'I shot the Sheriff...'

A picture may say a thousand words but most of the time those words are exaggerated.

This is certainly the case of Mayor Sara Duterte of Davao City, who was recently “pictured” punching out a “Sheriff” who intentionally ignored her request to wait for her arrival before enforcing a court ordered demolition of squatter shanties.

Already dealing with a disastrous flood that killed some 31 people in Davao, the Mayor had called upon the Sheriff to wait for her in order to avoid violence and bloodshed during the demolition.

According to independent contacts based in Davao City, the lady mayor was not attempting to stop or block the demolition but was merely concerned that it would lead to violence, which it did.

Surprised and insulted from being brushed off, Duterte finally lost it when she saw people who were hurt or injured. That was when her fist followed her fury.

Contrary to the reactions and insinuations of some, Duterte’s fist and fury was not about power or arrogance. I have no friendship with Sara Duterte but I have heard time and again that she is fiercely independent, a trained lawyer, wife and mother.

So for those who wrote her off as a “Tomboy” or “lesbian”, sorry but she is not.

That video grab, does injustice to her “mestisahin” features simply because the lady Mayor had already been doing the rounds visiting flood victims and walking in the rain.

Those who want to place her in the same mould as her father would be disappointed to know that the “ex-Mayor and his friends” openly talk about how they have been excluded and have no influence on Sara and Davao City management.

So what would make her snap aside from the snub and the injuries suffered by her constituents?

To answer this, one would have to be familiar with the difficult and often controversial world of “court orders” and “Sheriffs”. It is one of those things you call: “a tough job, but someone’s got to do it”.

In fact it is largely a no win situation for them because, each time a Sheriff enforces a “court order”, someone wins and someone loses. It is either; an eviction, a closure, a confiscation or a demolition. So no matter how fair or just the cause, the Sheriff will always be the bad guy.

What makes matters worse is that external forces have come into play and has further tarnished or blackened the image of Sheriffs.

Petitioners or businessmen who acquire a favorable judgment and court order have been known to give “incentives” to Sheriffs for the immediate or speedy implementation of court orders.

Among City hall veterans all over the country, those incentives begin with “pang gasolina” or mobilization, which is followed by “pang merienda” or snack, then “for the boys” in case the Sheriff needs the backing of uniformed police officers or a contingent of Civil Disturbance Unit.

So it makes no difference if the Sheriff is a good person or a bad person. The present system is based on the philosophy that those who have the most to gain must shoulder the cost of mobilization and implementation.

All the incentives up to this point is paid in cash and paid up front. So once the 30 pieces of silver has been paid, there is no return, no exchange and certainly no refund.

Once the assignment is completed, not only does the Sheriff go back to the office with his mission accomplished, those who are unscrupulous will certainly be looking forward to “commission collection”.

Given a “court order”, given a multi-level incentive package, and a no return- no refund clause, once the posse leaves the Sheriffs office, bribe or no bribe, they cannot come home empty handed.

In the Davao incident, the undue haste and the snub as well as injuries undoubtedly lit a fire of suspicion and frustration on the part of Mayor Duterte. I would not be surprised if all these come to the surface once investigations take place.

* * *

In a related matter, it is high time for law makers both in Congress and local governments to pass laws penalizing landowners and businessmen who leave vacant lots, open, unfenced and unguarded.

Each year millions upon millions of pesos are wasted in barangay hearings, city halls and civil courts to address the problem of squatting and land grabbing. Even more money and resources are wasted for demolition, relocation and crowd control just to get rid of trespassers and squatters.

But to date I don’t know of any rich person being fined or penalized for not fencing their property, not paying someone to watch the property and for not keeping them clean.

In the many places I have lived, it is usually the neighbor who has to clean the vacant lot for his own security and peace of mind that a wild fire won’t occur. If the neighbors can’t do it, they usually call the Barangay hall to act on the matter.

Between clearing vacant lots and evicting squatters too much of the taxpayers money is wasted on what should be the responsibility of the lot owner. In addition such a law should include a 1 to 5 percent fine on the value of the property for every demolition order issued by the court.

It is not fair that cops and MMDA personnel should get hurt simply because a property owner was too cheap or irresponsible to protect what is clearly very valuable property!

The fine will serve as an unforgettable lesson and a reimbursement for the costs of demolition and eviction.

* * *

[email protected].