GR 178830; (July, 2008) (Digest)
G.R. No. 178830 , G.R. No. 179317 & G.R. No. 179613 EN BANC; July 14, 2008
ROLEX SUPLICO, Petitioner, vs. NATIONAL ECONOMIC AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, ET AL., Respondents. AMSTERDAM HOLDINGS, INC., and NATHANIEL SAUZ, Petitioners, vs. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS, ET AL., Respondents. GALELEO P. ANGELES, ET AL., Petitioners, vs. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS, ET AL., Respondents.
FACTS
Multiple petitions were filed assailing the National Broadband Network (NBN) Project contract between the Philippine government and ZTE Corporation. Petitioners raised constitutional and legal issues, including alleged violations of procurement laws, the Build-Operate-Transfer Law, and the constitutional right to information. They argued the contract was tainted with irregularities and sought its nullification.
During the pendency of the cases, the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) filed a Manifestation and Motion informing the Court that the Philippine Government, through an indorsement from the Department of Transportation and Communications, had decided not to continue with the ZTE NBN Project. The OSG argued this decision rendered the petitions moot and academic, leaving no justiciable controversy for the Court to resolve. Petitioners opposed the motion, questioning the sufficiency and sincerity of the government’s cancellation and urging the Court to rule on the merits due to the transcendental importance of the issues.
ISSUE
Whether the Court should dismiss the consolidated petitions for being moot and academic due to the government’s decision to cancel the NBN Project.
RULING
Yes, the petitions are dismissed for being moot and academic. The Court’s power of judicial review requires an actual case or controversy involving a conflict of legal rights susceptible of judicial determination. A case becomes moot when it ceases to present a justiciable controversy because the issues have become academic or when no practical relief can be granted.
The government’s definitive decision to abandon the NBN Project removed any actual and substantial controversy. The Court cannot adjudicate on the validity of a contract that the government itself has already disavowed and will no longer implement. Granting the petitions’ prayer for nullification would be an exercise in futility, as there is no longer an operative contract to nullify. The Court emphasized that it is not permitted to decide moot questions or render advisory opinions.
While the Court acknowledged the doctrine allowing it to rule on moot cases of transcendental importance, it found the circumstances did not warrant its application here. The legal questions raised were complex and fact-intensive, tied to a specific transaction now withdrawn. Deciding them in the abstract, without a live controversy, would be premature. The dismissal is without prejudice to any future proper case involving an actual controversy over rights that are legally demandable and enforceable.