-
A group of lawyers has asked the Supreme Court to suspend implementation of the concession agreement for the Ninoy Aquino International Airport Public-Private Partnership project
-
The petitioners claimed the agreement is unconstitutional, illegal and void
A group of lawyers has asked the Supreme Court (SC) to suspend implementation of the concession agreement for the Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) Public-Private Partnership (PPP) Project.
The 182-page petition for certiorari and prohibition filed on April 7 sought the immediate issuance of a temporary restraining order or any preliminary injunctive remedies against the concession agreement as well as Manila International Airport Authority (MIAA) Revised Administrative Order (RAO) No. 1 series of 2024, which provides revised rates of fees, dues, charges or assessments collectible by the authority.
The petitioners asked the SC to declare the concession agreement, MIAA Revised AO No. 1, and PPP Governing Board Resolution No. 2023-12-02 as unconstitutional, illegal, and void.
The petitioners are Joel Butuyan, Soledad Derequito-Mawis, Anthony Gabriel “Tony” La Viña, Roger Rayel, and Jose Mari Benjamin Francisco Tirol while the respondents are the Cabinet of the Executive Department (represented by Executive Secretary Lucas Bersamin), Department of Transportation, MIAA, Pre-Bids and Awards Committee for the NAIA PPP Project, the PPP Governing Board, and New NAIA Infra Corp. (NNIC).
NNIC is the special purpose company formed by the winning bidder of the 15-year concession agreement for the NAIA PPP Project. It took over in September 2024. The MIAA RAO, meanwhile, was issued last year after the proposed revised fees, dues, and charges were approved during the Special Cabinet Meeting on September 4 through Cabinet Resolution No. 01 series of 2024. AO No. 01 updates the fees imposed since 2000.
The petition argued that bidding for the NAIA PPP Project did not comply with provisions of the new Republic Act No. 11966, or the PPP Code, which was signed into law on December 5, 2023 before the bidding for the NAIA project started. Instead, it said the project was conducted under the Build-Operate-Transfer Law, which was repealed by the PPP Code.
The petition noted that the Office of the Solicitor General and the Office of the Government Corporate Counsel both advised MIAA and the PBAC that the bidding and award of the NAIA PPP Project are covered by and must comply with the PPP Code.
“Instead of going back to the drawing boards and secure the necessary approvals under the newly enacted law, the MIAA could not be bothered by it nor deterred by mere opinions from the legal counsels of government bodies and instrumentalities,” the petitioners said.
Moreover, they said RAO No. 1 “is not only in violation of the law and against public policy, but that defies the all-important constitutional provisions on separation of power, due process, and equal protection of the laws.
“Given the clear and consistent public policy established by law and jurisprudence that rates of fees and charges for public services must always be reasonable and just, RAO violates substantive due process by setting rates without the benefit of informing the public about the bases thereof, by providing only for mechanisms to increase rates without any counterpart mechanism to decrease rates, and by completely abdicating in favor of a private entity the determination of certain rates or charges without regard to the standards set by the law,” the petitioners said.
According to the petition, the “ongoing and continuing implementation of a patently illegal RAO and the Concession Agreement founded upon it will result in grave injustice and irreparable damage to millions of Filipinos and foreign travelers, not to mention hundreds of airlines, concessionaires and lessees operating at NAIA, who are already being made to pay, every day, fees and charges on the basis of an illegal RAO.”
