MANILA, Philippines -- The Department of Justice (DoJ) will continue investigating the syndicated estafa (fraud) case filed against by a consumer advocacy group against 2006 officers Manila Electric Company (Meralco) after a temporary restraining order (TRO) lapsed.

Regional State Prosecutor Jaime Umpa said the preliminary investigation of the charges filed by the National Association of Electricity Consumers for Reforms (Nasecore) will push through on August 27 since the TRO issued by Makati Regional Trial Court Judge Wynlove Dumayas has lapsed.

Meralco had questioned before the Makati court the DoJ’s jurisdiction over Nasecor’s accusation that Meralco had misappropriated money it was supposed to refund its consumers.

The case stemmed from an Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) ruling that the 10 percent meter and bill deposits, totaling some P21 billion, that Meralco had charged its consumers should be returned.

The money was supposed to have been placed in trust with the ERC while the agency drew up a plan to implement the refunds.

However, Nasecore said Meralco allotted only six percent per consumer and allegedly reclassified the balance as "interest and other incomes," a move the group claimed amounted to the misappropriation of the money.

Those accused by Nasecore are Meralco chairman and CEO Manuel Lopez, executive vice president and chief financial officer Daniel Tagaza, first vice president and treasurer Rafael Andrada, vice president and corporate auditor and compliance officer Helen de Guzman, vice president and assistant comptroller Antoio Valera, senior assistant vice president and assistant treasurer Manolo Fernando; and 2006 directors Arthur Defensor, Gregory Domingo, Octavio Victor Espiritu, Christian Monsod, Federico Puno, Washington Sycip, Emilio Vicens, Cesar Virata and Francisco Viray.

Viray's term ended June 2, 2006.

Meralco pointed that the complainant should have paid the filing fee first before the DoJ could act on the complaint as required by law.

But Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez allowed the complaint to push through even without a filing fee, saying if the fee is made mandatory, poor litigants could never afford to file a case.

Gonzalez said the filing fee could be collected as a lien if the complainant wins the case and receives an award.