MANILA — A bishop of the Diocese of Marbel asked the Office of the Ombudsman to preventively suspend the board of directors of South Cotabato II Electric Cooperative (SOCOTECO II) while complaints over its controversial joint venture agreement with Ignite Power and Energy Corp. are being investigated.
In a letter received by the Ombudsman on Sept. 8, Bishop Cerilo Casicas said allowing the cooperative's directors implicated in the complaints to remain in office could threaten cooperative assets, records and the ability of member-consumer-owners to freely participate in the ongoing plebiscite on the proposed deal.
The bishop said the Diocese was writing on behalf of the clergy and the 300,000 member-consumer-owners of SOCOTECO II, which serves General Santos City and parts of South Cotabato and Sarangani.
“As a shepherd of the faithful who will bear the impacts of high electricity prices and unreliable service if this JVA proposal from Ignite Power gets approved, we stand with our communities in upholding transparency, integrity, and the rule of law,” Casicas wrote.
Casicas also asked Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla for a dialogue to discuss concerns over the joint venture agreement, which would reportedly give Ignite a controlling interest in the cooperative’s proposed joint venture company.
“We earnestly request a dialogue with your good office to apprise you of the plight of our consumers, whose access to affordable and reliable power is heavily compromised, and illegitimate activities from those in power eroding the space for our collective freedom of expression and right to suffrage,” he said.
This comes after General Santos City Rep. Shirlyn Bañas-Nograles filed House Resolution No. 1392, which directs the House Committee on Energy to investigate SOCOTECO II’s conditional joint venture agreement with Ignite and determine if it complies with existing laws and protects the cooperative’s assets and member-consumer-owners.
The resolution said consumers, local officials, business groups and civil society organizations raised concerns that some terms of the agreement were not publicly disclosed before an assembly.
The committee was also directed to examine SOCOTECO II’s proposed P10.5-billion capital program for 2026-2030, including its financing and if resulting debt could raise electricity rates and other consumer charges.