IT’S an open secret that the Cogon Public Market has seen better days — probably days when tartanilyas still ruled our streets. But apparently, pointing out that the place is a biohazard has suddenly become a dangerous proposition.
When Franklin Dagcuta, the president of the Market Vendors Association, raised a red flag linking the market’s grim sanitary state to a case of leptospirosis, he probably expected a mop. Maybe a pressure washer.
Instead, he got a political ultimatum.
City Councilor Enrico Salcedo — Agaw Eric, apparently the Grim Reaper of Speech to his critics — threatened to declare the vendor leader persona non grata unless he publicly apologized.
This serves as a chilling reminder: In the hallowed halls of the City Council, preserving the government’s Facebook aesthetic often takes precedence over actually sweeping the floor.
This begs a critical question for Cagayan de Oro: Has the City Council prioritized reputation management over public safety? Are we protecting the people, or are we protecting the poster?
A tale of two rodents
Let’s get personal. My ex-girlfriend and I once braved the Cogon Public Market “food court” (heavy quotation marks intended).
In the middle of devouring a slab of humba, a furry creature scurried over my foot. I looked down and saw what appeared to be a “spotted squirrel.”
Now, logic dictates that since we were not in a forest, it couldn’t have been a squirrel. It was, in fact, a rat the size of our Persian cat. I mistook the mange-induced bald spots on its back for the markings of the endangered Xerospermophilus perotensis.
I posted this on Facebook as a funny observation about how neglected the market has become.
But in light of recent events, should I issue a public apology to Agaw Eric? Does my review of a rodent require a retraction under threat of legislative exile?
The Councilor’s response to Dagcuta wasn’t to investigate the rats; it was to silence the whistleblower. This isn’t a request for accountability; it is coerced speech.
The Constitutional pushback
Demanding an apology under the threat of sanction forces a citizen to publicly disavow their reality just to avoid a scarlet letter. It implies that criticizing city management comes with a social price tag.
But let’s look at the law, shall we?
For the nth time, persona non grata is a diplomatic term usually reserved for foreign spies or ambassadors who commit major faux pas. But since the City Council loves throwing this phrase around like confetti, here is the reality check:
A City Council resolution cannot “banish” a Filipino citizen. The Supreme Court and the DILG have consistently held that local legislative bodies cannot prevent a Filipino from entering their city. Doing so would violate the Right to Travel and Liberty of Abode.
Sa ato pa, this declaration is legally toothless.
It is a legislative temper tantrum designed to assuage the “bruised” egos of councilors, not to protect the city’s residents. Remember: The councilors are employees of the city.
We are Cagayan de Oro City, not them.
The chilling effect
The threat is essentially a formal expression of displeasure — a government-issued “unfriend” button.
But here lies the rub: Dagcuta apologized. Why? Because while the law is on his side, the power dynamic is not. He represents vendors who operate at the mercy of the city government.
This wasn’t an apology; it was a hostage video.
Dagcuta shouldn’t have to apologize for describing reality — unless the rats (sized like mid-sized cats) in Cogon Market were the ones offended.
Using a legislative body to censure a private citizen for a comment on public infrastructure is a gross mismatch of power.
Even if Dagcuta’s medical link to leptospirosis wasn’t scientifically peer-reviewed, since when is being wrong a crime?
A vendor leader — and any citizen — should have the Constitutional right to be wrong without facing political exile.
When the government uses a sledgehammer to crack a nut, it creates a “chilling effect.” It sends a message to every other Kagay-anon: Do not complain about the smell, do not point out the rats, or you will be next.
The bottom line
Ultimately, this political intramural is a distraction. By focusing on Dagcuta’s “offense,” the narrative shifts away from the actual issue: the market is dirty.
The apology has become more important than the sanitation.
In a democratic space, the feedback loop between the government and the governed is sacred. If pointing out that a market is filthy results in a legislative threat, that feedback loop is broken.
This drama isn’t just about Dagcuta. It is about the fundamental right of any citizen to complain about their city without fear of retribution.
The persona non grata status should be a shield against actual threats to the city — the daylight killings, the crime syndicates, the visiting motorists with noisy mufflers — not a weapon used to smack down critics who just want a cleaner place to buy and eat.
