Who Won?

The Camp John Hay Development Corp. (CJHDevCo) hailed the ruling of the Philippine Dispute Resolution Center Inc. (PDRCI) ordering the Bases Conversion Development Authority (BCDA) to pay P1.42 billion to Camp John Hay developer, representing rental payments made by CJHDevCo to BCDA since 1998. But my question is who won in this debacle? Was it CJHDevco who is finally moving on from this drama  who will lose this place that invested heavily in or BCDA that can finally sell John Hay to the Ayala Group but they need to payback 1.4 Billion.

This is great news for both parties. The legal aspects of the case after the Philippine Dispute Resolution Center Inc. (PDRCI) released its decision must be the starting point for both parties to create peaceful relation with each other. They will observe the ethics of dealing the present situation about the case.

The BCDA should pay the CJHDevCo for 1.42 B to properly implement the resolution of PDRCI. Of course, BCDA should wait for the orders before claiming the camp. The development lies with BCDA to fulfill the aspect of the decision. Likewise, the two parties must coordinate with each other for proper endorsement.

The past record of this case had never been equally heard which in turn gave negative aspects for both parties. The BCDA pushed their negative propaganda against CJHDevCo. It caused much legal battle that made people think negatively. The BCDA pursued the claiming of the camp while at the same time, doing differently for CJHDevCo manager Bob Sobrepena. Now the case starts to show the true aspects.

Both parties should respect the decision of the arbitration tribunal. The camp takeover cannot be made overnight, thus must be done in an organized and realistic fashion. However, it is clear based on the decision that BCDA must pay P1.42 billion before the transition takes place. The PDRCI stressed that BCDA failed to comply with its obligation of setting up a One-Stop Action Center, which would have been an effective mechanism to facilitate the development of the John Hay Special Economic Zone.

“It is undeniable that the OSAC which the BCDA claims to have established in compliance with 2008 restructured memorandum of agreement (RMoA), was unable to perform its warranties. For one, the OSAC was manifestly not fully authorized to process and issue developmental permits, such as tree-cutting, earth billing, and tree-pruning permits,” the arbitration body said in its ruling.