Supreme Court trashed the petitions against the move to increase Philhealth premium.
The high court dismissed for lack of merit the petition of the militant group Kilusang Mayo Uno (KMU) questioning three ciculars of Philhealth that increased its members’ minimum monthly contributions in 2014.
In its petition filed in January 2014, the KMU challenged PhilHealth Circular No. 0027-2013, which increased contributions of PhilHealth members earning P8,999 or less from P750 to P1,000. It also questioned ciculars No. 0025-2013 ehich doubled the contributions for land-based Overseas Filipino Workers from P1,200 annually to P2,400; and No. 0024,s-2013 which increased from P1,800 to 2,400 or by P600, the annual Philhealth contributions of of members earning P25,000 or lower while members with a monthly salary of over P25,000 retained their contribution rates.
In a 13-page decision released by the SC, the high court held that KMU failed to prove that Philhealth gravely abused its discretion in issuing the above-mentioned circulars. The court stressed that Philhealth was able to justify the increase in annual premium rates with the enhanced benefits and the expanded coverage of medical conditions.
The court even said that the Philhealth acted with reasonable prudence and sensitivity to the public’s needs, having postponed the rate hike several times to relive public burden of simultaneous rate and price increases.
PhilHealth had explained that the increase was necessary for its members to be entitled to in-patient hospital care, out-patient coverage and other special benefit packages.
The SC maintained that Philhealth’s decision to widen the coverage of its National Health Insurance Program, which led to increased premium rates, was a business judgment that the court cannot interfere with. The SC stressed that the assailed contribution schedule remained equitable and progressive.
In line herewith, the Court dismissed the allegation of Philhealth’s award of P1.5 billion bonuses to its top officials and employees in 2012, saying it cannot encroach on the Commission on Audit’s jurisdiction.
The high court also ruled that the petition was premature as KMU had not exhausted administrative remedies before elevating the case before the SC.