‘No bail allowed’ in Baguio rep’s forest destruction case

BAGUIO CITY --  No bail may be allowed by the Sandiganbayan in the forest destruction case filed by the Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources against  Rep. Nicasio Aliping Jr. and three public works contractors once their trial commences.

This was stated in a manifestation with motion addressed to Deputy Ombudsman for Luzon Gerard Mosquera,  environmental ombudsman, by the DENR Cordillera Administrative Regional Office dated April 27, 2016 “because of the non-stop development in the area claimed by Respondent Aliping, (who) even with the effectivity of a Temporary Environment Protection Order, blatantly, arrogantly, completely and crassly defied the said TEPO which was issued by members of the highest court of the land sitting en banc.”

In the TEPO issued by the Supreme Court, Aliping “and those acting for and in his behalf (were ordered) to cease and desist from performing acts to develop or enhance the property located at Mount Santo Tomas Forest Reserve which the said respondent claims to be his and/or his brother’s, which acts include improving the old building standing on the land, building any structure thereon, continuing with the road opening activities, concreting any part of the road, and for the said respondent to immediately take steps to mitigate the contamination of the Amliang dams due to the erosion emanating from his road opening activity.”

The DENR-CAR, after counting that 306 trees and 455 saplings were destroyed in the excavation of the 2.6-km road leading to Aliping’s claimed property when discovered on April 15, 2014, valued the damages done there at over P10.3-milllion.

Despite Aliping’s claim that he has tax declarations covering his claimed property there, the DENR-CAR disproved it when they disclosed that a “perusal of the records will reveal that respondent Aliping has no tax declarations covering his alleged claim within Mount Santo Tomas Forest Reserve. The DENR maintains that records disclose that his claimed tax declarations identified as ARP Nos. 99-001-05853 and 99-001-05854 are not in his name, but in the names of Rosalie Leistner and the late Felimon Coyupan, respectively.

“Respondent Aliping likewise admitted that he purchased the property from a German couple, Andreas and Rosalie Leistner, and it is of public knowledge in Baguio City and Benguet Province that the German husband has been ordered arrested for violations of Republic Acts 9262 (Violence against Women and their Children) and 7610 (Child Abuse), (after being) believed to have sired 11 children by three Filipino women (who all lived in that same house located at Mount Santo Tomas, Tuba, Benguet). And while the German husband is now unaccounted for, some people, including Respondent Aliping, have been claiming ownership over his declared property.

“Respondent Aliping’s claim of the sale in his favor of the subject properties is noticeably and glaringly without proof of any documents evidencing the sale. Even a layman is aware that if he makes a claim of ownership, he must support the same with substantial proof. Consequently, Respondent Aliping’s claim of ownership, bereft of evidence, deserves not just scant consideration, but no consideration at all.”

“Moreover, Respondent Aliping’s argument that he is just improving his property and what he is doing is exactly what other people in the said area are doing, is again misplaced and utterly without legal basis,” the DENR-CAR said.

In the same manifestation, the DENR categorically maintains that Proclamation No. 581 issued on July 8, 1940 by President Manuel L. Quezon declared Mount Santo Tomas as a forest reserve which is undeniably descriptive of its legal status. ”This underscores the idea that it can never form part of the alienable and disposable lands, not unless an official proclamation, with due process, declares it as an integral part of the alienable and disposable lands of the public domain. And having (been) so determined as forest reserve, with no cogent reason having been raised to disestablish its classification, no one has the authority to ignore it as a forest reserve by just exercising his/her own discretion,” the DENR-CAR added.

“And any violation of the reasonable rules regulating the use and occupancy of the forest reserve is made a crime, not by the DENR, but by Congress. DENR, under the executive branch of the government, must execute the laws, criminal or otherwise. It is its bounden duty to do so,” the DENR-CAR pointed out.

“Simply put, those who cut, uproot, remove, collect, gather trees or forest products, and those who possess the timber or forest products without authority or legal documents, or those who will make unauthorized entry into any forest land become automatically liable of the acts punishable under Sections 77 and 78 of Presidential Decree 705 (or the Revised Forestry Code) regardless of the motive or purpose it was pursued. For what is material in determining the culpability of a person is whether or not the person or entity involved or charged with its violation possesses the required permit, license or authorization from DENR at the time he cuts, uproots, gathers or collects timber or forest products or at the time he occupies the forest land. The law must be applied regardless of who may be affected.

“ The remedy of respondents can be found elsewhere – either clemency from the executive or amendment of the law by the legislature – but certainly not a dismissal of the information or case even before it is heard where there has been a clear showing of violation of the law,” the DENR-CAR stressed.

“In Republic Act 10660 or An Act Strengthening Further the Functional and Structural Organization of the Sandiganbayan, which was approved on April 16 last year, it was stated that “In case private individuals are

charged as co-principals, accomplices or accessories with the public officers or employees, including those employed in government-owned or controlled corporations, they shall be tried jointly with said public officers and employees in the proper courts which shall exercise exclusive jurisdiction over them.”

Named as co-respondents in the forest destruction case filed by the DENR-CAR against Aliping before the Sandiganbayan were contractors William Go of Goldrich Construction and Trading, Romeo Aquino of R. U. Aquino Construction and Development Corporation, and Bernard Capuyan of BLC Construction and Aggregates.

A separate case was filed by the Baguio Water District against the same respondents for the turbidity of the Amliang Creek water sources, while another one was also filed before the Supreme Court by church leaders and concerned residents led by Bishop Carlito Cenzon of the Diocese of Baguio-Benguet and Archbishop Socrates Villegas of the Lingayen-Dagupan Diocese for the issuance of a TEPO and a Writ of Kalikasan.

It was also revealed in a letter to Mosquera dated April 11 this year that the case filed before the Ombudsman has been languishing in his office for many months. “Inspections conducted on the site showed that there was an excavation done and trees, poles, saplings were uprooted and found on the area. The backhoe loaders belonging to Respondents Go, Aquino and Capuyan were also found thereat.

“The simple fact that their backhoe loaders were found at Mount Santo Tomas Forest Reserve where the excavation and earth moving activities were being carried out and all probability were used to bulldoze the land and the trees… make them liable as co-principals, accomplices or accessories to the crime committed by Respondent Aliping. The law is clear and must be applied. This is, and should be, sufficient to find probable cause and thus immediately cause the filing of the information against Respondent Aliping as well as Respondents Go, Aquino and Capuyan before the Sandiganbayan,” the DENR-CAR said.

“Finally, DENR would like to reiterate the matter on the damages suffered by the government by reason of the acts of Respondent Aliping in causing the destruction of a portion of a clearly declared Mount Santo Tomas Forest Reserve which amount is safely pegged at a minimum of P10 million. This is certainly not a paltry amount which must be given due consideration in the recommendation of bail.

“In fact, the amount of P10 million is inclusive only of the damage by reason of the loss of the trees. This amount, huge as it is already, does not even cover the damage and injury caused to the Baguio Water District given the contamination of the water system of Baguio City and the nearby municipalities because of the soil erosion caused by the destruction of the trees. There is also the damage to government capital assets which have not yet been fully accounted for. As such, the offense should be non-bailable,” it added.

If found guilty, Aliping may be sentenced to maximum penalty for forest destruction and will be banned from holding  public office for life.