MPTC sheds light on issue of PEATC Petition against Cavitex

0
295
  1. Up to today, the Operations & Maintenance of the Manila Cavite Toll Expressway Project  (Cavitex) is the responsibility of PEATC, and the 485 regular employees and contract personnel involved in the 0 & M are the employees of PEATC based on the JVA agreement.  Our responsibility as CIC is for design, finance, and construction. The MCTEP project covers  R1 (7.5 Km), R1 Extensions (8.6Km) & Cavitex-C5 (7.7 km) or total  of about 23.8 km) 
  • Any complaints about the Cavitex operations should be addressed by PEATC.
  • Contracts for service providers are merely extended by CIC on the request of PRA – which includes among others security services, vehicle towing, maintenance equipment & services, bldg. & facilities maintenance, toll collection system maintenance, and including employee HMO, Insurance, and software subscriptions – all without the approval of the PEATC Board of Directors since there are no designated members in the PEATC Board due to concerns of GOCC Governance Commission.
  1. Part of the MCTEP project is the ongoing Cavitex- C-5 Link which covers Parañaque, Pasay & Taguig with a projected capacity of about 50,000 vehicles per day which will decongest Roxas Blvd., MIA, & EDSA.
  1. Finally, saying it mildly, PEATC OIC Esteban does not have any authority to file such a case of Mandamus without a PEATC Board approval since there is no PEATC Board to speak off.  The parties to the agreement are PRA, CIC & TRB.  So, it’s a brazen violation with very deliberate intention on his part and the private lawyers to mislead the public and stakeholders.  In short, walang karapatan si OIC Esteban! Our JVA has a dispute resolution mechanism which we offered to PRA/PEATC. It is therefore not true that we have not been responsive to their requests for information but unfortunately, we cannot make the reports that they should properly submit to COA to address the COA’s Findings.  No PEATC report on Revenue and O&M and cash flow since 2007. 
  2. We believe that, based on the advice of our lawyers, the case should be dismissed outright by the Court of Appeals because of a false and defective verification and certification and something as basic as filing the mandamus without proper authority of the PEATC or PRA Board and without the sign-off of the proper counsel OGCC.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here