June 08, 2009 04:11 PM Monday [ journal.com.ph ]
By: Jess V. Antiporda
A FORMER official of the Department of Agrarian Reform and a deputy of the register of deeds in Tagaytay City are facing criminal and administrative charges before the Office of the Ombudsman for their alleged involvement in the controversial conversion of over 33 hectares of agricultural land to non-agricultural use.
Charges of violation of the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees (RA6713) and violation of the Anti-Graft and Corruption Act were filed by Simplicio Macauba against Rolando Querubin, former DAR undersecretary, and Reynaldo Aquino of the register of deeds of Tagaytay City.
Macauba alleged that Querubin committed the violation after he approved the conversion of contested land (85 parcels of land) despite the lack of requirements particularly the complete payment of obligation by the farmer-beneficiaries to the Land Bank.
Before the conversion, the land located in Barangay Maguyam, Silang Cavite was first awarded to farmer-beneficiaries in the area.
In 1997 an application for land use conversion was filed by Manuel de Jesus on the strength of a special power of attorney from the farmer-beneficiaries although representing SP Properties at the same time.
After the application was elevated to Querubin for review, he disapproved it. However, he reversed his decision when a motion for reconsideration was filed although the farmer-beneficiaries had not fully paid their obligations with the Land Bank at the time of the approval of the conversion.
The complainant also accused Querubin of conniving with the applicant and SP Properties Inc. because the application for conversion has led to the transfer of the agricultural land to a private firm.
As for Aquino, Macauba said the former used his position when he allowed the land to be registered under the name of SP Properties Inc. knowing fully well that agricultural land exceeding five hectares cannot be acquired by one individual, whether natural or juridical.
The respondents however denied the allegations, saying the case should be dismissed because the complainant is not among the farmer-beneficiaries applying for conversion, or filed for conversion in their behalf.
The 33 hectares of land being contested is fully developed as manifested by industrial and commercial establishments erected in the area.
