This document is a petition submitted to the Senate of the Philippines requesting two actions: 1) That the Senate not consider or disapprove any bill making COVID-19 vaccination mandatory, and 2) That the Senate investigate issues related to the COVID-19 pandemic and vaccine rollout. The petition raises concerns about mandatory vaccination violating constitutional rights and questions whether the pandemic is truly a pandemic or a "plandemic." It argues that SARS-CoV-2 is a manufactured virus, citing patents and a pre-pandemic conference, and that the vaccines do not provide true immunity. The petition requests expert testimony on these issues.

1. Page | 1
THE HONORABLE MEMBERS
Senate of the Philippines
GSIS Building, Financial Center Building
Diokno Blvd., Pasay City, MM
Thru: HONORABLE VICENTE C. SOTTO III
Senate President
Dear Senate President Sotto:
We, the ALLIANCE for COVID-RESILIENT PHILIPPINES, humbly
present to all the Members of the Senate thru you, points at issue on the
current COVID-19 pandemic and the rollout of vaccines in connection
therewith.
The purposes of our submitting this petition to your august body are
two-fold:
(1) for the Senate not to consider or to disapprove any bill of the
House of Representatives that it has approved and endorsed to
the Senate making mandatory vaccination for children or adults
or both, against SARS-CoV-2, otherwise known as the novel
coronavirus and once infected with the virus, the resulting
disease is called COVID-19; and,
(2) for the Senate as a Committee of the whole or to assign to a
specific committee, the investigation, in aid of legislation, and/or
to determine its findings on the factual and legal issues hereunder
pointed out and for the Senate to craft the specific legislations
thereon and/or to recommend for executive action specific
measures as it may deem appropriate.
DISCUSSIONS
ON POINT NUMBER 1:
We most respectfully urge the Senate not to consider or to disapprove,
after due hearing, any Bill emanating from the House of Representatives that
has been endorsed to the Senate that makes mandatory, directly or
indirectly, vaccination of children or adults or both against SARS-CoV-2,

2. Page | 2
otherwise known as the novel coronavirus and once infected with the virus,
the resulting disease is called COVID-19.
The direct mandatory vaccination requirement that we oppose is when
the proposed law itself or the law duly deputizes the Secretary of Health to
authorize the mandatory vaccination. The indirect mandatory vaccination
requirement occurs when a vaccination passport or the presentation of a
similar documentotherwise called by a different name is prescribed for travel
or the entry in business establishments, recreational or sports centers, or in
schools, colleges or universities. There are constitutional issues that must be
threshed out in connection with direct or indirect mandatory vaccination
which include the constitutional right to informed consent, the constitutional
right of freedom of choice, the constitutional right to the exercise of religious
freedom and the constitutional right to adequate information, in the public
interest, and more importantly to the constitutional right to the pursuit of life,
liberty and happiness.
The particular case that we oppose is House Bill (HB) No. 8558
principally authored by District Representative Angelina “Helen” D.L. Tan,
M.D. of the 4th District of Quezon Province.
Said HB 8558 seeks to repeal Republic Act No. 10152, otherwise
known as the Mandatory Infants and Children Health Immunization Act of
2011 but, HB 8558 deceptively entitled Mandatory Immunization Program
Act, reenacts the list contained in R.A. No. 10152 which it purports to repeal,
but in fact, enlarges and expands the list covered by mandatory vaccination to
other types of vaccines such as the COVID-19 vaccine, and the Dengue
Vaccine/Dengvaxia, if the Secretary of Health determines that it is necessary
to do so, upon recommendation of the National Immunization and Technical
Advisory Group (NITAG). It should be recalled that it was the Senate that
investigated the Dengue Vaccine that resulted in the filing of criminal and/or
civil liabilities against officials of the DOH and the FDA which cases are still
pending in various courts.
ON POINT NUMBER 2:
The Senate is most respectfully urged to invite or to summon, in
accordance with its rules, the Secretary of Health, the head of the Food and
Drug Administration, the Philippine Representative of the World Health
Organization (WHO), medical experts and scientists, representatives of
Chambers of Commerce and Industry, of religious organizations, NGOs and
private medical experts and scientists. We are also prepared to submit a
recommended list of resource experts who will testify. The list of Resource

3. Page | 3
Persons is intended to provide the Senate wide-ranging views on the current
issues.
It is highly recommended that the issues to be investigated include the
following:
1. Whether what we have is a real pandemic or a plandemic.
If it is a real pandemic, how did the virus occur? What is its origin? Or,
if it is a plandemic, do we have a manufactured virus, that is to say, that
the virus is manmade in a laboratory?
That it is a manufactured virus, is evidenced by the following:
a. The novel coronavirus was patented by various parties years
prior to when the first COVID-19 case came out in March, 2020.
Attached hereto as Annex A, for the Senate’s consideration, is a
published article by Dr. Joseph Mercola on 24 July 2021 entitled,
“Patents Prove SARS-CoV-2 Is A Manufactured Virus”.
Indeed, only manmade matters with alleged “unique features”
can be patented. The fact that many viruses have been patented,
indicated that they have different alleged “unique features” and
therefore, the manufacturers of the vaccines also have differences
among them. Thus, for the government to purchase many
vaccines with different contents without disclosing to the general
public such differences, is not only a violation of the constitutional
principleof transparency and disclosureof information but a very
dangerous practice because the adverse effects will vary
depending on the vaccine brand used.
b. Before the first COVID case came out in March 2020, there was
already a conference held in October, 2019 where the subject
matter of the conference is to discuss what needs to be done if,
what they called a “hypothetical pandemic” occurs. This
conference clearly indicated that a “plandemic” will actually
happen that the sponsors of the conference already knew about.
Attached hereto as Annex B for the Senate consideration is the
summary of “EVENT 201” as published by the sponsors of the
Conference in the internet. There are six (6) videos of the
Conference with a viewing time of about three (3) hours. A copy
of such videos (in a USB) is hereto attached as Annex C for the
Senate President’s perusal and analysis. Said videos may be
reproduced for distribution to the Members of the Senate.

4. Page | 4
c. That a manufactured virus will be introduced that most
countries of the world would be deceived to believe in.
Fearmongering was used as a tool to convince people that until a
vaccine can be manufactured and sold, it was “projected” that
millions of people would die. It was prescribed as essential that
use of face masks, face shields, social distancing and lockdowns
would be imposed. And so, when “vaccines” were manufactured
at “warp speed without completing the standard practice of
clinical trials” for a number of years to determine the short-term,
medium-term and long-term adverse effects, the “vaccines” were
produced within a period of less than one (1) year. And thus, the
license issued by the FDAs was only for an “Emergency Use
Authorization” (EUA) which meant that the use is not for mass
distribution but, for an experimental use only to limited and
selected users confronted by an “emergency”. However, that did
not happen because the experimental vaccine to be used for
“emergency use only” have instead been widely distributed to
millions of people in each and every country that availed of the
“vaccines”.
Messenger RNA vaccines, also called mRNA vaccines, were the
first COVID-19 vaccinesauthorized for emergency usein the U.S.A.
This is a departure from the traditional vaccine technology that
put a weakened or inactive germ into our bodies but not mRNA
vaccines. Instead, the mRNA teaches our cells how to make a
protein that is intended to trigger an immune response inside our
body. Although the experiments showed that it did not work but
still, the pharmaceutical companies in the U.S.A. proceeded to
develop the experimental mRNA vaccines for emergency use.
There arose many objections and criticisms of applying the mRNA
vaccines to millions of people as “guinea pigs” for an experimental
vaccine. Attached hereto as Annex D, is an analytical article by Dr.
Joseph Mercola, dated 25 May 2021 entitled, Spike Protein
Damages Vascular Cells. The spike protein arose with the
introduction of mRNA vaccines.
d. These led to the questioning by many medical experts and
scientists that the “vaccines” manufactured were not real vaccines
because by definition, a real vaccine when administered, creates
immunity from the disease. But the “vaccines” that are being
used, do not immune the person vaccinated from being infected
with COVID-19 even after vaccination and worse, the virus in the
vaccine mutate to defend itself and the mutated viruscontinueto
be replicated such that the personsvaccinated infect other people.

5. Page | 5
e. As a consequence, a team of more than 1,000 lawyers and 10,000
medical experts filed a Complaint against the World Health
Organization (WHO), the Center for Disease Control (CDC) of the
USA and Bill Gates-Allied World Economic Forum’s “DAVOS
Group” for crimes against humanity for violations of the
Nuremberg Code. There were ten (10) cited violations of the
Nuremberg Code in the Complaint. Attached hereto as Annex E of
the 10-point violation with our comments for each and every one
of said violations. A copy of the Complaint filed, as posted in the
MEDICAL VERITAS The Journal of Truth and Health Science is
hereto attached as Annex E-1, for consideration of the Senate.
There were five (5) reasons cited why the “vaccines”
manufactured are not real vaccines. These are:
i. The “vaccine” do not provide immunity to the virus;
ii. It does not protect recipients from getting the virus;
iii. It does not reduce death from the virus infection;
iv. It does not reduce circulation of the virus; and,
v. It does not reduce transmission of the virus.
[N.B. In another approach why the so-called “COVID-19 vaccines”
are not vaccines by standard definition, the following are the
synthesis of what several medical experts said:
a. Definitions of what constitute a real vaccine
Although the pharmaceutical proponents of the COVID-19
vaccines are calling them vaccines but they did not follow the
standard definition of vaccine. If we look up the definition of
vaccines in five medical dictionaries, they would be found to be
all the same, but the COVID-19 solutionis completely different, as
shown below:
Online Medical Dictionary:
Vaccine: “Suspension of killed or attenuated
microorganisms (bacteria, viruses, fungi, protozoa),
antigenic proteins, synthetic constructs, or other bio-
molecular derivatives, administered for prevention,
amelioration, or treatment of infections and other
diseases”
Taber’s Online Medical Dictionary:
Vaccine: “Any suspension containing antigenic
molecules derived from a microorganism, given to
stimulate an immune response to an infectious disease.

6. Page | 6
Vaccines may be made from weakened or killed
microorganisms; inactivated toxins; toxoids derived from
microorganisms; or immunologically active surface
markers extracted or copied from microorganisms. They
can be given intramuscularly, subcutaneously,
intradermally, orally, or intranasally; as single agents; or
in combinations.”
Medicinenet Medical Dictionary:
Vaccine: “Microbial preparations of killed or modified
microorganismsthat canstimulate animmune response in
the body to prevent future infection with similar
microorganisms. These preparationsare usually delivered
by injection.”
Harvard Medical School
Harvard Health Publishing
Vaccination: “A method of protecting the body against
disease by injecting parts or all of a microorganism that
will cause the body to develop antibodies against the
microorganism and later fight off disease.”
The Free Medical Dictionary by Farlex:
Vaccine: “A suspension of attenuated or killed
microorganisms (viruses, bacteria or rickettsiae),
administered for prevention,ameliorationor treatment of
infectious diseases.”
b. COVID-19 Vaccines did not comply with standard procedure
adopted in other vaccines
The COVID-19 mRNA modification was not developed the way
any vaccines have been developed. For example, the FDA
granted special permission to producers Pfizer, Moderna and
Johnson & Johnson to expedite the development phases to
complete them much faster than normal. Vaccines normally
takesyears to complete Phase I which is laboratory development
but to illustrate the departure from the standard procedure,
Moderna completed this in just 63 days. Similar shortcuts were
also done by Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson. FDA even allowed
these producers to conduct human trials (although incomplete)
prior to animal trials, which no previous vaccines have been
allowed to do. By ignoring these established safety
requirements, the FDAsignificantly increased the risk of adverse
reactions. In addition, the FDA even allowed these producers to

7. Page | 7
skip further research on the long-term health risks even though
mRNA modificationshave never beendone before. These extreme
differences between the development of the COVID-19 solution
compared to other vaccines, confirm it is not a vaccine and also
exposes the agencies charged with looking out for public health
safety by showing they have another agenda.
(In the Philippines, under RA No 11525 known as COVID-19
Vaccination Program Act of 2021, Congress upon the
recommendation of the DOH, incorporated a provision in said
Act, Section 2(c) that provides:
“Recognize the experimental nature of COVID-19 vaccines
available in the market and compensate any serious adverse
effects (SAEs) arising from the use of COVID-19 vaccine,
experienced by people inoculated through the COVID-19
Vaccination Program”
and in Section 7 of the same Act, it stated that:
“Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, the Health
Technology Assessment Council (HTAC) shall have the
authority to make recommendations to the DOH on COVID-
19 vaccines based on preliminary data from Phase III
clinical trials and World Health Organization
recommendations, in the absence of completed Phase III
and Phase IV clinical trials: Provided, That the COVID-19
vaccine manufacturer has been issued an EUA by the FDA:
Provided, further, That the authority granted to the HTAC
herein shall only be valid for as long as the EUA issued by the
FDA is in effect, such that in the event of revocation or
cancellation thereof by the FDA Director General, the HTA
process shall be terminated regardless of stage, and if it has
been completed, the results shall be set aside.”)
c. Experimental vaccine should not be used for mass public
inoculation
The use of an experimental “COVID-19 vaccine” permitted
on an EUA basis only that is being applied for mass distribution
rather than on a limited or selected basis only which is what an
experimentationis all about, should be discontinued after having
been used for more than a year. The experimental use cannot
also be made mandatory but could be applied only on a
voluntary basis.

8. Page | 8
The adoption of the mRNA in a vaccine should also be
reconsidered as it has already been shown that it has very
dangerous and harmful effects.
Givenall the foregoing, the mRNAvaccine has been shown to be not
a real vaccine. While it has been used for experimental purposes
only, which is what an EUA is all about, this practice has been
allowed by U.S. FDA in the past, for testing of volunteers in the
course of the development of a vaccine, the positive and negative
results of which are still being awaited. Thus, the full and regular
authorization comes very much later than the testing period.]
f. This medical crisis that we face now, motivated as it is by
fearmongering, have recurrent downswings and upswings of
alleged affected surges in infections. Areas have been declared
from ECQ to MECQthen to GCQand reverted back again from GCQ
to MECQ to ECQ. As the infections from the original coronavirus
go down, variants suddenly rise alarming authorities to return to
more restrictive protocols. The policy guidelines on balancing life
and livelihood gets upset, creating instability and confusion. The
time has come for the Senate to investigate claims that the
polymerase chain reaction (PCR) Test is the major cause of false-
positive results that unwittingly impel Philippine Authorities to
result to lockdowns and more lockdowns.
g. At this point, the Senate is most respectfully urged to look at the
PCR Test and other tests that are currently being used to detect
the presence of COVID-19 virus, if indeed, such tests are grossly
inaccurate and creates mostly false-positive results. The
following must be look at at the Senate:
1. Initially the PCR Test applied for authorized use on
symptomatic patients but later on, the FDA was requested and
it approved the use of PCR Test on asymptomatic individuals.
What is the justification for this? What is the scientific proof
that asymptomatic individuals are carriers of infectious virus?
Is the novel coronavirus transmissible by air? For what
distance does the virus stay alive? Why does it infect persons
without such person showing any symptom? How long does
the virus travel?
2. The accuracy or inaccuracy of the PCR Test has been shown to
be dependent upon the cycle threshold (CT) that is being used.
According to study, a CT of 17 must be used to obtain 100%
confirmed real positives. Above 17 cycles, accuracy drops

9. Page | 9
dramatically. At 33 cycles, the false-positive rate is 80%.
Beyond 34 cycles, the false-positive rate reaches 90-100%.
The WHO has prescribed a 45 CT for testing thereby creating
mostly false-positive results. That artificially aggravates the
surges of COVID-19 cases.
3. The PCR Test cannot discern between live virus and dead,
noninfectious viral debris, the timing of the test is important.
Recent research shows the median time from symptom onset
to viral clearance confirmed by viral culture is seven (7) days,
whereas the PCR Test continues to detect nonviable
(noninfectious) SARS-CoV-2 for a median of thirty-four (34)
days.
4. The U.S. CDC has recently admitted that the PCR Test must be
replaced because it cannot distinguish flu-like symptoms and
coronavirus symptoms. The CDC said that the replacement of
the PCR Test will be made at the end of December, 2021. This
is another puzzle why there is a deliberate delay in replacing
the PCR Test. But the more important aspect of this, is, how
did the false-positives in the past and even presently, affected
the policies on regulatory restrictions that have been
prescribed because of the misleading statistics on false-
positives?
Because fully vaccinated individuals have been diagnosed with
COVID-19, the U.S. CDC has surprisingly lowered the CT from
its originally prescribed 40 to 28 when diagnosing vaccinated
individuals. The U.S. CDC has therefore been accused of
embarking in another COVID-19 cover-up.
5. There is no specific primer for COVID-19 testing. Only a
general primer of various types of viruses is being used,
thereby creating misleading results. Dr. Jose Micabalo Oclarit,
a scientist who specializes in Medical Biochemistry, Medical
Physiology, Molecular Biology, and Genetic Engineering, is
prepared to testify on the implications of this issue.
6. In the PCR Test kits, it was reported that it contains an “EO”
which stands for ethylene oxide. An ethylene oxide is a toxic
substance that creates flu like symptoms. Worse, repeated
exposure to it causes cancer on the individual tested. This has
to be investigated by the Senate.

10. Page | 10
What then is the view of Philippine Health authorities,
particularly our own Philippine FDA, on the foregoing defects
of the PCR Test that results in false-positives?
2. Having already discussed the issue of whether what we have is a
pandemic or a plandemic which included exposition on why the PCR
Test results in false-positive, we now bring to the attention of the
Senate, for investigation, the following issues:
a. In a media interview (in DZRH) on 12 August 2021, Dr. Romeo F.
Quijano, a retired professor of the of the U.P. College of Medicine’s
Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology said that he does
not want to be vaccinated because the “adverse effects of
vaccination is worse than the adverse effect of the COVID virus
itself.”
Instead of disputingthe assertion of Dr. Quijano, Philippine Health
authorities vilified him as being “irresponsible” while evading
answering his statement and we repeat it, that the adverse effect
of vaccination is worse than the adverse effect of the COVID-19
virus itself. This is a very important statement that the Senate
itself must investigate as it provides a very strong proposition
against vaccination and demands an alternative, prophylactic
(prevention)and therapeutic (cure)for the COVID-19 withoutany
adverse effect. It is only fair that we insist on a direct answer
from Philippine Health authorities.
b. Do the Philippine Health authorities deny, that even after
vaccination the persons vaccinated can still be infected with
COVID-19? There are reports in other countries where this is so
but none has been clearly reported in our country, even if that is
so. But the principle that vaccinated persons can still be infected
has not yet been clearly admitted by Philippine Health authorities
but newspaper reports have mentioned that in the Philippines,
the following high-profile personalities, who have already been
vaccinated, have still been infected with COVID-19 virus, namely,
Sen. Richard Gordon, Congressman Ronaldo Zamora, Manila
Mayor Francisco “Isko Moreno” Domagoso and Quezon City
Josefina “Joy” Belmonte.
c. Do the Philippine Health authorities admit that the virus inside
the body of a vaccinated person mutates such that the vaccinated
person contaminates or infects other persons? Thus, variance
created inside vaccinated individuals has been reported to spread
in Israel, in the U.S.A. and U.K. The reports included that

11. Page | 11
vaccination can enhance the transmission of highly virulent
pathogens because the mutated virus keeps replicating.
d. When a mutated virus infects individuals, is the vaccine still
effective against the mutated virus? Which of the vaccine brands
are being claimed that such vaccines are still effective and what is
the scientific basis for such claim? Which vaccine brand has not
made such a claim, should be disclosed?
e. In the reports of the Delta Variant, why has there been no
admission by the Philippine Health authorities that such variant
could be a mutation of the virus in vaccinated individuals? This
has been admitted in Israel and other countries but no such
admission has been made in our country.
f. In cases of reported mutations, which are considered as variants,
who among the Philippine Authorities have been able to identify
and isolate the existence of such variant? Which agency of
governmenthas the laboratory facilities and competentpersonnel
who can determine the different variants that have reported to
have occurred? Where are such laboratory facilities located as
variances were reported to have occurred in several regions of
the country? Have the different variances been isolated such that
they could be presented for verification and evaluation by other
independent virologists and/or by other experts?
g. How does the original virus where we are coming from, look like
in substance? Was a sample of such original coronavirus used to
develop a vaccine? Or only a pseudo-viruswas used? If the actual
virus used to develop a vaccine was real or pseudo or synthetic,
what is the scientific basis for claiming that the vaccines
developed could resist the specific wild virus or their variants that
enter?
h. Why has there been no report in our country of COVID-19
infection that emanate from vaccinated persons?
i. Why is a person who has already been vaccinated, still required to
wear masks, face shields or maintain social distancing? Do
persons who recovered from COVID-19, still be required to be
vaccinated? Attached hereto as Annex F herewith is an article
dated 24 May 2021, with Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola entitled,
“If You’ve Had COVID, Please Don’t Get Vaccinated”.
j. What is the expiry date of each and every vaccine that has been
introduced in this country? Why is it that some vaccines require

12. Page | 12
two (2) doses while others, only one? What are the substantive
differences between these two (2) types of vaccines?
k. What is the effectivity period of the vaccine to the person
inoculated? It has been reported that the effectivity of the vaccine
to the person inoculated is six (6) months. Does this mean that
every year thereafter, those who have been vaccinated will need
to undergo yearly vaccination? If that is so, the vaccine will
become a kind of “maintenance medicine”. Why is this not being
disclosed? Who will finance the yearly vaccination? These
questions must be clearly clarified.
l. The recovery rates of infected COVID-19 patients have been
reported to be 98/99%. Why then do we still need a vaccine
when the effectivity rate of a vaccine is much lower than the
recovery rate and, a vaccinated person still has to fight against
adverse effects?
m. Given the issues raised in above, how will “herd” immunity be
achieved? What further use is a vaccine given the answers to the
questions above?
n. Why is there no Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System
(VAERS) in our country while VAERS are regularly reported in
countriesin North America and Western Europe? Why is there no
report of how many vaccinated persons have again been infected
with COVID-19? How many of unvaccinated persons have been
infected by vaccinated persons? How many persons aged 16 and
below have actually been confirmed to have been infected by
COVID-19?
o. Of those who recovered from COVID-19, what is the medicine or
other treatments that have been applied that resulted to their
recovery? Why are not such treatment/measuresbeing published
for wider dissemination?
p. Whenever a person is infected in an office, his/her officemates are
invariably locked down at home. What is the recommended
medication of a person locked down at home who are
asymptomatic?
q. There is a confusion on what is the existing policy on the
following:
1. “No Vaccination, No Employment”

13. Page | 13
2. An employed person who is locked down at home
deserves or do not deserve salary duringthe period of
lockdown.
3. Is an employed person who has been hospitalized
because of COVID-19 entitled to receive salary or is
such a period of hospitalization chargeable to sick
leave credits? Or, if no such sick leave credits are still
available will such sick person deserve no salary
during the period of his hospitalization?
4. What is the direction of the policy of the government
on the issuance of a vaccine card, for travel within or
outside the country?
5. What further justify the continuation of the vaccine
program since vaccination doesnot provideimmunity
to the virus?
6. Why is there a bias on the use of vaccine while not
expressly recognizing alternative prevention
remedies? If the vaccine is proposed to be continued,
those who do not want to be vaccinated should be
allowed to seek an alternative treatment or remedy
that is also recognized rather than be compelled to be
vaccinated. Why can’t the Government expressly
support an alternative policy to adopt measures that
will boost the immune system rather than merely
focus on vaccination?
7. Why is there no clear-cut policy on who are exempt
from being vaccinated under the present program?
What pre-existing ailments of persons exempt them
from being vaccinated? Why are pregnant women
allowed to be vaccinated? What is the rate of
expected miscarriages? What is the rate of the birth
of defective children if pregnant women are required
to be vaccinated? There are reports in other
countries against pregnant women being vaccinated
but no such policy and no such reports have been
clearly articulated in our country such that
contradictory reports in media of alleged government
reports on the policies on pregnant women appear in
media.
8. The vaccination of children has been announced to be
postponed becauseof lack of supply. But the essential

14. Page | 14
question that is being avoided is why are minor
children being contemplated to be vaccinated
eventually?
3. The Senate should reexamine the recurrent use of lockdowns with
particular emphasis on:
a. its contamination effect among members of the family;
b. on the mental health effects of lockdowns; and
c. its impact on the economy
According to NEDA, the economic loss to the country for one (1)
week of lockdown in NCR is P150 Billion or P300 Billion in two (2)
weeks and if extended to four (4) weeks will amount to P600 Billion.
The Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) itself has stated, as quoted
in a press statement that a “two-week lockdown in NCR would translate
to P30 Billion worth of wage losses and affect 1.8 million workers.” The
PhilippineChamber of Commerceand Industry (PCCI) has also declared
that it opposes further extension of the lockdown in Metro Manila as
such will erase the country’s economic gains. The PCCI further added
that lockdown is not the only action to prevent the spread of the
coronavirus. The COVID-19 issue is “a pharmaceutical problem while a
lockdown is a militaristic solution.” [see The Philippine Star, 14 August
2021]
4. While we advocate to the immediate halt of the vaccination program but
if the government insists on a phase-out period for a limited period of
weeks or months, we recommend the assistance of the Senate on the
following:
a. That vaccination be optional and not mandatory;
b. That alternative prevention, prophylactic and
therapeutic remedies that are safer, more practical and
cost effective be adopted as a recognized public policy
with government financial support;
c. That the issues raised hereinabove be definitively
clarified with clear answers as such clarification will
enlighten our people and regain the confidence of the
majority in the government immunization program;
d. The composition of the IATF should immediately be
revamped in order to constitute a balanced group of
experts and not only members with a bias to the vaccines
that are being offered;

15. Page | 15
e. To commission a special body group using Filipino talent
and expertise that will recommend alternative treatment
and remedies within the next three (3) months.
f. To constitute a multi-sectoral group to study and
recommend concretesocio-economic recovery programs
in two stages.
The first stage is to implement a socio-economic
recovery program within the next seven (7) months, as
an interim measure. The assumption here is, there are
already self-evident action plans that could be
formulated and implemented within a two (2) week
period from its formulation. Such action plans are more
readily identifiable but are currently being held back or
held in abeyance because of the recurrent concern for
what appears to be a pandemic of false positives.
The second stage is the formulation and
implementation of a medium and long-term recovery
programs to be implemented after the elections in May,
2022.
We are also submitting copies of this document to the Office of the
President in order that executive action could also be taken to provide
clarifications to the issues raised herein and to consider the recommendations
herein propounded. Copies of this petition will also be circulated to the
various leagues of LGUs, Chambers of Commerce and Industry, private
medical associations, religious groups and other non-governmental
organizations for their consideration and reaction.
We do not want to put a political taint to this petition but because
national and local elections will already be held on May, 2022 and the filing of
certificate of candidacies will already start-off in October this year, 2021, the
respective stands, particularly of national candidates on the various issues
herein raised and the recommendations herein made will inevitably become
political issues that will provide choices of candidates to the electorate in
exercising their rights of suffrage.
We should keep in mind that thus far, only about 10-12% of the
population have been reported to have been vaccinated and not all of them
have received the 2 doses. Therefore, an overwhelming majority of the
Filipino people are either hesitant or refuse to be vaccinated. These statistics
should be of concern one way or the other to politicians. We emphasize this
as we approach the forthcoming political campaign.

16. Page | 16
With all due respect, we submit this petition for consideration.
Submitted this ____ day of August, 2021.
ALLIANCE for COVID-RESILIENT PHILIPPINES
by:
P.S. Many associations are signing up in support of this Petition. Thousands of
individuals are also affixing their signatures in this Petition. Such signed
documents will be submitted to the Senate as integral parts of this Petition