SEEKING to preserve one of its key enforcement tools against illegal fishing, the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) filed a motion for reconsideration asking the Supreme Court (SC) to reverse its decision declaring mandatory vessel monitoring unconstitutional, while pushing for a budget increase in 2027.
Coinciding with national efforts to curb illegal fishing, the Seafood and Fisheries Emerging Technologies (Safet) 2026 conference in Lapu-Lapu City, Cebu brought together more than 300 international experts. The event was co-hosted by BFAR, Safet and the British Embassy Manila to develop technology-driven solutions for ocean management.
When asked by SunStar Cebu to comment on the ruling during the conference — themed “From Innovation to Implementation: Powering responsible fisheries, markets and livelihoods” — fisheries officials clarified the scope of the SC decision on Fisheries Administrative Order (FAO) 266, which requires electronic monitoring devices on commercial fishing vessels.
Reconsideration plea
BFAR Assistant Director for Technical Services Isidro Velayo Jr. confirmed that the agency filed a motion for reconsideration regarding the ruling.
“The ruling is under motion for reconsideration and we are praying that perhaps the Supreme Court can reconsider their position,” Velayo said.
“Because we’re not just talking here of simple fish, but we are talking here of [an] ecosystem approach in fisheries management. That is why we really need the technology to help us because we have porous borders. It’s difficult to secure [and] monitor our 7,000-plus islands, including our archipelagic waters,” Velayo said.
“We are still hoping and praying that they will consider the motion for reconsideration,” Velayo said.
As an attached agency of the Department of Agriculture (DA), BFAR implements the Philippine Fisheries Code of 1998, which provides the legal framework for the sustainable management, development and conservation of national fisheries and aquatic resources. The vessel monitoring system serves as a primary tool to track compliance, safeguard closed fishing seasons and protect marine nursery grounds from illegal exploitation.
Supreme Court decision
In a decision made public on July 30, the SC declared FAO 266 unconstitutional, upholding a Regional Trial Court ruling that struck down the regulation for failing the rational basis test and violating constitutional protections against unreasonable searches, due process, and equal protection.
In the decision written by Associate Justice Maria Filomena Singh, the SC En Banc ruled that mandatory 24/7 location tracking and electronic catch reporting went beyond the legal definition of monitoring under the Fisheries Code, which does not require operators to disclose commercial fishing grounds that constitute proprietary business information. The high court also found the order discriminatory for excluding municipal fishing vessels and noted procedural flaws in stakeholder consultations.
While Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen warned in his dissent that invalidating the rule creates a “legal void” that blinds regulators, the court majority noted that state environmental goals must be pursued through constitutional and less restrictive means.
Scope of administrative order
Issued by the DA through BFAR in 2020, FAO 266 mandated all commercial Philippine-flagged fishing vessels to adopt Vessel Monitoring Measures (VMM).
The system integrated two primary components: a Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) to continuously track ship locations and an Electronic Reporting System (ERS) to record and transmit critical fisheries data, including species, catch volumes, dates and times of fishing activity.
Rather than serving as a basic GPS tracker, VMM was designed to provide fisheries authorities with real-time electronic oversight regarding where vessels operated, when they fished and what they harvested.
The regulation was established to strengthen law enforcement against illegal fishing, improve seafood traceability, support marine research, assist in investigating violations and aid search-and-rescue operations during maritime disasters.
The order traces its roots to Republic Act (RA) 8550, or the Philippine Fisheries Code of 1998, which was amended in 2015 by RA 10654.
Designed to deter and eliminate Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) fishing, the amended law mandates the National Government to establish a monitoring, control and surveillance system to ensure the sustainable management and conservation of aquatic resources.
BFAR Fisheries Resources Management Division Chief Roy Ortega clarified that the high court ruling targets the administrative drafting of the order rather than revoking the agency’s legal mandate to monitor national waters.
“The Supreme Court ruling did not strike down BFAR’s mandate to monitor vessels. What it says is BFAR needs to update or rework its FAO 266,” Ortega said.
“The Supreme Court is telling BFAR, ‘You need to do better in formulating your FAO 266.’ But it doesn’t say they intend for BFAR to stop doing the monitoring of vessels,” Ortega said.
Ortega said the bureau actively utilizes digital enforcement tools, including an IUU Fishing Threat Indexing Tool integrated into a Geographic Information System dashboard across 522 coastal municipalities, covering nearly 70 percent of coastal local government units (LGUs).
According to the DA-BFAR website, the Philippines ranked 54th out of 152 coastal nations and fourth best in Asia in the 2025 IUU Fishing Index by the Global Initiative Against Transnational Organized Crime.
Scoring 2.34 on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is best, the country outperformed the Asian average of 2.55.
BFAR attributed the progress to expanded sea patrols, compliance with regional fisheries agreements and targeted livelihood programs, such as salt industry development and aquaculture support, that provide fishers with alternative income to deter illegal practices.
Budget shortfalls
The legal challenge coincides with an active push by BFAR to expand its operating budget to sustain baseline operations, acquire floating assets and cushion coastal communities against climate impacts.
BFAR National Director Elizer Salilig said the bureau submitted a P11.4-billion proposed budget for 2027.
“Right now, we have P11.4 billion but marine lang yan (That is only for marine),” Salilig said.
However, P3 billion is earmarked for personnel salaries, while another P3 billion covers operational and maintenance costs across 17 regional offices, 82 provincial offices and 52 outreach stations.
To address critical infrastructure gaps, Agriculture Secretary Francisco Tiu Laurel Jr. backed an additional P1-billion proposal for post-harvest equipment, including solar-powered oxygenators and ice plant facilities.
The agency is also requesting P500 million to support fisherfolk during El Niño phenomena. Salilig said congressional adjustments could bring the final national allocation to between P10 billion and P14 billion.
“Our goal during my leadership as national director is to reduce poverty incidence, but the main goal is to increase the quality of life of our fisherfolk nationwide,” Salilig said, citing Philippine Statistics Authority data showing fisherfolk poverty incidence at 27.4 percent from 2021 to 2023.
To strengthen coastal enforcement, BFAR plans to supply LGUs with patrol boats equipped with 150-horsepower engines. The agency is procuring new floating assets to ensure every region receives at least two new patrol vessels while upgrading tracking infrastructure to meet global compliance standards.
BFAR 7 Director Mario Ruinata said funding remains the primary hurdle in enforcing fisheries regulations, establishing facilities to store fish during closed seasons and helping small-scale fishers.
“The challenge really is the budget. As you said, our director is hardworking when it comes to finding funds,” Ruinata said in a mix of Cebuano and English.
“For this year, the focus is on technology that can benefit our fisherfolk, especially small-scale fishers,” Ruinata said. / CDF