PTI-MPLA legal battle still on

The legal battle between Pacific Telecom Inc. and the Marianas Public Lands Authority continues, with no new negotiations taking place after the holidays.

Although PTI general manager Tony Mosley said the company wants to resume talks with the MPLA, no definite date has been set yet as to when PTI would initiate the move and communicate with the government agency.

“Everything is where it is,” Mosley said in a telephone interview yesterday. “We want them to drop the lawsuit.”

The dispute between the MPLA and the telecom company stemmed from disagreement over easement fees that MPLA wants to charge PTI for burying its telecom cables on public lands.

The MPLA has asked PTI some $2.1 million as easement fees, but the telecom firm disputed this and said that the easement formed part of its franchise from the CNMI government. The company also said the MPLA could not retroactively impose the fees.

The MPLA and its board sued PTI and Micronesian Telecommunications Corp., which the company wholly owns, after the companies disputed the agency’s demand for payment of easement fees—less than a month after PTI purchased all of MTC’s common stocks for approximately $60 million.

The lawsuit alleged that the companies breached the terms of public land leases and improperly used public lands in burying their cables without paying the agency some easement fees.

Following the MPLA’s filing of the suit, talks bogged down until Gov. Juan N. Babauta announced on Oct. 20 that he had urged the MPLA to get back to the negotiating table. Renewed talks bogged down last Oct. 27.

On Nov. 2, PTI and MTC sought the transfer of the MPLA’s lawsuit against them from the CNMI court to Saipan’s federal court, alleging that the agency’s causes of action were based on claims that infringe upon the U.S. Constitution and federal law.

MTC and PTI filed with the federal court a notice of removal, saying that MTC is a duly franchised CNMI telecommunications local exchange carrier subject to the provisions of the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996. The companies also accused the MPLA of engaging in discriminatory practices, particularly in the agency’s bid to impose certain public land lease and easement requirements.

Both parties have indicated willingness to get back to the negotiating table since the pre-holiday season, but no new negotiation has actually taken place to date. (John Ravelo)