Something smells fishy, PEATC
MPTC added that since the project is a joint venture with the PRA, any legal dispute involving the CIC should have rightfully included the PRA as an indispensable party.
Daily TribuneMPTC added that since the project is a joint venture with the PRA, any legal dispute involving the CIC should have rightfully included the PRA as an indispensable party.
As the battle for control of the Manila-Cavite Expressway (CAVITEX) between state firm Public Estates Authority Tollway Corporation (PEATC) and the Metro Pacific Tollways Corporation (MPTC) unit CAVITEX Infrastructure Corporation percolates, the issue that sticks out is that the agency should not even be running a tollway.
What is the function of its parent, the Philippine Reclamation Authority (PRA)?
Based on its specified function, PRA is a government agency attached to the Office of the President, and performs both regulatory and proprietary functions on which programs and projects are supportive of the government’s thrust to sustain economic gains by generating local and foreign investments in large-scale reclamation and development projects.
Nowhere was it provided that PEA or any of its line agencies has the authority to run a road system or collect tolls.
Nonetheless, CIC has an operations and maintenance agreement with PEATC that its officer in charge Dioscoro Esteban now wants to cancel and the operations of the tollway transferred to PEATC.
MPTC is also wondering why the PRA was not included among the parties in the mandamus case filed with the Court of Appeals (CA), which raises the possibility that Esteban has circumvented proper authorities in filing the petition.
“The petition against the CIC was filed by Esteban, an OIC of PEATC, who lacks the authority of the PRA or of the PEATC Board to file such a petition,” an MPTC official said.
PEATC also did not secure the endorsement of the Office of the Government Corporate Counsel in its case.
The OGCC represents the legal interests of government-owned and controlled corporations including the PEATC.
The government counsel had also directed the state firm to obtain the services of OGCC after obtaining the services of a private lawyer in the mandamus petition.
MPTC added that since the project is a joint venture with the PRA, any legal dispute involving the CIC should have rightfully included the PRA as an indispensable party.
How the petition for the writ was filed was also questioned as MPTC indicated that PEATC has opted to go to court even when the concessionaire has invited the agency for a dialogue to negotiate and resolve the CAVITEX issues.
A writ of mandamus from the CA will remove the MPTC’s right to manage CAVITEX and PEATC will take over the expressway, including its toll collection business.
A writ will also require CIC to turn over all its contract services to the PEATC.
According to the Toll Regulatory Board, the concession period for CAVITEX will last for 30 years between 1 October 1998 and 30 September 2033 which is another huge mystery over the rush that PEATC wanted to boot out MPTC.
The rush in the PEATC effort to remove PEATC was also noticed by the OGCC in a 19 February letter that described the termination last 29 January of state counsels in the mandamus case.
It indicated that the legal services of OGCC were hastily terminated without regard to its precarious effects or consequences on the cases being handled by OGCC.
“If PEATC is not properly represented in these cases, an adverse decision/resolution will have a major financial impact not only to PEATC’s operations but also to the other government agencies which have interest thereto, such as the Philippine Reclamation Authority (PEATC’s mother agency) and the Toll Regulatory Board,” according to the Government Corporate Counsel Rogelio Quevedo.
Ultimately, it is the government that will be placed at a disadvantageous position if OGCC will agree to PEATC’s unilateral termination, he added
The haste and the maneuvers that Esteban employed in the attempt to bump off CIC from the contract stinks to high heavens.
The government has the responsibility to look into the motivation driving the PEATC official or even PEA in the pursuit of taking over a business best left for the private sector to undertake.
The basic anomaly is that the PEATC is seeking to confiscate the CAVITEX operations when the administration’s thrust is to encourage the private sector to flourish with minimal government intervention.
