00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

1/102

Republic of the PhilippinesSUPREME COURT

Manila

EN BANC

G.R. No. 135385 December 6, 2000

ISAGANI CRUZ !" CESAR EUROPA,petitioners,vs.SECRETAR# O$ EN%IRONMENT AND NATURA& RESOURCES, SECRETAR# O$ 'UDGET ANDMANAGEMENT !" C(AIRMAN !" COMMISSIONERS O$ T(E NATIONA& COMMISSION ON INDIGENOUSPEOP&ES, respondents.(ON. )UAN M .$&A%IER, (ON. PONCIANO 'ENNAGEN, 'A#ANI ASCARRAGA, EDTAMI MANSA#ANGAN,'ASI&IO *ANDAG, E%EN DUNUAN, #AOM TUGAS, A&$REMO CARPIANO, &I'ERATO A. GA'IN,MATERNIDAD M. CO&AS, NARCISA M. DA&UPINES, 'AI +IRAMCONNIE SATURNO, 'AE M&OMO'EATRIZT. A'ASA&A, DATU 'A&ITUNGTUNGANTONIO D. &UMANDONG, DATU MANTUMU+A* TEO$ISTOSA'ASA&ES, DATU EDUAARDO 'ANDA, DATU )OE& UNAD, DATU RAMON 'A#AAN, TIMUA# )OSE ANO#,TIMUA# MACARIO D. SA&ACAO, TIMUA# ED*IN '. ENDING, DATU SA(AMPONG MA&ANA* %I, DATU 'ENPENDAO CA'IGON, 'AI NANAPNA#&IZA SA*A#, 'A# INA# DA#AME&INDA S. RE#MUNDO, 'AITINANG(AGA (E&INITA T. PANGAN, DATU MA+APU+A* ADO&INO &. SA*A#, DATU MAUDA#A*CRISPEN

SA*A#, %IC+# MA+A#, &OURDES D. AMOS, GI&'ERT P. (OGGANG, TERESA GASPAR, MANUE& S.ONA&AN, MIA GRACE &. GIRON, ROSEMARIE G. PE, 'ENITO CARINO, )OSEP( )UDE CARANTES,NETTE CARANTES%I%A&, &ANG&E# SEGUNDO, SATUR S. 'UGNA#, CAR&ING DOMU&OT, ANDRESMENDIOGRIN, &EOPO&DO A'UGAN, %IRGI&IO CA#ETANO, CONC(ITA G. DESCAGA, &E%# ESTE%ES,ODETTE G. ESTE%EZ, RODO&$O C. AGUI&AR, MAURO %A&ONES, PEPE (. ATONG, O$E&IA T. DA%I,PER$ECTO '. GUINOSAO, *A&TER N. TIMO&, MANUE& T. SE&EN, OSCAR DA&UN(A#, RICO O. SU&ATAN,RA$$# MA&INDA, A&$REDO A'I&&ANOS, )ESSIE ANDI&A', MIR&ANDO (. MANG+U&INTAS, SAMIESATURNO, ROMEO A. &INDA(A#, ROE& S. MANSANGCAGAN, PA-UITO S. &IESES, $I&IPE G. SA*A#,(ERMINIA S. SA*A#, )U&IUS S. SA*A#, &EONARDA SA*A#, )IMM# UG#U', SA&%ADOR TIONGSON,%ENANCIO APANG, MADION MA&ID, SU+IM MA&ID, NENENG MA&ID, MANG+ATADONG AUGUSTO DIANO,)OSEP(INE M. A&'ESO, MORENO MA&ID, MARIO MANGCA&, $E&A# DIAMI&ING, SA&OME P. SARZA,$E&IPE P. 'AGON, SAMM# SA&NUNGAN, ANTONIO D. EM'A, NORMA MAPANSAGONOS, ROMEO SA&IGA,SR., )ERSON P. GERADA, RENATO T. 'AGON, )R., SARING MASA&ONG, SO&EDAD M. GERARDA,

E&IZA'ET( &. MENDI, MORANTE S. TI*AN, DANI&O M. MA&UDAO, MINORS MARICE& MA&ID, rere/e!e"b er er CORNE&IO MA&ID, MARCE&INO M. &ADRA, rere/e!e" b er er MONICO D. &ADRA,)ENN#N MA&ID, rere/e!e" b er er TON# MA&ID, ARIE& M. E%ANGE&ISTA, rere/e!e" b ermoer &INA# 'A&'UENA, ED*ARD M. EMU#, SR., SUSAN 'O&ANIO, OND, PU&A 'ATO '4&AAN TRI'A&$ARMER4S ASSOCIATION, INTERPEOP&E4S EC(ANGE, INC. !" GREEN $ORUM*ESTERN%ISA#AS, intervenors.COMMISSION ON (UMAN RIG(TS, intervenor.I+A&A(AN INDIGENOUS PEOP&E !" (ARI'ON $OUNDATION $OR T(E CONSER%ATION O$ NATURA&RESOURCES, INC., intervenor.

R E S O L U T I O N

PER CURIAM:

Petitiones Isa!ani Cu" an# Cesa Euopa bou!ht this suit fo pohibition an# $an#a$us as citi"ens an#ta%pa&es' assailin! the constitutionalit& of cetain povisions of Republic Act No. ()*+ ,R.A. ()*+-' otheise /nonas the In#i!enous Peoples Ri!hts Act of +00* ,IPRA-' an# its I$ple$entin! Rules an# Re!ulations ,I$ple$entin!Rules-.

In its esolution of Septe$be 10' +00(' the Cout e2uie# espon#ents to co$$ent.+In co$pliance' espon#entsChaipeson an# Co$$issiones of the National Co$$ission on In#i!enous Peoples ,NCIP-' the !oven$enta!enc& ceate# un#e the IPRA to i$ple$ent its povisions' file# on Octobe +)' +00( thei Co$$ent to the Petition'in hich the& #efen# the constitutionalit& of the IPRA an# pa& that the petition be #is$isse# fo lac/ of $eit.

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

2/102

On Octobe +0' +00(' espon#ents Seceta& of the 3epat$ent of Envion$ent an# Natual Resouces ,3ENR-an# Seceta& of the 3epat$ent of Bu#!et an# Mana!e$ent ,3BM- file# thou!h the Solicito 4eneal aconsoli#ate# Co$$ent. The Solicito 4eneal is of the vie that the IPRA is patl& unconstitutional on the !oun#that it !ants oneship ove natual esouces to in#i!enous peoples an# pa&s that the petition be !ante# in pat.

On Nove$be +5' +00(' a !oup of intevenos' co$pose# of Sen. 6uan 7lavie' one of the authos of the IPRA' M.Ponciano Benna!en' a $e$be of the +0(8 Constitutional Co$$ission' an# the lea#es an# $e$bes of ++1!oups of in#i!enous peoples ,7lavie' et. al-' file# thei Motion fo Leave to Intevene. The& 9oin the NCIP in#efen#in! the constitutionalit& of IPRA an# pa&in! fo the #is$issal of the petition.

On Mach 11' +000' the Co$$ission on :u$an Ri!hts ,C:R- li/eise file# a Motion to Intevene an#;o to Appeaas A$icus Cuiae. The C:R assets that IPRA is an e%pession of the pinciple of paens patiae an# that the Statehas the esponsibilit& to potect an# !uaantee the i!hts of those ho ae at a seious #isa#vanta!e li/e in#i!enouspeoples. 7o this eason it pa&s that the petition be #is$isse#.

On Mach 1)' +000' anothe !oup' co$pose# of the I/alahan In#i!enous People an# the :aibon 7oun#ation fothe Consevation of Natual Resouces' Inc. ,:aibon' et al.-' file# a $otion to Intevene ith attache# Co$$ent

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

3/102

In a##ition' petitiones 2uestion the povisions of the IPRA #efinin! the poes an# 9uis#iction of the NCIP an#$a/in! custo$a& la applicable to the settle$ent of #isputes involvin! ancestal #o$ains an# ancestal lan#s onthe !oun# that these povisions violate the #ue pocess clause of the Constitution.

These povisions ae?

@,+- sections + to ) an# 0 hich #etail the pocess of #elineation an# eco!nition of ancestal #o$ainsan# hich vest on the NCIP the sole authoit& to #elineate ancestal #o$ains an# ancestal lan#s

@,1- Section 1Di hich povi#es that upon cetification b& the NCIP that a paticula aea is an ancestal#o$ain an# upon notification to the folloin! officials' na$el&' the Seceta& of Envion$ent an# NatualResouces' Seceta& of Inteio an# Local 4oven$ents' Seceta& of 6ustice an# Co$$issione of theNational 3evelop$ent Copoation' the 9uis#iction of sai# officials ove sai# aea te$inates

@,)- Section 8) hich povi#es the custo$a& la' ta#itions an# pactices of in#i!enous peoples shall beapplie# fist ith espect to popet& i!hts' clai$s of oneship' hee#ita& succession an# settle$ent oflan# #isputes' an# that an& #oubt o a$bi!uit& in the intepetation theeof shall be esolve# in favo of thein#i!enous peoples

@,- Section 8 hich states that custo$a& las an# pactices shall be use# to esolve #isputes involvin!in#i!enous peoples an#

@,- Section 88 hich vests on the NCIP the 9uis#iction ove all clai$s an# #isputes involvin! i!hts of thein#i!enous peoples.@

7inall&' petitiones assail the vali#it& of Rule FII' Pat II' Section + of the NCIP A#$inistative O#e No. +' seies of+00(' hich povi#es that @the a#$inistative elationship of the NCIP to the Office of the Pesi#ent is chaactei"e#as a lateal but autono$ous elationship fo puposes of polic& an# po!a$ coo#ination.@ The& conten# that sai#Rule infin!es upon the Pesi#ent=s poe of contol ove e%ecutive #epat$ents un#e Section +*' Aticle FII of theConstitution.8

Petitiones pa& fo the folloin!?

@,+- A #eclaation that Sections )' ' 8' *' (' 1DI' *' (' 0' 8)' 8 an# 88 an# othe elate# povisions ofR.A. ()*+ ae unconstitutional an# invali#

@,1- The issuance of a it of pohibition #iectin! the Chaipeson an# Co$$issiones of the NCIP to ceasean# #esist fo$ i$ple$entin! the assaile# povisions of R.A. ()*+ an# its I$ple$entin! Rules

@,)- The issuance of a it of pohibition #iectin! the Seceta& of the 3epat$ent of Envion$ent an#Natual Resouces to cease an# #esist fo$ i$ple$entin! 3epat$ent of Envion$ent an# NatualResouces Cicula No. 1' seies of +00(

@,- The issuance of a it of pohibition #iectin! the Seceta& of Bu#!et an# Mana!e$ent to cease an##esist fo$ #isbusin! public fun#s fo the i$ple$entation of the assaile# povisions of R.A. ()*+ an#

@,- The issuance of a it of $an#a$us co$$an#in! the Seceta& of Envion$ent an# Natual Resoucesto co$pl& ith his #ut& of ca&in! out the State=s constitutional $an#ate to contol an# supevise thee%ploation' #evelop$ent' utili"ation an# consevation of Philippine natual esouces.@*

Afte #ue #elibeation on the petition' the $e$bes of the Cout vote# as follos?

Seven ,*- vote# to #is$iss the petition. 6ustice Gapunan file# an opinion' hich the Chief 6ustice an# 6usticesBellosillo' Huisu$bin!' an# Santia!o 9oin' sustainin! the vali#it& of the challen!e# povisions of R.A. ()*+. 6usticePuno also file# a sepaate opinion sustainin! all challen!e# povisions of the la ith the e%ception of Section +'Pat II' Rule III of NCIP A#$inistative O#e No. +' seies of +00(' the Rules an# Re!ulations I$ple$entin! theIPRA' an# Section * of the IPRA hich he conten#s shoul# be intepete# as #ealin! ith the la!e

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

4/102

e%ploitation of natual esouces an# shoul# be ea# in con9unction ith Section 1' Aticle >II of the +0(*Constitution. On the othe han#' 6ustice Men#o"a vote# to #is$iss the petition solel& on the !oun# that it #oes notaise a 9usticiable contoves& an# petitiones #o not have stan#in! to 2uestion the constitutionalit& of R.A. ()*+.

Seven ,*- othe $e$bes of the Cout vote# to !ant the petition. 6ustice Pan!aniban file# a sepaate opinione%pessin! the vie that Sections ) ,a-,b-' ' 8' * ,a-,b-' (' an# elate# povisions of R.A. ()*+ ae unconstitutional.:e eseves 9u#!$ent on the constitutionalit& of Sections (' 0' 8' an# 88 of the la' hich he believes $ustaait the filin! of specific cases b& those hose i!hts $a& have been violate# b& the IPRA. 6ustice Fitu! also file#a sepaate opinion e%pessin! the vie that Sections ),a-' *' an# * of R.A. ()*+ ae unconstitutional. 6ustices

Melo' Pa#o' Buena' 4on"a!a

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

5/102

A classic essa& on the 79 o /oras itten in +(* b& 7ie#ich Niet"sche entitle# @On the Uses an#3isa#vanta!es of :isto& fo Life.@ E%poun#in! on Niet"scheJs essa&' 6u#!e Richa# Posne+ote?1

@La is the $ost histoicall& oiente#' o if &ou li/e the $ost bac/a#

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

6/102

). The option of secuin! a toens title to the ancestal lan#

B. The i!ht of oneship an# possession b& the ICCs;IPs to thei ancestal #o$ains is a li$ite# fo$ ofoneship an# #oes not inclu#e the i!ht to alienate the sa$e.

+. The in#i!enous concept of oneship an# custo$a& la

C. Sections * ,a-' * ,b- an# * of the IPRA #o not violate the Re!alian 3octine enshine# in Section 1'Aticle >II of the +0(* Constitution.

+. The i!hts of ICCs;IPs ove thei ancestal #o$ains an# lan#s

1. The i!ht of ICCs;IPs to #evelop lan#s an# natual esouces ithin the ancestal #o$ains #oesnot #epive the State of oneship ove the natual esouces' contol an# supevision in thei#evelop$ent an# e%ploitation.

,a- Section +' Pat II' Rule III of the I$ple$entin! Rules !oes be&on# the paa$etes ofSection *,a- of the la on oneship of ancestal #o$ains an# is ultra vires.

,b- The s$all

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

7/102

The Philippines passe# to Spain b& vitue of @#iscove&@ an# con2uest. Conse2uentl&' all lan#s beca$e thee%clusive pati$on& an# #o$inion of the Spanish Con. The Spanish 4oven$ent too/ cha!e of #istibutin! thelan#s b& issuin! o&al !ants an# concessions to Spania#s' both $ilita& an# civilian. Pivate lan# titles coul# onl&be ac2uie# fo$ the !oven$ent eithe b& puchase o b& the vaious $o#es of lan# !ant fo$ the Con. 8

The Las of the In#ies ee folloe# b& the Ley Hipotecaria' or e Mor::e &< o 18?3.*The SpanishMot!a!e La povi#e# fo the s&ste$atic e!istation of titles an# #ee#s as ell as possesso& clai$s. The lasou!ht to e!iste an# ta% lan#s pusuant to the Ro&al 3ecee of +((5. The Ro&al 3ecee of +(0' o the @MauaLa'@ as patl& an a$en#$ent of the Mot!a!e La as ell as the Las of the In#ies' as alea#& a$en#e# b&

pevious o#es an# #ecees.(This as the last Spanish lan# la po$ul!ate# in the Philippines. It e2uie# the@a#9ust$ent@ o e!istation of all a!icultual lan#s' otheise the lan#s shall evet to the state.

7ou &eas late' b& the Tre o Pr/ o December 10, 18?8' Spain ce#e# to the !oven$ent of the Unite#States all i!hts' inteests an# clai$s ove the national teito& of the Philippine Islan#s. In +05)' the Unite# Statescolonial !oven$ent' thou!h the Philippine Co$$ission' passe# Ac No. ?26, e r/ P7b9c &!" Ac.

'. %9e!o! >. M7rc!o

In +05' un#e the A$eican e!i$e' this Cout #eci#e# the case of Valenton v. Murciano.0

Valentonesolve# the 2uestion of hich is the bette basis fo oneship of lan#? lon!

The pea$ble state# that all those lan#s hich ha# not been !ante# b& Philip' o in his na$e' o b& the /in!s hopece#e# hi$' belon!e# to the Con.+)7o those lan#s !ante# b& the /in!' the #ecee povi#e# fo a s&ste$ ofassi!n$ent of such lan#s. It also o#ee# that all possessos of a!icultual lan# shoul# e%hibit thei title #ee#'otheise' the lan# oul# be estoe# to the Con.+

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

8/102

The Ro&al Ce#ula of Octobe +' +* einfoce# the Recopilacionhen it o#ee# the ConJs pincipalsub#ele!ate to issue a !eneal o#e #iectin! the publication of the ConJs instuctions?

@% % % to the en# that an& an# all pesons ho' since the &ea +*55' an# up to the #ate of the po$ul!ation an#publication of sai# o#e' shall have occupie# o&al lan#s' hethe o not % % % cultivate# o tenante#' $a& % % %appea an# e%hibit to sai# sub#ele!ates the titles an# patents b& vitue of hich sai# lan#s ae occupie#. % % %. Sai#sub#ele!ates ill at the sa$e ti$e an the paties inteeste# that in case of thei failue to pesent thei title #ee#sithin the te$ #esi!nate#' ithout a 9ust an# vali# eason theefo' the& ill be #epive# of an# evicte# fo$ theilan#s' an# the& ill be !ante# to othes.@+

On 6une 1' +((5' the Con a#opte# e!ulations fo the a#9ust$ent of lan#s @on!full& occupie#@ b& pivatein#ivi#uals in the Philippine Islan#s. Valentonconstue# these e!ulations to!ethe ith conte$poaneousle!islative an# e%ecutive intepetations of the la' an# conclu#e# that plaintiffsJ case fae# no bette un#e the +((5#ecee an# othe las hich folloe# it' than it #i# un#e the ealie ones. Thus as a !eneal #octine' the Coutstate#?

@Khile the State has ala&s eco!ni"e# the i!ht of the occupant to a #ee# if he poves a possession fo a sufficientlen!th of ti$e' &et it / 9eocer/, !" ob! rom em / "ee", !" 7!9 e "" e Se rem!e" e b/o97e o

In conclusion' the Cout ule#? @Ke hol# that fo$ +(85 to +(01 thee as no la in foce in these Islan#s b& hich

the plaintiffs coul# obtain the oneship of these lan#s b& pesciption' ithout an& action b& the State.@+*

Falentonha# no i!hts othe than those hich accue# to $ee possession. Muciano' on the othe han#' as #ee$e# to bethe one of the lan# b& vitue of the !ant b& the povincial seceta&. In effect' Falenton uphel# the Spanishconcept of state oneship of public lan#.

As a fittin! obsevation' the Cout a##e# that =Be o9c 7r/7e" b e S!/ Go>er!me! rom er9e/me/, re7r!: /e9er/ o! e 7b9c 9!"/ o ob! 9e "ee"/ ereor rom e Se, / bee!co!!7e" b e Amerc! Go>er!me! ! Ac No. ?26.@+(

C. Te P7b9c &!" Ac/ !" e Torre!/ S/em

Ac No. ?26' the fist Public Lan# Act' as passe# in pusuance of the povisions of the the Philippine Bill of +051.

The la !ovene# the #isposition of lan#s of the public #o$ain. It pescibe# ules an# e!ulations fo theho$estea#in!' sellin!' an# leasin! of potions of the public #o$ain of the Philippine Islan#s' an# pescibe# thete$s an# con#itions to enable pesons to pefect thei titles to public lan#s in the Islan#s. It also povi#e# fo the@issuance of patents to cetain native settles upon public lan#s'@ fo the establish$ent of ton sites an# sale of lotstheein' fo the co$pletion of i$pefect titles' an# fo the cancellation o confi$ation of Spanish concessions an#!ants in the Islan#s.@ In shot' the Public Lan# Act opeate# on the assu$ption that title to public lan#s in thePhilippine Islan#s e$aine# in the !oven$ent+0an# that the !oven$entJs title to public lan# spun! fo$ theTeat& of Pais an# othe subse2uent teaties beteen Spain an# the Unite# States.15The te$ @public lan#@efee# to all lan#s of the public #o$ain hose title still e$aine# in the !oven$ent an# ae thon open to pivateappopiation an# settle$ent'1+an# e%clu#e# the pati$onial popet& of the !oven$ent an# the fia lan#s. 11

Ac No. ?26

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

9/102

the one of the popet& #escibe# theein' sub9ect to such liens an# encu$bances as theeon note# o the laaants o eseves.18The cetificate of title is in#efeasible an# i$pesciptible an# all clai$s to the pacel of lan#ae 2uiete# upon issuance of sai# cetificate. This s&ste$ hi!hl& facilitates lan# conve&ance an# ne!otiation. 1*

D. Te P9!e Co!/7o!/

The Re!alian #octine as enshine# in the 1?35 Co!/7o!. One of the fi%e# an# #o$inatin! ob9ectives of the+0) Constitutional Convention as the nationali"ation an# consevation of the natual esouces of thecount&.1(Tere ere!o! ! >or o e r!c9e o /e

o

@#e!. 1. A99 :rc797r9, mber, !" m!er9 9!"/ o e 7b9c "om!, IF on the @National Econo$& an# thePati$on& of the Nation'@ to it?

@#e!. $. A99 9!"/ o e 7b9c "om!,

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

10/102

Si$pl& state#' all 9!"/ o e 7b9c "om! /

< the i!ht to #evelop lan#s an# natual esouces

< the i!ht to sta& in the teitoies

< the i!ht in case of #isplace$ent

< the i!ht to safe an# clean ai an# ate

< the i!ht to clai$ pats of esevations

< the i!ht to esolve conflict)1

< the i!ht to ancestal lan#s hich inclu#e

a. the i!ht to tansfe lan#;popet& to;a$on! $e$bes of the sa$e ICCs;IPs' sub9ect to custo$a&las an# ta#itions of the co$$unit& concene#

b. the i!ht to e#e$ption fo a peio# not e%cee#in! + &eas fo$ #ate of tansfe' if the tansfe isto a non

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

11/102

An& peson ho violates an& of the povisions of the Act such as' but not li$ite# to' unauthoi"e# an#;o unlafulintusion upon ancestal lan#s an# #o$ains shall be punishe# in acco#ance ith custo$a& las o i$pisone#fo$ 0 $onths to +1 &eas an#;o fine# fo$ P+55'555.55 to P55'555.55 an# obli!e# to pa& #a$a!es.5

A. I!":e!o7/ Peo9e/

The IPRA is a la #ealin! ith a specific !oup of people' i.e.' the In#i!enous Cultual Co$$unities ,ICCs- o theIn#i!enous Peoples ,IPs-. The te$ @ICCs@ is use# in the +0(* Constitution hile that of @IPs@ is the conte$poa&intenational lan!ua!e in the Intenational Labo O!ani"ation ,ILO- Convention +80+an# the Unite# Nations ,UN-

3aft 3eclaation on the Ri!hts of In#i!enous Peoples. 1

ICCs"IPsae #efine# b& the IPRA as?

@#e!. % &h'. Indigenous (ultural (ounities) Indigenous *eoples< efe to a !oup of people o ho$o!eneoussocieties i#entifie# b& self

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

12/102

8. In Re!ion FII< Ma!ahat of Ne!os Oiental an# Es/a&a of Bohol.

*. In Re!ion I>< the Ba#9ao nu$bein! about +01'555 in TaiI< Thee ae about +'**'58 IPs in Re!ion >I. The& ae tibes of the 3ibabaon' Mansa/a of3avao #el Note BJlaan' Gala!an' Lan!ila#' TJboli an# Talain!o# of 3avao #el Su Ma$a$anua of Sui!ao#el Su Man#a&a of the Sui!ao povinces an# 3avao Oiental Manobo Blit of South Cotabato theMan!!uan!on of 3avao an# South Cotabato Mati!salo! of 3avao #el Note an# 3el Su Ta!a/aolo'Tasa#a& an# Ubo of South Cotabato an# Ba!obo of 3avao #el su an# South Cotabato.

+5. In Re!ion >II< Ilianen' Tiua&' Ma!uin#anao' Maanao' Tausu!' a/an;Sa$al' an# Ianon.)

(o< e/e !":e!o7/ eo9e/ cme o 9>e ! e P9!e/ :oe/ bc o / er9 / 25,000 o 30,000 '.C.

'eore e me o *e/er! co!c,the Philippine achipela!o as people# la!el& b& the Ne!itos' In#onesians

an# Mala&s.The stains fo$ these !oups eventuall& !ave ise to co$$on cultual featues hich beca$e the#o$inant influence in ethnic efo$ulation in the achipela!o. Influences fo$ the Chinese an# In#ian civili"ations inthe thi# o fouth $illeniu$ B.C. au!$ente# these ethnic stains. Chinese econo$ic an# socio

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

13/102

usu&' loans' patneship' ci$e an# punish$ent' popet& i!hts' fa$il& elations an# a#option. Kheneve #isputesaose' these ee #eci#e# peacefull& thou!h a cout co$pose# b& the chieftain as @9u#!e@ an# the baan!a& el#esas @9u&.@ Conflicts aisin! beteen sub9ects of #iffeent baan!a&s ee esolve# b& abitation in hich a boa#co$pose# of el#es fo$ neutal baan!a&s acte# as abites.*

'r!:!c /oce " "/!:7/!: e7re e b/e!ce o r>e roer ! 9!". The chiefs $eel&a#$inistee# the lan#s in the na$e of the baan!a&. The social o#e as an e%tension of the fa$il& ith chiefse$bo#&in! the hi!he unit& of the co$$unit&. Each in#ivi#ual' theefoe' paticipate# in the co$$unit& oneship ofthe soil an# the instu$ents of po#uction as a $e$be of the baan!a&.(This ancient co$$unalis$ as pactice#

in acco#ance ith the concept of $utual shain! of esouces so that no in#ivi#ual' e!a#less of status' asithout sustenance. Oe9ome! o 9!"/.0Maine esouces an# fishin! !oun#s ee li/eise fee to all. Coastalco$$unities #epen#e# fo thei econo$ic elfae on the /in# of fishin! shain! concept si$ila to those in lan#co$$unities.85Reco!ni"e# lea#es' such as the chieftains an# el#es' b& vitue of thei positions of i$potance'en9o&e# so$e econo$ic pivile!es an# benefits. But thei i!hts' elate# to eithe lan# an# sea' ee sub9ect to theiesponsibilit& to potect the co$$unities fo$ #an!e an# to povi#e the$ ith the lea#eship an# $eans ofsuvival.8+

Someme ! e 13 ce!7r, I/9m

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

14/102

Inceasin! thei foothol# in the Philippines' the Spanish colonialists' civil an# eli!ious' classifie# the 7ilipinosacco#in! to thei eli!ious pactices an# beliefs' an# #ivi#e# the$ into thee t&pes . 7ist ee the I!"o/,theChistiani"e# 7ilipinos' ho !eneall& ca$e fo$ the lolan# populations. Secon#' ee the Moro/o the Musli$co$$unities' an# thi#' ee the !e9e/o the !":e!o7/ comm7!e/.*

The I!"oas a po#uct of the a#vent of Spanish cultue. This class as favoe# b& the Spania#s an# as alloe#cetain status althou!h belo the Spania#s. The Moro/ an# !e9e/ee e!a#e# as the loest classes. *8

Te Moro/ !" !e9e/ re//e" S!/ r79e !" Cr/!. The Moos ee #iven fo$ Manila an# the

Fisa&as to Min#anao

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

15/102

The polic& of assi$ilation an# inte!ation #i# not &iel# the #esie# esult. &e e S!r"/ !" Amerc!/,:o>er!me! em/ !e:ro! me /er o! No!9 M!ore/PANAMINJ.The PANAMINas tas/e# to inte!ate the ethnic !oups that sou!ht full inte!ation into the la!eco$$unit&' an# at the sa$e ti$e @potect the i!hts of those ho ish to peseve thei oi!inal lifea&s besi#e thela!e co$$unit&.@(0I! /or,

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

16/102

cultue. The political s&ste$s ee still stuctue# on the patiachal an# /inship oiente# aan!e$ent of poe an#authoit&. The econo$ic activities ee !ovene# b& the concepts of an ancient co$$unalis$ an# $utual help. Thesocial stuctue hich e$phasi"e# #ivision of labo an# #istinction of functions' not status' as $aintaine#. Thecultual st&les an# fo$s of life pota&in! the vaieties of social coutesies an# ecolo!ical a#9ust$ents ee /eptconstantl& vibant.0(

&!" / e ce!r9 e9eme! o e !":e!o7/ eo9e/4 e@/e!ce.Thee is no ta#itional concept of pe$anent'in#ivi#ual' lan# oneship. A$on! the I!oots' oneship of lan# $oe accuatel& applies to the tibal i!ht to usethe lan# o to teitoial contol. The people ae the secon#a& ones o stea#s of the lan# an# that if a $e$be

of the tibe ceases to o/' he loses his clai$ of oneship' an# the lan# evets to the bein!s of the spiit ol# hoae its tue an# pi$a& ones. Un#e the concept of @tusteeship'@ the i!ht to possess the lan# #oes not onl&belon! to the pesent !eneation but the futue ones as ell.00

C7/omr 9< o! 9!"ests on the ta#itional belief that no one ons the lan# e%cept the !o#s an# spiits' an#that those ho o/ the lan# ae its $ee stea#s.+55C7/omr 9< / /ro!: reere!ce or comm7!9o

$easues efee# to the Co$$ittees on Cultual Co$$unities' Envion$ent an# Natual Resouces' Ka&s an#Means' as ell as 7inance. It a#opte# al$ost en toto the co$pehensive vesion of Senate Bill Nos. +*8 an# +(8hich as a esult of /@ re:o!9 co!/79o!/ !" o!e !o!9 co!/79o!

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

17/102

esettle$ent of people to thei ancestal lan#' hich as $assive #uin! the Co$$onealth an# eal& &eas of thePhilippine Republic. Pusuant to the Re!alian 3octine fist into#uce# to ou s&ste$ b& Spain thou!h the Ro&al3ecee of +) 7ebua& +(0 o the Maua La' the !oven$ent passe# las to le!iti$i"e the holesalelan#!abbin! an# povi#e fo eas& titlin! o !ant of lan#s to $i!ant ho$estea#es ithin the ta#itional aeas of theICCs.@+50

Senato 7lavie futhe #eclae#?

@The IPs ae the offspin!s an# heis of the peoples ho have fist inhabite# an# cae# fo the lan# lon! befoe an&

cental !oven$ent as establishe#. Thei ancestos ha# teitoies ove hich the& ule# the$selves an# elate#ith othe tibes. These teitoies< the lan#< inclu#e people' thei #ellin!' the $ountains' the ate' the ai' plants'foest an# the ani$als. This is thei envion$ent in its totalit&. Thei e%istence as in#i!enous peoples is $anifeste#in thei on lives thou!h political' econo$ic' socio

(o7/e '99 No. ?125as sponsoe# b& Re. Z,Chai$an of the Co$$ittee on Cultual Co$$unities. It asoi!inall& authoe# an# subse2uentl& pesente# an# #efen#e# on the floo b& Re. Gre:oro A!"o9!of NothCotabato.++)

Rep. An#olanaJs sponsohip speech ea#s as follos?

@This Repesentation' as eal& as in the (th Con!ess' file# a bill of si$ila i$plications that oul# po$ote'eco!ni"e the i!hts of in#i!enous cultual co$$unities ithin the fa$eo/ of national unit& an# #evelop$ent.

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

18/102

Apat fo$ this' M. Spea/e' is ou obli!ation' the !oven$entJs obli!ation to assue an# ascetain that these i!htsshall be ell

In#i!enous Peoples Ri!ht Act' vi?

&'ec. ( a) Ancestral *omains. < Sub9ect to Section 8 heeof' efe to all aeas !eneall& belon!in! to ICCs;IPsco$pisin! lan#s' inlan# ates' coastal aeas' an# natual esouces theein' hel# un#e a clai$ of oneship'occupie# o possesse# b& ICCs;IPs b& the$selves o thou!h thei ancestos' co$$unall& o in#ivi#uall& since ti$ei$$e$oial' continuousl& to the pesent e%cept hen inteupte# b& a' foce $a9eue o #isplace$ent b& foce'#eceit' stealth o as a conse2uence of !oven$ent po9ects o an& othe volunta& #ealin!s entee# into b&!oven$ent an# pivate in#ivi#uals;copoations' an# hich ae necessa& to ensue thei econo$ic' social an#cultual elfae. It shall inclu#e ancestal lan#s' foests' pastue' esi#ential' a!icultual' an# othe lan#s in#ivi#uall&one# hethe alienable an# #isposable o otheise' huntin! !oun#s' buial !oun#s' oship aeas' bo#ies ofate' $ineal an# othe natual esouces' an# lan#s hich $a& no lon!e be e%clusivel& occupie# b& ICCs;IPs butfo$ hich the& ta#itionall& ha# access to fo thei subsistence an# ta#itional activities' paticulal& the ho$e

an!es of ICCs;IPs ho ae still no$a#ic an#;o shiftin! cultivatos

+) Ancestral Lands.< Sub9ect to Section 8 heeof' efes to lan# occupie#' possesse# an# utili"e# b& in#ivi#uals'fa$ilies an# clans ho ae $e$bes of the ICCs;IPs since ti$e i$$e$oial' b& the$selves o thou!h theipe#ecessos

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

19/102

The poce#ues fo clai$in! ancestal #o$ains an# lan#s ae si$ila to the poce#ues e$bo#ie# in 3epat$entA#$inistative O#e ,3AO- No. 1' seies of +00)' si!ne# b& then Seceta& of the 3epat$ent of Envion$ent an#Natual Resouces ,3ENR- An!el Alcala.++(3AO No. 1 alloe# the #elineation of ancestal #o$ains b& special tas/foces an# ensue# the issuance of Cetificates of Ancestal Lan# Clai$s ,CALCJs- an# Cetificates of Ancestal3o$ain Clai$s ,CA3CJs- to IPs.

The i#entification an# #elineation of these ancestal #o$ains an# lan#s is a poe confee# b& the IPRA on theNational Co$$ission on In#i!enous Peoples ,NCIP-.++0The !ui#in! pinciple in i#entification an# #elineation is self!ce o 'e!:7e :e rbe !e>er e :r!e" o !o!e ! ro>!cee re:/ro! o

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

22/102

that' in the vie of the Unite# States' he ha# lost all i!hts an# as a $ee tespasse hen the pesent !oven$entsei"e# his lan#. The a!u$ent to that effect see$s to a$ount to a #enial of !>e 9e/thou!h an i$potant patof the Islan# of Lu"on' at least' fo the ant of cee$onies hich the Spania#s oul# not have pe$itte# an# ha#not the poe to enfoce.@+

This is the onl& instance hen 6ustice :ol$es use# the te$ @native title@ in the entie len!th of the Cari$o#ecision.It is obseve# that the i#espea# use of the te$ @native title@ $a& be tace# to Pofesso Oen 6a$es L&nch' 6.'a Fisitin! Pofesso at the Univesit& of the Philippines Colle!e of La fo$ the ale Univesit& La School. In +0(1'Pof. L&nch publishe# an aticle in the P9!e &< )o7r!9 entitle# ,ative -itle Private Ri#/t and -ri+al

Land La0.+8This aticle as $a#e afte Pofesso L&nch visite# ove thit& tibal co$$unities thou!hout thecount& an# stu#ie# the oi!in an# #evelop$ent of Philippine lan# las.+*:e #iscusse# Cari$oe%tensivel& an# use#the te$ @native title@ to efe to CaioJs title as #iscusse# an# uphel# b& the U.S. Supe$e Cout in sai# case.

,b- In#ian Title

In a footnote in the sa$e aticle' Pofesso L&nch state# that the concept of @native title@ as #efine# b& 6ustice:ol$es in (ari-o@is conceptuall& si$ila to @aboi!inal title@ of the A$eican In#ians.+(This is not supisin!'acco#in! to Pof. L&nch' consi#ein! that #uin! the A$eican e!i$e' !oven$ent polic& toa#s ICCs;IPs asconsistentl& $a#e in efeence to native A$eicans.+0This as cleal& #e$onstate# in the case of Ru+i v.Provincial 1oard o2 Mindoro.+5

In Ru+i' the Povincial Boa# of Min#oo a#opte# a Resolution authoi"in! the povincial !oveno to e$ove theMan!&ans fo$ thei #o$ains an# place the$ in a pe$anent esevation in Sitio Ti!bao' La/e Nau9an. An&Man!&an ho efuse# to co$pl& as to be i$pisone#. Rubi an# so$e Man!&ans' inclu#in! one ho asi$pisone# fo t&in! to escape fo$ the esevation' file# fo habeas copus clai$in! #epivation of libet& un#e theBoa# Resolution. This Cout #enie# the petition on the !oun# of police poe. It uphel# !oven$ent polic&po$otin! the i#ea that a pe$anent settle$ent as the onl& successful $etho# fo e#ucatin! the Man!&ans'into#ucin! civili"e# custo$s' i$povin! thei health an# $oals' an# potectin! the public foests in hich the&oa$e#.++Spea/in! thou!h 6ustice Malcol$' the cout sai#?

@Refeence as $a#e in the Pesi#entJs instuctions to the Co$$ission to the polic& a#opte# b& the Unite# Statesfo the In#ian Tibes. The $etho#s folloe# b& the 4oven$ent of the Philippine Islan#s in its #ealin!s ith the soo!/. I 9/o co>er/ e =bor:!9 r:o o//e//o! or occ7!c.=+8The aboi!inal i!ht of possession #epen#s on the actual occupanc& of the lan#sin 2uestion b& the tibe o nation as thei ancestal ho$e' in the sense that such lan#s constitute #efinable teito&occupie# e%clusivel& b& the paticula tibe o nation. +*It is a i!ht hich e%ists apat fo$ an& teat&' statute' oothe !oven$ental action' althou!h in nu$eous instances teaties have been ne!otiate# ith In#ian tibes'eco!ni"in! thei aboi!inal possession an# #eli$itin! thei occupanc& i!hts o settlin! an# a#9ustin! theiboun#aies.+(

Amerc! ;7r/r7"e!ce reco:!e/ e I!"!/4 or !>e Amerc!/4 r:/ o 9!" e >e e9" !"

occ7e" beore e ="/co>er= o e Amerc/ b e E7roe!/. Te er9e/ "e!>e /eme! b eU.S. S7reme Co7r o! e !7re o bor:!9 9e er :>e/ 9e o e :o>er!me! b er!me!/, er!me! e@e!"/ o e com9ee 79me 9e, cr:e"

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

24/102

The Jo/nson#octine as a co$po$ise. It potecte# In#ian i!hts an# thei native lan#s ithout havin! toinvali#ate conve&ances $a#e b& the !oven$ent to $an& U.S. citi"ens.+8

Jo/nsonas eiteate# in the case of 6orcester v. %eor#ia.+8In this case' the State of 4eo!ia enacte# a lae2uiin! all hite pesons esi#in! ithin the Cheo/ee nation to obtain a license o pe$it fo$ the 4oveno of4eo!ia an# an& violation of the la as #ee$e# a hi!h $is#e$eano. The plaintiffs' ho ee hite $issionaies'#i# not obtain sai# license an# ee thus cha!e# ith a violation of the Act.

The U.S. Supe$e Cout #eclae# the Act as unconstitutional fo intefein! ith the teaties establishe# beteen

the Unite# States an# the Cheo/ee nation as ell as the Acts of Con!ess e!ulatin! intecouse ith the$. Itchaactei"e# the elationship beteen the Unite# States !oven$ent an# the In#ians as?

@The In#ian nations ee' fo$ thei situation' necessail& #epen#ent on so$e foei!n potentate fo the suppl& ofthei essential ants' an# fo thei potection fo$ laless an# in9uious intusions into thei count&. That poe asnatuall& te$e# thei potecto. The& ha# been aan!e# un#e the potection of 4eat Bitain but thee%tin!uish$ent of the Bitish poe in thei nei!hbohoo#' an# the establish$ent of that of the Unite# States in itsplace' le# natuall& to the #eclaation' on the pat of the Cheo/ees' that the& ee un#e the potection of theUnite# States' an# of no othe poe. The& assu$e# the elation ith the Unite# States hich ha# befoe subsiste#ith 4eat Bitain.

This elation as that of a nation clai$in! an# eceivin! the potection of one $oe poeful' not that of in#ivi#uals

aban#onin! thei national chaacte' an# sub$ittin! as sub9ects to the las of a $aste.@+88

It as the polic& of the U.S. !oven$ent to teat the In#ians as nations ith #istinct teitoial boun#aies an#eco!ni"e thei i!ht of occupanc& ove all the lan#s ithin thei #o$ains. Thus?

@7o$ the co$$ence$ent of ou !oven$ent Con!ess has passe# acts to e!ulate ta#e an# intecouse ith theIn#ians hich teat the$ as nations' espect thei i!hts' an# $anifest a fi$ pupose to affo# that potection hichteaties stipulate. All these acts' an# especiall& that of +(51' hich is still in foce' $anifestl& consi#e e /e>er9I!"! !o!/ / "/!c o9c9 comm7!e/, >!: error9 bo7!"re/,

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

25/102

A/ er9 / e 1? ce!7r, becme ccee" "ocr!e 9o7: ee 9e o e 9!"/ occ7e" b eI!"!/ e" becme >e/e" ! e /o>ere:! r/ e "/co>er!: E7roe! !o!!" 9er e or:!9 13 Se/ !" e U!e" Se/ r: o occ7!c ! e I!"! rbe/ ere9e// reco:!e".The 7e#eal 4oven$ent continue# the polic& of espectin! the In#ian i!ht ofoccupanc&' so$eti$es calle# In#ian title' hich it acco#e# the potection of co$plete oneship.+*+But thisaboi!inal In#ian inteest si$pl& constitutes @pe$ission@ fo$ the hites to occup& the lan#' an# $eans $eepossession not specificall& eco!ni"e# as oneship b& Con!ess. +*1It is clea that this i!ht of occupanc& base#upon aboi!inal possession is not a popet& i!ht.+*)It is vulneable to affi$ative action b& the fe#eal !oven$entho' as soveei!n' possesse# e%clusive poe to e%tin!uish the i!ht of occupanc& at ill. +*T7/, bor:!9 9e

/ !o e /me / 9e:9 9e.Aboi!inal title ests on actual' e%clusive an# continuous use an# occupanc& fo alon! ti$e.+*It entails that lan# one# b& In#ian title $ust be use# ithin the tibe' sub9ect to its las an# custo$s'an# cannot be sol# to anothe soveei!n !oven$ent no to an& citi"en. +*8Such title as In#ians have to possess an#occup& lan# is in the tibe' an# not in the in#ivi#ual In#ian the i!ht of in#ivi#ual In#ians to shae in the tibalpopet& usuall& #epen#s upon tibal $e$beship' the popet& of the tibe !eneall& bein! hel# in co$$unaloneship.+**

As a ule' In#ian lan#s ae not inclu#e# in the te$ @public lan#s'@ hich is o#inail& use# to #esi!nate such lan#sas ae sub9ect to sale o othe #isposal un#e !eneal las. +*(In#ian lan# hich has been aban#one# is #ee$e# tofall into the public #o$ain.+*0On the othe han#' an In#ian esevation is a pat of the public #o$ain set apat fo theuse an# occupation of a tibe of In#ians.+(5Once set apat b& pope authoit&' the esevation ceases to be publiclan#' an# until the In#ian title is e%tin!uishe#' no one but Con!ess can initiate an& pefeential i!ht on' o estictthe nationJs poe to #ispose of' the$.+(+

Te Amerc! ;7"cr /r7::9e" or more ! 200 er/ e 9e. Te 9o!: 9!e oc/e/ c!: Cari$o"" !o o7c o! !>e 9e !" e r>e crcer o !ce/r9 "om!/ !"9!"/. Cari$oe re/cro! 7!"er

e P7b9c &!" Ac

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

26/102

C/o' hoeve' as #eci#e# un#e the povisions of the Public Lan# Act an# Cari$oas cite# to suppot theapplicantJs clai$ of ac2uisitive pesciption un#e the sai# Act.

All these &eas' Cari$oha# been 2uote# out of conte%t si$pl& to 9ustif& lon!' continuous' open an# a#vesepossession in the concept of one of public a!icultual lan#. It is this lon!' continuous' open an# a#vesepossession in the concept of one of thit& &eas both fo o#ina& citi"ens+0an# $e$bes of the national cultual$inoities+0that convets the lan# fo$ public into pivate an# entitles the e!istant to a toens cetificate of title.

3J Te Oo! o Sec7r!: Torre!/ T9e o e A!ce/r9 &!" I!"ce/ e &!" / Pr>e.

The pivate chaacte of ancestal lan#s an# #o$ains as lai# #on in the IPRA is futhe /re!:e!e"b& theoption !iven to in#ivi#ual ICCs;IPs ove thei in#ivi#uall&e, e ICCHIP 9 o e be!e/ o C.A. 1F1 !" Ac F?6, e IPRA /e9 co!>er/ / !ce/r9 9!",re:r"9e// o

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

27/102

The option to e!iste lan# un#e the Public Lan# Act an# the Lan# Re!istation Act has nonetheless a li$ite#peio#. This option $ust be e%ecise# ithin tent& ,15- &eas fo$ Octobe 10' +00*' the #ate of appoval of theIPRA.

T7/, !ce/r9 9!"/ !" !ce/r9 "om!/ re !o r o e 9!"/ o e 7b9c "om!. Te re r>e!" be9o!: o e ICC/HIP/. Seco! 3 o Arc9e IIon National Econo$& an# Pati$on& of the +0(* Constitutionclassifies lan#s of the public #o$ain into fou cate!oies? ,a- a!icultual' ,b- foest o ti$be' ,c- $ineal lan#s' an#,#- national pa/s. Seco!5of the /me Arc9eII$entions ancestal lan#s an# ancestal #o$ains but it #oesnot classif& the$ un#e an& of the sai# fou cate!oies. To c9// em / 7b9c 9!"/ 7!"er ! o!e o e

o7r c9//e/

'. Te r: o o

Re!istation un#e the Public Lan# Act an# Lan# Re!istation Act eco!ni"es the concept of oneship un#ethec>9 9

cJ Member/ o e !o!9 c797r9 m!ore/ e/ or ro7: er re"ece//or/!!ere/ >e bee! ! oe!, co!!7o7/, e@c97/>e !" !ooro7/ o//e//o! !" occ7o! o

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

28/102

9!"/ o e 7b9c "om! /7b9e o :rc797re, 9 9

Oneship of ancestal #o$ains b& native title #oes not entitle the ICC;IP to a toens title but to a Cetificate ofAncestal 3o$ain Title ,CA3T-. The CA3T fo$all& eco!ni"es the !":e!o7/ concept of oneship of theICCs;IPs ove thei ancestal #o$ain. Thus?

@#e!. 3. Indigenous !on!ept of ownership.< In#i!enous concept of oneship sustains the vie that ancestal#o$ains an# all esouces foun# theein shall seve as the $ateial bases of thei cultual inte!it&. The in#i!enousconcept of oneship !eneall& hol#s that ancestal #o$ains ae the ICCs;IPs pivate but co$$unit& popet& hichbelon!s to all !eneations an# theefoe cannot be sol#' #ispose# o #esto&e#. It li/eise coves sustainableta#itional esouce i!hts.@

Te r: o o

r>e b7 comm7! roer. I / r>e /m9 bec7/e / !o r o e 7b9c "om!. '7 /r>e crcer e!"/ ere. Te !ce/r9 "om! / oer, re !o e@c9 e /me / coo

Comm7!9 r:/ o e 9!" re e9" !o o!9 b e re/e! o//e//or/ o e 9!" b7 e@e!"/ o 99:e!ero!/ o e ICC/HIP/, /, re/e! !" 77re, o e "om!.This is the eason h& the ancestal#o$ain $ust be /ept ithin the ICCs;IPs the$selves. The #o$ain cannot be tansfee#' sol# o conve&e# to othepesons. It belon!s to the ICCs;IPs as a co$$unit&.

A!ce/r9 9!"/ re 9/o e9" 7!"er e !":e!o7/ co!ce o o

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

29/102

7olloin! the constitutional $an#ate that @custo$a& la !oven popet& i!hts o elations in #ete$inin! theoneship an# e%tent of ancestal #o$ains'@1+8e IPRA, b 9e:/9>e , !ro"7ce/ !e< co!ce oo

C7/om, rom 9 Co"e / /o7rce o9

@#e!. 5. Rights to 0n!estral oains.< The i!hts of oneship an# possession of ICCs;IPs to thei ancestal#o$ains shall be eco!ni"e# an# potecte#. Such i!hts inclu#e?

a6 Right of wnership.< The i!ht to clai$ oer 9!"/, bo"e/ o eme!/ m"e b emat an& ti$e ithin the #o$ains

+6 Right to evelop Lands and Natural Resour!es.< S7b;ec o Seco! 56 ereo, e r: o "e>e9o,co!ro9 !" 7/e 9!"/ !" errore/ r"o!99 occ7e", oro!me!9 roeco! !" eco!/er>o! me/7re/, 7r/7! o !o!9 !" c7/omr 9

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

30/102

!6 Right to #ta" in the Territories.< The i!ht to sta& in the teito& an# not to be e$ove# theefo$. NoICCs;IPs ill be elocate# ithout thei fee an# pio info$e# consent' no thou!h an& $eans othe thane$inent #o$ain. % % %

d6 Right in (ase of ispla!eent.< In case #isplace$ent occus as a esult of natual catastophes' theState shall en#eavo to esettle the #isplace# ICCs;IPs in suitable aeas hee the& can have te$poa& lifesuppot s&ste$s?7 7 78

e6 Right to Regulate the 9ntr" of :igrants.< Ri!ht to e!ulate the ent& of $i!ant settles an# o!ani"ations

into thei #o$ains

f6 Right to #afe and (lean 0ir and ;ater.

ICCs;IPs also the i!ht to tansfe the lan# o popet& i!hts to $e$bes of the sa$e ICCs;IPs o non

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

31/102

@#e!. 2. A99 9!"/ o e 7b9c "om!, e!7re, or ro"7co!/r!: :reeme!/

!oth an# !eneal elfae of the count&. In such a!ee$ents' the state shall po$ote the #evelop$ent an# use oflocal scientific an# technical esouces.

The Pesi#ent shall notif& the Con!ess of eve& contact entee# into in acco#ance ith this povision' ithin thita&s fo$ its e%ecution.@11)

A99 9!"/ o e 7b9c "om! !" 99 !7r9 re/o7rce/ates' $ineals' coal' petoleu$' an# othe $inealoils' all foces of potential ene!&' fisheies' foests o ti$be' il#life' floa an# fauna' an# othe natualesouces< re o

+. The State $a& #iectl& un#eta/e such activities o

1. The State $a& ente into co

e@9oro!, "e>e9ome! !" 79o! o e/e !7r9 re/o7rce/. The State $a& #iectl& un#eta/e thee%ploitation an# #evelop$ent b& itself' o' it $a& allo paticipation b& the pivate secto thou!h coII' sec. Aticle >III' sec. 8 Aticle >IF' sec. +* an#Aticle >FI' sec. +1.

0*Mac3onal#' In#i!enous Peoples of the Philippines'supra' at ).

0(Sa$uel G. Tan' A :isto& of the Philippines' p. D+00*.

00Co#illea Stu#ies Po!a$' Lan# Use an# Oneship an# Public Polic& in the Co#illea' 10

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

42/102

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

43/102

+)*Caio v. Insula 4oven$ent' supra' at 0)0.

+)(I+id.

+)0Id. at 05.

+5Id. at 0+.

++Id. at 0+o!/ roer.

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

44/102

Until +(*+' In#ian tibes ee eco!ni"e# b& the Unite# States as possessin! the attibutes ofnations to the e%tent that teaties ee $a#e ith the$. In that &ea' hoeve' Con!ess' b& statute'#eclae# its intention theeafte to $a/e the In#ian tibes a$enable #iectl& to the poe an#authoit& of the Unite# States b& the i$$e#iate e%ecise of its le!islative poe ove the$' instea# ofb& teat&. Since then' In#ian affais have been e!ulate# b& acts if Con!ess an# b& contacts iththe In#ian tibes pacticall& a$ountin! to teaties< + A$ 6u 1#' Indians' Sec. D+00 e#.

+81 C.6.S. In#ians' Sec. 1( D+0 e#..

+*I+id. see also U.S. v. Santa 7e Pac. R. Co.' Ai".' 81 S. Ct. 1(' )+ U.S. ))0' (8 L. E#. 185 D+0+.

+(I+id.

+0( Kheat )' L. E#. 8(+ D+(1).

+85Id. at 8(5.

+8+Id. at 8(0.

+81Id. at 808 see also + ALR 7e# 1' Annotation? Poof an# E%tin!uish$ent of Aboi!inal Title to In#ianLan#s' Sec. 1Da D+0*0.

+8)Butt" v. Nothen Pac.R. Co.' 3a/.' * S. Ct. +55' ++0 U.S. ' )5 L. E#. ))5' )) D+((8.

+8L&nch' Native Title, supra,at 10)

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

45/102

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

46/102

+0+3iecto of Lan#s v. Inte$e#iate Appellate Cout' +8 SCRA 50 D+0(8 3iecto of Lan#s v. Bu&co' 1+8SCRA *( D+001 Republic v. Cout of Appeals an# Lapina' 1) SCRA 8* D+00.

+01* Phil. (05 D+08.

+0)Id. at (01.

+0Sec. ( Db' C.A. ++.

+0Sec. ( Dc' C.A. ++' as a$en#e#. This povision as a##e# in +08 b& R.A. )(*1.

+08Section +1' IPRA.

+0*@Ti$e i$$e$oial@ efes @to a peio# of ti$e hen as fa bac/ as $e$o& can !o' cetain ICCs;Ips ae/non to have occupie#' possesse# in the concept of one' an# utili"e# a #efine# teito& #evolve# tothe$' b& opeation of custo$a& la o inheite# fo$ thei ancestos' in acco#ance ith thei custo$s an#ta#itions.@ ,Sec. ) Dp' IPRA-.

+0(Section 1' C.A. ++.

+00Section (' C.A. ++.

155The classification of ancestal lan#s +( in slope o ove as alienable in the IPRA is an e%ception toSection +' P.3. *5' the Revise# 7oest& Co#e.

15+Chales Mac3onal#' Indigenous *eoples of the *hilippinesD Between #egregation and Integration'In#i!enous Peoples of Asia' supra' at pp. )' )5.

151Section ' Aticle >II' +0(* Constitution.

15)Ko#s in bol# ee a$en#$ents into#uce# b& R.A. )(*1 in +08.

15

Ko#s in bol# ee a$en#$ents into#uce# b& R.A. )(*1 on 6une +(' +08. On 6anua& 1' +0**'hoeve' Sec. ( Db an# ( Dc ee futhe a$en#e# b& P.3. +5*) statin! that these povisions on cultual$inoities appl& o!9 o 9e!b9e!" "/o/b9e 9!"/ o e 7b9c "om!< *leasesee Republic v. CAan# Paan' 15+ SCRA +' +5

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

47/102

1+1Antonio M. La Fina'0rguents for (ounal Title, *art II, 1 Phil. Nat. Res. L. 6. 1) D3ec. +0(0.

1+)Section ++' Copoation Co#e.

1+Sections 85II' +0(* Constitution.

1+*Custo$a& la is eco!ni"e# b& the Local 4oven$ent Co#e of +00+ in solvin! #isputes a$on! $e$besof the in#i!enous co$$unities' vi?

C#e!. 412 E!6 (on!iliation aong e+ers of indigenous !ultural !ounities.< The custo$s an#ta#itions of in#i!enous cultual co$$unities shall be applie# in settlin! #isputes beteen $e$besof the cultual co$$unities.@

1+(La ites custo$ into contact

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

48/102

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

49/102

1)*See infra.' pp. **

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

50/102

A! //7e o :r>e !o!9 !ere/ !"ee" "e/er>e/ roer 9ce ! ! or7m !", b9e ;7/co!/ or ">oc!: m", 9e 9o!e /o9o!/m, b eCo7r.

A ca#inal e2uie$ent' to hich I a!ee' is that one ho invo/es the Cout=s a#9u#ication $ust have a pesonal an#substantial inteest in the #ispute+in#ee#' the #evelopin! ten# oul# e2uie alogi!al ne7usbeteen the statusassete# an# the clai$ sou!ht to be a#9u#icate# in o#e to ensue that one is the pope an# appopiate pat& to

invo/e 9u#icial poe.1The ule e2uies a pat& to aptl& sho a pesonal sta/e in the outco$e of the case o anin9u& to hi$self that can be e#esse# b& a favoable #ecision so as to aant his invocation of the Cout=s

9uis#iction an# to en#e le!all& feasible the e%ecise of the Cout=s e$e#ial poes in his behalf. If it eeotheise' the e%ecise of that poe can easil& beco$e too uniel#& b& its shee $a!nitu#e an# scope to a pointthat $a&' in no s$all $easue' a#vesel& affect its inten#e# essentialit&' stabilit& an# conse2uentialit&.

Nevetheless' hee a $ost co$pellin! eason e%its' such as hen the $atte is of tanscen#ental i$potance an#paa$ount inteest to the nation')the Cout $ust ta/e the libeal appoach that eco!ni"es the le!al stan#in! ofnonta#itional plaintiffs' such as citi"ens an# ta%pa&es' to aise constitutional issues that affect the$.This Coutthus #i# so in a casethat involves the consevation of ou foests fo ecolo!ical nee#s. U!9 !" e@c b9!ce //r7c, e Co7r m7/ cce ! ec9ecc !oo! c! ree /e9 rom e bo!":e o 9e:9 !ce !"o9" re!c! ec!c9e/ /7bor"!e o err"!: co!cer!.

The petition see/s a #eclaation b& the Cout of unconstitutionalit& of cetain povisions of Republic Act No. ()*+' ala that obviousl& is &et incapable of e%act e2uation in its si!nificance to the nation an# its people no an# in the!eneations &et to co$e. Republic Act No. ()*+' otheise also /non as the In#i!enous Peoples Ri!hts Act of+00* ,@IPRA@-' enacte# into la in +00* an# $a#e effective on 11 Nove$be +00*' is appaentl& inten#e# to be ale!islative esponse to the +0(* Constitution hich eco!ni"es the i!hts of in#i!enous cultual co$$unities @ithinthe fa$eo/ of national unit& an# #evelop$ent@8an# co$$an#s the State' @/7b;ec o e ro>/o!/ o /Co!/7o! !" !o!9 "e>e9ome! o9ce/ !" ro:rm/'@ to potect the i!hts of in#i!enous cultualco$$unities to thei ancestal lan#s in o#e to ensue thei econo$ic' social' an# cultual ellr79 oe9o, co!ro9 !" 7/e 9!"/ !" !7r9 re/o7rce/ ' inclu#in! @er: o !e:oe e erm/ !" co!"o!/ or e e@9oro! o !7r9 re/o7rce/ in the aeas fo thepupose of ensuin! ecolo!ical' envion$ental potection an# the consevation $easues' pusuant to national an#custo$a& las@ ,pa. b- ther: o / ! e errore/,pa. c- the r: o re7r! o er b!"o!e" 9!"/

! c/e o "/9ceme!,pa. #- e r: o re:79e e!r o m:r!/r. eJK e r: o c9m r/ o!ce/r9 "om!/ re>o7/9 re/er>e" r. :JK !" e r: o re/o9>e 9!" co!9c/ ! ccor"!cermr9

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

51/102

!o be 9e!e".@ It o#ains that e =e@9oro!, "e>e9ome!, !" 79o! o !7r9 re/o7rce/ /99 be7!"er e 799 co!ro9 !" /7er>/o! o e Se.=(

These povisions ha# oots in the +0) Constitution hich' alon! ith so$e othe specific $an#ates in the +0)Constitution' fo$in! Aticle >II un#e the title @Consevation an# Utili"ation of Natual Resouces@' ee #eive#la!el& fo$ the epot of the Co$$ittee on Nationali"ation an# Pesevation of Lan#s an# othe NatualResouces.0Acco#in! to the Co$$ittee epot' a$on! the pinciples upon hich these povisions ee base#' as@that the lan#' $ineals' foest an# othe natual esouces constitute the e%clusive heita!e of the 7ilipino Nation'@an# shoul# theeb& @be peseve# fo those un#e the soveei!n authoit& of the Nation an# fo thei posteit&.@+5The

#ele!ates to the +0) Constitutional Convention ee of the unani$ous vie that the @polic& on natual esouces'bein! fun#a$ental to the nation=s suvival shoul# not be left to the chan!in! $oo# of the la$a/in! bo#&.@++

The +0(* Constitution' li/e the pecuso povisions in the +0) an# +0*) Constitutions' thus e%pesses thisregaliando!trineof the ol#' an# the doainial do!trineof the ne' that all lan#s an# natual esouces belon! to the stateothe than those hich it eco!ni"es to be of pivate oneship. E@ce or :rc797r9 9!"/ o e 7b9c"om! e9ome! !" 79o! o e ere:! c m7/, be

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

52/102

$oo!oe/

+People vs. Fea' 8 Phil. 8' (0 Macasiano vs. National :ousin! Authoit&' 11 SCRA 1)8' 1.

1A$ 6u +(0' p. 0+' S. v3.' +5 US 8+' ) L E# 1# )8' 0) S Ct ++8.

)Le!aspi vs. Civil Sevice Co$$ission' +5 SCRA )5' 5 Taa#a vs. Tuvea' +)8 SCRA 1*' )8' )*.

3efenso Santia!o' Miia$' Constitutional La' 7ist E#ition' +00' p. ++ see also Rev. 7. 6oa2uin Benas'S.6.' on the +0(* Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines' +008 E#.' pp. ))8

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

53/102

< Macli

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

54/102

In Philippine constitutional la' the te$ @in#i!enous peoples@ petains to those !oups of 7ilipinos ho haveetaine# a hi!h #e!ee of continuit& fo$ pe

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

55/102

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

56/102

concene# have been #iecte# to i$ple$ent the statute. It cannot be successfull& $aintaine# that e shoul# aaitthe a#vese conse2uences of the la in o#e to consi#e the contoves& actual an# ipe fo 9u#icial esolution. It ispecisel& the contention of the petitiones that the la' on its face' constitutes an unconstitutional ab#ication of Stateoneship ove lan#s of the public #o$ain an# othe natual esouces. Moeove' hen the State $achine& is setinto $otion to i$ple$ent an alle!e# unconstitutional statute' this Cout possesses sufficient authoit& to esolve an#pevent i$$inent in9u& an# violation of the constitutional pocess.

B. *etitioners, as !itiens and ta7pa"ers, have the reuisite standing to raise the !onstitutional uestions herein.

In a##ition to the e%istence of an actual case o contoves&' a peson ho assails the vali#it& of a statute $ust havea pesonal an# substantial inteest in the case' such that' he has sustaine#' o ill sustain' a #iect in9u& as a esultof its enfoce$ent.)Evi#entl&' the i!hts assete# b& petitiones as citi"ens an# ta%pa&es ae hel# in co$$on b& allthe citi"ens' the violation of hich $a& esult onl& in a @!eneali"e# !ievance@. )8et' in a sense' all citi"en=s an#ta%pa&e=s suits ae effots to ai !eneali"e# !ievances about the con#uct of !oven$ent an# the allocation ofpoe.)*

In seveal cases' the Cout has a#opte# a libeal attitu#e ith e!a# to stan#in!. )(The pope pat& e2uie$ent isconsi#ee# as $eel& poce#ual')0an# the Cout has a$ple #iscetion ith e!a# theeto.5As eal& as +0+5' theCout in the case of #everino vs. =overnor =eneral+hel#?

% % % Khen the elief is sou!ht $eel& fo the potection of pivate i!hts' the elato $ust sho so$e pesonal o

special inteest in the sub9ect $atte' since he is e!a#e# as the eal pat& in inteest an# his i!ht $ust cleal&appea. Upon the othe han#' e! be

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

57/102

$aintain a suit to ensue that an& !ant of concessions covein! the national econo$& an# pati$on& stictl&co$plies ith constitutional e2uie$ents. Thus' the pesevation of the inte!it& an# inviolabilit& of the nationalpati$on& is a pope sub9ect of a citi"en=s suit.

In a##ition' petitiones' as ta7pa"ers,possess the i!ht to estain officials fo$ astin! public fun#s thou!h theenfoce$ent of an unconstitutional statute.It is ell

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

58/102

be alloe# onl& hee the e#ess #esie# cannot be obtaine# in the appopiate couts o hee e%ceptional an#co$pellin! cicu$stances 9ustif& such invocation.*Ke hel# in *eople v. (uaresa(that?

A beco$in! e!a# fo 9u#icial hieach& $ost cetainl& in#icates that petitions fo the issuance of e%tao#ina& itsa!ainst fist level ,@infeio@- couts shoul# be file# ith the Re!ional Tial Cout' an# those a!ainst the latte' ith theCout of Appeals. A "rec !>oco! o e S7reme Co7r/ or:!9 ;7r/"co! o //7e e/e II of the Constitution' hich states?

Sec. 1. All lan#s of the public #o$ain' ates' $ineals' coal' petoleu$' an# othe $ineal oils' all foces of potentiaene!&' fisheies' foests o ti$be' il#life' floa an# fauna' an# othe natual esouces ae one# b& the State.Kith the e%ception of a!icultual lan#s' all othe natual esouces shall not be alienate#. The e%ploation'#evelop$ent' an# utili"ation of natual esouces shall be un#e the full contol an# supevision of the State. TheState $a& #iectl& un#eta/e such activities' o it $a& ente into co

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

59/102

aeas' an# lan#s no lon!e occupie# e%clusivel& b& in#i!enous cultual co$$unities but to hich the& ha#ta#itional access' paticulal& the ho$e an!es of in#i!enous cultual co$$unities ho ae still no$a#ic o shiftin!cultivatos. Ancestal #o$ains also inclu#e inlan# ates' coastal aeas an# natual esouces theein.8)A!ain' thesa$e ae e2uie# to have been @hel# un#e a clai$ of oneship' occupie# o possesse# b& ICCs;IPs' b&the$selves o thou!h thei ancestos' co$$unall& o in#ivi#uall& since ti$e i$$e$oial' continuousl& to [email protected]#e Section 8' popet& i!hts ithin the ancestal #o$ains alea#& e%istin! an#;o veste# uponeffectivit& of sai# la @shall be eco!ni"e# an# especte#.@

O

0. The provisions of I*R0 re!ogniing the ownership of indigenous peoples over the an!estral lands and an!estraldoains are not un!onstitutional.

In suppot of thei theo& that ancestal lan#s an# ancestal #o$ains ae pat of the public #o$ain an#' thus' one#b& the State' pusuant to Section 1' Aticle >II of the Constitution' petitiones an# the Solicito 4eneal a#vance thefolloin! a!u$ents?

7ist, acco#in! to petitiones' the Gin! of Spain un#e intenational la ac2uie# e%clusive #o$inion ove thePhilippines b& vitue of #iscove& an# con2uest. The& conten# that the Spanish Gin! un#e the theo& ofjura regaliahich as into#uce# into Philippine la upon Spanish con2uest in +1+' ac2uie# title to all the lan#s in theachipela!o.

Secon#' petitiones an# the Solicito 4eneal sub$it that ancestal lan#s an# ancestal #o$ains ae one# b& theState. The& invo/e the theo& ofjura regalia hich i$putes to the State the oneship of all lan#s an# $a/es theState the oi!inal souce of all pivate titles. The& a!ue that the Philippine State' as successo to Spain an# the

Unite# States' is the souce of an& assete# i!ht of oneship in lan#.

Thi#,petitiones an# the Solicito 4eneal conce#e that the (ari-o#octine e%ists. :oeve' petitiones $aintainthat the #octine $eel& states that title to lan#s of the public #o$ain $a& be ac2uie# b& pesciption. The Solicito4eneal' fo his pat' a!ues that the #octine applies onl& to alienable lan#s of the public #o$ain an#' thus' cannotbe e%ten#e# to othe lan#s of the public #o$ain such as foest o ti$be' $ineal lan#s' an# national pa/s.

7outh,the Solicito 4eneal assets that even assu$in! that native title ove ancestal lan#s an# ancestal #o$ainse%iste# b& vitue of the (ari-o#octine' such native title as e%tin!uishe# upon the atification of the +0)Constitution.

7ifth' petitiones a#$it that Con!ess is $an#ate# un#e Section ' Aticle >II of the Constitution to potect thati!hts of in#i!enous peoples to thei ancestal lan#s an# ancestal #o$ains. :oeve' the& conten# that the$an#ate is sub9ect to Section 1' Aticle >II an# the theo& ofjura regaliae$bo#ie# theein. Acco#in! to petitiones'the eco!nition an# potection un#e R.A. ()*+ of the i!ht of oneship ove ancestal lan#s an# ancestal #o$ainsis fa in e%cess of the le!islative poe an# constitutional $an#ate of Con!ess.

7inall&' on the pe$ise that ancestal lan#s an# ancestal #o$ains ae one# b& the State' petitiones posit thatR.A. ()*+ violates Section 1' Aticle >II of the Constitution hich pohibits the alienation of non

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

60/102

Un#ue eliance b& petitiones an# the Solicito 4eneal on the theo& ofjura regaliais un#estan#able. Not onl& isthe theo& ell eco!ni"e# in ou le!al s&ste$ it has been e!a#e#' al$ost ith eveence' as the i$$utablepostulate of Philippine lan# la. It has been incopoate# into ou fun#a$ental la an# has been eco!ni"e# b& theCout.8*

4eneall&' un#e the concept ofjura regalia' pivate title to lan# $ust be tace# to so$e !ant' e%pess o i$plie#'fo$ the Spanish Con o its successos' the A$eican Colonial !oven$ent' an# theeafte' the PhilippineRepublic. The belief that the Spanish Con is the oi!in of all lan# titles in the Philippines has pesiste# becausetitle to lan# $ust e$anate fo$ so$e souce fo it cannot issue foth fo$ nohee.8(

In its boa# sense' the te$ @jura regalia@ efes to o&al i!hts'80o those i!hts hich the Gin! has b& vitue of hispeo!atives.*5In Spanish la' it efes to a i!ht hich the soveei!n has ove an&thin! in hich a sub9ect has ai!ht of popet& opropriedad.*+These ee i!hts en9o&e# #uin! feu#al ti$es b& the /in! as the soveei!n.

The theo& of the feu#al s&ste$ as that title to all lan#s as oi!inall& hel# b& the Gin!' an# hile the use of lan#sas !ante# out to othes ho ee pe$itte# to hol# the$ un#e cetain con#itions' the Gin! theoeticall& etaine#the title.*1B& fiction of la' the Gin! as e!a#e# as the oi!inal popieto of all lan#s' an# the tue an# onl& souceof title' an# fo$ hi$ all lan#s ee hel#.*)The theo& ofjura regaliaas theefoe nothin! $oe than a natual fuitof con2uest.*

The Re!alian theo&' hoeve' #oes not ne!ate native title to lan#s hel# in pivate oneship since ti$e i$$e$oial

In the lan#$a/ case of (ari-o vs. Insular =overnent*

the Unite# States Supe$e Cout' evesin! the#ecision*8of the pe

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

61/102

The Solicito 4eneal' fo his pat' clai$s that the (ari-o#octine applies onl& to alienable lan#s of the public#o$ain an#' as such' cannot be e%ten#e# to othe lan#s of the public #o$ain such as foest o ti$be' $ineallan#s' an# national pa/s.

Thee is no $eit in these contentions.

A pope ea#in! of (ari-o oul# sho that the #octine enunciate# theein applies onl& to 9!"/ e9e' an# not to lan#s of the public #o$ain' hethe alienable o otheise. A#istinction $ust be $a#e beteen oneship of lan# un#e native title an# oneship b& ac2uisitive pesciption

a!ainst the State. Oneship b& vitue of native title pesupposes that the lan# has been hel# b& its possesso an#his pe#ecessos

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

62/102

Neithe as native title #istube# b& the Spanish cession of the Philippines to the Unite# States' conta& topetitiones= assetion that the US $eel& succee#e# to the i!hts of Spain' inclu#in! the latte=s i!hts ove lan#s ofthe public #o$ain.01Un#e the Teat& of Pais of 3ece$be +5' +(0(' the cession of the Philippines #i# not i$paian& i!ht to popet& e%istin! at the ti$e.0)3uin! the A$eican colonial e!i$e' native title to lan# as especte#'even potecte#. The Philippine Bill of +051 povi#e# that popet& an# i!hts ac2uie# b& the US thou!h cessionfo$ Spain ee to be a#$inistee# fo the benefit of the 7ilipinos.0In obvious a#heence to libetaian pinciples'McGinle&=s Instuctions' as ell as the Philippine Bill of +051' containe# a bill of i!hts e$bo#&in! the safe!ua#s ofthe US Constitution. One of these i!hts' hich seve# as an inviolable ule upon eve& #ivision an# banch of the

A$eican colonial !oven$ent in the Philippines'0as that @no peson shall be #epive# of life' libet&' o popet&

ithout #ue pocess of la.@08

These veste# i!hts safe!ua#e# b& the Philippine Bill of +051 ee in tun e%pessl&potecte# b& the #ue pocess clause of the +0) Constitution. Resultantl&' popet& i!hts of the in#i!enous peoplesove thei ancestal lan#s an# ancestal #o$ains ee fi$l& establishe# in la.

Nonetheless' the Solicito 4eneal ta/es the vie that the veste# i!hts of in#i!enous peoples to thei ancestallan#s an# #o$ains ee @abate# b& the #iect act b& the soveei!n 7ilipino people of atif&in! the +0)Constitution.@0*:e a#vances the folloin! a!u$ents?

The Soveei!n' hich is the souce of all i!hts inclu#in! oneship' has the poe to estuctue the consoli#ationof i!hts inheent in oneship in the State. Thou!h the $an#ate of the Constitutions that have been a#opte#' theState has este# contol of those potions of the natual esouces it #ee$s absolutel& necessa& fo social elfaean# e%istence. It has been hel# that the State $a& i$pai veste# i!hts thou!h a le!iti$ate e%ecise of police

poe.

Feste# i!hts #o not pohibit the Soveei!n fo$ pefo$in! acts not onl& essential to but #ete$inative of socialelfae an# e%istence. To allo otheise is to invite havoc in the establishe# social s&ste$. % % %

Ti$e

Petitiones conce#e that Con!ess is $an#ate# un#e Section ' Aticle >II of the +0(* Constitution+5+to potect thei!hts of in#i!enous peoples to thei ancestal lan#s an# ancestal #o$ains. Nonetheless' the& conten# that theeco!nition an# potection un#e IPRA of the i!ht of oneship of in#i!enous peoples ove ancestal lan#s an#ancestal #o$ains ae fa in e%cess of the le!islative poe an# constitutional $an#ate of the Con!ess'+51sincesuch eco!nition an# potection a$ount to the alienation of lan#s of the public #o$ain' hich is poscibe# un#eSection 1' Aticle >II of the Constitution.

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

63/102

Section ' Aticle >II of the Constitution e%pesses the soveei!n intent to @potect the r:/of in#i!enous peoplesto thei ancestal lan#s.@ In its !eneal an# o#ina& sense' the te$ @i!ht@ efes to an& le!all& enfoceableclai$.+5)It is a poe' pivile!e' facult& o #e$an# inheent in one peson an# inci#ent upon anothe.+5Khen use# inelation to popet&' @i!ht@ inclu#es an& inteest in o title to an ob9ect' o an& 9ust an# le!al clai$ to hol#' use an#en9o& it.+5Sai# povision in the Constitution cannot' b& an& easonable constuction' be intepete# to e%clu#e thepotection of the r: o oII also !ants Con!ess the poe to @povi#e fo the applicabilit& ofcusto$a& las !ovenin! popet& i!hts o elations in #ete$inin! the oneship an# e%tent of ancestal#o$ains.@ In li!ht of this povision' #oes Con!ess have the poe to #eci#e hethe ancestal #o$ains shall bepivate popet& o pat of the public #o$ain Also' #oes Con!ess have the poe to #ete$ine hethe the@e%tent@ of ancestal #o$ains shall inclu#e the natual esouces foun# theein

It is ea#il& appaent fo$ the constitutional eco#s that the fa$es of the Constitution #i# not inten# Con!ess to#eci#e hethe ancestal #o$ains shall be public o pivate popet&. Rathe' the& ac/nole#!e# that ancestal#o$ains shall be teate# as pivate popet&' an# that custo$a& las shall $eel& #ete$ine hethe such pivateoneship is b& the entie in#i!enous cultual co$$unit&' o b& in#ivi#uals' fa$ilies' o clans ithin the co$$unit&.The #iscussion belo beteen Messs. Re!ala#o an# Benna!en an# M. Chief 6ustice 3avi#e' then $e$bes ofthe +0(8 Constitutional Co$$ission' is instuctive?

MR. RE4ALA3O. Than/ &ou' Ma#a$e Pesi#ent. Ma& I see/ so$e claifications fo$ eithe Co$$issioneBenna!en o Co$$issione 3avi#e e!a#in! this phase @CON4RESS S:ALL PROFI3E 7OR T:E

APPLICABILIT O7 CUSTOMAR LAKS 4OFERNIN4 PROPERT RI4:TS OR RELATIONS in #ete$inin! theoneship an# e%tent of the ancestal #o$ain'@ because o#inail& it is the la on oneship an# the e%tent theeofhich #ete$ine the popet& i!hts o elations aisin! theefo$. On the othe han#' in this popose# a$en#$entthe phaseolo!& is that it is the popet& i!hts o elations hich shall be use# as the basis in #ete$inin! theoneship an# e%tent of the ancestal #o$ain. I assu$e thee $ust be a cetain #iffeence in the custo$a& lasan# ou e!ula civil las on popet&.

MR. 3AFI3E. That is e%actl& the eason' Ma#a$ Pesi#ent' h& e ill leave it to Con!ess to $a/e the necessa&e%ception to the !eneal la on popet& elations.

MR. RE4ALA3O. I as thin/in! if Co$$issione Benna!en coul# !ive us an e%a$ple of such a custo$a& laheein it is the popet& i!hts an# elations that #ete$ine the oneship an# the e%tent of that oneship' unli/ethe basic fun#a$ental ule that it is the oneship an# the e%tent of oneship hich #ete$ine the popet& i!htsan# elations aisin! theefo$ an# conse2uent theeto. Pehaps' these custo$a& las $a& have a #iffeentpovision o thust so that e coul# $a/e the coespon#in! su!!estions also b& a& of an a$en#$ent.

MR. 3AFI3E. That is e%actl& $& on peception.

MR. BENNA4EN. Let $e put it this a&.

Thee is a an!e of custo$a& las !ovenin! cetain t&pes of oneship. Tere

shoul# be co#ifie# an# shoul# be eco!ni"e# in elation to e%istin! national las. That is essentiall& theconcept.+58,E$phasis supplie#.-

The intention to teat ancestal #o$ains as pivate popet& is also appaent fo$ the folloin! e%chan!e beteenMesss. Suae" an# Benna!en?

MR. SUARE. Khen e spea/ of custo$a& las !ovenin! popet& i!hts o elations in #ete$inin! theoneship an# e%tent of the ancestal #o$ain' ae e thin/in! in te$s of the tibal oneship o co$$unit&oneship o of pivate oneship ithin the ancestal lan#s o ancestal #o$ain

8/11/2019 00. Cruz v. Secretary of DENR (Full Case)

64/102

MR. BENNA4EN. Te co!ce o c7/omr 9II of the Constitution to $ean @as sub9ect to the povision of Section 1' Aticle >II of

the Constitution'@ hich vests in the State oneship of all lan#s of the public #o$ain' $ineal lan#s an# othenatual esouces. 7olloin! this intepetation' petitiones $aintain that ancestal lan#s an# ancestal #o$ains aethe popet& of the State.

This poposition is untenable. In#ee#' Section 1' Aticle >II eiteates the #eclaations $a#e in the +0) an# +0*)Constitutions on the state polic& of consevation an# nationali"ation of lan#s of the public #o$ain an# natualesouces' an# is of paa$ount i$potance to ou national econo$& an# pati$on&. A close peusal of the eco#s ofthe +0(8 Constitutional Co$$ission eveals that the fa$es of the Constitution insete# the phase @sub9ect to thepovisions of this Constitution@ $ainl& to pevent the i$pai$ent of Toens titles an# othe pio i!hts in the#ete$ination of hat constitutes ancestal lan#s an# ancestal #o$ains' to it?

MR. NATIFI3A3. 6ust one 2uestion. I ant to clea this section potectin! ancestal lan#s. :o #oes this affect the

Toens title an# othe pio i!hts

MR. BENNA4EN. I thin/ that as also #iscusse# in the co$$ittee heain!s an# e #i# sa& that in cases hee #uepocess is cleal& establishe# in te$s of pio i!hts' these to have to be especte#.

MR. NATIFI3A3. The othe point is? :o vast is this ancestal lan# Is it tue that pats of Ba!uio Cit& aeconsi#ee# as ancestal lan#s

MR. BENNA4EN. The& coul# be e!a#e# as such. If the Co$$issione still ecalls' in one of the publications that Ipovi#e# the Co$$issiones' the pats coul# be consi#ee# as ancestal #o$ain in elation to the hole populationof Co#illea but not in elation to cetain in#ivi#uals o cetain !oups.

MR. NATIFI3A3. The Co$$issione $eans that the hole Ba!uio Cit& is consi#ee# as ancestal lan#

MR. BENNA4EN. es' in the sense that it belon!s to Co#illea o in the sa$e $anne that 7ilipinos can spea/ ofthe Philippine achipela!o as ancestal lan#' but not in te$s of the i!ht of a paticula peson o paticula !oup toe%ploit' utili"e' o sell it.

MR. NATIFI3A3. But is clea that the pio i!hts ill be especte#.

MR. BENNA4EN. 3efinitel&. ++5

Thus' the phase @sub9ect to the povisions of this Constitution@ as inten#e# b& the fa$es of the Constitution as aeiteation of the constitutional !uaantee that no peson shall be #epive# of popet& ithout #ue pocess of la.