Gamboa v. Teves (G.R. No. 176579; June 28, 2011)
CASE DIGEST: WILSON P. GAMBOA, Petitioner, vs. FINANCE SECRETARY
MARGARITO B. TEVES, FINANCE UNDERSECRETARY JOHN P. SEVILLA, AND COMMISSIONER
RICARDO ABCEDE OF THE PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION ON GOOD GOVERNMENT (PCGG) IN
THEIR CAPACITIES AS CHAIR AND MEMBERS, RESPECTIVELY, OF THE PRIVATIZATION
COUNCIL, CHAIRMAN ANTHONI SALIM OF FIRST PACIFIC CO., LTD. IN HIS CAPACITY
AS DIRECTOR OF METRO PACIFIC ASSET HOLDINGS INC., CHAIRMAN MANUEL V.
PANGILINAN OF PHILIPPINE LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE COMPANY (PLDT) IN HIS
CAPACITY AS MANAGING DIRECTOR OF FIRST PACIFIC CO., LTD., PRESIDENT NAPOLEON
L. NAZARENO OF PHILIPPINE LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE COMPANY, CHAIR FE BARIN OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE COMMISSION, and PRESIDENT FRANCIS LIM OF THE
PHILIPPINE STOCK EXCHANGE, Respondents. PABLITO V. SANIDAD and ARNO V.
SANIDAD, Petitioners-in-Intervention.
FACTS: In 1969, General Telephone and Electronics Corporation (GTE),
sold 26 percent of the outstanding common shares of PLDT to Philippine
Telecommunications Investment Corporation (PTIC). In 1977, Prime Holdings, Inc.
(PHI) became the owner of 111,415 shares of stock of PTIC. In 1986, the 111,415
shares of stock of PTIC held by PHI were sequestered by the Presidential
Commission on Good Government (PCGG). The 111,415 PTIC shares, which represent
about 46.125 percent of the outstanding capital stock of PTIC, were later
declared by this Court to be owned by the Republic of the Philippines.
In 1999, First Pacific, a Bermuda-registered acquired the remaining 54 percent of the outstanding capital stock of PTIC. On 20 November 2006, the Inter-Agency Privatization Council (IPC) of the Philippine Government through a public bidding sold the same shares to Parallax Venture who won with a bid of P25.6 billion or US$510 million.
Thereafter, First Pacific announced that it would exercise its right of first refusal as a PTIC stockholder and buy the 111,415 PTIC shares by matching the bid price of Parallax. On 14 February 2007, First Pacific, through its subsidiary, MPAH, entered into a Conditional Sale and Purchase Agreement of the 111,415 PTIC shares, or 46.125 percent of the outstanding capital stock of PTIC, with the Philippine Government for the price of P25,217,556,000 or US$510,580,189. The sale was completed on 28 February 2007.
Since PTIC is a stockholder of PLDT, the sale by the Philippine Government of 46.125 percent of PTIC shares is actually an indirect sale of 12 million shares or about 6.3 percent of the outstanding common shares of PLDT. With the sale, First Pacific common shareholdings in PLDT increased from 30.7 percent to 37 percent, thereby increasing the common shareholdings of foreigners in PLDT to about 81.47 percent. This, according to petitioner, violates Section 11, Article XII of the 1987 Philippine Constitution which limits foreign ownership of the capital of a public utility to not more than 40 percent.
On 28 February 2007, petitioner filed the instant petition for prohibition, injunction, declaratory relief, and declaration of nullity of sale of the 111,415 PTIC shares.
ISSUE: Does the term "capital" in Section 11, Article XII of the Constitution refer to the total common shares only or to the total outstanding capital stock of PLDT, a public utility?
HELD: Section 11, Article XII (National Economy and Patrimony) of the 1987 Constitution mandates the Filipinization of public utilities, to wit:
Section 11. No franchise, certificate, or any other form of authorization for the operation of a public utility shall be granted except to citizens of the Philippines or to corporations or associations organized under the laws of the Philippines, at least sixty per centum of whose capital is owned by such citizens; nor shall such franchise, certificate, or authorization be exclusive in character or for a longer period than fifty years. Neither shall any such franchise or right be granted except under the condition that it shall be subject to amendment, alteration, or repeal by the Congress when the common good so requires. The State shall encourage equity participation in public utilities by the general public. The participation of foreign investors in the governing body of any public utility enterprise shall be limited to their proportionate share in its capital, and all the executive and managing officers of such corporation or association must be citizens of the Philippines.
The intent of the framers of the Constitution in imposing limitations and restrictions on fully nationalized and partially nationalized activities is for Filipino nationals to be always in control of the corporation undertaking said activities. Otherwise, if the Trial Court ruling upholding respondent's arguments were to be given credence, it would be possible for the ownership structure of a public utility corporation to be divided into one percent (1%) common stocks and ninety-nine percent (99%) preferred stocks. Following the Trial Court ruling adopting respondent's arguments, the common shares can be owned entirely by foreigners thus creating an absurd situation wherein foreigners, who are supposed to be minority shareholders, control the public utility corporation.
The term "capital" in Section 11, Article XII of the Constitution refers only to shares of stock entitled to vote in the election of directors, and thus in the present case only to common shares, and not to the total outstanding capital stock comprising both common and non-voting preferred shares.
Indisputably, one of the rights of a stockholder is the right to participate in the control or management of the corporation. This is exercised through his vote in the election of directors because it is the board of directors that controls or manages the corporation. In the absence of provisions in the articles of incorporation denying voting rights to preferred shares, preferred shares have the same voting rights as common shares. However, preferred shareholders are often excluded from any control, that is, deprived of the right to vote in the election of directors and on other matters, on the theory that the preferred shareholders are merely investors in the corporation for income in the same manner as bondholders. In fact, under the Corporation Code only preferred or redeemable shares can be deprived of the right to vote. Common shares cannot be deprived of the right to vote in any corporate meeting, and any provision in the articles of incorporation restricting the right of common shareholders to vote is invalid.
Considering that common shares have voting rights which translate to control, as opposed to preferred shares which usually have no voting rights, the term "capital" in Section 11, Article XII of the Constitution refers only to common shares. However, if the preferred shares also have the right to vote in the election of directors, then the term "capital" shall include such preferred shares because the right to participate in the control or management of the corporation is exercised through the right to vote in the election of directors. In short, the term "capital" in Section 11, Article XII of the Constitution refers only to shares of stock that can vote in the election of directors.
This interpretation is consistent with the intent of the framers of the Constitution to place in the hands of Filipino citizens the control and management of public utilities. Thus, 60 percent of the "capital" assumes, or should result in, "controlling interest" in the corporation and thus in the present case, only to common shares, and not to the total outstanding capital stock (common and non-voting preferred shares).
FACTS: In 1969, General Telephone and Electronics Corporation (GTE),
sold 26 percent of the outstanding common shares of PLDT to Philippine
Telecommunications Investment Corporation (PTIC). In 1977, Prime Holdings, Inc.
(PHI) became the owner of 111,415 shares of stock of PTIC. In 1986, the 111,415
shares of stock of PTIC held by PHI were sequestered by the Presidential
Commission on Good Government (PCGG). The 111,415 PTIC shares, which represent
about 46.125 percent of the outstanding capital stock of PTIC, were later
declared by this Court to be owned by the Republic of the Philippines.In 1999, First Pacific, a Bermuda-registered acquired the remaining 54 percent of the outstanding capital stock of PTIC. On 20 November 2006, the Inter-Agency Privatization Council (IPC) of the Philippine Government through a public bidding sold the same shares to Parallax Venture who won with a bid of P25.6 billion or US$510 million.
Thereafter, First Pacific announced that it would exercise its right of first refusal as a PTIC stockholder and buy the 111,415 PTIC shares by matching the bid price of Parallax. On 14 February 2007, First Pacific, through its subsidiary, MPAH, entered into a Conditional Sale and Purchase Agreement of the 111,415 PTIC shares, or 46.125 percent of the outstanding capital stock of PTIC, with the Philippine Government for the price of P25,217,556,000 or US$510,580,189. The sale was completed on 28 February 2007.
Since PTIC is a stockholder of PLDT, the sale by the Philippine Government of 46.125 percent of PTIC shares is actually an indirect sale of 12 million shares or about 6.3 percent of the outstanding common shares of PLDT. With the sale, First Pacific common shareholdings in PLDT increased from 30.7 percent to 37 percent, thereby increasing the common shareholdings of foreigners in PLDT to about 81.47 percent. This, according to petitioner, violates Section 11, Article XII of the 1987 Philippine Constitution which limits foreign ownership of the capital of a public utility to not more than 40 percent.
On 28 February 2007, petitioner filed the instant petition for prohibition, injunction, declaratory relief, and declaration of nullity of sale of the 111,415 PTIC shares.
ISSUE: Does the term "capital" in Section 11, Article XII of the Constitution refer to the total common shares only or to the total outstanding capital stock of PLDT, a public utility?
HELD: Section 11, Article XII (National Economy and Patrimony) of the 1987 Constitution mandates the Filipinization of public utilities, to wit:
Section 11. No franchise, certificate, or any other form of authorization for the operation of a public utility shall be granted except to citizens of the Philippines or to corporations or associations organized under the laws of the Philippines, at least sixty per centum of whose capital is owned by such citizens; nor shall such franchise, certificate, or authorization be exclusive in character or for a longer period than fifty years. Neither shall any such franchise or right be granted except under the condition that it shall be subject to amendment, alteration, or repeal by the Congress when the common good so requires. The State shall encourage equity participation in public utilities by the general public. The participation of foreign investors in the governing body of any public utility enterprise shall be limited to their proportionate share in its capital, and all the executive and managing officers of such corporation or association must be citizens of the Philippines.
The intent of the framers of the Constitution in imposing limitations and restrictions on fully nationalized and partially nationalized activities is for Filipino nationals to be always in control of the corporation undertaking said activities. Otherwise, if the Trial Court ruling upholding respondent's arguments were to be given credence, it would be possible for the ownership structure of a public utility corporation to be divided into one percent (1%) common stocks and ninety-nine percent (99%) preferred stocks. Following the Trial Court ruling adopting respondent's arguments, the common shares can be owned entirely by foreigners thus creating an absurd situation wherein foreigners, who are supposed to be minority shareholders, control the public utility corporation.
The term "capital" in Section 11, Article XII of the Constitution refers only to shares of stock entitled to vote in the election of directors, and thus in the present case only to common shares, and not to the total outstanding capital stock comprising both common and non-voting preferred shares.
Indisputably, one of the rights of a stockholder is the right to participate in the control or management of the corporation. This is exercised through his vote in the election of directors because it is the board of directors that controls or manages the corporation. In the absence of provisions in the articles of incorporation denying voting rights to preferred shares, preferred shares have the same voting rights as common shares. However, preferred shareholders are often excluded from any control, that is, deprived of the right to vote in the election of directors and on other matters, on the theory that the preferred shareholders are merely investors in the corporation for income in the same manner as bondholders. In fact, under the Corporation Code only preferred or redeemable shares can be deprived of the right to vote. Common shares cannot be deprived of the right to vote in any corporate meeting, and any provision in the articles of incorporation restricting the right of common shareholders to vote is invalid.
Considering that common shares have voting rights which translate to control, as opposed to preferred shares which usually have no voting rights, the term "capital" in Section 11, Article XII of the Constitution refers only to common shares. However, if the preferred shares also have the right to vote in the election of directors, then the term "capital" shall include such preferred shares because the right to participate in the control or management of the corporation is exercised through the right to vote in the election of directors. In short, the term "capital" in Section 11, Article XII of the Constitution refers only to shares of stock that can vote in the election of directors.
This interpretation is consistent with the intent of the framers of the Constitution to place in the hands of Filipino citizens the control and management of public utilities. Thus, 60 percent of the "capital" assumes, or should result in, "controlling interest" in the corporation and thus in the present case, only to common shares, and not to the total outstanding capital stock (common and non-voting preferred shares).
