December 22, 1998
DAR OPINION NO. 121-98
HON . JEJOMAR BINAY
National President
Boy Scouts of the Philippines
181 Natividad Almeda-Lopez St.
Ermita, Manila
Sir:
This refers to your request for legal opinion on the matter of the Voluntary Offer to Sell (VOS) made by the Boy Scouts of the Philippines (BSP) over its property located in San Vicente, Asuncion, Davao del Norte, described as Lot No. 1, SWO-29502. In connection therewith, the following issues were analyzed in light of the applicable laws and jurisprudence:
1) The legal effect of the land grant in favor of the BSP;
2) The legal effect of the prohibition on alienation as provided in Section 3 of Republic Act No. 397 on BSP's voluntary offer to sell the land in question;
3) The compensation to which the BSP is entitled as a result land in question under the Voluntary Offer to Sell (VOS) scheme;
4) The applicability of E.O. 448 to the reservation of the land in question in favor of the BSP.
Anent the issue of the legal effect of the land grant in favor of the BSP, an examination of the pertinent laws and jurisprudence reveals that Republic Act No. 397 and Presidential Proclamation 286, in effect, declassified the lands described therein into alienable lands. The cases of Republic v Animas 56 SCRA 499 and Heirs of Amunategui v Director of Lands (126 SCRA 69) held that a positive act of government is needed to declassify land which is forest and convert it into alienable land. In the case under consideration, R.A. No. 397 and Presidential Proclamation No. 286 are the positive acts of the government which declassified the land mentioned therein into alienable land.
Moreover, this Office is of the view that Proclamation No. 286 issued by President Quirino reserving the parcel of land in Davao described therein in favor of the BSP constituted an absolute title in favor of the BSP. Applicable to this issue is the Supreme Court pronouncement in the case of Republic v CA (73 SCRA 146) wherein the High Court ruled that such a land grant is constitutive of a fee simple title or absolute title in favor of the grantee.
An analysis of Republic Act No. 397 otherwise known as AN ACT GRANTING THE BOY SCOUTS OF THE PHILIPPINES TEN THOUSAND HECTARES OF PUBLIC AGRICULTURAL LAND FOR ADDITIONAL SUPPORT AND MAINTENANCE OF THE SAID CORPORATION shows that the intent of the law is to grant and vest ownership over the said parcels of land in favor of the BSP. Section 1 of the said law clearly and unambiguously states that portions of public domain are granted and ceded to the BSP. The statute's legislative history confirms such. During the deliberations; Congressman Zosa, the Bill's author, unequivocably, stressed that the object of the law is to grant the Boy Scouts of the Philippines a number of hectares of land from the public domain in order that, from the income to be derived from the land, the organization, will have a means to support itself considering its laudable objectives. (Congressional Records, Deliberations by the House of Representatives on House Bill No. 1910, May 19, 1949, p. 2391).
To uphold the view that the operative act which would consummate the grant is when the property is deeded, conveyed and titled would defeat the very purpose for which RA 397 was enacted. While, indeed, it is stated in Section 2 thereof that the specific site chosen and surveyed is to be deeded, conveyed and transferred by the Director of Lands to BSP, it does not follow that such action by the Director of Lands is the operative act to convey the land, without which, the land remains part of the public domain. Taking the aforecited provision within the context of the spirit of the law, the entire procedure outlined in Section 2 is to be construed as merely to facilitate matters for the orderly realization of the object of the law. Thus, the fact that the ninety (90) hectare-land in question is untitled is of no moment. The fact remains the it is part and parcel of the 10,000 hectares ceded and granted to BSP by virtue of RA 397.
As to the issue on the prohibition to alienate the lands subject of the grant as provided in Section 3 of R.A. No. 397, this Office is of the view that the act of BSP in offering the property for sale pursuant to the Voluntary Offer to Sell provision of R.A. No. 6657, does not constitute a violation of the aforementioned provision of the land grant.
Section 4 of R.A. No. 6657 on Coverage of the Comprehensive Land Reform Program (CARP) automatically and effectively subjected Lot No. SWO 29507 under the coverage of the CARP. It is posited that the act of BSP in pursuance of Section 19 of R.A. 6657 (VOS provision) is merely to comply with, and give effect to, the mandate of the law. In so offering to sell the subject property, BSP merely tried to facilitate the acquisition of the land for eventual distribution to qualified beneficiaries as contemplated R.A. 6657.
As against a general prohibition to sell or alienate as provided in Section 3 of RA No. 397, the provision in Section 19 of R. A. No. 397 specifically allowing the sale and transfer of lands covered by the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program, to which Lot No. 1 SWO 29502 is subject to, it is submitted that the latter should prevail. Moreover, as the earlier law, R.A. No. 397 should give way to R.A. 6657 being the more recent law.
In connection with the same issue, it is worth-mentioning that the other portions of the land grant, over which patents or titles were formally issued, had earlier been placed under the Voluntary Offer to Sell (VOS) Scheme and that no objection on this ground had ever been raised. There is no reason why it should become an issue with respect to the particular lot in question.
With regard to the issue on compensation, the Office asseverates that the BSP is entitled to be compensated for the entire ninety- hectare area covering Lot No. 1 SWO 29502 whether cultivated of not. Likewise, BSP should be compensated for the rubber trees planted on the cultivated portions. As the absolute owner of the land in question, it is but BSP's right to be compensated therefor as a consequence of its being placed under the VOS Scheme of R.A. No. 6657. That certain portions are undeveloped is of no moment. As may be gleaned from Section 5 of R.A. No. 397, it is clear that the conditions for reversion to public domain of the lands subject of the land grant are not present. Section 5 of the said law states that:
". . . Such portion or portions of the lands herein granted which are not developed, cultivated, leased, or otherwise disposed of, after the lapse of twenty years from the date in which such lands have been deeded, conveyed and transferred in accordance with this Act, shall revert to the public domain and shall be open for settlement and disposition in accordance with the Public Land Act. . . " (emphasis supplied)
Since the lot in question is untitled, the twenty year reckoning period for reversion has not ran. Thus, albeit some portions are uncultivated, ownership of the entire lot remains with the BSP. As a consequence thereof, BSP should be compensated for such portions. The argument that BSP should not be compensated for the uncultivated portions has no legal leg to stand on.
Finally, E.O. 448 which transferred to the Department of Agrarian Reform for distribution lands reserved by Presidential Proclamations for specific public uses, is not applicable to the present case. The Executive Order only covers those which have been reserved for a government, its agencies and instrumentalities including government corporations. The terms of the law is clear and by no stretch of imagination can it extend to cover BSP which is a private non-profit corporation.
In sum, the Office is of the opinion that:
1) The effect of R.A. No. 397 and Presidential Proclamation 286 is to declassify the portions subject of the land grant into alienable lands;
2) By virtue of R. A. No. 397 and Presidential Proclamation 286, absolute title over Lot. No. 1 SWO 29502 located in Sari Vicente Asuncion, Davao del Norte has been legally vested in the BSP;
3) The prohibition to alienate as provided in Section 3 of R. A. 397 has been superseded by R.A. 6657;
4). BSP being the owner of the land in question is entitled to be compensated for the entire ninety (90) hectare area described as Lot No. 1 SWO 29502 whether developed or undeveloped. Likewise, BSP is entitled to be compensated for the rubber trees planted on the cultivated portions.
It is hoped that this Office has enlightened you on the matter.
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) DANILO T. LARA
Undersecretary for Legal Affairs, and Policy and Planning