chavez vs. public estate authority (2002)

7/27/2019 Chavez vs. Public Estate Authority (2002)

1/25

Republic of the PhilippinesSUPREME COURT

Manila

EN BANC

G.R. No. 133250 July 9, 2002

FRANCISCO I. CHAVEZ,petitioner,vs.

PU!IC ESTATES AUTHORIT" #$% AMARI COASTA! A" &EVE!OPMENTCORPORATION,respondents.

CARPIO,J.:

This is an original Petition for Mandamus ith pra!er for a rit of preliminar! in"unctionand a temporar! restraining order. The petition see#s to compel the Public EstatesAuthorit! $%PEA% for brevit!& to disclose all facts on PEA's then on(going renegotiationsith Amari Coastal Ba! and )evelopment Corporation $%AMAR*% for brevit!& to reclaimportions of Manila Ba!. The petition further see#s to en"oin PEA from signing a neagreement ith AMAR* involving such reclamation.

T'( F#)*+

+n November -, /01, the government, through the Commissioner of Public 2igha!s,

signed a contract ith the Construction and )evelopment Corporation of the Philippines$%C)CP% for brevit!& to reclaim certain foreshore and offshore areas of Manila Ba!. Thecontract also included the construction of Phases * and ** of the Manila(Cavite CoastalRoad. C)CP obligated itself to carr! out all the or#s in consideration of fift! percent ofthe total reclaimed land.

+n 3ebruar! 4, /00, then President 3erdinand E. Marcos issued Presidential )ecree No.-54 creating PEA. P) No. -54 tas#ed PEA %to reclaim land, including foreshore andsubmerged areas,% and %to develop, improve, ac6uire, 7 7 7 lease and sell an! and all#inds of lands.%+n the same date, then President Marcos issued Presidential )ecree No.-58 transferring to PEA the %lands reclaimed in the foreshore and offshore of the ManilaBa!%under the Manila(Cavite Coastal Road and Reclamation Pro"ect $MCCRRP&.

+n )ecember /, /5, then President Marcos issued a memorandum directing PEA toamend its contract ith C)CP, so that %9A:ll future or#s in MCCRRP 7 7 7 shall be funded

and oned b! PEA.% Accordingl!, PEA and C)CP e7ecuted a Memorandum of Agreementdated )ecember /, /5, hich stated;

%$i& C)CP shall underta#e all reclamation, construction, and such other othe MCCRRP as ma! be agreed upon b! the parties, to be paid accordiprogress of or#s on a unit price


2/25

Committee Report No. 8- dated =eptember , //0.0Among the conclusions of theirreport are; $& the reclaimed lands PEA see#s to transfer to AMAR* under the DA are landsof the public domain hich the government has not classified as alienable lands andtherefore PEA cannot alienate these landsG $& the certificates of title covering the3reedom *slands are thus void, and $1& the DA itself is illegal.

+n )ecember 8, //0, then President 3idel D. Ramos issued Presidential Administrative+rder No. 18 creating a >egal Tas# 3orce to conduct a stud! on the legalit! of the DA invie of =enate Committee Report No. 8-. The members of the >egal Tas# 3orce ere the=ecretar! of ustice,5the Chief Presidential >egal Counsel,/and the Fovernment CorporateCounsel.-The >egal Tas# 3orce upheld the legalit! of the DA, contrar! to the conclusions

reached b! the =enate Committees.

+n April 4 and 8, //5, the Philippine Daily Inquirerand Todaypublished reports thatthere ere on(going renegotiations beteen PEA and AMAR* under an order issued b!then President 3idel D. Ramos. According to these reports, PEA )irector Nestor Hala, PEAChairman Arsenio Iulo and retired Nav! +fficer =ergio Cru composed the negotiatingpanel of PEA.

+n April 1, //5, Antonio M. Julueta filed before the Court a Petition for Prohibition withApplication for the Issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order and PreliminaryInjunctiondoc#eted as F.R. No. 1//4 see#ing to nullif! the DA. The Court dismissed thepetition %for unarranted disregard of "udicial hierarch!, ithout pre"udice to the refiling ofthe case before the proper court.%

+n April 0, //5, petitioner 3ran# *. Chave $%Petitioner% for brevit!& as a ta7pa!er, filed

the instant Petition for Mandamus with Prayer for the Issuance of a rit of PreliminaryInjunction and Temporary Restraining Order. Petitioner contends the government standsto lose billions of pesos in the sale b! PEA of the reclaimed lands to AMAR*. Petitionerpra!s that PEA publicl! disclose the terms of an! renegotiation of the DA, invo#ing =ection5, Article **, and =ection 0, Article ***, of the /50 Constitution on the right of the peopleto information on matters of public concern. Petitioner assails the sale to AMAR* of lands ofthe public domain as a blatant violation of =ection 1, Article K** of the /50 Constitutionprohibiting the sale of alienable lands of the public domain to private corporations. 3inall!,petitioner asserts that he see#s to en"oin the loss of billions of pesos in properties of the=tate that are of public dominion.

After several motions for e7tension of time,1PEA and AMAR* filed their Comments on+ctober /, //5 and une 8, //5, respectivel!. Meanhile, on )ecember 5, //5,petitioner filed an +mnibus Motion; $a& to re6uire PEA to submit the terms of therenegotiated PEA(AMAR* contractG $b& for issuance of a temporar! restraining orderG and

$c& to set the case for hearing on oral argument. Petitioner filed a Reiterative Motion for*ssuance of a TR+ dated Ma! , ///, hich the Court denied in a Resolution dated une, ///.

*n a Resolution dated March 1, ///, the Court gave due course to the petitionre6uired the parties to file their respective memoranda.

+n March 1-, ///, PEA and AMAR* signed the Amended oint Denture Agree$%Amended DA,% for brevit!&. +n Ma! 5, ///, the +ffice of the President undeadministration of then President oseph E. Estrada approved the Amended DA.

)ue to the approval of the Amended DA b! the +ffice of the President, petitionepra!s that on %constitutional and statutor! grounds the renegotiated contract be decnull and void.%4

T'( I++u(+

The issues raised b! petitioner, PEA8and AMAR*are as follos;

*. ?2ET2ER T2E PR*NC*PA> RE>*E3= PRAIE) 3+R *N T2E PET*T*+N ARE M++TACA)EM*C BECA@=E +3 =@B=EL@ENT EDENT=G

**. ?2ET2ER T2E PET*T*+N MER*T= )*=M*==A> 3+R 3A*>*NF T+ +B=ERDEPR*NC*P>E F+DERN*NF T2E 2*ERARC2I +3 C+@RT=G

***. ?2ET2ER T2E PET*T*+N MER*T= )*=M*==A> 3+R N+N(EK2A@=T*+A)M*N*=TRAT*DE REME)*E=G

*D. ?2ET2ER PET*T*+NER 2A= !O"#$ $TA%DIT+ BR*NF T2*= =@*TG

D. ?2ET2ER T2E C+N=T*T@T*+NA> R*F2T T+ *N3+RMAT*+N *NC>@)E= +33*N3+RMAT*+N +N +N(F+*NF NEF+T*AT*+N= BE3+RE A 3*NA> AFREEMENTG

D*. ?2ET2ER T2E =T*P@>AT*+N= *N T2E AMEN)E) +*NT DENT@RE AFREE3+R T2E TRAN=3ER T+ AMAR* +3 CERTA*N >AN)=, REC>A*ME) AN) =T*>> TREC>A*ME), D*+>ATE T2E /50 C+N=T*T@T*+NG AN)

D**. ?2ET2ER T2E C+@RT *= T2E PR+PER 3+R@M 3+R RA*=*NF T2E *==@?2ET2ER T2E AMEN)E) +*NT DENT@RE AFREEMENT *= FR+)*=A)DANTAFE+@= T+ T2E F+DERNMENT.

T'( Cou*-+ Rul$/

First issue: whether the principal reliefs prayed for in the petition are mootacademic because of subsequent events.


3/25

The petition pra!s that PEA publicl! disclose the %terms and conditions of the on(goingnegotiations for a ne agreement.% The petition also pra!s that the Court en"oin PEA from%privatel! entering into, perfecting and


4/25

demand from the +ffice of the President. *n the instant case, PEA claims it has noaffirmative statutor! dut! to disclose publicl! information about its renegotiation of the

DA. Thus, PEA asserts that the Court must appl! the principle of e7haustion ofadministrative remedies to the instant case in vie of the failure of petitioner here todemand initiall! from PEA the needed information.

The original DA sought to dispose to AMAR* public lands held b! PEA, a governmentcorporation. @nder =ection 0/ of the Fovernment Auditing Code,the disposition ofgovernment lands to private parties re6uires public bidding. ()* was under a positivelegal duty to disclose to the public the terms and conditions for the sale of itslands. The la obligated PEA to ma#e this public disclosure even ithout demand frompetitioner or from an!one. PEA failed to ma#e this public disclosure because the original

DA, li#e the Amended DA, as the result of a negotiated contract, not of a publicbidding. Considering that PEA had an affirmative statutor! dut! to ma#e the publicdisclosure, and as even in breach of this legal dut!, petitioner had the right to see#direct "udicial intervention.

Moreover, and this alone is determinative of this issue, the principle of e7haustion ofadministrative remedies does not appl! hen the issue involved is a purel! legal orconstitutional 6uestion.0The principal issue in the instant case is the capacit! of AMAR* toac6uire lands held b! PEA in vie of the constitutional ban prohibiting the alienation oflands of the public domain to private corporations. ?e rule that the principle of e7haustionof administrative remedies does not appl! in the instant case.

Fourth issue: whether petitioner has locus standi to bring this suit

PEA argues that petitioner has no standing to institute mandamusproceedings to enforcehis constitutional right to information ithout a shoing that PEA refused to perform anaffirmative dut! imposed on PEA b! the Constitution. PEA also claims that petitioner hasnot shon that he ill suffer an! concrete in"ur! because of the signing or implementationof the Amended DA. Thus, there is no actual controvers! re6uiring the e7ercise of thepoer of "udicial revie.

The petitioner has standing to bring this ta7pa!er's suit because the petition see#s tocompel PEA to compl! ith its constitutional duties. There are to constitutional issuesinvolved here. 3irst is the right of citiens to information on matters of public concern.=econd is the application of a constitutional provision intended to insure the e6uitabledistribution of alienable lands of the public domain among 3ilipino citiens. The thrust ofthe first issue is to compel PEA to disclose publicl! information on the sale of governmentlands orth billions of pesos, information hich the Constitution and statutor! lamandate PEA to disclose. The thrust of the second issue is to prevent PEA from alienating

hundreds of hectares of alienable lands of the public domain in violation of theConstitution, compelling PEA to compl! ith a constitutional dut! to the nation.

Moreover, the petition raises matters of transcendental importance to the p*n +have, v. (+--,5the Court upheld the right of a citien to bring a ta7pa!er's smatters of transcendental importance to the public, thus (

%Besides, petitioner emphasies, the matter of recovering the ill(gotten eathe Marcoses is an issue of 'transcendental importance to the public.' 2e asthat ordinar! ta7pa!ers have a right to initiate and prosecute actions 6uestithe validit! of acts or orders of government agencies or instrumentalities, issues raised are of 'paramount public interest,' and if the! 'immediatel! affesocial, economic and moral ell being of the people.'

Moreover, the mere fact that he is a citien satisfies the re6uirement of perinterest, hen the proceeding involves the assertion of a public right, suchthis case. 2e invo#es several decisions of this Court hich have set asidprocedural matter of locus standi, hen the sub"ect of the case involved pinterest.

7 7 7

*n Ta&ada '( Tu'era, the Court asserted that hen the issue concerns a pright and the ob"ect of mandamus is to obtain the enforcement of a public the people are regarded as the real parties in interestG and because it is suffthat petitioner is a citien and as such is interested in the e7ecution of the he need not sho that he has an! legal or special interest in the result oaction. *n the aforesaid case, the petitioners sought to enforce their right informed on matters of public concern, a right then recognied in =ection , A

*D of the /01 Constitution, in connection ith the rule that las in order valid and enforceable must be published in the +fficial Faette or otheeffectivel! promulgated. *n ruling for the petitioners' legal standing, the declared that the right the! sought to be enforced 'is a public right recognieno less than the fundamental la of the land.'

!egaspi '( "i'il $er'ice "ommission, hile reiterating Taada, further decthat 'hen a mandamus proceeding involves the assertion of a public righre6uirement of personal interest is satisfied b! the mere fact that petitionecitien and, therefore, part of the general 'public' hich possesses the right.'

3urther, inAlbano '( Reyes, e said that hile e7penditure of public fundsnot have been involved under the 6uestioned contract for the developmanagement and operation of the Manila *nternational Container Terminal, 'interest 9as: definitel! involved considering the important role 9of the su

contract: . . . in the economic development of the countr! and the magnituthe financial consideration involved.' ?e concluded that, as a conse6uencedisclosure provision in the Constitution ould constitute sufficient authoriupholding the petitioner's standing.


5/25

=imilarl!, the instant petition is anchored on the right of the people to informationand access to official records, documents and papers a right guaranteed under=ection 0, Article *** of the /50 Constitution. Petitioner, a former solicitor general,is a 3ilipino citien. Because of the satisfaction of the to basic re6uisites laiddon b! decisional la to sustain petitioner's legal standing, i.e. $& theenforcement of a public right $& espoused b! a 3ilipino citien, e rule that thepetition at bar should be alloed.%

?e rule that since the instant petition, brought b! a citien, involves the enforcement ofconstitutional rights ( to information and to the e6uitable diffusion of natural resources (matters of transcendental public importance, the petitioner has the re6uisite locus standi.

Fifth issue: whether the constitutional right to information includes officialinformation on on%going negotiations before a final agreement.

=ection 0, Article *** of the Constitution e7plains the people's right to information onmatters of public concern in this manner;

%=ec. 0. The right of the people to information on matters of public concern shallbe recognied. *ccess to official records and to documents and paperspertaining to official acts transactions or decisions, as ell as togovernment research data used as basis for polic! development, shall be affordedthe citien, sub"ect to such limitations as ma! be provided b! la.% $Emphasissupplied&

The =tate polic! of full transparenc! in all transactions involving public interest reinforces

the people's right to information on matters of public concern. This =tate polic! ise7pressed in =ection 5, Article ** of the Constitution, thus;

%=ec. 5. =ub"ect to reasonable conditions prescribed b! la, the =tate adopts andimplements apolicy of full public disclosure of all its transactionsinvolving public interest.% $Emphasis supplied&

These tin provisions of the Constitution see# to promote transparenc! in polic!(ma#ingand in the operations of the government, as ell as provide the people sufficientinformation to e7ercise effectivel! other constitutional rights. These tin provisions areessential to the e7ercise of freedom of e7pression. *f the government does not disclose itsofficial acts, transactions and decisions to citiens, hatever citiens sa!, even ife7pressed ithout an! restraint, ill be speculative and amount to nothing. These tinprovisions are also essential to hold public officials %at all times 7 7 7 accountable to thepeople,%/for unless citiens have the proper information, the! cannot hold public officials

accountable for an!thing. Armed ith the right information, citiens can participate inpublic discussions leading to the formulation of government policies and their effectiveimplementation. An informed citienr! is essential to the e7istence and proper functioningof an! democrac!. As e7plained b! the Court in/almonte v. !elmonte Jr.1-

%An essential element of these freedoms is to #eep open a continuing dialogprocess of communication beteen the government and the people. *t is interest of the =tate that the channels for free political discussion be maintto the end that the government ma! perceive and be responsive to the peoill. Iet, this open dialogue can be effective onl! to the e7tent that the citieinformed and thus able to formulate its ill intelligentl!. +nl! henparticipants in the discussion are aare of the issues and have acceinformation relating thereto can such bear fruit.%

PEA asserts, citing +have, v. (+--,1that in cases of on(going negotiations the riginformation is limited to %definite propositions of the government.% PEA maintains thedoes not include access to %intra(agenc! or inter(agenc! recommendationcommunications during the stage hen common assertions are still in the procebeing formulated or are in the 'e7plorator! stage'.%

Also, AMAR* contends that petitioner cannot invo#e the right at the pre(decisional stabefore the closing of the transaction. To support its contention, AMAR* cites the follodiscussion in the /5 Constitutional Commission;

M. Su#(. And hen e sa! 'transactions' hich should be distinguishedcontracts, agreements, or treaties or hatever, does the Fentleman refer tsteps leading to the consummation of the contract, or does he refer tcontract itselfO

M. Ol( #he 0transactions0 used here $ suppose is generic therefore it can cover both steps leading to a contract and alrea

consummated contract r. (residing 1fficer.

r. &uare,: #his contemplates inclusion of negotiations leading toconsummation of the transaction.

r. 1ple: 2es sub"ect only to reasonable safeguards on the natinterest.

r. &uare,:Than# !ou.%1$Emphasis supplied&

AMAR* argues there must first be a consummated contract before petitioner can inthe right. Re6uiring government officials to reveal their deliberations at the pre(decistage ill degrade the 6ualit! of decision(ma#ing in government agencies. Fovernofficials ill hesitate to e7press their real sentiments during deliberations if theimmediate public dissemination of their discussions, putting them under all #inpressure before the! decide.

?e must first distinguish beteen information the la on public bidding re6uires Pdisclose publicl!, and information the constitutional right to information re6uires P


6/25

release to the public. Before the consummation of the contract, PEA must, on its on andithout demand from an!one, disclose to the public matters relating to the disposition ofits propert!. These include the sie, location, technical description and nature of thepropert! being disposed of, the terms and conditions of the disposition, the parties6ualified to bid, the minimum price and similar information. PEA must prepare all thesedata and disclose them to the public at the start of the disposition process, long before theconsummation of the contract, because the Fovernment Auditing Code re6uirespublicbidding. *f PEA fails to ma#e this disclosure, an! citien can demand from PEA thisinformation at an! time during the bidding process.

*nformation, hoever, on on%going evaluation or reviewof bids or proposals beingunderta#en b! the bidding or revie committee is not immediatel! accessible under theright to information. ?hile the evaluation or revie is still on(going, there are no %officialacts, transactions, or decisions% on the bids or proposals. 2oever, once the committeema#es its official recommendation, there arises a definite propositionon the partof the government. 3rom this moment, the public's right to information attaches, and an!citien can access all the non(proprietar! information leading to such definite proposition.*n +have, v. (+--,11the Court ruled as follos;

%Considering the intent of the framers of the Constitution, e believe that it isincumbent upon the PCFF and its officers, as ell as other governmentrepresentatives, to disclose sufficient public information on an! proposedsettlement the! have decided to ta#e up ith the ostensible oners and holders ofill(gotten ealth. =uch information, though, must pertain to definitepropositions of the government, not necessaril! to intra(agenc! or inter(agenc! recommendations or communications during the stage hen commonassertions are still in the process of being formulated or are in the %e7plorator!%

stage. There is need, of course, to observe the same restrictions on disclosure ofinformation in general, as discussed earlier such as on matters involving nationalsecurit!, diplomatic or foreign relations, intelligence and other classifiedinformation.% $Emphasis supplied&

Contrar! to AMAR*'s contention, the commissioners of the /5 Constitutional Commissionunderstood that the right to information contemplates inclusion of negotiationsleading to the consummation of the transaction.Certainl!, a consummatedcontract is not a re6uirement for the e7ercise of the right to information. +therise, thepeople can never e7ercise the right if no contract is consummated, and if one isconsummated, it ma! be too late for the public to e7pose its defects.)*wphi)(n+t

Re6uiring a consummated contract ill #eep the public in the dar# until the contract,hich ma! be grossl! disadvantageous to the government or even illegal, becomes a faitaccompli. This negates the =tate polic! of full transparenc! on matters of public concern,

a situation hich the framers of the Constitution could not have intended. =uch are6uirement ill prevent the citienr! from participating in the public discussion ofan!proposedcontract, effectivel! truncating a basic right enshrined in the Bill of Rights.

?e can allo neither an emasculation of a constitutional right, nor a retreat b! the of its avoed %polic! of full disclosure of all its transactions involving public interest.%

The right covers three categories of information hich are %matters of public connamel!; $& official recordsG $& documents and papers pertaining to official transactions and decisionsG and $1& government research data used in formupolicies. The first categor! refers to an! document that is part of the public records custod! of government agencies or officials. The second categor! refers to documentpapers recording, evidencing, establishing, confirming, supporting, "ustif!ing or e7plaofficial acts, transactions or decisions of government agencies or officials. The categor! refers to research data, hether ra, collated or processed, oned bgovernment and used in formulating government policies.

The information that petitioner ma! access on the renegotiation of the DA incevaluation reports, recommendations, legal and e7pert opinions, minutes of meeterms of reference and other documents attached to such reports or minutes, all reto the DA. 2oever, the right to information does not compel PEA to prepareabstracts, summaries and the li#e relating to the renegotiation of the DA.14The righaffords access to records, documents and papers, hich means the opportunit! to inand cop! them. +ne ho e7ercises the right must cop! the records, documentpapers at his e7pense. The e7ercise of the right is also sub"ect to reasonable regulato protect the integrit! of the public records and to minimie disruption to governoperations, li#e rules specif!ing hen and ho to conduct the inspection and cop!ing

The right to information, hoever, does not e7tend to matters recognied as privinformation under the separation of poers.1The right does not also appl! to informon militar! and diplomatic secrets, information affecting national securit!, and informon investigations of crimes b! la enforcement agencies before the prosecution accused, hich courts have long recognied as confidential.10The right ma! alsub"ect to other limitations that Congress ma! impose b! la.

There is no claim b! PEA that the information demanded b! petitioner is privinformation rooted in the separation of poers. The information does not Presidential conversations, correspondences, or discussions during closed(door Cameetings hich, li#e internal deliberations of the =upreme Court and other collecourts, or e7ecutive sessions of either house of Congress,15are recognied as confide

This #ind of information cannot be pried open b! a co(e6ual branch of governmefran# e7change of e7plorator! ideas and assessments, free from the glare of publicitpressure b! interested parties, is essential to protect the independence of decma#ing of those tas#ed to e7ercise Presidential, >egislative and udicial poer. 1/Tnot the situation in the instant case.

?e rule, therefore, that the constitutional right to information includes official informon on%going negotiationsbefore a final contract. The information, hoever, constitute definite propositions b! the government and should not cover recoge7ceptions li#e privileged information, militar! and diplomatic secrets and similar m


7/25

affecting national securit! and public order.4-Congress has also prescribed otherlimitations on the right to information in several legislations.4

&i'th issue: whether stipulations in the *mended J/* for the transfer to **4$of lands reclaimed or to be reclaimed violate the +onstitution.

#he 4egalian octrine

The onership of lands reclaimed from foreshore and submerged areas is rooted in theRegalian doctrine hich holds that the =tate ons all lands and aters of the publicdomain. @pon the =panish con6uest of the Philippines, onership of all %lands, territories

and possessions% in the Philippines passed to the =panish Cron.4The Hing, as thesovereign ruler and representative of the people, ac6uired and oned all lands andterritories in the Philippines e7cept those he disposed of b! grant or sale to privateindividuals.

The /18, /01 and /50 Constitutions adopted the Regalian doctrine substituting,hoever, the =tate, in lieu of the Hing, as the oner of all lands and aters of the publicdomain. The Regalian doctrine is the foundation of the time(honored principle of landonership that %all lands that ere not ac6uired from the Fovernment, either b! purchaseor b! grant, belong to the public domain.%41Article 11/ of the Civil Code of 55/, hich isno Article 4- of the Civil Code of /8-, incorporated the Regalian doctrine.

1wnership and isposition of 4eclaimed ands

The =panish >a of ?aters of 5 as the first statutor! la governing the onershipand disposition of reclaimed lands in the Philippines. +n Ma! 5, /-0, the PhilippineCommission enacted Act No. 84 hich provided for the lease but not the sale ofreclaimed lands of the government to corporations and individuals. >ater, onNovember /, //, the Philippine >egislature approved Act No. 504, the Public >andAct, hich authoried the lease but not the sale of reclaimed lands of thegovernment to corporations and individuals. +n November 0, /1, the NationalAssembl! passed Commonealth Act No. 4, also #non as the Public >and Act,hich authori,ed the lease but not the sale of reclaimed lands of thegovernment to corporations and individuals. CA No. 4 continues to this da! as thegeneral la governing the classification and disposition of lands of the public domain.

#he &panish aw of aters of 8966 and the +ivil +ode of 899

@nder the =panish >a of ?aters of 5, the shores, ba!s, coves, inlets and all atersithin the maritime one of the =panish territor! belonged to the public domain for publicuse.44The =panish >a of ?aters of 5 alloed the reclamation of the sea under Article8, hich provided as follos;

%Article 8. >ands reclaimed from the sea in conse6uence of or#s constructthe =tate, or b! the provinces, pueblos or private persons, ith proper permishall become the propert! of the part! constructing such or#s, unless otheprovided b! the terms of the grant of authorit!.%

@nder the =panish >a of ?aters, land reclaimed from the sea belonged to the underta#ing the reclamation, provided the government issued the necessar! permdid not reserve onership of the reclaimed land to the =tate.

Article 11/ of the Civil Code of 55/ defined propert! of public dominion as follos;

%Art. 11/. Propert! of public dominion is

. That devoted to public use, such as roads, canals, rivers, torrents, portbridges constructed b! the =tate, riverban#s, shores, roadsteads, and thasimilar characterG

. That belonging e7clusivel! to the =tate hich, ithout being of general use, is emplo!ed in some public service, or in the development of the naealth, such as alls, fortresses, and other or#s for the defense of the terand mines, until granted to private individuals.%

Propert! devoted to public use referred to propert! open for use b! the public. *n conpropert! devoted to public service referred to propert! used for some specific service and open onl! to those authoried to use the propert!.

Propert! of public dominion referred not onl! to propert! devoted to public use, but apropert! not so used but emplo!ed to develop the national wealth. This clapropert! constituted propert! of public dominion although emplo!ed for some econocommercial activit! to increase the national ealth.

Article 14 of the Civil Code of 55/ governed the re(classification of propert! of pdominion into private propert!, to it;

%Art. 14. Propert! of public dominion, hen no longer devoted to public usethe defense of the territor!, shall become a part of the private propert! o=tate.%

This provision, hoever, as not self(e7ecuting. The legislature, or the e7ecdepartment pursuant to la, must declare the propert! no longer needed for public u

territorial defense before the government could lease or alienate the propert! to prparties.48

*ct ;o. 865< of the (hilippine +ommission


8/25

+n Ma! 5, /-0, the Philippine Commission enacted Act No. 84 hich regulated thelease of reclaimed and foreshore lands. The salient provisions of this la ere as follos;

%=ection . The control and disposition of the foreshoreas defined in e7istingla, and the title to all -overnment or public lands made or reclaimed bythe -overnment by dredging or fillingor otherise throughout the Philippine*slands, shall be retained by the -overnmentithout pre"udice to vestedrights and ithout pre"udice to rights conceded to the Cit! of Manila in the >unetaE7tension.

=ection . $a& The =ecretar! of the *nterior shall cause all Fovernment or public

lands made or reclaimed b! the Fovernment b! dredging or filling or otherise tobe divided into lots or bloc#s, ith the necessar! streets and alle!a!s locatedthereon, and shall cause plats and plans of such surve!s to be prepared and filedith the Bureau of >ands.

$b& @pon completion of such plats and plans the -overnor%-eneral shall givenotice to the public that such parts of the lands so made or reclaimed asare not needed for public purposes will be leased for commercial andbusiness purposes, 7 7 7.

7 7 7

$e& #he leases above provided for shall be disposed of to the highest andbest biddertherefore, sub"ect to such regulations and safeguards as theFovernor(Feneral ma! b! e7ecutive order prescribe.% $Emphasis supplied&

Act No. 84 mandated that the government should retain title to all landsreclaimed by the government. The Act also vested in the government control anddisposition of foreshore lands. Private parties could lease lands reclaimed b! thegovernment onl! if these lands ere no longer needed for public purpose. Act No. 84mandatedpublic bidding in the lease of government reclaimed lands. Act No. 84made government reclaimed lands sui generisin that unli#e other public lands hich thegovernment could sell to private parties, these reclaimed lands ere available onl! forlease to private parties.

Act No. 84, hoever, did not repeal =ection 8 of the =panish >a of ?aters of 5. ActNo. 84 did not prohibit private parties from reclaiming parts of the sea under =ection 8of the =panish >a of ?aters. >ands reclaimed from the sea b! private parties ithgovernment permission remained private lands.

*ct ;o. =97< of the (hilippine egislature

+n November /, //, the Philippine >egislature enacted Act No. 504, the Public >andAct.4The salient provisions of Act No. 504, on reclaimed lands, ere as follos;

%=ec. . #he -overnor%-eneral upon the recommendation of &ecretary of *griculture and ;atural 4esources shall from time to classify the lands of the public domain into

$a&*lienable or disposable,

$b& Timber, and

$c& Mineral lands, 7 7 7.

=ec. 0. 3or the purposes of the government and disposition of alienabdisposable public lands, the -overnor%-eneral upon recommendatiothe &ecretary of *griculture and ;atural 4esources shall from timtime declare what lands are open to disposition or concession under*ct.%

=ec. 5. 1nly those lands shall be declared open to dispositioconcession which have been officially delimited or classified7 7 7.

7 7 7

=ec. 88. An! tract of land of the public domain hich, being neither timbemineral land, shall be classified as suitable for residential purposes ocommercial industrial or other productive purposes other agricultural purposes, and shall be open to disposition or concession, sh

disposed of under the provisions of this chapter, and not otherise.

=ec. 8. #he lands disposable under this title shall be classifiefollows;

>a? ands reclaimed by the -overnment by dredging fillinother meansG

>b? Foreshore@

>c? arshy landsor lands covered ith ater bordering upon the sor ban#s of navigable la#es or riversG

$d& >ands not included in an! of the foregoing classes.

7 7 7.


9/25

=ec. 85. #he lands comprised in classes >a? >b? and >c? of section fifty%si'shall be disposed of to private parties by lease only and not otherwise, assoon as the -overnor%-eneral upon recommendation by the &ecretary of*griculture and ;atural 4esources shall declare that the same are notnecessary for the public service and are open to dispositionunder thischapter. #he lands included in class >d? may be disposed of by sale orlease under the provisions of this *ct.% $Emphasis supplied&

=ection of Act No. 504 authoried the Fovernor(Feneral to %classif! lands of the publicdomain into 7 7 7 alienable or disposable%40lands. =ection 0 of the Act empoered theFovernor(Feneral to %declare hat lands are open to disposition or concession.% =ection 5of the Act limited alienable or disposable lands onl! to those lands hich have been%officiall! delimited and classified.%

=ection 8 of Act No. 504 stated that lands %disposable under this title45shall beclassified% as government reclaimed, foreshore and marsh! lands, as ell as other lands.All these lands, hoever, must be suitable for residential, commercial, industrial or otherproductive non%agriculturalpurposes. These provisions vested upon the Fovernor(Feneral the poer to classif! inalienable lands of the public domain into disposable landsof the public domain. These provisions also empoered the Fovernor(Feneral to classif!further such disposable lands of the public domain into government reclaimed, foreshoreor marsh! lands of the public domain, as ell as other non(agricultural lands.

=ection 85 of Act No. 504 categoricall! mandated that disposable lands of the publicdomain classified as government reclaimed, foreshore and marsh! lands shall bedisposed of to private parties by lease only and not otherwise.The Fovernor(Feneral, before alloing the lease of these lands to private parties, must formall! declarethat the lands ere %not necessar! for the public service.% Act No. 504 reiterated the=tate polic! to lease and not to sell government reclaimed, foreshore and marsh! lands ofthe public domain, a polic! first enunciated in /-0 in Act No. 84. Fovernmentreclaimed, foreshore and marsh! lands remained sui generis, as the onl! alienable ordisposable lands of the public domain that the government could not sell to privateparties.

The rationale behind this =tate polic! is obvious. Fovernment reclaimed, foreshore andmarsh! public lands for non(agricultural purposes retain their inherent potential as areasfor public service. This is the reason the government prohibited the sale, and onl! alloedthe lease, of these lands to private parties. The =tate ala!s reserved these lands forsome future public service.

Act No. 504 did not authorie the reclassification of government reclaimed, foreshoreand marsh! lands into other non(agricultural lands under =ection 8 $d&. >ands fallingunder =ection 8 $d& ere the onl! lands for non(agricultural purposes the governmentcould sell to private parties. Thus, under Act No. 504, the government could not sellgovernment reclaimed, foreshore and marsh! lands to private parties unless thelegislature passed a law allowing their sale.4/

Act No. 504 did not prohibit private parties from reclaiming parts of the sea pursua=ection 8 of the =panish >a of ?aters of 5. >ands reclaimed from the sea b! pparties ith government permission remained private lands.

ispositions under the 835 +onstitution

+n Ma! 4, /18, the /18 Constitution too# effect upon its ratification b! the 3people. The /18 Constitution, in adopting the Regalian doctrine, declared in =ectArticle K***, that

%=ection . All agricultural, timber, and mineral lands of the public domain,

minerals, coal, petroleum, and other mineral oils, all forces of potential energother natural resources of the Philippines belong to the =tate, and disposition, e7ploitation, development, or utiliation shall be limited to citiethe Philippines or to corporations or associations at least si7t! per centum ocapital of hich is oned b! such citiens, sub"ect to an! e7isting right, glease, or concession at the time of the inauguration of the Fovernestablished under this Constitution. ;atural resources with the e'ceptipublic agricultural land shall not be alienated, and no license, conceor lease for the e7ploitation, development, or utiliation of an! of the nresources shall be granted for a period e7ceeding tent!(five !ears, reneabanother tent!(five !ears, e7cept as to ater rights for irrigation, ater sufisheries, or industrial uses other than the development of ater poer, in cases beneficial use ma! be the measure and limit of the grant.% $Emsupplied&

The /18 Constitution barred the alienation of all natural resources e7cept agricultural lands, hich ere the onl! natural resources the =tate could alienate. foreshore lands, considered part of the =tate's natural resources, became inalienabconstitutional fiat, available onl! for lease for 8 !ears, reneable for another 8 !

The government could alienate foreshore lands onl! after these lands ere reclaimeclassified as alienable agricultural lands of the public domain. Fovernment reclaimemarsh! lands of the public domain, being neither timber nor mineral lands, fell undclassification of public agricultural lands.8-2oever, government reclaimed and mlands, although sub"ect to classification as disposable public agricultural lands, couldbe leased and not sold to private parties because of Act No. 504.

The prohibition on private parties from ac6uiring onership of government reclaimemarsh! lands of the public domain as onl! a statutor! prohibition and the legiscould therefore remove such prohibition. The /18 Constitution did not prohibit indivand corporations from ac6uiring government reclaimed and marsh! lands of the domain that ere classified as agricultural lands under e7isting public land las. =e, Article K*** of the /18 Constitution provided as follos;

%=ection . ;o private corporation or association may acquire leashold public agricultural lands in e'cess of one thousand and twenty


10/25

hectares nor may any individual acquire such lands by purchase ine'cess of one hundred and forty hectares or by lease in e'cess of onethousand and twenty%four hectares, or b! homestead in e7cess of tent!(fourhectares. >ands adapted to graing, not e7ceeding to thousand hectares, ma! beleased to an individual, private corporation, or association.% $Emphasis supplied&

=till, after the effectivit! of the /18 Constitution, the legislature did not repeal =ection 85of Act No. 504 to open for sale to private parties government reclaimed and marsh!lands of the public domain. +n the contrar!, the legislature continued the long established=tate polic! of retaining for the government title and onership of government reclaimedand marsh! lands of the public domain.

+ommonwealth *ct ;o. 8and Act, hich compiled the then e7isting las on lands of the publicdomain. CA No. 4, as amended, remains to this da! the e'isting generallawgoverning the classification and disposition of lands of the public domain other thantimber and mineral lands.8

=ection of CA No. 4 empoers the President to classif! lands of the public domain into%alienable or disposable%8 lands of the public domain, hich prior to such classificationare inalienable and outside the commerce of man. =ection 0 of CA No. 4 authories thePresident to %declare hat lands are open to disposition or concession.% =ection 5 of CANo. 4 states that the government can declare open for disposition or concession onl!lands that are %officiall! delimited and classified.% =ections , 0 and 5 of CA No. 4 read

as follos;

%=ec. . #he (resident upon the recommendation of the &ecretary of*griculture and +ommerce shall from time to time classify the lands ofthe public domain into

>a? *lienable or disposable,

$b& Timber, and

$c& Mineral lands,

and ma! at an! time and in li#e manner transfer such lands from one class toanother,81for the purpose of their administration and disposition.

=ec. 0. 3or the purposes of the administration and disposition of alienable ordisposable public lands, the (resident upon recommendation by the

&ecretary of *griculture and +ommerce shall from time to time dewhat lands are open to disposition or concession under this Act.

=ec. 5. 1nly those lands shall be declared open to dispositioconcession which have been officially delimited and classifiedand, practicable, surve!ed, and which have not been reserved for publquasi%public uses, nor appropriated b! the Fovernment, nor in an! mbecome private propert!, nor those on hich a private right authoriedrecognied b! this Act or an! other valid la ma! be claimed, or hich, hbeen reserved or appropriated, have ceased to be so. 7 7 7.%

Thus, before the government could alienate or dispose of lands of the public domaiPresident must first officiall! classif! these lands as alienable or disposable, anddeclare them open to disposition or concession. There must be no la reserving lands for public or 6uasi(public uses.

The salient provisions of CA No. 4, on government reclaimed, foreshore and mlands of the public domain, are as follos;

%=ec. 85.*ny tract of land of the public domain which being netimber nor mineral land is intended to be used for residential purpor for commercial industrial or other productive purposes other agricultural and is open to disposition or concession shall be dispof under the provisions of this chapter and not otherwise.

=ec. 8/. #he lands disposable under this title shall be classifie

follows;

>a? ands reclaimed by the -overnment by dredging fillinother means@

>b? Foreshore@

>c? arshy landsor lands covered ith ater bordering upon the sor ban#s of navigable la#es or riversG

$d& >ands not included in an! of the foregoing classes.

=ec. -. An! tract of land comprised under this title ma! be leased or sold, acase ma! be, to an! person, corporation, or association authoried to purcha

lease public lands for agricultural purposes. 7 7 7.

=ec. . #he lands comprised in classes >a? >b? and >c? of section fnine shall be disposed of to private parties by lease only and


11/25

otherwise, as soon as the (resident, upon recommendation b! the =ecretar! ofAgriculture, shall declare that the same are not necessary for the publicserviceand are open to disposition under this chapter. #he lands included inclass >d? may be disposed of by sale or lease under the provisions of this*ct.% $Emphasis supplied&

=ection of CA No. 4 readopted, after the effectivit! of the /18 Constitution, =ection85 of Act No. 504 prohibiting the sale of government reclaimed, foreshore and marsh!disposable lands of the public domain. All these lands are intended for residential,commercial, industrial or other non(agricultural purposes. As before, =ection alloedonl! the lease of such lands to private parties. The government could sell to privateparties onl! lands falling under =ection 8/ $d& of CA No. 4, or those lands for non(

agricultural purposes not classified as government reclaimed, foreshore and marsh!disposable lands of the public domain. 3oreshore lands, hoever, became inalienableunder the /18 Constitution hich onl! alloed the lease of these lands to 6ualifiedprivate parties.

=ection 85 of CA No. 4 e7pressl! states that disposable lands of the public domainintended for residential, commercial, industrial or other productive purposes other thanagricultural %shall be disposed of under the provisions of this chapter and nototherwise.% @nder =ection - of CA No. 4, the term %disposition% includes lease of theland. An! disposition of government reclaimed, foreshore and marsh! disposable lands fornon(agricultural purposes must compl! ith Chapter *K, Title *** of CA No. 4, 84unless asubse6uent la amended or repealed these provisions.

*n his concurring opinion in the landmar# case of 4epublic 4eal )state +orporation v.+ourt of *ppeals,88ustice Re!nato =. Puno summaried succinctl! the la on this

matter, as follos;

%3oreshore lands are lands of public dominion intended for public use. =o too arelands reclaimed b! the government b! dredging, filling, or other means. Act 84mandated that the control and disposition of the foreshore and lands under aterremained in the national government. =aid la alloed onl! the 'leasing' ofreclaimed land. The Public >and Acts of // and /1 also declared that theforeshore and lands reclaimed b! the government ere to be %disposed of toprivate parties b! lease onl! and not otherise.% Before leasing, hoever, theFovernor(Feneral, upon recommendation of the =ecretar! of Agriculture andNatural Resources, had first to determine that the land reclaimed as notnecessar! for the public service. This re6uisite must have been met before theland could be disposed of. !ut even then the foreshore and lands underwater were not to be alienated and sold to private parties. #hedisposition of the reclaimed land was only by lease. #he land remained

property of the &tate.% $Emphasis supplied&

As observed b! ustice Puno in his concurring opinion, %Commonealth Act No. 4 hasremained in effect at present.%

The =tate polic! prohibiting the sale to private parties of government reclaimed, foreand marsh! alienable lands of the public domain, first implemented in /-0 asreaffirmed in CA No. 4 after the /18 Constitution too# effect. The prohibition osale of foreshore lands, hoever, became a constitutional edict under the Constitution. 3oreshore lands became inalienable as natural resources of the =tate, ureclaimed b! the government and classified as agricultural lands of the public domahich case the! ould fall under the classification of government reclaimed lands.

After the effectivit! of the /18 Constitution, government reclaimed and mdisposable lands of the public domain continued to be onl! leased and not sold to prparties.8These lands remained sui generis, as the onl! alienable or disposable lanthe public domain the government could not sell to private parties.

=ince then and until no, the onl! a! the government can sell to private pgovernment reclaimed and marsh! disposable lands of the public domain is folegislature to pass a la authoriing such sale. CA No. 4 does not authoriPresident to reclassif! government reclaimed and marsh! lands into other non(agriculands under =ection 8/ $d&. >ands classified under =ection 8/ $d& are the onl! alienadisposable lands for non(agricultural purposes that the government could sell to prparties.

Moreover, =ection - of CA No. 4 e'presslyre6uires congressional authorit! blands under =ection 8/ that the government previousl! transferred to government unentities could be sold to private parties. =ection - of CA No. 4 declares that

%=ec. -. 7 7 7 The area so leased or sold shall be such as shall, in the "udgm

the =ecretar! of Agriculture and Natural Resources, be reasonabl! necessathe purposes for hich such sale or lease is re6uested, and shall not e7ceehundred and fort!(four hectares; Provided, hoever, That this limitation shaappl! to grants, donations, or transfers made to a province, municipalit! or bor subdivision of the Fovernment for the purposes deemed b! said enconducive to the public interestGbut the land so granted donatedtransferred to a province municipality or branch or subdivision o-overnment shall not be alienated encumbered or otherwise dispof in a manner affecting its title e'cept when authori,ed by +ongre7 7.% $Emphasis supplied&

The congressional authorit! re6uired in =ection - of CA No. 4 mirrors the legisauthorit! re6uired in =ection 8 of Act No. 504.

+ne reason for the congressional authorit! is that =ection - of CA No. 4 e7em

government units and entities from the ma7imum area of public lands that couac6uired from the =tate. These government units and entities should not "ust turn aand sell these lands to private parties in violation of constitutional or statutor! limita+therise, the transfer of lands for non(agricultural purposes to government unitentities could be used to circumvent constitutional limitations on onership of aliena


12/25

disposable lands of the public domain. *n the same manner, such transfers could also beused to evade the statutor! prohibition in CA No. 4 on the sale of government reclaimedand marsh! lands of the public domain to private parties. =ection - of CA No. 4constitutes b! operation of la a lien on these lands.80

*n case of sale or leaseof disposable lands of the public domain falling under =ection 8/of CA No. 4, =ections 1 and 0 re6uire a public bidding. =ections 1 and 0 of CA No.4 provide as follos;

%=ec. 1. ?henever it is decided that lands covered b! this chapter are notneeded for public purposes, the )irector of >ands shall as# the =ecretar! of

Agriculture and Commerce $no the =ecretar! of Natural Resources& for authorit!to dispose of the same. @pon receipt of such authorit!, the )irector of >ands shallgive notice b! public advertisement in the same manner as in the case of leasesor sales of agricultural public land, 7 7 7.

=ec. 0. #he lease or sale shall be made by oral bidding@ and ad"udicationshall be made to the highest bidder. 7 7 7.% $Emphasis supplied&

Thus, CA No. 4 mandates the Fovernment to put to public auction all leases or sales ofalienable or disposable lands of the public domain.85

>i#e Act No. 84 and Act No. 504 before it, CA No. 4 did not repeal =ection 8 of the=panish >a of ?aters of 5. Private parties could still reclaim portions of the sea ithgovernment permission. 2oever, the reclaimed land could become private landonly if classified as alienable agricultural land of the public domainopen to

disposition under CA No. 4. The /18 Constitution prohibited the alienation of all naturalresources e7cept public agricultural lands.

#he +ivil +ode of 85A

The Civil Code of /8- readopted substantiall! the definition of propert! of publicdominion found in the Civil Code of 55/. Articles 4- and 4 of the Civil Code of /8-state that

%Art. 4-. The folloing things are propert! of public dominion;

$& Those intended for public use, such as roads, canals, rivers, torrents, ports andbridges constructed b! the =tate, ban#s, shores, roadsteads, and others of similarcharacterG

$& Those hich belong to the =tate, ithout being for public use, and areintended for some public service or for the development of the national ealth.

7 7 7.

Art. 4. Propert! of public dominion, hen no longer intended for public ufor public service, shall form part of the patrimonial propert! of the =tate.%

Again, the government must formall! declare that the propert! of public dominion longer needed for public use or public service, before the same could be classifipatrimonial propert! of the =tate.8/*n the case of government reclaimed and marsh!of the public domain, the declaration of their being disposable, as ell as the manntheir disposition, is governed b! the applicable provisions of CA No. 4.

>i#e the Civil Code of 55/, the Civil Code of /8- included as propert! of public domthose properties of the =tate hich, ithout being for public use, are intended for pservice or the %development of the national wealth.% Thus, government reclaimemarsh! lands of the =tate, even if not emplo!ed for public use or public servdeveloped to enhance the national ealth, are classified as propert! of public domini


The /01 Constitution, hich too# effect on anuar! 0, /01, li#eise adopteRegalian doctrine. =ection 5, Article K*D of the /01 Constitution stated that

%=ec. 5. All lands of the public domain, aters, minerals, coal, petroleum and mineral oils, all forces of potential energ!, fisheries, ildlife, and other naresources of the Philippines belong to the =tate. ith the e'ceptioagricultural industrial or commercial residential and resettle

lands of the public domain natural resources shall not be alienatedno license, concession, or lease for the e7ploration, development, e7ploitatiutiliation of an! of the natural resources shall be granted for a period e7cetent!(five !ears, reneable for not more than tent!(five !ears, e7cept ater rights for irrigation, ater suppl!, fisheries, or industrial uses other thadevelopment of ater poer, in hich cases, beneficial use ma! be the meand the limit of the grant.% $Emphasis supplied&

The /01 Constitution prohibited the alienation of all natural resources ith the e7ceof %agricultural, industrial or commercial, residential, and resettlement lands of the pdomain.% *n contrast, the /18 Constitution barred the alienation of all natural resoe7cept %public agricultural lands.% 2oever, the term %public agricultural lands% i/18 Constitution encompassed industrial, commercial, residential and resettlementof the public domain.-*f the land of public domain ere neither timber nor mineral laould fall under the classification of agricultural land of the public domain. !oth

835 and 873 +onstitutions therefore prohibited the alienation of all naresources e'cept agricultural lands of the public domain.


13/25

The /01 Constitution, hoever, limited the alienation of lands of the public domain toindividuals ho ere citiens of the Philippines. Private corporations, even if holl! onedb! Philippine citiens, ere no longer alloed to ac6uire alienable lands of the publicdomain unli#e in the /18 Constitution. =ection , Article K*D of the /01 Constitutiondeclared that

%=ec. . The Batasang Pambansa, ta#ing into account conservation, ecological,and development re6uirements of the natural resources, shall determine b! lathe sie of land of the public domain hich ma! be developed, held or ac6uiredb!, or leased to, an! 6ualified individual, corporation, or association, and theconditions therefor. ;o private corporation or association may holdalienable lands of the public domain e'cept by lease not to e7ceed one

thousand hectares in area nor ma! an! citien hold such lands b! lease in e7cessof five hundred hectares or ac6uire b! purchase, homestead or grant, in e7cess oftent!(four hectares. No private corporation or association ma! hold b! lease,concession, license or permit, timber or forest lands and other timber or forestresources in e7cess of one hundred thousand hectares. 2oever, such area ma!be increased b! the Batasang Pambansa upon recommendation of the NationalEconomic and )evelopment Authorit!.% $Emphasis supplied&

Thus, under the /01 Constitution, private corporations could hold alienable lands of thepublic domain onl! through lease. +nl! individuals could no ac6uire alienable lands ofthe public domain, andprivate corporations became absolutely barred fromacquiring any Bind of alienable land of the public domain . The constitutional bane7tended to all #inds of alienable lands of the public domain, hile the statutor! banunder CA No. 4 applied onl! to government reclaimed, foreshore and marsh! alienablelands of the public domain.

( ;o. 8A9< +reating the (ublic )states *uthority

+n 3ebruar! 4, /00, then President 3erdinand Marcos issued Presidential )ecree No.-54 creating PEA, a holl! government oned and controlled corporation ith a specialcharter. =ections 4 and 5 of P) No. -54, vests PEA ith the folloing purposes andpoers;

%=ec. 4. Purpose. The Authorit! is hereb! created for the folloing purposes;

$a& #o reclaim land including foreshore and submerged areas bydredging filling or other means or to acquire reclaimed land@

$b& To develop, improve, ac6uire, administer, deal in, subdivide, dispose, lease

and sell any and all Binds of lands, buildings, estates and other forms of realpropert!, oned, managed, controlled and


14/25

?ithout such legislative authorit!, PEA could not sell but onl! lease its reclaimed foreshoreand submerged alienable lands of the public domain. Nevertheless, an! legislativeauthorit! granted to PEA to sell its reclaimed alienable lands of the public domain ouldbe sub"ect to the constitutional ban on private corporations from ac6uiring alienable landsof the public domain. 2ence, such legislative authorit! could onl! benefit privateindividuals.


The /50 Constitution, li#e the /18 and /01 Constitutions before it, has adopted theRegalian doctrine. The /50 Constitution declares that all natural resources are %ownedby the &tate,% and e7cept for alienable agricultural lands of the public domain, naturalresources cannot be alienated. =ections and 1, Article K** of the /50 Constitution statethat

%=ection . All lands of the public domain, aters, minerals, coal, petroleum andother mineral oils, all forces of potential energ!, fisheries, forests or timber,ildlife, flora and fauna, and other natural resources are owned by the &tate.ith the e'ception of agricultural lands all other natural resources shallnot be alienated. The e7ploration, development, and utiliation of naturalresources shall be under the full control and supervision of the =tate. 7 7 7.

=ection 1. >ands of the public domain are classified into agricultural, forest ortimber, mineral lands, and national par#s. Agricultural lands of the public domainma! be further classified b! la according to the uses hich the! ma! bedevoted.*lienable lands of the public domain shall be limited toagricultural lands. (rivate corporations or associations may not holdsuch alienable lands of the public domain e'cept by lease for a periodnot e'ceeding twenty%five years renewable for not more than twenty%five years and not to e'ceed one thousand hectares in area . Citiens ofthe Philippines ma! lease not more than five hundred hectares, or ac6uire notmore than telve hectares thereof b! purchase, homestead, or grant.

Ta#ing into account the re6uirements of conservation, ecolog!, and development,and sub"ect to the re6uirements of agrarian reform, the Congress shall determine,b! la, the sie of lands of the public domain hich ma! be ac6uired, developed,held, or leased and the conditions therefor.% $Emphasis supplied&

The /50 Constitution continues the =tate polic! in the /01 Constitution banning privatecorporations fromacquiring any Bind of alienable land of the public domain . >i#ethe /01 Constitution, the /50 Constitution allos private corporations to hold alienablelands of the public domain only through lease. As in the /18 and /01 Constitutions,the general la governing the lease to private corporations of reclaimed, foreshore andmarsh! alienable lands of the public domain is still CA No. 4.

#he 4ationale behind the +onstitutional !an

The rationale behind the constitutional ban on corporations from ac6uiring, ethrough lease, alienable lands of the public domain is not ell understood. )urindeliberations of the /5 Constitutional Commission, the commissioners proberationale behind this ban, thus;

%3R. BERNA=; Mr. Dice(President, m! 6uestions have reference to page 1, hich sa!s;

No private corporation or association ma! hold alienable lands of the p

domain e7cept b! lease, not to e7ceed one thousand hectares in area.'

*f e recall, this provision did not e7ist under the /18 Constitution, but thiintroduced in the /01 Constitution. *n effect, it prohibits private corporfrom ac6uiring alienable public lands. !ut it has not been very clea"urisprudence what the reason for this is. *n some of the cases decid/5 and /51, it was indicated that the purpose of this is to prelarge landholdings. *s that the intent of this provisionO

MR. D*>>EFA=; * thin# that is the spirit of the provision.

3R. BERNA=; *n e7isting decisions involving the *glesia ni Cristo, there instances here the *glesia ni Cristo as not alloed to ac6uire a mere s6uare meter land here a chapel stood because the =upreme Court said it be in violation of this.% $Emphasis supplied&

*n*yog v. +usi,4the Court e7plained the rationale behind this constitutional ban ia!;

%*ndeed, one purpose of the constitutional prohibition against purchases of agricultural lands b! private corporations is to e6uitabl! diffuse land onersto encourage 'oner(cultivatorship and the economic famil!(sie farm' aprevent a recurrence of cases li#e the instant case. 2uge landholdingcorporations or private persons had spaned social unrest.%

2oever, if the constitutional intent is to prevent huge landholdings, the Consticould have simpl! limited the sie of alienable lands of the public domaincorporations could ac6uire. The Constitution could have folloed the limitatioindividuals, ho could ac6uire not more than 4 hectares of alienable lands of the pdomain under the /01 Constitution, and not more than hectares under the Constitution.


15/25

*f the constitutional intent is to encourage economic famil!(sie farms, placing the land inthe name of a corporation ould be more effective in preventing the brea#(up offarmlands. *f the farmland is registered in the name of a corporation, upon the death ofthe oner, his heirs ould inherit shares in the corporation instead of subdivided parcelsof the farmland. This ould prevent the continuing brea#(up of farmlands into smaller andsmaller plots from one generation to the ne7t.

*n actual practice, the constitutional ban strengthens the constitutional limitation onindividuals from ac6uiring more than the alloed area of alienable lands of the publicdomain. ?ithout the constitutional ban, individuals ho alread! ac6uired the ma7imumarea of alienable lands of the public domain could easil! set up corporations to ac6uiremore alienable public lands. An individual could on as man! corporations as his means

ould allo him. An individual could even hide his onership of a corporation b! puttinghis nominees as stoc#holders of the corporation. The corporation is a convenient vehicleto circumvent the constitutional limitation on ac6uisition b! individuals of alienable landsof the public domain.

The constitutional intent, under the /01 and /50 Constitutions, is to transfer onershipof onl! a limited area of alienable land of the public domain to a 6ualified individual. Thisconstitutional intent is safeguarded b! the provision prohibiting corporations fromac6uiring alienable lands of the public domain, since the vehicle to circumvent theconstitutional intent is removed. The available alienable public lands are graduall!decreasing in the face of an ever(groing population. The most effective a! to insurefaithful adherence to this constitutional intent is to grant or sell alienable lands of thepublic domain onl! to individuals. This, it ould seem, is the practical benefit arising fromthe constitutional ban.

#he *mended Joint /enture *greement

The sub"ect matter of the Amended DA, as stated in its second ?hereas clause, consistsof three properties, namel!;

. %9T:hree partiall! reclaimed and substantiall! eroded islands along EmilioAguinaldo Boulevard in Parana6ue and >as Pinas, Metro Manila, ith a combinedtitled area of ,805,44 s6uare metersG%

. %9A:nother area of ,4,88/ s6uare meters contiguous to the three islandsG%and

1. %9A:t AMAR*'s option as approved b! PEA, an additional 18- hectares more orless to regularie the configuration of the reclaimed area.%8

PEA confirms that the Amended DA involves %the development of the 3reedom *slandsand further reclamation of about 8- hectares 7 7 7,% plus an option %granted to AMAR* tosubse6uentl! reclaim another 18- hectares 7 7 7.%

*n short, the Amended DA covers a reclamation area of 08- hectares. 1nly 85hectares of the 75A%hectare reclamation pro"ect have been reclaimed andrest of the 5=.85 hectares are still submerged areas forming part of !ay.

@nder the Amended DA, AMAR* ill reimburse PEA the sum of P,5/4,/,--.-PEA's %actual cost% in partiall! reclaiming the 3reedom *slands. AMAR* ill also comat its on e7pense, the reclamation of the 3reedom *slands. AMAR* ill further shouldthe reclamation costs of all the other areas, totaling 8/.8 hectares, still to be reclaAMAR* and PEA ill share, in the proportion of 0- percent and 1- percent, respectthe total net usable area hich is defined in the Amended DA as the total reclaimedless 1- percent earmar#ed for common areas. Title to AMAR*'s share in the net u

area, totaling 10.8 hectares, ill be issued in the name of AMAR*. =ection 8. $c& oAmended DA provides that

%7 7 7, PEA shall have the dut! to e7ecute ithout dela! the necessar! detransfer or conve!ance of the title pertaining to AMAR*'s >and share based o>and Allocation Plan. ()* when requested in writing by **4$ shall cause the issuance and delivery of the proper certificates of covering **4$0s and &hare in the name of **4$ , 7 7 7G provided, tmore than sevent! percent $0-Q& of the titled area at an! given time pertaAMAR*, PEA shall deliver to AMAR* onl! sevent! percent $0-Q& of the pertaining to AMAR*, until such time hen a corresponding proportionate aradditional land pertaining to PEA has been titled.% $Emphasis supplied&

$ndisputably under the *mended J/* **4$ will acquire and own a ma'imu367.5 hectares of reclaimed land which will be titled in its name.

To implement the Amended DA, PEA delegated to the unincorporated PEA(AMARventure PEA's statutor! authorit!, rights and privileges to reclaim foreshoresubmerged areas in Manila Ba!. =ection 1..a of the Amended DA states that

%PEA hereb! contributes to the "oint venture its rights and privileges to peRaland Reclamation and 2oriontal )evelopment as ell as on the ReclamArea, thereb! granting the oint Denture the full and e7clusive right, authoritprivilege to underta#e the Pro"ect in accordance ith the Master )evelopPlan.%

The Amended DA is the product of a renegotiation of the original DA dated April 8,and its supplemental agreement dated August /, //8.

#he #hreshold $ssue


16/25

The threshold issue is hether AMAR*, a private corporation, can ac6uire and on underthe Amended DA 10.8 hectares of reclaimed foreshore and submerged areas in ManilaBa! in vie of =ections and 1, Article K** of the /50 Constitution hich state that;

%=ection . All lands of the public domain, aters, minerals, coal, petroleum, andother mineral oils, all forces of potential energ!, fisheries, forests or timber,ildlife, flora and fauna, and other natural resources are oned b! the=tate. ith the e'ception of agricultural lands all other natural resourcesshall not be alienated. 7 7 7.

7 7 7

=ection 1. 7 7 7 Alienable lands of the public domain shall be limited to agriculturallands. (rivate corporations or associations may not hold such alienablelands of the public domain e'cept by lease, 7 7 7.%$Emphasis supplied&

+lassification of 4eclaimed Foreshore and &ubmerged *reas

PEA readil! concedes that lands reclaimed from foreshore or submerged areas of ManilaBa! are alienable or disposable lands of the public domain. *n its Memorandum, 0PEAadmits that

%@nder the Public >and Act $CA 4, as amended&, reclaimed lands areclassified as alienable and disposable lands of the public domain;

'=ec. 8/. The lands disposable under this title shall be classified as follos;

$a& >ands reclaimed b! the government b! dredging, filling, or othermeansG

7 7 7.'% $Emphasis supplied&

>i#eise, the >egal Tas# 3orce5constituted under Presidential Administrative +rder No.18 admitted in its Report and Recommendation to then President 3idel D.Ramos, C4Declaimed lands are classified as alienable and disposable lands ofthe public domain.%/The >egal Tas# 3orce concluded that

%). Conclusion

Reclaimed lands are lands of the public domain. 2oever, b! statutor! authorit!,the rights of onership and disposition over reclaimed lands have beentransferred to PEA, b! virtue of hich PEA, as oner, ma! validl! conve! the sameto an! 6ualified person ithout violating the Constitution or an! statute.

The constitutional provision prohibiting private corporations from holding land, e7cept b! lease $=ec. 1, Art. KD**,0-/50 Constitution&, does not apreclaimed lands hose onership has passed on to PEA b! statutor! grant.%

@nder =ection , Article K** of the /50 Constitution, the foreshore and submerged of Manila Ba! are part of the %lands of the public domain, aters 7 7 7 and other nresources% and conse6uentl! %oned b! the =tate.% As such, foreshore and submeareas %shall not be alienated,% unless the! are classified as %agricultural lands% opublic domain. The mere reclamation of these areas b! PEA does not convert inalienable natural resources of the =tate into alienable or disposable lands of the pdomain. There must be a la or presidential proclamation officiall! classif!ing reclaimed lands as alienable or disposable and open to disposition or conce

Moreover, these reclaimed lands cannot be classified as alienable or disposable if thhas reserved them for some public or 6uasi(public use.0

=ection 5 of CA No. 4 provides that %onl! those lands shall be declared opdisposition or concession hich have been officially delimited and classified.%President has the authorit! to classif! inalienable lands of the public domain into alieor disposable lands of the public domain, pursuant to =ection of CA No. 4. *n >aurFarcia,01the E7ecutive )epartment attempted to sell the Roppongi propert! in T

apan, hich as ac6uired b! the Philippine Fovernment for use as the Chancer! oPhilippine Embass!. Although the Chancer! had transferred to another location thi!ears earlier, the Court still ruled that, under Article 404of the Civil Code, a propepublic dominion retains such character until formall! declared otherise. The Court that

%The fact that the Roppongi site has not been used for a long time for a

Embass! service does not automaticall! convert it to patrimonial propert!such conversion happens onl! if the propert! is ithdran from public use $+7!gen and Acet!lene Co. v. Bercilles, =CRA 45 9/08:.* propcontinues to be part of the public domain not available for prappropriation or ownership 0until there is a formal declaration onpart of the government to withdraw it from being such0 $*gnacio v. )iof >ands, -5 Phil. 118 9/-:.% $Emphasis supplied&

P) No. -58, issued on 3ebruar! 4, /00, authoried the issuance of special land pafor lands reclaimed b! PEA from the foreshore or submerged areas of Manila Ba

anuar! /, /55 then President Coraon C. A6uino issued =pecial Patent No. 180 name of PEA for the 80.54 hectares comprising the partiall! reclaimed 3reedom *s=ubse6uentl!, on April /, /// the Register of )eeds of the Municipalit! of Paranissued TCT Nos. 01-/, 01 and 01 in the name of PEA pursuant to =ection -1 No. 8/ authoriing the issuance of certificates of title corresponding to land paten

this da!, these certificates of title are still in the name of PEA.

P) No. -58, coupled ith President A6uino's actual issuanceof a special pcovering the 3reedom *slands, is e6uivalent to an official proclamation classif!in


17/25

3reedom *slands as alienable or disposable lands of the public domain. P) No. -58 andPresident A6uino's issuance of a land patent also constitute a declaration that the3reedom *slands are no longer needed for public service. #he Freedom $slands arethus alienable or disposable lands of the public domain open to disposition orconcession to qualified parties.

At the time then President A6uino issued =pecial Patent No. 180, PEA had alread!reclaimed the 3reedom *slands although subse6uentl! there ere partial erosions on someareas. The government had also completed the necessar! surve!s on these islands. Thus,the 3reedom *slands ere no longer part of Manila Ba! but part of the land mass. =ection1, Article K** of the /50 Constitution classifies lands of the public domain into%agricultural, forest or timber, mineral lands, and national par#s.% Being neither timber,

mineral, nor national par# lands, the reclaimed 3reedom *slands necessaril! fall under theclassification of agricultural lands of the public domain. @nder the /50 Constitution,agricultural lands of the public domain are the onl! natural resources that the =tate ma!alienate to 6ualified private parties. All other natural resources, such as the seas or ba!s,are %aters 7 7 7 oned b! the =tate% forming part of the public domain, and areinalienable pursuant to =ection , Article K** of the /50 Constitution.

AMAR* claims that the 3reedom *slands are private lands because C)CP, then a privatecorporation, reclaimed the islands under a contract dated November -, /01 ith theCommissioner of Public 2igha!s. AMAR*, citing Article 8 of the =panish >a of ?aters of5, argues that %if the onership of reclaimed lands ma! be given to the part!constructing the or#s, then it cannot be said that reclaimed lands are lands of the publicdomain hich the =tate ma! not alienate.%08Article 8 of the =panish >a of ?aters readsas follos;

%Article 8. >ands reclaimed from the sea in conse6uence of or#s constructed b!the =tate, or b! the provinces, pueblos or private persons, with proper permission,shall become the propert! of the part! constructing such or#s, unlessotherwise provided by the terms of the grant of authority.% $Emphasissupplied&

@nder Article 8 of the =panish >a of ?aters of 5, private parties could reclaim fromthe sea onl! ith %proper permission% from the =tate. Private parties could on thereclaimed land onl! if not %otherise provided b! the terms of the grant of authorit!.% Thisclearl! meant that no one could reclaim from the sea ithout permission from the =tatebecause the sea is propert! of public dominion. *t also meant that the =tate could grant orithhold onership of the reclaimed land because an! reclaimed land, li#e the sea fromhich it emerged, belonged to the =tate. Thus, a private person reclaiming from the seaithout permission from the =tate could not ac6uire onership of the reclaimed landhich ould remain propert! of public dominion li#e the sea it replaced.0Article 8 of the

=panish >a of ?aters of 5 adopted the time(honored principle of land onership that%all lands that ere not ac6uired from the government, either b! purchase or b! grant,belong to the public domain.%00

Article 8 of the =panish >a of ?aters must be read together ith las subse6uenacted on the disposition of public lands. *n particular, CA No. 4 re6uires that lanthe public domain must first be classified as alienable or disposable beforgovernment can alienate them. These lands must not be reserved for public or 6public purposes.05Moreover, the contract beteen C)CP and the governmente7ecuted afterthe effectivit! of the /01 Constitution hich barred private corporafrom ac6uiring an! #ind of alienable land of the public domain. This contract coulhave converted the 3reedom *slands into private lands of a private corporation.

Presidential )ecree No. 1(A, issued on anuar! , /01, revo#ed all las authoriinreclamation of areas under ater and revested solel! in the National Fovernmenpoer to reclaim lands. =ection of P) No. 1(A declared that

%#he provisions of any law to the contrary notwithstandingreclamation of areas under ater, hether foreshore or inland, shall be limto the ;ational -overnment or any person authori,ed by it undproper contract. $Emphasis supplied&

7 7 7.%

P) No. 1(A repealed =ection 8 of the =panish >a of ?aters of 5 because reclamof areas under ater could no be underta#en onl! b! the National Fovernment operson contracted b! the National Fovernment. Private parties ma! reclaim from thonl! under a contract ith the National Fovernment, and no longer b! grant or permas provided in =ection 8 of the =panish >a of ?aters of 5.

E7ecutive +rder No. 88, issued on 3ebruar! 4, /0/, designated PEA as the NaFovernment's implementing arm to underta#e %all reclamation pro"ects ogovernment,% hich %shall be undertaBen by the ()* or through a proper cone'ecuted by it with any person or entity.% @nder such contract, a private receives compensation for reclamation services rendered to PEA. Pa!ment tocontractor ma! be in cash, or in #ind consisting of portions of the reclaimed land, suto the constitutional ban on private corporations from ac6uiring alienable lands opublic domain. The reclaimed land can be used as pa!ment in #ind onl! if the reclaland is first classified as alienable or disposable land open to disposition, anddeclared no longer needed for public service.

The Amended DA covers not onl! the 3reedom *slands, but also an additional 8hectares hich are still submerged and forming part of Manila Ba!. #here ilegislative or (residential act classifying these submerged areas as alienabdisposable lands of the public domain open to disposition. These submerged are not covered b! an! patent or certificate of title. There can be no dispute that tsubmerged areas form part of the public domain, and in their present are inalienable and outside the commerce of man. @ntil reclaimed from thethese submerged areas are, under the Constitution, %aters 7 7 7 oned b! the =forming part of the public domain and conse6uentl! inalienable. +nl! hen ac


18/25

reclaimed from the sea can these submerged areas be classified as public agriculturallands, hich under the Constitution are the onl! natural resources that the =tate ma!alienate. +nce reclaimed and transformed into public agricultural lands, the governmentma! then officiall! classif! these lands as alienable or disposable lands open todisposition. Thereafter, the government ma! declare these lands no longer needed forpublic service. +nl! then can these reclaimed lands be considered alienable or disposablelands of the public domain and ithin the commerce of man.

The classification of PEA's reclaimed foreshore and submerged lands into alienable ordisposable lands open to disposition is necessar! because PEA is tas#ed under its charterto underta#e public services that re6uire the use of lands of the public domain. @nder=ection 8 of P) No. -54, the functions of PEA include the folloing; %9T:o on or operate

railroads, trama!s and other #inds of land transportation, 7 7 7G 9T:o construct, maintainand operate such s!stems of sanitar! seers as ma! be necessar!G 9T:o construct,maintain and operate such storm drains as ma! be necessar!.% PEA is empoered to issue%rules and regulations as ma! be necessar! for the proper use b! private parties of anyor all of the highways roads utilities buildings andEor any of its propertiesandto impose or collect fees or tolls for their use.% Thus, part of the reclaimed foreshore andsubmerged lands held b! the PEA ould actuall! be needed for public use or service sinceman! of the functions imposed on PEA b! its charter constitute essential public services.

Moreover, =ection of E7ecutive +rder No. 88 provides that PEA %shall be primaril!responsible for integrating, directing, and coordinating all reclamation pro"ects for and onbehalf of the National Fovernment.% The same section also states that %9A:ll reclamationpro"ects shall be approved b! the President upon recommendation of the PEA, and shall beunderta#en b! the PEA or through a proper contract e7ecuted b! it ith an! person orentit!G 7 7 7.% Thus, under E+ No. 88, in relation to P) No. 1(A and P) No.-54, PEA

became the primar! implementing agenc! of the National Fovernment to reclaimforeshore and submerged lands of the public domain. E+ No. 88 recognied PEA as thegovernment entit! %to underta#e the reclamation of lands and ensure their ma7imumutiliation inpromoting public welfare and interests.%0/=ince large portions of thesereclaimed lands ould obviousl! be needed for public service, there must be a formaldeclaration segregating reclaimed lands no longer needed for public service from thosestill needed for public service.)*wphi)(n+t

=ection 1 of E+ No. 88, b! declaring that all lands reclaimed b! PEA %shall belong to or beoned b! the PEA,% could not automaticall! operate to classif! inalienable lands intoalienable or disposable lands of the public domain. +therise, reclaimed foreshore andsubmerged lands of the public domain ould automaticall! become alienable oncereclaimed b! PEA, hether or not classified as alienable or disposable.

The Revised Administrative Code of /50, a later la than either P) No. -54 or E+ No.

88, vests in the )epartment of Environment and Natural Resources $%)ENR% for brevit!&the folloing poers and functions;

%=ec. 4. Poers and 3unctions. The )epartment shall;

$& 7 7 7

7 7 7

$4& )'ercise supervision and controlover forest lands, alienable disposable public lands, mineral resources and, in the process of e7ercsuch control, impose appropriate ta7es, fees, charges, rentals and an! suchof lev! and collect such revenues for the e7ploration, development, utiliatigathering of such resourcesG

7 7 7

$4& (romulgate rules regulations and guidelines on the issuanclicenses permits concessions lease agreements and such oprivileges concerning the development e'ploration and utili,ation ocountry0s marine freshwater and bracBish water and over all aqresources of the country and shall continue to oversee supervisepolice our natural resourcesG cancel or cause to cancel such privileges failure, non(compliance or violations of an! regulation, order, and for all causes hich are in furtherance of the conservation of natural resourcesupportive of the national interestG

$8& )'ercise e'clusive "urisdiction on the management and dispositiall lands of the public domain and serve as the sole agency responfor classification, sub(classification, surve!ing and titling of lands in consulith appropriate agencies.%5-$Emphasis supplied&

As manager, conservator and overseer of the natural resources of the =tate, e7ercises %supervision and control over alienable and disposable public lands.% )ENRe7ercises %e7clusive "urisdiction on the management and disposition of all lands opublic domain.% Thus, )ENR decides hether areas under ater, li#e foreshosubmerged areas of Manila Ba!, should be reclaimed or not. This means that PEA nauthoriation from )ENR before PEA can underta#e reclamation pro"ects in Manila Bin an! part of the countr!.

)ENR also e7ercises e7clusive "urisdiction over the disposition of all lands of the pdomain. 2ence, )ENR decides hether reclaimed lands of PEA should be classifialienable under =ections 5and 05of CA No. 4. +nce )ENR decides that the reclalands should be so classified, it then recommends to the President the issuanceproclamation classif!ing the lands as alienable or disposable lands of the public doopen to disposition. ?e note that then )ENR =ecretar! 3ulgencio =. 3actora

countersigned =pecial Patent No. 180 in compliance ith the Revised AdministCode and =ections and 0 of CA No. 4.


19/25

*n short, )ENR is vested ith the poer to authorie the reclamation of areas under ater,hile PEA is vested ith the poer to underta#e the ph!sical reclamation of areas underater, hether directl! or through private contractors. )ENR is also empoered to classif!lands of the public domain into alienable or disposable lands sub"ect to the approval of thePresident. +n the other hand, PEA is tas#ed to develop, sell or lease the reclaimedalienable lands of the public domain.

Clearl!, the mere ph!sical act of reclamation b! PEA of foreshore or submerged areasdoes not ma#e the reclaimed lands alienable or disposable lands of the public domain,much less patrimonial lands of PEA. >i#eise, the mere transfer b! the NationalFovernment of lands of the public domain to PEA does not ma#e the lands alienable ordisposable lands of the public domain, much less patrimonial lands of PEA.

Absent to official acts a classification that these lands are alienable or disposable andopen to disposition and a declaration that these lands are not needed for public service,lands reclaimed b! PEA remain inalienable lands of the public domain. +nl! such anofficial classification and formal declaration can convert reclaimed lands into alienable ordisposable lands of the public domain, open to disposition under the Constitution, Title *and Title ***51of CA No. 4 and other applicable las.54

()*0s *uthority to &ell 4eclaimed ands

PEA, li#e the >egal Tas# 3orce, argues that as alienable or disposable lands of the publicdomain, the reclaimed lands shall be disposed of in accordance ith CA No. 4, thePublic >and Act. PEA, citing =ection - of CA No. 4, admits that reclaimed landstransferred to a branch or subdivision of the government %shall not be alienated,encumbered, or otherise disposed of in a manner affecting its title, e'cept when

authori,ed by +ongress; 7 7 7.%58$Emphasis b! PEA&

*n aurel vs. -arcia,5the Court cited =ection 45 of the Revised Administrative Code of/50, hich states that

%=ec. 45. +fficial Authoried to Conve! Real Propert!. ?henever real propert! ofthe Fovernment is authori,ed by law to be conveyed, the deed of conve!anceshall be e7ecuted in behalf of the government b! the folloing; 7 7 7.%

Thus, the Court concluded that a la is needed to conve! an! real propert! belonging tothe Fovernment. The Court declared that (

%*t is not for the President to conve! real propert! of the government on his or heron sole ill.*ny such conveyance must be authori,ed and approved by a

law enacted by the +ongress. *t re6uires e7ecutive and legislativeconcurrence.% $Emphasis supplied&

PEA contends that P) No. -58 and E+ No. 88 constitute the legislative autalloing PEA to sell its reclaimed lands. P) No. -58, issued on 3ebruar! 4, /00, prothat

%#he land reclaimed in the foreshore and offshore area of !aypursuant to the contract for the reclamation and construction of the MCavite Coastal Road Pro"ect beteen the Republic of the Philippines anConstruction and )evelopment Corporation of the Philippines dated Novemb/01 and

chavez vs. public estate authority (2002)

Documents