Ahead of schedule

LONDON — It is 7:30 p.m. here in the British capital; the sun is out and the weather, as the Brits would say, is “delightful with sun and clouds.”

I was able to enjoy the sun because my flight from Manila, Philippine Airlines’ Flight 720, arrived an hour earlier here at the Heathrow Airport, one of the busiest international gateways in the globe.

A flight arriving ahead of schedule may seem mundane or ordinary in this part of the world but not if you’re used to flying in and out of Manila through the Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) where flight delays are very common because of airport congestion.

You really see the difference when you are in other airports, and you wonder again and again why NAIA is the way it is.

NAIA is not only suffering from runway congestion but taxiway congestion as well. Indeed, its problems are piling up.

And so I wonder once again — what’s happening to the airport proposals now submitted for review to the Department of Transportation (DOTr)?

The super consortium of seven conglomerates, for instance, is still waiting for a decision on its proposal. The group was hoping to get a decision in June but government sources said the proposal is still with the Manila International Airport Authority (MIAA).

Of course, it is good that MIAA is reviewing the proposal. As the government entity currently authorized to operate NAIA, they need to be on board. But the DOTr needs to make sure that the review process for all its projects would meet the timetables. LLDA and property rights along Laguna de Bay

There’s a fierce legal battle between the Laguna Lake Development Authority and two private firms operating near Laguna de Bay.

LLDA has accused two companies – IPM Construction and Development Corp. and Level Up Construction – of alleged waste dumping and illegal reclamation in their respective areas. Both firms have strongly denied the allegations.

Turning the tables, IPM – one of the country’s biggest construction and waste management companies – has gone to court accusing LLDA of abusing its authority for evicting the firm, taking over its offices and seizing more than 200 trucks and heavy equipment inside its leased premises.

IPM presented documents showing that it operates a duly licensed Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) and Transfer Station. It also belied LLDA’s claim that it dumped garbage in Laguna de Bay and illegally reclaimed land in the area.

But LLDA general manager Jaime Medina said the company has conducted massive reclamation in the area.

In its defense, IPM said that subject 22-hectare land is titled, and that it occupies only a small portion of the property under a lease contract where it operates the MRF and Transfer Station. It insists that as one of the official garbage collectors of Taguig City, part of its contract requires the firm to set up an MRF and Transfer Station.

Garbage collected from Taguig using smaller trucks are sorted for recyclables in the MRF and the rest are immediately transferred to large hauling trucks and transported out of the Transfer Station to the Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA)-accredited sanitary landfill in Montalban, Rizal.

The company said it does not store or dump garbage in the area and that all residual waste goes to the sanitary landfill. In fact, it said in its defense that MMDA has records of the total volume of waste accepted by the landfill.

Ultimately, the Taguig Prosecutor’s office where LLDA lodged a criminal complaint against IPM – and the Court of Appeals where the company questioned the agency’s grave abuse of discretion – will have to decide on the parties’ conflicting claims.

While these cases are pending, it puts the spotlight on the real scope and breadth of LLDA’s powers. LLDA is responsible for the preservation, development and sustainability of Laguna de Bay and its 21 major tributary rivers.

But its authority has limitations. Like all government agencies, it is required to follow the strict Constitutional mandate of protecting and respecting the rights of persons whether natural or juridical. This includes the right to due process – the right to be informed of the charges and the right to a fair hearing – as well as the equal protection clause.

In the case of LLDA versus IPM, the company claims it wasn’t informed of the charges leveled against it and deprived of the chance to answer and defend themselves in a public hearing.

There’s also the issue of respect for property rights. Given that the lands recently seized by LLDA are titled properties, how can it ensure that the rights of registered owners are protected? For instance, If LLDA claims that these lands are part of the shoreland and, therefore, inalienable, why are these parcels of land titled?

Property owners and businesses near Laguna de Bay are currently sitting on the edge following LLDA’s takeover of IPM’s facilities. They’re eager to see how the cases between the competing parties will pan out as this would ultimately determine their future near the lake.

Iris Gonzales’ e-mail address is eyesgonzales@gmail.com.