In a two-page letter, the Castillo, Laman, Tan, Pantaleon and San Jose Law Office inquired from the high court’s public information office chief Ismael Khan whether news that Photokina’s deal was "null and void" came from his office.
"We are in a quandary as to the basis of the said statements in the (Sept. 19) article. In this regard, may we be enlightened as to whether the article was in fact authored by your good office, and, if not, the source of the article and the basis therefor."
George Balagtas, senior vice president for corporate affairs, told a press conference yesterday that they can still deal with the Comelec.
"We have a valid award and we won it fair and square," he asserted.
He explained further that what the SC ruled was that "Photokina may not compel or force the Comelec to resume contract negotiations for the formalization of the Voters Registration and Identification System (VRIS) award it had won in an impartial, open and formal bid."
Balagtas claimed they were "deeply disturbed" by the news bulletin, which he said "appeared to create a different impression from the official decision of the high court."
"We believe this to be a patent error and a malicious effort to distort the true decision of the SC and thereby place Photokina and its foreign partners in the VRIS consortium in a bad light," they said in a press statement.
"We are puzzled as to how and why such a glaring disparity happened," Balagtas said, adding they want to "repair the serious damage caused to our good name and corporate reputation."
On Sept. 18, the SC ruled unanimously that Photokina’s P6.5 billion winning bid for the computerization of the ID of the country’s 38 million voters was invalid from the beginning because of lack of funds.
Photokina has 15 days to reconsider but a reversal is unlikely because all of the 14 justices voted to strike down the bid, since available funds of the government is P1.2 billion.
"We rule that Photokina, though the winning bidder, cannot compel the Comelec to formalize the contract. Since Photokina’s bid is beyond the amount appropriated by Congress, the proposed contract is not binding upon the Comelec and is considered void," the SC stated.
In her 28-page decision, Justice Angelina Sandoval-Gutierrez added: "Verily, the contract, as expressly declared by law, is inexistent and void ab initio (from the very start)."
"This is to say that the proposed contract is without force and effect from the very beginning or from its incipiency, as if it had never been entered into, and hence, cannot be validated either by lapse of time or ratification."