CEBU, Philippines - The Cebu City officials charged with grave misconduct and grave abuse of authority before the Office of the President over the P20,000 calamity assistance the city government granted to City Hall officials and employees in 2013 have formally submitted their memorandum to the Department of the Interior and Local Government, which is tasked to hear the complaint filed by a supporter of the Bando Osmeña Pundok Kauswagan.
The city officials assailed the authority of the DILG and the Office of the President to hear the complaint of lawyer Reymelio Delute for alleged lack of jurisdiction.
City lawyer Jerone Castillo, who acted as counsel for the respondent officials reiterated that the DILG and the Office of the President do not have jurisdiction over the case.
Delute accused Mayor Michael Rama, Vice Mayor Edgardo Labella, Councilors Nestor Archival Sr., Mary Ann delos Santos, David Tumulak, Nendell Hanz Abella, Sisinio Andales, Alvin Arcilla, Roberto Cabarrubias, Ma. Nida Cabrera, Gerardo Carillo, Alvin Dizon, Eugenio Gabuya Jr., and Noel Eleuterio Wenceslao of grave misconduct and grave abuse of authority.
The case stemmed from the City Council’s approval of the City Ordinance 2379 giving P20,000 calamity assistance to each of the 4, 200 city officials and employees last year.
Castillo was assisted by lawyer Joshua Dacumos and Labella in drafting their memorandum.
“As respondents argued in their special affirmative defenses (as contained in their respective answers to the complaint), the honorable office does not have jurisdiction over the subject matter of the instant case. Thus, the instant case should be immediately dismissed,” the memorandum read.
“It is likewise prayed that the Honorable Office will deny for lack of merit complainant’s motion to disqualify the City Legal Office of the Cebu City Government to represent the Respondents in this case,” it added.
Respondents contend that only the court of law can nullify and declare an ordinance as invalid, since it would seem that there is a collateral attack on the validity of an ordinance.
Castillo said that since the DILG does not have jurisdiction over the administrative complaint, the office ought to “immediately dismiss the instant case.”
Meanwhile, Delute asked the DILG to deny the omnibus motion to dismiss filed by the respondents. He also asked the office to relieve Castillo as counsel for respondents since respondents were sued in their personal capacity as public officials that granted the “illegal” disbursement of calamity assistance to the City Hall officials.
Delute said that Castillo’s act as counsel of the respondents in this case is tantamount to conflict of interest because he is the city attorney and he ought to be protecting the interest of the city.
Delute appealed to DILG to suspend Rama and Labella to avoid “suppression of evidence considering that practically the vast majority of said City Hall officials and employees are beneficiaries of calamity financial assistance and it is their individual interest to collaborate with the respondents in their defense.” (FREEMAN)