Probe SC ruling favoring commercial fishers
Opposition lawmakers have asked the House of Representatives to look into the “adverse impacts” of a recent Supreme Court ruling allowing commercial fishing in municipal waters.
ACT Teachers Rep. France Castro, Gabriela Rep. Arlene Brosas and Kabataan Rep. Raoul Manuel filed on Jan. 28 House Resolution No. 2202 asking the committee on aquaculture and fisheries resources to look into the matter.
The resolution was prompted by the Supreme Court decision in August 2024 regarding a ruling of the Malabon Regional Trial Court allowing Mercidar Fishing Corp. to fish within municipal waters and nullifying some provisions of the Fisheries Code.
The Malabon court allowed commercial fishing in municipal waters deeper than seven fathoms (12.8 meters) while the high tribunal rejected the petition for review of the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) because of a tardy pleading.
Earlier this month, BFAR asked the high court to remand the case to the Malabon court because of its “far-reaching consequences” to resource management, environmental protection, and the welfare of affected communities.
Affected parties across the country, including towns with large constituents of fishers, have sought leave to intervene in the case, including the towns of Espinosa in Cebu and Del Carmen in Surigao del Norte, because of their constituents and the environment.
In seeking an inquiry, the Makabayan bloc said the ruling would “further legitimize the monopolization and corporate plunder of traditional fishing grounds, leading to the eventual marginalization of small-scale and artisanal fisherfolk.”
“The 15-kilometer municipal waters reserved for municipal fishers is merely two million square km, or only 15 percent of Philippine waters,” the proposed House resolution read.
“This entails that allowing commercial fishers to access the municipal waters would further shrink the reserved waters for small-scale fisherfolk to 2 percent,” it said.
“It is the mandate of the Philippine Constitution and the government to protect the livelihoods of small-scale and artisanal fisherfolk, ensure food security and preserve Philippine marine biodiversity,” it added.
The 1987 Constitution states that subsistence fisherfolk have “preferential use and access” to municipal waters.
