Jesus Crispin Remulla, Justice Secretary of the Philippines, stated that the proposal to change the color photographs in the Philippine Identification System ID ID (PhilSys ID), also known by the Philippine Identification Card(PhilID) to monochrome was “legally infirm”.
Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, (BSP), sought earlier the legal opinion of Department of Justice to determine if such modification could legally be undertaken.
This modification was made in accordance with the National Economic and Development Authority’s (NEDA), recommendation to change from the current digital printed color (using drop-on demand or DOD technology), and to monochrome engraving of the PhilID front-facing photo to improve photo quality.
In order to improve card personalization, the NEDA sought to replace DOD printers by laser engraving printers.
The recommendation was approved by the PhilSys Policy and Coordination Council at no additional cost.
Additionally, the council approved the signature of amended technical specifications that indicate monochrome print. This will be part of the memorandum o agreement (MoA).
The BSP and the Philippine Statistics Authority signed the MoA dated June 2, 2019, for the production the PhilID.
BSP executed a contract with AllCard Inc. on October 1, 2020 to fulfill this MoA.
Modifying technical specifications in the PhilID will lead to specific amendments to that MoA.
Remulla stated that there should be no amendments to any contract with the government after it is signed.
He stated that his legal opinion, which was published last weekend but not made public, said that the implementing regulations and regulations (IRRs) of Republic Act 9184 (“Government Procurement Reform Act”), state that amendments cannot be made during “emergency situations or fortuitous circumstances.”
Remulla said that it was mandatory to prove the existence of the conditions mentioned above to warrant amendment to an order. Remulla also stated that any changes in the technical specifications and terms of reference for government contracts already awarded are required.
He reminded the BSP that the existing terms of reference state that the PhilIDs have “colored photograph on the cards through a combination of laser engraving and digital colored printing/drop-on-demand technology.”
“The foregoing provision is categorical that the photograph must be colored, and it should be done through a combination of laser engraving and digital colored printing/drop-on-demand technology. Remulla stated that there is no TOR provision which allows parties to: (i) change from a colored photograph; (ii) remove digital printed color from the TOR, and instead replace DOD printers by laser engraving printers.
“Colored is quite different from monochrome and colored DOD printers provide different outputs to laser engraving printers (monochrome). He explained that the switch from colored printing to monochrome engraving and the replacement of DOD Printers with laser engraving printers were substantial amendments that would make such executed contract, if modified, an entirely different contract than the one that was bid upon.”
Remulla stated, “The rationale behind the strict guidelines is to protect the public from illegal schemes where the technical specifications originally set out as basis of bidding will later become modified during contract execution without sufficient legal basis.”