Title
Garcia vs. Board of Investments
Case
G.R. No. 92024
Decision Date
Nov 9, 1990
Congressman Garcia challenged BOI's approval of petrochemical plant relocation and feedstock change, citing national interest; SC ruled BOI abused discretion, annulled decision, upheld Bataan site and naphtha feedstock.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. 155001)

Facts:

  • Reservation of Petrochemical Zone and Initial Project Registration
    • Presidential Decree No. 1803 (January 16, 1981) reserved 576 hectares in Lamao, Limay, Bataan as the Petrochemical Industrial Zone under PNOC administration.
    • Bataan Refining Corporation (BRC), a government-owned corporation in Bataan, produced 60% of the country’s naphtha, the feedstock originally proposed for the plant.
  • Formation of Bataan Petrochemical Corporation (BPC) and Original BOI Registration
    • Taiwanese investors formed BPC, applied with the BOI specifying Limay, Bataan as site and naphtha as feedstock; on February 24, 1988, BOI granted registration with pioneer status and incentives (tax exemptions, repatriation of proceeds, remittance of earnings); RA 6767 further exempted naphtha from ad valorem tax.
    • House Bill (introduced by petitioner Garcia) eliminated the 48% ad valorem tax on naphtha for petrochemical use.
  • Proposed Amendments and BOI Approval
    • In early 1989, BPC’s major investor sought amendments—site transfer to Batangas (citing insurgency and proximity to Shell’s LPG depot), increased capitalization and capacity, and feedstock change to “naphtha and/or LPG.” Opposition arose from petitioner, President Aquino, and legislators.
    • BPC formally filed amendments on April 11, 1989; BOI denied petitioner’s request for amendment documents; on May 23, 1989, BOI Resolution No. 193 approved all proposed changes. BOI Vice-Chairman testified BOI could only recommend location and respected investor’s “final choice.”
  • Prior Supreme Court Proceedings (G.R. No. 88637)
    • Petitioner’s first certiorari petition (Sept. 7, 1989 decision) ordered BOI to publish amendments, grant record access (excluding trade secrets), and hold a 10-day hearing on petitioner’s opposition; denied writ of prohibition.
    • Petitioner’s motions for partial reconsideration (Sept. 19 & Oct. 24, 1989) raised P.D. 949/1803 and investor’s claimed final-choice right; majority denied, minority urged hearing. January 17, 1990 resolution clarified “no right of final choice” under Constitution or Investments Code; investor’s choice is subject to BOI approval.
  • Present Petition (G.R. No. 92024)
    • Petitioner challenges BOI’s Resolution No. 193 as grave abuse of discretion, invoking constitutional duty (Art. VIII, Sec. 1) to settle controversies and determine lack/excess of jurisdiction.
    • Core dispute: whether BOI unlawfully yielded to investor’s preference in transferring site and changing feedstock contrary to national interest.

Issues:

  • Did the BOI commit grave abuse of discretion in approving the transfer of the petrochemical plant site from Bataan to Batangas?
  • Did the BOI commit grave abuse of discretion in authorizing the change of feedstock from naphtha only to naphtha and/or LPG?
  • Can a foreign investor’s “final choice” of plant site and feedstock supersede BOI’s sovereign approval power and national-interest considerations?

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.