BOC documents

-A A +A

By Godofredo M. Roperos

Politics also

Monday, December 10, 2012

I RECEIVED some “emailed” materials Saturday noon and had them printed. I then went through them carefully a second time. I did not know whether to believe them or not.

I thought that perhaps there was a kind of media trap somewhere, or someone was trying to pull my leg. Eventually, I decided there was much to know what is truly going on at the Bureau of Customs (BOC) that only the cognoscenti will understand.

I felt there was something that I missed and I should really know, such as, is it all right for a company that is supposed to produce marble products to import sugar? This is in the document that has this head: Subject: Request for Overtime Service. It was addressed to a high-ranking BOC official.


The vessel carrying the shipment supposedly arrived on Nov. 22 and the request was made on the same day for five container vans. It had a note that said that since all customs taxes and duties have been paid, the shipper was requesting that “overtime services of the delivery of our shipment beyond regular working hours” be made.

But what truly made me curious is that in another document dated Nov. 23, there was a “Warrant of Seizure and Detention” ordered against the same shipment. The order was made by another high high-ranking BOC official, showing the Republic of the Philippines as plaintiff versus the shipment of five container vans containing sugar.

This last phrase in the order was what got me in the solar plexus. Why should the order say “said to contain sugar” when in an earlier document, the request for overtime service for delivery, it was already known that the shipment was “marble and granite products”? I cannot believe that the BOC official was not informed about it the day before.

Anyway, I went over the other documents. I came upon another document from the BOC Port of Cebu, with similar Cebu seizure identification case number against another consignee. And yet the manner or process which the cases went through in the eyes of the BOC official was the same.

The document also carried the phrase, “said to contain sugar.” But I wonder why a business firm that is supposed to produce audio visual products would need to import white sugar. Something is definitely fishy going on in the Cebu BOC, otherwise why are there many documents over two shipments of taxable products, except that the products are consigned to business firms that apparently made the wrong importation?

Hearken to this “emailed” appeal for assistance to me and to johnreysaavedra: “Please help this evil in the Bureau of Customs Cebu to be exposed.” In any case, this needs to be further looked into.

Published in the Sun.Star Cebu newspaper on December 11, 2012.


DISCLAIMER: Sun.Star website welcomes friendly debate, but comments posted on this site do not necessary reflect the views of the Sun.Star management and its affiliates. Sun.Star reserves the right to delete, reproduce or modify comments posted here without notice. Posts that are inappropriate will automatically be deleted.

Forum rules: Do not use obscenity. Some words have been banned. Stick to the topic. Do not veer away from the discussion. Be coherent and respectful. Do not shout or use CAPITAL LETTERS!

Today's front page

Sun.Star Cebu's front page for January 30, 2015

Other front pages

Sun.Star Jobs
  • Festivals
  • goodearth
  • SunStar Celebrity
  • Sun.Star Zup!
  • Habemus Papam
  • tell it to sunstar
  • Technology
  • Calamity Report
  • ePaper
  • Pnoy
  • Obituary
  • Sunstar Multimedia
  • Pacman blog
  • Filipino Abroad
  • Sinulog
  • Philippine Polls