Part 2
Allow me to use this space to showcase certain facts that Mrs. Leogan conveniently left out in her statement:
1) We, at least my father Mario Del Mar Lopez's family, with his individual share in the Lopez estate, helped the settlers out when they sought us out. For over two years we tried to delay their ejectment (including the families occupying another set of lots in my grandfather's name in Sitio Baca, on the other side, nearer Banilad road, beside Country Mall), even if it was detrimental to our own financial interests, going out of our way to work with the allies of Mayor Mike Rama, obviously dedicated local officials like Vice Mayor Edgar Labella, Councilor Daluz, lawyer Rosell of the Division for the Welfare of the Urban Poor, and Apas captain Ramil Ayuman, to assist and protect them.
My father and I didn't have to but we did—even if it caused further trouble with one of my father's siblings who favored their ejectment filed by Richard Unchuan (she thought we were "crazy helping the squatters." At least we don't have to do it ourselves, she said) we—even filed a Motion to Intervene as co-owners of the properties to stop their ejectment. We were willing to sell all of my father's shares in the Lopez estate (particularly the properties concerned) to their homeowners' association for a ridiculously and obscenely low price just so the settlers would finally be co-owners and would never have to worry about ejectment ever again. We tried to device payment schemes and proposed working with Pag-Ibig, the Presidential Commission for the Urban Poor, etcetera.
But after filing in the courts the Motion to Intervene to stop their ejectment, each time I would text them for a meeting so we can continue finding sustainable solutions for them, they would respond with, "next week, Sir Mike." And I would hear nothing from them the following week. This went on for at least six months. That should give anyone in my shoes the idea that they were not willing to help themselves and were not serious in finding a long-term solution to their predicament. We intervened in the courts using our rights to the lots to protect them, and it seems they were satisfied with the temporary delay in the ejectment it had caused.
If the Lopezes were not the rightful owners of Lots 943, 944, 945 etcetera as Mrs. Leogan claims, why would she and the association of settlers she heads seek us out, ask for our help, ask us to intervene, and for a while, before getting the intervention that they wanted from us, express their interest to buy our rights for a minimal amount?
2) Mrs. Leogan cites the records of the City Environment and Natural Resources Office, but forgets to mention the way more binding records of the Registry of Deeds where the titles are under the name Generoso Lopez. More importantly, she has left out two separate Supreme Court decisions that uphold Lopez ownership of those lots. In a July 2006 resolution (G.R. 172676), the Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals decision voiding the Deed of Sale executed by Generoso Lopez to his daughter Myrna Lopez-Terol and reverting ownership of Lots 943, 944, 945 to the other Lopez heirs, except for the share of Myrna already sold to Unchuan. The high court also affirmed the ownership of the Lopez heirs of lots in Sitio Baca.
The claim of the heirs of Quintin Vercide has also been dismissed by the courts in a separate case. On January 18, 2010, the high court denied their petition 'for failure to show any reversible error in both the Court of Appeals and RTC decisions,' confirming once again Generoso Lopez's ownership of lots in question. On August 27, 2010, the Supreme Court decision became final and executory (G.R. No. 188532).
I sincerely hope this puts an end to the half-truths being peddled in light of the tragic demolition of homes. My heart goes out to the settlers, it isn't easy facing the prospect of losing one's home, but we did what we can, everything that we could, to help them. My grandfather allowed them to live there—three decades now—for free, no rent, nothing, all that while we had to pay for the taxes and other fees and costs of protecting it from other claimants, all that despite not being able to use the land or profit from it because they're occupying it.
They've been living on my grandfather's properties for years, we fought for them as best as we could (probably the first time in history an owner ever defended the squatters occupying his properties from ejectment), we communicated with them and treated them with dignity, always decently and with respect, like friends even, the least they could do is try not to undermine Generoso Lopez's memory in the process.
Most of the Lopez heirs, after duly informing their fellow co-owners, including other claimants to the properties with debatable claims, have sold their pro-indiviso shares/rights to Lots 943, 944, 945 (excluding lots in Sitio Baca still owned by all the Lopez heirs). After all the headache and heartache those cursed lands have caused our family, it was just time to sing 'Let it go!'