Part Eight Conversion of Agricultural Lands
Petitioner CREBA, a private non-stock, non-profit corporation duly organized and
1. Conversion of Lands Sec 65, RA 6657
Section 65. Conversion of Lands. After the lapse of five (5) years from its
award, when the land ceases to be economically feasible and sound for agricultural
purposes, or the locality has become urbanized and the land will have a greater
economic value for residential, commercial or industrial purposes, the DAR, upon
application of the beneficiary or the landowner, with due notice to the affected
parties, and subject to existing laws, may authorize the reclassification or conversion
of the land and its disposition: provided, that the beneficiary shall have fully paid his
obligation.
2. Conversion of Agricultural Lands: Difference among Exemption, Conversion
and Reclassification
Cases:
1. CREBA v. Secretary of Agrarian Reform, G.R. No. 183409. June 18, 2010
CHAMBER OF REAL ESTATE AND BUILDERS ASSOCIATIONS, INC. (CREBA),
Petitioner,
- versus - THE SECRETARY OF AGRARIAN REFORM, Respondent.
G.R. No. 183409 June 18, 2010
DeCISion
PEREZ, J.:
This case is a Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition (with application for temporary
restraining order and/or writ of preliminary injunction) under Rule 65 of the 1997
Revised Rules of Civil Procedure, filed by herein petitioner Chamber of Real Estate
and Builders Associations, Inc. (CREBA) seeking to nullify and prohibit the
enforcement of Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) Administrative Order (AO)
No. 01-02, as amended by DAR AO No. 05-07, i and DAR Memorandum No. 88,ii for
having been issued by the Secretary of Agrarian Reform with grave abuse of
discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction as some provisions of the
aforesaid administrative issuances are illegal and unconstitutional.
existing under the laws of the Republic of the Philippines, is the umbrella
organization of some 3,500 private corporations, partnerships, single proprietorships
and individuals directly or indirectly involved in land and housing development,
building and infrastructure construction, materials production and supply, and
services in the various related fields of engineering, architecture, community
planning and development financing. The Secretary of Agrarian Reform is named
respondent as he is the duly appointive head of the DAR whose administrative
issuances are the subject of this petition.
The Antecedent Facts
The Secretary of Agrarian Reform issued, on 29 October 1997, DAR AO No. 07-97, iii
entitled Omnibus Rules and Procedures Governing Conversion of Agricultural Lands
to Non-Agricultural Uses, which consolidated all existing implementing guidelines
related to land use conversion. The aforesaid rules embraced all private agricultural
lands regardless of tenurial arrangement and commodity produced, and all untitled
agricultural lands and agricultural lands reclassified by Local Government Units
(LGUs) into non-agricultural uses after 15 June 1988.
Subsequently, on 30 March 1999, the Secretary of Agrarian Reform issued DAR AO
No. 01-99,iv entitled Revised Rules and Regulations on the Conversion of
Agricultural Lands to Non-agricultural Uses, amending and updating the previous
rules on land use conversion. Its coverage includes the following agricultural lands,
to wit: (1) those to be converted to residential, commercial, industrial, institutional
and other non-agricultural purposes; (2) those to be devoted to another type of
agricultural activity such as livestock, poultry, and fishpond the effect of which is to
exempt the land from the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP)
coverage; (3) those to be converted to non-agricultural use other than that
previously authorized; and (4) those reclassified to residential, commercial,
industrial, or other non-agricultural uses on or after the effectivity of Republic Act No.
6657v on 15 June 1988 pursuant to Section 20 vi of Republic Act No. 7160 vii and other
pertinent laws and regulations, and are to be converted to such uses.
On 28 February 2002, the Secretary of Agrarian Reform issued another
Administrative Order, i.e., DAR AO No. 01-02, entitled 2002 Comprehensive Rules
on Land Use Conversion, which further amended DAR AO No. 07-97 and DAR AO
No. 01-99, and repealed all issuances inconsistent therewith. The aforesaid DAR AO
No. 01-02 covers all applications for conversion from agricultural to non-agricultural
uses or to another agricultural use.
Thereafter, on 2 August 2007, the Secretary of Agrarian Reform amended
certain provisionsviii of DAR AO No. 01-02 by formulating DAR AO No. 05-07,
particularly addressing land conversion in time of exigencies and calamities.
To address the unabated conversion of prime agricultural lands for real
estate development, the Secretary of Agrarian Reform further issued Memorandum
No. 88 on 15 April 2008, which temporarily suspended the processing and approval
of all land use conversion applications.
By reason thereof, petitioner claims that there is an actual slow down of
housing projects, which, in turn, aggravated the housing shortage, unemployment
and illegal squatting problems to the substantial prejudice not only of the petitioner
and its members but more so of the whole nation.
Hence, this petition.
The Issues
In its Memorandum, petitioner posits the following issues:
I.
WHETHER THE DAR SECRETARY HAS JURISDICTION OVER LANDS THAT
HAVE BEEN RECLASSIFIED AS RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL,
OR FOR OTHER NON-AGRICULTURAL USES.
II.
WHETHER THE DAR SECRETARY ACTED IN EXCESS OF HIS JURISDICTION
AND GRAVELY ABUSED HIS DISCRETION BY ISSUING AND ENFORCING [DAR
AO NO. 01-02, AS AMENDED] WHICH SEEK TO REGULATE RECLASSIFIED
LANDS.
III.
WHETHER [DAR AO NO. 01-02, AS AMENDED] VIOLATE[S] THE LOCAL
AUTONOMY OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS.
IV.
WHETHER [DAR AO NO. 01-02, AS AMENDED] VIOLATE[S] THE DUE PROCESS
AND EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE[S] OF THE CONSTITUTION.
V.
WHETHER MEMORANDUM NO. 88 IS A VALID EXERCISE OF POLICE POWER. ix
The subject of the submission that the DAR Secretary gravely abused his discretion
is AO No. 01-02, as amended, which states:
Section 3. Applicability of Rules. These guidelines shall apply to all applications for
conversion, from agricultural to non-agricultural uses or to another agricultural use,
such as:
xxxx
3.4 Conversion of agricultural lands or areas that have been reclassified
by the LGU or by way of a Presidential Proclamation, to residential, commercial,
industrial, or other non-agricultural uses on or after the effectivity of RA 6657 on 15
June 1988, x x x. [Emphasis supplied].
Petitioner holds that under Republic Act No. 6657 and Republic Act No. 8435, x the
term agricultural lands refers to lands devoted to or suitable for the cultivation of the
soil, planting of crops, growing of fruit trees, raising of livestock, poultry or fish,
including the harvesting of such farm products, and other farm activities and
practices performed by a farmer in conjunction with such farming operations done
by a person whether natural or juridical, and not classified by the law as mineral,
forest, residential, commercial or industrial land. When the Secretary of Agrarian
Reform, however, issued DAR AO No. 01-02, as amended, he included in the
definition of agricultural lands lands not reclassified as residential, commercial,
industrial or other non-agricultural uses before 15 June 1988. In effect, lands
reclassified from agricultural to residential, commercial, industrial, or other non-
agricultural uses after 15 June 1988 are considered to be agricultural lands for
purposes of conversion, redistribution, or otherwise. In so doing, petitioner avows
that the Secretary of Agrarian Reform acted without jurisdiction as he has no
authority to expand or enlarge the legal signification of the term agricultural lands
through DAR AO No. 01-02. Being a mere administrative issuance, it must conform
to the statute it seeks to implement, i.e., Republic Act No. 6657, or to the
Constitution, otherwise, its validity or constitutionality may be questioned.
In the same breath, petitioner contends that DAR AO No. 01-02, as
amended, was made in violation of Section 65 xi of Republic Act No. 6657 because it
covers all applications for conversion from agricultural to non-agricultural uses or to
other agricultural uses, such as the conversion of agricultural lands or areas that
have been reclassified by the LGUs or by way of Presidential Proclamations, to
residential, commercial, industrial or other non-agricultural uses on or after 15 June
1988. According to petitioner, there is nothing in Section 65 of Republic Act No. 6657
or in any other provision of law that confers to the DAR the jurisdiction or authority to
require that non-awarded lands or reclassified lands be submitted to its conversion
authority. Thus, in issuing and enforcing DAR AO No. 01-02, as amended, the
Secretary of Agrarian Reform acted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack
or excess of jurisdiction.
Petitioner further asseverates that Section 2.19, xii Article I of DAR AO No. 01-02, as
amended, making reclassification of agricultural lands subject to the requirements
and procedure for land use conversion, violates Section 20 of Republic Act No.
7160, because it was not provided therein that reclassification by LGUs shall be
subject to conversion procedures or requirements, or that the DARs approval or
clearance must be secured to effect reclassification. The said Section 2.19 of DAR
AO No. 01-02, as amended, also contravenes the constitutional mandate on local
autonomy under Section 25,xiii Article II and Section 2,xiv Article X of the 1987
Philippine Constitution.
Petitioner similarly avers that the promulgation and enforcement of DAR AO
No. 01-02, as amended, constitute deprivation of liberty and property without due
process of law. There is deprivation of liberty and property without due process of
law because under DAR AO No. 01-02, as amended, lands that are not within DARs
jurisdiction are unjustly, arbitrarily and oppressively prohibited or restricted from
legitimate use on pain of administrative and criminal penalties. More so, there is
discrimination and violation of the equal protection clause of the Constitution
because the aforesaid administrative order is patently biased in favor of the
peasantry at the expense of all other sectors of society.
As its final argument, petitioner avows that DAR Memorandum No. 88 is not
a valid exercise of police power for it is the prerogative of the legislature and that it is
unconstitutional because it suspended the land use conversion without any basis.
The Courts Ruling
This petition must be dismissed.
Primarily, although this Court, the Court of Appeals and the Regional Trial
Courts have concurrent jurisdiction to issue writs of certiorari, prohibition,
mandamus, quo warranto, habeas corpus and injunction, such concurrence does
not give the petitioner unrestricted freedom of choice of court forum. xv In Heirs of
Bertuldo Hinog v. Melicor,xvi citing People v. Cuaresma,xvii this Court made the
following pronouncements:
This Court's original jurisdiction to issue writs of certiorari is not exclusive. It is
shared by this Court with Regional Trial Courts and with the Court of Appeals. This
concurrence of jurisdiction is not, however, to be taken as according to parties
seeking any of the writs an absolute, unrestrained freedom of choice of the court to
which application therefor will be directed. There is after all a hierarchy of courts.
That hierarchy is determinative of the venue of appeals, and also serves as a
general determinant of the appropriate forum for petitions for the extraordinary
writs. A becoming regard for that judicial hierarchy most certainly indicates that
petitions for the issuance of extraordinary writs against first level (inferior) courts
should be filed with the Regional Trial Court, and those against the latter, with the
Court of Appeals. A direct invocation of the Supreme Courts original jurisdiction to
issue these writs should be allowed only when there are special and important
reasons therefor, clearly and specifically set out in the petition. This is [an]
established policy. It is a policy necessary to prevent inordinate demands upon the
Courts time and attention which are better devoted to those matters within its
exclusive jurisdiction, and to prevent further over-crowding of the Courts docket. xviii
(Emphasis supplied.)
The rationale for this rule is two-fold: (a) it would be an imposition upon the precious
time of this Court; and (b) it would cause an inevitable and resultant delay, intended
or otherwise, in the adjudication of cases, which in some instances had to be
remanded or referred to the lower court as the proper forum under the rules of
procedure, or as better equipped to resolve the issues because this Court is not a
trier of facts.xix
This Court thus reaffirms the judicial policy that it will not entertain direct resort to it
unless the redress desired cannot be obtained in the appropriate courts, and
exceptional and compelling circumstances, such as cases of national interest and of
serious implications, justify the availment of the extraordinary remedy of writ of
certiorari, calling for the exercise of its primary jurisdiction.xx
Exceptional and compelling circumstances were held present in the following cases:
(a) Chavez v. Romulo,xxi on citizens right to bear arms; (b) Government of [the]
United States of America v. Hon. Purganan,xxii on bail in extradition proceedings; (c)
Commission on Elections v. Judge Quijano-Padilla, xxiii on government contract
involving modernization and computerization of voters registration list; (d) Buklod ng
Kawaning EIIB v. Hon. Sec. Zamora, xxiv on status and existence of a public office;
and (e) Hon. Fortich v. Hon. Corona,xxv on the so-called Win-Win Resolution of the
Office of the President which modified the approval of the conversion to agro-
industrial area.xxvi
In the case at bench, petitioner failed to specifically and sufficiently set forth special
and important reasons to justify direct recourse to this Court and why this Court
should give due course to this petition in the first instance, hereby failing to fulfill the
conditions set forth in Heirs of Bertuldo Hinog v. Melicor.xxvii The present petition
should have been initially filed in the Court of Appeals in strict observance of the
doctrine on the hierarchy of courts. Failure to do so is sufficient cause for the
dismissal of this petition.
Moreover, although the instant petition is styled as a Petition for Certiorari, in
essence, it seeks the declaration by this Court of the unconstitutionality or illegality
of the questioned DAR AO No. 01-02, as amended, and Memorandum No. 88. It,
thus, partakes of the nature of a Petition for Declaratory Relief over which this Court
has only appellate, not original, jurisdiction. xxviii Section 5, Article VIII of the 1987
Philippine Constitution provides:
Sec. 5. The Supreme Court shall have the following powers:
(1) Exercise original jurisdiction over cases affecting ambassadors, other public
ministers and consuls, and over petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo
warranto, and habeas corpus.
(2) Review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm on appeal or certiorari as the law
or the Rules of Court may provide, final judgments and orders of lower courts in:
(a) All cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty, international
or executive agreement, law, presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction,
ordinance, or regulation is in question. (Emphasis supplied.)
With that, this Petition must necessarily fail because this Court does not have
original jurisdiction over a Petition for Declaratory Relief even if only questions of law
are involved.
Even if the petitioner has properly observed the doctrine of judicial hierarchy, this
Petition is still dismissible.
The special civil action for certiorari is intended for the correction of errors of
jurisdiction only or grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction. Its principal office is only to keep the inferior court within the parameters
of its jurisdiction or to prevent it from committing such a grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.xxix
The essential requisites for a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 are: (1) the writ is
directed against a tribunal, a board, or an officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial
functions; (2) such tribunal, board, or officer has acted without or in excess of
jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction; and (3) there is no appeal or any plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in
the ordinary course of law.xxx
Excess of jurisdiction as distinguished from absence of jurisdiction means that an
act, though within the general power of a tribunal, board or officer, is not authorized
and invalid with respect to the particular proceeding, because the conditions which
alone authorize the exercise of the general power in respect of it are wanting. xxxi
Without jurisdiction means lack or want of legal power, right or authority to hear and
determine a cause or causes, considered either in general or with reference to a
particular matter. It means lack of power to exercise authority. xxxii Grave abuse of
discretion implies such capricious and whimsical exercise of judgment as is
equivalent to lack of jurisdiction or, in other words, where the power is exercised in
an arbitrary manner by reason of passion, prejudice, or personal hostility, and it must
be so patent or gross as to amount to an evasion of a positive duty or to a virtual
refusal to perform the duty enjoined or to act at all in contemplation of law. xxxiii
In the case before this Court, the petitioner fails to meet the above-mentioned
requisites for the proper invocation of a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65. The
Secretary of Agrarian Reform in issuing the assailed DAR AO No. 01-02, as
amended, as well as Memorandum No. 88 did so in accordance with his mandate to
implement the land use conversion provisions of Republic Act No. 6657. In the
process, he neither acted in any judicial or quasi-judicial capacity nor assumed unto
himself any performance of judicial or quasi-judicial prerogative. A Petition for
Certiorari is a special civil action that may be invoked only against a tribunal, board,
or officer exercising judicial functions. Section 1, Rule 65 of the 1997 Revised Rules
of Civil Procedure is explicit on this matter, viz.:
SECTION 1. Petition for certiorari. When any tribunal, board or officer exercising
judicial or quasi-judicial functions has acted without or in excess of its or his
jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction, and there is no appeal, nor any plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in
the ordinary course of law, a person aggrieved thereby may file a verified petition in
the proper court, alleging the facts with certainty and praying that judgment must be
rendered annulling or modifying the proceedings of such tribunal, board or officer.
A tribunal, board, or officer is said to be exercising judicial function where it has the
power to determine what the law is and what the legal rights of the parties are, and
then undertakes to determine these questions and adjudicate upon the rights of the
parties. Quasi-judicial function, on the other hand, is a term which applies to the
actions, discretion, etc., of public administrative officers or bodies x x x required to
investigate facts or ascertain the existence of facts, hold hearings, and draw
conclusions from them as a basis for their official action and to exercise discretion of
a judicial nature.xxxiv
Before a tribunal, board, or officer may exercise judicial or quasi-judicial acts, it is
necessary that there be a law that gives rise to some specific rights of persons or
property under which adverse claims to such rights are made, and the controversy
ensuing therefrom is brought before a tribunal, board, or officer clothed with power
and authority to determine the law and adjudicate the respective rights of the
contending parties.xxxv
The Secretary of Agrarian Reform does not fall within the ambit of a tribunal, board,
or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions. The issuance and
enforcement by the Secretary of Agrarian Reform of the questioned DAR AO No. 01-
02, as amended, and Memorandum No. 88 were done in the exercise of his quasi-
legislative and administrative functions and not of judicial or quasi-judicial functions.
In issuing the aforesaid administrative issuances, the Secretary of Agrarian Reform
never made any adjudication of rights of the parties. As such, it can never be said
that the Secretary of Agrarian Reform had acted with grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in issuing and enforcing DAR AO No. 01-
02, as amended, and Memorandum No. 88 for he never exercised any judicial or
quasi-judicial functions but merely his quasi-legislative and administrative functions.
Furthermore, as this Court has previously discussed, the instant petition in essence
seeks the declaration by this Court of the unconstitutionality or illegality of the
questioned DAR AO No. 01-02, as amended, and Memorandum No. 88. Thus, the
adequate and proper remedy for the petitioner therefor is to file a Petition for
Declaratory Relief, which this Court has only appellate and not original jurisdiction. It
is beyond the province of certiorari to declare the aforesaid administrative issuances
unconstitutional and illegal because certiorari is confined only to the determination of
the existence of grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction. Petitioner cannot simply allege grave abuse of discretion amounting to
lack or excess of jurisdiction and then invoke certiorari to declare the aforesaid
administrative issuances unconstitutional and illegal. Emphasis must be given to the
fact that the writ of certiorari dealt with in Rule 65 of the 1997 Revised Rules of Civil
Procedure is a prerogative writ, never demandable as a matter of right, never issued
except in the exercise of judicial discretion.xxxvi
At any rate, even if the Court will set aside procedural infirmities, the instant petition
should still be dismissed.
Executive Order No. 129-Axxxvii vested upon the DAR the responsibility of
implementing the CARP. Pursuant to the said mandate and to ensure the successful
implementation of the CARP, Section 5(c) of the said executive order authorized the
DAR to establish and promulgate operational policies, rules and regulations and
priorities for agrarian reform implementation. Section 4(k) thereof authorized the
DAR to approve or disapprove the conversion, restructuring or readjustment of
agricultural lands into non-agricultural uses. Similarly, Section 5(l) of the same
executive order has given the DAR the exclusive authority to approve or disapprove
conversion of agricultural lands for residential, commercial, industrial, and other land
uses as may be provided for by law. Section 7 of the aforesaid executive order
clearly provides that the authority and responsibility for the exercise of the mandate
of the [DAR] and the discharge of its powers and functions shall be vested in the
Secretary of Agrarian Reform x x x.
Under DAR AO No. 01-02, as amended, lands not reclassified as residential,
commercial, industrial or other non-agricultural uses before 15 June 1988 have been
included in the definition of agricultural lands. In so doing, the Secretary of Agrarian
Reform merely acted within the scope of his authority stated in the aforesaid
sections of Executive Order No. 129-A, which is to promulgate rules and regulations
for agrarian reform implementation and that includes the authority to define
agricultural lands for purposes of land use conversion. Further, the definition of
agricultural lands under DAR AO No. 01-02, as amended, merely refers to the
category of agricultural lands that may be the subject for conversion to non-
agricultural uses and is not in any way confined to agricultural lands in the context of
land redistribution as provided for under Republic Act No. 6657.
More so, Department of Justice Opinion No. 44, Series of 1990, which Opinion has
been recognized in many cases decided by this Court, clarified that after the
effectivity of Republic Act No. 6657 on 15 June 1988 the DAR has been given the
authority to approve land conversion. xxxviii Concomitant to such authority, therefore, is
the authority to include in the definition of agricultural lands lands not reclassified as
residential, commercial, industrial or other non-agricultural uses before 15 June
1988 for purposes of land use conversion.
In the same vein, the authority of the Secretary of Agrarian Reform to include lands
not reclassified as residential, commercial, industrial or other non-agricultural uses
before 15 June 1988 in the definition of agricultural lands finds basis in
jurisprudence. In Ros v. Department of Agrarian Reform,xxxix this Court has
enunciated that after the passage of Republic Act No. 6657, agricultural lands,
though reclassified, have to go through the process of conversion, jurisdiction over
which is vested in the DAR. However, agricultural lands, which are already
reclassified before the effectivity of Republic Act No. 6657 which is 15 June 1988,
are exempted from conversion.xl It bears stressing that the said date of effectivity of
Republic Act No. 6657 served as the cut-off period for automatic reclassifications or
rezoning of agricultural lands that no longer require any DAR conversion clearance
or authority.xli It necessarily follows that any reclassification made thereafter can be
the subject of DARs conversion authority. Having recognized the DARs conversion
authority over lands reclassified after 15 June 1988, it can no longer be argued that
the Secretary of Agrarian Reform was wrongfully given the authority and power to
include lands not reclassified as residential, commercial, industrial or other non-
agricultural uses before 15 June 1988 in the definition of agricultural lands. Such
inclusion does not unduly expand or enlarge the definition of agricultural lands;
instead, it made clear what are the lands that can be the subject of DARs
conversion authority, thus, serving the very purpose of the land use conversion
provisions of Republic Act No. 6657.
The argument of the petitioner that DAR AO No. 01-02, as amended, was
made in violation of Section 65 of Republic Act No. 6657, as it covers even those
non-awarded lands and reclassified lands by the LGUs or by way of Presidential
Proclamations on or after 15 June 1988 is specious. As explained in Department of
Justice Opinion No. 44, series of 1990, it is true that the DARs express power over
land use conversion provided for under Section 65 of Republic Act No. 6657 is
limited to cases in which agricultural lands already awarded have, after five years,
ceased to be economically feasible and sound for agricultural purposes, or the
locality has become urbanized and the land will have a greater economic value for
residential, commercial or industrial purposes. To suggest, however, that these are
the only instances that the DAR can require conversion clearances would open a
loophole in Republic Act No. 6657 which every landowner may use to evade
compliance with the agrarian reform program. It should logically follow, therefore,
from the said departments express duty and function to execute and enforce the
said statute that any reclassification of a private land as a residential, commercial or
industrial property, on or after the effectivity of Republic Act No. 6657 on 15 June
1988 should first be cleared by the DAR.xlii
This Court held in Alarcon v. Court of Appealsxliii that reclassification of lands does
not suffice. Conversion and reclassification differ from each other. Conversion is the
act of changing the current use of a piece of agricultural land into some other use as
approved by the DAR while reclassification is the act of specifying how agricultural
lands shall be utilized for non-agricultural uses such as residential, industrial, and
commercial, as embodied in the land use plan, subject to the requirements and
procedures for land use conversion. In view thereof, a mere reclassification of an
agricultural land does not automatically allow a landowner to change its use. He has
to undergo the process of conversion before he is permitted to use the agricultural
land for other purposes.xliv
It is clear from the aforesaid distinction between reclassification and conversion that
agricultural lands though reclassified to residential, commercial, industrial or other
non-agricultural uses must still undergo the process of conversion before they can
be used for the purpose to which they are intended.
Nevertheless, emphasis must be given to the fact that DARs conversion authority
can only be exercised after the effectivity of Republic Act No. 6657 on 15 June
1988.xlv The said date served as the cut-off period for automatic reclassification or
rezoning of agricultural lands that no longer require any DAR conversion clearance
or authority.xlvi Thereafter, reclassification of agricultural lands is already subject to
DARs conversion authority. Reclassification alone will not suffice to use the
agricultural lands for other purposes. Conversion is needed to change the current
use of reclassified agricultural lands.
It is of no moment whether the reclassification of agricultural lands to residential,
commercial, industrial or other non-agricultural uses was done by the LGUs or by
way of Presidential Proclamations because either way they must still undergo
conversion process. It bears stressing that the act of reclassifying agricultural lands
to non-agricultural uses simply specifies how agricultural lands shall be utilized for
non-agricultural uses and does not automatically convert agricultural lands to non-
agricultural uses or for other purposes. As explained in DAR Memorandum Circular
No. 7, Series of 1994, cited in the 2009 case of Roxas & Company, Inc. v. DAMBA-
NFSW and the Department of Agrarian Reform,xlvii reclassification of lands denotes
their allocation into some specific use and providing for the manner of their
utilization and disposition or the act of specifying how agricultural lands shall be
utilized for non-agricultural uses such as residential, industrial, or commercial, as
embodied in the land use plan. For reclassified agricultural lands, therefore, to be
used for the purpose to which they are intended there is still a need to change the
current use thereof through the process of conversion. The authority to do so is
vested in the DAR, which is mandated to preserve and maintain agricultural lands
with increased productivity. Thus, notwithstanding the reclassification of agricultural
lands to non-agricultural uses, they must still undergo conversion before they can be
used for other purposes.
Even reclassification of agricultural lands by way of Presidential Proclamations to
non-agricultural uses, such as school sites, needs conversion clearance from the
DAR. We reiterate that reclassification is different from conversion. Reclassification
alone will not suffice and does not automatically allow the landowner to change its
use. It must still undergo conversion process before the landowner can use such
agricultural lands for such purpose. xlviii Reclassification of agricultural lands is one
thing, conversion is another. Agricultural lands that are reclassified to non-
agricultural uses do not ipso facto allow the landowner thereof to use the same for
such purpose. Stated differently, despite having reclassified into school sites, the
landowner of such reclassified agricultural lands must apply for conversion before
the DAR in order to use the same for the said purpose.
Any reclassification, therefore, of agricultural lands to residential, commercial,
industrial or other non-agricultural uses either by the LGUs or by way of Presidential
Proclamations enacted on or after 15 June 1988 must undergo the process of
conversion, despite having undergone reclassification, before agricultural lands may
be used for other purposes.
It is different, however, when through Presidential Proclamations public agricultural
lands have been reserved in whole or in part for public use or purpose, i.e., public
school, etc., because in such a case, conversion is no longer necessary. As held in
Republic v. Estonilo,xlix only a positive act of the President is needed to segregate or
reserve a piece of land of the public domain for a public purpose. As such,
reservation of public agricultural lands for public use or purpose in effect converted
the same to such use without undergoing any conversion process and that they
must be actually, directly and exclusively used for such public purpose for which
they have been reserved, otherwise, they will be segregated from the reservations
and transferred to the DAR for distribution to qualified beneficiaries under the CARP. l
More so, public agricultural lands already reserved for public use or purpose no
longer form part of the alienable and disposable lands of the public domain suitable
for agriculture.li Hence, they are outside the coverage of the CARP and it logically
follows that they are also beyond the conversion authority of the DAR.
Clearly from the foregoing, the Secretary of Agrarian Reform did not act without
jurisdiction or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to
lack or excess of jurisdiction in (1) including lands not reclassified as residential,
commercial, industrial or other non-agricultural uses before 15 June 1988 in the
definition of agricultural lands under DAR AO No. 01-02, as amended, and; (2)
issuing and enforcing DAR AO No. 01-02, as amended, subjecting to DARs
jurisdiction for conversion lands which had already been reclassified as residential,
commercial, industrial or for other non-agricultural uses on or after 15 June 1988.
Similarly, DAR AO No. 01-02, as amended, providing that the reclassification of
agricultural lands by LGUs shall be subject to the requirements of land use
conversion procedure or that DARs approval or clearance must be secured to effect
reclassification, did not violate the autonomy of the LGUs.
Section 20 of Republic Act No. 7160 states that:
SECTION 20. Reclassification of Lands. (a) A city or municipality may,
through an ordinance passed by the sanggunian after conducting public hearings for
the purpose, authorize the reclassification of agricultural lands and provide for the
manner of their utilization or disposition in the following cases: (1) when the land
ceases to be economically feasible and sound for agricultural purposes as
determined by the Department of Agriculture or (2) where the land shall have
substantially greater economic value for residential, commercial, or industrial
purposes, as determined by the sanggunian concerned: Provided, That such
reclassification shall be limited to the following percentage of the total agricultural
land area at the time of the passage of the ordinance:
xxxx
(3) For fourth to sixth class municipalities, five percent (5%): Provided,
further, That agricultural lands distributed to agrarian reform beneficiaries pursuant
to Republic Act Numbered Sixty-six hundred fifty-seven (R.A. No. 6657), otherwise
known as The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law, shall not be affected by the
said reclassification and the conversion of such lands into other purposes shall be
governed by Section 65 of said Act.
xxxx
(e) Nothing in this Section shall be construed as repealing, amending, or
modifying in any manner the provisions of R.A. No. 6657.
The aforequoted provisions of law show that the power of the LGUs to
reclassify agricultural lands is not absolute. The authority of the DAR to approve
conversion of agricultural lands covered by Republic Act No. 6657 to non-
agricultural uses has been validly recognized by said Section 20 of Republic Act No.
7160 by explicitly providing therein that, nothing in this section shall be construed as
repealing or modifying in any manner the provisions of Republic Act No. 6657.
DAR AO No. 01-02, as amended, does not also violate the due process clause, as
well as the equal protection clause of the Constitution. In providing administrative
and criminal penalties in the said administrative order, the Secretary of Agrarian
Reform simply implements the provisions of Sections 73 and 74 of Republic Act No.
6657, thus:
Sec. 73. Prohibited Acts and Omissions. The following are prohibited:
xxxx
(c) The conversion by any landowner of his agricultural land into any non-
agricultural use with intent to avoid the application of this Act to his landholdings and
to disposes his tenant farmers of the land tilled by them;
xxxx
(f) The sale, transfer or conveyance by a beneficiary of the right to use or
any other usufructuary right over the land he acquired by virtue of being a
beneficiary, in order to circumvent the provisions of this Act.
xxxx
Sec. 74. Penalties. Any person who knowingly or willfully violates the provisions of
this Act shall be punished by imprisonment of not less than one (1) month to not
more than three (3) years or a fine of not less than one thousand pesos (P1,000.00)
and not more than fifteen thousand pesos (P15,000.00), or both, at the discretion of
the court.
If the offender is a corporation or association, the officer responsible therefor shall
be criminally liable.
And Section 11 of Republic Act No. 8435, which specifically provides:
Sec. 11. Penalty for Agricultural Inactivity and Premature Conversion. x x x.
Any person found guilty of premature or illegal conversion shall be penalized with
imprisonment of two (2) to six (6) years, or a fine equivalent to one hundred percent
(100%) of the government's investment cost, or both, at the discretion of the court,
and an accessory penalty of forfeiture of the land and any improvement thereon.
In addition, the DAR may impose the following penalties, after determining, in an
administrative proceedings, that violation of this law has been committed:
a. Consolation or withdrawal of the authorization for land use conversion; and
b. Blacklisting, or automatic disapproval of pending and subsequent conversion
applications that they may file with the DAR.
Contrary to petitioners assertions, the administrative and criminal penalties provided
for under DAR AO No. 01-02, as amended, are imposed upon the illegal or
premature conversion of lands within DARs jurisdiction, i.e., lands not reclassified as
residential, commercial, industrial or for other non-agricultural uses before 15 June
1998.
The petitioners argument that DAR Memorandum No. 88 is unconstitutional,
as it suspends the land use conversion without any basis, stands on hollow ground.
It bears emphasis that said Memorandum No. 88 was issued upon the instruction of
the President in order to address the unabated conversion of prime agricultural
lands for real estate development because of the worsening rice shortage in the
country at that time. Such measure was made in order to ensure that there are
enough agricultural lands in which rice cultivation and production may be carried
into. The issuance of said Memorandum No. 88 was made pursuant to the general
welfare of the public, thus, it cannot be argued that it was made without any basis.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant Petition for Certiorari is
DISMISSED. Costs against petitioner.
2. Ros v. DAR, G.R. No. 132477. August 31, 2005
JOSE LUIS ROS, ANDONI F. ABOITIZ, XAVIER ABOITIZ, ROBERTO E. ABOITIZ,
ENRIQUE ABOITIZ, MATTHIAS G. MENDEZONA, CEBU INDUSTRIAL PARK
DEVELOPERS, INC. and FBM ABOITIZ MARINE, INC., P e t i t i o n e r s, - versus
- DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM, HON. ERNESTO GARILAO, in his
capacity as DAR Secretary, and DIR. JOSE LLAMES, in his capacity as Director of
DAR-Regional 7, R e s p o n d e n t s.
G.R. No. 132477 August 31, 2005
DECISION
CHICO-NAZARIO, J.:
Petitioners are the owners/developers of several parcels of land located in Arpili,
Balamban, Cebu. By virtue of Municipal Ordinance No. 101 passed by the Municipal
Council of Balamban, Cebu, these lands were reclassified as industrial lands.[1] On
03 April 1995, the Provincial Board of Cebu approved Balambans land use plan and
adopted en toto Balambans Municipal Ordinance No. 101 with the passage of
Resolution No. 836-95 and Provincial Ordinance No. 95-8, respectively.[2] As part of
their preparation for the development of the subject lands as an industrial park,
petitioners secured all the necessary permits and appropriate government
certifications.[3]
Despite these permits and certifications, petitioner Matthias Mendezona received a
letter from Mr. Jose Llames, Director of the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR)
Regional Office for Region 7, informing him that the DAR was disallowing the
conversion of the subject lands for industrial use and directed him to cease and
desist from further developments on the land to avoid the incurrence of civil and
criminal liabilities.[4]
Petitioners were thus constrained to file with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of
Toledo City a Complaint dated 29 July 1996 for Injunction with Application for
Temporary Restraining Order and a Writ of Preliminary Injunction, docketed as Civil
Case No. T-590.[5] In an order[6] dated 12 August 1996, the RTC, ruling that it is the
DAR which has jurisdiction, dismissed the Complaint for lack of jurisdiction.[7] It
justified the dismissal in this wise:
A perusal of Section 20 of the Local Government Code expressly provides that the
Municipalities through an Ordinance by the Sanggunian may authorize the
reclassification of the agricultural land within their area into non-agricultural.
Paragraph (e) of the aforesaid Section, provides further: that nothing in this Section
shall be construed as repealing or modifying in any manner the provision of
Republic Act 6657. In an opinion of the Secretary of Justice, quoted: With respect of
(sic) conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural uses the authority of the DAR
to approve the same may be exercise (sic) only from the date of the effectivity of the
Agrarian Reform Law on June 15, 1988. It appears that the petitioners had applied
for conversion on June 13, 1995 and therefore the petitioner (sic) are estopped from
questioning the authority and jurisdiction of the Department of Agrarian Reform. The
application having been filed after June 15, 1988, the reclassification by the
Municipal Council of Balamban was just a step in the conversion of the aforestated
lands according to its purpose. Executive Order No. 129-A, Section 5, The
Department shall be responsible for implementing Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
and for such purpose it is authorized to (J) approve or disapprove the conversion,
restructuring or readjustment of agricultural land into non-agricultural uses. Said
Executive Order amended Section 36 of Republic Act No. 3644 which clearly
mandates that the DAR Secretary (sic) approve or disapprove conversion are not
impliedly repealed. In fact, under Section 75 of Republic Act 6657 the above laws
and other laws not inconsistent of (sic) this act shall have suppletory effect. Further,
Section 68 of Republic Act 6657 provides: No injunction, restraining order,
prohibition or mandamus shall be issued by the lower court against the Department
of Agrarian Reform, DENR and Department of Justice in their implementation of the
program. With this provision, it is therefore clear (sic) when there is conflict of laws
determining whether the Department of Agrarian Reform has been exclusively
empowered by law to approve land conversion after June 15, 1988 and (sic) the
final ruling falls only with the Supreme Court or Office of the President.
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the Application for Restraining Order is
hereby ordered DENIED and the main case is DISMISSED, this Court having no
jurisdiction over the same.[8]
In an order dated 18 September 1996, the trial court denied the motion for
reconsideration filed by the petitioners.[9] Petitioners filed before this Court a
Petition for Review on Certiorari with application for Temporary Restraining Order
and Writ of Preliminary Injunction.[10] In a resolution[11] dated 11 November 1996,
this Court referred the petition to the Court of Appeals.[12] Petitioners moved for a
reconsideration of the said resolution but the same was denied in a resolution dated
27 January 1997.[13]
At the Court of Appeals, the public respondents were ordered[14] to file their
Comments on the petition. Two sets of comments from the public respondents, one
from the Department of Agrarian Reform Provincial Office[15] and another from the
Office of the Solicitor General,[16] were submitted, to which petitioners filed their
Consolidated Reply.[17]
On 02 December 1997, the Court of Appeals rendered a decision[18] affirming the
Order of Dismissal issued by the RTC.[19] A motion for reconsideration filed by the
petitioners was denied in a resolution dated 30 January 1998.[20]
Hence, this petition.
The following issues[21] are raised by the petitioners for resolution:
(a) Whether or not the reclassification of the subject lands to industrial use by the
Municipality of Balamban, Cebu pursuant to its authority under Section 20(a) of
Republic Act No. 7160 or the Local Government Code of 1991 (the LGC) has the
effect of taking such lands out of the coverage of the CARL and beyond the
jurisdiction of the DAR;
(b) Whether or not the Complaint for Injunction may be dismissed under the doctrine
of primary jurisdiction;
(c) Whether or not the Complaint for Injunction is an appropriate remedy against the
order of the DAR enjoining development works on the subject lands;
(d) Whether or not the Regional Trial Court of Toledo City had authority to issue a
writ of injunction against the DAR.
In sum, petitioners are of the view that local governments have the power to
reclassify portions of their agricultural lands, subject to the conditions set forth in
Section 20[22][23]of the Local Government Code. According to them, if the
agricultural land sought to be reclassified by the local government is one which has
already been brought under the coverage of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Law (CARL) and/or which has been distributed to agrarian reform beneficiaries, then
such reclassification must be confirmed by the DAR pursuant to its authority under
Section 6522 of the CARL, in order for the reclassification to become effective. If,
however, the land sought to be reclassified is not covered by the CARL and not
distributed to agrarian reform beneficiaries, then no confirmation from the DAR is
necessary in order for the reclassification to become effective as such case would
not fall within the DARs conversion authority. Stated otherwise, Section 65 of the
CARL does not, in all cases, grant the DAR absolute, sweeping and all-
encompassing power to approve or disapprove reclassifications or conversions of all
agricultural lands. Said section only grants the DAR exclusive authority to approve
or disapprove conversions of agricultural lands which have already been brought
under the coverage of the CARL and which have already been distributed to farmer
beneficiaries.
The petition lacks merit.
After the passage of Republic Act No. 6657, otherwise known as Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Program, agricultural lands, though reclassified, have to go through
the process of conversion, jurisdiction over which is vested in the DAR. However,
agricultural lands already reclassified before the effectivity of Rep. Act No. 6657 are
exempted from conversion.
Department of Justice Opinion No. 44, Series of 1990, provides:
. . . True, the DARs express power over land use conversion is limited to cases in
which agricultural lands already awarded have, after five years, ceased to be
economically feasible and sound for agricultural purposes, or the locality has
become urbanized and the land will have a greater economic value for residential,
commercial or industrial purposes. But to suggest that these are the only instances
when the DAR can require conversion clearances would open a loophole in R.A. No.
6657, which every landowner may use to evade compliance with the agrarian reform
program. Hence, it should logically follow from the said departments express duty
and function to execute and enforce the said statute that any reclassification of a
private land as a residential, commercial or industrial property should first be cleared
by the DAR.
The requirement that agricultural lands must go through the process of conversion
despite having undergone reclassification was underscored in the case of Alarcon v.
Court of Appeals,[24] where it was held that reclassification of land does not suffice:
In the case at bar, there is no final order of conversion. The subject landholding was
merely reclassified. Conversion is different from reclassification. Conversion is the
act of changing the current use of a piece of agricultural land into some other use as
approved by the Department of Agrarian Reform. Reclassification, on the other
hand, is the act of specifying how agricultural lands shall be utilized for non-
agricultural uses such as residential, industrial, commercial, as embodied in the land
use plan, subject to the requirements and procedure for land use conversion.
Accordingly, a mere reclassification of agricultural land does not automatically allow
a landowner to change its use and thus cause the ejectment of the tenants. He has
to undergo the process of conversion before he is permitted to use the agricultural
land for other purposes.
Rep. Act No. 6657 took effect on 15 June 1988. Municipal Ordinance No. 101 of
Balamban, Cebu, which reclassified the subject lands, was passed on 25 March
1992, and Provincial Ordinance No. 95-8 of the Provincial Board of Cebu, which
adopted Municipal Ordinance No. 101, was passed on 03 April 1995, long after Rep.
Act No. 6657 has taken effect. Section 4 of Rep. Act No. 6657 provides:
SEC. 4. Scope. The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988 shall cover,
regardless of tenurial arrangement and commodity produced, all public and private
agricultural lands as provided in Proclamation No. 131 and Executive Order No.
229, including other lands of the public domain suitable for agriculture.
...
(d) All private lands devoted to or suitable for agriculture regardless of the
agricultural products raised or that can be raised thereon.
To further clarify any doubt on its authority, the DAR issued Administrative Order No.
12 dated October 1994 which reads:
Administrative Order No. 12
Series of 1994
SUBJECT: CONSOLIDATED AND REVISED RULES AND PROCEDURES
GOVERNING CONVERSION OF ARICULTURAL LANDS TO NON-
AGRICULTURAL USES
I. PREFATORY STATEMENT
The guiding principles on land use conversion is to preserve prime agricultural
lands. On the other hand, conversion of agricultural lands, when coinciding with the
objectives of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law to promote social justice,
industrialization, and the optimum use of land as a national resource for public
welfare, shall be pursued in a speedy and judicious manner.
To rationalize these principles, and by virtue of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 3844, as
amended, Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 27, P.D. No. 946, Executive Order (E.O.)
No. 129-A and R.A. No. 6657, the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) has issued
several policy guidelines to regulate land use conversion. This Administrative Order
consolidates and revises all existing implementing guidelines issued by the DAR,
taking into consideration, other Presidential issuances and national policies related
to land use conversion.
II. LEGAL MANDATE
A. The Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) is mandated to approve or
disapprove applications for conversion, restructuring or readjustment of agricultural
lands into non-agricultural uses, pursuant to Section 4(i) of Executive Order No.
129-A, Series of 1987.
B. Section 5(i) of E.O. No. 129-A, Series of 1987, vests in the DAR,
exclusive authority to approve or disapprove applications for conversion of
agricultural lands for residential, commercial, industrial, and other land uses.
C. Section 65 of R.A. No. 6657, otherwise known as the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law of 1988, likewise empowers the DAR to authorize under
certain conditions, the reclassification or conversion of agricultural lands.
D. Section 4 of Memorandum Circular No. 54, Series of 1993 of the Office
of the President, provides that action on applications for land use conversion on
individual landholdings shall remain as the responsibility of the DAR, which shall
utilize as its primary reference, documents on the comprehensive land use plans
and accompanying ordinances passed upon and approved by the local government
units concerned, together with the National Land Use Policy, pursuant to R.A. No.
6657 and E.O. No. 129-A.
III. DEFINITION OF TERMS
A. Agricultural land refers to land devoted to agricultural activity and not classified as
mineral, forest, residential, commercial or industrial land (Section 3[c], R.A. No.
6657).
B. Conversion is the act of changing the current use of a piece of agricultural land
into some other use.
C. Reclassification of agricultural lands is the act of specifying how agricultural lands
shall be utilized for non-agricultural uses such as residential, industrial, commercial,
as embodied in the land use plan. It also includes the reversion of non-agricultural
lands to agricultural use.
...
V. COVERAGE
These rules shall cover all private agricultural lands as defined herein regardless of
tenurial arrangement and commodity produced. It shall also include agricultural
lands reclassified by LGUs into non-agricultural uses, after June 15, 1988, pursuant
to Memorandum Circular (M.C.) No. 54, Series of 1993 of the Office of the President
and those proposed to be used for livestock, poultry and swine raising as provided
in DAR Administrative Order No. 9, Series of 1993.
In the case of Advincula-Velasquez v. Court of Appeals,[25] we held:
Our ruling in the Natalia case was reiterated in National Housing Authority v. Allarde
(318 SCRA 22 [1999]).
The Court of Appeals reliance on DOJ Opinion No. 44, Series of 1990, is in order. In
the said opinion, the Secretary of Justice declared, viz:
Based on the foregoing premises, we reiterate the view that with respect to
conversions of agricultural lands covered by R.A. No. 6657 to non-agricultural uses,
the authority of DAR to approve such conversions may be exercised from the date
of the laws effectivity on June 15, 1988. This conclusion is based on a liberal
interpretation of R.A. No. 6657 in the light of DARs mandate and extensive coverage
of the agrarian reform program.
Following the DOJ opinion, the DAR issued Administrative Order No. 6, Series of
1994, stating that lands already classified as non-agricultural before the enactment
of Rep. Act No. 6657 no longer needed any conversion clearance:
I. Prefatory Statement
In order to streamline the issuance of exemption clearances, based on DOJ Opinion
No. 44, the following guidelines are being issued for the guidance of the DAR and
the public in general.
II. Legal Basis
Sec. 3(c) of RA 6657 states that agricultural lands refers to the land devoted to
agricultural activity as defined in this act and not classified as mineral, forest,
residential, commercial or industrial land.
Department of Justice Opinion No. 44, series of 1990 has ruled that, with respect to
the conversion of agricultural lands covered by RA No. 6657 to non-agricultural
uses, the authority of DAR to approve such conversion may be exercised from the
date of its effectivity, on June 15, 1988. Thus, all lands that are already classified as
commercial, industrial, or residential before 15 June 1988 no longer need any
conversion clearance.
The authority of the DAR to approve conversions of agricultural lands covered by
Rep. Act No. 6657 to non-agricultural uses has not been pierced by the passage of
the Local Government Code. The Code explicitly provides[26] that nothing in this
section shall be construed as repealing or modifying in any manner the provisions of
Rep. Act No. 6657.
It being settled that jurisdiction over conversion of land is vested in the DAR, the
complaint for injunction was correctly dismissed by the trial and appellate courts
under the doctrine of primary jurisdiction. This Court, in Bautista v. Mag-isa Vda. De
Villena,[27] found occasion to reiterate the doctrine of primary jurisdiction
The doctrine of primary jurisdiction precludes the courts from resolving a
controversy over which jurisdiction has initially been lodged with an administrative
body of special competence. For agrarian reform cases, jurisdiction is vested in the
Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR); more specifically, in the Department of
Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB).
Executive Order 229 vested the DAR with (1) quasi-judicial powers to determine and
adjudicate agrarian reform matters; and (2) jurisdiction over all matters involving the
implementation of agrarian reform, except those falling under the exclusive original
jurisdiction of the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Environment and
Natural Resources. This law divested the regional trial courts of their general
jurisdiction to try agrarian reform matters.
Under Republic Act 6657, the DAR retains jurisdiction over all agrarian reform
matters. The pertinent provision reads:
Section 50. Quasi-Judicial Powers of the DAR. The DAR is hereby vested with the
primary jurisdiction to determine and adjudicate agrarian reform matters and shall
have exclusive original jurisdiction over all matters involving the implementation of
agrarian reform, except those falling under the exclusive jurisdiction of the
Department of Agriculture and the Department of Environment and Natural
Resources.
It shall not be bound by technical rules of procedure and evidence but shall proceed
to hear and decide all cases, disputes or controversies in a most expeditious
manner, employing all reasonable means to ascertain the facts of every case in
accordance with justice and equity and the merits of the case. Toward this end, it
shall adopt a uniform rule of procedure to achieve a just, expeditious and
inexpensive determination of every action or proceeding before it. . . .
Finally, the third and fourth issues which may be summed up into whether or not an
injunction is the appropriate remedy against the order of the DAR enjoining
petitioners in developing the subject land, we rule in the negative. Section 68 of
Rep. Act No. 6657 provides:
SEC. 68. Immunity of Government Agencies from Undue Interference. No injunction,
restraining order, prohibition or mandamus shall be issued by the lower courts
against the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR), the Department of Agriculture
(DA), the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), and the
Department of Justice (DOJ) in their implementation of the program.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant petition is DENIED for lack of
merit. The decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 42666 dated 02
December 1997 affirming the order dated 12 August 1996 of the Regional Trial Court
of Toledo City, Branch 29, in Civil Case No. T-590 is AFFIRMED. Costs against
petitioners.
SO ORDERED.
3. Land Reclassification Sec. 20 of RA 7160 or the Local Government
Code of 1991
Land Reclassification per Sec. 20 of RA 7160 (Local Government Code of 1991)
Section 20. Reclassification of Lands.
(a) A city or municipality may, through an ordinance passed by the sanggunian after
conducting public hearings for the purpose, authorize the reclassification of
agricultural lands and provide for the manner of their utilization or disposition in the
following cases: (1) when the land ceases to be economically feasible and sound for
agricultural purposes as determined by the Department of Agriculture or (2) where
the land shall have substantially greater economic value for residential, commercial,
or industrial purposes, as determined by the sanggunian concerned: Provided, That
such reclassification shall be limited to the following percentage of the total
agricultural land area at the time of the passage of the ordinance:
(1) For highly urbanized and independent component cities, fifteen percent (15%);
(2) For component cities and first to the third class municipalities, ten percent (10%);
and
(3) For fourth to sixth class municipalities, five percent (5%): Provided, further, That
agricultural lands distributed to agrarian reform beneficiaries pursuant to Republic
Act Numbered Sixty-six hundred fifty-seven (R.A. No. 6657). otherwise known as
The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law, shall not be affected by the said
reclassification and the conversion of such lands into other purposes shall be
governed by Section 65 of said Act.
(b) The President may, when public interest so requires and upon recommendation
of the National Economic and Development Authority, authorize a city or municipality
to reclassify lands in excess of the limits set in the next preceding paragraph.
(c) The local government units shall, in conformity with existing laws, continue to
prepare their respective comprehensive land use plans enacted through zoning
ordinances which shall be the primary and dominant bases for the future use of land
resources: Provided. That the requirements for food production, human settlements,
and industrial expansion shall be taken into consideration in the preparation of such
plans.
(d) Where approval by a national agency is required for reclassification, such
approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. Failure to act on a proper and
complete application for reclassification within three (3) months from receipt of the
same shall be deemed as approval thereof.
(e) Nothing in this Section shall be construed as repealing, amending, or modifying
in any manner the provisions of R.A. No. 6657.
Issuances:
1. MC 54, s. 1993 from the Office of the President Prescribing the
Guidelines governing Sec. 20 of RA 7160 Authorizing Cities And
Municipalities to Reclassify Agricultural Lands to Non-Agricultural
Uses
June 8, 1993
MEMORANDUM CIRCULAR NO. 54
PRESCRIBING THE GUIDELINES GOVERNING SECTION 20 OF RA 7160
OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE OF 1991
AUTHORIZING CITIES AND MUNICIPALITIES TO RECLASSIFY AGRICULTURAL
LANDS INTO NON-AGRICULTURAL USES
WHEREAS, RA 7160, otherwise known as the Local Government Code of 1991
(LGC), provides that cities and municipalities may reclassify agricultural lands into
non-agricultural uses within their respective jurisdictions, subject to the limitations
and other conditions prescribed under Section 20 of the LGC; TIEHSA
WHEREAS, the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of the LGC provides
that cities and municipalities shall continue to prepare their respective
comprehensive land use plans, enacted through zoning ordinances, subject to
applicable laws and rules and regulations;
WHEREAS, the IRR also prescribes that such plans shall serve as the primary and
dominant bases for future use of land resources and reclassification of agricultural
lands;
WHEREAS, the IRR further provides that the requirements for food production,
human settlements, ecological balance, and industrial expansion shall be
considered in the preparation of comprehensive land use plans;
WHEREAS, EO 129-A, s. of 1987, mandates the Department of Agrarian Reform
(DAR) to approve or disapprove the conversion, restructuring or readjustment of
agricultural lands into non-agricultural uses;
WHEREAS, the said EO has also vested in DAR exclusive authority to approve or
disapprove conversion of agricultural lands for residential, commercial, industrial,
and other land uses;
WHEREAS, Section 65 of RA 6657, otherwise known as the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law of 1988 (CARL), likewise empowers DAR to authorize, under
certain conditions, the reclassification or conversion of lands awarded to agrarian
reform beneficiaries;
WHEREAS, pursuant to the pertinent provisions of EO 129-A (1987), EO 229
(1987), and RA 6657, DAR issued various rules and regulations governing the
conversion or reclassification of agricultural lands into non-agricultural uses;
WHEREAS, there is a need to harmonize the provisions of Section 20 of the LGC
with those of EO 129-A (1987), EO 229 (1987), RA 6657, and other national policy
issuances and other pertinent laws to ensure a more rational and holistic approach
to land use, taking into account the objectives of the CARL and the decentralized
framework of local governance;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, FIDEL V. RAMOS, President of the Philippines, by virtue of
the powers vested in me by law, upon the recommendation of the Oversight
Committee created under Sec. 533 of the LGC, do hereby order and direct.
SECTION 1. Scope of Limitations
(a) Cities and municipalities with comprehensive land use plans reviewed and
approved in accordance with EO 72 (1993), may authorize the reclassification of
agricultural lands into non-agricultural uses and provide for the manner of their
utilization or disposition, subject to the limitations and other conditions prescribed in
this Order.
(b) Agricultural lands may be classified in the following cases:
(1) when the land ceases to be economically feasible and sound for agricultural
purposes as determined by the Department of Agriculture (DA), in accordance with
the standards and guidelines prescribed for the purpose; or
(2) where the land shall have substantially greater economic value for
residential, commercial, or industrial purposes as determined by the sanggunian
concerned, the city/municipality concerned should notify the DA, HLRB, DTI, DOT
and other concerned agencies on the proposed reclassification of agricultural lands
furnishing them copies of the report of the local development council including the
draft ordinance on the matter for their comments, proposals and recommendations
within seven (7) days upon receipt.
(c) However, such reclassification shall be limited to a maximum of the
percentage of the total agricultural land of a city or municipality at the time of the
passage of the ordinance as follows:
(1) For highly urbanized and independent component cities; fifteen percent
(15%);
(2) For component cities and first to third class municipalities, ten percent
(10%);
(3) For fourth to sixth class municipalities, five percent (5%).
(d) In addition, the following types of agricultural lands shall not be covered by
the said reclassification: caCSDT
(1) Agricultural lands distributed to agrarian reform beneficiaries subject to
Section 65 of RA 6657;
(2) Agricultural lands already issued a notice of coverage or voluntarily offered
for coverage under CARP;
(3) Agricultural lands identified under AO 20, s. of 1992, as non-negotiable for
conversion as follows:
(i) All irrigated lands where water is available to support rice and other crop
production;
(ii) All irrigated lands where water is not available for rice and other crop
production but within areas programmed for irrigation facility rehabilitation by DA and
National Irrigation Administration (NIA); and
(iii) All irrigable lands already covered by irrigation projects with firm funding
commitments at the time of the application for land conversion or reclassification.
(e) The President may, when public interest so requires and upon
recommendation of the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA),
authorize a city or municipality to reclassify lands in excess of the limits set in
paragraph (d) hereof. For this purpose, NEDA is hereby directed to issue the
implementing guidelines governing the authority of cities and municipalities to
reclassify lands in excess of the limits prescribed herein.
SECTION 2. Requirements and Procedures for Reclassification
(a) The city or municipal development council (CDC/MDC) shall recommend to
the sangguniang panlungsod or sangguniang bayan, as the case may be, the
reclassification of agricultural lands within its jurisdiction based on the requirements
of local development.
(b) Prior to the enactment of an ordinance reclassifying agricultural lands as
provided under Sec. 1 hereof, the sanggunian concerned must first secure the
following certificates from the concerned national government agencies (NGAs):
(1) A certification from DA indicating
(i) the total area of existing agricultural lands in the LGU concerned;
(ii) that such lands are not classified as non-negotiable for conversion or
reclassification under AO 20 (1992); and
(iii) that the land ceases to be economically feasible and sound for agricultural
purposes in the case of Sec. 1 (b-1).
(2) A certification from DAR indicating that such lands are not distributed or not
covered by a notice of coverage or not voluntarily offered for coverage under CARP.
(c) The HLURB shall serve as the coordinating agency for the issuance of the
certificates as required under the preceding paragraph. All applications for
reclassification shall, therefore, be submitted by the concerned LGUs to the HLRB,
upon receipt of such application, the HLRB shall conduct initial review to determine
if:
(1) the city or municipality concerned has an existing comprehensive land use
plan reviewed and approved in accordance with EO 72 (1993); and
(2) the proposed reclassification complies with the limitations prescribed in
SECTION 1 (d) hereof.
Upon determination that the above conditions have been satisfied, the
HLRB shall then consult with the concerned agencies on the required certifications.
The HLRB shall inform the concerned agencies, city or municipality of the result of
their review and consultation. If the land being reclassified is in excess of the limit,
the application shall be submitted to NEDA.
Failure of the HLRB and the NGAs to act on a proper and complete
application within three months from receipt of the same shall be deemed as
approved thereof.
(d) Reclassification of agricultural lands may be authorized through an
ordinance enacted by the sangguniang panlungsod or sangguniang bayan, as the
case may be, after conducting public hearings for the purpose. Such ordinance shall
be enacted and approved in accordance with Articles 107 and 108 of the IRR of the
LGC. STIHaE
(e) Provisions of Sec. 1 (b-2) hereof to the contrary notwithstanding, the
sanggunian concerned shall seek the advice of DA prior to the enactment of an
ordinance reclassifying agricultural lands. If the DA has failed to act on such request
within thirty (30) days from receipt thereof, the same shall be deemed to have been
complied with. Should the land subject to reclassification is found to be still
economically feasible for agriculture, the DA shall recommend to the LGU
concerned alternative areas for development purposes.
(f) Upon issuance of the certifications enumerated in Section 2 (b) hereof, the
sanggunian concerned may now enact an ordinance authorizing the reclassification
of agricultural lands and providing for the manner of their utilization or disposition.
Such ordinance shall likewise update the comprehensive land use plans of the LGU
concerned.
SECTION 3. Review of Ordinances Reclassifying Agricultural Lands
All ordinances authorizing the reclassification of agricultural lands shall be subject to
the review and approval by the province in the case of a component city or
municipality, or by HLRB in the case of a highly urbanized or independent
component city in accordance with EO 72 (1993).
SECTION 4. Use of the Comprehensive Land Use Plans and Ordinances as
Primary Reference Documents in Land Use Conversions
Pursuant to RA 6657 and EO 129-A, action on applications for land use conversions
on individual landholdings shall remain as the responsibility of DAR, which shall
utilize as its primary, reference documents the comprehensive land use plans and
accompanying ordinance passed upon and approved by the LGUs concerned,
together with the National Land Use Policy.
SECTION 5. Monitoring and Evaluation of Land Reclassification by LGUs
Concerned
Within six (6) months from the issuance of this Order, the HLRB shall design, in
coordination with DA, DAR, Department of the Interior and Local Government
(DILG), NEDA, League of Provinces, League of Cities and League of Municipalities,
and install a monitoring and evaluation system for the reclassification of agricultural
lands authorized by cities and municipalities.
The HLRB shall submit semestral reports to the Office of the President. A copy
thereof shall be furnished the DA, DAR, DILG, NEDA, League of Provinces, League
of Cities, and League of Municipalities.
SECTION 6. Transitory Provision
Provisions of Secs. 1 (a) and 2 (b) to the contrary notwithstanding, cities and
municipalities with land use plans approved not earlier than 01 January 1989, may
authorize the reclassification of agricultural lands in accordance with the limitations
and conditions prescribed in this Order. However, when the LGU has not reclassified
up to the said limitations, further reclassification may be exercised only within five
years from the approval of the plan. Thereafter, all reclassifications shall require
approval from the President pursuant to Sec. 1 (e) of this Circular.
SECTION 7. Effectivity
This Circular shall take effect immediately.
DONE in the City of Manila this 8th day of June in the year of Our Lord, Nineteen
Hundred and Ninety-three.
(SGD.) FIDEL V. RAMOS
President
2. DAR AO 1-02 The 2002 Comprehensive Rules on Land Conversion
February 28, 2002
DAR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 01-02
SUBJECT : 2002 Comprehensive Rules On Land Use Conversion
Pursuant to Section 65 and 49 of Republic Act (RA) No. 6657 (Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law of 1988), Section 4(j) and 5(l) of Executive Order (EO) No.
129-A (Reorganization Act of the Department of Agrarian Reform), the pertinent
provisions of RA 8435 (Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act), EO-45-2001
[25 October 2001], and in order to provide effective means of evaluating applications
for land use conversion, these Rules are hereby promulgated:
ARTICLE I
Preliminary Provisions
SECTION 1. Statement of Policies. The conversion of agricultural lands to
non-agricultural uses shall be governed by the following policies:
1.1. The State shall preserve prime agricultural lands to ensure food security.
1.2. The State shall ensure that all sectors of the economy and all regions of the
country are given optimum opportunity to develop, through the rational and
sustainable use of resources peculiar to each area, in order to maximize agricultural
productivity, to promote efficiency and equity, and to accelerate the modernization of
the agriculture and fisheries sectors of the country.
1.3. Conversion of agricultural lands to non-agricultural uses shall be strictly
regulated and may be allowed only when the conditions prescribed under RA 6657
and/or RA 8435 are present and complied with.
SECTION 2. Definition of Terms. All references in these Rules in the
masculine gender form (he/him/his) shall interchangeably mean the feminine form
(she/her/hers) or may refer to a group (it/it's/their). As used in this AO, the terms
enumerated are defined as follows:
2.1. Agricultural land refers to land devoted to or suitable for the cultivation of the
soil; planting of crops, growing of trees, raising of livestock, poultry, fish or
aquaculture production, including the harvesting of such farm products and other
farm activities and practices performed in conjunction with such farming operations
by persons whether natural or juridical, and not classified by law as mineral land,
forest or timber, or national park, or classified for residential, commercial, industrial
or other non-agricultural uses before 15 June 1988.
2.2. Area Highly Restricted from Conversion refers to agro-industrial cropland, or
land presently planted to industrial crops that support the economic viability of
existing agricultural infrastructure and agro-based enterprises; highland or area
located at an elevation of 500 meters or higher and have the potential for growing
semi-temperate and/or high value crops; land covered by a notice of land valuation
and acquisition; irrigable land not covered by irrigation projects with firm funding
commitment; and Environmentally Critical Area and Environmentally Critical Projects
as determined by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).
2.3. Area Non-Negotiable for Conversion refers to agricultural land not eligible
for conversion as enumerated in Section 4 hereof.
2.4. Comprehensive Land Use Plan refers to a document accompanied by maps
and similar illustrations, which represent the community-desired pattern of
population distribution and proposal for the future allocation of land for various land
use activities. It identifies the allocation, character and extent of the area's land
resources to be used for different purposes and includes the process and the criteria
employed in the determination of the land's use.
2.5. Conversion Moratorium refers to the policy enunciated in RA 8435 which
prohibits the conversion of irrigated lands, irrigable lands already covered by
irrigation projects with firm funding commitments, and lands with existing or having
the potential for growing high value crops so delineated and included within the
Strategic Agriculture and Fisheries Development Zones for the period starting 10
February 1998 to 09 February 2003.
2.6. Environmentally Critical Areas (ECA) refer to areas that are ecologically,
socially, or geologically sensitive as declared by law such as:
2.6.1. Areas declared by law as national parks, watershed reserves, wildlife
preserves and sanctuaries;
2.6.2. Areas identified as potential tourist spots;
2.6.3. Areas that are habitats of endangered or threatened species of indigenous
Philippine plants and animals;
2.6.4. Areas of unique historic, archeological or scientific interest;
2.6.5. Areas traditionally occupied by indigenous people or cultural communities;
2.6.6. Areas frequently hit by natural calamities (geologic hazards, floods,
typhoons and volcanic activities);
2.6.7. Areas with critical slopes of 18% and above;
2.6.8. Areas classified as prime agricultural lands;
2.6.9. Recharged areas of aquifer;
2.6.10. Water bodies used for domestic supply or to support fisheries and wildlife;
2.6.11. Mangrove areas with critical ecological functions or on which people depend
for livelihood; or
2.6.12. Coral reefs.
2.7. Environmentally Critical Project (ECP) refers to a:
2.7.1. Heavy industry project involving ferrous metals, iron or steel mills; petroleum
or petro-chemicals, oil, gas, or smelting plants;
2.7.2. Resource extractive project such as major mining and quarrying project,
forestry logging project, major wood processing, introduction of fauna or exotic
animals in public or private forests, forest occupancy, extraction of mangrove
products, grazing, fishery dikes, or fishpond development;
2.7.3. Major infrastructure project such as dam, power plant (utilizing fossil-fuel,
hydroelectric, geothermal, or nuclear power), reclamation, bridge, or a major road;
or
2.7.4. Golf course project.
2.8. Illegal Conversion is the conversion by any landowner of his agricultural
land into any non-agricultural use with intent to avoid the application of RA 6657 to
his landholding and to dispossess his tenant farmers of the land tilled by them; or
the change of nature of lands outside urban centers and city limits either in whole or
in part after the effectivity of RA 6657, as provided in Section 73 (c) and (e),
respectively, of the said Act.
2.9. Irrigable Land refers to land displaying marked characteristics justifying the
operation of an irrigation system.
2.10. Irrigated Land refers to land serviced by natural irrigation or irrigation
facilities. This includes lands where water is not readily available because existing
irrigation facilities need rehabilitation or upgrading or where irrigation water is not
available year-round.
2.11. Land Use refers to the manner of utilization of land, including its allocation,
development and management.
2.12. Land Use Conversion refers to the act or process of changing the current
physical use of a piece of agricultural land into some other use or for another
agricultural use other than the cultivation of the soil, planting of crops, growing of
trees, including harvesting of produce therefrom, as approved by DAR.
2.13. National Integrated Protected Areas System (NIPAS) refers to the
classification and administration of all designated protected areas to maintain
essential ecological processes and life support systems, to preserve genetic
diversity, to ensure sustainable use of resources found therein, and to maintain their
natural conditions to the greatest extent possible. NIPAS includes areas designated
as initial components of the system under Section 5 (a) of RA 7586 which include all
areas or islands in the Philippines proclaimed, designated or set aside, pursuant to a
law, presidential decree, presidential proclamation or executive order as national
park, game refuge, bird and wildlife sanctuary, wilderness area, strict nature reserve,
watershed, mangrove reserve, fish sanctuary, natural and historical landmark,
protected and managed landscape/seascape as well as identified virgin forest
before the effectivity of RA 7586; those proclaimed as part of the system in
accordance with the procedure established under the said Act such as strict nature
reserve, natural park, natural monument, wildlife sanctuary, protected landscapes
and seascapes; resource reserve; natural biotic areas; and other categories
established by law, conventions or international agreements wherein the Philippine
Government is a signatory.
2.14. Network of Protected Areas for Agricultural and Agro-Industrial
Development (NPAAAD) refers to agricultural areas identified by the Department of
Agriculture (DA) through the Bureau of Soils and Water Management in coordination
with the National Mapping and Resource Information Authority, in order to ensure
the efficient utilization of land to agriculture and agro-industrial development and
promote sustainable growth. The NPAAAD covers all irrigated areas, all irrigable
lands already covered by irrigation projects with firm funding commitments; all
alluvial plains highly suitable for agriculture, whether irrigated or not; agro-industrial
croplands or lands presently planted to industrial crops that support the viability of
existing agricultural infrastructure and agro-based enterprises; highland or areas
located at an elevation of five hundred (500) meters or above, which have the
potential for growing semi-temperate and high-value crops; all agricultural lands that
are ecologically fragile, the conversion of which will result in serious environmental
degradation, and mangrove areas and fish sanctuaries; and all fishery areas as
defined pursuant to the Fisheries Code of 1998.
2.15. Premature Conversion of Agricultural Land refers to the undertaking of any
development activity, the result of which may modify or alter the physical
characteristics of the agricultural land as would render it suitable for non-agricultural
purposes without an approved Conversion Order from the DAR.
2.16. Prime Agricultural Land refers to land that can be used for various or
specific agricultural activities and can provide optimum and sustainable yield with
minimum inputs and development costs as determined by the DA.
2.17. Private Agricultural Land refers to agricultural land as defined herein and
owned by natural or juridical persons or by the government in its proprietary
capacity.
2.18. Project Feasibility Study involves the investigation of the market, technical,
financial, economic, and operational viability of the project. Specifically, it looks into
the alternative technical schemes to attain the project's objectives including possible
size, location, production process, and physical and financial resource requirements.
The study also determines whether the project would generate sufficient benefits to
offset estimated investment and operating costs. Similarly, it ascertains which of the
alternatives would yield the largest positive return to the economy that would justify
its use of resources. Finally, it seeks the most suitable legal, administrative and
organizational arrangements to ensure that implementation would proceed as
planned and that completed facilities would be properly maintained and operated.
2.19. Reclassification of Agricultural Land refers to the act of specifying how
agricultural lands shall be utilized for non-agricultural uses such as, residential,
industrial, commercial, as embodied in the land use plan, subject to the
requirements and procedure for land use conversion, undertaken by a Local
Government Unit (LGU) in accordance with Section 20 of RA 7160 and Joint
Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB), DAR, DA, and Department of
Interior and Local Government (DILG) MC-54-1995. It also includes the reversion of
non-agricultural lands to agricultural use.
2.20. Socialized Housing refers to housing programs and projects covering
houses and lots or homelots undertaken by the government or the private sector for
the underprivileged and homeless citizens where the maximum cost per unit does
not exceed the maximum amount as prescribed by the Housing and Urban
Development Coordinating Council (HUDCC) which shall include sites and services
development, long-term financing, liberalized terms on interest payments, and such
other benefits in accordance with RA 7279.
2.21. Socio-Economic Benefit-Cost Study involves the assessment of the project's
net contribution to the national economic and social welfare, done through a
comparison of the economic and social benefits expected to be generated from the
project with the social and economic costs of its implementation and operation.
2.22. Special Economic Zone or Eco Zone refers to selected areas which are
highly developed or which have the potential to be developed into agro-industrial,
tourist, recreational, commercial, banking, investment and financial centers whose
metes and bounds are delimited by Presidential Proclamation.
2.23. Strategic Agriculture and Fisheries Development Zone (SAFDZ) refer to the
areas within the NPAAAD identified for production, agro-processing and marketing
activities to help develop and modernize, with the support of the government, the
agriculture and fisheries sectors in an environmentally and socio-culturally sound
manner.
2.24. Unauthorized Conversion is the act of changing the current use of the land
from agricultural (e.g. riceland) to another agricultural use, the effect of which is to
exclude the land from CARP coverage (e.g. livestock) without a Conversion Order
from the DAR, or changing the use of the land other than that allowed under the
Conversion Order issued by the DAR.
2.25. Watershed refers to a catchment area or drainage basin from which the
waters of a stream or stream system are drawn.
2.26. Zoning is the delineation/division of a city/municipality into functional zones
where only specific land uses are allowed. It directs and regulates the use of all
lands in the community in accordance with an approved or adopted land use plan for
the city/municipality. It prescribes setback provisions, minimum lot sizes, building
heights and bulk.
2.27. Zoning Ordinance refers to a local legislation approving the comprehensive
land use plan and providing for the regulations and other conditions, on the uses of
land including the limitation on the infrastructures that may be placed thereon within
the territorial jurisdiction of a city or municipality.
ARTICLE II
Coverage
SECTION 3. Applicability of Rules These guidelines shall apply to all
applications for conversion, from agricultural to non-agricultural uses or to another
agricultural use, such as:
3.1. Conversions into residential, commercial, industrial, institutional and other
non-agricultural purposes;
3.2. Development into other types of agricultural activities such as livestock,
poultry, and fishpond, the effect of which is to exempt the land from CARP coverage;
3.3. Conversions into non-agricultural use other than that previously authorized;
or
3.4 Conversion of agricultural lands or areas that have been reclassified by the
LGU or by way of a Presidential Proclamation, to residential, commercial, industrial,
or other non-agricultural uses on or after the effectivity of R.A. 6657 on 15 June
1988, pursuant to Section 20 of RA 7160, and other pertinent laws and regulations,
and are to be converted to such uses. However, for those reclassified prior to 15
June 1988, the guidelines in securing an exemption clearance from the DAR shall
apply.
SECTION 4. Areas Non-Negotiable for Conversion An application involving
areas non-negotiable for conversion shall not be given due course even when some
portions thereof are eligible for conversion. The following areas shall not be subject
to conversion:
4.1. Lands within protected areas designated under the NIPAS, including mossy
and virgin forests, riverbanks, and swamp forests or marshlands, as determined by
the DENR;
4.2. All irrigated lands, as delineated by the DA and/or the National Irrigation
Administration (NIA), where water is available to support rice and other crop
production, and all irrigated lands where water is not available for rice and other
crop production but are within areas programmed for irrigation facility rehabilitation
by the government;
4.3. All irrigable lands already covered by irrigation projects with firm funding
commitments, as delineated by the DA and/or NIA; and
4.4. All agricultural lands with irrigation facilities.
SECTION 5. Areas Highly Restricted from Conversion The following
areas/projects are classified as highly restricted from conversion:
5.1. Irrigable lands not covered by irrigation projects with firm funding
commitment;
5.2. Agro-industrial croplands, or lands presently planted to industrial crops that
support the economic viability of existing agricultural infrastructure and agro-based
enterprises;
5.3. Highlands or areas located in elevations of five hundred (500) meters or
above and which have the potential for growing semi-temperate or high value crops;
5.4. Lands issued with notice of land valuation and acquisition, or subject of a
perfected agreement between the landowner and the beneficiaries under the
Voluntary Land Transfer (VLT)/Direct Payment Scheme (DPS) under the CARP; and
5.5. Lands within an Environmentally Critical Area (ECA) or those involving the
establishment of an Environmentally Critical Project (ECP). Applications for
conversion under this sub-section shall require, apart from the standard,
requirements, an Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) which the applicant
must secure from the DENR prior to application (for ordinary applications) or prior to
commencement of actual land development (for applications involving housing
projects).
The Presidential Agrarian Reform Council (PARC) Land Use Technical Committee
(PLUTC) shall participate in the deliberations when the application involves land that
is highly restricted from conversion and with an area larger than five (5) hectares,
except housing projects covered by EO-45-2001.
SECTION 6. Priority Development Areas and Projects.
6.1. In accordance with RA 7916, EO-124-1993, and EO-258-2000, the following
are priority development areas for land conversion:
6.1.1. Specific sites in Regional Agri-Industrial Centers/Regional Industrial Centers
(RAIC/RIC) identified by the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) and the DA
pursuant to EO-124-1993.
6.1.2. Tourism Development Areas (TDA) identified by the Department of Tourism
(DOT) pursuant to EO-124-1993.
6.1.3. Agricultural areas intended for Eco Zone Projects, endorsed by Philippine
Economic Zone Authority (PEZA), pursuant to RA 7916.
6.1.4. Agricultural land, owned by the government, to be converted for projects of
national interest, as certified by proper government agency.
6.1.5. Agricultural land proposed to be developed as sites for processing plants of
agricultural products, as certified by the Department of Agriculture.
6.1.6. Sites intended for telecommunication facilities endorsed by the National
Telecommunications Commission.
6.2. Housing projects are priority development projects for land conversion that
shall follow the fast-tracking scheme prescribed under EO-45-2001. When the
application involves a mixed use of housing and non-housing projects, the
application shall not enjoy the privileges of housing projects unless at least eighty
percent (80%) of the land applied for conversion shall be used directly and
exclusively for housing.
SECTION 7. Lands within SAFDZ. In accordance with Section 9 of RA 8435,
the following rules shall govern conversion of lands within SAFDZ:
7.1. All irrigated lands, irrigable lands already covered by irrigation projects with
firm funding commitments, and lands with existing or having the potential for
growing high-value crops included within the SAFDZ shall be subject to a
conversion moratorium for a period of five (5) years from 10 February 1998 to 9
February 2003.
7.2. During the effectivity of the moratorium, conversion may be allowed with
respect to only five percent (5%) of said lands within SAFDZ upon compliance with
existing laws, rules and regulations.
7.3. The maximum of five percent (5%) of land(s) eligible for conversion to non-
agricultural use from the total SAFDZ area shall be jointly determined by the DA and
the DAR, upon the recommendation of the Regional and National SAFDZ
Committees pursuant to Rule 9.5.2 of DA-AO-6-1998, or the implementing rules and
regulations of RA 8435.
7.4. After the expiration of the conversion moratorium, conversion may be
allowed on a case-to-case basis, subject to existing laws, rules and regulations on
land use conversion.
ARTICLE III
Procedures
SECTION 8. Criteria for Conversion. The following criteria shall guide the
resolution of application for conversion:
8.1. Conversion may be allowed if the land subject of application is not among
those considered non-negotiable for conversion as provided in Section 4 hereof.
8.2. Conversion may be allowed, in accordance with Section 65 of RA 6657,
when the land has ceased to be economically feasible and sound for agricultural
purposes or the locality has become urbanized and the land will have a greater
economic value for residential, commercial, industrial, or other non-agricultural
purposes. ICTcDA
8.3. Conversion of lands within SAFDZ, as provided in Rule 9.5.2 of DA-AO-6-
1998, shall take into account the following factors:
8.3.1. The conversion of land use is consistent with the natural expansion of the
municipality or locality, as contained in the approved physical framework and land
use plan.
8.3.2. The area to be converted in use is not the only remaining food production
area of the community.
8.3.3. The land use conversion shall not hamper the availability of irrigation to
nearby farmlands.
8.3.4. The areas with low productivity will be accorded priority for land use
conversion.
8.3.5. Sufficient disturbance compensation shall be given to farmers whose
livelihood are negatively affected by the land use conversion as provided for by
existing laws and regulations.
8.4. When the agricultural land which is the subject of the application for
conversion has been acquired under RA 6657, its conversion shall be allowed only if
the applicant is the agrarian reform beneficiary thereof, and after he has fully paid
his obligation as required under Section 65 of RA 6657.
SECTION 9. Who May Apply for Conversion. The following persons may apply
for conversion:
9.1. Owners of private agricultural lands or other persons duly authorized by the
landowner;
9.2. Beneficiaries of the agrarian reform program after the lapse of five (5) years
from award, reckoned from the date of the issuance of the Certificate of
Landownership Award (CLOA), and who have fully paid their obligations and are
qualified under these Rules, or persons duly authorized by them; and
9.3. Government agencies, including government-owned or controlled
corporations, and LGUs, which own agricultural lands as their patrimonial property.
SECTION 10. Documentary Requirements. The applicant shall submit in
sextuplicate the following documents in six (6) separate bound folders (one [1]
original set and five [5] photocopy sets) with table of contents and page numbers of
all documents including photographs, sequentially numbered, except for maps and
development plans which shall likewise be in sextuplicate but shall be submitted in
six separate envelopes with contents properly labeled on each envelope. Of the six
(6) folders, two (2) will be transmitted to the Municipal Agrarian Reform Officer
(MARO), containing therein only the filled-up application form and the documents
specified in 10.4, 10.5 and 10.26 hereunder. The remaining four folders shall contain
all the documents enumerated hereunder that are applicable. The arrangement
thereof shall follow the sequence of the enumeration below, with the requirement
referred to in Section 10.1 hereof being the first document after the table of
contents:
10.1. Official receipt showing proof of payment of filing fee and inspection cost.
10.2. Official receipt showing proof of posting of bond in accordance with the
terms and conditions set forth in Section 24 hereof.
10.3. Duly accomplished application for conversion subscribed and sworn to
before a notary public or any person authorized to administer oaths.
10.4. True copy of the Original Certificate of Title (OCT) or Transfer Certificate of
Title (TCT) of the subject land, certified by the Register of Deeds not earlier than
thirty (30) days prior to application filing date.
In case of untitled land, the following shall be required in lieu of a title:
10.4.1. Certification from the DENR Community Environment and Natural
Resources Officer (CENRO) that the landholding has been classified as alienable
and disposable; and
10.4.2. Certification from the DENR CENRO (for administrative confirmation of
imperfect title) or the Clerk of Court (for judicial confirmation of imperfect title) that
the titling process/proceedings has commenced and there are no adverse claimants;
10.5. True copy of the Certificate of Title of the subject land as of 15 June 1988,
and all successor Titles until the present Title referred to in Section 10.4 hereof, if
applicable.
10.6. True copy of the current Tax Declaration covering the subject property.
10.7. Project feasibility study.
10.8. Joint venture agreement or any other business arrangement on the use of
the land between the landowner and the developer (if the developer is other than the
landowner) or between the EP/CLOA holders and the developer (if the land was
awarded under the agrarian reform program).
10.9. Narrative description of the development plan describing in detail the
activities, program components, phasing, schedule, work and financial plan, all duly
certified by a licensed engineer, architect, or land use planner.
10.10. Proof of financial and organizational capability of the developer to develop
land, including the following information:
10.10.1. Statement of project cost and availability of potential funding
source(s) for the development of the proposed project;
10.10.2. Profile of the developer;
10.10.3. Most recent financial statement, not later than the year before
application, duly authenticated by a certified public accountant; and
10.10.4. If the developer is a corporation or partnership, a copy of its
Certificate of Registration and recent General Information Sheet (GIS) for the
immediately preceding year, certified by the Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC), or in lieu of the latter, a duly accomplished GIS sworn to before a notary
public, provided, that if the land is to be used for socialized housing by the LGU
under EO 124-1993, a Sanggunian Resolution appropriating funds for the project
and authorizing the LGU to undertake the same shall be required: Provided, further,
that if the socialized housing shall be undertaken by other government agencies
such as the National Housing Authority and the like, a board resolution approving
the project and appropriating funds therefor shall likewise be submitted.
10.11. Socio-Economic Benefit-Cost Study of the proposed project.
10.12. Photographs, size 5R (five [5] inches by seven [7] inches), using color film,
and taken on the landholding under sunlight. The applicant shall attach the pictures
to a paper background and the photographer who took said pictures shall sign on
said paper background to certify the authenticity of the pictures. On each
background paper shall be written a short description of each picture. The pictures
shall consist of:
10.12.1. At least four (4) photographs taken from the center of the
landholding: one (1) facing north, one (1) facing east, one (1) facing south, and one
(1) facing west;
10.12.2. At least one (1) photograph per corner, taken from each corner of
the landholding's borders.
10.12.3. At least two (2) photographs each for all distinct man-made
structures existing on the land, taken from opposite angles;
10.12.4. At least two (2) photographs each of the front view of the
billboard(s) required in Section 11 hereof. The applicant shall set aside the second
copy of said billboard photograph(s) for submission to the MARO; and
10.12.5. Sufficient number of photographs of the most conspicuous
landmarks from the nearest barangay center and leading to and from the ingress
and egress routes at the subject landholding, for the purpose of assisting the ocular
inspection team in locating the site.
10.13. Affidavit/Undertaking in a single document of the applicant stating:
10.13.1. The number and names of the farmers, agricultural lessees, share
tenants, farmworkers, actual tillers, and/or occupants in the landholding; if there are
no such persons, a statement attesting to such fact;
10.13.2. That the applicant has paid or shall pay disturbance compensation
to the persons mentioned in Section 10.13.1 hereof, in accordance with the
computation, and under the terms and conditions, in Section 28 hereof;
10.13.3. That the applicant has erected the required number of billboards
and undertakes not to remove, deface or destroy said billboard, and that he shall
repair or replace the same when damaged, until after the approving authority
disposes of the application with finality;
10.13.4. That the applicant has not undertaken and shall not undertake
premature development prior to issuance of a Conversion Order;
10.13.5. That he authorizes the DAR to forfeit his bond when he undertakes
any premature development within the area before or after filing of the application
for conversion; and
10.13.6. That he has not commenced any action or filed any claim involving
the same land in any court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency; to the best of his
knowledge, no such other action or claim is pending therein; he has no knowledge
of any controversy or proceeding involving the status of said parcel of land or the
rights of person over its possession and entitlement to fruits or as beneficiary, the
determination of which is filed before any tribunal, court, the DAR or any other
agency; to his own knowledge, no such action or proceeding is pending in any court,
tribunal, or quasi-judicial agency; and should there be any same or similar action or
proceeding involving the property applied for conversion, which is either pending or
may have been terminated, he shall report such fact within five (5) days from
knowledge thereof to the approving authority where his aforesaid application has
been filed.
10.14. Certification of the MARO in a single document attesting compliance with
Section 14.1 hereof.
10.15. Certification from the HLURB Regional Officer on the actual zoning or
classification of the land subject of the application on the approved comprehensive
land use plan citing: (a) the municipal or city zoning ordinance number; and (b)
resolution number and date of approval by the HLURB or the Sangguniang
Panlalawigan concerned, as the case may be.
10.16. Certification from the authorized DA official stating, among others, the
classification of the property under the NPAAAD/SAFDZ, whether or not the subject
property is within the five percent (5%) limit of the SAFDZ allowed for conversion
and whether the land has ceased to be economically feasible and sound for
agricultural purposes. As provided for in DA-AO-2-2002, Article VI, Paragraph "4.2",
the certification inventory must include the following information:
10.16.1. Location and accessibility;
10.16.2. Limitations to agricultural production, such as steep slope, unstable
soil condition (landslide, etc.); inadequate land drainage; very shallow, stony, rocky
soil; very serious boulder problem;
10.16.3. Existing land use;
10.16.4. Indication of premature development or alteration of land use (with
picture);
10.16.5. Land use of adjoining area;
10.16.6. Indication of non-agricultural development; and
10.16.7. Potential for agricultural production.
In the event the land being applied for is within the 5% allowable limit under
Section 9 of RA 8435, the investigation report accompanying the inventory should
also include the following information:
10.16.8. Total area of the SAFDZ;
10.16.9. Allowable 5% limit;
10.16.10. Total area already approved for reclassification by the DA;
10.16.11. Balance of the 5% allowable area; and
10.16.12. Balance of the 5% allowable area if the application is approved.
10.17. Certification from the authorized DENR official stating, among others,
whether or not the subject land is within the NIPAS, mossy and virgin forests,
riverbanks, or swamp forests and marshlands; within an ECA, or will involve the
establishment of an ECP.
10.18. Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) when the subject land is within
an ECA or will involve the establishment of an ECP.
10.19. If applicable, Special Power of Attorney (SPA), when the applicant is not the
registered owner.
10.20. If applicable, notarized secretary's certificate of a corporate/cooperative
board resolution authorizing the representative, when the applicant is a corporation
or cooperative.
10.21. If applicable, concurrence letter of the mortgagee or of the individual or
entity in whose favor the encumbrance was constituted, when the property is
encumbered.
10.22. If applicable, endorsement from the concerned government agency, when
the application involves a priority development area or project.
10.23. If applicable, Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) certification attesting that
the applicant-landowner has fully paid his obligations to the LBP, when the applicant-
landowner is a beneficiary of the agrarian reform program.
10.24. If applicable, Provincial Agrarian Reform Officer (PARO) certification
attesting that the applicant-landowner acquired the subject land from a landed-
estate or under the Voluntary Land Transfer/Direct Payment Scheme (VLT/DPS) and
he has already fully paid his obligation thereunder, when the applicant-landowner is
a beneficiary of the agrarian reform program.
10.25. Vicinity map and a lot plan prepared by a duly-licensed geodetic engineer
indicating the lots being applied for and their technical descriptions, name of
owner/s, lot number and area. The map shall highlight the specific area applied for
conversion if the application covers less than the total lot area.
10.26. Directional sketch map showing the orientation of the subject property in
relation to adjoining lands and nearest provincial and/or national and/or feeder
roads, to facilitate and determine the location of the property for the purpose of
ocular inspection. The map shall: indicate the existing infrastructure and/or
improvements thereon including any house or tillage thereupon of any occupant
therein; landmarks within a one (1) kilometer radius; and owners of adjacent
properties. The map need not be drawn to scale.
10.27. Map of the development plan. For socialized housing projects, blueprint
copy of the development plan submitted and certified by the HLURB as basis for its
certification that the project conforms with the minimum standards of Batas
Pambansa Bilang 220.
10.28. Topographic Map if the subject property is within an upland, hilly or
mountainous area.
As a general rule, the applicant shall submit all the foregoing applicable
requirements from Sections 10.1 to 10.28 hereof at the time of application filing.
However, for applications involving housing projects under EO-45-2001, he may
defer the submission of the requirements mentioned in Sections 10.15 to 10.18
hereof and follow the alternative timetable in Sections 22.9.2 and 22.21 hereof.
SECTION 11. Public Notice The applicant shall post, in a conspicuous place(s)
within the subject property, a public notice contained in a billboard made of strong
weather-resistant material such as plywood, galvanized iron, tin, panaflex, or other
similar durable material, measuring 1.22 meters by 2.44 meters (4 feet by 8 feet). If
the landholding has an area of more than twenty (20) hectares, the applicant shall
erect one (1) billboard for every twenty (20) hectares, on strategic and visible points
in the landholding, preferably along a road. The billboard shall be written in the local
dialect and shall display all the information mentioned below, to wit:
11.1. Statement that the applicant is proposing to convert the subject landholding
from agricultural to non-agricultural use;
11.2. Complete name of the landowner(s) and applicant(s) and developer(s);
11.3. Total area and exact location of the conversion proposal;
11.4. Filing date of application for conversion;
11.5. Date of posting of billboard;
11.6. Schedule of ocular inspection;
11.7. Deadline for filing protest;
11.8. Address of the CLUPPI and RCLUPPI and PARO where oppositors may
formally file their protest;
11.9. Address of the approving authority; and
11.10. Date of approval or denial of the application, which shall be left blank, and
which the applicant shall fill up upon approval or denial of the application.
SECTION 12. Where to file application and Approving Authority.
12.1. Duly accomplished and notarized application forms and the complete
documentary requirements sit forth in Section 10 hereof shall be filed with the
following offices:
12.1.1. Regional Center for Land Use Policy Planning and Implementation
(RCLUPPI), located at the DAR Regional Office, for applications involving lands with
an area less than or equal to five (5) hectares, or a fraction above five (5) hectares.
The Regional Director shall be the approving authority for such applications; and
12.1.2. Center for Land Use Policy Planning and Implementation (CLUPPI), located
at the DAR Central Office, for applications involving lands with an area larger than
five (5) hectares. The Secretary shall be the approving authority for such
applications and may delegate the same authority to any Undersecretary.
12.2. When the application concerns a parcel of land that is adjacent to another
parcel of land that was previously granted a Conversion Order, and the sum of the
areas of both adjoining parcels of land exceeds five (5) hectares, the approving
authority for the present application shall be the Secretary, acting upon the
recommendation of the CLUPPI.
12.3. When the applicant owns or represents the owner(s) of two (2) or more
parcels of land within the same barangay or within two (2) or more barangays that
are adjacent to each other, and the sum of the areas of said parcels of land exceeds
five (5) hectares, the approving authority for an application involving any of said
parcels of land shall be the Secretary, acting upon the recommendation of the
CLUPPI.
12.4. When a single project proposes the conversion of two (2) or more parcels of
land with different owners but within the same barangay or within two (2) or more
barangays that are adjacent to each other, and the sum of the areas of said parcels
of land exceeds five (5) hectares, the approving authority for an application involving
any of said parcels of land shall be the Secretary, acting upon the recommendation
of the CLUPPI.
12.5. When the applicant or any oppositor challenges the jurisdiction of the
approving authority on the ground of error in computation of jurisdictional area, and
a higher authority takes cognizance of the dispute, the DAR approving authority
shall hold in abeyance the application for conversion until said higher authority
determines with finality the correct jurisdictional area.
12.6. Except in housing projects, the PLUTC shall act as the recommending body
when the application involves lands with an area larger than five (5) hectares and
which is highly restricted from conversion as per Section 5 hereof, or when, in the
opinion of the Secretary, the application requires inter-agency inputs that are crucial
for its judicious disposition.
12.7. The CLUPPI shall organize a Secretariat that shall be responsible for
processing all land use conversion applications and shall be the repository of all
records pertaining thereto. The CLUPPI/RCLUPPI shall be a one-stop processing
center for conversion applications undertaken in line with housing projects under
EO-45-2001. The RCLUPPI shall adopt the standard docketing system, and adopt
its own document-tracing system, and shall forward to the CLUPPI all its
decisions/resolutions/final orders, together with its quarterly statistic report on land
use conversion applications, for monitoring and consolidation of status reports by
the CLUPPI and safekeeping of the decisions/resolutions/final orders by the
Records Division. The CLUPPI shall be responsible for the centralized printing of all
applications for land use conversion.
SECTION 13. Filing Fee and Inspection Cost.
13.1. Filing Fee:
13.1.1. One thousand (1,000) pesos for applications involving lands with an area
less than or equal to five (5) hectares; or
13.1.2. Two thousand (2,000) pesos for applications involving lands with an area
larger than five (5) hectares.
13.2. Inspection Cost:
13.2.1. For applications involving lands with an area less than or equal to five (5)
hectares:
13.2.1.1. Ten thousand (10,000) pesos if the subject landholding is within the
same island as that of the Office of the Regional Director; or
13.2.1.2. Fifteen thousand (15,000) pesos if the subject landholding is not
within the same island as that of the Office of the Regional Director.
13.2.2. For applications involving lands with an area larger than five (5) hectares:
13.2.2.1. Ten thousand (10,000) pesos if the subject landholding is within the
main island of Luzon (except Bicol peninsula);
13.2.2.2. Fifteen thousand (15,000) pesos if the subject landholding is within
Regions I to IV but is not located within the main island of Luzon;
13.2.2.3. Fifteen thousand (15,000) pesos if the subject landholding is in Bicol
Peninsula or Visayas group of islands; or
13.2.2.4. Twenty thousand (20,000) pesos if the subject landholding is in the
Mindanao group of islands.
SECTION 14. MARO Certification.
14.1. Upon accomplishing the application form, the applicant shall furnish the
MARO with a photocopy of the same, together with a photocopy of the title(s) in
Sections 10.4 and/or 10.5 hereof and directional sketch map in Section 10.26
hereof. Upon receipt thereof, the MARO shall:
14.1.1. check the status of CARP coverage on and around the subject land;
14.1.2. inspect the applicant's billboard posting;
14.1.3. check the presence of any farmer, agricultural lessee, share tenant, farm
worker, actual tiller, or occupant; and
14.1.4. post the notices of application in a conspicuous place in the municipality and
a conspicuous place in the barangay covering the subject land (or a larger portion of
the subject land for properties that overlap on more than one barangay).
Thereafter, the MARO shall accomplish a certification of his findings
thereon, furnishing the applicant with the original copy of the certificate, as required
under Section 10.14 hereof.
14.2. For housing projects under EO-45-2001, if the MARO fails to act upon the
request for certification within ten (10) days from receipt of request, the applicant
shall notify the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI of such failure by personally filing an affidavit
reporting such inaction. The RCLUPPI/CLUPPI shall investigate the reason for the
non-issuance and take the steps necessary for the judicious resolution of the
pending application for conversion. Simultaneously, the disciplining authority of the
DAR shall, after proper investigation, impose upon the erring MARO the proper
administrative sanction(s).
SECTION 15. Ocular Inspection.
15.1. The ocular inspection shall be conducted on the property by the
RCLUPPI/CLUPPI.
15.2. The team designated to conduct ocular inspection shall verify and evaluate
the following:
15.2.1. Veracity of information contained in the application for land use conversion;
15.2.2. Description of the property(ies) applied for conversion, including among
others the location, terrain/topography, land cover and dominant land use of the
subject land and the surrounding areas;
15.2.3. Status of the coverage under CARP of the land applied for conversion;
15.2.4. Whether or not the land applied for conversion falls within the appropriate
zone in the land use plan of the city or municipality;
15.2.5. Existence of farmers, agricultural lessees, share tenants, farmworkers,
actual tillers, and/or occupants on the subject land;
15.2.6. Whether or not the farmers, agricultural lessees, share tenants,
farmworkers, actual tillers, and/or occupants have been paid or have agreed to the
terms of the disturbance compensation due them; and
15.2.7. Other information, relevant and useful in deciding whether to
approve/disapprove the application for conversion.
15.3. The Barangay Agrarian Reform Council (BARC) and Barangay Chairman
shall be notified of the ocular inspection but their presence is not mandatory.
SECTION 16. Protest. Persons affected by the proposed land use conversion,
such as identified beneficiaries, farmers, agricultural lessees, share tenants, actual
tillers, occupants, or residents of adjoining properties or communities, may file a
written protest against the application for conversion within thirty (30) days from
posting of the requisite billboard(s) under Section 11 hereof, or within fifteen (15)
days from conduct of ocular inspection, whichever is later. For applications involving
housing projects under EO-45-2001, the protest period shall be within seventeen
(17) days from posting of the requisite billboard(s) under Section 11 hereof, or within
five (5) days from conduct of ocular inspection, whichever is later. Thereafter, the
RCLUPPI/CLUPPI shall furnish all oppositors with copies of all orders or actions
taken relative to the subject application. An oppositor who is an identified Agrarian
Reform-Beneficiary (ARB) of the land applied for conversion, and who failed to file a
written protest within the protest period due to fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable
neglect, may intervene at any time during the pendency of the application. The filing
of any protest shall interrupt any running period for processing applications for
conversion, and shall lift the deadline for approving or disapproving the application.
SECTION 17. Where to file protest. Protests against the application for
conversion shall be filed with the PARO and/or RCLUPPI and/or CLUPPI, as the
case may be, by personal service, if feasible. An oppositor who files a protest before
the PARO shall do so by personal service, not by mail. Upon receipt of a protest by
personal service, the PARO shall, before the end of the next working day,
communicate with the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI by telephone or text message, to inform
the members thereof of such protest, and send a corresponding telegram and/or
radiogram which shall serve as written proof of compliance with the protest
notification requirement herein. Within four (4) working days from receipt of the
protest, the PARO shall transmit, by courier or speed delivery, to the
RCLUPPI/CLUPPI the original copy of the protest itself, and keep a photocopy
thereof in his custody. Failure of the PARO to comply with the directive under this
Section shall subject him to the appropriate disciplinary action.
SECTION 18. Examination of Records. Any interested person or his duly
authorized representative or counsel may request from the CLUPPI/RCLUPPI or
PARO/MARO a copy of the application, including the attachments thereto, but not
the DAR inter-office endorsement/recommendation and other documents as set
forth in DAR MC-25-1995. The CLUPPI/RCLUPPI shall not divulge its
recommendation so as not to pre-empt the final decision of the proper approving
authority.
SECTION 19. Resolution of Protest. The approving authority shall resolve the
protest simultaneously with the application for conversion. Whenever necessary, the
approving authority may, motu propio or upon motion by any oppositor, issue a
Cease and Desist Order (CDO).
SECTION 20. Grounds for Protest/Denial of Conversion. Protests against the
application and denial of the application may be instituted or founded on any of the
following grounds:
20.1. The area under application is non-negotiable for conversion;
20.2. The adverse effects of the displacement to be caused by the proposed
conversion far outweigh the social and economic benefits to the affected
communities;
20.3. Misrepresentation or concealment of facts material to the application for
conversion;
20.4. Illegal or premature conversion;
20.5. Existence of proof that conversion was resorted to as a means to evade
CARP coverage and to dispossess the tenant farmers of the land tilled by them.
20.6. The land applied for conversion has not ceased to be economically feasible
and sound for agricultural purposes, or the locality where it is found has not become
urbanized and the land will not have a greater economic value for residential,
commercial or industrial purposes. (Section 65 of RA 6657)
20.7. The applicant has violated, or the application for conversion is violative, of
agrarian laws, rules and regulations as well as other applicable statutes and other
administrative issuances.
SECTION 21. Processing of Applications. The following steps are the
procedure for ordinary conversions that do not involve "priority development areas
and projects" nor housing projects under Section 6 hereof:
21.1. The applicant shall first secure an Application Form from the RCLUPPI or
CLUPPI.
21.2. Following the instructions that accompany the Application Form, the
applicant shall install the public notice billboard(s) required under Section 11 hereof.
21.3. Immediately thereafter, the applicant shall fill up the Application Form with all
the necessary data. He shall reproduce at least five (5) clear photocopies of the
accomplished Application Form and place them in five (5) separate folders (plus a
sixth folder for the original set), the distribution of which shall be as follows:
21.3.1. The original copy for the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI (the receiving clerk must
rubberstamp the words "ORIGINAL" on the original copy);
21.3.2. Three (3) photocopies for the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI; and
21.3.3. Two (2) photocopies which the applicant shall furnish to the MARO as
advance copies.
21.4. When furnishing the MARO with folders of the application, the applicant
shall attach to the filled-up application form, clear photocopies of the:
21.4.1. Title(s) required under either Section 10.4 and/or Section 10.5 hereof, and
21.4.2. Directional sketch map required under Section 10.26 hereof.
21.5. Within five (5) days from receipt of the folders containing the documents in
Section 21.4 hereof, the MARO shall keep one folder for himself and transmit the
other folder to the PARO.
21.6. Within twenty (20) days from receipt of the above folder, the MARO shall:
check the status of CARP coverage on the subject land; inspect the billboard; check
presence of farmers, agricultural lessees, share tenants, farm workers, actual tillers,
or occupants; post notices of the application in a conspicuous place in the
municipality and a conspicuous place in the barangay covering the subject land (or a
larger portion of the subject land for properties that overlap on more than one
barangay); prepare a single-document MARO certification reporting the result of all
the foregoing tasks; and make available to the applicant the original copy of said
MARO certification.
21.7. If the MARO fails to act upon the request for issuance of the above
certification within twenty (20) days from receipt of the request, the applicant shall
notify the PARO and RCLUPPI/CLUPPI of such failure by personally filing an
affidavit reporting such inaction. Within five (5) days from receipt of the affidavit of
inaction, the PARO shall compel the MARO to act upon the request. If the MARO
still refuses to act for no justifiable reason, the PARO shall, within twenty (20) days
from receipt of the affidavit of inaction, perform by himself the duties abandoned by
the MARO. Meantime, the disciplining authority of the DAR, shall, after proper
investigation, impose upon said MARO the appropriate administrative sanction(s).
21.8. At this juncture, the applicant has four (4) application forms left after
furnishing two (2) advance copies for the MARO and PARO. The applicant shall
place said application forms in the remaining four (4) folders and all the applicable
documentary requirements set forth in Section 10 hereof, all the originals being in
one (1) folder, and the photocopies thereof being in the three (3) other folders.
These four (4) folders shall be the initiatory pleading of the application for
conversion.
21.9. The applicant shall submit to the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI the four (4) folders. The
RCLUPPI/CLUPPI shall then review the completeness of the folders. If found
complete, the applicant shall pay the filing fees and inspection cost (in accordance
with Section 13 hereof) and post the necessary bond (in accordance with Section 24
hereof), after which the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI may accept the application. Acceptance
date of the folders shall be the "Filing Date" of the application.
21.10. The distribution of the four (4) folders shall be as follows: The
RCLUPPI/CLUPPI shall keep a folder containing the originals and a folder
containing photocopies. At the same time, the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI Secretariat shall
transmit the remaining two (2) folders to the PARO and MARO respectively.
Immediate transmittal of said folders is important because the PARO shall utilize the
information therein when acting upon any protest against the application, or when
issuing any comment that he may wish to submit to the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI in
connection with the application.
21.11. Within ten (10) days from Filing Date, the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI shall issue to
the applicant a Notice of Conduct of Ocular Inspection, indicating the date thereof.
The ocular inspection shall be held not earlier than ten (10) days nor later than
twenty (20) days from issuance date of the Notice of Conduct of Ocular .Inspection.
The RCLUPPI/CLUPPI shall inform the MARO by the fastest means of
communication of the date of ocular inspection with instructions to ensure
dissemination of the Notice to all farmers, agricultural lessees, share tenants,
farmworkers, actual tillers, or occupants in the subject landholding.
21.12. The applicant shall transmit said Notice to the MARO and indicate the ocular
inspection date on the billboard(s) at least five (5) days before conduct of ocular
inspection. On or before ocular inspection date, the applicant shall submit to the
RCLUPPI/CLUPPI a proof that the MARO was able to receive a copy of said Notice.
21.13. The RCLUPPI/CLUPPI shall then conduct ocular inspection, and if possible,
hold a dialogue with the farmers, agricultural lessees, share tenants, farmworkers,
actual tillers, or occupants found in the subject landholding.
21.14. The RCLUPPI/CLUPPI ocular inspection team shall, within five (5) days
from conduct of ocular inspection, accomplish an Investigation Report which shall
include the result of its dialogue.
21.15. The RCLUPPI/CLUPPI shall deliberate on the merits of the application and
may call the applicant and/or oppositor(s), if any, for clarificatory questioning, to
judiciously resolve any dispute arising from the application. The RCLUPPI shall
invite the PARO to participate in the deliberations. Upon his discretion, the PARO
may submit a written comment to the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI.
21.16. Within sixty (60) days from issuance of the MARO certification, but not later
than eighty (80) days from Filing Date, the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI shall forward its
recommendation, together with the records, to the approving authority.
21.17. Within thirty (30) days from submission of the recommendation, the
approving authority shall resolve the application and furnish copies of the decision to
the applicant and oppositor(s), if any.
21.18. The filing of any protest shall interrupt any running period for processing
applications for conversion and shall lift the deadline for approving or disapproving
the application. Upon receipt of a protest, the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI shall order the filing
of a comment, reply, rejoinder, and such other pleadings that may aid in a judicious
resolution of the protest issues, and thereafter schedule hearings where the parties
may present their respective evidence. After conclusion of the hearings, the
RCLUPPI/CLUPPI shall submit its recommendation to the approving authority which
shall resolve the protest simultaneously with the application.
SECTION 22. Processing of Applications Involving Priority Development Areas
and Projects. Applications involving "priority development areas and projects"
under Section 6.1 hereof, and housing projects under Section 6.2 hereof, shall
follow the following steps:
22.1. The applicant shall first secure an Application Form from the RCLUPPI or
CLUPPI.
22.2. Following the instructions that accompany the Application Form, the
applicant shall install the public notice billboard(s) required under Section 11 hereof.
22.3. Immediately thereafter, the applicant shall fill up the Application Form with all
the necessary data. He shall reproduce at least five (5) clear photocopies of the
accomplished Application Form and place them in five (5) separate folders (plus a
sixth folder for the original set), the distribution of which shall be as follows:
22.3.1. The original copy for the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI (the receiving clerk must
rubberstamp the words "ORIGINAL" on the original copy);
22.3.2. Three (3) photocopies for the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI; and
22.3.3. Two (2) photocopies which the applicant shall furnish to the MARO as
advance copies.
22.4. When furnishing the MARO with folders of the application, the applicant
shall attach to the filled-up application form, clear photocopies of the:
22.4.1. Title(s) required under either Section 10.4 and/or Section 10.5 hereof; and
22.4.2. Directional sketch map required under Section 10.26 hereof.
22.5. Within five (5) days from receipt of the folders containing the documents in
Section 22.4 hereof, the MARO shall keep one folder for himself and transmit the
other folder to the PARO.
22.6. MARO certification:
22.6.1. Priority development areas and projects under Section 6.1 hereof. Within
twenty (20) days from receipt of the above folder, the MARO shall: check the status
of CARP coverage on the subject land; inspect the billboard; check presence of
farmers, agricultural lessees, share tenants, farm workers, actual tillers, or
occupants; post notices of the application in a conspicuous place in the municipality
and a conspicuous place in the barangay covering the subject land (or a larger
portion of the subject land for properties that overlap on more than one barangay);
prepare a single-document MARO certification reporting the result of all the
foregoing tasks; and make available to the applicant the original copy of said MARO
certification.
22.6.2. Housing projects under Section 6.2 hereof (EO-45-2001). Within ten (10)
days from receipt of the above folder, the MARO shall: check the status of CARP
coverage on the subject land; inspect the billboard; check presence of farmers,
agricultural lessees, share tenants, farm workers, actual tillers, or occupants; post
notices of the application in a conspicuous place in the municipality and a
conspicuous place in the barangay covering the subject land (or a larger portion of
the subject land for properties that overlap on more than one barangay); prepare a
single-document MARO certification reporting the result of all the foregoing tasks;
and make available to the applicant the original copy of said MARO certification.
22.7. MARO inaction:
22.7.1. Priority development areas and projects under Section 6.1 hereof. If the
MARO fails to act upon the request for issuance of the above certification within
twenty (20) days from receipt of the request, the applicant shall notify the PARO and
RCLUPPI/CLUPPI of such failure by personally filing an affidavit reporting such
inaction. Within five (5) days from receipt of the affidavit of inaction, the PARO shall
compel the MARO to act upon the request. If the MARO still refuses to act for no
justifiable reason, the PARO shall, within twenty (20) days from receipt of the
affidavit of inaction, perform by himself the duties abandoned by the MARO.
Meantime, the disciplining authority of the DAR shall, after proper investigation,
impose upon said MARO the appropriate administrative sanction(s).
22.7.2. Housing projects under Section 6.2 hereof (EO-45-2001). If the MARO fails
to act upon the request for said certification within ten (10) days from receipt of the
request, the applicant shall notify the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI of such failure by
personally filing an affidavit reporting such inaction. The RCLUPPI/CLUPPI shall
investigate the reason for the non-issuance and take the steps necessary for the
judicious resolution of the pending application for conversion. Simultaneously, the
disciplining authority of the DAR shall, after proper investigation, impose upon the
erring MARO the proper administrative sanction(s).
22.8. At this juncture, the applicant has four (4) application forms left after
furnishing two (2) advance copies for the MARO and PARO. The applicant shall
place said application forms in the remaining four (4) folders and all the applicable
documentary requirements set forth in Section 10 hereof, all the originals being in
one (1) folder, and the photocopies thereof being in the three (3) other folders.
These four (4) folders shall be the initiatory pleading of the application for
conversion.
22.9. Filing Date:
22.9.1. Priority development areas and projects under Section 6.1 hereof . The
applicant shall submit to the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI the four (4) folders containing all the
applicable documentary requirements set forth in Section 10 hereof. The
RCLUPPI/CLUPPI shall then review the completeness of the application. If found
complete, the applicant shall pay the filing fee and inspection cost (in accordance
with Section 13 hereof) and post the necessary bond (in accordance with Section 24
hereof), after which the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI may accept the application. Acceptance
date of the folders shall be the "Filing Date" of the application.
22.9.2. Housing projects under Section 6.2 hereof (EO-45-2001). The applicant
shall submit to the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI the four (4) folders containing all the
applicable requirements set forth in Section 10 hereof except those in Sections
10.15 to 10.18 (certifications from the HLURB, DA, and DENR) which the applicant
may submit at a later time. The RCLUPPI/CLUPPI shall then review the
completeness of the application. If found complete, the applicant shall pay the filing
fee and inspection cost (in accordance with Section 13 hereof) and post the
necessary bond (in accordance with Section 24 hereof), after which the
RCLUPPI/CLUPPI may accept the application. Acceptance date of the folders shall
be the "Filing Date" of the application.
22.10. The distribution of the four (4) folders shall be as follows: The
RCLUPPI/CLUPPI shall keep a folder containing the originals and a folder
containing photocopies. At the same time, the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI Secretariat shall
transmit the remaining two (2) folders to the PARO and MARO respectively.
Immediate transmittal of said folders is important because the PARO shall utilize the
information therein when acting upon any protest against the application, or when
issuing any comment that he may wish to submit to the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI in
connection with the application.
22.11. Within five (5) days from Filing Date, the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI shall issue to
the applicant a Notice of Conduct of Ocular Inspection, indicating the date thereof.
The ocular inspection shall be held not earlier than ten (10) days nor later than
fifteen (15) days from issuance date of the Notice of Conduct of Ocular Inspection.
The RCLUPPI/CLUPPI shall inform the MARO by the fastest means of
communication of the date of ocular inspection with instructions to ensure
dissemination of the Notice to all farmers, agricultural lessees, share tenants,
farmworkers, actual tillers, or occupants in the subject landholding.
22.12. The applicant shall transmit said Notice to the MARO and indicate the ocular
inspection date on the billboard(s) at least five (5) days before conduct of ocular
inspection. On or before ocular inspection date, the applicant shall submit to the
RCLUPPI/CLUPPI a proof that the MARO was able to receive a copy of said Notice.
22.13. The RCLUPPI/CLUPPI shall then conduct ocular inspection, and if possible,
hold a dialogue with the farmers, agricultural lessees, share tenants, farmworkers,
actual tillers, and/or occupants found in the subject landholding.
22.14. The RCLUPPI/CLUPPI ocular inspection team shall, within five (5) days
from conduct of ocular inspection, accomplish an Investigation Report which shall
include the result of its dialogue.
22.15. The RCLUPPI/CLUPPI shall deliberate on the merits of the application and
may call the applicant and/or oppositor(s), if any, for clarificatory questioning to
judiciously resolve any dispute arising from the application. The RCLUPPI shall
invite the PARO to participate in the deliberations. Upon his discretion, the PARO
may submit a written comment to the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI.
22.16. RCLUPPI/CLUPPI recommendation:
22.16.1. Priority development areas and projects under Section 6.1 hereof .
Within forty (40) days from issuance of the MARO certification, but not later than
sixty (60) days from Filing Date, the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI shall forward its
recommendation, together with the records, to the approving authority.
22.16.2. Housing projects under Section 6.2 hereof (EO-45-2001). Within
thirty (30) days from issuance of the MARO certification or filing of affidavit of MARO
inaction, but not later than forty (40) days from Filing Date, the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI
shall forward its recommendation, together with the records, to the approving
authority.
22.17. The filing of any protest shall interrupt the running period for processing
applications for conversion and shall lift the deadline for approving or disapproving
the application. Upon receipt of a protest, the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI shall order the filing
of a comment, reply, rejoinder, and such other pleadings that may aid in a judicious
resolution of the protest issues, and thereafter schedule hearings where the parties
may present their respective evidence. After conclusion of the hearings, the
RCLUPPI/CLUPPI shall submit its recommendation to the approving authority which
shall resolve the protest simultaneously with the application.
22.18. Protests against applications involving housing projects shall likewise
interrupt the running period and lift the deadline for approving or disapproving the
application. In line with Section 4(c) of EO 45-2001, the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI shall
make a preliminary determination on whether or not the protest stands on valid
grounds. When the protest is prima facie meritorious, the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI shall
order the filing of a comment, reply, rejoinder, and such other pleadings that may aid
in a judicious resolution of the protest issues, and thereafter schedule hearings
where the parties may present their respective evidence. After conclusion of the
hearings, the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI shall submit its recommendation to the approving
authority which shall resolve the protest simultaneously with the application.
22.19. Approving Authority Decision:
22.19.1. Priority development areas and projects under Section 6.1 hereof .
Within thirty (30) days from submission of the recommendation, the approving
authority shall resolve the application and furnish copies of the decision to the
applicant and oppositor(s), if any.
22.19.2. Housing projects under Section 6.2 hereof (EO-45-2001). Within
thirty (30) days from submission of the recommendation, the approving authority
shall resolve the application and furnish copies of the decision to the applicant and
oppositor(s), if any. The thirty (30) day period herein shall not run unless the
applicant submits to the approving authority the requirements set forth in Sections
10.15 and 10.16 (certifications from the HLURB and DA).
22.20. In housing projects under EO-45-2001, when the approving authority finds
the application meritorious, but the applicant has not yet submitted the necessary
DENR certifications referred to in Sections 10.17 and 10.18 hereof, the approving
authority shall not issue any Conversion Order, but may, in lieu thereof, issue a
Provisional Conversion Order. A Provisional Conversion Order does not allow the
applicant to undertake any development activity on the subject land. No
reglementary period for filing a motion for reconsideration or appeal shall run upon
the issuance of a Provisional Conversion Order. The issuance of the final
Conversion Order or its denial shall be done only after the approving authority has
received from the DENR: a certification that the subject land is not within the NIPAS;
and an ECC or a certification that the same is not necessary.
SECTION 23. Bond. To guarantee that the applicant shall not undertake
premature conversion pending consideration of the application, and ensure faithful
compliance with the conditions of the Conversion Order by the applicant/developer,
cash or surety bonds shall be required pursuant to Section 35, Chapter 6, Book IV of
the Administrative Code of 1987.
23.1. No surety bond shall be acceptable except that issued by the Government
Service Insurance System (GSIS), in line with the Office of the President (OP)
Administrative Order (AO) No. 33 [25 August 1987], as amended by OP-AO-141 [12
August 1994], "Prescribing Guidelines for the Insurance of All Properties, Contracts,
Rights of Action and other Insurance Risks of the Government, Including Those in
Which the Government Has an Insurable Interest, with the General Insurance Fund
of the Government Service Insurance System". This Guidelines expressly repeals all
provisions in DAR-MC-9-1999 relating to posting of bond.
23.2. The PARO shall be the recommending authority in resolving all motions for
withdrawal or refund of bond.
SECTION 24. Bond To Guarantee Against Premature Conversion.
24.1. The applicant shall, upon filing of the application, post a cash bond
equivalent to at least two point five percent (2.5%) of the zonal value of the land per
latest issuance of the Department of Finance, in the form of cash or
manager's/cashier's check posted in favor of the DAR.
24.2. In lieu of a cash bond, the applicant may post a surety bond, issued by the
GSIS, equivalent to at least fifteen percent (15%) of the total zonal value of the land
per latest issuance of the Department of Finance, indicating the following conditions
at the minimum that:
24.2.1. The bond is callable on demand;
24.2.2. The DAR shall forfeit the bond in favor of the Agrarian Reform Fund when it
finds the applicant carrying out any premature conversion activity; and
24.2.3. The validity of the bond shall be for a period of one (1) year, renewable by
not more than one (1) year when necessary.
24.3. The DAR shall forfeit the bond in favor of the Agrarian Reform Fund when
the applicant, or any person acting in his behalf, carries out any actual conversion
activity on the land prior to the application's approval. Forfeiture shall be without
prejudice to the filing of criminal charges against those responsible for premature
conversion.
24.4. After faithful compliance with the terms and conditions of the bond, the
applicant may opt to refund or convert the same into a performance bond after
issuance of the Conversion Order.
24.5. The following projects shall be exempt from posting a "bond to guarantee
against premature conversion":
24.5.1. Socialized housing projects as certified by the HLURB;
24.5.2. Resettlement projects for families displaced by development of government
projects as certified by the National Housing Authority (NHA); and
24.5.3. Community Mortgage Program (CMP) projects as certified by the National
Home Mortgage Finance Corporation (NHMFC).
When the application involves a mixed use of socialized and non-socialized housing
projects, the application shall not enjoy any bond exemption for socialized housing
unless at least eighty (80) percent of the land applied for conversion shall be used
directly and exclusively for socialized housing.
SECTION 25. Convertibility of Bond. An applicant who posted a "bond to
guarantee against premature conversion" using a GSIS surety bond may thereafter
opt to convert said surety bond into a performance bond after securing the consent
of the GSIS, in line with Article 2079 of the Civil Code.
SECTION 26. Performance Bond. Within five (5) days from receipt of a copy of
the Conversion Order, the applicant shall post a performance bond in the form of
either of the following:
26.1. Cash or manager's/cashier's check equivalent to at least two point five
percent (2.5%) of the total zonal value of the land per latest issuance of the
Department of Finance; or
26.2. GSIS surety bond equivalent to at least fifteen percent (15%) of the total
zonal value of the land per latest issuance of the Department of Finance, indicating
the following conditions at the minimum that:
26.2.1. The bond is callable on demand;
26.2.2. A photocopy of the approved Conversion Order is attached and forms part
of the bond;
26.2.3. The DAR shall forfeit the bond in favor of the Agrarian Reform Fund when it
finds the applicant in default of his obligation to complete development of the land
and/or comply with any of the conditions in the Conversion Order; and
26.2.4. The validity of the bond shall be equivalent to the prescribed period of
development of the area under the Conversion Order.
SECTION 27. Reimbursement for Government Investment. Pursuant to DA-AO-
6-1998, in case of approved conversion of land within SAFDZ, the registered owner
shall pay the government, through the Treasurer of the Philippines, the amount
equivalent to the government's investment cost, including inflation, estimated to
include all expenditures for capital goods expended by any and all agencies,
financed from public, national or local budget resources, whether sourced from
domestic or foreign, on the land applied for land use conversion, provided, that:
27.1. The valuation of such investments will be equivalent to the total government
expenditure made on the land in question, adjusted for average inflation over the
period starting from the beginning of investment up to the month of approval of
conversion;
27.2. The valuation shall be determined jointly by the Municipal Assessor and
Municipal Treasurer, in consultation with those agencies which have made public
investments in the area; and
27.3. The payment of the landowner shall be made in a single, lump sum payment
to the Treasurer of the Philippines through the Municipal Treasurer of the
Municipality where the farmland concerned is located.
SECTION 28. Disturbance Compensation.
28.1. The applicant and/or landowner and/or developer shall pay disturbance
compensation in cash or kind or combination of cash and kind to the farmers,
agricultural lessees, share tenants, farmworkers, actual tillers, and/or occupants
affected by the conversion, in such amounts or under such terms as the parties may
mutually agree upon.
28.2. The amount of disturbance compensation shall not be less than five (5)
times the average of the gross harvests on the target landholding during the last five
(5) preceding calendar years, pursuant to Section 36 of RA 3844, as amended by
Section 7 of RA 6389.
28.3. Compensation in kind may consist of some or all or mixture of housing,
homelots, employment, and/or other benefits. The DAR shall approve the terms of
any agreement for the payment of disturbance compensation and monitor
compliance therewith. In no case shall compliance with the terms and conditions
thereof extend beyond sixty (60) days from the date of approval of the application for
conversion.
28.4. If the parties fail to agree on the amount of disturbance compensation, or
raise an issue questioning the lease or tenancy relationship or any other prejudicial
issue that tends to justify non-payment of disturbance compensation, either or both
parties may refer the issue to the Provincial Agrarian Reform Adjudicator (PARAD)
for resolution. While the case is pending before the Adjudicating Authority, the
landowner(s)/applicant(s) may not evict said farmers, agricultural lessees, share
tenants, farmworkers, actual tillers, or occupants, until such time when the
Adjudicating Authority resolves the prejudicial issue(s) with finality.
28.5. The applicant shall furnish the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI with proof of payment of
disturbance compensation within five (5) days from receipt of payment.
ARTICLE IV
Conversion to Homelot
SECTION 29. Criteria. Conversion to a homelot is allowable when: the
applicant owns the lot that he proposes to convert; he intends to establish a dwelling
place for himself on said lot; the lot has an area not exceeding five hundred (500)
square meters; and the conversion shall be from agricultural to purely residential
use.
SECTION 30. Documentary Requirements.
30.1. Official receipt showing proof of payment of filing fee and inspection cost;
30.2. Duly accomplished application for conversion subscribed and sworn to
before a notary public or any person authorized to administer oaths;
30.3. True copy of the Original Certificate of Title (OCT) or Transfer Certificate of
Title (TCT) of the subject land, certified by the Register of Deeds not earlier than
thirty (30) days prior to application filing date.
In case of untitled land, the following shall be required in lieu of a title:
30.3.1. Certification from the DENR Community Environment and Natural
Resources Officer (CENRO) that the landholding has been classified as alienable
and disposable; and
30.3.2. Certification from the DENR CENRO (for administrative confirmation of
imperfect title) or the Clerk of Court (for judicial confirmation of imperfect title) that
the titling process/proceedings has commenced and there are no adverse claimants;
30.4. True copy of the Certificate of Title of the subject land as of 15 June 1988,
and all successor Titles until the present Title referred to in Section 10.4 hereof, if
applicable.
30.5. Directional sketch map to guide the ocular inspection team in locating the
homelot.
SECTION 31. Procedure.
31.1. The applicant shall first secure an Application Form from the RCLUPPI.
31.2. Following the instructions that accompany the Application Form, the
applicant shall fill up the same with all the necessary data, and thereafter, reproduce
at least three (3) clear photocopies of the accomplished Application Form which he
shall place in three (3) separate folders (plus a fourth folder for the original set), the
distribution of which shall be as follows:
31.2.1. The original copy for the RCLUPPI (the receiving clerk must rubberstamp
the words "ORIGINAL" on the original copy);
31.2.2. One (1) photocopy for the RCLUPPI;
31.2.3. One (1) photocopy for the PARO; and
31.2.4. One (1) photocopy for the MARO.
31.3. The RCLUPPI shall then review the completeness of the application folders.
If found complete, the applicant shall pay a filing fee amounting to Five Hundred
Pesos (P500) and the inspection cost amounting to One Thousand Pesos (P1,000).
Acceptance date of the application folders shall be the "Filing Date" of the
application.
31.4. Within five (5) days from Filing Date, the RCLUPPI shall transmit two (2) of
the above folders, containing photocopies, to the PARO and MARO, respectively.
31.5. Within thirty (30) days from receipt of the folder, the MARO shall: check the
status of CARP coverage on the subject landholding, post notices of the application
in a conspicuous place in the municipality and a conspicuous place in the barangay
covering the subject landholding; and submit a report thereon to the PARO.
31.6. Within thirty (30) days from receipt of the MARO report, the PARO shall
issue to the applicant a Notice of Conduct of Ocular Inspection indicating the date
thereof. The ocular inspection shall be held not earlier than fifteen (15) days nor later
than thirty (30) days from issuance date of the Notice of Conduct of Ocular
Inspection.
31.7. The PARO and MARO or their representatives shall conduct ocular
inspection in the presence of the applicant and oppositor(s), if any.
31.8. Within thirty (30) days from conduct of ocular inspection, the PARO shall
submit a report and forward the records to the RCLUPPI.
31.9. The RCLUPPI shall deliberate on the merits of the application and may call
the applicant and/or oppositor(s), if any, for clarificatory questioning, to judiciously
resolve any dispute arising from the application.
31.10. Within thirty (30) days from receipt of the PARO report, the RCLUPPI shall
submit its recommendation to the Regional Director.
31.11. Within thirty (30) days from receipt of the RCLUPPI recommendation, the
Regional Director shall promulgate his decision on whether to grant or deny
conversion.
31.12. The filing of a protest shall interrupt the running of any of the foregoing
deadline periods. The RCLUPPI shall thereupon proceed to hear the protest and
thereafter submit its recommendation to the Regional Director who shall resolve the
protest simultaneously with the application.
ARTICLE V
Issuance of Conversion Order and its Effects
SECTION 32. Issuance of Order. No Conversion Order (or its denial) shall be
valid without the following information:
32.1. Conversion case number.
32.2. OCT/TCT numbers and corresponding lot numbers. In case of untitled
lands, the lot numbers and corresponding survey plan numbers.
32.3. Names of all registered landowners for each parcel of land.
32.4. Name of applicant or representative, if the applicant is not the landowner.
32.5. Name of developer.
32.6. Proposed use of the land.
32.7. Total area applied for conversion.
32.8. Total area approved or disapproved for conversion; and
32.9. Date of approval or denial of the order.
SECTION 33. Conditions of Conversion Order. The approval of the application
for conversion shall be subject to the following conditions:
33.1. The applicant shall not undertake any development until all the applicable
permits and clearances from the other concerned government agencies have been
granted.
33.2. Within fifteen (15) days from receipt of the Conversion Order, the landowner
shall post a performance bond in accordance with Sections 25 or 26 hereof.
33.3. Within thirty (30) days from receipt of the Conversion Order, the landowner
shall request the Register of Deeds to annotate on the property's title the land use
allowed under the Conversion Order.
33.4. Within sixty (60) days from receipt of the Conversion Order, the landowner
shall return to the CLUPPI or RCLUPPI a certified true copy of the title that already
contains the annotation indicating the land use allowed under the Conversion Order.
33.5. Within sixty (60) days from receipt of the Conversion Order, the landowner,
solidarity with his co-owner(s) and developer(s), shall pay disturbance compensation
to the affected farmers, agricultural lessees, share tenants, farmworkers, actual
tillers, or occupants, in such amounts or kinds as the parties may mutually agree
upon, subject to the approval of the DAR.
33.6. Within one (1) year from issuance of the Conversion Order, the landowner
and/or developer shall commence development on the property approved for
conversion, and shall complete development not later than the deadline(s) set forth
in its site development plan schedule, but in no case shall development extend
beyond five (5) years from issuance of the Conversion Order.
33.7. For housing projects, the landowner shall secure an ECC, if applicable, prior
to undertaking any development therein.
33.8. The landowner and his representatives shall allow DAR officials free and
unhampered access into the property approved for conversion for the purpose of
monitoring compliance with the terms and conditions thereof.
33.9. The landowner and future landowner(s) of the property approved for
conversion shall not change its use to another use not authorized under the
Conversion Order without prior consent from the DAR. This prohibition extends to
changes in housing standards, changes in selling schemes, changes from social
housing to open market housing or vice-versa, and all other similar changes.
33.10. The landowner and/or developer shall submit quarterly reports on the status
of development to the MARO, PARO, and DAR Regional Office covering the subject
property.
33.11. The grant of a Conversion Order alone shall not be a ground for eviction.
Any person who desires to evict occupants on the basis of the Conversion Order
shall invoke other meritorious grounds and file the proper action.
33.12. The DAR reserves the right to revoke the Conversion Order upon valid
grounds and after proper investigation.
SECTION 34. Effects of approval of conversion The approval of an application
for conversion shall have, but shall not be limited to, the following effects:
34.1. It shall be limited to the specific use of the land authorized in the Conversion
Order;
34.2. It shall be subject to the schedule indicated in the detailed site development,
work and financial plans, but in no case shall the period of development extend
beyond five (5) years from issuance of the Conversion Order except as authorized
by the Secretary or the approving official on meritorious grounds, provided that, if
the development cannot be accomplished within five (5) years, the grantee of the
Conversion Order shall submit a written request for extension within the six (6)
months before the lapse of the five (5)-year period, and provided further, that the
extended development period shall be one (1) year for every five (5) hectares, but in
no case shall the extension exceed five (5) years.
34.3. The conditions thereof shall be binding upon successors-in-interest of the
property; HTacDS
34.4. The applicant shall allow duly authorized representatives of DAR free and
unhampered access to the property subject of the Conversion Order to monitor
compliance with the terms and conditions thereof;
34.5. The use authorized in the Conversion Order shall be annotated on the title
of the subject property; and
34.6. It shall be without prejudice to the ancestral domain claims of indigenous
peoples, if any, pursuant to RA 8371 or the "Indigenous Peoples Rights Act".
SECTION 35. Distribution of copy of Conversion Order.
35.1. For monitoring purposes, the RCLUPPI shall furnish the CLUPPI with copies
of all Conversion Orders issued at the regional level.
35.2. The RCLUPPI/CLUPPI shall be responsible and liable for giving a copy of
the Conversion Order (or its denial) to all parties listed in the Conversion Order.
35.3. The Registry of Deeds of the locality wherein the area applied for
conversion is located, among others, shall be given a copy of the Conversion Order.
The applicant, upon filing of the application for conversion, shall give the complete
address of the local Registry of Deeds to the RCLUPPI/CLUPPI Secretariat.
35.4. The DENR's Environmental Management Bureau (EMB), and all other
concerned agencies and parties, shall be given a copy of the Conversion Order or
its denial.
ARTICLE VI
Motion for Reconsideration
SECTION 36. Motion for Reconsideration A party may file only one (1) motion
for reconsideration of the decision, resolution, or final order of the Regional Director
or Secretary, and may do so only within a non-extendible period of fifteen (15)
calendar days from receipt of the challenged decision, resolution, or final order. The
pendency of a timely motion for reconsideration by the proper party shall stay
execution of the challenged decision, resolution, or final order.
36.1. At the Regional Director's level, if the motion for reconsideration is denied,
the movant may perfect an appeal before the Secretary within only the remainder of
said non-extendible period of fifteen (15) calendar days. If the motion for
reconsideration is granted, resulting to the reversal of the original decision, the
aggrieved party may perfect an appeal before the Secretary within a full but non-
extendible period of fifteen (15) calendar days from receipt of the reversed
resolution.
36.2. At the Office of the Secretary's level, if the motion for reconsideration is
denied, the movant may perfect an appeal before the Office of the President (OP)
within fifteen (15) calendar days from receipt of the resolution denying the motion for
reconsideration.
ARTICLE VII
Appeals
SECTION 37. Who May Appeal. Only the aggrieved party or parties who is/are
either the applicant(s) or protestor(s)/oppositor(s), or both, or their successor(s)-in-
interest, may appeal the decision, resolution, or final order of the Regional Director
or Secretary within the periods prescribed in Section 33 hereof. The appellant(s)
shall furnish copies of the appeal pleadings to all parties and to the RCLUPPI,
Regional Director, CLUPPI, and Secretary.
SECTION 38. When to Appeal. The appellant(s) may perfect his/their appeal
within a non-extendible period of fifteen (15) calendar days from receipt of the
decision, resolution, or final order of the approving authority. The moment the DAR
loses jurisdiction over a case by reason of an appeal to the OP, the applicable rules
of the OP shall then govern the appeal.
SECTION 39. Where to File an Appeal.
39.1. Appeal from the decision, resolution, or final order of the Regional Director
to the Secretary shall be made by filing a Notice of Appeal before the Office of the
Regional Director of origin, furnishing copies thereof to all adverse parties, if any,
together with payment of the requisite appeal fees to the cashier of the regional
office of origin.
39.2. Appeal from the decision, resolution, or final order of the Secretary shall be
made by filing a Notice of Appeal before either the Office of the Bureau of Agrarian
Legal Assistance (BALA) Director, or directly at the OP, furnishing copies thereof to
all adverse parties, if any, together with payment of the requisite appeal fees to the
cashier of either the DAR or OP.
39.3. Appeal from the decision, resolution, or final order of the Secretary may be
taken to the Court of Appeals by certiorari in accordance with Section 54 of RA
6657.
SECTION 40. Appeal by a Pauper Litigant. A party opposing an application for
conversion, who is a farmer, agricultural lessee, share tenant, farmworker, actual
tiller, occupant, member of a farmers' collective or cooperative, or any other person
directly working on the land may allege that he is a pauper litigant without need for
further proof. He shall enjoy pauper litigant privileges such as exemption from
payment of appeal fees.
SECTION 41. Appeal Pleadings. For appeals from the Regional Director to the
Secretary, the appellant shall submit an appeal brief with the BALA within fifteen (15)
days from perfection of the appeal, furnishing a copy thereof to all parties and to the
RCLUPPI, Regional Director and CLUPPI. The appellee may submit a comment (not
motion to dismiss) within ten (10) days from receipt of the appeal brief, furnishing a
copy thereof to the appellant and to the RCLUPPI, Regional Director and CLUPPI.
Within fifteen (15) days from filing of appellee's comment, the BALA shall issue a
preliminary order stating either that:
41.1. The pleadings on record need further clarification and the conduct of a
clarificatory hearing is necessary. Ten (10) days after the termination thereof, the
parties may be ordered to simultaneously file their respective appeal memorandum.
41.2. The pleadings on record are insufficient for a proper determination of the
issues raised and so the parties shall simultaneously file their respective appeal
memorandum within ten (10) days from receipt of order for simultaneous filing.
41.3. The pleadings on record are sufficient for deciding the appeal and
henceforth the deciding authority shall promulgate its decision.
Upon submission of sufficient pleadings, the BALA Director shall submit his
recommendation to the deciding authority.
SECTION 42. Perfection of Appeal.
42.1. The filing of a proper notice of appeal and payment of requisite appeal fees
in due time perfects the appeal with respect to the subject matter thereof.
42.2. The office that rendered the challenged decision, resolution, or final order
loses jurisdiction over the case after perfection of the appeal and expiration of the
period to appeal by all other parties.
SECTION 43. DAR Representation on Appeal.
43.1. The Secretary shall represent the DAR in all appeals to the OP.
43.2. The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) shall represent the DAR in all
appeals to the Court of Appeals. Alternatively, the OSG may deputize any DAR
lawyer to represent the DAR in said appeals.
SECTION 44. Execution Pending Appeal.
44.1. Appeal from the Regional Director The appeal shall stay execution of the
decision, resolution, or final order of the Regional Director unless the Secretary
directs execution pending appeal when the exceptional nature and circumstances of
the case so requires (EO 292-1987, Book VII, Chapter 4, Section 21).
44.2. Appeal to the OP The appeal shall stay execution of the decision,
resolution, or final order of the Secretary unless the OP directs execution pending
appeal upon such terms and conditions as it may deem just and reasonable (OP-
AO-18-1987 Section 4).
SECTION 45. Finality of Conversion Order. The Conversion Order or its denial
shall become final and executory after all parties were able to receive a copy of the
Order, and after the lapse of fifteen (15) calendar days from receipt by the party who
last receives a copy of the Order, and no motion for reconsideration or appeal has
been filed. The Head of the Legal Division of the Regional Office or the BALA
Director, as the case may be, shall issue the appropriate Certificate of Finality.
ARTICLE VIII
Revocation or Withdrawal of Conversion Orders
SECTION 46. Filing of Petition. Any person may file a petition to revoke, and
the landowner may file a petition to withdraw, the Conversion Order before the
approving authority within ninety (90) days from discovery of facts warranting
revocation or withdrawal, but not more than one (1) year from issuance of the
Conversion Order. When the petition alleges any of the grounds in the enumeration
in the next section, the filing period shall be within ninety (90) days from discovery of
such facts but not beyond the development period stipulated in the Conversion
Order. Within the DAR, only the Secretary may resolve petitions that question the
jurisdiction of the recommending body or approving authority.
SECTION 47. Grounds. The following acts or omissions shall warrant
revocation of the Conversion Order:
47.1. Lack of jurisdiction of the approving authority;
47.2. Misrepresentation or concealment of facts material to the grant of
conversion;
47.3. Non-compliance with the conditions of the Conversion Order;
47.4. Non-compliance with the agreement on disturbance compensation payment;
47.5. Conversion to a use other than that authorized in the Conversion Order, or
47.6. Any other serious violation of agrarian laws.
SECTION 48. General Procedure.
48.1. Upon receipt of the petition, the approving authority shall order the
respondent(s) to file a comment within fifteen (15) days from receipt of said order.
48.2. The proceedings shall be non-litigious in nature. Except for basic essential
requirements of due process, the approving authority shall refrain from strict
application of procedural technicalities and rules governing admissibility and
sufficiency of evidence obtaining in judicial courts.
48.3. The approving authority shall undertake reasonable means to ascertain the
facts of the controversy, including a thorough examination of witnesses, and, ocular
inspection of the premises in question, as may be necessary.
48.4. The approving authority shall render a decision on the merits of the case
within thirty (30) days from the time the case is deemed submitted for resolution.,
SECTION 49. Effect of Revocation or Withdrawal of Conversion Order. The
land subject thereof shall revert to the status of agricultural lands and shall be
subject to CARP coverage as circumstances may warrant.
ARTICLE IX
Monitoring of Land Use Conversion
SECTION 50. Responsibility for Monitoring Illegal Conversion. The
Provincial/City Task Forces on Illegal Conversion, created pursuant to DAR-DOJ
Joint AO 5-1994, shall monitor cases of illegal conversion of agricultural lands in the
provinces or cities, as the case may be. The PARO shall submit quarterly reports on
illegal conversion to the National Task Force on Illegal Conversion at the DAR
Central Office.
SECTION 51. Compliance Monitoring. Compliance with the terms and
conditions of the Conversion Order shall be monitored, as follows:
51.1. The landowner or developer shall submit quarterly reports on the status of
the development to the RCLUPPI and the PARO with jurisdiction over the property.
51.2. The RCLUPPI shall turn over reports to the designated office in the
Regional Office which shall monitor compliance by the applicant/developer with the
terms and conditions of the conversion, including the posting of the approved order.
It shall submit quarterly reports to the CLUPPI regarding the status of land use
conversions, copy furnished the DAR Provincial and Municipal Offices concerned.
51.3. The CLUPPI shall evaluate and consolidate the reports submitted by the
Regional Office, and render quarterly reports on the status of the land use
conversion applications to the Secretary, through the Undersecretary for Field
Operations and Support Services, copy furnished the National Task Force on Illegal
Conversion.
51.4. The BARC and representative of Non-Government Organizations/People's
Organizations (NGO/PO) may be authorized by the DAR Secretary or Regional
Director to assist in monitoring compliance with the terms and conditions of the
Conversion Order, as may be necessary.
ARTICLE X
Investigation and Prosecution
SECTION 52. Prohibited Acts and Omissions. The following acts or omissions
are prohibited:
52.1. The conversion by any landowner of his agricultural land into any non-
agricultural use with intent to avoid the application of the CARP on his landholdings
and to dispossess his tenant farmers of the land tilled by them, as provided for
under Section 73 (c) of RA 6657;
52.2. The change of the nature of lands outside urban centers and city limits,
either in whole or in part, after the effectivity of RA 6657, as provided in Section 73
(e) thereof;
52.3. Premature conversion as defined under Section 4 of RA 8435 and Section 2
hereof, or the undertaking of any development activity, the results of which modify or
alter the physical characteristics of the agricultural lands to render them suitable for
non-agricultural purposes without an approved Conversion Order from the DAR;
52.4. Unauthorized conversion or changing the current use of the land from
agricultural (e.g. rice land) to another agricultural use, the effect of which is to
exempt the land from CARP coverage (e.g. livestock, poultry, aquaculture) without a
Conversion Order from the DAR, or changing the use of the land to one other than
that allowed under the Conversion Order issued by the DAR as defined under
Section 2 hereof.
SECTION 53. Who May be Held Liable.
53.1. Any landowner or developer, who commits any act which constitutes illegal,
premature or unauthorized conversion, including, their accomplices and
accessories, if any, shall be investigated pursuant to these Rules.
53.2. If the offender is a corporation or an association, the officer responsible
therefor shall be held liable.
SECTION 54. Investigating Officials.
54.1. The DAR Officials, who are designated members of the Provincial/City Task
Forces on Illegal Conversion pursuant to DAR-DOJ Joint AO-5-1994, shall be
primarily responsible for the investigation, gathering of evidence, and the filing of the
complaints against illegal, premature or unauthorized conversions within their
respective areas of jurisdiction.
54.2. The Secretary may, however, direct such other officials as may be
appropriate to investigate cases of illegal, premature, or unauthorized conversion.
He may constitute a team composed of national and/or local DAR officials,
representatives from other law enforcement agencies, and volunteers from
NGOs/POs for this purpose.
54.3. The Secretary or his duly authorized representative shall be furnished
copies of the investigation reports and other relevant documents for appropriate
action.
SECTION 55. Duties of Provincial/City Task Forces on Illegal Conversion. In
accordance with DAR-DOJ Joint AO-5-1994, the Provincial/City Task Forces on
Illegal Conversion shall perform the following duties and responsibilities:
55.1. DAR Members:
55.1.1. Conduct actual ocular inspection and case build-up;
55.1.2. File the necessary complaint/affidavit together with supporting documents
before the task force member prosecutor;
55.1.3. Investigate all ongoing development project and conversion of agricultural
land;
55.1.4. Monitor the conversion situation in the province and cities within the
province;
55.1.5. Report to the National Task Force on the conversion situation in the
province and cities within the province; and
55.1.6. Perform such other related functions, which may be assigned by the
National Task Force on Illegal Conversion.
55.2. DOJ Prosecutor Members:
55.2.1. Conduct inquest or preliminary investigation, as the case may be;
55.2.2. Recommend and file criminal cases against the landowners and developers
involved in illegal conversion of agricultural lands under RA 6657;
55.2.3. Submit to the National Task Force a monthly progress/status report of all
cases involving illegal conversion of agricultural lands; and
55.2.4. Perform such other related functions, which may be assigned by the
National Task Force on Illegal Conversion.
SECTION 56. Evidentiary Requirements. In illegal, premature or unauthorized
conversions, the investigating officials mentioned in Section 51 hereof shall be
responsible for securing the evidence necessary to support the charges.
SECTION 57. Administrative Action. The following procedure shall be followed
in the administrative investigation of illegal, premature, or unauthorized conversions:
57.1. On the basis of the complaint or report received, the Secretary or his duly
authorized representative shall conduct an investigation to determine if a prima facie
case of illegal, premature, or unauthorized conversion exists.
57.2. Upon determination of the prima facie case, the Secretary, or Regional
Director (for those cases where he was the approving authority), shall issue a cease
and desist order (CDO) directing the respondent to stop any and all development
activities in the area and requiring him to explain within ten (10) days from receipt of
the CDO why he should not be penalized for violation of existing laws, rules and
regulations on land use conversion.
57.3. After the lapse of the period to answer, whether or not an answer has been
filed, administrative proceedings shall be conducted to determine if the respondent
can be held liable for illegal, premature, or unauthorized conversion. The
proceedings shall not be bound by the technical rules of procedure and evidence,
but shall proceed in a most expeditious manner, employing all reasonable means to
ascertain the facts of every case in accordance with justice and equity and the
merits of the case. The investigating official shall have the power to summon
witnesses, administer oaths, take testimony, require submission of reports, compel
the production of books and documents and answers to interrogatories and issue
subpoena ad testificandum and subpoena duces tecum and to enforce its writs
through sheriffs or other duly deputized officers. He shall likewise have the power to
punish for direct and indirect contempt in the same manner and subject to the same
penalties as provided in the Rules of Court, in accordance with Section 50 of RA
6657.
57.4. Upon determination that the respondent committed illegal, premature, or
unauthorized conversion, the cash bond or performance bond, if any, shall be
cancelled and forfeited in favor of the government, without prejudice to the
imposition of other penalties or sanctions, as may be warranted.
57.5. Any government official who, directly or indirectly, assisted or took part in
the commission of illegal, premature or unauthorized conversion shall be
administratively charged or dealt with in accordance with pertinent laws and
regulations.
SECTION 58. Institution of Criminal Action.
58.1. The DAR members of Provincial/City Task forces on Illegal Conversion shall
be primarily responsible for filing complaints of illegal or premature conversion
pursuant to RA 6657 or RA 8435 before the Office of the Provincial or City
Prosecutor. However, the Secretary or the National Task Force on Illegal Conversion
may directly institute such criminal action in flashpoint cases or those, which, in his
judgment, would require immediate action to protect public interest.
58.2. The DOJ prosecutor-members of the Provincial/City Task Forces on Illegal
Conversion shall conduct inquest or preliminary investigation, as the case maybe,
and recommend the filing of criminal cases in court against the landowners,
developers, and all those responsible for illegal or premature conversion, as the
evidence may warrant.
58.3. However, unauthorized conversions as defined herein shall not warrant
criminal prosecution but only administrative sanctions, as may be appropriate.
SECTION 59. Prosecution of Illegal Conversion Cases. The prosecution of
illegal conversion cases shall be the primary responsibility of the designated
provincial/city prosecutors, with active support from the concerned DAR Officials.
SECTION 60. Role of National Task Force on Illegal Conversion. Pursuant to
DAR-DOJ Joint AO-4-1993, the National Task Force on Illegal Conversion shall
perform the following duties and responsibilities:
60.1. Identify and set priority areas or provinces where illegal conversion of
agricultural lands are rampant;
60.2. Report to the Secretaries of the DAR and the DOJ on the conversion
situation in the country;
60.3. Recommend the issuance and/or amendment of guidelines and circulars on
conversion and/or illegal conversion of agricultural lands;
60.4. Designate such persons who will coordinate and monitor the activities of the
Provincial Task Forces on Illegal Conversion; and
60.5. Perform such other related functions as may be assigned by the Secretary
of the Department of Agrarian Reform and the Secretary of the Department of
Justice.
ARTICLE XI
Penalties and Sanctions
SECTION 61. Administrative Sanctions. The DAR may impose any or all of the
following sanctions after determining, in an appropriate administrative proceeding,
that a violation of these Rules has been committed:
61.1. Revocation or withdrawal of the authorization for land use conversion;
61.2. Blacklisting of the applicant, developer or representative;
61.3. Automatic disapproval of pending and subsequent conversion applications
that the offender may file with the DAR;
61.4. Issuance of cease and desist order by the Secretary or Regional Director, as
the case may be, upon verified reports that premature, illegal or unauthorized
conversion activities are being undertaken; or
61.5. Forfeiture of cash bond or performance bond.
SECTION 62. Administrative Sanctions against DAR officials or employees.
The DAR may impose against its own officials or employees the following sanctions,
in accordance with the Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service
[effective 26 September 1999], specifically Rule IV, Section 52, sub-section "C",
numbers "13" to "15", to wit:
62.1. Failure to act promptly on letters and request within fifteen (15) days from
receipt, except as otherwise provided in the rules implementing the Code of Conduct
and Ethical Standards of Public Officials and Employees:
1st Offense Reprimand;
2nd Offense Suspension 1 to 30 days;
3rd Offense Dismissal.
62.2. Failure to process documents and complete action on document and papers
within a reasonable time from preparation thereof, except as otherwise provided in
the rules implementing the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards of Public
Officials and Employees:
1st Offense Reprimand;
2nd Offense Suspension 1 to 30 days;
3rd Offense Dismissal.
62.3. Failure to attend to anyone who wants to avail himself of the services of the
office, or act promptly and expeditiously on public transactions:
1st Offense Reprimand;
2nd Offense Suspension 1 to 30 days;
3rd Offense Dismissal.
SECTION 63. Criminal Penalties.
63.1. Pursuant to Section 73 (c), (e) and 74 of RA 6657, any person who
knowingly or willfully converts agricultural lands into any non-agricultural use with
intent to avoid the application of said Act and to dispossess his tenant farmers of the
land tilled by them; or who changes the nature of the land outside urban centers and
city limits in whole or in part after the effectivity of RA 6657 shall be punished by
imprisonment of not less than one (1) month to not more than three (3) years or a
fine of not less than fifteen thousand (P15,000.00) pesos, or both, at the discretion
of the court.
63.2. Any person found guilty of premature or illegal conversion under RA 8435
shall be penalized, in accordance with Section 11 thereof, with imprisonment of two
(2) to six (6) years, or a fine equivalent to one hundred percent (100%) of the
government's investment cost, or both, at the discretion of the court, and an
accessory penalty of forfeiture of the land and any improvement thereon.
ARTICLE XII
Transitory and Final Provisions
SECTION 64. Effect of Pending Applications. This Administrative Order shall
apply prospectively to all applications for land use conversion. Existing rules shall
govern all pending applications for land use conversion. Grantees of previous
conversion orders who were not yet able to complete development of properties
approved for conversion may request for extension of the development period by
first posting a new performance bond in accordance with Sections 23 to 26 of this
Administrative Order.
SECTION 65. Repealing Clause. This Administrative Order amends or repeals
all other DAR issuances inconsistent herewith.
SECTION 66. Separability Clause. Any judicial pronouncement declaring as
unconstitutional any provision or portion of this Administrative Order shall not affect
the validity of the other provisions herein.
SECTION 67. Effectivity. This Administrative Order shall take effect ten (10)
days after complete publication in at least two (2) newspapers with nationwide
circulation.
Diliman, Quezon City, 28 February 2002. CDAHIT
(SGD.) HERNANI A. BRAGANZA
Secretary
Case: Fortich v. Corona, GR. No. 131457, April 24, 1998 Decision, Opinion and
Resolution of the Motion for Reconsideration with the Decision of the Office of the
President (OP) on the Sumilao Case
[G.R. No. 131457. November 17, 1998.]
HON. CARLOS O. FORTICH, PROVINCIAL, GOVERNOR OF BUKIDNON, HON.
REY B. BAULA, MUNICIPAL MAYOR OF SUMILAO, BUKIDNON, NQSR
MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, petitioners, vs. HON.
RENATO C. CORONA, DEPUTY EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, HON. ERNESTO D.
GARILAO, SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN
REFORM, respondents.
OPINION
MARTINEZ, J p:
This pertains to the two (2) separate motions for reconsideration filed by herein
respondents and the applicants for intervention, seeking a reversal of our April 24,
1998 Decision nullifying the so-called win-win Resolution dated November 7, 1997,
issued by the Office of the President in O.P. Case No. 96-C-6424, and denying the
applicants Motion For Leave To Intervene.
Respondents motion is based on the following grounds:
I.
THE SO-CALLED WIN-WIN RESOLUTION DATED NOVEMBER 7, 1997 IS NOT A
VOID RESOLUTION AS IT SEEKS TO CORRECT AN ERRONEOUS RULING. THE
MARCH 29, 1996 DECISION OF THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT COULD NOT
AS YET BECOME FINAL AND EXECUTORY AS TO BE BEYOND MODIFICATION.
II.
THE PROPER REMEDY OF PETITIONERS IS A PETITION FOR REVIEW UNDER
RULE 43 AND NOT A PETITION FOR CERTIORARI UNDER RULE 65 OF THE
RULES OF COURT.
III.
THE FILING OF A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION IS A CONDITION SINE
QUA NON BEFORE A PETITION FOR CERTIORARI MAY BE FILED BECAUSE
THE QUESTIONED RESOLUTION IS NOT PATENTLY ILLEGAL.
IV.
PETITIONERS ARE GUILTY OF FORUM-SHOPPING BECAUSE ULTIMATELY
PETITIONERS SEEK THE SAME RELIEF, WHICH IS TO RESTRAIN THE
DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM FROM PLACING THE SUBJECT 144-
HECTARE PROPERTY UNDER THE COMPREHENSIVE AGRARIAN REFORM
LAW (CARL). 1
For their part, the grounds relied upon by the applicants for intervention are as
follows:
I.
THE INTERVENORS POSSESS A RIGHT TO INTERVENE IN THESE
PROCEEDINGS.
II.
THE MODIFICATION BY THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT (OP) OF ITS 29
MARCH 1996 DECISION, THROUGH THE 7 NOVEMBER 1997 WIN-WIN
RESOLUTION, WAS NOT ERRONEOUS BUT WAS A VALID EXERCISE OF ITS
POWERS AND PREROGATIVES.
III.
THE WIN-WIN RESOLUTION PROPERLY ADDRESSES THE SUBSTANTIAL
ISSUES RELATIVE TO THIS CASE. 2
Both movants also ask that their respective motions be resolved by this
Court en banc since the issues they raise are, as described by the respondents,
novel, 3 or, as characterized by the applicants for intervention, of transcendental
significance. 4 Most specifically, movants are presenting the issue of whether or not
the power of the local government units to reclassify lands is subject to the approval
of the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR).
The instant motions are being opposed vehemently by herein petitioners.
The grounds raised here were extensively covered and resolved in our
challenged Decision. A minute resolution denying the instant motions with finality
would have been sufficient, considering that the same follows as a matter of course
if warranted under the circumstances as in other equally important cases. However,
in view of the wide publicity and media coverage that this case has generated, in
addition to the demonstrations staged at the perimeter of this Court, as well as the
many letters coming from different sectors of society (the religious and the NGOs)
and even letters from abroad, we deem it necessary to write an extended resolution
to again reiterate the basis for our April 24, 1998 Decision, and hopefully
write finis to this controversy.
To support their request that their motions be referred to the Court en banc, the
movant cited the Resolution of this Court dated February 9, 1993, in Bar Matter No.
209, which enumerates the cases that may be resolved, en banc, among which are
the following:
xxx xxx xxx
3. Cases raising novel questions of law;
xxx xxx xxx
8. Cases assigned to a division which in the opinion of at least three (3) members
thereof merit the attention of the Court en banc and are acceptable to a majority of
the actual membership of the Court en banc; and
xxx xxx xxx
Regrettably, the issues presented before us by the movants are matters of no
extraordinary import to merit the attention of the Court en banc. Specifically, the
issue of whether or not the power of the local government units to reclassify lands is
subject to the approval of the DAR is no longer novel, this having been decided by
this Court in the case of Province of Camarines Sur, et al. vs. Court of
Appeals 5 wherein we held that local government units need not obtain the approval
of the DAR to convert or reclassify lands from agricultural to non-agricultural use.
The dispositive portion of the Decision in the aforecited case states:
WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED and the questioned decision of the Court
of Appeals is set aside insofar as it (a) nullifies the trial courts order allowing the
Province of Camarines Sur to take possession of private respondents property; (b)
orders the trial court to suspend the expropriation proceedings; and (c) requires the
Province of Camarines Sur to obtain the approval of the Department of Agrarian
Reform to convert or reclassify private respondents property from agricultural to
non-agricultural use.
xxx xxx xxx (Emphasis supplied)
Moreover, the Decision sought to be reconsidered was arrived at by
a unanimous vote of all five (5) members of the Second Division of this Court.
Stated otherwise, this Second Division is of the opinion that the matters raised by
movants are nothing new and do not deserve the consideration of the Court en
banc. Thus, the participation of the full Court in the resolution of movants motions
for reconsideration would be inappropriate.
We shall now resolve the respondents motion for reconsideration.
In our Decision in question, we struck down as void the act of the Office of the
President (OP) in reopening the case in O.P. Case No. 96-C-6424 through the
issuance of the November 7, 1997 win-win Resolution which substantially
modified its March 29, 1996 Decision that had long become final and executory,
being in gross disregard of the rules and basic legal precept that accord finality to
administrative determinations. It will be recalled that the March 29, 1996 OP
Decision was declared by the same office as final and executory in its Order dated
June 23, 1997 after the respondent DARs motion for reconsideration of the said
decision was denied in the same order for having been filed beyond the 15-day
reglementary period.
In their instant motion, the respondents contend that the win-win Resolution of
November 7, 1997 is not a void resolution as it seeks to correct an erroneous
ruling, hence, (t)he March 29, 1996 decision of the Office of the President could
not as yet become final and executory as to be beyond modification. 6
The respondents explained that the DARs failure to file on time the motion for
reconsideration of the March 29, 1996 OP Decision was excusable:
The manner of service of the copy of the March 29, 1996 decision also made it
impossible for DAR to file its motion for reconsideration on time. The copy was
received by the Records Section of the DAR, then referred to the Office of the
Secretary and then to the Bureau of Agrarian Legal Assistance. By the time it was
forwarded to the litigation office of the DAR, the period to file the motion for
reconsideration had already lapsed. Instead of resolving the motion for
reconsideration on the merits in the interest of substantial justice, the Office of the
President denied the same for having been filed late. 7 (Emphasis supplied)
We cannot agree with the respondents contention that the June 23, 1997 OP
Order which denied the DARs motion for reconsideration of the March 29, 1996 OP
Decision for having been filed late was an erroneous ruling which had to be
corrected by the November 7, 1997 win-win Resolution. The said denial of the
DARs motion for reconsideration was in accordance with Section 7 of Administrative
Order No. 18, dated February 12, 1987, which mandates that
decisions/resolutions/orders of the Office of the President shall, except as otherwise
provided for by special laws, become final after the lapse of fifteen (15) days from
receipt of a copy thereof . . .,unless a motion for reconsideration thereof is filed
within such period. 8
Contrary to the respondents submission, the late filing by the DAR of its motion
for reconsideration of the March 29, 1996 OP Decision is not excusable. The
respondents explanation that the DARs office procedure after receiving the copy of
the March 29, 1996 OP Decision made it impossible for DAR to file its motion for
reconsideration on time since the said decision had to be referred to the different
departments of the DAR, cannot be considered a valid justification. There is nothing
wrong with referring the decision to the departments concerned for the preparation
of the motion for reconsideration, but in doing so, the DAR must not disregard the
reglementary period fixed by law, rule or regulation. In other words, the DAR must
develop a system of procedure that would enable it to comply with the reglementary
period for filing the said motion. For, the rules relating to reglementary period should
not be made subservient to the internal office procedure of an administrative body.
Otherwise, the noble purpose of the rules prescribing a definite period for filing a
motion for reconsideration of a decision can easily be circumvented by the mere
expediency of claiming a long and arduous process of preparing the said motion
involving several departments of the administrative agency.
The respondents then faulted the Office of the President when they further
stressed that it should have resolved the (DARs) motion for reconsideration on the
merits in the interest of substantial justice, instead of simply denying the same for
having been filed late, 9 adding that technicalities and procedural lapses should be
subordinated to the established merits of the case. 10 Respondents thus plead for
a relaxation in the application of the rules by overlooking procedural lapses
committed by the DAR.
We are not persuaded.
Procedural rules, we must stress, should be treated with utmost respect and
due regard since they are designed to facilitate the adjudication of cases to remedy
the worsening problem of delay in the resolution of rival claims and in the
administration of justice. The requirement is in pursuance to the bill of rights
inscribed in the Constitution which guarantees that all persons shall have a right to
the speedy disposition of their cases before all judicial, quasi-judicial
and administrative bodies. 11 The adjudicatory bodies and the parties to a case are
thus enjoined to abide strictly by the rules. 12 While it is true that a litigation is not a
game of technicalities, it is equally true that every case must be prosecuted in
accordance with the prescribed procedure to ensure an orderly and speedy
administration of justice. 13 There have been some instances wherein this Court
allowed a relaxation in the application of the rules, but this flexibility was never
intended to forge a bastion for erring litigants to violate the rules with impunity. 14 A
liberal interpretation and application of the rules of procedure can be resorted to only
in proper cases and under justifiable causes and circumstances.
In the instant case, we cannot grant respondents the relief prayed for since
they have not shown a justifiable reason for a relaxation of the rules. As we have
discussed earlier, the DARs late filing of its motion for reconsideration of the March
29, 1996 OP Decision was not justified. Hence, the final and executory character of
the said OP Decision can no longer be disturbed, much less substantially
modified. Res judicata has set in and the adjudicated thing or affair should forever
be put to rest. It is in this sense that we, in our decision under reconsideration,
declared as void and of no binding effect the win-win Resolution of November 7,
1997 which substantially modified the March 29, 1996 Decision, the said resolution
having been issued in excess of jurisdiction and in arrant violation of the
fundamental and time-honored principle of finality to administrative determinations.
The movants, however, complain that the case was decided by us on the basis
of a technicality, and, this has been the rallying cry of some newspaper columnists
who insists that we resolve this case not on mere technical grounds.
We do not think so.
It must be emphasized that a decision/resolution/order of an administrative
body, court or tribunal which is declared void on the ground that the same was
rendered without or in excess of jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion, is by
no means a mere technicality of law or procedure. It is elementary that jurisdiction of
a body, court or tribunal is an essential and mandatory requirement before it can act
on a case or controversy. And even if said body, court or tribunal has jurisdiction
over a case, but has acted in excess of its jurisdiction or with grave abuse of
discretion, such act is still invalid. The decision nullifying the questioned act is
an adjudication on the merits.
In the instant case, several fatal violations of the law were committed, namely:
(1) the DAR filed its motion for reconsideration of the March 29, 1996 OP Decision
way beyond the reglementary period; (2) after the said motion for reconsideration
was denied for having been filed late, the March 29, 1996 Decision was declared
final and executory, but the DAR still filed a second motion for reconsideration which
is prohibited by the rules; 15 (3) despite this, the second motion for reconsideration
was entertained by herein respondent, then Deputy Executive Secretary Renato C.
Corona, and on the basis thereof, issued the win-win Resolution dated November
7, 1997, substantially modifying the March 29, 1996 Decision which had long
become final and executory; and (4) the reopening of the same case through the
issuance of the November 7, 1997 win-win Resolution was in flagrant infringement
of the doctrine of res judicata. These grave breaches of the law, rules and settled
jurisprudence are clearly substantial, not of technical nature.
It should be stressed that when the March 29, 1996 OP Decision was declared
final and executory, vested rights were acquired by the herein petitioners, namely,
the province of Bukidnon, the municipality of Sumilao, Bukidnon, and the NQSR
Management and Development Corporation, and all others who should be benefited
by the said decision. Thus, we repeat, the issue here is not a question of technicality
but that of substance and merit. In the words of the learned Justice Artemio V.
Panganiban in the case of Videogram Regulatory Board vs. Court of Appeals, et
al., 16 (j)ust as a losing party has the right to file an appeal within the prescribed
period, the winning party also has the correlative right to enjoy the finality of the
resolution of his/her case.
Another matter which the movants bring to our attention is that when the DARs
Order denying petitioners, application for conversion was first brought by petitioner
Carlos O. Fortich to the Office of the President, the appropriate administrative rules
were not complied with. We wish to point out that, apparently, movants had the
opportunity to question this alleged lapse in procedure but chose not to avail of the
same. For the win-win Resolution itself never mentioned this supposed procedural
lapse as an issue. Here, the issue which has been brought to the fore is
the validity of the win-winResolution of November 7, 1997, not that of any other
previous proceedings. The movants cannot now question the supposed procedural
lapse for the first time before us. It should have been raised and resolved at the first
opportunity, that is, at the administrative level.
The other grounds raised by respondents in their instant motion for
reconsideration concerning the propriety of petitioners remedy, the absence of a
motion for reconsideration of the win-win Resolution before resorting to the present
petition for certiorari, and forum shopping have already been extensively dealt with
in our challenged decision. We need not further elaborate on these grounds except
to state that the same lacks merit.
With respect to the motion for reconsideration filed by the applications for
intervention, we likewise find the same unmeritorious. The issue of the applicants
right to intervene in this proceedings should be laid to rest. The rule in this
jurisdiction is that a party who wishes to intervene must have a certain right or
legal interest in the subject matter of the litigation. 17 Such interest must be
actual, substantial, material, direct and immediate, and not simply contingent and
expectant. 18
Here, the applicants for intervention categorically admitted that they were not
tenants of petitioner NQSR Management and Development Corporation, but were
merely seasonal, farmworkers in a pineapple plantation on the subject land which
was under lease for ten (10) years to the Philippine Packing
Corporation. 19 Respondent, the DAR Secretary Ernesto Garilao, also admitted in
his Order of June 7, 1995 that the subject land is neither tenanted nor validly
covered for compulsory acquisition . . . 20
Under Section 4, Article XIII of the 1987 Constitution, the right to own directly or
collectively the land they till belongs to the farmers and regular farmworkers who are
landless, and in the case ofother farmworkers, the latter are entitled to receive
a just share of the fruits of the land. The pertinent portion of the aforecited
constitutional provision mandates:
Sec. 4. The State shall by law, undertake an agrarian reform program founded
on the right of farmers and regular farmworkers, who are landless, to own directly or
collectively the lands they till or, in the case of other farmworkers, to receive a just
share of the fruits thereof. . . . (Emphasis supplied)
Commenting on the above-quoted provision, the eminent constitutionalist, Fr.
Joaquin G. Bernas, S.J., one of the framers of the 1987 Constitution, declares that
under the agrarian reform program the equitable distribution of the land is a right
given to landless farmers and regular farmworkers to own the land they till, while
the other or seasonal farmworkers are only entitled to a just share of the fruits of the
land. 21 Being merely seasonal farmworkers without a right to own, the applicants
motion for intervention must necessarily fail as they have no legal or actual and
substantial interest over the subject land.
It is noteworthy the even the win-win Resolution of November 7, 1997 which
the herein respondents and the applicants for intervention seek to uphold, did not
recognize the latter as proper parties to intervene in the case simply because the
qualified farmer-beneficiaries have yet to be meticulously determined as ordered in
the said resolution. The dispositive portion of the win-win Resolution reads:
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the decision of the Office of the President,
through Executive Secretary Ruben Torres, dated March 29, 1996, is hereby
MODIFIED as follows:
xxx xxx xxx
(3) The Department of Agrarian Reform is hereby directed to carefully and
meticulously determine who among the claimants are qualified beneficiaries.
xxx xxx xxx
We take note of the Memorandum in Intervention filed by 113 farmers on October
10, 1997 without ruling on the propriety or merits thereof since it is unnecessary to
pass upon it at this time.
SO ORDERED. 22 (Emphasis supplied)
These are all that are necessary to dispose of the instant separate motions for
reconsideration considering that the crucial issue in the present petition for certiorari
is simply the validity of the win-win resolution.
But even if we tackle the other issues which the movants describe as
substantial, namely: (1) whether the subject land is considered a prime agricultural
land with irrigation facility; (2) whether the land has long been covered by a Notice of
Compulsory Acquisition (NCA); (3) whether the land is tenanted, and if not, whether
the applicants for intervention are qualified to become beneficiaries thereof; and (4)
whether the Sangguniang Bayan of Sumilao has the legal authority to reclassify the
land into industrial/institutional use, to our mind, the March 29, 1996 OP Decision
has thoroughly and properly disposed of the aforementioned issues. We quote the
pertinent portions of the said Decision:
After a careful evaluation of the petition vis-a-vis the grounds upon which the denial
thereof by Secretary Garilao was based, we find that the instant application for
conversion by the Municipality of Sumilao, Bukidnon is impressed with merit. To be
sure, converting the land in question from agricultural to agro-industrial would open
great opportunities for employment and bring about real development in the area
towards a sustained economic growth of the municipality. On the other hand,
distributing the land to would-be beneficiaries (who are not even tenants, as there
are none) does not guarantee such benefits.
Nevertheless, on the issue that the land is considered a prime agricultural land with
irrigation facility it maybe appropriate to mention that, as claimed by petitioner, while
it is true that there is, indeed, an irrigation facility in the area, the same merely
passes thru the property (as a right of way) to provide water to the ricelands located
on the lower portion thereof. The land itself, subject of the instant petition, is not
irrigated as the same was, for several years, planted with pineapple by the
Philippine Packing Corporation.
On the issue that the land has long been covered by a Notice of Compulsory
Acquisition (NCA) and that the existing policy on withdrawal or lifting on areas
covered by NCA is not applicable, suffice it to state that the said NCA was declared
null and void by the Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB) as
early as March 1, 1992. Deciding in favor of NQSRMDC, the DARAB correctly
pointed out that under Section 8 of R.A. No. 6657, the subject property could not
validly be the subject of compulsory acquisition until after the expiration of the lease
contract with Del Monte Philippines, a Multi-National Company, or until April 1994,
and ordered the DAR Regional Office and the Land Bank of the Philippines, both in
Butuan City, to desist from pursuing any activity or activities covering petitioners
land.
On this score, we take special notice of the fact that the Quisumbing family has
already contributed substantially to the land reform program of the government, as
follows: 300 hectares of rice land in Nueva Ecija In the 70s and another 100
hectares in the nearby Municipality of Impasugong, Bukidnon, ten (10) years ago,
for which they have not received just compensation up to this time.
Neither can the assertion that there is no clear and tangible compensation package
arrangements for the beneficiaries hold water as, in the first place, there are no
beneficiaries to speak about, for the land is not tenanted as already stated.
Nor can procedural lapses in the manner of identifying/reclassifying the subject
property for agro-industrial purposes be allowed to defeat the very purpose of the
law granting autonomy to local government units in the management of their local
affairs. Stated more simply, the language of Section 20 of R.A. No. 7160, supra, is
clear and affords no room for any other interpretation. By unequivocal legal
mandate, it grants local government units autonomy in their local affairs including
the power to convert portions of their agricultural lands and provide for the manner
of their utilization and disposition to enable them to attain their fullest development
as self-reliant communities.
WHEREFORE, in pursuance of the spirit and intent of the said legal mandate and
in view of the favorable recommendations of the various government agencies
abovementioned, the subject Order, dated November 14, 1994 of the Hon.
Secretary, Department of Agrarian Reform, is hereby SET ASIDE and the instant
application of NQSRMDC/BAIDA is hereby APPROVED. 23 (Emphasis supplied)
It is axiomatic that factual findings of administrative agencies which have
acquired expertise in their field are binding and conclusive on the
Court, 24 considering that the Office of the President is presumed to be most
competent in matters falling within its domain.
The interest of justice is invoked by movants. We are aware of that famous
adage of the late President Ramon Magsaysay that those who have less in life
should have more in law. Our affirmation of the finality of the March 29, 1996 OP
Decision is precisely pro-poor considering that more of the impoverished members
of society will be benefited by the agro-economic development of the disputed land
which the province of Bukidnon and the municipality of Sumilao, Bukidnon intend to
undertake. To our mind, the OP Decision of March 29, 1996 was for the eventual
benefit of the many, not just of the few. This is clearly shown from the development
plan on the subject land as conceived by the petitioners. The said plan is supposed
to have the following components as indicated in the OP Decision of March 29,
1996:
1. The Development Academy of Mindanao which constitutes the following:
Institute for Continuing Higher Education; Institute for Livelihood Science (Vocational
and Technical School); Institute for Agribusiness Research; Museum, Library,
Cultural Center, and Mindanao Sports Development Complex which covers an area
of 24 hectares;
2. Bukidnon Agro-Industrial Park which consists of corn processing for corn oil,
corn starch, various corn products; rice processing for wine, rice-based snacks,
exportable: rice; cassava processing for starch, alcohol and food delicacies;
processing plants, fruits and fruit products such as juices; processing plants for
vegetables processed and prepared for market; cold storage and ice plant; cannery
system; commercial stores; public market; and abattoir needing about 67 hectares;
3. Forest development which includes open spaces and parks for recreation,
horse-back riding, memorial and mini-zoo estimated to cover 33 hectares; and
4. Support facilities which comprise the construction of a 360-room hotel,
restaurants, dormitories and a housing project covering an area of 20 hectares. 25
Expressing full support for the proposed project, the Sangguniang Bayan of
Sumilao, Bukidnon, on March 4, 1993, enacted Ordinance No. 24 converting or re-
classifying the subject 144-hectare land from agricultural to industrial/institutional
use with a view of providing an opportunity to attract investors who can inject new
economic vitality, provide more jobs and raise the income of its people. The said
project was also supported by the Bukidnon Provincial Board which, on the basis of
a Joint Committee Report submitted by its Committee on Law, Committee on
Agrarian Reform and Socio-Economic Committee, approved the said ordinance on
February 1, 1994, now docketed as Resolution No. 94-95.
Impressed with the proposed project, several government agencies and a
private cooperative, including the people of the affected barangay, recommended
the same. Again, we quote the pertinent portion of the OP Decision of March 29,
1996:
The said NQSRMDC Proposal was, per Certification dated January 4,
1995, adopted by the Department of Trade and Industry, Bukidnon Provincial
Office, as one of its flagship projects. The same was likewise favorably
recommended by the Provincial Development Council of Bukidnon; the municipal,
provincial and regional office of the DAR; the Regional Office (Region X) of the
DENR (which issued an Environmental Compliance Certificate on June 5, 1995); the
Executive Director, signing By Authority of PAUL G. DOMINGUEZ, Office of the
President Mindanao; the Secretary of DILG; and Undersecretary of DECS
Wilfredo D. Clemente.
In the same vein, the National Irrigation Administration, Provincial Irrigation Office,
Bagontaas Valencia, Bukidnon, thru Mr. Julius S. Maquiling, Chief, Provincial
Irrigation Office, interposed NO OBJECTION to the proposed conversion . . .
Also, the Kisolon-San Vicente Irrigators Multi Purpose Cooperative, San Vicente,
Sumilao, Bukidnon, interposed no objection to the proposed conversion of the land
in question as it will provide more economic benefits to the community in terms of
outside investments that will come and employment opportunities that will be
generated by the projects to be put up . . ..
On the same score, it is represented that during the public consultation held at the
Kisolan Elementary School on 18 March 1995 with Director Jose Macalindong of
DAR Central Office and DECS Undersecretary Clemente, the people of the affected
barangay rallied behind their respective officials in endorsing the
project. 26 (Emphasis supplied)
In this regard, the petitioners gave this assurance: The proposed project is
petitioners way of helping insure food, shelter and lifetime security of the greater
majority of Sumilaos 22,000 people. It is capable of employing thousands of
residents, enabling them to earn good income ranging about P40,000.00 to
P50,000.00 for each. 27
We express our grave concern with the manner some sectors of society have
been trying to influence this Court into resolving this case on the basis of
considerations other than the applicable law, rules and settled jurisprudence and the
evidence on record. We wish to emphasize that notwithstanding the previous
adverse comments by some columnists in the print media, the assailed Decision
was arrived at in the pursuit of justice and the rule of law.
Finally, for those who refuse to understand, no explanation is possible, but for
those who understand, no explanation is necessary.
WHEREFORE, the separate motions for reconsideration of the April 24, 1998
Decision of this Court, filed by the respondents and the applicants for intervention,
are hereby DENIED with FINALITY.
SO ORDERED.
Melo and Mendoza, JJ., concur
Separate Opinions
PUNO, J ., dissenting:
The salient facts are well established. The instant controversy originated from
an application for land use conversion filed on December 11, 1993 before the DAR
by Mr. Gaudencio Beduya in behalf of the Bukidnon Agro-Industrial Development
Association (BAIDA) and petitioner NQSR Management and Development
Corporation concerning its 144-hectare land in San Vicente, Sumilao, Bukidnon. In
an Order 1 dated November 14, 1994, DAR Secretary Ernesto D. Garilao denied the
application for conversion of the land from agricultural to agro-industrial use and
ordered its distribution to qualified landless farmers. BAIDA and NQSR Management
and Development Corporation filed a motion for reconsideration 2 dated January 9,
1995, which was, however, denied in an Order 3 dated June 7, 1995. Thereafter,
Bukidnon Governor Carlos O. Fortich sent a letter 4 to President Fidel V. Ramos
requesting him to suspend the Garilao Order and to confirm the ordinance enacted
by the Sangguniang Bayan of Sumilao converting the subject land from agricultural
to industrial/institutional land. Acting on the letter, then Executive Secretary Torres
reversed the Garilao Order and upheld the power of local government units to
convert portions of their agricultural lands into industrial areas. 5Respondent DAR
Secretary Garilao filed a motion for reconsideration, admittedly tardy, which was
denied by then Executive Secretary Torres on the ground that his March 29, 1996
decision had already become final and executory in view of the lapse of the fifteen-
day period for filing a motion for reconsideration. A second motion for
reconsideration was filed during the pendency of which President Ramos constituted
the Presidential Fact-Finding Task Force. On November 7, 1997, Deputy Executive
Secretary Corona issued that herein-assailed win-win resolution which, pursuant to
the recommendations of the task force, substantially modified the Torres decision by
awarding one hundred (100) hectares of the Sumilao property to the qualified farmer
beneficiaries and allocating only forty four (44) hectares for the establishment of an
industrial and commercial zone.
In our decision promulgated in Baguio City on April 24, 1998, we annulled the
win-win resolution on the ground that public respondent Deputy Executive
Secretary Renato C. Corona committed grave abuse of decision in modifying an
already final and executory decision of then Executive Secretary Ruben D. Torres. It
is undisputed that the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) failed to comply with
the fifteen-day period for filing a motion for reconsideration. 6 It received the Torres
decision on April 10, 1996 but transmitted its motion for reconsideration to the DAR
Records Management Division for mailing to the Office of the President only on May
23, 1996. 7 The Office of the President received the motion on July 14, 1997.
Forthwith, we applied the rule on finality of administrative determinations and upheld
the policy of setting an end to litigation as an indispensable aspect of orderly
administration of justice. In their motions for reconsideration, respondents and
intervenors protest the technical basis of our decision.
I vote to grant their motions for reconsideration and remand the case to the
Court of Appeals.
First. It is true that procedural rules are necessary to secure just, speedy and
inexpensive disposition of every action and proceeding. 8 Procedure, however, is
only a means to an end, 9 and they may be suspended when they subvert the
interests of justice. It is self-evident that the prerogative to suspend procedural rules
or to grant an exception in a particular case lies in the authority that promulgated the
rules. 10
Rules concerning pleading, practice and procedure in all courts are
promulgated by this Court.11 On the other hand, it is the President as administrative
head who is vested by the Administrative Code of 1987 to promulgate rules relating
to governmental operations, including administrative procedure. These rules take
the form of administrative orders. 12 This power is necessary for the President to
discharge his constitutional duty of faithfully executing our laws. 13 Under
exceptional circumstances, this Court has suspended its rules to prevent
miscarriage of justice. In the same breath, we should hold that the President has the
power to suspend the effectivity of administrative rules of procedure when they
hamper, defeat or in any way undermine the effective enforcement of the laws of the
land. Indeed, we already recognize that Congress can suspend its own rules if doing
so will enable it to facilitate its task of lawmaking. The three great branches of our
government are co-equal and within their own sphere they have the same
responsibility to promote the good of our people. There is no reason to withhold the
power to suspend rules from the President and grant it alone to the two other
branches of government.
A closer scrutiny of the records in the instant case reveals that the fifteen-day
rule for filing a motion for reconsideration under Section 7 of Administrative Order
No. 18 was suspended by the President when he constituted, on October 15, 1997
or some six (6) months after the promulgation of the Torres decision, the Presidential
Fact-Finding Task Force to conduct a comprehensive review of the proper land use
of the 144-hectare Sumilao property. At that time, then Executive Secretary Torres
had already denied the first motion for reconsideration of the DAR on the ground
that his March 29, 1997 decision had already become final and executory. This
notwithstanding, the President treated the case as still open and stated in his
memorandum that the findings of the Presidential Fact-Finding Task Force will be
inputs to the resolution of the case now pending at the Office of the President
regarding the said land (emphasis ours). 15 The President took cognizance of the
special circumstances surrounding the tardy filing by the DAR of its motion for
reconsideration. The DAR lawyers assigned to the Sumilao case received the Torres
decision only after the lapse of the reglementary fifteen-day period for appeal. The
copy of the decision intended for them was passed from one office to another, e.g.,
the Records Section of the DAR, the Office of the DAR Secretary, the Bureau of
Agrarian Legal Assistance, before it finally reached the DAR Litigation Office. It does
not appear to be just that DAR will be made to lose a significant case because of
bureaucratic lapses. Viewed in this context, we should rule that the President
suspended the effectivity of Section 7 of Administrative Order No. 18 and that his
exercise of discretion in this regard cannot be assailed as whimsical.
I also respectfully submit this act of the President also finds full sanction under
the corollary principles of presidential power of control and qualified political agency.
This presidential power of control over the executive branch of government extends
over all executive officers from Cabinet Secretary to the lowliest clerk and has been
held by us, in the landmark case of Mondano vs. Silvosa to mean the power of [the
President] to alter or modify or nullify or set aside what a subordinate officer had
done in the performance of his duties and to substitute the judgment of the former
with that of the latter. It is said to be at the very heart of the meaning of Chief
Executive.
Equally well accepted, as a corollary rule to the control powers of the President, is
the Doctrine of Qualified Political Agency. As the President cannot be expected to
exercise his control powers all at the same time and in person, he will have to
delegate some of them to his Cabinet members.
Under this doctrine, which recognizes the establishment of a single executive, all
executive and administrative organizations are adjuncts of the Executive
Department, the heads of the various executive departments are assistants and
agents of the Chief Executive, and, except in cases where the Chief Executive is
required by the Constitution or law to act in person o[r] the exigencies of the
situation demand that he act personally, the multifarious executive and
administrative functions of the Chief Executive are performed by and through the
executive departments, and the acts of the Secretaries of such departments,
performed and promulgated in the regular course of business, are, unless
disapproved or reprobated by the Chief Executive presumptively the acts of the
Chief Executive. . . .
Thus, and in short, the Presidents power of control is directly exercised by him over
the members of the Cabinet who, in turn, and by his authority, control the bureaus
and other offices under their respective jurisdictions in the executive
department.' 16
By suspending the fifteen-day-period for filing a motion for reconsideration and
re-opening the Torres decision, the President clearly exercised his control power
over an alter-ego within the framework of a constitutional and presidential system of
governance.
The Presidents suspension of the fifteen-day rule for filing a motion for
reconsideration cannot be characterized as arbitrary. The Sumilao problem raises
fundamental issues which conflict between land reform and the industrialization of
the countryside, the power of control by the President over his alter egos vis-a-vis
the power of local governments to convert agricultural land to industrial land. The
resolution of these issues has far reaching implications on the success of our land
reform program. Indeed, their successful resolution can bring peace or rebellion in
our countryside. The President should not be frustrated by an administrative
procedural rule that he himself promulgated, from formulating a creative, legal
solution to the Sumilao problem. There is no denying the liberal interpretation
equally accorded to both administrative and judicial rules in order to promote their
object to the extent that technicality be not a bar to the vindication of a legitimate
grievance. We have trumpeted the truism that when technicality ceases to be an aid
to justice, the courts are justified in excepting from its operation a particular
case. 17 We ought not to deny the same power to the Chief Executive who heads a
co-equal branch of government.
Second. The petitioners are estopped from assailing the authority of the Office
of the President to re-open the Sumilao case and resolve it based on the report of
the Presidential Fact-Finding Task Force. Undeniably, petitioners participated in the
processes conducted by the task force. Their participation in the administrative
proceedings without raising any objection thereto, bars them from raising any
jurisdictional infirmity after an adverse decision is rendered against
them. 18 Petitioners Carlos O. Fortich and Rey B. Baula, Bukidnon Governor and
Sumilao Mayor, respectively, were named members of the task force. 19 The
president ordered the task force to confer with the representatives of, among others,
the landowner, namely petitioner NQSR Management and Development
Corporation. 20 In a letter dated October 20, 1997 addressed to the President, the
counsel for NQSR Management and Development Corporation expressed its
reluctance to comment on the merits and demerits of the [motion for intervention
and motion to admit additional evidence filed by the farmer beneficiaries] out of
respect of the Regional Trial Court and the Court of Appeals where these cases are
presently pending. 21 NQSR Management and Development Corporation, however,
did not question the authority of the President to constitute the task force despite its
express adherence to the declaration made by then Executive Secretary Torres as
to the finality of his March 29, 1997 decision. It was confident that its interests would
be promoted and protected by Bukidnon Governor Fortich who himself filed the
appeal from the order of DAR Secretary Garilao 22 and Sumilao Mayor Baula who
certified as correct Resolution No. 24 approved by the Sangguniang Bayan of
Sumilao on March 4, 1993 converting the 144-hectare property from agricultural to
industrial/institutional land. 23 But when the win-win resolution was issued by the
Office of the President on November 7, 1997, allowing the conversion into industrial
land of only forty four (44) hectares of the 114-hectare Sumilao property and
ordering the distribution of the rest to qualified farmer beneficiaries, petitioners were
flabbergasted. Mr. Norberto Quisumbing, Jr. could hardly hide his disdain over that
resolution in his letter to the provincial agrarian reform officer protesting as absurd
and arbitrary the valuation of the 100 hectares at P5.1 million pesos. That resolution
was allegedly an unprecedented turn-around which is most difficult for the
discerning public to appreciate. 24
The win-win resolution being adverse to petitioners, they now assail the
authority of the President to modify the Torres decision. Under the above-mentioned
circumstances, however, the principle of estoppel applies to effectively bar
petitioners from raising the issue of jurisdiction. 25 While lack of jurisdiction of the
court or quasi-judicial body may be assailed at any stage, a partys active
participation in the proceedings before it will estop him from assailing its lack of
jurisdiction. 26 This Court has always frowned upon the undesirable practice of a
party submitting his case for decision and then accepting the judgment, only if
favorable, and attacking it for lack of jurisdiction when adverse. 27
Third. Considering the special circumstances of the case as detailed above, it
would better serve the ends of justice to obtain a definitive resolution of the issue
raised in the instant petition and remand the same to the Court of Appeals where
jurisdiction over this appeal lies. Noteworthy, is the pendency in the Court of Appeals
of two more cases involving the Sumilao property: (1) Petition for Certiorari and
Prohibition, entitled, N.Q.S.R. Management & Development Corporation and
Bukidnon Agro-Industrial Association, Petitioners, vs. Hon. Ernesto Garilao,
Secretary of the Department of Agrarian Reform; Rogelio E. Tamin, DAR Regional
Director, Region X; Nicanor Peralta, Provincial Agrarian Reform Officer, Region X;
Dolores Apostol, Municipal Agrarian Reform Officer, Sumilao, Bukidnon,
Respondents; 28 and (2) Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition, entitled, Rodolfo
Buclasan, et al., Petitioners, vs. Hon. Leonardo N. Demecillo, as Judge of RTC,
Malaybalay, Bukidnon, Branch IX and NQSR Management and Development
Corporation, Respondents. 29
The remand of the instant petition to the Court of Appeals would enable said
court to consolidate the same with the two other cases pending there which
undoubtedly contemplate of the same factual milieu and raise invariably the same
issues as in this petition, leaving no room for further confusion that will surely be
wrought by the rendition of conflicting decisions affecting a single controversy.
For the above reasons, I vote to grant the motions for reconsideration filed by
the respondents and the intervenors who should be allowed to intervene pursuant to
sec. 1, Rule 19 and to remand the instant petition to the Court of Appeals for
appropriate proceedings.
Part Nine Mechanisms for Program
Implementation
1. Presidential Agrarian Reform Council Secs. 41, 42, 43, 49, RA 6657
Presidential Agrarian Reform Council Secs. 41, 42, 43 and 49 of RA 6657
Section 41. The Presidential Agrarian Reform Council. The Presidential
Agrarian Reform Council (PARC) shall be composed of the President of the
Philippines as Chairman, the Secretary of Agrarian Reform as Vice-Chairman and
the following as members; Secretaries of the Departments of Agriculture;
Environment and Natural Resources; Budget and Management; Local Government:
Public Works and Highways; Trade and Industry; Finance; Labor and Employment;
Director-General of the National Economic and Development Authority; President,
Land Bank of the Philippines; Administrator, National Irrigation Administration; and
three (3) representatives of affected landowners to represent Luzon, Visayas and
Mindanao; six (6) representatives of agrarian reform beneficiaries, two (2) each from
Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao, provided that one of them shall be from the cultural
communities.
Section 42. Executive Committee. There shall be an Executive Committee
(EXCOM) of the PARC composed of the Secretary of the DAR as Chairman, and
such other members as the President may designate, taking into account Article XIII,
Section 5 of the Constitution. Unless otherwise directed by PARC, the EXCOM may
meet and decide on any and all matters in between meetings of the PARC: provided,
however, that its decisions must be reported to the PARC immediately and not later
than the next meeting.
Section 43. Secretariat. A PARC Secretariat is hereby established to provide
general support and coordinative services such as inter-agency linkages; program
and project appraisal and evaluation and general operations monitoring for the
PARC.
The Secretariat shall be headed by the Secretary of Agrarian Reform who shall be
assisted by an Undersecretary and supported by a staff whose composition shall be
determined by the PARC Executive Committee and whose compensation shall be
chargeable against the Agrarian Reform Fund. All officers and employees of the
Secretariat shall be appointed by the Secretary of Agrarian Reform.
X x x.
Section 49. Rules and Regulations. The PARC and the DAR shall have the
power to issue rules and regulations, whether substantive or procedural, to carry out
the objects and purposes of this Act. Said rules shall take effect ten (10) days after
publication in two (2) national newspapers of general circulation.
2. Provincial Agrarian Reform Coordinating Committee Secs. 44 and 45,
RA 6657
Provincial Agrarian Reform Coordinating Committee (PARCCOM) Secs. 44 and 45
of RA 6657
Section 44. Provincial Agrarian Reform Coordinating Committee (PARCCOM).
A Provincial Agrarian Reform Coordinating Committee (PARCCOM) is hereby
created in each province, composed of a Chairman, who shall be appointed by the
President upon the recommendation of the EXCOM, the Provincial Agrarian Reform
Officer as Executive Officer, and one representative each from the Departments of
Agriculture, and of Environment and Natural Resources and from the LBP, one
representative each from existing farmers organizations, agricultural cooperatives
and non-governmental organizations in the province; two representatives from
landowners, at least one of whom shall be a producer representing the principal
crop of the province, and two representatives from farmer and farmworker-
beneficiaries, at least one of whom shall be a farmer or farmworker representing the
principal crop of the province, as members: provided, that in areas where there are
cultural communities, the latter shall likewise have one representative.
The PARCCOM shall coordinate and monitor the implementation of the CARP in the
province.t shall provide information on the provisions of the CARP, guidelines issued
by the PARC and on the progress of the CARP in the province.
Section 45. Province-by-Province Implementation. The PARC shall provide
the guidelines for a province-by-province implementation of the CARP. The ten-year
program of distribution of public and private lands in each province shall be adjusted
from year by the provinces PARCCOM in accordance with the level of operations
previously established by the PARC, in every case ensuring that support services
are available or have been programmed before actual distribution is effected.
3. Barangay Agrarian Reform Committee Secs. 46 to 48, RA 6657
Barangay Agrarian Reform Committee (BARC) Secs. 46 to 48 of RA 6657
Section 46. Barangay Agrarian Reform Committee (BARC). Unless otherwise
provided in this Act, the provisions of Executive Order No. 229 regarding the
organization of the Barangay Agrarian Reform Committee (BARC) shall be in effect.
Section 47. Functions of the BARC. In addition to those provided in Executive
Order No. 229, the BARC shall have the following functions:
(a) Mediate and conciliate between parties involved in an agrarian dispute including
matters related to tenurial and financial arrangements;
(b) Assist in the identification of qualified beneficiaries and landowners within the
barangay;
(c) Attest to the accuracy of the initial parcellary mapping of the beneficiarys tillage;
(d) Assist qualified beneficiaries in obtaining credit from lending institutions;
(e) Assist in the initial determination of the value of the land;
(f) Assist the DAR representatives in the preparation of periodic reports on the
CARP implementation for submission to the DAR;
(g) Coordinate the delivery of support services to beneficiaries; and
(h) Perform such other functions as may be assigned by the DAR.
(2) The BARC shall endeavor to mediate, conciliate and settle agrarian disputes
lodged before it within thirty (30) days from its taking cognizance thereof.f after the
lapse of the thirty day period, it is unable to settle the dispute, it shall issue a
certificate of its proceedings and shall furnish a copy thereof upon the parties within
seven (7) days after the expiration of the thirty-day period.
Section 48. Legal Assistance. The BARC or any member thereof may,
whenever necessary in the exercise of any of its functions hereunder, seek the legal
assistance of the DAR and the provincial, city, or municipal government..
4. Department of Agrarian Reform EO 129-A dated July 26, 1987
EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 129-A July 26, 1987
MODIFYING ORDER NO. 129 REORGANIZING AND STRENGTHENING THE
DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
WHEREAS, Executive Order No. 129 dated January 30, 1987 was suspended;
WHEREAS, Presidential Proclamation No. 131 and Executive Order No. 229, both
dated July 22, 1987 instituted a Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP)
and provided the mechanisms for its implementation;
WHEREAS, Executive Order No. 229 vests on the Department of Agrarian Reform
quasi-judicial powers to determine and adjudicate agrarian reform matters;
WHEREAS, there is a need to strengthen and expand the functions of the
Department of Agrarian Reform to be more effective in implementing the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program;
WHEREAS, under Article XVIII, Section 6, of the 1987 Constitution, the President
shall continue to exercise legislative powers until the First Congress convenes;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, CORAZON C. AQUINO, PRESIDENT OF THE
PHILIPPINES, by virtue of the powers vested in me by the Constitution, do hereby
order:
Sec. 1. Title. This Executive Order shall otherwise be known as the Reorganization
Act of the Department of Agrarian Reform.
Sec. 2. Reorganization. The Department of Agrarian Reform is hereby reorganized
structurally and functionally, hereinafter referred to as the Department, in
accordance with the provisions of this Executive Order.
Sec. 3. Declaration of Policy. It is the declared policy of the State of completely
abolish all remnants of feudalism and all other types of unjust tenurial arrangements,
implement the comprehensive agrarian reform program, increase the productivity of
the direct producers, and strengthen the agricultural base for increased
industrialization.
Pursuant to this policy, the State shall:
a) Establish owner-cultivated economic, family-size farms and collectively-
owned/cooperatively-cultivated farms as the foundation of Philippine agriculture;
b) Prohibit absentee land ownership;
c) Rechannel and divert landlord capital in agriculture to industrial development;
d) Assist in the preservation and conservation of prime lands for agricultural
purposes;
e) Encourage the establishment and protect the autonomy and independence of
institutions of farmers and farmworkers that will safeguard their interests and ensure
their dignified existence, free from pernicious restraints and practices;
f) Create just and viable socio-economic structures in agriculture conducive to
greater productivity and higher incomes through the cooperative system of
production, processing, marketing, distribution, and credit services;
g) Accelerate the disposition of public alienable, disposable, and cultivable land to
actual cultivators and other qualified beneficiaries and develop agrarian
communities for full utilization of land for human growth and development;
h) Institutionalize partnerships between government and organizations of farmers
and farmworkers in agrarian reform policy formulation, program implementation, and
evaluation;
i) Provide specific investment opportunities, alternative employment, and other
incentives for landowners affected by agrarian reform;
j) Ensure adequate funding support for the agrarian reform program as well as
timely, affordable, and appropriate financing schemes to its beneficiaries;
k) Implement an agricultural land tax scheme that will prevent land hoarding and/or
speculation.
Sec. 4. Mandate. The Department shall be responsible for implementing the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program and, for such purpose, it is authorized to:
a) Acquire, determine the value of, subdivide into family-size farms or organize into
collective of cooperative farms and develop private agricultural lands for distribution
to qualified tillers, actual occupants, and displaced urban poor;
b) Administer and dispose all cultivable portions of the public domain declared as
alienable and disposable for agricultural purposes transferred to it by the
Department of Environment and Natural Resources;
c) Acquire, by purchase or grant, real estate properties suited for agriculture that
have been foreclosed by the national government;
d) Undertake land consolidation, land reclamation, land forming, and conservation in
areas subject to agrarian reform;
e) Facilitate the compensation of landowners covered by agrarian reform;
f) Issue emancipation patents to farmers and farmworkers who have been given
lands under the agrarian reform program as may be provided for by law;
g) Provide free legal services to agrarian reform beneficiaries and resolve agrarian
conflicts and land tenure problems;
h) Develop and implement alternative land tenure systems such as cooperative
farming and agro-industrial estates, among others;
i) Undertake land use management and land development studies and projects in
agrarian reform areas;
k) Approve or disapprove the conversion, restructuring or readjustment of
agricultural lands into non-agricultural uses;
l) Monitor and evaluate the progress of agrarian reform implementation;
m) Assist the Office of the Solicitor General in providing evidence for the reversion
proceedings to be filed with respect to lands of the public domain, occupied by
private individuals and their tenants or farmworkers which are subject to land reform,
and real rights connected therewith which have been acquired in violation of the
Constitution or the public land laws or through corrupt practices;
n) Submit progress reports to the Office of the President, to Congress, and to the
people at the end of each year and at all times make available to the general public
information on the current status of its programs.
Sec. 5. Powers and Functions. Pursuant to the mandate the Department, and in
order to ensure the successful implementation of the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Program, the department is hereby authorized to:
a) Advise the President and the Presidential Agrarian Reform Council on the
promulgation of executive/administrative orders, other regulative issuances and
legislative proposals designed to strengthen agrarian reform and protect the
interests of the benefeciaries thereof;
b) Implement all agrarian laws, and for this purpose, punish for contempt and issue
subpoena, subpoena duces tecum, writs of execution of its decisions, and other
legal processes to ensure successful and expeditious program implementation; the
decisions of the Department may in proper cases, be appealed to the Regional Trial
Courts but shall be immediately executory notwithstanding such appeal;
c) Establish and promulgate operational policies, rules and regulations and priorities
for agrarian reform implementation;
d) Coordinate program implementation with the Land Bank of the Philippines and
other relevant civilian and military government agencies mandated to support the
agrarian reform program;
e) Acquire, administer, distribute, and develop agricultural lands for agrarian reform
purposes;
f) Undertake surveys of lands covered by agrarian reform;
g) Issue emancipation patents to farmers and farmworkers covered by agrarian
reform for both private and public lands and when necessary make administrative
corrections of the same;
h) Provide free legal services to agrarian reform beneficiaries and resolve agrarian
conflicts and land-tenure related problems as may be provided for by law;
i) Promote the organization and development of cooperatives and other associations
of agrarian reform beneficiaries;
j) Conduct continuing education and promotion programs on agrarian reform for
beneficiaries, land-owners, government personnel, and the general public;
k) Institutionalize the participation of farmers, farmworkers, other beneficiaries, and
agrarian reform advocates in agrarian reform policy formulation, program
implementation, and evaluation;
l) Have exclusive authority to approve or disapprove conversion of agricultural lands
for residential, commercial, industrial, and other land uses as may be provided for by
law;
m) Call upon any government agency, including the Armed Forces of the Philippines,
and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to extend full support and cooperation
to program implementation;
n) Exercise such other powers and functions as may be provided for by law or
directed by the President, to promote efficiency and effectiveness in the delivery of
public services.
Sec. 6. Structural Organization. The Department shall consist of the Department
Proper, the staff offices, the staff bureaus and the regional/provincial/municipal
agrarian reform offices.
The Department Proper shall consist of the following:
a) Office of the Secretary;
b) Offices of the Undersecretaries;
c) Offices of the Assistant Secretaries;
d) Public Affairs Staff;
e) Special Concerns Staff;
f) Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board.
The staff sectoral bureaus, on the other hand, shall be composed of:
a) Bureau of Land Acquisition and Distribution;
b) Bureau of Land Development;
c) Bureau of Agrarian Legal Assistance;
d) Bureau of Agrarian Reform Information and Education;
e) Bureau of Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Development.
The field offices shall consist of the Department regional offices, the provincial
offices and the municipal agrarian reform office.
Sec. 7. Secretary of Agrarian Reform. The authority and responsibility for the
exercise of the mandate of the Department and the discharge of its powers and
functions shall be vested in the Secretary of Agrarian Reform, hereinafter referred to
as Secretary, who shall have supervision and control over the Department and shall
be appointed by the President.
Sec. 8. Office of the Secretary. The Office of the Secretary shall consist of the
Secretary, his immediate staff, the Public Affairs Staff and the Special Concerns
Staff.
Sec. 9. Undersecretary. The Secretary shall be assisted by four (4) Undersecretaries
who shall be appointed by the President upon the recommendation of the Secretary.
The Secretary is hereby authorized to delineate, assign and/or reassign the
respective functional areas of responsibility of the Undersecretaries, provided, That
such responsibility shall be with respect to the mandate and objectives of the
Department; and provided, Further, that no Undersecretary shall be assigned
primarily administrative responsibilities.
Sec. 10. Assistant Secretary. The Secretary and the Undersecretaries shall also be
assisted by seven (7) Assistant Secretaries, who shall be appointed by the President
upon the recommendation of the Secretary. The Secretary is hereby authorized to
delineate, assign and/or reassign the respective functional areas of responsibility of
the Assistant Secretaries, provided, That such responsibility shall be with respect to
the mandate and objectives of the Department.
Sec. 11. Public Affairs Staff. There is hereby created a Public Affairs Staff, under the
office of the Secretary, to be headed by a Director and assisted by an Assistant
Director, which shall serve as the public information arm of the Department. It shall
be responsible for disseminating information and agrarian reform policies, plans,
programs and projects; and respond to public queries related to the implementation
of the agrarian reform program.
Sec. 12. Special Concerns Staff. There is hereby created a Special Concerns Staff
under the Office of the Secretary, to be headed by a Director and assisted by an
Assistant Director, which shall be responsible for handling priority areas/subjects
identified by the Secretary that necessitate special and immediate attention.
Sec. 13. Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board. There is hereby created an Agrarian
Reform Adjudication Board under the Office of the Secretary. The Board shall be
composed of the Secretary as Chairman, two (2) Undersecretaries as may be
designated by the Secretary, the Assistant Secretary for Legal Affairs, and three (3)
others to be appointed by the President upon the recommendation of the Secretary
as members. A Secretariat shall be constituted to support the Board. The Board
shall assume the powers and functions with respect to the adjudication of agrarian
reform cases under Executive Order No. 229 and this Executive Order. These
powers and functions may be delegated to the regional offices of the Department in
accordance with rules and regulations to be promulgated by the Board.
Sec. 14. Planning and Project Management Office. There is hereby created a
Planning and Project Management Office within the Department Proper which shall
be responsible for coordinating and initiating the development, integration and
prioritization of plans, programs and projects of the Department; monitoring and
evaluating agrarian reform program implementation; establishing linkages with
foreign funding institutions; and coordinating the activities of the different Offices,
Bureaus and Attached Agencies of the Department.
Sec. 15. Policy and Strategic Research Office. There is hereby created a Policy and
Strategic Research Office within the Department Proper which shall be responsible
for establishing and implementing a computerized management information system
as well as for coordinating and/or initiating research and studies for planning and
policy formulation purposes.
Sec. 16. Finance, Management and Administrative Office. There is hereby created a
Finance, Management and Administrative Office within the Department Proper which
shall be responsible for the proper and timely allocation of funds to support
approved programs, projects and activities; the appropriate management control
and accounting of funds; the management of the Department's physical assets; and
the provision of services to ensure effective and efficient personnel management
and manpower career development, and for the establishment of management
systems and procedures.
Sec. 17. Field Operations Office. There are hereby created Field Operations Offices
for Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao within the Department Proper which shall monitor
and assess the implementation of the Department's policies, plans and programs at
the regional, provincial and municipal levels.
Sec. 18. Legal Affairs Office. There is hereby created a Legal Affairs Office within the
Department Proper which shall be responsible for the review of contracts and other
legal matters, the rendition of legal assistance to Department personnel and those
who will be affected by the agrarian reform program.
Sec. 19. Bureau of Land Acquisition and Distribution. There is hereby created the
Bureau of Land Acquisition and Distribution which shall absorb the relevant
functions of the Bureaus of Land Acquisition, Distribution and Development, and of
Land Tenure Improvement. The Bureau of Land Acquisition and Distribution, to be
headed by a Director and assisted by an Assistant Director, shall be responsible for
the development of policies, plans, programs, standard operating procedures, and
for providing technical assistance, relative to the acquisition and distribution of
private agricultural lands covered by the agrarian reform program, including land
tiller-landowner identification, land valuation, and landowners compensation,
transfer of ownership to actual tillers, leasehold arrangements, stewardship, and
land transfer actions.
Sec. 20. Bureau of Land Development. There is hereby created the Bureau of Land
Development which shall absorb the relevant functions of the Bureau of Land
Acquisition, Distribution and Development. The Bureau of Land Development, to be
headed by a Director and assisted by an Assistant Director, shall responsible for the
development of policies, plans and programs, and for providing technical assistance,
relative to land surveys, land use, capability and classification, engineering services,
and land consolidation.
Sec. 21. Bureau of Agrarian Legal Assistance. The Bureau of Agrarian Legal
Assistance shall be strengthened and shall be responsible for developing guidelines,
plans and programs for legal assistance including developing, maintaining and
coordinating para-legal services for those who will be affected by the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program. It shall be headed by a Director and
assisted by an Assistant Director.
Sec. 22. Bureau of Agrarian Reform Information and Education. There is hereby
created the Bureau of Agrarian Reform Information and Education which shall
absorb the functions of the Agrarian Reform Education Service which is abolished
by this Executive Order. The Bureau of Agrarian Reform Information and Education,
to be headed by a Director and assisted by an Assistant Director, shall be
responsible for developing and conducting continuing training and education
programs for the acquisition of knowledge, value formation, and development of
skills and favorable attitudes among benefeciaries and personnel of the Department
and other agencies, and the increase of awareness, participation and acceptance of
agrarian reform by the public through the dissemination of information and
communication materials.
Sec. 23. Bureau of Agrarian Reform Benefeciaries Development. There is hereby
created the Bureau of Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Development which shall
absorb the relevant functions of the Bureau of Resettlement. The Bureau of Agrarian
Reform Beneficiaries Development, to be headed by a Director and assisted by an
Assistant Director, shall be responsible for the development of policies, plans and
programs, and for providing technical assistance, relative to the development of
settlement areas into viable agrarian communities. It shall also be responsible for
promoting the organization of agrarian reform beneficiaries, liaison with farmer and
farm workers organizations to ensure the raising or farm incomes, the promotion of
all forms of farm cooperation, the achievement of a dignified existence and the
creation of a viable economic structure conducive to greater productivity and higher
farm income.
Sec. 24. Regional Offices The Department shall have twelve (12) Regional Offices.
Each Regional Office shall be headed by a Regional Director who shall be assisted
by an Assistant Regional Director for operations and an Assistant Regional Director
for Administration.
The Regional Offices shall be responsible for the implementation of laws, policies,
plans, programs, projects, rules and regulations of the Department in its
administrative region. For such purpose, it shall have the following functions:
a) Prepare and submit plans and programs for the region on:
1) Land acquisition and distribution;
2) Information and education;
3) Land use management and land development;
4) Agrarian reform beneficiaries development;
b) Provide technical assistance to Provincial Offices and Municipal Agrarian Reform
Offices in the implementation of approved plans and programs;
c) Conduct operations research and evaluation of agrarian reform implementation
within the region;
d) Coordinate with other government and private agencies and farmer and farm
workers organizations at the regional level, to carry out the programs/projects for the
general welfare of agrarian reform beneficiaries;
e) Maintain an information system in coordination with the established monitoring
systems;
f) Review and evaluate reports and other documents submitted by the Provincial
Offices and Municipal Agrarian Reform Offices and agrarian reform clientele;
g) Submit periodic feedback as may be necessary in the service of the Department's
clientele.
Sec. 25. Provincial Offices. The Agrarian Reform District Offices are hereby
abolished and in their stead the Department shall create Provincial Agrarian Reform
Offices as may be necessary in promoting efficiency and effectiveness in the
delivery of its services. Each Provincial Agrarian Reform Office shall be headed by a
Provincial Agrarian Reform Officer.
The Provincial Agrarian Reform Offices shall be responsible for directing and
coordinating the operations and activities of the Municipal Agrarian Reform Offices
operating within the province and has the following functions:
a) Set priorities, specific targets, schedules, and deadlines for the execution of
approved plans, programs, and projects on:
1) Land acquisition, distribution, transfer of land ownership to actual tillers, including
land-tiller-landowner identification, tenurial security, leasehold arrangements, land
surveys, land valuation and landowner's compensation as may be provided for by
law;
2) Continuing information and education programs on agrarian reform;
3) Encouraging the organizational development of agrarian reform beneficiaries
cooperatives and other associations and institutionalizing farmer-government
partnership in agrarian reform policy formulation, program implementation, and
evaluation;
4) Landowners' compensation and rechanneling landowner capital to industrial
development;
5) Development and implementation of alternative land tenure systems such as
cooperative farming, cooperative cultivatorship schemes, and agro-industrial
estates, among others;
6) Land use management;
7) Compact farming, integrated farming system, sloping agricultural land technology,
and other land conservation measures in agrarian reform areas, in coordination with
farmer and farm workers organizations;
8) Provision of legal services to those affected by agrarian reform and resolution of
agrarian conflicts and land tenure problems;
b) Provide administrative services to the Municipal Agrarian Reform Offices within
the province;
c) Provide legal services to agrarian reform beneficiaries in cases arising from or
connected with agrarian reform disputes, handling of expropriation proceedings,
registering cooperatives and reviewing and acting on all matters initially investigated
and elevated by Municipal Agrarian Reform Office;
d) Provide technical assistance to Municipal Agrarian Reform Offices in the
implementation of approved plans and programs;
e) Coordinate with governmental, private agencies, and farmer and farm worker
organizations at the provincial level, to carry out programs;
f) Conduct periodic performance audit survey in collaboration with the regional office
and monitor agrarian reform program accomplishments, including operational
problems and constraints, and recommend appropriate remedial measures for
effective program implementation;
g) Perform such other functions as may be necessary in the service of the
Department's clientele;
Sec. 26. Municipal Agrarian Reform Offices. The Department shall have as many
Municipal Agrarian Reform Offices as may be necessary in promoting efficiency and
effectiveness in the delivery of its services, which shall be headed by a Municipal
Agrarian Reform Officer.
The Municipal Agrarian Reform Office shall be responsible for directly implementing
agrarian reform programs and delivering expected results at the municipal level. For
such purpose, it shall have the following functions:
a) Implement policies and programs on land acquisition and distribution and transfer
of landowners to actual tillers, including identification of farms, landowners, and
beneficiaries, leasehold arrangements, land valuation, landowner's compensation
and transfer actions as determined in accordance with law;
b) Undertake continuing information and education programs on agrarian reform
among the beneficiaries thereof;
c) Encourage and promote the organization and development of agrarian reform
beneficiaries and assist in the registration of organized cooperatives;
d) Institutionalize beneficiaries' participation in agrarian reform policy formulation
and program implementation;
e) Organize/establish compact farms, land consolidation, integrated farm system,
sloping agricultural land technology and other cooperative-cultivatorship schemes;
f) Provide assistance in agrarian reform research;
g) Provide assistance to various legal services, including legal information and legal
counselling, documentation and preliminary processing of applications for patents
and applications to purchase lots, preliminary investigation of conflicting claims of lot
boundaries and appraisal of properties, and mediation of different problems arising
from implementation of the agrarian reform program; execution and registration of
lease contracts, initial investigation of administrative cases, and other legal services;
h) Provide assistance on project identification, formulation, and development that
would uplift the socio-economic status of the beneficiaries including projects that
would channel landlord capital to industrial development;
i) Cooperative with other government and private agencies and farmer and farm
worker organizations within the area of coverage for effective program/project
implementation;
j) Submit periodic reports on program/projects accomplishments including identified
problems and recommended solutions thereto;
k) Implement projects supportive of national priority programs which the Department
is committed to assist;
l) Perform such other functions as may be assigned from time to time, to promote
efficiency and effectiveness in the delivery of public services.
Sec. 27. Attached Agency
a) The Department shall, subject to the approval of the Presidential Agrarian Reform
Council, create the Foundation for the Agrarian Reform Movement of the Philippines
(FARM-Philippines) to administer, operate, and manage programs and projects
developed by the Department and initiate alternative livelihood projects for displaced
small landowners. It shall be attached to the office of the Secretary and shall be
governed by a Board of Trustees. The Foundation will be authorized to raise funds
and to contract foreign and domestic loans for its projects.
Sec. 28. Transitory Provisions. In accomplishing the acts of reorganization herein
prescribed, the following transitory provisions shall be complied with, unless
otherwise provided elsewhere in this Executive Order;
a) The transfer of a government unit shall include the functions, appropriations,
funds, records, equipment, facilities, chosen in action, rights, other assets, and
liabilities, if any, of the transferred unit as well as the personnel thereof, as may be
necessary, who shall, in a hold-over capacity, continue to perform their respective
duties and responsibilities and receive the corresponding salaries and benefits.
Those personnel from the transferred unit whose positions are not included in the
Department's new position structure and staffing pattern approved and prescribed
by the Secretary or who are not reappointed shall be deemed separated from the
service and shall be entitled to the benefits provided in the second paragraph of
Section 29 hereof.
b) The transfer of functions which results in the abolition of the government unit that
exercised them shall include the appropriations, funds, records, equipment, facilities,
chosen in action, rights, other assets and personnel as may be necessary to the
proper discharge of the transferred functions. The abolished unit's remaining
appropriations and funds, if any, shall revert to the General Fund and its remaining
assets, if any, shall be allocated to such appropriate units as the Secretary shall
determine or shall otherwise be disposed in accordance with the Government
Auditing Code and other pertinent laws, rules and regulations. Its liabilities, if any,
shall likewise be treated in accordance with the Government Auditing Code and
other pertinent laws, rules and regulations. Its personnel shall, in a hold-over
capacity, continue to perform their duties and responsibilities and receive their
corresponding salaries and benefits. Its personnel whose positions are not included
in the Department's structure and staffing pattern approved and prescribed by the
Secretary under Section 29 hereof or who are not reappointed, shall be deemed
separated from the service and shall be entitled to the benefits provided in the
second paragraph of the same Section 29.
c) Any transfer of functions which does not result in the abolition of the government
unit that has exercised them shall include the appropriations, funds, records,
equipment, facilities, chosen in action, rights, and assets and personnel as may be
necessary to the proper discharge of the transferred functions. The liabilities, if any,
that may have been incurred in connection with the discharge of the transferred
functions, shall be treated in accordance with the Government Auditing Code and
other pertinent laws, rules and regulations. Such personnel shall, in a hold-over
capacity, continue to perform their duties and responsibilities and receive their
corresponding salaries and benefits unless in the meantime they are separated from
the service. Any personnel, whose positions are not included in the Department's
new position structure and staffing patter approved and prescribed by the Secretary
under Section 29 hereof or who are not reappointed, shall be deemed separated
from the service and shall be entitled to the benefits provided in the second
paragraph of the same Section 29.
d) In case of the abolition of a government unit which does not result in the transfer
of its functions to another unit, the appropriations and funds of the abolished entity
shall revert to the General Fund, while the records, equipment, facilities, chosen in
action, rights, and other assets thereof shall be allocated to such appropriate entities
as the Secretary shall determine or shall otherwise be disposed in accordance with
the Government Auditing Code and other pertinent laws, rules and regulations, The
liabilities of the abolished units shall be treated in accordance with the Government
Auditing Code and other pertinent laws, rules and regulations, while the personnel
thereof, whose position, is not included in the Department's new position structure
and staffing pattern approved and prescribed by the Secretary under Section 29
hereof or who has not reappointed, shall be deemed separated from the service and
shall be entitled to the benefits provided in the second paragraph of the same
Section 29.
e) In case of merger or consolidation of government units, the new or surviving unit
shall exercise the functions (subject to the reorganization herein prescribed and the
laws, rules and regulations pertinent to the exercise of such functions) and shall
acquire the appropriations, funds, records, equipment, facilities, chosen in action,
rights, other assets, liabilities, if any, and personnel, as may be necessary, of the
units that compose the merged unit shall in a hold-over capacity, continue to perform
their respective duties and responsibilities and receive their corresponding salaries
and benefits unless in the meantime they are separated from the service. Any such
personnel, whose positions are not included in the Department's new position
structure and staffing pattern approved and prescribed by the Secretary under
Section 29 hereof or who are not reappointed, shall be deemed separated from the
service and shall be entitled to the benefits provided in the second paragraph of the
same Section 29.
f) In case of termination of a function which does not result in the abolition of the
government unit which performed such function, the appropriations and funds
intended to finance the discharge of such function shall revert to the General Fund
while the records, equipment, facilities, chosen in action, rights and other assets
used in connection with the discharge of such function shall be allocated to the
appropriate units as the Department shall determine or shall otherwise be disposed
in accordance with the Government Auditing Code and other pertinent laws, rules
and regulations, The liabilities, if any, that may have been incurred in connection
with the discharge of such function shall likewise be treated in accordance with the
Government Auditing Code and other pertinent laws, rules and regulations. The
personnel who have performed such function, whose positions are not included in
the Department's new position structure and staffing pattern approved and
prescribed by the Secretary under Section 29 hereof or who have not been
reappointed, shall be deemed separated from the service and shall be entitled to the
benefits provided in the second paragraph of the same Section 29 hereof.
Sec. 29. New, Structure and Pattern. Upon approval of this Executive Order, the
officers and employees of the Department shall, in a hold-over capacity, continue to
perform their respective duties and responsibilities and receive the corresponding
salaries and benefits unless in the meantime they are separated from government
service.
The new position structure and staffing pattern of the Department shall be approved
and prescribed by the Secretary within sixty (60) days from the effectivity of this
Executive Order and the authorized positions created thereunder shall be filled with
regular appointments by him or by the President as the case may be. Those
incumbents whose positions are not included therein or who are not reappointed
shall be deemed separated from the service. Those separated from the service shall
receive the retirement benefits to which they be entitled under existing laws, rules
and regulations. Otherwise, they shall be paid the equivalent of one (1) month basic
salary for every year of service in the government, or a fraction thereof, computed
on the basis of the highest salary received, but in no case shall such payment
exceed the equivalent of twelve (12) months salary. lawphi1.net
Sec. 30. Periodic Performance Evaluation. The Department of Agrarian Reform is
hereby required to formulate and enforce a system of measuring and evaluating
periodically and objectively the performance of the Department and submit the same
annually to the President.
Sec. 31. Notice or Consent Requirement. If any reorganizational change herein
authorized is of such substance or materiality as to prejudice third persons with
rights recognized by law or contract such that notice to or consent of creditors is
required to be made or obtained pursuant to any agreement entered into with any of
such creditors, such notice or consent requirement shall be complied with prior to
the implementation of such reorganizational change.
Sec. 32. Prohibition Against Structural Changes. No change in the reorganization
herein prescribed shall be valid except upon prior approval of the President for the
purpose of promoting efficiency and effectiveness in the delivery of public services.
Sec. 33. Funding. Funds needed to carry out the provisions of this Executive Order
shall be taken from funds available in the Department.
Sec. 34. Implementing Authority of the Secretary. The Secretary shall issue orders,
rules and regulations and other issuances as may be necessary to ensure the
effective implementation of the provisions of this Executive Order.
Sec. 35. Separability. Any portion or provision of this Executive Order that may be
declared unconstitutional shall not have the effect of nullifying other portions or
provisions hereof as long as such remaining portions or provisions can still subsist
and be given effect in their entirety. lawphi1.net
Sec. 36. Repealing Clause. All laws, ordinances, rules and regulations and other
issuances or parts thereof, which are inconsistent with this Executive Order, are
hereby repealed or modified accordingly. lawphi1.net
Sec. 37. Effectivity. This Executive Order shall take effect immediately.
APPROVED in the City of Manila, Philippines, this 26th day of July, in the Year of
Our Lord, Nineteen Hundred and Eighty-Seven.
5. Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB) Sec. 13,
EO 129-A
Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB) Sec. 13 of EO 129-A
Sec. 13. Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board. There is hereby created an Agrarian
Reform Adjudication Board under the Office of the Secretary. The Board shall be
composed of the Secretary as Chairman, two (2) Undersecretaries as may be
designated by the Secretary, the Assistant Secretary for Legal Affairs, and three (3)
others to be appointed by the President upon the recommendation of the Secretary
as members. A Secretariat shall be constituted to support the Board. The Board
shall assume the powers and functions with respect to the adjudication of agrarian
reform cases under Executive Order No. 229 and this Executive Order. These
powers and functions may be delegated to the regional offices of the Department in
accordance with rules and regulations to be promulgated by the Board.
Part Ten Financing the Program
1. Funding Source per Sec. 63 of RA 6657 and Financing under Secs. 21
and 22 of EO 229 (1987)
Funding Source per Sec. 63 of RA 6657 and Financing under Secs. 21 and 22 of
EO 229 (1987)
Funding Source Sec. 63 of RA 6657
Section 63. Funding Source. The initial amount needed to implement this Act
for the period of ten (10) years upon approval hereof shall be funded from the
Agrarian Reform Fund created under Sections 20 and 21 of Executive Order No.
229.
Additional amounts are hereby authorized to be appropriated as and when needed
to augment the Agrarian Reform Fund in order to fully implement the provisions of
this Act.
Sources of funding or appropriations shall include the following:
(a) Proceeds of the sales of the Assets Privatization Trust;
(b) All receipts from assets recovered and from sales of ill-gotten wealth recovered
through the Presidential Commission on Good Government;
(c) Proceeds of the disposition of the properties of the Government in foreign
countries;
(d) Portion of amounts accruing to the Philippines from all sources of official foreign
grants and concessional financing from all countries, to be used for the specific
purposes of financing production credits, infrastructures, and other support services
required by this Act;
(e) Other government funds not otherwise appropriated.
All funds appropriated to implement the provisions of this Act shall be considered
continuing appropriations during the period of its implementation.
Financing Secs. 21 and 22 of EO 229 (1987)
CHAPTER V. FINANCING
Sec. 20. Agrarian Reform Fund. As provided in Proclamation No. 131 dated July 22,
1987, a special fund is created, known as The Agrarian Reform Fund, an initial
amount of FIFTY BILLION PESOS (P50 billion) to cover the estimated cost of the
CARP from 1987 to 1992 which shall be sourced from the receipts of the sale of the
assets of the Asset Privatization Trust (APT) and receipts of sale of ill-gotten wealth
recovered through the Presidential Commission on Good Government and such
other sources as government may deem appropriate. The amount collected and
accruing to this special fund shall be considered automatically appropriated for the
purpose authorized in this Order.
Sec. 21. Supplemental Appropriations. The amount of TWO BILLION SEVEN
HUNDRED MILLION PESOS (P2.7 billion) is hereby appropriated to cover the
supplemental requirements of the CARP for 1987, to be sourced from the receipts of
the sale of ill-gotten wealth recovered through the Presidential Commission on Good
Government and the proceeds from the sale of assets by the APT. The amount
collected from these sources shall accrue to The Agrarian Reform Fund and shall
likewise be considered automatically appropriated for the purpose authorized in this
Order.
2. RA 8532 (1998) Providing Augmentation Fund for the CARP with an
Additional Amount of Fifty Billion Pesos
February 23, 1998
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8532
AN ACT STRENGTHENING FURTHER THE COMPREHENSIVE AGRARIAN
REFORM PROGRAM (CARP), BY PROVIDING AUGMENTATION FUND
THEREFOR, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE SECTION 63 OF REPUBLIC ACT
NO. 6657, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS "THE CARP LAW OF 1988"
SECTION 1. Section 63 of Republic Act No. 6657, otherwise known as
the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988 is hereby amended to read as
follows: cdrep
"Section 63. Funding Source. The amount needed to implement
this Act until the year 2008 shall be funded from the Agrarian Reform
Fund.
"Additional amounts necessary for this purpose are hereby authorized
to be appropriated in excess of the initial funds, amounting to Fifty
billion pesos (P50,000,000,000.00) provided under Sections 20 and 21
of Executive Order No. 229.
"The additional amount hereby authorized to be appropriated shall in
no case exceed Fifty billion pesos (P50,000,000,000.00).
"Sources of funding or appropriations shall include the following:
"a) Proceeds of the sales of the Assets Privatization Trust;
"b) All receipts from assets recovered and from sales of ill-gotten
wealth recovered through the Presidential Commission on Good
Government;
"c) Proceeds of the disposition of the properties of the Government
in foreign countries, for the specific purposes of financing production
credits, infrastructure and other support services required by this Act;
cdtai
 "d) All income and collections arising from the agrarian reform
operations, projects and programs of CARP implementing agencies;
"e) Portion of amounts accruing to the Philippines from all sources
of official foreign aid grants and concessional financing from all
countries, to be used for the specific purposes of financing production,
credits, infrastructures, and other support services required by this Act;
"f) Yearly appropriations of no less than Three billion pesos
(P3,000,000,000.00) from the General Appropriations Act;
"g) Other government funds not otherwise appropriated."
SECTION 2. This Act shall take effect within fifteen (15) days following
the completion of its publication in at least two (2) newspapers of general
circulation. cdlex
Approved: February 23, 1998
3. Additional Funding Source Sec. 21 of RA 9700, amending Sec. 63 of
RA 6657
Funding Source per Sec. 63 of RA 6657 and Financing under Secs. 21 and 22 of
EO 229 (1987)
Funding Source Sec. 63 of RA 6657
Section 63. Funding Source. The initial amount needed to implement this Act
for the period of ten (10) years upon approval hereof shall be funded from the
Agrarian Reform Fund created under Sections 20 and 21 of Executive Order No.
229.
Additional amounts are hereby authorized to be appropriated as and when needed
to augment the Agrarian Reform Fund in order to fully implement the provisions of
this Act.
Sources of funding or appropriations shall include the following:
(a) Proceeds of the sales of the Assets Privatization Trust;
(b) All receipts from assets recovered and from sales of ill-gotten wealth recovered
through the Presidential Commission on Good Government;
(c) Proceeds of the disposition of the properties of the Government in foreign
countries;
(d) Portion of amounts accruing to the Philippines from all sources of official foreign
grants and concessional financing from all countries, to be used for the specific
purposes of financing production credits, infrastructures, and other support services
required by this Act;
(e) Other government funds not otherwise appropriated.
All funds appropriated to implement the provisions of this Act shall be considered
continuing appropriations during the period of its implementation.
Financing Secs. 21 and 22 of EO 229 (1987)
CHAPTER V. FINANCING
Sec. 20. Agrarian Reform Fund. As provided in Proclamation No. 131 dated July 22,
1987, a special fund is created, known as The Agrarian Reform Fund, an initial
amount of FIFTY BILLION PESOS (P50 billion) to cover the estimated cost of the
CARP from 1987 to 1992 which shall be sourced from the receipts of the sale of the
assets of the Asset Privatization Trust (APT) and receipts of sale of ill-gotten wealth
recovered through the Presidential Commission on Good Government and such
other sources as government may deem appropriate. The amount collected and
accruing to this special fund shall be considered automatically appropriated for the
purpose authorized in this Order.
Sec. 21. Supplemental Appropriations. The amount of TWO BILLION SEVEN
HUNDRED MILLION PESOS (P2.7 billion) is hereby appropriated to cover the
supplemental requirements of the CARP for 1987, to be sourced from the receipts of
the sale of ill-gotten wealth recovered through the Presidential Commission on Good
Government and the proceeds from the sale of assets by the APT. The amount
collected from these sources shall accrue to The Agrarian Reform Fund and shall
likewise be considered automatically appropriated for the purpose authorized in this
Order.
Part Eleven Agrarian Justice or the Resolution of
Agrarian Disputes
1. Administrative Adjudication Secs. 50-53 of RA 6657
CHAPTER XII
Administrative Adjudication
Section 50. Quasi-Judicial Powers of the DAR. The DAR is hereby vested with
the primary jurisdiction to determine and adjudicate agrarian reform matters and
shall have exclusive original jurisdiction over all matters involving the
implementation of agrarian reform except those falling under the exclusive
jurisdiction of the Department of Agriculture (DA) and the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).
It shall not be bound by technical rules of procedure and evidence but shall proceed
to hear and decide all cases, disputes or controversies in a most expeditious
manner, employing all reasonable means to ascertain the facts of every case in
accordance with justice and equity and the merits of the case. Toward this end, it
shall adopt a uniform rule of procedure to achieve a just, expeditious and
inexpensive determination for every action or proceeding before it.
Section 51. Finality of Determination. Any case or controversy before it shall be
decided within thirty (30) days after it is submitted for resolution. Only one (1) motion
for reconsideration shall be allowed. Any order, ruling or decision shall be final after
the lapse of fifteen (15) days from receipt of a copy thereof.
Section 52. Frivolous Appeals. To discourage frivolous or dilatory appeals from
the decisions or orders on the local or provincial levels, the DAR may impose
reasonable penalties, including but not limited to fines or censures upon erring
parties.
Section 53. Certification of the BARC. The DAR shall not take cognizance of
any agrarian dispute or controversy unless a certification from the BARC that the
dispute has been submitted to it for mediation and conciliation without any success
of settlement is presented: provided, however, that if no certification is issued by the
BARC within thirty (30) days after a matter or issue is submitted to it for mediation or
conciliation the case or dispute may be brought before the PARC.
2. DAR AO 3, S. 2003 2003 Rules on Agrarian Law Implementation [ALI]
Cases
SEE ATTACHED
3. The 2009 DARAB Rules of Procedure

It shall have the power to summon witnesses, administer oaths, take testimony,
require submission of reports, compel the production of books and documents and
answers to interrogatories and issue subpoena, and subpoena duces tecum, and
enforce its writs through sheriffs or other duly deputized officers.t shall likewise have
the power to punish direct and indirect contempts in the same manner and subject September 1, 2009
to the same penalties as provided in the Rules of Court. THE 2009 DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM ADJUDICATION BOARD
(DARAB) RULES OF PROCEDURE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Responsible farmer leaders shall be allowed to represent themselves, their fellow Rule I
farmers, or their organizations in any proceedings before the DAR: provided, General Provisions
however, that when there are two or more representatives for any individual or Section 1. Title
group, the representatives should choose only one among themselves to represent Section 2. Construction
such party or group before any DAR proceedings. Section 3. Technical Rules Not Applicable
Section 4. Doubts to be Resolved in Favor of the Beneficiary
Notwithstanding an appeal to the Court of Appeals, the decision of the DAR shall be Section 5. Official Seal
immediately executory. Rule II
Jurisdiction of the Board and its Adjudicators Summons, Answer, and Submission of Evidence
Section 1. Primary and Exclusive Original and Appellate Jurisdiction Section 1. Issuance of Summons, Time to Answer and Submission of Evidence
Section 2. Appellate Jurisdiction of the Board Section 2. By Whom Served
Section 3. Annulment of Judgment of Adjudicators Section 3. Answer Required
Section 4. Referral to Office of the Secretary (OSEC) Section 4. Time to Answer Non-Extendible
Section 5. Role of the RARAD Section 5. Amendment of Answer
Section 6. Powers Section 6. Answer to Amended Complaint or Petition
Rule III Section 7. No Default upon Failure to Answer ASIETa
Mediation or Conciliation at Barangay Level Section 8. Order Upon Receipt of Answer or Lapse of Reglementary Period
Section 1. BARC Certification Section 9. Affidavits
Section 2. Referral to BARC Section 10. Reply
Section 3. Report of Settlement at BARC to Adjudicator Rule VIII
Section 4. Land or Parties in Two (2) Barangays Appearances
Section 5. Certification of Non-Settlement Section 1. Appearance
Section 6. Special Rules on Mediation and Conciliation cIECTH Section 2. Manner of Appearance
Rule IV Section 3. Assignment of DAR Lawyer or Legal Officer
Commencement of Action, Venue, and Cause of Action Section 4. Authority to Bind Party
Section 1. Complaint or Petition Rule IX
Section 2. Certification and Verification on Related Cases Preliminary Conference
Section 3. Amendment of and Supplement to Complaint or Petition Section 1. When Conducted
Section 4. Venue Section 2. Notice of Preliminary Conference
Section 5. One Suit for a Single Cause of Action Section 3. Appearance of Parties
Section 6. Splitting a Single Cause of Action Section 4. Effect of Failure to Appear
Section 7. Joinder of Causes of Action Section 5. Amicable Settlement
Rule V Section 6. Failure to Arrive at an Amicable Settlement
Parties and Caption Section 7. Record of Preliminary Conference
Section 1. Parties in Interest Rule X
Section 2. Pauper Litigant Proceedings before the Adjudicators
Section 3. Associations or Corporations as Plaintiffs or Defendants Section 1. Nature of Proceedings
Section 4. Alternative Defendants Section 2. Role of the Adjudicator in the Proceedings
Section 5. Unknown Identity or Name of Defendants Section 3. Orders or Resolutions During the Hearing of the Case
Section 6. Entity without Juridical Personality as Defendants Section 4. Submission of Position Papers
Rule VI Section 5. Procedure on Clarificatory Hearing
Service of Pleadings Section 6. Record of Proceedings
Section 1. Service of Pleadings, Notices, and Resolutions Section 7. Period to Render the Decision
Section 2. Service Upon Associations Section 8. Award and Damages
Section 3. Service Upon Private, Domestic Juridical Entities Section 9. Finality of Judgment
Section 4. Service Upon Public Corporation Section 10. Motion for Reconsideration
Section 5. Return of Service Rule XI
Section 6. Proof of Completeness of Service Motions in General
Section 7. Substituted Service Section 1. Motion Defined
Rule VII Section 2. Form
Section 3. Contents Rule XVII
Section 4. Notice Preliminary Injunction/Supervision of Harvest
Section 5. Proof of Service Section 1. Preliminary Injunction, When Granted
Section 6. Expeditious Resolution of Motions Section 2. No Injunction to Restrain Tilling or Harvesting
Section 7. Non-allowable Motions caCSDT Section 3. Temporary Restraining Order
Rule XII Section 4. Supervision of Harvest
Intervention Rule XVIII
Section 1. Who May Intervene Direct and Indirect Contempt
Section 2. Time to Intervene Section 1. Direct Contempt
Section 3. Answer-in-Intervention Section 2. Indirect Contempt
Rule XIII Section 3. Appeal from Indirect Contempt
Decisions/Resolutions/Final Orders Rule XIX
Section 1. Decisions/Resolutions/Final Orders Preliminary Determination of Just Compensation
Section 2. Promulgation Section 1. Principal Role of Adjudicator
Section 3. Notice of Decisions/Resolutions/Final Orders Section 2. By Whom Conducted
Section 4. Entry of Decisions/Resolutions/Final Orders Section 3. Order for Submission of Evidence, Position Papers and Notice of
Rule XIV Hearing
Appeals Section 4. Failure to Comply with Above Order
Section 1. Appeal to the Board Section 5. When Resolution Deemed Final
Section 2. Grounds Section 6. Filing of Original Action with the Special Agrarian Court for Final
Section 3. Notice of Appeal and Appeal Memorandum Determination
Section 4. Perfection of Appeal Section 7. Notice of Resolution
Section 5. Motions after Filing of Notice of Appeal Section 8. Return of Claim Folder
Section 6. Transmittal of Appeal and Records Section 9. Execution of Judgments for Just Compensation which have Become
Section 7. Docketing of Case Final and Executory
Section 8. Caption Rule XX
Section 9. Frivolous or Dilatory Appeal Execution
Section 10. Withdrawal of Appeal Section 1. Execution upon Final Order or Decision
Section 11. When Appeal is Submitted for Decision Section 2. Execution Pending Appeal
Section 12. Period to Decide Appeal Section 3. Execution When Issued; Exception
Section 13. Finality of Decisions/Resolutions Section 4. Execution by Motion or by Independent Action
Rule XV Section 5. Execution in Case of Death of Party
Judicial Review Section 6. Issuance, Form, and Contents of a Writ of Execution
Section 1. Appeal to the Court of Appeals Section 7. Judgment for Specified Acts Vesting Title
Section 2. Findings of Fact: Final and Conclusive Section 8. Return of Writ of Execution
Section 3. No Restraining Order or Preliminary Injunction Section 9. Property Exempt from Execution
Rule XVI Section 10. How Execution for the Delivery or Restitution of Property Enforced
Relief from Decision/Resolution/Final Order cASEDC
Section 1. Petition for Relief from Decision/Resolution/Final Order Section 11. Removal of Improvements on Property Subject of Execution
Section 2. Form and Time of Filing of Petition Section 12. Effect of Judgment or Final Order
Section 3. Answer Rule XXI
Section 4. Procedure AIaSTE Board Regulations
Section 1. Internal Business RULE I
Section 2. Assignment of Cases General Provisions
Section 3. En Banc Meeting SECTION 1. Title. These Rules shall be known as the 2009 Department of
Section 4. Presiding Officer Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB) Rules of Procedure.
Section 5. Hearing and Pronouncement of a Decision/Resolution/Final Order SECTION 2. Construction. These Rules shall be liberally construed to carry
Rule XXII out the objectives of the agrarian reform program and to promote just, expeditious
The Board Secretariat and inexpensive adjudication and settlement of agrarian cases, disputes, or
Section 1. The Board Secretariat controversies.
Section 2. Filing of Pleadings and Documents All references in these Rules to the Members of the Board or the Adjudicators in the
Section 3. Custody of the Seal and Books of the Board masculine (he, him, or his) shall be construed to also mean the feminine form (she,
Section 4. Access to the Board Records her, or hers).
Section 5. Calendar, General Docket, and Other Books of the Board SECTION 3. Technical Rules Not Applicable. The Board and its Regional and
Section 6. Releasing of Communication, Issuances and Other Matters Provincial Adjudication Offices shall not be bound by technical rules of procedure
Section 7. Issuance of Certified True Copies and evidence as prescribed in the Rules of Court, but shall proceed to hear and
Rule XXIII decide all agrarian cases, disputes or controversies in a most expeditious manner,
Other Fees, Charges and Costs employing all reasonable means to ascertain the facts of every case in accordance
Section 1. Payment of Fees with justice and equity. EaDATc
Section 2. Filing Fees a. If and when a case comes up for adjudication wherein there is no applicable
Section 3. Legal Fees provision under these rules, the procedural law and jurisprudence generally
Section 4. Where Fees to Be Paid applicable to agrarian disputes shall be applied.
Section 5. Sheriffs, and Other Persons Serving Processes b. The Adjudication Board (Board), and its Regional Agrarian Reform
Section 6. Stenographers Adjudicators (RARADs) and Provincial Agrarian Reform Adjudicators (PARADs)
Section 7. Costs hereinafter referred to as the Adjudicators, shall have the authority to adopt any
Section 8. Costs in Actions or Proceedings appropriate measure or procedure in any given situation or matter not covered by
Section 9. Dismissal of Action or Appeal these rules. All such special measures or procedures and the situations to which
Section 10. Attorney's Fees as Costs they have been applied must be reported to the Board.
Section 11. Costs When Witness Fails to Appear c. The provisions of the Rules of Court shall not apply even in suppletory
Section 12. Government is Exempt ETIHCa character unless adopted herein or by resolution of the Board.
Rule XXIV SECTION 4. Doubts to Be Resolved in Favor of the Beneficiary. Any
Miscellaneous Provisions reasonable doubt in the interpretation of these rules, as well as in the interpretation
Section 1. Transitory Provisions of contracts and stipulations between the contending parties, shall be resolved in
Section 2. Separability Provisions favor of the beneficiary, potential beneficiary, tenant farmer, farm-worker, agricultural
Section 3. Repealing Clause lessee, farmers' cooperative, association or organization.
Section 4. Effectivity Clause SECTION 5. Official Seal. The Board shall design and adopt a seal to be
THE 2009 DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM ADJUDICATION BOARD imprinted in all its resolutions, orders, decisions, and other documents as an
RULES OF PROCEDURE indication of their official character. The seal of the DARAB shall depict its official
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 49 and 50 of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 6657 as function as the dispenser of agrarian justice. It shall be consistent with the basic
amended by R.A. No. 9700 and Section 34 of Executive Order (E.O.) No. 129-A in design and symbolism of the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) logo.
relation to Section 13 thereof, the following rules governing the conduct of RULE II
proceedings before the Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board Jurisdiction of the Board and the Adjudicators
(DARAB) and its Regional and Provincial Adjudication Offices, are hereby adopted SECTION 1. Primary and Exclusive Original and Appellate Jurisdiction. The
and promulgated. Board shall have primary and exclusive jurisdiction, both original and appellate, to
determine and adjudicate all agrarian disputes involving the implementation of the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) under R.A. No. 6657, as
amended by R.A. No. 9700, E.O. Nos. 228, 229, and 129-A, R.A. No. 3844 as
amended by R.A. No. 6389, Presidential Decree No. 27 and other agrarian laws and
their Implementing Rules and Regulations. Specifically, such jurisdiction shall
include but not be limited to cases involving the following:
a. The rights and obligations of persons, whether natural or juridical, engaged
in the management, cultivation, and use of all agricultural lands covered by R.A. No.
6657, otherwise known as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL), as
amended, and other related agrarian laws; ACaDTH
b. The preliminary administrative determination of reasonable and just
compensation of lands acquired under Presidential Decree (PD) No. 27 and the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP);
c. Those cases involving the annulment or rescission of lease contracts or
deeds of sale or their amendments involving lands under the administration and
disposition of the DAR or Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP), and the amendment
of titles pertaining to agricultural lands under the administration and disposition of
the DAR and LBP; as well as EPs issued under PD 266, Homestead Patents, Free
Patents, and miscellaneous sales patents to settlers in settlement and re-settlement
areas under the administration and disposition of the DAR;
d. Those cases involving the ejectment and dispossession of tenants and/or
leaseholders;
e. Those cases involving the sale, alienation, pre-emption, and redemption of
agricultural lands under the coverage of the CARL, as amended or other agrarian
laws;
f. Those involving the correction, partition, secondary and subsequent
issuances such as reissuance of lost/destroyed owner's duplicate copy and
reconstitution of Certificates of Land Ownership Award (CLOAs) and Emancipation
Patents (EPs) which are registered with the Land Registration Authority;
g. Those cases involving the review of leasehold rentals and fixing of
disturbance compensation;
h. Those cases involving the collection of amortization payments, foreclosure
and similar disputes concerning the functions of the LBP, and payments for lands
awarded under PD No. 27, RA No. 3844, as amended, and R.A. No. 6657, as
amended by R.A. No. 9700, and other related laws, decrees, orders, instructions,
rules, and regulations, as well as payment for residential, commercial, and industrial
lots within the settlement and resettlement areas under the administration and
disposition of the DAR;
i. Those cases involving boundary disputes over lands under the
administration and disposition of the DAR and the LBP, which are transferred,
distributed, and/or sold to tenant-beneficiaries and are covered by deeds of sale,
patents, and certificates of title;
j. Those cases previously falling under the original and exclusive jurisdiction of
the defunct Court of Agrarian Relations under Section 12 of PD No. 946 except
those cases falling under the proper courts or other quasi-judicial bodies; and
ACTIHa
k. Such other agrarian cases, disputes, matters or concerns referred to it by
the Secretary of the DAR.
SECTION 2. Appellate Jurisdiction of the Board. The Board shall have
exclusive appellate jurisdiction to review, reverse, modify, alter, or affirm resolutions,
orders and decisions of the Adjudicators.
No order of the Adjudicators on any issue, question, matter, or incident raised before
them shall be elevated to the Board until the hearing shall have been terminated and
the case decided on the merits.
SECTION 3. Annulment of Judgment of Adjudicators. Annulment of final
judgment of Adjudicators shall be initiated by filing a verified complaint or petition
with the Board attaching thereto certified copies of the assailed decision and
alleging therein with particularity the facts and the law relied upon for said
annulment.
The annulment may be based only on grounds of extrinsic fraud and lack of
jurisdiction. If based on extrinsic fraud, the action must be filed within three (3) years
from its discovery; and if based on lack of jurisdiction, before it is barred by laches or
estoppel.
SECTION 4. Referral to Office of the Secretary (OSEC). In the event that a
case filed before the Adjudicator shall necessitate the determination of a prejudicial
issue involving an agrarian law implementation case, the Adjudicator shall dismiss
the case without prejudice to its re-filing, and, for purposes of expediency, refer the
same to the Office of the Secretary or his authorized representative in the locality.
Prejudicial issue is defined as one that arises in a case the resolution of which is a
logical antecedent of the issue involved therein, and the jurisdiction over which
pertains to the Office of the Secretary.
The prejudicial issue must be determinative of the case before the Board or the
Adjudicator but the jurisdiction to try and resolve the question is lodged with the
Office of the Secretary.
SECTION 5. Role of the RARAD. The RARAD shall be the Executive
Adjudicator in his Region directly responsible to the Board. As such, he shall:
a. Exercise administrative supervision over the PARADs and, in the absence of
the PARAD concerned, their personnel, which shall include, among others, the
monitoring of cases in his Region; SDHAcI
b. Receive, hear, and adjudicate agrarian disputes and land cases within the
Region;
c. He shall also hear the following cases:
1. Those cases that cannot be handled by the PARAD on account of inhibition,
disqualification or when there is no PARAD designated in the locality;
2. Those matters of such complexity and sensitivity that the decision thereof
would constitute an important precedent affecting regional interest as may be
recommended by the concerned RARAD and approved by the Board; and
3. Preliminary determination of just compensation within the jurisdictional limits
as stated in Rule XIX, Sec. 2 hereof; and
4. Hear application for the issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction and/or
temporary restraining order and such other cases which the Board may assign.
SECTION 6. Powers. The Members of the Board and the Adjudicators are
empowered to summon witnesses, administer oaths, take testimony, require
submission of reports, compel production of books and documents and answers to
interrogatories, and to issue subpoena duces tecum, writs of possession, writs of
execution, and other writs to enforce its orders and decisions through their Sheriffs
or duly deputized officers.
For this purpose, whenever necessary, they shall direct the Philippine National
Police, the Armed Forces of the Philippines or any of their component units, or other
law enforcement agencies to assist in the enforcement and execution of their
decisions, orders, writs, and other processes.
RULE III
Mediation or Conciliation at Barangay Level
SECTION 1. BARC Certification. The Board or its Adjudicators shall not take
cognizance of any agrarian case, dispute, or controversy, unless a certification from
the Barangay Agrarian Reform Committee (BARC) of the barangay where the land
involved is located is presented, to the effect that the dispute has been submitted to
it for mediation or conciliation without any success or settlement, except that the
said certification is not necessary in the following cases: EHSCcT
a. where the issue involves the valuation of land to determine just
compensation for its acquisition;
b. where one party in a public or private corporation, partnership, association
or juridical person, or a public officer or employee and the dispute relates to the
performance of his official functions;
c. where the Secretary of the DAR directly refers the matter to the Board or
Adjudicator; or
d. upon certification of the Municipal Agrarian Reform Officer (MARO) or, in his
absence, the Senior Agrarian Reform Program Technologist (SARPT) or Agrarian
Reform Program Technologist (ARPT) of the non-existence of the BARC or the
inability of the BARC to convene.
SECTION 2. Referral to BARC. If the filing of the complaint or petition is not
accompanied by the required BARC Certification, the same shall be referred to the
BARC or DAR Technologist of the barangay where the land is located, as stated in
the complaint, through the MARO of the area, directing:
a. The BARC to conduct mediation/conciliation proceedings, by requiring the
parties to submit their supporting documents and to return the matter to the
Adjudicator with a report of the result of the proceedings, together with the complete
records submitted before it, within thirty (30) days from receipt of the complaint or
petition; or
b. The SARPT or ARPT in case of non-existence of the BARC or its inability to
convene for that purpose, to refer the matter back to the Adjudicator within five (5)
days from receipt thereof with a certification of non-existence or inability of the
BARC to convene.
SECTION 3. Report of Settlement at BARC to Adjudicator. If the case is
referred by the Board or the Adjudicator and the same is settled at the BARC level,
the results thereof shall be contained in a report to be submitted to the Board or the
Adjudicator who referred the matter, within seven (7) days from the termination of
the proceedings before the BARC, which report shall be the basis for the rendition of
judgment/decision of the case before the Board or the Adjudicator. HSDIaC
SECTION 4. Land or Parties in Two (2) Barangays. Where the land in dispute
straddles two or more barangays or the parties involved reside in different
barangays, the BARC of the barangay where the larger portion of the property lies,
shall have the authority to conduct mediation or conciliation proceedings under
these Rules, unless for convenience and accessibility and upon agreement of the
parties such proceedings should be held in another barangay within the Municipality
or adjacent Municipality where the land in dispute is located.
SECTION 5. Certification of Non-settlement. If the BARC is unable to settle
the dispute within thirty (30) days, it shall return the case to the Adjudicator of origin
with a certification of non-settlement, furnishing a copy thereof to the parties.
SECTION 6. Special Rules on Mediation and Conciliation. The mediation and
conciliation proceedings at the BARC shall be conducted in accordance with the
uniform rules adopted and promulgated by the DAR.
RULE IV
Commencement of Action, Venue, and Cause of Action
SECTION 1. Complaint or Petition. An action before the Adjudicator shall be
initiated by filing a sworn complaint or verified petition with the Adjudicator in the
Province where the land involved is located.
Upon the filing of the complaint or petition, the hour, day, month, and year when it
was filed shall be stamped thereon.
The complaint shall include the affidavit(s) of witnesses and documentary evidence,
if any. The complaint or petition shall be duly signed by the complainant or petitioner,
or his counsel, or by one who can show a special power of attorney to represent the
complainant or petitioner.
It shall state the area of the land involved and the Barangay where the land is
located, or if the land is located in two (2) or more barangays, the barangay where
the larger portion of the land is located.
It shall also state the name and residence of the complainant or petitioner and that
of the defendant or respondent, the facts constituting the cause of action, and the
relief being sought.
Two (2) copies of the complaint or petition, and its annexes or attachments, and as
many copies required to be served upon each of the defendants or respondents,
shall be filed. CEcaTH
SECTION 2. Certification and Verification on Related Cases.
a. The complainant or petitioner shall certify under oath, in the complaint or in
a sworn certification annexed thereto and simultaneously filed therewith, that:
1. he has not commenced any other action or filed any claim involving the
same land or issue in any court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency;
2. to the best of his knowledge, no such other action or claim is pending
therein;
3. he has no knowledge of any controversy or proceeding involving the status
of said parcel of land or the rights of person/s over its possession and entitlement to
fruits or as beneficiary, the determination of which is filed before any tribunal, court,
the DAR or any other agency;
4. should there be any same or similar action or proceeding involving the
property, which is either pending or may have been terminated, he shall report such
fact within five (5) days from knowledge thereof to the Adjudicator with whom the
complaint or initiatory pleading was filed.
b. In the event that the complaint or petition does not bear the Certification, the
Adjudicator shall issue an order directing complainant or petitioner to comply with
such requirement within ten (10) days from receipt of the Order.
c. Failure to file certification and verification of related cases within the
aforementioned ten (10) day period and/or subsequent discovery of commission of
forum-shopping may be a ground for summary dismissal. Dismissal for failure to file
certification and verification shall be without prejudice to re-filing.
SECTION 3. Amendment of and Supplement to Complaint or Petition. The
complaint or petition may be amended, or supplemented at any time before a
responsive pleading is served or, in case of a reply, at any time within five (5) days
after it is served. IcDCaT
After the responsive pleadings have been served, amendments or the filing of
supplemental pleadings may be allowed at any stage of the proceedings but before
rendition of judgment only upon motion filed with the Adjudicator furnishing copies
thereof to the adverse party.
The motion to amend shall indicate the amendment sought to be admitted. In the
case of a supplemental pleading, it shall set forth the transactions, occurrences or
events which have happened since the date of the pleading sought to be
supplemented.
SECTION 4. Venue.
a. All actions shall be brought before the Adjudicator of the province where the
land involved is located;
b. If the land is located or found in two or more provinces, the action shall be
brought before the Adjudicator concerned where the larger portion of the land lies,
unless for convenience, accessibility, and upon agreement of the parties and upon
approval of the RARAD, the venue shall be with the Adjudicator of the other
province;
c. However, upon motion of either of the parties and for compelling reasons,
the hearing of the case may be changed or transferred to another place within or
outside the Region by order of the RARAD or the Board.
SECTION 5. One Suit for a Single Cause of Action. A party may not institute
more than one suit for a single cause of action.
SECTION 6. Splitting a Single Cause of Action. If two or more suits are
instituted on the basis of a single cause of action, the filing of one or a judgment
upon the merits in any one is available as a ground for the dismissal of the others.
SECTION 7. Joinder of Causes of Action. A complainant or petitioner having
more than one cause of action against the same defendant or respondent arising
out of the same questioned relationship shall join all of them in one complaint or
petition.
RULE V
Parties and Caption
SECTION 1. Parties in Interest. Every agrarian case must be initiated and
defended in the name of the real party in interest. All parties having an interest in the
matter shall be joined as complainant or petitioner. All persons who claim an interest
in the dispute or subject matter thereof adverse to the complainant or petitioner, or
who are necessary to a complete determination or settlement of the issues involved
therein shall be joined as defendants or respondents. caCTHI
If an additional respondent is impleaded in a later pleading, the action is
commenced with regard to him on the date of the filing of such pleading.
The heirs of the deceased may be allowed to substitute the deceased without
requiring the appointment of an executor or administrator.
The Adjudicator shall forthwith order said legal representative or representatives to
appear and substitute the deceased within a period of ten (10) days from notice.
SECTION 2. Pauper Litigant. A party who is an agricultural lessee, share
tenant, actual tiller, amortizing owner-cultivator, farm-worker, a member of any
farmers' organization, association, or a farmers' cooperative, as alleged and applied
for in a sworn complaint or motion, shall be entitled to the rights and privileges of a
pauper litigant under these Rules without further proof thereof. He shall continue to
enjoy such status as a pauper litigant at all levels of adjudication until the case is
terminated.
SECTION 3. Association or Corporation as Plaintiffs or Defendants. When two
or more persons, associated in any business, transact such business under a
common name, whether it comprises the name of such persons or not, the
associates may sue or be sued under such common name.
Persons associated in business that are sued under a common name, must all be
named individually in the answer filed by them or in their behalf, stating their
business address.
SECTION 4. Alternative Defendants. Where the complainant or the plaintiff is
uncertain against who of several persons he is entitled to relief, he may join any or
all of them as defendants in the alternative, although a right to relief against one
may be inconsistent with a right to relief against the other.
SECTION 5. Unknown Identity or Name of Defendants. Whenever the identity
or name of a defendant is unknown, he may be sued as the unknown party using
such designation as the case may require. When his identity or true name is
discovered, the pleading must be amended accordingly.
SECTION 6. Entity without Juridical Personality as Defendants. When two or
more persons not organized as an entity with juridical personality enter into a
transaction, they may be sued under the name by which they are generally or
commonly known.
In the answer of such defendant, the names and addresses of the persons
composing said entity must all be revealed. cHSTEA
RULE VI
Service of Pleadings
SECTION 1. Service of Pleadings, Notices, and Resolutions.
a. The party filing the pleading subsequent to the complaint shall serve the
opposing party with a copy thereof in the manner provided for in these Rules and
proof of such service shall be filed with the records of the case; and
b. Summons, notices, and copies of resolutions, orders shall be served
personally as far as practicable, or by registered mail upon the party himself, his
counsel, or his duly authorized representative. However, notice to the counsel is
notice to the party himself whether he is a complainant or petitioner, or a defendant
or respondent.
SECTION 2. Service Upon Associations. When persons associated in
business are sued under a common name, service may be effected upon all the
defendants by serving upon any one of them, or upon the person in charge of the
office or place of business maintained in its common name. But such service shall
not bind individually any person whose connection with the association has, upon
due notice, been severed before the action is brought.
SECTION 3. Service Upon Private Domestic Juridical Entities. If the defendant
is a corporation, partnership, association or cooperative organized and registered
under Philippine laws with a juridical personality, service may be made on the
president, managing partner, general manager, corporate or board secretary,
treasurer or in-house counsel.
SECTION 4. Service Upon Public Corporation. When the respondent is the
Republic of the Philippines, service may be effected on the Solicitor General. In case
of a province, city, municipality, or other public corporations, service may be effected
on its chief executive or on such other officer as the law or Adjudicator may direct.
SECTION 5. Return of Service. The Sheriff or other designated officer who
personally served the summons, notice, order, or decision shall submit his return
within five (5) days from the date of his service thereof, stating therein the name of
the person served and the date of receipt of the same or if no service was effected,
the serving officer shall state the reasons therefor. CIDaTc
SECTION 6. Proof of Completeness of Service. The return is prima facie proof
of the facts indicated therein. Service by registered mail is completed upon receipt
by the addressee, his counsel, or by his duly authorized representative or agent.
SECTION 7. Substituted Service. If service of pleadings, motions, notices, and
resolutions, orders and other papers cannot be made under the preceding sections,
the office and place of residence of the party or his counsel being unknown, service
may be made by delivering the copy to the Clerk of the Adjudicator or the Board,
with proof of failure of both personal service and service by mail. The service is
complete at the time of such delivery.
RULE VII
Summons, Answer, and Submission of Evidence
SECTION 1. Issuance of Summons, Time to Answer, and Submission of
Evidence. If the complaint or petition is filed together with the BARC Certification
and the affidavit(s) of witnesses, with the Adjudicator, as required in Rule III of these
Rules, or upon the return of the complaint referred to the BARC in accordance with
said Rule III, the corresponding summons and notice of hearing shall be issued
attaching therewith a copy of such complaint, petition, affidavit, and documentary
evidence, if any.
The summons and notice of hearing shall direct the defendant or respondent to file
an answer to the complaint or petition or submit counter-affidavits and other
documentary evidence, if any, within a non-extendible period of fifteen (15) days
from receipt thereof, furnishing a copy to the petitioner/s or the complainant/s. The
summons shall specify the date, time, and place of the hearing and shall order the
parties and their witnesses to appear at the scheduled date of hearing.
If the defendant or respondent cannot be served within a reasonable time as
provided in the preceding paragraph, service may be effected:
a. by leaving copies of the summons at the defendant's or respondent's
residence with some person of suitable age and discretion residing therein; or
b. by leaving the copies at defendant's or respondent's office or regular place
of business with some competent person in charge thereof. ISDCHA
The provisions on service of summons as provided in the Rules of Court shall have
suppletory effect. However, if publication is effected pursuant to the above rule, only
the notice of summons and notice of hearing shall be published and not the entire
complaint or petition.
The summons and all other notices to be issued by the Adjudicator shall be written
in English or in Filipino.
SECTION 2. By Whom Served. The summons and notice of hearing with the
attached copy of the complaint, petition, affidavit and documentary evidence, if any,
may be personally served by any DAR employee, including the Municipal Agrarian
Reform Officer (MARO) or any other personnel authorized by the Adjudicator issuing
the summons or by registered mail to the defendant or respondent within two (2)
days from the filing or return thereof, as the case may be.
SECTION 3. Answer Required. The defendant or respondent must file a sworn
answer to the complaint or petition by responding with admissions or specific denials
of each and every allegation in the complaint or petition, or if this cannot be done, by
averring lack of sufficient knowledge thereof, which will be deemed as a specific
denial.
A mere general denial will not be deemed as an answer.
The defendant or respondent may incorporate in his answer a motion to dismiss on
the ground of prescription, lack of jurisdiction, failure to state a cause of action,
improper venue or when there is another action pending between the same parties
for the same cause or where the cause of action is barred by a prior judgment.
An answer must be accompanied by the affidavit(s) of respondent's witnesses. The
answer may include a counterclaim or cross-claim for damages, attorney's fees, or
litigation expenses.
SECTION 4. Time to Answer Non-Extendible. The fifteen (15)-day
reglementary period within which the defendant or respondent is required to answer
shall not be extended. ISDCHA
SECTION 5. Amendment of Answer. The defendant or respondent may
amend his answer upon motion filed with the Adjudicator, together with the amended
answer sought to be admitted, notifying the complainant or petitioner of the motion
with the amended answer attached thereto, and giving the latter the opportunity to
be heard thereon.
If the motion is granted, a new copy of the entire answer incorporating and
appropriately indicating the amendment thereon shall be filed with the Adjudicator,
furnishing a copy thereof to the complainant or petitioner.
The amended answer supersedes the original answer.
SECTION 6. Answer to Amended Complaint or Petition. The defendant or
respondent shall file his answer to the amended complaint or petition within fifteen
(15) days from receipt thereof, furnishing a copy to the petitioner or complainant.
If no new answer is filed, the answer previously filed shall serve as the answer to the
amended complaint or petition.
SECTION 7. No Default upon Failure to Answer. When the defendant or
respondent fails to file an answer, no declaration of default shall be made nor
judgment by default be rendered.
The complainant or petitioner must proceed to prove his case and defendant or
respondent shall be allowed to participate in subsequent proceedings and such
defendant or respondent may request by motion that he be furnished copies of
orders, pleadings and other processes.
SECTION 8. Order upon Receipt of Answer or Lapse of Reglementary Period.
Within five (5) days from receipt of the Answer or from the lapse of the fifteen (15)
day reglementary period to file Answer, without any Answer having been filed, as the
case may be, the Adjudicator shall issue an Order setting the date of the initial
preliminary conference which must be held within forty-five (45) days from the date
of such Order.
SECTION 9. Affidavits. The affidavits required to be submitted under this Rule
shall state only facts of direct personal knowledge of the affiants and shall show their
competence to testify to the matters stated therein.
A violation of this requirement may subject the party or the counsel who submits the
same to disciplinary action, and shall be cause to expunge the inadmissible affidavit
or portion thereof from the record. ITESAc
All affidavits required to be submitted under this Rule shall be sworn to before the
presiding Adjudicator, or in his absence, any other Adjudicator or any other person
authorized to administer oaths under the Revised Administrative Code.
SECTION 10. Reply. A reply may be filed within five (5) days from service of the
pleading responded to.
RULE VIII
Appearances
SECTION 1. Appearance. A lawyer appearing for a party is presumed to be
properly authorized for that purpose. A non-lawyer may appear before the Board or
any of its Adjudicators, if:
a. He represents himself as a party to the case;
b. He represents a farmers' organization or its members, provided that he shall
present proof of authority from the organization or its members or such authority
duly signed by the President or head of the organization;
c. He is a law student who has successfully completed his third year of the
regular four-year prescribed law curriculum and is enrolled in a recognized law
school's clinical legal education program approved by the Supreme Court. His
appearance pursuant to this rule shall be under the direct supervision and control of
a member of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines duly-accredited by the law school.
Any and all pleadings, motions, memoranda or other papers to be filed must be
signed by the supervising attorney for and in behalf of the legal aid clinic.
d. He is a DAR Legal Officer duly authorized by the appropriate Head of Office
in accordance with the internal regulations of the Department of Agrarian Reform.
For this purpose, the DAR Legal Officer must have the prescribed authorization form
before he may be allowed to appear before the Board or any of its Adjudicators,
Provided, that when there are two or more representatives for any individual or
group, such individual or group should choose only one representative.
SECTION 2. Manner of Appearance. Appearances may be oral or in writing.
The complete business address of the counsel or representative shall be made of
record and the adverse party or his counsel shall be properly notified. Any change in
the address of counsel or representative shall be filed with the Adjudicator with
notice to the adverse party and counsel. SAcCIH
SECTION 3. Assignment of DAR Lawyer or Legal Officer. A party appearing
without counsel or represented by a non-lawyer may be assigned a counsel de
officio from among the DAR Lawyers or Legal Officers designated by the appropriate
Head of Office or a member of the bar who is willing to act as such counsel de
officio.
SECTION 4. Authority to Bind Party. Attorneys and other representatives of
parties cannot, without a special power of attorney, enter into a compromise
agreement with the opposing party when a full or partial discharge of a client's
interest is made.
RULE IX
Preliminary Conference
SECTION 1. When Conducted. After the last pleading shall have been served
and filed, or upon receipt of the BARC certification of non-settlement in instances
when the case was referred to the BARC for mediation/conciliation, the Adjudicator
shall set the case for a preliminary conference.
SECTION 2. Notice of Preliminary Conference. The notice of the preliminary
conference shall be served upon the representative or counsel of record or the party
himself, if he has no representative or counsel of record.
SECTION 3. Appearance of Parties. It shall be the duty of parties and their
counsel to appear at the preliminary conference.
The counsel or his representative cannot, without a written authority or express
consent of his client, enter into an amicable settlement, submit to alternative modes
of dispute resolution, or enter into stipulations or admissions of facts or of
documents.
SECTION 4. Effect of Failure to Appear. If either or both parties fail to appear
for preliminary conference, despite proper notice, the conference shall be deemed
terminated and the Adjudicator shall render a decision on the basis of the evidence
on record.
SECTION 5. Amicable Settlement. During the preliminary conference and at
any stage of the proceedings, the Board or the Adjudicator shall exert all efforts and
take positive steps for the amicable settlement of the case. aTCADc
Should the parties arrive at any settlement as to the whole or part of the dispute, the
same shall be reduced into writing in a language or dialect known to, and spoken by
the parties and signed by them before the adjudicator or the board.
If a compromise agreement is entered into by the parties in a manner other than as
specified above, the adjudicator or the board shall set the case for a hearing for the
purpose of determining the authenticity and due execution thereof before approving
it.
The settlement shall be approved after the Board or the Adjudicator is satisfied that
it was voluntarily entered into by the parties and the same is not contrary to relevant
laws, rules, and regulations, and after having explained to them the terms and
consequences thereof.
The order or decision approving the compromise agreement shall have the effect of
a judgment on the case, which shall immediately be final and executory.
In all cases where the beneficiaries, tenant farmers, or farm-workers are not
assisted by a private counsel, the adjudicator or the board shall coordinate with the
proper office of the DAR to ensure that said parties are assisted by a lawyer or legal
officer in arriving at a settlement.
SECTION 6. Failure to Arrive at an Amicable Settlement. In the event that the
adjudicator denies the compromise agreement or the parties are not able to reach
an amicable settlement of the case, the adjudicator shall:
a. consider the submission of the case to alternative modes of dispute
resolution;
b. resolve and dispose of preliminary incidents related to the case;
c. determine whether any of the parties intends to propound clarificatory
questions on any of the affiants/witnesses;
d. determine whether there is a need to issue the appropriate subpoena upon
any witness who refuses to execute an affidavit;
e. determine the dates of subsequent hearings for the purpose of examining
the witnesses; and
f. take up other matters as may simplify and aid in the prompt disposition of
the case. TaHDAS
SECTION 7. Record of Preliminary Conference. The proceedings in the
conference shall be recorded. Upon termination of the same, the Adjudicator shall
issue an order, which shall embody the matters taken up therein, and the date set
for the initial hearing of the case, if any.
The aforementioned order shall control the subsequent proceedings of the case,
subject to such modifications, which may be made to prevent manifest injustice.
RULE X
Proceedings Before the Adjudicators
SECTION 1. Nature of Proceedings. The proceedings before the Adjudicator
shall be non-litigious in nature.
Subject to the essential requirements of due process, the technicalities of law and
procedures and the rules governing the admissibility and sufficiency of evidence
obtained in the courts of law shall not apply.
The Adjudicator shall employ reasonable means to ascertain the facts of the
controversy including a thorough examination or re-examination of witnesses and
the conduct of ocular inspection of the premises in question, if necessary.
SECTION 2. Role of the Adjudicator in the Proceedings. The Adjudicator shall
personally conduct the hearing. He shall take full control of the proceedings. He may
examine the parties and witnesses freely with respect to the matters at issue, and
shall limit the right of the parties or their counsels to ask questions only for the
purpose of clarifying the points of law at issue or of facts involved in the case. He
shall also limit the presentation of evidence by the contending parties only to matters
relevant and material to the issues and necessary for a just, expeditious, and
inexpensive disposition of the case.
SECTION 3. Orders or Resolutions During the Hearing of the Case. The order
or resolution of the Adjudicator on any issue, question, matter, or incident raised
before him shall be valid and effective until the hearing of the same shall have been
terminated and resolved on the merits.
SECTION 4. Submission of Position Papers. In case the parties fail to arrive at
an amicable settlement of the case or the adjudicator denies the compromise
agreement, the adjudicator shall issue an order directing the parties and their
counsels to simultaneously submit their respective position papers and formal offer
of evidence. The same position papers shall be submitted within Thirty (30) days
from receipt of the order.
SECTION 5. Procedure on Clarificatory Hearing. Within fifteen (15) days from
receipt of the position papers from the parties, the adjudicator may conduct
clarificatory hearing.
During the clarificatory hearing, the adjudicator shall have full control of the
proceeding but may allow counsels to propound clarificatory questions to the
witnesses. CDAcIT
At the hearing, the affidavits submitted by the parties shall constitute the direct
testimonies of the witnesses who executed the same. A witness summoned to
appear in accordance with Section 6 (d), Rule IX hereof may be subjected to such
clarificatory questioning even without submitting his affidavit.
Upon termination of the clarificatory hearing, the case or incident shall be deemed
submitted for decision or resolution.
SECTION 6. Record of Proceedings. The proceedings before the Adjudicator
shall be recorded by a stenographer. In the absence of an available stenographer,
the Adjudicator shall make a written summary of the proceedings, including the
substance of the evidence presented which shall be attested by the parties or their
counsel and shall form part of the records of the case. Should any party or counsel
refuse to sign, the reason for such refusal shall be noted therein.
SECTION 7. Period to Render the Decision. The Adjudicator shall render the
decision on the merits of the case within thirty (30) days after the filing of the verified
position papers or after the lapse of the period to file a verified position paper
without the same having been filed or after the clarificatory hearing shall have been
concluded by the Adjudicator.
SECTION 8. Award and Damages. The Adjudicator or the Board, in
appropriate cases, may award actual, compensatory, exemplary, and moral
damages and attorney's fees. The attorney's fees to be awarded should be
reasonable.
SECTION 9. Finality of Judgment. Unless appealed, the decision, order, or
resolution disposing of the case on the merits shall be final after the lapse of fifteen
(15) days from receipt of a copy thereof by the counsel or representative on record,
and by the party himself whether or not he is appearing on his own behalf,
whichever is later. In all cases, the parties themselves shall be furnished with a copy
of the decision, order or resolution.
SECTION 10. Motion for Reconsideration. Within fifteen (15) days from receipt
of notice of the order, resolution, or decision of the Board or Adjudicator, a party may
move for reconsideration of such order, resolution, or decision on the grounds that:
a. the findings of fact in the said decision, order, or resolution are not
supported by substantial evidence; or
b. the conclusions stated therein are contrary to law and jurisprudence.
cEHITA
The motion for reconsideration shall be filed together with proof of service of a copy
thereof upon the adverse party.
Only one (1) Motion for Reconsideration shall be allowed for each party.
The filing of a Motion for Reconsideration shall interrupt the period to perfect an
appeal. If the motion is denied, the aggrieved party shall have a period of fifteen (15)
days reckoned from the receipt of the notice of denial.
RULE XI
Motions in General
SECTION 1. Motion Defined. Every application for relief, other than by
principal pleadings.
SECTION 2. Form. All motions shall be in writing, except those made in the
course of a hearing or trial.
SECTION 3. Contents. A motion shall state the relief sought and the grounds
upon which it is based and, if necessary, shall be accompanied by supporting
affidavits and documents.
SECTION 4. Notice. A copy of the motion together with copies of supporting
affidavits or documents shall be served by the movant upon all parties and counsels
concerned, at least three (3) days before the hearing thereof.
The Adjudicator or the Board may, however, hear a motion on shorter notice upon
good cause, especially on matters, which may be disposed of motu proprio.
SECTION 5. Proof of Service. No motion shall be acted upon by the
Adjudicator or by the Board without proof of service thereof except when he/it is
satisfied that the rights of the adverse party are not affected.
SECTION 6. Expeditious Resolution of Motions. All motions shall be resolved
within a reasonable period from its submission for resolution. The same shall be
considered submitted for resolution upon the filing of the last pleading supporting or
opposing the motion. Any motion for reconsideration of an interlocutory order shall
be filed within fifteen (15) days from receipt thereof.
SECTION 7. Non-allowable Motions. The following motions shall not be
allowed:
a. Motion to declare defendant or respondent in default or for a default
judgment; HTCaAD
b. All other motions filed before an Answer, except Motions to Dismiss on the
ground of prescription, lack of jurisdiction or failure to state a cause of action,
improper venue or when there is another action pending between the same parties
for the same cause or where the cause of action is barred by a prior judgment;
c. Motion for extension of time to file an appeal, motion for reconsideration, or
appeal memorandum.
RULE XII
Intervention
SECTION 1. Who May Intervene. A person who has a legal interest on the
matter in litigation, or in the success of either of the parties or an interest against
both, or has a substantial right or interest in the subject matter of the case before the
Adjudicator or Board, may be allowed to intervene in the action by filing a pleading-
in-intervention.
In case where the Board or the Adjudicator has competent jurisdiction, agrarian
reform beneficiaries or identified beneficiaries and/or their associations shall have
legal standing and interest to intervene concerning their individual or collective rights
and/or interests under the CARP.
The fact of non-registration of such associations with the Securities and Exchange
Commission, or Cooperative Development Authority, or any concerned government
agency shall not be used against them to deny the existence of their legal standing
and interest in a case filed before such courts and quasi-judicial bodies.
SECTION 2. Time to Intervene. A person desiring to intervene may, before
judgment by the Adjudicator or the Board, file a motion for leave to intervene
attaching the pleading-in-intervention with notice upon all the parties to the action.
In allowing or disallowing a motion for leave to intervene, the Adjudicator or the
Board shall consider if the intervention will unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication
of the rights of the original parties or if the intervenor's right may be fully protected in
a separate proceeding.
SECTION 3. Answer-in-Intervention. The answer-in-intervention shall be filed
within fifteen (15) days from notice of the order allowing the intervention, unless a
different period is fixed by the Adjudicator or the Board. CHATEa
RULE XIII
Decisions/Resolutions/Final Orders
SECTION 1. Decisions/Resolutions/Final Orders. The
decisions/resolutions/final orders of the Adjudicator shall be in writing, prepared and
signed by him and filed with the Regional or Provincial Clerk of the Adjudicator. It
shall clearly and completely state the findings of fact and specify the evidence and
the law or jurisprudence upon which the decision is based.
The decisions/resolutions/final orders of the Board shall be in writing, prepared by
the Member to whom it is assigned, signed by the Members of the Board and filed
with the Executive Director of the Board Secretariat.
SECTION 2. Promulgation. After the judgment/resolution/final order is signed
by the Adjudicator or Members of the Board, the same shall be filed with the
Regional or Provincial Clerk of the Adjudicator or of the Board, respectively, who
shall indicate thereon the date of promulgation thereof.
SECTION 3. Notice of Decision/Resolution/Final Order. Upon promulgation of
the decision/resolution/final order, the Regional or Provincial Clerk of the Adjudicator
or of the Board, as the case may be, shall immediately cause copies thereof to be
served upon the parties and their counsel as well as the DAR and other government
officials who may take part in the execution or implementation of such
decision/resolution/final order.
In the event that a copy of the decision cannot be served upon the parties and/or
their counsel as well the DAR and other government officials for whatever reason, a
notice of the decision/resolution/final order shall be served upon the latter in the
manner provided for in Section 2, Rule VII hereof. If such manner of service fails,
the notice of the decision shall be served by publication in a newspaper of general
circulation. For this purpose, the Board shall schedule, at least once a year, the
publication of said notice falling under this section. However, at the option of the
prevailing party, the publication of the notice of decision falling under this section
may be undertaken ahead of the schedule fixed by the Board, provided that all
expenses of publication shall be shouldered by the prevailing party. All notices to be
published under this Rule shall contain the DARAB Case Number and the names of
all the parties in the case.
All the Adjudicators shall submit to the Board a periodic quarterly report of all
decisions rendered, for the purpose of including the same in the annual publication
of the notice of decisions.
All notices of decision/resolution/final order shall be written in English or in Filipino.
cECaHA
SECTION 4. Entry of Decisions/Resolutions/Final Orders. If no appeal or
motion for reconsideration is filed within the time provided in these rules, the
decision/resolution/final order of the Board or Adjudicator shall be entered in the
Book of Entries of Decisions by the Clerk of the Board and the Regional or
Provincial Clerk of the Adjudicator, respectively. The date of finality of the
decision/resolution/final order shall be deemed to be the date of its entry.
The record of entry shall contain the dispositive portion of the
decision/resolution/final orders and shall be signed by the Clerk of the Adjudicator or
of the Board, as the case may be, with a certification that such
decision/resolution/final order has become final and executory.
RULE XIV
Appeals
SECTION 1. Appeal to the Board. An appeal may be taken to the Board from
a resolution, decision or final order of the Adjudicator that completely disposes of the
case by either or both of the parties within a period of fifteen (15) days from receipt
of the resolution/decision/final order appealed from or of the denial of the movant's
motion for reconsideration by:
a. filing a Notice of Appeal together with the Appellant's Memorandum with the
Adjudicator who rendered the decision or final order appealed from;
b. furnishing copies of said Notice of Appeal together with the Appellant's
Memorandum to opposing party/s and counsel/s; and
c. paying an appeal fee of One Thousand Pesos (PhP1,000.00) to the DAR
Cashier where the Office of the Adjudicator is situated or through postal money
order, payable to the DAR Cashier where the Office of the Adjudicator is situated, at
the option of the appellant.
A pauper litigant shall be exempt from the payment of the appeal fee.
Proof of service of Notice of Appeal to the affected parties and to the Board and
payment of appeal fee shall be filed, within the reglementary period, with the
Adjudicator a quo and shall form part of the records of the case.
Non-compliance with the foregoing shall be a ground for dismissal of the appeal.
SECTION 2. Grounds. The aggrieved party may appeal to the Board from a
final order, resolution or decision of the Adjudicator on any of the following grounds
that: aDIHCT
a. Errors in the findings of fact or conclusions of law were committed which if
not corrected, would cause grave and irreparable damage or injury to the appellant;
or
b. The order, resolution or decision was obtained through fraud or coercion.
SECTION 3. Notice of Appeal and Appeal Memorandum. The Notice of Appeal
together with the Appellant's Memorandum shall:
a. be filed with the Adjudicator concerned in three (3) legible copies with proof
of service to the affected parties, and payment of appeal fee unless appellant is a
pauper litigant as provided for in Rule V, Sec. 2 hereof;
b. indicate the parties to the appeal;
c. specify the judgment or final order appealed from;
d. state the material dates showing the timeliness of the appeal; and
SECTION 4. Perfection of Appeal. An appeal is deemed perfected upon
compliance with Section 1 of this Rule.
If the appeal is perfected, the Adjudicator shall, within five (5) days from receipt of
Notice of Appeal together with Appellant's Memorandum, issue an Order stating that
the appeal was perfected in accordance with the Rules, and direct the transmittal of
records to the Board thru the Executive Director of the Board Secretariat, otherwise,
he shall issue an Order denying the said notice of appeal.
The Board thru the Executive Director of the Board Secretariat shall immediately
notify the parties that the record of the case has already been received by the
DARAB Central Office and shall order the appellee and/or his counsel to submit his
Appellee's Memorandum.
The appellee and/or his counsel may submit his Appellee's Memorandum within
fifteen (15) days from receipt of the said Order furnishing a copy thereof to the
appellant/s and the latter's counsel/s.
After the filing of their respective appeal memoranda with the Board or the lapse of
the period within which to file the same, the case shall be deemed submitted for
resolution. In case no appellee's memorandum has been filed within the
reglementary period, the Board may proceed to render judgment thereon based on
the records of the case. DAcaIE
A pauper litigant's appeal is deemed perfected upon the filing of the Notice of Appeal
together with the Appellant's Memorandum in accordance with said Section 1 of this
Rule.
SECTION 5. Motions After Filing of Notice of Appeal. Any motion, after the
perfection of the Appeal and before the elevation of the case records to the Board,
shall be filed with the Board, attaching thereto a certified copy of the Decision of the
Adjudicator, the Notice of Appeal together with the Appellant's Memorandum and
proof of payment of appeal fee. A copy of the motion shall be furnished to the
Adjudicator and the opposing parties.
SECTION 6. Transmittal of Appeal and Records. The Adjudicator concerned
shall, after the issuance of the Order stating the perfection of the appeal, transmit
the appeal to the Board, together with the complete records of the case, furnishing
the parties with copies of the letter of transmittal to the Board.
The records of the case shall contain, among others, a table of contents, all original
pleadings filed, documentary exhibits, transcripts or written summaries of the
hearings, notices, orders or decisions of the Adjudicator and proofs of service
thereof, which shall all be numbered consecutively and initialed by the Adjudicator or
the authorized Clerk of the Board on each and every page thereof.
SECTION 7. Docketing of Cases. Upon the receipt of the records of the case
on appeal, the Executive Director of the Board Secretariat shall docket the case and
notify the parties thereof.
SECTION 8. Caption. In all cases appealed to the Board, the title shall remain
as it was before the Adjudicator but the party appealing shall be further called the
"appellant" and the adverse party the "appellee", and the case shall be assigned a
docket number.
SECTION 9. Frivolous or Dilatory Appeal. To discourage frivolous or dilatory
appeals, the Board shall impose reasonable penalties, including, but not limited to,
fine or censure upon erring parties.
SECTION 10. Withdrawal of Appeal. An appeal may be withdrawn at any time
prior to the promulgation of the resolution, order or decision, except when public
interest is prejudiced thereby. Upon approval of the withdrawal of an appeal, the
case shall stand as if no appeal had ever been taken. aIcDCT
SECTION 11. When Appeal is Submitted for Decision. The appeal shall be
deemed submitted for decision upon the filing of the last pleading or memorandum
as may be required or permitted to be filed by the Board, or upon the expiration of
the period for its filing.
SECTION 12. Period to Decide Appeal. The Board shall render its decision on
appeal before it, as much as possible, within thirty (30) days after its submission.
SECTION 13. Finality of Decisions/Resolutions. Decisions/resolutions/orders of
the Board shall become final after the lapse of fifteen (15) days from receipt of a
copy thereof by the counsel or representative on record, and by the party himself
whether or not he is appearing on his own behalf, whichever is later, unless an
appeal or motion for reconsideration thereof is filed within such period. In all cases,
the parties themselves shall be furnished with a copy of the
decision/resolution/order.
If a copy of the decision cannot be served personally or by mail and publication is
effected in accordance with Section 3, Rule 13 hereof, said decision shall become
final after the lapse of sixty (60) days from the date of publication.
Only one motion for reconsideration by either party shall be allowed and entertained.
RULE XV
Judicial Review
SECTION 1. Appeal to the Court of Appeals. Any decision, order, resolution,
award or ruling of the Board on any agrarian dispute or any matter pertaining to the
application, implementation, enforcement, interpretation of agrarian reform laws or
rules and regulations promulgated thereunder, may be brought on appeal within
fifteen (15) days from receipt of a copy thereof, to the Court of Appeals in
accordance with the Rules of Court.
SECTION 2. Findings of Fact; Final and Conclusive. The findings of fact of the
Board, if based on substantial evidence, shall be final and conclusive upon the
courts pursuant to Section 54, Republic Act No. 6657.
SECTION 3. No Restraining Order or Preliminary Injunction. Except for the
Supreme Court, no court in the Philippines shall have jurisdiction to issue any
restraining order or writ of preliminary injunction against the Board or its Adjudicators
in any case, dispute or controversy arising from, necessary to, or in connection with
the application, implementation, enforcement or interpretation of the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law and other pertinent laws on agrarian reform and regulations
promulgated thereunder pursuant to Section 55, Republic Act (R.A.) No. 6657 as
amended by R.A. No. 9700. ICTHDE
RULE XVI
Relief from Decision/Resolution/Final Order
SECTION 1. Petition for Relief from Decision/Resolution/Final Order. When a
decision/resolution/final order is rendered by the Adjudicator against any party,
through fraud, accident, mistake and excusable negligence and such party has no
other adequate remedy available to him in the ordinary course of law, he may file a
petition for relief with said Adjudicator, praying that the decision/resolution/final order
be set aside.
SECTION 2. Form and Time of Filing of Petition. A petition for relief must be
verified and a copy thereof together with its annexes and supporting affidavits, if any,
must be furnished to the adverse party or parties and filed within sixty (60) days
from the time the fraud, accident, mistake or excusable negligence was discovered
and within six (6) months after the decision/resolution/final order was rendered.
The petition must be accompanied by affidavits and supporting documents showing
the fraud, accident, mistake or excusable negligence relied upon, whichever is
applicable as well as the proof of service of the petition on the other party or parties.
Without such proof of service the petition shall not be entertained.
SECTION 3. Answer. Should the petition be sufficient in form and substance,
the Adjudicator shall issue an order directing the party or parties to file their answer
thereto within fifteen (15) days from receipt of said order. The order shall also set the
date for the hearing of the petition.
SECTION 4. Procedure. If after due hearing, the petition is found to be
meritorious, the Adjudicator shall set aside the questioned decision/resolution/final
order and he shall then proceed to hear the principal case.
When an appeal from the denial of the petition for relief is granted, the Board shall
give due course to the appeal, as if a timely and proper appeal has been made from
the questioned decision/resolution/final order.
RULE XVII
Preliminary Injunction/Supervision of Harvest
SECTION 1. Preliminary Injunction, When Granted. A writ of preliminary
injunction, restraining order or a status quo order may be granted by the Board or
any two (2) of its Members or the Adjudicator, when it is established, on the basis of
allegations in the sworn complaint or motion, which shall be duly supported by
affidavits of merit, that the acts being complained of, if not enjoined, would cause
some grave and irreparable damage or injury to any of the parties in interest so as
to render ineffectual the decision which may be in favor of such party. Should the
Board or the Adjudicator believe that it is necessary to post a bond, it shall fix the
reasonable amount of the bond to be filed by the party applying for the injunction in
favor of the party who might suffer thereby, if it is finally determined that the
complainant or petitioner is not entitled thereto. Upon the filing and approval of such
bond, a writ of injunction may be issued. The Board or the Adjudicator may also
require the performance of a particular act or acts, subject to the rules herein
provided, in which case, it shall be known as a preliminary mandatory injunction.
HDacIT
SECTION 2. No Injunction to Restrain Tilling or Harvesting. In cases where
the tenurial status of a person is at issue, the Board or its Adjudicator shall not issue
any order restraining or enjoining the actual tiller from cultivating the land, or
harvesting the standing crops nor issue an order impounding the harvest, if any,
without providing him with at least fifty percent (50%) of the net harvest.
SECTION 3. Temporary Restraining Order. A temporary restraining order
issued ex-parte, shall be valid only for twenty (20) days from the date the same is
received by the respondent. During this period, the parties shall be required to
present evidence to substantiate their respective positions on whether or not a
preliminary injunction shall be granted. The period of twenty (20) days may be
extended upon motion of the proper party on valid grounds, for another twenty (20)
days from the expiration of the original period, or motu proprio by the Board.
Thereafter, no motion for further extension of the temporary restraining order shall
be allowed. After due notice and hearing, and before the lapse of the temporary
restraining order, the issue of preliminary injunction or status quo should be
resolved.
SECTION 4. Supervision of Harvest. An order for the supervision of harvest
may also be granted by the Board or any two (2) of its Members or the Adjudicator,
when it is established on the basis of the allegations in the sworn complaint or
motion, which shall be duly supported by the affidavits of merit, that one or more
persons are claiming rights adverse to the tiller on the landholding in question or
there is a dispute as to the sharing in the net harvest of the landholding.
The Order for the supervision of harvest shall remain effective unless the Board or
Adjudicator issues an order lifting or revoking the same.
RULE XVIII
Direct and Indirect Contempt
SECTION 1. Direct Contempt. The Board or any of its Members or Adjudicator
may summarily pass judgment on acts of direct contempt committed in the presence
of, or so near the Chairman or any Member of the Board or its Adjudicator, as to
obstruct or interrupt the proceedings before the same, including disrespect towards
the Members of the Board or its Adjudicator, offensive behavior towards others, or
refusal to be sworn or to answer as a witness, or to subscribe to an affidavit or
deposition when lawfully required to do so. If the offense is committed against the
Board or any of its Members or its Adjudicator, the same shall be punished by a fine
not exceeding One Thousand Pesos (P1,000.00), or imprisonment of not exceeding
ten (10) days or both. IEAacT
The judgment of the Board or any of its Members or Adjudicator on direct contempt
is immediately executory and not appealable.
SECTION 2. Indirect Contempt. The Board or any of its Members or its
Adjudicator may also cite and punish any person for indirect contempt in accordance
with Section 50 of R.A. No. 6657 as amended by R.A. No. 9700.
Proceedings for indirect contempt may be initiated motu proprio by the board or
adjudicator against which the contempt was committed by order or any other formal
charge requiring the respondent to show cause why he should not be punished for
contempt.
In all other cases, charges for indirect contempt shall be commenced by a verified
petition with supporting particulars and certified true copies of documents or papers
involved therein, and upon full compliance with the requirements for filing initiatory
pleadings in the board or adjudicator concerned. If the contempt charges arise out of
or are related to a principal action pending before the Board or Adjudicator, the
petition for contempt shall allege that fact but said petition shall be docketed, heard
and decided separately.
SECTION 3. Appeal from Indirect Contempt. Any person adjudged guilty of
indirect contempt by the Adjudicator, may, within a period of five (5) days from notice
of the judgment, appeal the same to the Board, and the execution of said judgment
shall be suspended pending the resolution of the appeal upon the filing by the said
person of a bond on condition that he will abide by, and perform the judgment should
the appeal be decided against him.
RULE XIX
Preliminary Determination of Just Compensation
SECTION 1. Principal Role of Board/Adjudicator. The principal role of the
Board/Adjudicator in the summary administrative proceedings for the preliminary
determination of just compensation is to determine whether the Land Bank of the
Philippines (LBP) and the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) in their land
valuation computations have complied with the administrative orders and other
issuances of the Secretary of the DAR and the LBP.
SECTION 2. By Whom Conducted. The preliminary proceedings of land
valuation for the purpose of the determination of just compensation for its acquisition
shall be conducted: ICTaEH
a. by the PARAD when the initial land valuation of the Land Bank of the
Philippines (LBP) is less than Ten Million Pesos (PhP10,000,000.00);
b. by the RARAD when the said valuation is Ten Million Pesos and above but
less than Fifty Million Pesos (PhP50,000,000.00); and
c. by the Board when the said valuation is Fifty Million Pesos
(PhP50,000,000.00) and above.
In the event of non-availability, inhibition or disqualification of a designated PARAD
in the locality, the RARAD concerned may conduct preliminary proceedings of land
valuation notwithstanding that the jurisdictional amount is less than Ten (10) Million
Pesos.
On account of non-availability, inhibition or disqualification of the RARAD concerned,
the Board may conduct the preliminary proceedings of land valuation or designate
the same to an Adjudicator from among the PARADs in the region.
SECTION 3. Order for Submission of Evidence, Position Papers, and Notice of
Hearing. Upon receipt of the Claim Folder (CF) containing all the pertinent
documents, the Board/Adjudicator shall issue an order:
a. to the landowner, the LBP, the DAR officials concerned, the farmer-
beneficiaries and other interested parties, that they may examine the claim folder in
the Adjudicator's possession and to submit evidence, pertinent documents, and their
respective position papers and affidavits within thirty (30) days from receipt of the
order; and
b. notifying said parties of the date set for hearing on the matter.
Thereafter, the Board/Adjudicator shall proceed to make an administrative
determination of just compensation following the procedure in ordinary cases.
The Order shall be served in the same manner as the service of summons as
provided for in Rule VII hereof.
SECTION 4. Failure to Comply with Above Order. If the parties fail to submit
the required documents and their position papers, and/or to appear on the date set
for hearing, despite proper notice, the matter shall be deemed submitted for
resolution. ADETca
SECTION 5. When Resolution Deemed Final. Failure on the part of the
aggrieved party to contest the resolution of the Board/Adjudicator within the afore-
cited reglementary period provided shall be deemed a concurrence by such party
with the land valuation, hence said valuation shall become final and executory.
SECTION 6. Filing of Original Action with the Special Agrarian Court for Final
Determination. The party who disagrees with the decision of the
Board/Adjudicator may contest the same by filing an original action with the Special
Agrarian Court (SAC) having jurisdiction over the subject property within fifteen (15)
days from his receipt of the Board/Adjudicator's decision.
Immediately upon filing with the SAC, the party shall file a Notice of Filing of Original
Action with the Board/Adjudicator, together with a certified true copy of the petition
filed with the SAC.
Failure to file a Notice of Filing of Original Action or to submit a certified true copy of
the petition shall render the decision of the Board/Adjudicator final and executory.
Upon receipt of the Notice of Filing of Original Action or certified true copy of the
petition filed with the SAC, no writ of execution shall be issued by the
Board/Adjudicator.
SECTION 7. Notice of Resolution. A copy of the resolution of the
Board/Adjudicator shall be sent to the landowner, the Land Bank of the Philippines,
the potential farmer beneficiaries, other interested parties, and their counsels.
SECTION 8. Return of Claim Folder. The Board/Adjudicator shall, within three
(3) days from return of the notice of the resolution pursuant to the preceding section,
transmit the Claim Folder (CF), together with the complete records thereof to the
office of origin or the Provincial Agrarian Reform Officer (PARO) concerned, copy
furnished the LBP.
SECTION 9. Execution of Judgments for Just Compensation Which Have
Become Final and Executory. The Sheriff shall enforce a writ of execution of a
final judgment for compensation by demanding for the payment of the amount stated
in the writ of execution in cash and bonds against the Agrarian Reform Fund in the
custody of the LBP in accordance with RA 6657, as amended, and the LBP shall pay
the same in accordance with the final judgment and the writ of execution within five
(5) days from the time the landowner accordingly executes and submits to the LBP
the corresponding deed/s of transfer in favor of the government and surrenders the
muniments of title to the property in accordance with Section 16 (c) of RA 6657, as
amended. CDESIA
RULE XX
Execution
SECTION 1. Execution Upon Final Order or Decision. Execution shall issue
upon an order, resolution or decision that finally disposes of the action or
proceeding. Such execution shall issue as a matter of course and upon the
expiration of the period to appeal therefrom if no appeal has been duly perfected.
The Adjudicator concerned may, upon certification by the proper officer that a
resolution, order or decision has been served to the counsel or representative on
record and to the party himself, and has become final and executory, and, upon
motion or motu proprio, issue a writ of execution ordering the DAR Sheriff or any
DAR officer to enforce the same. In appropriate cases, the Board or any of its
Members or its Adjudicator shall deputize and direct the Philippine National Police,
Armed Forces of the Philippines or any of their component units or other law
enforcement agencies in the enforcement of any final order, resolution or decision.
SECTION 2. Execution Pending Appeal. Any motion for execution of the
decision of the Adjudicator pending appeal shall be filed before the Board which may
grant the same upon meritorious grounds, upon the posting of a sufficient bond in
the amount conditioned for the payment of damages which the aggrieved party may
suffer, in the event that the final order or decision is reversed on appeal, provided
that the bond requirement shall not apply if the movant is a farmer-
beneficiary/pauper litigant.
SECTION 3. Execution When Issued; Exception. On motion of the prevailing
party or motu proprio, the Adjudicator shall order execution of an order or decision
that has already become final and executory.
Appeal shall not stay the execution of a decision or order except when the ejectment
of a tenant farmer, agricultural lessee or tiller, settler, or amortizing owner-cultivator
is directed, or a decision or a portion thereof involving solely the issue of just
compensation.
When the decision is based on an amicable settlement or compromise agreement,
the same shall be immediately executory.
SECTION 4. Execution by Motion or by Independent Action. A final and
executory judgment may be executed on motion within five (5) years from the date
of its entry. After the lapse of such time, and before it is barred by the statute of
limitations, a judgment may be enforced by action.
SECTION 5. Execution in Case of Death of Party. Where a party dies after the
entry of the judgment or order, execution thereon may issue, or one already issued
may be enforced in the following manner:
a. In case of the death of the judgment obligee, upon application of his
executor or administrator, or successor in interest; CTcSIA
b. In case of the death of the judgment obligor, against his executor or
administrator or successor in interest;
c. In case of the death of the judgment obligor after execution is actually levied
upon any of his property, the same may be sold for the satisfaction thereof, in the
manner provided for by the Rules of Court and the officer making the sale shall
account for any surplus in his hands to the corresponding executors or
administrator.
Provided, however, that if the judgment is for payment of rental in arrearages
claimed against the tenant-farmer, agricultural lessee or tiller or settler or amortizing
owner-cultivator, execution shall be levied upon the produce of the landholding not
exceeding 75%.
SECTION 6. Issuance, Form, and Contents of a Writ of Execution. The writ of
execution must be issued by the Board or its Adjudicator which granted the motion.
It must intelligently refer to such judgment or order attaching a certified copy of the
judgment or order to the writ of execution and requiring the sheriff or any proper
officer to whom it is directed to enforce the writ according to its terms, upon the party
against whom the same is rendered, or upon any other person required thereby, or
by law, to obey the same, and such party or person may be punished for contempt,
if he disobeys such judgment.
SECTION 7. Judgment for Specified Acts Vesting Title. If a judgment directs a
party to execute a conveyance of land, or to deliver deeds or other documents, or to
perform any other specific act, and the party fails to comply within the time specified,
the Board or the Adjudicator may direct the act to be done by some other person
appointed by the said Board or Adjudicator at the cost of the disobedient party and
the act when so done shall have like effects as if done by such disobedient party.
SECTION 8. Return of Writ of Execution. The writ of execution shall be
returned to the Board or Adjudicator issuing it immediately after the judgment has
been satisfied in part or in full. If the judgment cannot be satisfied in part or in full
within thirty (30) days after his receipt of the writ, the officer shall report to the Board
or Adjudicator, as the case may be, and state the reason therefor. Such writ shall
continue in effect during the period within which the judgment may be enforced by
motion. The officer shall make a report every thirty (30) days on the proceedings
taken thereon until the judgment is satisfied in full, or its effectivity expires. The
return or periodic reports shall set forth the whole proceedings taken, and shall be
filed with the Board Secretariat or Clerk of the Adjudicator, as the case may be, to be
preserved with the other papers in the case. A certified copy of the record of an
execution in the execution book kept by the Board Secretariat or Clerk or of the
officer's return thereon, shall be evidence of the contents of the originals whenever
they, or any part thereof, have been lost or destroyed. TSacID
SECTION 9. Property Exempt from Execution. Except as otherwise expressly
provided by law, the following properties, and no other, shall be exempt from
execution:
a. the judgment obligor's family home as provided by law or, the homestead in
which he resides, and land necessarily used in connection therewith, unless the
family home or homestead is the subject matter of the dispute;
b. tools and implements necessarily used by him in his trade or employment;
c. beasts of burden necessarily used by him in his ordinary occupation;
d. his necessary clothing and articles for ordinary personal use, excluding
jewelry;
e. household furniture and utensils necessary for housekeeping, and used for
that purpose by the judgment obligor and his family, such as the judgment obligor
may select, of a value not exceeding One Hundred Thousand Pesos
(PhP100,000.00);
f. provisions for individual or family use sufficient for four months;
g. the professional libraries of attorneys, judges, physicians, pharmacists,
dentists, engineers, surveyors, clergymen, teachers, and other professionals, not
exceeding Three Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP300,000.00) in value;
h. one (1) fishing boat and accessories not exceeding the total value of One
Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP100,000.00), owned by any fishermen by the lawful
use of which he earns a livelihood;
i. so much of the earnings of the judgment obligor for his personal services
within the four (4) months preceding the levy as are necessary for the support of his
family;
j. lettered gravestones;
k. all moneys, benefits, privileges, or annuities accruing or in any manner
growing out of any life insurance;
l. the right to receive legal support, or money or property obtained as such
support, or any pension or gratuity from the government; and
m. properties especially exempt by law.
But no article or species of property mentioned in this section shall be exempt from
execution issued upon a judgment involving said property, upon judgment recovered
for its price or upon a judgment of foreclosure of a mortgage thereon. SDIACc
SECTION 10. How Execution for the Delivery or Restitution of Property Enforced.
The officer must enforce an execution for the delivery or restitution of property by
ousting therefrom the person against whom the judgment is rendered and placing
the judgment obligee in possession of such property, and by levying upon so much
of the property of the judgment obligor as will satisfy the amount of the judgment
and costs included in the writ of execution.
SECTION 11. Removal of Improvements on Property Subject of Execution.
When the property subject of the execution contains improvements constructed or
planted by the judgment obligor or his agent, the officer shall not destroy, demolish
or remove said improvements except upon order of the Board or the Adjudicator
issued upon petition of the judgment obligee after due hearing and after the former
has failed to remove the same within the time fixed by the Board or Adjudicator.
SECTION 12. Effect of Judgment or Final Order. The effect of a judgment or
final order rendered by the Board or Adjudicator having jurisdiction to pronounce the
judgment or order, may be as follows:
a. In case of judgment or order against a specific thing or property, the
judgment or order is conclusive upon the title or right to the thing or property;
b. In other cases, the judgment or order is, with respect to the matter directly
adjudged or as to any other matter that could have been raised in relation thereto,
conclusive between the parties and their successors in interest by title subsequent
to the commencement of the action, litigating for the same thing and under the same
title and in the same capacity; and
c. In any other litigation between the same parties or their successors in
interest, that only is deemed to have been adjudged in a former judgment which
appears upon its face to have been so adjudged, or which was actually and
necessarily included therein or necessary thereto.
RULE XXI
Board Regulations
SECTION 1. Internal Business. The Members of the Board, sitting en banc,
shall make appropriate orders or rules to govern the assignment of cases among its
Members, and other matters relating to the business of the Board.
Such Orders or Rules, as may be so adopted by the Board, shall continue in force
until repealed, amended or modified/altered by it. TIaCHA
SECTION 2. Assignment of Cases. All cases brought to or filed with the Board
shall be raffled among the Members thereof for hearing and/or decision, in
accordance with the orders and/or internal rules that the Board may adopt.
All motions, pleadings and other matters filed after the case has already been
assigned to a Member of the Board, shall immediately be referred to the said
Member for appropriate action thereon and consolidation with the records file
thereof.
SECTION 3. En Banc Meeting. The Board shall sit en banc in the performance
of its policy and rule-making power and in the exercise of its administrative and
adjudicatory functions.
A majority of the actual Members of the Board shall constitute a quorum for its
session en banc.
The affirmative votes of the majority of the Members shall be necessary to
promulgate policies and rules of the Board.
SECTION 4. Presiding Officer. The Secretary of the Department of Agrarian
Reform, or in his absence, the designated Vice-Chair of the Board, shall act as the
Chair and shall preside over its deliberations.
SECTION 5. Hearing and Pronouncement of a Decision/Resolution/Final Order.
The participation of the Members of the Board in the deliberation, and the
concurrence and signature of a majority of its Members, shall be required for the
pronouncement of a decision/resolution/final order determining the merits of a case
on appeal before it.
However, the concurrence of only two (2) members shall be necessary in the
issuance of interlocutory orders.
RULE XXII
The Board Secretariat
SECTION 1. The Board Secretariat. There shall be a Board Secretariat, which
shall be headed by the Executive Director who shall, among others, serve and
function as the Clerk of the Board. HTDcCE
SECTION 2. Filing of Pleadings and Documents. Pleadings, documents, and
all other matters brought to the Board shall be filed with the Secretariat, which shall
keep a complete file thereof and be responsible therefor.
In cases where the matter, question or controversy brought before the Board is
raffled to a Member thereof, the original records shall be referred to such member,
with a complete copy of the records kept on file with the Secretariat. Thereafter, all
pleadings, documents and papers related thereto shall be filed with the Secretariat,
which shall forward the same to the Member concerned, with copies furnished the
Secretariat.
SECTION 3. Custody of the Seal and Books of the Board. The Secretariat
shall have custody of the seal of the Board together with all the records of all the
proceedings of the Board including the exhibits, documentary evidence, case folders
and the files of the same.
SECTION 4. Access to the Board Records. All official records of the Board
shall be open to the public during normal office hours subject to the payment of the
required fees except those that are classified as confidential which cannot be
divulged without violating the rights of the parties concerned or prejudicing public
interest.
SECTION 5. Calendar, General Docket, and Other Books of the Board. The
Secretariat shall prepare a calendar and entry of the proceedings of the Board in a
Minute Book. The designated officer of the Secretariat shall take charge of the
service of the orders, decisions, subpoenas, and other processes issued by the
Board and certify the date and hour of promulgation of any order as well as the
names of all parties who were notified thereof.
The Secretariat shall keep a general docket for the said Board, duly numbered and
containing entries of all the original and appealed cases before it.
The Secretariat shall keep a compilation of copies of all resolutions, orders and
decisions issued by the Board in the order of their dates of promulgation. CHIScD
SECTION 6. Releasing of Communications, Issuances and Other Matters. All
communications and/or issuances pertaining to the Board and other matters before
the Board shall be released only thru the Secretariat which shall keep a record
and/or file a copy thereof and be responsible therefor.
SECTION 7. Issuance of Certified True Copies. Upon proper written request,
the Secretariat shall issue to any party a certified true copy, under the seal of the
Board, of any document, record, resolution, order, or decision, or entry under its
custody, subject to the payment of the required fees and limitations imposed in
Section 4 hereof.
RULE XXIII
Other Fees, Charges and Costs
SECTION 1. Payment of Fees. Upon the filing of the pleading or other
application which initiates an action or proceeding, the fees prescribed therefor shall
be paid in full.
SECTION 2. Filing Fees. A filing fee of One Thousand (P1,000.00) Pesos plus
a legal research fee of One Hundred (100.00) Pesos shall be charged for any
petition or complaint filed with the Adjudicator, as an original action.
The pauper litigant as stated in Section 2 of Rule V of these Rules is exempt from
the payment of the herein filing fees.
SECTION 3. Legal Fees. The following legal fees shall be charged and
collected.
a. For furnishing certified transcript of the records or additional copies of any
record, decision, ruling or entry of which any party is entitled to demand and receive
a copy, Seven (P7.00) Pesos per page;
b. For every certificate not on process, Ten (P10.00) Pesos per page;
c. For every search of any record of more than one year outstanding and
reading the same, Fifteen (P15.00) Pesos.
SECTION 4. Where Fees to be Paid. The fees herein shall be paid by the
party concerned to the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) Cashier or its
counterpart offices at the time of filing or request. If the fees are not paid, the Board
or Adjudicator may refuse to take action thereon until they are paid except as
otherwise provided herein. For this purpose, the Department of Agrarian Reform
(DAR) Cashier or its counterpart offices shall segregate all fees collected from its
general fund and shall also maintain a separate Book of Account, for all transactions
covered hereunder. EaISTD
SECTION 5. Sheriffs, and Other Persons Serving Processes.
a. For serving summons and copy of complaint, One Hundred Pesos
(PhP100.00) for each defendant;
b. For serving subpoenas, Eighty Pesos (PhP80.00) for each witness to be
served;
c. For serving a temporary restraining order, or writ of injunction, preliminary or
final, Two Hundred Pesos (PhP200.00);
d. For filing bonds or other instruments of indemnity or security in provisional
remedies, Eighty Pesos (PhP80.00) for each bond or instrument;
e. For executing a writ or process to place a party in possession of real estate,
Four Hundred Pesos (PhP400.00);
f. For advertising sale, excluding the cost of publication, Two Hundred Pesos
(PhP200.00) Pesos;
g. For taking inventory of goods levied upon when the inventory is ordered by
the Board or its Adjudicator, Four Hundred Pesos (PhP400.00) per day of actual
inventory work;
h. For levying on execution per personal or real property, Two Hundred Pesos
(PhP200.00);
i. For money collected by him by order, execution, attachment, or any other
process, the following sums, to wit:
1. On the first Four Thousand Pesos (PhP4,000.00), four per centum (4%);
and
2. On all sums in excess of Four Thousand Pesos (PhP4,000.00), two per
centum (2%).
In addition to the fees herein above fixed, the party requesting for the issuance of
any process whether preliminary, incidental, or final, shall pay the sheriff's expenses
in serving or executing the process, or safeguarding the property levied upon,
attached or seized, including actual travel expenses by the regular means of
transportation, guards' fees, warehousing and similar charges, in an amount
estimated by the Sheriff, subject to the approval of the Board or Adjudicator. Upon
approval of said estimated expenses, the interested party shall deposit such amount
with the Clerk-of-the-Board and ex-officio Sheriff, who shall disburse the same to the
Sheriff assigned to effect the process. Any unspent amount shall be refunded to the
party making the deposit. A full report shall be submitted by the Sheriff assigned with
his return and the Sheriff's expenses shall be taxed as cost against the losing party.
TaEIAS
SECTION 6. Stenographers. Stenographers shall give certified transcripts of
notes taken by them to any party requesting for the same upon due payment of
Seven Pesos (PhP7.00) for each page of not less than two hundred fifty (250) the date of effectivity of these Rules, shall be governed by the DARAB Rules
words. prevailing at the time of their filing.
SECTION 7. Costs. Cost may be allowed to the prevailing party but the Board Provided that all cases or proceedings involving the cancellation of EPs, CLOAs and
or the Adjudicator, as the case may be, shall have the power, for special reasons, to other titles issued under any agrarian reform program which are registered with the
adjudge that either party shall pay the costs of an action, or that the same be divided Registry of Deeds and which remain pending before the Board or Adjudicator, as of
as may be equitable. No costs shall be allowed against the Republic of the June 30, 2009, shall be referred to the Secretary of the DAR within thirty (30) days
Philippines unless otherwise provided by law. immediately upon the effectivity of these Rules, unless those cases deemed
SECTION 8. Costs in Actions or Proceedings. In any action or proceedings submitted for resolution, in accordance with Sec. 9, R.A. No. 9700.
before the Board or Adjudicator, the prevailing party may recover the following costs: Provided, further, that all previously acquired lands wherein valuation is subject to
a. For his own attendance and that of his attorney, down to and including final challenge by landowners' shall be completed and finally resolved pursuant to
judgment, Three Hundred Pesos (PhP300.00); Section 17 of R.A. No. 6657, as amended by R.A. No. 9700.
b. All lawful fees charged against him by the Board or Adjudicator, in entering SECTION 2. Separability Provisions. If, for any reason, any portion or
and docketing the action and recording the proceedings and judgment therein and provision of these Rules is declared unconstitutional or invalid by the Supreme
for the issuance of all proceedings; Court, no other provision of these Rules shall be affected thereby.
c. If testimony is received by the Board or Adjudicator not taken from another SECTION 3. Repealing Clause. The 2003 DARAB Rules and all DAR
tribunal or a court of justice and transmitted thereto, the prevailing party shall be Administrative Orders, Circulars and DAR Adjudication Board Resolutions
allowed the same cost for witness fees, depositions, processes and service thereof; promulgated and issued prior to the effectivity of these Rules that are inconsistent
and herewith are hereby repealed and/or modified accordingly.
d. The legal fees of the Board or Adjudicator in an action may also be SECTION 4. Effectivity Clause. These Rules shall take effect immediately after
adjudged against the defeated party, or apportioned as justice requires. its publication in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation. TcHEaI
SECTION 9. Dismissal of Action or Appeal. If an action or an appeal is Done this September 1, 2009 at Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines.
dismissed for want of jurisdiction or otherwise, the Board or Adjudicator, THE DAR ADJUDICATION BOARD:
nevertheless, shall have the power to render judgment for costs, as justice may (SGD.) NASSER C. PANGANDAMAN
require. Secretary
SECTION 10. Attorney's Fees as Costs. Attorney's Fees may be charged as Chairman
costs against the adverse party in accordance with Article 2208 of the New Civil (SGD.) GERUNDIO C. MADUEO
Code. Undersecretary, PPEAO
SECTION 11. Costs When Witness Fails to Appear. If a witness fails to appear Ex-officio Member
at the time and place specified in the subpoena issued by the Board or the (SGD.) AMBROSIO B. DE LUNA
Adjudicator, the costs for the arrest of the witness shall be paid by the witness if the Undersecretary, LAO
Board or Adjudicator shall determine that his failure to answer the subpoena was Ex-officio Member
willful and/or without just excuse. DAEaTS (SGD.) EDGAR A. IGANO
SECTION 12. Government is Exempt. The Republic of the Philippines, its Assistant Secretary, LAO
national agencies and instrumentalities, are exempt from paying the legal fees Vice-Chair
provided in this rule. Local governments and government-owned or controlled (SGD.) MA. PATRICIA P. RUALO-BELLO
corporations, with or without independent charters, are not exempt from paying such Board Member III
fees. (SGD.) JIM G. COLETO
RULE XXIV Board Member III
Miscellaneous Provisions (SGD.) ARNOLD C. ARRIETA
SECTION 1. Transitory Provisions. These Rules shall govern all cases filed on Board Member III
or after its effectivity. All cases pending with the Board and the Adjudicators, prior to
Case: Vda. de Tangub vs. CA, UDK 9864, December 3, 1990
FIRST DIVISION [UDK No. 9864 : December 3, 1990.]
RUFINA VDA. DE TANGUB, Petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS, PRESIDING
JUDGE of the [CAR] RTC, Branch 4, Iligan City, and SPOUSES DOMINGO and
EUGENIA MARTIL, Respondents.
DECISION
NARVASA, J.:
The jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Court, acting as a special agrarian court, in the
light of Executive Orders Numbered 129-A and 229 and Republic Act No. 6657, is
what is at issue in the proceeding at bar.
Rufina Tangub and her husband, Andres, now deceased, filed with the Regional Trial
Court of Lanao del Norte in March, 1988, "an agrarian case for damages by reason
of the(ir) unlawful dispossession . . .was tenants from the landholding" owned by the
Spouses Domingo and Eugenia Martil. 1 Several persons were also impleaded as
defendants, including the Philippine National Bank, it being alleged by the plaintiff
spouses that said bank, holder of a mortgage on the land involved, had caused
foreclosure thereof, resulting in the acquisition of the property by the bank as the
highest bidder at the foreclosure sale, and in the sale by the latter, some time later,
of portions of the land to the other persons named as its co-defendants (all
employees of the National Steel Corporation), and it being prayed that mortgage
and the transactions thereafter made in relation thereto be annulled and voided. 2
In an Order rendered on August 24, 1988, respondent Judge Felipe G. Javier, Jr.
dismissed the complaint. 3 He opined that by virtue of Executive Order No. 229
"providing the mechanisms for the implementation of the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Program approved on July 24, 1987" Executive No. 129-A approved on
July 26, 1987, as well as the Rules of the Adjudication Board of the Department of
Agrarian Reform, jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Court over agrarian cases had
been transferred to the Department of Agrarian Reform.:-cralaw
The Tangub Spouses filed a petition for Certiorari with this Court, docketed as UDK-
8867, assigned to the Second Division. Discerning however no special and
important reason for taking cognizance of the action, this Court referred the same to
the Court of Appeals, that tribunal having concurrent jurisdiction to act thereon.: nad
The Court of Appeals, by Decision promulgated on October 23, 1989, 4 dismissed
the petition, finding that the jurisdictional question had been correctly resolved by
the Trial Court. The Court of Appeals, adverted to a case earlier decided by it, on
August 30, 1989, Estanislao Casinillo v. Hon. Felipe G. Javier, Jr., et al., in which it
was "emphatically ruled that agrarian cases no longer fall under the jurisdiction of
Regional Trial Courts but rather under the jurisdiction of the DAR Adjudication
Board." 5 The ruling was grounded on the provisions of Executive Orders Numbered
229, approved on July 22, 1987, and 129-A, issued on July 26, 1987, in relation to
Republic Act No. 6657, effective on June 15, 1988. Said executive orders, it was
pointed out, were issued by President Corazon C. Aquino undoubtedly in the
exercise of her revolutionary powers in accordance with Section 6, Article XVIII
[Transitory Provisions] of the 1986 Constitution providing that the "incumbent
President shall continue to exercise legislative powers until the first Congress is
convened."
The petitioner Rufina Vda. de Tangub, now widowed, is once again before this
Court, contending that the Trial Court's "order of dismissal of August 26, 1988, and
the decision of the Honorable Court of Appeals affirming it, are patently illegal and
unconstitutional" because they deprive "a poor tenant access to courts and directly
violate R.A. 6657, PD 946, and Batas Bilang 129."
The petition is without merit.
Section 1 of Executive Order No. 229 sets out the scope of the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Program (CARP). It states that the program
". . . shall cover, regardless of tenurial arrangement and commodity
produce, all public and private agricultural land as provided in Proclamation
No. 131 dated July 22, 1987, including whenever applicable in accordance
with law, other lands of the public domain suitable to agriculture."
Section 17 thereof.
1) vested the Department of Agrarian Reform with "quasi-judicial powers to
determine and adjudicate agrarian reform matters," and
2) granted it "jurisdiction over all matters involving implementation of
agrarian reform, except those falling under the exclusive original jurisdiction
of the DENR and the Department of Agriculture [DA], as well as "powers to
punish for contempt and to issue subpoena, subpoena duces tecum and
writs to enforce its orders or decisions."
Section 4 of Executive Order No. 129-A made the Department of Agrarian Reform
"responsible for implementing the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program, and,
for such purpose," authorized it, among others, to
"(g) Provide free legal services to agrarian reform beneficiaries and resolve agrarian
conflicts and land tenure problems; . . (and)
x x x
(j) Approve or disapprove the conversion, restructuring or readjustment of
agricultural lands into non-agricultural uses: . ."
And Section 5 of the same Executive Order No. 129-A specified the powers and
functions of the Department of Agrarian Reform, including the following::- nad
"(b) Implement all agrarian laws, and for this purpose, punish for contempt and issue
subpoena, subpoena duces tecum, writ of execution of its decision, and other legal
processes to ensure successful and expeditious program implementation; the
decisions of the Department may in proper cases, be appealed to the Regional Trial
Courts but shall be immediately executory notwithstanding such appeal;
x x x
(h) Provide free legal service to agrarian reform beneficiaries and resolve agrarian
conflicts and land tenure related problems as may be provided for by laws;
(i) Have exclusive authority to approve or disapprove conversion of agricultural
lands for residential, commercial, industrial, and other land uses as may be provided
. . ."
The jurisdiction thus conferred on the Department of Agrarian Reform, i.e.:
(a) adjudication of all matters involving implementation of agrarian reform;
(b) resolution of agrarian conflicts and land tenure related problems; and
(c) approval or disapproval of the conversion, restructuring or readjustment of
agricultural lands into residential, commercial, industrial, and other non-agricultural
uses,
is evidently quite as extensive as that theretofore vested in the Regional Trial Court
by Presidential Decree No. 946, which extended to the rights and obligations of
persons in the cultivation and use of agricultural land, and other matters affecting
tenant-farmers, agricultural lessees, settlers, owner-cultivators, farms' cooperatives
or organizations under laws, Presidential Decrees, Orders, instructions, Rules and
Regulations in relation to the agrarian reform program. 6 Clearly, the latter must be
deemed to have been eliminated by its being subsumed in the broad jurisdiction
conferred on the Department of Agrarian Reform. The intention evidently was to
transfer original jurisdiction to the Department of Agrarian Reform, a proposition
stressed by the rules formulated and promulgated by the Department for the
implementation of the executive orders just quoted. 7 The rules included the creation
of the Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board designed to exercise the adjudicatory
functions of the Department, and the allocation to it of
". . . original and exclusive jurisdiction over the subject matter vested upon it by law,
and all cases, disputes, controversies and matters or incidents involving the
implementation of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program under Executive
Order No. 229, Executive Order No. 129-A, Republic Act No. 3844, as amended by
Republic Act No. 6289, Presidential Decree No. 27 and other agrarian laws and their
implementing rules and regulations."
The implementing rules also declare that "(s)pecifically, such jurisdiction shall extend
over but not be limited to . . (that theretofore vested in the Regional Trial Courts, i.e.)
(c)ases involving the rights and obligations of persons engaged in the cultivation and
use of agricultural land covered by the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program
(CARP) and other agrarian laws . . ."
The matter has since been further and definitively clarified by Republic Act No.
6657, which was signed into law by President Aquino on June 10, 1988 and became
effective immediately after its "publication in two (2) national newspapers of general
circulation" on June 15, 1988. The Act makes references to and explicitly recognizes
the effectivity and applicability of Presidential Decree No. 229. 8 More particularly,
the Act echoes the provisions of Section 17 of Presidential Decree No. 229, supra,
investing the Department of Agrarian Reform with original jurisdiction, generally, over
all cases involving agrarian laws, although, as shall shortly be pointed out, it
restores to the Regional Trial Court, limited jurisdiction over two groups of cases.
Section 50 reads as follows:
"SEC. 50. Quasi-Judicial Powers of the DAR. The DAR is hereby vested with
primary jurisdiction to determine and adjudicate agrarian reform matters and shall
have exclusive original jurisdiction over all matters involving the implementation of
agrarian reform, except those falling under the exclusive jurisdiction of the
Department of Agriculture [DA] and the Department of Environment and Natural
Resources [DENR].
It shall not be bound by technical rules of procedure and evidence but shall proceed
to hear and decide all cases, disputes or controversies in a most expeditious
manner, employing all reasonable means to ascertain the facts of every case in
accordance with justice and equity and the merits of the case. Toward this end, it
shall adopt a uniform rule of procedure to achieve a just, expeditious and
inexpensive determination of every action or proceeding before it.
It shall have the power to summon witnesses, administer oaths, take testimony,
require submission of reports, compel the production of books and documents and
answers to interrogatories and issue subpoena and subpoena duces tecum and to
enforce its writs through sheriffs or other duly deputized officers. It shall likewise
have the power to punish direct and indirect contempts in the same manner and
subject to the same penalties as provided in the Rules of Court. x x x
Notwithstanding an appeal to the court of appeals, the decision of the DAR shall be
immediately executory." 9
The Regional Trial Courts have not, however, been completely divested of "Responsible farmer leaders shall be allowed to represent themselves, their fellow
jurisdiction over agrarian reform matters. Section 56 of RA 6657, on the other hand, farmers, or their organizations in any proceedings before the DAR: Provided,
confers "special jurisdiction" on "Special Agrarian Courts," which are Regional Trial however, That when there are two or more representatives for any individual or
Courts designated by the Supreme Court at least one (1) branch within each group, the representatives should choose only one among themselves to represent
province to act as such. These Regional Trial Courts qua Special Agrarian Courts such party or group before any DAR proceedings."
have, according to Section 57 of the same law, original and exclusive jurisdiction
WHEREFORE, for lack of merit, the petition is DISMISSED, and the Decision of the
over:
Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP. No. 16725 dated October 23, 1989, AFFIRMED,
1) "all petitions for the determination of just compensation to land-owners," without pronouncement as to costs.
and
SO ORDERED.
2) "the prosecution of all criminal offenses under . . [the] Act."
Cruz, Gancayco, Grio-Aquino and Medialdea, JJ., concur.
In these cases, "(t)he Rules of Court shall apply . . unless modified by . . . (the) Act."
It is relevant to mention in this connection that
(1) appeals from decisions of the Special Agrarian Courts "may be taken by
filing a petition for review with the Court of Appeals within fifteen (15) days
from receipt or notice of the decision, . ." 10 and
(2) appeals from any "decision, order, award or ruling of the DAR on any
agrarian dispute or on any matter pertaining to the application,
implementation, enforcement, or interpretation of this Act and other pertinent
laws on agrarian reform may be brought to the Court of Appeals by
Certiorari 11 except as otherwise provided . . . within fifteen (15) days from
receipt of a copy thereof," the "findings of fact of the DAR [being] final and
conclusive if based on substantial evidence." 12
The Regional Trial Court of Iligan City was therefore correct in dismissing Agrarian
Case No. 1094. It being a case concerning the rights of the plaintiffs as tenants on
agricultural land, not involving the "special jurisdiction" of said Trial Court acting as a
Special Agrarian Court, it clearly came within the exclusive original jurisdiction of the
Department of Agrarian Reform, or more particularly, the Agrarian Reform
Adjudication Board, established precisely to wield the adjudicatory powers of the
Department, supra.
The petitioner had not bothered to substantiate her contention that she has been
denied access to the courts, which is just as well. The contention is on its face
utterly without merit. It may profit her and her counsel to realize that apart from
granting all concerned parties access to a quasi-judicial forum (the Adjudication
Board of the Department of Agrarian Reform), the law strives to make resolution of
controversies therein more expeditious and inexpensive, by providing not only that
the Board "shall not be bound by technical rules of procedure and evidence," supra,
but also that, as explicitly stated by the penultimate paragraph of Section 50 of the
Act::-cralaw
i

ii

iii

iv

vi

vii

viii

ix

xi

xii

xiii

xiv

xv

xvi

xvii

xviii

xix

xx

xxi

xxii

xxiii

xxiv

xxv

xxvi

xxvii

xxviii

xxix

xxx

xxxi

xxxii
xxxiii

xxxiv

xxxv

xxxvi

xxxvii

xxxviii

xxxix

xl

xli

xlii

xliii

xliv

xlv

xlvi

xlvii

xlviii

xlix

li