Dishonesty of a gov't. employee.

 

Hole of Justice

by Peter G. Jimenea

Dishonesty

In 1999, the Director of the National Library filed a complaint with the office of the Ombudsman, against Lily, her Asst. Director at the same office, for violation of RA 3019, or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, as amended.

The case stemmed from the alleged misrepresentation and/or dishonesty committed by Lily when she declared in her Bio-data that she was a consultant of the National library from Mar.- Dec. 2003 and February 24 to present. This additional qualification was attached to her application when she seeks the position of Assistant Director of the National Library in 1996.

But after investigation by the Office of the Ombudsman, it was discovered that she merely held the position from March 1, 1993 to December 1994. Lily asserted that this bio-data she submitted in her application for Director of National Archives in 1994, was inadvertently attached to her application for Asst. Director of the National Library in 1996 and controverted its authenticity since it did not bear her initial or signature.

Graft Investigation Officer I Marlyn M. Reyes found petitioner not guilty of the offense charged and ordered that the complaint be dismissed for lack of merit. However, upon review, the Office of Legal Affairs, Office of the Ombudsman, in its Memorandum raldated October 21, 1999, reversed the earlier decision. It found petitioner guilty of dishonesty and, consequently, dismissed her from government service.

Lily sought recourse before the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 57158, arguing that:

1. the honorable Office of the Ombudsman, through its office of the Chief legal counsel, erred in holding that it had the requisite jurisdiction to act on the complaint for an act committed three years ago against the petitioner who is not within the scope of applicability of RA 6770;

On August 11, 2006, the CA denied the instant petition and the assailed Memoranda dated October 21, 1999 and January 5, 2000 of the Office of the Ombudsman in OMB-ADM-0-99-0517 are AFFIRMED.

Hence the Petition. Lily argues that the CA erred when it ruled that the Office of the Ombudsman has jurisdiction over the administrative case three years ago and before her entry into government service when nobody has shown interest over it.

SEC. 21. Officials Subject to Disciplinary Authority; Exceptions. ― The Office of the Ombudsman shall have disciplinary authority over all elective and appointive officials of the Government and its subdivisions, instrumentalities and agencies, including members of the Cabinet, local government, government-owned or controlled corporations and their subsidiaries, except over officials who may be removed only by impeachment or over Members of Congress, and the Judiciary.

SEC. 20. Exceptions. The Ombudsman “may” not conduct the necessary investigation of any administrative act or omission complained of if it believes that the complaint was filed after one year from the occurrence of the act of omission complained of:

Office of the Ombudsman v. De Sahagun,²⁸ cralaw the Court held that the period stated in Section 20 (5) of R.A. No. 6770 does not refer to the prescription of the offense, but to the discretion given to the Office of the Ombudsman on whether it would investigate a particular administrative offense.

The use of the word "may" in the provision is construed as permissive and operating to confer discretion. Where the words of a statute are clear, plain and free from ambiguity, they must be given their literal meaning and applied without attempted interpretation

SEC. 46.(18), Title I, Book V of the Administrative Code of 1987 provides.... Discipline: General Provisions. (b) even if the dishonest act was committed by the employee prior to entering the government service, such act is still a ground for disciplinary action.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition is DENIED. The Decision dated August06 and the Resolution dated October 23, 2006, of the Court of Appeals in CA G.R. SP No. 57158, are AFFIRMED. (SC Third Division. G.R. No. 175115 : December 23, 2009)

The Impeachment

 Hole of Justice
by Peter G. Jimenea

Discipline by Impeachment

Deliberate or not, the three justices of the Supreme Court (SC) has committed a big blunder that puts their integrity in peril. First is plagiarism, a shameful issue on why the international communities are now looking at our judiciary with disdain.

Next is the creation of the Truth Commission, widely believe in time to keep alive the people's hope to curb the rampant corruption in the government. It could have been a redemption of the judiciary from that shameful plagiarism issue, unfortunately, the SC declared the creation or Truth Commission as unconstitutional.

For the expectant Filipinos, it was a declaration feeding hatred. Even Pres. Pnoy felt betrayed by the SC decision. As most SC Justices are Arroyo's appointees, the junking of the Truth Commission is publicly perceived done to protect the former president and her family from prosecution of graft and corruption cases.
  
The third is worse, the SC reversal of the conviction of Hubert Webb et al, from guilty to not guilty in the grisly Vizconde massacre. The case was decided only after Webb et al, have already spent fifteen years in prison serving life-sentence.

The SC Justices who reversed the verdict claim the testimonies of star witness Jessica Alfaro were inconsistent and unbelievable. In short, they decide on technicalities when the witness detailed testimonies insistently disclosed she was with the group of Webb when the crime was committed.

In fact, the conviction of Webb et al, by the lower court was upheld by the Court of Appeals (CA) due to its trust to the lower court judge who has the wider opportunity to observe, evaluate and appreciate the witness' testimonies during the intensity of Court trials.

Beside which, why did it take that long for the High Tribunal to decide on the Webb et at, case? ART. VIII, SEC.15(1) of the Constitution says that any case or matter brought to the SC shall be resolved within twenty four (24) months. (610 SCRA334) G.R. No. 180764, January 19, 2010.

As convicts are known members of well-off and influential families, it creates a widespread suspicion without affirming the perception that the recent SC reversal of the Lower Court decision and the Court of Appeals resolution is in exchange for..... you know what!
  
Now let's see if Congress can make good its threat to impeach the SC justices who signed for the acquittal of Hubert Webb et al. The same is true with their threat against Omb. Merceditas Gutierrez for entrusting to her underling that provocative letter which took its toll on lives of several Hong Kong tourists in the 2010 Manila hostage crisis.

Like the SC justices, Omb. Gutierrez has her own misgivings. A lot of complaints filed with her office against corrupt government officials were not acted upon for so long a time. Those cases are now filling-up there and as to when will be resolved, only God knows.

This reminds me of a beautiful old song Monalisa.The lyrics tell of men who were obsessed by her beauty. So many dreams had been brought to her doorstep but like the cases filed at the Ombudsman's office, they just lie there and they die there. The reason why I suggest the change of name for the Office of the Ombudsman into The Office of Monalisa!

Both the SC and the Ombudsman have disciplining authority being feared by legal luminaries and politicians alike. Feeling comfortable and untouchable, their offices are now sending us a strong signal that people with money have different treatment than you and me.

I don't think this is what judiciary business is all about. If Congress has impeached the former President of the Republic why can't its legislators push through with the impeachment of undeserving officials at these branches of the government?

The only way to discipline these errant officials is by impeachment. Let's not wait for the restive members of the armed forces to impose their own concept of justice which may be at odds with due process!

A Selective Prosecution

Hole of Justice
by Peter G. Jimenea

A contemptuous Ombudsman prerogative

This story explains why there are corrupt public officials never indicted despite the number of graft and corruption cases filed against them at the Office of Monalisa ehe.... este Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez.

In 1999, the Director of the National Library filed a complaint with the office of the Ombudsman, against her Asst. Director (the herein Petitioner), for violation of RA 3019, or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, as amended.

The alleged misrepresentation was committed by the assistant when she applied for the present position in 1996. In her bio-data, petitioner claimed she had been consultant of the National Library from Mar. - Dec. 2003 and February 24, 1999.

But after investigation, the Office of the Ombudsman discovered that she merely held the position from March 1, 1993 to December 1994. She asserted the bio-data was used by her in applying for jobs in 1994, and was inadvertently attached to her application for Asst. Director of the National Library in 1996. She also controverted its authenticity since it did not bear her initial or signature.

Graft Investigation Officer I Marlyn M. Reyes found petitioner not guilty and ordered the complaint against her be dismissed for lack of merit. Upon review by the OMB Office of Legal Affairs, however, the petitioner was found guilty of dishonesty and it reversed the earlier decision. Thru a Memo, she was eventually dismissed from gov't. Service on October 21, 1999.

She sought recourse before the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 57158, arguing that:

1. The honorable Office of the Ombudsman, through its office of the Chief legal counsel, erred in holding that it had the requisite jurisdiction to act on the complaint for an act committed three years ago against the petitioner who is not within the scope of applicability of RA 6770;

On August 11, 2006, the CA denied the instant petition and the Memo dated October 21, 1999 of the Office of the Ombudsman in OMB-ADM-0-99-0517 was AFFIRMED on January 5, 2000.

Hence the Petition. She argues that the CA erred when it ruled that the Office of the Ombudsman has jurisdiction over the administrative case three years ago and before her entry into government service when nobody has shown interest over it.

SEC. 21. Officials Subject to Disciplinary Authority; Exceptions. - The Office of the Ombudsman shall have disciplinary authority over all elective and appointive officials of the Government and its subdivisions, instrumentalities and agencies, including Members of the Cabinet, local government, government-owned or controlled corporations and their subsidiaries, except over officials who may be removed only by impeachment like Members of Congress and the Judiciary.

SEC. 20. Exceptions. The Ombudsman 杜aynot conduct the necessary investigation of any administrative act or omission complained of if she believes the complaint was filed after one year from the occurrence of the act of omission complained of: Office of the Ombudsman v. De Sahagun. 

TheCourt held that the period stated in Section 20 (5) of R.A. No. 6770 does not refer to the prescription of the offense, but to the discretion given to the Office of the Ombudsman on whether it would investigate a particular administrative offense or not.

The use of the word "may" in the provision is construed as permissive and operating to confer discretion. Where the words of a statute are clear, plain and free from ambiguity, they must be given their literal meaning and applied without attempted interpretation.

SEC. 46.(18), Title I, Book V of the Administrative Code of 1987 provides.... Discipline: General Provisions. (b) even if the dishonest act was committed by the employee prior to entering the government service, such act is still a ground for disciplinary action.

But that is not what we are only looking for. It is the contemptuous prerogative of Ombudsman Gutierrez whether to investigate or not the complaint filed in her office. I hope this neglect of allowing graft and corruption cases to sleep long in her office is not in exchange for ...... you know what!

The Dinagyang 2011

Hole of Justice

by Peter G. Jimenea

The pretty-bad sides of Dinagyang 2011

Iloilo Dinagyang Festival is now an institution. But the organizers and city public officials who deserved credit for the success must also take note of its pretty-bad aftermath to obviate criticism that can taint the face of success of this celebration.

Before the good and bad sides of this story, let's look back to history of this affair that started in 1971. It is named Ati-atihan in honor of Senior Sto. Nino, by the parish priest of San Jose Church at Plaza Libertad, Iloilo City.

Big shipping lines with offices in the city like the Negros Navigation, Compania Maritima (which lost a warrior), Go Thong, and many others, together with local business establishments, joined the affair by sponsoring a tribe-of-choice participating in the contest

As far as I can recall during the festival, aside from the Mardigras, Ati-atihan tribes alone is more than 30, sporting different costumes, marching on the streets with the sound of drumbeats towards the finish line until 3:00 oclock pm.

Nearby municipalities like Guimbal also sent tribes to join the festival. The province of Antique which doesn't want to be left behind has also its Binirayan Tribe in queue with others contestants participating in the affair.

In 1988, however, the Ati-atihan was renamed Dinagyang Festival by the late Pacifico Sudario, also a journalist by profession. The festival continue to develop in honor of Senior Sto. Nino until it became one of tourists attractions in this country.

But not until corruption hit the officials managing the affair for non-accounting of expenses for years due to lack of documents or no document at all. To get out of the mess, the previous administration renamed the Festival into a Foundation Inc. The same dog of different collar, that's it!

Now let's go to the good side of the story (bankrolled by druglords?) under the administration of Mayor Jed Patrick Mabilog and the Foundation under a new Pres. Ramon Cua Locsin. Together with all city officials, they mustered an unprecedented number of local and foreign tourists during the festival. For that, let's give them the credit due.

Congratulations to Mayor Mabilog, Cong. Jerry Trenas, Pres. Cua Locsin, City Tourism Officer Ben Jimena, the SP members and the rest of good Ilonggos who took part in preparation of the successful festival.

Also to Gov. Arthur Defensor, the Prov'l. Board Members, the municipal mayors and town officials who took part in the celebration, and to all LGUs and NGOs that has extended support for the success of the affair.

We salute PRO6 Director, C/Supt. Cipriano Querol, Jr. for the commendable performance of the PNP in preserving peace and order during the entire celebration. We extend this credit to Prov'l. Dir. Gil Leben, ICPO Dir. Marietto Valerio and to all members of the police force who assisted us during the festival.

Also to PDEA Reg'l. Dir. Paul Ledesma for his group efforts to contain the flow of illegal drugs before, during and after the celebration. This is evident by the good behavior of drug addicts who participated in the festival..

The only bad side of this story is the stinks of human-urine at the central site of the festivities. This is easily smelled by people after the celebration ended. This is the same problem that we have left behind unattended in 1971.

This is an agonizing problem of the Iloilo resorts and restaurants association members with food-stalls in the main streets of the city. They had been appealing to our city officials to put up a proper public urinal system during the festivity, yet, nothing happened to date.

The people are wondering if our city officials are interested only in money as no public urinal was constructed in preparation for the affair. This problem of 1971 is still our irritant problem today. Our

city officials must do something to get rid of this mess before the Dinagyang 2012 comes.

If the stink of human urine remains a problem-in-eternity, the growing public scorn against our city government officials for dereliction of duty may eventually redound into a scroll that forms the basis of their blasphemy!.

What's in Jerry?

Hole of Justice

by Peter G. Jimenea

Make my day!

Cong. Jerry Trenas may be feeding grudge against me for bringing out on line corruption issues against his administration when still a mayor of Iloilo City. But during his term as elected mayor, he committed misgivings that as to contrition for what he did, apology may not be accepted!

First is the construction of Iloilo Terminal Market bankrolled by the P120M city government loan from the Philippine National Bank (PNB). It was delayed because the first P17M loan released by the bank prior to the start of the project went to the wrong pockets. The crooks hurriedly cut into pieces the gold at hand as if passengers catching the last plane out, forgetting the guard of the treasury who also want a share of the loot. Thus, the delay!

Even the relative of the mayor wants to get a share by lobbying to sub-contract the electrical and water pipe installations inside the market. I am privy to this deal being the manager of an insurance company who issued the performance bond of the contractor as his guarantee to finish the job.

When the mess broke out, city officials threatened to confiscate the bond and sue the contractor for the delay. But the mayor slowed down for fear this could open the hidden mystery of the contract as some officials have become overnight millionaires from that deal.

In order to obviate unwanted consequences, the mayor decided to takeover the construction of the Iloilo Terminal Market. The project was undertaken by administration to cover-up the mess they're in until it was completed. This is one of a story that won't go away.

Then comes the Iloilo City Government Employees Housing Project in Pavia, Iloilo, funded by another P120 million loan from the PNB. The contract was awarded to Ace Builders of Alex Trinidad, rumored to be a friend of Mayor Trenas.

But as soon as the project started, the P120M loan from the PNB was transferred to Philippine Veterans Bank (PVB). The “kamag-anak” factor has played a big role in this transfer which eventually bind the city government to a new accountability of P132M due to alleged expensive transfer-documentation.

Worse, the materials used in the construction of the supposed 413 units of houses were incidentally discovered to be of substandard quality that the media feasted on the issue. Alarmed by the discovery, the city council pass a unanimous resolution urging Mayor Trenas to rescind the contract with Ace Builders and sue the contractor Alex Trinidad.

Unfortunately, Mayor Trenas cannot be intimidated by a resolutions. He just ignored it and continued paying the contractor's billing in millions of pesos. Despite the residual imperfection of the deal, their will was done!

Only the intervention of the Ombudsman stopped the mayor from paying the contractor. Unfortunately, Trinidad has already pocketed P62.5M.of the taxpayers money without a single unit built out of the 413 low-cost houses as stipulated in the contract.

The Employees Housing Project that started during the first term of Jerry Trenas in 2001, eventually ended a “white elephant” in 2009. In streets smart parlance, a hao shiao and the mayor has a lot of explaining to do. But as Mayor Trenas doesn't want to talk about it anymore, these stories of anomaly is now a scroll that forms the basis of his blasphemy!

Few have the faintest idea that the city government pays P17,000 daily interest for that failed housing project including holidays. For over a year, the total interest paid is P24.7M. This deliberate injustice to taxpayers' money is a crime that cries to God for vengeance!

Here, we cannot easily dispel the growing public perception that Trenas is the most despised mayor Iloilo City ever had. But God knows, que peccat ebrius luat sobrius - he who offends when drunk shall be punished when sober. I hope to have made your day in this column. Somebody asks for it, unlike me who just wait for others to....... see the title!

The Supreme Court

Hole of Justice

by Peter G. Jimenea

On wisdom of the Court

After fifteen long-years, the Supreme Court acquitted Hubert Webb and six other convicts jailed for the grisly 1991 Vizconde massacre. The Court thrashed the testimony of prosecution star witness Jessica Alfaro as “inconsistent and unbelievable.”

In a voting of 7-4-4, the Court acquitted Webb, Antonio Lejano, Michael Gatchalian, Hospicio Fernandez, Miguel Rodriguez, Peter Estrada and Gerardo Biong “for failure of the prosecution to prove their guilt beyond reasonable doubt.”

The Supreme Court reversed the decision dated Dec. 15, 2005, and the resolution dated Jan. 26, 2007, of the Court of Appeals and ordered the immediate release from detention of Webb et al. unless they are confined for another lawful cause.

Article VIII, Section 15 (1) of the Constitution directs: All cases or matters filed after the effectivity of this Constitution must be decided or resolved within twenty-four months from the date of submission for the Supreme Court, and, unless reduced by the Supreme Court, twelve months for all lower collegiate courts, and three months for all other lower courts.

Then why did it take that long for the SC Justices to read in detail the inconsistencies in Alfaro's testimony as their claim pointed out? Convicts who had been released from the National Bilibid Prison cannot believe the sudden acquittal of Webb et. al, based on the not guilty findings of the SC.

Convicts I interview said they never heard of inmates imprisoned for 15 years and above who were released from prison due to reversal of sentence from guilty to not guilty. As disclosed, the probable reason for an inmate's release ahead of his term is by commutation of sentence.

Others were released from prison not on the ground of a not guilty findings of the SC which review their cases but because of their good behavior. In which case, prison officials recommend them for parole or pardon.

Had there been report of any late-arrest of suspects that can be attributed to the massacre, it will surely cushion the negative impact of this SC reversal of verdict from guilty to “not guilty.” For that, they only added this celebrated case to the list of unsolved crimes in Philippine history.

Worse is the entailed statement of the Court in its decision to acquit the seven accused. It says; “In our criminal justice system, what is important is, not whether the court entertains about the innocence of the accused since an open mind is willing to explore all possibilities, but whether it entertains a reasonable lingering doubt as to his guilt.”

Jurisprudence tells us that a question of law exists when the doubt or controversy concerns the correct application of law to a certain set of facts; or when the issue does not call for an examination of the probative value of the evidence presented, the truth or falsehood of the facts being admitted.

There is also a question of fact when a doubt or difference arises as to the truth or falsehood of facts or when the query invites calibration of the whole evidence considering mainly the credibility of the witnesses, the existence and relevancy of specific surrounding circumstances, as well as their relation to each other and to the whole, and the probability of the situation.

The credibility of the witness and her testimony have been dealt with accordingly and calibrated by the lower court during the niceties of the trial, of which the CA eventually upheld. Sad to say but these were reversed by the SC on mere technicality.

Due to the still existing procedural questions relative to this case, it creates an impression without affirming the perception that this long-delayed decision of the SC of acquitting Hubert Webb et. al, is in exchange for - you know what!

So, who murdered Estrellita Vizconde and her daughters, Jennifer, 7 and Carmela, 18, who was raped before being stabbed to death? If the murderers are still at-large they could be smiling to the ears by now. For Lauro Vizconde, this wisdom of SC Justices is a tragedy as it endangers him of becoming their last casualty!

The Church on RHB

Hole of Justice

by Peter G. Jimenea

Excommunicate me!

The Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) is openly opposed to the Reproductive Health Bill (RHB) still under deliberation in Congress. I find no fault in this except, their propensity to nitpick with the State affairs when their own backyards are in shambles.

Before the May 2010 elections, they threatened the legislators supporting the RH Bill with rejection of votes. Now they are also threatening Pres. Noynoy Aquino with impeachment if he will support the RH Bill. But in Church, they taught us that Jesus Christ has never threatened with retributions those Roman soldiers who persecuted Him.

It is widely believe that parish priests of the Roman Catholic Church in the Philippines survive only through the support of devoted-parishioners. So perhaps, they fear the lose of income from these flocks once the population control is enacted into law.

This holds true to their income from wealthy donors, special masses on demand, wedding ceremonies and many others. In fact, we were even taught during our younger days that no dead members of the family can go to heaven without a ticket from the church known as blessings - for a fee!

But if we concede with the whims of our devotees, how could this struggling government contain the fast growing population when it cannot even provide the basic needs of millions of poor families in the squatter areas? What is in store for these lowly citizens at this time of economic disparity?

As we see it, only twenty percent of children with poor parents finished high school. Less of them have at least put a step in the first year or in second year college, no more. The few survivor may graduate with a college degree, but what about after graduation? The best credential in job hunting today is not what you know - but whom you know. This is what got the poor so hopeless about!

Not only that. Today, many young-mothers died due to lack of proper education about early pregnancy. Yet, Church devotees don't even have the faintest idea on why those young-mothers and their kids died.

Church leaders must now ponder on why reports of abortion are so rampant today and why this illegal business proliferates. More so on reports of abandoned dead and alive fetus almost everywhere.

This only shows that birth control by calendar method is not working well in slum areas. If the birth control pills and condoms are bad for the Church, what about abortion which now seems a solution of last resort by the unprepared and unwed young mothers?

Timendi causa est nescire - ignorance is the cause of fear. This could be the reason why those women who understand the RHB are now emboldened to challenge the Church to excommunicate them. This is a cause for alarm as it can propel more exodus from among women devotees of the Catholic Church.

The RH Bill is not strictly confined in birth control or family planning. It also dwells on helpful information about raising a child, a family, and most of all, about the risk of early pregnancy. A recent report claims that one of every three women in Asia dies during pregnancy or while giving birth.

Church leaders should present their solution to the problem as population explosion seems inevitable. They government has provided them enough opportunity to lobby in Congress for the amendment of the Bill before its enactment into law. They should make use of it.

As noted, lot of devotees are now moving away from their divine faith in Catholic Church due to great difference in opinion regarding the RH Bill. The Church may have their own interpretation of the law but it may be at odds with the understanding and current need of young women of the new generation.

Our Church leaders must work hand in hand with the government to get the best result. An argument aimed to sway popular support by appealing to sentiment weakness rather than facts and reasons would only end in a miserable compromise. A lop-sided stand on this issue can force more women to challenge the Catholic Church to say ........see the title!

The Iloilo River

Hole of Justice

by Peter G. Jimenea

The Barbecue Park

Pres. Noynoy Aquino should take note of the recent spat between Roy Fanunal, a restaurant owner with establishment alongside the Iloilo river bank, and Mayor Jed Patrick Mabilog. This is a step forward for the latter's sincere desire to clear the river banks with eyesores.

It is the restoration of the once clean and beautiful Iloilo River in the name of environment protection. But by skipping the Barbecue Park, a restaurant owned by a Chinese which is just across the street and even occupying more space of the river bank, connotes a selective approach to prosecution.

Mayor Mabilog could start up from that Chinese eatery which over the years had been the cause of public consternation for its continued expansion along the riverside. But if city officials cannot stop the guy when he was still a private citizen, how much more today that he is now a city councilor?

Perhaps brilliant city councilor-lawyers like Plaridel Nava, Joshua Alim and Leonel Geroche with smooth mastery of the law can cite to us the persuasive reasons on why Mayor Mabilog's persecution of Fanunal and protecting Councilor Yee is the right thing to do.

If ever the mayor feels that by doing so there is a violation of inter-parliamentary courtesy, they can go back to the constitutional principle of separation of powers in this case. There are counter arguments against this order as a matter of course but meantime, they must set aside the good views of the mayor they refuse to share.

Should Mayor Mabilog dish out the usual line of his predecessor that we'll study it first or we will deal on that later, it is a glaring proof of camaraderie that goes with the saying, what are we in power for? But victims know they only overtly professed what they covertly undertake from the public's irreverent gaze.

The high-profile campaign of Mabilog to get rid of nuisance and eyesores at the river banks only shows a working-mayor far different from his predecessor who has done nothing but confined on studying the problem that comes into his office.

We just hope that as Mabilog now eagerly waded into the areas of private life and private enterprise, there will be more enthusiasm than embarrassment as his aggressive tactics and public performance connotes a high level of hostility.

His sudden intervention to stop the ongoing filling up of the area around the establishment of Fanunal beneath the river showed us the determination of a local executive to protect the environment which no government official has boldly did before.

Mayor Mabilog's sincere sentiment and determination to restore the beauty and the once cleanliness of the Iloilo River is sending us a strong signal that he is bound to preserve the city government property and it should stay with the government and not handed to businessmen.

Thus, the trouble between him and businessman Fanunal, so far has shown that he is a man – hinting a grim possibility of a secret compromise in exchange for you know what, otherwise, the only ones who get screwed in the end are the Ilonggos as usual.

Sad to say, his attention is centered only on the establishment of Fanunal, skipping the Barbecue Park of Councilor Yee. The controversy of this Barbecue Park that has consumed the city for years, was as it turned out, not good for other businessmen and to the Ilonggos as well.

This is not what we think how mayor should dispense justice. By ruling out the business establishment of Councilor Yee from the others who have committed a violation is selective approach to prosecution. To skip Barbecue Park from those to be demolished, instead of using it as an example to obviate consequences, is designing his own downfall.

The mayor should know that the media is behind him in this war against the unscrupulous businessmen whose establishments are encroaching the Iloilo River banks. Despite his harsh words against the press people, the latter would still join the fray because the prize at stake in this war is worthy of the battle they are fighting for!

Your honor for such commitment is per bene meritus, very well deserved. But si ves pacem, para bellum – if you want peace, be prepared for war.