SC urged to act swiftly on Amari case

Cyber Bay shareholders led by former stockbroker Rolando S. Atienza and the Italian-Thai Development (BVI) Co. Ltd. together with Centasia Group Ltd. in separate motions recently urged the Supreme Court to swiftly reverse its ruling that nullified the 750-hectare Amari Manila Bay reclamation project.

Cyber Bay shareholders last April 8 told the high court that the nullification of the reclamation contract will have adverse effect on their investments: "Considering that Cyber Bay’s main business activity is its investment in Amari, the nullification of the amended joint venture agreement entered into between the Philippine Estate Authority (PEA) and Amari places in serious question the viability of Cyber Bay." This being the case, they added that their shares of stock are "plainly in jeopardy." The impact of the SC decision to them is "therefore direct and immediate."

More importantly, the "questioned decision" nullified an agreement which appears "to have been voluntarily entered into by the Philippine government and which underwent the scrutiny of various government agencies." They said that the SC action "puts into very serious question the credibility and reliability of the various government agencies which thoroughly evaluated and thereafter gave their seal of approval on the subject joint venture agreement and subject amended joint venture agreement, the integrity of the local stock market, and the sanctity of contracts in general."

Ital-Thai and Centasia on their April 11 motion, on the other hand, urged the high court to resolve "with utmost dispatch" their motion to intervene in the case.

The two foreign investors filed last Feb. 21 a motion for reconsideration in intervention seeking the reversal of the "questioned" July 9, 2002 SC ruling. But last March 4, the SC issued a resolution merely "noting" their complaint.

To merely "note" their petition, the investors claimed, "would be to put them in limbo and leave them and their undisputed valuable investments in the project in such an indeterminate state."

They emphasized that they are interested in the early resolution of the case because: "they are the foreign stockholders of Cyber Bay, the parent corporation of Amari; and they have valuable investments which stand to be directly prejudiced, if not rendered at naught, by the non-implementation" of the joint venture agreement.

More importantly, they asserted that they are actually, materially and directly interested in these proceedings because, for the project to succeed and upon invitation of the Philippine government, they advanced substantial amounts for the capitalization of Amari, guaranteed Amari’s bank loans and, in certain cases, even assumed the payment of their interests.

And because Cyber Bay’s only source of income is its investment in Amari, whose only asset is the joint venture agreement, the nullification of the contract would gravely prejudice Cyber Bay and its stockholders, especially Ital-Thai and Centasia.

"Worse, the affirmation of the Assailed Decision (insofar as it nullifies the AJVA) would render valueless the shares of stock of Cyber Bay, those held by the petitioners and those owned by the Filipino Investing Public, the innocent purchasers who invested in these shares relying, in good faith, upon the acts of the government particularly the members of the Executive Department," Ital-Thai and Centasia said.