The deadline of this article could not wait for what eventually took place yesterday in Sitio San Miguel, Barangay Apas, this city. The other day, we caught sight, courtesy of televised reports, of two residential homes taken down by the brute, though legal, force of a court authorized demolition crew. When I hit my computer keyboard yesterday, I could only shudder at the thought that probably more houses would be literally torn to pieces and agonize with the dwellers depressed by the unexpected loss of roof over their heads.
I do not cry over spilt milk even if that act would somehow humor some of my friends in that area. Really, I commiserate with them. But, if the court found Ms. Aletha Suico-Magat, to be the legal owner of the contested land, the settlers should find solace in the fact that they used the land for free for decades such that it is but fair to yield possession thereof to the rightful owner.
Just the same, we, thru this painful circumstance of demolition, reinforce some of the hard lessons we have already known. First, our occupancy, tolerated or not, of a piece of land titled to another does not ripen into ownership. We may have lived thereon for many years without knowing who the owners are, but there will always come a time when the title holders or their successors-in-interest can assert their dominion against our stay. From the bits and pieces of news coverage days before the scheduled demolition, it seemed that the initial attitude of San Miguel people conveyed the message that they have accepted their fate until of course, some men, for a host of reasons, buoyed their moral to a fighting, though inutile, stance.
Second, this is the right time for the local government to create an office designed to address the matter of urban settling. In fact, this is rather late, but since we honor the saying "mas vale tarde que nunca", such office is still relevant. After its creation, the first logical step is obvious. Manned by competent personnel, it has to move quickly to ascertain all areas within our city that may have been occupied by settlers who are not the owners.
The objective of such a survey is to determine in whose names are these assets registered because the likelihood is that while others occupy these lots, these owners continue to pay taxes. It should not be forgotten that the fundamental reason the Torrens system has been adopted in our country is to protect the owners. If they are known, the city is duty bound to assist them enjoy their ownership.
When it is discovered that there are settlers on a parcel of land, the next thing this office shall do is to identify the occupants. How come they have settled on this land? Since when? Why have they chosen such a particular place to build their homes on? Where do they come from? Do they have the means to acquire where their houses stand, in case the owners decide to sell?
With pertinent facts at hand, this office will start the process of helping both sides. The owner does not have to go to court where the next sure thing to come is expense. If, on one hand, a transfer is possible, the office shall work for the parties to reach acceptable levels of conveyance within a much shorter time line than what litigation demands seeing to it that dubious claimants are excluded from the scene.
If on the other hand, it appears that the owners are bent on getting back their properties, it might be arrogant for settlers to cry social justice no matter how hallowed the late Justice Laurel defined it because the act of denying the owners enjoyment of their asset is in itself a form of injustice. When it is certain that owners want to use their lands, it becomes the sole function of the city, as much as parens patriae calls for, to anticipate the demands of relocation where, unlike the San Miguel experience, everybody is somewhat unprepared.
It is nice to think that the administration of His Honor, Cebu City Mayor Michael L. Rama, has the privilege of preparing for events similar to that befalling upon the residents of San Miguel, Apas.