by Myrna Velasco September
19, 2016
Eleven power supply
agreements (PSAs) were junked by the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) for
having ‘legally defective’ contractual terms.
The supply deals
established to have been flawed were that of the Biliran Electric Cooperative and
GN Power Dinginin Ltd.Co. (GNPD); La Union Electric Cooperative and GNPD; North
Cotabato Electric Cooperative with Western Mindanao Power Corporation; and
Camarines Sur Electric Cooperative IV and Unified Leyte Geothermal Energy, Inc.
The others were with
the Cebu Electric Cooperative I and Mariveles Power Generation Corporation
(MPGC); Davao del Norte Electric Cooperative, Inc. and San Miguel Consolidated
Power Corporation (SMCPC); Siargao Electric Cooperative and SMCPC; Misamis
Oriental Electric Cooperative, Inc. I and SMCPC; Zamboanga del Sur I Electric
Cooperative and SMCPC; and Nueva Vizcaya Electric Cooperative, Inc. with San
Miguel Energy Corporation.
The ERC noted “the 11
applications failed to meet the Commission’s requirements as regards verification
and certification of non-forum shopping.”
Given that, the
regulatory body emphasized that “the applications were deemed legally
defective.”
The Commission
expounded that “in the absence of any compelling reasons to rule otherwise,
(it) deemed the legal defects as sufficient ground to dismiss the said
applications.”
Being a quasi-judicial
body, ERC Chairperson Jose Vicente Salazar stressed that they are “duty-bound
to ensure that applicants and petitioners doing business in its regulated field
act with truthfulness and diligence in the filing of their pleadings.”
The regulatory thus
noted that “to prevent a repeat of the foregoing incident dismissal, the
Commission has implemented a rigorous pre-filing process in order to ensure
that applications filed before the Commission are in compliance with its
requirements and resolutions.”
Based on the relevant
rules issued by the ERC, it is mandatory that applications for approval of
contracts must be accompanied by a verification stating that the affiant had read
the pleading; and that the allegations therein shall be based on the his
personal knowledge or backed by authentic records.
Additionally, the ERC
rules prescribe that “applications contain a sworn certification of non-forum
shopping” which shall also state that “the applicant has not commenced any
action or filed any claim involving the same issues in any other court,
tribunal or quasi-judicial body.”
The ERC indicated “the
11 applications have failed to validly comply with these twin requirements of verification
and certification of non-forum shopping.”
No comments:
Post a Comment