The Philippine Red Cross building stands across the back of the capitol in downtown Cagayan de Oro. The Red Cross has sued Misamis Oriental Gov. Yevgeny Vincente Emano and one Rhea Ritzie P. Nueva over a lease agreement that affects a property that the Red Cross claims ownership of. (photo by Cong B. Corrales)
- Advertisement -

By CONG B. CORRALES, Associate Editor
and NITZ ARANCON, Correspondent .

THE Philippine Red Cross is facing the prospects of losing its over 1,594-square meter property in downtown Cagayan de Oro as an offshoot of the 2013 deal between Misamis Oriental Gov. Yevgeny Vincente Emano and a mysterious lessee named Rhea Ritzie P. Nueva.

- Advertisement -

Through provincial legal officer Cerilio Neil Pacana, Emano demanded three things from the humanitarian aid organization: give the certificate of titles it holds back to the province; pay the capitol rent for the contested property, and pay the governor P1 million in damages for dragging him into a civil case.

The Red Cross filed a civil case against Emano and Nueva in 2017 in connection with a controversial agreement that allowed the latter to lease a 1,029-square meter property across the Northern Mindanao Medical Center, build structures on it, and then engage in subletting. The Red Cross complained that Nueva encroached on part of its property and that the 2013 Emano-Nueva deal had no authority from the provincial board.

No capitol official could say exactly who Nueva is, and Emano has given no clear answers to questions about the capitol’s mysterious lessee at press time.

In the 12-page verified answer of Emano to the Red Cross’s complaint in 2017, docketed under Civil Case CO-ORD-2017-498 for Accion Publiciana or Recovery of Possession and Damages before the Regional Trial Court-Branch 38, Pacana argued that the organization lost its ownership of the parcel of land donated to it by the capitol when it failed to comply with a provision in the 1956 deed of donation.

Pacana said that when the then-governor Vicente de Lara executed the deed of donation to the Red Cross on May 2, 1956, one condition was for the Red Cross to construct a building on the donated property “within two years from the date of the donation is signed by the Donor (province) and duly accepted by the Donee (Red Cross).”

However, Pacana pointed out, the Red Cross constructed its building on the property in 1992 or some 36 years after the deed of donation was executed.

This, Pacana argued, effectively nullified the Red Cross’s claim to the contested property.

“For failure of the PRC to comply with the terms and conditions of the Deed of Donation, dated May 2, 1956, the same was automatically revoked pursuant to the automatic revocation and reversion clause found therein,” Pacana writes in Emano’s verified answer.

Pacana said this was exacerbated when the Red Cross caused the issuance of TCT-206242 and TCT-206243 which declared the pieces of land under their ownership “without any legal basis or color of title, to the damage and prejudice of the rights of the Province.”

“Significantly, the Deed of Confirmation, dated October 26, 2009, merely confirmed the subdivisions of Lt. B-3-F-3-B-3, Psd-1-002248, covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-109599, registered in the name of the province. It did not, however, give authority to PRC to transfer the ownership and title of the land covered by the revoked Deed of Donation in its name,” Pacana adds.

He pointed out that TCT-206242 and TCT-206243, as shown in a cadastral map, are “nowhere close to the triangular portion of the property subject of the revoked Deed of Donation.”

He argued further that even if the deed of donation was not revoked, the donation is still deemed void based on Section 57 of the Public Land Act where it is stipulated that any donation must have the concurrence of Congress.

“To this day, no such authorization was issued by Congress ratifying the same and thus, it is patently void,” Pacana writes.

However, he said the capitol has been lenient to the humanitarian aid organization, considering the vital services it delivers to the needy in Northern Mindanao. 

But Pacana said Emano would be amenable to Red Cross’s continued use of the property provided that it paid the capitol a monthly rent beginning in the year when the province’s revenue code took effect “until it had vacated the properties.”

Based on the province’s Revenue Code of 2005, Pacana said, the Red Cross owes the capitol P159,400 a month since 2006 or P100 per square meter. The rates have been increased in the province’s 2017 Revenue Code.

Emano, through Pacana, also asked the regional court to make the humanitarian aid organization pay him P1 million in moral damages because he was dragged into the civil suit.

“That by reason of malicious, unfounded, and baseless accusations of the plaintiff, not to say the least misleading statements, and the unlawful and fraudulent maneuvers made, the herein defendant Governor (Emano), whose personality had been dragged by this malicious complaint, had suffered anxieties, sleepless nights, and besmirched reputation because it gravely affected his dealings with his constituents which entitled him to moral damages of not less than P1 million, and exemplary damages that the honorable court may award after proving during the course of the trial,” Pacana writes.

Disclaimer

Mindanao Gold Star Daily holds the copyrights of all articles and photos in perpetuity. Any unauthorized reproduction in any platform, electronic and hardcopy, shall be liable for copyright infringement under the Intellectual Property Rights Law of the Philippines.

- Advertisement -