Vol. 34 No.232
       ©2007 Marianas Variety
Wednesday, February 7, 2007 www.mvariety.com
Serving the CNMI for 34 years
 

© 2007 Marianas Variety
Published by Younis Art Studio Inc.
All Rights Reserved
Email :
mvariety@vzpacifica.net
Ex-MPLA chairwoman testifies in Deleon Guerrero’s lawsuit vs gov’t

By Cherrie Anne E. Villahermosa
Variety News Staff

FORMER Marianas Public Lands Authority Chairwoman Ana Demapan Castro took the witness stand and testified against the government in connection with the lawsuit filed by former MPLA Commissioner Edward Deleon Guerrero.
Deleon Guerrero is seeking $252,000 plus interest from the Department of Public Lands, the successor of the now defunct MPLA.
Deleon Guerrero, who was hired by MPLA in 2004, was terminated in Feb. 2006, following the inauguration of the new administration.
He then sued DPL for breach of contract, claiming that the termination was without cause.
Deleon Guerrero said his contract was supposed to end in 2008.
Castro, during direct examination with the plaintiff’s counsel, Brien Sers Nicholas, said that when they hired Deleon Guerrero they didn’t have any idea that MPLA would be abolished.
She said they later decided to terminate Deleon Guerrero’s contract to protect the other MPLA employees as the agency was then facing a lot of pressure involving different controversies and allegations.
Castro said MPLA was accused of mismanagement and improper hiring.
“There was a lot of stuff going on at that time to get rid of MPLA, to get rid of the employees — so much pressure that what came to our minds was how to protect the employees of MPLA,” she said.
Castro admitted that before they terminated De Leon Guerrero’s contract, they already anticipated a lawsuit.
“When we signed the contract, we did it in good faith. The decision to terminate was not made outright — there was a lot of discussion,” Castro said.
DPL Secretary John Del Rosario was present during the trial.
Deputy Attorney General Gregory Baka represents the government and DPL.
Deleon Guerrero’s complaint stated that his contract gave him an annual salary of $80,000, subject to an annual increase of 5 percent.
He said he was entitled to receive other benefits including eight hours of annual leave per pay period, sick leave and a lump sum payment valued at $252,000.
He said he has yet to receive the $252,000 and all his attempts to collect the amount from DPL have been unsuccessful and unproductive.