Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Separate Opinions
PANGANIBAN, J., concurring:
I concur with the lucid and convincing ponencia of Mr. Justice Reynato S. Puno. I write to stress two points:
1. The Issue Is Whether Oil Companies May UnilaterallyFix Prices, Not Whether This Court MayInterfere in
Economic Questions
With the issuance of the status quo order on October 7, 1997 requiring the three respondent oil companies Petron,
Shell and Caltex to cease and desist from increasing the prices of gasoline and other petroleum fuel products for
a period of thirty (30) days, the Court has been accused of interfering in purely economic policy matters 1 or,
worse, of arrogating unto itself price-regulatory powers. 2 Let it be emphasized that we have no desire nay, we
have no power to intervene in, to change or to repeal the laws of economics, in the same manner that we cannot
and will not nullify or invalidate the laws of physics or chemistry.
The issue here is not whether the Supreme Court may fix the retail prices of petroleum products, Rather, the issue is
whether RA 8180, the law allowing the oil companies to unilaterally set, increase or decrease their prices, is valid or
constitutional.
Under the Constitution, 3 this Court has in appropriate cases the DUTY, not just the power, to determine
whether a law or a part thereof offends the Constitution and, if so, to annul and set it aside. 4 Because a serious
challenge has been hurled against the validity of one such law, namely RA 8180 its criticality having been
preliminarily determined from the petition, comments, reply and, most tellingly, the oral argument on September 30,
1997 this Court, in the exercise of its mandated judicial discretion, issued the status quo order to prevent the
continued enforcement and implementation of a law that was prima facie found to be constitutionally infirm. Indeed,
after careful final deliberation, said law is now ruled to be constitutionally defective thereby disabling respondent oil
companies from exercising their erstwhile power, granted by such defective statute, to determine prices by
themselves.
Concededly, this Court has no power to pass upon the wisdom, merits and propriety of the acts of its co-equal
branches in government. However, it does have the prerogative to uphold the Constitution and to strike down and
annul a law that contravenes the Charter. 5 From such duty and prerogative, it shall never shirk or shy away.
By annulling RA 8180, this Court is not making a policy statement against deregulation. Quite the contrary, it is
simply invalidating a pseudo deregulation law which in reality restrains free trade and perpetuates a cartel, an
oligopoly. The Court is merely upholding constitutional adherence to a truly competitive economy that releases the
creative energy of free enterprise . It leaves to Congress, as the policy-setting agency of the government, the speedy
crafting of a genuine, constitutionally justified oil deregulation law.
2. Everyone, Rich or Poor, Must Sharein the Burdens of Economic Dislocation
Much has been said and will be said about the alleged negative effect of this Courts holding on the oil giants profit
and loss statements. We are not unaware of the disruptive impact of the depreciating peso on the retail prices of
refined petroleum products. But such price-escalating consequence adversely affects not merely these oil companies
which occupy hallowed places among the most profitable corporate behemoths in our country. In these critical times
of widespread economic dislocations, abetted by currency fluctuations not entirely of domestic origin, all sectors of
society agonize and suffer. Thus, everyone, rich or poor, must share in the burdens of such economic aberrations.
I can understand foreign investors who see these price adjustments as necessary consequences of the countrys
adherence to the free market, for that, in the first place, is the magnet for their presence here. Understandably, their
concern is limited to bottom lines and market share. But in all these mega companies, there are also Filipino
entrepreneurs and managers. I am sure there are patriots among them who realize that, in times of economic turmoil,
the poor and the underprivileged proportionately suffer more than any other sector of society. There is a certain
threshold of pain beyond which the disadvantaged cannot endure. Indeed, it has been wisely said that if the rich
who are few will not help the poor who are many, there will come a time when the few who are filled cannot escape
the wrath of the many who are hungry. Kayat sa mga kababayan nating kapitalista at may kapangyarihan,
nararapat lamang na makiisa tayo sa mga walang palad at mahihirap sa mga araw ng pangangailangan . Huwag na
nating ipagdiinan ang kawalan ng tubo, o maging and panandaliang pagkalugi . At sa mga mangangalakal na ganid
at walang puso: hirap na hirap na po ang ating mga kababayan. Makonsiyensya naman kayo!