Suspended village chief 'has no authority' to sign clearance

CEBU. Suspended barangay captain Gines Abellana. (SunStar File)
CEBU. Suspended barangay captain Gines Abellana. (SunStar File)

SUSPENDED Mambaling barangay captain Gines Abellana no longer has the authority to sign barangay clearances and other documents, the Cebu City Legal Office (CLO) said.

In a legal opinion, the CLO said the suspension order of Abellana, which was issued by the City Council, was not set aside despite his appeal before the Office of the President (OP).

The legal opinion, which was prepared by city lawyer Bernard Inocentes Garcia, the handling legal officer of the matter, explained that based on Section 61 of the Local Government Code (LGC), the decision of the Council in an administrative complaint filed against an elective barangay official “shall be final and executory.”

Section 68 of LGC also provides that “an appeal shall not prevent a decision from becoming final or executory.

Last January, the City Council ordered the suspension of Abellana after finding him guilty of abuse of authority.

CLO released a legal opinion following the letter that lawyer Yedah Ylanan of the Business Permit and Licensing Office (BPLO) received from Abellana after the former did not honor the barangay clearances that several business establishments in Mambaling submitted with the latter's signature.

A barangay clearance is among the requirements that an establishment owner must submit before BPLO for business permit renewal.

Garcia, in his legal opinion, quoted the interpretation of the Supreme Court on meaning of Section 68 of the LGC in the case of Mendoza vs. Laxina Sr., where the high court clarified that the phrases “final or executory” means that the administrative appeals will not prevent the enforcement of the decisions of a council.

“Despite the categorical ruling of the court on the nature of the SP’s suspension order as immediately executory, Hon. Punong Barangay Abellana insists that his suspension is stayed pursuant to the DILG (Department of Interior and Local Government) Memorandum Circular dated January 23, 2019, quoting Section 9 of AO (Administrative Order) 22,” read portion of the legal opinion.

Portion of section 9 of AO 22 states that the “execution of the decision/resolution/order appealed from is stayed upon the filing of the notice of appeal within the prescribed period herein, provided that the stay of execution shall not apply where provided by a special law.”

Section 1 of AO 22 also provides the 15-day period for an appeal before the OP.

Considering that the LGC specifically provides that an appeal shall not prevent the enforcement of the City Council resolution, AO 22, Section 9, does not apply to Abellana.

“Thus, with the same force, this special law, i.e. the Local Government Coe, must also be followed with respect to the stay of execution provided in the Section 9 of AO No. 22, i.e. “that the stay of execution shall not apply (a) where provided by special law,” read portion of the legal opinion.

Ylanan said she already wrote Abellana as response to the latter’s letter, informing him of the legal opinion released by CLO.

“I also informed Mayor Tomas Osmeña about this and he told me to follow the legal opinion in the absence of a court decision on the matter,” she said.

Trending

No stories found.

Just in

No stories found.

Branded Content

No stories found.
SunStar Publishing Inc.
www.sunstar.com.ph