Meaningful moves

The people’s expectation that changes could happen in this administration may be fulfilled somehow by simply rectifying the injustices previously committed by some departments and agencies of the government which continue up to the present.

The first one that easily stands out due to sheer length of time is that involving the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH). I hope the new DPWH Secretary Babes Singson who has been known for his Christian principles and values before joining the government could personally and seriously look into this case of Lourdes Paez-Villa, a landowner who has been deprived, without just compensation, of her property covered by TCT No. 409503 with an area of 3,723 square meters when the DPWH used it as a road right of way in the construction of the Marikina-Infanta highway way back in 1972.

From the time the property was taken from her in 1972, Ms Paez-Villa had been following up the payment of the just compensation for her property. But for one reason or another, among which was her lack of connection, she had been given the usual run-around and “red tapes” especially because her claim was quite substantial and “attractive” enough to be the subject of “haggling” and “negotiation” which is par for the course in any government bureaucracy.

But finally, after almost 30 years, or in 2001, the DPWH agreed to pay her just compensation especially when it had to pay the adjacent owner who was a former Congressman. So on December 20, 2001 a Deed of Absolute Sale was executed between her and the DPWH then headed by Secretary Simeon Datumanong. The said Deed of Sale provided among others that the DPWH shall pay Ms Villa, the value of the land fixed at P 11,169,000 plus rentals from 1972 computed at P114 per square meter including 6% interest from due date until full payment.

Armed with a valid and duly executed contract, Ms. Villa thought that her claim could breeze through the usual bureaucratic rigmarole. Unfortunately however, only partial amount of the land value was paid to her allegedly because the capital gains tax of P670,140 was deducted. Not a single centavo of the rental subject matter of the valid contract has been paid up to now despite the Supreme Court ruling in the case of Manila International Airport vs, Rodriguez, G.R. 161836, February 28, 2006: Forform vs PNR, G.R. 124795, December 11, 2008 and the famous case involving the Arlegui Property decided in October 2007 (Mendoza vs. Republic). The grave injustice here is compounded by the fact that because of the long lapse of time Ms. Villa may not enjoy what is due her for much longer time.

The other grave injustice is that suffered by employees of a Government Owned and Controlled Corporation (GOCC) under the Department of Agriculture known as the Philippine Crop Insurance Corporation (PCIC) and a Government Financial Institution, the Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP).

Before the Salary Standardization Law was passed on July 1,1989, the employees in these government agencies were receiving allowances to augment their meager basic pay. The PCIC employees were given the Cost of Living Allowance (COLA), Amelioration Allowance, (AA) and Equity Allowance (EA). Employees of the LBP were enjoying the COLA and the Bank Equity Pay (BEP). But in view of the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) Circular CCC 10, the said allowances were deemed integrated in their standardized salaries. So the employees did not receive them anymore. This circular was however not published as required, to be effective.

So on August 12, 1998 in the case of De Jesus vs. COA (G.R.109023), the Supreme Court declared the said CCC 10 null and void and of no effect until it has been duly published. The SC also ordered that the employees’ allowance be paid from the time it was stopped until the Circular has been published and has become effective. Thereafter several other cases have been decided by the SC to the same effect. When its opinion was sought, even the Office of the Government Corporate Counsel (OGCC) declared that the said employees’ allowances between those periods should be paid.

Unfortunately, despite the jurisprudence and the opinion, these two government agencies among others still refused to pay the same. So the employees concerned were forced to file cases in courts which have been pending up to now and may be finally resolved only after several more years. In the meantime most of the employees have already retired and incurred debts. Some of them have died while others have failing health which could have been avoided if they were paid those allowances.

Of course, the injustice here is confined to a limited number of people in the government. But if they can be rectified as soon as possible by settling those valid and legal claims, it will be a great symbol of this administration’s earnestness and sincerity in achieving the necessary promised reforms in governance.

Note: Books containing compilation of my articles on Labor Law and Criminal Law (Vols. I and II) are now available. Call tel. 7249445.

*      *      *

E-mail at: [email protected]