Dr. Bernie Anabo Jr
In the Bureau of Customs (BOC), there’s an unwritten truth: positions are rarely permanent, and neither are alliances. The latest whispers within Aduana suggest a high-ranking Division Chief whose conduct has raised serious questions among insiders and observers.
Publicly, this official presents an image of professionalism and compliance. Privately, accounts from colleagues paint a different picture—one of selective favoritism, political backing, and alleged circumvention of official directives.
Several sources allege that this Division Chief has built a network of preferred collectors, brokers, and importers who appear to enjoy smoother processing and “green lane” treatment. In contrast, those who fall out of favor reportedly find themselves reassigned or sidelined. One BOC insider likened it to a “patron-client” setup that undermines consistent enforcement of customs rules.
The political connections are no secret. Reports suggest that the official enjoys strong support from influential members of Congress, particularly from Central Luzon. Such backing, critics argue, can weaken internal accountability and allow certain practices to continue despite leadership changes.
Defying Reform?
Under Commissioner Ariel Nepomuceno, the BOC has publicly committed to good governance and the President’s No Take Policy, aiming to eliminate corruption and streamline honest trade. Yet multiple accounts suggest that in some areas, entrenched systems remain intact—sometimes even resistant to central directives.
Several stakeholders allege that the Division Chief in question maintains long-standing arrangements with a select group of stakeholders. These relationships reportedly ensure that certain shipments, even with incomplete or questionable documentation, pass through without delay—if the right conditions are met.
While these allegations remain unproven in court, the consistency of such accounts across multiple ports should raise red flags for oversight bodies.
Why It Matters
If true, these practices not only violate internal policy but also undermine public trust in the BOC’s reform agenda. A Tara System—where fees are allegedly exchanged for favorable processing—places compliant traders at a disadvantage and erodes the Bureau’s ability to meet both its revenue and integrity targets.
Reform in the BOC is not just about appointing trusted people to key positions; it’s about ensuring that those positions are held by individuals who demonstrate both competence and unquestionable integrity. Without this, the cycle of reshuffles risks becoming a game of musical chairs—different players, same system.
The question now is whether the Commissioner’s office will investigate these persistent reports and take decisive action, or whether political insulation will once again prove stronger than reform.
