Cavitex operator files raps vs OIC of PEATC

MANILA, Philippines — The Cavitex Infrastructure Corp. has filed a criminal complaint against Dioscoro Esteban Jr., officer-in-charge of the state-owned firm PEA Tollway Corp. (PEATC) over the alleged unauthorized filing of a petition seeking to remove CIC’s right to manage and operate the Manila-Cavite Expressway (CAVITEX).

In a 35-page complaint filed before the Office of the Ombudsman on May 6, CIC Legal Services head Criselda Funelas, representing the corporation, charged Esteban with violation of Section 3 (e) of Republic Act 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act as well as of perjury, usurpation of authority and slander as defined and penalized under Articles 183, 177 and 358 of the Revised Penal Code, respectively.

The complaint stemmed from Estaban’s filing of a petition for a writ of mandamus dated March 15, 2024 before the Court of Appeals praying for the full transfer of the operation and maintenance as well as the collection of toll in CAVITEX to PEATC from the CIC.

Esteban, in his petition, also prayed to the court to require the CIC to transfer to PEATC all other contract services related to CAVITEX operations such as the CIC’s utility contracts with Meralco, Maynilad, PLDT and Smart.

The CIC, a subsidiary of the Pangilinan-led Metro Pacific Tollways Corp., holds the concession to operate and maintain CAVITEX through a joint venture agreement (JVA) entered with the Philippine Reclamation Authority (PRA) and its unit, PEATC in December 1994.

In the petition, Esteban, representing the PEATC, said the CIC’s authority to operate the CAVITEX has already expired and that the government is bound to lose billions of pesos in revenues if the CIC is allowed to continue to operate the tollway.

Esteban, in the petition, added that the government had lost around P2.4 billion in 2023 to CIC.

In its complaint, however, the CIC said Esteban filed the petition for writ of mandamus without the approval of the PEATC’s parent agency, the PRA and the Office of the Government Corporate Counsel (OGCC).

The CIC said OGCC, which must represent the legal interests of state-owned firms like the PEATC in court proceedings, in fact “vehemently objected” with the