CEBU, Philippines - Cebu City Councilor Sisinio Andales wants to suspend the discussion of the P3.32 billion supplemental budget out of “judicial courtesy” after a complaint was filed in court questioning the method used in the sale of the South Road Properties.
Andales explained that any discussion on the supplemental budget number one should be held in abeyance considering that the city government is using the proceeds of the SRP sale as source of fund.
“Since there is a pending case in the trial court questioning the sale of SRP by way of public bidding not by unsolicited proposal, I think we have to respect whatever be the ruling of the court,” Andales said.
Earlier this week, members of the City Council were sued by a certain Romulo Torres. Torres is seeking to get an injunction from the court to stop the city government from using the payment of the SRP. He is questioning the mode of disposal of the 45.2-hectare lot.
Torres alleged that the resolution the City Council authorizing Mayor Michael Rama to dispose of lots at the SRP has violated City Ordinance 2332, “An Ordinance protecting the South Road Properties and its Stakeholders from Unlawful and Unauthorized Transactions and Dealings.”
Andales said the members of the City Council should not approve nor disapprove the SB-1 yet pending the resolution of the case.
“Meanwhile, we cannot proceed on discussing how to spend the money based on the supplemental budget-1 because that issue is the very issue that if we approve the same, the complaint in court will be moot and academic. That is why, I think we have to wait because we want to be enlightened also whether a mere resolution can amend or supersede an ordinance,” he said.
He recalled that the Department of the Interior and Local Government in Manila has issued an opinion saying that a resolution cannot supersede the ordinance. Andales said DILG has not reversed its opinion yet.
“Based on judicial courtesy, I think we have to respect,” he said.
However, City Councilor Gerardo Carillo said the city government can proceed with its transaction and discussion on the SB-1 since the complainant has not secured an injunction from the court yet.
“The ordinance is presumed valid unless proven otherwise by the courts of law. There is a process. We have to go on and approve until such time the court shall resolve the issues raised by the complaint,” he said.
He told Andales to raise his concerns when the SB-1 will be deliberated in the regular session. — (FREEMAN)