|
Wednesday, June 28, 2006
Raps, new councilman heat Bugo rivalry
By Lizanilla J. Amarga
THE power struggle between Barangay Bugo leaders is seen to worsen with the recent appointment of a barangay councilman and the possible filing of usurpation charges by rival Barangay Chairman Nerio Obliosca.
Barangay Chairman Perseveranda Araña's legal counsel Rogelio Bagabuyo on Tuesday filed a motion to dismiss the petition elevated by Obliosca's lawyer Jose Alejandro Pallugna to the Court of Appeals (CA) Mindanao.
Pallugna believes that the motion to dismiss will not be given due course by CA-Mindanao as it is a "prohibited motion" based on the Rules of Court while Bagabuyo said the motion is allowed as it is a petition "with leave of court."
Meanwhile, Mayor Vicente Emano said he believes that the rivalry between Araña and Obliosca will affect the delivery of services at Barangay Bugo.
"It is the people who are at the losing end," he said in over the radio.
Emano said he has received reports that the barangay kagawads who are with Araña passed a resolution declaring Obliosca as permanently incapacitated and appointing a new barangay kagawad in his stead.
He is convinced that this appointment somehow runs counter to the 20-day temporary restraining order (TRO) that Araña's camp has won from the courts.
'Wrongfully tendered'
Pallugna for his part told Sun.Star that if such reports of a new appointment were true, then their camp would immediately file usurpation charges.
He said the powers of the barangay kagawads do not include the power to appoint a new kagawad.
"We will file usurpation charges against them," he said.
Araña said Monday that the barangay kagawads approved a resolution declaring Obliosca as permanently incapacitated and thus must be replaced.
He added that their Barangay Lupon official Aurelia Ubando has now been appointment as Obliosca's replacement.
Bugo chairman Araña retired last Feb. 27 and Obliosca took over his position.
Obliosca terminated 32 barangay workers and was accused of forging signatures of residents in connection to the People's Initiative signature campaign among others.
Barangay kagawads and several other residents went to Araña to beg him to return to office considering that his resignation was "wrongfully tendered" and thus was "void from the very beginning" based on RA 9043.
Discretion
But Obliosca with the help of Emano and Pallugna contested Araña's return. Araña with Bagabuyo and the barangay kagawads went to court and filed a Quo Warranto case with TRO.
RTC-17 presiding judge Florencia Abbu granted the 20-day TRO.
Obliosca and Pallugna went to CA-Mindanao and filed charges against Abbu for issuing the TRO and to declare such an act "a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction."
But Tuesday, Araña said they have filed a motion to dismiss against the petition for certiorari filed by Pallugna and Obliosca at the CA-Mindanao.
Pallugna said he is confident that the motion to dismiss filed by Araña and Bagabuyo will be ignored by the CA-Mindanao.
He cited the Rules of Court as providing that a motion to dismiss is a "prohibited motion" in this stage of the legal battle.
"The respondent has to file an answer not a motion to dismiss," he said adding that he has yet to receive a copy of this motion.
Contention
Bagabuyo said, "Please take note that my motion to dismiss is with leave of court."
Araña for his part sent this text message: "It is prohibited but this is only to bring some issues to the attention of the Court of Appeals."
Araña and Bagabuyo filed a motion to dismiss a copy of which was furnished to this paper. Its contents include citations of several requirements that were not complied with by Obliosca and Pallugna and that it "does not conform to the proper form and substance."
Also, Bagabuyo pointed out that Pallugna's petition to the CA-Mindanao should be considered as an "unsigned petition."
He said Pallugna who is a private practicing lawyer is alleging that Obliosca is a public official and should be represented by a government lawyer.
"Of course, undersigned counsel (Bagabuyo) is also a private practicing lawyer, but he is representing the respondent (Araña) as a taxpayer...and is authorized by the Sangguniang Barangay to act as counsel," he said.
"...not only that, petitioner's counsel (Pallugna) is using expired receipts of the IBP and PTR; hence, without any authority to practice law, at least for the moment," his petition further reads.
But Pallugna for his part yesterday debunked Bagabuyo's contention that his receipts from the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) and Professional Tax Receipt (PTR) has already expired and thus, the petition at CA-Mindanao be considered "unsigned."
He said this as last year around December 2005 he was required to renew his IBP and PTR. "So, that's valid until December 2006," he said.
(June 28, 2006 issue)
Write letter to the editor. Click here.
Join the Sun.Star message board. Click here. |
|
[return to top]
[home]
[network page]
|
LOCAL NEWS
BUSINESS
OPINION
SPORTS
LIFESTYLE
FEATURE
SUPERBALITA
|
