Banning imported waste
A Manila court has recently found one of the local importers guilty in the infamous Canada hazardous waste importation case that triggered a diplomatic row more than a decade ago.
The court sentenced Adelfa Eduardo, owner of Chronic Plastics, to up to 20 years in prison and a P1 million fine. Eduardo was found violating Republic Act No. 6969, or the Toxic Substances, Hazardous and Nuclear Waste Control Act of 1990. It said Eduardo aided in the importation of hazardous waste contained in 10 shipping containers that arrived at the Port of Manila in June 2013.
This is the first time that a Philippine court has held an importer criminally liable. In a statement on Oct. 16, Justice Secretary Fredderick A. Vida said the ruling shows that “real justice for all” includes protecting the environment “by holding accountable those who exploit or abuse it for selfish gains.”
To recall, the shipment from Canada was initially declared as compressed plastic scrap, but an inspection revealed that it contained mixed, unsorted, and heterogeneous plastic materials, as well as used adult diapers. It entered the country without the required clearance from the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), a requirement when bringing in plastic and metal scraps.
Misdeclared cargo
Part of the waste imports was shipped back to Canada in 2019 under the orders of former President Rodrigo Duterte—meaning the container vans were essentially docked in Philippine ports for six years.
The case became an example of how misdeclared cargo can easily enter the country’s borders and how long it takes for local courts to resolve such cases. And while the ruling marks a significant legal victory, there are still other consignees and intermediary brokers involved in this and other cases that are pending.
Another case involves three Koreans who have been accused of importing several tons of garbage from South Korea to a port in Misamis Oriental in 2018. The shipment was misdeclared, again, as “synthetic plastic synthetic resin.” The municipal waste was re-exported back to South Korea in batches through early 2020, but the case is still ongoing.
The importation of waste has also continued, with the Bureau of Customs (BOC) intercepting—in separate incidents in July and August—container vans of e-waste from the United States headed for the Port of Subic.
Basel Convention
The Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA), which administers the freeport under RA 7227, had earlier maintained that the shipments contained recyclable materials intended for legitimate recycling activities and should not be classified as waste.
The SBMA, however, later announced a temporary halt on the entry of e-waste shipments from the United States while it reviewed its policy. It subsequently clarified that shipments already in transit would still be allowed to enter the freeport, provided they were determined to be nonhazardous.
The Environmental Task Force Against Illegal E-Waste Imports to the Philippines, however, has questioned the SBMA’s authority to determine whether e-waste shipments could enter the country. It argued that the BOC and the DENR-Environmental Management Bureau should be the country’s competent authorities under the Basel Convention in determining whether shipments comply with environmental regulations.
The environmental coalition also pointed out that e-waste shipments from the US should not be allowed to enter the country because it is not a party to the Basel Convention, while the Philippines is.
Hazards to people’s health
The country ratified the Basel Convention, which permits developed countries to export hazardous waste or materials to developing nations as long as the receiving country explicitly consents, in October 1993. But environmental groups have been urging the government to impose a total ban on the importation of wastes because they pose hazards to people’s health.
In 2023, EcoWaste Coalition reminded President Marcos to ratify the Basel Convention Ban Amendment, an additional protocol that prohibits developed countries from exporting hazardous waste to developing countries under any circumstance, even for recycling or recovery purposes.
The Ban Amendment was adopted in September 1995, and yet the country has not ratified it. The recent ruling on the Canada hazardous waste case should remind the government, again, to act on the amendment if it wants to prevent the entry of toxic waste into the country.
While the vigilance of the BOC, environmental, and local government authorities is appreciated, the ratification of the Ban Amendment is a crucial step in permanently blocking foreign waste from entering Philippine borders.
To paraphrase, one country’s trash is not another country’s treasure. The Philippines can even barely handle its own waste—it’s time that the government imposes a total ban on its entry.
******
Get real-time news updates: inqnews.net/inqviber
