ANGELES CITY – The deputy chief of the Angeles City Tourism Office (ACTO) got a severe tongue-lashing from the sangguniang panlungsod (SP) here on Thursday after insisting that the city government has no regulatory power over a resort which is inside an Aeta ancestral domain even if the road leading to it lies within the city limits.
John Montances, deputy chief of the ACTO, said Puning Hot Spring Resort and Restaurant is inside the Porac Aeta Ancestral Domain (PAAD), citing provisions of the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act (IPRA) and stating that the city has no jurisdiction over it.
During the SP Regular Session at the Legislative Building at the City Hall Compound here on Thursday, Councilor Bryan Nepomuceno asked the panel of guests if the city has actual jurisdiction over the road leading to Puning and if it has the power to regulate it.
Earlier, the SP received a letter-complaint from businessman Rene Romero who claimed that his group of off-roaders was barred from using the road from the Sacobia River to Sitio Target in Barangay Sapangbato here which is within Puning.
The bone of contention is whether Puning has the right or authority to select and prevent persons that can access the barangay road at Puning which is located in Sitio Target, Sapangbato.
The panel of guests invited by the SP to shed light on the matter included Romero, who is the leader of the complainants of mostly 4×4 groups and off roaders, Sapangbato Barangay Captain Mario M. Manialung, Puning operations manager Joseph Lozano and Montances.
Manialung replied “Yes” to Nepomuceno’s query but reiterated that the city has jurisdiction up to Puning’s station 2 only. “Hanggang doon lang po tayo sa station 2,” Manialung said.
The village chief explained that the contested road is straddling the boundaries of Mabalacat City in the north, Angeles City in southeast which covers the road leading to Sitio Target, Sapangbato to the hot springs and Porac in the northwest where the hot springs are located in Barangay Inararo.
Ownership
But Montances said everything in Puning is owned by the Aetas or Indigenous People (IP) and proceeded to read Chapter 2 of the IPRA Law, particularly Section 3 Definition of Terms and sub letter a) Ancestral Domain.
He even volunteered his own interpretation of the IPRA law and said: “Mula sa pinakamataas na kalangitan hanggang sa pinakalalim ng karagatan, sila po ang may pag aari noon (From the heights of the heavens to the depths of the seas, they [IPs] are the owners of that).”
Montances was also bringing a map and showed it to the SP and pointed to the riverbed in contention and said it belongs to the IPs. “Yung riverbeds po sa kanila po yon (The riverbeds that’s theirs),” he said.
But Councilor Amos Rivera said: “Generally speaking the riverbed is owned by the government; meaning to say under the police power of the government, madam chair, we can actually do something about it by exercising our regulatory powers.”
Rivera said there should be a provision in Puning’s memorandum of agreement (MOA) for an easement or right of way because the riverbed is part of the public domain.
“Yung easement or right of way hindi lang sa banyaga, hindi lang sa katutubo, hindi lang sa Pilipino, kundi po sa lahat ng pweding dumaan sa nasabing daanan (The right of way is not only for foreigners, not only for Aetas, not only for Filipinos but for all those who want to pass on the said road),” Rivera told a stunned Montances.
Councilor Max Sangil lectured Montances and said he should not tell the SP what to do especially in the interpretation of the law.
Sangil said Montances made it appear that the SP is ignorant of the laws of the land when it is precisely the SP’s job to enact laws for the benefit of the people and not just private companies.
Fiery Vicky
Vice Mayor Vicky Vega- Cabigting said Puning should make a policy for other people that are not Puning customers to use the road.
“You don’t have to say how we should intervene. We are intervening right now. This is what it’s going to be,” a fiery Cabigting said.
“This is not acceptable wherein Filipinos are treated like second class citizens. This has to stop. Let’s do it because no one should be treated like that,” she added.
For his part, Romero said he is thankful to the city council for bringing up their cause. “Iisa lang naman ang gusto nating mangyare, huwag tayong bawalan kase ito ay public domain. Ang may ari nito ay ang gobyerno ang may ari nito ay mga Plilipino (There is only one thing that we want to happen, that we won’t be prevented in using the road again because it is part of public domain. The owner is the government and the Filipino people),” he said.
On the other hand, Lozano insisted that they never closed the road barricade which they put up for safety reasons: “Nakabukas po lagi yon (It is always open).”
At the sidelines after the session, Councilor Maricel “Marang” Morales cautioned Lozano that there is an Anti-Discrimination Ordinance that can be leveled against Puning since barring people from using a public road is also part of discrimination.
But Lozano insisted, “every year po nadoon po sila, Ma’am, wala pong bawal (every year they are there mam there is no prohibition).”
But Lozano admitted that the barricade was put up to control stubborn individuals who want to proceed even when safety is compromised.
