Sammy Martin
Manila Times

IN the beginning of this, the 14th Congress, congressmen filed several bills to upgrade the ancient Maritime Code of the Philippines. Sadly, after they were filed and referred to the corresponding committee, hearings have not been held.

So the New Maritime Code that would reform and streamline the industry and the government’s role in it have remained a dream.

These bills, whose becoming law might be the key to the end of sea disasters like those that have befallen Sulpicio Lines ships and stop the loss of sea travelers’ lives, are immobile in the Committee on Transportation as if they were the drowned victims in MV Princess of the Stars and the other ill-fated Sulpicio ships that have sunk: the MV Doña Paz, MV Doña Marilyn and MV Princess of the Orient.

House Bill 76, authored by Rep. Rozzano Rufino Biazon of Muntinlupa City was filed July 2, 2007, was read and referred to the transportation committee on July 24, 2007, a day after the 14th Congress opened. This committee has not called a single hearing.

Biazon’s reason for filing the bills is to reform the rotten laws dealing with registration of ships, maritime liens and ship mortgages, maritime fraud, accidents at sea and ship owners’ liability.

His bill contains a separate common carrier provision to apply specifically to vessels transporting passengers and goods. It likewise updates the marine insurance provisions found in the Insurance Code of 1978 and creates alternative methods of dispute settlement in the form of arbitration.

Biazon writes in his explanatory note that “Maritime Law in other countries has become one of the most dynamic, complex and rapidly changing areas of law as both the courts and the legislature have sought to fashion new laws to meet social, economic and human needs resulting from the ever expanding maritime industry.”

But in our country, Biazon points out, the development and growth of admiralty and maritime law are almost static if not eroded so that the industry’s future at this moment is difficult to predict.

He said, “There is a need for all stakeholders, particularly admiralty lawyers, ship owners and those who are involved in the shipping industry to help reform and update the country’s shipping laws.”

The measure, Biazon continues, positions the Philippine maritime industry to benefit from the advances in the means of communication and transportation, the greater interaction among people, especially in business, where there are now complex domestic and international transactions.

There are two identical bills, both aiming to create the Department of Maritime Affairs which is tasked to formulate and implement the government’s policies, plans and programs for the promotion of maritime safety and the development of ports, shipping, shipbuilding, seafaring and other activities in the maritime industry. These were filed by Representatives Roque Ablan Jr. of Ilocos Norte and Jose Solis of Sorsogon.

House Bill 841 of Ablan was filed on July 9, 2007, was read on the floor on July 31, 2007 and was referred to the House Committee on Government Reorganization as lead committee, which has not set a date for any hearing on the Ablan bill.

Solis’ House Bill 979 which was filed on July 10, 2007, read on the plenary on August 1, 2007 and referred to the House Committee on Government Reorganization with secondary referral to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and Committee on Transportation, is still pending with the committees since August 22, 2007.

Thoroughly checking on the bills, the index and with the transport committee secretariat, The Manila Times found out that four more bills about the maritime industry have been filed.

They are House Bills 2612 and 2715, both titled “An Act Regulating Shipping Vessels Coasting Philippine Waters for the Protection of Shores” and House Bill 4167, “An Act Allowing Foreign Vessels to engage in Coastwise Trade in the Country” all filed by Rep. Rufus Rodriguez of Cagayan de Oro City.

The last measure filed is a local bill, House Bill 4357—”An Act Establishing the Mati Wharf in Mati City as Shipping Hub for Davao Region”—by Rep. Thelma Almario of Davao Oriental.

House Bill 2612 was filed September 19, 2007, was read also on that date, and then referred to the House Committee on Ecology and Natural Resources. It has not had a hearing so far.

Rodriguez re-filed his bill, now under the identifier House Bill 2715, on October 3, 2007, with some small amendments. It was referred to the House Committee on Ecology the following day. The bill has been pending in the committee since April 29, 2008.

His HB 4167 was filed May 21, 2008 and referred the same day to the House Committee on Trade and Industry and the Committee on Transportation as secondary committee, as well as to the Ways and Means committee. It has been labeled as pending since May 28, 2008 in the mother committee.

The lone local bill among the seven bills on maritime industry, Rep. Thelma Almario’s HB 4357 which was filed June 11, 2008, two days before Congress adjourned sine die on June 13, is still pending for first reading.

The big question is why the bills on the maritime industry are moving at a very slow pace and are almost static.

Is it because some members of the House of Representatives are owners of shipping lines and the measure might affect their business?

This is the 64-million-dollar question that needs to be addressed soonest.