LCP out to contest SC cityhood ruling

MANILA, Philippines - The League of Cities of the Philippines (LCP) is mobilizing local officials to pass resolutions questioning the latest ruling of the Supreme Court (SC) that approved the conversion of 16 new cities despite their not meeting legal requirements.

LCP officials met yesterday and approved the proposal to initiate the passage of resolutions by their respective Sangguniang Panglunsod and barangay councils.

Letters from city mayors, vice mayors, councilors, lawyers’ groups, academics, city hall employees and non-government organizations would also be sent to the SC to express concern over the Court’s reversal of the first ruling that declared the 16 cityhood laws as unconstitutional.

“But this time, we will do it in the open and not resort to secrecy as has been done by lawyers of the 16 towns applying for cityhood,” said Mayor Oscar Rodriguez of San Fernando, Pampanga, president of the LCP.

Rodriguez was referring to two secret letters received by the SC on Jan. 19, 2009, on the controversial case questioning the constitutionality of creating 16 new cities that failed to meet the requirements of the Local Government Code.

Joseph Morigomen, counsel for the LCP, said the letters bore the letterheads of Estelito Mendoza, lawyer of the 16 new cities.

“This is completely against the law – to write the Court seeking a favorable decision. Under the law, all parties involved in the case must be furnished with copies of pleadings and motions. In such case, we as well as our legal counsels were not provided with those secret documents,” he lamented.

Calapan City Mayor Paulino Salvador Leachon, LCP vice chairman, claimed that the two secret letters addressed to the justices were clearly designed to influence the voting in the case.

“To write the SC justices, some of whom have been his (Mendoza’s) previous subordinates, is on its own entirety wrong,” Leachon added.

Before the secret letters were sent to the SC, the Court ruled on Nov. 18, 2008 that the laws creating the 16 new cities were unconstitutional. The decision was declared final and executory on May 21, 2009.

The Court reopened the cityhood case on Dec. 21, 2009 and reversed its ruling and declared the new cities as legitimate. But the SC flip-flopped again on Aug. 24, 2010, and ruled that the cityhood laws were unconstitutional.

Two weeks ago, on Feb. 15, 2011, the Court reversed itself for the third time and declared the cityhood laws constitutional.

Three other LCP officials – Mayors Evelyn Uy of Dipolog City, Allan Celino of Roxas City and Dan Lim of Tagbilaran City – said the local city councils have finished deliberation on the resolutions against the 16 new cities.

“We will bring the resolution to the SC as soon as it is approved,” said Celino, who had started convening all legal luminaries in his city and nearby cities to discuss the issue and voice their sentiments against the Court’s decision.

Speaking on behalf of Visayan cities, Lim of Tagbilaran City, also the LCP vice president for Visayas, said the SC flip-flop is a blow to the Court’s credibility.