Is EO 1088 protecting the little guy or crushing the shipping industry? PPA deaf to crisis, lobby groups say

A decree meant to protect the little guy in the shipping industry may have handed them a whip to crack over everyone else.

That's the accusation from major shipping players, who say Executive Order No. 1088 — a 1985 presidential decree that was supposed to shield local harbor pilots from being crushed by big shipping lines — has instead created what they call a "tyranny of the minority."

And the Philippine Ports Authority (PPA), the agency tasked with keeping the balance, has gone deaf to their cries.

"We brought these problems to the attention of the PPA, both orally and in writing, but our requests for meetings have rarely been granted, and written replies are non-existent," shipping industry representatives complained at a forum on June 8.

The result? Pilotage service fees — the charges for guiding ships into ports — aren't set by clear rules but by whatever the harbor pilots feel like charging. Those fees are now driving up freight costs, which in turn inflate the price of food and goods that every Filipino consumer pays for at the sari-sari store or supermarket.

This isn't a small problem. It's a direct leak in the government's fight against inflation, and it's getting worse every day.

The major players are now pinning their hopes on a bill in Congress: House Bill No. 5485, filed by Quezon City 3rd District Representative Franz S. Pumaren, who also chairs the House committee on transportation. The bill has been discussed three times at the committee level in the last three months. A counterpart bill in the Senate may be sponsored by Senator Raffy Tulfo.

On June 8, the Monday Circle forum at the Westin Hotel in Manila heard from the full force of the shipping industry's frustration. Ric Jamandre (president of the Philippine Ship Agents Association, PSAA), Mark Parco (president of the Philippine Interisland Shipping Association Inc., PISAI), and Joey Ilagan (chairman of the Association of International Shipping Lines Inc., AISL) laid out the case. They were joined by Patrick Ronas (president of AISL) and Max Cruz (executive director of AISL).

The group said the original idea of EO 1088 was good — ensure safety and efficiency in harbors while protecting the livelihood of a minority group of local pilots. But the letter of the law has been twisted to destroy its own spirit. A small subgroup, granted special status for the common good, has used those protections to establish an absolute tyranny over the majority.

The proposed law has two main goals: liberalize harbor pilotage and separate the PPA's regulatory role from its developmental role.

At the heart of the bill is the creation of a National Pilotage Board (NPB), a central body that would regulate pilotage services across all Philippine ports. The board would standardize professional and ethical conduct, approve pilotage tariffs, enforce transparency in fee collection, and discipline erring pilots and pilotage organizations.

The bill also pushes for an open pilotage policy — meaning shipping lines wouldn't be forced to use only the pilots assigned by a local monopoly. They could choose from a pool of accredited pilots, bringing competition and, hopefully, lower fees.

Other maritime countries that once had similar legal protections for minority pilot groups have already scrapped them after seeing abuses. The Philippines, the shipping groups argue, should follow suit before the country loses its competitive edge.

"The protective cloak given to the minority is turning out to be less healthy and less helpful in fostering peace and growth in the industry. It has promoted structural aberrations that have led to inimical port operations."

The groups didn't hold back. They said the PPA's indifference is now casting a negative image over the already challenged administration of President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. If the government can't fix a simple problem like runaway pilotage fees, how can it tackle inflation?

The solution, they say, is clear: abrogate EO 1088 and replace it with a more progressive law. The bill is now under committee discussion in the lower house. The Senate has yet to file a counterpart measure, but the industry is watching closely.