SC voids mandatory tracking of commercial fishing vessels



The Department of Justice (DOJ) said Friday it will rely on evidence to determine whether last week's explosion outside…

Several lawmakers on Friday criticized the Pasig Regional Trial Court's decision to temporarily halt the implementation…

The Department of Justice (DOJ) is prepared to examine the legal and constitutional issues surrounding the…

A certain public office occupant sits on a debt that refuses to age gracefully and may become the source of serious…

The Senate impeachment court on Thursday received the tax records sought by House prosecutors in the impeachment trial…
The Supreme Court has affirmed a 2021 Malabon City Regional Trial Court ruling declaring unconstitutional the mandatory tracking of commercial fishing vessels under Fisheries Administrative Order (FAO) No. 266.
In a decision promulgated on 21 January and penned by Associate Justice Maria Filomena Singh, the Court declared FAO No. 266, issued by the Department of Agriculture in 2020, null and void.
The order required commercial fishing vessels to install a Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) and an Electronic Reporting System (ERS) to help authorities detect illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing.
The Court directed the Department of Agriculture, through the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR), to immediately address the deficiencies in FAO No. 266 and report the actions taken.
In a 13-2 decision, the Court ruled that the regulation failed the Rational Basis Test, finding that the government did not sufficiently demonstrate that the VMS and ERS were effective in detecting IUU fishing violations.
The Court also held that the policy violated the constitutional rights of commercial fishing operators, including Royale Fishing Corporation, Bonanza Fishing and Market Resources Inc., and RBL Fishing Corporation, particularly their rights against unreasonable searches and seizures, due process, and equal protection of the law.
The three companies were respondents in the petition filed before the Supreme Court by the Department of Agriculture, BFAR, the National Telecommunications Commission, and environmental group Oceana Philippines.
In a statement, Oceana Philippines criticized the ruling, saying it favored commercial fishing operators over small-scale fishers.
"The Supreme Court decision will sink Philippine fisheries even further as it weakens our last line of defense against illegal, unreported, unregulated fishing," the group said.
It warned that commercial fishing vessels could now operate in municipal waters without real-time accountability.
"Where is the justice in this decision?" Oceana Philippines said.
BFAR has maintained that the vessel monitoring system under FAO No. 266 was intended to strengthen the government's ability to monitor fishing activities, enforce fisheries laws, and promote the long-term sustainability of the country's marine resources.