Group seeks House probe on alleged Socoteco II plebiscite issues

MANILA, Philippines — The House of Representatives has been pressed to start its investigation of the issues hounding South Cotabato II Electric Cooperative Inc. (Socoteco II), particularly on alleged problems with the plebiscite for its joint venture agreement (JVA) with Ignite Power and Energy Holdings Inc.

In a statement, progressive group Bayan Muna party-list and its former representative Carlos Zarate said they have received reports of irregularities, including supposed undue influence exerted by community leaders and the conduct of “proxy voting.”

According to Zarate, the House must start its investigation even as Congress has adjourned for a session break.

“We are seeing a disturbing pattern where barangay officials, health workers, and purok leaders are reportedly being utilized to facilitate proxy voting and other forms of undue influence. This is a direct assault on the democratic rights of the member-consumer-owners (MCOs) of Socoteco II,” Zarate said.

“We cannot afford to wait for the Congress session to resume; the integrity of the cooperative is at stake right now,” he added.

READ: Socoteco II consumers urged: Vote in plebiscite, respect outcome

According to Zarate, there have been calls from a group, called the Protect Socoteco II Coalition, for the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) regional office in Region XII to conduct a fact-finding mission following allegations of vote-buying.

Zarate said this should also be checked by Congress, as any interference in MCOs’votes is an “attempt to bypass the genuine sentiment of the consumers.”

“The involvement of public officials in railroading a plebiscite for a private-led venture is highly irregular and demands an immediate inquiry. Even during the congressional break, the oversight function of Congress must remain vigilant,” he said.

“We must stop this maneuver to hand over the management of an electric cooperative—built by the sweat and contributions of the people—to big business interests like Prime Electric and MP Holdings. The DILG and the House committees must act decisively to ensure that the MCOs are not robbed of their right to a free and informed choice,” he added.

READ: Socoteco II-Ignite Power proposed deal unfazed despite protest

Socoteco II is facing criticism after its board pushed for a JVA with Ignite Power, despite questions about whether the electric cooperative’s methods in securing the authority for the agreement were even proper. There have been calls to suspend the cooperative’s board officials for supposedly acting arbitrarily, and for facing criminal and administrative charges.

The plebiscite, meanwhile, will determine whether the JVA with Ignite should push through. Early this October, Sarangani Rep. Steve Chiongbian Solon urged MCOs of Socoteco II to participate in the plebiscite as they should be involved in key decision-making matters.

Meanwhile, a resolution has been filed before the House seeking a probe on Socoteco II’s proposed JVA with Ignite. Last August, South Cotabato Rep. Shirlyn L. Bañas-Nograles filed House Resolution No. 1401 last August, asking the House to check the JVA and determine whether the proposed arrangement complies with existing laws, rules, and regulations.

Bañas-Nograles’ resolution also seeks an assessment of whether the JVA will affect the rights and economic interests of the government and Socoteco’s MCOs.

The lawmaker based her resolution on consumer complaints about the process used by Socoteco II’s board in securing authority for the proposed JVA, with the Social Action Center of the Diocese of Marbel claiming that Resolution No. 104 was declared adopted during the cooperative’s 43rd Annual General Membership Assembly last July 25 without a duly counted vote.

SAC-Marbel also questioned the use of a standing vote without an actual count and called for the deferment of the plebiscite.

Last August 31, Socoteco II officials said that the proposed JVA remains intact despite a recent rally opposing the deal.

Then, on September 12, it was reported that the Regional Trial Court in Polomolok, South Cotabato has granted Socoteco’s motion to lift a temporary restraining order (TRO) on the plebiscite for the proposed JVA.

READ: Court lifts restraining order vs Socoteco II–Ignite plebiscite

The court order lifted the September 4 TRO, which was initially extended to Sept. 24— effectively affecting the plebiscite originally scheduled earlier this month.

Aside from Bañas-Nograles, ACT Teachers party-list Rep. Antonio Tinio also backed calls for an investigation, saying that he understands the concerns raised by Diocese of Marbel Bishop Cerilo Casicas.

Casicas is one of the two Catholic Church bishops—the other being Diocese of San Carlos Bishop Gerardo Alminaza—who asked Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla to preventively suspend members of Socoteco II’s Board of Directors for pushing for a supposedly questionable agreement.

READ: Clergy to Ombudsman: Suspend electric co-op’s execs over JVA issue

Zarate believes any investigation on Socoteco II will be a “litmus test for accountability.”

“If barangay officials are indeed weaponizing their positions to secure a ‘yes’ vote through coercion or inducement, they must be held liable,” Zarate said.

“The people of General Santos and surrounding areas deserve a fair process, not a pre-arranged outcome that prioritizes corporate profit over public service,” he added. /cb