-
Another group of current and former employees, concerned citizens, and non-profit organizations asked the Supreme Court to void the public-private partnership pact between the government and San Miguel Corp.’s New Naia Infrastructure Corp.
-
In a 36-page pleading submitted Tuesday, they pleaded for the high court to stop the enforcement of an order imposing rate adjustment rules at the Ninoy Aquino International Airport.
-
Four months ago, a separate group of lawyers also questioned before the high court Administrative Order No. 1 and the concession agreement for allegedly violating their constitutional rights to due process
Another group of current and former employees, concerned citizens, and non-profit organizations asked the Supreme Court to void the public-private partnership pact between the government and San Miguel Corp.’s New Naia Infrastructure Corp. (NNIC).
In a 36-page pleading submitted on August 12, they also asked the high tribunal to stop the enforcement of an order imposing rate adjustment rules at the Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA).
Four months ago, a separate group of lawyers also questioned before the high court Administrative Order (AO) No. 1 and the concession agreement for allegedly violating their constitutional rights to due process and equal protection of the law.
This week’s petitioners included workers from Philippine Airlines, NAIA, private citizens and groups like the Samahang Manggagawa sa Paliparan ng Pilipinas, Freedom From Debt Coalition and OFW Wellness Association Inc. They were represented by lawyer Christoper Belmonte.
They urged the SC to declare as illegal both Manila International Airport Authority’s (MIAA) AO No. 1 and NAIA’s concession agreement with NNIC, arguing that the AO and the agreement had bypassed public participation and disregarded due process in approving “sweeping airport fee hikes.”
Named as respondents were Executive Secretary Lucas Bersamin, the Department of Transportation (DOTr), MIAA and the NNIC.
The concession agreement finalized on March 18, 2024, is a contract between the DOTr, MIAA and the NNIC that covers the rehabilitation, operation, expansion and eventual transfer of NAIA.
It grants the NNIC the right to operate and maintain the NAIA for 15 years, extendable by another 10 years. Belmonte said AO No. 1 was done “without genuine public consultation. Not one overseas Filipino worker, not one airport worker, not one ordinary passenger was meaningfully heard before these rate increases were approved.”
The NNIC began collecting fees and charges at NAIA on Oct. 1, 2024. Covered by AO 1 are regulated fees and charges, such as passenger processing charges or fees at check-in counters and self-check kiosks. Other charges include concession privilege fees; royalty fees on the sale of aviation fuel, oil, grease and lubricants; and vehicle parking fees.
READ: NAIA implements new aeronautical, cargo terminal fees
According to the petitioners, they were “excluded from the process” as they were not provided a full account of the events leading to the signing of AO 1 and the concession agreement.
They stated that the supposed public hearings or consultations held in February 2024 were “sham proceedings conducted for the sake of compliance only.”
They also questioned the alleged violation of the doctrine of nondelegation of legislative powers, arguing that Congress delegated the authority to fix rates to MIAA, DOTr and ultimately the Cabinet.
But the petitioners added that they are not against development and even welcome the initiative to boost the standards of the country’s gateways and key infrastructure.
Their petition said: “Progress must never come at the expense of participatory governance. It must never be rushed, cloaked in secrecy, or imposed without due regard [for] the voice and welfare of the people.”
“In the end, NAIA does not merely belong to any private operator or administrative body, it belongs to the Filipino people. And decisions that affect its future must be made with them, not apart from them,” they said.
