BCDA answers the SM Aura question, "Why only now?"

With regards to the SM Aura issue, one of the burning questions being asked of BCDA by pro-SM pundits as well as concerned netizens is, "Why only now?" They are under the impression that the BCDA, for some reason, waited until SM's brand new luxury mall was ready to launch before publicly complaining that the development was illegal.

But the BCDA would like to point out that as early as 2009, the Bonifacio Estate Services Corporation (BESC), which is in charge of BGC’s upkeep, rejected SM Prime Holdings Inc.’s Outline Application for the proposed Community and Retail Complex  on the grounds that: (i) "The proposed land uses are inconsistent with  Section 8(d) of Republic Act No. 7227, as amended, since the same is limited to “national government and local government centers, sports facilities and parks.”

But while a BESC permit is necessary to engage in construction activities in BGC, SM was able to commence building by getting a permit from Taguig City Hall. SM even avoided declaring the official purpose of the development, and this loophole allowed them to continue with the building.

BCDA President and CEO Arnel Paciano D. Casanova also points out that “Many people were kept in the dark on what that huge structure being built along C5 was. There were no signages, no advertisements, nothing. The structure was virtually completed when SM officially announced that it was a mall. It is a building that was completely done in bad faith,” Casanova noted.

SM keeps on insisting that it is an innocent 3rd party in this issue, but the BESC has jurisdiction over the construction projects inside BGC, and has authority to approve or deny project applications. SM knew this full well—otherwise, why would they even apply for a permit from BESC in the first place?

SM knew that Aura should not have been built—but they built it anyway.