Carino vs Insular Government, 1909

On June 23, 1903, Mateo Cario went to the Court of Land Registration to petition his inscription as the owner of a
146 hectare land hes been possessing in the then municipality of Baguio. Mateo only presented possessory
information and no other documentation. The State opposed the petition averring that the land is part of the US
military reservation. The CLR ruled in favor of Mateo. The State appealed. Mateo lost. Mateo averred that a grant
should be given to him by reason of immemorial use and occupation as in the previous case Cansino vs Valdez &
Tiglao vs Government.
ISSUE: Whether or not Mateo is the rightful owner of the land by virtue of his possession of it for some time.
HELD: No. The statute of limitations did not run against the government. The government is still the absolute owner
of the land (regalian doctrine). Further, Mateos possession of the land has not been of such a character as to require
the presumption of a grant. No one has lived upon it for many years. It was never used for anything but pasturage
of animals, except insignificant portions thereof, and since the insurrection against Spain it has apparently not been
used by the petitioner for any purpose.
While the State has always recognized the right of the occupant to a deed if he proves a possession for a sufficient
length of time, yet it has always insisted that he must make that proof before the proper administrative officers, and
obtain from them his deed, and until he did the State remained the absolute owner

RUBI VS PROVINCIAL BOARD
Rubi and various other Manguianes (Mangyans) in the province of Mindoro were ordered by the
provincial governor of Mindoro to remove their residence from their native habitat and to established
themselves on a reservation in Tigbao, still in the province of Mindoro, and to remain there, or be
punished by imprisonment if they escaped. Manguianes had been ordered to live in a reservationmade to
that end and for purposes of cultivation under certain plans. The Manguianes are a Non-Christian tribe
who were considered to be of very low culture.
One of the Manguianes, a certain Dabalos, escaped from the reservation but was later caught and
was placed in prison at Calapan, solely because he escaped from the reservation. An application for
habeas corpus was made on behalf by Rubi and other Manguianes of the province, alleging that by virtue
of the resolution of the provincial board of Mindoro creating the reservation, they had been illegally
deprived of their liberty. In this case, the validity of Section 2145 of the Administrative Code, which
provides:
With the prior approval of the Department Head, the provincial governor of any province in which non-
Christian inhabitants are found is authorized, when such a course is deemed necessary in the interest of
law and order, to direct such inhabitants to take up their habitation on sites on unoccupied public lands to
be selected by him and approved by the provincial board.
was challenged.
ISSUE: Whether or not Section 2145 of the Administrative Code constitutes undue delegation. Whether
or not the Manguianes are being deprived of their liberty.
HELD:
I. No. By a vote of five to four, the Supreme Court sustained the constitutionality of this section of the
Administrative Code. Under the doctrine of necessity, who else was in a better position to determine
whether or not to execute the law but the provincial governor. It is optional for the provincial governor to
execute the law as circumstances may arise. It is necessary to give discretion to the provincial
governor. The Legislature may make decisions of executive departments of subordinate official thereof, to
whom it has committed the execution of certain acts, final on questions of fact.
II. No. Among other things, the term non-Christian should not be given a literal meaning or a religious
signification, but that it was intended to relate to degrees of civilization. The term non-Christian it was
said, refers not to religious belief, but in a way to geographical area, and more directly to natives of the
Philippine Islands of a low grade of civilization. In this case, the Manguianes were being reconcentrated in
the reservation to promote peace and to arrest their seminomadic lifestyle. This will ultimately settle them
down where they can adapt to the changing times.
The Supreme Court held that the resolution of the provincial board of Mindoro was neither discriminatory
nor class legislation, and stated among other things: . . . one cannot hold that the liberty of the citizen is
unduly interfered with when the degree of civilization of the Manguianes is considered. They are
restrained for their own good and the general good of the Philippines. Nor can one say that due
process of law has not been followed. To go back to our definition of due process of law and equal
protection of the laws, there exists a law; the law seems to be reasonable; it is enforced according to the
regular methods of procedure prescribed; and it applies alike to all of a class.

SLAPP Suit - refers to any action, whether civil, criminal or administrative, brought against any person,
institution or any government agency or local government unit or its official and employees, with the
intent to harass, vex, exert undue pressure or stifle any legal recourse that such person, institution, or
government agency has taken or may take in the enforcement of environmental laws, protection of the
environment or assertion of environmental rights.

Quantum of Evidence
Defendant - The party seeking the dismissal of the case must prove by substantial evidence that his acts
for the enforcement of environmental law is a legitimate action for the protection, preservation and
rehabilitation of the environment.
The party filing the action assailed as a SLAPP shall prove by preponderance of evidence that the action
is not a SLAPP and is a valid claim.
Distinction - Writ of Kalikasan / Continuing Mandamus

The Writ of Kalikasan may be distinguished for a writ of Continuing mandamus in the following cases:
1. The WOK may be sought to deal with an unlawful act or omission involving environmental damage of
such magnitude that it theatens life, health, or property of inhabitants in 2 or more cities / provinces.
While the WCM invloves a neglect r exclusion of a law, rule or right.
2. The WOK is available to any person or representative or agent (PO/NGO/PIG); while in an action for
CM, the petioner must be the one who is personally aggrieved.
3. In a WOK the respondent may be a public or private entity or individual while the CM involves the
government or its officers .
4. The venue of the action on the availment of WOK is the SC or CA; while a CM may be filed in the RTC,
CA or SC.
5. In terms of discovery measures, the application for a WOK involves ocular inspection or production of
documents while in a petition for CM there are no specific measures provided for in the REP.
6. In a petition for WOK, demand for damages has to be filed in a separate suit while a action for CM
allows demand for damages based on malicious neglect of duty.

Cases :
1. Rubi vs Provincial Board of Mindoro
2. People vs Cayat
2 cases of which speaks of traditional conception of IPs in a legal and historical context.

IPs / ICCs - refer to a group of people or homogenous societies identified by self asciption and ascription
by others,
who have continuously lived as organized community on communally bounded and defined
territory,
and who have, since time immemorial, occupied, possessed and utililized such territories,
sharing common bonds of language, customs, traditions, and other distinctive cultural traits,
or who have, through resistance to political, social, and cultural inroads of colonization, non-
indigenous religions and cultures, become historically differentiated from the majority of
Filipinos.
Ancestral Domain - refers to all areas generally belonging to ICCs/IPs comprising lands, inland waters,
coastal areas, and natural resources therein,
held under a claim of ownership, occupied, or possesed by ICCs/IPs, by themselves or through
therein ancestors
communally or individually since tine immemorial, continuously to the present
except when interrupted by war, force majeure or displacement by force , deceit, stealth or as a
consequence of government projects or any other voluntary dealings entered into by govt and
private individuals/corporations,
and which are necessary to ensure their economic, social and cultural welfare.


Native Title - defined as pre-conquest rights to lands and domains which, as far back as memory
reaches,
have been held under a claim of private ownership by ICCs/IPs,
have never been public lands
and are thus indusputably presumed to have been held hat way since Spanish Conquest.
Priority rights
The rule on natural resources within the domains, is that ICCs/IPs with priority rights in the
harvesting, extraction, development, or exploitation
but, a non-IP may be allowed to take part in the Dev & utilization for a period not exceeding
25 years renewable for another 25 years.
Provided, a formal and written agreement is entered into with the IPs concerned
Or that the community pursuant to its own decision making process has agreed to allow such
operation.
Rule on Sale /Transfer
1. AD can never be sold
2. AL may be transferred only to / among members of the same IP; but may be redeemd within 15
years if transfered to non-IPs due to vitiated consent /unconscionable price.
CADT - formal recognition of native title.
Registration Option (within 20 years) :
1. CA 141, or
2. LRA 496


Rights related to AD:
1. to claim ownership
2. to develop lands and natural resources
3. to stay in the territories
4. to be resettled (in case of displacement)
5. to regulate entry of migrant settlers
6. to have access to integrated systems for the management of their inland waters and their air
space.
7. to claim parts of reservations (Expt : those for Public welfare and service)
8. to resolve land conflicts using customary laws (before going to court )