The government has postponed the opening of the third terminal of Pasay City's Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) from December 15 to April next year due to terror threats, said Transportation and Communi-cation Secretary Leandro Mendoza.

However, Philippine Airlines (PAL) president Avelino Zapanta told Gulf News that no international carrier has signed a contract with NAIA's terminal 3 because it has no cargo facility.

For the same reason, a board of airlines also has not accredited the terminal, said Zapanta.

"That is the weakness of the area," confirmed Meynardo Halili, president and chairman of ASPAC International Airfreight forwarding company.

"Our export and import industries are directly related to cargo handling. The airline industry depends on the cargo industry by 50 per cent," said Halili.

He added that the government should have sought a cargo-friendly terminal when it gave the contract to build and operate to the Philippine International Air Terminals Co. Inc. (Piatco) in 1998.

Piatco is 70 per cent owned by the local Cheong group and 30 per cent by Fraport AG, a German firm which operates Frankfurt airport, the largest in continental Europe. Right now, NAIA's terminal 1 has its own cargo handling facility.

NAIA's terminal 2, which serves PAL, the country's flag carrier, has its own cargo terminal, including a cargo-dedicated building.

"The international and local airlines are comfortable where they are right now," said Halili.

He noted that terminal 3, if made according to the needs of the carriers for cargo and passengers, would have been the perfect vehicle for decongesting the traffic at NAIA's existing terminals.

In the contract, Piatco should have constructed an underground road leading to its cargo terminal. This should be connected to the cargo terminal areas that currently serve terminals 1 and 2. But Piatco failed to include these in the construction of the terminal 3.

In general, the state of the new terminal mirrors the overall weakness of the country's international airport.

"Our cargo handling facilities are 10 to 15 years behind, compared with the facilities at the airports in Hong Kong, Thailand, Singapore and Malaysia," said Halili.

When asked why the cargo handling services remain outdated in the Philippines, Halili blamed the country's customs office for having influenced the design of cargo terminals.

"Our customs procedures are onerous. They don't facilitate cargo movement and they are open to more corrupt practices with the number of signatures needed for cargo passage," stated Halili.

He said the terminal 3 should have undertaken a project to make a different cargo terminal. The terminal 3 can make a difference for tourists and passengers but not for cargo handling, which would have made it attractive to all carriers, explained Halili.

The needs of the cargo industry should not have been bypassed in the making of the terminal since revenues from cargo handling were behind the fast recovery of the Asia Pacific airlines in the region after the September 11 terror attacks in the U.S.

Earlier, President Gloria Arroyo formed a panel, led by Executive Secretary Alberto Romulo, to review the contract given by the government to Piatco. Sources said the plan was to take advantage of Fraport's offer of $ 300 million for its shares with Piatco.

In October, Fraport chief executive Wilhelm Bender warned that his company will sue the Philippine government for calling for changes in the design of the terminal, including other provisions in the contract it signed during the time of former president Joseph Estrada.

The government called for reduced departure tax at the terminal from $20 to $11. It has also refused to abide by the old contract that the third terminal will be the only terminal at the airport for international traffic and duty-free goods.