Conflict of Interest in the Tacloban South Terminal Proposal

In today's column, I will put on the hat of a lawyer, which I rarely do and not that of an economist which I usually do.

“Conflict of interest” is a term that is often mentioned particularly with respect to actions by government officials.

This conflict arises when an official, who occupies a position of public trust, acts on a matter that affects his private interests such as his business, his family, or his properties.

Even if the action is delegated or assigned to a lower level official, the fact that such official is doing so through a subordinate does not erase the conflict. The official is still in a position to alter or influence the subordinate's decision.

The term “interest” refers to possibility of gain or loss particularly in terms of resources such as assets in the form of land, building, equipment, or cash.

A term related to “conflict of interest” is “delicadeza” which refers to a deliberate effort to avoid suspicion because the decision will affect the interest of the decision-maker who occupies, as I mentioned, a position of trust.

Thus, because of “delicadeza”, we have public officials who will not accept an appointment to a position because it can be taken to mean he/she will favor his/her relatives, companies, and properties which will be affected by his decisions. Alternatively, officials “divest” themselves of interests which run counter to their official positions.

What's the significance of these definitions?

There is so much talk in Tacloban City these days about a bus terminal planned to be located in the south, particularly the Tabo-an area of Marabaras, Tacloban City. A consultation meeting with representatives of the public has been held.

Those in the city government who are proposing this better look up the meaning of “conflict of interest” and “delicadeza” and their legal implications. There are provisions in laws pertaining to ethics in the public service and in anti-graft and corruption that are very pertinent here.

The property, if the talk is accurate, is owned by the family of the City Mayor of Tacloban who will, in turn, have to approve the business permit and franchise of the bus terminal. Even if no figures have been cited, it is safe to estimate that the terminal will generate a large amount of income running to several hundred thousand pesos a month. Thus, it is a project that will generate considerable profits that, in a 25-year franchise, could run to close to P50 million.

The legal advisers of the Mayor should do him a favor by pointing out the two terms I just mentioned. Otherwise, someone, especially in this political season might go to court and point out the conflict of interest that will be too glaring and substantial to ignore and refute.

The congestion in the existing bus terminal will not justify exemption from the general rule on conflict of interest. Besides, there are other places along the same highway where the terminal can be set up.

Neither will public approval through a consultation erase the issue of conflict of interest because the fact of conflict still exists even if all of us agree to the proposal. The public welfare argument, to my mind cannot override the conflict of interest rule. Otherwise, this argument will always be used for the convenience of the officials concerned and the rule will have no teeth.

Divestment could be an option but it would be too cumbersome and may not be a valid defense in a conflict of interest issue, particularly if the timing of the divestment is done after the proposal is made. Divestment at this time could be taken as a convenient veil that is merely artificial and can easily be lifted anytime.

One of the difficulties a public official faces from time to time is be unable to do what could be beneficial to the public due to rules like “conflict of interest”. On the other hand, such a rule protects the public from officials who will use their political power for private or personal gain.