Judge stops BOC computerization

July 23, 2013

The Bureau of Customs headed by Commissioner Ruffy Biazon was among the government agencies that
received a tongue-lashing from President Aquino in his State of the ation Address before Congress the
other day! The B"C re#eatedly falls short of its collection targets$ and has been unable to sto# smuggling!
%henever Biazon is as&ed by the #ress what he #lans to do to increase collections$ sto# smuggling$ and
curb corru#tion in the bureau$ he answers' (com#uterization!)
%ith com#uterization$ Biazon says$ there will be no contact between the im#orter and customs
em#loyees! o #a#er wor&! *verything will be by com#uter! Aside from curbing corru#tion$ transactions
in the B"C will be quic&! +i,ers will be #ut out of business! And collections will increase!
"ne reason for the dro# in collections$ aside from corru#tion$ is that more and more duty-free treaties
between the Phili##ines and other countries are being im#lemented! Because of this$ although im#orts
increase$ tariff collections decrease! -uch of the recent im#orts are duty-free!
.oing bac& to com#uterization$ it has started at the B"C and was #lanned for com#letion ne,t year were
it not for a -anila regional trial court /udge who sto##ed the award of the com#uterization contract to the
winning bidder!
0ast -arch$ after a bidding #rocess which was strictly su#ervised by the B"C bids and awards committee
and which was #ronounced by Biazon himself as thorough and trans#arent$ the 1ntegrated Phili##ine
Customs System 21PCS3 was awarded to the /oint venture of %ebb +ontaine and .lobal Resource for
"utsource %or&ers 2.row3 1nc!
A notice to #roceed was issued and the o#eration to modernize the B"C 1T system began!
But less than two wee&s ago$ 4udge Armando 5anga issued a tem#orary restraining order on the award of
the P677-million contract to the winning bidder$ (until the hearing of the #etition for a #reliminary
in/unction) filed by the losing bidder$ "mni#rime -ar&eting 1nc! re#resented by its #resident$ Annabelle
-argaroli!
The /udge claimed that the #etitioner had succeeded in #resenting evidence that it may suffer irre#arable
in/ury if the deal were to be awarded to %ebb +ontaine and .row!
"mni#rime sought to annul the notice of award to %ebb +ontaine$ claiming that the latter failed to
com#ly with bidding requirements because it submitted #a#ers in which the signature of the notary #ublic
had been forged!
0ast wee&$ %ebb +ontaine filed an urgent motion to dissolve the TR"!
0awyers would find 4udge 5anga8s reasoning interesting! 9e said "mni#rime would suffer irre#arable
in/ury from the continuation of the act sought to be en/oined!
9owever$ the B"C has already awarded the contract to the /oint venture and issued a notice to #roceed!
The /oint venture has begun its contractual obligations and was in fact already o#erating before
"mni#rime filed its #etition!
Thus$ it is the /oint venture of %ebb +ontaine and .row that will suffer irre#arable in/ury from this TR"$
not "mni#rime!
1nterestingly$ "mni#rime admitted in its #etition that it was disqualified after the technical #ro#osals of
the three bidders were o#ened and e,amined! 1ts disqualification sim#ly means that it neither acquired nor
was it vested with any right over the 1PCS #ro/ect!
%ithout a clear legal right to be #rotected$ then there can be no violation of any right to s#ea& of for
"mni#rime!
Biazon is understandably u#set! 1n interviews with the media$ he insists that the B"C com#uterization
#rogram is aboveboard$ and that the com#laint filed by -argaroli stemmed from a #ersonal vendetta
against %ebb +ontaine!
9e says he questioned "mni#rime8s bid after he discovered that the com#any failed to #artici#ate in the
bidding #rocess for lac& of some required documents!
According to Biazon$ "mni#rime was a #artner of the local subsidiary of %ebb +ontaine in a #revious
maintenance contract with the B"C! But %ebb +ontaine dro##ed "mni#rime and #artnered with .row
for the new com#uterization #ro/ect!
(They do not seem to get along as business #artners$ so they #arted ways and %ebb +ontaine ended u#
#artnering with .row$) Biazon says$ adding that there were no irregularities in the bidding last -arch as
legal and #ro#er #rocedures were thoroughly and trans#arently followed!
Biazon also says he will res#ect the TR"$ but warns that delay in im#lementing the com#uterization
#ro/ect can adversely affect revenue collections! 9e says there is no legal question as to the necessity and
im#ortance of the #ro/ect that is envisioned to increase collections and hel# rid the B"C of illegal
transactions!
Readmore' htt#'::o#inion!inquirer!net:6;<<6:/udge-sto#s-boc-com#uterization=i,zz<y4o>zaw#
_____________________________________________________________________________________
SC stops BCDA rom !idding out "13#3B property in $aguig
January 11, 2013
The Su#reme Court sto##ed the Bases Conversion ?evelo#ment Authority 2BC?A3 from bidding out the
P@>!>-billion #ro#erty in Bonifacio South area in Taguig City!
(The Court resolved to issue a tem#orary restraining order en/oining res#ondents or any of their
re#resentatives or agents from #roceeding with the bidding #rocess sub/ect of its Ainvitation to bid8Band
in any way dis#osing of the sub/ect lot which acts tend to render the Court8s resolution of the #etition
ineffectual$ effective immediately until further orders from the Court$) the high court8s third division
released +riday said!
At the same time$ the high court gave the BC?A u# to 4anuary <@ to submit their comment on S-8s
#etition!
The resolution was issued u#on the #etition filed by S- 0and 1nc!$ the original #ro/ect #ro#onent for the
develo#ment of the #ro#erty!
S- too& the case to the Su#reme Court after BC?A o#ted to dis#ose of the >>!@-hectare #ro#erty through
a #ublic bidding!
BC?A said they have not yet awarded the contract to S-!
BC?A believed that the offer of S- 0and for P>C$D77 #er square meter was too low for the #rime
#ro#erty as nearby areas were now fetching between P;7$777 and PE7$777 #er square meter!
Readmore' htt#'::business!inquirer!net:@7<@E@:sc-sto#s-bcda-from-bidding-out-#@>->b-#ro#erty-in-
taguig=i,zz<y4qPo"df
Court grants $%O motion to stop re&!idding o !us terminal pro'ect
(o)em!er 12, 2011
The Regional Trial Court has granted the motion for issuance of a tem#orary restraining order 2TR"3
filed by two construction com#anies see&ing to sto# the Famboanga City .overnment from re-bidding
the 1ntegrated Bus Terminal 21BT3 #ro/ect in ?ivisoria!
The re-bidding was scheduled yesterday$ but because of the court order$ the controversial #ro/ect will be
shelved or bac& to a (status quo) as agreed u#on by the
TR" #etitioners and the res#ondent 2city government3!
1n his two-#age order$ Regional Trial Court Branch @; 4udge Tibing A! Asaali said the holding of a
#ublic bidding yesterday will cause irre#arable damage and untold in/ury to the #etitioners 2RC?.
Construction Cor#! and R!G! Aquino Construction and ?evelo#ment Co#!3 since the bidding of the 1BT
#ro/ect was unilaterally recalled and cancelled$ (consequently the #etitioners were a##arently denied due
#rocess!)
1n the same order$ 4udge Asaali ordered the res#ondents 2City government through -ayor Celso 0obregat
and its Bids and Award Committee3 to a##ear before his sala on ovember <@$ <7@@ at < #!m!!to show
cause why a %rit of Preliminary 1n/unction should not be issued to #ermanently sto# the re-bidding of the
1BT #ro/ect!
The two #etitioners have filed with the court a s#ecial civil action as&ing for a certiorari$ mandamus and
#ermanent in/unction with a##lication for TR" or writ of #reliminary in/unction to #rohibit the city
government from (re-advertising$ rebuilding and other acts in furtherance of the rebidding of the 1BT
Pro/ect!)
Asaali noted that the hearing scheduled on ?ecember @C$ <77D$ was regarding the #ro#riety of the
issuance of a %rit of Preliminary 1n/unction against the city government to #rohibit them from
committing any acts which would #re/udice RC?. and R!G! Aquino with res#ect to the 1BT #ro/ect!
(But instead of #roceeding with the hearing$ the #arties /ust agreed to maintain the Status Huo! And on
the #art of the res#ondents$ would not #roceed with the re-advertising and rebidding of the #ro/ects! The
#etitioners on their #art have agreed to dis#ense with or at least sus#end the #roceedings regarding the
issuance of a %rit of Preliminary 1n/unction since the #arties have already agreed to maintain the Status
Huo! As a result of the discussion the #arties held on ?ecember @C$ <77D as manifested and noted by this
Court that they have agreed on the maintenance of the status quo until the merits of the case have been
decided! $This was consequently embodied in the "rder of this 9onorable Court on ?ecember @D$ <77D!
And with maintenance of the status quo$ further #roceeding u# to the #re-trial and sti#ulation of facts by
the #arties and their counsel geared towards the maintenance of the status quo$) Asaali said!
RC?.$ a local contractor which was awarded the contract for the construction of the 1BT in ?ivisoria in
<77D$ had earlier filed a contem#t of court charge against ?r! -ario Arriola$ chairman of the city8s Bids
and Awards Committee 2BAC3 $ alleging that the latter violated the status quo agreement on the 1BT by
ordering its rebidding$ which was #ublished in the 4uly >@$ <7@@ issue of the Phili##ine ?aily 1nquirer
and the Phili##ine .overnment *lectronic Procurement System 2P910.*PS3 website! Both rebidding
notices were signed by ?r! Arriola!
At the same time$ RC?. moved for the issuance by the court of a TR" or #reliminary in/unction to sto#
all rebidding activities ordered by the BAC chairman for the construction of the 1BT!
RC?. was /oined in the motion by R!G! Aquino Construction and ?evelo#ment Cor#oration$ which is in
/oint venture with RC?. for the #ro/ect!
1n documents filed in court$ the Roque I Butuyan 0aw "ffice and Atty! Jic R! Solis$ lawyers for the
RC?.$ cited a court order dated ?ecember @C$ <7@7 which recognized a status quo agreement with the
lawyers for the city!
The contract for the construction of the integrated bus terminal was awarded to RC?. in /oint venture
with R!G! Aquino Construction Cor#oration on A#ril @>$ <77D! 1t was later cancelled by -ayor 0obregat$
which led to the contractors filing of a civil case with the RTC$ questioning the cancellation order of the
mayor!
The court case has dragged the bus terminal #ro/ect which is a flagshi# #ro/ect of the 0obregat
administration and similar viewed by many quarters as an im#ortant underta&ing considering that almost
all cities in -indanao have modern and attractive bus terminals$ e,ce#t for Famboanga City!
Read more' htt#'::zamboangatimes!#h:zamboangatimes:to#-news:<D;7-court-grants-tro-motion-to-sto#-
re-bidding-of-bus-terminal-#ro/ect!html