By Gemma Q. Casas
Variety News Staff

SUPERIOR Court Associate Judge David A. Wiseman denied Rep. Stanley T. Torres and his legislative consultant’s request to postpone payment of their disputed CUC bills pending the judicial review of the agency’s higher power rates.
Torres, Ind.-Saipan, and Jack Angello sought judicial review of CUC’s increased rate structure which resulted in a more than 100 percent increase in electric rates.
Additionally, the two sought injunctive relief for the postponement of their disputed bills pending the conclusion of the judicial review.
The two earlier signed promissory notes with CUC agreeing that they would pay their disputed bills within a certain period.
Their agreement with CUC came after the agency’s administrative hearing office ruled that CUC’s new higher power rates were legally implemented contrary to the two’s argument that they were “unconstitutional and unlawful.”
In his eight-page decision, Wiseman said if the court finds CUC’s rate structure unlawful, the plaintiffs would be entitled to damages as would other consumers paying more than what they used to pay for their electricity.
But, he added, at “this early stage in the litigation, and without further argument from plaintiffs regarding why the hearing officer’s conclusion that legislative action cured the governor’s overreaching was legally erroneous, the court has no reason to question the hearing officer’s logic and conclusions.”
The judge said the two “are not in danger of suffering irreparable injury if forced to comply with the terms of their payment agreement, this factor carries no significant weight.”
He ordered the two to settle their disputed bills with CUC within seven calendar days from the date of his order, May 4.
Torres, however, is challenging Wiseman’s decision and noted that he is “perturbed” by the judge’s statement that the lawmaker “lost credibility” when he signed the promissory note with CUC.
Torres said he was “forced to sign an unfair promissory note within 24 hours under threat that he and his family would lose their power, after CUC had rejected his proposal to pay the disputed amount in good faith over a justifiable period of time during the court proceedings.”
He added, “Why does Wiseman allow CUC to harm people with their continuous mismanagement and then stick it to the people who have to suffer for the monopolistic mismanagement of CUC?”
Torres said he wants to know why the government is allowed to postpone payment of its disputed bills while ordinary citizens are punished if they don’t come up with payments.
“The Superior Court should be consistent and fair in its application of the law to all in the CNMI — not just the government,” he said.