Under this added option, the buyer pays for the unit bought and, subsequently, surrenders possession to the management of CJHDC
Various locators and investors in Camp John Hay-which was privatized in the late 1990s-have been in limbo because of the dispute, with both the BCDA and the Robert Sobrepena-owned CJHDC alleging bad faith in the other party.
The BCDA claims CJHDC has not been paying the government the annual rental fees for the property, while the private firm claims that the government has failed to turnover to it the entire property, which would have allowed it to earn the money needed to meet its financial obligations.
The case, which sought to revoke the special economic zone (SEZ) status of Camp John Hay, was only made known to CJHDC in 2003 when the Supreme Court decision withdrawing the SEZ benefits was published in the newspapers.
A significant delay in the issuance of an environmental clearance certificate (ECC) by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) prevented CJHDC from commencing development.
Delay in the demolition of American-era structures inside Camp John Hay prevented CJHDC from commencing development.
The two sides earlier went through arbitration proceedings, and after the case was decided, the Baguio regional trial court issued to CJHDC
a notice to vacate the property after the BCDA would pay for the P1.42 billion that BCDA owed the company.
Last month, after 10 years, the center ruled that CJHDC must vacate Camp John Hay, and so the BCDA apparently thought it wise to implement the ruling by itself right away, preferably through a forcible takeover with goons.
It did not matter to the BCDA that the PDRCI also ruled that, actually, it was the BCDA that violated the joint venture agreement with CJHDC and that the BCDA must pay CJHDC some P1.4 billion in damages.
The PDRCI ruling also needed another court procedure: That is the Regional Trial Court must confirm, on the one hand, the award of P1.4 billion to CJHDC, and on the other, the termination of the joint venture agreement.
The authority then filed several cases against CJHDC, including the "squatting" case and other inconsequential cases like "estafa."
At the center of all the legalese screaming in court, plus all the hemming and hawing in media, is this not-too-simple question: How much does CJHDC must pay the BCDA in rental.