The elements of serious injury and imminent threat of serious injury not having been established, it is hereby recommended that no definitive general safeguard measure be imposed on the importation of gray Portland cement. The Tariff Commission held public hearings and conducted its own investigation, then on 13 March 2002, issued its Formal Investigation Report ("Report"). After the DTI issued a provisional safeguard measure, 6 the application was referred to the Tariff Commission for a formal investigation pursuant to Section 9 of the SMA and its Implementing Rules and Regulations, in order to determine whether or not to impose a definitive safeguard measure on imports of gray Portland cement. Philcemcor, an association of at least eighteen (18) domestic cement manufacturers filed with the DTI a petition seeking the imposition of safeguard measures on gray Portland cement, 5 in accordance with the SMA. 4Ī brief summary as to how the present petition came to be filed by Southern Cross. 3 The SMA provides the structure and mechanics for the imposition of emergency measures, including tariffs, to protect domestic industries and producers from increased imports which inflict or could inflict serious injury on them. 8800, the Safeguard Measures Act ("SMA"), which was one of the laws enacted by Congress soon after the Philippines ratified the General Agreement on Tariff and Trade (GATT) and the World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement. 2 As can well be recalled, the case centers on the interpretation of provisions of Republic Act No. Just as much was asserted in the Decision, and the same holds true with this present Resolution.Īn extensive narration of facts can be found in the Decision. For this Court, it is about elementary statutory construction, constitutional limitations on the executive power to impose tariffs and similar measures, and obedience to the law. For respondents, it is about love of country and the future of the domestic industry in the face of foreign competition. This case, of course, is ultimately not just about cement. At present, the burden of passion, if not proof, has shifted to public respondents Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) and private respondent Philippine Cement Manufacturers Corporation (Philcemcor), 1 who now seek reconsideration of our Decision dated 8 July 2004 ( Decision), which granted the petition of petitioner Southern Cross Cement Corporation (Southern Cross). Still, the parties in this case have done their best to put up a spirited advocacy of their respective positions, throwing in everything including the proverbial kitchen sink. SOUTHERN CROSS CEMENT CORPORATION, Petitioners,ĬEMENT MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINES, THE SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY, THE SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE and THE COMMISSIONER OF THE BUREAU OF CUSTOMS, Respondent.Ĭement is hardly an exciting subject for litigation.