Reaction to ‘Serious Allegations’

I write in reference to a column that was published in The Philippine Star on Sept. 20, 2026, entitled “Serious Allegations.”

I wish to correct several inaccurate and misleading claims, which I have outlined below for clarity. The public deserves clarity based on the record, not insinuations.

1. On the Solar Para sa Bayan Franchise (SPSB)

The SPSB franchise under Republic Act No. 11357 was non-exclusive and did not create any monopoly. It was never sold, and it never received government funds or subsidies. The franchise was approved by an overwhelming majority of both chambers.

It bears emphasizing that the law required the DOE to issue implementing rules and identify the areas where Solar Para sa Bayan could operate. The DOE did not fulfill both responsibilities. Without the regulatory framework and operating areas contemplated by the law, the franchise could not be used.

The company eventually ceased operations after substantial losses, and the franchise ceased to have effect by operation of law.

It is therefore false and misleading to claim that the company “never intended to provide solar energy and was only out to make a fast buck,” when the government’s own inaction made implementation legally impossible.

2. On Renewable Energy Service Contracts (RESCs)

The claim that there was conspiracy to corner solar service contracts and create a monopoly is outright false. DOE records as of January 2026 show that 518 solar projects under the RE Law were issued contracts, and only 42 of these were issued to Solar Philippines and its affiliate companies. This is nowhere near monopoly levels.

Every Solar Energy Service Contract (SESC) is awarded through a multi-layered technical, legal, and financial review by the DOE, not through personal discretion, thus making any supposed collusion structurally impossible. The allegation of “locking out rivals” is baseless and contradicted by the competitive landscape of dozens of active solar developers nationwide.

Furthermore, the claim that exclusive government rights over the country’s solar energy resources were given to create a virtual monopoly is entirely false. The contracts issued by the DOE to Solar Philippines are standard contracts issued to all developers. The form and structure of these contracts are prescribed by DOE contracting guidelines. These contracts did not involve public funds and did not confer any monopoly. They merely authorized private developers to invest their own capital within defined contract areas.

Project advancement, however, was constrained by sector-wide issues such as grid interconnection limitations, transmission capacity constraints, permitting delays, land acquisition challenges, and right-of-way problems.

These are longstanding structural issues affecting many renewable energy projects nationwide. These are realities recognized under the renewable energy contracting framework, the RE Law and its implementing rules and regulations, and consistently reflected in DOE guidelines. This framework provides a pre-development stage precisely to test feasibility and commercial viability, and, as such, recognizes that not all RE projects will succeed.

3. On the alleged P10-billion financial obligations

For the record, there are clearly no unpaid financial obligations to the government “exceeding P10.44 billion due to terminated contracts.” All dues for terminated contracts attributable to Solar Philippines and its affiliates have been fully settled, with official receipts.

There is no demand letter from DOE to Solar Philippines requiring payment of P10.44 billion in financial obligations, nor was there any demand letter for that amount ever addressed to Leandro Leviste. There was a DOE letter sent to Mr. Emmanuel Rubio, President of SP New Energy Corporation (SPNEC), which has been majority-owned and controlled by MGen since 2024. The letter to Mr. Rubio was dated 23 December 2025. By that time, SPNEC was already under different ownership, control, and management, making it clear that the DOE’s demand was directed at the company operated by MGen – not Solar Philippines or Mr. Leviste.

4. On the timing and political context

It should be noted as well that the contracts in question were awarded across multiple administrations and under three DOE Secretaries, following standard procedures. Solar Philippines has regularly reported on the progress of different projects since 2013, with no adverse DOE findings.

The questioned article asserts that “as early as 2024, the DOE during a Senate budget hearing disclosed that 21 of 42 service contracts awarded to SPPPHI were already being processed for termination.” That may be true as part of the DOE’s broad administrative review of more than a hundred solar energy service contracts held by various developers. But the escalation into persecution – particularly the criminal accusations – was not directed at those other developers. That distinction is material: administrative review is routine; selective criminalization is not. It is this divergence that underscores the retaliatory character of the present allegations.

Finally, efforts to drag Senator Loren Legarda into this matter solely on the basis of being Mr. Leviste’s mother are punitive, baseless, and legally indefensible. A blood relationship is not evidence, and using it as the basis for accusation reduces the complaint to harassment rather than a credible claim of wrongdoing.

We respectfully ask that the same measure of space accorded to the column in question be granted to this letter, consistent with the principle of equal treatment.

Very truly yours,

ATTY. ANTONIO G.M. LA VIÑA

Spokesperson for Senator Loren Legarda

and Representative Leandro Leviste