The Supreme Court (SC) on Wednesday ordered Malacañang and other concerned government offices to comment on a petition filed by several agriculture sector organizations seeking to have Executive Order No. 62 declared unconstitutional
The EO, which was issued on June 20, lowers tariffs on imported rice and other issued agricultural products
SC spokesman Camille Sue Mae Ting said the magistrates issued the order during its en banc session held on Tuesday.
The high court also deferred taking action on the prayer of the petitioners led by Samahang Industriya ng Agrikultura (SINAG) Inc., for the issuance of a temporary restraining order (TRO) to immediately suspend the implementation of the E.O 62.
“The Court without giving due course to the petition and prayer for TRO, required the respondents to file their comments within a non-extendible period of 10 days from notice,” the SC said.
The petitioners immediately welcomed the Court’s decision to compel respondents to comment on their petition and urged President Marcos and the other respondents to halt the implementation of the order pending the SC decision on the merits of the case.
“SINAG and the whole agri sector welcome the order of the Supreme Court in requiring the respondents to file their comments within 10 days,” SINAG chair Rosendo So said.
“Considering that the matter of the constitutionality of EO 62 is now pending before the SC, the pendency of this legal action should be respected by the respondents; (and they should) defer any action in relation to EO 62 and, give due respect to the SC,” SINAG’s leader added.
The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), which serves as the chief government counsel, said it has yet to receive a copy of the Court’s resolution requiring it to comment on the petition but it is already studying the legal issues raised in the actual petition.
Solicitor General Menardo Guevarra, however, said EO 62 will continue to be implemented unless a TRO is issued by the Court.
“We do not know whether the SC will issue a TRO or not in the days to come. I suppose the SC justices are also presently evaluating whether any injunctive relief is necessary as far as the government is concerned, however, the EO will be implemented unless temporarily restrained by the SC,” the Solicitor General stressed.
Besides SINAG, other petitioners in the case are Federation of Free Farmers Inc. (FFFI), United Broiler Raisers Association (UBRA), Sorosoro Ibaba Development Cooperative (SIDC), and Magsasaka Partylist representative Argel Cabatbat.
President Marcos, Executive Secretary Lucas Bersamin, National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) Secretary Arsenio Balisacan and Tariff Commission chairperson Marilou Mendoza were named as respondents in the petition.
The petitioners argued that EO 62 should be scrapped for being unconstitutional as it was hastily issued without proper consultation with the affected stakeholders.
They added that EO No. 62 violates the limitations and conditions set forth in the Flexible Clause of Republic Act 10863, which makes its issuance invalid and the exercise tantamount to undue delegation of legislative powers.
The order also violates the state policy to develop a self-reliant and independent national economy effectively controlled by Filipinos and violates the constitutional mandate to protect the farmers from unfair competition and trade practices, according to the petitioners.
