Neto Valente
The concessionaire company of the C and D land plots of Nam Van Lake expects Chief Executive (CE) Chui Sai On to fulfill his promise of solving the problem created by the “wrongful interpretation” of the new Land Law, said the president of the Nam Van Development Company Ltd., Jorge Neto Valente. The comments were made during the forum organized yesterday by the company on the “Impacts of the Land Law to the Investment, Economy and Society of Macau” at the Macau World Trade Center.
The president of the company was referring to the words of the CE made in late December 2015 during the 16th anniversary of the handover, where he said that the government would not take the initiative to amend the Land Law but would consider it if the Legislative Assembly (AL) members propose amendments.
The words were also recalled in a video recording that was also screened at the event.
“To me, the Chief Executive does not tell lies. I cannot think that a CE lies. I heard him, we all hear him promising a solution. I have to believe that if the CE promises – I want to believe – that he will deliver what he promised,” said Neto Valente.
For the company, there are only two possible ways out of the problem, one for short term and another for the longer term.
“In the long term, it’s out of the question – the law needs to
be revised. We need to evaluate the situation case by case. We cannot compare what is not comparable. We need to do something and this is in the hands of the government. It is for the government to find a solution that is just, scientific, respecting the truth, economic and that may restore the confidence and the trust in the work of the institutions of Macau,” he concluded.
During the forum, several persons related to the company highlighted the reasons behind the non-development of the lands, presenting several documents that support the information.
One of the most active members of the discussion panel was Patrick Wong, the executive director of Nam Van Development Company that claimed that the company did all they could to develop the land in the given time.
“I never wasted one single minute in the development of my land. Why do I need to go to court?” he asked. “This is called stealing!” he cried.
Wong claimed that the company has always fulfilled its duties and cooperated with the government through the former Secretary for Transport and Public Works, Lau Si Io.
“Can you handle the truth?” he asked, adding, “we not looking for compensation from money that belongs to Macau people. We are looking for a fair solution,” he said replying to journalists’ questions.
Neto Valente, who is also the president of the Macau Lawyer’s Association, was on the same page. He said: “The investors are not looking for compensation. An investor looks to develop a project,” adding that any possible indemnities would always be “much smaller than the real damage made by the repossession [reclaiming] of the land. The compensation is the last resort to reduce the losses of the investment and the legitimate and expected profit. But this is not the aim of Nam Van [Development Company].”
The lawyer and legislator Leonel Alves was another of the participants in the forum. In an attempt to justify the company’s claims, he reduced the case to a football match in which time lost during the match must be compensated for at the end of the game, through added time.
Gonçalo Mendes da Maia, partner at MdME lawyers firm, said “what shocks me is that the government has the power to act, in fact it has the duty to act and it is refusing to do so, passing the the burden of ruling and governing to the judiciary [institutions].”
“They are simply saying, ‘we don’t want to act, let’s pass this to the courts.’ But the courts do not exist for that purpose; they exist to interpret the law and to settle disputes, not to make decisions that should be the government’s responsibility,” he said.
Mendes da Maia added that he hopes that the proposal sent by the legislator Gabriel Tong to the AL to add an “interpretative note” to the law will be approved in the name of a civic law system and justice for all those involved.
On the sidelines of the event, legislator Gabriel Tong explained that his interpretative note aims to fix wording “that is inducing people to a solution that is totally unacceptable, unless we accept the injustice.”
“How can we imagine that a government can concede land, never allow [the concessionaire] to build and then say ‘hey, the time has elapsed’. It’s ridiculous,” he continued. “If we have a law that says this, then there is a problem with the law. If there was an intention to operate like this [from the beginning] then the intention was a bad one and cannot be accepted by the legal system,” he concluded.
‘Procrastination and bureaucracy are familiar to people’
Speaking on the sidelines of the forum organized by Nam Van Development Company, Scott Chiang, president of New Macau Association said that “unfortunately the [government’s] procrastination and bureaucracy are too familiar to people in Macau.”
He said that he might show a “little sympathy” to the case were he not to recall that this discussion involves only two pieces of land in a universe of plots of land to be reclaimed by the government.
Chiang also agrees with Wong’s assessment that “the mechanism behind the judgment of whether the developer is guilty is not open and the public is not in the position to challenge [that verdict].”
“As a stakeholder, Mr Wong and his company can go to court and challenge that decision based on administration [misconducts] point of view but Macau citizens can’t challenge any decision,” explained Chiang.
Aspect of yesterday’s event
No Comments