Filing Consumer Petitions at ERC a Disturbing Experience
By Aya Jallorina
Executive Director
Matuwid na Singil sa Kuryente Consumer Alliance Inc.(MSK)
aya.msk14org@gmail.com
matuwid.org
Electricity consumers have long been questioning whether the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) is promoting the interest of consumers and not only that of big utilities especially Meralco. My recent experience in what I believe was a simple process of filing the MSK petition with the ERC docket office was very disturbing and showed that the ERC, not only makes rules that are anti-consumer, but will not even allow consumers’ viewpoints in the regulatory door for appropriate, respectful, obligatory, and entitled consideration and due process.
It was a disturbing experience for me.Your consumer advocacy group MSK in collaboration with many cause- oriented groups and concerned citizens, has filed the first petition for a rule change at ERC for them to pass a resolution mandating the holding of open competitive bidding of bilateral power supply contracts instead of monopolizing them and negotiating the price and terms with its affiliates and sister companies.
We prepared for the petition, followed the ERC’s rules of practice and procedure, and meticulously completed the required supporting documents. We expected just to submit and docket the consumers petition with the records division of the ERC and should be done in three (3) minutes. I was surprised that the ERC’s records section will not even accept our petition “for lack of substance”. That’s right! Here is a records clerk who is essentially making a decision to shutdown the consumers petition, will not even allow it to be recorded and recognized, much less schedule it for study and hearing! I was sent to the technical division, then to the legal division of ERC. They kept telling me our petition lacked substance and that they can’t accept it. I explained that they should just received it, and allow the Commission to decide on our petition. I even challenged them to certify to the effect that they are refusing to accept the same, and at that point, they might have realized I was determined to have the petition be received because when I said that, they began to act as if they are only concerned with consumers. Their words were clear: Sayang, mababasura lang naman ito for lack of substance.
With that, it means the ERC bureaucracy is structurally, procedurally, and perhaps culturally, biased against the interest of the consumers. They are forgetting that the Epira law under Section 41 mandated the ERC to look after consumer interest.
I argued that the duty of the records and docket section is only ministerial and they have no authority to essentially pass judgment on the merits and substance of the petition, especially from the consumer groups. Even for us who have seen this kind of government apathy and taxpayer letdown, to see this kind of callous practice, and to see it up close and personal, is still bone chilling. And only because this government agency, the Energy Regulatory Commission, is specifically mandated to protect the consumer interest. How can they even come close to protecting us when they display so much bias and will not even allow us in the door.Really bone chilling.
What are the electric consumers and the proletariat supposed to do? With this kind of emperious posture, the ERC, one of the key government institutions under our democracy that is supposed to be a bastion of consumer protection, is not offering a democratic platform to seek reforms and justice. They are dangerously pushing the aggrieved to seek regress somewhere else outside the democratic processes?
It took more than an hour of internal deliberations (and maybe some clearances from the vested interests?) and steadfast argument on our part, before the ERC’s record section finally did what they were supposed to do two hours before which was to receive and record the consumers petition for a rule change. Thank you!
Still the experience is quite disturbing and we hope it is not a precursor of how ERC will treat consumer interests in the future. Very disturbing!
