We Filipinos were heartened a few weeks back when we received the information from our health authorities that the daily count of new positive cases of COVID-19 was decreasing, and that our nation could probably start thinking about flattening the curve. We began to grow excited about the next stage, the “New Normal,” when our businesses and other economic undertakings could finally gear up and moveforward from where it wasstalled six months ago. Unfortunately, the new normal did not come to pass and we find ourselves still in the time of the pandemic, with a still growing number of positive cases. We continue to learn of millions of Filipino workers who are still without a job, or if with a job, with a jobthat hardly allows them to support themselves and their dependents.
How do we help?
Government has already enacted various measures to address these. These can be found in the “Bayanihan to Heal as One Act (RA 11469), the Bayanihan to Recover as One Act (RA 11494) and Proclamation 1021. How do we use these laws to benefit our fellow consumers?
RA 11469, RA 11494 and Proclamation 1091 were enacted to address the hardship brought by the pandemic and tell us that our country is in a state of continuing national health emergency. For this reason, measures to ensure socio economic relief towards assisting the nation’s citizens as a whole should likewise continue to remain in place.
The access to essential goods and services is one of the most important rights of the consumer. Following the spirit and letter of the Bayanihan laws and the Price Act, our government and its instrumentalities should aid and support our consumers by a continuing price freeze on basic necessities across the country. The price freeze should apply to processed, agricultural, and marine products, as well as medicines. The price freeze should be continuing and co-terminus with the relevant laws.
I advocated for these measures from the very start of the lockdown. For instance, RA11469 provides that continuing measures should ensure that there is no hoarding, price manipulation, cartel, and profiteering in the marketplace. As a special law, the provisions of this law take precedence over the provisions of the general law, in this case, the Price Act, as amended, which places a limit of 60 days on any price freeze. Therefore, the IATF must ensure that the price freeze is continued and strictly enforced for as long as there is a national crisis and pandemic leading to quarantine and lockdown. Here, the provisions of the Bayanihan law which sees a continuing crisis is superior to the Price Act which puts a cap (60 days) on the price freeze.
I strongly believe that or as long as the declaration of national emergency is not yet lifted, the provisions of the Price Act, which is the standard currently being followed by the regulators in determining the terms and other minutiae of the price violations, should harmonize with the intent of special laws addressing the pandemic and its economic consequences . The price freeze on commodities such as LPG as well as other basic necessities should not be lifted and should continue to be enforced even beyond the terms set in the Price Act. The enactment of the Bayanihan to Recover as One Act (RA 11494) and Proclamation 1021 affirmed the continuing implementation of the nationwide price freeze.
The word “continuing“ used in the new special law is clear. Those charged with the duty to implement this law should never lose sight of, and should always take into consideration the countless Filipinos who have lost their jobs or livelihoods as a direct result of the lockdowns and the various versions of quarantine protocols. A price freeze should be imposed on all basic necessities – not just for a maximum of sixty days - but for as long as the conditions that required the enactment of the Bayanihan law RA 11469 and Proclamation 1021 exist.
Vic Dimagiba is President of Laban Konsyumer Inc.
Email: [email protected]
Facebook:
Laban Konsyumer Inc.
Website:
www.labankonsyumer.com