Prime Bonifacio Global City part of the decision
MANILA (UPDATED) - The Court of Appeals (CA) has ordered Taguig City to stop exercising jurisdiction over the 729-hectare Fort Andres Bonifacio or Fort Boni since this area is part of Makati City.
In a 37-page ruling penned by Associate Justice Marlene Gonzales-Sison, the appellate court’s sixth division upheld several presidential fiats declaring Fort Boni as part of Makati.
The ruling can be appealed, but the appellate court ordered Taguig to immediately cease and desist from exercising jurisdiction over the disputed areas.
In a text message, Makati City spokesman Joey Salgado said they have yet to receive a copy of the decision.
Nonetheless, he said “Makati’s claim on these areas have historical and legal bases. We have always maintained they are part of Makati and we are glad that the CA has upheld our jurisdiction.”
The Court of Appeals noted since 1970, the national census had already included 7 military barangays-- (Cembo, South Cembo, East Rembo, West Rembo, Comembo, Pembo and Pitogo) as well as the Inner Fort barangays (Barangay Post Proper Northside and Barangay Post Proper Southside)-- as part of Makati’s jurisdiction.
Bonifacio Global City is also part of the Inner Fort.
The appellate court’s decision reversed the Pasig City Regional Trial Court’s order invalidating Presidential Proclamation No. 2475, which shows Makati’s jurisdiction over Fort Boni.
Also upheld by the CA is Proclamation No. 518, which modified the PD No. 2475.
“Hence, Presidential Proclamation Nos. 2475 and 518 did not alter boundaries instead confirmed that said area is under the jurisdiction of Makati,” the CA ruled.
The CA also noted that residents in the areas mentioned are Makati voters.
It also stressed that Taguig belatedly filed a complaint against Makati in its claim over the areas.
Proclamation 2475 was enacted in 1986, and Proclamation 518 was created in 1990. Taguig filed the complaint in 1993.
Quoting the Supreme Court, the appellate court said the “considerable delay in asserting one’s right before a court of justice is strongly persuasive of the lack of merit of his claim, since it is human nature for a person to enforce his right when same is threatened or invaded.”