G.R. No. 227670 - Alyansa para sa Bagong Pilipinas, Inc. vs. Energy Regulatory Commission

The 2015 DOE Circular mandated that all Distribution Utilities (DUs) procure Power Supply Agreements (PSAs) only through a Competitive Selection Process (CSP) to ensure transparency, efficiency, and least‐cost procurement in the electricity sector.
The purpose of the CSP was to protect over 95 million consumers and millions of business enterprises by preventing monopolistic pricing and ensuring that any costs incurred are passed on fairly to the public.

On October 20, 2015, the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) jointly issued a Joint Resolution directing that the ERC issue the guidelines necessary to implement the CSP.
In line with the Joint Resolution, the ERC promulgated its CSP Guidelines (ERC Resolution No. 13, Series of 2015) which, among other things, postponed the effective date of the mandated CSP from the original June 30, 2015 to November 7, 2015.

On March 15, 2016, the ERC issued the ERC Clarificatory Resolution (ERC Resolution No. 1, Series of 2016), which further postponed the effective date of the CSP from November 7, 2015 to April 30, 2016.
This extension allowed Distribution Utilities to continue entering into PSAs without the mandated competitive process, thereby potentially bypassing the intended transparency and consumer protection provisions.
The action effectively rendered 90 PSAs, submitted during the postponement period, susceptible to passing on higher power acquisition costs to consumers over lengthy contract terms.

Alyansa para sa Bagong Pilipinas, Inc. (ABP), represented by its petitioners, contested the unilateral postponement of the CSP’s effective date by the ERC.
ABP argued that by unilaterally “restating” the effective date without proper coordination with the DOE, the ERC exceeded its quasi-legislative authority.
The petition emphasized that such postponements were contrary to the intent of the DOE Circular and harmed the public interest by disabling the competitive mechanism intended to check price gouging.

Did the ERC have the statutory authority to unilaterally postpone or amend the effective date of the CSP as originally mandated by the DOE Circular?
Does such a unilateral “restatement” fall within the ERC’s quasi-legislative power or does it exceed its delegated authority given the need for DOE coordination?

Should PSAs executed or submitted during the extended period (after June 30, 2015) be considered valid as a basis for passing on power costs to consumers, or must they strictly comply with the CSP requirements?
Does the postponement effectively “freeze” the competitive process for an extended duration, thereby undermining consumer protection?

Was the ERC’s failure to coordinate with the DOE in its postponement of the CSP effective date a violation of the statutory scheme as provided in the DOE Circular?
If so, does this lack of coordination render the ERC’s resolutions void ab initio?