J. Albert Gamboa l September 2, 2022 l The Manila Times
Johor Bahru, Malaysia (photo from www.kayak.com)
JOHOR BAHRU, Malaysia: Given this southern Malaysian city’s proximity, several of Johor Bahru’s property development projects involving land reclamation work in the Straits of Johor have worried the Singaporean Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) due to the possible transboundary impact.
Having visited Johor Bahru five times over the past two-and-a-half decades, I have witnessed how it has transformed from a sleepy backwater into the bustling metropolis that it is today. During my current visit, which coincides with Merdeka Day commemorating Malaysia’s independence from British rule, the city impressed me as a progressive hub of southern Malaysia and a bedroom community for many Malaysians working in Singapore.
Cited in particular by the MFA is the Forest City special economic zone that will involve several connected man-made islands with a total land size of almost 2,000 hectares. The massive project is part of the Iskandar development corridor composed of Johor Bahru and three neighboring districts connected to Singapore via two bridges. It is named after the present ruler of Johor state, Sultan Ibrahim Ismail Iskandar.
This brings to mind another controversial reclamation project back home in the Philippines that came to the attention in these past weeks. I am referring to the P34-billion Manila Bay project of Waterfront Manila Premier Development Inc. (WMPDI) in a joint venture (JV) with the Manila city council. The Philippine Reclamation Authority (PRA) recently ordered that the 318-hectare reclamation commence despite a pending case before Branch 139 of the Makati Regional Trial Court (RTC).
Asian Seas Resources and Construction Development Corp. (Asserco) is opposing the PRA move. In a media interview, Asserco legal counsel Jose Bernas said the current PRA board did not have the authority to issue approvals since they were serving in an acting capacity under the new administration. Asserco bewailed the fact that the project awarded to WMPDI overlapped its own project award issued by PRA in 1991.
In a 225-page decision last April, RTC Judge Benjamin Pozon ruled that the tripartite JV deal was null and void primarily because it did not undergo public bidding as well as for its failure to get National Economic and Development Authority board approval. After Puzon’s retirement last July, his replacement, in the person of fellow Makati RTC Judge Rommel Baybay, immediately granted WMPDI’s motion for reconsideration and declared Puzon’s decision premature. Baybay’s contention was that the Office of the President should have been impleaded as an indispensable party in the case.
According to WMPDI lawyer Ma. Julieta Santos, the Waterfront Manila project complied with the requirements of both the PRA and the City of Manila. Invoking Baybay’s decision, PRA Assistant General Manager Joseph John Literal also granted WMPDI’s request to defer payment of the Social Environment Fund. Asserco’s Bernas, however, contends that Literal does not have the authority to approve such requests. In other words, he cannot usurp the power of the board and issue a “midnight” resolution.
When a board is composed of holdover officials from a previous administration, it should not render judgment on pending matters. Prudence dictates that the decision be reserved for the next appointees who will serve on a permanent basis.
*** The author is the chief finance officer of Asian Center for Legal Excellence and chairman of the FINEX Media Affairs Committee. The opinion expressed herein does not necessarily reflect the views of these institutions and The Manila Times.
