By Anthony Sasin, Spokesperson and Director
Pilipino Banana Growers Association, Inc.

In a Resolution issued on November 16, 2007, the Court of Appeals issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) suspending the enforcement of the ban on aerial spraying for sixty (60) days. The Court of Appeals recognized the extreme urgency for the matter and the resulting grave and irreparable injury that will continue to befall the banana growers and exporters unless the ban on aerial spraying is lifted pending the resolution of the appeal.

The Pilipino Banana Growers and Exporters Association (PBGEA) and the affected farms in Davao City welcome this development. This is a source of great relief. The TRO will afford the Court of Appeals the time and opportunity it needs to properly appreciate the issues raised and the evidence presented to reach a just and fair conclusion of the case. PBGEA looks forward to a fair and sober resolution of the merits of this case by the Court of Appeals.

Since the Decision dated 23 September 2007 was handed down by the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Davao City upholding the City Ordinance, the farms have been unable to conduct aerial spraying in Davao City. This has placed in jeopardy, not simply their economic viability, but more importantly, the livelihood of thousands of workers and their dependents.

Added to these are the thousands more working on allied or dependent enterprises supported by the banana export industry, like trucking, shipping, packaging, insurance, security and finance. One PBGEA member corporation has already lost 200 of its employees due to the difficulties caused by the ban. With a TRO, PBGEA and its members breathe a sigh of relief.

With the TRO, perhaps the proponents of the ban will realize that this is not a case of profit vs. people but a case of fact vs. fiction.

PBGEA hopes that the proponents of the ban will realize that by insisting on the aerial spraying ban, apart from endangering the livelihood of people for which they have not provided any alternative, they are only compelling the plantations in Davao City configured for aerial spraying to resort to ground spraying which has been proven to be an inefficient, inaccurate and ineffective spraying method.

With the ban in place, the farms were forced to use more volumes and subject more workers to longer periods of exposure to the fungicides that they baselessly say are harmful.
PBGEA has always asked the proponents of the ban, if indeed the fungicides are harmful as they claim, why ban the method of application? Why force the plantations to use more of the questioned fungicides by employing methods that are inefficient? Why not have the questioned fungicide banned instead?

For now, as status quo is carried out, what the PBGEA is appealing for is a sober and fact-based assessment of the issues.