Dismissal sought on case over proceeds of SRP lots

CEBU, Philippines -  The Cebu City Council is seeking for the dismissal of the civil suit, that asks the court to stop the CEBU, Philippines - city government from using the P8.35-billion proceeds from the sale of lots at the South Road Properties.

The council, in their position paper signed by the city’s legal counsels Jerone Castillo and Mary Rose Salvatiera, is asking Regional Trial Court Judge Alexander Acosta to dismiss the petition filed by a certain Romulo Torres suing the City Council over the SRP deal for failure to state a cause of action.

 “There is absolutely no conflict in the manner of selling or disposing the SRP lots,” the document read.

 The council further cited Torres’ lack of legal standing to file the said petition for his failure to satisfy the first requirement for a taxpayer’s suit to prosper – “public funds derived from taxation are disbursed by a political subdivision or instrumentality and in doing so, a law is violated or some irregularity is committed.”

 Being a “resident and taxpayer” of the city, Torres filed a civil petition before the court on September 17 for declaratory relief, injunction with prayer for temporary restraining order and writ of preliminary injunction against Vice Mayor Edgardo Labella and the City Council members.  

 Torres earlier said the resolution the City Council passed which authorized Mayor Michael Rama to dispose of a 45.2-hectare property at the SRP is null and void as it violated City Ordinance 2332, “An Ordinance protecting the South Road Properties and its Stakeholders from Unlawful and Unauthorized Transactions and Dealings.”

 However, the council asserted in its pleading that the civil suit of Torres is also not the proper remedy to question the validity of the city ordinance.

 Torres also reportedly failed to implead “indispensable parties” like Cebu City, which stands to be prejudiced by the filing of the petition, the council argued.  

 The council also stated in its position paper Torres’ failure to inform the Office of the Solicitor General in filing the petition which is pursuant to Section 3, Rule 63 of the Revised Rules of Court.

 Further, the council said no injunctive relief should be granted to Torres for failing to cite in his petition his willingness to post bond should the injunction be issued.

 On October 14, Acosta denied Torres’ request as he found no basis to issue a TRO against the city government on the use of the P8.5 billion it earned from the three developers that won the bidding for the SRP lots.

 Acosta earlier said there was no willingness on the part of Torres to post bond while the case is being heard.

During the hearing of the case, Torres also failed to appear in court. — (FREEMAN)