City Hall opposes lifting closure of One Citilink

A closure order is posted on the wall of the One Citilink Terminal on July 28. (CDN FILE PHOTO)

Cebu City Hall questioned the necessity of a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) against the closure of the One Citilink Terminal in Natalio Bacalso Avenue.

Rey Gealon, Cebu City Transportation Office chief, said the terminal was closed for operating with an expired business permit.

“Citilink, which is closed and had ceased operations, is no longer suffering from any grave and irreparable injury—an essential ground for TRO, among others. Under the circumstances, prayer for TRO is moot and academic,” Gealon said.

He said the city will file an official memorandum to the Regional Trial Court (RTC) to express its stand on the issue.

RTC Branch 23 Presiding Judge Generosa Labra earlier denied the city’s motion for her to inhibit from the case for “lack of merit.”

Wanting
City Hall’s lawyers claimed that Judge Labra showed impartiality in favor of the management of Citilink terminal by “strongly urging” that the case be settled out of court.

They said the judge “subtly hinted” that a temporary restraining order will eventually be issued if a settlement will not be reached.

In an order dated August 26 but received by the City Legal Office last September 15, Labra denied the motion.

“The City of Cebu maintains her position that a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) can no longer be used as the grounds for its issuance are miserably wanting in this case,” Gealon said.

He said the city will abide by the legal process even if it means that their motion for inhibition was denied. Gealon said they will continue to believe in the integrity of the judge as well as the law.

Gealon cited a Supreme Court jurisprudence stating that a TRO can’t be issued to a business that lacks a permit.

Last July, City Hall ordered the closure of Citilink, stating that the terminal’s business permit expired last April 20.

Cebu City Mayor Michael Rama also ordered the terminal’s closure last July 28 for its failure to pay its obligations to the City amounting to more than P12 million.