"We are also arranging with the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) and the lawyers of Piatco for a face-to-face non-binding meeting for purposes of exploring any alternative remedy," Teehankee said.
The concurrent justice undersecretary explained that "non-binding" meant that an agreement may be reached "without prejudice" to the case pending in the Supreme Court. "This does not mean that the government is softening on its position."
Government lawyers maintained that the September 1997 deal struck by the Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC) and its supplements are void since most of the conditions in the contract are onerous on the part of the government.
One condition stated in the contract, they pointed out, is shouldering Piatco’s financial obligations should it default on its loans.
Piatco stated in its 108-page pleading that the mediation and arbitration mode suggested by Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr. seemed to be headed for a stalemate because of DOTC’s refusal to appoint an expert neutral evaluator who will be handling the dispute.
Both parties — Piatco and the government — have submitted their respective position papers before the high tribunal which is expected to hand down a resolution on the dispute.
In a joint 113-page memorandum, Solicitor General Alfredo Benipayo and Teehankee stated that it is their duty to invalidate an onerous contract.
The OSG defended its flip-flopping stand on the Piatco dispute, claiming it has no choice but to review all cases on the legal perspective, which may include contradicting policies espoused by the government.
"Neither is a previous contrary stand of the OSG an insuperable hurdle to its subsequent espousal of a different view. The Solicitor General may abandon or discontinue prosecution of the case in the exercise of his sound discretion," Benipayo said.
Piatco has accused the government of attempting to take over NAIA 3.
Piatco also said the government is bent on taking over the world-class airport terminal, as the Manila International Airport Authority (MIAA) has, in fact, "accredited surreptitiously" a service operator after the SC issued its Dec. 30, 2003 order to both parties to settle their issue at their level.
The supposed surreptitious accreditation, Piatco said, was done without any sanction from the high tribunal and is a "clear violation of Piatco’s right to appoint service providers in NAIA 3."