Protected property (3)
THE last-recorded effort of the Alcasabas heirs was writing then Sta. Maria, Laguna Mayor Josie Almario-Cuenta (2009) and her successor, Mayor Antonio Carolino (2010), pleading for the inclusion of the former’s squatters in the Municipality’s list of qualified beneficiaries in Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’s Community Mortgage Program (CMP).
These two local chief executives did not honor Mr. Manolo “Boy” Alcasabas formal requests with any reply.
Be that as it may, both the national government and LGU-Sta. Maria, Laguna are compelled by the Constitution and existing laws (notably under RA 7160’s general welfare clause) to NOW address with dispatch the Alcasabases’ problem with “informal settlers”.
Their subject inheritance squarely falls within the vortex of PROTECTED PROPERTY under the Bill of Rights.
The right to property is a fundamental right, intimately related with the right to life and liberty.
Protection of property is, therefore, a basic, if demandable, governance responsibility.
Only in the Philippines is squatting a recognized/tolerated malfeasance!
And NO Binays nor Robredos have been able to satisfactorily deal with it at any time in living memory.
Squatting has irretrievably exacerbated over time due to the lack of po-litical will by our ELECTIVE leaders in addressing the same.
The reason is quite obvious. Social statistics indicate that homeless and squatters outnumber land-owners.
And come electoral exercises, squatters could spell the difference bet-ween winning and losing to candidates to public offices.
Trouble is that in a supposed “government of laws and not of men”, where “everyone is equal before the law”, legitimate landowners are entitled to protection, too!
Where government fails to deal with them, whom shall they go to for succor?