|
Wednesday, May 17, 2006
Appeals court upholds city status of Talisay
CEBU CITY -- The Court of Appeals (CA) has dismissed Cebu City Mayor Tomas Osmeña’s petition to nullify the cityhood of Talisay. The court pointed out that the “belated action” raises questions as to its motive.
The 17-page decision penned by Associate Justice Apolinario D. Bruselas Jr. of the CA’s 18th Division, declared that Republic Act (RA) 8979, the law creating Talisay City, “does not suffer from any constitutional or statutory infirmities.”
An elated Talisay City Attorney Aurora Econg, who received the CA’s favorable ruling Tuesday afternoon, declared: “It’s a triumph for all the Talisaynons. I have delivered to them what they expected from me as their city legal officer.”
In dismissing the petition for lack of merit, the CA asked why it took the petitioner four years to question the law when the former Cebu coastal town has been enjoying its corporate functions as a city and recognized by all the cities nationwide.
Talisay became a component city of Cebu Province in 2001.
Opportunity
“The petitioner had all the opportunity to question the constitutionality of the law at the earliest opportunity, but it did not do so,” the ruling read.
Associate Justices Arsenio J. Magpale and Vicente L. Yap concurred with the May 10 verdict.
Mayor Osmeña said Cebu City Hall will ask the appellate court to reconsider its decision.
Sought for his reaction Tuesday afternoon, Osmeña, in a phone interview, said: “I will discuss the matter with my lawyers. I don’t understand the legalese. We will file a motion for reconsideration.”
In a separate interview, Talisay City Mayor Socrates Fernandez welcomed the decision.
He also said Talisay City will continue cooperating with Cebu City.
“Padayon gihapon ang atong pagpakigtamba-yayong sa dakbayan sa Sugbo. Atong dawaton ang hukom nga dakong pagka-matuod,” Fernandez said.
City status
The CA decision said Osmeña did not raise questions when the bill, sponsored by Representative Eduardo “Eddiegul” Gullas (Cebu, 1st district), was still being deliberated in Congress.
The petitioner’s move has already been overtaken by subsequent events such as the reclassification of Talisay from a fifth class to a fourth class city on July 29, 2005 by the Department of Budget of Management-Bureau of Local Government Finance, it also said.
Talisay clinched the fourth class city status for posting an income of more than P160 million from 2000 to 2003.
“Such a belated action confounds the mind of this court as to its motives in assailing the validity of the law,” the decision read.
As to the claims that Talisay failed to comply with the three major requirements—income, land area and population—to become a city, the CA pointed out that RA 8979 was not approved with “indecent haste.”
It concluded that when Talisay was still a municipality and applied for cityhood, it had already complied with the requisites of income and population as certified by the Department of Finance and National Statistics Office (NSO).
Revenues
Years before it became a city, Talisay had consistently raised its revenues as a first-class municipality, it said.
Also, section 450 of the Local Government Code uses the word “either” (not and), thus, the land area and population need not be concurrently complied with.
The appellate court also gave weight to the NSO’s Jan. 14, 2000 letter-certification pegging Talisay’s population at 150,238.
Osmeña insisted that Talisay fell short of the population requirement as it reportedly had only 148,110 population on May 1, 2000.
He stated that Talisay’s area covers only 39.87 square kilometers (sq.km.), which is way below the statutory requirement of 100 sq.km.
However, the CA stated that the local government is not obligated to comply strictly with the minimum population and land area requirements as long as the required income is satisfied.
The objective of the law, it said, is for the LGU to grow into an “economically, financially sound self-government community and not dependent on the national government for its existence.”
Imminent danger
The CA also disagreed with the petitioner’s contention that Cebu City’s revenue would stand to be prejudiced with the enactment of RA 8979.
“There is no showing that the petitioner has sustained or is in imminent danger of sustaining injury or damage as a consequence of the enforcement of RA 8979,” it said.
It added that Cebu City is not even a real party in interest to assail its constitutionality and does not possess the locus standi (personal or substantial interest) to question the same.
Lastly, the CA stated that it cannot give due course to the petitioner’s prayer to issue a writ of prohibition against the Department of Budget and Management from releasing the Internal Revenue Allotment share of Talisay City.
It also rejected the call to issue a writ of mandamus directing the DBM to remit Talisay’s share as a municipality.
“The prayer for the issuance of a writ of prohibition and mandamus must necessarily fail,” it said. (Sun.Star Cebu)
(May 17, 2006 issue)
Write letter to the editor. Click here.
Join the Sun.Star message board. Click here. |
|
|
|
[return to top]
[home]
|
|
