Pormal ng nagfile ng kaso
si Arnel Igancio noong May 22, 2020 laban sa dating singer at artista na si
Mystica sa Imus City's prosecutors
office sa lalawigan ng Cavite dahil sa pagmumura nito sa Pangulo.
Ang mga kasong isinampa
kay Mystica ay ang mga sumusunod:
1. Inciting to sedition
2.Cyber libel
3.Violation sa bayanihan to heal as one act
Sa facebook page ay sinabi
ni Arnell Ignacio na "Kapag seryoso ang issue e file na ako ng case. Hindi
talakan lang sa FB. Hindi mo puede mura-murahin si presidente nang ganun-ganun
lang at aatungal ka pagkatapos. Mas malala, nagyaya ka pa na pabagsakin ang
gobyerno imbis na tumulong ka na lang. Yung pagmumura mo naman e parang
PERSONAL ang kasalanan sa iyo, e. Kahit man lang sana sa edad nung tao e
binigay mo na kahit katiting na paggalang.”
Ayon din kay Arnell
Ignacio, kaya nagtatalak si Mystica ay para makakuha ng madaming likes at
followers.
Matatandaangnaglabas ng saloobin si Mystica at umani ito
ng matitinding pambabatikos sa mga Duterte suporters at paupuri naman sa mga
Anti Duterte suportes. Sabi nya:
"I am challenging the
President! Siya ang i-home quarantine. Wag siyang palabasin at wag siyang
bigyan ng pagkain at inumin. Tingnan natin kung ano ngayon ang magiging
kahihinatnan niya…"
Subalit makaraan ang ilang
araw ay humingi ang dating cast ng probinsyano na pinagbibidahan ni Coco Martin
ng paumanhin sa Pangulo.
“Ako talaga ay
taga-suporta ng President… Alam ko na ang President natin may puso yan… Kung
ako man ay nakapagmura, and I repeated it again, dahil sa parang ako rin ay
isang anak ng isang ama. Kasi from the start, tinuring ko na siyang ama,” the
celebrity stressed.
“I’m sure naman na
mapapatawad ako ni Presidente dahil alam niya na ang isang tao kapag
frustrated, masasabi niya lahat… And bilang anak, alam ko na hindi tama yun…”
dagdag pa niya.
Si Mystica o Ruby Rose
Villanueva sa totoonf buhay ay isang Filipina Showbiz personality. Sya ay
tinaguriang "SPLIT QUEEN" dahil sa pagsplit nito sa stage sa tuwing
sya ay nagperperform.
Napabalita na si Mystica
ay mga properties sa US at maging sa Pilipinas subalit ang lahat ay nawalaat ayon sa report pinasok din ni Mystica and
pagbebenta ng fried Chicken para mabuhay. Nung kasagsagan ng career ni MYstica
sa entertainment industry ay binalita sa Showbiz Central na sya ay may mansion
sa America. Sinabi niyang may mansion sya sa Georgia at Los Angeles, meron din
syang luxury cars. Totoong nabuhay sa karangyaan si Mystica at nagtayo pa nga
ang dating aktres ng sariling banda.
Ano nga ba ang nangyari
kay Mystica? Nasaan na ang mga properties niya? Nassan na ang mga mansion at
luxury cars niya sa America at Pilipinas?
Ayon sa report, nawala ang
kanyang mga properties dahil sa kanyang di magndang desisyon. Kung kaya ngayon
ay nagpipilit sya na muling makabalik sa showbiz na nagbigay sa kanya ng
marangyang pamumuhay.
Ang pag-iingay nya kaya sa
social Media at pagmumura sa Pangulo ang magbabalik sa kanya sa dating
ningning?
Sa aking palagay at
opinyon ay mali kung ito man ang kanyang way para makabalik dahil si Pangulonh
Duterte ay mahal ng mga Pilipino at binoto ng 16 Million na mga Pilipino. Wala
ni isa mang celebrity sa Pilipinas ang mayroon 16M na social media following.
Kung ako si Mystica, dapat
sa halip na si duterte ang minura niya ay yung mga kalaban na lang Pangulo tyak magkakaroon sya ng mdaming Supporters tulad ni Mocha Uson.
Matapos na ipasa ni Speaker Allan Cayetano and Housebill 6732 kung saan naglalayon na payagang makapag-operate ang ABS-CBN kahit paso na ang prangkisa nito hanggang Oktubre ngayon taon sa isinagwang pagdinig ng Kongreso nung Mayo 13, 2020 sa unang pagdinig nito.
Umani ng matinding batikos si Speaker Allan Cayetano at hindi ito nagustuhan ng mga taong sumusuporta sa pagsara ng ABS-CBN. Tinawag na balimbing, ahas, dilawan at kung ano-anong mga maaanghang na salita ang binitawan ng mga Netizens sa kanyang facebook page comment section.
Ayon sa isang netizen: " Why do I feel that somehow he is trying to say that Congress can distort the law according to its preference. The franchise is a privilege not a right! Obey the law. Freedom of the press is still in the Philippines without ABS-CBN. Do some legal remedies, not calling the sympathy of the public.
Nakatanggap naman ng papuri si Speaker Allan Cayetano mula sa mga taong sumusuporta sa ABS-CBN.Ang ginawang ito ni Speaker Cayetano ay nagbigay ng pag-asa sa mga supporters ng ABS-CBN.
Sa isang interview ni Speaker Cayetano kay Ted Failon sinabi ni Speaker Cayetano na sasama daw sya sa ABS-CBN na magrally kung mag-ooff the air ang ABS-CBN at sincere daw sya dito. Nagsinungaling daw ang NTC at tinakot ni Solicitor general Calida ang NTC kung kaya napilitan ang NTC na hindi mag-issue ng provisional franchise para sa ABS-CBN.
Ayon naman kay Atty Larry Gadon ay magresign na lang daw si Speaker Cayetano dahil labag sa Constitution ang ginawa ni Speaker Cayetano at ito naman ay sinuportahan ng mga netizens na gigil na gigil sa ginawa ng Speaker.
Ayon naman kay Former Senator Chiz Escudero ay hindi rin sang-ayon sa naging desisyon ni Speaker Cayetano dahil ayon sa ilalim ng public service act, meron tayong parity clause sa mga prangkisang binibigay, kung 25 years ang binigay na prangkisa sa istasyon,dapat 25 years din sa iba.
Matapos ang ginawang ito ni Speaker Cayetano ay nagsilabasan ang mga video nito kung saan ay nangampanya sya sa ilalim ng partido ni Former president Noynoy Aquino ksama sina Bam Aquino at Antonio Trillanes. Tinawag ng mga netizen si Cayetano na Balimbing.
Samantala sa ikalawang pagdinig ng House of Representative sa prangkisa ng ABS-CBN is nirecall ng house ang naging una nitong desisyon na bigyan ng provisional franchise hanggang Oct 2020 ang ABS-CBN.
Let me make this of
record, Mr Speaker, that at any time, the House can approve this bill, House
Bill 6732 on 3rd reading, but because of the insistence of our colleagues to
interpellate further on the matter, I move that we reconsider our approval on
2nd reading of HB 6732," banggit ni Representative Palma
But Section 26(2), Article VI of the 1987 Constitution states: "No bill passed by either House shall become a law unless it has passed 3 readings on separate days, and printed copies thereof in its final form have been distributed to its members 3 days before its passage," except when the President certifies the bill as urgent.
Ito na kaya ang simula ng pagbagsak ng political career ni Speaker Cayetano kung sakaling muli syang tumakbo sa susunod na Presidential Election? Ano ang inyong palagay? Wag kalimutang magkomento
Ang POGO o ang tintawag na Philippine Offshore Gaming Operators ay isang online na pasugalan na ang mga manlalaro ay sa ibang bansa. Para makapag-operate ay kailangan ng legal na lisensya na magmumula sa PAGCOR o ang Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation. Nagsimulang mag-operate ang POGO sa Pilipinas noong 2015 kung kelan si Pangulong Noyoy Aquino pa ang Presidente ng Pilipinas.
Ang POGO ay isang income-generating at no cost with the Government. Ito ay isang BPO o Business Process Outsourcing na tulad din ng call center industry sa Pilipinas. Sa kasalukuyan ay merong 31,500 plus na mga Pilipinong nagtatrabaho sa POGO na nag-gegenerate ng 225 Million pesos monthly income.
Halos ay umabot ng 26.5 billion pesos ang naibigay sa Gobyerno para sa COVID-19 ng PAGCOR na kinita mula sa POGO. Matatandaang naglaan ang Gobyerno ng 270 + bilyong piso para isuporta sa lockdown bunga ng Covid-19 pandemic. Ang Gobyerno ay nangangailangan ng pondo ngayon dahil ang pagkolekta ng tax ay bumaba dahil sa Covid-19 at dahil dito, ang POGO ang isang pinakamagandang opsyon para makakuha ng pondo ang Gobyerno. Samantala ang pagubukas ng POGO sa gitna ng Lockdown ay tinutulan ni Vice President Leni Robredo. "Alam natin na maraming katiwalian, malaki iyong social costs sa 'tin dahil sa proliferation ng POGO," she told CNN Philippines."Parang panget na mensahe na sila pa ang uunahing payagang bumukas kaysa sa mga negosyo na nag-e-employ ng mga Pilipino... Kung binabawalan natin iyong mga para sa Pilipino bakit bibigyan sila ng parang privilege na magbukas?" Sa mga talumpati ni President Duterte, sinabi nyang legal ang POGO at wala itong nilalabag na batas at ito ay ayon din naman kay Sec Panelo. May mga illegal POGO operators at sila ay iniimbestigahan na ng mga Deapartamento ng Gobyerno na dapat mag-imbestiga. Samantala nrito ang mga revenues ng Gobyerno na nakuha sa POGO. 2015 - 56 million Pesos 2016 - 72 million Pesos 2017 - 3.2 Billion Pesos 2018 - 6.11 Billion Pesos 2019 - 5.73 Billion Pesos at 18 Billion Pesos Franchise Application Regulatory Fees.
PRIVILEGE SPEECH OF REP. BERNADETTE HERERRA-DY
ON THE WATER CONCESSIONS ISSUE
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said that “an unjust law, is no law at all”. By extension I dare say an unjust contract, is no contract at all. I speak of contracts that are overly one-sided, and extend to the level of an intolerable loss of our sovereignty.
I refer, of course, to the 1997 water concession agreements entered into with Manila Water Company and Maynilad. These contracts are bursting with provisions of numerous illegalities and excessive misinterpretations all to the detriment of the Filipino people!
It is high time that we truly enforce accountability to those responsible for defrauding the consumers for the benefit of private interests! Allow me to describe these provisions for you.
First, to consider the concessionaires as mere agents of the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System, is by all means a farce! These companies are public utilities, no ifs and buts about it. For those who insist on their status as agents of MWSS, you are responsible for allowing these companies to pass on “business expenses” and corporate income taxes that they should rightfully be paying, all to the consumers. These include the outlandish and ridiculous provisions in the concession agreements to pass on to the consumers all legal and arbitration expenses.
In 2018 alone, these two concessionaires sought to pass on to the consumers by increasing rates to cover corporate expenses such as donations, travel expenses, sports expenses, legal and arbitration fees, and corporate income taxes! Gastos nila, taongbayan ang magbabayad?
Through this same “agency treatment” these companies have abused the system even further, determining that the maximum 12% limit rate of return imposed on public utilities do not apply to them as they are “mere agents”.
This alone is a preposterous disservice to the country! However as they often say on TV shopping shows, “wait there’s more”!
The government has bent-over backwards in favor of these companies! The so-called “innovation” of the MWSS Regulatory Office in its interpretation of the Concession Agreement allowed the concessionaires to collect fees via the water tariff capital investment plans and programs that have not yet been implemented or for those that have already been abandoned.
They were allowed to bill consumers for projects that to this day have yet to be fully implemented. To name only a few:
The Wawa Dam Project (PhP 732 million),
The Laguna Lake Project (PhP 100 million),
The Laiban Dam Project (PhP 45.3 billion),
The Pinugay Sewerage Treatment Project (PhP 600 million and overpriced),
The Angat Water Reliability Projects (PhP 5.4 billion), and
The Earthquake Contingency Project (PhP 4.130 billion).
For these six projects alone, a total of 56.262 billion pesos have been billed in advance from the Filipino people. I ask, where are these projects today? Why is it that the benefit from these haven’t been felt by the people? How is it that this year alone our own people suffered from a massive systematic water shortage that disrupted the national capital region?
Let’s recap, shall we? These companies charge to the consumers various business expenses, and have the people pre-pay for projects some of which are already abandoned or yet to be fully implemented, and they want the government to pay 10 billion pesos through their arbitration?
Have they performed their duties and responsibilities from the concession agreements they consider to sacred? I use this term lightly, as they themselves do not seem to respect the concession agreements they anchor their claims. The very agreements themselves all point to the fact that they are public utilities and the only semblance of any agency is to allow them to be empowered agents of the MWSS to apply for the exercise of governmental functions such as easement, eminent domain, and right of way.
Existing law, jurisprudence, and overall basic common sense all point to the conclusion that water distribution and provision of sewerage services to the general public, granted by concession from the MWSS as the original public utility from its legislative Charter. So the MWSS is a public utility and it enters into concession agreements to the two companies, and all of a sudden they aren’t public utilities themselves?
But let’s focus on the other issues for now. After all, they want government to uphold their concession agreements. What has happened to the requirement of the very same concession agreements for these companies to provide proper sewerage and sanitation systems? Where are the “international standard” piping systems they are supposed to have created? Ladies and gentlemen, these concessionaires, these companies, are still using the drainage systems of the DPWH. These drains are ill-suited for sewerage and sanitation, and once the annual rains come, sewage is included in the floodwaters, increasing the spread of diseases such as leptospirosis, dengue, dysentery, among others, as well as causing the spread of toxic elements that are hazardous to the public.
When we experience services that we are not satisfied with, what do we do? As consumers we can choose not to patronize those establishments. Pag hinde tayo masaya sa serbisyo ano ang ginagawa natin?
Even with more than a decade to go under their current agreements, the MWSS did the unthinkable. In 2014 it extended these agreements by an additional 15 years, to expire in 2037.
Again let’s recap. We pay for their corporate income taxes and other business expenses, advanced for projects that are non-existent or abandoned, look the other way when they fail to provide the sewerage and sanitation systems, and extend their contracts even though the expiry is so far away? Are we going to stand by and allow this massive duping of the Filipino people?
“Beware the fury of a patient man” as John Dryden says. In this case, beware that of a patient woman! These onerous contracts have been the subject of my own research and numerous calls for investigations close to a decade ago! I am truly thankful that today, President Duterte himself has seen this issue and has not only pledged to act accordingly but will hold these companies accountable. Thank you Mr. President for acknowledging that these widespread actions can no longer be tolerated!
Now I call on my fellow legislators here in the House of Representatives and in the Senate, let us expose these actions for what they are… a widespread swindling of the Filipino people and its government. Let us all unite and act for the benefit of our people, our constituents who elected us to serve!
Allow me to leave you with these words of Anatole France “justice is the means by which established injustices are sanctioned.” Let us all act to correct these injustices of the past once and for all!
Thank you and may God continue to bless the Philippines and the Filipino people!
Sino ba naman ang mag-aakala na ang lahat ng bagay na nagaganap ngayon na kinasasankutan ni Faeldon sa BuCor ay planong lahat ng Pangulong Duterte sa pamamagitan ng Pawn Attack. Nakakabilib dahil tanging sya lang ang Presidente ng Pilipinas after Marcos ang nakita nating may napakabrilliant attack.
Matatandaan na pinalaya ni Faeldon ang mga preso alinsunod ayon sa patakaran ng GCTA kung saan ay nagbigay ng kapangyarihan kay Faeldon para mapalaya ang mga preso. Pinalaya ni Faeldon ang halos 1700 na mga preso na may iba't-ibang kaso tulad ng rape, drug related at murder na tinuturing na Heinous crime. Matapos ang kontrobersyal na isyung ito ay pinagresign ni Duterte si Faeldon at nag-order na ibalik ang mga presong pinalaya sa loob ng 15 araw. Umalingawngaw ang balitang ito na kinasangkutan din ni Senator Bato Dela Rosa matapos na magbigay ito ng pahayag ng pagsuporta sa pagpapalaya sa mga preso dahil sa ito umano ang nakasaad sa batas na pinirmahan ni Noynoy Aquino. Bagay naman na naging laman ng pahayagan at social media na nagbunga ng galit ng taong-bayan kay Senator Bato Dela Rosa. Samantala, inamin naman ni Senator Drilon na isa sya sa mga senador na pumabor sa GCTA at hindi nya naisip ang masamang implikasyon nito dahil sa hindi paglagay ng pagwawalang bisa ng batas sa mga may kasong heinous crime. Nung 2014 ay 62 inmates convicted with heinous crime ang nakalaya, 105 naman nun 2015, 335 noong 2016, 335 noong 2017 at 384 nung 2018. Ang mga pangalan ay hindi binangit. Sino sino kaya ang mga napalaya na dapat ay maibestigahan. Hindi kaya may plano si Duterte na ilabas ang pangalan ng mga napalaya upang lalong madiin ang nasa likod nito? Matatandaan na si Delima ang Justice Secretary noong panahon ni Noynoy.
Republic Act 7659, the law signed in 1993 and which imposed the death penalty, says that heinous crimes include:
Treason
Piracy in general and mutiny on the high seas in Philippine waters
Qualified piracy
Qualified bribery
Parricide
Murder
Infanticide
Kidnapping and serious illegal detention
Robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons
Destructive arson
Rape
Importation, distribution, manufacturing and possession of illegal drugs
Sino- sino ang maaapektuhan ng CGTA sakaling maisama ang heinous crime sa mga di dapat mabigyan nito?
Si Delima ay nakakulong sa kasong Drugs na isa din sa Heinous crime. Wala na bang chance na makalaya si Delima kung maribisa ang GCTA? Ito na ba ang katapusan ni Delima? Pano kung maisabatas pa ang Death Penalty? Si Delima kaya ang unang mabibitay? Alam kaya ng kampo ni Noynoy noon na maaaring makasuhan si Delima ng may kaugnayan sa Droga kaya nila nilagdaan ang batas na to? Bagaman si Delima pa lang ang nasa kulungan ay posible ring sumunod sa kanya si Noynoy Aquino, Antonio Trillanes, Joma Sison at ilan pang Senador na may mga alleged cases na maaaring mapabilang sa heinous crime. Ito na kaya ang isang panibagong kalbaryong kakaharapin ng oposisyon at magtuloy-tuloy ang pamumuno ni Duterte ayon sa kanyang plano dahil paniguradong gisado sa sariling mantika ang oposisyon. Paano na lang kung matuloy pa ang Death penalty? Ano sa palagay niyo? Abangan natin ang susunod na mangyayari.
Simula ng maisabatas ang CGTA ay may kabuuang 2,160 na ang napalaya na may mga kasong kinabibilangan ng karumal-dumal na krimen, 939 sa kasong rape , murder 874, drug violations 261. 445 naman ang kabuuang napalaya sa panahon ni Aquino.
Sa ilalim ng administrasyong Duterte, narito ang summary ng mga napalayang preso na naconvict dahil sa karumal-dumal na krimen.
Murder - 748
Rape - 745
Drugs - 156
Kidnapping - 32
Parricide - 23
Arson - 6
Bribery - 2
Others - 2
Total: 1,714
Matapos ang pagpapalaya ni Faeldon sa mga preso ay agad syang tinanggal sa Pwesto ni Pangulong Duterte dahil sa paglabag di umano nito sa kanyang utos. Samantala ay binigyan naman ni Duterte ng 15 days para magsurrender ang mga napalaya. Sa kasalukuyan ay hindi lalampas sa sampu ang nagsurrender. Ang mga pangalan ng mga napalaya ay nasa watch list na ng Immigration. 1 milyon naman ang bounty ng bawat isang nakatakas.
Samantala narito naman ang nakasaaad sa batas:
Republic Act 10592 Section 5. Article 99 of the same Act is hereby further amended to read as follows:"
"ART. 99. Who grants time allowances. – Whenever lawfully justified, the Director of the Bureau of Corrections, the Chief of the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology and/or the Warden of a provincial, district, municipal or city jail shall grant allowances for good conduct. Such allowances once granted shall not be revoked."
Section 4. Article 98 of the same Act is hereby further amended to read as follows:
"ART. 98. Special time allowance for loyalty. – A deduction of one fifth of the period of his sentence shall be granted to any prisoner who, having evaded his preventive imprisonment or the service of his sentence under the circumstances mentioned in Article 158 of this Code, gives himself up to the authorities within 48 hours following the issuance of a proclamation announcing the passing away of the calamity or catastrophe referred to in said article. A deduction of two-fifths of the period of his sentence shall be granted in case said prisoner chose to stay in the place of his confinement notwithstanding the existence of a calamity or catastrophe enumerated in Article 158 of this Code.
"This Article shall apply to any prisoner whether undergoing preventive imprisonment or serving sentence."
"ART. 29. Period of preventive imprisonment deducted from term of imprisonment. – Offenders or accused who have undergone preventive imprisonment shall be credited in the service of their sentence consisting of deprivation of liberty, with the full time during which they have undergone preventive imprisonment if the detention prisoner agrees voluntarily in writing after being informed of the effects thereof and with the assistance of counsel to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners, except in the following cases:
"1. When they are recidivists, or have been convicted previously twice or more times of any crime; and
"2. When upon being summoned for the execution of their sentence they have failed to surrender voluntarily.
"If the detention prisoner does not agree to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners, he shall do so in writing with the assistance of a counsel and shall be credited in the service of his sentence with four-fifths of the time during which he has undergone preventive imprisonment.
"Credit for preventive imprisonment for the penalty of reclusion perpetua shall be deducted from thirty (30) years.
"Whenever an accused has undergone preventive imprisonment for a period equal to the possible maximum imprisonment of the offense charged to which he may be sentenced and his case is not yet terminated, he shall be released immediately without prejudice to the continuation of the trial thereof or the proceeding on appeal, if the same is under review. Computation of preventive imprisonment for purposes of immediate release under this paragraph shall be the actual period of detention with good conduct time allowance: Provided, however, That if the accused is absent without justifiable cause at any stage of the trial, the court may motu proprio order the rearrest of the accused: Provided, finally, That recidivists, habitual delinquents, escapees and persons charged with heinous crimes are excluded from the coverage of this Act.In case the maximum penalty to which the accused may be sentenced is lestierro, he shall be released after thirty (30) days of preventive imprisonment."
Republic Act 7659, the law signed in 1993 and which imposed the death penalty, says that heinous crimes include:
Treason
Piracy in general and mutiny on the high seas in Philippine waters
Qualified piracy
Qualified bribery
Parricide
Murder
Infanticide
Kidnapping and serious illegal detention
Robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons
Destructive arson
Rape
Importation, distribution, manufacturing and possession of illegal drugs
Matibay na nakasaad sa batas na may kapangyarihan si Faeldon na magrant ng time allowance ayon sa Secton 5 article 99 ng RA 10952. Ang tanong, bakit ganito ang batas? Nasaan ang checks and balance dito? Sino ang nagsuri at nag-approve ng reports ni Faeldon? Bakit walang independent ang nagsusuri nito? Ang batas na ito ay delikado. Maari nitong palayain ang sinumang may sala basta malakas sa Bucor Chief.
Ayon sa article 29, ang mga may kasong heinous crime ay exluded pero bakit nakalusot ito kay Faeldon? "I am a soldier, I do what I am told". Ang tanong, Sino o ano ang ang-utos kay Faeldon? Kung may mali si Faeldon, posible din na may mali din ang mga naunang nairelease sa panahon ni Noynoy Aquino.
Rice fields are turning gold and two weeks from now, harvesting season will start here in Nueva Ecija. But unlike last year, you don't see from the farmer's eyes the excitement of reaping the fruit of four months of hard labor. Excitement turned into worry... worrying of just breaking even or even selling the harvest at a loss. Farmers have all the reasons to worry for the farm gate price of fresh palay is currently at 12 to 14 pesos per kilogram compared to 19 to 21 pesos per kilogram same season last year.
Here are some interesting numbers... The average cost and average yield per hectare during this season are 40,000 pesos and 5,000 kgs of palay, respectively. At 12 pesos per kg, it will give a net income of 20,000 pesos per hectare ((12 pesos/kg x 5,000 kgs) - 40,000 pesos) compared to 55,000 pesos ((19 pesos/kg x 5,000 kgs) - 40,000 pesos) same season last year. That is roughly 65% loss of income! 20,000 pesos income translates to 3,333 pesos of monthly income and that amount of money is surely not enough to have a decent living for a farmer who only owns one or two hectares of farm.
It is ironic that farmers are the ones feeding the nation yet they cannot feed themselves...
It is ironic that government officials are exhausting all their time in figuring out where transgenders should pee yet they are ignoring the industry where millions of Filipinos depend their future...
The Rice Tariffication Law titled “An Act liberalizing the importation, exportation, and trading of rice, lifting for the purpose the quantitative import restriction on rice, and for other purposes” was signed into law by President Rodrigo Roa Duterte on February 14, 2019. This is also known as the Rice Liberalization Act or Republic Act No. 11203, which amends the Agricultural Tariffication Act of 1996 that imposed tariff to agricultural imports except for rice. Primarily, the law aims to lift the quantitative restriction (QR) on rice imports and replace it with a general tariff. The Agricultural Tariffication Act of 1996 served as the Philippine government’s compliance to our obligation to WTO, lifting QRs and imposing tariff to agricultural products. The law aims to protect local farmers from the entry of more imported rice into the country through the imposition of 35% tariff on rice coming from member-countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) like Thailand and Vietnam. For non-ASEAN countries, 40% tariff is imposed. The collected tariffs will be used to fund mass irrigation, warehousing, and rice research. Effects of rice tariffication: Positive:
Lower retail prices for consumers. Possible savings for the consumers as it allows no limit in terms of the volume of imports which will eventually stabilize prices. However, in the long run, the economy could benefit more from the adoption of import tariffs than implementation of QRS which limit the entry of commodities and may lead to unstable prices.
Address the rice shortage. Would address the urgent need to improve availability of rice in the country, prevent artificial rice shortages, reduce the prices of rice in the market, and curtail corruption and cartel domination in the rice industry.
Lower inflation rates. The law will also reduce government's role in rice importation and lead to more rice imports by the private sector, thus, lowering rice prices and help tame inflation.
Interventions to support rice farmers. RCEF will provide key interventions to support farmers and enhance their competitiveness and profitability, including farm machinery and equipment to improve farm operations, rice seed development, propagation, and promotion, expanded rice credit, and extension services. Likewise, it will open up a window for farmers to export and contribute to the world market.
Negative
New law lacks safety nets for Filipino farmers. Farmer groups clamor that the new law will make them compete with cheap rice imports, making them more penniless. Measures should be in place to ensure that Filipino farmers will not suffer with the rice tariffication law and that "safety nets" are available for farmers. While it has its good points, the lack of government regulation worries stakeholders.
Potential displacement of farmers, NFA employees, accredited NFA retailers, rice millers and rice by-product producers. Aside from the obvious displacement of rice farmers, NFA employees, and some 90,000 accredited NFA rice retailers nationwide, the deregulation of rice imports goes beyond the industry. Some of the businesses and industries that will be affected by liberalized rice importation includes the following:
Millers. There are around 6,600 registered rice millers all over the country, employing 55,000 workers. Industry stakeholders, in a position paper, said that a complete milling facility costs from Php 30 million (US$572,519.08) to Php 50 million (US$954,198.47)1 . This would place the value of the whole industry itself at Php200 billion (US$ 3.82 billion) to Php300 billion (US$ 5.73) ( (Orly Manuntag, Confideartion of Grains Retailers Association of the Philippines).
Animal feeds and beer industry. A by-product of the rice milling process, the rice bran is used for making animal and aquaculture feeds. A shortage in local unhusked rice production would also mean there would be a drop in its by-product. If feed mills produce less, it would cause a possible increase in the prices of pork and chicken which use rice bran as major ingredient for its feeds. Another by-product which comes from the milling process is the brewer's rice or “binlid” which is used in manufacturing alcoholic drinks, particularly beer.
Biomass, construction industry. A drop in local rice output will also mean a decrease in rice hull, which is used as fuel for biomass furnaces used in the provinces to provide electricity. Rice hulls are also used as a binder for cement and land fillers (Orly Manuntag, Confideartion of Grains Retailers Association of the Philippines).
Enable cartels of the rice trade and will throw poor sectors into a worsened state of hunger. There is no guarantee that retail rice prices will be lower in the long run with unhampered importation. Relying on rice imports makes the country vulnerable to higher world market prices as well as to rice production and export decisions of other countries. In 2008, for instance, Vietnam, India and Pakistan restricted their rice exports amid rising global rice prices. Thailand also raised the idea of creating a global rice cartel similar to that for oil exporting countries.
Some salient issues on rice tariffication
Rice imports are cheaper than domestically produced rice. Under a free market, the market price of rice will decline with the influx of cheaper rice imports. Liberalizing rice imports will help, but will not solve the Philippines' inflation problem.
Tariff are set at 35% tariff rate on all rice imports from ASEAN countries, and a 40% tariff on all imports from non-ASEAN countries. However, some experts claim these tariff rates are still too high, and lower rates (10% to 20%) might be more feasible in keeping with the central goal of making rice more affordable for Filipinos. While this will result in imported rice becoming more expensive, the flood of imported grains will still threaten local produce and worse, affects the farmers.
To ensure that the rice to be imported will not be infested by pathogens or pests like bukbok (weevils), the new law requires that all private players secure “sanitary and phytosanitary import clearances” from BPI before they can import. Past experience tells us that this could be prone to abuse (Dr. Ramon Clarete, University of the Philippines School of Economics).
The Rice Fund will be put to better use if it were focused instead on improving rice farmers’ access to credit and crop insurance (Dr. Emil Q. Javier, National Academy of Science and Technology).
Begun and held in Metro Manila, on Monday, the twenty-third day of July, two thousand eighteen.
REPUBLIC ACT No. 11203
An Act Liberalizing the Importation, Exportation and Trading of Rice, Lifting for the Purpose the Quantitative Import Restriction on Rice, and For Other Purposes
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippine Congress Assembled:
Section 1. Section 2 of Republic Act (R. A.) No. 8178. as amended, is hereby further amended to read as follows:
"Sec. 2. Declaration of Polic - — It is the policy of the State to ensure food security and to make the country’s agricultural sector viable, efficient and globally competitive. The State adopts the use of tariffs m lieu of non-tariff import restrictions to protect local producers of agricultural products.
Section 2. Section 3 of R. A. No. 8178. as amended is hereby further amended to read as follows:
"Sec. 3. Definition of Terms. - The following definitions apply to the terms used in this Act:
"(a) ‘Agricultural products’ shall refer to specific commodities classified under Chapters 1-24 of the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System (HS) adopted and used in Section 1611 of R. A. No. 10863, otherwise known as the "Customs Modernization and Tariff Act" (CMTA);
"x x x
"(c) ‘ATIGA Rate’ refers to tariff rate commitments under the ASEAN Trade m Goods Agreement (ATIGA) applicable to importations originating from Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) member States;
"(d) ‘Bound rate’ refers to the agreed maximum tariffs on products committed by the Philippines to the World Trade Organization (WTO) under the Uruguay Round Final Act, and under the ATIGA, in accordance with its tariff schedule (Annex 2: Tariffs under the ASEAN Trade in Goods Agreement (ATIGA)- PHILIPPINES);
"(e) ‘Buffer Stock’ refers to the optimal level of rice inventory that shall be maintained at any given time to be used for emergency situations and to sustain the disaster relief programs of the government during natural or man-made calamities;
"(f) ‘In-Quota Tariff Rate’ refers to the tariff rates for minimum access volumes committed by the Philippines to the WTO under the Uruguay Round Final Act:
"(g) ‘Out-Quota Tariff Rate’ refers to the higher rate of customs duty that is levied on the quantities of an imported agricultural product in excess of its minimum access volume (MAV);
"(h) ‘Minimum Access Volume’ refers to the volume of a specific agricultural product that is allowed to be imported with a lower tariff as committed by the Philippines to the WTO under the Uruguay Round Final Act;
"(i) ‘Most Favoured Nation (MFN) Rate’ refers to Philippine tariff rates that are applicable to imports from all sources as prescribed in the CMTA;
"(j) ‘Quantitative Import Restrictions’ refer to non-tariff restrictions used to limit the amount of imported commodities, including, but not limited to discretionary import licensing and import quotas, whether qualified or absolute;
"(k) ‘Rice’ refers to all products classified under the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System (HS) heading 10.06;
"(l) ‘Rice Shortage’ is a situation where the quantity available or the supply of the commodity in a market falls short of the quantity demanded or required at a given time;
"(m) ‘Tariff’ refers to a tax levied on a commodity imported from another country. It earns revenues for the government and regarded as instruments to promote local industries by taxing their competitors. The benefit is accorded to the local producers by the maintenance of a domestic price at a level equal to the world price plus the tariff;
"(n) ‘Tariff Equivalent’ refers to the rate of tariff that provides comparable protection under existing quantitative import restrictions, reflected by the average price gap between domestic prices and world prices; and
"(o) ‘Tariffication’ refers to the lifting of all existing quantitative restrictions such as import quotas or prohibitions, imposed on agricultural products, and replacing these restrictions with tariffs."
Section 3. Section 4 of R. A. No. 8178, as amended, hereby further amended to read as follows:
"Sec. 12. Repeal. - The following laws and all other laws or provisions of law prescribing quantitative import restrictions or granting government agencies the power to impose such restrictions on agricultural products or hindering the liberalization of the importation, exportation and trading of rice are hereby repealed:
"x x x
"(8) Subparagraphs i, v, vi, vii, xi. xii, xiii, xiv, xv, xvi, xvii, xviii, xix, xxii, xxiii, and xxv of Section 6(a) of Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 4, as amended."
Section 4. A new Section 5 is hereby inserted after Section 4 of R. A. No. 8178, as amended, to read as follows:
"Sec. 5. Issuance of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Import Clearance for Rice for the Sole Purpose of Ensuring Food. Safety. - All importers of rice are required to secure a Sanitary and Phytosanitary Import Clearance (SPSIC) from the Bureau of Plant Industry (BPI) prior to importation in accordance with existing laws, rules and regulations: Provided, That the clearance shall not provide for import volume and timing restrictions: Provided, further, That failure on the part of the BPI to release the SPSIC without informing the rice importer of any error, deficiency, omission, or additional documentary requirement shall mean automatic approval of the SPSIC applied for within seven (7) days after submission of the complete requirements.
"The imported rice should arrive before the expiration of the SPSIC from the BPI.
"The food safety regulatory function of the NFA under Item (i), Section 16 of R. A. No. 10611, otherwise known as the ‘Food Safety Act of 2013’.1âwphi1 is hereby transferred to the BPI."
Section 5. Section 6 of R. A. No. 8178, as amended, is hereby further amended to read as follows:
"Sec. 6. Tariffication. - In lieu of quantitative import restrictions, the maximum bound rates committed under the Uruguay Round Final Act shall be imposed on the agricultural products whose quantitative import restrictions are repealed by this Act. xxx.
"x x x
"For the tariff equivalent of the quantitative import restrictions on rice, the bound rate shall be as notified by the Philippines to the WTO as follows:
"(a) For the minimum access volume committed by the Philippines to WTO. the in-quota tariff rate indicated in the applicable provisions of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture shall apply;
"(b) For rice imports originating from ASEAN member states, the import duty rate under the ATIGA shall apply; and
"(c) For rice imports originating from non-ASEAN WTO member states, the out-quota tariff rate is one hundred eighty percent (180%) or the tariff equivalent calculated in accordance with Paragraph 10 pf Annex 5, Section b, of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture upon the expiration of the waiver relating to the special treatment for rice of the Philippines, whichever is higher, shall apply.
"The calculated tariff equivalent shall be determined by the Tariff Commission and approved by the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) Board within forty-five (45) days upon the effectivity of this Act."
Section 6. A new Section 7 is hereby inserted after Section 6 of R. A. No. 8178, as amended, to read as follows:
"Sec. 7. Powers of the President. - Consistent with the Philippine national interest and the objective of safeguarding Filipino farmers and consumers, the President is hereby empowered to act with full delegated authority subject to the provisions of the CMTA. in the following circumstances:
"(a) The President may increase, reduce, revise, or adjust existing rates of import duty up to the bound rate committed by the Philippines under the WTO Agreement on Agriculture and under the ATIGA, including any necessary change in classification applicable to the importation of rice: Provided, That the power herein delegated to the President shall only be exercised when Congress is not in session: Provided, further, That any order issued by the President adjusting the applied tariff rates shall take effect fifteen (15) days after publication;
"(b) In the event of any imminent or forecasted shortage, or such other situation requiring government intervention, the President is empowered for a limited period and/or a specified volume, to allow the importation at a lower applied tariff rate to address the situation. Such order shall take effect immediately and can only be issued when Congress is not in session; and
"(c) In case the calculated out-quota tariff rate referred to under Section 6(c) of this Act exceeds one hundred percent (100%), the provision of Paragraph 1, Section 1608(a) of the CMTA shall also not apply.
"The power herein delegated to the President may be withdrawn or terminated by Congress through a Joint Resolution."
Section 7. A new Section 7-A is hereby inserted after the new Section 7 of R. A. No. 8178, as amended, to read as follows:
"Sec. 7-A. Trade Negotiation Authority. - In the interest of the Philippine rice industry and Philippine consumers, and upon the recommendation of the NEDA and the Department of Agriculture (DA), the President may enter into trade negotiations or renegotiations of the Philippine international trade commitments on rice."
Section 8. A new Section 8 is hereby inserted after the new Section 7-A of R. A. No. 8178. as amended, to read as follows:
"Sec. 8. Maintenance of Rice Buffer Stock. - The NFA shall, in accordance with the rules, regulations and procedures to be promulgated, maintain sufficient rice buffer stock to be sourced solely from local farmers."
Section 9. A new Section 9 is hereby inserted after the new Section 8 of R. A. No. 8178. as amended, to read as follows:
"Sec. 9. Lifting of Quantitative Export Restrictions on Ric - — Any and all laws, rules, regulations, guidelines, and other issuances imposing quantitative export restrictions on rice are hereby repealed. The exportation of rice shall be allowed in accordance with the established redes, regulations and guidelines."
Section 10. A new Section 10 is hereby inserted after the new Section 9 of R. A. No. 8178, as amended, to read as follows:
"Sec. 10. Special Rice Safeguard. - In order to protect the Philippine rice industry from sudden or extreme price fluctuations, a special safeguard duty on rice shall be imposed in accordance with R.A. No. 8800, otherwise known as the ‘Safeguard Measures Act’ and its implementing rules and regulations."
Section 11. Section 7 of R. A. No. 8178. as amended, is hereby renumbered as Section 11 and is amended to read as
"Sec. 11. Mechanism for the Implementation of Minimum Access Volume (MAV). - An equitable and transparent mechanism for allocating the MAV of agricultural products whose quantitative restrictions are herein lifted, shall be developed and established, having the least government intervention, addressing the requirements of each geographical area, and without entailing any cost to importers/users of these products to the detriment of local consumers and other end-users.
"In the case of rice, its MAV will revert to its 2012 level at three hundred fifty thousand metric tons (350,000 MT) as indicated in the Philippine commitment to the WTO.
"x x x."
Section 12. Section 8 of R. A. No. 8178. as amended, is hereby renumbered as Section 12 and is amended to read as follows:
"Sec. 12. Agricultural Competitiveness Enhancement Fund. - To implement the policy enunciated in this Act, there is hereby created the Agricultural Competitiveness Enhancement Fund, herein referred to as the Fund. The Fund shall consist of all duties collected from the importation of agricultural products, except rice, under the MAV mechanism, including unused balances and collections from repayments from loan beneficiaries including interests, if any. The Fund shall be automatically credited to Special Account 183 in the General Fund of the National Treasury: Provided, That fund releases shall not be subject to any ceiling bv the Department of Budget and Management (DBM).
"x x x."
Section 13. A new Section 13 is hereby inserted after the renumbered Section 12 of R. A. No. 8178, as amended, to read as follows:
"Sec. 13. Rice Competitiveness Enhancement Fund. - There is hereby created a Rice Competitiveness Enhancement Fund, herein referred to as the ‘Rice Fund’. The Rice Fund shall consist of an annual appropriation of Ten billion pesos (₱10,000,000,000.00) for the next six (6) years following the approval of this Act and shall be automatically credited to a Special Account in the General Fund of the National Treasury which shall be in place within ninety (90)’ days upon the effectivity of this Act.
"At the end of the sixth (6th) year, a mandatory review shall be conducted by the Congressional Oversight Committee on Agricultural and Fisheries Modernization (COCAFM) to determine whether the Rice Fund and its use as provided for under this Act shall be continued, amended, or terminated. The COCAFM shall utilize the increase or decrease in farmers’ incomes as a primary benchmark in determining the effectiveness of the interventions under the program and its possible extension.
"The Secretary of Agriculture shall be accountable and responsible for the Rice Fund in coordination with other government agencies concerned.1âwphi1
"The amount allocated shall be released directly to the implementing agencies as provided for in this Act based on the objectives and plans of the rice industry roadmap: Provided, That the unutilized portion of the Rice Fund allocated to the implementing agencies shall not revert to the General Fund but shall continue to be used for the purpose for which it was set aside. Fund releases charged against the Rice Fund shall not be subject to any ceiling by the Department of Budget and Management (DBM).
"Any program undertaken in accordance with this Act shall only be deemed complementary and supplementary to and shall not be a replacement of any existing programs for rice and rice farmers already implemented by the DA and other agencies concerned.
"Subject to the usual accounting and auditing rules and regulations, the Rice Fund shall be allocated and disbursed to rice producing areas, as follows:
"(a) Rice Farm Machineries and Equipment – Fifty percent (50%) of the Rice Fund shall be released to and implemented by the Philippine Center for Postharvest Development and Mechanization (PHilMech) as grant in kind to eligible farmers associations, registered rice cooperatives and local government units (LGUs), in the form of rice farm equipment, such as tillers, tractors, seeders, threshers, rice planters, harvesters, irrigation pumps, small solar irrigation, reapers, driers, millers, and the like, for purposes of improving farm mechanization: Provided, That the PHilMech shall, whenever feasible, procure from accredited local manufacturers to assist in the promotion of locally manufactured farm machineries and equipment;
"(b) Rice Seed Development, Propagation and Promotion – Thirty percent (30%) of the Rice Fund shall be released to and implemented by the Philippine Rice Research Institute (PhilRice) and shall be used for the development, propagation and promotion of inbred rice seeds to rice farmers and the organization of rice farmers into seed growers associations and/or cooperatives engaged in seed production and trade:
"(c) Expanded Rice Credit Assistance – Ten percent (10%) of the Rice Fund shall be made available in the form of credit facility with minimal interest rate-s and with minimum collateral requirements to rice farmers and cooperatives, to be managed equally by the Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) and the Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP); and
"(d) Rice Extension Services – Ten percent (10%) of the Rice Fund shall be made available for the extension services provided by PHilMech. PhilRice. Agricultural Training Institute (ATI) and Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA) for teaching skills on rice crop production, modern rice farming techniques, seed production, farm mechanization, and knowledge/technology transfer through farm schools nationwide as follows: seventy percent (70%) to TESDA, ten percent (10%) each to ATI, PhilRice and PHilMech.
"Provided, That the percentage allocation will be reviewed on the third year of the effectivity of this Act for possible revisions should intervention priorities change.
"Provided, further, That preferential attention should be given to rice farmers, cooperatives and associations adversely affected by the tariffication of the quantitative import restriction on rice in accordance with the thrust and priorities of R. A. No. 8435, as amended, otherwise known as the ‘Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act’ and the Philippine Development Plan (PDP). The increase or decrease of farmers’ incomes shall be the primary benchmark in granting these interventions.
"Provided, furthermore, That if the annual tariff revenues from rice importation exceeds Ten billion pesos (₱10,000,000,000.00) in any given year within the six (6) year period following the effectivity of this Act, the excess tariff revenues shall be earmarked by Congress and included in the General Appropriations Act (GAA) of the following year:
"(a) Rice Farmer Financial Assistance – A portion of the excess rice tariff revenues shall be released to the DA and shall be used for providing direct financial assistance to rice farmers who are farming two (2) hectares and below regardless of whether they continue farming rice or not as compensation for the projected reduction or loss of farm income arising from the tariffication of the quantitative import restrictions on rice;
"(b) Titling of Agricultural Rice Lands – A portion of the excess rice tariff revenues shall be released to the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR), Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) and Land Registration Authority (LRA). and shall be used for the subdivision and titling of agricultural rice lands or parts thereof awarded to farmer-beneficiaries under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) and other similar programs of the government:
"(c) Expanded Crop Insurance Program on Rice – A portion of the excess tariff revenues shall be released to the Philippine Crop Insurance Corporation (PCIC) and shall be used for the provision of crop insurance to qualified rice farmer-beneficiaries under « its existing agricultural insurance programs; and
"(d) Crop Diversification Program – A portion of the excess tariff revenues shall be released to the DA and shall be used for productivity-enhancement programs for rice farmers seeking to diversify production towards other crops.
"The Congressional Oversight Committee on Agricultural and Fisheries Modernization (COCAFM) shall conduct a periodic review of the use of the Rice Fund."
Section 14. A new Section 14 is hereby inserted after the new Section 13 of R. A. No. 8178, as amended, to read as follows:
"Sec. 14. Beneficiaries of the Rice Fund. - The beneficiaries of the Rice Fund shall be those farmers and farmworkers and their dependents listed in the Registry System for Basic Sectors in Agriculture (RSBSA), and rice cooperatives and associations accredited by the DA. Within one hundred eighty (180) days from the effectivity of this Act, the DA. in consultation with farmers’ cooperatives and organizations and LGUs, shall validate and update the masterlist of eligible beneficiaries to ensure that those listed are legitimate farmers, farmworkers and rice cooperatives and associations.
"In order to focus on the targeted rice farmer beneficiaries, cooperatives and associations for the Rice Fund, the list of rice producing provinces and LGUs, as provided for by PhilRice as of 2015-2018. shall, be the basis and shall be added to the roadmap as an appendix."
Section 15. A new Section 15 is hereby inserted after the new Section 14 of R. A. No. 8178. as amended, to read as follows:
"Sec. 15. Rice Industry Roadmap. - Upon the effectivity of this Act, the DA, .together with the NED A. Department of Finance (DOF), DBM, DAR. National Irrigation Administration (NIA), TESDA, PCIC, National Anti-Poverty Commission (NAPC) Farmer Sectoral Council Representative and other government agencies concerned, including rice farmer representatives, shall be given a maximum of one hundred eighty (180) days to formulate and adopt the rice roadmap to restructure the government‘s delivery of support services for the agricultural rice sector.
"The following principles shall govern the development and implementation of the roadmap for the rice industry:
"(a) Raise sustainable investments in the rice industry particularly on rice support infrastructure and post-harvest facilities;
"(b) Improve the productivity, efficiency and profitability of small rice farmers and landless farmworkers;
"(c) Strengthen research and development programs that will enhance the resiliency of the rice industry:
"(d) Preserve and enhance the rice production capabilities of future generations;
"(e) Provide accessible, targeted and technology-oriented support services that cover the entire value chain;
"(f) Set up responsible, participatory and effective governance mechanisms; and
"(g) Address impact of income loss caused by rice tariffication.
"The rice industry roadmap shall be implemented through a complementation of the DA‘s rice sector programs as funded by the GAA, and the Rice Fund created under this Act."
Section 16. A new Section 16 is hereby inserted after the new Section 15 of R. A. No. 8178. as amended, to read as follows:
"Sec. 16. National Single Window Program. - To ensure the accurate collection of tariff as provided in Section 6 of this Act, the National Single Window (NSW) program of the Bureau of Customs (BOC) shall be implemented within one hundred eighty (180) days from the effectivity of this Act in accordance with Executive Order No. 482."
Section 17.Implementing Rules and Regulations. - Within forty-five (45) days from effectivity of this Act, the DA, NEDA and DBM shall, in coordination with DAR. DENR, NIA. LRA, PCIC. PHilMech, PhilRice, TESDA, LBP, DBP, ATI, and other government agencies concerned and after consultation with directly affected stakeholders, promulgate the rules and regulations to effectively implement the provisions of this Act.
Section 18.Separability Clause. - If any portion of this Act is declared invalid or unconstitutional, the portions or provisions which are not affected shall continue to be in full force and effect.
Section 19.Repealing Clause. - All laws, decrees, executive issuances, rules and regulations inconsistent with this Act are hereby repealed or modified accordingly.
Section 20.Effectivity. - This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its publication in the Official Gazette or in a newspaper of general circulation.
Approved, GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO Speaker of the House of Representatives VICENTE C. SOTTO III President of the Senate
This Act which is a consolidation of Senate Bill No. 1998 and House Bill No. 7785 was passed by the Senate and the House of Representatives on November 28. 2018.
DANTE ROBERTO P. MALING Acting Secretary General House of Representatives MYRA MARIE D. VILLARICA Secretary of the Senate Approved: February 14, 2019 (Sgd.) RODRIGO ROA DUTERTE President of the Philippines Source: http://ap.fftc.agnet.org/ap_db.php?id=960&print=1
