THE Office of the Solicitor General has advised the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources and the National Telecommunications Commission to comply with the ruling of the Malabon City Regional Trial Court that declared its controversial Fisheries Administrative Order No. 266 requiring fishing boats to install Vessel Monitoring and Electronic Reporting Systems as void and unconstitutional.
In a legal opinion sent to BFAR Director Eduardo Gongona, Solicitor General Jose Calida told the BFAR and NTC to comply with the June 1, 2021 decision of Malabon City RTC, Branch 170, declaring FAO No. 266 series of 2020 issued by the Department of Agriculture through the BFAR as null and void for being unconstitutional and contrary to the provisions of the Fisheries Code.
The court also made permanent its writ of injunction against the implementation of the BFAR’s FAO 266 that requires all commercial fishing operators to have vessel monitoring and electronic reporting systems installed in their catchers as part of BFAR’s Integrated Marine Environment Monitoring System (IMEMS). The vessel monitoring devices also require the covered vessels to apply for Maritime Mobile Service Identity numbers with the National Telecommunications Commission.
On 25 June 2021, the DA-BFAR and NTC appealed the RTC decision to the Supreme Court. After months, no temporary restraining order was issued by the high court.
Acting on the query of the NTC seeking guidance on the writ of permanent injunction with respect to its function of issuing Marine Mobile Service Identity (MMSI) for the transceivers in BFAR’s Integrated Marine Environment Monitoring System (IMEMS) vis-í -vis the RTC’s ruling that FAO 266 is unconstitutional and contrary to Fisheries Code, the OSG replied “in the affirmative” when asked by two agencies on “whether the implementation of FAO is restrained by the writ of injunction issued by the RTC pending appeal to the Supreme Court.”
While the OSG maintained that the assailed decision of the Malabon court has yet to attain finality, Calida stressed that “given that the RTC made permanent the preliminary injunction issued by it, and unless the Supreme Court issues any injunctive writ to enjoin the enforcement of the same, the OSG is of the opinion that BFAR and NTC should desist from implementing FAO 266.”
“By virtue of the rendition of the assailed decision, the RTC made the preliminary injunction permanent. As a consequence, the writ shall be immediately enforced, unless stayed or restrained by the Supreme Court,” the OSG said in its reply to BFAR and NTC.
The new OSG legal opinion departs from its earlier position that despite the permanent injunction and the absence of the TRO from the Supreme Court, BFAR and NTC can still implement FAO 266 and direct commercial fishing operators to install the vessel monitoring devices.
DA-BFAR even threatened the fishing operators that it will revoke their fishing licenses, clearances and permits and stop them from operating unless they install the VMS. DA-BFAR and NTC even conducted an orientation on the IMEMS project on January 18, 2022.
Meanwhile, Jaydrick Johnson Yan, president of the Southern Philippines Deep Sea Fishing Association (Sophil), said that fishing companies in Zamboanga City will defy the BFAR order and will go out to sea without the tracking devices when the fishing season opens in March.
Yap said the association’s 22-member fishing companies will send out their fleets with copies of the court ruling and the injunction against the implementation of the VMS requirement.
Yap warned that if the BFAR will insist on implementing the VMS tracking devices, they will be compelled to go on strike and not go out to sea.