Piatco: An SC case taken to the press

Stories are being circulated of late about an alleged sinister plot to wrestle ownership and control of Piatco from the Chengs. It’s odd, because they’re all coming out now that the Supreme Court has heard the case and presumably is ready to decide the fate of Piatco and its NAIA-3 contract. Then again, it’s not hard to sense a deliberate design to the stories. Certain publicists in recent years have taken to redefining press freedom as the planting of newspaper stories aimed at influencing or pre-empting the Tribunal. Only the other week a presidential wannabe’s media handlers tried to depict the justices as political persecutors who want him to run only from behind bars. The doctors who spin such stories obviously think so little of the judicial process and the men of the bench.

In Piatco’s case the stories slyly aim to picture the Chengs as hapless victims and thus entitled to great sympathy, and the persons who’ve been very critical of the NAIA-3 contract as villains deserving only of scorn and suspicion. The drama may well have worked, except that the storyline they peddled is too contrived and incredible even Mother Lily wouldn’t have touched it.

The central antagonist, if the plot were to be believed, is apparently Secretary Gloria Tan Climaco. To recall, she was the adviser on flagship projects tasked by President Gloria Arroyo to review the NAIA-3 contract. After several months of study she determined it to be onerous. She publicly disclosed her findings to the Senate Blue-Ribbon Committee. The President eventually agreed with her summary and declared the contract void.

The stories now coming out no longer deal with the facts of the case. Instead, the tack has shifted to casting aspersions on Climaco’s credibility. They claim she has been angling all this time to broker a deal for favored investors to buy out the Chengs. The insinuation is, since Climaco failed to squeeze in the said investors, she would rather now kill the project.

The Chengs are hallucinating. No investor in his right mind would touch the project with a ten-foot pole, considering all the detailed exposés about it. Climaco was correct in saying that any financial advisor worth his salt would admonish his client against investing in Piatco anytime before the Supreme Court rules on the controversy. An advisor who doesn’t do so should lose his license and be thrown in jail for plain incompetence and neglect.

If anyone must be found grossly incompetent and neglectful by far, it is Fraport’s German counsel, Dietrich Stiller. From documents, Stiller had advised Fraport on and helped draft the many contracts it signed with the Chengs. The validity of those contracts are now in doubt for potential breach of the Anti-Dummy Law and the Foreign Investments Act. Besides, only Filipinos are allowed to practise law in the Philippines. If so, then he was illegally practising in Manila. Perhaps, the immigration office should look into this. While they’re at it, the Bureau of Internal Revenue might as well check if the income he earned for services rendered in Manila is liable to tax.

Fraport reportedly has fired Stiller. Good for Fraport. Stiller’s repute in local legal circles did not help its cause. He is viewed as co-conspirator of the Chengs in inveigling the European airport giant to plunk its ill-advised investment in Piatco. A Fraport finance officer once remarked to Climaco how come every time they put in more money into the project their equity participation in Piatco seemed to diminish. Another oddity.

Stiller sought to cover his back by trying to procure the services of local counsels. Sometime last year he approached several law firms, reportedly including Angara Concepcion Cruz Regala Abello (ACCRA), Castillo Laman Tan Pantaleon & San Jose Law Offices, Villaraza & Angangco Law Firm (V&A), and Picazo Buyco Tan Fider & Santos Law Offices. Stiller’s notoriety preceded him, though. All these offices declined. Their polite excuse was because of conflict of interest. They wouldn’t tell Stiller to his face what they thought of him and the project he represented. Fortunately for Fraport, it eventually managed to secure the services of two respectable law firms, namely, Herrera Teehankee Faylona & Cabrera Law Offices and Siguion Reyna Montecillo & Ongsiako Law Offices.

But to get back to the storyline, the shadows behind it would have us believe that Climaco and V&A aim to push the Chengs out of the picture so that Asian Emerging Dragons Corp. can come back and reclaim the project which it lost in 1996. This is preposterous. AEDC already has declared in various forums, including the Senate Blue-Ribbon Committee hearing, that it has no more interest in the project. The taipans who own AEDC certainly wouldn’t take their own word lightly. The only reason the project got this far was because AEDC withdrew its case before a lower court questioning Piatco’s right to the project. Because of the withdrawal, the court dismissed AEDC’s petition with prejudice. That is, AEDC cannot just revive the case on whim. There’s one last caveat: AEDC started out with six taipans. Now, it is solely owned by Lucio Tan, who also controls Philippine Airlines. As such, AEDC may not operate the airport even if it wanted to because of obvious conflict of interest.

For good measure, the planted stories also cast Washington Sycip, Executive Secretary Alberto Romulo and Lucio Tan as villains. But, of course, the more the antagonists, the spicier the depiction of Piatco and the Chengs as victims. If they only had more material, they probably would find a way to naming even Saddam Hussein.

The NAIA-3 controversy is already before the Supreme Court. The parties to the controversy eagerly await the decision. Probably the people behind the stories are anxious about the validity of their cause, and thus opted to change venue to the Fourth Estate.

* * *

Catch Linawin Natin, Mondays at 11 p.m., on IBC-13.

* * *

You can e-mail comments to: [email protected]