Barking up the wrong tree - "Payumo is being mentally dishonest"
Former Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority Chairman Felicito “Tong” Payumo is barking up the wrong tree in his media campaign to blame the Bases Conversion Development Authority for the inability of three farmers in Dinalupihan, Bataan, to get paid for the land affected by the construction of the multi-billion peso Subic Clark Expressway project.
Payumo is saying that the three farmer families are not being paid because of the squabble between the BCDA and the Land Bank of the Philippines.
Sad to say, Payumo is being mentally dishonest. The more accurate assessment of the situation—and Payumo knows well that this is the case—is that BCDA is ready to pay the farmers as soon as they can produce the title to the land.
The problem is that LandBank, the agent of the Department of Agrarian Reform, refuses to release the title because there is a pending court case for the property. The former owner of the “land reformed” properties is disputing the agrarian reform department’s acquisition price and wants to be paid more.
Payumo says LandBank should already release the title since the farmers has already paid in full what they are supposed to pay for the land placed under land reform, but that LandBank is adamant in not releasing the title until the court case is finished.
If Payumo is honest about the whole thing, he would say that the squabble is between LandBank and the three farmers. BCDA is just being dragged into the case.
BCDA president Narciso Abaya has made clear BCDA’s position when he wrote Philippine Daily Inquirer reporter Tonette Orejas in reaction to Payumos tirade. “We have the cash and are ready to pay the three farmers as soon as they can produce the two documents that should emanate from the LandBank of the Philippines.” Abaya says the two documents are the certificate of full payment and the release of real estate mortgage. “We have been waiting for these documents to be released so that the farmers can be paid immediately.”
Abaya further explains: “We have now a manager’s check amounting to 100 percent of the value of the three parcels of land. You must understand that we cannot just release the payment because we are bound by the rules governing certificate of land ownership award, which the farmers presumably have in their possession.
As a former government official, Payumo should be sympathetic to BCDA’s dilemma. Paying the farmers without the title is a sure way to be charged by the Ombudsman.
Payumo knows this very well. When I visited him once, when he was still SBMA chairman, he told me that even if you follow the rules you might end up having a case at the Ombudsman. He cited the case where he allowed the sale of some trees that had been uprooted because of a typhoon. The logs from the uprooted trees were confiscated by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources and he was charged before the Ombudsman.
If he can be charged even if he followed procedures, then he should understand if BCDA is unable to follow his demand that the farmers be paid in spite of the farmers’ inability to produce the documents needed to make the payment legal.
Unfairly blaming BCDA for the inability of the farmers to get paid is bad enough. What’s worse is when Payumo instigated the supposed “caretakers” of the farmers to put up a barricade to stop construction activities of highway in the area.
Payumo is holding the project hostage. He knows very well that if he delays it, the BCDA would lose millions. This is really an irresponsible act for a former SBMA chairman and a congressman wannabe.
Questions have been raised on who really now owns the three parcels of land that should belong to the three farmer land reform beneficiaries. There are talks that the certificates of the farmers have been bought for a measly sum and whoever holds it stands to earn a windfall.
The farmers paid P1 per sq m for the land under the agrarian reform department’s valuation. If their land is purchased for P150 per sq m, which was the purchase price for the adjacent Payumo family property acquired by BCDA, then the new owner stands to make more than a million for the three parcels measuring 1.4 hectares even if only P10 or P20 per sq m was paid to the farmers.
I am sure that it is not Payumo who now holds the farmers’ certificates. He knows very well that buying these certificates is not allowed by law.
Alvin Capino - Counterpoint, Manila Standard Today
Payumo is saying that the three farmer families are not being paid because of the squabble between the BCDA and the Land Bank of the Philippines.
Sad to say, Payumo is being mentally dishonest. The more accurate assessment of the situation—and Payumo knows well that this is the case—is that BCDA is ready to pay the farmers as soon as they can produce the title to the land.
The problem is that LandBank, the agent of the Department of Agrarian Reform, refuses to release the title because there is a pending court case for the property. The former owner of the “land reformed” properties is disputing the agrarian reform department’s acquisition price and wants to be paid more.
Payumo says LandBank should already release the title since the farmers has already paid in full what they are supposed to pay for the land placed under land reform, but that LandBank is adamant in not releasing the title until the court case is finished.
If Payumo is honest about the whole thing, he would say that the squabble is between LandBank and the three farmers. BCDA is just being dragged into the case.
BCDA president Narciso Abaya has made clear BCDA’s position when he wrote Philippine Daily Inquirer reporter Tonette Orejas in reaction to Payumos tirade. “We have the cash and are ready to pay the three farmers as soon as they can produce the two documents that should emanate from the LandBank of the Philippines.” Abaya says the two documents are the certificate of full payment and the release of real estate mortgage. “We have been waiting for these documents to be released so that the farmers can be paid immediately.”
Abaya further explains: “We have now a manager’s check amounting to 100 percent of the value of the three parcels of land. You must understand that we cannot just release the payment because we are bound by the rules governing certificate of land ownership award, which the farmers presumably have in their possession.
As a former government official, Payumo should be sympathetic to BCDA’s dilemma. Paying the farmers without the title is a sure way to be charged by the Ombudsman.
Payumo knows this very well. When I visited him once, when he was still SBMA chairman, he told me that even if you follow the rules you might end up having a case at the Ombudsman. He cited the case where he allowed the sale of some trees that had been uprooted because of a typhoon. The logs from the uprooted trees were confiscated by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources and he was charged before the Ombudsman.
If he can be charged even if he followed procedures, then he should understand if BCDA is unable to follow his demand that the farmers be paid in spite of the farmers’ inability to produce the documents needed to make the payment legal.
Unfairly blaming BCDA for the inability of the farmers to get paid is bad enough. What’s worse is when Payumo instigated the supposed “caretakers” of the farmers to put up a barricade to stop construction activities of highway in the area.
Payumo is holding the project hostage. He knows very well that if he delays it, the BCDA would lose millions. This is really an irresponsible act for a former SBMA chairman and a congressman wannabe.
Questions have been raised on who really now owns the three parcels of land that should belong to the three farmer land reform beneficiaries. There are talks that the certificates of the farmers have been bought for a measly sum and whoever holds it stands to earn a windfall.
The farmers paid P1 per sq m for the land under the agrarian reform department’s valuation. If their land is purchased for P150 per sq m, which was the purchase price for the adjacent Payumo family property acquired by BCDA, then the new owner stands to make more than a million for the three parcels measuring 1.4 hectares even if only P10 or P20 per sq m was paid to the farmers.
I am sure that it is not Payumo who now holds the farmers’ certificates. He knows very well that buying these certificates is not allowed by law.
Alvin Capino - Counterpoint, Manila Standard Today
posted by OlongapoCity Zambales at
7:16 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home