MANILA, Philippines - Ilocos Sur Gov. Luis “Chavit” Singson said yesterday the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) is to blame for the tensions at the 18.4-hectare “Payanig sa Pasig” complex in Pasig City.
Singson, who posted 40 of his own security guards Friday night at the portion of the property near the Autocamp car dealership to stake his claim on the complex, said the PCGG should not press its ownership of the land pending the conduct of further “dialogues.”
He said in a telephone interview that PCGG chairman Andres Bautista made the first move when he sent security guards to the Autocamp portion of the property Friday, apparently to exercise ownership.
“If I had been hot-headed, there would have been shots fired,” he said.
Singson said Bautista posted guards despite a request he made in a recent meeting, wherein he declared his claim over the property and advised against PCGG – through holding firm Independent Realty Corp. and its subsidiary, Mid-Pasig Land Development Corp. (MPLDC) – taking over the complex.
“They were the ones that made the first move,” Singson said. “We’re just trying to protect our rights and property.”
Singson said he is the rightful owner of the land via his purchase of Blemp Commercial, Philippines, Inc., which he claimed had acquired the original title to the property from MPLDC when it was still controlled by the late self-confessed Marcos crony and dummy, Jose Yao Campos.
In the recent meeting with Bautista, Singson said he had presented the original title of Blemp Commercial, while the PCGG-controlled MPLDC could only show a reconstituted title.
“They said they wanted the NBI to examine my title and I said I had no problem with that,” Singson said.
He said he had asked for more meetings and was surprised when the PCGG sent security guards last week.
IRC chairman and president Luis Quiogue said they are set to bring the matter to the Department of Justice and the Department of Interior and Local Governments.
“We’re meeting with various government agencies. We’re presenting this to the appropriate government agencies that can address the situation,” Quiogue told The STAR.
The PCGG started efforts to take over the Payanig property after the Sandiganbayan issued a ruling last April upholding the PCGG’s ownership of the land and denying a motion for intervention filed by Blemp Commercial.
In its 23-page resolution, the anti-graft court noted that the property is owned by PCGG by virtue of its ownership and control of the MPLDC.
The Sandiganbayan said Blemp failed to satisfy requirements provided under the Rules of Court to show proof that it has a legal interest in the case.
According to PCGG spokesman Nick Suarez, Singson filed a motion for reconsideration, asking the anti-graft court to reverse its decision.
“If he really believes that the property is his, he should go to the court and not bully and harass our security guards. He should know that, being a government official,” he said.
SC voids Pasig’s sale of complex
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court (SC) ruled that the Pasig City government’s sale of the Payanig property in 2005 was null and void due to the failure of the city government to pay real property taxes.
The SC ruling penned by Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio, released last Thursday, stemmed from the city government’s petition for review of a Court of Appeals decision upholding a Pasig regional trial court’s decision granting the PCGG’s request to nullify the real property tax assessment issued by the city government.
The lower court also set aside the city government’s warrants of levy over the property and its subsequent public auction.
In December 2005, the city government tried to auction off the property, but since there were no other bidders, the city government bought the property and was issued the corresponding certificates of sale.
In junking the sale, the SC said under the Local Government Code of the Philippines, properties owned by the government are exempt from real property tax “except when the beneficial use thereof has been granted… for a taxable person.”
The SC allowed the city government to issue new real property tax assessments covering only portions of the property leased to taxable individuals and entities and only for the period of the lease.– With Edu Punay