1. On the integration project, it appears to me that FRESA came to “take”, not to “give”. FRESA defiled RA 9646 mandate to integrate. PHILRES is also guilty of this, so is CREBA, and all other groups who wants their own selves to become AIPO. FRESA, PHILRES, and CREBA is the cause of the DELAY and should be cited for CONTEMPT for refusing to INTEGRATE with the rest of the RESPs who does not belong to their “exclusive” organizations.
2. On the Legal Opinion that AIPO Electorates are “Association Presidents” that justified the appointment of FRESA as AIPO. The legal opinion is wrong.
EXPLANATION. Two groups are arguing on AIPO: (A) integration of associations, versus (B) integration of individuals --- and they have same reference which is Sec 34 of RA 9646. Argument A uses the first paragraph of Sec 34. Argument B uses the second paragraph of Sec 34. In my opinion, BOTH are correct, complimenting, and not separable, not isolatable. It should not be "versus". INTEGRATION means “LAHAT TAYO”, whether you are a member of an association/organization or not, and that is what Sec 34 is saying. The first paragraph MANDATES (instructs, orders, compels) the Associations to participate in the INTEGRATION. The second paragraph gives the individual members the AUTOMATIC rights of membership to the INTEGRATION, without need to join any association.
3. On the question of who is the electorate that I saw you mentioned in your 20 April 2011 letter to PRC. The Legal Opinion of PRC is wrong. The PRC Legal Opinion cited an example that the formation of the Integrated Bar of Lawyers was historically done in a manner that the Presidents of the Lawyers’ Associations were the only ones who voted for the first Board of the Bar – please advise him to double-check his historical account. The Legal opinion of PRC is WRONG and I am sure about this as sure as a clear blue sky. There is nothing in RA 9646 that says the organizations’ Presidents or their representative are the electorates. The legal opinion appears to be an “INVENTION”, rendered specifically applicable only during its time for the sole purpose of justifying the anomalous appointment of FRESA as Interim AIPO.
EXPLANATION. Sec 34 Par 2. says: "A real estate service practitioner duly registered with the Board shall automatically become a member of the accredited and integrated professional organization of real estate service practitioners, and shall receive the benefits and privileges appurtenant thereto." Section 34 of RA 9646 gives the individual members all rights due to being a member of AIPO because it says "shall receive benefits and privileges appurtenant thereto". Part of this RIGHTS OF MEMBERSHIP, which is legal, inherent, natural, customary, and traditional in any other professional organization in the Philippines, is each member’s RIGHT TO ASPIRE FOR OFFICERSHIP AND THE RIGHT TO VOTE.
There are similar Professional Laws that is in HARMONY with my interpretation. For example, the most recent would be the RA 10029, The Philippine Psychology Act of 2009. Sec 31 Integration of the Profession. It says: "- The profession shall hereinafter be integrated by consolidating all practitioners into one (1) national organization of registered and licensed psychologists and psychometricians, which shall be recognized and accredited by the Board, subject to approval of the Commission. A psychologist or psychometrician duly registered and licensed by the Board and the Commission shall automatically become a member of said organization and shall receive the benefits and privileges, as well as be subject to all responsibilities and obligations, appurtenant thereto upon payment of the required fees and dues. Membership in the integrated organization shall not be a bar to membership in any other association of psychologists and/or psychometricians."
Now let’s go down to personal level. I, myself, is an individual member and a legitimate charter member of AIPO being someone included in the grandfather provision. If the AIPO Formation Process will infringe my right to run for a position and my right to vote, then we will have CONFLICT FOREVER. Remember, once they cut the line of my microphone, and the result is I never stopped hating. You infringe my right to vote, we well be enemies for the rest of our lives. I am just a small voice and one vote, you should not be afraid of me.
If the electorate will only be the Presidents of the organizations, the voting rights of the individual members will be infringed. But if the electorate will be ALL individuals, then no voting rights will be infringed because ALL includes the Presidents or Reps of the organizations.
The Presidents and Representatives of the Association cannot automatically assume that they can “Represent” the VOTING RIGHTS of their members. Their respective Association’s Charters does not give them such official right to infringe upon the voting rights of their members. They may be able to, in fact anyone can represent as long as it passes though proper due diligence of AUTHORIZATION from the individual members they assumingly represent, plus there must be a compelling reason why the member cannot come to exercise the duty to vote.
4. On the issue of “which will come first?”: (A) AIPO Registration with SEC, or (B) PRC Accreditation of AIPO? This issue is relevant because this is the issue that PHILRES is focusing to cancel the FRESA appointment as Interim AIPO. The answer to that is simple. The meaning ng "A" sa AIPO ay "Accredited".
Hindi mo ma yan dapat i-register sa SEC as "Accredited" kung hindi pa yan SURE na ma-accredit ng PRC. Pero bago Accredit, ehhhh Integrate muna. Pag ma integrate na, bibigyan nay an ng PRC ng go signal to register in SEC to comply with the last requirement which is SEC registration. After SEC registration, bibigyan na ng PRC ang AIPO ng Official Certificate of Accreditation.
Hindi kailangan SEC-Registered ang volunteer AIPO Formation Convenor Group para maka organize ng National Convention ng lahat na Charter Mambers and National Election for Board of Trustees. Ang Charter Members ay yung covered ng grandfather provision.
5. The nominees of the position of PRB-RES should undergo public opinion, that is why it is announced to the public for feedback. I was informed that Mr. Ong nominated himself to the Interim AIPO FRESA for the PRB-RES position. FRESA removed his name from the nominees list because he had "adverse" record, specifically on a conviction of violation of Code of Ethics. So, Mr. Ong's name did not pass though the public feedback test. It is a surprise that he became Chairman of PRB-RES. Mr. Ong has to RESIGN.
Ed, my dear friend and comrade in this struggle for the professionalization of the Real Estate Service, you are FRESA at during those times of the nomination, but you silenced the issue about the anomalous appointment of Mr. Ong, and I am so disappointed. I am telling you, as a friend, although it is unreasonably late already, please write an official report about this issue and have it received by the current PRC Chairman, then give me a copy to give my soul a peace. If you will not do this, your name will be permanently etched in Real Estate Service History as a conspirator and tolerator of such anomaly.
6. WHAT POSITIONS ARE WE GOING TO VOTE FOR?
QUESTION: Sir John, sa election ng AIPO, anong positions ba ang i-elect natin? Board and Officers ba or Board lang? ANSWER: There is no universal standard on that. The AIPO Election Volunteer Committee will decide on it. However, I found some reference material on guide for meetings and organizations that says "Option A. For smaller organisations such as local sporting clubs it is common to let the members vote directly for their president and for the holders of other executive positions. This is regarded as more democratic. It makes sense where most of the voters know the candidates for office personally."
"Option B. For larger organisations such as listed companies it is common for members to elect members of the board and for the board then to elect one of their number to be the Chair. It is felt that this approach produces the most useful result, as the members of the board would be in a better position than the membership at large to choose the best person for the job and to identify a person with whom the rest of the board can work effectively."
Malaki ang electorate ng AIPORESP. Sa tingin ko, following that reference above, dapat susundin natin ang Option B. Board of Trustees lang ang i-elect natin, and bahala na ang Board of Trustees na mag choose among themselves kung sino ang magiging President, Vice-President, Treasurer, etc based on volunteerism and capability. Pwede na every three years mag election ang general membership ng Board of Trustees.
7. AIPORESP HISTORY 101. PHILRES - THE CASE OF COMELEC WHO INFRINGED THE ELECTORATE.
Sometime around April 2010, ang PRB-RES AIPO Formation Committee ay nangimbita (hindi nag publish ha) ng mga "kakilala" nila na RESP na mag buo ng "AIPO Convenor's Group" na magsilbing COMELEC. Etong grupo na eto, imbis na i-convene ang mga RESPs for the conduct of National Election for Board of Trustees, ehhh nag collude and conspire sila at ginawa nila ang sarili nila bilang Broard of Trustees at ang grupo nila ay tinawag nilang PHILRES at niregister sa SEC. Ang nangyari, bantay salakay. Si COMELEC, imbis na mag administer ng election, ay ginawang hari ang sarili.
After na maregister ni PHILRES ang sarili niya sa SEC, nangyari na ang pinaka-karumaldumal na pangyayari na naging sanhi ng delay ng AIPO Formation. Alam natin lahat na INTEGRATION muna bago ACCREDITATION at inaasahan na mag organize si "Group Convenor" (kuno) ng National Convention for ALL RESPs. Pero ang ginawa ni PHILRES, walang National Convention, 20 May 2010 nag apply kaagad siya sa PRC para marecognize na AIPO. Ayan na, tumiwangwang na ang pansariling motibo ng grupo na i-disinfranchise ang mga RESPs.
Sino ang pumirma ng application ng PHILRES for AIPO? Si Florentino S Dulalia, Presidente ng CREBA! Naalala nyo na ang CREBA ay merong Anti-RESA petition sa Supreme Court? Ang principal place of business ng PHILRES, sa CREBA! Ayayaaaaay!
I am so tired already of this anomalies piling up. Let’s just follow the straight path. Please share this email to others.
JOHN REMOLLO PETALCORIN
xxxxx END OF LETTER xxxxx
For Historical Recordation purpose, below the names of the Convenor Group that formed PHILRES are. They are given opportunity to respond in IPORESP Facebook Group.
Domingo D. De Vera
Moises C. Canayon
Florentino S. Dulalia Jr.
Gener R. Sison
Marissa P. Magsino
Jose De Guzman
Roche U. Rigos
Julius G. Topacio
Amelita E. Sarmiento
Jeffrey R. Sosa
Enrico Melchor G. Sevilla
Ernesto M. Angeles
Juan B. Dayag
Evangeline M. De Jesus
Alejandro S. Manalac
Tomasito Z. Academia
Dr. Mary Gaw So
Abundio C. Gultiano Jr
Victor T. Salinas
Nestor P. Quiambao
Nelson E. Parreno
Mario G. Magcalas
Genaro N. Flores
Carolina O. Alvarez
If there is anything else important that I forgot to include in this article, or if you experienced a real estate transaction that is anomalous, scam, fraudulent scheme that you want me to document and expose for others to be warned, or if you want to donate to the war chest of real estate consumer rights advocacy, please feel free to email me at JohnPetalcorin@Gmail.Com. If you want to comment about this article, there is a provision for this purpose that you can find below.
Thank you so much for visiting my site. May God Bless You!