EDITORIAL - Legal niceties and common sense

Cebu City councilors are reportedly in a quandary on how to use some P30 million in unspent calamity funds. There have been suggestions to use the money to repair the city's roads which are in an embarrassing state of disrepair, but they are unsure whether this is legal.

If we remember right (although the city is not in any way involved in our recollection) the calamity fund has been one of the most abused and misused sources of quick and easy money by local governments.

If we recall further, several barangays once created a stir when their greedy officials decided to dip into unused calamity funds in order to gift themselves with huge bonuses for Christmas.

And if we dig even deeper into our memory, not a single one of those greedy barangay officials was ever punished, even with just a tap on the wrist, for the immorality, if the act itself was not a crime.

If at all, some were only asked to return the money they gifted themselves with. But to this day it remains unclear if any one of them ever did. All we know is that, after all the "Sturm und Drang," the issue was eventually consigned to the dustbin of forgetfulness.

So, how legally can the calamity fund be used if there is no more calamity to use it on? Do we pray for a calamity so that we can use it, or is the absence of a calamity the real bonus that those greedy barangay officials once gifted themselves with never was?

On the other hand, isn't the disastrous state of the city's roads already a huge calamity in itself? One of the definitions of calamity is "a state of great distress and adversity?" Doesn't the state of the city's roads aptly fit that description to a tee?

To be sure, the P30 million in unspent calamity funds will never be enough to repair all city roads, considering the state of their deterioration. But they can help mitigate the distress somewhat. Unless of course the legal niceties stand in the way of common sense.