GENERAL SANTOS CITY(October 8) — WITH the proposed Socoteco II joint venture facing legal, procedural and consumer challenges, Sarangani Rep. Steve Chiongbian Solon urged the cooperative’s members-consumers-owners (MCOs) to participate in the plebiscite and make an informed decision on the deal.
The vote, however, has been repeatedly disrupted and rescheduled. Socoteco II has already conducted several rounds of voting, but its Oct. 3-4 plebiscite schedule was postponed, leaving the process in flux as the cooperative and other parties deal with continuing legal and procedural issues. The cooperative has also posted partial and official results for the Sept. 26-27 voting round.
The proposed joint venture agreement (JVA) between the South Cotabato II Electric Cooperative Inc. (Socoteco II) and Ignite Power and Energy Holdings Inc. could shape how electricity is supplied to General Santos City, South Cotabato and Sarangani for years to come.
Solon said the plebiscite gives MCOs a direct voice in deciding the cooperative’s direction and the future of its services.
“This is an opportunity to have a direct say in an issue that may shape our power sector and regional development for years to come,” he said Tuesday.
He urged consumers to study the issues surrounding the proposed agreement, weigh competing arguments and decide based on what they believe would best serve the affected communities.
The call comes amid questions over the process by which Socoteco II’s board secured authority to pursue the JVA.
South Cotabato Rep. Shirlyn L. Bañas-Nograles filed House Resolution No. 1401 in August seeking a congressional investigation into the proposed agreement, including whether it complies with existing laws, rules and regulations and whether it protects the economic interests and rights of the government and Socoteco II’s MCOs.
The resolution cited complaints over the approval of the proposed JVA during Socoteco II’s 43rd Annual General Membership Assembly on July 25.
The Social Action Center of the Diocese of Marbel questioned the declaration that Board Resolution No. 104 had been adopted, claiming there was no duly counted vote. It also questioned the use of a standing vote and called for the plebiscite to be deferred.
The dispute has also reached the Office of the Ombudsman.
Diocese of Marbel Bishop Cerilo Casicas and Diocese of San Carlos Bishop Gerardo Alminaza asked Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla in a Sept. 8 letter to preventively suspend members of the Socoteco II board amid criminal and administrative complaints filed against them.
ACT Teachers party-list Rep. Antonio Tinio has also backed calls for an investigation, citing concerns raised by Casicas.
Court action disrupted the voting schedule
The plebiscite was first scheduled over four weekends in September. A temporary restraining order issued by the Regional Trial Court in Polomolok, South Cotabato halted the initial Sept. 5-6 voting schedule. The court later lifted that TRO on Sept. 12, allowing the voting process to resume.
The cooperative subsequently proceeded with later voting schedules, including Sept. 19-20 and Sept. 26-27. However, Socoteco II later announced the postponement of the Oct. 3-4 schedule, according to its official notices.
This means the plebiscite should not be described simply as a vote that is scheduled to conclude on a particular weekend unless Socoteco II announces a new schedule.
The proposed JVA remains under scrutiny. A separate court challenge has raised questions about whether MCOs were given sufficient information to make an informed decision on the proposed agreement.
El Niño adds pressure to power debate
While the proposed agreement remains under scrutiny, another issue is adding urgency to the debate: the threat of tighter electricity supply as El Niño intensifies.
The General Santos City Chamber of Commerce and Industry (GSCCCI) has called for the resumption of the plebiscite, warning that power-supply problems could worsen if a strong El Niño affects the country.
GSCCCI president Miguel Rene Dominguez said the cooperative needs a potential partner to help address electricity-supply pressures and described the proposed JVA as a possible “white knight.”
“The most expensive electricity is having no electricity at all,” Dominguez said, adding that the chamber’s position is for the plebiscite to proceed.
The competing positions put Socoteco II consumers at the center of a decision involving not only the cooperative’s proposed partnership but also questions over governance, due process, consumer rights and the reliability of electricity supply.
For Solon, the immediate responsibility rests with the MCOs.
He urged them to examine the facts and arguments before voting and said the eventual result should be respected as an expression of their right and responsibility to help determine the future of Socoteco II and the communities it serves.
