|
Thursday, March 13, 2003
Editorial: ‘Untangling’ a deal
The Cebu City Government wants to get out of what it says is a bad deal: buying a 2,856-sq.m. lot for the poor for almost P32 million.
The City, in its motion resisting the order of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) judge to pay, says the price is too stiff for socialized housing. The land when paid by the occupant will cost P10,000 per sq.m.
If the City will push through with the purchase, officials risk being made to refund for the amount if it is disallowed by the Commission on Audit (COA), and even going to jail, the motion filed by the City says.
Assuming the facts are correct, it is sound argument. The problem is that it is raised at the moment when the City is already ordered to pay.
At this stage, the wisdom of the decision to buy the lot is a closed issue. The City, from scouting for land to picking the lot to going to court, has had ample time to determine if it is the right property to buy under government rules.
The land, located in Hipodromo, was targeted in an expropriation proceeding. Meaning, it was the City that initiated the purchase by court action, either because the owner, Ciriaco Ortega, wouldn’t sell or the negotiated price was not acceptable to him.
What happened to the dynamics of choice and decision, by the executive that proposed the site and the legislative that appropriated the money and approved the purchase?
Expropriation is a long and arduous process. What did they do while the case was in court but before the court could resolve it and issue the order to pay?
Perhaps the owner would like to get out of the deal too. Or perhaps not. After going through litigation, he might want the sale.
The City is asking the court to “untangle” the rule protecting a judgment that is “final and executory.” We don’t know if the court will set aside the order to pay, allow the City to withdraw or drop the case altogether.
But there would have been no need for untangling anything in the first place had the executive and legislative departments, including the city attorney’s office whose lawyers knew the rules, done their job well.
Not as bad as Davao’s
Cebu City police chief Josephus Angan was reported to have commented that the three murders that were committed in Cebu City Monday didn’t have the same impact as that of the Davao City bombing.
The incidents—the murder of a woman doctor in her apartment, a patient in a government hospital, and a student at the front yard of his home—were unfortunate, Angan said, but there are security problems we should be alarmed about.
No one can diminish the threat that what happened in Davao can happen in Cebu.
Yet, the largeness of the problem of terrorism cannot be used to overshadow the need to make the citizen safe against other forms of violence.
Concern about bombing cannot reduce the need for swiftly solving crimes like murder or robbery even if the single-incident victims are not multiple and the destruction doesn’t cut a wide swath.
Even in urbanized cities, residents must be made to feel safe—by quickly bringing criminals to justice.
(March 13, 2003 issue)
Want Sun.Star news on your mobile phone? Click here.
Write letter to the editor. Click here.
Join the Sun.Star message board. Click here. |
|
[ return
to top ]
[ home
]
|
LOCAL NEWS
BUSINESS
OPINION
SPORTS
LIFESTYLE
FEATURE
SUPERBALITA
WEEKEND
|
