A useless resolution
‘No matter how encompassing this constitutional phrase "in aid of legislation" is, I do not see any way our legislature can undo a court order for demolition. There is such a thing as separation of powers enshrined in our fundamental law and because of this democratic principle, the resolution you author Hon. Dizon, is to quote Shakespeare, much ado about nothing.’
More than two decades ago, I had the privilege of working with then Mr. Alvin Dizon, now an honorable member of the Cebu City Sangguniang Panlungsod. Of course, he may not recall the event even if it, actually, was not just an hour or a day but an extended period of time of our constant rubbing of elbows. There is also the possibility that he may deny it but, with other idealistic student leaders from the school that has emerged to be the present University of Cebu, he was in the inner circle of several youth volunteers from other universities in our city with whom I shared unpolished thoughts on governance. Perhaps, it was our constant caucuses that honed his political aspirations.
With an ad cautilam advice from a friend, I must declare then that I owe Hon. Dizon, a lot. Deep in my heart is an interminable sense of gratitude for his support to my past endeavors. I vividly remember how he and his fellow youth leaders tried to forge, for me, a political philosophy and provided the drive to achieve a dream such that there is no way I could repay them.
Having said that, I must say that I write this article today with absolute unease. But, if I was the father-figure that he and his fellow idealists considered, then it must be in that context that I compose this write up on his resolution asking the congress to investigate the rash of demolitions of houses, notably that which adversely affects more than a hundred homes in San Miguel, Barangay Apas, this city.
There are a lot of substantive things the city councilors can do. Passing that resolution is only useless cover for unpardonable incompetence or gross inability to comprehend the real problem. At best, it is plainly passing the buck!
But, what buck are we talking about? Hon. Dizon, is asking Congress to investigate if there were violations of the rights of informal settlers during the demolition. That is not the call of the day, Mr. Councilor. You are confusing the issue. People in San Miguel are losing their residences to the demolition crew. That is the extreme urgency. The legislative investigation you are proposing cannot accomplish anything immediately. No matter how encompassing this constitutional phrase "in aid of legislation" is, I do not see any way our legislature can undo a court order for demolition. There is such a thing as separation of powers enshrined in our fundamental law and because of this democratic principle, the resolution you author Hon. Dizon, is to quote Shakespeare, much ado about nothing.
I do not want to remind the honorable councilor that he has a job to do, and this work is local legislation, that is, making laws applicable to our city. My unsolicited advice is for him to review what he has been doing at the council. Urging government agencies to do something, which happens to be the genre of most of his resolutions, is not the correct and true concept of ordinance making. Sponsoring many such measures, is, quite unfortunately, not doing legislative work. Sadly, the records at the city council show that he has infected other councilors with this malaise.
Going back to the problem of San Miguel residents, the city government has few options to stall the demolition. For one, it may have its hand full fending off difficult legal issues, but it can initiate expropriation proceedings under the public use of the rubric of socialized housing or urban and housing reform and ask the court for stay order as immediate relief. There is ample jurisprudence to anchor upon in case the city favors this move. But, if that idea happens to be complex, the city can resort to the less debatable option of bridging a possible relocation. It has acquired many lots for kindred purpose that to date have not been fully occupied, why not relocate affected families there?
From our former connectivity, I like to think that Hon. Dizon prefers to do a substantive legislative work. With this in mind, his job is to write an ordinance, not an urging resolution, that shall lay down parameters that the city can take to provide areas for possible settlement by landless families, prevent settlers from encroaching into other people's properties and/or help those already in such a situation find a quick and reasonable way towards resettlement.