February 23, 1998
DAR OPINION NO. 27-98
PARO Mildred Marcaida
DAR Provincial Office
Del Rosario St., Naga City
Camarines Sur
Dear PARO Marcaida:
This refers to the expropriation of the Baduria Estate by the Provincial Government of Camarines Sur. The antecedent facts are as follows: Mr. Baduria is the owner of a 145.732 hectare agricultural land located in the Municipalities of Tigaoan and Ocampo, Camarines Sur, 6.5129 hectares of which were placed under Compulsory Acquisition and the remaining areas were voluntarily offered for sales to the government through the DAR; the provincial government of Camarines Sur filed expropriation proceedings over the subject property for the purpose of using the same as a deer farm, thus processing of the claimfolders were held in abeyance the other hand, Mr. Baduria informed the DAR that he is withdrawing the subject properties from VOS coverage alleging expropriation by the local. government as the reason for such, hence, the following queries were posed, to wit: first, can the landowner withdraw the property, from VOS coverage; second, can Mr. Baduria be compelled to pay disturbance compensation to the beneficiaries; third, is the sanctuary for wildlife superior to the source of livelihood of the people; and fourth, can the DAR oppose the expropriation?
Under the governing rules of Administrative Order No. 06, Series of 1997 (Revision of Administrative Order No. 05, Series of 1992, Entitled "Clarificatory Guidelines and Amendments to Administrative Order No. 09, Series of 1990", the same provide that "withdrawal of VOS shall no longer be allowed after the letter offer for VOS, i.e., CARP Farm No. 1 (Annex "A") is received by the DAR. However, the DAR may allow the withdrawal of VOS if the withdrawal of VOS is for the purpose of acquisition and compensation through the Voluntary Land Transfer/Direct Payment Scheme (VLT/DPS); provided that, the claimfolder has not yet been forwarded to the Land Bank of the Philippines for the computation of the land value". Mr. Baduria can no longer withdraw his landholding subject of a VOS under the aforestated Administrative Order considering that the documentation of the claimfolders have already been completed. Moreover, his reason for the VOS withdrawal does not fall under the legally allowed exceptions, since his justification was the expropriation of subject landholding by the provincial government.
It is submitted that although we cannot prevent the local government unit from filing a case for expropriation, we believe that the award of the farmlots in favor of the beneficiaries, having been made pursuant to the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program of the government holds precedence over the expropriation thereof for purposes of deer farming by the local government. Besides, local government units have no inherent power of eminent domain and can exercise it only when expressly authorized by the legislature. Such power being merely delegated must be clearly expressed, either in the law conferring the power or in other legislations (Province of Camarines Sur vs. Court of Appeals, 222 SCRA 173).
We advise that the DAR lawyers in the locality should immediately assist in protecting the rights and interests of the beneficiaries of the subject landholdings.
Please be guided accordingly.
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) ARTEMIO A. ADASA, JR.
Undersecretary for Legal Affairs, and Policy and Planning
Copy furnished:
Percival Dalugdug
Regional Director
DAR Region V, Tanchuling Bldg.,
Lakandula Drive, Gogon, Legaspi City
Liwayway Hernandez
MARO, Municipal Agrarian Reform Office
Tigaoan, Camarines Sur
Osmundo del Socorro
MARO, Municipal Agrarian Reform Office
Ocampo, Camarines Sur