Group asks court to push Big 3 audit

MANILA, Philippines – The civil society group Social Justice Society yesterday asked the Manila Regional Trial Court to deny the Office of the Solicitor General’s (OSG’s) motion to stop the audit of the books of account of the “Big 3” oil companies Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corp., Chevron Phils, Inc. (formerly Caltex Phils, Inc.) and Petron Corp.

In a three-page comment on the motion for reconsideration of the Office of the Solicitor General,” SJS and its legal counsel lawyer Vladimir Alarique Cabigao prayed that the motion for reconsideration filed by the OSG be denied and that other reliefs, just and equitable under the premises, be granted.

On May 22, government lawyers from the OSG urged Judge Silvino Pampilo Jr. of the Manila RTC Branch 26 to reconsider its decision ordering the audit of the books of account of Shell, Chevron and Petron. But, Cabigao, in asking the court to deny OSG’s motion said the Court, in the exercise of its supreme power of parens patriae, should deny the motion for reconsideration filed by the OSG in favor of respondents. 

Cabigao said the judiciary, as an agency of the State acting as parens patriae, should provide protection of the person and property of a person non sui juries. 

Parens patriae is a term in Latin for “parent of the nation”. In law, it refers to the public policy power of the state to intervene against an abusive or negligent natural parent, legal guardian or informal caretaker, and to act as the parent of any child or individual who is in need of protection.

Non sui juries is a term applied to an individual who lacks the legal capacity to act on his or her own behalf.

Cabigao said the opening and examination of the books of respondents were dictated by the “law of overruling necessity.” “The Latin maxim ‘salus populi est suprema lex’ embodies the character of the assailed order of the Honorable Court which was meant to protect the general welfare of the people against the allegation of violation of the Oil Deregulation Law by respondents,” said Cabigao in his MR. Thus, Cabigao said, the issue raised by SJS in this action should not be left unresolved by sheer technicality when there is an opportunity to invoke judicial intervention to make a definitive ruling on a justifiable controversy that concerns paramount public interest.

Clarification

In a related development, Pandacan Councilor Ernesto Rivera, also President Pro-Tempore of the Manila City Council, yesterday clarified erroneous newspaper reports claiming 20 councilors voted in favor and 14 against the controversial ordinance extending the stay of the oil depot during the May 14 final reading.

“There was only one officially recorded ‘No’ vote against the ordinance staying the long-awaited relocation of the oil depot in Pandacan and it was my vote,” Rivera said. The 14 ‘No’ votes referred to in the reports was actually during the March 19 second reading of the draft ordinance. He said the crucial and most important votes that count was the third and final reading.

The Pandacan councilor said that the City Council of Manila, in its regular session held Tuesday, unanimously approved the minutes of the regular session held on May 14 where the controversial Draft Ordinance No. 7177, amending Ordinance No. 8119, otherwise known as Comprehensive Land Use Plan and Zoning, by creating a medium industrial zone, (1-2) and heavy industrial zone (1-3), was approved on third reading, making official the result of the voting.

Twenty out of 21 remaining councilors were present when the vote was called for, voted in favor, and only one against. The lone dissenting vote was cast by Rivera.