EDITORIAL - Barking up the wrong tree

Somebody has filed a case against several city hall officials and employees for joining a recent rally protesting the continued inaction of the city council on a proposed supplemental budget that is intended to finance several very important expenditures, including payment of loans, bonuses, and basic services such as garbage collection.

The basis for the case is a civil service rule that prohibits government workers from joining protests. The protest against the city council was not the first time government officials and employees, not necessarily from Cebu City, have protested. Every now and then, civil servants do join protests, the most common of which is the wearing of black garments or arm bands.

But in almost all of the other incidents, no cases were ever filed because the protests did not proceed from political controversies but from unpopular policy changes or decisions. This is what sets apart the hullaballoo at city hall. Everything that is crippling governance in the city is rooted in politics, of the very bad and pernicious kind.

But if a case had to be filed against city hall officials and employees for violating a civil service rule, why cannot a case also be filed against Cebu City councilors who are allowing politics to interfere with their mandated responsibilities to their constituents. Elected officials like city councilors are under greater obligation to do well than those who did not swear a public oath in order to serve.

The fellow who filed the case apparently did not have his priorities right. He filed a case against those whose actions were only precipitated by an earlier action, or inaction. Of course it is always suspicious when a virtual unknown suddenly surfaces to take public action. But there is no begrudging a citizen who takes legal action as a matter of right.

What is regrettable is that this fellow is barking up the wrong tree by initiating the wrong course of action. If the guy truly felt violated or deprived by the protest action of some city hall officials and employees, he ought to feel even more violated and deprived by those whose inaction prompted the protest action in the first place.

The city hall officials and employees may have walked out of their jobs for a few hours in protest. But what is that? What irreparable damage has the walkout and protest done to the city in general and to the suer in particular? On the other hand, by refusing to do their responsibilities, the city councilors who are sitting on the supplemental budget are causing untold damage to the city's reputation, holding hostage duly earned bonuses, and disrupting basic services.