DILG on Laperal demolition

Much has been said about Interior and Local Government Secretary Jesse Robredo’s role and presence during the clearing up operations of the Makati City government at the Laperal compound in Makati City last April 28, 2011.

Your columnist, Mr. William Esposo, in the May 3 issue of his column, “As I Wreck the Chair” in your newspaper, said that the DILG Secretary “erred when he pandered to the demands of the informal settlers of the Laperal Compound.”

First of all, Secretary Robredo did not intend to pander to the demands of the informal settlers. It serves to clarify that it was never Secretary Robredo’s position to let the informal settlers return to the Laperal Compound. The return of the informal settlers to the compound was never the issue.

The real issue at hand was clarifying the exact terms of the resettlement and what the Secretary wanted was to serve as go-between and conduct a dialogue among the residents of Laperal Compound, the city government of Makati and other stakeholders to avert further violence and to decide finally on what to do with the settlers of the privately-owned land in Barangay Guadalupe Viejo. The informal settlers in the said compound were agitated by the demotion not because they refuse to resettle but because the details of their resettlement were still not clear. They were essentially being forced to leave the area already even when there was still no indication or guarantee about where and when they will be resettled.

As early as April 26, the settlers had already sent a letter (attached) to the city government to request for a dialogue and public consultation in order to secure concrete assurances on the assistance that would be provided once they were relocated. They even offered to see Mayor Jejomar Erwin Binay Jr. at the city hall.

Unfortunately, this request was turned down. Had this request been granted, the violent incident on April 28, possibly, could have been avoided.

This is the reason why the DILG Secretary immediately went to the Laperal Compound on that fateful day when the settlers resisted the team sent by the city government to clear the area.

Probably, this action did not sit well with the city government which is why your newspaper columnist, Babe Romualdez, said in his May 1 column that “Makati Mayor Junjun Binay ignored Secretary Robredo when he stood pat in his decision to stop residents from returning to the area.”

Let me also point out that the DILG Chief had also received specific instructions from President Benigno S. Aquino III to initiate the talks with the settlers.

There are still issues and concerns that need to be clarified to the informal settlers group that entail a formal dialogue among the concerned sectors.

One issue is that residents whose houses were not damaged by the fire would be affected by the clearing operations.

Another key issue is that while there was promise of relocation and relocation assistance for the settlers, there was no concrete agreement on when and where the settlers would be relocated and what kind of assistance would be given.

It is also noteworthy to mention that before the April 19, 2011 fire at the compound, a similar blaze devastated the area on July 7, 2008.

After the said fire or on July 17, 2008, the Makati City Social Welfare Department allowed the settlers affected by the area to return by issuing “entry passes” (attached) for them to build and occupy the shelters. The affected area was even re-blocked after the 2008 fire. This only means that some of them are not even informal settlers because they have been allowed to stay by the city government.

All these issues could have been settled and agreed upon by the concerned sectors through a formal dialogue which was, as I said, outrightly rejected by the city government.

The team from the DILG, including PNP-NCRPO chief, Director Nicanor Bartolome and Southern Police District head Chief Superintendent Jose Arne Delos Santos, initiated the dialogue, which amicably resolved the tension. The settlers agreed not to return because it became clear to them that the property is a danger zone and is not safe for settlement, as declared by the city government. The immediate issue at hand was the safety of the residents.