Aquino’s testimony does not answer all questions

E commend former President Benigno Aquino 3rd for honoring the Senate’s invitation to attend the Blue Ribbon inqury into the Dengvaxia controversy. He did not invoke privileges in order to avoid questions. To the contrary, he answered all questions posed to him patiently.

He knew the facts at hand when his government had to make a decision on how to address the Dengue problem facing the country.

Compared with the way he handled the inquiry, the health officials of his administration were more argumentative and righteous.

Never once have any of the Aquino officials acknowledge that what they implemented turned out to be a mess. Apology was never on their minds.

President Aquino had an elaborate rationale for his decision- making on Dengvaxia. But this notwithstanding, his testimony failed to settle many questions that still trouble the Filipino public concerning the issue.

1. Why was the information given by the Department of Health inadequate to guide and lead President Aquino to the correct decision? How could the DoH miss utterly the possibility that Sanofi Pasteur would declare its immunization vaccine unsafe for those without a dengue history?

2. Why was the Philippines the first country to contract and commit to the use of Dengvaxia? And why a whopping P3.5 billion contract for a vaccine that had yet to be cleared by the World Aquino government wait for the clearance?

3. Why was the Dengvaxia immunization drive timed to coincide with the may 2016 elections? Did politics figure in Aquino’s decision?

4. Finally, was the Philippines made into a laboratory – and Filipino children into guinea pigs – for Dengvaxia? These questions remain, despite all the talking. Consequently, we return to a key point we made in an earlier editorial. An investigation into the Dengvaxia controversy is best carried out by

- tion with the National Bureau of Investigation

- ment that are in the best position to conduct a thorough and impartial inquiry.

We remain skeptical that an open congressional inquiry can ferret out the facts and accountability, especially under the light of live television. Edgar Matobato is the only one we can remember who confessed to crimes during his testimony.