Petitioners seek SC stay on NAIA modernization agreement
Text size
Three decades after the Marcopper mining disaster devastated Marinduque’s waterways, the province is again pressing the…
Housing is probably the biggest issue affecting people the world over.
Malacañang on Monday called for a more thorough investigation into the questioned flood control projects in Taguig…
The defense on Monday backed the move by senator-judges to exclude a prosecution witness who testified on the firearms…
The private operator of the Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) defended its concession agreement Wednesday as a petition to halt the deal reached the Supreme Court.
New NAIA Infra Corp. (NNIC) issued a statement saying it respects the right of groups to seek legal remedies while maintaining that the public-private partnership is necessary to modernize the aging gateway.
Petitioners Atty. Rico Domingo and Atty. Cesar Oracion are asking the high court to issue a temporary restraining order against the 2024 agreement. They argue that increased airport charges under the deal will raise costs for airlines and related industries, which would ultimately be passed on to travelers.
The petition further claims the agreement is unconstitutional, citing alleged violations of due process and the right to travel.
NNIC countered that several safeguards and exemptions are already in place to protect vulnerable sectors. The firm cited that overseas Filipino workers remain exempt from both international terminal fees and travel taxes.
Additionally, domestic airlines operating at NAIA receive a 65 percent discount on landing and takeoff fees to help mitigate operational costs.
The operator also clarified that NAIA was not included in recent government fee relief measures because those programs apply only to airports managed by the Civil Aviation Authority of the Philippines.
Other major hubs under private management, such as those in Cebu and Clark, were similarly excluded.
“For many years, NAIA’s fees remained unchanged even as the airport grew busier and more strained,” NNIC said. The firm argued that decades of underinvestment led to the congestion and service limitations travelers currently face.
The firm stressed that the concession followed an open and competitive bidding process and includes government oversight to ensure accountability.
The Supreme Court has not yet acted on the plea for a restraining order. The current filing reiterates motions first brought to the court in 2025 seeking to suspend the agreement and related administrative orders from the Manila International Airport Authority.
