Farmer groups ask SC to declare EO lowering rice tariffs unconstitutional

MANILA, Philippines — Farmer groups on Thursday asked the Supreme Court (SC) to declare “null and void” and unconstitutional the executive order (EO) reducing and modifying tariff rates on rice and other agricultural products. 

In a 27-page petition, groups Samahang Industriya ng Agrikultura, Federation of Free Farmers, United Broiler Raisers Association, Sorosoro Ibaba Development Cooperative and a representative from Magsasaka Partylist asked the high court to declare EO 62 unconstitutional. 

Along with the plea on making the EO unconstitutional, the groups also asked the SC to issue a temporary restraining order on the implementation of the EO while court proceedings are ongoing. 

According to the groups, the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) and the Tariff Commission failed to conduct consultations among the affected farmer groups which resulted in them filing the petition.

“But none of the mandated consultation/hearings/investigations were ever held specifically for the purpose of further lowering the tariff of rice and other agricultural produce,” the petition read. 

“The mandated process is a limitation set forth by the law before the President can validly issue the Executive Order involving tariff of rice and other agricultural products,” it added. 

According to the petitioners, the groups referred to previous executive orders, namely EO No. 135, EO No. 10, and EO No. 50, which had mandated consultations, investigations and hearings, unlike the assailed EO 62.

These executive orders mandated a reduction in tariffs on certain products such as meat, corn and rice.

The petitioners also said that the EO not only lacked proper consultation but also allegedly breached the constitutional duty of government officials to shield farmers from unfair competition and trade practices and to cultivate a self-reliant and independent national economy controlled by Filipinos.

They added that the EO will make the country reliant on foreign produce.

“The issuance of EO No. 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, EO 62 exposes