SC asked to stop Manila court from releasing rice imports without permit
Solicitor General Francis Jardeleza. INQUIRER FILE PHOTO
MANILA, Philippines—The Department of Agriculture (DA) and the Bureau of Customs (BOC) asked the Supreme Court to stop the Manila Regional Trial Court from implementing its orders allowing the release of 189,540 bags of rice that arrived last year in Manila port without the proper documents.
In a 78-page petition for certiorari, the DA and BOC through Solicitor General Francis Jardeleza also urged the high court to uphold the validity of National Food Authority Memorandum Circular No. AO-2K13-03-003 and the NFA Council resolution No. 670-2013 requiring rice imports to be covered by import permits despite the lifting of the World Trade Organization’s special treatment on quantitative restrictions for rice on June 30, 2012.
Government lawyers said Judge Cicero Jurado Jr. abused its discretion when he issued his orders dated Jan. 23, 2014 and Feb. 27, 2014 and his amended order dated Feb. 28, 2014 that stopped the BOC and the district of collectors for the ports of Manila, North Harbor (Manila International Container Port) and South Harbors from alerting, seizing, and holding not only the rice shipments of St. Hildegard Grains Enterprises but also of Bold Bidder Marketing and General Merchandise owned by Ivy Souza, the original consignee of the rice shipments.
The importers initiated the complaint before the Manila RTC after the BOC refused to release the said shipments for failure to produce the required import permits.
Jardeleza said the lower court, in allowing the release of the shipments has deprived the government of due process especially that Bold Bidder is not even a party to the case.
Article continues after this advertisement“Indeed, Bold Bidder Marketing and General Mechandise did not participate in the proceedings. Thus, it is perplexing that respondent Judge would issue an order granting relief to a person not even asking for it,” the OSG pointed out.
Article continues after this advertisement“The respondent Judge in issuing the questioned order, violated a very basic rule when he issued the writ of preliminary injunction in favor of a non-party. It is basic that no man shall be affected by any proceeding to which he is a stranger, and strangers to a case are not bound by judgment rendered by the court,” the OSG added.
Jardeleza said only member-states may bring suits in relation to any violation of the agreement and not a private entity.
He also insisted the authority of the NFA to require import permits for rice importations did not cease upon the expiration of the special treatment.
The government noted the Philippines had already submitted a third revision of its request for waiver relating to special treatment for rice of the Philippines.
Since it requested for a waiver, Jardeleza noted that nine interested WTO member-states have initiated negotiations with the Philippine government.
“Currently, the Philippines’s formal request for a waiver of its WTO obligation or the extension of the Special treatment on rice importation remains pending with the WTO. To date, the country’s request for extension has not been denied,” the Solicitor General said.
“With the on-going negotiations for a waiver, there is effectively acquiescence by interested WTO member countries to the continued imposition of quantitative restrictions on rice by the Philippines,” Jardeleza said.
RELATED STORIES
BOC holds rice imports until permits question settled
