G.R. No. 135385, December 6, 2000
Isagani Cruz and Cesar Europa
vs National Commission on Indigenous
Peoples
Facts:
Petitioners view that the IPRA is partly
unconstitutional on the ground that it grants ownership over natural resources
to indigenous peoples. They argue that IPRA and its implementing rules will
amount to an unlawful deprivation of the State's ownership over lands of the
public domain as well as minerals and other natural resources, in violation of
the regalian doctrine of the Constitution.
Petitioners also content that, by providing
for an all-encompassing definition of "ancestral domains" and
"ancestral lands" which might even include private lands found within
said areas, Sections 3(a) and 3(b) violate the rights of private landowners.
In addition, petitioners question the
provisions of the IPRA defining the powers and jurisdiction of the NCIP and
making customary law applicable to the settlement of disputes involving
ancestral domains and ancestral lands on the ground that these provisions
violate the due process clause of the Constitution.
Finally, petitioners assail the validity of
Rule VII, Part II, Section 1 of the NCIP Administrative Order No. 1, series of
1998, which provides that "the administrative relationship of the NCIP to
the Office of the President is characterized as a lateral but autonomous
relationship for purposes of policy and program coordination." They
contend that said Rule infringes upon the President’s power of control over
executive departments under Section 17, Article VII of the Constitution.
As the votes were equally divided (7 to 7)
and the necessary majority was not obtained, the case was redeliberated upon.
However, after redeliberation, the voting remained the same. Accordingly,
pursuant to Rule 56, Section 7 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, the petition is
DISMISSED.
Notes:
Puno: "When Congress enacted the
Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA), it introduced radical concepts into the
Philippine legal system which appear to collide with settled constitutional and
jural precepts on state ownership of land and other natural resources. The
sense and subtleties of this law cannot be appreciated without considering its
distinct sociology and the labyrinths of its history. This Opinion attempts to
interpret IPRA by discovering its soul shrouded by the mist of our history.
After all, the IPRA was enacted by Congress not only to fulfil the
constitutional mandate of protecting the indigenous cultural communities' right
to their ancestral land but more importantly, to correct a grave historical
injustice to our indigenous people."
The IPRA recognizes the existence of the
indigenous cultural communities or indigenous peoples (ICCs/IPs) as a distinct
sector in Philippine society. It grants these people the ownership and
possession of their ancestral domains and ancestral lands, and defines the
extent of these lands and domains. The ownership given is the indigenous
concept of ownership under customary law which traces its origin to native
title.
Indigenous Cultural Communities or
Indigenous Peoples refer to a group of people or homogeneous societies who have
continuously lived as an organized community on communally bounded and defined
territory. These groups of people have actually occupied, possessed and
utilized their territories under claim of ownership since time immemorial. They
share common bonds of language, customs, traditions and other distinctive
cultural traits, or, they, by their resistance to political, social and
cultural inroads of colonization, non-indigenous religions and cultures, became
historically differentiated from the Filipino majority. ICCs/IPs also include
descendants of ICCs/IPs who inhabited the country at the time of conquest or
colonization, who retain some or all of their own social, economic, cultural
and political institutions but who may have been displaced from their
traditional territories or who may have resettled outside their ancestral
domains.
To recognize the rights of the indigenous
peoples effectively, Senator Flavier proposed a bill based on two postulates:
(1) the concept of native title; and (2) the principle of parens patriae.
"Sec. 3 a) Ancestral Domains. -
Subject to Section 56 hereof, refer to all areas generally belonging to
ICCs/IPs comprising lands, inland waters, coastal areas, and natural resources
therein, held under a claim of ownership, occupied or possessed by ICCs/IPs by
themselves or through their ancestors, communally or individually since time
immemorial, continuously to the present except when interrupted by war, force
majeure or displacement by force, deceit, stealth or as a consequence of
government projects or any other voluntary dealings entered into by government
and private individuals/corporations, and which are necessary to ensure their
economic, social and cultural welfare.
b) Ancestral Lands.- Subject to Section 56
hereof, refers to land occupied, possessed and utilized by individuals,
families and clans who are members of the ICCs/IPs since time immemorial, by
themselves or through their predecessors-in-interest, under claims of
individual or traditional group ownership, continuously, to the present except
when interrupted by war, force majeure or displacement by force, deceit,
stealth, or as a consequence of government projects and other voluntary
dealings entered into by government and private individuals/corporations,
including, but not limited to, residential lots, rice terraces or paddies,
private forests, widen farms and tree lots."
The rights of the ICCs/IPs to their
ancestral domains and ancestral lands may be acquired in two modes: (1) by native
title over both ancestral lands and domains; or (2) by torrens title under the
Public Land Act and the Land Registration Act with respect to ancestral lands
only.
Native title refers to ICCs/IPs'
preconquest rights to lands and domains held under a claim of private ownership
as far back as memory reaches. These lands are deemed never to have been public
lands and are indisputably presumed to have been held that way since before the
Spanish Conquest.
Article 12
Section 2. All lands of the public domain,
waters, minerals, coal, petroleum, and other mineral oils, all forces of
potential energy, fisheries, forests or timber, wildlife, flora and fauna, and
other natural resources are owned by the State. With the exception of
agricultural lands, all other natural resources shall not be alienated. The
exploration, development, and utilization of natural resources shall be under
the full control and supervision of the State. The State may directly undertake
such activities, or it may enter into co-production, joint venture, or
production-sharing agreements with Filipino citizens, or corporations or
associations at least sixty per centum of whose capital is owned by such
citizens. Such agreements may be for a period not exceeding twenty-five years,
renewable for not more than twenty-five years, and under such terms and
conditions as may be provided by law. In cases of water rights for irrigation,
water supply fisheries, or industrial uses other than the development of water
power, beneficial use may be the measure and limit of the grant.
The State shall protect the nation’s marine
wealth in its archipelagic waters, territorial sea, and exclusive economic
zone, and reserve its use and enjoyment exclusively to Filipino citizens.
The Congress may, by law, allow small-scale
utilization of natural resources by Filipino citizens, as well as cooperative
fish farming, with priority to subsistence fishermen and fish workers in
rivers, lakes, bays, and lagoons.
The President may enter into agreements
with foreign-owned corporations involving either technical or financial
assistance for large-scale exploration, development, and utilization of
minerals, petroleum, and other mineral oils according to the general terms and
conditions provided by law, based on real contributions to the economic growth
and general welfare of the country. In such agreements, the State shall promote
the development and use of local scientific and technical resources.
The President shall notify the Congress of
every contract entered into in accordance with this provision, within thirty
days from its execution.
Section 3. Lands of the public domain are
classified into agricultural, forest or timber, mineral lands and national
parks. Agricultural lands of the public domain may be further classified by law
according to the uses to which they may be devoted. Alienable lands of the
public domain shall be limited to agricultural lands. Private corporations or
associations may not hold such alienable lands of the public domain except by
lease, for a period not exceeding twenty-five years, renewable for not more
than twenty-five years, and not to exceed one thousand hectares in area.
Citizens of the Philippines may lease not more than five hundred hectares, or
acquire not more than twelve hectares thereof, by purchase, homestead, or
grant.
Taking into account the requirements of
conservation, ecology, and development, and subject to the requirements of
agrarian reform, the Congress shall determine, by law, the size of lands of the
public domain which may be acquired, developed, held, or leased and the
conditions therefor.
Section 4. The Congress shall, as soon as
possible, determine, by law, the specific limits of forest lands and national
parks, marking clearly their boundaries on the ground. Thereafter, such forest
lands and national parks shall be conserved and may not be increased nor
diminished, except by law. The Congress shall provide for such period as it may
determine, measures to prohibit logging in endangered forests and watershed
areas.
Section 5. The State, subject to the
provisions of this Constitution and national development policies and programs,
shall protect the rights of indigenous cultural communities to their ancestral
lands to ensure their economic, social, and cultural well-being.
The Congress may provide for the
applicability of customary laws governing property rights or relations in
determining the ownership and extent of ancestral domain.
Section 6. The use of property bears a
social function, and all economic agents shall contribute to the common good.
Individuals and private groups, including corporations, cooperatives, and
similar collective organizations, shall have the right to own, establish, and
operate economic enterprises, subject to the duty of the State to promote
distributive justice and to intervene when the common good so demands.
Section 7. Save in cases of hereditary
succession, no private lands shall be transferred or conveyed except to
individuals, corporations, or associations qualified to acquire or hold lands
of the public domain.
