According to Wigberto Tañada of the FTA, the SC ruling is "harsh" and "misinterprets the safeguard measures and the Constitution."
Tañada pointed out that the Constitution clearly states the need to protect local industries.
The SC ruling, Tanada said, "does not seem to recognize this (the need to protect local industries)."
FTA co-convenor for the agricultural sector Manuel Quiambao, for his part, said that the SC decision could be a death knell for the agriculture and manufacturing sector.
Quiambao said the Safeguard Measures Act (SMA) has been passed by Congress to protect local agro-industrial sector against the rapid tariff liberalization under the World Trade Organization (WTO) agreement.
The SC en banc ruling stemmed from the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) motion for reconsideration of the SC Second Division’s ruling in July last year overturning the Appellate Court’s previous ruling that the DTI had the power to impose the safeguard tariff.
With the SC’s final ruling, the DTI can no longer impose a safeguard duty on imported cement.
Southern Cross Cement Corp. (SCCC) was the first to file a case against the DTI for imposing a provisional safeguard duty of P20.60 per 40 kilogram bag of Portland cement.
The DTI decided to impose the safeguard tariff after the local cement industry presented their case that the entry of imported cement has not resulted in any notable decline in local cement prices.
Instead, the entry of imported cement, according to local cement manufacturers only adversely affected the operation of local cement makers.
However, the Tariff Commission, in its own investigation, did not agree with claims that imported cement was being dumped in the country.
Dumping involves the sale of the imported product at below production cost in the country of origin.
Former Trade and Industry Secretary Cesar V. Purisima had previously called the first SC ruling "a blow to our ability to implement our policies and protect our industries against competition."
A source also stressed that the Supreme Court, in effect, gave the Tariff Commission the power over the life and death of the local agro-industrial sector.