Published
By Jeffrey Damicog
The Supreme Court (SC)
has been asked on Tuesday to no longer allow the Manila Electric Corporation
(Meralco) to collect bill deposits from consumers.
In their 36-page
petition for certiorari, the petitioners, comprised mostly of legislators from
the Makabayan bloc of the House of Representatives, pointed out that the bill
deposit is not allowed under the Electric Power Industry Reform Act (EPIRA).
“Based on the EPIRA,
Meralco, being a DU (distribution utility), can only collect from its consumers
(i) distribution wheeling charges, (ii) connection fees, and (iii) retail
rate,” the petition pointed out among other arguments.
The signatories of the petition are Bayan Muna Chairman Neri J. Colmenares,
Bayan Muna Partylist Rep. Carlos Isagani T. Zarate, Anakpawis Partylist Rep.
Ariel B. Casilao, Gabriela Women’s Partylist Reps. Emerenciana A. De Jesus and
Arlene D. Brosas, Act Teachers Partylist Reps. Antonio L. Tinio and Francisca
L. Castro, Kabataan Partylist Rep. Sarah Jane I. Elago, Bagong Alyansang
Makabayan Secretary General Renato M. Reyes, Jr.
“The electricity bill
deposit is an unjust charge that is being used by Meralco to boost its profits
through a commingling scheme that is also unjust and illegal within the
framework of the EPIRA and the Meralco Franchise,” the petitioners pointed out.
Intended as a guarantee
for the payment of bills and held in trust by Meralco, the petitioners said the
bill deposit has become “a burden to many consumers.”
“In reality, it has become an oppressive exaction and a multi-billion peso
money-making scheme,” they stated.
In their petition, the
petitioners asked the SC to declare as “illegal and void” the bill deposit
provision in the Magna Carta for Residential Electricity Consumers and its
amendments under Resolution No. 28, series of 2010.
Apart from permanently
prohibiting Meralco and other similarly situated distribution utilities from
collecting bill deposits, the petitioners also asked the high tribunal to order
Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) “to implement the refund of the Bill
Deposits to the Consumers in the Captive Market.”
As an alternative, the
petitioners said the SC could instead “prohibit and declare as illegal the
commingling of the bill deposit funds and order the ERC and Meralco to pay the
consumers the interest rate earned by the bill deposits.
The legislators also sought the SC to order the Commission on Audit (COA) to
audit all the bill deposits collected and the interests earned by Meralco from
the collected deposits.
No comments:
Post a Comment