Judge in Peco case wants it moved to another court after MORE’s suit

By Lenie Lectura -January 6, 2020
from Business Mirror

THE Regional Trial Court (RTC) judge hearing its expropriation case against Panay Electric Co. Inc. has suggested that another court handle the case following a complaint lodged against him by Peco rival, More Electric and Power Corp. (MORE Power).

“This case has been observed to have become too politicized. It may be respectfully suggested for the best interest of the parties that this case be transferred outside the jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Court of Iloilo to be tried and head by the designated judge therein,” Judge Daniel Antonio Gerardo S. Amular of RTC Branch 35 said in his January 2 statement.

Based on the 33-page complaint lodged with the Supreme Court on December 12, MORE Power accused Amular for grave misconduct, gross ignorance of the law and violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct.

In particular, MORE said Amular violated Canons 1 and 2 of the Code of Judicial Conduct “when he held a private conference inside his chamber but prohibiting the lawyers of MORE and Peco from attending.”

Amular, however, said the complaint was based on allegations and that MORE must prove that he did commit those allegations. “It is a basic legal concept that he who alleges must prove, and mere allegations by themselves would not be given weight because it does not amount to evidence.”

Amular also said that he had written the SC on December 17 regarding the complaint. He also said that he wrote the Department of Justice on December 11 to seek for guidance.

MORE Power President Roel Castro and company lawyer Hector Teodosio are seeking the removal of Amular as the judge handling the expropriation of the distribution assets of Peco.

They alleged that Amular had delayed resolution of the case in favor of Peco as shown by his order to MORE Power to agree to a settlement of the case with Peco during a meeting with Castro and a Peco official in his chamber in September last year.

Amular, in his response to MORE Power, denied delaying the expropriation proceedings, saying he was awaiting the SC decision on whether MORE Power’s expropriation powers are constitutional.

Also, he cited the numerous expropriation cases that were disposed promptly in the past. “The present expropriation case is a case of first impression. There has been no precedent of this case filed before the entire Philippine judiciary.… So many legal issues confront the court, hence, it is most unfair to charge the court it is delaying the case,” Amular said.

MORE Power also pointed to Amular’s decision to ignore the writ of possession (WOP) issued by the previous Iloilo City RTC judge who handled the expropriation case, Judge Yvette Go, as provided under Republic Act 11212 which granted MORE a 25-year franchise as electricity distribution utility in Iloilo City.

The new Iloilo City power utility has deposited almost P500 million with the Iloilo City RTC following Judge Go’s issuance of the WOP as provided under RA 11212.

RA 11212, approved by the 17th Congress and signed into law by President Duterte on February 14, 2019, granted MORE the power of eminent domain and the power to expropriate any distribution assets in Iloilo City.

It also authorized the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) to issue Peco a two-year temporary certificate of public convenience and necessity (CPCN) so it could continue distributing electricity in Iloilo City until MORE Power starts its power distribution.

Peco had sought to stop the expropriation of its distribution assets and had the Mandaluyong Regional Trial Court declare Sections 10 and 17 of RA 11212, granting MORE Power’s power of eminent domain and expropriation, as unconstitutional because they allegedly deprived Peco of its rights.

The SC, however, issued on December 3, 2019, a temporary restraining order to stop the Mandaluyong Court from enforcing its ruling. The TRO remains in effect until the SC decides whether the Mandaluyong RTC erred in declaring  unconstitutional the expropriation powers given by Congress to MORE Power.

Amular had asked the Chief Justice in his letter last month if his court can proceed notwithstanding the pending case before the SC.