Supreme Court asked to nullify EO 62 lowering tariffs on agri products

MANILA, Philippines — Agricultural groups filed a petition asking the Supreme Court (SC) to nullify President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr.’s Executive Order No. 62 issued last June, which reduces tariffs on agricultural products.

Executive Order No. 62, also known as “Modifying the Nomenclature and Rates of Import Duty on Various Products,” lowered the tariff on rice from 35 percent to 15 percent and tariffs on other agricultural products.

READ: Marcos formalizes rice tariff cut via EO 62

Petitioners said the EO was hastily issued without consultation, investigation, and hearing, which are required under Republic Act 10863 or the Flexile Clause of Customs Modernization and Tariff Act.

“EO 62 was hastily issued sans consultation, investigation, hearings, which are required under RA 10863 to be complied with before the President can validly make issuance of an Executive order involving tariff reduction,” Aside from Samahang Industriya ng Agrikultura (Sinag) legal counsel Atty. Virgie Lacsa Suarez said.

Aside from Sinag Inc., other petitioners are the Federation of Free Farmers Inc. (FFFI), United Broiler Raisers Assn. 1 Inc., Sorosoro Ibaba Development Cooperative (SIDC), and Magsasaka Partylist representative Att. Argel Cabatbat.

They also asked SC to immediately stop the implementation of the EO on July 7 pending the Court’s decision on the merits of the petition.

The groups named President Marcos Jr., Executive Secretary Lucas Bersamin, National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) Secretary Arsenio Balisacan, and Tariff Commission chairperson Marilou Mendoza as respondents.

Petitioners said that even before EO 62, tariffs for corn imports were already lowered to five percent, 15 percent for pork, and 35 percent for rice imports under EO 10. EO 12 was also issued, reducing tariffs for electric vehicles from between five and 35 percent to zero percent.

“Significantly, these EOs… have gone through the mandated consultations, investigation and hearing. As a matter of fact, herein petitioners were duly notified and have actively attended and participated in the investigations help prior to the issuance of the said EOs,” read the petition.

“Despite the clear procedure that ensures the exercise of the petitioners of their constitutional right to due process, the issuance of EO 62 was issued in clear violation of the due process. This is tantamount to undue delegation of the delegated rule-making power of the President,” the petition read.

Petitioners also warned that reducing tariffs on staple products such as corn “poses significant challenges for local farmers.”

The petitioners said, “Lower tariffs can lead to an influx of cheaper imported goods, undermining domestic producers’ and farmers’ sales and products.”

READ: Groups ready suit against new tariffs

They added that issuing EO 62 “is clearly detrimental to the farmers, who may struggle to compete with the lower prices of imported products. As a result, their livelihoods and the agricultural sector in general may suffer, which can exacerbate rural poverty and further drag economic disparity.”

Petitioners also said that the EO would practically make the country’s economy dependent on importation, which is contrary to the state policy of a self-reliant and independent economy as mandated under  Article 12, Section (National Economy and Patrimony) and Article XIII, Section (Social Justice and Human Rights) of the 1987 Constitution.

“The issuance of EO 62 does not make our farmers more competitive; rather it is a threat to our farmers and fishers and to the entire economy. Instead of protecting and supporting our farmers, EO62 exposes our very own food producers to unfair foreign competition,” the petitioners said.

“The danger of reduced tariffs for the next four years does not in any way make our country self-reliant; rather it makes us dependent on foreign produce,” they added.