Rep. Radaza asks Ombuds to reverse causeway ruling

CEBU, Philippines - Lapu-Lapu City lone district Rep. Arturo Radaza has sought the reversal of the Ombudsman resolution that found him and city attorney Vincent Joseph Lim liable for graft for ordering the demolition of a causeway in Barangay Agus sometime in 2007.

The anti-graft office in Manila through overall deputy Ombudsman Orlando Casimiro approved the filing of the graft charges against Radaza and Lim before the court for alleged “unlawful, whimsical and despotic” demolition of a causeway.

Lapu-Lapu City legal office, in their motion for reconsideration, prayed before the Office of the Ombudsman to reverse its resolution and to dismiss the case claiming that the anti-graft investigators “committed grave errors of fact and law, and serious irregularities resulting to fallacious conclusions which the evidence on record do not support.”

Lawyers Roldan Pepito and James Abadia claimed that complainant Efraim Pelaez, owner of Goldfin Land Corporation, has failed to adduce any document evidencing ownership of the causeway, which necessitates a clear and manifest right over the property. 

According to them, they were surprised that the investigator explicably failed to consider the admission made by the complainants during the course of the proceedings that the causeway was not situated in the area covered by the foreshore lease application.

Radaza was the subject of the complaint because it was him who ordered the demolition when he was still the mayor of Lapu-Lapu City, while Lim was then the city attorney. Lim is now deceased.

According to the Ombudsman ruling, there is sufficient evidence to prove that Radaza and Lim caused the summary demolition of the structure without judicial proceedings.

It said that the Goldfin Land Corporation represented by Pelaez had a pending foreshore lease application before the Department of Environment and Natural Resources over the foreshore area where the causeway was situated.

The causeway has been in existence for over 15 years and the causeway is covered by an application for special registration under the amnesty program of the Philippine Reclamation Authority.

“Ineluctably, the foreshore area subject of foreshore lease agreement does not include the causeway since the causeway bounds the foreshore on the south,” Radaza’s counsels argued.

They added, “But assuming that the causeway is within the foreshore lease agreement, complainants still cannot claim that they are its owners since Mr. Pelaez a mere applicant.”

Radaza’s counsels further argued that “even if we were to assume for the sake of argument that Pelaez is the owner of the causeway, the fact remains that it has not been issued the appropriate permit from the city or any national agency and is consequently illegal.”

Before the demolition, Pelaez accused the Lapu-Lapu City officials of corruption and failure to deliver basic services to its constituents. He ran for mayor in the last elections but lost to Radaza’s wife, Paz. — THE FREEMAN