We don’t know whether current Customs Commissioner Nicanor Faeldon will end up staying or going, but one thing is certain: He is neither the first nor last commissioner to encounter difficulty whipping the agency into shape even if he came with sincere intentions and a definite plan.
The Bureau of Customs is one of two agencies by which the government collects revenues. The Bureau of Internal Revenue is tasked to tax people and entities, while Customs collects duties from the goods that come into our shores. Year after year, however, the bureau fails to achieve its collection targets. These lost revenues could be put to use in boosting infrastructure and social services.
The BoC’s notoriety is legendary. It has always landed on the list of agencies perceived most corrupt. Stories of the lavish lifestyle of many Customs employees despite their meager salaries have persisted. Powerful factions in the bureau have made any semblance of lasting reform impossible.
As an example, five years ago, 2,000 container vans on the way to the Port of Batangas disappeared; they have never been found. The lack of indignation over this incredible event betrays our collective resignation to the bureau’s character.
President Rodrigo Duterte appointed former Marine Capt. Nicanor Faeldon to the hardship post last year. Faeldon was known for staging mutinies against the government; it was believed he would have the will to disrupt a flawed system that rewarded incompetence and protected—some say encouraged—corruption. He even brought with him his team of Magdalo soldiers, the same men who riled against the corruption taking place in the military.
But a shipment of shabu worth P6 billion was cleared by the bureau and found its way to a Valenzuela warehouse. Faeldon said the risk management officer who did not alert the system that the shipment contained illegal drugs “is nowhere to be found.” This is primarily why lawmakers are now calling for his resignation.
Of course, there is a power play. Faeldon’s chief of staff called the Speaker of the House of Representatives an imbecile, saying the Speaker’s office was trying to strong-arm Faeldon into appointing an official they deemed not qualified. Even the Executive department seems conflicted as to whether or not Faeldon continues to enjoy the President’s trust.
The current controversy over the leadership of the bureau is temporary; a permanent cause for concern is that a revenue-generating agency of government cannot seem to get past its reputation of being a hotbed for corruption. Whoever sits at the helm of the BoC has the grave responsibility —and the danger—of dismantling the environment that has enabled this system for so long. That the problem has always been there does not weaken the argument, the urgent need, for a solution.
Faeldon is facing trouble today; tomorrow, another commissioner will find himself or herself in the same predicament. A drastic, sweeping move to change the bureau is in order—one that would make entrenched syndicates realize that finally, their days are numbered.