mental health examinations, including a hair follicle drug test.
In a comment filed before the high tribunal, the OSG argued that the petition lacks merit, pointing out that the petitioners have no legal standing to sue and that the move violates the Chief Executive’s absolute immunity from suit while in office.
The petition, which seeks a writ of mandamus, was filed by former House Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez, along with Virgilio Garcia, Juan Rana, and Raymundo Junia. Executive Secretary Ralph Recto was also named as a respondent. A writ of mandamus is a judicial directive commanding a government official to perform a mandatory, non-discretionary duty that they have supposedly neglected or refused to do.
’A Fishing Expedition’
Led by Solicitor General Darlene Marie Berberabe, the OSG fiercely criticized the filing, stating that the former lawmaker and his co-petitioners failed to establish any legal, constitutional, or factual basis to force the President into a medical examination or to publish such results.
The government’s top law firm stated that the petitioners failed to demonstrate any factual basis asserting that the President is suffering from a serious illness.
“Stripped clean of bombast and rhetoric, this Petition is nothing more than a fishing expedition. It must be resolutely denied,”
Public Concern vs. Political Harassment
In their mandamus petition, Alvarez’s group argued that the complete state of the President’s health is a matter of “utmost concern” for the Filipino people, especially during times that require timely leadership. They cited Section 12, Article VII of the Constitution (the public’s right to be informed of the President’s health in case of serious illness) and Section 7, Article III (the right to information on matters of public concern).
The petitioners claimed that Marcos has exhibited “disturbing behavior and impressions” during interviews, pointing to alleged slurred speech, incoherent statements, and physical weakness, alongside unverified media reports of undisclosed hospitalizations.
“Despite the gravity of such reports, there has been no official confirmation, denial or medical bulletin issued by competent medical professionals to clarify the matter. The lack of transparency has caused widespread public uncertainty and concern,”
However, the OSG countered that an overly broad interpretation of these constitutional provisions could open the floodgates to political harassment and destabilize the government.
The OSG clarified that the President has no constitutional obligation to undergo a medical exam or a hair follicle drug test to prove his fitness for office. It emphasized that under Section 12 of Article VII, the duty to inform the public only becomes active when a serious illness already exists as an established fact.
No Evidentiary Support
The OSG further argued that the petitioners themselves admitted to a lack of evidence. In their Verification and Certification of Non-Forum Shopping, the Alvarez group noted that evidentiary support would only be available “after a reasonable opportunity for discovery.”
The Solicitor General explained that while the right to information grants access to existing official records and documents, it does not authorize the judiciary to force the creation of new clinical records through medical procedures.
“It does not authorize courts to create new official records by compelling the President to undergo a hair follicle drug test or any other medical procedure. Here, the reliefs prayed for would not draw upon any existing repository of official records. Rather, they would manufacture new clinical data through a court-ordered intrusion upon the person of the President,”
The OSG concluded by reiterating that President Marcos has consistently informed the public that he is healthy, well, and fully capable of performing his official duties, leaving no factual basis for the Supreme Court to issue an extraordinary remedy.