The Bureau of Fire Protection (BFP) has begun implementing sweeping reforms, including the use of body-worn cameras and the relief of hundreds of personnel, following allegations of a multibillion-peso inspection racket raised during a Senate hearing on Wednesday.
During the Committee on Public Order and Dangerous Drugs inquiry, Sen. Raffy Tulfo cited complaints from the public and welcomed the earlier disclosure by Interior Secretary Jonvic Remulla about an alleged P15-billion annual racket within the BFP tied to fire safety inspections.
Tulfo said the scheme, which he had previously exposed during his years as a broadcaster, allegedly involved inspectors favoring specific suppliers of fire extinguishers while blocking competitors from entering the market.
“Dahil for the first time ever, isang DILG Secretary nage-expose nito. Kasi matagal na po ito nangyayari eh. Even when I was still a broadcaster many, many years ago, decades ago,” Tulfo said, noting that such practices should no longer be denied by officials.
BFP Chief Superintendent Rico Kwan Tiu acknowledged the issue and outlined measures aimed at curbing corruption and restoring public trust.
“All our fire safety inspectors are now wearing body-worn cameras to monitor their actions,” Tiu told lawmakers.
He added that 902 fire safety inspectors in Metro Manila had been relieved from their posts, with similar actions expected in other regions. The affected personnel are currently undergoing reintegration and reorientation, while newly designated inspectors are taking a 40-hour training course focused on fire safety inspection, ethics and integrity.
Tiu said the bureau is also coordinating with training institutions to expand the pool of qualified inspectors, citing manpower gaps in enforcing the Fire Code.
Tulfo, however, raised concerns that irregularities could persist despite the use of cameras, noting that transactions could still take place outside official inspections. He suggested that authorities also monitor patterns such as the widespread use of a single brand of fire extinguishers across multiple establishments, which he said could signal favoritism.
In response, Tiu stressed that the BFP does not endorse or recommend any specific brand of fire extinguisher.
“The BFP is not into recommending any kind or brand. We are not in business,” he said, adding that under existing standards, fire extinguishers do not have fixed expiration dates but must be maintained to ensure operational readiness.
The BFP has also launched an internal probe into possible conflicts of interest involving personnel allegedly linked to fire extinguisher manufacturers.
“That is part of our monitoring because engaging in such business is a clear conflict of interest,” Tiu said.
To strengthen accountability, the bureau is encouraging the public to report anomalies through its “e-reklamo” platform and is planning to convene a multi-stakeholder forum. Tiu said he is also pushing for the creation of a BFP and Industry Advisory Council to address systemic issues in fire safety inspections.
Tulfo reiterated long-standing complaints that some inspectors allegedly delay or withhold permits from establishments that refuse to purchase equipment from preferred suppliers.
Tiu maintained that such practices are limited to a small number of personnel but assured lawmakers that the agency is taking action.
“We assure you that these anomalies are being addressed,” he said, citing the launch of an initiative aimed at intensifying monitoring and enforcement efforts.
The BFP is also preparing to introduce a business identification number-based inspection system to further standardize processes and reduce opportunities for corruption, Tiu added.
