Friendsonline

Las Piñas judge in hot water

2009-09-02T10:19:00.000+08:00

Las Piñas judge in hot water

By: Hector Lawas of Journal Online

Officers of the 12,000-strong United BF Homeowners’ Associations Inc. (Parañaque, Las Piñas, and Muntinlupa) yesterday filed an administrative complaint before the Supreme Court against Las Piñas Regional Trial Court Judge Raul Bautista Villanueva of Branch 274 for stopping the installation of water pipes by the Manila Waterworks and Sewerage System and Maynilad Water Services Corp. inside the BF Homes community in Parañaque, Las Piñas, and Muntinlupa. In a 15-page letter-complaint to Chief Justice Reynato Puno, the UBFHAI stressed that Judge Villanueva should be sanctioned for gross ignorance of the law, grave abuse of discretion, and utterly oppressive conduct.

”The Honorable Supreme Court has time and again cautioned judges not to indiscriminately issue injunctions when the claimed irreparable injury of a party is compensable, or when its issuance will cause injury that will far outweigh the benefit it will serve to the party supposed to be protected,” the UBFHAI said.

The group was accompanied by Parañaque Rep. Roilo Golez during the filing of the letter-complaint before the High Court.

According to the group, Villanueva issued a preliminary injunction against a government infrastructure project being undertaken by MWSS providing water service to the BF Homes community on the motion of developer BF Homes Inc. and its water service company Philippine Waterworks and Construction Corp (PWCC).

He also restrained and extended the effect of the injunction to the Maynilad Water Services Corp. and private contractors, stopping all these agencies from providing water to 12,000 households of BF Homes.

UBFHAI claimed that MWSS was ordered by President Arroyo thru Executive Order 688 issued on February 22, 2007, to provide water services to BF Homes. The EO was anchored on Presidential Decree No. 1345 empowering MWSS to take over the centralized water supply system within its jurisdiction.

“In issuing the preliminary injunction against MWSS, Maynilad Water Services, and all agents acting on their behalf, Villanueva effectively extended for an indefinite period of time the suffering of the thousand of residents of BF Homes who have been waterless for decades. He committed extreme injustice to the residents because he favored a non-existent private interest over public interest,” the group said.

For his part, Villanueva said to allow the MWSS to provide water services to the BF Homes community would be tantamount to taking of private property without just compensation.

He stressed that “taking without just compensation” should not only be construed in the physical sense but includes likewise the taking of the business from BF Homes Inc.(BFHI) and PWCC to provide water service to BF Homes community.

However, the UBFHAI disclosed that BFHI and PWCC no longer have any water service business since 2003. Because of this inability and failure of PWCC to provide water to BF Homes owners, the National Water Resources Board (NWRB) did not renew PWCC’s Certificate of Public Convenience to provide water.

Also, UBFHAI bared that the NWRB denied the PWCC’s motion for reconsideration, prompting the BFHI and PWCC to elevate the matter to the regional trial court.

UBFHAI stressed that the rationale of the prohibition against the whimsical issuances of TROs and injunctions by judges is to avoid disruption of essential government projects in areas of activity critical to the country’s economic development efforts, which, under the Constitution, must be implemented expeditiously and efficiently.

Also the prohibition was bolstered by the issuance of an Administrative Circular No. 11-200 banning the issuance of temporary restraining orders or writs of preliminary prohibitory or mandatory injunctions in cases involving government infrastructure projects.

Waterless BF Homes: No immediate relief

2009-08-24T14:43:00.006+08:00

@ Yahoo! Video

Homeowners of BF Homes Parañaque Subdivision are calling the attention of the Supreme Court against a member of the judiciary for gross ignorance of the law, grave abuse of discretion and utterly oppressive conduct.

The complaint is anchored on the preliminary injunction the RTC Judge of Las Piñas issued against a government infrastructure project being undertaken by the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage Corporation and Maynilad.

In issuing a preliminary injunction the Judge effectively extended for an indefinite period of time the suffering of the thousands of residents of BF Homes who have been waterless for decades. In his Order dated July 3, 2009, the Judge committed extreme injustice to the residents because it favored a non-existent private interest over public interest.

The judge ruled in favor of the private, no longer existing, interest of BF Homes, Inc. and PWCC by saying that to allow MWSS to provide water service to the BF Homes community would be tantamount to taking of private property without just compensation. MWSS was restrained in a earlier injunction from taking over the central water reticulation and distribution system of the developer, thus it failed to provide water to residents.

The court said that “taking without compensation” should not only be construed in the physical sense but includes likewise the taking of the business from BF Homes, Inc. and PWCC to provide water service to the BF Homes community.

Good grief! BF Homes Inc. and PWCC no longer have any water service business to speak of. The National Water Resources Board refused to renew in 2003 PWCC’s Certificate of Public Convenience for its failure to provide water to the homeowners.

Incredibly, “the Court considers as of no moment the supposed denial by the National Water Resources Board the application of the petitioner BF Homes for a certificate of public convenience to operate and maintain a waterworks system within BF Homes Subdivision, Barangay BF, Parañaque City. After all, what is vital to therein case is the constitutionality or not of PD No. 1345 and EO No. 688, nothing more, nothing less.”

The Honorable Judge conveniently considered as “of no moment” a very vital piece of information and evidence which clearly showed that BF Homes and PWCC do not have an existing right that stands to be irreparably injured unless a preliminary injunction is issued. The fact that BF Homes and PWCC no longer have a franchise to provide water service to the residents of BF Homes shows only too clearly that they are not entitled to the cloak of protection offered by the writ.

The Supreme Court has time and again cautioned judges not to indiscriminately issue injunctions when the claimed possible irreparable injury of a party is compensable, or when its issuance will cause injury that will far outweigh the benefit it will serve the party supposed to be protected:

No Court, except the Supreme Court, shall issue any temporary restraining order, preliminary injunctions or preliminary mandatory injunction against the government, or any of its subdivisions, officials or any person or entity whether public or private acting under the government direction, to restrain, prohibit … the undertaking or authorization of any other lawful activity necessary for such contract/project.(Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 8975).

The rationale behind the aforesaid prohibition is to avoid disruption of essential government projects in areas of activity critical to the country’s economic developments efforts, which, under the Constitution, must be implemented expeditiously and efficiently.

This prohibition is bolstered by the issuance of Administrative Circular No. 11-2000 which bans the issuance of temporary restraining orders or writs of preliminary prohibitory or mandatory injunctions in cases involving government infrastructure projects. Section 4 thereof provides that “Any temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction or preliminary mandatory injunction issued in violation of Section 3 hereof is void and of no force and effect.”

Despite the widely touted “inexhaustible water table” as widely marketed and advertised when it opened in 1969, the subdivision, now home to 12,000 households, is waterless for decades. Its developer, BF Homes, Inc. has failed miserably in complying with its representation to ensure that basic utilities such as adequate water supply to the homeowners and residents. The action of the Honorable Judge is therefore tantamount to tolerating and rewarding the utter misrepresentation and dereliction of duty committed by BF Homes, Inc. while penalizing the residents and homeowners of BF Homes in continuously depriving them of much needed potable water.

BF homeowners arise! Aside from the pipe laying and interconnection costs of P38,200 each, you have nothing more to lose but your chains. Grrrr!

Waterless BF Homes: Relief at unconsionable rate?

2008-05-26T09:58:00.003+08:00

It will be recalled that over a year ago, Mayor Bernabe was proclaiming that there will be water in notoriously waterless BF Homes. [“Parañaque City’s long wait for water is over”– Inquirer 02/10/07]. In fact, the giant posters and billboards with his ubiquitous pictures and those of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and Vice-President Noli de Castro, from the pedestrian overpass in the Sucat Interchange, to other parts of the city and in BF Homes, thank the national officials for bringing water to the subdivision. People are quick to tell us how lucky we are to have water in BF Homes, until we tell them that water is only in the papers and the billboards. Ask any beleaguered homeowner in the village.

As early as 2000, the United BF Homeowners’ Associations, Inc. (UBFHAI) board of directors was already meeting with Maynilad for the interconnection to BF Homes. It was a funny situation because it (Maynilad) would have to sit down separately with BF Homes, Inc. (BFHI) and Philippine Waterworks and Construction Corporation (PWCC) better known as BF Homes Waterworks (BFW), which owns the water system, and the association. Dealing with BFHI is like dealing with a child. In the end, connection was made through UBFHAI’s largest member association (BF Northwest) from the Lopez gate, but only on the scheme whereby BFHI would buy water in bulk and resell it to the homeowners. The directors agreed to the arrangement, just to have the connection made and deal with the other matters later. Indeed, water came in for about two months to the relief of the Parañaque residents of the subdivision.

But this should also be emphasized: Maynilad can only provide 30% of the water consumption needs of the 765 ha. subdivision. It was clear on that from the beginning. What this means is that even if Maynilad supplies BF Homes with water, it will only come up to a little over 30% of our total needs (adding the trickle, if at all, we get from BFHI/BFW), until such time a new and better water source is found.

In early 2001, Maynilad cut off connection to BF Homes for failure of BFHI/BFW to pay its bills. The latter claimed the charges were too high. Of course, it was high because the account was classified commercial. If it consented to have individual meters for homeowners, the rate would have been much lower.

Sometime in 2004, after Meralco shut down power supply to the pumps, again for failure of BFHI to pay its bills, the UBFHAI directors brought the matter to the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB). A meeting was conducted there between UBFHAI, BFHI/BFW and Meralco. It was revealed that BFHI/BFW owed Meralco something like P41 Million in arrears, which it also refused to pay, claiming overpayment in previous billings.

UBFHAI thereafter secured a decision in the case of Arranza, et al. v. BFHI, et al., which it filed way back in 1990, directing the latter to provide 24-hour water supply to the subdivision, failing which, to turn over the water system to UBFHAI. The association moved for an execution pending appeal, but the motion was somehow lost after some government officials intervened, or so we were told. The case is now in the Court of Appeals. This is how things work in this country.

Thereafter, the directors filed a complaint in the MWSS for the turnover of the water system to the homeowners association under the old Presidential decree, but the case was dismissed because at the time, there were no implementing rules and regulations for the decree.

This is not quite understood by the public, but the executive order of President Arroyo, which has been touted to finally make possible the takeover of a subdivision’s water system by the homeowners association, is actually only the implementing rules and regulations (IRR) for the old decree.

The IRR provides that the petition for takeover shall be made by either the developer or the duly constituted homeowners association. But there are other basic requirements for the petition that only the developer can comply with, such as the mandatory pressure tests and the technical data on the pipes and equipment, so that even if the association files the petition, it will not move, until the developer complies with the technical requirements. And in BF Homes, the developer’s intransigence is legend! The problem is thus reduced to a Sisyphean situation.

What is now actually being negotiated is still bulk sale of water to BFHI/BFW as in 2000, but the latter is asking so much [P51/cu.m.], and Maynilad and dear Mayor are reportedly angling for less. [“P49 per cubic meter would be acceptable,” Mayor Bernabe told The STAR – 05/12/08]. The waterworks insists it cannot lower the proposed consumer rate considering the high systems losses due to leakage. The 40-year old water system, dormant for the last 20 years or thereabouts, will leak like a sieve upon activation. Consequently, the lower rate similar to those of other neighbouring subdivisions like Tahanan [P25/cu.m.] is simply not viable.

There was some press release also that Maynilad or the mayor said they will force the take over of the water system, and BFHI reportedly said go ahead, and it will file for an injunction in court. It could too, under the principles of due process and just compensation, since it still owns the system on paper.

The scuttlebutt is that there is an interconnection agreement at P46 per cubic meter negotiated by the mayor which rate he claims is acceptable to BF homeowners. Not surprisingly, BF homeowners are being conditioned to accept the negotiated rate of P46 which is 84% higher to Tananan’s P25 since this is less than that of deepwell water delivered by enterprising water haulers at P85.

The rate of water haulers is high because of the high cost of water extraction and delivery by water tankers. This rate can be reduced to acceptable level if accredited water haulers are allowed in the interim to buy from Maynilad at less than Tahanan’s P25/cu.m. for delivery to BF homeowners.

So, the bottom line is that Maynilad can only provide 30% of the village’s consumption needs, and BFHI/BFW will still buy water in bulk. Takeover of the water supply system is not on the table at the moment. If the scheme goes through, assuming that the homeowners will agree to the unconscionable rate, it should come with a prayer that BFHI/BFW will not refuse to pay its bills in the future as it did in 2001.

The solution to the problem is ultimately in the hands of the homeowners association with the cooperation of BFHI/BFW which the HLURB can help in forging without the attendant politics.

Waterless BF Homes: Is relief in sight?

2008-05-18T17:02:00.001+08:00

Mayor Florencio Bernabe Jr. is quoted as asking Maynilad Water Services Inc. to set lower water rates for BF Homes Parañaque residents, who will soon enjoy water dripping from their household faucets after being waterless for many years.

According to him, the city government, homeowners, subdivision developers, and Maynilad representatives have yet to agree on the rates.

“P49 (per cubic meter) would be acceptable,” Bernabe told The STAR, hoping that Maynilad and subdivision developer BF Homes Inc. will consider the amount as the most reasonable rate.

He said he hopes to lower the developer’s proposed price of P51 per cubic meter by P2 so as not to make it too expensive for residents.

The mayor did not disclose that the price he said would be acceptable to BF Homeowners [at P49/m3] is almost twice the cost [at P25/m3] as that of his village Tahanan. See cost analysis table.

Cost per 500 gals (1.89 cu.m.)	BFW	Delivery	Tahanan
Volume (cu.m.)	1.89	1.89	1.89
Cost per cubic meter	55.00	84.66	25
Total cost (per 500 gals.)	103.95	160.00	47.25

Rate proposed by PWCC
Monthly consumption (cu.m.)	28.35	28.35	28.35
Cost per cubic meter	55.00	84.66	25.00
Total monthly cost	1,559.25	2,400.00	708.75
Price difference	220%	339%	Base
Reduced Rate proposed by PWCC
Monthly consumption (cu.m.)	28.35	28.35	28.35
Cost per cubic meter	51.00	84.66	25.00
Total monthly cost	1,445.85	2,400.00	708.75
Price difference	204%	339%	Base
Rate proposed by the mayor
Monthly consumption (cu.m.)	28.35	28.35	28.35
Cost per cubic meter	49.00	84.66	25.00
Total monthly cost	1,389.15	2,400.00	708.75
Price difference	196%	339%	Base

How soon water will be brought into BF Homes will depend on the agreement by the BF homeowners to the rate proposed by BF Waterworks (BFW). The waterworks insist that it cannot lower the proposed rate considering the high system loss due to leakage. The 40-year old water system, dormant for the last 20 years or thereabouts, will leak like a sieve upon activation. Consequently, the lower rate similar to those of other neighboring subdivisions like Tahanan is simply not viable.

MWSS threatens to “takeover” the water system under PD 1345 upon failure to interconnet. But “takeover” does not mean outright confiscation. The government cannot takeover private property without the constitutional due process. This means that MWSS may and is empowered to initiate the legal acquisition of the water system at a just compensation to be determined by a competent court. This is due process and the longer option.

Not surprisingly, BF homeowners are being conditioned for the “equal sufferance” supply of water (rationing) at a cost less than that of deepwell water delivered by enterprising water haulers. This a political option being proposed by our mayor who is up for another term. Either that or we are in for a long haul.

The mayor said that “P49 (per cubic meter) would be acceptable” to BF homeowners. Assuming that the proposal is acceptable to BF Waterworks, we ask: Is the rate acceptable to you?

If we don’t stand up for our rights and speak out in order to save face and avoid confrontation, we will end up exactly where we don’t want to be but where we deserve.

In the meantime, we thank the water haulers for the water in our tap, not the politicians who are already campaigning this early with posters littering our streets for the 2010 election.

Back to the future

2008-03-18T09:58:00.000+08:00

“Introibo ad altare Dei.”

“I will go unto the Altar of God” will signal the beginning of the Mass in St. Jerome to be celebrated according to the Rite of the Missale Romanum issued in 1962. This will be the first time the TLM will be publicly celebrated in St. Jerome in almost 40 years.

Parish priest Rev. Fr. Germanetto Grato has willingly received the petition of a group of faithful for the public celebration of the Tridentine rite every Sunday at 9:30 A.M. starting June 29, 2008, the feast day of Sts. Peter and Paul. St. Jerome Church is conveniently located at the Alabang Town Center in Muntinlupa City.

What to expect

Some pertinent [edited] notes from Get ready for the Tridentine Mass:

Because of some of the architectural changes made to the church, there might be some physical changes that will have to be made in order to offer the Tridentine Mass.

Although not yet possible at this time, having the Tabernacle on the altar would be a great blessing because the celebrant will now be facing the altar, and in truth, he should face the altar even in the Novus Ordo.

1. The most important thing is that the priest will face the altar (the back wall), standing in the front of the altar.

2. There will be altar rail so that people can receive communion kneeling.

3. Vestments, altar clothes, candles, a crucifix, patens, etc. outlined in the Rubrics will be strictly followed in offering the Mass.

4. The Tridentine Mass is more visual than verbal, so all will be done to decorate the altar: candles, statues, flowers, etc.

5. The choir will be completely out of sight, either in the back of the church, up in the choir loft, or in a side altar. No one but the priest and altar boys will be on the altar.

6. A paten will be held by the altar-boy when passing out communion.

7. Although not required, an altar rail cloth may be hanged from the back side of the altar rail. Just before communion this cloth is flipped over the altar rail and when people come up for communion they put their hands under the cloth. This is added protection in case a host or piece of host drops past the paten.

What the people need to know

The first thing people need to know about the Tridentine Mass is that its emphasis is silent prayer and quiet reflection. This means that from the moment you walk into the church, you change all your actions from social to prayerful.

Movements should be reverent and slow. Absolutely no talking, not even a “Hi!” Treat the Mass is if you were at the foot of the Crucifixion of Christ, silently watching Him offer sacrifice for your sins, because that is what the Mass is. Treat the Tabernacle is if you were being presented face to face with the Triune God in Heaven for the first time, because that is who is in that Tabernacle. Christ said to Saint Gertrude: “One idle word in church is worth a hundred years in Purgatory.” Of course, “idle” means unnecessary but what words are necessary?

1. Dress as if you have died and were about to see God face to face in Heaven.

2. Men should never go to Mass in shorts or short sleeve shirts.

3. Women should dress modestly and feminine (not like men).

4. Women should use veils as is traditional but not mandatory.

5. As for standing or kneeling during Mass, just follow the other people or the altar-boys.

6. Music should be sung like a whisper. The choir is taught to sing to God and not to the people. The church is not big so speakers may not to be used because the music should sound like Heavenly background to prayer and not something that beats up the ears and brain, preventing prayer. Since there is a choir there is no reason to sing along with them. The choir is well trained and any singing along should be done very quietly so as not to interrupt the trained singers.

7. Follow along with the mass in the Missal (English on one side and Latin on the other). If the church has not purchased the missals yet or cannot afford them, you can buy them.

8. After reading the words of the Tridentine you will see that most of the Mass is the priest praying to God and only when he turns and faces the people does he speaks to the people. This is the high priest (Christ) praying to the Father for us. It is Christ offering His sacrifice for us, and we are just there watching and thanking God.

9. Remember that people are there to pray, so do not fidget with your rosary or make sounds or movements that would distract others from prayer. Just use common Church etiquette, which means making others comfortable around you.

10. When going to communion stay in line and go to the next space at the altar rail and kneel down and wait for the priest to come to you. If there is a communion cloth over the altar rail, but your hands under it. The priest will say, “May the Body of our Lord Jesus Christ preserve your soul unto everlasting life.” You will receive communion on the tongue, bow your head a moment and get up and go back to your pew. Remain kneeling until the priest starts the final prayers of the Mass.

11. After Mass leave the church without talking because a great many people will remain inside praying and you do not want to interrupt God. After some distance from the front door, it is time to socialize and share your faith with others.

There is an on-going recruitment for more altar-boys (no altar girls) because it is traditional to have four or more altar-boys at each Mass. This will also increase vocations to the priesthood because this is where God touches boys with this grace.

Multinational Village “takeover”

2008-03-11T09:03:00.003+08:00

By Atty. Renato “Tito” Fernandez

I had an interesting conversation with a homeowner from Multinational Village who filled me in on what happened, and is still happening, in their subdivision. What he related was very informative and bears a very close resemblance to what is happening in BF Homes/United BF Homeowners’ Associations, Inc. (UBFHAI).

Before the election of Mayor June Bernabe in 2004, Multinational Village had a well-established and peacefully functioning homeowner’s association. By many accounts, it was a well-run organization under the leadership of Arnel Gacutan, a popular, dynamic and articulate young man whom we met several years ago. He implemented various projects in Multinational including a mammoth covered court, all self-funded without any assistance from the city government. (Unfortunately, the beautiful covered court was not properly maintained after he was eased out).

Some two (2) weeks before the local elections in 2004, he was asked by then Vice Mayor Bernabe, who was running for Mayor, if the latter could put a table near the main entrance of Multinational Village. Because it could be mistaken as being partisan, Arnel Gacutan politely declined. [Homeowners associations are supposed to be non-partisan, non-political organizations]. One had to consider also the matter of fairness to other opposing candidates.

In any case, Vice Mayor Bernabe won and Dr. Olivarez lost. That was when Arnel Gacutan and Multinational Village experienced intense and withering turmoil. Not long after, the city government accused the association of using guards without individual posting permits (shades of UBFHAI) although they were all employed by a licensed security agency given a valid permit by the previous administration. Arnel Gacutan was publicly portrayed as a drug lord who amassed unexplained wealth. He was harassed, arrested, subjected to congressional investigation and in the process suffered extreme personal humiliation.

But the young man knew how not to knuckle down. He counter-attacked. He showed and proved that he had in fact been given a written commendation by the Head of the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) for his efforts in assisting the campaign against illegal drugs, a revelation which no doubt exposed him to grave personal risk. As for the charges of unexplained wealth, he produced before the congressional investigation his BIR income tax returns, the exact copies of which were already in the possession of our Parañaque congressman. What his detractors conveniently failed to reveal was that Arnel was, and is, in the real estate business up to now from where he made honest income.

All the disinformation, accusations and complaints against Arnel for involvement in drugs (sic), unexplained wealth, etc. were all dismissed by the concerned agencies (including the DOJ) and none survived objective legal scrutiny. In short, they were baseless and were only a subterfuge, a pretext to cut Arnel down before his constituents for the real and ultimate objective – his expulsion from the leadership of the homeowners association of Multinational Village and its domination by personalities close to the powers that are.

During all these, elections were held in Multinational’s homeowners association in early 2005. For some reason, the HLURB suddenly got involved and enjoined the use of proxies (previously allowed during past elections) of which Arnel Gacutan had quite a number. His valid proxies were disregarded to neutralize his popular advantage during a rigged election (it was postponed by the Board but pushed through by the HLURB and his opponents) and he “lost” to Felix Resuello. In time, a power behind the throne began to emerge in Multinational, commonly referred to as the La Huerta group who called the shots behind the scenes. It is said they are close to the powers that are. Resuello was later shunted aside, to be replaced by Olive Begre who was also later wrongly taken out on an issue of principle, and replaced by a retired general Arsenio Torres, with the blessings of the power brokers.

Arnel Gacutan and company appealed the HLURB’s adverse resolutions/decision to the Office of the President which on May 16, 2006, set aside the election of the Resuello group. In due time, Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita’s decision became binding and executory in favor of Arnel’s group. However, in a rash of legal maneuvers, the losing parties close to the city government secured from the HLURB that “modified, altered or amended a decision that has become final and executory”, and were considered in excess of jurisdiction by the Court of Appeals. Still, they would not yield the leadership of Multinational’s homeowners association and resisted all attempts to fully enforce the decision of Secretary Ermita. Arnel’s group is aghast at such open defiance.

In the meantime, Multinational Village is in limbo. Their clubhouse is shuttered and padlocked with the misleading sign “Under Renovation”. The lawful officers under Arnel Gacutan refrain from entering it to avoid a confrontation with the powers that are in the government. Inexplicably, the breakaway group under Gen. Torres holds court in the subdivision’s auditorium, not in the clubhouse. Maybe they already feel they are not lawfully empowered.

What pitiless events dogged Arnel Gacutan because of his good faith denial of the installation of a table before elections! On the other hand, Celso Reyes of UBFHAI got into trouble because his newly-elected Board in 2004 turned down the proposal of the security agency of Dr. Renato “Boy” Bernabe, the Mayor’s brother, to provide security services to all the gates, clubhouse and sensitive areas of BF Homes. Never mind that the winning bidder had a superior offer, including Closed Circuit TV (CCTV). That was beside the point.

The dogs of war were soon unleashed and the rest are current events where the full might of the city government, HLURB, and UBFHAI’s disgruntled elements were brought to bear on Celso Reyes and his group. BF Homes is in limbo. Maybe that’s also the game plan.

However we look at them, the two (2) situations are eerily similar!

BF homeowner slams LGU takeover

2008-03-03T13:07:00.000+08:00

What is the undue interest and persistence of Parañaque Mayor Jun Bernabe in the internal affairs of United BF Homeowners Associations, Inc. (UBFHAI)? He is the only mayor we know who is actively preoccupied with seeking the dissolution and destruction of a proud and self-respecting homeowners’ association organized according to law.

UBFHAI has existed continuously for more than 18 years and, except for the usual problems that attend to the life of a village association, has been the only central spokesman for the 10,000 BF homeowners in Parañaque, Las Piñas and Muntinlupa.

Starting with his takeover of UBFHAI’s gates in Aguirre, Elizalde and El Grande in 2005 with a blitzkrieg sweep of his SWAT troops, Mayor Bernabe has been systematically prying away at the structure of UBFHAI. Under the law, it is not the job of a city government to enforce a decision of the regular courts or the HLURB. That is the job of the sheriff. The enforcement of compliance lies with him and the courts – they have the power to cite for contempt, to penalize, to impose fines and damages. The Mayor’s office has gone beyond and has been acting as the judge, jury and executioner, more than the courts.

Several years ago, the same thing happened to Multinational Village which effectively destroyed the vestiges of the homeowners’ established self-governance. The city government actively supported a rival block of candidates, created widespread dissension in the village and sealed the takeover of the clubhouse with SWAT troops. The LGU supplanted the homeowners’ for self-government with its own indirect control.

When the Management Committee (Mancom) of HLURB took over the UBFHAI Clubhouse last year, they were aided by shock troops and personnel of the Mayor. They are still there for everyone to see, big and brazen as life, with the uniform patches of CSU (Civilian Security Unit?). They act as the praetorian guards to the Mancom and their followers.

The city’s liaison officer for homeowners’ affairs, Ms. Diana Quiros, acts as the spokesperson, mouthpiece, enforcer, campaigner and apologist for the group. Widely distrusted by mainstream homeowners, she goes about her job creating discord and disunity among BF’s residents. DIVIDE and CONQUER! That seems to be the unwritten motto of the Mayor’s game plan.

When the Mayor organized a meeting several weeks ago at the Dragon Prince ostensibly to brief homeowners on the water situation, the first part of the discussion was an exposition of the work of the Mancom, their alleged findings (sic) in their audit of UBFHAI and the participation of leading personalities of the opposition in BF who seek the dismemberment of UBFHAI and supplanting it with another. It means, therefore, that the work of the Mancom and the game plan of the Mayor are parts of the whole, being presented at the same time, at the same venue, and at his initiative.

The Mayor’s fingerprints are all over the place, including his Dear Jimmy letter when he asked Mayor Fresnedi to dismantle BF’s gate in Tirona in the Muntinlupa side. The prize is the domination of BF Homes and the suppression of self-determination and self-governance as a village. Does he do that in Tahanan Village where he lives? He wouldn’t dare!

But why does he want to stamp UBFHAI out of existence and supplant his minions? Arrogance of power?

Let’s express our feelings freely!

Atty. Renato “Tito” Fernandez

[Atty. Tito Fernandez is a charter member of UBFHAI]

MWSS “shuffle” to takeover of waterless subdivisions

2008-01-21T22:48:00.000+08:00

In a “praise” release, the Mayor of Parañaque announced that Malacañang has empowered the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS) to provide service to waterless villages, especially those abandoned or neglected by developers or owners with the issuance of Executive Order 688.

Officials, leaders, and residents of BF Homes in Parañaque are rejoicing and thanking the President Arroyo’s landmark executive order through the efforts of the mayor.

But, hey, Malacañang has already empowered MWSS to takeover the water supply system in residential subdivision 30 years ago, for crying out loud!

Presidential Decree 1345 issued April 2, 1978, empowers the “MWSS” to “take over the operation and maintenance of centralized water systems of residential subdivisions within its territorial jurisdiction …” and “shall thereafter cause the system to operate at the desired level … chargeable to the subdivision owner/developer…”

Unfortunately, as we all know, MWSS is no longer in the water distribution business in Metro Manila. It consequently does not have financial and personnel resources for a takeover contemplated by the Presidential Decree. The Executive Order will most probably empower MWSS to takeover the water system of BF Waterworks and turn it over to Maynilad, the franchisee south of Metro Manila.

The problem with this “shuffle” is that the cost to render the system operable chargeable to the subdivision owner/developer under the Presidential Decree will be shifted to the homeowners. And to sweeten the pie, Maynilad will be charging commercial rate (higher than residential rate) probably to the existing BF Waterworks or homeowners associations who in turn will be adding their own operating markups. Homeowners will be told to be grateful for the “equal sufferance” supply of water (rationing) at a cost less than that of “dirty” water delivered by enterprising water haulers.

As P.T. Barnum used to say, “Suckers are born every minute.”

MMDA on BF car “sticker” conflict: clueless

2008-01-18T22:23:00.000+08:00

Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) Chairman Bayani F. Fernando was quoted as saying that “all roads are public property” and that “even roads in private residential areas are no longer considered private, according to law” on the question of issuance of car “stickers” of private subdivisions, particularly BF Homes Parañaque Subdivision.

The kind of things the chairman is talking about is not trivial to me. They have driven me to disgust and near despair in the recent years.

After having scrimped and saved and then spent my life savings for a house in BF Homes Parañaque in order to enjoy well-deserved peace and quiet away from the madding crowd, I find the same madding crowd practically in my front yard, complete with cars, container vans, heavy trucks and squatters to boot.

The MMDA Chairman is quoted as saying: “All roads are normally open. The closing of roads require public hearings. A road is no longer private. Any road customarily used as a road is public.”

Good grief! The Chairman is clueless.

The takeover by the local government of the subdivision roads of BF Homes subdivision is patently illegal. The roads, sidewalks, parks and open spaces are privately titled to the developer. As such, the local government cannot simply take over private property without due process. In the words of the Supreme Court in Phicomsat v. Alcuaz 180 SCRA 218 “[a]ny regulation, therefore, which operates as an effective confiscation of private property or constitutes an arbitrary or unreasonable infringement of property rights is void, because it is repugnant to the constitutional guaranties of due process and equal protection of the laws.”

On the constitutional proscription against the use of public funds for private purposes, this is what the Supreme Court said in the case G.R. No. 148357 Aniano A. Albon vs. Bayani F. Fernando, et al:

“The ruling in the 1991 White Plains Association decision relied on by both the trial and appellate courts was modified by this Court in 1998 in White Plains Association v. Court of Appeals. Citing Young v. City of Manila, this Court held in its 1998 decision that subdivision streets belonged to the owner until donated to the government or until expropriated upon payment of just compensation.”

“Section 335 of RA 7160 is clear and specific that no public money or property shall be appropriated or applied for private purposes. This is in consonance with the fundamental principle in local fiscal administration that local government funds and monies shall be spent solely for public purposes.”

“In Pascual v. Secretary of Public Works, the Court laid down the test of validity of a public expenditure: it is the essential character of the direct object of the expenditure which must determine its validity and not the magnitude of the interests to be affected nor the degree to which the general advantage of the community, and thus the public welfare, may be ultimately benefited by their promotion. Incidental advantage to the public or to the State resulting from the promotion of private interests and the prosperity of private enterprises or business does not justify their aid by the use of public money.”

“Therefore, the use of LGU funds for the widening and improvement of privately-owned sidewalks is unlawful as it directly contravenes Section 335 of RA 7160. This conclusion finds further support from the language of Section 17 of RA 7160 which mandates LGUs to efficiently and effectively provide basic services and facilities. The law speaks of infrastructure facilities intended primarily to service the needs of the residents of the LGU and “which are funded out of municipal funds.” It particularly refers to “municipal roads and bridges” and “similar facilities.”

“Applying the rules of ejusdem generis, the phrase “similar facilities” refers to or includes infrastructure facilities like sidewalks owned by the LGU. Thus, RA 7160 contemplates that only the construction, improvement, repair and maintenance of infrastructure facilities owned by the LGU may be bankrolled with local government funds.”

The issuance of vehicular stickers is not just an excuse to “raise funds”. In BF Homes Parañaque Subdivision, stickers serve as traffic volume regulator and computer data banks (of about 40,000 motorists) provide immediate identification of the criminal elements in our midst.

As to collection of fees, Rule V, Section 5 of the HLURB Rules on the Registration and Supervision of Homeowners Association (series of 2004) recognizes the right of homeowners association to impose and collect reasonable fees on members and non-members residents who avail of or benefit from the facilities and services of the association, to defray necessary operation expenses; and to exercise other powers necessary for the governance and operation of the association.

The conflict in BF Homes started in 1997 with the re-zoning of the subdivision’s main roads to raise revenues for the municipality to qualify for cityhood being pushed by Congressman Roilo Golez. Yet today, like the biblical fence-sitter of old, he washes his hands of the responsibility for the destruction of the residential character of our neighborhood.

Be that as it may, this is my unsolicited advice to BF homeowners: Don’t take a politician’s statements at face value. “Since a politician never believes what he says, he is surprised when others believe him.” [Charles de Gaulle, one-time President of France].

More unsolicited advice: If you do care about all this nonsense, what can you do? Well, you have to speak up and make time to fight a guerrilla war. Write letters and emails of protest. Telephone their offices. Politicians may be sloppy about spending our tax money, but they fear negative publicity. There’s political power in numbers. Get your friends involved in the action.

Probing the HLURB takeover of UBFHAI

2008-01-08T17:29:00.000+08:00

Respect, as we all know, is the state of being held in high esteem or honor. It is earned by treating others in an honest and caring way. When someone feels that you are not being fair or that you are putting your self interest ahead of his, you will not earn respect. Failing to deliver a favor or perform a service is the quickest way to lose it.

Our government, politicians and public officials are famous for shooting their mouths off and not following through. The restriction of “residence only” written in our transfer certificate of titles is a mute testimony that a government guarantee is not worth the paper it is written on.

It is sad that in our struggle to preserve the residential character of our neighborhood, BF Homes, Parañaque, residents think that the local government is the obstacle rather than the ally. For years the local government has been licensing commercial establishments in violation of zoning ordinance.

In 1997, the local government passed an ordinance that commercialized our main roads and made easy access to our homes by non-residents. To homeowners who value the security and privacy of their homes, this ordinance is frustrating and unpleasant. To raise revenues for the municipality to qualify for cityhood being pushed by Congressman Golez, the privately titled main streets of BF Homes were reclassified as commercial despite the lack of “… the written conformity or consent of the dully organized homeowners association, or in the absence of the latter, by the majority of the lot buyers in the subdivision” as required by Section 22 of PD-957.

The ordinance legalized many commercial establishments intruding into residential areas. These firms do not have their own drainage systems so they discharge wastes into the drainage systems of the subdivision which was designed for the use of homeowners, causing pollution and destruction of our roads.

You don’t have to look further than Parañaque for a preview of what is coming. Main street BF Homes will be transformed into another Doña Soledad Avenue of Better Living Subdivision.

The local government appropriated the homeowners’ park by building a barangay hall, police and fire department buildings, and a covered tennis court. It repaired the sidewalks and installed additional lampposts on the declared commercial roads. The roads, sidewalks, parks and open spaces in BF Homes are privately titled to the developer. Thus, no public money could be used on them.

In undertaking the projects, the mayor violated the constitutional proscription against the use of public funds for private purposes, as well as Sections 335 and 336 of RA 7160, and the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. This means that the mayor and the councilors can be held liable for misappropriation or misuse of public funds, which can lead to the filing of graft and corruption against them.

Of course this is outrageous. You’d think that with a dismal record of doing nothing the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) would all resign in shame but no! Instead, Arbiter Dustan San Vicente praised himself and HLURB for protecting the homeowners at the congressional hearing probing into the takeover of the homeowners association by HLURB.

The takeover, without a writ of execution, is based on the complaint of a former president who alleged that “there were missing funds and equipment and other anomalies during the current term of the current United BF Homeowners’ Association [UBFHAI] President Celso Reyes.” That sounds like a criminal complaint and not included in the job description of the HLURB, for crying out loud. Any decision rendered without jurisdiction is a total nullity.

Arbiter San Vicente gave a long winded explanation of interlocutory order that confuses instead of clarifying his issuances. Technically, an interlocutory order is not appealable, we are told. Really? If so, why did the board of commissioners nullify his 5 orders?

Interlocutory Order is defined as an order determining an intermediate issue, made in the course of a pending litigation which does not dispose of the case, but abides further court action resolving the entire controversy. Such orders are not generally appealable until after the entire matter has been disposed of by final order or judgment.

I cannot imagine a regular district court issuing a writ of execution while the case is being appealed and heard by a superior court. That legal mumbo jumbo of the arbiter is a lot of nonsense and will not hold water. He offered no explanation of his issuances despite the HLURB rule that “the filing of an appeal … shall have the effect of automatically staying the execution of any decision or order…”

I can only shake my head in disbelief at the claim that the arbiter is doing a good job of protecting the homeowners. Good grief! The word “chutzpah” doesn’t come close to describing it. San Vicente’s self-appointed management committee forced open the Association’s vault and divested it with all its content of undetermined amount of money and documents, broke open all the filling cabinets, and took some of the documents out of the clubhouse. One of the appointed management committee member even took 2 vaults out of the clubhouse. Protection? Give me a break!

Why do these people do what they want, without worrying about sanctions? There are speculations, many unsavory. But I like this one: “Because they can.”

Nutrition and Health

2008-01-02T15:16:00.000+08:00

“If you have your health, you have everything.” Don’t many people often say this? We would gladly exchange everything for our health. We pay doctors our entire savings to heal us, if necessary.

But not everyone who says, “If you have your health, you have everything”— only the old, the infirm or people whose health is at risk.

The laws of reality represent a real sequence of cause and effect; we live in effect of them. We must know them for such knowledge limits our freedom to guess but increases our freedom to act and think. Thus the law of gravity may mean that if from the top of a high cliff you see a man drowning, you may have to go down instead of jumping. Jumping represents a short-cut but it would destroy you and not help the drowning man.

The law of physical order follows the same sequence of cause and effect. Eating unhealthy foods produces unhealthy and fatal consequences. We are tempted to do short-cuts so we go to prayer healings or get somebody to pray over us when we get sick. It’s like jumping from a hilltop and expecting our Creator to catch us in mid-air or suspend the effect of gravity.

Our modern diet causes enormous problems for our health. But taking good care of ourselves is not just a health luxury. It’s an absolute necessity if we don’t want to be held hostage by pharmaceutical drugs, blood checkups and hospital stays. Not doing this only takes away more and more of our energies, our freedoms – even our lives.

The solution to our ailments is to get back into our natural state of vibrant health by “cleansing” ourselves from the inside, allowing our body to rest and heal itself. Think about it: For every disease, our immune system is triggered and it immediately starts fighting it. Our body can restore every wound, diseased organ or damaged cell that it needs to – but it cannot do that if we keep polluting it.

Most adults need 2,000 and 3,000 calories a day. Women and smaller less active people need fewer calories; men and larger, more active people need more calories. Wellness experts tell us that the distribution of calories should be: 40% to 50% from carbohydrates, 30% from fat and 20% from protein. We are strictly to avoid margarine, vegetable shortening and all products listing them as ingredients and all products made with partially hydrogenated oils of any kind.

Like most of us I simply cannot get the fruits and vegetables I want or figure out how to achieve a balanced diet of 33 nutrients. Instead, I take a good daily multivitamin-multimineral supplement for gaps in my diet.

You achieve good health through eating healthy food. There's no shortcut. There isn't a pill or an herb you can take to counteract an unhealthy diet. Don't roll the dice and gamble your life away. If you are under diet restriction, boost your immune system by taking a daily multivitamin-multimineral food supplement of 33 nutrients which requires little or no digestion. I survived a seven arterial heart bypass, failing kidneys, deteriorating prostate condition and falling weight by following a healthy and active lifestyle. I am a living proof that it works.

For those of you who watch what you eat, here's the final word on nutrition and health which somebody sent via email. It's a relief to know the truth after all those conflicting nutritional studies.

1. The Japanese eat very little fat and suffer fewer heart attacks than Americans.

2. The Mexicans eat a lot of fat and suffer fewer heart attacks than Americans.

3. The Chinese drink very little red wine and suffer fewer heart attacks than Americans.

4. The Italians drink a lot of red wine and suffer heart attacks than Americans.

5. The Germans drink a lot of beers and eat lots of sausages and fats and suffer fewer heart attacks than Americans

CONCLUSION: Eat and drink what you like. Speaking English is apparently what kills you. Lol!

Happy New Year!

Indecent Haste

2007-11-11T15:11:00.000+08:00

“HLURB takes over BF homeowners’ group… based on the complaint of a former president who alleged that “there were missing funds and equipment and other anomalies during the current term of the current United BF Homeowners’ Association President Celso Reyes.” [PhilStar, Sunday, Nov. 4, 2007].

You have just read a big problem with media. What was reported, whether right or wrong, could not be taken back.

The media can inform or entertain but they can also shape your opinions. And they can be used by powerful people to seduce, persuade and often lie to you. That’s dishonest, to paraphrase a respected journalist.

Journalism is a business, and the business of business is to make money and those who can best do that are the charlatans and opportunists. Come across or nothing gets printed or broadcasted, that’s “envelopemental” journalism.

Let’s get the story straight.

The sanction against the board of directors and the forcible takeover of the United BF Homeowners’ Association clubhouse was effected by a sheriff, several Parañaque policemen, about 50 civilian security units from the office of the Mayor, and a bunch of Barangay tanods. The word “overkill” is not even appropriate for this outrageous incident.

It is unusual to observe law enforcers in record numbers; hindi na kailangan sunduin pa [no need to pick them up] by homeowners calling for assistance. Law enforcers are blind to frequent broad daylight robbery-holdups and break-ins in the commercial areas and residential enclaves.

Homeowners are learning to leave at home their wallets, credit cards, expensive jewelries and cell phones when dining out or going to hair salons, a risky proposition at this time. This deplorable situation is the consequence of the mayor’s action of opening the main gates of the subdivision to the general public and prohibiting the posting of security guards at the main gates. It is ironic that his own brother and sister-in-law were victims of motorcycle-riding criminals in broad daylight robbery-holdup while having lunch in a restaurant.

You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to know that the HLURB directive appointing a management committee over a duly elected board of directors was flawed. The disqualification of the complainant during the recent election precipitated the filing of the suit. The case against the Election Committee was an election controversy, pure and simple. How can the HLURB Arbiter issue any directive, let alone bind the Association and its Board of Directors, who are not even impleaded parties to the case?

The sheriff effected the takeover of the clubhouse without a writ of execution and the HLURB Arbiter practically re-wrote the rule in ordering his decision executory despite the perfection of an appeal. Section 4 Rule XVI of the HLURB Rules provide that the “filing of an appeal in accordance with these rules shall have the effect of automatically staying the execution of any decision or order of the Arbiter or Executive Committee, unless otherwise provided in these rules.”

Such indecent haste and “garapalan” [bare-faced] violation of the rule of law merits congressional investigation.

Like the soldiers in the Ninoy Aquino slay case who were criminally convicted, the classic defense of these modern Pontius Pilates is that they were “just following orders.” When will our law enforcers learn that following unjust or unlawful order is not a defense for a criminal act or an excuse for wrong doing?

A Sad Commentary On American Justice

2007-08-18T08:26:00.000+08:00

The U.S. Supreme Court slammed the door on Filipino-Americans born in the Philippines. By its denial to review the appellate court’s decision, the Court closed the window of opportunity to address a wider issue of national importance which cuts to the very core of America, its loyalties and the allegiance of its citizens.

The case arose when the [former] Immigration and Naturalization Service [“INS”] decided after 2 years that they committed an “error” in issuing the certificate, and after protracted proceedings, cancelled James’s [not his real name] certificate of citizenship. After exhausting administrative remedies, James brought an action for declaratory judgment and the district court declared him a U.S. citizen.

James, a “natural” son [his parents married in 1958] of a U.S. citizen father and a U.S. national mother, was born in the Philippines in 1931 during the territorial period [1898-1946]. After his father died in 1966, James sought to establish claim to U.S. citizenship, being frustrated by the interpretation given by the Department of State. He finally prevailed and was issued a certificate of citizenship in 1992 and thereafter his U.S. citizenship passport. His wife was admitted as a lawful permanent resident and resides with him, as well as his youngest children who immigrated as minors.

On appeal, the appellate court ruled that “residence in the Philippines during the territorial period does not qualify as residence ‘in the United States’ and ‘the rights of citizenship shall not descend to children whose fathers never resided in the United States’ under Revised Statutes §1993,” effectively reversing the decision of the district court.

Revised Statutes §1993, originally enacted in 1855 when the U.S. was not yet a colonial power provides that “All children heretofore born or hereafter born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, whose fathers were or may be at the time of their birth citizens thereof, are declared to be citizens of the United States, but the rights of citizenship shall not descend to children whose fathers never resided in the United States.”

Under strict interpretation of the statute, children of U.S. citizens born in the Philippines during the territorial period were not born outside the “jurisdiction” of the United States, and therefore, the statute does not apply. Yet they were not born “in the United States” under Article XIV, and could not gain citizenship in that manner. In other words, the absurd situation arises that these children, disenfranchised of their citizenship, could be considered to have fallen through a “statutory crack,” an aberration in law.

While children falling in the “statutory crack” may have been disqualified under the literal reading of the statute, the agency [INS] did not engage in the literal practice of disqualification for many years. Instead, U.S. agencies applied or interpreted or “constructed” Revised Statutes §1993 provisions to include those children as citizens. Likewise, residence in the outlying possessions was deemed sufficient to transmit citizenship to a child. James’s father, born and lived all his life in the Philippines, derived his U.S. citizenship at birth from his father [James’s grandfather] despite not being born outside the “jurisdiction” of the United States. R.W. Flournoy, Assistant to the Legal Adviser, Department of State, at the hearings before the House of Representatives, Subcommittee of the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, 76^th Congress, H1073-6, Nationality Act of 1940, testified:

“We have been holding in the State Department for years that, notwithstanding the peculiar language of section 1993 of the Revised Statutes, which relates to a child born outside the territory and jurisdiction of the United States, we have been holding that that is applicable to a child born in one of the outlying possessions; otherwise those children would be aliens.” [Revise And Codify Nationality Laws, pp. 55-56].

James’s entire life has been literally turned upside down by this event – cancellation or revocation of citizenship – when in truth and in fact the sole basis of the upheaval is a purported “error” that INS freely admitted in the application or “construction” of Revised Statutes §1993 which, if taken strictly, does not even apply to him. The liberties taken by INS in reading into the Statute a “construction” which excludes James from his citizenship is not only inequitable and unfair under the circumstances, but is at cross purposes with the substance and intent of the law itself. James in truth has no chance under the Statute, not because he is disqualified by it, but because it does not apply to him. What the INS asked the court to uphold is the application, interpretation or “construction” the INS itself gives to the Statute, which unfairly disqualifies James.

The Department of State since 1912 has held that Revised Statutes §1993 apply as of the date of birth, to child born out of wedlock in the outlying possessions of the United States, provided paternity is established. The Attorney General sustained the “construction” in an opinion of April 7, 1920. [32 Op. Atty. Gen. 162]. Ironically, the same Attorney General now holds that residence in the Philippines during the territorial period does not satisfy the residence of the Statute. Since the appellate court has sustained a new statutory “construction”, will the Attorney General cancel the certificate of citizenship “illegally” issued to illegitimate children born in the Philippines since 1912?

Within In re Mendiola [647 F. Supp. 839 (S.D.N.Y 1986)], the originator of the chain of citizenship was a U.S. born great grandfather. All subsequent generations lived only in the Philippines, and all were granted certificates of citizenship. Will the Attorney General now apply the court-sanctioned “construction” and cancel certificates issued to the generations of Meniola’s?

Acquisition of birthright citizenship is retroactive to birth – the citizen is considered to have acquired citizenship at birth and to have always maintained that status, even if that status is not confirmed until adulthood. While there are conditions precedent, for some categories, conditions subsequent or concurrent such as the modern retention requirements, once granted, there is no second class citizenship status recognized either under the constitution or in the statute.

Here, James was determined by the INS to be a citizen of the United States at the time of his birth. He was administered and voluntarily took an oath of allegiance to the United States at the time of that determination, effectively renouncing his Philippines citizenship. He applied for and obtained a U.S. passport. Upon his last entry to the U.S., he was admitted as a U.S. citizen. The Court’s decision has rendered him stateless, a cruel and unusual punishment, unable to obtain passport to travel and has been deprived peace of mind from fears of deportation and separation from loved ones.

Current statute provides for the cancellation of a certificate of citizenship for those who “illegally” acquired citizenship at birth, but clearly states that cancellation of the certificate des not affect the underlying citizenship status of the person in whose name it was issued. There is absolutely no process for the removal of the citizenship, the nullification of the oath taken, or a return to former status, since from birth the status of the individual was that of the citizen.

The absence of a de-citizenship process and the express inclusion of the provision that cancellation of the certificates does not alter the underlying status is powerful evidence that James’s case should have been accorded the absolute scrutiny by the Supreme Court. Congress has had ample opportunity to correct this situation if it deemed it to be a defect. The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act of 1966 was a comprehensive overhaul of the Immigration and Nationality Act, but did not include a provision to correct this alleged “defect.” James contends that this is because it is no defect in law, but rather a clear message that birthright citizenship, once granted, is not to be taken away.

It is clear that the court-sanctioned “construction” of Revised Statutes §1993 is flawed. Yet, the Supreme Court has declined to exercise its power of judicial review and takes issue with the narrow and myopic reading the appellate court gave to Revised Statutes §1993 in its adoption of the position of the Attorney General. As a result, the agency can now rightly lay claim to the enviable power to wield the unrestrained sword of bias and prejudice – today to interpret in favor, tomorrow, to interpret against. The many-horned hydra of arbitrariness, capriciousness and unbridled discretion shall rear its ugly head.

Water Blues

2007-08-01T09:07:00.000+08:00

Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS) provides water from the Umiray, Angat and Ipo river basins to Metro Manila’s private concessionaires Manila Water Co. Inc. and Maynilad Water Services Inc. for distribution. However, these water sources can barely meet current demand, let alone connect additional customers.

The proposed P47.93-billion Laiban Dam project is intended to supply 1,900 million liters a day (MLD), or 22 cubic meters a second, of water and address an existing gap of 1,122 MLD in the Metro Manila water supply.

The dam will be built at the Kaliwa River in Tanay, in Rizal province, in the central and southwestern parts of the Sierra Madre mountain range. It is to be an alternative to the Angat and the Ipo dams, and is expected to operate in 2016.

Enough water by 2016? Don’t get your hopes up.

Current census projection shows there will be 88.7 million Filipinos by year’s end. That number can double in less than 20 years. We’re back to square one by 2016.

Presently, there is water rationing in Parañaque. When Maynilad says that they are ready to supply water to 10,000 households in BF Homes, this means further rationing. Equal sufferance?

The developer allowed the village’s Maynilad connection to be cut off by refusing to pay its bills amounting to P5 million and also by refusing to allow the homeowners direct connection to Maynilad which would have been a cheaper option for homeowners instead of buying water in bulk and reselling it to the homeowners at a profit.

The wells in the subdivision have dried up when the United BF Homeowners’ Associations, Inc. (UBFHAI) filed a case asking, among others, the Housing & Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) to order the developer to provide 24-hour water supply to homeowners. Jurisdictional resolution took all of nine (9) years from the time the case was filed on July 5, 1995.

On September 27, 2005, the HLURB ordered “respondents BF Homes, Inc. and Philippine Waterworks Construction Corporation (PWCC) to provide a 24-hour water supply to the entire subdivision failing which to turn over the operation of the water system in the subdivision to the United BF Homeowners’ Associations, Inc.”

Unfortunately, the developer has taken steps to appeal that decision. With or without the foregoing decision, the provisions of Presidential Decree 1345 can be properly applied, the Association wrote the MWSS last February 28, 2006. The decree provides:

“MWSS, shall upon petition of the Homeowners Association … take over the operation and maintenance of centralized water systems of residential subdivisions within its territorial jurisdiction …” and “shall thereafter cause the system to operate at the desired level … The cost to render the system operable shall be chargeable to the subdivision owner/developer provided that the provision of adequate water supply has been specified or implied in the contract of sale or other forms used in offering the housing units within the project for sale. Otherwise, the cost to make the system operational shall be chargeable to the homeowners of the subdivision.”

By choice, Maynilad prefers to supply to PWCC instead of direct connection to homeowners so that it can charge the higher commercial rate instead of the cheaper residential rate and avoid system maintenance services. On the other hand, PWCC profits by reselling the water above its acquisition costs and operating expenses without the expense of drilling more water wells.

Obviously, the direct connection option by the enclaves suggested by Maynilad and city hall officials will not prosper at all. Why the empowered MWSS does not “take over the operation and maintenance” of BF Homes water system under the circumstances is anybody’s guess.

In the last election, subdivisions homeowners, comprising the majority of electorate in Parañaque, had the opportunity to elect a non-politician candidate who promised to provide water within his term of office if elected. He was willing to put his money where his mouth is, so to speak, by posting a P50 million performance bond once elected. If we are in this mess, it’s because the majority elected those who, like Pontius Pilate, wash their hands of the responsibility of providing basic necessities of their constituents.

When will water become available to BF homeowners on “equal sufferance” basis is best summed up by Maynilad’s demand to BF Homes water administrator: Pay up.

BF Homes Holdup, Break-in

2007-07-25T10:43:00.000+08:00

About two weeks ago, there was another daylight holdup in BF Homes. Carlo Reyes, a hair saloon beside Union Bank, near Bacolod Chicken House (where the brother’s mayor was earlier held up) along President’s Avenue, BF Homes, was held up by 2 men on a motor cycle. They stuffed in a sack the hand bags and goodies of the ladies and took off in one motor cycle. How about that!

The present dispensation has destroyed the residential character of our neighborhood, forcibly opened our gates to horrendous outsider traffic and exposed residents to criminal elements, and illegally constructed government facilities using government funds on a private property (Aguirre Park), including a covered tennis court.

The commercialization of the subdivision, we are told, is progress, and instead of tossing the blame to the local government for the destruction of the residential character of the subdivision, residents should be grateful.

Let me put it this way: When a storm is coming, you close all your windows. After the storm and you see the mess, you don’t ask why. You ask who opened windows.

The following is a slightly edited email, with a request for dissemination to residents and visitors of BF Homes Subdivision in Parañaque:

At around 9pm last night, we (well, our car) were the victims of “glass breakers”.

We were parked along the main street of BF Homes (President’s Avenue) -- a parking lot in front of a closed luxury car shop right beside the entrance to Tahanan Village. A lamp post illuminated the area and it was only a few steps to the guard house. And at 9pm, it was still a very busy street. So without giving it another thought, we locked the car and crossed the street to where we were having dinner.

We came back an hour later to find our left rear window open—at least, that’s what I thought. At closer inspection we found that the window had actually been smashed. And they did a pretty good job of it—the whole glass lay inside the car unbroken, with only shattered bits around it. Maybe that’s why they didn’t trip the alarm. They knew what they were doing, as we were later told by the police that it wasn’t the first time this happened in the area.

Anyway, we realized that a bag in the back seat caught their attention. It wasn’t a flashy one, and we thought our car was darkly tinted enough to hide what was inside. Apparently we were wrong. The bag contained some cash, credit cards, atm cards, a phone, and house keys. So we immediately got on the phone to have the cards and phone line cut, and all that. We put a makeshift window made of dark plastic so that we could at least drive home without inhaling the polluted air of South Super Highway.

And we thanked God that it was just a bag that was stolen, not our entire car...that it was just a window that was smashed, and not us. We’ve all heard these stories before and have been warned, especially about leaving your laptops in cars, or when going to particularly dangerous areas. But when it happens to you, inside a busy, well-lit area inside a private subdivision, with only a simple bag as the trigger, you can’t help but think, what’s the world coming to? Hay.”

Bottom line—please, please be extra careful, guys. No matter where you go, or what you have, these people will always find a way to get what they want (or need—I keep telling myself that I hope whoever did it was really in dire need na lang). Otherwise, sana kainin sila ng mga malalaking pulang langgam. Don’t give them the opportunity.

Priestly Vestments

2007-06-27T15:23:00.000+08:00

The Archdiocese of Manila reminded the faithful that there is a proper dress code for attending Mass. Wearing the proper attire when attending Mass, said the archdiocese’s Ministry of Liturgical Affairs, is an important part of showing respect to the sanctity of the house of God.

Well and good. However, if there is a dress code for the faithful for attending Mass, there are also priestly vestments for celebrating Mass.

Priests in our parish do not follow the General Instructions of the Roman Missal (“GIRM”) with regards to the proper vestment that all the priests should wear at Mass. Most of the time, the priest celebrant wears an oversized stole over what appears to be a plain white “chasu-alb.” The chasuble is supposed to be a robe of color suitable to the liturgy of the day and worn on top of the alb and stole. It’s usually green (for ordinary times), although it could be white, violet, red, rose or black depending on the occasion. What does the 1975 edition of the GIRM say?

“The vestment common to ministers of every rank is the alb, tied at the waist with a cincture, unless it is made to fit without a cincture. An amice should be put on first if the alb does not completely cover the street clothing. A surplice may not be substituted for the alb when the chasuble or dalmatic is to be worn or when a stole is used instead of the chasuble or dalmatic.” [GIRM 298]

The priest who is celebrating Mass normally is to wear an alb and a chasuble:

“Unless otherwise indicated, the chasuble, worn over the alb and stole, is the vestment proper to the priest celebrant at Mass and other rites immediately connected with Mass.” [GIRM 299]

The Ceremonial of Bishops [CB] also describes the priest’s vestment in this way:

“Unless otherwise indicated, the chasuble, worn over the alb and stole, is the vestment proper to the priest celebrant at Mass and other rites immediately connected with Mass. [CB 66]

Wearing the alb and stole only when celebrating Mass has been permitted in limited circumstances (such as during concelebrations when there is a limited number of chasubles available), and when celebrated outside a church or oratory. It is clear from the above that the minimum vestments for celebrating Mass are the “chasuble, worn over the alb and stole.” These vestments are obligatory vestments envisaged in Canon 929, which states:

“In celebrating and administering the Eucharist, priests ad deacons are to wear the liturgical vestments prescribed by the rubrics.”

As already noted above, the rubrics are found in GIRM nos. 298-300, and in CB no. 66. As pointed out above, the exception to these requirements for Eucharistic celebrations are limited to concelebrations and celebrations outside a church. Nowhere does it allow the principal celebrant in any Mass held inside a church building to vest only with an oversized stole over a “chasu-alb.” What happened to the alb, the symbol of purity? Without it, the priest’s street clothes and bare arms can clearly be seen. Isn’t the alb worn precisely for the purpose of hiding the priest’s ordinary wear? How can the laity be expected to dress appropriately for Mass when the ordained minister himself is dressed inappropriately? I have also seen instances of priests wearing an alb but with a plain white or cream-colored “chasu-alb” over it, and an oversized stole over the “chasu-alb.” Both practices are not in accord with the established norms.

This casual mentality towards vesting diminishes the solemnity of the Mass. If people can afford to expend time to dress correctly to attend formal affairs hosted by mere mortals, surely, our Lord deserves no less.

Robbers struck in BF Homes Parañaque

2007-05-10T18:48:00.000+08:00

Three armed men robbed the elder brother of Parañaque Mayor Florencio Bernabe at a restaurant in Parañaque City Wednesday afternoon.

Senior Superintendent Ronald Estilles said Dr. Renato “Boy” Bernabe and his wife Baby were among those who fell prey to the group of robbers who struck at the Bacolod Chicken House at President’s Avenue in Barangay BF Homes Parañaque.

Police said the robbers who were armed with handguns barged at the restaurant at around 1 p.m. and immediately announced the holdup.

Two of the suspects immediately went to the table occupied by the Bernabe family and divested them of their jewelry and cellular phones.

The suspects also took the valuables from about a dozen customers who were dining at the time. Taking advantage of the fact that there was no security guard posted at the restaurant, the heist took only about a few minutes to complete.

The suspects escaped without taking anything from the cash register of the restaurant, police said.

Surprisingly, members of the Parañaque police headquarters arrived at the crime scene ahead of the police personnel from a nearby police community precinct beside the Barangay BF Homes which is just a stone’s throw away from the restaurant.

Estilles said his men is now conducting follow up operation for the immediate capture of the suspects, who reportedly belongs to the FX Robbery Gang who are responsible for the series of robberies on public utility vehicles.

Police said they are now hunting down one of the alleged leaders of the gang identified as Bobby Baliber, whose picture, along with his other cohorts, are now posted in various business establishments BF Homes.

Baliber, a resident of Purok 5, Sampaloc, Site 2, Barangay BF Homes, had been arrested in November 26, 2006, along with two other accused Joel Lazarito and Cris Dadibas, on charges of robbery.

The subdivision residents had resented the move of Mayor Bernabe who ordered the force-opening of the gates of the BF Homes to public traffic, which has reportedly sparked a rash of crimes in the village, including pick-pockets, snatchers, car theft, and cellular phone robbers.

[Daily Tribune by Ben Gines, Jr.]

Face The Issue

2007-05-09T17:33:00.000+08:00

1. Allegation: Romeo G. Roxas of Green Circle Properties and Resources, Inc. logged and cleared their area at Umiray-Dingalan wantonly.

The Facts: The 28,000 hectare Umiray-Dingalan area is a titled property bought from a former owner who have the area logged under an SPLTL (Special Private Land Timber License). The area as far back as the mid of the 18^th century was claimed and cleared by Inspeccion General de Montes and later, during the American Regime was titled under the Torrens System.

Since Roxas’ Green Circle is not a logging company but on realty and development, logging was stopped. The former operator applied for salvage and retrieval operations with the DENR and was the one responsible for logs coming out of the area.

Also, as the area is an alienable and disposable having been a titled property, Green Circle therefore has all the rights to develop their area subject to limitations and provisions of an Environmental Compliance Certificate issued by DENR re: development activities. Hence, for al intents and purposes and as deemed required, Green Circle can cut-down all trees without any violations as per P.D. 705 – the Forestry Reform Code.

2. Allegation: Romeo G. Roxas is not an heir of a Philippine Veteran.

The Facts: The father of Romeo Roxas is an employee of the Commonwealth and is directly providing services to the US Government as a Teacher/ Superintendent. Hence the father is a veteran and therefore the son is an heir.

3. Allegation: He (Romeo Roxas) burns money and cut down trees

The Facts: Romeo G. Roxas is a monetarist who is well-versed with the Keynesian Theory. He doesn’t burn money but instead creates wealth through his development efforts. He implements or wants to implement theories and practices learned and experienced.

The writers/hackers of the undocumented articles in the internet are “journalist” of the AC-DC genre. Romeo G. Roxas proved he can never kowtow with their “extortions” and hence, earned their ire.

Numbers

2007-04-16T16:48:00.000+08:00

30% Proportion of Filipino couples unaware that babies result from having sex, according to a study by the Philippine government.

2.36% Net population growth in the Philippines, among the highest in the world, with 4,000 babies born every day. [Source: Time Magazine, 03/14/05]

Leaders of the Catholic Church, the religion of 81 percent of the Philippine population, condemn birth control.[Source: Pulse Asia]

Ayan!

***

Thousands of Americans were marching on the 4^th year anniversary of the Iraq war, calling the killing of 3,500 American soldiers since the start of the war as “immoral!”

By comparison, since the start of the Iraq war, more than 5,000,000 (five million!) American babies have died by abortion.

It seems to me that the protesters are marching for the wrong reason.

Wake-up Call

2007-04-10T08:20:00.000+08:00

A friend telephoned to disagree to my characterization of BF Homes Parañaque Subdivision. The commercialization of the subdivision is progress, and instead of tossing the blame to the local government for the destruction of the residential character of the subdivision, residents should be grateful.

And why not, considering that even within BF Homes, residents cannot seem to put their acts together on the subject of keeping the subdivision safe for their families whose welfare has been shoved aside by a persistent minority. This is eloquently expressed in Mayor Jun Bernabe’s February 15, 2006, letter to Muntinlupa Mayor Jaime Fresnide:

This is just a follow-up to our conversation last Sunday via our cellphones in which we discussed… the increasing number of complaints that my office has been receiving regarding the use of Tirona gate as a two-way access route for residents living in both Parañaque and Alabang, Muntinlupa sides of BF Homes.

To raise revenues for the municipality to qualify for cityhood being pushed by (re-electionist) Congressman Roilo Golez, public opinion was ignored, public preferences were disregarded, and public meetings were rigged!

In water-starved BF Homes, the 1997 re-zoning of subdivision’s main streets converted properties one lot deep along Aquirre and a portion of El Grande Avenues to commercial zones, allowing the construction of multi-storey structures, restaurants, beer houses, super clubs, liquor stores, gasoline service stations, supermarkets, banks, colleges and universities, including funeral parlors, mortuaries and crematory services and memorial chapels. Homeowners are outraged by the prospect of having such establishments as their next door neighbors.

The letter continues: Sometime in August last year, we implemented City Ordinance No. 00-15, Series of 2000 and opened the major roads of BF Homes-Parañaque to the public. In doing so, we effectively took over from UBFHAI the function and responsibility of manning the gates of the subdivision’s major roads in the interest of order and public service…

The local government cannot simply take over private property [the road lots are privately titled] without due process, but [re-electionist] Mayor Jun Bernabe, using SWAT power, forcibly opened the gates of the subdivision. In doing so, as his letter aptly articulated, he effectively let loose a huge influx of outsider traffic that includes commuters, short-cutting motorists, commercial vehicles of all types, and legions of squatters, carjackers, carnappers and even prowlers, thieves, rapists, and all sorts of criminals.

Over the objections of homeowners, and despite the constitutional proscription against the use of public funds for private purposes, the mayor appropriated yet another portion of Aguirre Park for a two-story Barangay Hall. For good measure, the park fronting the Resurrection Parish Church is also designated garbage segregation facility. [Follow your nose, you can’t miss it!]

The commercial area in Phase I has been converted into one big parking area with the “pito” boys, displaying the charms of modern Mafioso’s, licensed to collect “parking fees.” These “volunteers” are sporting “PNP-CVO” uniforms, cap and ID’s costing, I am told, something like PhP1,000. Not far behind are the security guards of the commercial establishments collecting “tips” for illegal parking.

Aguirre and President’s Avenues and Elizalde Street in the commercial district in Phase I are no on-street parking areas. Yet, despite repeated written appeals for enforcement from some 200 residents located at the end of President’s Avenue, the local authorities remain deaf. The commercial establishments continue with impunity to appropriate the roads and sidewalks at President’s corner Aguirre Avenues for parking, double parking and sometimes triple parking, making going and coming home difficult and hazardous for residents.

Obviously, our barangay captain, who is busy campaigning for a seat in the city council, is the problem, not the solution.

We are not against progress, but traffic, efficient garbage disposal and distribution of basic necessities are also primary considerations. Progress should be rational and for the good of the majority, otherwise, it is a brutalization of the quality of our lives.

The present dispensation has destroyed the residential character of our neighborhood, forcibly opened our gates to horrendous outsider traffic and exposed residents to criminal elements, illegally constructed government facilities on the park, including garbage segregation facility. Yet, many of those responsible are shamelessly seeking re-election, while some even have the gall and temerity to aspire for higher public offices.

We are saddled with officials who cannot grasp even the basic fundamentals of urban planning, who lack the creativity to increase the city’s coffers except to increase real estate taxes, and who exhibit total disregard for a healthy environment.

Clearly, our re-electionist congressman, mayor, councilors, and barangay officials are insensitive and unresponsive to the feelings of residents over the demands of outside speculators. THEY DO NOT DESERVE OUR VOTES!

Above The Law?

2007-03-26T13:39:00.000+08:00

The United BF Homeowners’ Association has filed a petition in the Office of the Ombudsman, claiming that it was unconstitutional and unlawful for City Mayor of Parañaque to disburse public funds of the City of Parañaque for the clearing, repair and maintenance of the existing sidewalks of BF Homes Parañaque Subdivision. The sidewalks are private property of BF Homes, Inc. Hence, the city government could not use public resources on them. In undertaking the project, therefore, respondent allegedly violated the constitutional proscription against the use of public funds for private purposes as well as Sections 335 and 336 of RA 7160 [Local Government Code of 1991] and the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.

Undoubtedly, the respondent city mayor, through his legal adviser, is invoking the Supreme Court’s 1991 decision in justifying the project [including the construction of a two-story Barangay Hall at the Aguirre Park], as follows:

“When [a strip of land] was withdrawn from the commerce of man as the open space required by law to be devoted for the use of the general public, its ownership was automatically vested in the [LGU] and/or the Republic of the Philippines, without need of paying any compensation to [the developer], although it is still registered in the latter’s name. Its donation by the owner/developer is a mere formality.” [193 SCRA 765]

But the 1991 White Plains ruling was modified by the Supreme Court in 1998, holding that subdivision streets belonged to the owner until donated to the government or until expropriated upon payment of just compensation. [297 SCRA 547]

Under subdivision laws [PD-957, 1216], lots allotted by subdivision developers as road lots include roads, sidewalks, alleys and planting strips. Thus, what is true for subdivision roads or streets applies to subdivision sidewalks as well. Ownership of the sidewalks in a private subdivision belongs to the subdivision owner/developer until it is either transferred to the government by way of donation or acquired by the government through expropriation.

The Court has laid down the test of validity of a public expenditure: it is the essential character of the direct object of the expenditure which must determine its validity and not the magnitude of the interests to be affected nor the degree to which the general advantage of the community, and thus the public welfare, may be ultimately benefited by their promotion. Incidental advantage to the public or to the State resulting from the promotion of private interests and the prosperity of private enterprises or business does not justify their aid by the use of public money. [Pascual v. Secretary of Public Works, 110 Phil. 331 (1960)]

Section 335 of RA 7160 is clear and specific that no public money or property shall be appropriated or applied for private purposes. This is in consonance with the fundamental principle in local fiscal administration that local government funds and monies shall be spent solely for public purposes.

Therefore, the use of LGU funds for the improvement of privately-owned sidewalks [and the construction of the Barangay Hall] in BF Homes Parañaque Subdivision is unlawful as it directly contravenes Section 335 of RA 7160.

The case filed by the homeowners association is hardly moving, if at all, thanks to the mayor’s influential legal adviser. How can the validity of the challenged appropriation and expenditure be determined if the Ombudsman prosecutor sits on the case?

We can make the difference

2007-03-20T13:38:00.000+08:00

After having scrimped and saved and then spent our life savings for a house in BF Homes Parañaque Subdivision in order to enjoy a well deserved peace and quiet away from the madding crowd, so to speak, we find that we are to suffer the sad fate of having the same madding crowd practically in our front yards, complete with cars and vans to boot.

Our politicians have shove aside our families’ welfare in the interest of commerce, opening our main gates to a huge influx of outsider traffic that includes squatters, commuters, short-cutting motorists, and even prowlers, thieves, rapists, and all sort of criminals.

Criminals are now roaming free in and out of BF Homes to commit murder, armed robbery, “akyat-bahay,” carjacking, carnapping and snatching. Even our PCJ church parishioners within the confine of the church premises were not spared by the brutality of crime.

We have to queue up to get in and out of the subdivision. BF Homes is now the main artery for traffic to and from Cavite/Las Piñas and Parañaque, Pasay, Makati and points north. Foot traffic has drastically increased and we no longer know the background and number of strangers roaming our neighborhoods.

In a word, we have the distinction of having been chosen by the mayor of Parañaque to be fed to his constituents!

The commercialization cannot, by any stretch of imagination, be described as promotive of the health, safety, peace and order, education, morals, comfort and convenience, or protection of property – in short, the wellbeing and general welfare – of the greater number of residence of BF Homes. For the serenity, peace and quiet have been replaced by the chaos, turmoil and frenzy of commerce. Where there was no crowding, congestion, and air and noise pollution, these banes of the so-called “progress” now pervade and suffocate the environment. To characterize the re-zoning as an exercise of police power would be retrogressive.

To paraphrase a justice of the appellate court, part of the allure of subdivision living is the comparative privacy and exclusivity which the residents enjoy. Otherwise, we might as well have lived along the main road and spared ourselves the expense of paying a premium for our abodes. Perhaps Mayor Jun Bernabe and his obedient cohorts would not would not think too highly of their idea of general access through subdivision roads if it were they whose relaxation would be disturbed by the constant honking of horns and the screeching of tires, or if they had to live in constant fear of a wayward car plowing through their front doors, decimating the entire household, maids, children and all.

We are saddled with officials who cannot seem to grasp even the basic fundamentals of urban planning, who lack the creativity to increase the city’s coffers except by increasing real estate taxes and who exhibit a total disregard for a healthy environment.

We made the difference in the 2004 election with a voter’s turnout of 60% instead of the usual 10%. Let’s all go out in the upcoming May election to express our indignation by voting them out of office.

Promises Revisited

2007-03-15T17:09:00.000+08:00

Promising to find “immediate solution to the chronic water supply shortage” [translation: “walang tubig!”] and respect the will of the majority on the question of commercialization of the subdivision’s main streets, then candidate Jun Bernabe convinced Association officials to tirelessly campaign for him as city mayor. Association officials campaigned for new voters registration and provided free transportation during the 2004 election. The result was that 60% (instead of the usual less than 10%) of registered BF Homes voters turned out to vote.

Upon assumption into office, Mayor Jun Bernabe opened the roads of the subdivision to the general public in utter disregard of the sentiments of the residents and his electoral promise to abide by the will of the majority. In a classic case of too little, too late, he has “created a water crisis committee to find immediate and long-term solutions to the chronic water supply shortage in BF Homes Subdivision and other communities in the city.”

The membership of the committee is composed, naturally, of his business cronies and obedient cohorts. Consequently, except as an aid for re-election in the upcoming election, nothing really is expected of this committee but hot air.

This is not unlike his electoral promise when he first ran as mayor. The resolution of the waterless subdivision makes for a good electoral campaign. The incumbent mayor, it must be conceded, is unlike the other politicians when it comes to personal honor of keeping one’s word. He has, after all, created a water crisis committee to look into the problem even if “water supply [of his constituents] is a national government concern.”

The re-electionist mayor’s “praise” release that “Parañaque City long wait for water is over” is a cruel joke. Good grief! He takes the BF Homes electorate as morons.

The pump at Villamor Airbase is not capable of pumping water to Parañaque, Muntinlupa and Las Piñas, assuming there is sufficient water from Balara. Since there have been no new installations of high capacity pumps and mains, nor will the developer agree to the takeover of BF waterworks system, the claim is nothing but a re-election gimmick.

Unlike animals, man lives by intellect and will and thus he lives not just for the moment but also binds himself to his future by his promises.

Without promises there could be no stable society. Nothing human holds together without this glue – the very glue that is becoming unglued today. I mean the individual promise-keeping. There is no sense of personal honor of keeping one’s word anymore. We have become a society of Pontius Pilates, washing our hands of responsibilities as he did. Yet a man who does not keep his promises is not a man; he is a weasel.