Court denies vendors TRO on market demolition case

By Isagani S. Liporada

BAGUIO CITY – The Municipal Trial Court last week denied issuance of a temporary restraining order and writ of preliminary prohibitory injunction prayed for by vendors affected by the August 22 clearing operations at Block 3here at the city market.

Branch IV MTC Judge Maria Clarita Casuga-Tabin in an order dated October 29 said TRO is already “moot and academic” in the case Ana Maria Carbalo, et al. vs. Policarpio Tamayo, et al.

She ruled vendors failed to show “clear and legal right to the grant of [PPI]” and thus, the same must be denied.

The suit filed by 300-effected vendors is for forcible entry and damages with application for injunctive reliefs.

The vendors alleged, the city through force, intimidation, strategy, and stealth implemented the demolition of their stalls, being notified of an impending demolition of their stalls on a Friday when no judicial remedy can be availed of.

Impleaded in the case were market supervisor Tamayo, administrator Carlos Canilao, demolition team head Nazita Banez, one Nuel Saranilla and Baguio City Police Office chief David Lacdan.

Tabin on the request for TRO and PPI ruled, “There is no question the parcel of land upon which [vendors] erected their stalls belongs to the City of Baguio as evidenced by Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. 2208.”

She said the vendors failed to present evidence showing awards or contracts of lease to show they were allowed by government to occupy their respective spaces to dispute a certification issued by treasurer Thelma Manois stating they are not registered stall-holders.

“It is in the city government’s exercise of police power that the vendors were made to vacate the stalls as the same were constructed with highly combustible materials and are in dilapidated state… becoming fire hazard.”

“This situation is further confirmed by the Fire Safety Inspection Report by the Office of the City Fire Marshal.”

She cited Supreme Court Circular No. 68-94 which provides "no court shall have jurisdiction to issue any restraining order in any case, dispute or controversy involving an infrastructure project of government.”

Meanwhile, mediation before the Philippine Mediation Center and Judicial Dispute Resolution on other aspects of the forcible entry and damages case scheduled Dec. 8, still stands.