DoJ says no to black and white natl ID photos

The proposal to alter colored photos in the Philippine Identification System ID, also called the Philippine Identification Card or the Philippine Identification Card (PhilID) to monochrome was “legally invalid,” Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla stated.

Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas had previously sought legal advice from the Department of Justice regarding whether this modification could be legally done.

The National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA), part of its recommendation to change from current digital color printing (using drop–on-demand (DOD) technology) to monochrome Laser engraving of the PhilID’s front-facing photo to improve the quality of photos, recommended the modification.

To increase card personalization, the NEDA sought to replace DOD printers by laser engraving printers.

After the initial recommendation was approved by the PhilSys Policy and Coordination Council, a resolution was issued at no cost to government.

Additionally, the council approved signing the revised technical specifications for monochrome printing. These will form part of the Memorandum of Agreement (MoA).

For the production of the PhilID, the BSP entered into a MoA on June 2, 2020 with the Philippine Statistics Authority.

BSP, in fulfillment of the MoA, signed an agreement with AllCard Inc., Oct. 1, 2020 for supply of the PhilID.

Modifying technical specifications within the PhilID will lead to specific modifications to the MoA.

Remulla said no amendments to any contract for government should be made after the signing of it.

He stated that his legal opinion, which was published last weekend but not made public, said that Republic Act 9184’s implementing rules (IRRs) states that amends cannot be made during emergencies or fortuitous circumstances.

Remulla stated that “based on the preceding, it is mandatory for you to prove the existence of these conditions in order to warrant amendment of an order or, in this instance, any modification in the technical specifications and terms of reference of government contracts already awarded.”

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 to laser engraving printers; (ii) take digital colored printing out of the TOR.

The output of colored printers (colorful) is different than monochrome laser engraving. He explained that the switch from color printing to monochrome engraving and the replacement DOD printers by laser engraving printers were substantial modifications which could make such an executed contract (if modified) completely different from the one bidded on.”

Remulla stressed that “the purpose of the strict guidelines is to protect the public against unlawful schemes where technical specifications initially established as the basis for bidding are later modified during contract execution without sufficient legal base.”