Insecure

A resolution was filed at the House of Representatives urging our immigration authorities to declare Donald Trump persona non grata.

That resolution only convinces us that this legislative chamber is overpopulated, with many congressmen lacking truly important causes to advocate. This is, after all, not the first time some effort was made to deny entry to foreigners making offensive remarks about the country and its people.

Recall that time when a group of congressmen called for Justin Bieber to be banned from the country after making what they called “distasteful remarks” about then Saranggani Rep. Manny Pacquiao. Nothing came out of that.

At another instance, people wanted to ban American TV actress Teri Hatcher, playing her character in the script, insulted her gynecologist by saying she was going to check if her diplomas “did not come from some med school in the Philippines.” To placate the outrage fanned by politicians here, the Philippine consul in Los Angeles was asked to write the TV station airing the show.

Our Immigration Bureau actually banned actor Alec Baldwin for saying, in a US talkshow, he considered “getting” himself a Filipino mail-order bride. Chip Tsao, a Hong Kong columnist, was also banned for saying the Philippines was “a nation of servants.”

Clair Danes, of the popular TV political thriller “Homeland,” once described Manila as a “ghastly and weird city” that “smelled of cockroaches, with rats all over, and there is no sewerage system…” That provoked the usual furor although our TV viewers continued following her show.

The current controversy over Trump arises from remarks quoting from a US Senate subcommittee on immigration citing instances of screening failures. The list included the case of a Philippine national later arrested for plotting terrorist activity. It was not a condemnation of the country or its people.

Our politicians are prone to make much ado over nothing. The hypersensitivity to adverse appraisals abroad (even if they do contain some truth) can only be a measure of our extreme insecurity.

Many years ago, a US writer published a piece that said we have a “damaged culture.” Our damaged culture responded promptly with widespread outrage.

Jurisdiction

By law, it is the Philippine Ports Authority (PPA) that has jurisdiction over the Manila North Harbor. On that basis, the agency entered into a 25-year contract with the Manila North Harbor Port, Inc. (MNHPI) to “manage, operate, develop and maintain the Manila North Harbor.”

It is clear, from the contract, that the North Harbor provides “domestic terminal services” to inter-island shipping. The charges paid government by the private company are based on that assumption.

On June 2 this year, former BOC Commissioner Alberto Lina issued Customs Memorandum Order 12-2016 ordering personnel of the Bureau to help MNHPI prepare “to accept, handle and store import, export and transshipment cargo and to equip it with the necessary facility to operate as an international port.” From subsequent announcements, it is clear that the BoC views the North Harbor as a “sub-port” of our main international port.

Lina, in several interviews, justifies the order as a measure that will help decongest the Manila Port. From a pure logistics point of view, that might appear to be a practical move.

However, the PPA strongly objects to this issuance. The agency sees the issuance as skirting its authority over the port facility. More important, the issuance undermines the PPA’s contract with MNHPI, with adverse implications on government’s share of revenues. The private company was allowed rights under the contract to operate a domestic shipping terminal.

From the viewpoint of the PPA, the BoC issuance allowing North Harbor to moonlight as an international terminal is illegal. While the BoC may grant ports “Accredited Customs Facility” (ACF) status, its authority does not extend to ports within the exclusive jurisdiction of other regulatory bodies.

Too, the memorandum order in question, according to the PPA’s lawyers, enhances the value of MNHPI’s existing contract and alters existing terms. Because of that, the BoC may be liable for graft, since it adds to the value of the contractor without proper bidding.

At any rate, the PPA ordered all port offices, harbor pilots and shipping lines to desist from handling foreign cargos destined for the North Harbor. That sets the stage for a showdown between two vital agencies of government.

Customs Commissioner Nick Faeldon ought to look into this controversy as soon as possible. The confrontation between his agency and the PPA could lead to even more operational problems down the road.

If the BoC issuance will truly help ease the congestion at the Manila port, then the existing contract with MNHPI should be renegotiated. Clearly, the BoC issuance constitutes impairment of the existing contract.

Renegotiating the contract with MNHPI should be renegotiated ahead of elevating the North Harbor to a facility allowed to service ships bearing foreign cargo. The BoC issuance appears to cut legal corners, unduly benefitting MNPHI as a business and even opening yet another door for smuggling.

The PPA has reason to feel aggrieved since it enjoys exclusive jurisdiction over the North Harbor facility. That jurisdiction was clearly undermined by the BoC issuance.

The wonder of it all is that such a serious problem as this one is left to continue festering. A problem like this one demands prompt response.

Over the weekend, President Duterte declared all appointive officials below Cabinet rank should immediately vacate their posts and consider themselves resigned. This surprising order clearly gets in the way of the PPA and the BoC resolving their dispute.