SC stops release of smuggled rice in Manila

MANILA, Philippines - The Supreme Court (SC) has effectively stopped the release of the rice shipment seized by the Bureau of Customs (BOC) at the Port of Manila last year.

In a resolution released yesterday, the high court issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) enjoining the Manila regional trial court (RTC) from implementing its earlier ruling ordering BOC to release the 189,540 bags of rice shipment it confiscated for lack of required import permit.

The SC also directed Manila RTC Branch 11 presiding Judge Cicero Jurado Jr. to suspend hearing the case pending resolution of the petition filed by the BOC and Department of Agriculture (DA).

The TRO is effective immediately and until further orders from the high court.

In the same order, the high tribunal also consolidated a similar case earlier filed by BOC and DA in connection with another seized shipment in Davao City.

The shipment was consigned to Danilo Galang, owner of St. Hildegard Grains Enterprises, and Bold Bidder Marketing and General Merchandise owned by Ivy Souza.

The SC required respondents Galang and Souza to answer the petition within 10 days from receipt of notice.

In the assailed orders last Jan. 23 and Feb. 27, the RTC restrained the BOC and the district collectors for the ports of Manila, North Harbor (Manila International Container Port) and South Harbor from alerting, seizing and holding not only the rice shipments of Galang but also of Souza.

In their petition filed through the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), the BOC and DA argued that Judge Jurado committed grave abuse of discretion as he deprived the government of due process when he issued the writ of preliminary injunction not only in favor of Galang but also of Bold Bidder, which is non-party in the case before the lower court.

Likewise, the OSG argued that Galang could not claim any rights from the expiration of the special treatment under the WTO agreement with regard to import quotas.

Solicitor General Francis Jardeleza said only member-states could bring suits in relation to any violation of the agreement and not a private entity like Galang.

Jardaleza also insisted that the National Food Authority (NFA)’s requirement of import permit for rice importation did not cease upon the expiration of special treatment.

The government noted that the Philippines had already submitted a third revision of its request for waiver relating to special treatment for rice of the Philippines.

Last Feb. 25, the SC issued a TRO enjoining the Davao RTC from enforcing the writ of preliminary mandatory injunction it earlier issued ordering the BOC to release rice imports it earlier seized due to lack import permits.

The TRO covers the Dec. 12, 2013 order injunction, which restrained the BOC District Collector of the Port of Davao from seizing respondent Joseph Ngo’s rice shipments.

In issuing the TRO, the Court found meritorious the arguments of Jardeleza regarding lack of adequate representation of the BOC during the hearings conducted before the RTC and the lack of legal standing of Ngo to sue.

The government argued that Ngo cannot anchor his case on the expiration of the WTO special treatment for rice as only member-states can bring suits in case there are violations of the provisions of the agreement.

It argued that regardless of the status of the quantitative restrictions, the NFA has the sole authority to import rice and to authorize private entities to import rice under Republic Act No. 8178 (The Agricultural Tariffication Act).