Cebu City Mayor Nestor Archival Sr. said he was “sad” over a second complaint filed against him before the Ombudsman, as he defended his ownership of property inside Monterrazas de Cebu and his decision not to issue a cease-and-desist order against the development.
Archival acknowledged in an interview Monday that he owns property within Monterrazas Subdivision in Barangay Guadalupe.
He said he began acquiring the property in 2016 and completed the purchase in 2022, explaining that he bought it gradually rather than paying for it in a single transaction.
“Pobre man ta, dili man ko dato, so if I’m going to pay, dili man ko kapalit og dali. Hinay-hinay,” he said. (I am poor and not rich, so I could not afford to buy it outright. I paid for it gradually.)
Archival said he later secured the necessary documents and declared the property in his 2025 Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN).
“So there, so it’s in there, wa na nako gitago,” he said. (So there, it is declared. I did not hide it.)
The mayor was responding to a complaint-affidavit filed by Cebu City resident Ed Rama before the Office of the Ombudsman Area Office for the Visayas on Aug. 19.
Rama accused Archival of violating Sections 3(e) and 3(h) of Republic Act No. 3019, or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, as well as grave misconduct, grave abuse of authority and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service.
The complaint centers on a 713-square-meter property identified as Lot 6, Block 5 of Monterrazas Subdivision. It said the property was registered under Archival and his spouse and entered in the Cebu City Registry of Deeds on Oct. 18, 2022.
Rama alleged that Archival’s ownership created a conflict of interest because the mayor had taken an official position on calls to suspend development activities at Monterrazas.
Archival, however, also defended his decision not to issue a separate city cease-and-desist order against the project.
Calls for a halt to development intensified amid concerns over flooding, environmental compliance and the project’s water-catchment facilities.
Archival said he saw no need for another stoppage order after the Department of Environment and Natural Resources had already taken regulatory action involving the development.
“How can I make a cease and desist, where in fact there are reports coming, of course, from DENR nga ilaha na ning gi-open, ya ni-follow na ni,” he said. (How can I issue a cease-and-desist order when reports from the DENR show that it had already taken action and the developer had complied with it?)
Archival has maintained that the DENR is the proper agency to determine Monterrazas’ environmental compliance.
He also said the authority to issue a city cease-and-desist order for developments of this nature rests with his office, but that he found no basis to issue one against Monterrazas.
His position has been opposed by Vice Mayor Tomas Osmeña and several City Council members, who have called for the suspension of development activities except those involving water-catchment facilities.
Rama’s complaint argued that Archival should have disclosed his property interest and refrained from participating in official matters involving the development.
Section 3(h) of RA 3019 prohibits public officers from having a direct or indirect financial or pecuniary interest in a business, contract or transaction in connection with which they intervene in their official capacity.
Rama also cited Section 3(e), which covers acts involving manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence that cause undue injury or give a private party an unwarranted benefit, advantage or preference.
The complaint further invoked Republic Act No. 6713, or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees, in alleging that Archival should have disclosed his interest and recused himself from matters involving Monterrazas.
Rama asked the Ombudsman to conduct a preliminary investigation and, if warranted, pursue criminal and administrative charges against Archival. He also sought the mayor’s preventive suspension while the case is pending.
The complaint cited previous regulatory and environmental issues involving Monterrazas, including alleged violations of conditions under its Environmental Compliance Certificate and other environmental regulations.
The DENR Environmental Management Bureau in Central Visayas, however, lifted its separate stoppage order against the development in April 2026 after the developer reported completing remedial work on detention ponds.
Archival welcomed the lifting of the EMB order and has cited it as part of his reason for not supporting another city-issued stoppage order.
“But to those people nga gusto jud ko’ng ikiha, then ilaha pod na, ilaha pod silang gusto, and I congratulate them,” he said. (But to those people who really want to file a case against me, that is their choice, that is what they want, and I congratulate them.)
The allegations against Archival remain subject to investigation and determination by the Ombudsman.
Photo courtesy of Nestor Archival / FB
Comments