A group of power consumers has added its voice to those opposing the Supreme Court’s decision suspending the government’s implementation of the retail competition and open access (RCOA) in the electricity industry.
The National Association of Electricity Consumers for Reforms (Nasecore) has filed a motion for intervention urging the 15-member tribunal to allow it to participate in the discussions concerning the RCOA.
In a 12-page motion, it said the temporary restraining order (TRO) issued by the high court on the resolutions and department orders of the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) and the Department of Energy (DOE) regarding RCOA would adversely affect the public.
“(T)he issues raised herein are matters of transcendental importance, public service, policy and interest, and that its electricity consumers-members will be directly, actually and greatly affected by the annulment of the… assailed issuances in this petition,” the group said in its March 1 motion filed by the Nasecore executive director, Rafael Antonio Acebedo.
On Feb. 21, the high court granted the TRO sought by San Beda College-Alabang, Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Riverbanks Development Corp. and Ateneo de Manila University.
The TRO prevented consumers with monthly average peak demand of at least 1 megawatt to choose and directly negotiate with their own power supplier to get the most competitive electricity rates as allowed under RCOA.
The Nasecore argued that the delay in the implementation of RCOA, which was supposed to take effect last Feb. 26, would only allow some power companies to monopolize the electricity industry by stunting free competition as mandated by Republic Act No. 9136, or the Electric Power Industry Reform Act of 2001 (Epira).
“The assailed issuances (of the DOE and ERC) are valid and reasonable regulatory measures geared toward the promotion of the avowed purposes of the Epira (to) promote true market competition and prevent harmful monopoly and market power abuse in the electric power industry,” the group said.
“Any decision or resolution to the contrary will definitely prove harmful to the welfare and interest of the electricity-consuming public,” it added.