“The GOCC has not released her salary for her last month in office in 2010 because she refused to submit her SALN or show their joint SALN filing. Go to www.rappler.com for the whole story.”
by Ducky Paredes
In September 2003, Mr. and Mrs. bought a 1,200-sq- m lot on Maranaw Street in La Vista for P16 million.
Three months later, they purchased a 62.7-sq-m condominium unit in One Burgundy Plaza on Katipunan Avenue for P2.5 million.
A year later, they acquired a 48 sq.-m unit on the 31st-floor of The Columns in Ayala Avenue, for P3.5 million. But, in their tax declaration, the assessed market value was placed at P1.2 million.
In 2005, they bought a 113-sq-m condominium unit on the 19th floor of the Bonifacio Ridge, which cost P9.1 million. But their tax declaration shows the market value at P2.3 million.
They made their latest acquisition in December 2009, right beside Bonifacio Ridge: a P14.5 million, 303.05-sq-m penthouse condominium on the 38th floor of Bellagio Tower 1 in The Fort, with 3 parking slots.
They swear that all of these have been bought on installment.
It must have been a tough grind, paying for all those acquisitions on a salary of only P70,000 a month!
In 2007, four years after they started their buying spree, she took on a job as chairman, president, CEO and COO of a GOCC. She stepped down in June 2010. During those three years, she received a total of about P5.7 million, including basic salary and allowances.
Her annual salary, as of 2009, was: P1.9 million, including allowances. Of this amount, basic salary was P939,972. In 2010, she earned about half of this (P972,148).
She never filed a single SALN while at the GOCC. All public officials are required by law to submit their assets statement. She did not because she explained that she and her spouse filed joint SALNs.
The GOCC has not released her salary for her last month in office in 2010 because she refused to submit her SALN or show their joint SALN filing.
Go to www.rappler.com for the whole story.
* * *
We have a letter regarding the destruction of 182 of the already very few remaining trees in Baguio City. (One would think that, at least in in Baguio, which we call the “City of Pines,” the pine tree would be a protected species: “It was reported that the Department of Energy and Natural Resources (DENR) gave permission to SM City Baguio for the cutting of 43 planted Alnus trees, and balling of 97 growing Benguet pine trees and 42 pine saplings to give way to its planned seven-level open-air retail, dining and entertainment destination along Governor Pack Road covering 76,000-square-meter floor area, and the same was approved by Baguio City Mayor Mauricio Domogan.
“The DENR executives and Mayor Domogan should recall that the major cause of the tragedy that befell the people of Cagayan De Oro City and Iligan City is man-made which officials in the government, like them, are capable of preventing under stricter enforcement of environmental laws. For, environmental laws are enacted to ensure the preservation of ecological balance and protection of the environment.
“The Philippine Constitution requires that the government ‘protect and promote the health of the people and instill health consciousness among them.’ (Section 15, Article II).
“Presidential Decree (PD) No. 953 requires the planting of trees in certain places and penalizing unauthorized cutting, destruction, damaging and injuring of certain trees, plants and vegetation.
“Mayor Domogan should instead crusade to leverage the power of environmental laws in protecting and nurturing the environment by enforcing PD 953 and going to the court to stop such ‘tree massacre’. In the case of Oposa vs. Secretary Factoran (224 SCRA 792 [1993]), the Supreme Court upheld the principle of ‘intergenerational equity’ or otherwise known as the ‘Oposa Doctrine”’ which is a trail-blazing doctrine affirming that the interests of the future generations could be protected in court.” — Atty. Emmanuel LJ. Mapili
* * *
Too bad that Reynato Puno is no longer Chief Justice. It was his Court that proclaimed the Writ of Kalikasan on the basis of Article II, Section 16 on the Declaration of Principles and State Policies of the 1987 Constitution, which states that, “The State shall protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature”.
The Writ of Kalikasan may be availed of individually and cumulatively and it may include the issuance of a Temporary Environmental Protection Order (TEPO) in cases when there is an extreme urgency and/or the applicant may suffer grave injustice or irreparable injury.
The very purpose of the Writ of Kalikasan is to protect the rights of persons whose constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology is violated, or threatened with violation that may involve an environmental damage of such magnitude as to prejudice the life, health or property of inhabitants in two or more cities of provinces.
So, Atty. Mapili, that’s what you should do. Invoke the Writ of Kaikasan against Henry Sy, SM and your mayor!
* * *
Another letter: “Lost integrity for the position occupied by supposedly the national repository of uprightness, fairness and wisdom.
“It is indeed a national shame of a chief justice to undervalue his SALNs. It is not so difficult to accept this kind of folly from a corrupt businessman, politician, celebrity, ordinary taxpayer but not from a judge or a justice of the Supreme Court much more from a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
“Corona has lost all his right to occupy the position of the Chief Justice. He has lost his right to stay in his office a single minute longer.” — Roger C. Limpoco
* * *
“The design of impeachment is to remove the impeachable officer from office, not to punish him. An impeachable act need not be criminal. That explains why the Constitution states that the officer removed shall nevertheless be subject to prosecution in an ordinary criminal case. ” — Justice Renato Corona in his 2003 separate opinion on Francisco v. House of Representatives
# # # #
hvp 01.22.12
Post a Comment