The Supreme Court decision rendered last November requires the Big 3 oil companies to remove the oil depot facilities from Pandacan, Manila, and not merely to cease operations.
In its en banc session, the SC issued this clarification even as it dismissed the motion for reconsideration filed by Pilipinas Shell Petroleum and stressed that the relocation deadline holds.
“The Court denied the motion for reconsideration of Shell because the reasons given had already been decided upon by the Court and there was no need for the Court to rule upon them anew,” the Court ruled
Acting on the clarification sought by Chevron (formerly Caltex Philippines Inc.), the SC stressed that there are overwhelming reasons stated in its previous ruling to support the pronouncement of the Court that the very nature of depots has no place in a densely populated area.
The high court cited the history of the Pandacan terminals where flames spread over the entire City of Manila when fuel storage dumps were set on fire in December 1942 and another incident involving an explosion—both of which were discussed in an earlier challenge to the oil depots.
“The Court pointed out that its decision is clear and that it was the City’s Ordinance No. 8187 that had been declared unconstitutional and invalid as far as the continued stay of the Pandacan Oil terminals is concerned,” the Court resolution said.
It also reminded the oil firms that it did not give its consent to consider January 2016 as separate deadline for compliance with its decision.
“The timelines prescribed in the assailed decision shall be observed to the letter,” it stressed.
The Court also said that its decision is final and that no further pleadings will be entertained to avoid further attempts to delay the enforcements of its decision
It can be recalled that last November, the SC declared unconstitutional and invalid Manila City Ordinance 8187 which the oil companies were using to justify the continued operation of the Pandacan oil depot.
The tribunal also directed the Manila City government to cease and desist from implementing the ordinance.
Instead, the Court affirmed the validity of Manila City Ordinance No. 8027, which reclassifies portions of the Manila districts of Pandacan and Sta. Ana from industrial to commercial and directs certain business owners and operators, including Caltex (Philippines), Inc., Petron Corporation and Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corporation to cease from operating their businesses.
The SC declared in its February 13, 2008 decision that the objective of the ordinance “is to protect the residents of Manila from the catastrophic devastation that will surely occur in case of a terrorist attack on the Pandacan terminals.”
In its November 2014 decision, the SC gave the oil companies six months to remove their Pandacan oil terminals after its submission of an updated comprehensive plan and relocation schedule.
It also gave the oil firms 45 days to submit the relocation plan.
