ILOILO – Former Health secretary Janette Garin welcomed the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) decision to withdraw 98 cases of reckless imprudence resulting in homicide filed against her and two former health officials. The cases were linked to the controversial dengue vaccine Dengvaxia.
“This is harassment, plain and simple. The same cases have been dismissed and refiled multiple times, just with different children’s names,” Garin said.
DOJ secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla issued a resolution on January 10 directing the prosecutor general to withdraw the criminal information filed at the Quezon City Regional Trial Court against Garin, former Health Undersecretary Dr. Gerardo Bayugo, and former Department of Health (DOH) Officer-in-Charge Dr. Ma. Joyce Ducusin.
Garin maintained that the Dengvaxia vaccine is safe and claimed that allegations against her and her colleagues were politically motivated. She accused the Public Attorney’s Office (PAO) and other groups of using public health issues to tarnish the DOH and the Aquino administration.
“In the absence of malicious intent on the part of respondents-appellants, they cannot be held liable for conspiring and confederating with one another to commit reckless imprudence,” Remulla stated in the resolution.
Garin first learned of the DOJ’s decision through news reports and requested a copy of the resolution from a congressional colleague. She described the DOJ decision as “laudable”, noting the repetitive filing and dismissal of cases.
Parents and Allegations
The cases stemmed from DOH’s dengue immunization program, which began in April 2016. The program aimed to protect over 700,000 schoolchildren from dengue, but some parents alleged that their children developed severe symptoms and later died after receiving the vaccine.
The complainants reported that symptoms such as headaches, fever, rashes, and abdominal pain appeared after the children were inoculated. Some children reportedly died between seven days to almost three years after vaccination. Forensic examinations revealed organ enlargement and extensive bleeding, particularly in the brain.
On January 27, parents and relatives of these children gathered outside the DOJ to demand the continuation of cases against Garin and her co-accused.
DOJ’s Basis for Dismissal
Justice Undersecretary Raul Vasquez explained that the cases were legally untenable as they relied on both “reckless imprudence” and “conspiracy”, which are difficult to reconcile. He noted that recklessness is unintentional, while conspiracy implies intent.
The DOJ resolution stated there was no evidence of a “causal link” between Dengvaxia and the children’s deaths. It also emphasized that the time lapse between vaccination and death made it unlikely that the vaccine was the cause.
Even if a causal relationship were established, the DOJ found no evidence tying the respondents’ actions or omissions to the deaths. The resolution also noted that the Dengvaxia program was not “haphazardly designed, planned, or implemented,” as it had been proposed before Garin’s tenure.
Legal Remedies
Vasquez suggested that the families of the alleged victims consider civil claims for damages instead of pursuing criminal cases.
“The challenge for their lawyers is to craft a legal strategy that may provide some help and compensation for their suffering,” Vasquez said.
Background on Dengvaxia
Dengvaxia, the world’s first dengue vaccine, was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in December 2015. The P4-billion dengue immunization program targeted Grade 4 students in Metro Manila, Calabarzon, and Central Luzon — regions with high dengue cases.
However, public backlash following reported fatalities led to the suspension of the program. Vaccine manufacturer Sanofi Pasteur returned the funds, while PAO filed cases against DOH officials. PAO chief Persida Rueda-Acosta faced criticism for fueling vaccine hesitancy, which contributed to a measles outbreak in 2019.
Garin expressed frustration over what she called a misuse of public health issues for political purposes. Her lawyers are now evaluating potential legal actions against those responsible for the repeated filing of cases./PN
