- Messages
- 29
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 26
Re: Hello mga Ka Symb, im Back!
nakaposition lang sila ngayon..
nakaposition lang sila ngayon..
Sandigan junks Marcos family claim to Paoay property
By Cynthia D. Balana
Philippine Daily Inquirer
| April 23, 2014 at 7:56 pm
MANILA, Philippines
https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5045/5288978990_7d439f5e87_b.jpg
Sandiganbayan has dismissed the claim of the family of the late
President Ferdinand Marcos to a 57.68-hectare lakeside resort in
Paoay, Ilocos Norte, because the area specified in an impugned
contract was an actually an “inalienable public domain,” it being a
national park.
In a 33-page decision by the anti-graft court’s First Division dated April
21, 2014, the court declared the 1978 lease agreement between
Marcos and the defunct Philippine Tourism Authority null and void.
“The Paoay Lake and lands within one kilometer from its water line…
was declared to be a national park and therefore considered public
land. These were, therefore, outside the commerce of man,” the court
said.
The verdict was penned by Justice Rafael Lagos, and was concurred
in by Justices Rodolfo Ponferrada and Efren de la Cruz, division
chairman.
The court said the late dictator had no right to bind the property in any
agreement or proprietary transaction as supposed owner because he
did not own the property.
Presidential Decree No. 1554, issued by Marcos on Aug. 11, 1978,
reclassified stretches of land around Paoay Lake as “alienable public
land.” The Marcos-PTA lease deal was signed on Dec. 20, 1978.
“Section 101 of the Public Land Act provides a remedy whereby lands
of the public domain fraudulently awarded to the applicant may be
recovered or reverted back to its original owner, the government,” the
court ruling said.
“An action for reversion has to be instituted by the Solicitor General, in
the name of the Republic of the Philippines,” it added.
This means all 154 lots covered by the lease agreement, structures
found on them, and even those that are already covered by approved
patents to the children and grandchildren of Marcos and any other
third-party, were property of the Republic.
Aside from the lots, the court also placed under the control of the
government, through Tourism Infrastructure and Enterprise Zone
Authority (TIEZA), the Malacañang Ti Amianan (Malacañang of the
North), Maharlika Hall building, Suba Sports Complex, the Old Motor
Pool, swimming pools, tennis court and an 18-hole golf course.
Court records showed that no less than 79 lots in the questioned
property are already under free patents or have pending free patent
applications by Ilocos Norte Gov. Imee Marcos and her children.
Former first lady and now Ilocos Norte Rep. Imelda Marcos, Sen.
Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. and Irene Marcos-Araneta had
executed waiver of rights over the subject lots in favor of Imee Marcos
and her children.
More than half of the lots already have approved and/or pending patent
applications by the Marcos heirs and other persons.
Senator Marcos had insisted to the court that the Paoay resort estate
was not the subject of any forfeiture move by petitioner Presidential
Commission on Good Government and therefore cannot be considered
ill-gotten wealth.
He also questioned the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan over the
case.
The court said state lawyers should now ask the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources and the Land Management Bureau
to nullify adverse claims by other parties on parts of the questioned
property.
The court said lawyers from the Office of the Solicitor General and the
PCGG were able to establish that the property previously belonged to
the government and was thus transferred to the Marcos family and their
associates illegally.
But the court said the fact that the PCGG never sequestered the
property was immaterial.
“What matters is that the petition alleges that the former president used
all his powers and influence to appropriate to himself all the lots
covered by the lease with scanty claims of ownership,” it said.
The court cited as proof of unlawful financial interests by the late
president the “hundred of millions of pesos” development undertaken
on the Paoay property with the use of taxpayers’ money shortly after
the lease agreement was signed.
It likewise cited the patent applications made by the Marcos heirs over
the developed lots covered by the lease.
(“T)he Marcos heirs have concentrated their free patent applications on
the lots where most of the improvements are situated. Just on this
score, the lease contract should be declared void,” the ruling said.
The court took more than four years to resolve the case after it was
filed by the PCGG on March 3, 2010.
