|
THE
Supreme Court (SC) has issued a ruling affirming the
decision of the Court of Appeals (CA) which nullified
the writ of preliminary injunction issued by a lower
court enjoining the government from collecting toll fees
for the use of the Coastal Road that connects Metro
Manila to Cavite.
In
effect, the ruling allows the government to impose toll
fees on motorists passing along Coastal Road pending the
lower court’s resolution on the petition filed by
Ernesto Francisco, in his capacity as a taxpayer,
seeking to nullify the Toll Operation Agreement (TOA)
entered into by the Toll Regulatory Board (TRB) and
Public Estates Authority (PEA) and UEM-Mara Philippines
Corp. (UMPC).
UMPC was
incorporated by two Malaysian entities, United Engineers
(Malaysia) Berhad (UEM) and Majlis Amanah Rakyat (Mara).
The TOA
was intended for the design, construction, operation and
maintenance of the R-1 Expressway (Airport Road Junction
to Zapote), the C-5 Link Expressway (link between the
R-1 Expressway and South Luzon Expressway) and the R-1
Expressway Extension (Zapote to Noveleta, Cavite). All
three expressways are components of the Manila-Cavite
Toll Expressway Project (Mctep).
In a
22-page decision penned by Associate Justice Renato
Corona, the Court’s First Division held that the CA was
correct in nullifying the writ of preliminary injunction
issued on June 23, 1998, by Judge Teofilo Guadiz Jr. of
the Regional Trial Court of Makati City, Branch 147.
The SC
noted there was no showing that the TRB and PEA abused
their discretion in imposing and collecting the toll
fees.
The High
Court agreed with the CA that the trial court does not
have jurisdiction to issue any restraining order “in any
case, dispute or controversy involving an infrastructure
project,” as prescribed by Presidential Decree 1818. The
provision is intended to prevent delays in the
implementation of government projects since it disrupts
economic development.
The
Court rejected Francisco’s claim that the Mtcep is not a
government infrastructure since it had existed since the
1980s, predating PD 1818, and UMPC merely upgraded it.
He had
also asserted that since the project was financed by a
foreign group, it does not “form part of the government
capital investment.”
But, the
SC said, the CA correctly held that the Mctep is a
government project, since the government, through, the
TRB, is one of the contracting parties of the TOA.
“It is
an infrastructure project because it involves the
construction, design, operation and maintenance of the
expressways. The collection of toll fees is an activity
necessary for the execution, implementation or operation
of this infrastructure project of the government,” the
SC said. |
