Home > Op-ed | To bottom

Decide on the Jadewell issue now

The Jadewell Parking Systems Corporation again landed the local media, both in the print and broadcast. In fact, stories on Jadewell were bannered by local papers. But these banner stories are misleading. Equally misleading are the headlines which made the issue sensational.These alleged that there was a Supreme Court (SC) order for the arrest of Baguio City Mayor Braulio Yaranon.

To clarify the present issues, let us review some important past events.

The Third Division of the SC issued on February 9, 2005 a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction which ordered Mayor Yaranon to immediately reopen the streets operated and/or occupied by Jadewell. The writ arises from the petition filed by Jadewell, the alleged king of the streets of the city.

In its resolution dated April 20, the Third Division of the SC issued a resolution finding that Mayor Yaranon failed to comply with the writ issued on February 9. As a result, the resolution imposed the following: First, it found the mayor guilty of direct and indirect contempt for his disobedience of the writ of mandatory injunction; Second, he was imposed a fine of P 10,000 payable in 5 days else non-payment would mean his imprisonment; Third, it ordered the NBI to arrest and detain the mayor until his compliance with the writ of injunction.

The third was sensationalized by some media in the city. Maybe because of the words “arrest” and “detain”. It must be understood however that the arrest and detain order is dependent on the immediate compliance by the mayor. If the mayor complied for the opening of the said streets, then there is no need for the arrest and detention. So what’s the use of the banner story on the arrest? Well, your guess is good as mine.

* * * * *

It must be clarified that the February 9 writ did not resolve the legality of the contract between Jadewell and the City with regard to the pay parking scheme of our streets. It remains undecided by the Court. With the issuance of the writ, it seems that the status quo should be observed: the streets should be opened until such time that they will decide as to the legality of the contract.

The mayor issued a statement on May 5 reiterating and clarifying that the above writ is not equivalent to the validity of the contract of Jadewell to collect fees for the street parking. He reiterated their position that the scheme is institutionalized graft and corruption, as anti-graft and corrupt complaint was filed against members of the awards committee that awarded the pay parking contract to Jadewell despite the latter’s failure to qualify on the contract.

The mayor stood by his Executive Order No. 1-004 which recognize the citizens right not to pay public revenue to Jadewell, a private juridical entity. By issuing this order, the mayor has several legal bases. First, the Local Government Code states that collection of local taxes, fees, charges and other impositions shall not be let to any private person (Sec. 130, R.A. 7160); Second, these should be levied and collected for public purposes (Sec. (b) (2) R.A. 7160); Third, it is based on legal maxim where properties of public dominion are outside the commerce of men, as such they cannot be appropriated and cannot be alienated or encumbered (Tan Toco v. Municipality of Iloilo, 49 Phils. 52; Meneses v. Commonwealth , 69 Phils. 499). We all knew that Jadewell is a private entity, the collections are shared by Jadewell and the City, and it is an act of utilizing the streets for commerce by Jadewell.

These bases support the position of the people against Jadewell. And I am wondering why despite such basis, the Court failed to determine whether the contract between Jadewell and the city government is valid or not. This should be decided once and for all. While I recognize the urgency of Jadewell’s prayer for the writ of injunction, the determination as to the legality of the contract for the pay parking scheme is equally urgent too. The immediate resolution of the case will end the conflict arising from the contract. More importantly, the delay is tantamount to the denial of justice. The people of Baguio have been waiting for too long for the decision. It must be done in the earliest possible time before it results to unproductive events. A decision on the issue will also expose those involved if anomalies actually characterized the contract. These are the sentiments of most of the Baguio residents. #

Home > Op-ed | Back to top