Omnia in Bonum by Atty. Paul Yusi
The Pampanga Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Inc. (PamCham) recently held its annual general membership meeting and elected its new board of directors for 2027 and 2028.
As is customary in the regular corporate practice of large corporations, the president and treasurer presented their respective annual reports on the organization’s activities, management decisions, and financial condition. Upon the chairman’s request, a motion to approve the reports was made from the floor, duly seconded, and approved. A separate motion approving all acts of management was likewise made, seconded, and adopted by the membership.
When the guest of honor, Clark Development Corporation (CDC) President Atty. Agnes Devanera, delivered her speech, she remarked on the manner, transparency and leadership in which the meeting was conducted—with the legal niceties and procedural formalities properly observed.
The improved process was carefully planned, no doubt in part because PamCham Corporate Secretary Ryan Tan is a lawyer. It is therefore unsurprising that protocols commonly observed in corporate meetings were applied to the chamber’s general membership meeting.
During the open forum, I asked President Devanera for her thoughts on a matter that has long intrigued me: Why has no government corporate entity or GOCC other than BCDA itself, yet been created or designated to administer the Pax Silica site at New Clark City?
What we have so far heard and read is that the BCDA, together with the Department of Finance and the Department of Trade and Industry, has been at the forefront of discussions—both locally and internationally—concerning the Luzon Economic Corridor.
But the question remains: Who will ultimately administer and regulate the Pax Silica site?
This appears unusual when viewed against the experience of other former United States military facilities that were converted into special economic zones. The Clark Freeport and Special Economic Zone, the Subic Bay Freeport Zone, and the Poro Point Freeport Zone are administered by GOCCs, specifically created or established for that purpose.
It was only later that I began to appreciate a possible explanation. A substantial portion of the former Fort Bonifacio in Taguig was not converted into a traditional government-administered economic zone. Instead, it became the subject of a joint venture between BCDA and private developers and investors—beginning with its original partner Metro Pacific Group and eventually involving Ayala Land and Greenfield Development.
That model may help explain the direction being taken at Pax Silica.
The site may not merely be a venue where foreign direct investments from the West will converge, invest, and conduct business. Pax Silica may itself be the investment—an undertaking into which private developers and investors will commit substantial capital, expertise, and resources, with BCDA participating as landowner or trustee of the Republic and strategic government partner.
If that is the intended structure, then the absence of a new government corporation or regulatory body may be deliberate rather than accidental. The project could be designed as a large-scale public-private development, with BCDA providing the land and government interface while private partners (local or foreign) undertake development, construction, operations, and commercialization.
Still, the public deserves clarity.
An economic project as consequential as Pax Silica cannot be viewed solely as a real estate venture. It is being presented as part of the larger Luzon Economic Corridor and as a potential platform for advanced industries, technology, logistics, manufacturing, and foreign investment. Its governance structure, regulatory framework, ownership arrangements, environmental safeguards, and accountability mechanisms should therefore be transparent from the beginning.
If Pax Silica will be administered through a private-public partnership, the public should know the terms. If BCDA will retain control, that authority should be clearly defined. If a special regulatory regime is contemplated, Congress and the executive branch should explain why it is necessary and how it will operate.
The Clark, Subic, and Poro Point models show the value of having a dedicated government entity with a clear mandate. The Bonifacio Global City experience, on the other hand, demonstrates how a major former military property can be transformed through a partnership between BCDA and private developers.
Pax Silica may ultimately follow the latter path. But regardless of the model, it must be governed by clear rules, competent administration, and full accountability.
The orderly conduct of PamCham’s general membership meeting offered a useful reminder: procedure matters. Legal formalities are not empty rituals. They provide structure, define authority, protect stakeholders, and establish confidence in collective decisions.
The same principles should guide Pax Silica.
Before investments arrive and before the Pax Silica site becomes a centerpiece of the Luzon Economic Corridor, the government must first make clear who is in charge, under what law, and for whose benefit the project will be developed.
