More than a month following the Fifth Chamber of the Administrative Litigation Court notified its resolution regarding the annulment of the contracts of onerous usufruct and operations signed by APM Terminals (originally by Terminal de Contenedores Quetzal (TCQ)), uncertainty continues regarding the continuity and form of operations that this terminal will have.
EPQ manager Ricardo Monterroso said on Sunday, July 14, that work is being done on solutions, but he refused to disclose the alternatives and proposals that the Board of Directors has analyzed, because the possible scenarios that might be resolved are still under discussion.
According to other sources in the sector, the port’s board of directors was in session for several hours on Friday, July 12, evaluating alternatives to resolve the situation. It is not known whether they reached any agreements.
Meanwhile, that same Friday, the Public Prosecutor’s Office (MP) announced on its social media that the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office carried out investigations at the EPQ headquarters, located in Zone 9 of the capital, “with the aim of gathering relevant information on the possible intervention of said entity.”
“This investigation seeks to obtain crucial data for the development of the ongoing investigation,” the MP said, although it did not provide details on what case is being investigated.
On Sunday followingnoon, the MP, through the communications office, provided the following information: “This is an investigation that arose from several citizen complaints. The purpose of the investigation carried out by the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office was to obtain information and request that said entity, within a period of 5 days, provide a report regarding the possible procedures that might be carried out there with the purpose of managing a possible intervention.”
“During the hearing, the head of the entity (EPQ) was spoken to, and he indicated that they would forward the data requested by the prosecutor’s office, which will be analyzed to establish the legal actions to be taken,” it added.
Meanwhile, the EPQ manager explained that there were no raids, but that they were given two documents. In one, the MP requests information regarding the current situation and, in general, whether any process has been carried out at the container terminal, and in the second, he asks if there is any intervention process at EPQ that has taken place or is regarding to take place; what they did specifically request is the list of the names of the members of the Board of Directors.
CONTENT FOR SUBSCRIBERS
Monterroso said that the MP gave them five working days to respond officially. As of yesterday, they had not delivered what was requested to the Prosecutor’s Office and they plan to do so during the week.
Denies intervention
Regarding whether there is an intervention in EPQ at present or if it might occur, the official responded that this is a power of the President of the Republic, but that the port authority knows nothing regarding this issue.
Asked whether the MP’s actions might be an interference in the process of deciding the fate of the container terminal, Monterroso said that he might not say whether this was the case and that the board has not authorized him to give institutional opinions until a final resolution is made.
Users: Uncertainty continues and they ask for a process and transition
Users of the facilities and port services at EPQ agreed that uncertainty continues regarding the continuity of operations, but they are asking for a transition process in which APM continues to operate while an orderly tender with technical bases is carried out.
Alejandro Toledo, president of the Council of Users of International Transport of Guatemala (Cutrigua), said that he recently participated in a meeting with the Minister of Communications where they discussed four topics, two of which are related to ports.
He explained that the government was consulted on the next step in the case of the container terminal, since although there is a provisional injunction granted to Cacif, which suspends the cancellation of the APM Terminals contract, the problem is that this decision can change at any time, so the government must take concrete steps and the solution of a new operator is an option.
Toledo said he has heard that two options were being discussed: one is that APM will rent the services it provides to EPQ, but he believes that this will not happen. The other is that EPQ might rent the facilities to APM for the time necessary to continue operating until a solution is found.
The director believes that the current government has the will, but that in order to carry out the tender correctly, a transition contract of at least 3 years will be required, because if it were a shorter period it would not be feasible.
Toledo admitted that he was surprised by the MP’s actions in EPQ, although he does not know if there is evidence that the MP’s actions are of interference. What he did admit is that there is a tense relationship between the MP and the Executive Branch.
Fanny D. Estrada, director of institutional relations for the Guatemalan Association of Exporters (Agexport), said that it is not possible to think that the container terminal will stop operating at some point, because it is very important for the country and is where raw materials, machinery, and equipment used for production, as well as products for sale, enter and it is a strategic point for export.
He says that they are waiting for the government’s indication that the port will not stop and that it will find the most appropriate way to operate. Another important aspect is that the Superintendency of Tax Administration (SAT) has already prepared a mechanism for temporary customs storage (DAT) because if the port were to stop, the tax authority would not be able to touch the containers.
CONTENT FOR SUBSCRIBERS
“On the legal side, it has been most difficult for them to make decisions regarding which mechanism to apply, but the President of the Republic has said that a solution will be found and that the situation will not be paralyzed, which has given us peace of mind, but we are still waiting,” added D. Estrada.
He said that the proposal that has been analyzed is that there be a transition so that the government has all the legal mechanisms to continue operating, and there is a discussion regarding whether a period of 5 or 10 years will be needed for the transition.
To allow time to complete the bidding process, launch it, and find an operator, it is estimated that the transition should take a minimum of 3 to 5 years, he added.
#MPs #investigation #EPQ #generates #uncertainty #future #container #terminal
