DA, BOC execs face graft complaint for 'allowing' imported rice entry despite ban

Graft, grave misconduct, gross neglect of duty and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of service complaint have been filed against Department of Agriculture (DA) and Bureau of Customs (BoC) officials over alleged violation of the ban on entry of imported regular and well-milled rice in September last year.

In an 11-page complaint filed before the Office of the Ombudsman on January 8, Raul Montemayor and Argel Joseph Cabatbat accused Bureau of Plant Industry Director Gerald Panganiban, BOC Commissioner Ariel Nepomuceno, among other unnamed BPI and Customs officials, of violating the ban on entry of imported regular and well-milled rice in September last year provided under President Ferdinand Marcos, Jr.’s Executive Order 93.

The petitioners said imported rice was still allowed to enter the country until September 15, even if the ban took effect on September 1.

“Despite the clear impending ban announced as early as August 6, 2025, respondent Panganiban, with the notation of Secretary Francisco Tiu-Laurel, Jr. of the Department of Agriculture, issued a BPI Memorandum dated August 14, 2025. This Memorandum established arbitrary 'grace periods' that effectively superseded the President's Executive Order and the CMTA,” the complaint read, referring to the Customs Modernization and Tariff Act.

The complainants said that such “grace periods” allowed bulk load carriers to arrive and unload as late as September 15, 2025, provided they were shipped out from the country of origin by August 30, 2025, as well as allowed containerized shipments to enter without any clear arrival deadline, provided they had a Bill of Lading dated on or before August 25, 2025.

As a result, the complainants said that based on the Bureau of Customs' records for the month of September 2025, or while the ban was fully in effect, rice shipments totalling 340,215.945 tons were allowed entry, which accounted for more than 90% of the imported rice covered by the ban.

In addition, the complainants argued that because of the “grace periods,” the objective of EO 93 to stabilize supply and prices was completely frustrated because palay farmgate prices in September 2025 dropped to P15.60 per kilo or 9% decline from the P17.11 per kilo average in the preceding month.

“This price collapse is directly attributable to the market's knowledge that import volumes were not actually being restricted. By allowing containerized shipments based solely on a Bill of Lading date without an arrival deadline, Respondents opened a loophole for importers to arrange for an actual shipment in September or October using pre-dated documents, solely to the benefit of private importers and to the detriment of Filipino farmers,” the complaint read.

“The acts of Respondents caused undue injury to the government and the agricultural sector. The arrival of 348,132 tons of rice during the harvest season exacerbated the oversupply and brought down palay farmgate prices, directly defeating the purpose of EO 93. Simultaneously, it gave unwarranted benefits to importers who were allowed to violate the ban,” the complaint added.

GMA News Online has reached out to Panganiban and Nepomuceno for their comments. —LDF, GMA Integrated News