February 11, 1999

DAR OPINION NO. 14-99

Atty. Charlie B. Dorion

Corporate Secretary

Paraiso International Properties, Inc.

Unit 23-H, Summit Tower I

530 Shaw Blvd., Mandaluyong City

Dear Atty. Dorion:

This has reference to your letter dated 05 November 1998 wherein you would like to request for an opinion as to the effect of the "Joint HLRB, DAR, DA and DILG Memorandum Circular" dated 21 March 1995 to the Conversion Orders issued by DAR dated 30 August 1991, granting the applications for conversion of Mrs. Corazon C. Pantoja, Mr. J. Antonio Leviste and Mr. Pedro M. Berberabe, Sr. with corresponding areas of 29.1150 has., fifty (50) has. and 49.6986 has., respectively, situated in Barangays Biga and Laya (now Barangay Paraiso), Calatagan, Batangas.

A perusal of the said Joint Memorandum Circular and a thorough evaluation of the same reveals that it has no significant effect on the validity of the Conversion Orders issued by DAR dated 30 August 1991. Reclassification and conversion are not synonymous and therefore, do not refer to one and the same thing. Land reclassification is a power exercised by the municipal or city government through the town planning process, subject to review and approval by the Provincial Sanggunian through the Provincial Land Use Council (PLUC). Land Use Conversion, on the other hand, is the actual change in land use from agricultural to non-agricultural and goes through the DAR's evaluation process, which takes into account the tenants and farmworkers, if any, on the landholding and the ascertainment of disturbance compensation. It bears stressing here that ordinances reclassifying lands are not subject to DAR approval, however, the finality of the ordinance reclassifying the land will not convert the agricultural areas covered thereby to non-agricultural uses. Land use conversion legally falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the DAR, thus, the change in the use of an agricultural land for non-agricultural purposes is subject to DAR's evaluation and approval.

From all the foregoing, it is clear that the aforementioned Joint Memorandum Circular dated 21 March 1995 merely serves as a guideline in the implementation of Memorandum Circular No. 54 and has no bearing insofar as the validity of the Conversion Orders earlier issued by DAR on 30 August 1991, which were accordingly and duly resolved on the merits of each subject application or petition for conversion.

Thank you for communicating with us and we hope to have enlightened you on the matter.

Very truly yours,

(SGD.) DANILO T. LARA

Undersecretary for Legal Affairs, and Policy and Planning