MANILA, Philippines—The law is supposed to primarily improve the performance of the State’s top two revenue collection arms and, more importantly, to minimize if not stamp out corruption in those agencies. Given the urgent need to raise government revenues to prop up a frail economy, its enactment was supposed to make those tasked to enforce it feel its necessity. But it took more than three years and the combination of a congressional report, a Supreme Court decision and media vigilance to prod the officials concerned into giving the law a little push.

And so the other day, Finance Secretary Margarito Teves directed the commissioners of the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) and the Bureau of Customs (BoC) to submit by Sept. 30 their respective lists of under-performers who are liable for dismissal under the law. Republic Act 9335, also known as the Lateral Attrition Act of 2005, offers officials and employees of the BIR and BoC a system of rewards and punishments, depending on whether they exceed their annual revenue goals or fail to meet them.

Despite the incentives the law offers, the BIR consistently fell short of its targets in 2005, 2006 and 2007. Yet, no BIR official or employee has been dismissed pursuant to RA 9335. Neither did the BoC make it in 2005. It surpassed its target in 2006 but missed in 2007. Customs Deputy Commissioner Rey Umali sought to justify his agency’s collection shortfall in 2007 as the result of unrealized economic assumptions used in setting the target for the year, like the lower-than-expected peso-dollar exchange rate. As in the BIR, no Customs official or employee has been fired under RA 9335.

Some officials are said to have held back the implementation of the law because of questions over its constitutionality. The Abakada Guro Party List sought its nullification because it would corrupt the BIR and BoC people’s sense of duty to serve their country with integrity, loyalty and efficiency and transform them into mercenaries. The Bureau of Customs Employees Association (BOCEA) opposed the law’s penalty of dismissal, reasoning out that it “defeats the government employees’ tenure of office.”

The Supreme Court ruled last Aug. 17 that the law is constitutional. “A law enacted by Congress enjoys the strong presumption of constitutionality,” it stated. “To justify its nullification, there must be a clear and unequivocal breach of the Constitution, not a doubtful and equivocal one.”

It is high time to implement the law, said Quezon province’s Rep. Danilo Suarez, head of the House of Representatives ways and means committee. “The BIR and BoC commissioners and their respective officers should be vigorous in fully implementing the law, instead of looking for loopholes to circumvent the penalties provided therein,” the committee said in a report submitted to the Department of Finance last month.

Yet, in 2007 the law or some of its provisions were implemented when the BoC rewarded Customs Commissioner Napoleon Morales and hundreds of other BoC officials and staff for exceeding the bureau’s 2006 collection target, in complete disregard of legal questions that remained unresolved until then.

It is no surprise therefore that Teves’ response to the congressional report is seen as something “triggered” more by media reports than by an honest resolve to enforce the law. Others say it reflects the administration’s true attitude toward corruption, if not the finance chief’s helplessness in fighting graft and inefficiency in his department.

But who’s really to blame? Outside political interventions make some unscrupulous tax collectors “untouchable” and most of them get back to influential positions soon after they are sued. Lawsuits against smugglers and tax evaders are more quickly forgotten than prosecuted.

Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile has questioned the rewards given to the BoC officials and employees, saying that the BoC exceeded its 2006 target with tax payments for 2007 that were advanced by oil companies. The secretary of finance is probably aware that some district collectors and revenue officers, to meet their collection quotas, have resorted to this questionable practice.

All this has shown that RA 9335 doesn’t seem to achieve its objectives. And given the BIR’s and BoC’s records for the past three years, it is doubtful if the law excites its prospective beneficiaries into working harder. After all, with the law, they can have their cake and eat it too.