Bacolod City Legal Officer Allan Zamora yesterday asked the Court to dismiss the new case on the construction of the government center on the grounds that the plaintiffs are not real parties in interest and have no legal standing to file the case.

The case seeking the declaration of nullity of Appropriation Ordinance No. 1 for the release of the 15 percent mobilization fund was filed on March 1 by Barangay Captains Madeline Diaz, Brigid Tan, Elvira Arcobillas, Norberto Subiate, Sammy Gaitan, Anjo Ayco, Rodolfo Montano and Rufino Alcala, as well as former executive assistants Sancho Nagar and Victor Eduardo.

Respondents in the case are the City of Bacolod represented by Mayor Evelio Leonardia, Vice Mayor Renecito Novero, the 10 councilors who approved the ordinance, Acting City Treasurer Annabelle Badajos, Acting City Accountant Eduardo Ravena and Hilmarc's Construction Corp. represented by engineer Efren Canlas.

Novero said he will file a separate answer together with the other councilors.

On March 9, RTC Judge Rodney Bolunia had dismissed a case seeking the nullification of the contract between the city and the government center contractor, HCC filed by another group.

The legal counsel of the group, Rolando Villamor, said he will file a notice of appeal on the order of Bolunia to the Court of Appeals on both question of fact and law.

Meanwhile, in the answer he filed before the RTC, Zamora who represented Leonardia, Badajos and Ravena, said the plaintiffs, aside from claiming they are taxpayers, failed to alleged their interest in filing the instant case. He said they did not even alleged that they will sustain a direct injury as a result of the passage of the questioned resolution.

Zamora said the case must be dismissed on the ground that the complaint states no cause of action and because plaintiffs are not the real parties in interest.

He said a party bringing a suit challenging the constitutionality of the law, act, or statute must show "not only that the law is invalid, but also that he has sustained or is in immediate, or imminent danger of sustaining some direct injury as a result of its enforcement, and not merely that he suffers in some indefinite way."

Zamora said there is no memorandum of agreement executed between the city and HCC as claimed by the plaintiffs, but what was executed between the two parties was a contract for the construction and site development of the government center.

The contract between the city and HCC does not mention about the source of money to be used for the construction of the project, Zamora said. The loan agreement with Land Bank of the Philippines is only a credit line to be availed of by the city in the construction of the project and that there is no such thing as "double funding," he said.

Zamora said the enactment of Appropriation Ordinance No. 1 was never attended by deliberate haste and prompted by sinister and questionable motives. He said the truth and fact are that such passage of the questioned appropriation ordinance was motivated by the necessity of preserving the donated property worth about P140 million and the urgent need of preventing a possible damage suit against the city.

Zamora said the allegation that a check was prepared even before the questioned appropriation ordinance was signed by the authorized officers of defendant City of Bacolod will not affect the validity of such appropriation ordinance.

He cited Item No. 7.1 of the Updated Budget Operations Manual for Local Government Units which provides that "in the case of a supplemental budget, the same shall be deemed effective on the date such ordinance was passed by the Sanggunian."

Zamora said the loan agreement with LBP does not prohibit the city from using its resources or part of its resources in the construction of the project. He said that, based on records, the city has an available P43,523,811.65 from its Internal Revenue Allotment and P55 million representing "net income" (surplus), or a total available amount of P93,523,811.65.

Zamora said the Mayor believes that should the 15 percent of the contract price (P59.2 million) for the construction of the project be paid by the city, it will be more advantageous to the defendant city as there will be a considerable reduction in the intended loan that will result in the reduction of the amount of interest which the city will pay.*CGS

back to top