By Felix ‘Boy’ Espineda, Jr.
SORSOGON CITY, 28April 2014 (BicolToday.com) – The passage of SORECO II Special Projects Resolution No. 36 on the twenty second of this month once more put into the spotlight the real intention of the board of directors why it insist on disregarding the National Electrification Administration Reform Act of 2013(R.A. 10531) the prevailing law that governs the conduct of the board election.
The power utility previously set May 24 this year for the election of the board but with the queries raised by the Ad Hoc Interim Committee in Resolution No. 2 regarding the utility election code contravenes the position of SORECO II board in Resolution No. 62 informing the AHEC “that due to the registration of SORECO II with the Cooperative Development Authority the Philippine Cooperative Law of 2008(R.A.9520) in the conduct of the board election will be followed.
The issues are the eligibility clause of RA 10531 for those seeking board seats which put an end to the re-election bid of some of the incumbent board of directors. Affected are directors Mia Mendoza, Martin Ravanilla and Carmelo Darius Dometita who have filed their certificate of candidacies for another term.
Seeking a reprieve, the board of directors thru chairman Dennis Enteria sent a letter to the National Electrification Administration asking the NEA to “relax” the provision of R.A., 10531 regarding the qualifications and disqualifications opf the candidates or members of the Board which they have yet to receive a reply.
In the same resolution again the Board inquired from the Cooperative Development Authority regarding the same issue, but it is still waiting a word from CDA.
Again the Board’s premise said that it invited the members of AHEC ON April 22 and in the said meeting the AHEC agreed “that the candidates who may be disqualified under the NEA law (R.A. 10531) shall be allowed to join and be a candidate during the Board election provided however, that he/she is qualified under the CDA and the by-laws of the Cooperative”; that the candidate shall execute and Undertaking or Waiver that in case he is elected, he is deemed to have lost his right to sit as director if the Supreme Court declares that R.A. 10531 is constitutional and the qualifications and disqualifications of the Board of electric cooperatives under the CDA is covered by the NEA law.”
But this position was assailed by some members of the legal profession here saying that NEA cannot relax any provision of RA 10531, if indeed the Board petition the high court regarding the constitutionality of RA 10531 and the high tribunal to this date has yet to issue a ruling then the conduct of the election for the board seat must be compliant with the pertinent provisions of RA 10531.
If the Board insist to avail the remedies of the CDA law, they said, then only those provisions not inconsistent with RA 10531 for the subject law holds the board to follow. Their insistence is purely personal because of their various personal reasons, they added.
Some consumers of the cooperative believe that this development is negative to the image of the members of the board since the question of eligibility, qualifications and disqualifications are defined by R.A. 10531. Moving it to June 7 doesn’t alter their intentions to hold forever their seats. [BicolToday.com]