|
THE
Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed the petition filed by
the Freedom from Debt Coalition (FDC) and several
Party-list groups seeking to nullify for being
unconstitutional the resolutions issued by the
Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS)
declaring that its concessionaires are mere contractors
and not public utilities, thus, exempting them from the
12-percent profit margin limitation.
In the
en banc decision written by Associate Justice Angelina
Sandoval-Gutierrez, the High Tribunal held the
petitioners failed to resort to the appropriate remedy
in questioning MWSS Board Resolution No. 2004-2001 and
MWSS-Regional Office (RO) Resolution No. 04-006-CA.
The
Court noted that under Section 12 of the MWSS Charter,
it was the defunct Public Service Commission (now
National Water Regulatory Board) that had the exclusive
original jurisdiction over all cases contesting the
rates of water and sewerage services.
The SC
said the petition also suffers “from a fatal defect”
since it failed to implead both concessionaires—Manila
Water Co. Inc., (MWCI) and Maynilad Water Services Inc.
(MWSI) —which are indispensable parties.
Besides
these, the Court noted the petitioners failed to follow
the hierarchy of courts when it directly filed the
petition at the SC instead of seeking relief from lower
courts.
“Significantly, the petition raises issues of fact which
cannot be addressed to this Court…This matter is a
factual issue requiring presentation and evaluation of
evidence such as bidding documents, memoranda, and the
testimonies of the participants of the bidding and
contract negotiations,” said the decision.
Thus,
the issue on whether the MWSI and MWCI are public
utilities will have to be resolved by examining the
intention of MWSS and the concessionaires at the time of
the bidding process, negotiation and execution of the
concession agreements in lower courts.
The SC
added the claim of the petitioners that the MWSS
resolutions could allow the increase of water rates
beyond the 12-percent rate of return limit “is purely
speculative” and would require extensive computations.
“These are matters beyond the Court’s function as it is
not a trier of facts.”
The SC
also pointed out the petitioners failed to cite any
provision in the Constitution that was violated by the
respondents. “While petitioners claim that the assailed
resolutions are a ‘flagrant violation of the
Constitution and the statutory provisions defining
public utilities,’ they failed to cite any
constitutional provision being violated.”
The
petitioners had argued that Article 9 of the concession
agreements states that the standard rates may be
adjusted from time to time subject to the limitation
that the concessionaires’ rate of net return shall not
exceed 12 percent per year, as required in Section 12 of
Republic Act 6234, or the MWSS Charter.
But on
September 15, 2003, and December 2, 2003, petitioner
alleged, the Commission on Audit submitted to the MWSS
its audit reports stating that MWSI, which services the
western sector of Metro Manila which had recently been
awarded to a new concessionaire, had a net rate of
return (ROR) of 7.71 percent while the MWCI, led by the
Ayala group and serves the eastern Metro Manila side,
had an ROR of 40.92 percent. |
