City Hall assails DILG ruling on calamity aid

CEBU, Philippines - The Cebu City Legal Office has questioned the “credibility” of the order issued by the Department of Interior and Local Government denying its motion to dismiss the case against the city for disbursing calamity assistance at P20,000 each to 4,200 employees, including officials.

City lawyer Jerone Castillo pointed out that the DILG order, which describes the city’s motion as having “lack of jurisdiction and merit” was signed by someone who did not affix his actual name and authority to sign on behalf of the hearing officer, Atty. Christopher Tiu.

Tiu, however, signed the notice of hearing on the same date.

“It is improper that two persons signing two related papers at the same time… without a doubt, therefore, the credibility of the Order of the Honorable Office dated 13 February 2015 is highly suspect,” the city’s motion for reconsideration reads.

 “All was dated February 13, nipirma si Tiu sa notice pero sa order wala, it was another person. How can that be? Atong gi-question ang manner it was presented and issued, but with due respect sa office that issued it,” Castillo added.

Castillo also questioned why the city was not given an original copy of the order. It was only faxed on February 17.

The DILG ruled that the prejudicial question in law and jurisprudence as raised during the hearing is “untenable to warrant the suspension of the proceedings, much more, for dismissal of the complaint.”

DILG said further that the allegation in the complaint does not rest on the proposition of declaring City Ordinance 2379 valid or not, but rather on the alleged impropriety of giving calamity assistance to city’s employees and officials who were not affected by calamities.

In December 2013, the City Council approved City Ordinance 2379, granting P20,000 calamity assistance to city officials and employees.

In a motion for reconsideration filed last Friday, the city insists that DILG has no subject matter jurisdiction over the instant case “as collateral attack of local ordinance is not allowed under the law.”

Castillo also questioned DILG’s finding that it has subject-matter jurisdiction over the instant case.

Castillo said DILG’s finding is a “grave error on the part of the Honorable Office.”

“In the course of enacting Cebu City Ordinance No. 2379, the Cebu City Councilors themselves unanimously provided for the rule that one needed only to be employed with the Cebu City government as of 15 October 2013 in order to be qualified to receive the calamity assistance which is the subject of this case,” the city’s motion for reconsideration reads.

“This is clear from the minutes of the regular session of the Sangguniang Panlungsod of the City of Cebu on 18 December 2013, a certified true copy of which was annexed to and discussed in detail in respondents’ memorandum dated 17 October 2014, which was submitted before this Honorable Office pursuant to its order of 14 October 2014,” it added.

Considering the validity of the ordinance, Castillo said it cannot be attacked collaterally before the DILG, but can only be “directly attacked before the regular courts.

“Any order or decision rendered by the Honorable Office on a case on which it has no jurisdiction is null and void and could never become final and executor as the proceedings themselves are null and void,” the motion reads further.

The city said DILG should “immediately dismiss the instant case for lack of jurisdiction.” —JMO (FREEMAN)