April 24, 1997
DAR OPINION NO. 48-97
Mr. Vicente S. Corcuera
President
Residential, Industrial Commercial
Estate Management Corp.
#37 East Capitol Drive, Pasig City
Dear Mr. Corcuera:
This has reference to your letter dated 24 June 1996 addressed to President Fidel V. Ramos requesting for land swapping of the properties owned by Honeycomb Farm Corporation and RICEM Corporation on the one hand, with the properties owned by the government on the other.
As gleaned from your letter together with the enclosure therein attached, the subject property has an aggregate area of 1,314 hectares and situated at Barangays Curvada Quezon, Petugo Dadawisan and San Jose all in Cataingan, Masbate; that said landholdings are owned by Honeycomb Farm Corporation and RICEM Corporation and covered by TCT Nos. 4562, 2549, 2550 and 2872; that on 24 June 1996, you wrote President Fidel V. Ramos as representative of the abovementioned properties requesting for land swapping at the ratio of 1 hectare private land to 5 hectares public lands pursuant to R.A. 926 and that the land swapping agreement was finally resorted after the Land Bank of the Philippines offered a very low valuation.
Please be informed that the state is mandated through the Department of Agrarian Reform to compulsorily acquire agricultural lands in excess of retention area for distribution to qualified beneficiaries. This is clear from Section 4 of R.A. 6657 which expressly provides that the "Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988 shall cover regardless of tenurial arrangement and commodity produced, all public and private agricultural lands as provided in Proclamation No. 131 and Executive Order No. 229 including other lands of the public domain suitable for agriculture." The express authority to compulsorily acquire agriculture lands in excess of retention area is couched in mandatory characters thus, implying that no one shall be exempt from the coverage.
Moreover, a careful scrutiny of Republic Act No. 926 readily reveals that its application is limited only to landed estates; its application cannot by implication be extended beyond what the law purports to be. Such being the case, private land is not contemplated under R.A. 926. Besides, compulsory coverage under R.A. 6657 cannot and should never be burdened by conditions which the parties may wish to impose because its coverage cannot be made to depend indirectly at least, on the party's volition.
We hope to have clarified the matters with you.
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) ARTEMIO A. ADASA, JR.
Undersecretary for Legal Affairs, and Policy and Planning
Copy furnished:
Director Gloria J. Fabia
BLAD, DARCO