The majority faction of the prominent Lopez family has issued a sharp rebuke against Lopez Inc. President Federico “Piki” Lopez, accusing him of hypocrisy for offering reconciliation while simultaneously advancing legal actions against his relatives.
The family majority pointed out a glaring contradiction between Lopez’s public gestures and his recent move to file indirect contempt charges.
“What he says and what he does are two different things,” the majority group stated.
During First Gen’s annual shareholders’ meeting on May 28, Lopez expressed a strong public desire to mend familial ties. However, the majority faction highlighted that his legal complaints were filed on that exact same day, characterizing the action as manipulative.
“This is Piki double speak. He talks peace and at the same time attacks. We are keeping our options open,” the majority said.
At the heart of the widening rift are allegations regarding “poison pill” provisions embedded within a hydropower agreement between First Gen and Prime Infrastructure. Concerned investors have demanded formal documentation of the deal to assess potential corporate liabilities.
According to the majority group, Lopez’s legal filing claims that their conditional withholding of support for management—pending the release of those specific documents—creates legal exposure.
The faction has previously slammed the company for a six-month delay in revealing clauses that could trigger up to ₱24 billion in penalties if Lopez or his designees are ousted. They have since asked the Philippine Stock Exchange to investigate the delayed disclosure.
The corporate battle escalated after shareholders holding a 71% stake previously attempted to oust Lopez as president and CEO due to a breakdown in confidence.
While that resolution was later rescinded—a move Lopez initially framed as a step toward healing the family divide—tensions have clearly reignited.
In defense of its leadership, First Gen maintained that all of its business dealings are strictly reviewed and approved by its board of directors, asserting that its management-change clauses are standard industry practices intended to protect its corporate partners.