Social justice is "neither communism, nor despotism, nor atomism, nor anarchy," but the humanization

of laws and the equalization of social and economic forces by the State so that justice in its rational and
objectively secular conception may at least be approximated. Social justice means the promotion of the
welfare of all the people, the adoption by the Government of measures calculated to insure economic
stability of all the competent elements of society, through the maintenance of a proper economic and
social equilibrium in the interrelations of the members of the community, constitutionally, through the
adoption of measures legally justifiable, or extra-constitutionally, through the exercise of powers
underlying the existence of all governments on the time-honored principle of salus populi est suprema
lex. Social justice, therefore, must be founded on the recognition of the necessity of interdependence
among divers and diverse units of a society and of the protection that should be equally and evenly
extended to all groups as a combined force in our social and economic life, consistent with the
fundamental and paramount objective of the state of promoting the health, comfort, and quiet of all
persons, and of bringing about "the greatest good to the greatest number."

HOMEPHILIPPINE CONSTITUTIONSTHE CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

The Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines

PREAMBLE

ARTICLE I National Territory

ARTICLE II Declaration of Principles and State Policies

ARTICLE III Bill of Rights

ARTICLE IV Citizenship

ARTICLE V Suffrage

ARTICLE VI Legislative Department

ARTICLE VII Executive Department

ARTICLE VIII Judicial Department

ARTICLE IX Constitutional Commissions

ARTICLE X Local Government

ARTICLE XI Accountability of Public Officers

ARTICLE XII National Economy and Patrimony

ARTICLE XIII Social Justice and Human Rights

ARTICLE XIV Education, Science and Technology, Arts, Culture and Sports

ARTICLE XV The Family

ARTICLE XVI General Provisions

ARTICLE XVII Amendments or Revisions

ARTICLE XVIII Transitory Provisions

Principles

THE 1987 CONSTITUTION

THE CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

PREAMBLE

We, the sovereign Filipino people, imploring the aid of Almighty God, in order to build a just and
humane society and establish a Government that shall embody our ideals and aspirations, promote the
common good, conserve and develop our patrimony, and secure to ourselves and our posterity the
blessings of independence and democracy under the rule of law and a regime of truth, justice, freedom,
love, equality, and peace, do ordain and promulgate this Constitution.

ARTICLE I

National Territory

The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the islands and waters embraced
therein, and all other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting of
its terrestrial, fluvial, and aerial domains, including its territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the insular
shelves, and other submarine areas. The waters around, between, and connecting the islands of the
archipelago, regardless of their breadth and dimensions, form part of the internal waters of the
Philippines.

ARTICLE II

Declaration of Principles and State Policies

Principles

SECTION 1. The Philippines is a democratic and republican State. Sovereignty resides in the people and
all government authority emanates from them.

SECTION 2. The Philippines renounces war as an instrument of national policy, adopts the generally
accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land and adheres to the policy of peace,
equality, justice, freedom, cooperation, and amity with all nations.
SECTION 3. Civilian authority is, at all times, supreme over the military. The Armed Forces of the
Philippines is the protector of the people and the State. Its goal is to secure the sovereignty of the State
and the integrity of the national territory.

SECTION 4. The prime duty of the Government is to serve and protect the people. The Government may
call upon the people to defend the State and, in the fulfillment thereof, all citizens may be required,
under conditions provided by law, to render personal military or civil service.

SECTION 5. The maintenance of peace and order, the protection of life, liberty, and property, and the
promotion of the general welfare are essential for the enjoyment by all the people of the blessings of
democracy.

SECTION 6. The separation of Church and State shall be inviolable.

State Policies

SECTION 7. The State shall pursue an independent foreign policy. In its relations with other states the
paramount consideration shall be national sovereignty, territorial integrity, national interest, and the
right to self-determination.

SECTION 8. The Philippines, consistent with the national interest, adopts and pursues a policy of
freedom from nuclear weapons in its territory.

SECTION 9. The State shall promote a just and dynamic social order that will ensure the prosperity and
independence of the nation and free the people from poverty through policies that provide adequate
social services, promote full employment, a rising standard of living, and an improved quality of life for
all.

SECTION 10. The State shall promote social justice in all phases of national development.

SECTION 11. The State values the dignity of every human person and guarantees full respect for human
rights.
SECTION 12. The State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect and strengthen the family
as a basic autonomous social institution. It shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the
unborn from conception. The natural and primary right and duty of parents in the rearing of the youth
for civic efficiency and the development of moral character shall receive the support of the Government.

SECTION 13. The State recognizes the vital role of the youth in nation-building and shall promote and
protect their physical, moral, spiritual, intellectual, and social well-being. It shall inculcate in the youth
patriotism and nationalism, and encourage their involvement in public and civic affairs.

SECTION 14. The State recognizes the role of women in nation-building, and shall ensure the
fundamental equality before the law of women and men.

SECTION 15. The State shall protect and promote the right to health of the people and instill health
consciousness among them.

SECTION 16. The State shall protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced and healthful
ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature.

SECTION 17. The State shall give priority to education, science and technology, arts, culture, and sports
to foster patriotism and nationalism, accelerate social progress, and promote total human liberation and
development.

SECTION 18. The State affirms labor as a primary social economic force. It shall protect the rights of
workers and promote their welfare.

SECTION 19. The State shall develop a self-reliant and independent national economy effectively
controlled by Filipinos.

SECTION 20. The State recognizes the indispensable role of the private sector, encourages private
enterprise, and provides incentives to needed investments.

SECTION 21. The State shall promote comprehensive rural development and agrarian reform.
SECTION 22. The State recognizes and promotes the rights of indigenous cultural communities within
the framework of national unity and development.

SECTION 23. The State shall encourage non-governmental, community-based, or sectoral organizations
that promote the welfare of the nation.

SECTION 24. The State recognizes the vital role of communication and information in nation-building.

SECTION 25. The State shall ensure the autonomy of local governments.

SECTION 26. The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service, and prohibit
political dynasties as may be defined by law.

SECTION 27. The State shall maintain honesty and integrity in the public service and take positive and
effective measures against graft and corruption.

SECTION 28. Subject to reasonable conditions prescribed by law, the State adopts and implements a
policy of full public disclosure of all its transactions involving public interest.

ARTICLE III

Bill of Rights

SECTION 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall
any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.

SECTION 2. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against
unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and no
search warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable cause to be determined personally
by the judge after examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may
produce, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.
SECTION 3. (1) The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable except upon lawful
order of the court, or when public safety or order requires otherwise as prescribed by law.

(2) Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the preceding section shall be inadmissible for any
purpose in any proceeding.

SECTION 4. No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or
the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.

SECTION 5. No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise
thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or
preference, shall forever be allowed. No religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or
political rights.

SECTION 6. The liberty of abode and of changing the same within the limits prescribed by law shall not
be impaired except upon lawful order of the court. Neither shall the right to travel be impaired except in
the interest of national security, public safety, or public health, as may be provided by law.

SECTION 7. The right of the people to information on matters of public concern shall be recognized.
Access to official records, and to documents, and papers pertaining to official acts, transactions, or
decisions, as well as to government research data used as basis for policy development, shall be
afforded the citizen, subject to such limitations as may be provided by law.

SECTION 8. The right of the people, including those employed in the public and private sectors, to form
unions, associations, or societies for purposes not contrary to law shall not be abridged.

SECTION 9. Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation.

SECTION 10. No law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be passed.

SECTION 11. Free access to the courts and quasi-judicial bodies and adequate legal assistance shall not
be denied to any person by reason of poverty.
SECTION 12. (1) Any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall have the right to
be informed of his right to remain silent and to have competent and independent counsel preferably of
his own choice. If the person cannot afford the services of counsel, he must be provided with one. These
rights cannot be waived except in writing and in the presence of counsel.

(2) No torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation, or any other means which vitiate the free will shall
be used against him. Secret detention places, solitary, incommunicado, or other similar forms of
detention are prohibited.

(3) Any confession or admission obtained in violation of this or Section 17 hereof shall be inadmissible in
evidence against him.

(4) The law shall provide for penal and civil sanctions for violations of this section as well as
compensation to and rehabilitation of victims of torture or similar practices, and their families.

SECTION 13. All persons, except those charged with offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua when
evidence of guilt is strong, shall, before conviction, be bailable by sufficient sureties, or be released on
recognizance as may be provided by law. The right to bail shall not be impaired even when the privilege
of the writ of habeas corpus is suspended. Excessive bail shall not be required.

SECTION 14. (1) No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law.

(2) In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved, and
shall enjoy the right to be heard by himself and counsel, to be informed of the nature and cause of the
accusation against him, to have a speedy, impartial, and public trial, to meet the witnesses face to face,
and to have compulsory process to secure the attendance of witnesses and the production of evidence
in his behalf. However, after arraignment, trial may proceed notwithstanding the absence of the accused
provided that he has been duly notified and his failure to appear is unjustifiable.

SECTION 15. The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended except in cases of
invasion or rebellion when the public safety requires it.

SECTION 16. All persons shall have the right to a speedy disposition of their cases before all judicial,
quasi-judicial, or administrative bodies.
SECTION 17. No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.

SECTION 18. (1) No person shall be detained solely by reason of his political beliefs and aspirations.

(2) No involuntary servitude in any form shall exist except as a punishment for a crime whereof the party
shall have been duly convicted.

SECTION 19. (1) Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment
inflicted. Neither shall death penalty be imposed, unless, for compelling reasons involving heinous
crimes, the Congress hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty already imposed shall be reduced to
reclusion perpetua.

(2) The employment of physical, psychological, or degrading punishment against any prisoner or
detainee or the use of substandard or inadequate penal facilities under subhuman conditions shall be
dealt with by law.

SECTION 20. No person shall be imprisoned for debt or non-payment of a poll tax.

SECTION 21. No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense. If an act is
punished by a law and an ordinance, conviction or acquittal under either shall constitute a bar to
another prosecution for the same act.

SECTION 22. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted.

ARTICLE IV

Citizenship

SECTION 1. The following are citizens of the Philippines:

(1) Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of this Constitution;
(2) Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines;

(3) Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon
reaching the age of majority; and

(4) Those who are naturalized in accordance with law.

SECTION 2. Natural-born citizens are those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without having
to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship. Those who elect Philippine
citizenship in accordance with paragraph (3), Section 1 hereof shall be deemed natural-born citizens.

SECTION 3. Philippine citizenship may be lost or reacquired in the manner provided by law.

SECTION 4. Citizens of the Philippines who marry aliens shall retain their citizenship, unless by their act
or omission they are deemed, under the law, to have renounced it.

SECTION 5. Dual allegiance of citizens is inimical to the national interest and shall be dealt with by law.

ARTICLE V

Suffrage

SECTION 1. Suffrage may be exercised by all citizens of the Philippines not otherwise disqualified by law,
who are at least eighteen years of age, and who shall have resided in the Philippines for at least one
year and in the place wherein they propose to vote for at least six months immediately preceding the
election. No literacy, property, or other substantive requirement shall be imposed on the exercise of
suffrage.

SECTION 2. The Congress shall provide a system for securing the secrecy and sanctity of the ballot as
well as a system for absentee voting by qualified Filipinos abroad.
The Congress shall also design a procedure for the disabled and the illiterates to vote without the
assistance of other persons. Until then, they shall be allowed to vote under existing laws and such rules
as the Commission on Elections may promulgate to protect the secrecy of the ballot.

ARTICLE VI

The Legislative Department

SECTION 1. The legislative power shall be vested in the Congress of the Philippines which shall consist of
a Senate and a House of Representatives, except to the extent reserved to the people by the provision
on initiative and referendum.

SECTION 2. The Senate shall be composed of twenty-four Senators who shall be elected at large by the
qualified voters of the Philippines, as may be provided by law.

SECTION 3. No person shall be a Senator unless he is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines, and, on
the day of the election, is at least thirty-five years of age, able to read and write, a registered voter, and
a resident of the Philippines for not less than two years immediately preceding the day of the election.

SECTION 4. The term of office of the Senators shall be six years and shall commence, unless otherwise
provided by law, at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following their election.

No Senator shall serve for more than two consecutive terms. Voluntary renunciation of the office for any
length of time shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuity of his service for the full term
for which he was elected.

SECTION 5. (1) The House of Representatives shall be composed of not more than two hundred and fifty
members, unless otherwise fixed by law, who shall be elected from legislative districts apportioned
among the provinces, cities, and the Metropolitan Manila area in accordance with the number of their
respective inhabitants, and on the basis of a uniform and progressive ratio, and those who, as provided
by law, shall be elected through a party-list system of registered national, regional, and sectoral parties
or organizations.
(2) The party-list representatives shall constitute twenty per centum of the total number of
representatives including those under the party list. For three consecutive terms after the ratification of
this Constitution, one-half of the seats allocated to party-list representatives shall be filled, as provided
by law, by selection or election from the labor, peasant, urban poor, indigenous cultural communities,
women, youth, and such other sectors as may be provided by law, except the religious sector.

(3) Each legislative district shall comprise, as far as practicable, contiguous, compact and adjacent
territory. Each city with a population of at least two hundred fifty thousand, or each province, shall have
at least one representative.

(4) Within three years following the return of every census, the Congress shall make a reapportionment
of legislative districts based on the standards provided in this section.

SECTION 6. No person shall be a Member of the House of Representatives unless he is a natural-born

citizen of the Philippines and, on the day of the election, is at least twenty-five years of age, able to read
and write, and, except the party-list representatives, a registered voter in the district in which he shall
be elected, and a resident thereof for a period of not less than one year immediately preceding the day
of the election.

SECTION 7. The Members of the House of Representatives shall be elected for a term of three years
which shall begin, unless otherwise provided by law, at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following
their election.

No member of the House of Representatives shall serve for more than three consecutive terms.
Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be considered as an interruption in
the continuity of his service for the full term for which he was elected.

SECTION 8. Unless otherwise provided by law, the regular election of the Senators and the Members of
the House of Representatives shall be held on the second Monday of May.

SECTION 9. In case of vacancy in the Senate or in the House of Representatives, a special election may
be called to fill such vacancy in the manner prescribed by law, but the Senator or Member of the House
of Representatives thus elected shall serve only for the unexpired term.
SECTION 10. The salaries of Senators and Members of the House of Representatives shall be determined
by law. No increase in said compensation shall take effect until after the expiration of the full term of all
the Members of the Senate and the House of Representatives approving such increase.

SECTION 11. A Senator or Member of the House of Representatives shall, in all offenses punishable by
not more than six years imprisonment, be privileged from arrest while the Congress is in session. No
Member shall be questioned nor be held liable in any other place for any speech or debate in the
Congress or in any committee thereof.

SECTION 12. All Members of the Senate and the House of Representatives shall, upon assumption of
office, make a full disclosure of their financial and business interests. They shall notify the House
concerned of a potential conflict of interest that may arise from the filing of a proposed legislation of
which they are authors.

SECTION 13. No Senator or Member of the House of Representatives may hold any other office or
employment in the Government, or any subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof, including
government-owned or controlled corporations or their subsidiaries, during his term without forfeiting
his seat. Neither shall he be appointed to any office which may have been created or the emoluments
thereof increased during the term for which he was elected.

SECTION 14. No Senator or Member of the House of Representatives may personally appear as counsel
before any court of justice or before the Electoral Tribunals, or quasi-judicial and other administrative
bodies. Neither shall he, directly or indirectly, be interested financially in any contract with, or in any
franchise or special privilege granted by the Government, or any subdivision, agency, or instrumentality
thereof, including any government-owned or controlled corporation, or its subsidiary, during his term of
office. He shall not intervene in any matter before any office of the Government for his pecuniary
benefit or where he may be called upon to act on account of his office.

SECTION 15. The Congress shall convene once every year on the fourth Monday of July for its regular
session, unless a different date is fixed by law, and shall continue to be in session for such number of
days as it may determine until thirty days before the opening of its next regular session, exclusive of
Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays. The President may call a special session at any time.

SECTION 16. (1) The Senate shall elect its President and the House of Representatives its Speaker, by a
majority vote of all its respective Members.

Each House shall choose such other officers as it may deem necessary.
(2) A majority of each House shall constitute a quorum to do business, but a smaller number may
adjourn from day to day and may compel the attendance of absent Members in such manner, and under
such penalties, as such House may provide.

(3) Each House may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly behavior,
and, with the concurrence of two-thirds of all its Members, suspend or expel a Member. A penalty of
suspension, when imposed, shall not exceed sixty days.

(4) Each House shall keep a Journal of its proceedings, and from time to time publish the same,
excepting such parts as may, in its judgment, affect national security; and the yeas and nays on any
question shall, at the request of one-fifth of the Members present, be entered in the Journal.

Each House shall also keep a Record of its proceedings.

(5) Neither House during the sessions of the Congress shall, without the consent of the other, adjourn
for more than three days, nor to any other place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.

SECTION 17. The Senate and the House of Representatives shall each have an Electoral Tribunal which
shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of their
respective Members. Each Electoral Tribunal shall be composed of nine Members, three of whom shall
be Justices of the Supreme Court to be designated by the Chief Justice, and the remaining six shall be
Members of the Senate or the House of Representatives, as the case may be, who shall be chosen on
the basis of proportional representation from the political parties and the parties or organizations
registered under the party-list system represented therein. The senior Justice in the Electoral Tribunal
shall be its Chairman.

SECTION 18. There shall be a Commission on Appointments consisting of the President of the Senate, as
ex officio Chairman, twelve Senators and twelve Members of the House of Representatives, elected by
each House on the basis of proportional representation from the political parties and parties or
organizations registered under the party-list system represented therein. The Chairman of the
Commission shall not vote, except in case of a tie. The Commission shall act on all appointments
submitted to it within thirty session days of the Congress from their submission. The Commission shall
rule by a majority vote of all the Members.
SECTION 19. The Electoral Tribunals and the Commission on Appointments shall be constituted within
thirty days after the Senate and the House of Representatives shall have been organized with the
election of the President and the Speaker. The Commission on Appointments shall meet only while the
Congress is in session, at the call of its Chairman or a majority of all its Members, to discharge such
powers and functions as are herein conferred upon it.

SECTION 20. The records and books of accounts of the Congress shall be preserved and be open to the
public in accordance with law, and such books shall be audited by the Commission on Audit which shall
publish annually an itemized list of amounts paid to and expenses incurred for each Member.

SECTION 21. The Senate or the House of Representatives or any of its respective committees may
conduct inquiries in aid of legislation in accordance with its duly published rules of procedure. The rights
of persons appearing in or affected by such inquiries shall be respected.

SECTION 22. The heads of departments may upon their own initiative, with the consent of the President,
or upon the request of either House, as the rules of each House shall provide, appear before and be
heard by such House on any matter pertaining to their departments. Written questions shall be
submitted to the President of the Senate or the Speaker of the House of Representatives at least three
days before their scheduled appearance. Interpellations shall not be limited to written questions, but
may cover matters related thereto. When the security of the State or the public interest so requires and
the President so states in writing, the appearance shall be conducted in executive session.

SECTION 23. (1) The Congress, by a vote of two-thirds of both Houses in joint session assembled, voting
separately, shall have the sole power to declare the existence of a state of war.

(2) In times of war or other national emergency, the Congress may, by law, authorize the President, for a
limited period and subject to such restrictions as it may prescribe, to exercise powers necessary and
proper to carry out a declared national policy. Unless sooner withdrawn by resolution of the Congress,
such powers shall cease upon the next adjournment thereof.

SECTION 24. All appropriation, revenue or tariff bills, bills authorizing increase of the public debt, bills of
local application, and private bills shall originate exclusively in the House of Representatives, but the
Senate may propose or concur with amendments.

SECTION 25. (1) The Congress may not increase the appropriations recommended by the President for
the operation of the Government as specified in the budget. The form, content, and manner of
preparation of the budget shall be prescribed by law.
(2) No provision or enactment shall be embraced in the general appropriations bill unless it relates
specifically to some particular appropriation therein. Any such provision or enactment shall be limited in
its operation to the appropriation to which it relates.

(3) The procedure in approving appropriations for the Congress shall strictly follow the procedure for
approving appropriations for other departments and agencies.

(4) A special appropriations bill shall specify the purpose for which it is intended, and shall be supported
by funds actually available as certified by the National Treasurer, or to be raised by a corresponding
revenue proposed therein.

(5) No law shall be passed authorizing any transfer of appropriations; however, the President, the
President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court, and the heads of Constitutional Commissions may, by law, be authorized to augment any item in
the general appropriations law for their respective offices from savings in other items of their respective
appropriations.

(6) Discretionary funds appropriated for particular officials shall be disbursed only for public purposes to
be supported by appropriate vouchers and subject to such guidelines as may be prescribed by law.

(7) If, by the end of any fiscal year, the Congress shall have failed to pass the general appropriations bill
for the ensuing fiscal year, the general appropriations law for the preceding fiscal year shall be deemed
reenacted and shall remain in force and effect until the general appropriations bill is passed by the
Congress.

SECTION 26. (1) Every bill passed by the Congress shall embrace only one subject which shall be
expressed in the title thereof.

(2) No bill passed by either House shall become a law unless it has passed three readings on separate
days, and printed copies thereof in its final form have been distributed to its Members three days before
its passage, except when the President certifies to the necessity of its immediate enactment to meet a
public calamity or emergency. Upon the last reading of a bill, no amendment thereto shall be allowed,
and the vote thereon shall be taken immediately thereafter, and the yeas and nays entered in the
Journal.
SECTION 27. (1) Every bill passed by the Congress shall, before it becomes a law, be presented to the
President. If he approves the same, he shall sign it; otherwise, he shall veto it and return the same with
his objections to the House where it originated, which shall enter the objections at large in its Journal
and proceed to reconsider it. If, after such reconsideration, two-thirds of all the Members of such House
shall agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent, together with the objections, to the other House by which it
shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two-thirds of all the Members of that House, it shall
become a law. In all such cases, the votes of each House shall be determined by yeas or nays, and the
names of the Members voting for or against shall be entered in its Journal. The President shall
communicate his veto of any bill to the House where it originated within thirty days after the date of
receipt thereof; otherwise, it shall become a law as if he had signed it.

(2) The President shall have the power to veto any particular item or items in an appropriation, revenue,
or tariff bill, but the veto shall not affect the item or items to which he does not object.

SECTION 28. (1) The rule of taxation shall be uniform and equitable. The Congress shall evolve a
progressive system of taxation.

(2) The Congress may, by law, authorize the President to fix within specified limits, and subject to such
limitations and restrictions as it may impose, tariff rates, import and export quotas, tonnage and
wharfage dues, and other duties or imposts within the framework of the national development program
of the Government.

(3) Charitable institutions, churches and parsonages or convents appurtenant thereto, mosques, non-
profit cemeteries, and all lands, buildings, and improvements, actually, directly, and exclusively used for
religious, charitable, or educational purposes shall be exempt from taxation.

(4) No law granting any tax exemption shall be passed without the concurrence of a majority of all the
Members of the Congress.

SECTION 29. (1) No money shall be paid out of the Treasury except in pursuance of an appropriation
made by law.

(2) No public money or property shall be appropriated, applied, paid, or employed, directly or indirectly,
for the use, benefit, or support of any sect, church, denomination, sectarian institution, or system of
religion, or of any priest, preacher, minister, or other religious teacher, or dignitary as such, except when
such priest, preacher, minister, or dignitary is assigned to the armed forces, or to any penal institution,
or government orphanage or leprosarium.

(3) All money collected on any tax levied for a special purpose shall be treated as a special fund and paid
out for such purpose only. If the purpose for which a special fund was created has been fulfilled or
abandoned, the balance, if any, shall be transferred to the general funds of the Government.

SECTION 30. No law shall be passed increasing the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court as
provided in this Constitution without its advice and concurrence.

SECTION 31. No law granting a title of royalty or nobility shall be enacted.

SECTION 32. The Congress shall, as early as possible, provide for a system of initiative and referendum,
and the exceptions therefrom, whereby the people can directly propose and enact laws or approve or
reject any act or law or part thereof passed by the Congress or local legislative body after the
registration of a petition therefor signed by at least ten per centum of the total number of registered
voters, of which every legislative district must be represented by at least three per centum of the
registered voters thereof.

ARTICLE VII

Executive Department

SECTION 1. The executive power shall be vested in the President of the Philippines.

SECTION 2. No person may be elected President unless he is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines, a
registered voter, able to read and write, at least forty years of age on the day of the election, and a
resident of the Philippines for at least ten years immediately preceding such election.

SECTION 3. There shall be a Vice-President who shall have the same qualifications and term of office and
be elected with and in the same manner as the President. He may be removed from office in the same
manner as the President.
The Vice-President may be appointed as a Member of the Cabinet. Such appointment requires no
confirmation.

SECTION 4. The President and the Vice-President shall be elected by direct vote of the people for a term
of six years which shall begin at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following the day of the election
and shall end at noon of the same date six years thereafter. The President shall not be eligible for any
reelection. No person who has succeeded as President and has served as such for more than four years
shall be qualified for election to the same office at any time.

No Vice-President shall serve for more than two consecutive terms. Voluntary renunciation of the office
for any length of time shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuity of the service for the
full term for which he was elected.

Unless otherwise provided by law, the regular election for President and Vice-President shall be held on
the second Monday of May.

The returns of every election for President and Vice-President, duly certified by the board of canvassers
of each province or city, shall be transmitted to the Congress, directed to the President of the Senate.
Upon receipt of the certificates of canvass, the President of the Senate shall, not later than thirty days
after the day of the election, open all certificates in the presence of the Senate and the House of
Representatives in joint public session, and the Congress, upon determination of the authenticity and
due execution thereof in the manner provided by law, canvass the votes.

The person having the highest number of votes shall be proclaimed elected, but in case two or more
shall have an equal and highest number of votes, one of them shall forthwith be chosen by the vote of a
majority of all the Members of both Houses of the Congress, voting separately.

The Congress shall promulgate its rules for the canvassing of the certificates.

The Supreme Court, sitting en banc, shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to the election,
returns, and qualifications of the President or Vice- President, and may promulgate its rules for the
purpose.

SECTION 5. Before they enter on the execution of their office, the President, the Vice-President, or the
Acting President shall take the following oath or affirmation:
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully and conscientiously fulfill my duties as President (or
Vice-President or Acting President) of the Philippines, preserve and defend its Constitution, execute its
laws, do justice to every man, and consecrate myself to the service of the Nation. So help me God.” (In
case of affirmation, last sentence will be omitted.)

SECTION 6. The President shall have an official residence. The salaries of the President and Vice-
President shall be determined by law and shall not be decreased during their tenure. No increase in said
compensation shall take effect until after the expiration of the term of the incumbent during which such
increase was approved. They shall not receive during their tenure any other emolument from the
Government or any other source.

SECTION 7. The President-elect and the Vice-President-elect shall assume office at the beginning of their
terms.

If the President-elect fails to qualify, the Vice-President-elect shall act as President until the President-
elect shall have qualified.

If a President shall not have been chosen, the Vice-President-elect shall act as President until a President
shall have been chosen and qualified.

If at the beginning of the term of the President, the President-elect shall have died or shall have become
permanently disabled, the Vice-President-elect shall become President.

Where no President and Vice-President shall have been chosen or shall have qualified, or where both
shall have died or become permanently disabled, the President of the Senate or, in case of his inability,
the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall act as President until a President or a Vice-President
shall have been chosen and qualified.

The Congress shall, by law, provide for the manner in which one who is to act as President shall be
selected until a President or a Vice-President shall have qualified, in case of death, permanent disability,
or inability of the officials mentioned in the next preceding paragraph.

SECTION 8. In case of death, permanent disability, removal from office, or resignation of the President,
the Vice-President shall become the President to serve the unexpired term. In case of death, permanent
disability, removal from office, or resignation of both the President and Vice-President, the President of
the Senate or, in case of his inability, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, shall then act as
President until the President or Vice-President shall have been elected and qualified.

The Congress shall, by law, provide who shall serve as President in case of death, permanent disability,
or resignation of the Acting President. He shall serve until the President or the Vice-President shall have
been elected and qualified, and be subject to the same restrictions of powers and disqualifications as
the Acting President.

SECTION 9. Whenever there is a vacancy in the Office of the Vice-President during the term for which he
was elected, the President shall nominate a Vice-President from among the Members of the Senate and
the House of Representatives who shall assume office upon confirmation by a majority vote of all the
Members of both Houses of the Congress, voting separately.

SECTION 10. The Congress shall, at ten o’clock in the morning of the third day after the vacancy in the
offices of the President and Vice-President occurs, convene in accordance with its rules without need of
a call and within seven days enact a law calling for a special election to elect a President and a Vice-
President to be held not earlier than forty-five days nor later than sixty days from the time of such call.
The bill calling such special election shall be deemed certified under paragraph 2, Section 26, Article VI
of this Constitution and shall become law upon its approval on third reading by the Congress.
Appropriations for the special election shall be charged against any current appropriations and shall be
exempt from the requirements of paragraph 4, Section 25, Article VI of this Constitution. The convening
of the Congress cannot be suspended nor the special election postponed. No special election shall be
called if the vacancy occurs within eighteen months before the date of the next presidential election.

SECTION 11. Whenever the President transmits to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the
House of Representatives his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of
his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties
shall be discharged by the Vice-President as Acting President.

Whenever a majority of all the Members of the Cabinet transmit to the President of the Senate and to
the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to
discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice-President shall immediately assume the powers
and duties of the office as Acting President.

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President of the Senate and to the Speaker of the
House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall reassume the powers
and duties of his office. Meanwhile, should a majority of all the Members of the Cabinet transmit within
five days to the President of the Senate and to the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written
declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Congress
shall decide the issue. For that purpose, the Congress shall convene, if it is not in session, within forty-
eight hours, in accordance with its rules and without need of call.

If the Congress, within ten days after receipt of the last written declaration, or, if not in session, within
twelve days after it is required to assemble, determines by a two-thirds vote of both Houses, voting
separately, that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice-
President shall act as the President; otherwise, the President shall continue exercising the powers and
duties of his office.

SECTION 12. In case of serious illness of the President, the public shall be informed of the state of his
health. The Members of the Cabinet in charge of national security and foreign relations and the Chief of
Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, shall not be denied access to the President during such
illness.

SECTION 13. The President, Vice-President, the Members of the Cabinet, and their deputies or assistants
shall not, unless otherwise provided in this Constitution, hold any other office or employment during
their tenure. They shall not, during said tenure, directly or indirectly, practice any other profession,
participate in any business, or be financially interested in any contract with, or in any franchise, or
special privilege granted by the Government or any subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof,
including government-owned or controlled corporations or their subsidiaries. They shall strictly avoid
conflict of interest in the conduct of their office.

The spouse and relatives by consanguinity or affinity within the fourth civil degree of the President shall
not during his tenure be appointed as members of the Constitutional Commissions, or the Office of the
Ombudsman, or as Secretaries, Undersecretaries, chairmen or heads of bureaus or offices, including
government-owned or controlled corporations and their subsidiaries.

SECTION 14. Appointments extended by an Acting President shall remain effective, unless revoked by
the elected President within ninety days from his assumption or reassumption of office.

SECTION 15. Two months immediately before the next presidential elections and up to the end of his
term, a President or Acting President shall not make appointments, except temporary appointments to
executive positions when continued vacancies therein will prejudice public service or endanger public
safety.
SECTION 16. The President shall nominate and, with the consent of the Commission on Appointments,
appoint the heads of the executive departments, ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, or
officers of the armed forces from the rank of colonel or naval captain, and other officers whose
appointments are vested in him in this Constitution. He shall also appoint all other officers of the
Government whose appointments are not otherwise provided for by law, and those whom he may be
authorized by law to appoint. The Congress may, by law, vest the appointment of other officers lower in
rank in the President alone, in the courts, or in the heads of departments, agencies, commissions, or
boards.

The President shall have the power to make appointments during the recess of the Congress, whether
voluntary or compulsory, but such appointments shall be effective only until after disapproval by the
Commission on Appointments or until the next adjournment of the Congress.

SECTION 17. The President shall have control of all the executive departments, bureaus, and offices. He
shall ensure that the laws be faithfully executed.

SECTION 18. The President shall be the Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces of the Philippines and
whenever it becomes necessary, he may call out such armed forces to prevent or suppress lawless
violence, invasion or rebellion. In case of invasion or rebellion, when the public safety requires it, he
may, for a period not exceeding sixty days, suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or place
the Philippines or any part thereof under martial law. Within forty-eight hours from the proclamation of
martial law or the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, the President shall submit a
report in person or in writing to the Congress. The Congress, voting jointly, by a vote of at least a
majority of all its Members in regular or special session, may revoke such proclamation or suspension,
which revocation shall not be set aside by the President. Upon the initiative of the President, the
Congress may, in the same manner, extend such proclamation or suspension for a period to be
determined by the Congress, if the invasion or rebellion shall persist and public safety requires it.

The Congress, if not in session, shall, within twenty-four hours following such proclamation or
suspension, convene in accordance with its rules without any need of a call.

The Supreme Court may review, in an appropriate proceeding filed by any citizen, the sufficiency of the
factual basis of the proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the privilege of the writ or the
extension thereof, and must promulgate its decision thereon within thirty days from its filing.

A state of martial law does not suspend the operation of the Constitution, nor supplant the functioning
of the civil courts or legislative assemblies, nor authorize the conferment of jurisdiction on military
courts and agencies over civilians where civil courts are able to function, nor automatically suspend the
privilege of the writ.

The suspension of the privilege of the writ shall apply only to persons judicially charged for rebellion or
offenses inherent in or directly connected with the invasion.

During the suspension of the privilege of the writ, any person thus arrested or detained shall be
judicially charged within three days, otherwise he shall be released.

SECTION 19. Except in cases of impeachment, or as otherwise provided in this Constitution, the
President may grant reprieves, commutations and pardons, and remit fines and forfeitures, after
conviction by final judgment.

He shall also have the power to grant amnesty with the concurrence of a majority of all the Members of
the Congress.

SECTION 20. The President may contract or guarantee foreign loans on behalf of the Republic of the
Philippines with the prior concurrence of the Monetary Board, and subject to such limitations as may be
provided by law. The Monetary Board shall, within thirty days from the end of every quarter of the
calendar year, submit to the Congress a complete report of its decisions on applications for loans to be
contracted or guaranteed by the Government or government-owned and controlled corporations which
would have the effect of increasing the foreign debt, and containing other matters as may be provided
by law.

SECTION 21. No treaty or international agreement shall be valid and effective unless concurred in by at
least two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.

SECTION 22. The President shall submit to the Congress within thirty days from the opening of every
regular session, as the basis of the general appropriations bill, a budget of expenditures and sources of
financing, including receipts from existing and proposed revenue measures.

SECTION 23. The President shall address the Congress at the opening of its regular session. He may also
appear before it at any other time.
ARTICLE VIII

Judicial Department

SECTION 1. The judicial power shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be
established by law.

Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights
which are legally demandable and enforceable, and to determine whether or not there has been a grave
abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or
instrumentality of the Government.

SECTION 2. The Congress shall have the power to define, prescribe, and apportion the jurisdiction of
various courts but may not deprive the Supreme Court of its jurisdiction over cases enumerated in
Section 5 hereof.

No law shall be passed reorganizing the Judiciary when it undermines the security of tenure of its
Members.

SECTION 3. The Judiciary shall enjoy fiscal autonomy. Appropriations for the Judiciary may not be
reduced by the legislature below the amount appropriated for the previous year and, after approval,
shall be automatically and regularly released.

SECTION 4. (1) The Supreme Court shall be composed of a Chief Justice and fourteen Associate Justices.
It may sit en banc or in its discretion, in divisions of three, five, or seven Members. Any vacancy shall be
filled within ninety days from the occurrence thereof.

(2) All cases involving the constitutionality of a treaty, international or executive agreement, or law,
which shall be heard by the Supreme Court en banc, and all other cases which under the Rules of Court
are required to be heard en banc, including those involving the constitutionality, application, or
operation of presidential decrees, proclamations, orders, instructions, ordinances, and other
regulations, shall be decided with the concurrence of a majority of the Members who actually took part
in the deliberations on the issues in the case and voted thereon.
(3) Cases or matters heard by a division shall be decided or resolved with the concurrence of a majority
of the Members who actually took part in the deliberations on the issues in the case and voted thereon,
and in no case, without the concurrence of at least three of such Members. When the required number
is not obtained, the case shall be decided en banc: Provided, that no doctrine or principle of law laid
down by the court in a decision rendered en banc or in division may be modified or reversed except by
the court sitting en banc.

SECTION 5. The Supreme Court shall have the following powers:

(1) Exercise original jurisdiction over cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls,
and over petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, and habeas corpus.

(2) Review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm on appeal or certiorari, as the law or the Rules of Court may
provide, final judgments and orders of lower courts in:

(a) All cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty, international or executive agreement,
law, presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance, or regulation is in question.

(b) All cases involving the legality of any tax, impost, assessment, or toll, or any penalty imposed in
relation thereto.

(c) All cases in which the jurisdiction of any lower court is in issue.

(d) All criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua or higher.

(e) All cases in which only an error or question of law is involved.

(3) Assign temporarily judges of lower courts to other stations as public interest may require. Such
temporary assignment shall not exceed six months without the consent of the judge concerned.

(4) Order a change of venue or place of trial to avoid a miscarriage of justice.

(5) Promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading,
practice, and procedure in all courts, the admission to the practice of law, the Integrated Bar, and legal
assistance to the underprivileged. Such rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for
the speedy disposition of cases, shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade, and shall not diminish,
increase, or modify substantive rights. Rules of procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies
shall remain effective unless disapproved by the Supreme Court.

(6) Appoint all officials and employees of the Judiciary in accordance with the Civil Service Law.

SECTION 6. The Supreme Court shall have administrative supervision over all courts and the personnel
thereof.

SECTION 7. (1) No person shall be appointed Member of the Supreme Court or any lower collegiate
court unless he is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines. A Member of the Supreme Court must be at
least forty years of age, and must have been for fifteen years or more a judge of a lower court or
engaged in the practice of law in the Philippines.

(2) The Congress shall prescribe the qualifications of judges of lower courts, but no person may be
appointed judge thereof unless he is a citizen of the Philippines and a member of the Philippine Bar.

(3) A Member of the Judiciary must be a person of proven competence, integrity, probity, and
independence.

SECTION 8. (1) A Judicial and Bar Council is hereby created under the supervision of the Supreme Court
composed of the Chief Justice as ex officio Chairman, the Secretary of Justice, and a representative of
the Congress as ex officio Members, a representative of the Integrated Bar, a professor of law, a retired
Member of the Supreme Court, and a representative of the private sector.

(2) The regular Members of the Council shall be appointed by the President for a term of four years with
the consent of the Commission on Appointments. Of the Members first appointed, the representative of
the Integrated Bar shall serve for four years, the professor of law for three years, the retired Justice for
two years, and the representative of the private sector for one year.

(3) The Clerk of the Supreme Court shall be the Secretary ex officio of the Council and shall keep a record
of its proceedings.
(4) The regular Members of the Council shall receive such emoluments as may be determined by the
Supreme Court. The Supreme Court shall provide in its annual budget the appropriations for the Council.

(5) The Council shall have the principal function of recommending appointees to the Judiciary. It may
exercise such other functions and duties as the Supreme Court may assign to it.

SECTION 9. The Members of the Supreme Court and judges of lower courts shall be appointed by the
President from a list of at least three nominees prepared by the Judicial and Bar Council for every
vacancy. Such appointments need no confirmation.

For the lower courts, the President shall issue the appointments within ninety days from the submission
of the list.

SECTION 10. The salary of the Chief Justice and of the Associate Justices of the Supreme Court, and of
judges of lower courts shall be fixed by law. During their continuance in office, their salary shall not be
decreased.

SECTION 11. The Members of the Supreme Court and judges of lower courts shall hold office during
good behavior until they reached the age of seventy years or become incapacitated to discharge the
duties of their office. The Supreme Court en banc shall have the power to discipline judges of lower
courts, or order their dismissal by a vote of a majority of the Members who actually took part in the
deliberations on the issues in the case and voted thereon.

SECTION 12. The Members of the Supreme Court and of other courts established by law shall not be
designated to any agency performing quasi-judicial or administrative functions.

SECTION 13. The conclusions of the Supreme Court in any case submitted to it for decision en banc or in
division shall be reached in consultation before the case is assigned to a Member for the writing of the
opinion of the Court. A certification to this effect signed by the Chief Justice shall be issued and a copy
thereof attached to the record of the case and served upon the parties. Any Member who took no part,
or dissented, or abstained from a decision or resolution must state the reason therefor. The same
requirements shall be observed by all lower collegiate courts.
SECTION 14. No decision shall be rendered by any court without expressing therein clearly and distinctly
the facts and the law on which it is based.

No petition for review or motion for reconsideration of a decision of the court shall be refused due
course or denied without stating the legal basis therefor.

SECTION 15. (1) All cases or matters filed after the effectivity of this Constitution must be decided or
resolved within twenty-four months from date of submission for the Supreme Court, and, unless
reduced by the Supreme Court, twelve months for all lower collegiate courts, and three months for all
other lower courts.

(2) A case or matter shall be deemed submitted for decision or resolution upon the filing of the last
pending, brief, or memorandum required by the Rules of Court or by the court itself.

(3) Upon the expiration of the corresponding period, a certification to this effect signed by the Chief
Justice or the presiding judge shall forthwith be issued and a copy thereof attached to the record of the
case or matter, and served upon the parties. The certification shall state why a decision or resolution has
not been rendered or issued within said period.

(4) Despite the expiration of the applicable mandatory period, the court, without prejudice to such
responsibility as may have been incurred in consequence thereof, shall decide or resolve the case or
matter submitted thereto for determination, without further delay.

SECTION 16. The Supreme Court shall, within thirty days from the opening of each regular session of the
Congress, submit to the President and the Congress an annual report on the operations and activities of
the Judiciary.

ARTICLE IX

Constitutional Commissions

A. Common Provisions
SECTION 1. The Constitutional Commissions, which shall be independent, are the Civil Service
Commission, the Commission on Elections, and the Commission on Audit.

SECTION 2. No Member of a Constitutional Commission shall, during his tenure, hold any other office or
employment. Neither shall he engage in the practice of any profession or in the active management or
control of any business which in any way be affected by the functions of his office, nor shall he be
financially interested, directly or indirectly, in any contract with, or in any franchise or privilege granted
by the Government, any of its subdivisions, agencies, or instrumentalities, including government-owned
or controlled corporations or their subsidiaries.

SECTION 3. The salary of the Chairman and the Commissioners shall be fixed by law and shall not be
decreased during their tenure.

SECTION 4. The Constitutional Commissions shall appoint their officials and employees in accordance
with law.

SECTION 5. The Commission shall enjoy fiscal autonomy. Their approved annual appropriations shall be
automatically and regularly released.

SECTION 6. Each Commission en banc may promulgate its own rules concerning pleadings and practice
before it or before any of its offices. Such rules however shall not diminish, increase, or modify
substantive rights.

SECTION 7. Each Commission shall decide by a majority vote of all its Members any case or matter
brought before it within sixty days from the date of its submission for decision or resolution. A case or
matter is deemed submitted for decision or resolution upon the filing of the last pleading, brief, or
memorandum required by the rules of the Commission or by the Commission itself. Unless otherwise
provided by this Constitution or by law, any decision, order, or ruling of each Commission may be
brought to the Supreme Court on certiorari by the aggrieved party within thirty days from receipt of a
copy thereof.

SECTION 8. Each Commission shall perform such other functions as may be provided by law.

B. The Civil Service Commission

SECTION 1. (1) The Civil Service shall be administered by the Civil Service Commission composed of a
Chairman and two Commissioners who shall be natural-born citizens of the Philippines and, at the time
of their appointment, at least thirty-five years of age, with proven capacity for public administration,
and must not have been candidates for any elective position in the elections immediately preceding
their appointment.

(2) The Chairman and the Commissioners shall be appointed by the President with the consent of the
Commission on Appointments for a term of seven years without reappointment. Of those first
appointed, the Chairman shall hold office for seven years, a Commissioner for five years, and another
Commissioner for three years, without reappointment. Appointment to any vacancy shall be only for the
unexpired term of the predecessor. In no case shall any Member be appointed or designated in a
temporary or acting capacity.

SECTION 2. (1) The civil service embraces all branches, subdivisions, instrumentalities, and agencies of
the Government, including government-owned or controlled corporations with original charters.

(2) Appointments in the civil service shall be made only according to merit and fitness to be determined,
as far as practicable, and, except to positions which are policy-determining, primarily confidential, or
highly technical, by competitive examination.

(3) No officer or employee of the civil service shall be removed or suspended except for cause provided
by law.

(4) No officer or employee in the civil service shall engage, directly or indirectly, in any electioneering or
partisan political campaign.

(5) The right to self-organization shall not be denied to government employees.

(6) Temporary employees of the Government shall be given such protection as may be provided by law.

SECTION 3. The Civil Service Commission, as the central personnel agency of the Government, shall
establish a career service and adopt measures to promote morale, efficiency, integrity, responsiveness,
progressiveness, and courtesy in the civil service. It shall strengthen the merit and rewards system,
integrate all human resources development programs for all levels and ranks, and institutionalize a
management climate conducive to public accountability. It shall submit to the President and the
Congress an annual report on its personnel programs.

SECTION 4. All public officers and employees shall take an oath or affirmation to uphold and defend this
Constitution.

SECTION 5. The Congress shall provide for the standardization of compensation of government officials
and employees, including those in government-owned or controlled corporations with original charters,
taking into account the nature of the responsibilities pertaining to, and the qualifications required for
their positions.

SECTION 6. No candidate who has lost in any election shall, within one year after such election, be
appointed to any office in the Government or any government-owned or controlled corporations or in
any of their subsidiaries.

SECTION 7. No elective official shall be eligible for appointment or designation in any capacity to any
public office or position during his tenure.

Unless otherwise allowed by law or by the primary functions of his position, no appointive official shall
hold any other office or employment in the Government or any subdivision, agency or instrumentality
thereof, including government-owned or controlled corporations or their subsidiaries.

SECTION 8. No elective or appointive public officer or employee shall receive additional, double, or
indirect compensation, unless specifically authorized by law, nor accept without the consent of the
Congress, any present, emolument, office, or title of any kind from any foreign government.

Pensions or gratuities shall not be considered as additional, double, or indirect compensation.

C. The Commission on Elections

SECTION 1. (1) There shall be a Commission on Elections composed of a Chairman and six
Commissioners who shall be natural-born citizens of the Philippines and, at the time of their
appointment, at least thirty-five years of age, holders of a college degree, and must not have been
candidates for any elective position in the immediately preceding elections. However, a majority
thereof, including the Chairman, shall be Members of the Philippine Bar who have been engaged in the
practice of law for at least ten years.

(2) The Chairman and the Commissioners shall be appointed by the President with the consent of the
Commission on Appointments for a term of seven years without reappointment. Of those first
appointed, three Members shall hold office for seven years, two Members for five years, and the last
Members for three years, without reappointment. Appointment to any vacancy shall be only for the
unexpired term of the predecessor. In no case shall any Member be appointed or designated in a
temporary or acting capacity.

SECTION 2. The Commission on Elections shall exercise the following powers and functions:

(1) Enforce and administer all laws and regulations relative to the conduct of an election, plebiscite,
initiative, referendum, and recall.

(2) Exercise exclusive original jurisdiction over all contests relating to the elections, returns, and
qualifications of all elective regional, provincial, and city officials, and appellate jurisdiction over all
contests involving elective municipal officials decided by trial courts of general jurisdiction, or involving
elective barangay officials decided by trial courts of limited jurisdiction.

Decisions, final orders, or rulings of the Commission on election contests involving elective municipal
and barangay offices shall be final, executory, and not appealable.

(3) Decide, except those involving the right to vote, all questions affecting elections, including
determination of the number and location of polling places, appointment of election officials and
inspectors, and registration of voters.

(4) Deputize, with the concurrence of the President, law enforcement agencies and instrumentalities of
the Government, including the Armed Forces of the Philippines, for the exclusive purpose of ensuring
free, orderly, honest, peaceful, and credible elections.

(5) Register, after sufficient publication, political parties, organizations, or coalitions which, in addition to
other requirements, must present their platform or program of government; and accredit citizens’ arms
of the Commission on Elections. Religious denominations and sects shall not be registered. Those which
seek to achieve their goals through violence or unlawful means, or refuse to uphold and adhere to this
Constitution, or which are supported by any foreign government shall likewise be refused registration.

Financial contributions from foreign governments and their agencies to political parties, organizations,
coalitions, or candidates related to elections constitute interference in national affairs, and, when
accepted, shall be an additional ground for the cancellation of their registration with the Commission, in
addition to other penalties that may be prescribed by law.

(6) File, upon a verified complaint, or on its own initiative, petitions in court for inclusion or exclusion of
voters; investigate and, where appropriate, prosecute cases of violations of election laws, including acts
or omissions constituting election frauds, offenses, and malpractices.

(7) Recommend to the Congress effective measures to minimize election spending, including limitation
of places where propaganda materials shall be posted, and to prevent and penalize all forms of election
frauds, offenses, malpractices, and nuisance candidacies.

(8) Recommend to the President the removal of any officer or employee it has deputized, or the
imposition of any other disciplinary action, for violation or disregard of, or disobedience to its directive,
order, or decision.

(9) Submit to the President and the Congress a comprehensive report on the conduct of each election,
plebiscite, initiative, referendum, or recall.

SECTION 3. The Commission on Elections may sit en banc or in two divisions, and shall promulgate its
rules of procedure in order to expedite disposition of election cases, including pre-proclamation
controversies. All such election cases shall be heard and decided in division, provided that motions for
reconsideration of decisions shall be decided by the Commission en banc.

SECTION 4. The Commission may, during the election period, supervise or regulate the enjoyment or
utilization of all franchises or permits for the operation of transportation and other public utilities,
media of communication or information, all grants, special privileges, or concessions granted by the
Government or any subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof, including any government-owned or
controlled corporation or its subsidiary. Such supervision or regulation shall aim to ensure equal
opportunity, time, and space, and the right to reply, including reasonable, equal rates therefor, for
public information campaigns and forums among candidates in connection with the objective of holding
free, orderly, honest, peaceful, and credible elections.
SECTION 5. No pardon, amnesty, parole, or suspension of sentence for violation of election laws, rules,
and regulations shall be granted by the President without the favorable recommendation of the
Commission.

SECTION 6. A free and open party system shall be allowed to evolve according to the free choice of the
people, subject to the provisions of this Article.

SECTION 7. No votes cast in favor of a political party, organization, or coalition shall be valid, except for
those registered under the party-list system as provided in this Constitution.

SECTION 8. Political parties, or organizations or coalitions registered under the party-list system, shall
not be represented in the voters’ registration boards, boards of election inspectors, boards of
canvassers, or other similar bodies. However, they shall be entitled to appoint poll watchers in
accordance with law.

SECTION 9. Unless otherwise fixed by the Commission in special cases, the election period shall
commence ninety days before the day of the election and shall end thirty days after.

SECTION 10. Bona fide candidates for any public office shall be free from any form of harassment and
discrimination.

SECTION 11. Funds certified by the Commission as necessary to defray the expenses for holding regular
and special elections, plebiscites, initiatives, referenda, and recalls, shall be provided in the regular or
special appropriations and, once approved, shall be released automatically upon certification by the
Chairman of the Commission.

D. Commission on Audit

SECTION 1. (1) There shall be a Commission on Audit composed of a Chairman and two Commissioners,
who shall be natural-born citizens of the Philippines and, at the time of their appointment, at least
thirty-five years of age, certified public accountants with not less than ten years of auditing experience,
or members of the Philippine Bar who have been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years,
and must not have been candidates for any elective position in the elections immediately preceding
their appointment. At no time shall all Members of the Commission belong to the same profession.
(2) The Chairman and the Commissioners shall be appointed by the President with the consent of the
Commission on Appointments for a term of seven years without reappointment. Of those first
appointed, the Chairman shall hold office for seven years, one Commissioner for five years, and the
other Commissioner for three years, without reappointment. Appointment to any vacancy shall be only
for the unexpired portion of the term of the predecessor. In no case shall any Member be appointed or
designated in a temporary or acting capacity.

SECTION 2. (1) The Commission on Audit shall have the power, authority, and duty to examine, audit,
and settle all accounts pertaining to the revenue and receipts of, and expenditures or uses of funds and
property, owned or held in trust by, or pertaining to, the Government, or any of its subdivisions,
agencies, or instrumentalities, including government-owned or controlled corporations with original
charters, and on a post-audit basis: (a) constitutional bodies, commissions and offices that have been
granted fiscal autonomy under this Constitution; (b) autonomous state colleges and universities; (c)
other government-owned or controlled corporations and their subsidiaries; and (d) such non-
governmental entities receiving subsidy or equity, directly or indirectly, from or through the
Government, which are required by law or the granting institution to submit to such audit as a condition
of subsidy or equity. However, where the internal control system of the audited agencies is inadequate,
the Commission may adopt such measures, including temporary or special pre-audit, as are necessary
and appropriate to correct the deficiencies. It shall keep the general accounts of the Government and,
for such period as may be provided by law, preserve the vouchers and other supporting papers
pertaining thereto.

(2) The Commission shall have exclusive authority, subject to the limitations in this Article, to define the
scope of its audit and examination, establish the techniques and methods required therefor, and
promulgate accounting and auditing rules and regulations, including those for the prevention and
disallowance of irregular, unnecessary, excessive, extravagant, or unconscionable expenditures, or uses
of government funds and properties.

SECTION 3. No law shall be passed exempting any entity of the Government or its subsidiary in any guise
whatever, or any investment of public funds, from the jurisdiction of the Commission on Audit.

SECTION 4. The Commission shall submit to the President and the Congress, within the time fixed by
law, an annual report covering the financial condition and operation of the Government, its subdivisions,
agencies, and instrumentalities, including government-owned or controlled corporations, and non-
governmental entities subject to its audit, and recommend measures necessary to improve their
effectiveness and efficiency. It shall submit such other reports as may be required by law.
ARTICLE X

Local Government

General Provisions

SECTION 1. The territorial and political subdivisions of the Republic of the Philippines are the provinces,
cities, municipalities, and barangays. There shall be autonomous regions in Muslim Mindanao and the
Cordilleras as hereinafter provided.

SECTION 2. The territorial and political subdivisions shall enjoy local autonomy.

SECTION 3. The Congress shall enact a local government code which shall provide for a more responsive
and accountable local government structure instituted through a system of decentralization with
effective mechanisms of recall, initiative, and referendum, allocate among the different local
government units their powers, responsibilities, and resources, and provide for the qualifications,
election, appointment and removal, term, salaries, powers and functions and duties of local officials, and
all other matters relating to the organization and operation of the local units.

SECTION 4. The President of the Philippines shall exercise general supervision over local governments.
Provinces with respect to component cities and municipalities, and cities and municipalities with respect
to component barangays shall ensure that the acts of their component units are within the scope of
their prescribed powers and functions.

SECTION 5. Each local government unit shall have the power to create its own sources of revenues and
to levy taxes, fees, and charges subject to such guidelines and limitations as the Congress may provide,
consistent with the basic policy of local autonomy. Such taxes, fees, and charges shall accrue exclusively
to the local governments.

SECTION 6. Local government units shall have a just share, as determined by law, in the national taxes
which shall be automatically released to them.
SECTION 7. Local governments shall be entitled to an equitable share in the proceeds of the utilization
and development of the national wealth within their respective areas, in the manner provided by law,
including sharing the same with the inhabitants by way of direct benefits.

SECTION 8. The term of office of elective local officials, except barangay officials, which shall be
determined by law, shall be three years and no such official shall serve for more than three consecutive
terms. Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be considered as an
interruption in the continuity of his service for the full term for which he was elected.

SECTION 9. Legislative bodies of local governments shall have sectoral representation as may be
prescribed by law.

SECTION 10. No province, city, municipality, or barangay may be created, divided, merged, abolished, or
its boundary substantially altered, except in accordance with the criteria established in the Local
Government Code and subject to approval by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite in the political
units directly affected.

SECTION 11. The Congress may, by law, create special metropolitan political subdivisions, subject to a
plebiscite as set forth in Section 10 hereof. The component cities and municipalities shall retain their
basic autonomy and shall be entitled to their own local executives and legislative assemblies. The
jurisdiction of the metropolitan authority that will hereby be created shall be limited to basic services
requiring coordination.

SECTION 12. Cities that are highly urbanized, as determined by law, and component cities whose
charters prohibit their voters from voting for provincial elective officials, shall be independent of the
province. The voters of component cities within a province, whose charters contain no such prohibition,
shall not be deprived of their right to vote for elective provincial officials.

SECTION 13. Local government units may group themselves, consolidate or coordinate their efforts,
services, and resources for purposes commonly beneficial to them in accordance with law.

SECTION 14. The President shall provide for regional development councils or other similar bodies
composed of local government officials, regional heads of departments and other government offices,
and representatives from non-governmental organizations within the regions for purposes of
administrative decentralization to strengthen the autonomy of the units therein and to accelerate the
economic and social growth and development of the units in the region.
Autonomous Region

SECTION 15. There shall be created autonomous regions in Muslim Mindanao and in the Cordilleras
consisting of provinces, cities, municipalities, and geographical areas sharing common and distinctive
historical and cultural heritage, economic and social structures, and other relevant characteristics within
the framework of this Constitution and the national sovereignty as well as territorial integrity of the
Republic of the Philippines.

SECTION 16. The President shall exercise general supervision over autonomous regions to ensure that
the laws are faithfully executed.

SECTION 17. All powers, functions, and responsibilities not granted by this Constitution or by law to the
autonomous regions shall be vested in the National Government.

SECTION 18. The Congress shall enact an organic act for each autonomous region with the assistance
and participation of the regional consultative commission composed of representatives appointed by
the President from a list of nominees from multisectoral bodies. The organic act shall define the basic
structure of government for the region consisting of the executive department and legislative assembly,
both of which shall be elective and representative of the constituent political units. The organic acts
shall likewise provide for special courts with personal, family, and property law jurisdiction consistent
with the provisions of this Constitution and national laws.

The creation of the autonomous region shall be effective when approved by majority of the votes cast
by the constituent units in a plebiscite called for the purpose, provided that only provinces, cities, and
geographic areas voting favorably in such plebiscite shall be included in the autonomous region.

SECTION 19. The first Congress elected under this Constitution shall, within eighteen months from the
time of organization of both Houses, pass the organic acts for the autonomous regions in Muslim
Mindanao and the Cordilleras.

SECTION 20. Within its territorial jurisdiction and subject to the provisions of this Constitution and
national laws, the organic act of autonomous regions shall provide for legislative powers over:

(1) Administrative organization;

(2) Creation of sources of revenues;

(3) Ancestral domain and natural resources;

(4) Personal, family, and property relations;

(5) Regional urban and rural planning development;

(6) Economic, social, and tourism development;

(7) Educational policies;

(8) Preservation and development of the cultural heritage; and

(9) Such other matters as may be authorized by law for the promotion of the general welfare of the
people of the region.

SECTION 21. The preservation of peace and order within the regions shall be the responsibility of the
local police agencies which shall be organized, maintained, supervised, and utilized in accordance with
applicable laws. The defense and security of the regions shall be the responsibility of the National
Government.

ARTICLE XI

Accountability of Public Officers

SECTION 1. Public office is a public trust. Public officers and employees must at all times be accountable
to the people, serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty, and efficiency, act with
patriotism and justice, and lead modest lives.
SECTION 2. The President, the Vice-President, the Members of the Supreme Court, the Members of the
Constitutional Commissions, and the Ombudsman may be removed from office, on impeachment for,
and conviction of, culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other
high crimes, or betrayal of public trust. All other public officers and employees may be removed from
office as provided by law, but not by impeachment.

SECTION 3. (1) The House of Representatives shall have the exclusive power to initiate all cases of
impeachment.

(2) A verified complaint for impeachment may be filed by any Member of the House of Representatives
or by any citizen upon a resolution of endorsement by any Member thereof, which shall be included in
the Order of Business within ten session days, and referred to the proper Committee within three
session days thereafter. The Committee, after hearing, and by a majority vote of all its Members, shall
submit its report to the House within sixty session days from such referral, together with the
corresponding resolution. The resolution shall be calendared for consideration by the House within ten
session days from receipt thereof.

(3) A vote of at least one-third of all the Members of the House shall be necessary either to affirm a
favorable resolution with the Articles of Impeachment of the Committee, or override its contrary
resolution. The vote of each Member shall be recorded.

(4) In case the verified complaint or resolution of impeachment is filed by at least one-third of all the
Members of the House, the same shall constitute the Articles of Impeachment, and trial by the Senate
shall forthwith proceed.

(5) No impeachment proceedings shall be initiated against the same official more than once within a
period of one year.

(6) The Senate shall have the sole power to try and decide all cases of impeachment. When sitting for
that purpose, the Senators shall be on oath or affirmation. When the President of the Philippines is on
trial, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court shall preside, but shall not vote. No person shall be
convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.

(7) Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than removal from office and
disqualification to hold any office under the Republic of the Philippines, but the party convicted shall
nevertheless be liable and subject to prosecution, trial, and punishment according to law.
(8) The Congress shall promulgate its rules on impeachment to effectively carry out the purpose of this
section.

SECTION 4. The present anti-graft court known as the Sandiganbayan shall continue to function and
exercise its jurisdiction as now or hereafter may be provided by law.

SECTION 5. There is hereby created the independent Office of the Ombudsman, composed of the
Ombudsman to be known as Tanodbayan, one overall Deputy and at least one Deputy each for Luzon,
Visayas, and Mindanao. A separate Deputy for the military establishment may likewise be appointed.

SECTION 6. The officials and employees of the Office of the Ombudsman, other than the Deputies, shall
be appointed by the Ombudsman according to the Civil Service Law.

SECTION 7. The existing Tanodbayan shall hereafter be known as the Office of the Special Prosecutor. It
shall continue to function and exercise its powers as now or hereafter may be provided by law, except
those conferred on the Office of the Ombudsman created under this Constitution.

SECTION 8. The Ombudsman and his Deputies shall be natural-born citizens of the Philippines, and at
the time of their appointment, at least forty years old, of recognized probity and independence, and
members of the Philippine Bar, and must not have been candidates for any elective office in the
immediately preceding election. The Ombudsman must have for ten years or more been a judge or
engaged in the practice of law in the Philippines.

During their tenure, they shall be subject to the same disqualifications and prohibitions as provided for
in Section 2 of Article IX-A of this Constitution.

SECTION 9. The Ombudsman and his Deputies shall be appointed by the President from a list of at least
six nominees prepared by the Judicial and Bar Council, and from a list of three nominees for every
vacancy thereafter. Such appointments shall require no confirmation. All vacancies shall be filled within
three months after they occur.

SECTION 10. The Ombudsman and his Deputies shall have the rank of Chairman and Members,
respectively, of the Constitutional Commissions, and they shall receive the same salary, which shall not
be decreased during their term of office.
SECTION 11. The Ombudsman and his Deputies shall serve for a term of seven years without
reappointment. They shall not be qualified to run for any office in the election immediately succeeding
their cessation from office.

SECTION 12. The Ombudsman and his Deputies, as protectors of the people, shall act promptly on
complaints filed in any form or manner against public officials or employees of the Government, or any
subdivision, agency or instrumentality thereof, including government-owned or controlled corporations,
and shall, in appropriate cases, notify the complainants of the action taken and the result thereof.

SECTION 13. The Office of the Ombudsman shall have the following powers, functions, and duties:

(1) Investigate on its own, or on complaint by any person, any act or omission of any public official,
employee, office or agency, when such act or omission appears to be illegal, unjust, improper, or
inefficient.

(2) Direct, upon complaint or at its own instance, any public official or employee of the Government, or
any subdivision, agency or instrumentality thereof, as well as of any government-owned or controlled
corporation with original charter, to perform and expedite any act or duty required by law, or to stop,
prevent, and correct any abuse or impropriety in the performance of duties.

(3) Direct the officer concerned to take appropriate action against a public official or employee at fault,
and recommend his removal, suspension, demotion, fine, censure, or prosecution, and ensure
compliance therewith.

(4) Direct the officer concerned, in any appropriate case, and subject to such limitations as may be
provided by law, to furnish it with copies of documents relating to contracts or transactions entered into
by his office involving the disbursement or use of public funds or properties, and report any irregularity
to the Commission on Audit for appropriate action.

(5) Request any government agency for assistance and information necessary in the discharge of its
responsibilities, and to examine, if necessary, pertinent records and documents.

(6) Publicize matters covered by its investigation when circumstances so warrant and with due
prudence.
(7) Determine the causes of inefficiency, red tape, mismanagement, fraud, and corruption in the
Government and make recommendations for their elimination and the observance of high standards of
ethics and efficiency.

(8) Promulgate its rules of procedure and exercise such other powers or perform such functions or
duties as may be provided by law.

SECTION 14. The Office of the Ombudsman shall enjoy fiscal autonomy. Its approved annual
appropriations shall be automatically and regularly released.

SECTION 15. The right of the State to recover properties unlawfully acquired by public officials or
employees, from them or from their nominees or transferees, shall not be barred by prescription,
laches, or estoppel.

SECTION 16. No loan, guaranty, or other form of financial accommodation for any business purpose may
be granted, directly or indirectly, by any government-owned or controlled bank or financial institution to
the President, the Vice-President, the Members of the Cabinet, the Congress, the Supreme Court, and
the Constitutional Commissions, the Ombudsman, or to any firm or entity in which they have controlling
interest, during their tenure.

SECTION 17. A public officer or employee shall, upon assumption of office and as often thereafter as may
be required by law, submit a declaration under oath of his assets, liabilities, and net worth. In the case of
the President, the Vice-President, the Members of the Cabinet, the Congress, the Supreme Court, the
Constitutional Commissions and other constitutional offices, and officers of the armed forces with
general or flag rank, the declaration shall be disclosed to the public in the manner provided by law.

SECTION 18. Public officers and employees owe the State and this Constitution allegiance at all times,
and any public officer or employee who seeks to change his citizenship or acquire the status of an
immigrant of another country during his tenure shall be dealt with by law.

ARTICLE XII

National Economy and Patrimony

SECTION 1. The goals of the national economy are a more equitable distribution of opportunities,
income, and wealth; a sustained increase in the amount of goods and services produced by the nation
for the benefit of the people; and an expanding productivity as the key to raising the quality of life for
all, especially the underprivileged.

The State shall promote industrialization and full employment based on sound agricultural development
and agrarian reform, through industries that make full and efficient use of human and natural resources,
and which are competitive in both domestic and foreign markets. However, the State shall protect
Filipino enterprises against unfair foreign competition and trade practices.

In the pursuit of these goals, all sectors of the economy and all regions of the country shall be given
optimum opportunity to develop. Private enterprises, including corporations, cooperatives, and similar
collective organizations, shall be encouraged to broaden the base of their ownership.

SECTION 2. All lands of the public domain, waters, minerals, coal, petroleum, and other mineral oils, all
forces of potential energy, fisheries, forests or timber, wildlife, flora and fauna, and other natural
resources are owned by the State. With the exception of agricultural lands, all other natural resources
shall not be alienated. The exploration, development, and utilization of natural resources shall be under
the full control and supervision of the State. The State may directly undertake such activities, or it may
enter into co-production, joint venture, or production-sharing agreements with Filipino citizens, or
corporations or associations at least sixty per centum of whose capital is owned by such citizens. Such
agreements may be for a period not exceeding twenty-five years, renewable for not more than twenty-
five years, and under such terms and conditions as may be provided by law. In cases of water rights for
irrigation, water supply, fisheries, or industrial uses other than the development of water power,
beneficial use may be the measure and limit of the grant.

The State shall protect the nation’s marine wealth in its archipelagic waters, territorial sea, and exclusive
economic zone, and reserve its use and enjoyment exclusively to Filipino citizens.

The Congress may, by law, allow small-scale utilization of natural resources by Filipino citizens, as well as
cooperative fish farming, with priority to subsistence fishermen and fishworkers in rivers, lakes, bays,
and lagoons.

The President may enter into agreements with foreign-owned corporations involving either technical or
financial assistance for large-scale exploration, development, and utilization of minerals, petroleum, and
other mineral oils according to the general terms and conditions provided by law, based on real
contributions to the economic growth and general welfare of the country. In such agreements, the State
shall promote the development and use of local scientific and technical resources.

The President shall notify the Congress of every contract entered into in accordance with this provision,
within thirty days from its execution.

SECTION 3. Lands of the public domain are classified into agricultural, forest or timber, mineral lands,
and national parks. Agricultural lands of the public domain may be further classified by law according to
the uses which they may be devoted. Alienable lands of the public domain shall be limited to agricultural
lands. Private corporations or associations may not hold such alienable lands of the public domain
except by lease, for a period not exceeding twenty-five years, renewable for not more than twenty-five
years, and not to exceed one thousand hectares in area. Citizens of the Philippines may lease not more
than five hundred hectares, or acquire not more than twelve hectares thereof by purchase, homestead,
or grant.

Taking into account the requirements of conservation, ecology, and development, and subject to the
requirements of agrarian reform, the Congress shall determine, by law, the size of lands of the public
domain which may be acquired, developed, held, or leased and the conditions therefor.

SECTION 4. The Congress shall, as soon as possible, determine by law the specific limits of forest lands
and national parks, marking clearly their boundaries on the ground. Thereafter, such forest lands and
national parks shall be conserved and may not be increased nor diminished, except by law. The Congress
shall provide, for such period as it may determine, measures to prohibit logging in endangered forests
and watershed areas.

SECTION 5. The State, subject to the provisions of this Constitution and national development policies
and programs, shall protect the rights of indigenous cultural communities to their ancestral lands to
ensure their economic, social, and cultural well-being.

The Congress may provide for the applicability of customary laws governing property rights or relations
in determining the ownership and extent of ancestral domain.

SECTION 6. The use of property bears a social function, and all economic agents shall contribute to the
common good. Individuals and private groups, including corporations, cooperatives, and similar
collective organizations, shall have the right to own, establish, and operate economic enterprises,
subject to the duty of the State to promote distributive justice and to intervene when the common good
so demands.
SECTION 7. Save in cases of hereditary succession, no private lands shall be transferred or conveyed
except to individuals, corporations, or associations qualified to acquire or hold lands of the public
domain.

SECTION 8. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 7 of this Article, a natural-born citizen of the
Philippines who has lost his Philippine citizenship may be a transferee of private lands, subject to
limitations provided by law.

SECTION 9. The Congress may establish an independent economic and planning agency headed by the
President, which shall, after consultations with the appropriate public agencies, various private sectors,
and local government units, recommend to Congress, and implement continuing integrated and
coordinated programs and policies for national development.

Until the Congress provides otherwise, the National Economic and Development Authority shall function
as the independent planning agency of the government.

SECTION 10. The Congress shall, upon recommendation of the economic and planning agency, when the
national interest dictates, reserve to citizens of the Philippines or to corporations or associations at least
sixty per centum of whose capital is owned by such citizens, or such higher percentage as Congress may
prescribe, certain areas of investments. The Congress shall enact measures that will encourage the
formation and operation of enterprises whose capital is wholly owned by Filipinos.

In the grant of rights, privileges, and concessions covering the national economy and patrimony, the
State shall give preference to qualified Filipinos.

The State shall regulate and exercise authority over foreign investments within its national jurisdiction
and in accordance with its national goals and priorities.

SECTION 11. No franchise, certificate, or any other form of authorization for the operation of a public
utility shall be granted except to citizens of the Philippines or to corporations or associations organized
under the laws of the Philippines at least sixty per centum of whose capital is owned by such citizens,
nor shall such franchise, certificate, or authorization be exclusive in character or for a longer period than
fifty years. Neither shall any such franchise or right be granted except under the condition that it shall be
subject to amendment, alteration, or repeal by the Congress when the common good so requires. The
State shall encourage equity participation in public utilities by the general public. The participation of
foreign investors in the governing body of any public utility enterprise shall be limited to their
proportionate share in its capital, and all the executive and managing officers of such corporation or
association must be citizens of the Philippines.

SECTION 12. The State shall promote the preferential use of Filipino labor, domestic materials and
locally produced goods, and adopt measures that help make them competitive.

SECTION 13. The State shall pursue a trade policy that serves the general welfare and utilizes all forms
and arrangements of exchange on the basis of equality and reciprocity.

SECTION 14. The sustained development of a reservoir of national talents consisting of Filipino scientists,
entrepreneurs, professionals, managers, high-level technical manpower and skilled workers and
craftsmen in all fields shall be promoted by the State. The State shall encourage appropriate technology
and regulate its transfer for the national benefit.

The practice of all professions in the Philippines shall be limited to Filipino citizens, save in cases
prescribed by law.

SECTION 15. The Congress shall create an agency to promote the viability and growth of cooperatives as
instruments for social justice and economic development.

SECTION 16. The Congress shall not, except by general law, provide for the formation, organization, or
regulation of private corporations. Government-owned or controlled corporations may be created or
established by special charters in the interest of the common good and subject to the test of economic
viability.

SECTION 17. In times of national emergency, when the public interest so requires, the State may, during
the emergency and under reasonable terms prescribed by it, temporarily take over or direct the
operation of any privately owned public utility or business affected with public interest.

SECTION 18. The State may, in the interest of national welfare or defense, establish and operate vital
industries and, upon payment of just compensation, transfer to public ownership utilities and other
private enterprises to be operated by the Government.
SECTION 19. The State shall regulate or prohibit monopolies when the public interest so requires. No
combinations in restraint of trade or unfair competition shall be allowed.

SECTION 20. The Congress shall establish an independent central monetary authority, the members of
whose governing board must be natural-born Filipino citizens, of known probity, integrity, and
patriotism, the majority of whom shall come from the private sector. They shall also be subject to such
other qualifications and disabilities as may be prescribed by law. The authority shall provide policy
direction in the areas of money, banking, and credit. It shall have supervision over the operations of
banks and exercise such regulatory powers as may be provided by law over the operations of finance
companies and other institutions performing similar functions.

Until the Congress otherwise provides, the Central Bank of the Philippines, operating under existing
laws, shall function as the central monetary authority.

SECTION 21. Foreign loans may only be incurred in accordance with law and the regulation of the
monetary authority. Information on foreign loans obtained or guaranteed by the Government shall be
made available to the public.

SECTION 22. Acts which circumvent or negate any of the provisions of this Article shall be considered
inimical to the national interest and subject to criminal and civil sanctions, as may be provided by law.

ARTICLE XIII

Social Justice and Human Rights

SECTION 1. The Congress shall give highest priority to the enactment of measures that protect and
enhance the right of all the people to human dignity, reduce social, economic, and political inequalities,
and remove cultural inequities by equitably diffusing wealth and political power for the common good.

To this end, the State shall regulate the acquisition, ownership, use, and disposition of property and its
increments.

SECTION 2. The promotion of social justice shall include the commitment to create economic
opportunities based on freedom of initiative and self-reliance.
Labor

SECTION 3. The State shall afford full protection to labor, local and overseas, organized and unorganized,
and promote full employment and equality of employment opportunities for all.

It shall guarantee the rights of all workers to self-organization, collective bargaining and negotiations,
and peaceful concerted activities, including the right to strike in accordance with law. They shall be
entitled to security of tenure, humane conditions of work, and a living wage. They shall also participate
in policy and decision-making processes affecting their rights and benefits as may be provided by law.

The State shall promote the principle of shared responsibility between workers and employers and the
preferential use of voluntary modes in settling disputes, including conciliation, and shall enforce their
mutual compliance therewith to foster industrial peace.

The State shall regulate the relations between workers and employers, recognizing the right of labor to
its just share in the fruits of production and the right of enterprises to reasonable returns on
investments, and to expansion and growth.

Agrarian and Natural Resources Reform

SECTION 4. The State shall, by law, undertake an agrarian reform program founded on the right of
farmers and regular farmworkers, who are landless, to own directly or collectively the lands they till or,
in the case of other farmworkers, to receive a just share of the fruits thereof. To this end, the State shall
encourage and undertake the just distribution of all agricultural lands, subject to such priorities and
reasonable retention limits as the Congress may prescribe, taking into account ecological,
developmental, or equity considerations, and subject to the payment of just compensation. In
determining retention limits, the State shall respect the right of small landowners. The State shall
further provide incentives for voluntary land-sharing.

SECTION 5. The State shall recognize the right of farmers, farmworkers, and landowners, as well as
cooperatives, and other independent farmers’ organizations to participate in the planning, organization,
and management of the program, and shall provide support to agriculture through appropriate
technology and research, and adequate financial, production, marketing, and other support services.
SECTION 6. The State shall apply the principles of agrarian reform or stewardship, whenever applicable
in accordance with law, in the disposition or utilization of other natural resources, including lands of the
public domain under lease or concession suitable to agriculture, subject to prior rights, homestead rights
of small settlers, and the rights of indigenous communities to their ancestral lands.

The State may resettle landless farmers and farmworkers in its own agricultural estates which shall be
distributed to them in the manner provided by law.

SECTION 7. The State shall protect the rights of subsistence fishermen, especially of local communities,
to the preferential use of local marine and fishing resources, both inland and offshore. It shall provide
support to such fishermen through appropriate technology and research, adequate financial,
production, and marketing assistance, and other services. The State shall also protect, develop, and
conserve such resources. The protection shall extend to offshore fishing grounds of subsistence
fishermen against foreign intrusion. Fishworkers shall receive a just share from their labor in the
utilization of marine and fishing resources.

SECTION 8. The State shall provide incentives to landowners to invest the proceeds of the agrarian
reform program to promote industrialization, employment creation, and privatization of public sector
enterprises. Financial instruments used as payment for their lands shall be honored as equity in
enterprises of their choice.

Urban Land Reform and Housing

SECTION 9. The State shall, by law, and for the common good, undertake, in cooperation with the public
sector, a continuing program of urban land reform and housing which will make available at affordable
cost decent housing and basic services to underprivileged and homeless citizens in urban centers and
resettlements areas. It shall also promote adequate employment opportunities to such citizens. In the
implementation of such program the State shall respect the rights of small property owners.

SECTION 10. Urban or rural poor dwellers shall not be evicted nor their dwellings demolished, except in
accordance with law and in a just and humane manner.

No resettlement of urban or rural dwellers shall be undertaken without adequate consultation with
them and the communities where they are to be relocated.
Health

SECTION 11. The State shall adopt an integrated and comprehensive approach to health development
which shall endeavor to make essential goods, health and other social services available to all the people
at affordable cost. There shall be priority for the needs of the underprivileged sick, elderly, disabled,
women, and children. The State shall endeavor to provide free medical care to paupers.

SECTION 12. The State shall establish and maintain an effective food and drug regulatory system and
undertake appropriate health manpower development and research, responsive to the country’s health
needs and problems.

SECTION 13. The State shall establish a special agency for disabled persons for rehabilitation, self-
development and self-reliance, and their integration into the mainstream of society.

Women

SECTION 14. The State shall protect working women by providing safe and healthful working conditions,
taking into account their maternal functions, and such facilities and opportunities that will enhance their
welfare and enable them to realize their full potential in the service of the nation.

Role and Rights of People’s Organizations

SECTION 15. The State shall respect the role of independent people’s organizations to enable the people
to pursue and protect, within the democratic framework, their legitimate and collective interests and
aspirations through peaceful and lawful means.

People’s organizations are bona fide associations of citizens with demonstrated capacity to promote the
public interest and with identifiable leadership, membership, and structure.

SECTION 16. The right of the people and their organizations to effective and reasonable participation at
all levels of social, political, and economic decision-making shall not be abridged. The State shall, by law,
facilitate the establishment of adequate consultation mechanisms.
Human Rights

SECTION 17. (1) There is hereby created an independent office called the Commission on Human Rights.

(2) The Commission shall be composed of a Chairman and four Members who must be natural-born
citizens of the Philippines and a majority of whom shall be members of the Bar. The term of office and
other qualifications and disabilities of the Members of the Commission shall be provided by law.

(3) Until this Commission is constituted, the existing Presidential Committee on Human Rights shall
continue to exercise its present functions and powers.

(4) The approved annual appropriations of the Commission shall be automatically and regularly
released.

SECTION 18. The Commission on Human Rights shall have the following powers and functions:

(1) Investigate, on its own or on complaint by any party, all forms of human rights violations involving
civil and political rights;

(2) Adopt its operational guidelines and rules of procedure, and cite for contempt for violations thereof
in accordance with the Rules of Court;

(3) Provide appropriate legal measures for the protection of human rights of all persons within the
Philippines, as well as Filipinos residing abroad, and provide for preventive measures and legal aid
services to the underprivileged whose human rights have been violated or need protection;

(4) Exercise visitorial powers over jails, prisons, or detention facilities;

(5) Establish a continuing program of research, education, and information to enhance respect for the
primacy of human rights;
(6) Recommend to the Congress effective measures to promote human rights and to provide for
compensation to victims of violations of human rights, or their families;

(7) Monitor the Philippine Government’s compliance with international treaty obligations on human
rights;

(8) Grant immunity from prosecution to any person whose testimony or whose possession of documents
or other evidence is necessary or convenient to determine the truth in any investigation conducted by it
or under its authority;

(9) Request the assistance of any department, bureau, office, or agency in the performance of its
functions;

(10) Appoint its officers and employees in accordance with law; and

(11) Perform such other duties and functions as may be provided by law.

SECTION 19. The Congress may provide for other cases of violations of human rights that should fall
within the authority of the Commission, taking into account its recommendations.

ARTICLE XIV

Education, Science and Technology, Arts, Culture, and Sports

Education

SECTION 1. The State shall protect and promote the right of all citizens to quality education at all levels
and shall take appropriate steps to make such education accessible to all.

SECTION 2. The State shall:

(1) Establish, maintain, and support a complete, adequate, and integrated system of education relevant
to the needs of the people and society;

(2) Establish and maintain a system of free public education in the elementary and high school levels.
Without limiting the natural right of parents to rear their children, elementary education is compulsory
for all children of school age;

(3) Establish and maintain a system of scholarship grants, student loan programs, subsidies, and other
incentives which shall be available to deserving students in both public and private schools, especially to
the underprivileged;

(4) Encourage non-formal, informal, and indigenous learning systems, as well as self-learning,
independent, and out-of-school study programs particularly those that respond to community needs;
and

(5) Provide adult citizens, the disabled, and out-of-school youth with training in civics, vocational
efficiency, and other skills.

SECTION 3. (1) All educational institutions shall include the study of the Constitution as part of the
curricula.

(2) They shall inculcate patriotism and nationalism, foster love of humanity, respect for human rights,
appreciation of the role of national heroes in the historical development of the country, teach the rights
and duties of citizenship, strengthen ethical and spiritual values, develop moral character and personal
discipline, encourage critical and creative thinking, broaden scientific and technological knowledge, and
promote vocational efficiency.

(3) At the option expressed in writing by the parents or guardians, religion shall be allowed to be taught
to their children or wards in public elementary and high schools within the regular class hours by
instructors designated or approved by the religious authorities of the religion to which the children or
wards belong, without additional cost to the Government.

SECTION 4. (1) The State recognizes the complementary roles of public and private institutions in the
educational system and shall exercise reasonable supervision and regulation of all educational
institutions.
(2) Educational institutions, other than those established by religious groups and mission boards, shall
be owned solely by citizens of the Philippines or corporations or associations at least sixty per centum of
the capital of which is owned by such citizens. The Congress may, however, require increased Filipino
equity participation in all educational institutions.

The control and administration of educational institutions shall be vested in citizens of the Philippines.

No educational institution shall be established exclusively for aliens and no group of aliens shall
comprise more than one-third of the enrollment in any school. The provisions of this subsection shall
not apply to schools established for foreign diplomatic personnel and their dependents and, unless
otherwise provided by law, for other foreign temporary residents.

(3) All revenues and assets of non-stock, non-profit educational institutions used actually, directly, and
exclusively for educational purposes shall be exempt from taxes and duties. Upon the dissolution or
cessation of the corporate existence of such institutions, their assets shall be disposed of in the manner
provided by law.

Proprietary educational institutions, including those cooperatively owned, may likewise be entitled to
such exemptions subject to the limitations provided by law including restrictions on dividends and
provisions for reinvestment.

(4) Subject to conditions prescribed by law, all grants, endowments, donations, or contributions used
actually, directly, and exclusively for educational purposes shall be exempt from tax.

SECTION 5. (1) The State shall take into account regional and sectoral needs and conditions and shall
encourage local planning in the development of educational policies and programs.

(2) Academic freedom shall be enjoyed in all institutions of higher learning.

(3) Every citizen has a right to select a profession or course of study, subject to fair, reasonable, and
equitable admission and academic requirements.
(4) The State shall enhance the right of teachers to professional advancement. Non-teaching academic
and non-academic personnel shall enjoy the protection of the State.

(5) The State shall assign the highest budgetary priority to education and ensure that teaching will
attract and retain its rightful share of the best available talents through adequate remuneration and
other means of job satisfaction and fulfillment.

Language

SECTION 6. The national language of the Philippines is Filipino. As it evolves, it shall be further developed
and enriched on the basis of existing Philippine and other languages.

Subject to provisions of law and as the Congress may deem appropriate, the Government shall take
steps to initiate and sustain the use of Filipino as a medium of official communication and as language of
instruction in the educational system.

SECTION 7. For purposes of communication and instruction, the official languages of the Philippines are
Filipino and, until otherwise provided by law, English.

The regional languages are the auxiliary official languages in the regions and shall serve as auxiliary
media of instruction therein.

Spanish and Arabic shall be promoted on a voluntary and optional basis.

SECTION 8. This Constitution shall be promulgated in Filipino and English and shall be translated into
major regional languages, Arabic, and Spanish.

SECTION 9. The Congress shall establish a national language commission composed of representatives of
various regions and disciplines which shall undertake, coordinate, and promote researches for the
development, propagation, and preservation of Filipino and other languages.

Science and Technology

SECTION 10. Science and technology are essential for national development and progress. The State
shall give priority to research and development, invention, innovation, and their utilization; and to
science and technology education, training, and services. It shall support indigenous, appropriate, and
self-reliant scientific and technological capabilities, and their application to the country’s productive
systems and national life.

SECTION 11. The Congress may provide for incentives, including tax deductions, to encourage private
participation in programs of basic and applied scientific research. Scholarships, grants-in-aid, or other
forms of incentives shall be provided to deserving science students, researchers, scientists, inventors,
technologists, and specially gifted citizens.

SECTION 12. The State shall regulate the transfer and promote the adaptation of technology from all
sources for the national benefit. It shall encourage the widest participation of private groups, local
governments, and community-based organizations in the generation and utilization of science and
technology.

SECTION 13. The State shall protect and secure the exclusive rights of scientists, inventors, artists, and
other gifted citizens to their intellectual property and creations, particularly when beneficial to the
people, for such period as may be provided by law.

Arts and Culture

SECTION 14. The State shall foster the preservation, enrichment, and dynamic evolution of a Filipino
national culture based on the principle of unity in diversity in a climate of free artistic and intellectual
expression.

SECTION 15. Arts and letters shall enjoy the patronage of the State. The State shall conserve, promote,
and popularize the nation’s historical and cultural heritage and resources, as well as artistic creations.

SECTION 16. All the country’s artistic and historic wealth constitutes the cultural treasure of the nation
and shall be under the protection of the State which may regulate its disposition.

SECTION 17. The State shall recognize, respect, and protect the rights of indigenous cultural
communities to preserve and develop their cultures, traditions, and institutions. It shall consider these
rights in the formulation of national plans and policies.
SECTION 18. (1) The State shall ensure equal access to cultural opportunities through the educational
system, public or private cultural entities, scholarships, grants and other incentives, and community
cultural centers, and other public venues.

(2) The State shall encourage and support researches and studies on the arts and culture.

Sports

SECTION 19. (1) The State shall promote physical education and encourage sports programs, league
competitions, and amateur sports, including training for international competitions, to foster self-
discipline, teamwork, and excellence for the development of a healthy and alert citizenry.

(2) All educational institutions shall undertake regular sports activities throughout the country in
cooperation with athletic clubs and other sectors.

ARTICLE XV

The Family

SECTION 1. The State recognizes the Filipino family as the foundation of the nation. Accordingly, it shall
strengthen its solidarity and actively promote its total development.

SECTION 2. Marriage, as an inviolable social institution, is the foundation of the family and shall be
protected by the State.

SECTION 3. The State shall defend:

(1) The right of spouses to found a family in accordance with their religious convictions and the demands
of responsible parenthood;
(2) The right of children to assistance, including proper care and nutrition, and special protection from
all forms of neglect, abuse, cruelty, exploitation, and other conditions prejudicial to their development;

(3) The right of the family to a family living wage and income; and

(4) The right of families or family associations to participate in the planning and implementation of
policies and programs that affect them.

SECTION 4. The family has the duty to care for its elderly members but the State may also do so through
just programs of social security.

ARTICLE XVI

General Provisions

SECTION 1. The flag of the Philippines shall be red, white, and blue, with a sun and three stars, as
consecrated and honored by the people and recognized by law.

SECTION 2. The Congress may, by law, adopt a new name for the country, a national anthem, or a
national seal, which shall all be truly reflective and symbolic of the ideals, history, and traditions of the
people. Such law shall take effect only upon its ratification by the people in a national referendum.

SECTION 3. The State may not be sued without its consent.

SECTION 4. The Armed Forces of the Philippines shall be composed of a citizen armed force which shall
undergo military training and serve, as may be provided by law. It shall keep a regular force necessary
for the security of the State.

SECTION 5. (1) All members of the armed forces shall take an oath or affirmation to uphold and defend
this Constitution.
(2) The State shall strengthen the patriotic spirit and nationalist consciousness of the military, and
respect for people’s rights in the performance of their duty.

(3) Professionalism in the armed forces and adequate remuneration and benefits of its members shall be
a prime concern of the State. The armed forces shall be insulated from partisan politics.

No member of the military shall engage directly or indirectly in any partisan political activity, except to
vote.

(4) No member of the armed forces in the active service shall, at any time, be appointed or designated in
any capacity to a civilian position in the Government including government-owned or controlled
corporations or any of their subsidiaries.

(5) Laws on retirement of military officers shall not allow extension of their service.

(6) The officers and men of the regular force of the armed forces shall be recruited proportionately from
all provinces and cities as far as practicable.

(7) The tour of duty of the Chief of Staff of the armed forces shall not exceed three years. However, in
times of war or other national emergency declared by the Congress, the President may extend such tour
of duty.

SECTION 6. The State shall establish and maintain one police force, which shall be national in scope and
civilian in character, to be administered and controlled by a national police commission. The authority of
local executives over the police units in their jurisdiction shall be provided by law.

SECTION 7. The State shall provide immediate and adequate care, benefits, and other forms of
assistance to war veterans and veterans of military campaigns, their surviving spouses and orphans.
Funds shall be provided therefor and due consideration shall be given them in the disposition of
agricultural lands of the public domain and, in appropriate cases, in the utilization of natural resources.

SECTION 8. The State shall, from time to time, review to upgrade the pensions and other benefits due to
retirees of both the government and the private sectors.
SECTION 9. The State shall protect consumers from trade malpractices and from substandard or
hazardous products.

SECTION 10. The State shall provide the policy environment for the full development of Filipino
capability and the emergence of communication structures suitable to the needs and aspirations of the
nation and the balanced flow of information into, out of, and across the country, in accordance with a
policy that respects the freedom of speech and of the press.

SECTION 11. (1) The ownership and management of mass media shall be limited to citizens of the
Philippines, or to corporations, cooperatives or associations, wholly-owned and managed by such
citizens.

The Congress shall regulate or prohibit monopolies in commercial mass media when the public interest
so requires. No combinations in restraint of trade or unfair competition therein shall be allowed.

(2) The advertising industry is impressed with public interest, and shall be regulated by law for the
protection of consumers and the promotion of the general welfare.

Only Filipino citizens or corporations or associations at least seventy per centum of the capital of which
is owned by such citizens shall be allowed to engage in the advertising industry.

The participation of foreign investors in the governing body of entities in such industry shall be limited
to their proportionate share in the capital thereof, and all the executive and managing officers of such
entities must be citizens of the Philippines.

SECTION 12. The Congress may create a consultative body to advise the President on policies affecting
indigenous cultural communities, the majority of the members of which shall come from such
communities.

ARTICLE XVII

Amendments or Revisions
SECTION 1. Any amendment to, or revision of, this Constitution may be proposed by:

(1) The Congress, upon a vote of three-fourths of all its Members; or

(2) A constitutional convention.

SECTION 2. Amendments to this Constitution may likewise be directly proposed by the people through
initiative upon a petition of at least twelve per centum of the total number of registered voters, of which
every legislative district must be represented by at least three per centum of the registered voters
therein. No amendment under this section shall be authorized within five years following the ratification
of this Constitution nor oftener than once every five years thereafter.

The Congress shall provide for the implementation of the exercise of this right.

SECTION 3. The Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of all its Members, call a constitutional
convention, or by a majority vote of all its Members, submit to the electorate the question of calling
such a convention.

SECTION 4. Any amendment to, or revision of, this Constitution under Section 1 hereof shall be valid
when ratified by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite which shall be held not earlier than sixty days
nor later than ninety days after the approval of such amendment or revision.

Any amendment under Section 2 hereof shall be valid when ratified by a majority of the votes cast in a
plebiscite which shall be held not earlier than sixty days nor later than ninety days after the certification
by the Commission on Elections of the sufficiency of the petition.

ARTICLE XVIII

Transitory Provisions

SECTION 1. The first elections of Members of the Congress under this Constitution shall be held on the
second Monday of May, 1987.
The first local elections shall be held on a date to be determined by the President, which may be
simultaneous with the election of the Members of the Congress. It shall include the election of all
Members of the city or municipal councils in the Metropolitan Manila area.

SECTION 2. The Senators, Members of the House of Representatives, and the local officials first elected
under this Constitution shall serve until noon of June 30, 1992.

Of the Senators elected in the election of 1992, the first twelve obtaining the highest number of votes
shall serve for six years and the remaining twelve for three years.

SECTION 3. All existing laws, decrees, executive orders, proclamations, letters of instructions, and other
executive issuances not inconsistent with this Constitution shall remain operative until amended,
repealed, or revoked.

SECTION 4. All existing treaties or international agreements which have not been ratified shall not be
renewed or extended without the concurrence of at least two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.

SECTION 5. The six-year term of the incumbent President and Vice-President elected in the February 7,
1986 election is, for purposes of synchronization of elections, hereby extended to noon of June 30,
1992.

The first regular elections for the President and Vice-President under this Constitution shall be held on
the second Monday of May, 1992.

SECTION 6. The incumbent President shall continue to exercise legislative powers until the first Congress
is convened.

SECTION 7. Until a law is passed, the President may fill by appointment from a list of nominees by the
respective sectors the seats reserved for sectoral representation in paragraph (2), Section 5 of Article VI
of this Constitution.

SECTION 8. Until otherwise provided by the Congress, the President may constitute the Metropolitan
Authority to be composed of the heads of all local government units comprising the Metropolitan
Manila area.
SECTION 9. A sub-province shall continue to exist and operate until it is converted into a regular
province or until its component municipalities are reverted to the mother province.

SECTION 10. All courts existing at the time of the ratification of this Constitution shall continue to
exercise their jurisdiction, until otherwise provided by law. The provisions of the existing Rules of Court,
judiciary acts, and procedural laws not inconsistent with this Constitution shall remain operative unless
amended or repealed by the Supreme Court or the Congress.

SECTION 11. The incumbent Members of the Judiciary shall continue in office until they reach the age of
seventy years or become incapacitated to discharge the duties of their office or are removed for cause.

SECTION 12. The Supreme Court shall, within one year after the ratification of this Constitution, adopt a
systematic plan to expedite the decision or resolution of cases or matters pending in the Supreme Court
or the lower courts prior to the effectivity of this Constitution. A similar plan shall be adopted for all
special courts and quasi-judicial bodies.

SECTION 13. The legal effect of the lapse, before the ratification of this Constitution, of the applicable
period for the decision or resolution of the cases or matters submitted for adjudication by the courts,
shall be determined by the Supreme Court as soon as practicable.

SECTION 14. The provisions of paragraphs (3) and (4), Section 15 of Article VIII of this Constitution shall
apply to cases or matters filed before the ratification of this Constitution, when the applicable period
lapses after such ratification.

SECTION 15. The incumbent Members of the Civil Service Commission, the Commission on Elections, and
the Commission on Audit shall continue in office for one year after the ratification of this Constitution,
unless they are sooner removed for cause or become incapacitated to discharge the duties of their office
or appointed to a new term thereunder. In no case shall any Member serve longer than seven years
including service before the ratification of this Constitution.

SECTION 16. Career civil service employees separated from the service not for cause but as a result of
the reorganization pursuant to Proclamation No. 3 dated March 25, 1986 and the reorganization
following the ratification of this Constitution shall be entitled to appropriate separation pay and to
retirement and other benefits accruing to them under the laws of general application in force at the
time of their separation. In lieu thereof, at the option of the employees, they may be considered for
employment in the Government or in any of its subdivisions, instrumentalities, or agencies, including
government-owned or controlled corporations and their subsidiaries. This provision also applies to
career officers whose resignation, tendered in line with the existing policy, had been accepted.

SECTION 17. Until the Congress provides otherwise, the President shall receive an annual salary of three
hundred thousand pesos; the Vice-President, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of
Representatives, and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, two hundred forty thousand pesos each;
the Senators, the Members of the House of Representatives, the Associate Justices of the Supreme
Court, and the Chairmen of the Constitutional Commissions, two hundred four thousand pesos each;
and the Members of the Constitutional Commissions, one hundred eighty thousand pesos each.

SECTION 18. At the earliest possible time, the Government shall increase the salary scales of the other
officials and employees of the National Government.

SECTION 19. All properties, records, equipment, buildings, facilities, and other assets of any office or
body abolished or reorganized under Proclamation No. 3 dated March 25, 1986 or this Constitution shall
be transferred to the office or body to which its powers, functions, and responsibilities substantially
pertain.

SECTION 20. The first Congress shall give priority to the determination of the period for the full
implementation of free public secondary education.

SECTION 21. The Congress shall provide efficacious procedures and adequate remedies for the reversion
to the State of all lands of the public domain and real rights connected therewith which were acquired in
violation of the Constitution or the public land laws, or through corrupt practices. No transfer or
disposition of such lands or real rights shall be allowed until after the lapse of one year from the
ratification of this Constitution.

SECTION 22. At the earliest possible time, the Government shall expropriate idle or abandoned
agricultural lands as may be defined by law, for distribution to the beneficiaries of the agrarian reform
program.

SECTION 23. Advertising entities affected by paragraph (2), Section 11 of Article XVI of this Constitution
shall have five years from its ratification to comply on a graduated and proportionate basis with the
minimum Filipino ownership requirement therein.
SECTION 24. Private armies and other armed groups not recognized by duly constituted authority shall
be dismantled. All paramilitary forces including Civilian Home Defense Forces not consistent with the
citizen armed force established in this Constitution, shall be dissolved or, where appropriate, converted
into the regular force.

SECTION 25. After the expiration in 1991 of the Agreement between the Republic of the Philippines and
the United States of America concerning Military Bases, foreign military bases, troops, or facilities shall
not be allowed in the Philippines except under a treaty duly concurred in by the Senate and, when the
Congress so requires, ratified by a majority of the votes cast by the people in a national referendum held
for that purpose, and recognized as a treaty by the other contracting State.

SECTION 26. The authority to issue sequestration or freeze orders under Proclamation No. 3 dated
March 25, 1986 in relation to the recovery of ill-gotten wealth shall remain operative for not more than
eighteen months after the ratification of this Constitution. However, in the national interest, as certified
by the President, the Congress may extend said period.

A sequestration or freeze order shall be issued only upon showing of a prima facie case. The order and
the list of the sequestered or frozen properties shall forthwith be registered with the proper court. For
orders issued before the ratification of this Constitution, the corresponding judicial action or proceeding
shall be filed within six months from its ratification. For those issued after such ratification, the judicial
action or proceeding shall be commenced within six months from the issuance thereof.

The sequestration or freeze order is deemed automatically lifted if no judicial action or proceeding is
commenced as herein provided.

SECTION 27. This Constitution shall take effect immediately upon its ratification by a majority of the
votes cast in a plebiscite held for the purpose and shall supersede all previous Constitutions.

Ratified: February 2, 1987

Source: CDAsia
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

All content is in the public domain unless otherwise stated.

Feedback Form

ABOUT GOVPH

Learn more about the Philippine government, its structure, how government works and the people
behind it.

GOV.PH

Official Gazette

Open Data Portal

GOVERNMENT LINKS

The President

Office of the President

Office of the Vice President

Senate of the Philippines

House of Representatives

Supreme Court

Court of Appeals

Sandiganbayan

Section 20. Reclassification of Lands. -

(a) A city or municipality may, through an ordinance passed by the sanggunian after conducting public
hearings for the purpose, authorize the reclassification of agricultural lands and provide for the manner
of their utilization or disposition in the following cases: (1) when the land ceases to be economically
feasible and sound for agricultural purposes as determined by the Department of Agriculture or (2)
where the land shall have substantially greater economic value for residential, commercial, or industrial
purposes, as determined by the sanggunian concerned: Provided, That such reclassification shall be
limited to the following percentage of the total agricultural land area at the time of the passage of the
ordinance:
(1) For highly urbanized and independent component cities, fifteen percent (15%);

(2) For component cities and first to the third class municipalities, ten percent (10%); and

(3) For fourth to sixth class municipalities, five percent (5%): Provided, further, That agricultural lands
distributed to agrarian reform beneficiaries pursuant to Republic Act Numbered Sixty-six hundred fifty-
seven (R.A. No. 6657). otherwise known as "The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law", shall not be
affected by the said reclassification and the conversion of such lands into other purposes shall be
governed by Section 65 of said Act.

(b) The President may, when public interest so requires and upon recommendation of the National
Economic and Development Authority, authorize a city or municipality to reclassify lands in excess of the
limits set in the next preceding paragraph.

(c) The local government units shall, in conformity with existing laws, continue to prepare their
respective comprehensive land use plans enacted through zoning ordinances which shall be the primary
and dominant bases for the future use of land resources: Provided. That the requirements for food
production, human settlements, and industrial expansion shall be taken into consideration in the
preparation of such plans.

(d) Where approval by a national agency is required for reclassification, such approval shall not be
unreasonably withheld. Failure to act on a proper and complete application for reclassification within
three (3) months from receipt of the same shall be deemed as approval thereof.

(e) Nothing in this Section shall be construed as repealing, amending, or modifying in any manner the
provisions of R.A. No. 6657.

Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT

Manila
EN BANC

G.R. No. 78742 July 14, 1989

ASSOCIATION OF SMALL LANDOWNERS IN THE PHILIPPINES, INC., JUANITO D. GOMEZ, GERARDO B.

ALARCIO, FELIPE A. GUICO, JR., BERNARDO M. ALMONTE, CANUTO RAMIR B. CABRITO, ISIDRO T. GUICO,
FELISA I. LLAMIDO, FAUSTO J. SALVA, REYNALDO G. ESTRADA, FELISA C. BAUTISTA, ESMENIA J. CABE,
TEODORO B. MADRIAGA, AUREA J. PRESTOSA, EMERENCIANA J. ISLA, FELICISIMA C. ARRESTO,
CONSUELO M. MORALES, BENJAMIN R. SEGISMUNDO, CIRILA A. JOSE & NAPOLEON S. FERRER,
petitioners,

vs.

HONORABLE SECRETARY OF AGRARIAN REFORM, respondent.

G.R. No. 79310 July 14, 1989

ARSENIO AL. ACUNA, NEWTON JISON, VICTORINO FERRARIS, DENNIS JEREZA, HERMINIGILDO GUSTILO,
PAULINO D. TOLENTINO and PLANTERS' COMMITTEE, INC., Victorias Mill District, Victorias, Negros
Occidental, petitioners,

vs.

JOKER ARROYO, PHILIP E. JUICO and PRESIDENTIAL AGRARIAN REFORM COUNCIL, respondents.

G.R. No. 79744 July 14, 1989

INOCENTES PABICO, petitioner,

vs.

HON. PHILIP E. JUICO, SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM, HON. JOKER ARROYO,
EXECUTIVE SECRETARY OF THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT, and Messrs. SALVADOR TALENTO, JAIME
ABOGADO, CONRADO AVANCENA and ROBERTO TAAY, respondents.

G.R. No. 79777 July 14, 1989

NICOLAS S. MANAAY and AGUSTIN HERMANO, JR., petitioners,

vs.

HON. PHILIP ELLA JUICO, as Secretary of Agrarian Reform, and LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES,
respondents.

CRUZ, J.:

In ancient mythology, Antaeus was a terrible giant who blocked and challenged Hercules for his life on
his way to Mycenae after performing his eleventh labor. The two wrestled mightily and Hercules flung
his adversary to the ground thinking him dead, but Antaeus rose even stronger to resume their struggle.
This happened several times to Hercules' increasing amazement. Finally, as they continued grappling, it
dawned on Hercules that Antaeus was the son of Gaea and could never die as long as any part of his
body was touching his Mother Earth. Thus forewarned, Hercules then held Antaeus up in the air, beyond
the reach of the sustaining soil, and crushed him to death.

Mother Earth. The sustaining soil. The giver of life, without whose invigorating touch even the powerful
Antaeus weakened and died.

The cases before us are not as fanciful as the foregoing tale. But they also tell of the elemental forces of
life and death, of men and women who, like Antaeus need the sustaining strength of the precious earth
to stay alive.

"Land for the Landless" is a slogan that underscores the acute imbalance in the distribution of this
precious resource among our people. But it is more than a slogan. Through the brooding centuries, it has
become a battle-cry dramatizing the increasingly urgent demand of the dispossessed among us for a plot
of earth as their place in the sun.

Recognizing this need, the Constitution in 1935 mandated the policy of social justice to "insure the well-
being and economic security of all the people," 1 especially the less privileged. In 1973, the new
Constitution affirmed this goal adding specifically that "the State shall regulate the acquisition,
ownership, use, enjoyment and disposition of private property and equitably diffuse property ownership
and profits." 2 Significantly, there was also the specific injunction to "formulate and implement an
agrarian reform program aimed at emancipating the tenant from the bondage of the soil." 3
The Constitution of 1987 was not to be outdone. Besides echoing these sentiments, it also adopted one
whole and separate Article XIII on Social Justice and Human Rights, containing grandiose but
undoubtedly sincere provisions for the uplift of the common people. These include a call in the following
words for the adoption by the State of an agrarian reform program:

SEC. 4. The State shall, by law, undertake an agrarian reform program founded on the right of farmers
and regular farmworkers, who are landless, to own directly or collectively the lands they till or, in the
case of other farmworkers, to receive a just share of the fruits thereof. To this end, the State shall
encourage and undertake the just distribution of all agricultural lands, subject to such priorities and
reasonable retention limits as the Congress may prescribe, taking into account ecological,
developmental, or equity considerations and subject to the payment of just compensation. In
determining retention limits, the State shall respect the right of small landowners. The State shall
further provide incentives for voluntary land-sharing.

Earlier, in fact, R.A. No. 3844, otherwise known as the Agricultural Land Reform Code, had already been
enacted by the Congress of the Philippines on August 8, 1963, in line with the above-stated principles.
This was substantially superseded almost a decade later by P.D. No. 27, which was promulgated on
October 21, 1972, along with martial law, to provide for the compulsory acquisition of private lands for
distribution among tenant-farmers and to specify maximum retention limits for landowners.

The people power revolution of 1986 did not change and indeed even energized the thrust for agrarian
reform. Thus, on July 17, 1987, President Corazon C. Aquino issued E.O. No. 228, declaring full land
ownership in favor of the beneficiaries of P.D. No. 27 and providing for the valuation of still unvalued
lands covered by the decree as well as the manner of their payment. This was followed on July 22, 1987
by Presidential Proclamation No. 131, instituting a comprehensive agrarian reform program (CARP), and
E.O. No. 229, providing the mechanics for its implementation.

Subsequently, with its formal organization, the revived Congress of the Philippines took over legislative
power from the President and started its own deliberations, including extensive public hearings, on the
improvement of the interests of farmers. The result, after almost a year of spirited debate, was the
enactment of R.A. No. 6657, otherwise known as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988,
which President Aquino signed on June 10, 1988. This law, while considerably changing the earlier
mentioned enactments, nevertheless gives them suppletory effect insofar as they are not inconsistent
with its provisions. 4

The above-captioned cases have been consolidated because they involve common legal questions,
including serious challenges to the constitutionality of the several measures mentioned above. They will
be the subject of one common discussion and resolution, The different antecedents of each case will
require separate treatment, however, and will first be explained hereunder.
G.R. No. 79777

Squarely raised in this petition is the constitutionality of P.D. No. 27, E.O. Nos. 228 and 229, and R.A. No.
6657.

The subjects of this petition are a 9-hectare riceland worked by four tenants and owned by petitioner
Nicolas Manaay and his wife and a 5-hectare riceland worked by four tenants and owned by petitioner
Augustin Hermano, Jr. The tenants were declared full owners of these lands by E.O. No. 228 as qualified
farmers under P.D. No. 27.

The petitioners are questioning P.D. No. 27 and E.O. Nos. 228 and 229 on grounds inter alia of
separation of powers, due process, equal protection and the constitutional limitation that no private
property shall be taken for public use without just compensation.

They contend that President Aquino usurped legislative power when she promulgated E.O. No. 228. The
said measure is invalid also for violation of Article XIII, Section 4, of the Constitution, for failure to
provide for retention limits for small landowners. Moreover, it does not conform to Article VI, Section
25(4) and the other requisites of a valid appropriation.

In connection with the determination of just compensation, the petitioners argue that the same may be
made only by a court of justice and not by the President of the Philippines. They invoke the recent cases
of EPZA v. Dulay 5 and Manotok v. National Food Authority. 6 Moreover, the just compensation
contemplated by the Bill of Rights is payable in money or in cash and not in the form of bonds or other
things of value.

In considering the rentals as advance payment on the land, the executive order also deprives the
petitioners of their property rights as protected by due process. The equal protection clause is also
violated because the order places the burden of solving the agrarian problems on the owners only of
agricultural lands. No similar obligation is imposed on the owners of other properties.

The petitioners also maintain that in declaring the beneficiaries under P.D. No. 27 to be the owners of
the lands occupied by them, E.O. No. 228 ignored judicial prerogatives and so violated due process.
Worse, the measure would not solve the agrarian problem because even the small farmers are deprived
of their lands and the retention rights guaranteed by the Constitution.
In his Comment, the Solicitor General stresses that P.D. No. 27 has already been upheld in the earlier
cases of Chavez v. Zobel, 7 Gonzales v. Estrella, 8 and Association of Rice and Corn Producers of the
Philippines, Inc. v. The National Land Reform Council. 9 The determination of just compensation by the
executive authorities conformably to the formula prescribed under the questioned order is at best initial
or preliminary only. It does not foreclose judicial intervention whenever sought or warranted. At any
rate, the challenge to the order is premature because no valuation of their property has as yet been
made by the Department of Agrarian Reform. The petitioners are also not proper parties because the
lands owned by them do not exceed the maximum retention limit of 7 hectares.

Replying, the petitioners insist they are proper parties because P.D. No. 27 does not provide for
retention limits on tenanted lands and that in any event their petition is a class suit brought in behalf of
landowners with landholdings below 24 hectares. They maintain that the determination of just
compensation by the administrative authorities is a final ascertainment. As for the cases invoked by the
public respondent, the constitutionality of P.D. No. 27 was merely assumed in Chavez, while what was
decided in Gonzales was the validity of the imposition of martial law.

In the amended petition dated November 22, 1588, it is contended that P.D. No. 27, E.O. Nos. 228 and
229 (except Sections 20 and 21) have been impliedly repealed by R.A. No. 6657. Nevertheless, this
statute should itself also be declared unconstitutional because it suffers from substantially the same
infirmities as the earlier measures.

A petition for intervention was filed with leave of court on June 1, 1988 by Vicente Cruz, owner of a 1.
83- hectare land, who complained that the DAR was insisting on the implementation of P.D. No. 27 and
E.O. No. 228 despite a compromise agreement he had reached with his tenant on the payment of
rentals. In a subsequent motion dated April 10, 1989, he adopted the allegations in the basic amended
petition that the above- mentioned enactments have been impliedly repealed by R.A. No. 6657.

G.R. No. 79310

The petitioners herein are landowners and sugar planters in the Victorias Mill District, Victorias, Negros
Occidental. Co-petitioner Planters' Committee, Inc. is an organization composed of 1,400 planter-
members. This petition seeks to prohibit the implementation of Proc. No. 131 and E.O. No. 229.

The petitioners claim that the power to provide for a Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program as
decreed by the Constitution belongs to Congress and not the President. Although they agree that the
President could exercise legislative power until the Congress was convened, she could do so only to
enact emergency measures during the transition period. At that, even assuming that the interim
legislative power of the President was properly exercised, Proc. No. 131 and E.O. No. 229 would still
have to be annulled for violating the constitutional provisions on just compensation, due process, and
equal protection.

They also argue that under Section 2 of Proc. No. 131 which provides:

Agrarian Reform Fund.-There is hereby created a special fund, to be known as the Agrarian Reform
Fund, an initial amount of FIFTY BILLION PESOS (P50,000,000,000.00) to cover the estimated cost of the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program from 1987 to 1992 which shall be sourced from the receipts
of the sale of the assets of the Asset Privatization Trust and Receipts of sale of ill-gotten wealth received
through the Presidential Commission on Good Government and such other sources as government may
deem appropriate. The amounts collected and accruing to this special fund shall be considered
automatically appropriated for the purpose authorized in this Proclamation the amount appropriated is
in futuro, not in esse. The money needed to cover the cost of the contemplated expropriation has yet to
be raised and cannot be appropriated at this time.

Furthermore, they contend that taking must be simultaneous with payment of just compensation as it is
traditionally understood, i.e., with money and in full, but no such payment is contemplated in Section 5
of the E.O. No. 229. On the contrary, Section 6, thereof provides that the Land Bank of the Philippines
"shall compensate the landowner in an amount to be established by the government, which shall be
based on the owner's declaration of current fair market value as provided in Section 4 hereof, but
subject to certain controls to be defined and promulgated by the Presidential Agrarian Reform Council."
This compensation may not be paid fully in money but in any of several modes that may consist of part
cash and part bond, with interest, maturing periodically, or direct payment in cash or bond as may be
mutually agreed upon by the beneficiary and the landowner or as may be prescribed or approved by the
PARC.

The petitioners also argue that in the issuance of the two measures, no effort was made to make a
careful study of the sugar planters' situation. There is no tenancy problem in the sugar areas that can
justify the application of the CARP to them. To the extent that the sugar planters have been lumped in
the same legislation with other farmers, although they are a separate group with problems exclusively
their own, their right to equal protection has been violated.

A motion for intervention was filed on August 27,1987 by the National Federation of Sugarcane Planters
(NASP) which claims a membership of at least 20,000 individual sugar planters all over the country. On
September 10, 1987, another motion for intervention was filed, this time by Manuel Barcelona, et al.,
representing coconut and riceland owners. Both motions were granted by the Court.
NASP alleges that President Aquino had no authority to fund the Agrarian Reform Program and that, in
any event, the appropriation is invalid because of uncertainty in the amount appropriated. Section 2 of
Proc. No. 131 and Sections 20 and 21 of E.O. No. 229 provide for an initial appropriation of fifty billion
pesos and thus specifies the minimum rather than the maximum authorized amount. This is not allowed.
Furthermore, the stated initial amount has not been certified to by the National Treasurer as actually
available.

Two additional arguments are made by Barcelona, to wit, the failure to establish by clear and convincing
evidence the necessity for the exercise of the powers of eminent domain, and the violation of the
fundamental right to own property.

The petitioners also decry the penalty for non-registration of the lands, which is the expropriation of the
said land for an amount equal to the government assessor's valuation of the land for tax purposes. On
the other hand, if the landowner declares his own valuation he is unjustly required to immediately pay
the corresponding taxes on the land, in violation of the uniformity rule.

In his consolidated Comment, the Solicitor General first invokes the presumption of constitutionality in
favor of Proc. No. 131 and E.O. No. 229. He also justifies the necessity for the expropriation as explained
in the "whereas" clauses of the Proclamation and submits that, contrary to the petitioner's contention, a
pilot project to determine the feasibility of CARP and a general survey on the people's opinion thereon
are not indispensable prerequisites to its promulgation.

On the alleged violation of the equal protection clause, the sugar planters have failed to show that they
belong to a different class and should be differently treated. The Comment also suggests the possibility
of Congress first distributing public agricultural lands and scheduling the expropriation of private
agricultural lands later. From this viewpoint, the petition for prohibition would be premature.

The public respondent also points out that the constitutional prohibition is against the payment of
public money without the corresponding appropriation. There is no rule that only money already in
existence can be the subject of an appropriation law. Finally, the earmarking of fifty billion pesos as
Agrarian Reform Fund, although denominated as an initial amount, is actually the maximum sum
appropriated. The word "initial" simply means that additional amounts may be appropriated later when
necessary.
On April 11, 1988, Prudencio Serrano, a coconut planter, filed a petition on his own behalf, assailing the
constitutionality of E.O. No. 229. In addition to the arguments already raised, Serrano contends that the
measure is unconstitutional because:

(1) Only public lands should be included in the CARP;

(2) E.O. No. 229 embraces more than one subject which is not expressed in the title;

(3) The power of the President to legislate was terminated on July 2, 1987; and

(4) The appropriation of a P50 billion special fund from the National Treasury did not originate from the
House of Representatives.

G.R. No. 79744

The petitioner alleges that the then Secretary of Department of Agrarian Reform, in violation of due
process and the requirement for just compensation, placed his landholding under the coverage of
Operation Land Transfer. Certificates of Land Transfer were subsequently issued to the private
respondents, who then refused payment of lease rentals to him.

On September 3, 1986, the petitioner protested the erroneous inclusion of his small landholding under
Operation Land transfer and asked for the recall and cancellation of the Certificates of Land Transfer in
the name of the private respondents. He claims that on December 24, 1986, his petition was denied
without hearing. On February 17, 1987, he filed a motion for reconsideration, which had not been acted
upon when E.O. Nos. 228 and 229 were issued. These orders rendered his motion moot and academic
because they directly effected the transfer of his land to the private respondents.

The petitioner now argues that:

(1) E.O. Nos. 228 and 229 were invalidly issued by the President of the Philippines.

(2) The said executive orders are violative of the constitutional provision that no private property shall
be taken without due process or just compensation.
(3) The petitioner is denied the right of maximum retention provided for under the 1987 Constitution.

The petitioner contends that the issuance of E.0. Nos. 228 and 229 shortly before Congress convened is
anomalous and arbitrary, besides violating the doctrine of separation of powers. The legislative power
granted to the President under the Transitory Provisions refers only to emergency measures that may
be promulgated in the proper exercise of the police power.

The petitioner also invokes his rights not to be deprived of his property without due process of law and
to the retention of his small parcels of riceholding as guaranteed under Article XIII, Section 4 of the
Constitution. He likewise argues that, besides denying him just compensation for his land, the provisions
of E.O. No. 228 declaring that:

Lease rentals paid to the landowner by the farmer-beneficiary after October 21, 1972 shall be
considered as advance payment for the land.

is an unconstitutional taking of a vested property right. It is also his contention that the inclusion of even
small landowners in the program along with other landowners with lands consisting of seven hectares or
more is undemocratic.

In his Comment, the Solicitor General submits that the petition is premature because the motion for
reconsideration filed with the Minister of Agrarian Reform is still unresolved. As for the validity of the
issuance of E.O. Nos. 228 and 229, he argues that they were enacted pursuant to Section 6, Article XVIII
of the Transitory Provisions of the 1987 Constitution which reads:

The incumbent president shall continue to exercise legislative powers until the first Congress is
convened.

On the issue of just compensation, his position is that when P.D. No. 27 was promulgated on October 21.
1972, the tenant-farmer of agricultural land was deemed the owner of the land he was tilling. The
leasehold rentals paid after that date should therefore be considered amortization payments.

In his Reply to the public respondents, the petitioner maintains that the motion he filed was resolved on
December 14, 1987. An appeal to the Office of the President would be useless with the promulgation of
E.O. Nos. 228 and 229, which in effect sanctioned the validity of the public respondent's acts.
G.R. No. 78742

The petitioners in this case invoke the right of retention granted by P.D. No. 27 to owners of rice and
corn lands not exceeding seven hectares as long as they are cultivating or intend to cultivate the same.
Their respective lands do not exceed the statutory limit but are occupied by tenants who are actually
cultivating such lands.

According to P.D. No. 316, which was promulgated in implementation of P.D. No. 27:

No tenant-farmer in agricultural lands primarily devoted to rice and corn shall be ejected or removed
from his farmholding until such time as the respective rights of the tenant- farmers and the landowner
shall have been determined in accordance with the rules and regulations implementing P.D. No. 27.

The petitioners claim they cannot eject their tenants and so are unable to enjoy their right of retention
because the Department of Agrarian Reform has so far not issued the implementing rules required
under the above-quoted decree. They therefore ask the Court for a writ of mandamus to compel the
respondent to issue the said rules.

In his Comment, the public respondent argues that P.D. No. 27 has been amended by LOI 474 removing
any right of retention from persons who own other agricultural lands of more than 7 hectares in
aggregate area or lands used for residential, commercial, industrial or other purposes from which they
derive adequate income for their family. And even assuming that the petitioners do not fall under its
terms, the regulations implementing P.D. No. 27 have already been issued, to wit, the Memorandum
dated July 10, 1975 (Interim Guidelines on Retention by Small Landowners, with an accompanying
Retention Guide Table), Memorandum Circular No. 11 dated April 21, 1978, (Implementation Guidelines
of LOI No. 474), Memorandum Circular No. 18-81 dated December 29,1981 (Clarificatory Guidelines on
Coverage of P.D. No. 27 and Retention by Small Landowners), and DAR Administrative Order No. 1,
series of 1985 (Providing for a Cut-off Date for Landowners to Apply for Retention and/or to Protest the
Coverage of their Landholdings under Operation Land Transfer pursuant to P.D. No. 27). For failure to
file the corresponding applications for retention under these measures, the petitioners are now barred
from invoking this right.

The public respondent also stresses that the petitioners have prematurely initiated this case
notwithstanding the pendency of their appeal to the President of the Philippines. Moreover, the
issuance of the implementing rules, assuming this has not yet been done, involves the exercise of
discretion which cannot be controlled through the writ of mandamus. This is especially true if this
function is entrusted, as in this case, to a separate department of the government.

In their Reply, the petitioners insist that the above-cited measures are not applicable to them because
they do not own more than seven hectares of agricultural land. Moreover, assuming arguendo that the
rules were intended to cover them also, the said measures are nevertheless not in force because they
have not been published as required by law and the ruling of this Court in Tanada v. Tuvera.10 As for LOI
474, the same is ineffective for the additional reason that a mere letter of instruction could not have
repealed the presidential decree.

Although holding neither purse nor sword and so regarded as the weakest of the three departments of
the government, the judiciary is nonetheless vested with the power to annul the acts of either the
legislative or the executive or of both when not conformable to the fundamental law. This is the reason
for what some quarters call the doctrine of judicial supremacy. Even so, this power is not lightly
assumed or readily exercised. The doctrine of separation of powers imposes upon the courts a proper
restraint, born of the nature of their functions and of their respect for the other departments, in striking
down the acts of the legislative and the executive as unconstitutional. The policy, indeed, is a blend of
courtesy and caution. To doubt is to sustain. The theory is that before the act was done or the law was
enacted, earnest studies were made by Congress or the President, or both, to insure that the
Constitution would not be breached.

In addition, the Constitution itself lays down stringent conditions for a declaration of unconstitutionality,
requiring therefor the concurrence of a majority of the members of the Supreme Court who took part in
the deliberations and voted on the issue during their session en banc.11 And as established by judge
made doctrine, the Court will assume jurisdiction over a constitutional question only if it is shown that
the essential requisites of a judicial inquiry into such a question are first satisfied. Thus, there must be an
actual case or controversy involving a conflict of legal rights susceptible of judicial determination, the
constitutional question must have been opportunely raised by the proper party, and the resolution of
the question is unavoidably necessary to the decision of the case itself. 12

With particular regard to the requirement of proper party as applied in the cases before us, we hold that
the same is satisfied by the petitioners and intervenors because each of them has sustained or is in
danger of sustaining an immediate injury as a result of the acts or measures complained of. 13 And even
if, strictly speaking, they are not covered by the definition, it is still within the wide discretion of the
Court to waive the requirement and so remove the impediment to its addressing and resolving the
serious constitutional questions raised.
In the first Emergency Powers Cases, 14 ordinary citizens and taxpayers were allowed to question the
constitutionality of several executive orders issued by President Quirino although they were invoking
only an indirect and general interest shared in common with the public. The Court dismissed the
objection that they were not proper parties and ruled that "the transcendental importance to the public
of these cases demands that they be settled promptly and definitely, brushing aside, if we must,
technicalities of procedure." We have since then applied this exception in many other cases. 15

The other above-mentioned requisites have also been met in the present petitions.

In must be stressed that despite the inhibitions pressing upon the Court when confronted with
constitutional issues like the ones now before it, it will not hesitate to declare a law or act invalid when
it is convinced that this must be done. In arriving at this conclusion, its only criterion will be the
Constitution as God and its conscience give it the light to probe its meaning and discover its purpose.
Personal motives and political considerations are irrelevancies that cannot influence its decision.
Blandishment is as ineffectual as intimidation.

For all the awesome power of the Congress and the Executive, the Court will not hesitate to "make the
hammer fall, and heavily," to use Justice Laurel's pithy language, where the acts of these departments,
or of any public official, betray the people's will as expressed in the Constitution.

It need only be added, to borrow again the words of Justice Laurel, that —

... when the judiciary mediates to allocate constitutional boundaries, it does not assert any superiority
over the other departments; it does not in reality nullify or invalidate an act of the Legislature, but only
asserts the solemn and sacred obligation assigned to it by the Constitution to determine conflicting
claims of authority under the Constitution and to establish for the parties in an actual controversy the
rights which that instrument secures and guarantees to them. This is in truth all that is involved in what
is termed "judicial supremacy" which properly is the power of judicial review under the Constitution. 16

The cases before us categorically raise constitutional questions that this Court must categorically
resolve. And so we shall.

II
We proceed first to the examination of the preliminary issues before resolving the more serious
challenges to the constitutionality of the several measures involved in these petitions.

The promulgation of P.D. No. 27 by President Marcos in the exercise of his powers under martial law has
already been sustained in Gonzales v. Estrella and we find no reason to modify or reverse it on that
issue. As for the power of President Aquino to promulgate Proc. No. 131 and E.O. Nos. 228 and 229, the
same was authorized under Section 6 of the Transitory Provisions of the 1987 Constitution, quoted
above.

The said measures were issued by President Aquino before July 27, 1987, when the Congress of the
Philippines was formally convened and took over legislative power from her. They are not "midnight"
enactments intended to pre-empt the legislature because E.O. No. 228 was issued on July 17, 1987, and
the other measures, i.e., Proc. No. 131 and E.O. No. 229, were both issued on July 22, 1987. Neither is it
correct to say that these measures ceased to be valid when she lost her legislative power for, like any
statute, they continue to be in force unless modified or repealed by subsequent law or declared invalid
by the courts. A statute does not ipso facto become inoperative simply because of the dissolution of the
legislature that enacted it. By the same token, President Aquino's loss of legislative power did not have
the effect of invalidating all the measures enacted by her when and as long as she possessed it.

Significantly, the Congress she is alleged to have undercut has not rejected but in fact substantially
affirmed the challenged measures and has specifically provided that they shall be suppletory to R.A. No.
6657 whenever not inconsistent with its provisions. 17 Indeed, some portions of the said measures, like
the creation of the P50 billion fund in Section 2 of Proc. No. 131, and Sections 20 and 21 of E.O. No. 229,
have been incorporated by reference in the CARP Law. 18

That fund, as earlier noted, is itself being questioned on the ground that it does not conform to the
requirements of a valid appropriation as specified in the Constitution. Clearly, however, Proc. No. 131 is
not an appropriation measure even if it does provide for the creation of said fund, for that is not its
principal purpose. An appropriation law is one the primary and specific purpose of which is to authorize
the release of public funds from the treasury. 19 The creation of the fund is only incidental to the main
objective of the proclamation, which is agrarian reform.

It should follow that the specific constitutional provisions invoked, to wit, Section 24 and Section 25(4)
of Article VI, are not applicable. With particular reference to Section 24, this obviously could not have
been complied with for the simple reason that the House of Representatives, which now has the
exclusive power to initiate appropriation measures, had not yet been convened when the proclamation
was issued. The legislative power was then solely vested in the President of the Philippines, who
embodied, as it were, both houses of Congress.
The argument of some of the petitioners that Proc. No. 131 and E.O. No. 229 should be invalidated
because they do not provide for retention limits as required by Article XIII, Section 4 of the Constitution
is no longer tenable. R.A. No. 6657 does provide for such limits now in Section 6 of the law, which in fact
is one of its most controversial provisions. This section declares:

Retention Limits. — Except as otherwise provided in this Act, no person may own or retain, directly or
indirectly, any public or private agricultural land, the size of which shall vary according to factors
governing a viable family-sized farm, such as commodity produced, terrain, infrastructure, and soil
fertility as determined by the Presidential Agrarian Reform Council (PARC) created hereunder, but in no
case shall retention by the landowner exceed five (5) hectares. Three (3) hectares may be awarded to
each child of the landowner, subject to the following qualifications: (1) that he is at least fifteen (15)
years of age; and (2) that he is actually tilling the land or directly managing the farm; Provided, That
landowners whose lands have been covered by Presidential Decree No. 27 shall be allowed to keep the
area originally retained by them thereunder, further, That original homestead grantees or direct
compulsory heirs who still own the original homestead at the time of the approval of this Act shall retain
the same areas as long as they continue to cultivate said homestead.

The argument that E.O. No. 229 violates the constitutional requirement that a bill shall have only one
subject, to be expressed in its title, deserves only short attention. It is settled that the title of the bill
does not have to be a catalogue of its contents and will suffice if the matters embodied in the text are
relevant to each other and may be inferred from the title. 20

The Court wryly observes that during the past dictatorship, every presidential issuance, by whatever
name it was called, had the force and effect of law because it came from President Marcos. Such are the
ways of despots. Hence, it is futile to argue, as the petitioners do in G.R. No. 79744, that LOI 474 could
not have repealed P.D. No. 27 because the former was only a letter of instruction. The important thing is
that it was issued by President Marcos, whose word was law during that time.

But for all their peremptoriness, these issuances from the President Marcos still had to comply with the
requirement for publication as this Court held in Tanada v. Tuvera. 21 Hence, unless published in the
Official Gazette in accordance with Article 2 of the Civil Code, they could not have any force and effect if
they were among those enactments successfully challenged in that case. LOI 474 was published, though,
in the Official Gazette dated November 29,1976.)

Finally, there is the contention of the public respondent in G.R. No. 78742 that the writ of mandamus
cannot issue to compel the performance of a discretionary act, especially by a specific department of
the government. That is true as a general proposition but is subject to one important qualification.
Correctly and categorically stated, the rule is that mandamus will lie to compel the discharge of the
discretionary duty itself but not to control the discretion to be exercised. In other words, mandamus can
issue to require action only but not specific action.

Whenever a duty is imposed upon a public official and an unnecessary and unreasonable delay in the
exercise of such duty occurs, if it is a clear duty imposed by law, the courts will intervene by the
extraordinary legal remedy of mandamus to compel action. If the duty is purely ministerial, the courts
will require specific action. If the duty is purely discretionary, the courts by mandamus will require
action only. For example, if an inferior court, public official, or board should, for an unreasonable length
of time, fail to decide a particular question to the great detriment of all parties concerned, or a court
should refuse to take jurisdiction of a cause when the law clearly gave it jurisdiction mandamus will
issue, in the first case to require a decision, and in the second to require that jurisdiction be taken of the
cause. 22

And while it is true that as a rule the writ will not be proper as long as there is still a plain, speedy and
adequate remedy available from the administrative authorities, resort to the courts may still be
permitted if the issue raised is a question of law. 23

III

There are traditional distinctions between the police power and the power of eminent domain that
logically preclude the application of both powers at the same time on the same subject. In the case of
City of Baguio v. NAWASA, 24 for example, where a law required the transfer of all municipal
waterworks systems to the NAWASA in exchange for its assets of equivalent value, the Court held that
the power being exercised was eminent domain because the property involved was wholesome and
intended for a public use. Property condemned under the police power is noxious or intended for a
noxious purpose, such as a building on the verge of collapse, which should be demolished for the public
safety, or obscene materials, which should be destroyed in the interest of public morals. The
confiscation of such property is not compensable, unlike the taking of property under the power of
expropriation, which requires the payment of just compensation to the owner.

In the case of Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon, 25 Justice Holmes laid down the limits of the police
power in a famous aphorism: "The general rule at least is that while property may be regulated to a
certain extent, if regulation goes too far it will be recognized as a taking." The regulation that went "too
far" was a law prohibiting mining which might cause the subsidence of structures for human habitation
constructed on the land surface. This was resisted by a coal company which had earlier granted a deed
to the land over its mine but reserved all mining rights thereunder, with the grantee assuming all risks
and waiving any damage claim. The Court held the law could not be sustained without compensating the
grantor. Justice Brandeis filed a lone dissent in which he argued that there was a valid exercise of the
police power. He said:

Every restriction upon the use of property imposed in the exercise of the police power deprives the
owner of some right theretofore enjoyed, and is, in that sense, an abridgment by the State of rights in
property without making compensation. But restriction imposed to protect the public health, safety or
morals from dangers threatened is not a taking. The restriction here in question is merely the
prohibition of a noxious use. The property so restricted remains in the possession of its owner. The state
does not appropriate it or make any use of it. The state merely prevents the owner from making a use
which interferes with paramount rights of the public. Whenever the use prohibited ceases to be noxious
— as it may because of further changes in local or social conditions — the restriction will have to be
removed and the owner will again be free to enjoy his property as heretofore.

Recent trends, however, would indicate not a polarization but a mingling of the police power and the
power of eminent domain, with the latter being used as an implement of the former like the power of
taxation. The employment of the taxing power to achieve a police purpose has long been accepted. 26
As for the power of expropriation, Prof. John J. Costonis of the University of Illinois College of Law
(referring to the earlier case of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co., 272 US 365, which sustained a zoning law
under the police power) makes the following significant remarks:

Euclid, moreover, was decided in an era when judges located the Police and eminent domain powers on
different planets. Generally speaking, they viewed eminent domain as encompassing public acquisition
of private property for improvements that would be available for public use," literally construed. To the
police power, on the other hand, they assigned the less intrusive task of preventing harmful externalities
a point reflected in the Euclid opinion's reliance on an analogy to nuisance law to bolster its support of
zoning. So long as suppression of a privately authored harm bore a plausible relation to some legitimate
"public purpose," the pertinent measure need have afforded no compensation whatever. With the
progressive growth of government's involvement in land use, the distance between the two powers has
contracted considerably. Today government often employs eminent domain interchangeably with or as
a useful complement to the police power-- a trend expressly approved in the Supreme Court's 1954
decision in Berman v. Parker, which broadened the reach of eminent domain's "public use" test to
match that of the police power's standard of "public purpose." 27

The Berman case sustained a redevelopment project and the improvement of blighted areas in the
District of Columbia as a proper exercise of the police power. On the role of eminent domain in the
attainment of this purpose, Justice Douglas declared:

If those who govern the District of Columbia decide that the Nation's Capital should be beautiful as well
as sanitary, there is nothing in the Fifth Amendment that stands in the way.
Once the object is within the authority of Congress, the right to realize it through the exercise of
eminent domain is clear.

For the power of eminent domain is merely the means to the end. 28

In Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City, 29 decided by a 6-3 vote in 1978, the U.S Supreme
Court sustained the respondent's Landmarks Preservation Law under which the owners of the Grand
Central Terminal had not been allowed to construct a multi-story office building over the Terminal,
which had been designated a historic landmark. Preservation of the landmark was held to be a valid
objective of the police power. The problem, however, was that the owners of the Terminal would be
deprived of the right to use the airspace above it although other landowners in the area could do so
over their respective properties. While insisting that there was here no taking, the Court nonetheless
recognized certain compensatory rights accruing to Grand Central Terminal which it said would
"undoubtedly mitigate" the loss caused by the regulation. This "fair compensation," as he called it, was
explained by Prof. Costonis in this wise:

In return for retaining the Terminal site in its pristine landmark status, Penn Central was authorized to
transfer to neighboring properties the authorized but unused rights accruing to the site prior to the
Terminal's designation as a landmark — the rights which would have been exhausted by the 59-story
building that the city refused to countenance atop the Terminal. Prevailing bulk restrictions on
neighboring sites were proportionately relaxed, theoretically enabling Penn Central to recoup its losses
at the Terminal site by constructing or selling to others the right to construct larger, hence more
profitable buildings on the transferee sites. 30

The cases before us present no knotty complication insofar as the question of compensable taking is
concerned. To the extent that the measures under challenge merely prescribe retention limits for
landowners, there is an exercise of the police power for the regulation of private property in accordance
with the Constitution. But where, to carry out such regulation, it becomes necessary to deprive such
owners of whatever lands they may own in excess of the maximum area allowed, there is definitely a
taking under the power of eminent domain for which payment of just compensation is imperative. The
taking contemplated is not a mere limitation of the use of the land. What is required is the surrender of
the title to and the physical possession of the said excess and all beneficial rights accruing to the owner
in favor of the farmer-beneficiary. This is definitely an exercise not of the police power but of the power
of eminent domain.

Whether as an exercise of the police power or of the power of eminent domain, the several measures
before us are challenged as violative of the due process and equal protection clauses.
The challenge to Proc. No. 131 and E.O. Nos. 228 and 299 on the ground that no retention limits are
prescribed has already been discussed and dismissed. It is noted that although they excited many bitter
exchanges during the deliberation of the CARP Law in Congress, the retention limits finally agreed upon
are, curiously enough, not being questioned in these petitions. We therefore do not discuss them here.
The Court will come to the other claimed violations of due process in connection with our examination
of the adequacy of just compensation as required under the power of expropriation.

The argument of the small farmers that they have been denied equal protection because of the absence
of retention limits has also become academic under Section 6 of R.A. No. 6657. Significantly, they too
have not questioned the area of such limits. There is also the complaint that they should not be made to
share the burden of agrarian reform, an objection also made by the sugar planters on the ground that
they belong to a particular class with particular interests of their own. However, no evidence has been
submitted to the Court that the requisites of a valid classification have been violated.

Classification has been defined as the grouping of persons or things similar to each other in certain
particulars and different from each other in these same particulars. 31 To be valid, it must conform to
the following requirements: (1) it must be based on substantial distinctions; (2) it must be germane to
the purposes of the law; (3) it must not be limited to existing conditions only; and (4) it must apply
equally to all the members of the class. 32 The Court finds that all these requisites have been met by the
measures here challenged as arbitrary and discriminatory.

Equal protection simply means that all persons or things similarly situated must be treated alike both as
to the rights conferred and the liabilities imposed. 33 The petitioners have not shown that they belong
to a different class and entitled to a different treatment. The argument that not only landowners but
also owners of other properties must be made to share the burden of implementing land reform must
be rejected. There is a substantial distinction between these two classes of owners that is clearly visible
except to those who will not see. There is no need to elaborate on this matter. In any event, the
Congress is allowed a wide leeway in providing for a valid classification. Its decision is accorded
recognition and respect by the courts of justice except only where its discretion is abused to the
detriment of the Bill of Rights.

It is worth remarking at this juncture that a statute may be sustained under the police power only if
there is a concurrence of the lawful subject and the lawful method. Put otherwise, the interests of the
public generally as distinguished from those of a particular class require the interference of the State
and, no less important, the means employed are reasonably necessary for the attainment of the
purpose sought to be achieved and not unduly oppressive upon individuals. 34 As the subject and
purpose of agrarian reform have been laid down by the Constitution itself, we may say that the first
requirement has been satisfied. What remains to be examined is the validity of the method employed to
achieve the constitutional goal.

One of the basic principles of the democratic system is that where the rights of the individual are
concerned, the end does not justify the means. It is not enough that there be a valid objective; it is also
necessary that the means employed to pursue it be in keeping with the Constitution. Mere expediency
will not excuse constitutional shortcuts. There is no question that not even the strongest moral
conviction or the most urgent public need, subject only to a few notable exceptions, will excuse the
bypassing of an individual's rights. It is no exaggeration to say that a, person invoking a right guaranteed
under Article III of the Constitution is a majority of one even as against the rest of the nation who would
deny him that right.

That right covers the person's life, his liberty and his property under Section 1 of Article III of the
Constitution. With regard to his property, the owner enjoys the added protection of Section 9, which
reaffirms the familiar rule that private property shall not be taken for public use without just
compensation.

This brings us now to the power of eminent domain.

IV

Eminent domain is an inherent power of the State that enables it to forcibly acquire private lands
intended for public use upon payment of just compensation to the owner. Obviously, there is no need to
expropriate where the owner is willing to sell under terms also acceptable to the purchaser, in which
case an ordinary deed of sale may be agreed upon by the parties. 35 It is only where the owner is
unwilling to sell, or cannot accept the price or other conditions offered by the vendee, that the power of
eminent domain will come into play to assert the paramount authority of the State over the interests of
the property owner. Private rights must then yield to the irresistible demands of the public interest on
the time-honored justification, as in the case of the police power, that the welfare of the people is the
supreme law.

But for all its primacy and urgency, the power of expropriation is by no means absolute (as indeed no
power is absolute). The limitation is found in the constitutional injunction that "private property shall
not be taken for public use without just compensation" and in the abundant jurisprudence that has
evolved from the interpretation of this principle. Basically, the requirements for a proper exercise of the
power are: (1) public use and (2) just compensation.
Let us dispose first of the argument raised by the petitioners in G.R. No. 79310 that the State should first
distribute public agricultural lands in the pursuit of agrarian reform instead of immediately disturbing
property rights by forcibly acquiring private agricultural lands. Parenthetically, it is not correct to say
that only public agricultural lands may be covered by the CARP as the Constitution calls for "the just
distribution of all agricultural lands." In any event, the decision to redistribute private agricultural lands
in the manner prescribed by the CARP was made by the legislative and executive departments in the
exercise of their discretion. We are not justified in reviewing that discretion in the absence of a clear
showing that it has been abused.

A becoming courtesy admonishes us to respect the decisions of the political departments when they
decide what is known as the political question. As explained by Chief Justice Concepcion in the case of
Tañada v. Cuenco: 36

The term "political question" connotes what it means in ordinary parlance, namely, a question of policy.
It refers to "those questions which, under the Constitution, are to be decided by the people in their
sovereign capacity; or in regard to which full discretionary authority has been delegated to the
legislative or executive branch of the government." It is concerned with issues dependent upon the
wisdom, not legality, of a particular measure.

It is true that the concept of the political question has been constricted with the enlargement of judicial
power, which now includes the authority of the courts "to determine whether or not there has been a
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or
instrumentality of the Government." 37 Even so, this should not be construed as a license for us to
reverse the other departments simply because their views may not coincide with ours.

The legislature and the executive have been seen fit, in their wisdom, to include in the CARP the
redistribution of private landholdings (even as the distribution of public agricultural lands is first
provided for, while also continuing apace under the Public Land Act and other cognate laws). The Court
sees no justification to interpose its authority, which we may assert only if we believe that the political
decision is not unwise, but illegal. We do not find it to be so.

In U.S. v. Chandler-Dunbar Water Power Company,38 it was held:

Congress having determined, as it did by the Act of March 3,1909 that the entire St. Mary's river
between the American bank and the international line, as well as all of the upland north of the present
ship canal, throughout its entire length, was "necessary for the purpose of navigation of said waters, and
the waters connected therewith," that determination is conclusive in condemnation proceedings
instituted by the United States under that Act, and there is no room for judicial review of the judgment
of Congress ... .

As earlier observed, the requirement for public use has already been settled for us by the Constitution
itself No less than the 1987 Charter calls for agrarian reform, which is the reason why private agricultural
lands are to be taken from their owners, subject to the prescribed maximum retention limits. The
purposes specified in P.D. No. 27, Proc. No. 131 and R.A. No. 6657 are only an elaboration of the
constitutional injunction that the State adopt the necessary measures "to encourage and undertake the
just distribution of all agricultural lands to enable farmers who are landless to own directly or
collectively the lands they till." That public use, as pronounced by the fundamental law itself, must be
binding on us.

The second requirement, i.e., the payment of just compensation, needs a longer and more thoughtful
examination.

Just compensation is defined as the full and fair equivalent of the property taken from its owner by the
expropriator. 39 It has been repeatedly stressed by this Court that the measure is not the taker's gain
but the owner's loss. 40 The word "just" is used to intensify the meaning of the word "compensation" to
convey the idea that the equivalent to be rendered for the property to be taken shall be real,
substantial, full, ample. 41

It bears repeating that the measures challenged in these petitions contemplate more than a mere
regulation of the use of private lands under the police power. We deal here with an actual taking of
private agricultural lands that has dispossessed the owners of their property and deprived them of all its
beneficial use and enjoyment, to entitle them to the just compensation mandated by the Constitution.

As held in Republic of the Philippines v. Castellvi, 42 there is compensable taking when the following
conditions concur: (1) the expropriator must enter a private property; (2) the entry must be for more
than a momentary period; (3) the entry must be under warrant or color of legal authority; (4) the
property must be devoted to public use or otherwise informally appropriated or injuriously affected; and
(5) the utilization of the property for public use must be in such a way as to oust the owner and deprive
him of beneficial enjoyment of the property. All these requisites are envisioned in the measures before
us.

Where the State itself is the expropriator, it is not necessary for it to make a deposit upon its taking
possession of the condemned property, as "the compensation is a public charge, the good faith of the
public is pledged for its payment, and all the resources of taxation may be employed in raising the
amount." 43 Nevertheless, Section 16(e) of the CARP Law provides that:
Upon receipt by the landowner of the corresponding payment or, in case of rejection or no response
from the landowner, upon the deposit with an accessible bank designated by the DAR of the
compensation in cash or in LBP bonds in accordance with this Act, the DAR shall take immediate
possession of the land and shall request the proper Register of Deeds to issue a Transfer Certificate of
Title (TCT) in the name of the Republic of the Philippines. The DAR shall thereafter proceed with the
redistribution of the land to the qualified beneficiaries.

Objection is raised, however, to the manner of fixing the just compensation, which it is claimed is
entrusted to the administrative authorities in violation of judicial prerogatives. Specific reference is
made to Section 16(d), which provides that in case of the rejection or disregard by the owner of the
offer of the government to buy his land-

... the DAR shall conduct summary administrative proceedings to determine the compensation for the
land by requiring the landowner, the LBP and other interested parties to submit evidence as to the just
compensation for the land, within fifteen (15) days from the receipt of the notice. After the expiration of
the above period, the matter is deemed submitted for decision. The DAR shall decide the case within
thirty (30) days after it is submitted for decision.

To be sure, the determination of just compensation is a function addressed to the courts of justice and
may not be usurped by any other branch or official of the government. EPZA v. Dulay 44 resolved a
challenge to several decrees promulgated by President Marcos providing that the just compensation for
property under expropriation should be either the assessment of the property by the government or the
sworn valuation thereof by the owner, whichever was lower. In declaring these decrees
unconstitutional, the Court held through Mr. Justice Hugo E. Gutierrez, Jr.:

The method of ascertaining just compensation under the aforecited decrees constitutes impermissible
encroachment on judicial prerogatives. It tends to render this Court inutile in a matter which under this
Constitution is reserved to it for final determination.

Thus, although in an expropriation proceeding the court technically would still have the power to
determine the just compensation for the property, following the applicable decrees, its task would be
relegated to simply stating the lower value of the property as declared either by the owner or the
assessor. As a necessary consequence, it would be useless for the court to appoint commissioners under
Rule 67 of the Rules of Court. Moreover, the need to satisfy the due process clause in the taking of
private property is seemingly fulfilled since it cannot be said that a judicial proceeding was not had
before the actual taking. However, the strict application of the decrees during the proceedings would be
nothing short of a mere formality or charade as the court has only to choose between the valuation of
the owner and that of the assessor, and its choice is always limited to the lower of the two. The court
cannot exercise its discretion or independence in determining what is just or fair. Even a grade school
pupil could substitute for the judge insofar as the determination of constitutional just compensation is
concerned.

xxx

In the present petition, we are once again confronted with the same question of whether the courts
under P.D. No. 1533, which contains the same provision on just compensation as its predecessor
decrees, still have the power and authority to determine just compensation, independent of what is
stated by the decree and to this effect, to appoint commissioners for such purpose.

This time, we answer in the affirmative.

xxx

It is violative of due process to deny the owner the opportunity to prove that the valuation in the tax
documents is unfair or wrong. And it is repulsive to the basic concepts of justice and fairness to allow
the haphazard work of a minor bureaucrat or clerk to absolutely prevail over the judgment of a court
promulgated only after expert commissioners have actually viewed the property, after evidence and
arguments pro and con have been presented, and after all factors and considerations essential to a fair
and just determination have been judiciously evaluated.

A reading of the aforecited Section 16(d) will readily show that it does not suffer from the arbitrariness
that rendered the challenged decrees constitutionally objectionable. Although the proceedings are
described as summary, the landowner and other interested parties are nevertheless allowed an
opportunity to submit evidence on the real value of the property. But more importantly, the
determination of the just compensation by the DAR is not by any means final and conclusive upon the
landowner or any other interested party, for Section 16(f) clearly provides:

Any party who disagrees with the decision may bring the matter to the court of proper jurisdiction for
final determination of just compensation.
The determination made by the DAR is only preliminary unless accepted by all parties concerned.
Otherwise, the courts of justice will still have the right to review with finality the said determination in
the exercise of what is admittedly a judicial function.

The second and more serious objection to the provisions on just compensation is not as easily resolved.

This refers to Section 18 of the CARP Law providing in full as follows:

SEC. 18. Valuation and Mode of Compensation. — The LBP shall compensate the landowner in such
amount as may be agreed upon by the landowner and the DAR and the LBP, in accordance with the
criteria provided for in Sections 16 and 17, and other pertinent provisions hereof, or as may be finally
determined by the court, as the just compensation for the land.

The compensation shall be paid in one of the following modes, at the option of the landowner:

(1) Cash payment, under the following terms and conditions:

(a) For lands above fifty (50) hectares, insofar as the excess hectarage is concerned — Twenty-five
percent (25%) cash, the balance to be paid in government financial instruments negotiable at any time.

(b) For lands above twenty-four (24) hectares and up to fifty (50) hectares — Thirty percent (30%)
cash, the balance to be paid in government financial instruments negotiable at any time.

(c) For lands twenty-four (24) hectares and below — Thirty-five percent (35%) cash, the balance to
be paid in government financial instruments negotiable at any time.

(2) Shares of stock in government-owned or controlled corporations, LBP preferred shares, physical
assets or other qualified investments in accordance with guidelines set by the PARC;

(3) Tax credits which can be used against any tax liability;

(4) LBP bonds, which shall have the following features:

(a) Market interest rates aligned with 91-day treasury bill rates. Ten percent (10%) of the face value
of the bonds shall mature every year from the date of issuance until the tenth (10th) year: Provided,
That should the landowner choose to forego the cash portion, whether in full or in part, he shall be paid
correspondingly in LBP bonds;

(b) Transferability and negotiability. Such LBP bonds may be used by the landowner, his successors-
in- interest or his assigns, up to the amount of their face value, for any of the following:

(i) Acquisition of land or other real properties of the government, including assets under the Asset
Privatization Program and other assets foreclosed by government financial institutions in the same
province or region where the lands for which the bonds were paid are situated;

(ii) Acquisition of shares of stock of government-owned or controlled corporations or shares of

stock owned by the government in private corporations;

(iii) Substitution for surety or bail bonds for the provisional release of accused persons, or for
performance bonds;

(iv) Security for loans with any government financial institution, provided the proceeds of the loans
shall be invested in an economic enterprise, preferably in a small and medium- scale industry, in the
same province or region as the land for which the bonds are paid;

(v) Payment for various taxes and fees to government: Provided, That the use of these bonds for
these purposes will be limited to a certain percentage of the outstanding balance of the financial
instruments; Provided, further, That the PARC shall determine the percentages mentioned above;

(vi) Payment for tuition fees of the immediate family of the original bondholder in government
universities, colleges, trade schools, and other institutions;

(vii) Payment for fees of the immediate family of the original bondholder in government hospitals;
and

(viii) Such other uses as the PARC may from time to time allow.
The contention of the petitioners in G.R. No. 79777 is that the above provision is unconstitutional
insofar as it requires the owners of the expropriated properties to accept just compensation therefor in
less than money, which is the only medium of payment allowed. In support of this contention, they cite
jurisprudence holding that:

The fundamental rule in expropriation matters is that the owner of the property expropriated is entitled
to a just compensation, which should be neither more nor less, whenever it is possible to make the
assessment, than the money equivalent of said property. Just compensation has always been
understood to be the just and complete equivalent of the loss which the owner of the thing
expropriated has to suffer by reason of the expropriation . 45 (Emphasis supplied.)

In J.M. Tuazon Co. v. Land Tenure Administration, 46 this Court held:

It is well-settled that just compensation means the equivalent for the value of the property at the time
of its taking. Anything beyond that is more, and anything short of that is less, than just compensation. It
means a fair and full equivalent for the loss sustained, which is the measure of the indemnity, not
whatever gain would accrue to the expropriating entity. The market value of the land taken is the just
compensation to which the owner of condemned property is entitled, the market value being that sum
of money which a person desirous, but not compelled to buy, and an owner, willing, but not compelled
to sell, would agree on as a price to be given and received for such property. (Emphasis supplied.)

In the United States, where much of our jurisprudence on the subject has been derived, the weight of
authority is also to the effect that just compensation for property expropriated is payable only in money
and not otherwise. Thus —

The medium of payment of compensation is ready money or cash. The condemnor cannot compel the
owner to accept anything but money, nor can the owner compel or require the condemnor to pay him
on any other basis than the value of the property in money at the time and in the manner prescribed by
the Constitution and the statutes. When the power of eminent domain is resorted to, there must be a
standard medium of payment, binding upon both parties, and the law has fixed that standard as money
in cash. 47 (Emphasis supplied.)

Part cash and deferred payments are not and cannot, in the nature of things, be regarded as a reliable
and constant standard of compensation. 48
"Just compensation" for property taken by condemnation means a fair equivalent in money, which must
be paid at least within a reasonable time after the taking, and it is not within the power of the
Legislature to substitute for such payment future obligations, bonds, or other valuable advantage. 49
(Emphasis supplied.)

It cannot be denied from these cases that the traditional medium for the payment of just compensation
is money and no other. And so, conformably, has just compensation been paid in the past solely in that
medium. However, we do not deal here with the traditional excercise of the power of eminent domain.
This is not an ordinary expropriation where only a specific property of relatively limited area is sought to
be taken by the State from its owner for a specific and perhaps local purpose.

What we deal with here is a revolutionary kind of expropriation.

The expropriation before us affects all private agricultural lands whenever found and of whatever kind
as long as they are in excess of the maximum retention limits allowed their owners. This kind of
expropriation is intended for the benefit not only of a particular community or of a small segment of the
population but of the entire Filipino nation, from all levels of our society, from the impoverished farmer
to the land-glutted owner. Its purpose does not cover only the whole territory of this country but goes
beyond in time to the foreseeable future, which it hopes to secure and edify with the vision and the
sacrifice of the present generation of Filipinos. Generations yet to come are as involved in this program
as we are today, although hopefully only as beneficiaries of a richer and more fulfilling life we will
guarantee to them tomorrow through our thoughtfulness today. And, finally, let it not be forgotten that
it is no less than the Constitution itself that has ordained this revolution in the farms, calling for "a just
distribution" among the farmers of lands that have heretofore been the prison of their dreams but can
now become the key at least to their deliverance.

Such a program will involve not mere millions of pesos. The cost will be tremendous. Considering the
vast areas of land subject to expropriation under the laws before us, we estimate that hundreds of
billions of pesos will be needed, far more indeed than the amount of P50 billion initially appropriated,
which is already staggering as it is by our present standards. Such amount is in fact not even fully
available at this time.

We assume that the framers of the Constitution were aware of this difficulty when they called for
agrarian reform as a top priority project of the government. It is a part of this assumption that when
they envisioned the expropriation that would be needed, they also intended that the just compensation
would have to be paid not in the orthodox way but a less conventional if more practical method. There
can be no doubt that they were aware of the financial limitations of the government and had no illusions
that there would be enough money to pay in cash and in full for the lands they wanted to be distributed
among the farmers. We may therefore assume that their intention was to allow such manner of
payment as is now provided for by the CARP Law, particularly the payment of the balance (if the owner
cannot be paid fully with money), or indeed of the entire amount of the just compensation, with other
things of value. We may also suppose that what they had in mind was a similar scheme of payment as
that prescribed in P.D. No. 27, which was the law in force at the time they deliberated on the new
Charter and with which they presumably agreed in principle.

The Court has not found in the records of the Constitutional Commission any categorical agreement
among the members regarding the meaning to be given the concept of just compensation as applied to
the comprehensive agrarian reform program being contemplated. There was the suggestion to "fine
tune" the requirement to suit the demands of the project even as it was also felt that they should "leave
it to Congress" to determine how payment should be made to the landowner and reimbursement
required from the farmer-beneficiaries. Such innovations as "progressive compensation" and "State-
subsidized compensation" were also proposed. In the end, however, no special definition of the just
compensation for the lands to be expropriated was reached by the Commission. 50

On the other hand, there is nothing in the records either that militates against the assumptions we are
making of the general sentiments and intention of the members on the content and manner of the
payment to be made to the landowner in the light of the magnitude of the expenditure and the
limitations of the expropriator.

With these assumptions, the Court hereby declares that the content and manner of the just
compensation provided for in the afore- quoted Section 18 of the CARP Law is not violative of the
Constitution. We do not mind admitting that a certain degree of pragmatism has influenced our decision
on this issue, but after all this Court is not a cloistered institution removed from the realities and
demands of society or oblivious to the need for its enhancement. The Court is as acutely anxious as the
rest of our people to see the goal of agrarian reform achieved at last after the frustrations and
deprivations of our peasant masses during all these disappointing decades. We are aware that
invalidation of the said section will result in the nullification of the entire program, killing the farmer's
hopes even as they approach realization and resurrecting the spectre of discontent and dissent in the
restless countryside. That is not in our view the intention of the Constitution, and that is not what we
shall decree today.

Accepting the theory that payment of the just compensation is not always required to be made fully in
money, we find further that the proportion of cash payment to the other things of value constituting the
total payment, as determined on the basis of the areas of the lands expropriated, is not unduly
oppressive upon the landowner. It is noted that the smaller the land, the bigger the payment in money,
primarily because the small landowner will be needing it more than the big landowners, who can afford
a bigger balance in bonds and other things of value. No less importantly, the government financial
instruments making up the balance of the payment are "negotiable at any time." The other modes,
which are likewise available to the landowner at his option, are also not unreasonable because payment
is made in shares of stock, LBP bonds, other properties or assets, tax credits, and other things of value
equivalent to the amount of just compensation.

Admittedly, the compensation contemplated in the law will cause the landowners, big and small, not a
little inconvenience. As already remarked, this cannot be avoided. Nevertheless, it is devoutly hoped
that these countrymen of ours, conscious as we know they are of the need for their forebearance and
even sacrifice, will not begrudge us their indispensable share in the attainment of the ideal of agrarian
reform. Otherwise, our pursuit of this elusive goal will be like the quest for the Holy Grail.

The complaint against the effects of non-registration of the land under E.O. No. 229 does not seem to be
viable any more as it appears that Section 4 of the said Order has been superseded by Section 14 of the
CARP Law. This repeats the requisites of registration as embodied in the earlier measure but does not
provide, as the latter did, that in case of failure or refusal to register the land, the valuation thereof shall
be that given by the provincial or city assessor for tax purposes. On the contrary, the CARP Law says that
the just compensation shall be ascertained on the basis of the factors mentioned in its Section 17 and in
the manner provided for in Section 16.

The last major challenge to CARP is that the landowner is divested of his property even before actual
payment to him in full of just compensation, in contravention of a well- accepted principle of eminent
domain.

The recognized rule, indeed, is that title to the property expropriated shall pass from the owner to the
expropriator only upon full payment of the just compensation. Jurisprudence on this settled principle is
consistent both here and in other democratic jurisdictions. Thus:

Title to property which is the subject of condemnation proceedings does not vest the condemnor until
the judgment fixing just compensation is entered and paid, but the condemnor's title relates back to the
date on which the petition under the Eminent Domain Act, or the commissioner's report under the Local
Improvement Act, is filed. 51

... although the right to appropriate and use land taken for a canal is complete at the time of entry, title
to the property taken remains in the owner until payment is actually made. 52 (Emphasis supplied.)

In Kennedy v. Indianapolis, 53 the US Supreme Court cited several cases holding that title to property
does not pass to the condemnor until just compensation had actually been made. In fact, the decisions
appear to be uniformly to this effect. As early as 1838, in Rubottom v. McLure, 54 it was held that
"actual payment to the owner of the condemned property was a condition precedent to the investment
of the title to the property in the State" albeit "not to the appropriation of it to public use." In Rexford v.
Knight, 55 the Court of Appeals of New York said that the construction upon the statutes was that the
fee did not vest in the State until the payment of the compensation although the authority to enter
upon and appropriate the land was complete prior to the payment. Kennedy further said that "both on
principle and authority the rule is ... that the right to enter on and use the property is complete, as soon
as the property is actually appropriated under the authority of law for a public use, but that the title
does not pass from the owner without his consent, until just compensation has been made to him."

Our own Supreme Court has held in Visayan Refining Co. v. Camus and Paredes, 56 that:

If the laws which we have exhibited or cited in the preceding discussion are attentively examined it will
be apparent that the method of expropriation adopted in this jurisdiction is such as to afford absolute
reassurance that no piece of land can be finally and irrevocably taken from an unwilling owner until
compensation is paid ... . (Emphasis supplied.)

It is true that P.D. No. 27 expressly ordered the emancipation of tenant-farmer as October 21, 1972 and
declared that he shall "be deemed the owner" of a portion of land consisting of a family-sized farm
except that "no title to the land owned by him was to be actually issued to him unless and until he had
become a full-fledged member of a duly recognized farmers' cooperative." It was understood, however,
that full payment of the just compensation also had to be made first, conformably to the constitutional
requirement.

When E.O. No. 228, categorically stated in its Section 1 that:

All qualified farmer-beneficiaries are now deemed full owners as of October 21, 1972 of the land they
acquired by virtue of Presidential Decree No. 27. (Emphasis supplied.)

it was obviously referring to lands already validly acquired under the said decree, after proof of full-
fledged membership in the farmers' cooperatives and full payment of just compensation. Hence, it was
also perfectly proper for the Order to also provide in its Section 2 that the "lease rentals paid to the
landowner by the farmer- beneficiary after October 21, 1972 (pending transfer of ownership after full
payment of just compensation), shall be considered as advance payment for the land."

The CARP Law, for its part, conditions the transfer of possession and ownership of the land to the
government on receipt by the landowner of the corresponding payment or the deposit by the DAR of
the compensation in cash or LBP bonds with an accessible bank. Until then, title also remains with the
landowner. 57 No outright change of ownership is contemplated either.
Hence, the argument that the assailed measures violate due process by arbitrarily transferring title
before the land is fully paid for must also be rejected.

It is worth stressing at this point that all rights acquired by the tenant-farmer under P.D. No. 27, as
recognized under E.O. No. 228, are retained by him even now under R.A. No. 6657. This should counter-
balance the express provision in Section 6 of the said law that "the landowners whose lands have been
covered by Presidential Decree No. 27 shall be allowed to keep the area originally retained by them
thereunder, further, That original homestead grantees or direct compulsory heirs who still own the
original homestead at the time of the approval of this Act shall retain the same areas as long as they
continue to cultivate said homestead."

In connection with these retained rights, it does not appear in G.R. No. 78742 that the appeal filed by
the petitioners with the Office of the President has already been resolved. Although we have said that
the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies need not preclude immediate resort to judicial
action, there are factual issues that have yet to be examined on the administrative level, especially the
claim that the petitioners are not covered by LOI 474 because they do not own other agricultural lands
than the subjects of their petition.

Obviously, the Court cannot resolve these issues. In any event, assuming that the petitioners have not
yet exercised their retention rights, if any, under P.D. No. 27, the Court holds that they are entitled to
the new retention rights provided for by R.A. No. 6657, which in fact are on the whole more liberal than
those granted by the decree.

The CARP Law and the other enactments also involved in these cases have been the subject of bitter
attack from those who point to the shortcomings of these measures and ask that they be scrapped
entirely. To be sure, these enactments are less than perfect; indeed, they should be continuously re-
examined and rehoned, that they may be sharper instruments for the better protection of the farmer's
rights. But we have to start somewhere. In the pursuit of agrarian reform, we do not tread on familiar
ground but grope on terrain fraught with pitfalls and expected difficulties. This is inevitable. The CARP
Law is not a tried and tested project. On the contrary, to use Justice Holmes's words, "it is an
experiment, as all life is an experiment," and so we learn as we venture forward, and, if necessary, by
our own mistakes. We cannot expect perfection although we should strive for it by all means.
Meantime, we struggle as best we can in freeing the farmer from the iron shackles that have
unconscionably, and for so long, fettered his soul to the soil.
By the decision we reach today, all major legal obstacles to the comprehensive agrarian reform program
are removed, to clear the way for the true freedom of the farmer. We may now glimpse the day he will
be released not only from want but also from the exploitation and disdain of the past and from his own
feelings of inadequacy and helplessness. At last his servitude will be ended forever. At last the farm on
which he toils will be his farm. It will be his portion of the Mother Earth that will give him not only the
staff of life but also the joy of living. And where once it bred for him only deep despair, now can he see
in it the fruition of his hopes for a more fulfilling future. Now at last can he banish from his small plot of
earth his insecurities and dark resentments and "rebuild in it the music and the dream."

WHEREFORE, the Court holds as follows:

1. R.A. No. 6657, P.D. No. 27, Proc. No. 131, and E.O. Nos. 228 and 229 are SUSTAINED against all
the constitutional objections raised in the herein petitions.

2. Title to all expropriated properties shall be transferred to the State only upon full payment of
compensation to their respective owners.

3. All rights previously acquired by the tenant- farmers under P.D. No. 27 are retained and recognized.

4. Landowners who were unable to exercise their rights of retention under P.D. No. 27 shall enjoy the
retention rights granted by R.A. No. 6657 under the conditions therein prescribed.

5. Subject to the above-mentioned rulings all the petitions are DISMISSED, without pronouncement as to
costs.

SO ORDERED.

B. a. LTI

LAND TENURE AND IMPROVEMENT

The LTI component seeks to secure the tenurial status of the farmers and farmworkers in the lands they
till. This involves the following:

A. LAND ACQUISITION AND DISTRIBUTION (LAD)

This involves the redistribution of private agricultural lands (PAL) and non- private agricultural lands
(refers to distributed settlements and government owned lands). It utilizes the acquisition scheme of
Voluntary Offer to Sell (VOS), Voluntary Land Transfer (VLT), Compulsory Acquisition (CA), and those
foreclosed by government financing institutions (GFIs).

B. LAND USE MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT (LUMD)

This is a preliminary activity to land distribution which involves the conduct of subdivision survey for
individual landholdings to be awarded to qualified Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries.

OTHER LTI SERVICES

A. SUBDIVISION OF COLLECTIVE CLOAs INTO INDIVIDUAL CLOA

This is a post-LAD activity that deals with the fragmentation of mother CLOA into individual CLOAs.

B. REDOCUMENTATION SUBDIVIDED COLLECTIVE CLOA INTO INDIVIDUAL CLOA

This refers to the subdivision survey and redocumentation of individual CLOAs out of the subdivided
mother CLOA.

C. LEASEHOLD OPERATIONS PROGRAM

Leasehold program is a non-land transfer program. This involves placing of areas under leasehold
tenancy as evidenced by the establishment of a leasehold contract between farmers and landowners

D. DISTRIBUTED BUT NOT YET DOCUMENTED AND DISTRIBUTED BUT NOT YET PAID (DNYD/DNYP)
Distributed But Not Yet Documented (DNYD) are landholdings where claims are still at the level of the
DAR for completion of required documents prior to submission to LBP for land valuation while
Distributed But Not Yet Paid (DNYP) lands pertain to landholdings where claims have been transmitted
by DAR to LBP but lack pre-payment requirements before payments are released to the landowners.

b. Agrarian Justice Delivery

AGRARIAN JUSTICE DELIVERY

A. AGRARIAN LEGAL ASSISTANCE

Agrarian legal assistance is comprised of resolution of Agrarian Law Implementation (ALI) cases, ARB
representation before judicial and quasi-judicial bodies, and mediation and conciliation. ALA aims to
provide legal support to ARBs in the course of agrarian disputes whether filed in regular courts or in DAR
Adjudication Board (DARAB). Resolution of ALI cases involved administrative rendering of decision on
exemption, conversion, and retention, among others.

B. ADJUDICATION OF CASES

This involves the resolution of cases by the DAR Adjudication Board (DARAB) and any of its salas. Cases
under DARAB Jurisdiction include, among others, the rights and obligations of persons, whether natural
or juridical, engaged in the management, cultivation, and use of all agricultural lands covered by
Republic Act No. 6657, otherwise known as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL), as
amended, and other related agrarian laws; the preliminary administrative determination of reasonable
and just compensation of Lands acquired under Presidential Decree (PD) No. 27 and the CARP, and cases
involving the ejectment and dispossession of tenants and/or leaseholders

c. Program Beneficiaries Development (photos)

MANNER OF ACQUISITION

BATASnatin LIVE! Free legal advice every Wednesday and Friday at 6pm.

MODES OF ACQUISITION OF AGRICULTURAL LAND

Category: Land Titles And Deeds

MODES OF ACQUISITION OF AGRICULTURAL LAND

1. Operation land transfer—mechanism established for the implementation of PD27

2. Voluntary offer to sell—scheme whereby the landowners voluntarily offer their agricultural lands for
coverage regardless of phasing

3. Voluntary land transfer/direct payment scheme—landowner and the beneficiary enter into a
voluntary agreement for the direct transfer of lands to the latter

4. Compulsory acquisition—whereby the land is expropriated by the State (Section 16 of RA 6657)

5. Voluntary stock distribution in the case of corporate farms – alternative arrangement for the physical
distribution of lands wherein corporate owners voluntarily divest a portion of their capital stock, equity
or participation in favor of their workers or other qualified beneficiaries

CASES:

G.R. No. 127876

d) Prepares Summary of Minutes of the conference/public hearing to be guided by CARP Form No.
7.

e) Forwards the completed VOCF/CACF to the Provincial Agrarian Reform Office (PARO) using CARP
Form No. 8 (Transmittal Memo to PARO).

xxx xxx xxx

DAR A.O. No. 9, Series of 1990 lays down the rules on both Voluntary Offer to Sell (VOS) and Compulsory
Acquisition (CA) transactions involving lands enumerated under Section 7 of the CARL. 54 In both VOS
and CA. transactions, the MARO prepares the Voluntary Offer to Sell Case Folder (VOCF) and the
Compulsory Acquisition Case Folder (CACF), as the case may be, over a particular landholding. The
MARO notifies the landowner as well as representatives of the LBP, BARC and prospective beneficiaries
of the date of the ocular inspection of the property at least one week before the scheduled date and
invites them to attend the same. The MARO, LBP or BARC conducts the ocular inspection and
investigation by identifying the land and landowner, determining the suitability of the land for
agriculture and productivity, interviewing and screening prospective farmer beneficiaries. Based on its
investigation, the MARO, LBP or BARC prepares the Field Investigation Report which shall be signed by
all parties concerned. In addition to the field investigation, a boundary or subdivision survey of the land
may also be conducted by a Survey Party of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources
(DENR) to be assisted by the MARO. 55 This survey shall delineate the areas covered by Operation Land
Transfer (OLT), areas retained by the landowner, areas with infrastructure, and the areas subject to VOS
and CA. After the survey and field investigation, the MARO sends a "Notice of Coverage" to the
landowner or his duly authorized representative inviting him to a conference or public hearing with the
farmer beneficiaries, representatives of the BARC, LBP, DENR, Department of Agriculture (DA), non-
government organizations, farmer's organizations and other interested parties. At the public hearing,
the parties shall discuss the results of the field investigation, issues that may be raised in relation
thereto, inputs to the valuation of the subject landholding, and other comments and recommendations
by all parties concerned. The Minutes of the conference/public hearing shall form part of the VOCF or
CACF which files shall be forwarded by the MARO to the PARO. The PARO reviews, evaluates and
validates the Field Investigation Report and other documents in the VOCF/CACF. He then forwards the
records to the RARO for another review.

DAR A.O. No. 9, Series of 1990 was amended by DAR A.O. No. 1, Series of 1993. DAR A.O. No. 1, Series of
1993 provided, among others, that:

IV. OPERATING PROCEDURES:

Steps Responsible Activity Forms/

Agency/Unit Document

(requirements)
A. Identification and

Documentation

xxx xxx xxx

5 DARMOIssue Notice of Coverage CARP

to LO by personal delivery Form No. 2

with proof of service, or

registered mail with return

card, informing him that his

property is now under CARP

coverage and for LO to select

his retention area, if he desires

to avail of his right of retention;

and at the same time invites him

to join the field investigation to

be conducted on his property

which should be scheduled at

least two weeks in advance of

said notice.

A copy of said Notice shall CARP

be posted for at least one Form No. 17

week on the bulletin board of

the municipal and barangay

halls where the property is

located. LGU office concerned

notifies DAR about compliance

with posting requirements thru

return indorsement on CARP

Form No. 17.

6 DARMOSend notice to the LBP, CARP

BARC, DENR representatives Form No. 3

and prospective ARBs of the schedule of the field investigation

to be conducted on the subject

property.

7 DARMOWith the participation of CARP

BARC the LO, representatives of Form No. 4

LBP the LBP, BARC, DENR Land Use

DENR and prospective ARBs, Map

Local Office conducts the investigation on

subject property to identify

the landholding, determines

its suitability and productivity;

and jointly prepares the Field

Investigation Report (FIR)

and Land Use Map. However,

the field investigation shall

proceed even if the LO, the

representatives of the DENR and

prospective ARBs are not available

provided, they were given due

notice of the time and date of

investigation to be conducted.

Similarly, if the LBP representative

is not available or could not come

on the scheduled date, the field

investigation shall also be conducted,

after which the duly accomplished

Part I of CARP Form No. 4 shall

be forwarded to the LBP

representative for validation. If he agrees

to the ocular inspection report of DAR,

he signs the FIR (Part I) and

accomplishes Part II thereof.

In the event that there is a

difference or variance between

the findings of the DAR and the

LBP as to the propriety of

covering the land under CARP,

whether in whole or in part, on

the issue of suitability to agriculture,

degree of development or slope,

and on issues affecting idle lands,

the conflict shall be resolved by

a composite team of DAR, LBP,

DENR and DA which shall jointly

conduct further investigation

thereon. The team shall submit its

report of findings which shall be

binding to both DAR and LBP,

pursuant to Joint Memorandum

Circular of the DAR, LBP, DENR

and DA dated 27 January 1992.

8 DARMOScreen prospective ARBs

BARC and causes the signing of CARP

the Application of Purchase Form No. 5

and Farmer's Undertaking

(APFU).

9 DARMOFurnishes a copy of the CARP

duly accomplished FIR to Form No. 4

the landowner by personal

delivery with proof of

service or registered mail

will return card and posts

a copy thereof for at least

one week on the bulletin

board of the municipal

and barangay halls where

the property is located.

LGU office concerned CARP

notifies DAR about Form No. 17

compliance with posting

requirement thru return

endorsement on CARP
Form No. 17.

B. Land Survey

10 DARMOConducts perimeter or Perimeter

And/or segregation survey or

DENR delineating areas covered Segregation

Local Office by OLT, "uncarpable Survey Plan

areas such as 18% slope

and above, unproductive/

unsuitable to agriculture,

retention, infrastructure.

In case of segregation or

subdivision survey, the

plan shall be approved

by DENR-LMS.
C. Review and Completion

of Documents

11. DARMOForward VOCF/CACF CARP

to DARPO. Form No. 6

xxx xxx xxx.

DAR A.O. No. 1, Series of 1993, modified the identification process and increased the number of
government agencies involved in the identification and delineation of the land subject to acquisition. 56
This time, the Notice of Coverage is sent to the landowner before the conduct of the field investigation
and the sending must comply with specific requirements. Representatives of the DAR Municipal Office
(DARMO) must send the Notice of Coverage to the landowner by "personal delivery with proof of
service, or by registered mail with return card," informing him that his property is under CARP coverage
and that if he desires to avail of his right of retention, he may choose which area he shall retain. The
Notice of Coverage shall also invite the landowner to attend the field investigation to be scheduled at
least two weeks from notice. The field investigation is for the purpose of identifying the landholding and
determining its suitability for agriculture and its productivity. A copy of the Notice of Coverage shall be
posted for at least one week on the bulletin board of the municipal and barangay halls where the
property is located. The date of the field investigation shall also be sent by the DAR Municipal Office to
representatives of the LBP, BARC, DENR and prospective farmer beneficiaries. The field investigation
shall be conducted on the date set with the participation of the landowner and the various
representatives. If the landowner and other representatives are absent, the field investigation shall
proceed, provided they were duly notified thereof. Should there be a variance between the findings of
the DAR and the LBP as to whether the land be placed under agrarian reform, the land's suitability to
agriculture, the degree or development of the slope, etc., the conflict shall be resolved by a composite
team of the DAR, LBP, DENR and DA which shall jointly conduct further investigation. The team's findings
shall be binding on both DAR and LBP. After the field investigation, the DAR Municipal Office shall
prepare the Field Investigation Report and Land Use Map, a copy of which shall be furnished the
landowner "by personal delivery with proof of service or registered mail with return card." Another copy
of the Report and Map shall likewise be posted for at least one week in the municipal or barangay halls
where the property is located.

Clearly then, the notice requirements under the CARL are not confined to the Notice of Acquisition set
forth in Section 16 of the law. They also include the Notice of Coverage first laid down in DAR A.O. No.
12, Series of 1989 and subsequently amended in DAR A.O. No. 9, Series of 1990 and DAR A.O. No. 1,
Series of 1993. This Notice of Coverage does not merely notify the landowner that his property shall be
placed under CARP and that he is entitled to exercise his retention right; it also notifies him, pursuant to
DAR A.O. No. 9, Series of 1990, that a public hearing, shall be conducted where he and representatives
of the concerned sectors of society may attend to discuss the results of the field investigation, the land
valuation and other pertinent matters. Under DAR A.O. No. 1, Series of 1993, the Notice of Coverage
also informs the landowner that a field investigation of his landholding shall be conducted where he and
the other representatives may be present.

B. The Compulsory Acquisition of Haciendas Palico and Banilad

In the case at bar, respondent DAR claims that it, through MARO Leopoldo C. Lejano, sent a letter of
invitation entitled "Invitation to Parties" dated September 29, 1989 to petitioner corporation, through
Jaime Pimentel, the administrator of Hacienda Palico. 57 The invitation was received on the same day it
was sent as indicated by a signature and the date received at the bottom left corner of said invitation.
With regard to Hacienda Banilad, respondent DAR claims that Jaime Pimentel, administrator also of
Hacienda Banilad, was notified and sent an invitation to the conference. Pimentel actually attended the
conference on September 21, 1989 and signed the Minutes of the meeting on behalf of petitioner
corporation. 58 The Minutes was also signed by the representatives of the BARC, the LBP and farmer
beneficiaries. 59 No letter of invitation was sent or conference meeting held with respect to Hacienda
Caylaway because it was subject to a Voluntary Offer to Sell to respondent DAR. 60

When respondent DAR, through the Municipal Agrarian Reform Officer (MARO), sent to the various
parties the Notice of Coverage and invitation to the conference, DAR A.O. No. 12, Series of 1989 was
already in effect more than a month earlier. The Operating Procedure in DAR Administrative Order No.
12 does not specify how notices or letters of invitation shall be sent to the landowner, the
representatives of the BARC, the LBP, the farmer beneficiaries and other interested parties. The
procedure in the sending of these notices is important to comply with the requisites of due process
especially when the owner, as in this case, is a juridical entity. Petitioner is a domestic

corporation, 61 and therefore, has a personality separate and distinct from its shareholders, officers and
employees.

The Notice of Acquisition in Section 16 of the CARL is required to be sent to the landowner by "personal
delivery or registered mail." Whether the landowner be a natural or juridical person to whose address
the Notice may be sent by personal delivery or registered mail, the law does not distinguish. The DAR
Administrative Orders also do not distinguish. In the proceedings before the DAR, the distinction
between natural and juridical persons in the sending of notices may be found in the Revised Rules of
Procedure of the DAR Adjudication Board (DARAB). Service of pleadings before the DARAB is governed
by Section 6, Rule V of the DARAB Revised Rules of Procedure. Notices and pleadings are served on
private domestic corporations or partnerships in the following manner:
Sec. 6. Service upon Private Domestic Corporation or Partnership. — If the defendant is a corporation
organized under the laws of the Philippines or a partnership duly registered, service may be made on
the president, manager, secretary, cashier, agent, or any of its directors or partners.

Similarly, the Revised Rules of Court of the Philippines, in Section 13, Rule 14 provides:

Sec. 13. Service upon private domestic corporation or partnership. — If the defendant is a corporation
organized under the laws of the Philippines or a partnership duly registered, service may be made on
the president, manager, secretary, cashier, agent, or any of its directors.

Summonses, pleadings and notices in cases against a private domestic corporation before the DARAB
and the regular courts are served on the president, manager, secretary, cashier, agent or any of its
directors. These persons are those through whom the private domestic corporation or partnership is
capable of action. 62

Jaime Pimentel is not the president, manager, secretary, cashier or director of petitioner corporation. Is
he, as administrator of the two Haciendas, considered an agent of the corporation?

The purpose of all rules for service of process on a corporation is to make it reasonably certain that the
corporation will receive prompt and proper notice in an action against it. 63 Service must be made on a
representative so integrated with the corporation as to make it a priori supposable that he will realize
his responsibilities and know what he should do with any legal papers served on him, 64 and bring home
to the corporation notice of the filing of the action. 65 Petitioner's evidence does not show the official
duties of Jaime Pimentel as administrator of petitioner's haciendas. The evidence does not indicate
whether Pimentel's duties is so integrated with the corporation that he would immediately realize his
responsibilities and know what he should do with any legal papers served on him. At the time the
notices were sent and the preliminary conference conducted, petitioner's principal place of business
was listed in respondent DAR's records as "Soriano Bldg., Plaza Cervantes, Manila," 66 and "7th Flr.
Cacho-Gonzales Bldg., 101 Aguirre St., Makati, Metro Manila." 67 Pimentel did not hold office at the
principal place of business of petitioner. Neither did he exercise his functions in Plaza Cervantes, Manila
nor in Cacho-Gonzales Bldg., Makati, Metro Manila. He performed his official functions and actually
resided in the haciendas in Nasugbu, Batangas, a place over two hundred kilometers away from Metro
Manila.

Curiously, respondent DAR had information of the address of petitioner's principal place of business. The
Notices of Acquisition over Haciendas Palico and Banilad were addressed to petitioner at its offices in
Manila and Makati. These Notices were sent barely three to four months after Pimentel was notified of
the preliminary conference. 68 Why respondent DAR chose to notify Pimentel instead of the officers of
the corporation was not explained by the said respondent.

Nevertheless, assuming that Pimentel was an agent of petitioner corporation, and the notices and
letters of invitation were validly served on petitioner through him, there is no showing that Pimentel
himself was duly authorized to attend the conference meeting with the MARO, BARC and LBP
representatives and farmer beneficiaries for purposes of compulsory acquisition of petitioner's
landholdings. Even respondent DAR's evidence does not indicate this authority. On the contrary,
petitioner claims that it had no knowledge of the letter-invitation, hence, could not have given Pimentel
the authority to bind it to whatever matters were discussed or agreed upon by the parties at the
preliminary conference or public hearing. Notably, one year after Pimentel was informed of the
preliminary conference, DAR A.O. No. 9, Series of 1990 was issued and this required that the Notice of
Coverage must be sent "to the landowner concerned or his duly authorized representative." 69

Assuming further that petitioner was duly notified of the CARP coverage of its haciendas, the areas
found actually subject to CARP were not properly identified before they were taken over by respondent
DAR. Respondents insist that the lands were identified because they are all registered property and the
technical description in their respective titles specifies their metes and bounds. Respondents admit at
the same time, however, that not all areas in the haciendas were placed under the comprehensive
agrarian reform program invariably by reason of elevation or character or use of the land. 70

The acquisition of the landholdings did not cover the entire expanse of the two haciendas, but only
portions thereof. Hacienda Palico has an area of 1,024 hectares and only 688.7576 hectares were
targetted for acquisition. Hacienda Banilad has an area of 1,050 hectares but only 964.0688 hectares
were subject to CARP. The haciendas are not entirely agricultural lands. In fact, the various tax
declarations over the haciendas describe the landholdings as "sugarland," and "forest, sugarland,
pasture land, horticulture and woodland." 71

Under Section 16 of the CARL, the sending of the Notice of Acquisition specifically requires that the land
subject to land reform be first identified. The two haciendas in the instant case cover vast tracts of land.
Before Notices of Acquisition were sent to petitioner, however, the exact areas of the landholdings were
not properly segregated and delineated. Upon receipt of this notice, therefore, petitioner corporation
had no idea which portions of its estate were subject to compulsory acquisition, which portions it could
rightfully retain, whether these retained portions were compact or contiguous, and which portions were
excluded from CARP coverage. Even respondent DAR's evidence does not show that petitioner, through
its duly authorized representative, was notified of any ocular inspection and investigation that was to be
conducted by respondent DAR. Neither is there proof that petitioner was given the opportunity to at
least choose and identify its retention area in those portions to be acquired compulsorily. The right of
retention and how this right is exercised, is guaranteed in Section 6 of the CARL, viz:
Sec. 6. Retention Limits. — . . . .

The right to choose the area to be retained, which shall be compact or contiguous, shall pertain to the
landowner; Provided, however, That in case the area selected for retention by the landowner is
tenanted, the tenant shall have the option to choose whether to remain therein or be a beneficiary in
the same or another agricultural land with similar or comparable features. In case the tenant chooses to
remain in the retained area, he shall be considered a leaseholder and shall lose his right to be a
beneficiary under this Act. In case the tenant chooses to be a beneficiary in another agricultural land, he
loses his right as a leaseholder to the land retained by the landowner. The tenant must exercise this
option within a period of one (1) year from the time the landowner manifests his choice of the area for
retention.

Under the law, a landowner may retain not more than five hectares out of the total area of his
agricultural land subject to CARP. The right to choose the area to be retained, which shall be compact or
contiguous, pertains to the landowner. If the area chosen for retention is tenanted, the tenant shall
have the option to choose whether to remain on the portion or be a beneficiary in the same or another
agricultural land with similar or comparable features.

C. The Voluntary Acquisition of Hacienda Caylaway

Petitioner was also left in the dark with respect to Hacienda Caylaway, which was the subject of a
Voluntary Offer to Sell (VOS). The VOS in the instant case was made on May 6, 1988, 72 before the
effectivity of R.A. 6657 on June 15, 1988. VOS transactions were first governed by DAR Administrative
Order No. 19, series of 1989, 73 and under this order, all VOS filed before June 15, 1988 shall be heard
and processed in accordance with the procedure provided for in Executive Order No. 229, thus:

III. All VOS transactions which are now pending before the DAR and for which no payment has been
made shall be subject to the notice and hearing requirements provided in Administrative Order No. 12,
Series of 1989, dated 26 July 1989, Section II, Subsection A, paragraph 3.

All VOS filed before 15 June 1988, the date of effectivity of the CARL, shall be heard and processed in
accordance with the procedure provided for in Executive Order No. 229.

xxx xxx xxx.

Sec. 9 of E.O. 229 provides:

Sec. 9. Voluntary Offer to Sell. — The government shall purchase all agricultural lands it deems
productive and suitable to farmer cultivation voluntarily offered for sale to it at a valuation determined
in accordance with Section 6. Such transaction shall be exempt from the payment of capital gains tax
and other taxes and fees.

Executive Order 229 does not contain the procedure for the identification of private land as set forth in
DAR A.O. No. 12, Series of 1989. Section 5 of E.O. 229 merely reiterates the procedure of acquisition in
Section 16, R.A. 6657. In other words, the E.O. is silent as to the procedure for the identification of the
land, the notice of coverage and the preliminary conference with the landowner, representatives of the
BARC, the LBP and farmer beneficiaries. Does this mean that these requirements may be dispensed with
regard to VOS filed before June 15, 1988? The answer is no.

First of all, the same E.O. 229, like Section 16 of the CARL, requires that the land, landowner and
beneficiaries of the land subject to agrarian reform be identified before the notice of acquisition should
be issued. 74 Hacienda Caylaway was voluntarily offered for sale in 1989. The Hacienda has a total area
of 867.4571 hectares and is covered by four (4) titles. In two separate Resolutions both dated January
12, 1989, respondent DAR, through the Regional Director, formally accepted the VOS over the two of
these four

titles. 75 The land covered by two titles has an area of 855.5257 hectares, but only 648.8544 hectares
thereof fell within the coverage of R.A. 6657. 76 Petitioner claims it does not know where these portions
are located.

Respondent DAR, on the other hand, avers that surveys on the land covered by the four titles were
conducted in 1989, and that petitioner, as landowner, was not denied participation therein, The results
of the survey and the land valuation summary report, however, do not indicate whether notices to
attend the same were actually sent to and received by petitioner or its duly authorized representative.
77 To reiterate, Executive Order No. 229 does not lay down the operating procedure, much less the
notice requirements, before the VOS is accepted by respondent DAR. Notice to the landowner, however,
cannot be dispensed with. It is part of administrative due process and is an essential requisite to enable
the landowner himself to exercise, at the very least, his right of retention guaranteed under the CARL.

III. The Conversion of the three Haciendas.

It is petitioner's claim that the three haciendas are not subject to agrarian reform because they have
been declared for tourism, not agricultural

purposes. 78 In 1975, then President Marcos issued Proclamation No. 1520 declaring the municipality of
Nasugbu, Batangas a tourist zone. Lands in Nasugbu, including the subject haciendas, were allegedly
reclassified as non-agricultural 13 years before the effectivity of R. A. No. 6657. 79 In 1993, the Regional
Director for Region IV of the Department of Agriculture certified that the haciendas are not feasible and
sound for agricultural development. 80 On March 20, 1992, pursuant to Proclamation No. 1520, the
Sangguniang Bayan of Nasugbu, Batangas adopted Resolution No. 19 reclassifying certain areas of
Nasugbu as non-agricultural. 81 This Resolution approved Municipal Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1992,
the Revised Zoning Ordinance of Nasugbu 82 which zoning ordinance was based on a Land Use Plan for
Planning Areas for New Development allegedly prepared by the University of the Philippines. 83
Resolution No. 19 of the Sangguniang Bayan was approved by the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of
Batangas on March 8, 1993. 84

Petitioner claims that proclamation No. 1520 was also upheld by respondent DAR in 1991 when it
approved conversion of 1,827 hectares in Nasugbu into a tourist area known as the Batulao Resort
Complex, and 13.52 hectares in Barangay Caylaway as within the potential tourist belt. 85 Petitioner
present evidence before us that these areas are adjacent to the haciendas subject of this petition,
hence, the haciendas should likewise be converted. Petitioner urges this Court to take cognizance of the
conversion proceedings and rule accordingly. 6

We do not agree. Respondent DAR's failure to observe due process in the acquisition of petitioner's
landholdings does not ipso facto give this Court the power to adjudicate over petitioner's application for
conversion of its haciendas from agricultural to non-agricultural. The agency charged with the mandate
of approving or disapproving applications for conversion is the DAR.

At the time petitioner filed its application for conversion, the Rules of Procedure governing the
processing and approval of applications for land use conversion was the DAR A.O. No. 2, Series of 1990.
Under this A.O., the application for conversion is filed with the MARO where the property is located. The
MARO reviews the application and its supporting documents and conducts field investigation and ocular
inspection of the property. The findings of the MARO are subject to review and evaluation by the
Provincial Agrarian Reform Officer (PARO). The PARO may conduct further field investigation and submit
a supplemental report together with his recommendation to the Regional Agrarian Reform Officer
(RARO) who shall review the same. For lands less than five hectares, the RARO shall approve or
disapprove applications for conversion. For lands exceeding five hectares, the RARO shall evaluate the
PARO Report and forward the records and his report to the Undersecretary for Legal Affairs.
Applications over areas exceeding fifty hectares are approved or disapproved by the Secretary of
Agrarian Reform.
The DAR's mandate over applications for conversion was first laid down in Section 4 (j) and Section 5 (l)
of Executive Order No. 129-A, Series of 1987 and reiterated in the CARL and Memorandum Circular No.
54, Series of 1993 of the Office of the President. The DAR's jurisdiction over applications for conversion
is provided as follows:

A. The Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) is mandated to "approve or disapprove applications

for conversion, restructuring or readjustment of agricultural lands into non-agricultural uses," pursuant
to Section 4 (j) of Executive Order No. 129-A, Series of 1987.

B. Sec. 5 (l) of E.O. 129-A, Series of 1987, vests in the DAR, exclusive authority to approve or
disapprove applications for conversion of agricultural lands for residential, commercial, industrial and
other land uses.

C. Sec. 65 of R.A. No. 6657, otherwise known as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988,
likewise empowers the DAR to authorize under certain conditions, the conversion of agricultural lands.

D. Sec. 4 of Memorandum Circular No. 54, Series of 1993 of the Office of the President, provides
that "action on applications for land use conversion on individual landholdings shall remain as the
responsibility of the DAR, which shall utilize as its primary reference, documents on the comprehensive
land use plans and accompanying ordinances passed upon and approved by the local government units
concerned, together with the National Land Use Policy, pursuant to R.A. No. 6657 and E.O. No. 129-A. 87

Applications for conversion were initially governed by DAR A.O. No. 1, Series of 1990 entitled "Revised
Rules and Regulations Governing Conversion of Private Agricultural Lands and Non-Agricultural Uses,"
and DAR A.O. No. 2, Series of 1990 entitled "Rules of Procedure Governing the Processing and Approval
of Applications for Land Use Conversion." These A.O.'s and other implementing guidelines, including
Presidential issuances and national policies related to land use conversion have been consolidated in
DAR A.O. No. 07, Series of 1997. Under this recent issuance, the guiding principle in land use conversion
is:

to preserve prime agricultural lands for food production while, at the same time, recognizing the need of
the other sectors of society (housing, industry and commerce) for land, when coinciding with the
objectives of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law to promote social justice, industrialization and
the optimum use of land as a national resource for public welfare. 88

"Land Use" refers to the manner of utilization of land, including its allocation, development and
management. "Land Use Conversion" refers to the act or process of changing the current use of a piece
of agricultural land into some other use as approved by the DAR. 89 The conversion of agricultural land
to uses other than agricultural requires field investigation and conferences with the occupants of the
land. They involve factual findings and highly technical matters within the special training and expertise
of the DAR. DAR A.O. No. 7, Series of 1997 lays down with specificity how the DAR must go about its
task. This time, the field investigation is not conducted by the MARO but by a special task force, known
as the Center for Land Use Policy Planning and Implementation (CLUPPI-DAR Central Office). The
procedure is that once an application for conversion is filed, the CLUPPI prepares the Notice of Posting.
The MARO only posts the notice and thereafter issues a certificate to the fact of posting. The CLUPPI
conducts the field investigation and dialogues with the applicants and the farmer beneficiaries to
ascertain the information necessary for the processing of the application. The Chairman of the CLUPPI
deliberates on the merits of the investigation report and recommends the appropriate action. This
recommendation is transmitted to the Regional Director, thru the Undersecretary, or Secretary of
Agrarian Reform. Applications involving more than fifty hectares are approved or disapproved by the
Secretary. The procedure does not end with the Secretary, however. The Order provides that the
decision of the Secretary may be appealed to the Office of the President or the Court of Appeals, as the
case may be, viz:

Appeal from the decision of the Undersecretary shall be made to the Secretary, and from the Secretary
to the Office of the President or the Court of Appeals as the case may be. The mode of appeal/motion
for reconsideration, and the appeal fee, from Undersecretary to the Office of the Secretary shall be the
same as that of the Regional Director to the Office of the Secretary. 90

Indeed, the doctrine of primary jurisdiction does not warrant a court to arrogate unto itself authority to
resolve a controversy the jurisdiction over which is initially lodged with an administrative body of special
competence. 91 Respondent DAR is in a better position to resolve petitioner's application for
conversion, being primarily the agency possessing the necessary expertise on the matter. The power to
determine whether Haciendas Palico, Banilad and Caylaway are non-agricultural, hence, exempt from
the coverage of the CARL lies with the DAR, not with this Court.

Finally, we stress that the failure of respondent DAR to comply with the requisites of due process in the
acquisition proceedings does not give this Court the power to nullify the CLOA's already issued to the
farmer beneficiaries. To assume the power is to short-circuit the administrative process, which has yet
to run its regular course. Respondent DAR must be given the chance to correct its procedural lapses in
the acquisition proceedings. In Hacienda Palico alone, CLOA's were issued to 177 farmer beneficiaries in
1993. 92 Since then until the present, these farmers have been cultivating their lands. 93 It goes against
the basic precepts of justice, fairness and equity to deprive these people, through no fault of their own,
of the land they till. Anyhow, the farmer beneficiaries hold the property in trust for the rightful owner of
the land.
IN VIEW WHEREOF, the petition is granted in part and the acquisition proceedings over the three
haciendas are nullified for respondent DAR's failure to observe due process therein. In accordance with
the guidelines set forth in this decision and the applicable administrative procedure, the case is hereby
remanded to respondent DAR for proper acquisition proceedings and determination of petitioner's
application for conversion.

SO ORDERED.