Dysfunctional and comical

The tug-of-war in the city council has been a political reality in Cebu City for several years already. Last Tuesday and Wednesday, such differences sunk to dysfunctional and comical levels.

The opposition in the council clung to whatever technicality that may arguably be allowed by the house rules in order to prevent a favorable reconsideration of the erstwhile rejected resolution on the proposed P18-billion Kawit Island venture deal.

After a two-day standoff between the majority and minority blocs which saw the session extending up to near midnight last Tuesday, presiding officer Vice Mayor Edgar Labella banged the gavel last Wednesday. It was supposed to signal the session’s adjournment. Labella together with the eight opposition councilors then left the session hall.

The BOPK councilors who constitute the majority in the city council continued with the session, asserting that it was not properly adjourned. Outnumbered, the minority together with the vice mayor simply walked out, the BOPK bloc said. But Labella insists he had validly adjourned the session upon a motion duly seconded.

I disagree with Labella. A motion to adjourn is a form of privileged motion because it deals with the rights of the members and with the group. Under the rules, it takes precedence over all other motions and is undebatable, yet as always it is subject to the discretion of the majority.

In my understanding of parliamentary rules, a second to a motion is a voice of a group member agreeing that the motion should be considered. Therefore, after a second is made, the presiding officer must refer the motion to the discretion of the entire group before it is considered carried.

What Labella did as presiding officer, according to the reports, was that he adjourned the council session upon the voice of only the movant and the seconder, banging the gavel without even bothering to perceive if there was little or no opposition to a motion to adjourn.

That seems contrary to the purpose of parliamentary procedures. I have great respect and admiration for Vice Mayor Labella. I used to cover his office as a reporter during his Deputy Ombudsman days in the late 90s. I find him to be a sober and sensible public servant. I have my doubts now.

Parliamentary procedure is a democratic process that is based on common sense and courtesy in order that the business of the parliament may move forward with reasonable dispatch. The rules should have been simple. The side with the most votes wins.

Certainly, the minority have rights that must be preserved too – the right to raise a motion, the right to be heard, the right to object, the right to argue – but not to the extent of stifling the will of the majority.

Labella may have raised a cogent point, that he cannot be a party to an act allegedly in contravention of the house rules – the issue being, if a rejected resolution can still be reconsidered under the circumstances. But Labella is not a judge. As presiding officer, he should have yielded to the discretion of the majority, without prejudice to any challenge later before the proper court of the council’s act.

It has been more convenient for Labella and the opposition to argue on technicalities purportedly based on the house rules. But that only makes them appear, in the most apt Cebuano term, “nagpa-goryo goryo.”

Public perception has nearly as much to do with how councilors conduct their session as with their stand on important issues. Yet nobody so far among the opposition councilors has realized that the public is getting tired of their antics. From the way the public is reacting online about this sorry episode, it might still be possible for the opposition to survive a BOPK sweep in the next elections but that would now prove a steeper climb.

Cebu City voters do not appreciate politicians who behave like they have no regard for what their constituents feel, smug at the thought that they were elected into office. That’s the lesson that then congressman Tomas Osmeña learned when voters in 2013 chose to live with three more years of Mayor Mike Rama rather than put Osmeña back in charge of City Hall. Apparently Osmeña learned from that lesson when he slowly and patiently took steps to win back the voters’ hearts and minds.