By Francis Allan L. Angelo
Former Iloilo vice-governor and lawyer Rolex T. Suplico, who was also a Congressman and a franchise lawyer, called on More Electric and Power Corporation (MORE Power) and Panay Electric Company (PECO) to move on and serve the Ilonggos, as they have been proclaiming all along.
Suplico was reacting to the news that the Supreme Court en banc had recently ruled in favor of MORE Power in two cases pending before Court, pertaining to constitutional issues, which PECO raised against MORE Power’s legislative franchise, Republic Act No. 11212.
“I wish to remind everyone that Congress granted the distribution utility franchise to MORE Power, and not to PECO. I am alluding to RA 11212, entitled: “AN ACT GRANTING MORE ELECTRIC AND POWER CORPORATION A FRANCHISE TO ESTABLISH, OPERATE, AND MAINTAIN FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES AND IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST, A DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM FOR THE CONVEYANCE OF ELECTRIC POWER TO THE END USERS IN THE CITY OF ILOILO, PROVINCE OF ILOILO, AND ENSURING THE CONTINUOUS AND UNINTERRUPTED SUPPLY OF ELECTRICITY IN THE FRANCHISE AREA,” which was approved by President Rodrigo Duterte on February 14, 2019,” Suplico said in a statement.
He said that it is time to put forward the consumers’ welfare after the protracted legal battle.
“With this in mind, I call on PECO to move on and allow MORE Power to focus on its mandate under RA 11212, which is to serve the Ilonggos.
This way, PECO – by allowing an entity with a franchise to comply with the latter – will also be, in a way, serving the Ilonggos,” Suplico said.
“I also call on MORE Power to comply with its mandates under RA 11212. As the grantee under RA 11212 to distribute electric power in Iloilo City, it has no choice. It has to hit the ground running. It has to serve the public interest of all Ilonggos. And, as I said before, it has to lower the electricity rates in Iloilo City,” Suplico added.
Suplico said that “public interest, not private interest, is always the guiding principle in the grant of legislative franchises by Congress.”
“This is because a franchise is always granted in the name of public welfare. The obligation to serve the public was given to MORE Power by Congress, not to PECO. I cannot anymore over-emphasize this. And nobody can argue with this, not even PECO.”
“I wish to say that enough is enough. I am sure that the Ilonggos are waiting for the intramurals between MORE Power and PECO to end. They should now put their words in their mouths. It is time to move on. And it is time to serve the Ilonggos,” Suplico added.
Voting 8-6, the SC ruled in favor of MORE Power in the following petitions:
1.) More Electric and Power Corporation vs. Panay Electric Company, Inc. (GR No. 248061) and
2.) Republic of the Philippines, More Electric and Power Corporation vs. Panay Electric Company, Inc. (GR No. 249406).
The two cases pertain to the constitutional issues raised against MORE Power’s congressional franchise via Republic Act 11212.
In granting the petitions, the SC reversed the judgment of the Regional Trial Court Branch 209 of Mandaluyong City in Civil Case No. R-MND-19-00571 and declared Sections 10 and 17 of Republic Act No. 11212 constitutional.
Section 10 authorizes MORE to exercise the power of eminent domain and acquire such private property as is actually necessary for the realization of the purpose for which the franchise is granted.
Section 17 states the power of MORE, as grantee, to effectively acquire power distribution assets. The distribution assets that exist within the franchise area could only refer to those of PECO.
Right after MORE Power’s franchise was signed into law on Feb 14, 2020, PECO questioned RA 11212 before the Mandaluyong RTC.
The case was filed against defendants MORE, Department of Energy, Energy Regulatory Commission and all other agencies tasked to implement RA No. 11212.
In July 2019, Regional Trial Court Branch 209 Judge Monique Quisumbing-Ignacio ruled that PECO has no obligation to sell and MORE has no right to expropriate PECO’s assets under Sections 10 and 17 of RA No. 11212 and PECO’s rights to its properties are protected against arbitrary and confiscatory taking.
“Wherefore, premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered declaring Sections 10 and 17 of RA No. 11212 void and unconstitutional for infringing on PECO’s rights to due process and equal protection of the law,” reads the dispositive portion of Judge Ignacio’s ruling.
“The power of eminent domain had never been intended to be used as a tool to take private property already being devoted to public use for the same public purpose,” the ruling added.
But MORE Power was able to secure a temporary restraining order (TRO) from the SC in December 2019, which paved the way for the Iloilo Regional Trial Court Branch 23 to greenlight the takeover of PECO’s assets on Feb 28, 2020.
PECO legal counsel Estrella Elamparo said the defeat was a temporary setback as they will exhaust all legal remedies at their disposal.
“It was a close vote on a novel issue that had never been raised before our Highest Court, but will certainly have reverberating consequences that open the power of expropriation to abuse. The tight vote lends support to our position that the takeover of PECO’s properties is not the exercise of eminent domain contemplated by our laws, but a violation of constitutional rights,” she said.
“Although this is a massive hurdle, we will not give up on our fight and we will continue to pursue the available legal remedies to defend PECO’s constitutional rights. Despite this temporary setback, we remain optimistic that we will ultimately be vindicated not just for PECO but for the people of Iloilo,” Elamparo added.
