My hazardous task

When Dr. Jose R. Gullas, Sir Dodong to many of us, asked me to put my thoughts in a column in this paper, he did not know writing was (still is) not my cup of tea. I never pretended to be able to compose my ideas into readable literature, but I could not refuse a marching order from someone I had my highest respect for. So, to follow his directive, I then approached Editor Juanito Jabat, also Sir Nito to us, and we set forth some kind of a guiding principle for my future articles.

 On popular issues, I was to discern an angle that readers would rather not view and mine was the burden of bringing u it up to the surface and discussing it as an alternative point. On contentious matters, I was to write on the least appreciated side. If I had to go against the tide, figuratively speaking, I had to do it in the pursuit of looking at another angle to the story. That was how Off Tangent was born.

 That characterization has probably been brought to its extreme when I wrote a series of articles about the demolition of the illegal structures along the Mahiga river. By any standards, it has been a popular subject as it will continue to attract public opinion. That the settlers deserved humanitarian consideration was (is, really) a safe and most popular position. It was very easy to condemn the mayor for ordering the demolition of the illegal structures without provision for a place to transfer to. To demand that they be provided with a relocation site was a most convenient approach.

 In those earlier articles, I tried to present the off tangent side. Mine was a position that did not seem to flow with the raging sentiments of many. I contended that for a long time, those settlers have violated environmental mandates and the mayor was only doing his duty. And I thought that it was a lonely position.

 But, except for one, the few feedbacks I got proved me wrong. Most of those who gave me their reactions silently applauded the mayor for his “political will.” It was not off tangent after all, to say that it was time to enforce the rules no matter who may suffer the consequence. Yes, some opinion makers cried foul upon the report that the mayor refused to provide relocation sites for those whose riverside structures were to be torn down. There was no question that the sight of a dismantled house would break our hearts. But, the many who were informed later that the settlers refused an earlier offer to be relocated cheered, understandably from the sanctuaries of their own homes, the mayor for having the guts.

 Yes, there was one letter that stuck its thumb out. It was written in a most emotional manner that it contained a lot of ad hominems. The writer said that I should have not composed my articles in the way I did because, being a former city councilor, I should know that those settlers belong to the less privileged sector of our society and they deserve a welter of compassion. Happily though, as if he turned around, he asked that similar illegal structures built along riverbanks but owned by wealthy families be also demolished!

 The writer did not understand my position. Or perhaps, I was not able to posit my stand clearly. Just the same, the veiled threats I got are hazards brought about by my stand. At the pain of sounding redundant, let me set for my premise as simply as I can.

The act of His Honor, Cebu City Mayor Michael Rama, in clearing the waterways of illegal structures is a legal mandate. This was also the duty of his predecessor, former Mayor and now Honorable Congressman Tomas Osmeña. Thousands of lives and millions worth of properties continue to be placed at risk by inundation. Typhoon Ondoy demonstrated it best. The clogged waterways resulted in the flooding of many areas. Authorities are of the opinion that our own rivers have become too clogged by illegal structures that we are faced with the same kind of tragedy Ondoy caused. And the situation is so critical that it demands political will.