Cement manufacturers decry mislabeled imported cement

Section 9, Article XVI of the Constitution provides, “The State shall protect consumers from trade malpractices and from substandard and hazardous products.” In view of that mandate, Congress enacted Republic Act 7394, or the Consumer Act of the Philippines.

Since the Consumer Act took effect in 1992, enterprises in the Philippines have improved their products and services with a view toward the welfare and safety of consumers nationwide.

One requirement under the law is the proper labeling of products, including information as to whether or not the product is manufactured in the Philippines.

Urban households use small amounts of cement, purchased from construction supply stores, to make general repairs in their dwellings. Households in the countryside also use cement to maintain small backyard farms and agricultural enterprises.

Evidently, cement is a product used by consumers and is, therefore, covered by the labeling requirements of the Consumer Act. Thus, if cement is manufactured locally, its label should indicate that it is “manufactured in the Philippines.” To state the obvious, imported cement cannot be labeled in the same manner. Its label must indicate where it was imported from.

The Cement Manufacturers Association of the Philippines ( CEMAP) is calling the attention of the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) to what looks like a case of mislabeled imported cement passed off as locally manufactured product.

More specifically, CEMAP is referring to the packaging and labeling of a 40-kilogram bag of “Union V Super Cement Strength 40.” This particular product is sold by a firm called Philcement. Its label states it is a “product of the Philippines.”

According to CEMAP, it is common knowledge in the local cement industry that Philcement is a large-scale importer of cement manufactured in Vietnam, and that Philcement sells the imported cement throughout the country either in bulk or in retail.

Since the phrase “product of the Philippines” is not synonymous to “manufactured in the Philippines,” CEMAP wants the DTI to ascertain if the cement sold by Philcement is really manufactured locally.

CEMAP also asserts that bags of “Union V Super Cement Strength 40” do not comply with the law,i.e ., there is no Philippine Standard ( PS) license printed on the bag, while the batch identification and manufacturing date are not printed clearly on it. Those omissions, CEMAP maintains, also constitute non- compliance with DAO 17-06 (Series of 2017) issued by the DTI.

A DTI official claims that Philcement’s Bataan bagging facility has a

PS license consistent with the provisions of DAO 17-06, and that based on the guidelines, when the manufacturer is accredited by the Bureau of Product Standards, the manufacturer can label its product “manufactured in the Philippines.”

The same DTI of f icial illogically concluded that even if the product is imported but as long as one has the PS license, that imported product may be labelled as locally made. Good grief!

DTI Secretary Ramon Lopez, however, opined offhand that if the product is not really manufactured locally, it cannot be labelled as “made in the Philippines.” That makes perfect sense.

While Philcement insists that it complies with DAO 17- 06, it has not categorically denied that its cement in question is imported.

Among the measures President Rodrigo Duterte is pursuing for the country to recover from the recession triggered by the COVID- 19 pandemic is to promote the “buy local” practice among consumers.

That objective will be put to naught if imported cement can be passed off as local ly manufactured cement. Therefore, if there is a loophole in the existing regulations of the DTI which allows a circumvention of the Consumer Act, Lopez should plug that loophole.

Cement is vital to President Duterte’s infrastructure campaign, and the local cement industry generates direct employment for 42,000 Filipinos and derivative employment for 125,000 more.

An estimated P155 billion or close to one percent of the country’s total gross domestic product was contributed by the local cement manufacturing industry in pre-pandemic 2016. The industry pays about P24 billion in corporate and individual income taxes annually.

It is in the best interest of the country that the local cement industry is protected from unfair competition created by entities that do not comply with Philippine trade and consumer protection laws.

“

If there is a loophole in the existing regulations of the DTI which allows a circumvention of the Consumer Act, Lopez should plug that loophole.

“

CEMAP wants the DTI to ascertain if the cement sold by Philcement is really manufactured locally.