CHILL, folks. No evil company, local or international, employed hi-tech little minions to cart away your personal passport details. There was no breach.
What did happen? Well, we have to travel back in time to piece this puzzle together.
Way back in 2001, when my father, then Sen. Blas F. Ople, accepted his appointment as secretary of foreign affairs, I served as his chief of staff. One of my first discoveries was a secured room within the huge Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) building with rows of tiny desks with personnel affixing the personal data page to the passports with glue and using script to write the applicants’ names.
The issues then were the poor quality of our passport booklets, and inevitable imperfections associated with such a laborious process. During that time there was also enormous pressure for the Philippines to elevate its quality standards to meet ICAO requirements. ICAO stands for the International Civil Aviation Organization, the United Nations-specialized agency that oversees the governance of the Convention on International Civil Aviation.
Raising our Jurassic passports to ICAO standards required several implementation phases passed on from one administration to the next. During my father’s time, the transition focused on converting passports with manually attached data pages into machine-readable ready passports. The passports were printed by the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP).
When Ka Blas died, two other foreign affairs secretaries took over. This was during the time of then- President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. The secretaries were: Delia Albert and Alberto Romulo. Under their watch, the passports were still under the care of both the DFA and the BSP.
The BSP tapped Oberthur Technologies, a well-regarded French digital security company, to design the personalization system from end to end, but with the database still squarely resting with the DFA and BSP.
In 2014, the DFA received notice that the BSP was no longer interested in printing the Philippine passports. Why? The reason was never publicly revealed. By this time, the personalization system designed by Oberthur Technologies was completed and fully functional. There was no abrupt, hostile ending of contract between the BSP and Oberthur Technologies. The French company did its job and moved on.
When the BSP relinquished its role as passport printer, the DFA felt it had no other choice but to enter into a contract with the APO Production Unit Inc., a government agency under the jurisdiction of the Presidential Communications Office. This was when Secretary Herminio “Sonny” Coloma was presidential communications secretary, and Secretary Albert del Rosario served as DFA chief. Some say the transition from BSP to APUI was orchestrated. Some say it wasn’t. The facts can be easily established in a Senate or House hearing.
According to insiders, the DFA had to enter into an agreement with APUI because it was the only government agency that was willing to provide the DFA with a new e-passport system as a government-to-government deal. The fear then was, had there been no agreement between the DFA and APUI, then passport issuances would grind to a halt. APUI decided to take on a private-sector partner (United Graphic Expression Corp.) in order to fulfill its orders through a joint venture agreement. Did it officially inform the DFA about the JVA? And was DFA given the opportunity to vet UGEC given its role as the legal custodian of the Philippine passport? This, too, can be easily established.
Insiders said the DFA contract with APUI passed through the National Economic and Development Authority, Department of Science and Technology, the Department of Budget and Mananagement, and the Government Procurement Policy Board. What remains unclear is whether the joint venture agreement between APUI and the United Graphic Expression Corp. underwent the same rigorous and vigorous inter-agency review prior to its approval. An independent probe would help put this issue to rest. Such an investigation should also focus on this question: What happened to the personalization system designed by Oberthur and the data already loaded in that system? A successful and efficient migration of that data meant doing away with birth certificates altogether as a requirement for passport renewal. Clearly, there was a glitch somewhere.
Looking back, we need to acknowledge the reforms that led to where we are now. Remember those days when foreign immigration officers singled us out for possessing a non-ICAO compliant passport? Those days are over. Remember when online appointments meant waiting for months? That, too, has been solved. Overseas Filipino workers, senior citizens and persons with disability can walk-in and have their passports renewed. Validity is now good for 10 years. We can shop and apply for passports in our favorite mall. Life is better, yes?
For travelers who have let more than five years lapse before renewing their passports, the DFA requires that you bring a copy of your birth certificate with you. This is a one-time ask. Once you fulfill this requirement, every renewal (now extended to 10 years each time), will be a breeze. How many passport holders continue to fall under this category? That is for the DFA to reveal. Why was their old data not included in UGEC’s e-passport system? This also needs to be explained.
Is it right for a private company to continue handling something as delicate and politically sensitive as our passports without being directly accountable to the DFA?
Considering that we have entered an era where data is gold, the DFA must find a way to be directly and solely in control of the system, data and personalization of our passports. All roads (and tweets) must lead to this.