GR 214042 Lazaro Javier (Digest)
G.R. No. 214042 , August 13, 2024
FOUNDATION FOR ECONOMIC FREEDOM, PETITIONER, VS. ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION AND NATIONAL RENEWABLE ENERGY BOARD, RESPONDENTS. [G.R. No. 215579] REMIGIO MICHAEL A. ANCHETA II, PETITIONER, VS. ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, NATIONAL TRANSMISSION CORPORATION, NATIONAL RENEWABLE ENERGY BOARD, AND MANILA ELECTRIC COMPANY, RESPONDENTS, FOUNDATION FOR ECONOMIC FREEDOM AND CITIZENWATCH, INC., INTERVENORS, [G.R. No. 235624] ALYANSA NG MGA GRUPONG HALIGI NG AGHAM AT TEKNOLOHIYA PARA SA MAMAMAYAN (AGHAM) AND ANGELO B. PALMONES, PETITIONERS, VS. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION, NATIONAL RENEWABLE ENERGY BOARD, NATIONAL TRANSMISSION CORPORATION, AND MANILA ELECTRIC COMPANY, RESPONDENTS, DEVELOPERS FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY FOR ADVANCEMENT, INC. (DREAM), INTERVENOR.
FACTS
The consolidated cases involve challenges to the Feed-in Tariff (FIT) system under the Renewable Energy Act. The Concurring Opinion of Justice Lazaro-Javier notes that the role of the FIT settlement agent was transferred to the National Transmission Corporation (TransCo) by virtue of Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) Resolution No. 15, series of 2012. This designation resulted from a collaborative effort among government agencies: the ERC solicited stakeholder comments, the Office of the Government Corporate Counsel opined that the FIT is a public fund, and the National Renewable Energy Board recommended TransCo as the settlement agent. The opinion addresses the validity of the early collection from and payment by end-consumers of the FIT Allowance (FIT-All).
ISSUE
Whether the imposition of the FIT-All on end-consumers is a valid exercise of police power, despite the financial burden it places on them.
RULING
Yes. The Concurring Opinion fully concurs with the ponencia’s validation of the early collection of the FIT-All. It cites the precedent in Republic v. Bacolod-Murcia Milling, which upheld a similar levy (the Sugar Adjustment and Stabilization Fund) as a legitimate exercise of police power for a public purpose—in that case, to rehabilitate and stabilize the sugar industry. By analogy, the FIT-All, which aims to promote, protect, and advance the renewable energy industry—a matter of public concern that affects the nation’s welfare, wealth, and employment—is similarly a regulatory measure implemented under the state’s police power. The opinion further notes that FIT schemes where end-users shoulder the cost of incentivizing renewable energy are also implemented in other countries like Japan and Germany. However, Justice Lazaro-Javier expresses a personal observation that the balance is tilted against end-consumers, who bear the burden passed on to them, while questioning why the profits of fossil fuel-based electricity generation are not similarly targeted. She concedes that this is a matter of legislative wisdom beyond judicial inquiry.