NAIA-3 To Open Mid-2005

dcdr76dcdr76 Registered User PExer
It's good that the government finally made a move on this. Hopefully, they would finish what they started.



Wednesday, December 22, 2004

Govt takes over NAIA-3

Terminal expected to open mid-2005

By Niel Villegas Mugas, Reporter

The government will take over Terminal 3 of the Ninoy Aquino Internatio_nal Airport to break the impasse in the negotiations for its sale and to have it opened by the middle of next year.

Trade and Industry Secretary Cesar V. Purisima told reporters on Tuesday that the government, through the Office of Solicitor General, has filed before the Pasay City Regional Trial Court an expropriation case for Terminal 3.

Purisima is part of the negotiating team ironing out the details for the expropriation. Also on the team are former Justice Secretary Merceditas Gutierrez and Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita.

The Manila International Airport Authority Board will have the power to expropriate the terminal since it is provided by its charter.

Under Rule 67, Section 2 of the MIAA charter, the board can take over the terminal once an expropriation complaint is filed and after the defendant, in this case the Philippine International Airport Terminals Co. (Piatco), is notified.

The government will have to provide a just and fair compensation for the terminal owners. Estimates made by the MIAA showed that the government will have to raise some P3 billion just for the down payment.

The amount was based on the P14,000 to P16,000 a square meter multiplied by the terminal’s 182,5000 square meters.

The P14,000 to P16,000 is the rule of thumb for assessing similar property for real-estate tax purposes.

The down payment, however, is only a part of what the government has to cough up. It will also have to indemnify for damages in case the court invalidates the expropriation.

The compensation, Purisima said, conforms with the ruling of the Supreme Court. Although the Court nullified Piatco’s contract on Terminal 3, it stressed the need to pay the compensation.

Purisima is confident the takeover would speed up the negotiations for the opening and eventual use of the terminal.

He said that instead of the government waiting for the results of arbitration proceedings in Washington and Singapore, a process that is not expected to be completed until 2007, the government decided to go ahead with the takeover, whose result is the same as that of the arbitration.

“[The takeover] accelerates the process. Right now it is in arbitration and whatever the arbitration court decides it will definitely be on commercial resolution, and it will then allow the government to take over the facilities. So what this [expropriation] does is just advance the process,” Purisima stressed.

“At least when you take over now, early next year you can already open the airport, then the arbitration will still be going on,” he added.

In the first place, Purisima said the government simply cannot let the terminal remain closed when it can be used by the public.

“The whole process has reached an impasse for a long time and we are waiting for an arbitration, which will take a long time, and we cannot let this facility rot. We have to consider the interest of the public and businessmen and open it up,” he said.

Expropriation would mean that NAIA Terminal 1, which now serves as the main international airport, would be closed down, allowing Terminal 3 to take over.

Purisima said the MIAA will operate Terminal 3 and the government will have to bid it out.

The government will also be talking to the Philippine Air Lines for its transfer to Terminal 3 from the Terminal 2, now used as the main domestic airport.

With the takeover started, the Arroyo administration must look for an estimated $15 million to make the terminal operational within six months.

The $15 million, according to Solicitor General Alfredo Beni_payo, is still not fixed. A lot would depend on the result of the inspection of the terminal’s facilities to determine what needs to be repaired or built.

Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita said President Arroyo “has ordered the completion of all unfinished work so that our people can finally have an international airport they could be proud of.”

Ermita said Purisima, Telecommunications chief Leandro Men_doza and other members of the Cabinet would start discussing how the money will be raised.

He said the government is looking at all possibilities including that of having a private backer.

“Everything is possible,” Ermita said.

Branch 117 of the Pasay Regional Trial Court will still hold a hearing and appoint three commissioners who would assess how much NAIA Terminal 3 is worth.

Benipayo said the negotiating team would insist on hiring international experts to do the assessment.

The assessment would determine the actual value of NAIA 3 and the “just compensation” that the Philippine government should pay Piatco.

Piatco is demanding $565 million and Fraport, which owns the majority stake in Piatco, wants $425 million to cover the cost of the construction.

Fraport AG of Germany has filed an arbitration case against the government with the World Bank International Center for Settlements of Investment Disputes.

The government said the contract for building the airport was pegged at $323 million, but that the entire structure can only be valued at $305 million after Piatco and Fraport failed to build an $18-million tunnel specified in the agreement.
--With Ma. Theresa Torres


  • LuciusLucius Member PExer
    after 3 years of changing the laws and possibly bribing other officials, Govt takes over NAIA-3 from its private investors. Why? Why fight so long and hard? $$$$$$ of course to be divided. More mansions to build and luxury cars to buy abroad. ..simple as that. It's how pinoy government officials show they care about their country.
  • joeydaninjajoeydaninja Dalmatian Maus PExer
    it's about time.

    i went to the old NAIA recently, and it's not exactly the first thing you want tourists to see when they come to this country :D
  • hebehebe on parole PExer
    that's good. :)
  • soltera81soltera81 A little bit of everything ✭✭
    This is good news. We cannot allow it to be another white elephant.
  • bikoy_vilbikoy_vil Member PExer
    walang ginastos ang gobyerno sa NAIA 3 tapos kukunin na lang nila. kawawa naman ang mga foreign investors na nagtayo ng NAIA 3, bilyon bilyon ang ginastos nila pero matapos nilang gawin ang airport, sasabihing ilegal ang kontrata nila at kukunin na lang ng gobyerno yon.

    sino pa kayang foreign investors ang magtyatyagang maginvest para sa infrastructure ng pilipinas kung ganyan ang nangyayari dito.

    so this is not really a very good thing
  • That's why bibigyan sila ng "JUST" compensation. Di natin alam kung ano ang just para sa kanila, basta just.

    Marami ring kalokohan na ginawa ang mga investors na gumawa sa NAIA-3.

    Kaya parehong may kasalanan ang gobyerno at ang PIATCO consortium.

    I hope yung North Rail project hindi malagay sa ganitong situation.
  • lacroixlacroix Member ✭✭✭
    The govt will pay the investors. I forgot how much the exact amount.

    Dapat at matapos na ito.

    We need the new airport. Bulok na bulok na yong kasalukuyan.
  • I'm excited about this facility...! Sana pag pumunta ako ng states diyan na ako sasakay ng plane at hindi sa unti-unting gumuguhon naia-1
  • the_BuGsthe_BuGs d ko hilig PExer
    at sana yung mga buwitre ng NAIA-I eh wag ng lumipat sa NAIA-III :lol:
  • angelteddyangelteddy Member PExer
    The Office of the Solicitor General has filed a motion for reconsideration on the ruling of the Pasay City Regional Trial Court (RTC) ordering the government to pay an initial $62
    million as "just compensation" to the Philippine International Air
    Terminals Co. (PIATCO).

    According to Sec. Ermita, not only PIATCO is claiming compensation for the property but also its German partner, Fraport, AG; Takeneka, the contractor; and other members of the consortium, like Pair Cargo, and the Philippine Air and Ground Services, Inc.

    The actual valuation of the property will have to
    be done by 3 Commissioners to be assigned by the court, and only after the valuation is done that the actual amount of cost of the structure could be determined.

    But to show good faith on the part of the government, Ermita said, the amount of P60 million, as called for by the law, has been deposited with the Land Bank of the Philippines when the expropriation proceedings were filed.
  • hebehebe on parole PExer
    what is important is that everything be done legally. having this terminal finished will be a big help to tourism especially now that we have to take advantage of tourists' being redirected here due to the tsunami. strike while the iron is hot.
  • gekokujogekokujo Original Fire PExer
    don't celebrate yet. if the govt. is really committed to compensating the Germans, they're going to need all the tourist dollars they can get; otherwise, if past practice is anything to go by, those guys aren't going to stop at anything to get their money back: remember, the Phil. govt. is not the only one in the world that resorts to expropriation if it considers its interests disadvantaged.

    a while back, the Russians ran afoul of a diff. group of European investors; to recover their investments, the latter went to courts all over the world, wherever any Russian company had assets for a judge to seize: Russian airplanes, Russian ships and their cargo, etc. - if worst comes to worst with the N3 fiasco, any Phil. company operating overseas will be fair game.

    expropriation, in such an arbitrary fashion and esp. against a foreign company, is never to be treated lightly: sure, Fraport may have a hard time dealing with the Arroyo admin here, - but nothing's stopping them from asking their govt. to take out their frustration on Filipinos elsewhere.

    i don't know whether the apparently cavalier attitude of our govt. is owed to naivety or plain stupidity, but as usual taxpayers are going to foot the bill.
  • angelteddyangelteddy Member PExer
    It is inexplicable why Fraport AG did not intervene in the PIATCO cases to protect its interest. Clearly, it slept on its right.

    IMO, there's an imprudence on the part of Fraport.

    Foreign corporations (like Fraport AG) doing business in the Philippines are required by law to secure license to operate. Did Fraport AG secure a license to operate in the Philippines? If it did, then it is clothe with a legal personality to institute a suit or intervene in the PIATCO cases to protect its interest.

    Fraport AG provided the biggest funds to complete the project. If the PIATCO contracts are declared null and void, then its investment in the project will be put in jeopardy. Evidently, it will not be able to collect from PIATCO as a major creditor.

    The legal conclusions and findings of the Supreme Court will not change even with Fraport's intervention. However, had it intervened, the Court could have resolved how its investment or financial exposure in the project can be compensated. The decision in the case never mentioned of Fraport AG's huge financial exposure and the project's stage of completion.
  • danilinhodanilinho Member PExer
    He may have lost in the elections but this is Roco's chance to leave a legacy. I hope he will get the airport open.


    Roco helps govt in NAIA 3 case

    By Ma. Theresa Torres, Reporter

    President Arroyo has tapped Raul Roco, her rival in the last election, to help the government tackle legal obstacles in taking over the controversial Ninoy Aquino International Airport Terminal 3.

    The President’s spokesman and press secretary, Ignacio Bunye, said on Thursday that Roco has been attending the meeting with government lawyers to chart the legal strategy that would open NAIA 3.

    Roco ran for president in the May election but dropped out in the middle of the campaign to have his prostate cancer treated in the US.

    His campaign lost momentum and he finished out of the running in the election.

    Roco was the first candidate to concede to Mrs. Arroyo.

    Bunye said Roco has attended four or five meetings with the government lawyers. He said Roco is not charging the government for his services.

    A month after Roco returned to the country after seeking medical treatment in the US, the President had reached out to him, Bunye said.

    “Both the President and the former senator have something in common in their platform of government, and that is to be able to operate NAIA 3,” Bunye said.

    Because of their common interest, Bunye said, the President asked Roco to help her explore legal avenues to be able to operate NAIA 3 by the middle of this year.

    “We are very glad and very happy that he’s helping us in the project,” Bunye said.

    At the 60th anniversary of the Manila Overseas Press Club Wednesday night, the President acknowledged Roco for his advice on the NAIA 3 issue.

    Mrs. Arroyo appointed Roco education secretary after she took office in 2001. He resigned following protests from employees of the education department.

    Last month the government announced it was expropriating the terminal, because it felt the idle facility was going to waste while cases regarding payments to the contractor, Philippine International Air Terminals Corp. were being resolved.

    On Thursday Solicitor General Alfredo Benipayo petitioned the Supreme Court to stop a Pasay City court from demanding that the government pay $62,343,175.77 to Piatco as compensation for NAIA 3.

    Benipayo also asked the Court to restrain the judge, Henrick Gingoyon, from ordering the appointment of three commissioners to determine just compensation for Piatco and overturning a motion denying the government’s motion for reconsideration and inhibition.

    Benipayo said the orders were questionable because they were issued “in excess of jurisdiction and/or with grave abuse of discretion and with manifest bias, partiality and indecent haste.”
    -- With Jomar Canlas
  • angelteddyangelteddy Member PExer
    I've heard he's doing this pro bono. That's kind of him. :)

    Here are the five grounds relied upon by the Supreme Court to declare the PIATCO contract null and void:

    1. PIATCO was not a qualified bidder.

    2. PIATCO’s 1997 Concession Agreement clearly violated public policy, when it altered the original terms of draft concession agreement made known to other bidders.

    3. Providing a direct government guarantee for Build Operate Transfer project is illegal under the BOT law.

    4. PIATCO, even as allowed to operate as a monopoly, cannot require the Government to break its contractual obligations to existing service providers nor violate rights of third parties.

    5. The PIATCO contract requires government to pay compensation to concessionaire in case of a takeover of the facility in times of war or national emergency. This clearly violates the Philippine Constitution.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file