It’s final: Giant oil firms can’t stay in Pandacan

The Supreme Court (SC) en banc has “denied with finality” the motion for reconsideration of oil companies seeking a reconsideration of the tribunal’s decision ordering oil firms to move out of the Pandacan Oil Depot.

In a four-page resolution dated April 28, the SC through Clerk of Court Ma. Luisa Villarama noted that the “arguments raised by the oil companies in their second motion for reconsideration show that they are a mere rehash of the arguments raised in the first motion for reconsideration or the basic issues have already been passed upon by the court.”

“The court also take judicial cognizance of the fact that the oil companies have begun to comply with the orderly phaseout of the oil depots from Pandacan with the submission of the requisite plans and reports,” the SC ruled, saying no further pleadings shall be entertained in the case.

Two years ago, the SC ordered the closure of the Pandacan Oil Depot in Manila that three big oil companies are occupying because of a threat of a terrorist attack. The oil firms are Caltex Philippines Inc. (now Chevron), Petron Corp. and Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corp.

Located on the southern bank of the Pasig River near Malacañang Palace, the depot supplies about half of Luzon’s fuel needs and about 82 percent of Metro Manila’s gasoline and diesel requirements.

The SC directed then Mayor Lito Atienza to “immediately enforce” a local ordinance meant to prevent an attack on the facility and to protect the public.

Surrounded by homes and commercial establishments, the 30-hectare depot is one of the places that are immediately placed under tight watch when the police raise the security alert.

Ordinance No. 8027 reclassified portions of Pandacan and Sta. Ana districts from industrial to commercial zones, according to the tribunal.

The ordinance directed Caltex, Petron and Pilipinas Shell to stop their operations in Pandacan within six months from its effectivity.

The ordinance was passed in 2001 but was not implemented because Atienza and the Department of Energy subsequently signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with Caltex, Petron and Shell that allowed the three firms to scale down operations and install safety measures.

The high court said the ordinance was necessary to remove the risk of the oil depot being attacked by terrorists and harming Manila’s residents.

The tribunal added the objective of the ordinance was “to protect the residents of Manila from the catastrophic devastation that will surely occur in case of a terrorist attack on the Pandacan Terminals. No reason exists why such a protective measure should be delayed.”

The Social Justice Society (SJS), which describes itself as a political party registered with the Commission on Elections, raised the issue of the ordinance’s implementation to the SC.

SJS asked the court whether the MoU with the oil companies and the subsequent resolutions that ratified it could repeal Ordinance No. 8027.

Under the MoU, the oil companies would decommission 28 of the 54 tanks in the depot and create safety buffer and green zones around the compound. Liquefied petroleum gas terminals in the depot also had to be removed.

The ordinance was approved by the Manila City Council on Nov. 28, 2001, effective Dec. 28, 2001. The MoU, ratified as Resolution No. 97, was effective for six months starting July 25, 2002. Another resolution, No. 13, extended the validity of Resolution No. 97 to April 30, 2003 and authorized Atienza to issue special business permits to the oil companies.

The country’s three largest oil firms, however, were in agreement that the high court’s decision was based on a city ordinance that had already been superseded by a newer one. –Benjamin B. Pulta, Daily Tribune