ILOILO City – Already “exasperated with some courts”, Mayor Jerry Treñas appealed for speedy resolution to the dragging legal battle between Panay Electric Co. (PECO) and MORE Electric and Power Corp. (MORE Power). “Indi pwede ang korte mag inagi (courts can’t be sissies). They will have to decide one way or the other,” he said.
The mayor warned of dire consequences if the uncertainty on the power distribution here lingers indefinitely.
“Kon ang korte mag inagi kag magpalagyo (If courts become feeble and cowardly) then you are opening the whole situation for people to take the law into their hands,” said Treñas, a lawyer.
MORE Power secured a 25-year power distribution franchise here in February. But PECO questioned the franchise’s constitutionality. The case is now with the Supreme Court.
On the other hand, MORE Power filed an expropriation case to take over PECO’s power distribution system. The Regional Trial Court Branch 35, however, suspended the proceedings last month.
Treñas said it is the responsibility of courts to resolve legal issues to maintain order in society.
“Indi pwede nga indi sila ka-decision (Courts cannot not make decisions). Ang bilog nga syudad apektado dasun ga-inagi pa ang iban nga korte (The whole city is affected while some courts are taking their time). Indi pwede ‘na (This is not acceptable). Are they telling us to take the law in our hands?” said Treñas.
MORE Power scored a big legal win last week. In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court En Banc stopped the implementation of the ruling of the Regional Trial Court in Mandaluyong City declaring two sections of MORE Power’s franchise law void and unconstitutional.
According to the Supreme Court, the Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) it issued should remain in effect until further orders from it.
However, it remains unclear when will the Regional Trial Court Branch 35 here resume the proceedings of the expropriation case against PECO. In ordering the suspension, Presiding Judge Daniel Antionio Gerardo Amular cited supervening events.
Among others, Amular noted the Supreme Court’s pronouncement that the issue of the franchise law’s constitutionality would be like a prejudicial question to the expropriation case as it would be a waste of time and effort to appoint evaluation commissioners and debate the market value of the property sought to be condemned if it turns out that the condemnation was illegal.
“The question of constitutionality is of paramount importance in the interest of legal and procedural fairness in view of the novelty of the case,” said Amular.
“Indeed, the ruling of the Honorable SC will guide this Court whether the authority conferred upon the plaintiff as a quasi-public corporation by Congress has been correctly or properly exercised by it,” he added.
PECO’s franchise as sole power distributor in Iloilo City expired on Jan. 19 this year. It failed to secure an extension from Congress over several issues such as poor customer relations, erroneous billings, power failures, high rates, etc.
MORE Power president Roel Castro said the latest Supreme Court ruling was “a manifestation of the rule of law.”
“With the issuance of the TRO, MORE Power is confident that the lower court will take its cue and decisively rule on the Application for the Issuance of the Writ of Possession. With all due respect, the law and rules are clear: Upon compliance with the requirements, a petitioner in an expropriation case is entitled to a writ of possession as a matter of right and it becomes the ministerial duty of the trial court to forthwith issue the writ of possession,” Castro said./PN
