BY ORDERING the court sheriffs to serve a writ of possession to Panay Electric Co. (PECO), in effect turning over the power distribution utility in Iloilo City to MORE Electric and Power Corp. (MORE Power), Judge Emerald Requina-Contreras of the lloilo Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 23 upheld the legitimacy of Republic Act (RA) 11212 “under the doctrine of presumption of constitutionality of the laws.”
RA 11212 – the law passed by Congress on Dec. 11, 2018 and approved by President Rodrigo Duterte on Feb. 14, 2019 – awarded to MORE Power the new 25-year franchise to convey electric power to the end-users in Iloilo City via expropriation of PECO’s power-distribution equipment.
The judge’s decision jumpstarted the transition from PECO – whose franchise expired on Jan. 19, 2019 – to MORE Power, which had suffered a one-year delay due to the former’s legal action questioning the validity of the law for being “confiscatory”.
This columnist, a non-lawyer, has repeatedly relied on “common sense” in reiterating in this corner that a law passed by Congress and approved by the President would be presumed operational unless amended by Congress or declared “unconstitutional” by the Supreme Court.
Otherwise, any Tom, Dick or Harry could delay its implementation by filing a case in the lower court, as PECO had done.
My belief in the presumption of constitutionality of RA 11212 stemmed from an earlier law that had undergone nationwide criticism. I was even one of those who wrote against that law – RA 10533, better known as K-12, for being “unnecessary” – because it would stretch high school education from four to six years, hence a bigger financial burden to parents.
As soon as the law passed Congress in 2013, cause-oriented groups and student organizations took to the streets and petitioned the Supreme Court (SC) to declare the law unconstitutional. The petition, while still pending, had no deterrent effect in the implementation of the K-12 program of the Department of Education.
It was only on Oct. 9, 2018 that the SC declared “constitutional” the K-12 law. By then, the first batch of Grade 12 or senior high students had graduated. An “unconstitutional” verdict, however, would have aborted the program.
So it is with the expropriation of the sole distribution utility in Iloilo. PECO could not insist on waiting for the SC to act on a pending petition for review on certiorari of a decision by another regional trial court in Mandaluyong City which declared RA 11212 “unconstitutional.”
The SC has restrained that lower court from implementing that decision without prejudice to its own final ruling later.
The seizure of the power facilities via a writ of possession is half the battle won. There remains the second stage in the jurisdiction of Judge Contreras, whose job now is to determine the sufficiency or insufficiency of the “just compensation” (P481,842,450) that MORE Power has offered to pay PECO.
Assuming that the managers of PECO now accept its fate, would they be in a position to haggle for a higher amount?
On this matter we consulted Leopoldo “Doods” Moragas, a retired senior assistant vice president of the Philippine National Bank who was the consultant of Philippine Long Distance Telephone Co. (PLDT) when the latter was negotiating to buy the Southern Iloilo Telephone Co. of Miag-ao, Iloilo.
“I wrote PECO a letter,” he said. “I proposed synthesizing and reviewing their financial reports to arrive at a more realistic valuation of their assets. But with the ball now in MORE Power’s possession, it will be more difficult for PECO to strike a better deal.” (hvego31@gmail.com/PN)
