Understanding the Jurisdictional Boundaries in Agrarian Reform: The DAR Secretary’s Role in Cancellation of CLOAs

Philcontrust Resources, Inc. v. Atty. Reynaldo Aquino, G.R. No. 214714, October 07, 2020

Imagine waking up one day to find that the land you’ve owned for years has been redistributed without your knowledge or consent. This scenario is not far-fetched for many landowners in the Philippines, where agrarian reform laws aim to redistribute land to farmers but often lead to complex legal battles. The case of Philcontrust Resources, Inc. v. Atty. Reynaldo Aquino is a prime example, shedding light on the intricate jurisdictional lines within the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) and the crucial role of the DAR Secretary in resolving disputes over land ownership awards.

In this case, Philcontrust Resources, Inc., a landowner, challenged the issuance of Certificates of Land Ownership Award (CLOAs) to several beneficiaries, claiming that the land was residential and thus exempt from the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP). The central legal question was whether the Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB) or the DAR Secretary had jurisdiction over the cancellation of these CLOAs.

Legal Context: The Framework of Agrarian Reform in the Philippines

The Philippine agrarian reform system is governed by Republic Act No. 6657, also known as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL). This law aims to promote social justice by redistributing land to landless farmers. However, the process is fraught with complexities, particularly regarding the jurisdiction over disputes arising from land redistribution.

The DAR is tasked with implementing agrarian reform, and its powers are divided into administrative and quasi-judicial functions. The DAR Secretary handles administrative matters, such as classifying land for CARP coverage and issuing CLOAs, while the DARAB deals with quasi-judicial issues, such as disputes between landowners and tenants.

Key to this case is Section 50 of RA No. 6657, which grants the DAR exclusive jurisdiction over agrarian reform matters. However, the 2003 DARAB Rules of Procedure further delineate these powers, stating that the DARAB has jurisdiction over the cancellation of registered CLOAs only if there is an agrarian dispute between landowners and tenants. If the dispute concerns the administrative implementation of agrarian laws, such as the classification of land, it falls under the DAR Secretary’s jurisdiction.

For instance, if a landowner claims that their property is residential and thus exempt from CARP, they must file their petition with the DAR Secretary, not the DARAB. This distinction is crucial because it determines the proper venue for resolving such disputes, ensuring that the correct legal procedures are followed.

Case Breakdown: The Journey of Philcontrust Resources, Inc.

Philcontrust Resources, Inc., formerly known as Inter-Asia Land Development Co., owned several parcels of land in Tagaytay City, which were classified as residential. In 2003, they received a notice from the Provincial Agrarian Reform Office (PARO) stating that their land was covered by CARP, and CLOAs were issued to several beneficiaries.

Philcontrust challenged the issuance of these CLOAs, arguing that their land was not agricultural and thus should be exempt from CARP. They filed a petition for cancellation with the Provincial Agrarian Reform Adjudicator (PARAD), which was dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction. The case then proceeded to the DARAB, which also dismissed the petition, stating that the matter should be filed with the DAR Secretary.

The Court of Appeals (CA) upheld the DARAB’s decision, emphasizing that the absence of an agrarian dispute meant that the DARAB lacked jurisdiction. Philcontrust then appealed to the Supreme Court, which ultimately denied the petition, affirming the CA’s ruling.

The Supreme Court’s decision hinged on the distinction between the DARAB’s and the DAR Secretary’s jurisdictions. The Court stated, “The DARAB’s jurisdiction over petitions for cancellation of registered CLOAs is confined only to agrarian disputes.” Furthermore, it clarified that “in the absence of a tenancy relationship between the parties, the petition for cancellation must be filed with the DAR Secretary.”

The Court also addressed Philcontrust’s allegations of lack of notice and non-payment of just compensation, stating that these issues must be resolved by the DAR Secretary, as they involve the implementation of agrarian laws.

Practical Implications: Navigating Future Agrarian Reform Disputes

This ruling has significant implications for landowners and beneficiaries involved in agrarian reform disputes. It underscores the importance of understanding the jurisdictional boundaries within the DAR, ensuring that disputes are filed with the correct body to avoid unnecessary legal battles.

For landowners, it is crucial to monitor the classification of their properties and promptly file any petitions for exemption with the DAR Secretary if they believe their land is not agricultural. Similarly, beneficiaries must be aware of the legal processes involved in acquiring land under CARP to protect their rights.

Key Lessons:

• Understand the difference between administrative and quasi-judicial functions within the DAR.
• File petitions for exemption from CARP coverage with the DAR Secretary, not the DARAB, if there is no agrarian dispute.
• Ensure compliance with the proper procedures for land acquisition, including receiving notice and just compensation.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is a Certificate of Land Ownership Award (CLOA)?

A CLOA is a document issued by the DAR that evidences ownership of land granted to a beneficiary under agrarian reform programs.

Who has jurisdiction over the cancellation of CLOAs?

The DARAB has jurisdiction if the cancellation involves an agrarian dispute between landowners and tenants. Otherwise, the DAR Secretary has jurisdiction over matters related to the administrative implementation of agrarian reform laws.

What should a landowner do if they believe their property is exempt from CARP?

Landowners should file a petition for exemption with the DAR Secretary, providing evidence that their land is not agricultural.

Can a landowner challenge the issuance of CLOAs without an agrarian dispute?

Yes, but the challenge must be filed with the DAR Secretary, as it involves the administrative implementation of agrarian reform laws.

What are the rights of landowners regarding just compensation?

Landowners are entitled to just compensation for their properties acquired under CARP, and any disputes over compensation should be resolved by the DAR Secretary.

How can beneficiaries protect their rights under CARP?

Beneficiaries should ensure they receive proper documentation and follow the legal processes for land acquisition to safeguard their rights.

ASG Law specializes in agrarian reform and land disputes. Contact us or email hello@asglawpartners.com to schedule a consultation.