HELD:

No, the provisions of IPRA do not contravene the Constitution. Examining the IPRA, there is
nothing in the law that grants to the ICCs/IPs ownership over the natural resources within their
ancestral domain. Ownership over the natural resources in the ancestral domains remains with
the State and the rights granted by the IPRA to the ICCs/IPs over the natural resources in their
ancestral domains merely gives them, as owners and occupants of the land on which the
resources are found, the right to the small scale utilization of these resources, and at the same
time, a priority in their large scale development and exploitation

The only exceptions are the posting of the ordinance as approved but this omission does
not affect its validity, considering that its publication in three successive issues of a newspaper
of general circulation will satisfy due process.

It has also not been shown that the text of the ordinance has

been translated and disseminated, but this requirement applies to the approval of local
development plans and public investment programs of the local government unit and not to tax
ordinances.

Because of the matter

Secretary of Justice (on appeal to him of four oil companies and a taxpayer) declared Ordinance
No.

7794 (Manila Revenue Code) null and void for non-compliance with the procedure in the
enactment of tax ordinances and for containing certain

1. before declaring a law unconstitutional, on the theory that the measu

2. re was first carefully studied by the executive and the legislative departments and
determined by them to be in accordance with the fundamental law before it was fina
3. lly approved. To doubt is to sustain. The presumption of
4. constitutionality can be overcome only by the clearest showing that there was in