Noy rejects amendments to Baguio City charter

BAGUIO CITY – President Aquino has rejected amendments to this city’s century-old charter, particularly on tenurial rights and land disposition including provisions which oppositionists said, were contrary to the Philippine Constitution and other laws.

The President did not sign into law House Bill 3759 revising the charter of Baguio City and returned the measure without his signature after vetoing it.

Mr. Aquino said objectives of the bill relating to local governmental powers were covered by the Local Government Code of 1991.

“The proposed measure impinges on the Department of Environment and Natural Resources’ exclusive mandate over control and supervision of alienable and disposable public lands, and runs counter to the laws governing the disposition of townsite reservations,” he said in the veto.

The President said Section 35 of the proposed amended charter is “ambiguous as to the entity that may dispose of alienable and disposable lands which are part of the townsite reservation.”

The city’s charter was enacted in 1909 under the American colonial government.

Amendments to the charter were first introduced 12 years ago by then congressman, now Mayor Mauricio Domogan.

Former Youth Rep. Edgar Avila in a media interview, said the measure was rejected by the president owing to its unconstitutional provisions and other proposals contrary to law.

But Domogan said those who urged the president to veto amendments to the city charter did not study well its legality.

He did not name oppositors to the measure.

Domogan said the city government will not give up in efforts to have its revised Charter signed into law since it is the only way to totally solve its boundary dispute with the neighboring town of Tuba, Benguet and the disposition of alienable and disposable lands to qualified home lot applicants.

“President Aquino was misled into vetoing the whole Charter of Baguio,” Domogan said, adding that the President’s claim that some provisions of the revised Charter runs counter with national laws is not actually true.

While it is true that the Local Government Code of 1991 provides the procedure on how to settle boundary disputes, Domogan explained it is not clear on how to concretize the settlement, thus, the agreement reached by the city and Tuba officials on how to settle their dispute so that the city will be able to establish its metes and bounds within its 57.4-square kilometer land area was already enshrined in the Charter that was approved by both the House of Representatives and the Senate.

Reacting to the President’s argument that it is not clear in Section 35 which agency of government will handle the disposition of alienable and disposable lands, the local chief executive pointed out that it is still the Department of Environment and Natural Resources that will be in charge with the disposition of alienable and disposable lands in accordance to existing policies.

According to him, the creation of an inter-agency committee to screen the over 5,600 still pending applications for land titles is to ensure that the screening will be fastracked considering that the DENR-CAR regional executive director will also be a member of the created committee, thus, the power to dispose alienable and disposable lands is still lodged with the DENR.

On the statement of the President that the revised Charter is in violation of the provisions of the Public Land Act that requires all fees generated from the sale and disposal of alienable and disposable lands will accrue to the national coffers, Domogan claimed Section 36 which mandates that proceeds from the sale of the city’s alienable and disposable lands will accrue to the city’s coffers is just a carryover from the provisions of the 1909 city Charter. – With a report from Dexter See