Roads right-of- way for sale?

LETTERS FROM THE AGNO

March L. Fianza

History keeps repeating itself. Some years ago, Barangay officials of Bakakeng Central in Baguio applied for lots along Marcos Highway and the Old Sto. Tomas Road for its needs. The applications were turned down by the DENR because the DPWH said these were within the Road Right-Of-Way. 

Years later, the barangay officials were surprised to find out that the office of the Baguio City Engineering District issued RROW clearances saying that the said portion of the old Sto. Tomas Road is “not within the right of way.”

The certification subsequently served as basis for the DENR to issue town site sales applications or TSAs to private individuals Mark Hilario, Arlene de Leon, Ida Dadpaas, Marvin Pulido, and Margie Nicolas Chan.

However, I learned that the Ombudsman dismissed the complaints against them and some city government officials, as the alleged conspiracy case filed against them was not proven.Apparently, the issuance of the TSA eventually allowed the private applicants, who were alleged to be dummies of DPWH and DENR officials, to construct their houses in the area. 

There was nothing else that the barangay officials could do but to file the necessary graft and corruption charges against the DPWH officials involved. They also sought for the cancellation of the TSAs from the DENR that were placed under the names of private individuals, one of whom was allegedly related to the district engineer.  

In response to the complaints, the DPWH head that time eventually filed formal charges against his employees, then Baguio City District Engineering Office assistant district engineer Nestor Nicolas and two other employees.

Last month, news came out that the Office of the Ombudsman found probable cause to indict former Public Works and Highways City District Engineer Nicolas for violation of Section 3 of Republic Act 9013 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, and further recommended the filing of falsification of public documents charges against him and his subordinate, Engr. Eduardo Lunes, a special agent of the BCDEO.

The ombudsman resolution that was signed in 2007, but was released only recently to the concerned parties after undergoing review by Ombudsman Conchita Morales.

***

Last week, news had it that the Office of the Ombudsman ordered the filing of charges of graft and malversation of public funds before the Sandiganbayan against a former regional director of the DPWH  in the Cordillera, six of his assistants and three others for the payment of some P2.5 million for fictitious RROW claims in 2001.

Facing charges are then DPWH-CAR regional director Antonio Purugganan, then assistant regional director Edilberto Carabbacan who is now the present RD, then legal officer Alberto Tremor, then OIC division chief Juliet Anosan, then cashier III Evelyn Picardal, then project engineer Cristobal Tinaza, and engineer II Christian Felix Kanongkong.

The 29-page Ombudsman resolution said, Purugganan conspired with the respondents and caused the disbursement of public funds amounting to P2,557,200 based on the allegedly fictitious and anomalous RROW claims of one Antero Palaci and Gertrude Ingosan 13 years ago.This was the time when the DPWH-CAR undertook a road improvement project along the Pico-Lamtang Road in La Trinidad, Benguet in 1997.

In its report, the Ombudsman said that on Dec. 11, 2001, then project engineer Tinaza  certified that based on field investigation, the properties of Palaci and Ingosan were affected by the road improvement project, thus the amounts of P2,196,300 and P360,900 were paid to them, respectively.

But on Nov. 5, 2003, it was discovered by the Commission on Audit-CAR that the RROW claims were the “products of forgery” as the mentioned properties were not actually traversed by the road improvement project. The COA eventually disallowed the disbursements to Palaci and Ingosan. 

The Office of the Ombudsman further reported that it was “highly improbable for Ingosan to execute a deed of conveyance in 2002 as she died in 2000, and her heirs even did not receive any payment.”

In an earlier ruling, the Office of the President dismissed Purugganan from the government service over the same irregularity.

These cases provoke suspicions that road easements are being sold to private persons. Isn’t this also the reason why demolition jobs on buildings occupying RROWs in the city and other thoroughfares cannot be implemented because government officials are the ones who have been assisting the applicants in processing the validity of lot claims?

If so, it would be best to re-investigate RROW cases if payments for these were received by the right persons. Who sell the RROW corners and pocket the money?