Garcia v. Board of Investments
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Proclamation No. 361, as amended, reserved a significant parcel of public land in Lamao, Limay, Bataan for industrial estate purposes, later enlarged by P.D. No. 1803 to become the Petrochemical Industrial Zone. The Bataan Refining Corporation (BRC), a government-owned entity, is located in Bataan and produces a substantial portion of the nation's naphtha. Taiwanese investors formed the Bataan Petrochemical Corporation (BPC) to establish a petrochemical project, initially intending to use Bataan as the plant site and naphtha as feedstock. BPC was registered by the Board of Investments (BOI) with pioneer status and granted fiscal incentives. A bill was even introduced by Congressman Enrique T. Garcia to eliminate the ad valorem tax on naphtha for this project, which was welcomed by BPC. Procedural History: In February 1989, BPC sought to amend its registration to change the plant site from Bataan to Batangas, alter the feedstock to include liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), and increase its investment. Despite opposition from Bataan officials, including Congressman Garcia, and a preference expressed by President Aquino for the project to remain in Bataan, BPC formally requested these amendments from the BOI on April 11, 1989. Congressman Garcia requested copies of the application and amendments, which the BOI, citing investor consent, refused to provide. On May 25, 1989, the BOI approved the revisions to BPC's project. The Petition: On June 26, 1989, Congressman Enrique T. Garcia filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition with the Supreme Court, alleging grave abuse of discretion by the BOI and the Department of Trade and Industry. The petition argued that the BOI failed to observe due process by approving the amendments without a hearing, denied Garcia access to public records in violation of transparency, and improperly approved the change in plant site and feedstock, contravening existing presidential proclamations and decrees designating Bataan as the petrochemical industrial zone. The petitioner sought to compel the BOI to publish the amended application, grant access to the records, and hold a hearing on his opposition to the transfer.
Issue(s)
Whether the Board of Investments (BOI) committed grave abuse of discretion in approving the amended application of Bataan Petrochemical Corporation (BPC) without a hearing. Whether the BOI denied the petitioner due process by refusing to furnish him copies of BPC's application and supporting documents. Whether the BOI gravely abused its discretion in approving the change in the site of BPC's petrochemical plant from Bataan to Batangas, and the change in feedstock, in violation of Presidential Decrees. Whether the petitioner, as a congressman representing Bataan, has legal interest in the matter of the transfer of the BPC petrochemical plant.
Ruling
The petition for certiorari is granted. The Board of Investments is ordered: (1) to publish the amended application for registration of the Bataan Petrochemical Corporation; (2) to allow the petitioner to have access to its records on the original and amended applications for registration, excluding privileged papers containing trade secrets and other business and financial information; and (3) to set for hearing the petitioner's opposition to the amended application. The petition for a writ of prohibition or preliminary injunction is denied. No costs.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of grave abuse of discretion and denial of due process in approving the amended application without a hearing: The Court ruled that the BOI committed grave abuse of discretion. The Omnibus Investments Code of 1987 mandates consultations with affected communities whenever necessary and requires the publication of applications for registration. While the original application was published, the amended application, which involved a significant change in the plant site from Bataan to Batangas, was in effect a new application. Therefore, it should have been published to allow oppositors, like the petitioner, an opportunity to be heard. The failure to publish the amended application and hold a hearing deprived the oppositors of due process. On the issue of denial of due process by refusing access to documents: The Court held that the petitioner's request for copies of the application and supporting documents could not be denied. The Constitution guarantees the right of citizens to access information on matters of public concern. While the Omnibus Investments Code provides for the confidentiality of applications, this confidentiality is not absolute and can be overcome by court orders or the consent of the applicant. The BOI's refusal to provide the documents, citing the applicant's objection, violated the petitioner's constitutional right to information. On the issue of approving the change in site and feedstock in violation of Presidential Decrees: The Court stated that it was not concerned with the economic, social, and political aspects of the case, nor did it possess the expertise to determine whether the transfer would be best for the project and the country. However, it emphasized that the BOI must comply with the law and its own rules and regulations prescribing notice and hearing. The Court's concern was limited to the alleged violation of due process and the alleged extra-legal exercise of power by the public respondents in approving the transfer without proper procedure. On the issue of the petitioner's legal interest: The Court found that the petitioner had legal interest in the matter. The provision in the Investments Code requiring publication of applications implicitly recognizes that proposed investments are matters of public concern on which the public has a right to be heard. When the BOI approved the original application for Bataan, the inhabitants of that province, represented by the petitioner, acquired a vital interest in the project's establishment and its potential impact on their economic life and environment. Therefore, they had a right to be consulted on any proposal to transfer the project site.
Main Doctrine
The Board of Investments (BOI) committed grave abuse of discretion and denied due process by approving the amended application of Bataan Petrochemical Corporation (BPC) for the transfer of its plant site without publishing the amended application and without holding a hearing for oppositors. The amended application, by changing the site, constituted a new application requiring publication and a hearing. Furthermore, the petitioner's right to access information on matters of public concern under Article III, Section 7 of the Constitution was violated when the BOI refused to furnish him copies of the application and its supporting documents.