MANILA, July 14 (PNA) -— The Supreme Court (SC), in an 18-page decision released Monday, junked three petitions seeking the cancellation of the controversial ZTE broadband deal saying that the issue has become “moot and academic” with the scrapping of the US$ 329.48 million project by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo last Oct. 2, 2007.

The three petitions were respectively filed by Iloilo Vice Governor Rolex Suplico, Amsterdam Holdings Inc., and the Lawyers and Advocates for Accountability, Transparency, Integrity and Good Governance (LATIGO).

In Associate Justice Ruben Reyes’ decision, the SC cannot rule on the merits of the case as the resolutions of the three petitions involve the settling of factual issues that requires the reception of evidence, even if the high court will disregard mootness as a point.

“There is not an iota of doubt that this may not be done by this Court in the first instance. As has been stated often enough, this Court is not a trier of facts,” the decision said.

The SC said that the ZTE in its comment “correctly pointed out” that since Suplico filed his petition directly with the SC without prior factual findings made by any lower court, a determination of pertinent and relevant facts is needed.

The SC also ruled that it would be “simply impossible” for it to annul and set aside the award of the national broadband deal to ZTE without evidence to support a prior factual finding pointing to any violation of law that could lead to such an annulment order.

“For sure, the Supreme Court is not the proper venue for this factual matter to be threshed out,” the decision added.

In dismissing the three petitions, the SC also ordered that the Sept. 11, 2007 temporary restraining order it had issued on the ZTE project be dissolved.

Suplico, in his earlier petition, prayed that the high court order the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA), the Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC), the Commission on Information and Communications Technology, the Telecommunications Office and the Bids and Awards For Information and Communications Technology, to comply with the pertinent provisions of the law regarding procurement of government information and communications technology contracts and public bidding for the NBN contract.

But the SC said that it would be presumptuous on its part to summarily compel the public respondents to comply with pertinent provisions of law regarding the procurement of government infrastructure projects without any factual basis or prior determination of “very particular violations committed by specific government officials of the executive branch.”

“For the Court to do so would amount to a breach of the norms of comity among co-equal branches of government. A perceived error cannot be corrected by committing another error. Without proper evidence, the Court cannot just presume that the executive did not comply with procurement laws. Should the Court allow itself to fall into this trap, it would plainly commit grave error itself,” the SC added.

The SC pointed that the hearings conducted by the Senate on the ZTE deal cannot be used as basis for its decision which requires a “judicial finding of facts.”

“The Court is, therefore, constrained to dismiss the petitions and deny them due course because of mootness and because their resolution requires reception of evidence which cannot be done in an original petition brought before the Supreme Court,” the Court ruled.

Suplico, in his 129-page mandamus petition filed last Aug. 2007, also asked the Court to stop the government from implementing the project on the grounds that it is in violation of the Constitution, the Government Procurement Act, the Build-Operate-Transfer law and the Telecoms Policy Act.

Named respondents in his petition were the NEDA, DOTC, the Commission on Information and Communications Technology, Telecommunications Office, Bids and Awards for Information and Communications Technology, ZTE Corp., Amsterdam Holdings Inc., and Arescom Inc.

Justices Antonio Carpio, Ma. Alicia Austria-Martinez and Conchita Carpio Morales expressed dissenting opinions on the resolution.