SC rules with finality PEA-Amari deal is null and void

The Supreme Court (SC) denied with finality yesterday the appeal of the Ital-Thai developer Amari Coastal Bay Development Authority over the multibillion-peso land reclamation deal that was once derided by government officials as the "mother of all scams."

Voting 8-5-1 after hearing new arguments, the high court affirmed its July 9, 2002 decision that the land deal on and around Freedom Island in Manila Bay was null and void because it was unconstitutional ab initio (from the beginning).

Justice Antonio Carpio, who also wrote the original decision last year, debunked Amari’s new argument that the high court could not retroactively nullify the joint venture agreement (JVA)covering the controversial land deal.

"The decision, whether made retroactive or not, does not change the law since the decision merely reiterates the law that prevailed," Carpio wrote in the 19-page majority decision.

The SC justices who concurred with Carpio were Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr., Justices Jose Vitug, Artemio Panganiban, Leonardo Quisumbing, Ma. Alicia Austria-Martinez, Conchita Morales and Romeo Calleja Sr.

Those who dissented were Justices Josue Bellosillo, Reynato Puno, Consuelo Ynares-Santiago, Angelina Sandoval-Gutierrez and Renato Corona. Justice Adolf Azcuna abstained.

The high court also dismissed as "lacking in merit" Amari’s argument that the court should not have nullified the agreement because it was signed between Amari and the Public Estates Authority (PEA) in good faith.

"Amari cannot claim good faith because even before Amari signed the amended JVA on March 30, 1999, petitioner had already filed the instant case on April 27, 1998 questioning precisely the qualification of Amari to acquire Freedom Island," read the decision.

Neither could Amari claim good faith since it could not explain the P9.876 billion it supposedly spent in developing the disputed property, the court said.

The SC also noted that Amari has not paid PEA the full reimbursement cost incurred by PEA in reclaiming Freedom Island. Amari stated that it had paid only P300 million of the P1.894 billion total agreed upon for the reclamation.

Moreover, the SC said PEA is unlike the Bases Conversion and Development Authority (BCDA) which is mandated to dispose of former military lands. PEA should undertake reclamation projects nationwide and not sell these lands of the public domain.

If Amari had really wanted to avoid the constitutional ban, the SC noted it could have transferred the disputed properties to any qualified party to avoid violating two provisions of Article XII of the Constitution.

Amari’s motion for reconsideration stemmed from the high court’s July 9, 2002 decision granting the December 1998 petition filed by former Solicitor General Francisco Chavez seeking to nullify PEA’s sale to Amari of 77.34 hectares of still submerged areas of Manila Bay.

The court then ruled that the submerged areas "remain inalienable natural resources of the public domain" and their sale to Amari violated the constitutional injunction on alienating the country’s natural resources, like public land.

PEA, the government agency in charge of public lands, entered into a joint venture deal with Amari in April 1995 where the Italian-Thai firm would develop and eventually gain title to the reclaimed land.

But in November of the same year, former Senate president Ernesto Maceda delivered a privileged speech and claimed the anomaly involved some P50 billion — the "mother of all scams."

In April 1998, however, then President Joseph Estrada ordered a renegotiation of the deal through a panel headed by then PEA chairman Arsenio Yulo, PEA director Nestor Kalaw and retired Navy officer Sergio Cruz. – With Nikko Dizon, Jose Rodel Clapano