The Philippines dropped or fell six notches in the 2016 Corruption Index country ranking published by Transparency International. This is not unusual for a country which for many years has been caught up with such stigma that has tarnished its reputation worldwide.
In every section of the government whether it is legislative, executive or judiciary, corruption is most prevalent or common occurrences.
Governments, whether they are in legislative, executive or judiciary, are made as ‘milking cows’ of corrupt judges, adjudicators, key officials, employees and almost everyone. President Duterte cannot oversee everyone in all branches of the government to execute or enforce the laws. The community sectors, private and all people dealing with particular sections need to join hand to assist in the initiatives to weed out corruption.
Take the case of landowners or their estate or heirs seeking eviction of tenants who refuse to continue paying the lease of property where they plant vegetables or edible plants after the death of the parents with whom the tenants were dealing. They claim that Department of Agrarian Reform is working for the land to be transferred to them. However, the heirs or successors in interest oppose any claim which will deprive them the ownership. One tenant of the group of 20 tenants claims that she bought the property of about five hectares from the heirs and therefore she should not be evicted. She produced a copy of her purported notarised ‘deed of sale’ with alleged signatures of the heirs. The heirs denied their signatures and said they are all fictitious.
This is not a complicated case as the heirs produced the necessary documents (titles of the land in the name of landowners) to establish they are the rightful owners after the parents passed away. After the case was submitted for decision, another two years had gone and nothing was done to the case. However, before the case was resolved, the heirs decided to make an offer with the nine tenants which they accepted and later signed a settlement agreement to resolve the dispute. The tenants agreed to continue the lease every two years and recognised the ownership of the heirs towards the properties. The compromise agreement waited to be approved as usual. But the approval and decision of other parts of the claim were not forthcoming as expected.
President Duterte came to power last year and the matter was referred to his office after one (1) year of indecision. After about one year, the decision came. The decision includes the approval of the compromise agreement and likewise cover the issue of ownership of five hectares with the alleged notarised deed of sale signed by the heirs who denied authenticity. The adjudicator without remorse approved a spurious sale claiming that there is a presumption of validity of the notarised sale and unless proven otherwise the document is valid and lawful.
Litigants have to come up with bribed money to change the decision or a more expeditious resolution of a case.
(For comments or feedback, email cbulos@imemlawyers.com.au)
