SC summons energy execs to answer petitions vs power rate hike
INQUIRER FILE PHOTO
MANILA, Philippines—The Supreme Court called on energy officials to explain points raised in several petitions against the power rate hike.
Summoned were Energy Secretary Carlos Jericho Petilla, Energy Regulatory Chairperson Zenaida Ducut and Philippine Electricity Market Corporation President Melinda Ocampo.
In a 4-page order, the high court said the three “were expected to be able to competently and completely answer questions related to, among others, their processes and procedures.”
The three were called upon by the high court because of the technical aspects on the issue.
Three separate petitions were filed by various groups questioning the legality of the P4.15 per kilowatt-hour rate increase which was supposed to be implemented on a staggered basis. Petitioners alleged that there was collusion among the power players and the government.
They also alleged that the ERC violated the consumer’s right to due process when it hastily approved Meralco’s proposed rate increase.
The high court issued a restraining order last December 23 stopping the implementation of the increase.
On January 21, the high court will conduct a debate on the legality of the raise as well as the manner it was approved.
It has set issues to be discussed for the oral argument after meeting the parties involved in a preliminary conference last Monday.
The following are among the issues to be tackled during the oral argument:
* Whether or not the ERC violated the consumer’s right to due process and a provision in the Electric Power Industry Reform Act (EPIRA) requiring it to protect the public from market abuse;
* Whether or not the amendment to Section 4(e), Rule 3 of the EPIRA law’s Implementing Rules and Regulation which allows automatic rate adjustments or increases to recover generation cost violates due process of law;
* Whether or not the ERC resolution allowing rate adjustments proposed by Meralco last Dec. 9 is valid;
* Whether or not automatic rate adjustments to recover generation cost amount to a surrender of ERCs regulatory function in violation of the EPIRA Law;
* Whether or not Section 6 and 29 of the EPIRA law are unconstitutional in declaring that (a) power generation supply are not public utilities and (b) their charges are beyond regulation by the ERC.
Also to be debated on would be whether the restraining order against the implementation of the staggered rate increase should be lifted and if a refund can be given to consumers who paid the increase.
Related Stories:
SC to gov’t: Explain power rate hike
Supreme Court halts power rate hike
SC expands list of respondents in power rate hike row
