Rama to clear CitiCenter Complex

CEBU, Philippines - Mayor Michael Rama will push through with the clearing operations inside the CitiCenter Commercial Complex in Barangay Kamagayan after the Regional Trial Court dismissed the case filed against him.

 The mayor ordered City Administrator Jose Marie Poblete to pursue the clearing operation that was suspended after some of the persons who constructed their houses inside the former wet market filed the civil case before the court.

“Atong ipadayon ang clearing operation diha. (We will continue with the clearing operations),” the mayor said.

In her order, RTC Judge Ma. Lynna Adviento dismissed the case filed by one Crispin Calesterio and other informal settlers of the former wet market in Barangay Kamagayan against the mayor and the city administrator because the plaintiffs are not considered “parties in interest.”

The court granted the motions filed by both parties, particularly the motion to withdraw the case filed by the plaintiffs and the motion to dismiss the case also filed by the mayor’s counsels.

But it was learned that while Rama ordered Poblete to pursue the clearing of the shanties inside the former wet market, there is an existing City Ordinance No. 2351 that suspended the demolition of the houses inside the CitiCenter Commercial Complex.

Rama vetoed the ordinance when it was passed by the City Council, but the mayor’s veto was overridden by two third votes of the members of the City Council.

Councilor Alvin Dizon said that the city legislators are not totally against the clearing operation to be conducted at the CitiCenter Commercial Complex but there should be a negotiation between the city and the affected families as what the law provides.

 The affected residents filed the civil case against the mayor and his city administrator after they received eviction notices that directed them to vacate within 72 hours from receipt of the order.

Several of the concerned residents claimed that they have been living in the abandoned wet market building way back in 2000 because they were allowed by the former owner of the property to stay in the complex as they were paying monthly rentals.

But since the previous owner of the property failed to pay their taxes to the city, the property was forfeited in favor of the government sometime in 2004. (FREEMAN)