September 4, 1998
DAR OPINION NO. 90-98
RODOLFO A. RICACHO, Jr.
Legal Officer I
Office of the Regional Director
DAR, Regional Office No. VIII
Tacloban City
Dear Mr. Ricacho:
This refers to your letter dated 14 July 1998 requesting for opinion on the query posed therein.
As stated, your query is prompted by the recommendation of the Legal Section, DAR, Regional Office No. VIII, Tacloban City, to grant more than five (5) hectares or 5.0253 hectare of agricultural land to the landowner/petitioner citing Administrative Order No. 03-85, Series of 1985 as basis of such grant. As alleged, the said award of 5.0253 hectare of agricultural land to the landowner is within the tolerable retention limit allowed by law. Your query is whether or not the grant of more than five (5) hectares or 5.0253 hectare of agricultural land as retention area of the landowner/petitioner is within the contemplation of the 10% "tolerable limit" provided for under the said Administrative Order.
The Department of Agrarian Reform had already previously opined that MAR A.O. No. 3, Series of 1985 cannot be made to apply on the retention limit of a landowner provided under CARL (DAR Opinion No. 30, S. 1997, 20 March 1997 and DAR Opinion No. 125, S. 1997, 14 November 1997).
The pertinent portions or provisions of the aforementioned DAR Legal Opinions are as follows, quote:
1. DAR Opinion No. 30, Series of 1997
"Applying the above provisions on the subject matter at hand, we submit that MAR A.O. No. 3, Series of 1985 cannot be made to apply on the retention limit of a landowner provided under CARL. The reason is that, the mandate of the law is clearly to distribute CARP-covered lands to the landless or to qualified farmer beneficiaries who have the aptitude, willingness and ability to make said lands as productive as possible. To increase the retention limit of a landowner within the so-called "tolerable limit", though it may be perceived as negligible, would nonetheless defeat the very purpose for which the law (R.A. No. 6657) was enacted. Accordingly, in such excess area, the same should rather be allocated or awarded in favor of a qualified agrarian reform beneficiary."
2. DAR Opinion No. 125, Series of 1997
". . . the term "tolerable limits" applies only to award to farmer beneficiaries and not to dispositions of property by registered owners. Neither can it be legally inferred from the provision of Ministry of Agrarian Reform Administrative Order No. 03, Series of 1985 which explicitly provides that "the economic family size farm to be transferred to a bona fide farmer beneficiary pursuant to Presidential Decree No. 27 shall include a tolerable limit of not more than ten percent (10%) or 3.3 hectares if irrigated and 5. 5 hectares if unirrigated. Accordingly, the same cannot be made to apply on the retention limit of a landowner provided under CARL because the mandate of the law is clearly to distribute CARP-covered lands to the landless or to qualified farmer-beneficiaries who have the aptitude, willingness and ability to make the lands as productive as possible. To increase the retention limit would defeat the purpose for which the law (R.A. No. 6657) was enacted."
The policy as set forth above is clearly in accord with the provisions of Sections 6 and 73 (a) of R.A. No. 6657 which limit the maximum retention and landownership ceiling to five (5) hectares only.
In the light of the foregoing, we would like to reiterate our Department's opinion that the term "tolerable limit" applies only to award to farmer beneficiaries and cannot be made to apply on the retention limit of a landowner as provided for under R.A. No. 6657 (CARL). This is in order to preclude the setting of a bad precedent and to foreclose possible circumvention of the Program.
Thank your for communicating with us and we hope to have clarified the matter with you.
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) DANILO T. LARA
Undersecretary for Legal Affairs, and Policy and Planning
Copy furnished:
Ms. Myrna E. Delovino Legal Officer II
DAR Legal Section, Region VIII
Tacloban City