Government seeks to clarify ruling on Amari deal

Government lawyers asked the Supreme Court yesterday to clarify its July 9 ruling invalidating a re-negotiated May 1999 land deal involving the sale of Public Estates Authority (PEA) of 157 hectares of reclaimed land along Roxas boulevard to Thai developer Amari Coastal Bay Development Corp.

Solicitor General Simeon Marcelo emphasized that the reclaimed lands in the Freedom Islands are all documented and considered "patrimonial properties" of the PEA which can be sold to "qualified private corporations."

The SC decision "creates a state of uncertainty" on other major reclamation projects of the PEA, some of which have already been completed, the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) said in a 26-page appeal. It noted that the reclamation costs alone had reached billions.

The appeal said the SC decision has "far-reaching economic implications" because it "weighs heavily on PEA’s ability to entice private entities, both local and foreign, to invest in its reclamation projects."

On July 9, the 13 justices of the SC voted unanimously to nullify former President Joseph Estrada’s re-negotiated land deal with the controversial Amari.

In issuing the July 9 decision, the SC granted the December 1998 petition filed by former Solicitor General Francisco Chavez which sought the invalidation of the PEA’s sale to Amari of 157 hectares of reclaimed land along Roxas boulevard.

Justice Antonio Carpio said in the 76-page unanimous decision he wrote that the "PEA may lease these lands to private corporations but may not sell or transfer ownership of these lands to private corporations. PEA may only sell these lands to Philippine citizens." Carpio ruled the 592 hectares of submerged areas of Manila Bay "remain inalienable natural resources of the public domain."

However, Marcelo said in his appeal to the SC that Freedom Islands lands can be sold because these reclaimed lands cannot be categorized as public domain as defined in Article 420 of the Civil Code.

The OSG appeal said Article 420 of the Civil Code classifies "properties intended for public use" and those "intended for public service or for the development of national wealth" as public domain lands.

It said that since the PEA charter allows it to "sell any and all kinds of lands," it only follows that there is legislative authority granted to PEA to sell its lands whether patrimonial or alienable lands of public domain.

Marcelo said in his appeal that PEA should be allowed to "resort to appropriate arrangements" with firms who can provide the funds for the project because PEA has only limited resources and that reclamation projects require huge capital.

His appeal suggested that "there is a need to clarify the...court’s ruling that the reclaimed lands comprising the Freedom Islands, which are titled in the name of the PEA may only be leased to qualified private corporations."

The July 9 ruling said the PEA-Amari deal "glaringly" violated two provisions of Article XII of the Constitution. Section 2 of the article prohibits the "alienation of natural resources other than agricultural lands" while Section 3 prohibits "private firms from acquiring any kind of alienable land."

The SC ruled that under Commonwealth Act 141, which remains in effect, the government can only sell public lands to private entities only if Congress allows it.

"Since then and until now, the only way the government can sell to private parties government reclaimed and marshy disposable lands of the public domain is for the legislature to pass a law authorizing such sale," the ruling said.