chavez vs publis estates 1

8/9/2019 Chavez vs Publis Estates 1

1/57

EN BANC

[G.R. No. 133250. November 11, 2003]

FRANCISCO I. CHAVEZ,petitioner, vs.PU!IC ES"A"ES AU"HORI"# $%&A'ARI

COAS"A! A# (EVE!OP'EN"CORPORA"ION, respondents.

R E S O ! U " I O N

CARPIO,J.)

This Court is asked to legitimize a government contract that conveyed to a private

entity 157.! hectares o" reclaimed pu#lic lands along $o%as Boulevard in &etro &anila

at thenegotiatedprice of P1,200 per square meter. 'o(ever) pu#lished reports

place the market price o" land near that area at that time at a high o" *+,),,, per s-uare

meter.1/The di0erence in price is a staggering P140.16 billion) e-uivalent to the

#udget o" the entire udiciary "or seventeen years and more than three times the &arcos

2(iss deposits that this Court "or"eited in "avor o" the government.

&any (orry to death that the private investors (ill lose their investments) at most

not more than one3hal" #illion pesos in legitimate e%penses) 4/i" this Court voids the

contract. No one seems to (orry a#out the more than tens o" #illion pesos that the

hapless ilipino people (ill lose i" the contract is allo(ed to stand. There are those (ho-uestion these 6gures) #ut the -uestions arise only #ecause the private entity someho(

managed to inveigle the government to sell the reclaimed lands (ithout pu#lic #idding in

patent violation o" the overnment Auditing Code.

ortunately "or the ilipino people) t(o 2enate Committees) the 2enate Blue $i##on

Committee and the Committee on Accounta#ility o" *u#lic 89cers) conducted e%tensive

pu#lic hearings to determine the actual market value o" the pu#lic lands sold to the

private entity. "*e Se%$+e Comm++ee- e-+$b-*e& +*e /e$r, %&-+$be $%&

%$+er$be $/+ +*$+ +*e -$e o +*e b/ $%&- - ro--4 $%& %/o%-/o%$b4

%&erv$e& b$-e& o% o/$ &o/me%+- -bm++e& b4 +*e roer over%me%+

$e%/e- &r% +*e Se%$+e %ve-+$+o%. :e -uote the ;oint report o" these t(o

2enate Committees) 2enate Committee $eport No. 5/

"*e Co%-&er$+o% or +*e Proer+4

*EA) under the ?A) o#ligated itsel" to convey title and possession ove

consisting o" appro%imately 8ne &illion ive 'undred 2eventy Eight T

'undred orty 8ne @1)57)!!1 2-uare &eters "or a total consideratio

Eight 'undred Ninety our &illion 8ne 'undred T(enty Nine Thousand

@*1)+!)14+)4,,.,, *esos) or a price o" 8ne Thousand T(o 'undred

per s-uare meter.

A//or&% +o +*e 6o%$ v$$+o% o +*e re$ o I%+er%$ Rev

o +*e Proer+4 - Seve% "*o-$%& E*+ H%&re& Pe-o- 7 P 8,9

-;$re me+er. "*e '%/$ A--e--or oP$r$e+ v$e o +*e Proer+4 $+

Pe-o- 7 P @,000.00: er -;$re me+er . Based on these alone) the

agreed to convey the property is a pittance. And *EA cannot claim ig

valuations) at least not those o" the &unicipal Assessors o9ce) since

to convince the 89ce o" the &unicipal Assessor o" *araa-ue to redu

various reclaimed properties thereat in order "or *EA to save on accru

ta%es.

*EAs ;usti6cation "or the purchase price are various appraisal reports

"ollo(ing=

@1 An appraisal #y ?ic T. 2alinas $ealty and Consultancy 2

that the *roperty is (orth *5,,.,, per s-uare meter "oand *75,.,, per s-uare meter "or the t(o other islands

o" *1)17,),,,.,, as o" 44 e#ruary 1++5D

@4 An appraisal #y ?alencia Appraisal Corporation conclud

*roperty is (orth *5, per s-uare meter "or sland ) *

meter "or sland and *4),,,) also as o" 44 e#ruary 1++5D a

@> An Appraisal #y Asian Appraisal Company) nc. @AAC)

*roperty is (orth appro%imately *1),,, per s-uare me

per s-uare meter "or sland and *


2/57

appearing in t(o di0erent reports #y the same appraisal company su#mitted (ithin a

span o" one year render all such appraisal reports un(orthy o" even the slightest

consideration. Fr+*ermore, +*e $r$-$ reor+ -bm++e& b4 +*e Comm--o%

o% A&+ e-+m$+e- +*e v$e o +*e Proer+4 +o be

$ro?m$+e4 P 33,@83,000,000.00, or P 21,333.08 er -;$re me+er.

There (ere also other o0ers made "or the property "rom other parties (hich indicate that

the *roperty has #een undervalued #y *EA. or instance) on ,< &arch 1++5) &r. Foung

G. 2ee) *resident o" 2aeil'eavy ndustries Co.) Htd.) @2outh Iorea) o0ered to #uy the

property at *1)!,,.,, and e%pressed its (illingness to issue a stand3#y letter o" credit

(orth J1, million. *EA did not consider this o0er and instead 6nalized the ?A (ithA&A$. 8ther o0ers (ere made on various dates #y Aspac &anagement and

Gevelopment roup nc. @"or *1))!+,)++4)45,.,, @e%cluding the #onus. " A&A$ (as (illing to pay such amount "or

the *roperty) (hy (as *EA (illing to sell "or only *1)+!)14+)4,,.,,) making theovernment stand to lose appro%imately *1)5+),,,.,, per s-uare meter) the overnment no( stands to

lose appro%imately *4)!1)1+>),,.,,. But an even #etter assumption (ould #e that

the value o" the *roperty is *!)5,,.,, per s-uare meter) as per the AAC appraisal report

dated 4< &arch 1++


3/57

$ore-$& -+o/>*o&er- b4 =$4 o ee- orroe--o%$ eor+- $%& -erv/e- %

-//e--4 %eo+$+% $%& -e/r% or A'ARI +*e o%+ Ve%+re Areeme%+)

as "ollo(s=

Form of Payment PaidPayable !n "mount

&anagers Checks 4 April 1++5 * !,,),,,),,,.,,

&anagers Checks Kpon signing o"

letter 41 an. + 15,),,,),,,.,,

! *GCs &onthly) over a 143month pd.

"rom date o" letter >57)>),5,.,,

Cash #onus :hen sale o" land #egins not e%ceeding

157)!!)1,,.,,

Geveloped land "rom *ro;ect Kpon completion o" each Costing

phase >,,),,,),,,.,,

"O"A! P1,85D,808,150.0

0

PPPPPPPPPPPPPP

'r. !- e%+e6 o SGV, +*e e?+er%$ $&+or- o A'ARI, +e-+Be& +*$+ -$&

!e++erAreeme%+ =$- $rove& b4 +*e A'ARI o$r&.


4/57

agricultural lands, all ot'er natural resources s'all not be alienated.

% % %. @Emphasis supplied

2u#merged lands) like the (aters @sea or #ay a#ove them) are part o" the 2tates

inaliena#le natural resources. 2u#merged lands are property o" pu#lic dominion)

a#solutely inaliena#le and outside the commerce o" man.1,/This is also true (ith respect

to "oreshore lands. Any sale o" su#merged or "oreshore lands is void #eing contrary to

the Constitution.11/

This is (hy the Ce#u City ordinance merely granted Essel) nc. an Mirrevoca#le

option to purchase the "oreshore lands afterthe reclamation and did not actually sellto Essel) nc. the still to #e reclaimed "oreshore lands. Clearly) in the *once Cases the

option to purchase re"erred to reclaimed lands) and not to "oreshore lands (hich are

inaliena#le. $eclaimed lands are no longer "oreshore or su#merged lands) and thus may

-uali"y as aliena#le agricultural lands o" the pu#lic domain provided the re-uirements o"

pu#lic land la(s are met.

n the instant case) the #ulk o" the lands su#;ect o" the Amended ?A are

still submerged landseven to this very day) and there"ore inaliena#le and outside the

commerce o" man. 8" the 75, hectares su#;ect o" the Amended ?A) 5+4.15 hectares

or 35 of t'e total area are still submerged, permanently under t'e $aters

of anila -ay. Knder the Amended ?A) the *EA conveyed to Amari the su#merged

lands even #e"ore their actual reclamation) although the documentation o" the deed o"

trans"er and issuance o" the certi6cates o" title (ould #e made only a"ter actualreclamation.

The Amended ?A states that the *EA M'ereby contributes to t'e Joint

entureits rig'ts and privileges toper"orm $a(land $eclamation and 'orizontal

Gevelopment as (ell aso$n t'e *eclamation "rea.14/The Amended ?A "urther

states that Mthe sharing o" the oint ?enture *roceeds shall #e #ased on the ratio o" thirty

percent @>,R "or *EA and seventy percent @7,R "or A&A$. 1>/The Amended ?A also

provides that the *EA Mhere#y designates A&A$ to per"orm *EAs rights and privileges

to reclaim) o(n and develop the $eclamation Area.1!/%n s'ort, under t'e "mended

J" t'e P" contributed its rig'ts, privileges and o$ners'ip over t'e

*eclamation "rea to t'e Joint enture $'ic' is 305 o$ned by"mari. oreover,

t'e P" delegated to "mari t'e rig't and privilege to reclaim t'e submerged

lands.

The Amended ?A mandates that the *EA had Mthe duty to e%ecute (ithout delay the

necessary deed o" trans"er or conveyance o" the title pertaining to A&A$s Hand share

#ased on the Hand Allocation *lan.15/The Amended ?A also provid

re-uested in (riting #y A&A$) shall then cause the issuance and de

certi6cates o" title covering A&A$s Hand 2hare in the name o" A&A$

n the *once Cases) the City o" Ce#u retained o(nership o" the r

lands and Essel) nc. only had an Mirrevoca#le option to purcha

"oreshore lands once actually reclaimed. n sharp contrast) in the ins

o" the reclamation area) including the su#merged lands) (as immed

the ;oint venture. Amariimmediately ac-uired the a#solute right to

the reclamation area) (ith the deeds o" trans"er to #e documented an

title to #e issued upon actual reclamation. Amaris right to o(n the immediately e0ective upon the approval o" the Amended ?A and not

#e e%ercised in the "uture i" and (hen the reclamation is ac

su#merged lands) #eing inaliena#le and outside the commerce o" m

su#;ect o" the commercial transactions speci6ed in the Amended ?A.

2econd) in the *once Cases the Ce#u City ordinance gran

Mirrevoca#le option to purchase "rom Ce#u City not more than 7,

lands. The o(nership o" the reclaimed lands remained (ith Ce#u

e%ercised its option to purchase. :ith the su#se-uent enactment

Auditing Code @*residential Gecree No. 1!!5 on 11 une 1+7) any

land must #e made only through pu#lic #idding. Thus) such an Mirr

purchase government land (ould no( #e void #eing contrary to

pu#lic #idding e%pressly re-uired in 2ection 7+ 17/o" *G No. 1!!5. pu#lic #idding is reiterated in 2ection >7+1/o" the 1++1 Hocal

1+/8#viously) the ingenious reclamation scheme adopted in the Ce#

no longer #e "ollo(ed in vie( o" the re-uirement o" pu#lic #id

government lands. n the instant case) the Amended ?A is a negot

clearly contravenes 2ection 7+ o" *G No. 1!!5.

Third) $epu#lic Act No. 1++ authorized municipalities and

reclaim fores'orelands. The t(o $esolutions in the *onc

the Ce#u City ordinance only (ith respect to "oreshore areas) and nu

respect to su#merged areas. Thus) the 47 une 1+


5/57

ustice $eynato 2. *uno stated that under Common(ealth Act No. 1!1) M"oreshore and

lands under (ater (ere not to #e alienated and sold to private parties) and that such

lands Mremained property o" the 2tate. ustice *uno emphasized that MCommon(ealth

Act No. 1!1 has remained in e0ect at present. The instant case involves principally

su#merged lands (ithin &anila Bay. 8n this score) the *once Cases) (hich (ere decided

#ased on $A No. 1++) are not applica#le to the instant case.

ourth) the *once Cases involve the authority o" the City o" Ce#u to reclaim

"oreshore areas pursuant to a general la() $A No. 1++. The City o" Ce#u is a pu#lic

corporation and is -uali6ed) under the 1+>5) 1+7>) and 1+7 Constitutions) to hold

aliena#le or even inaliena#le lands o" the pu#lic domain. There is no dispute that apu#lic corporation is not covered #y the constitutional #an on ac-uisition o" aliena#le

pu#lic lands. Both the + uly 4,,4 Gecision and the < &ay 4,,> $esolution o" this Court

in the instant case e%pressly recognize this.

Ce#u City is an end user government agency) ;ust like the Bases Conversion and

Gevelopment Authority or the Gepartment o" oreign A0airs. 41/Thus) Congress may #y

la( trans"er pu#lic lands to the City o" Ce#u to #e used "or municipal purposes) (hich

may #e pu#lic or patrimonial. Hands thus ac-uired #y the City o" Ce#u "or a pu#lic

purpose may not #e sold to private parties. 'o(ever) lands so ac-uired #y the City

o" Ce#u "or a patrimonial purpose may #e sold to private parties) including private

corporations.

'o(ever) in the instant case the *EA is not an end user agency (ith respect to thereclaimed lands under the Amended ?A. As (e e%plained in the < &ay 4,,> $esolution=

*EA is the central implementing agencytasked to undertake reclamation

pro;ects nation$ide. *EA took the place o" the Gepartment o" Environment and Natural

$esources @MGEN$ "or #revity as the government agency charged (ith leasing or

selling all reclaimedlands o" the pu#lic domain. %n t'e 'ands of P", $'ic' too+

over t'e leasing and selling functions of )/*, reclaimed fores'ore 8or

submerged lands9 lands are public lands in t'e same manner t'at t'ese same

lands $ould 'ave been public lands in t'e 'ands of )/*. @Emphasis supplied

8ur + uly 4,,4 Gecision e%plained the rationale "or treating the *EA in the same

manner as the GEN$ (ith respect to reclaimed "oreshore or su#merged lands in this

(ise=

To allo( vast areas o" reclaimed lands o" the pu#lic domain to #e trans"erred to *EA as

private lands (ill sanction a gross violation o" the constitutional #an on private

corporations "rom ac-uiring any kind o" aliena#le land o" the pu#lic d

simply turn around) as P" 'as no$ done under t'e "mended J

several hundreds o" hectares o" these reclaimed and still to #e reclaim

single private corporation in only one transaction. This scheme (ill e

constitutional #an in 2ection >) Article Q o" the 1+7 Constitution (h

di0use e-uita#ly the o(nership o" aliena#le lands o" the pu#lic domai

no( num#ering over , million strong. @Emphasis supplied

inally) the *once Cases (ere decided under the 1+>5 Constit

private corporations to ac-uire aliena#le lands o" the pu#lic domain.

Constitution prohi#ited private corporations "rom ac-uiring aliena#ledomain) and the 1+7 Constitution reiterated this prohi#ition. 8

Cases cannot serve as authority "or a private corporation to ac-u

lands) much less su#merged lands) since under the present Co

corporation like Amari is #arred "rom ac-uiring aliena#le lands o" the

Clearly) the "acts in the *once Cases are di0erent "rom the "acts

&oreover) the governing constitutional and statutory provisions hav

*once Cases (ere disposed o" in 1+


6/57

JHEREFORE) the second &otions "or $econsideration 6led #y *u#lic Estates

Authority and Amari Coastal Bay Gevelopment Corporation are GENEG"or#eing

prohi#ited pleadings. n any event) these &otions "or $econsideration have no merit. No

"urther pleadings shall #e allo(ed "rom any o" the parties.

SO OR(ERE(.

avide, !r., C.!., Pan"aniban, Austria#Martinez, Car$io#Morales, andCalle%o, &r.,

!!., concur.

'ellosillo, ! ., voted to grant reconsideration) pls. see dissenting opinion.

Puno, !., maintains previous -uali6ed opinion.

(itu", !., pls. see separate@concurring opinion.

)uisumbin", !., voted to allo( reconsideration) see separate opinion.

*nares#&antia"o,&andoval#Gutierrez, andCorona, !!., maintains their dissent.

Azcuna, !., no part.

Tin"a, !., see dissenting opinion.

$epu#lic o" the *hilippines

2K*$E&E C8K$T

&anila

EN BANC

.$. No. +4,1> uly 45) 1++,

2AH?AG8$ '. HAK$EH) petitioner)

vs.

$A&8N A$CA) as head o" the Asset *rivatization Trust) $AKH &ANHA*K2) as 2ecretary

o" oreign A0airs) and CATAHN8 &ACA$A) as E%ecutive 2ecretary) respondents.

.$. No. +4,!7 uly 45) 1++,

G8N28 2. 8EGA) petitioner)

vs.

EQECKT?E 2EC$ETA$F &ACA$A) $.) A22ET2 *$?ATSAT8N T$K2T

T. A$CA) A&BA22AG8$ $A&8N GEH $82A$8) et al.) as mem#ers o

ANG BGGN C8&&TTEE2 8N T'E KTHSAT8NG2*82T8N *ETT

8?E$N&ENT *$8*E$TE2 N A*AN) respondents.

Arturo M. Tolentino for $etitioner in +-/.

KTE$$ES) $.)!.0

These are t(o petitions "or prohi#ition seeking to en;oin respondents)

representatives and agents "rom proceeding (ith the #idding "or the

s-uare meters o" land at >,< $oppongi) 53Chome &inato3ku Tokyo) ap

e#ruary 41) 1++,. :e granted the prayer "or a temporary restraining

e#ruary 4,) 1++,. 8ne o" the petitioners @in .$. No. +4,!7 like(ise

mandamus to compel the respondents to "ully disclose to the pu#lic t

decision to push through (ith the sale o" the $oppongi property inspir

opposition and to e%plain the proceedings (hich e0ectively prevent t

ilipino citizens and entities in the #idding process.

The oral arguments in .$. No. +4,1>) 1aurel v. Garcia, et al.(ere he&arch 1>) 1++,. A"ter .$. No. +4,!7)O%eda v. &ecretary Macarai", e

respondents (ere re-uired to 6le a comment #y the CourtUs resolutio

44) 1++,. The t(o petitions (ere consolidated on &arch 47) 1++, (he

o" the parties in the 1aurelcase (ere deli#erated upon.

The Court could not act on these cases immediately #ecause the resp

motion "or an e%tension o" thirty @>, days to 6le comment in .$. No

a second motion "or an e%tension o" another thirty @>, days (hich (

1++,) a third motion "or e%tension o" time granted on &ay 4!) 1++, a

"or e%tension o" time (hich (e granted on une 5) 1++, #ut calling th

respondents to the length o" time the petitions have #een pending. A

(as 6led) the petitioner in .$. No. +4,!7 asked "or thirty @>, days to

noted his motion and resolved to decide the t(o @4 cases.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/nov2003/133250_vitug.htmhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/nov2003/133250_quisumbing.htmhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/nov2003/133250_sandoval.htmhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/nov2003/133250_vitug.htmhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/nov2003/133250_quisumbing.htmhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/nov2003/133250_sandoval.htm


7/57

The su#;ect property in this case is one o" the "our @! properties in apan ac-uired #y the

*hilippine government under the $eparations Agreement entered into (ith apan on &ay

+) 1+5

@> The Io#e $esidential *roperty at 13+,34 8#anoyama3cho) 2hinohara) Nada3ku) Io#e)

a residential lot (hich is no( vacant.

The properties and the capital goods and services procured "rom the apanese

government "or national development pro;ects are part o" the indemni6cation to the

ilipino people "or their losses in li"e and property and their su0ering during :orld :ar .

The $eparations Agreement provides that reparations valued at J55, million (ould #e

paya#le in t(enty @4, years in accordance (ith annual schedules o" procurements to #e

6%ed #y the *hilippine and apanese governments @Article 4) $eparations Agreement.

$ep. Act No. 17+) the $eparations Ha() prescri#es the national policy on procurement

and utilization o" reparations and development loans. The procurements are divided intothose "or use #y the "overnment sector and those "or$rivate $arties in pro;ects as the

then National Economic Council shall determine. Those intended "or the private sector

shall #e made availa#le #y sale to ilipino citizens or to one hundred @1,,R percent

ilipino3o(ned entities in national development pro;ects.

The $oppongi property (as ac-uired "rom the apanese government under the 2econd

Fear 2chedule and listed under the heading Vovernment 2ectorV) through $eparations

Contract No. >,, dated une 47) 1+5. The $oppongi property consists o" the land and

#uilding V"or the Chancery o" the *hilippine Em#assyV @Anne% &3G to &emorandum "or

*etitioner) p. 5,>. As intended) it #ecame the site o" the *hilippine Em#assy until the

latter (as trans"erred to Nampeidai on uly 44) 1+7< (hen the $oppongi #uilding needed

ma;or repairs. Gue to the "ailure o" our government to provide necessary "unds) the

$oppongi property has remained undeveloped since that time.

A proposal (as presented to *resident Corazon C. A-uino #y "ormer *hilippine

Am#assador to apan) Carlos . ?aldez) to make the property the su#;ect o" a lease

agreement (ith a apanese 6rm 3 Ia;ima Corporation W (hich shall c

#uildings in $oppongi and one @1 #uilding in Nampeidai and renovate

*hilippine Chancery in Nampeidai. The consideration o" the construct

lease to the "oreign corporation o" one @1 o" the #uildings to #e cons

and the t(o @4 #uildings in Nampeidai. The other #uilding in $oppong

used as the *hilippine Em#assy Chancery. At the end o" the lease per

leased #uildings shall #e occupied and used #y the *hilippine governm

o(nership or title shall occur. @2ee Anne% VBV to $eply to Comment T

government retains the title all throughout the lease period and there

government has not acted "avora#ly on this proposal (hich is pendin

rati6cation #et(een the parties. nstead) on August 11) 1+3A) B) C and G.

8n uly 45) 1+7) the *resident issued E%ecutive 8rder No. 4+< entitli

citizens or entities to avail o" separationsU capital goods and services

lease or disposition. The "our properties in apan including the $oppon

mentioned in the 6rst V:hereasV clause.

Amidst opposition #y various sectors) the E%ecutive #ranch o" the gov

pushing) (ith great vigor) its decision to sell the reparations propertie

$oppongi lot. The property has t(ice #een set "or #idding at a minimu

J445 million. The 6rst #idding (as a "ailure since only one #idder -ua

one) a"ter postponements) has not yet materialized. The last schedule

e#ruary 41) 1++, (as restrained #y his Court. Hater) the rules on #id

such that the J445 million Ooor price #ecame merely a suggested Oo

The Court 6nds that each o" the herein petitions raises distinct issues

.$. No. +4,1> o#;ects to the alienation o" the $oppongi property to a

petitioner in .$. No. +4,!7 adds as a principal o#;ection the alleged

the *hilippine government in "avor o" selling the property to non3ilipi

entities. These petitions have #een consolidated and are resolved at t

the o#;ective is the same 3 to stop the sale o" the $oppongi property.

The petitioner in .$. No. +4,1> raises the "ollo(ing issues=

@1 Can the $oppongi property and others o" its kind #e alienated #y

overnmentLD and


8/57

@4 Goes the Chie" E%ecutive) her o9cers and agents) have the authority and ;urisdiction)

to sell the $oppongi propertyL

*etitioner Gionisio 8;eda in .$. No. +4,!7) apart "rom -uestioning the authority o" the

government to alienate the $oppongi property assails the constitutionality o" E%ecutive

8rder No. 4+< in making the property availa#le "or sale to non3ilipino citizens and

entities. 'e also -uestions the #idding procedures o" the Committee on the Ktilization or

Gisposition o" *hilippine overnment *roperties in apan "or #eing discriminatory against

ilipino citizens and ilipino3o(ned entities #y denying them the right to #e in"ormed

a#out the #idding re-uirements.

n G.2. 3o. +-/) petitioner Haurel asserts that the $oppongi property and the related

lots (ere ac-uired as part o" the reparations "rom the apanese government "or

diplomatic and consular use #y the *hilippine government. ?ice3*resident Haurel states

that the $oppongi property is classi6ed as one o" pu#lic dominion) and not o" private

o(nership under Article !4, o" the Civil Code @2ee in"ra.

The petitioner su#mits that the $oppongi property comes under Vproperty intended "or

pu#lic serviceV in paragraph 4 o" the a#ove provision. 'e states that #eing one o" pu#lic

dominion) no o(nership #y any one can attach to it) not even #y the 2tate. The $oppongi

and related properties (ere ac-uired "or Vsites "or chancery) diplomatic) and consular

-uarters) #uildings and other improvementsV @2econd Fear $eparations 2chedule. Thepetitioner states that they continue to #e intended "or a necessary service. They are held

#y the 2tate in anticipation o" an opportune use. @Citing > &anresa


9/57

75: "*e ro*b+o% $$%-+ +*e -$e +o %o%F%o /+6e%- or e%++e- %o+

=*o4 o=%e& b4 F%o /+6e%- o /$+$ oo&- re/eve& b4 +*e P*%e-

%&er +*e Re$r$+o%- A/+ 7Se/+o%- 2 $%& 12 o Re. A/+ No. 189:M $%&

7@: "*e &e/$r$+o% o +*e -+$+e o/4 o b/ &-/o-re o $

+r$%-$/+o%- %vov% b/ %+ere-+ 7Se/+o% 29, Ar+/e III, Co%-+++o%:.

*etitioner 8;eda (arns that the use o" pu#lic "unds in the e%ecution o" an

unconstitutional e%ecutive order is a misapplication o" pu#lic "unds 'e states that since

the details o" the #idding "or the $oppongi property (ere never $ublicly disclosed until

e#ruary 15) 1++, @or a "e( days #e"ore the scheduled #idding) the #idding guidelinesare availa#le only in Tokyo) and the accomplishment o" re-uirements and the selection o"

-uali6ed #idders should #e done in Tokyo) interested ilipino citizens or entities o(ned #y

them did not have the chance to comply (ith *urchase 80er $e-uirements on the

$oppongi. :orse) the $oppongi shall #e sold "or a minimum price o" J445 million "rom

(hich price capital gains ta% under apanese la( o" a#out 5, to 7,R o" the Ooor price

(ould still #e deducted.

?

The petitioners and respondents in #oth cases do not dispute the "act that the $oppongi

site and the three related properties (ere through reparations agreements) that these

(ere assigned to the government sector and that the $oppongi property itsel" (as

speci6cally designated under the $eparations Agreement to house the *hilippine

Em#assy.

The nature o" the $oppongi lot as property "or pu#lic service is e%pressly spelled out. t is

dictated #y the terms o" the $eparations Agreement and the corresponding contract o"

procurement (hich #ind #oth the *hilippine government and the apanese government.

There can #e no dou#t that it is o" pu#lic dominion unless it is convincingly sho(n that

the property has #ecome patrimonial. This) the respondents have "ailed to do.

A- roer+4 o b/ &om%o%, +*e Roo% o+ - o+-&e +*e /ommer/e o

m$%. I+ /$%%o+ be $e%$+e&. I+- o=%er-* - $ -e/$ /oe/+ve o=%er-* or

e%er$ -e $%& e%o4me%+, $% $/$+o% +o +*e -$+-$/+o% o /oe/+ve

%ee&-, $%& re-&e- % +*e -o/$ ro. "*e ro-e - %o+ +o -erve +*e S+$+e $-

$ r&/$ er-o%, b+ +*e /+6e%-M + - %+e%&e& or +*e /ommo% $%& b/

=e$re $%& /$%%o+ be +*e obe/+ o $ror$+o%. 7"$>e% rom 3 '$%re-$, @@

@M /+e& % "oe%+%o, Comme%+$re- o% +*e Cv Co&e o +*e

E&+o%, Vo. II, . 2@:.

The applica#le provisions o" the Civil Code are=

A$T. !1+. *roperty is either o" pu#lic dominion or o" priv

A$T. !4,. The "ollo(ing things are property o" pu#lic do

@1 Those intended "or pu#lic use) such as roads) canals

ports and #ridges constructed #y the 2tate) #anks shorothers o" similar characterD

@4 Those (hich #elong to the 2tate) (ithout #eing "or

intended "or some pu#lic service or "or the developmen

(ealth.

A$T. !41. All other property o" the 2tate) (hich is not o

stated in the preceding article) is patrimonial property.

The $oppongi property is correctly classi6ed under paragraph 4 o" Ar

Code as property #elonging to the 2tate and intended "or some pu#lic

'as the intention o" the government regarding the use o" the propert#ecause the lot has #een dle "or some yearsL 'as it #ecome patrimo

The "act that the $oppongi site has not #een used "or a long time "or

service does not automatically convert it to patrimonial property. Any

happens only i" the property is (ithdra(n "rom pu#lic use @Ce#u 8%yg

Co. v. Bercilles) >5 1+


10/57

-or+ +o re$r $%& mrove +*e roer+4@2ee 'eirs o" elino 2antiago v. Hazaro)

1


11/57

The su#se-uent approval on 8cto#er !) 1+ #y *resident A-uino o" the

recommendation #y the investigating committee to sell the $oppongi property (as

premature or) at the very least) conditioned on a valid change in the pu#lic character o"

the $oppongi property. &oreover) the approval does not have the "orce and e0ect o" la(

since the *resident already lost her legislative po(ers. The Congress had already

convened "or more than a year.

Assuming "or the sake o" argument) ho(ever) that the $oppongi property is no longer o"

pu#lic dominion) there is another o#stacle to its sale #y the respondents.

There is no la7 authorizin" its conveyance.

2ection 7+ @" o" the $evised Administrative Code o" 1+17 provides

2ection 7+ @" Conveyances and contracts to 7hich the Government is a

$arty. : n cases in (hich the overnment o" the $epu#lic o" the

*hilippines is a party to any deed or other instrument conveying the title

to real estate or to any other property the value o" (hich is in e%cess o"

one hundred thousand pesos) the respective Gepartment 2ecretary shall

prepare the necessary papers (hich) together (ith the proper

recommendations) shall be submitted to the Con"ress of the Phili$$ines

for a$$roval by the same.2uch deed) instrument) or contract shall #e

e%ecuted and signed #y the *resident o" the *hilippines on #ehal" o" the

overnment o" the *hilippines unless the overnment o" the *hilippines

unless the authority there"or #e e%pressly vested #y la( in another o9cer.

@Emphasis supplied

The re-uirement has #een retained in 2ection !) Book o" the Administrative Code o"

1+7 @E%ecutive 8rder No. 4+4.

2EC. !. O;cial Authorized to Convey 2eal Pro$erty. W :henever real

property o" the overnment is authorized by la7 to be conveyed,the deed

o" conveyance shall #e e%ecuted in #ehal" o" the government #y the

"ollo(ing=

@1 or property #elonging to and titled in the name o" the $epu#lic o" the

*hilippines) #y the *resident) unless the authority there"or is e%pressly

vested #y la( in another o9cer.

@4 or property #elonging to the $epu#lic o" the *hilipp

the name o" any political su#division or o" any corporat

instrumentality) #y the e%ecutive head o" the agency o

@Emphasis supplied

t is not "or the *resident to convey valua#le real property o" the gove

her o(n sole (ill. Any such conveyance must #e authorized and appr

enacted #y the Congress. t re-uires e%ecutive and legislative concurr

$esolution No. 55 o" the 2enate dated une ) 1++) asking "or the de

o" the $oppongi property does not (ithdra( the property "rom pu#lic authorize its sale. t is a mere resolutionD it is not a "ormal declaration

pu#lic character o" the $oppongi property. n "act) the 2enate Commit

$elations is conducting hearings on 2enate $esolution No. 7>! (hich

policy considerations and calls "or a "act36nding investigation o" the c

#ehind the decision to sell the *hilippine government properties in ap

The resolution o" this Court inO%eda v. 'iddin" Committee, et al., su$

upon the constitutionality o" E%ecutive 8rder No. 4+


12/57

The Court does not ordinarily pass upon constitutional -uestions unless these -uestions

are properly raised in appropriate cases and their resolution is necessary "or the

determination o" the case @*eople v. ?era) 7/. The Court (ill not pass

upon a constitutional -uestion although properly presented #y the record i" the case can

#e disposed o" on some other ground such as the application o" a statute or general la(

@2iler v. Houisville and Nashville $. Co.) 41> K.2. 175) 1+,+/) $ailroad Commission v.

*ullman Co.) >14 K.2. !+< 1+!1/.

The petitioner in .$. No. +4,1> states (hy the $oppongi property should not #e sold=

The $oppongi property is not ;ust like any piece o" property. t (as given tothe ilipino people in reparation "or the lives and #lood o" ilipinos (ho

died and su0ered during the apanese military occupation) "or the su0ering

o" (ido(s and orphans (ho lost their loved ones and kindred) "or the

homes and other properties lost #y countless ilipinos during the (ar. The

Tokyo properties are a monument to the #ravery and sacri6ce o" the

ilipino people in the "ace o" an invaderD like the monuments o" $izal)

Xuezon) and other ilipino heroes) (e do not e%pect economic or 6nancial

#ene6ts "rom them. But (ho (ould think o" selling these monumentsL

ilipino honor and national dignity dictate that (e keep our properties in

apan as memorials to the countless ilipinos (ho died and su0ered. Even

i" (e should #ecome paupers (e should not think o" selling them. or it

(ould #e as i" (e sold the lives and #lood and tears o" our countrymen.

@$ollo3 .$. No. +4,1>) p.1!7

The petitioner in .$. No. +4,!7 also states=

$oppongi is no ordinary property. t is one ceded #y the apanese

government in atonement "or its past #elligerence "or the valiant sacri6ce

o" li"e and lim# and "or deaths) physical dislocation and economic

devastation the (hole ilipino people endured in :orld :ar .

t is "or (hat it stands "or) and "or (hat it could never #ring #ack to li"e)

that its signi6cance today remains undimmed) inspire o" the lapse o" !5

years since the (ar ended) inspire o" the passage o" >4 years since the

property passed on to the *hilippine government.

$oppongi is a reminder that cannot W should not W #e dissipated ... @$ollo3

+4,!7) p. +

t is indeed true that the $oppongi property is valua#le not so much #

inOated prices "etched #y real property in Tokyo #ut more so #ecause

value to all ilipinos W veterans and civilians alike. :hether or not the

related properties (ill eventually #e sold is a policy determination (h

*resident and Congress must concur. Considering the propertiesU imp

the la(s on conversion and disposition o" property o" pu#lic dominion

"ollo(ed.

:'E$E8$E) N ?E: 8 T'E 8$E8N) the petitions are $ANTE

prohi#ition is issued en;oining the respondents "rom proceeding (ith

$oppongi property in Tokyo) apan. The e#ruary 4,) 1++, Temporary made *E$&ANENT.

28 8$GE$EG.

Melencio#Herrera, Paras, 'idin, Gri


13/57

$oppongi property) possi#ly to stop the transaction altogetherD and ill any case it is not a

la(. The sale o" the said property may #e authorized only #y Congress through a duly

enacted statute) and there is no such la(.

8nce again) (e have a9rmed the principle that ours is a government o" la(s and not o"

men) (here every pu#lic o9cial) "rom the lo(est to the highest) can act only #y virtue o"

a valid authorization. am happy to note that in the several cases (here this Court has

ruled against her) the *resident o" the *hilippines has su#mitted to this principle (ith

#ecoming grace.

*AGHHA)!., concurring=

concur in the decision penned #y &r. ustice utierrez) r.) only (ish to make a "e(

o#servations (hich could help in "urther clari"ying the issues.

Knder our tripartite system o" government ordained #y the Constitution) it is Congress

that lays do(n or determines policies. The *resident e%ecutes such policies. The policies

determined #y Congress are em#odied in legislative enactments that have to #e

approved #y the *resident to #ecome la(. The *resident) o" course) recommends to

Congress the approval o" policies #ut) in the 6nal analysis) it is Congress that is the policy

3 determining #ranch o" government.

The ;udiciary interprets the la(s and) in appropriate cases) determines (hether the la(s

enacted #y Congress and approved #y the *resident) and presidential acts implementing

such la(s) are in accordance (ith the Constitution.

The $oppongi property (as ac-uired #y the *hilippine government pursuant to the

reparations agreement #et(een the *hilippine and apanese governments. Knder such

agreement) this property (as ac-uired #y the *hilippine government "or a speci6c

purpose) namely) to serve as the site o" the *hilippine Em#assy in Tokyo) apan.

Conse-uently) $oppongi is a property o" pu#lic dominion and intended "or pu#lic service)

s-uarely "alling (ithin that class o" property under Art. !4, o" the Civil Code) (hich

provides=

Art. !4,. The "ollo(ing things are property o" pu#lic dominion =

@1 ...

@4 Those (hich #elong to the 2tate) (ithout #eing "or

intended "or some pu#lic service or "or the developmen

(ealth. @>>+a

*u#lic dominion property intended "or pu#lic service cannot #e aliena

property is 6rst trans"ormed into private property o" the state other(

patrimonial property o" the state. 1The trans"ormation o" pu#lic domi

state patrimonial property involves) to my mind) a$olicy decision. t i

#ecause the treatment o" the property varies according to its classi6c

Conse-uently) it is Congress (hich can decide and declare the conve

"rom a pu#lic dominion property to a state patrimonial property. Cong

such decision or declaration.

&oreover) the sale o" pu#lic property @once converted "rom pu#lic dom

patrimonial property must #e approved #y Congress) "or this again is

@i.e. to keep or dispose o" the property. 2ec. !) Book 1 o" the Admin

1+7 provides=

2EC. !. O;cial Authorized to Convey 2eal Pro$erty. W

property o" the overnment is authorized #y la( to #e

o" conveyance shall #e e%ecuted in #ehal" o" the gover

"ollo(ing=

@1 or property #elonging to and titled in

$epu#lic o" the *hilippines) #y the *resid

authority there"or is e%pressly vested #y

o9cer.

@4 or property #elonging to the $epu#l

#ut titled in the name o" any political su#

corporate agency or instrumentality) #y

o" the agency or instrumentality. @Empha

But the record is #are o" any congressional decision or approval to sel

record is like(ise #are o" any congressional authority e%tended to the

$oppongi thru pu#lic #idding or other(ise.

t is there"ore) clear that the *resident cannot sell or order the sale o"

pu#lic #idding or other(ise (ithout a prior congressional approval) 6r


14/57

$oppongi "rom a pu#lic dominion property to a state patrimonial property) and) second)

authorizing the *resident to sell the same.

ACC8$GNHF) my vote is to $ANT the petition and to make *E$&ANENT the temporary

restraining order earlier issued #y this Court.

2A$&ENT8)!., concurring=

The central -uestion) as see it) is (hether or not the so3called V$oppongi propertyU haslost its nature as property o" pu#lic dominion) and hence) has #ecome patrimonial

property o" the 2tate. understand that the parties are agreed that it (as property

intended "or Vpu#lic serviceV (ithin the contemplation o" paragraph @4) o" Article !>,) o"

the Civil Code) and accordingly) land o" 2tate dominion) and #eyond human commerce.

The lone issue is) in the light o" supervening developments) that is non3user thereo" #y

the National overnment @"or diplomatic purposes "or the last thirteen yearsD the

issuance o" E%ecutive 8rder No. 4+< making it availa#le "or sale to any interested #uyerD

the promulgation o" $epu#lic Act No. All natural resources) under the Constitution) a

e%ceptional cases) #elong to the 2tate. 1,

am elated that the Court has #anished previous uncertainties.

EHCAN8)!., dissenting

:ith regret) 6nd mysel" una#le to share the conclusions reached #y

utierrez) r.

or purposes o" this separate opinion) assume that the piece o" land

$oppongi) 53Chome) &inato3ku Tokyo) apan @hereina"ter re"erred to a

propertyV may #e characterized as property o" pu#lic dominion) (ith

Article !4, @4 o" the Civil Code=

*roperty/ (hich #elongs/ to the 2tate) (ithout #eing "

are intended "or some pu#lic service 3.

t might not #e amiss ho(ever) to note that the appropriateness o" try

the con6nes o" the simple three"old classi6cation "ound in Article !4,


15/57

@Vproperty "or pu#lic use property Vintended "or some pu#lic serviceV and property

intended V"or the development o" the national (ealthV all $ro$ertyo(ned #y the

$epu#lic o" the *hilippines (hether "ound (ithin the territorial #oundaries o" the $epu#lic

or located (ithin the territory o" another sovereign 2tate) is notsel"3evident. The 6rst

item o" the classi6cation property intended "or$ublic use : can scarcely #e properly

applied to property #elonging to the $epu#lic #ut "ound (ithin the territory o" another

2tate. The third item o" the classi6cation property intended "or the development o" the

national (ealth is illustrated) in Article >>+ o" the 2panish Civil Code o" 1+) #y mines

or mineral properties. Again) mineral lands o(ned #y a sovereign 2tate are rarely) i"

ever) "ound (ithin the territorial #ase o" another sovereign 2tate. The task o" e%amining

in detail the applica#ility o" the classi6cation set out in Article !4, o" our Civil Code to

property that the *hilippines happens to o(n outside its o(n #oundaries must) ho(ever)

#e le"t to academicians.

or present purposes) too) agree that there is no -uestion o" conOict o" la(s that is) at

the $resent time) #e"ore this Court. The issues #e"ore us relate essentially to authority to

sell the $oppongi propertyso far as Phili$$ine la7 is concerned.

The ma;ority opinion raises t(o @4 issues= @a (hether or not the $oppongi property has

#een converted into patrimonial property or property o" the private domain o" the 2tateD

and @# assuming an a9rmative ans(er to @a) (hether or not there is legal authority to

dispose o" the $oppongi property.

Addressing the 6rst issue o" conversion o" property o" pu#lic dominion intended "or some

pu#lic service) into property o" the private domain o" the $epu#lic) it should #e noted

that the Civil Code does not address the -uestion o" 7hohas authority to e0ect such

conversion. Neither does the Civil Code set out or re"er to any$rocedure"or such

conversion.

8ur case la() ho(ever) contains some "airly e%plicit pronouncements on this point) as

ustice 2armiento has pointed out in his concurring opinion. n 8"nacio v. irector of

1ands @1, *hils. >>5 1+


16/57

the City Council o" Ce#u #y resolution declared a certain portion o" an e%isting street as

an a#andoned road) Vthe same not #eing included in the city development planV.

2u#se-uently) #y another resolution) the City Council o" Ce#u authorized the acting City

&ayor to sell the land through pu#lic #idding.Althou"h there 7as no formal and e4$licit

declaration of conversion of $ro$erty for $ublic use into $atrimonial $ro$erty, the

2upreme Court said=

%%% %%% %%%

@4 &ince that $ortion of the city street sub%ect of $etitioner@s a$$lication

for re"istration of title 7as 7ithdra7n from $ublic use, it follo7s that such

7ithdra7n $ortion becomes $atrimonial $ro$erty 7hich can be the ob%ect

of an ordinary contract.

Article !44 o" the Civil Code e%pressly provides that V*roperty o" pu#lic

dominion) (hen no longer intended "or pu#lic use o" "or pu#lic service)

shall "orm part o" the patrimonial property o" the 2tate.V

Besides) the $evised Charter o" the City o" Ce#u hereto"ore -uoted) in very

clear and une-uivocal terms) states that V*roperty thus (ithdra(n "rom

pu#lic servitude may #e used or conveyed "or any purpose "or (hich other

real property #elonging to the City may #e la("ully used or conveyed.V

Accordingly) the 7ithdra7al of the $ro$erty in 9uestion from $ublic use

and its subse9uent sale to the $etitioner is valid.'ence) the petitioner has

a registra#le title over the lot in -uestion. @!1 o" the 1+ 2panish Civil Code (hich has #een carried over verbatiminto ourCivil Code #y Article !44 thereo") (rote=

Ha di6cultad mayor en todo esto estri#a) naturalmente)

momento en -ue los #ienes de dominio pu#lico de;an d

Administracion o la autoridad competente legislative re

virtud del cual cesa el destino o uso pu#lico de los #ien

naturalmente la di6cultad -ueda desde el primer mom

un punto de partida cierto para iniciar las relaciones ;u

pudiera ha#er lugar Pero $uede ocurrir 9ue no haya ta

e4$resa, le"islativa or administrativa, y, sin embar"o, c

destino $ublico de los bienesD ahora #ien) en este caso

;uridicos -ue resultan de entrar la cosa en el comercio

entedera 9ue se ha vericado la conversion de los bien

El citado tratadista $icci opina) respecto del antiguo Co

a6rmativa) y por nuestra parte creemos -ue tal de#e s

destino de las cosas no depende tanto de una declarac

del uso pu#lico de las mismas) y cuanda el uso pu#lico

de determinados #ienes) cesa tam#ien su situacion en

2i una "ortaleza en ruina se a#andona y no se repara) s

pu#lica se a#andona tam#ien por constituir otro nuevo

condiciones....am#os #ienes cesan de estar Codigo) y l

o memos administrativas. @> &anresa) Comentarios al

Espanol) p. 14 7a ed.D 1+54 @Emphasis supplied

The ma;ority opinion says that none o" the e%ecutive acts pointed to

purported) e%pressly or de6nitely) to convert the $oppongi property inproperty W o" the $epu#lic. Assuming that to #e the case) it is respec

that cumulative e>ect o" the e%ecutive acts here involved (as to con

originally intended "or and devoted to pu#lic service into patrimonial

2tate) that is) property suscepti#le o" disposition to and appropration

These e%ecutive acts) in their totality i" not each individual act) make

intent o" the E%ecutive Gepartment to e0ect such conversion. These e

include=

@a Administrative 8rder No. > dated 11 August 1+5) (hich created a

study the dispositionutilization o" the overnmentUs property in apan

(as composed o" o9cials o" the E%ecutive Gepartment= the E%ecutive

*hilippine Am#assador to apanD and representatives o" the Gepartme

and the Asset *rivatization Trust. 8n 1+ 2eptem#er 1+) the Commito the *resident the sale o" one o" the lots @the lot speci6cally in $opp


17/57

pu#lic #idding. 8n ! 8cto#er 1+) the *resident approved the recommendation o" the

Committee.

8n 1! Gecem#er 1+) the *hilippine overnment #y diplomatic note in"ormed the

apanese &inistry o" oreign A0airs o" the $epu#licUs intention to dispose o" the property

in $oppongi. The apanese overnment through its &inistry o" oreign A0airs replied that

it interposed no o#;ection to such disposition #y the $epu#lic. 2u#se-uently) the

*resident and the Committee in"ormed the leaders o" the 'ouse o" $epresentatives and

o" the 2enate o" the *hilippines o" the proposed disposition o" the $oppongi property.

@# E%ecutive 8rder No. 4+. :ith respect) it may #e stressed that there is no a#andonment

involved here) certainly no a#andonment o" property or o" property rights. :hat is

involved is the charge o" the classi6cation o" the property "rom property o" the pu#lic

domain into property o" the private domain o" the 2tate. &oreover) i" "or "ourteen @1!

years) the overnment did not see 6t to appropriate (hatever "unds (ere necessary to

maintain the property in $oppongi in a condition suita#le "or diplomatic representationpurposes) such circumstance may) (ith e-ual logic) #e construed as a mani"estation o"

the crystalizing intent to change the character o" the property.

@d 8n >, &arch 1++) a pu#lic #idding (as in "act held #y the E%ecu

the sale o" the lot in $oppongi. The circumstance that this #idding (a

certainly does not argue against an intent to convert the property inv

that is disposa#le #y #idding.

The a#ove set o" events and circumstances makes no sense at all i" it

7hole) sho( at least the intent on the part o" the E%ecutive Gepartme

kno(ledge o" the Hegislative Gepartment to convert the property inv

patrimonial property that is suscepti#le o" #eing sold.

'aving reached an a9rmative ans(er in respect o" the 6rst issue) it i

address the second issue o" (hether or not there e%ists legal authorit

disposition o" the $oppongi property.

The ma;ority opinion re"ers to 2ection 7+@" o" the $evised Administra

(hich reads as "ollo(s=

2EC. 7+ @". Conveyances and contracts to 7hich the Go

$arty. W n cases in (hich the overnment o" the $epu

*hilippines is a party to any deed or other instrument c

to real estate or to any other property the value of 7hic

one hundred thousand $esos) the respective Gepartme

prepare the necessary papers (hich) together (ith the

recommendations) shall #e submitted to the Con"ress

for a$$roval by the same. 2uch deed) instrument) or co

e%ecuted and signed #y the *resident o" the *hilippines

overnment o" the *hilippines unless the authority the

vested #y la( in another o9cer. @Emphasis supplied

The ma;ority opinion then goes on to state that= The re9uirement h

2ection !) Book o" the Administrative Code o" 1+7 @E%ecutive 8rder

reads=


property o" the overnment is authorized by la7 to be

o" conveyance shall #e e%ecuted in #ehal" o" the gover"ollo(ing=


18/57

@1 or property #elonging to and titled in the name o" the $epu#lic o" the

*hilippines) #y the *resident) unless the authority there"or is e%pressly


@4 or property #elonging to the $epu#lic o" the *hilippines #ut titled in

the name o" any political su#division or o" any corporate agency or

instrumentality) #y the e%ecutive head o" the agency or instrumentality.

@Emphasis supplied

T(o points need to #e made in this connection. irstly)the re9uirement of obtainin"

s$ecic a$$roval o" Congress 7hen the $rice of the real $ro$erty #eing disposed o" is in

e4cess of One Hundred Thousand Pesos P--,---.--I under the $evised Administrative

Code o" 1+17) has #een deleted from &ection 5J of the +J6 Administrative Code . :hat

2ection ! o" the present Administrative Code re"ers to isauthorization by la7 "or the

conveyance. 2ection ! does not purport to #e itsel" a source o" legal authority "or

conveyance o" real property o" the overnment. or 2ection ! merely speci6es the

o9cial authorized to e%ecute and sign on #ehal" o" the overnment the deed o"

conveyance in case o" such a conveyance.

2econdly) e%amination o" our statute #ooks sho(s that authorization #y la( "or

disposition o" real property o" the private domain o" the overnment) has #een granted

#y Congress #oth in the "orm o" @a a general) standing authorization "or disposition o"

patrimonial property o" the overnmentD and @# speci6c legislation authorizing the

disposition o" particular pieces o" the overnmentUs patrimonial property.

2tanding legislative authority "or the disposition o" land o" the private domain o" the

*hilippines is provided #y Act No. >,>) entitled VAn Act Authorizing the 2ecretary o"

Agriculture and Natural $esources to 2ell or Hease 1and of the Private omain of the

Government of the Phili$$ine 8slands @no( $epu#lic o" the *hilippinesV) enacted on +

&arch 1+44. The "ull te%t o" this statute is as "ollo(s=

Be it enacted #y the 2enate and 'ouse o" $epresentatives o" the

*hilippines in Hegislature assem#led and #y the authority o" the same=

2ECT8N 1. The 2ecretary o" Agriculture and Natural $esources @no(

2ecretary o" the Environment and Natural $esources is here#y authorized

to sell or lease land o" the private domain o" the overnment o" the

*hilippine slands) or any part thereo") to such persons) corporations orassociations as are) under the provisions o" Act Num#ered T(enty3eight

hundred and seventy3"our) @no( Common(ealth Act No. 1!1) as amended

kno(n as the *u#lic Hand Act) entitled to apply "or the

agricultural pu#lic land.

2ECT8N 4. The sale of the land referred toin the prec

i" such land is agricultural) #e made in the manner and

limitations prescri#ed in chapters 6ve and si%) respectiv

Hand Act) and if it be classied di>erently, in conformity

$rovisions of cha$ter nine of said Act= *rovided) ho(ev

necessary "or the pu#lic service shall #e e%empt "rom t

Act.

2ECT8N >. This Act shall take e0ect on its approval.

Approved) &arch +) 1+44. @Emphasis supplied

Hest it #e assumed that Act No. >,> re"ers only to agricultural lands

domain o" the 2tate) it must #e noted that Chapter + o" the old *u#lic

47! is no( Chapter + o" the present *u#lic Hand Act @Common(ealt

amended and that #oth statutes re"er to= Vany tract o" land o" the pu

#eing neither tim#er nor mineral land) is intended to #e used "orresid

"or commercial or industrial $ur$oses other than agriculturalV @Empha

aLsl n other (ords) the statute covers the sale or lease or residential

industrial land o" the private domain o" the 2tate.

mplementing regulations have #een issued "or the carrying out o" the

No. >,>. 8n 41 Gecem#er 1+5!) the then 2ecretary o" Agriculture an

$esources promulgated Hands Administrative 8rders Nos. 73< and 737

entitled) respectively= V2upplementary $egulations overning the 2al

the Private omain o" the $epu#lic o" the *hilippinesVD and V2uppleme

overning the 1ease of 1ands of Private omain o" the $epu#lic o" th

in 51 8.. 434+ 1+55/.

t is perhaps (ell to add that Act No. >,>) although no( si%ty3eight @

in e0ect and has not #een repealed. 1

2peci6c legislative authorization "or disposition o" particular patrimon

2tate is illustrated #y certain earlier statutes. The 6rst o" these (as A

enacted on 4< April 1+,!) (hich provided "or the disposition o" the "ri#y the overnment "rom the $oman Catholic Church) to bona de set

thereo" or to other persons. n!acinto v. irector of 1ands@!+ *hil. 5>


19/57

lands (ere held to #e private and patrimonial properties o" the 2tate. Act No. 4>,> applies not only to lands o" the private

domain o" the 2tate located in the *hilippines but also to $atrimonial $ro$erty found

outside the Phili$$ines) may appear strange or unusual. respect"ully su#mit that such

position is not any more unusual or strange than the assumption that Article !4, o" the

Civil Code applies not only to property o" the $epu#lic located (ithin *hilippine territory

#ut also to property "ound outside the #oundaries o" the $epu#lic.

t remains to note that under the (ell3settled doctrine that heads o" E%ecutive

Gepartments are alter e"oso" the *resident @(illena v. &ecretary of the 8nterior) +/) and in vie( o" the constitutional po(er o" control e%ercised #y the *resident

over department heads @Article ?) 2ection 17)1+7 Constitution) the *resident hersel"

may carry out the "unction or duty that is speci6cally lodged in the 2ecretary o" the

Gepartment o" Environment and Natural $esources @Araneta v. Gatmaitan1,1 *hil. >41+57/. At the very least) the *resident retains the po(er to approve or disapprove the

e%ercise o" that "unction or duty (hen done #y the 2ecretary o" Envir

$esources.

t is hardly necessary to add that the "oregoing analyses and su#miss

the austere -uestion o" e%istence o" legal po(er or authority. They ha

(ith much de#ated -uestions o" (isdom or propriety or relative desir

proposed disposition itsel" or o" the proposed utilization o" the anticip

the property involved. These latter types o" considerations 'e (ithin t

responsi#ility o" the political departments o" government the E%ecutiv

Hegislative authorities.

or all the "oregoing) vote to dismiss the *etitions "or *rohi#ition in #

+4,1> and +4,!7.

ernan, C.!., 3arvasa, Gancayco, Cortes and Medialdea, !!., concurrin

2eparate 8pinions

C$KS)!., concurring=

concur completely (ith the e%cellent ponencia o" &r. ustice utierre

"ollo(ing o#servations only "or emphasis.

t is clear that the respondents have "ailed to sho( the *residentUs leg

the $oppongi property. :hen asked to do so at the hearing on these p

2olicitor eneral (as at #est am#iguous) although must add in "airn

not his "ault. The "act is that there is 3no such authority. Hegal e%pertis

con;ure that statutory permission out o" thin air.

E%ec. 8rder No. 4+


20/57

8nce again) (e have a9rmed the principle that ours is a government o" la(s and not o"

men) (here every pu#lic o9cial) "rom the lo(est to the highest) can act only #y virtue o"

a valid authorization. am happy to note that in the several cases (here this Court has

ruled against her) the *resident o" the *hilippines has su#mitted to this principle (ith

#ecoming grace.

*AGHHA)!., concurring=

concur in the decision penned #y &r. ustice utierrez) r.) only (ish to make a "e(

o#servations (hich could help in "urther clari"ying the issues.

Knder our tripartite system o" government ordained #y the Constitution) it is Congress

that lays do(n or determines policies. The *resident e%ecutes such policies. The policies

determined #y Congress are em#odied in legislative enactments that have to #e

approved #y the *resident to #ecome la(. The *resident) o" course) recommends to

Congress the approval o" policies #ut) in the 6nal analysis) it is Congress that is the policy

3 determining #ranch o" government.

The ;udiciary interprets the la(s and) in appropriate cases) determines (hether the la(s

enacted #y Congress and approved #y the *resident) and presidential acts implementing

such la(s) are in accordance (ith the Constitution.

The $oppongi property (as ac-uired #y the *hilippine government pursuant to thereparations agreement #et(een the *hilippine and apanese governments. Knder such

agreement) this property (as ac-uired #y the *hilippine government "or a speci6c

purpose) namely) to serve as the site o" the *hilippine Em#assy in Tokyo) apan.

Conse-uently) $oppongi is a property o" pu#lic dominion and intended "or pu#lic service)

s-uarely "alling (ithin that class o" property under Art. !4, o" the Civil Code) (hich

provides=

Art. !4,. The "ollo(ing things are property o" pu#lic dominion =

@1 ...

@4 Those (hich #elong to the 2tate) (ithout #eing "or pu#lic use) and are

intended "or some pu#lic service or "or the development o" the national(ealth. @>>+a

*u#lic dominion property intended "or pu#lic service cannot #e aliena

property is 6rst trans"ormed into private property o" the state other(

patrimonial property o" the state. 1The trans"ormation o" pu#lic domi

state patrimonial property involves) to my mind) a$olicy decision. t i

#ecause the treatment o" the property varies according to its classi6c

Conse-uently) it is Congress (hich can decide and declare the conve

"rom a pu#lic dominion property to a state patrimonial property. Cong

such decision or declaration.

&oreover) the sale o" pu#lic property @once converted "rom pu#lic dom

patrimonial property must #e approved #y Congress) "or this again is

@i.e. to keep or dispose o" the property. 2ec. !) Book 1 o" the Admin

1+7 provides=


property o" the overnment is authorized #y la( to #e


"ollo(ing=

@1 or property #elonging to and titled in

$epu#lic o" the *hilippines) #y the *resid

authority there"or is e%pressly vested #y

o9cer.

@4 or property #elonging to the $epu#l#ut titled in the name o" any political su#

corporate agency or instrumentality) #y

o" the agency or instrumentality. @Empha

But the record is #are o" any congressional decision or approval to sel

record is like(ise #are o" any congressional authority e%tended to the

$oppongi thru pu#lic #idding or other(ise.

t is there"ore) clear that the *resident cannot sell or order the sale o"

pu#lic #idding or other(ise (ithout a prior congressional approval) 6r

$oppongi "rom a pu#lic dominion property to a state patrimonial prop

authorizing the *resident to sell the same.

ACC8$GNHF) my vote is to $ANT the petition and to make *E$&AN

restraining order earlier issued #y this Court.


21/57

2A$&ENT8)!., concurring=

The central -uestion) as see it) is (hether or not the so3called V$oppongi propertyU has

lost its nature as property o" pu#lic dominion) and hence) has #ecome patrimonial

property o" the 2tate. understand that the parties are agreed that it (as property

intended "or Vpu#lic serviceV (ithin the contemplation o" paragraph @4) o" Article !>,) o"

the Civil Code) and accordingly) land o" 2tate dominion) and #eyond human commerce.

The lone issue is) in the light o" supervening developments) that is non3user thereo" #y

the National overnment @"or diplomatic purposes "or the last thirteen yearsD the

issuance o" E%ecutive 8rder No. 4+< making it availa#le "or sale to any interested #uyerD

the promulgation o" $epu#lic Act No.


22/57

national (ealth is illustrated) in Article >>+ o" the 2panish Civil Code o" 1+) #y mines

or mineral properties. Again) mineral lands o(ned #y a sovereign 2tate are rarely) i"

ever) "ound (ithin the territorial #ase o" another sovereign 2tate. The task o" e%amining

in detail the applica#ility o" the classi6cation set out in Article !4, o" our Civil Code to

property that the *hilippines happens to o(n outside its o(n #oundaries must) ho(ever)

#e le"t to academicians.

or present purposes) too) agree that there is no -uestion o" conOict o" la(s that is) at

the $resent time) #e"ore this Court. The issues #e"ore us relate essentially to authority to

sell the $oppongi propertyso far as Phili$$ine la7 is concerned.

The ma;ority opinion raises t(o @4 issues= @a (hether or not the $oppongi property has#een converted into patrimonial property or property o" the private domain o" the 2tateD

and @# assuming an a9rmative ans(er to @a) (hether or not there is legal authority to

dispose o" the $oppongi property.

Addressing the 6rst issue o" conversion o" property o" pu#lic dominion intended "or some

pu#lic service) into property o" the private domain o" the $epu#lic) it should #e noted

that the Civil Code does not address the -uestion o" 7hohas authority to e0ect such

conversion. Neither does the Civil Code set out or re"er to any$rocedure"or such

conversion.

8ur case la() ho(ever) contains some "airly e%plicit pronouncements on this point) asustice 2armiento has pointed out in his concurring opinion. n 8"nacio v. irector of

1ands @1, *hils. >>5 1+

?elayoUs Gigest) ?ol. 1) p. 54.

... is undou#tedly that the courts are neither primarily c

indeed in a position to determine (hether any pu#lic la

"or the purposes speci6ed in Article ! o" the Ha( o" :auntil a formal declaration on the $art of the Governmen

e4ecutive de$artment or the 1e"islature, to the e>ect t

9uestion is no lon"er needed for coast#"uard service, fo

s$ecial industries, they continue to be $art of the $ubli

available for $rivate a$$ro$riation or o7nershi$.@1, *

emphasis supplied

Thus) under gnacio) either the ?4ecutive e$artment or the 1e"islat

convert property o" the 2tate o" pu#lic dominion into patrimonial prop

No particular "ormula or procedure o" conversion is speci6ed either in

case la(. Article !44 o" the Civil Code simply states that= V*roperty o"

dominion) 7hen no lon"er intended forpu#lic use or "or$ublic servic

the patrimonial property o" the 2tateV. respect"ully su#mit) there"orere-uirement (hich is legitimately imposa#le is that the intent to conv

reasona#ly clear "rom a consideration o" the acts or acts o" the E%ecu

o" the Hegislative Gepartment (hich are said to have e0ected such co

The same legal situation e%ists in respect o" conversion o" property o

#elonging to municipal corporations) i.e.) local governmental units) in

property o" such entities. n CebuO4y"en Acetylene v. 'ercilles@


23/57

@4 &ince that $ortion of the city street sub%ect of $etitioner@s a$$lication

for re"istration of title 7as 7ithdra7n from $ublic use, it follo7s that such

7ithdra7n $ortion becomes $atrimonial $ro$erty 7hich can be the ob%ect

of an ordinary contract.

Article !44 o" the Civil Code e%pressly provides that V*roperty o" pu#lic

dominion) (hen no longer intended "or pu#lic use o" "or pu#lic service)

shall "orm part o" the patrimonial property o" the 2tate.V

Besides) the $evised Charter o" the City o" Ce#u hereto"ore -uoted) in very

clear and une-uivocal terms) states that V*roperty thus (ithdra(n "rom

pu#lic servitude may #e used or conveyed "or any purpose "or (hich otherreal property #elonging to the City may #e la("ully used or conveyed.V

Accordingly) the 7ithdra7al of the $ro$erty in 9uestion from $ublic use

and its subse9uent sale to the $etitioner is valid.'ence) the petitioner has

a registra#le title over the lot in -uestion. @!1 o" the 1+ 2panish Civil Code (hich has #een carried over verbatiminto our

Civil Code #y Article !44 thereo") (rote=

Ha di6cultad mayor en todo esto estri#a) naturalmente) en 6;ar el

momento en -ue los #ienes de dominio pu#lico de;an de serlo. 2i la

Administracion o la autoridad competente legislative realizan -un acto en

virtud del cual cesa el destino o uso pu#lico de los #ienes de -ue se trata

naturalmente la di6cultad -ueda desde el primer momento resuelta. 'ay

un punto de partida cierto para iniciar las relaciones ;uridicas a -ue

pudiera ha#er lugar Pero $uede ocurrir 9ue no haya taldeclaracione4$resa, le"islativa or administrativa, y, sin embar"o, cesar de hecho el

destino $ublico de los bienesD ahora #ien) en este caso, y para los e"ectos

;uridicos -ue resultan de entrar la cosa en el comercio

entedera 9ue se ha vericado la conversion de los bien

El citado tratadista $icci opina) respecto del antiguo Co

a6rmativa) y por nuestra parte creemos -ue tal de#e s

destino de las cosas no depende tanto de una declarac

del uso pu#lico de las mismas) y cuanda el uso pu#lico

de determinados #ienes) cesa tam#ien su situacion en

2i una "ortaleza en ruina se a#andona y no se repara) s

pu#lica se a#andona tam#ien por constituir otro nuevo

condiciones....am#os #ienes cesan de estar Codigo) y l

o memos administrativas. @> &anresa) Comentarios al Espanol) p. 14 7a ed.D 1+54 @Emphasis supplied

The ma;ority opinion says that none o" the e%ecutive acts pointed to

purported) e%pressly or de6nitely) to convert the $oppongi property in

property W o" the $epu#lic. Assuming that to #e the case) it is respec

that cumulative e>ect o" the e%ecutive acts here involved (as to con

originally intended "or and devoted to pu#lic service into patrimonial

2tate) that is) property suscepti#le o" disposition to and appropration

These e%ecutive acts) in their totality i" not each individual act) make

intent o" the E%ecutive Gepartment to e0ect such conversion. These e

include=

@a Administrative 8rder No. > dated 11 August 1+5) (hich created astudy the dispositionutilization o" the overnmentUs property in apan

(as composed o" o9cials o" the E%ecutive Gepartment= the E%ecutive

*hilippine Am#assador to apanD and representatives o" the Gepartme

and the Asset *rivatization Trust. 8n 1+ 2eptem#er 1+) the Commi

to the *resident the sale o" one o" the lots @the lot speci6cally in $opp

pu#lic #idding. 8n ! 8cto#er 1+) the *resident approved the recom

Committee.

8n 1! Gecem#er 1+) the *hilippine overnment #y diplomatic note

apanese &inistry o" oreign A0airs o" the $epu#licUs intention to disp

in $oppongi. The apanese overnment through its &inistry o" oreign

it interposed no o#;ection to such disposition #y the $epu#lic. 2u#se-

*resident and the Committee in"ormed the leaders o" the 'ouse o" $eo" the 2enate o" the *hilippines o" the proposed disposition o" the $op


24/57

@# E%ecutive 8rder No. 4+. :ith respect) it may #e stressed that there is no a#andonment

involved here) certainly no a#andonment o" property or o" property rights. :hat is

involved is the charge o" the classi6cation o" the property "rom property o" the pu#licdomain into property o" the private domain o" the 2tate. &oreover) i" "or "ourteen @1!

years) the overnment did not see 6t to appropriate (hatever "unds (ere necessary to

maintain the property in $oppongi in a condition suita#le "or diplomatic representation

purposes) such circumstance may) (ith e-ual logic) #e construed as a mani"estation o"

the crystalizing intent to change the character o" the property.

@d 8n >, &arch 1++) a pu#lic #idding (as in "act held #y the E%ecutive Gepartment "or

the sale o" the lot in $oppongi. The circumstance that this #idding (as not success"ul

certainly does not argue against an intent to convert the property involved into property

that is disposa#le #y #idding.

The a#ove set o" events and circumstances makes no sense at all i" it does not) as a

7hole) sho( at least the intent on the part o" the E%ecutive Gepartment @(ith thekno(ledge o" the Hegislative Gepartment to convert the property involved into

patrimonial property that is suscepti#le o" #eing sold.

'aving reached an a9rmative ans(er in respect o" the 6rst issue) it i

address the second issue o" (hether or not there e%ists legal authorit

disposition o" the $oppongi property.

The ma;ority opinion re"ers to 2ection 7+@" o" the $evised Administra

(hich reads as "ollo(s=

2EC. 7+ @". Conveyances and contracts to 7hich the Go

$arty. W n cases in (hich the overnment o" the $epu

*hilippines is a party to any deed or other instrument cto real estate or to any other property the value of 7hic

one hundred thousand $esos) the respective Gepartme

prepare the necessary papers (hich) together (ith the

recommendations) shall #e submitted to the Con"ress

for a$$roval by the same. 2uch deed) instrument) or co

e%ecuted and signed #y the *resident o" the *hilippines

overnment o" the *hilippines unless the authority the

vested #y la( in another o9cer. @Emphasis supplied

The ma;ority opinion then goes on to state that= The re9uirement h

2ection !) Book o" the Administrative Code o" 1+7 @E%ecutive 8rder

reads=


property o" the overnment is authorized by la7 to be


"ollo(ing=

@1 or property #elonging to and titled in the name o" t

*hilippines) #y the *resident) unless the authority there


@4 or property #elonging to the $epu#lic o" the *hilipp

the name o" any political su#division or o" any corporat

instrumentality) #y the e%ecutive head o" the agency o

@Emphasis supplied


25/57

T(o points need to #e made in this connection. irstly)the re9uirement of obtainin"

s$ecic a$$roval o" Congress 7hen the $rice of the real $ro$erty #eing disposed o" is in

e4cess of One Hundred Thousand Pesos P--,---.--I under the $evised Administrative

Code o" 1+17) has #een deleted from &ection 5J of the +J6 Administrative Code . :hat

2ection ! o" the present Administrative Code re"ers to isauthorization by la7 "or the

conveyance. 2ection ! does not purport to #e itsel" a source o" legal authority "or

conveyance o" real property o" the overnment. or 2ection ! merely speci6es the

o9cial authorized to e%ecute and sign on #ehal" o" the overnment the deed o"

conveyance in case o" such a conveyance.

2econdly) e%amination o" our statute #ooks sho(s that authorization #y la( "or

disposition o" real property o" the private domain o" the overnment) has #een granted#y Congress #oth in the "orm o" @a a general) standing authorization "or disposition o"

patrimonial property o" the overnmentD and @# speci6c legislation authorizing the

disposition o" particular pieces o" the overnmentUs patrimonial property.

2tanding legislative authority "or the disposition o" land o" the private domain o" the

*hilippines is provided #y Act No. >,>) entitled VAn Act Authorizing the 2ecretary o"

Agriculture and Natural $esources to 2ell or Hease 1and of the Private omain of the

Government of the Phili$$ine 8slands @no( $epu#lic o" the *hilippinesV) enacted on +

&arch 1+44. The "ull te%t o" this statute is as "ollo(s=

Be it enacted #y the 2enate and 'ouse o" $epresentatives o" the

*hilippines in Hegislature assem#led and #y the authority o" the same=

2ECT8N 1. The 2ecretary o" Agriculture and Natural $esources @no(

2ecretary o" the Environment and Natural $esources is here#y authorized

to sell or lease land o" the private domain o" the overnment o" the

*hilippine slands) or any part thereo") to such persons) corporations or

associations as are) under the provisions o" Act Num#ered T(enty3eight

hundred and seventy3"our) @no( Common(ealth Act No. 1!1) as amended

kno(n as the *u#lic Hand Act) entitled to apply "or the purchase or lease or

agricultural pu#lic land.

2ECT8N 4. The sale of the land referred toin the preceding section shall)

i" such land is agricultural) #e made in the manner and su#;ect to the

limitations prescri#ed in chapters 6ve and si%) respectively) o" said *u#lic

Hand Act) and if it be classied di>erently, in conformity 7ith the$rovisions of cha$ter nine of said Act= *rovided) ho(ever) That the land

necessary "or the pu#lic service shall #e e%empt "rom t

Act.

2ECT8N >. This Act shall take e0ect on its approval.

Approved) &arch +) 1+44. @Emphasis supplied

Hest it #e assumed that Act No. >,> re"ers only to agricultural lands

domain o" the 2tate) it must #e noted that Chapter + o" the old *u#lic

47! is no( Chapter + o" the present *u#lic Hand Act @Common(ealt

amended and that #oth statutes re"er to= Vany tract o" land o" the pu

#eing neither tim#er nor mineral land) is intended to #e used "orresid"or commercial or industrial $ur$oses other than agriculturalV @Empha

other (ords) the statute covers the sale or lease or residential) comm

land o" the private domain o" the 2tate.

mplementing regulations have #een issued "or the carrying out o" the

No. >,>. 8n 41 Gecem#er 1+5!) the then 2ecretary o" Agriculture an

$esources promulgated Hands Administrative 8rders Nos. 73< and 737

entitled) respectively= V2upplementary $egulations overning the 2al

the Private omain o" the $epu#lic o" the *hilippinesVD and V2uppleme

overning the 1ease of 1ands of Private omain o" the $epu#lic o" th

in 51 8.. 434+ 1+55/.

t is perhaps (ell to add that Act No. >,>) although no( si%ty3eight @in e0ect and has not #een repealed. 1

2peci6c legislative authorization "or disposition o" particular patrimon

2tate is illustrated #y certain earlier statutes. The 6rst o" these (as A

enacted on 4< April 1+,!) (hich provided "or the disposition o" the "ri

#y the overnment "rom the $oman Catholic Church) to bona de set

thereo" or to other persons. n!acinto v. irector of 1ands@!+ *hil. 5>

lands (ere held to #e private and patrimonial properties o" the 2tate.

enacted on 34 e#ruary 1+1!) authorized the sale o" the&an 1azaro

the City o" &anila) (hich had also #een purchased #y the overnmen

Catholic Church. n anuary 1+1 &anresa . 2ee also *rovince o" Sam#oanga d

Sam#oanga) No. H34!!!,) &arch 4) 1+

5 gnacio v. Girector o" Hands) 1, *hil. >>5) >>+ @1+, 1+74 !< 2C$A 7>! $ # $ANC2C8 C'A?ES titi


27/57

2alas v. arencio) No. H34+7) August >,) 1+74) !< 2C$A 7>!D $a#uco v.

?illegas) No.

H34!+1 is very much in e0ect and that the Bureau o" Hands continues to date

to act under it. 2ee also) in this connection) 2ections 4 and ! o" $epu#lic

Act No. !77) enacted + une 1+5, and as last amended #y B.*. Blg 4>>.

This statute government the disposition o" lands o" the pu#lic domain and

o" the private domain o" the 2tate) including lands previously vested in the

Knited 2tates Alien *roperty Custodian and trans"erred to the $epu#lic o"

the *hilippines.

4 2ince Act No. >,> esta#lished certain -uali6cations "or applicants "or

purchase or lease o" land o" private domain o" the government) it is

relevant to note that E%ecutive 8rder No. 4+>45, uly +) 4,,4

$ANC2C8 . C'A?ES) petitioner)vs.*KBHC E2TATE2 AKT'8$TF and A&A$ C8A2TAH BAF GE?EH8*&ENTC8$*8$AT8N) respondents.

CA$*8)!.0

This is an original *etition "or &andamus (ith prayer "or a (rit o" prand a temporary restraining order. The petition seeks to compeAuthority @V*EAV "or #revity to disclose all "acts on *EAUs then on3g(ith Amari Coastal Bay and Gevelopment Corporation @VA&A$V "orportions o" &anila Bay. The petition "urther seeks to en;oin *EA "

agreement (ith A&A$ involving such reclamation.

The acts

8n Novem#er 4,) 1+7>) the government) through the Commissionersigned a contract (ith the Construction and Gevelopment Corporati@VCGC*V "or #revity to reclaim certain "oreshore and o0shore areascontract also included the construction o" *hases and o" the &a$oad. CGC* o#ligated itsel" to carry out all the (orks in consideratiothe total reclaimed land.

8n e#ruary !) 1+77) then *resident erdinand E. &arcos issued *re1,! creating *EA. *G No. 1,! tasked *EA Vto reclaim land) inclusu#merged areas)V and Vto develop) improve) ac-uire) % % % lease akinds o" lands.V18n the same date) then *resident &arcos issued *re

1,5 trans"erring to *EA the Vlands reclaimed in the "oreshore and o0BayV4under the &anila3Cavite Coastal $oad and $eclamation *ro;ect

8n Gecem#er 4+) 1+1) then *resident &arcos issued a memorandamend its contract (ith CGC*) so that VA/ll "uture (orks in &CC"unded and o(ned #y *EA.V Accordingly) *EA and CGC* e%ecutedAgreement dated Gecem#er 4+) 1+1) (hich stated=

V@i CGC* shall undertake all reclamation) construction) and the &CC$$* as may #e agreed upon #y the parties) to #eprogress o" (orks on a unit pricelump sum #asis "or items oupon) su#;ect to price escalation) retention and other teprovided "or in *residential Gecree No. 15+!. All the 6nancin(orks shall #e provided #y *EA.

% % %

@iii % % % CGC* shall give up all its development rights and here#y agrees to cede vie( o" 2enate Committee $eport No 5


28/57

@iii % % % CGC* shall give up all its development rights and here#y agrees to cedeand trans"er in "avor o" *EA) all o" the rights) title) interest and participation o"CGC* in and to all the areas o" land reclaimed #y CGC* in the &CC$$* as o"Gecem#er >,) 1+1 (hich have not yet #een sold) trans"erred or other(isedisposed o" #y CGC* as o" said date) (hich areas consist o" appro%imately Ninety3Nine Thousand our 'undred 2eventy Three @++)!7> s-uare meters in theinancial Center Area covered #y land pledge No. 5 and appro%imately Three&illion Three 'undred Eighty T(o Thousand Eight 'undred Eighty Eight@>)>4) s-uare meters o" reclaimed areas at varying elevations a#ove &eanHo( :ater Hevel located outside the inancial Center Area and the irstNeigh#orhood Knit.V>

8n anuary 1+) 1+) then *resident Corazon C. A-uino issued 2pecial *atent No. >517)granting and trans"erring to *EA Vthe parcels o" land so reclaimed under the &anila3Cavite Coastal $oad and $eclamation *ro;ect @&CC$$* containing a total area o" onemillion nine hundred 6"teen thousand eight hundred ninety "our @1)+15)+! s-uaremeters.V 2u#se-uently) on April +) 1+) the $egister o" Geeds o" the &unicipality o"*araa-ue issued Trans"er Certi6cates o" Title Nos. 7>,+) 7>11) and 7>14) in the name o"*EA) covering the three reclaimed islands kno(n as the Vreedom slandsV located at thesouthern portion o" the &anila3Cavite Coastal $oad) *araa-ue City. The reedom slandshave a total land area o" 8ne &illion ive 'undred 2eventy Eight Thousand our 'undredand orty 8ne @1)57)!!1 s-uare meters or 157.!1 hectares.

8n April 45) 1++5) *EA entered into a oint ?enture Agreement @V?AV "or #revity (ithA&A$) a private corporation) to develop the reedom slands. The ?A also re-uired thereclamation o" an additional 45, hectares o" su#merged areas surrounding these islandsto complete the con6guration in the &aster Gevelopment *lan o" the 2outhern

$eclamation *ro;ect3&CC$$*. *EA and A&A$ entered into the ?A through negotiation(ithout pu#lic #idding.!8n April 4) 1++5) the Board o" Girectors o" *EA) in its $esolutionNo. 14!5) con6rmed the ?A.58n une ) 1++5) then *resident idel ?. $amos) throughthen E%ecutive 2ecretary $u#en Torres) approved the ?A. 1that in cases o" on3going negotiations the right toin"ormation is limited to Vde6nite propositions o" the government.V *EA maintains theright does not include access to Vintra3agency or inter3agency recommendations orcommunications during the stage (hen common assertions are still in the process o"#eing "ormulated or are in the Ue%ploratory stageU.V

Also) A&A$ contends that petitioner cannot invoke the right at the pre3decisional stageor #e"ore the closing o" the transaction. To support its contention) A&A$ cites the"ollo(ing discussion in the 1+< Constitutional Commission=

V&r. 2uarez. And (hen (e say UtransactionsU (hich should #e distinguished "romcontracts) agreements) or treaties or (hatever) does the entleman re"er to thesteps leading to the consummation o" the contract) or does he re"er to thecontract itsel"L

&r. 8ple= The @transactions@ used here, 8 su$$ose is "eneric and therefore, it cancover both ste$s leadin" to a contract and already a consummated contract, Mr.Presidin" O;cer.

Mr. &uarez0 This contem$lates inclusion of ne"otiations leadin" to the

consummation of the transaction.

Mr. O$le0 *es, sub%ect only to reasonable safe"uards on the national interest.

Mr. &uarez0Thank you.V>4@Emphasis supplied

A&A$ argues there must 6rst #e a consummated contract #e"ore petitioner can invokethe right. $e-uiring government o9cials to reveal their deli#erations at the pre3decisional stage (ill degrade the -uality o" decision3making in government agencies.overnment o9cials (ill hesitate to e%press their real sentiments during deli#erations i"there is immediate pu#lic dissemination o" their discussions) putting them under all kindso" pressure #e"ore they decide.

:e must 6rst distinguish #et(een in"ormation the la( on pu#lic #idding re-uires *EA to

disclose pu#licly) and in"ormation the constitutional right to in"ormation re-uires *EA torelease to the pu#lic. Be"ore the consummation o" the contract) *EA must) on its o(n and(ithout demand "rom anyone) disclose to the pu#lic matters relating to the disposition o"

p p y pproperty #eing disposed o") the terms and conditions o" the disp-uali6ed to #id) the minimum price and similar in"ormation. *EA mudata and disclose them to the pu#lic at the start o" the disposition pthe consummation o" the contract) #ecause the overnmere-uires$ublic biddin". " *EA "ails to make this disclosure) any citize*EA this in"ormation at any time during the #idding process.

n"ormation) ho(ever) on on#"oin" evaluation or revie7o" #ids undertaken #y the #idding or revie( committee is not immediately aright to in"ormation. :hile the evaluation or revie( is still on3going) acts) transactions) or decisionsV on the #ids or proposals. 'o(ever) makes its o;cial recommendation) there arises a denite $ro$ositiogovernment. rom this moment) the pu#licUs right to in"ormationcitizen can access all the non3proprietary in"ormation leadingproposition. n Chavez v. PCGG)>>the Court ruled as "ollo(s=

VConsidering the intent o" the "ramers o" the Constitution) (incum#ent upon the *C and its o9cers) as (ell asrepresentatives) to disclose su9cient pu#lic in"ormationsettlement they have decided to take up (ith the ostensi#le o" ill3gotten (ealth. 2uch in"ormation) though) must $ro$ositions of the "overnment) not necessarily to intra3agerecommendations or communications during the stage (henare still in the process o" #eing "ormulated or are in the Ve%plois need) o" course) to o#serve the same restrictions on disclosugeneral) as discussed earlier Z such as on matters involvindiplomatic or "oreign relations) intelligence and other clas@Emphasis supplied

Contrary to A&A$Us contention) the commissioners o" the 1Commission understood that the right to in"ormation contemne"otiations leadin" to the consummation of the transaction. Certaicontract is not a re-uirement "or the e%ercise o" the right to in"ormapeople can never e%ercise the right i" no contract is consummconsummated) it may #e too late "or the pu#lic to e%pose its de"ects.

$e-uiring a consummated contract (ill keep the pu#lic in the dark(hich may #e grossly disadvantageous to the government or even illeaccom$li. This negates the 2tate policy o" "ull transparency on mattea situation (hi

chavez vs publis estates 1

Documents