Tinio presses need to probe Socoteco II deal: ‘Will consumers benefit?’

MANILA, Philippines — ACT Teachers party-list Rep. Antonio Tinio has joined calls to investigate the proposed joint venture agreement (JVA) between the South Cotabato II Electric Cooperative (Socoteco II) and a private firm, saying that Congress should ascertain whether consumer welfare remains as the priority.

In a statement on Monday, Tinio said that he is now a co-author of House Resolution (HR) No. 1401, which asks the House of Representatives to start a probe of Socoteco II’s possible JVA with Ignite Power and Energy Corporation due to allegations of irregularity and unfairness in the deal.

Socoteco II is facing scrutiny after its board pushed for the JVA with Ignite Power despite questions in whether the electric cooperative’s methods in securing the authority for the agreement were even proper.

Article continues after this advertisement

READ: Clergy to Ombudsman: Suspend electric co-op’s execs over JVA issue

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

“We must scrutinize this deal down to its finest print. Any joint venture involving cooperative assets must pass the test of transparency, legality, and genuine benefit to the member-consumer-owners—not the other way around, where the people pay the price for deals brokered behind closed doors,” he said.

“Ultimately, it is the member-consumer-owners who stand to lose or gain the most from this deal. Their right to a fair, transparent, and credible process must be respected at all costs. The inquiry under HR 1401 will shed light on whether this JVA truly serves the public interest or merely paves the way for a takeover of yet another public utility,” Tinio ended.

Tinio’s decision to sign up as a co-author of HR No. 1401 came after the Department of Education (DepEd) withdrew from the memorandum of agreement covering the use of public schools and the participation of its personnel in the Socoteco II plebiscite.

It was South Cotabato Rep. Shirlyn L. Bañas-Nograles who filed HR No. 1401 last August, asking the House of Representatives to investigate the proposed JVA and determine whether the supposed arrangement complies with existing laws, rules and regulations.

Article continues after this advertisement

READ: Court lifts restraining order vs Socoteco II–Ignite plebiscite

Bañas-Nograles’ resolution also seeks an assessment of whether the JVA will affect the rights and economic interests of the government and Socoteco’s member-consumer-owners (MCOs).

Article continues after this advertisement

The lawmaker based her resolution on consumer complaints about the process used by Socoteco II’s board in securing authority for the proposed JVA, with the Social Action Center of the Diocese of Marbel claiming that Resolution No. 104 was declared adopted during the cooperative’s 43rd Annual General Membership Assembly last July 25 without a duly counted vote.

SAC-Marbel also questioned the use of a standing vote without an actual count and called for the deferment of the plebiscite.

Last August 31, Socoteco II officials said that the proposed JVA remains intact despite a recent rally opposing the deal.

READ: Socoteco II-Ignite Power proposed deal unfazed despite protest

Then, on Sept. 12, it was reported that the Regional Trial Court in Polomolok, South Cotabato, has granted Socoteco’s motion to lift a temporary restraining order (TRO) on the plebiscite for the proposed JVA.

The court order lifted the Sept. 4 TRO, which was initially extended to Sept. 24—effectively affecting the plebiscite originally scheduled earlier this month.

But aside from Bañas-Nograles’ concerns, Tinio said that the issues raised by Diocese of Marbel Bishop Cerilo Casicas—who appealed to Education Secretary Sonny Angara to protect teachers from being drawn into the plebiscite—are very much valid.

Casicas is one of the two Catholic Church bishops—the other being Diocese of San Carlos Bishop Gerardo Alminaza—who asked Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla to preventively suspend members of Socoteco II’s Board of Directors for pushing for a supposedly questionable agreement.

In their letter to Remulla dated Sept. 8, Casicas and Alminaza asked Remulla to suspend the board members as criminal and administrative charges have already been filed against them.

“The concerns raised by Bishop Casicas and local officials are valid and deeply worrying. Our teachers must not be used, and worse, exposed to legal jeopardy, in exercises tied to a disputed and controversial deal,” Tinio said.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

“DepEd’s withdrawal is a welcome step, but the Department must still guarantee protection and clear guidance for teachers and school heads caught in the middle of this dispute,” Tinio added. /cb