Maritime stakeholders divided over controversial Magna Carta of Seafarers

STAKEHOLDERS from different maritime sectors are divided over the Senate’s ratification of the controversial Magna Carta of Filipino Seafarers.

Maritime employers and maritime educators were questioning several salient features of the bill seen to grossly affect their respective sectors should the bill be passed into law.

This is the third time the Senate ratified the bicameral conference committee report on the Magna Carta of Seafarers.

Stakeholders from different maritime sectors are divided over the Senate’s ratification of the controversial Magna Carta of Filipino Seafarers. PHOTO BY DUNCAN TORRES

The first bill was submitted to President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. but was withdrawn by Congress in February.

Another report, a harmonized version of the bill, was ratified by the Senate in May but was not submitted to Malacañang.

Maritime education to be transferred to Marina

It can be recalled that the Philippine Association of Maritime Institutions (PAMI) strongly opposed the inclusion of Chapter 18 in the bill.

The chapter provides maritime schools are required to buy a training ship as part of the on-board training (OBT) requirement of maritime students — a mandate that is “unimplementable” according to PAMI as it will cost maritime schools hand and limb and subsequently increase tuition that could greatly affect the students.

PAMI also expressed concern over the possible transfer of maritime education to Marina.

“We are sad that our opposition to the inclusion of education was not given due consideration. The bill clearly states the jurisdiction of maritime education,” Czar Manglicmot III, president of PAMI, said.

“Will this mean that the Maritime Industry Authority (Marina) will control and monitor core and general subjects that are originally under the Department of Education (DepEd) and Commission on Higher Education (CHEd)? So Marina will also need to monitor the Boy Scout and NROTC program?” Manglicmot added.

Manglicmot questioned the fate of bachelor degrees and whether maritime education should be transferred to Marina.

“Paano na ang BS degrees? Mawawala na? (What about BS degrees? Will they be phased out?) BS degrees are conferred solely by CHEd,” he added.

Manglicmot explained that maritime students without a bachelor’s degree are not qualified to take licensure examinations and upgrade their Certificates of Competency.

Their inability to be promoted to a higher rank will, in turn, leave a vacuum in the line-up of maritime ship officers.

Meanwhile, the Association of Licensed Manning Agencies (ALMA) Maritime Group welcomed the ratification of the said Magna Carta now that it includes a new section that provides for the escrow bonds to be posted by seafarers.

ALMA has previously flagged the removal of the Escrow Deposit Provision that was originally contained in House Bill 7325.

The provision protects Filipino seamen from ambulance chasers or lawyers who lure them into filing court claims against their employers and extracting unwarranted fees thereafter.

“The escrow provision would have been a more elaborate safeguard for seafarers. If the final version for enactment as a law will be without it, it will be very hard for both government and private entities to convince some of the shipowners to continue hiring Filipinos,” Christina Garcia, ALMA president, said in a previous interview.

In the July version of the Magna Carta, Chapter 59, or the Execution of Judgment and Monetary Awards, was inserted.

The insertion, however, was opposed by Sens. Aquilino Pimentel III and Risa Hontiveros, who both voted against the ratification of the Magna Carta.

“The insertion seeks to treat foreign employers of Filipino seafarers more favorably than our law treats local employers of Filipino workers,” Pimentel said.

“In the newly inserted Section 59, a bond must be posted by the seafarers before a writ of execution is issued in their favor. If we approve this requirement of posting a bond, decisions in favor of Filipino seafarers cannot be executed until the foreign employer has exhausted all his appeals up to the Supreme Court,” Pimentel added.

Meanwhile, Hontiveros expressed dismay over the frequent reconvening of the bicameral committee to “return the controversial provision that will mandate the payment of a bond before the monetary benefits arising from disability are released.”