Collateral damage
I was in high school when I heard, for the first time, this term "collateral damage." As I came to understand its meaning, the term was a military jargon to justify self-inflicted injuries in war. It sounded practical to accept the responsibility of having injured, maimed or even killed comrades in the process of trying to annihilate opposing armies. In my young mind though, it was quite disturbing.
As it unfurled to me then, a bombing run done along the former demarcation line of North and South Vietnam by US Air Force B-52's based in far-away Hawaii almost always produced "collateral damage." Unintended casualties were inflicted on friendly forces from bombs directed mainly at enemy troops. The bombardments were aimed at decimating North Vietnamese Army regulars massed for attacks at the south, but some stray bombs would hit allied South Vietnamese forces on the side causing damage to such friendly forces.
Of late, someone attributed to the honorable former Cebu City Congressman Tomas R. Osmeña, as having mentioned "collateral damage" in relation to the case filed against His Honor, Cebu City Mayor Michael L. Rama, and the honorable vice mayor, as well as most of the members of the city sanggunian, by Atty. Reymelio Delute. In a news account subsequent to the filing of the case,the former legislator was quoted as saying that the inclusion of his friendly forces, (to mean many councilors belonging to his block called BOPK), was a case of collateral damage. So, I thought he was the man behind the case.
The case that Atty. Delute, initiated, centered on grave abuse on the part of the mayor for endorsing and on the side of the city council for passing an ordinance appropriating calamity fund assistance to city hall employees. The calamities were the October 15, 2013 earthquake and the November 2013 Super typhoon Yolanda.Osmeña, probably thought that should the case succeed in an administrative sanction against the respondents, his BOPK councilors included, the damage to his allies was, as self-inflicted, simply collateral.
Having learned that the Delute case had been scheduled for hearing last Tuesday, yesterday and today, I was eagerly awaiting for the initial reports about it yesterday. I read that Atty. Delute, the complainant, apparently tagged along a counsel in Atty. Benjamin Militar. It is not uncommon that lawyer-litigants engage the services of fellow attorneys. I do remember this quote but not its author: "He is a fool of a lawyer who has himself for a client." Atty. Delute, is therefore, not a fool.
The news, however, indicated a twist. In fact, it was more an actual damage on the action of Atty. Delute, itself than on the BOPK councilors. As reported, the two lawyers might not have agreed on a common theory resulting into diverse plans of action. The lawyer-complainant seemed poised to pursue the invalidity of the "calamity assistance fund" ordinance but his counsel had another direction. Atty. Militar theorized that the grave abuse occurred in the distribution of the calamity funds.
If Atty. Delute had his way, the investigating officers might focus on awaiting for pieces of evidence proving grave abuse to buttress the invalidity of the ordinance. In Atty Delute's concept, the responsible parties should be the mayor, vice mayor and the entire city council, include Hon. Margarita Osmeña, for voting it to be an ordinance, unanimously. Obviously, the former lawmaker would not want that situation where his lady would be a "collateral damage."
To save Councilor Osmena from the harsh punitive effects of the Delute proposition, Atty. Militar wanted the investigator to look into the grave abuse in the distribution of the fund and not in the passing of the ordinance. In his theory, Hon. Osmeña and few others should be spared from the indictment because they did not participate in the availment of the calamity fund assistance.
But, the Delute theory could be flawed. He should know that the investigators from the DILG is without authority to judge whether an ordinance is invalid or unconstitutional. Such jurisdiction lies in the regular courts of law. Should he want the calamity fund assistance ordinance rendered null, he should press his complaint with the judicial department and not with the executive.
Unfortunately, the Militar theory does not advance the cause apparently engineered by Atty. Delute's patron. If such ordinance is valid, its faithful implementation can not be an act of "grave abuse" on the part of the mayor and others.
- Latest
