Updated Kalanggaman Case Report 9-23

CASE BACKGROUND
Calanggaman Island 1, a strip of land with an area of less than 10 hectares is

situated approximately 12 kilometers from the shoreline of the mainland of Palompon,
Leyte.
Since time immemorial, Calanggaman Island has been identified with Palompon,
with its rich marine environment that served as traditional fishing grounds of the local
fisherfolks and communal area for swimming and social gatherings of local residents.
The Nuñez shoal of Calanggaman Island was even named after a publicly-known
family of sea-going residents of Palompon, the Nuñez family.
The peaceful exercise of territorial jurisdiction and ownership of the

Municipality of Palompon over the Calanggaman Island was disturbed when it came to
the knowledge of the local officials through the Municipal Assessor‟s Office that a
certain ANDRES G. TORING of Nailon, Bogo, Cebu was claiming to be the owner of
the said parcel of coconut land with an area of Two Thousand Six Hundred Ninety Six
(2,696) square meters evidenced by Tax Declaration No. 128192 under Revision 6.
Alarmed by the so-called “owner” and his claim of Calanggaman Island, then
Councilor Herville Pajaron [now the Head of the Municipal Environment and
Sustainable Development Office (MESDO)] inquired into the status and land
classification of the island. It was done despite the fact that the Sangguniang Bayan (SB)
of Palompon firmly believed that the said island is within the territorial jurisdiction of
the municipality. The inquiries were only to examine the records of the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) VIII and the Registry of Deeds to support
the legal claim of the municipality.
During the June 7, 1999 SB Regular Session3, Pajaron reported before the august
body that from his investigation it was found out that no records relative to the island
before the Second World War could be retrieved since all records were destroyed during
the war.
Records from the Registry of Deeds only show that the said property was
covered under Tax Declaration No. 66644 in the name of PABLO SITOY. It appeared
that in 1950, the same property was transferred to AGRIPINO ENSOY, a resident of
1
Calanggaman Island as geographically described in Municipal Resolution No. 129-090992 and gleaned
from the Excerpts of the 10th Regular Session of the SB of Palompon, Leyte held on September 9, 1992.
2
Attached hereto as Annex A is Tax Declaration No. 12819 R6 under the declared name of Andres G.
Toring.
3
Attached hereto as Annex B is a copy of the Excerpts of the 20th Regular Session of the SB of
Palompon, Leyte held on June 7, 1999.
4
Attached hereto as Annex C is the Tracer of Records issued by the Municipal Assessor of Palompon;
also indicated by Tax Declaration No. 7755 which cancels Tax Declaration No. 6664 R3 (1950).
2 | Calanggaman Island, Palompon, Leyte
(The Celso de los Angeles/Legacy Group
of Companies unlawful Acquisition.)
Palompon, Leyte as evidenced by Tax Declaration No. 77555 which was subsequently
cancelled with the issuance of Tax Declaration No.28806 R4, this time, with Agripino
Ensoy as the “owner” and Alberto G. Toring as Administrator of the said property.
Tax Declaration No.28807 R4 begins with the year 1974.
Later on in 1979, Tax Declaration No. 2880 R4 was cancelled by Tax

Declaration No. 156458 with Andres B. Toring as the “owner”. However, no
document was recorded as to how the transfer was effected from the previous “owner”
Ensoy to the “new owner” Toring.
That same year, Tax Declaration No. 12819 under Revision 6 was issued
which cancelled Tax Declaration No. 15645. Andres Toring of Nailon, Bogo, Cebu
was the declared “owner” of the property. This Tax Declaration was reflected in the
Topography Map of the Philippines issued by the National Mapping and Resource
Information Authority (NAMRIA). This was also reflected in the Philippine Coast and
Geodetic Survey.
It was sad to note though that the Calanggaman Island does not appear on the
Map of Palompon in previous years. Rarely was it shown in a NAMRIA-produced Map9
of the Province of Leyte sometime in 1990. Neither does it appear in the land
classification map of the municipality. 10
This, however, did not discount the fact that the Calanggaman Island is part of
Palompon. Apart from the records that the ANDRES TORING, the so-called “owner” of
the island paid real property taxes in Palompon, it has also been established that the
municipality of Palompon and its neighboring towns and municipalities acknowledged
that the said island is part of the political division of the Municipality of Palompon. 11
To demonstrate its firm stand on its claim, the Municipality of Palompon through
the Sangguniang Bayan passed a resolution to interpose no objection on the installation
of a lighthouse in the island to serve as point of reference for navigators. In the said
Resolution No. 129-09099212 which was approved during the September 9, 1992 SB
5
Attached hereto as Annex D is Tax Declaration No. 7755.
6
Attached hereto as Annex E is Tax Declaration No. 2880 R4.
7
Attached hereto as Annex E is Tax Declaration No. 2880 R4.
8
Attached hereto as Annex F is Tax Declaration No. 15645.
9
Attached hereto as Annex G is a machine copy of a NAMRIA Map of the Province of Leyte, dated
1990.
10
Comprehensive Development Plan of the Municipality of Palompon (town plan: 1983-1987,
projections: 1983-2000). Also as certified by the DENR Region 8, Regional Technical Director-FMS and
marked as Annex H.
11
As featured in Banat News, November 21, 2008 issue, in the news article written by Gregg M. Rubio
entitled “MGA ARMADO NANGHASI SA MALAPASCUA”, DOT-7 Director Dawnie Roa specifically
recognized Calanggaman Island as part of the territorial jurisdiction of Palompon, Leyte.
12
Attached hereto as Annex I is Municipal Resolution No. 129-090992.
Regular Session, the SB recognized Calanggaman as part of Barangay Tinabilan,

Palompon and that it is located around two nautical miles from the mainland Palompon.
In October 27, 1993, SB passed Resolution No. 158-27109313 requesting the

Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) Secretary to Declare
Calanggaman Island as a Marine Protected Area with the aim of protecting the
surrounding waters of the island against dynamite fishing and other forms of illegal
fishing. Again, the SB reiterated the municipality‟s rightful jurisdiction of the island as it
provided in its whereas clause, to quote: “Whereas, Kalanggaman Island is part of the
potential division of the Municipality of Palompon as per Tax Declaration No. 12819
Revision 6 in the name of Andres Toring of Nailon, Bogo, Cebu”.
It also provided that the Calanggaman Island was once among the five sites
under the DENR Visayas proposed for proclamation into Marine Protected Area
intended purposely for its Coastal Environmental Program (CEF).
In August 3, 1994, during the 29th Regular Session of the SB of Palompon,

Resolution No. 58-03089414 entitled “A Resolution Declaring Kalanggaman, Tabuc,
Cabgan and Gumalac Islands, San Juan and Sabang Beaches, Tinubdan (Victoria) and
Mabini (Maparat) Springs, Santiago (Tres Navis), Liberty (Tres Marias), San Joaquin
(Balay sa Mananap) Caves, Masaba and Belen Falls for Reforestation, Wildlife
Preservation, Environmental Protection and Tourism Development Under Protective
Care of the Agencies (DENR and Philippine Tourism Authority) Concerned” was
passed.
The assumption to office of the new members of the SB and the Vice-Mayor did
not bring to an end the municipality‟s claim of ownership and territorial jurisdiction of
Calanggaman Island. Rather, with the leadership of then Vice-Mayor Eulogio Tupa
(now the Municipal Mayor), several legislative acts were taken.
Rumors that there were private individuals working on for the declaration of
Calanggaman Island as alienable and disposable land reached the municipality. Thus, on
September 8, 199715, three resolutions were approved by the SB in relation to the
Kalanggaman Island, to wit:
1. Resolution No. 104-080997, “Urging the DENR Not To Declare

Kalanggaman Island as Alienable and Disposable Land”, it being part
of the public domain under the territorial jurisdiction of the
Municipality of Palompon and a potential tourist haven that once
developed could generate income for the municipality.
13
Attached hereto as Annex J is Municipal Resolution No. 158-271093.
14
Attached hereto as Annex K is Municipal Resolution No. 58-030894.
15
Attached hereto as Annex L is the copy of the Minutes of the 31st SB Regular Session held on
September 8, 1997.
2. Resolution No. 105-080997, “Reiterating The Request of the

Municipality of Palompon, Leyte for the DENR Thru the
Environmental Management and Protected Areas Services to Evaluate
and Declare Kalanggaman Island as a Marine Protected Area”
3. Resolution No. 106-080997, “Requesting the Department of Tourism
thru Hon. Secretary Mina Gabor to Send Some Representatives from
the Same Office to evaluate Kalanggaman Island for Tourism
Purposes.
The positive acts of the local legislators only proved that the municipality
remained unyielding on the Calanggaman issue.
However, it is distressing to note that until this very day, the requests of the
municipality fell on the deaf ears of the DENR and the DOT.
In June 7, 1999, another request was made by the SB under Resolution No. 129-
07069916. This time for the National Mapping Resource Information Authority
(NAMRIA) to inquire as to the land classification of Calanggaman Island and should
there be none, to allow the Provincial Environmental and Natural Resources Office
(PENRO) to conduct an ocular survey/inspection for that purpose.
NAMRIA is a government agency under the DENR responsible for providing the
public with map-making services and acting as the central mapping agency, depository
and distribution facility of natural resources data in the form of maps, charts, texts and
statistics.
In the June 14, 1999 where the Regular SB Session was actually held in the
Calanggaman Island, Palompon, Leyte, Municipal Resolution No. 137-14069917,
entitled “Requesting the PENRO to endorse to the NAMRIA for the inclusion of
Calanggaman Island in the Philippine Map particularly indicating that it is under the
Municipality of Palompon”, was passed.
To further strengthen the municipality‟s jurisdiction over Calanggaman Island,

Resolution No. 139-14069918 was approved. The resolution was to request the
Municipal Mayor to order the Department Heads particularly the Municipal Social
Welfare and Development, Rural Health Unit, Municipal Agriculture, Chief of Police,
Local Civil Registrar and the Municipal Engineering to visit and make appropriate
solutions to the needs of the residents of Sitio Calanggaman, Barangay Tinabilan.
16
Refer to Annex B.
17
Attached hereto as Annex M is Municipal Resolution No. 137-140699 as recorded in the Minutes of
the 21st Regular SB Session on June 14, 19999 held at Calanggaman Island, Palompon, Leyte.
18
Attached hereto as Annex N is Municipal Resolution No. 139-140699, also documented in the Minutes
of the 21st Regular SB Session on June 14, 19999 held at Calanggaman Island, Palompon, Leyte..
With the approval of the municipality‟s Strategic Agriculture and Fisheries

Development Zone (SAFDZ) as provided in Resolution No. 227-08119919, a special
mention was made therein on the inclusion of the Calanggaman Island as part of the
municipality and thus covered by the SAFDZ.
Section 6, par. B of Municipal Ordinance No. 257-15119920 otherwise known as

“An Ordinance Promoting Marine Eco-Tourism, Prescribing the Proper Use, Imposing
Fees and Other Charges for the Trips Using the Municipality-Owned Seacrafts,
Providing Penalties Therefor and For Other Purposes”, provided for the prescribed fees
and charges for the eco-tour related trips to Calanggaman Island.
The Ordinance was approved in November 15, 1999.
The Comprehensive Land Use Plan21 of the Municipality of Palompon passed

and approved in October 27, 2003 by the Municipal Council identified Calanggaman
Island as an Eco-tourism Zone.
In 2004, it has come to the attention of the Municipal Government that the
Calanggaman Island has been the subject of a duly notarized Extra-Judicial
Declaration of Heirs and Deed of Absolute Sale 22 entered into between certain
WALDERTRUDES TORING, PURITA TORING, SOCORRO TORING,
CATALINO TORING, MILAGROS TORING, NENA TORING, MORIE
TORING, and HEIRS OF ALBERTO TORING, represented by WILSON
TORING (the only forced and legal heirs of ANDRES TORING) the VENDORS;
and JOEL RETUYA and CELSO DE LOS ANGELES, JR., the VENDEES.
Under the said document, the Two Thousand Six Hundred Ninety Six (2,696)
square meters coconut land (ISLAND), situated in Calanggaman, Tinabilan, Palompon,
Leyte; bounded on the North, East, South and West, by seashore; under Tax Declaration
No. 12819 was sold by the Vendors to the above-mentioned Vendees for and in
consideration of Two Hundred Thousand Pesos (P200,000.00). The document was
notarized on September 16, 2003 at Cebu City by notary public ATTY. ANTHONY
GARCIA, recorded in his notarial book as Doc. No. 436, Page 89, Book No. I, Series
of 2003. Attached to the Deed of Sale was the Technical Description of the subject
property prepared by Geodetic Engineer Venerando E. Lubiano.
19
Attached hereto as Annex O is Municipal Resolution No. 227-081199.
20
Attached hereto as Annex P is Municipal Ordinance No. 257-151199, as gleaned from the Excerpts of
the Minutes of the 41st Regular Session of the SB held on November 15, 1999 .
21
Attached hereto as Annex Q is the Excerpts from the Minutes of the 1st Special Session of the SB held
on February 19, 2004 stating thereat the Comprehensive Land Use Plan of the Municipality of Palompon.
22
Attached hereto as Annex R is Extra-Judicial Declaration of Heirs and Deed of Absolute Sale entered
into between certain WALDERTRUDES TORING, PURITA TORING, SOCORRO TORING,
CATALINO TORING, NENA TORING, MORIE TORING, HEIRS OF ALBERTO TORING, (the legal
heirs of ANDRES TORING) the VENDORS; and JOEL RETUYA and CELSO DE LOS ANGELES, the
VENDEES.
Tax Declaration No. 02-00722 R11 issued in the name of Retuya and De Los
Angeles which cancelled Tax Declaration No. 12819 R6 reflected an exorbitant
increase in land area. From .2696 hectares it has gone up to 9.8158 hectares. No Deed of
Conveyance whatsoever covering the increased land area is kept on record in custody of
the Municipal and Provincial Assessor.
In January 13, 200423, Former Mayor Marcelo Onate wrote a communication to

the Sangguniang Bayan informing the latter that several private individuals have
surfaced and made ownership claims over the Calanggaman Island. He reported to the
SB of the construction of a landmark outpost by the municipality. He also enlightened
the SB members of the need to initiate concrete steps to promote tourism in the island
and iron out proprietary and governmental rights over the island. He requested the SB to
pass a resolution declaring Calanggaman Island a tourist destination. He further
requested for the creation of a Special Committee to study and recommend legal ways
and actions to preserve and protect the interest of the municipality.
In January 19, 2004, Municipal Council passed Resolution No. 008-19020424,

declaring Calanggaman Island as an eco-destination for local and foreign tourists.
The Municipality intensified its claim of jurisdiction and ownership over

Calanggaman that on February 19, 200425 the SB passed the following resolutions:
1. Resolution No. 024 - 190204, “Expressing the Municipality‟s Strong

Objection and Opposition to the Survey Plan and Application for
Land Titling of Kalanggaman Island, a Public Land”;
2. Resolution No. 025-190204, “Urging the Regional Office of the
Protected Area and Wildlife Services of the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources to Certify Kalanggaman Island
a Public Land Within the Municipality of Palompon, as an Eco-
Destination Area, Its Marine Habitat Protected and Secured”;
3. Resolution No. 026-190204, “Authorizing the Municipal Mayor
Atty. Marcelo C. Oñate to Engage the Services of a Licensed
Geodetic Engineer to prepare a Survey Plan for Kalanggaman
Island”;
4. Resolution No. 027-190204, “Authorizing the Municipal Mayor
Atty. Marcelo C. Oñate to Construct, Install and Establish a
Monitoring Station, Guard House and Mooring/Docking Facilities in
Kalanggaman Island”;
5. Resolution No. 028-190204, “Expressing the Municipality‟s Strong
Objection and Vehement Opposition to the Sale, Transfer and Land
23
Attached hereto as Annex S is the Letter of Former Mayor Marcelo Oñate to the SB dated 13 January
2004.
24
Attached hereto as Annex T is Municipal Resolution No. 008-190204.
25
Attached hereto as Annex U is copy of the Excerpts of the 1st Special SB Session held on n February
19, 2004.
Titling of Kalanggaman Island, a Public Land, of the Municipality of

Palompon and Urging the Provincial Assessor for its Disapproval
and Cancellation of the Tax Declaration Issued Thereof”;
6. Resolution No. 029-190204, “Expressing the Municipality‟s Strong
Objection and Vehement Opposition to the Sale, Transfer and Land
Titling of Kalanggaman Island, a Public Land and Directing the
Municipal Assessor to Cause for the Revocation and Cancellation of
the Tax Declaration Issued Thereof”;
7. Resolution No. 030-190204 entitled “Asserting the Municipality‟s
Jurisdictional Rights and Ownership over Kalanggaman Island, a
Public Land, in the Municipality of Palompon.”
The SB maintained that Calanggaman Island is not a private land, not alienable
and disposable but a public land that it cannot and must not be sold or transferred or
titled to private persons. Hence, the transfer of the declared names of the claimants of
Calanggaman Island to the so-called “New Owners” was done with haste and amazingly
expeditious processing and approval.
Agitated by the moves of the municipality, CELSO DE LOS ANGELES, JR.26

filed criminal and administrative complaints against then Municipal Mayor Marcelo
Oñate, Vice-Mayor Constantino Tupa and all SB members before the Office of the
Ombudsman for violation of RA 3019, “Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act” and RA
6719, “An Act Establishing A Code Of Conduct And Ethical Standards For Public
Officials And Employees, To Uphold The Time-Honored Principle Of Public Office
Being A Public Trust, Granting Incentives And Rewards For Exemplary Service,
Enumerating Prohibited Acts And Transactions And Providing Penalties For Violations
Thereof And For Other Purposes”.
In its April 14, 2004 Consolidated Evaluation Report 27, the Office of the
Ombudsman Visayas recommended that both complaints be closed and terminated on
grounds of lack of substance.
De Los Angeles likewise resorted to filing an Action for Declaratory Relief and
Injunction before the Regional Trial Court, Palompon, Leyte against Marcelo Oñate, et
al. The same was denied by the court sometime on 25 May 2004 28.
26
Mr. Celso de los Angeles is the chairman of Legacy Group of Companies, which he acquired
sometime in 1997. Legacy Group of Companies owns 13 rural banks with 29 branches nationwide; all 13
banks closed voluntarily last year due to insolvency and have since been taken over by the Philippine
Deposit Insurance Corp. The Legacy Group, which is a conglomerate of banks and pre-need companies,
entered the picture in 2003 when it applied for a land titling to Kalanggaman Island. It claims to have
bought the rights to the islet from its previous holder, a certain Andres Turing. But records show that
Turing held less than three hectares of the property but Legacy wants to title almost 10 hectares.
27
Attached hereto as Annex V is the Consolidated Evaluation Report of the Ombudsman Cebu dated 14
April 2004.
Notably, two years thereafter, on 5 June 2006 29, as capsulated in the Minutes of
th
the 20 Regular Session of the Sangguniang Bayan of Palompon, Leyte, Mr. Celso de
los Angeles, together with his lawyer Atty. Binky Noel, appeared before the
Sangguniang Bayan Members and the former Mayor Marcelo Oñate to personally render
his apology to the said Municipal Officials referring to the incident in April and May
2004. This pretense of an apology30 succumb to his presentation of his proposal to the
Municipal Officials of Palompon of a Kalanggaman Island Development, which he
called “KALANGGAMAN BLUE WATER ISLAND RESORT”. What was surprising
is that the Oñate Administration that time became magnanimous and friendly to Mr.
Celso de los Angeles. In fact, it showed in the said Minutes that a Memorandum of
Agreement between the municipality and the developer was to be executed thereafter,
not to mention that in the same Minutes Mr. Celso de los Angeles was denoted as
“owner” of the Calanggaman Island (or was it only a typographical error of the S.B.
Secretary that time?). Nonetheless, no records of the aforesaid MOA can be found to
have existed in the public files of the Local Government Unit of Palompon.
In 2006, Tax Declaration No. 02-31048-00722 underwent a general revision

resulting to its cancellation with the issuance of Tax Declaration No. 05-31048-00577
R12 still with Retuya and De los Angeles, Jr. as “owners”.
Surprisingly though, on January 21, 2004, Retuya executed a Deed of Absolute

Sale thereby selling, transferring and conveying unto his “co-owner” De Los Angeles
the Calanggaman Island for the sum of Two Hundred Thousand Pesos (P200,000.00),
making the latter the “sole owner” of the island.
On the same date, the deed was duly notarized by Notary Public Atty. Victor
Alfredo O. Queniahan of Zamora Street, Mandaue City, Cebu and recorded in his
Notarial Book as Doc. No. 146, Page No. 31, Book No.24, Series of 2004.
Unknown to the Municipality, Celso De Los Angeles, Jr. successfully transferred

“ownership” of the island to the RURAL BANK OF CARMEN (CEBU) INC. with
principal office at Cogon West, Carmen Cebu by virtue of a duly notarized Deed of
Assignment under the seal of Notary Public Lawyer Lyndon B. Basan on September
21, 2006. The amount involved in the said transaction was Three Hundred Thousand
Pesos (P300,000.00).
A transfer fee of P750 was paid and taxes due were paid on June 5, 2006.
28
Attached hereto as Annex W is the Order of the Regional Trial Court, Br. 17 of Palompon, Leyte for
SCA NO. 0034-PN, Declaratory Relief, Injunction, etc., dated 25 May 2004
29
Attached hereto as Annex X is the Minutes of the 20th Regular Session of the Sangguniang Bayan of
Palompon, Leyte.
30
The purported apology made by Mr. Celso de los Angeles became controversial and in fact featured in
West Leyte Weekly Express, June 12-18, 2006 issue, in the article entitled “Major investor offers to
develop Leyte‟s „Boracay.”
This is evidenced by Tax Declaration No. 05-31048-00730 R1231. This tax

declaration was preceded by Tax Declaration Nos. 02-3148-0072232 and 05-31048-
0057733, all declared under the name of Joel L. Retuya and Celso de los Angeles and
covering 9.8158 hectares.
Last August 6, 2008, personnel from the Municipal Eco-Tourism and Services
Office headed by Chedna Romero together with Wojtek Nieszporek, a German
Consultant of the DTI-GTZ Project visited the Calanggaman Island as part of the
continuing evaluation of the eco-tourism destinations and establishments in the town. As
soon as they arrived at the island, the group was approached by a fully-armed guard34
who has been stationing there. To the surprise of the group, the guard (certain Mr.
Batitay) prevented them from entering the island and strongly pronounced the “No
Docking” policy in the island upon orders of the “owner” Celso De Los Angeles. It was
also found out that the guard had maintained a structure in the island that serves as his
quarters.
Batitay told the group that it should have first coordinated with De Los Angeles‟
office in Cebu before proceeding to the island. He confided to the group that he has been
working with De Los Angeles for the past three years and that there are two more guards
employed to keep watch over the island in scheduled rotations, that is one guard for
every three months.
After being convinced by Romero, Batitay allowed and accompanied the group
to tour the island on foot and take pictures. The group observed a huge hole on the
shoreline approximately six meters by ten meters and four feet deep, an indication that
hauling has been done. When asked by the group, Batitay explained that it was due to
typhoon Frank.
Another observation was the presence of more or less 20 dead baby sharks
commonly known as “pating” on the sand bar. Batitay said the sharks were probably
trapped on the island resulting to their death. The group doubted Batitay‟s explanation
since there were dried baby sharks hanged outside his quarters. They tried to examine
some of dead baby sharks and found out that the internal organs were deliberately taken
out. It was later on learned by the group that the liver of sharks is valuable because of its
proven medicinal component.
31
Attached hereto as Annex Y is Tax Declaration No. 05-31048-00730 R12.
32
Attached hereto as Annex Z is Tax Declaration No. 02-31048-00722.
33
Attached hereto as Annex aa is Tax Declaration No. 02-31048-00577.
34
The presence of this fully armed men in Calanggaman Island is corroborated in evidence by the report
of Gregg M. Rubio of Banat News, November 21, 2008 issue, which article is entitled “MGA ARMADO
NANGHASI SA MALAPASCUA”. According to said news article, armed men from neighboring
Calanggaman Island (recognized as part of Palompon, Leyte) caused trouble and disturbance in
Malapascua (a part of Cebu‟s territorial jurisdiction).
Just recently, the municipality was informed that the land subject of the
controversy has been transferred to EDIFICE REALTY AND DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION with principal office at 3rd floor, The World Trade Center Bldg.,
Salcedo Village, Makati City. The transfer was made through an Absolute Deed of
Sale35 of Unregistered Land. Ma. Karen Pitoy, President of the Rural Bank of Carmen
(VENDOR) signed in representation of the said bank. The document was duly notarized
on October 6, 2008 under the seal of Lawyer Joselito Troy G. Suello (surname was
copied blurred in the said document). The transfer resulted to the cancellation of Tax
Declaration No. 05-31048-00730 R12 with the issuance of Tax Declaration No. 08-
31048-0077336 to the above-mentioned entity.
Without delay, the Municipality then created a team to closely look into this very
alarming concern. After an extensive research and consolidation of data relative to the
Calanggaman issue, this comprehensive case report was made. The report includes a
thorough discussion on the legal issues involved, the law and the recent jurisprudential
backings on the proprietary claims of the municipality.
On February 23, during the 72nd Regular Session of the SB, Councilor Jesus
Villardo III sponsored five resolutions reasserting the Municipality‟s territorial
jurisdiction and ownership of Calanggaman Island. In addition, he also pushed for
proactive ways to maintain the municipality‟s claims over the island.
The following resolutions were adopted by the Sangguniang Bayan:
1. Municipal Resolution No. 233-23020937, “Reasserting the Municipality‟s

Territorial Jurisdiction and Ownership of Kalanggaman Island”;
2. Municipal Resolution No. 234-233020938, “Requesting the Municipal
Mayor to Authorize the Deputation of Municipal Employees with the
Assistance of the Local Philippine National Police to Take Immediate and
Actual Occupation of the Entire Kalanggaman Island”;
3. Municipal Resolution No. 235-23020939, “ Authorizing the Municipal
Mayor to Erect distinguishing Structures on Kalanggaman Island as well as
Other Islands Within the Municipality of Palompon through the Municipal
Planning and Development Office”;
4. Municipal Resolution No. 236-23020940, “Authorizing the Office of the
Mayor to Immediately Initiate the Filing of an Adverse Claim Over
35
Attached hereto as Annex bb is Deed of Absolute Sale entered into between Rural Bank of Carmen
(Cebu) Inc., the VENDOR; and EDIFICE REALTY AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, the
VENDEE.
36
Attached hereto as Annex cc is Tax Declaration No. 08-31048-00773.
37
Hereto attached as Annex dd and made an integral part hereof.
38
Hereto attached as Annex ee and made an integral part hereof.
39
Hereto attached as Annex ff and made an integral part hereof.
40
Hereto attached as Annex gg and made an integral part hereof.
Kalanggaman Island Before the Provincial Assessor‟s Office and the

Registry of Deeds of the Province of Leyte”; and
5. Municipal Resolution No. 237-23020941, “Urging the Congress of the
Republic of the Philippines to Include the Matter of Alleged Ownership of
Kalanggaman Island by Celso De Los Angeles in Relation to its Investigation
in Aid of Legislation Involving the Latter”.
The Municipality is on the belief that enlightening the public on the issue
through the media will not only stir the people‟s consciousness on the significance of the
issue but will also help the Congress on its on going investigation on De Los Angeles
and the Legacy Group.
Thus, on February 25, Wednesday, 7:00 in the morning, a press conference was
held at the Municipal Session Hall. Reporters, photographers and cameramen from
different media organizations in Ormoc, Tacloban and Cebu were present.
Immediately after the press conference, Mayor Eulogio Tupa led some 50
residents42 of Palompon, officials from the Philippine National Police Office- Palompon
Station and the media in repossessing the island of Calanggaman.
The strong assertion of the Municipality‟s proprietary rights over Calanggaman

was a bold and timely move of the local leadership befitting the national celebration of
the 23rd Edsa Revolution.
In a very diplomatic manner, Mayor Tupa, Vice-Mayor Lloyd Surigao,

Councilor Villardo and Municipal Legal Consultant Donna Villa Gaspan talked with
certain Cirilo Matagad Batitay, the guard on duty (This was the same Batitay whom the
personnel from Municipal Eco-Tours Office dealt with during its August 6, 2008 visit in
the island) of the municipality‟s intention to take back possession of the island.
Batitay admitted that he and the two other guards, namely: Roy V. Melendres
and Jeomar B. Autida were employed by BA Investigation and Security Agency, Inc.
(BAISA) since 2006 to render security duties in Calanggaman Island as per Office
Order43 dated June 6, 2006 signed by certain Richard Baladhay, BAISA Vice President
for Operations.
Under the said order, there was no mention of the identity of the client that
requested for security works of BAISA. It only provides, to quote:
“This is with regards to the recent pronouncement and request from our client
who presently owns the Kalanggaman Island located at the east cost of Palompon,
41
Hereto attached as Annex hh and made an integral part hereof.
42
Hereto attached is the Attendance of people during the repossession dated 25 February 2009 and marked
as Annex ii.
43
Attached hereto as Annex jj and made an integral part hereof.
Leyte. The request from the said island owner states that we will not allow anybody or
anyone to dock on the island effective immediately due to the on going survey for the
impending improvement plan of the said islet.”
The said document bears the office address of BAISA, that is: 3rd floor of the
Philippine Countryside Rural Bank, Bldg., M.C. Briones St., Hi-way Maguikay
Mandaue City, Cebu. Said Philippine Countryside Rural Bank is among the 12 banks of
the Legacy Group that declared bank holidays.
In the Duty Detail Order (DDO)44 of Batitay, Melendres and Autida, a Protector
Caliber .38 Revolver and Amscor 12 GA Shotgun with serial nos. 825436 and 826305,
respectively, were issued by the security agency. The guards were also issued five (5)
rounds of Caliber .38 live ammunitions. A certain Rosalito Trapila, BAISA Operations
Manager signed the said DDO in behalf of the company president Raul Austria.
However, when the municipality took possession of the island, SPO 4 Rogelio
Naval, Deputy COP, was able to confiscate45 from Batitay the abovementioned company
issued firearms plus another Revolver Caliber .38 with serial no. 825403, one round of
caliber .38 live ammunition and two (2) pcs. 12 Guage Ammunitions. Batitay took
custody of the said firearms and ammunitions but could not present any document to
prove that these were covered by valid licenses.
Batitay also turned over to the police one unit of Robin Generator and a
Maronaka grass cutter. All items were deposited before the Palompon Police Station.
Symbolizing the successful and peaceful take over of the possession and control
of the island, Mayor Tupa and Vice-Mayor Surigao signed the five resolutions earlier
passed by the Sangguniang Bayan. They also led other local officials and the
townspeople in the installation of a signage 46 in the island which reads:
“Per C.A. 141 and P.D. 705 Kalanggaman Island is not a private property. It is
unclassified, inalienable and indisposable land of public domain, hence a public
forest. Nunot sa tinguha nga kausaban, ang Kalanggaman iyaha sa katawhan!.”
Batitay was then brought to the police station where he was allowed to make a
call to his bosses in their Mandaue City office. He was referred to the Municipal Social
Welfare and Development Office which provided him with his provisions and
transportation in going back to Cebu.
44
Attached hereto is DDO No. 0036-2009 as Annex kk and made an integral part hereof
45
Attached hereto is the Certification as per Blotter record dated 25 February 2009 as Annex ll and made
an integral part hereof.
46
Attached hereto is a photo taken on 25 February 2009 at Calanggaman during the successful take over
of the Municipality over the island marked as Annex mm and made an integral part hereof.
The historical repossession of the island landed on the front page of local papers
The Freeman Newspaper47, Sunstar Cebu48, Leyteno Peryodiko49 and West Leyte
Express. It also came out in EV Mail Newspaper 50, Super Balita Cebu and Cebu Daily
News51.
Palompon was put in the limelight as the Calanggman issue also came out as
among the top stories in the national broadsheets like Philippine Star52, Philippine Daily
Inquirer and Manila Times53.
GMA 7-Cebu (“Balitang Bisdak” and “Buena Mano”) and GMA 7 Manila prime
time news program “24 Oras” also aired the municipality‟s repossession of
Calanggaman island.
Several radio stations dyHP, Bantay Radyo, dyRF, dySS and dyLA provided
radio news reports on the event as well.
A profound discussion on the issues surrounding the Calanggaman controversy

was also aired in dyAB‟s “Arangkada”, a program hosted by award-winning veteran
broadcaster and columnist Leo Lastimosa.
In keeping with Municipal Resolutions No. 233-230209 and 234-230209, the

mayor issued an order54 deputizing fish wardens, police (PNP Office Palompon Station),
staff from the Human Ecological Security Group to stay on the island.
47
Attached hereto is a news article entitled “Battle for Recovery Looms. Leyte town loses island to
Legacy” by Ferliza Contratista, Staff Member of The Freeman Newspaper published on February 26,
2009 marked as Annex nn and made an integral part hereof.
48
Attached hereto is a news article entitled “Town repossesses „Legacy‟ island” by Elias O. Baquero,
Senior Reporter of Sunstar Cebu published on February 26, 2009 marked as Annex oo and made an
integral part hereof.
49
Attached hereto is a news article entitled “Development plan of Kalanggaman Island outlined” by RC
Dejon, of Leyteno Peryodiko Vol. VI, Issue No. 9, February 23-March 1, 2009 marked as Annex pp and
made an integral part hereof.
50
Attached hereto is a news article entitled “Palompon dads reiterate claim over Kalanggaman island,
again” by Lalaine M. Jimenea of Eastern Visayas Mail (EV Mail) Vol. 10, No. 04 published on February
23-March 1, 2009 marked as Annex qq and made an integral part hereof.
51
Attached hereto is an Editorial entitled “It‟s payback time” printed and published in the Opinion
Section of the Cebu Daily News dated February 27, 2009 marked as Annex rr and made an integral part
hereof.
52
Attached hereto is a news article entitled “Legacy landgrab? Ttown loses island” by Ferliza Contratista,
Freeman News Service published in the Philippine Star on February 27, 2009 marked as Annex ss and
made an integral part hereof.
53
Attached hereto is a news article entitled “Legacy boss illegally owned Leyte island” by Marit Stinus-
Remonde, Columnist of The Manila Times Newspaper published on March 5, 2009 marked as Annex tt
and made an integral part hereof.
54
Attached hereto is Office Order No. 12-A and marked as Annex uu and made an integral part hereof.
From the day of the repossession, the Municipality has opened the Island for
anyone who wishes to go there and enjoy the beauty of the place. As of yet, no fees
whatsoever are collected from visitors.
The Municipality through Mayor Tupa sent communications to concerned

national government offices (DENR, Office of the President, DOT, NAMRIA, Office of
the Solicitor General, PDIC, Bangko Sentral, Office of the Senate President, etc.) to
bring to the attention of the heads of the move of the municipality to pursue legal actions
to put an end to the unlawful claim of De Los Angeles over the island of Calanggaman.
The same offices were also furnished copies of the updated case report and other
documents that would support the stand of the municipality on the issue.
Local officials made it a point to update the people of Palompon of the actions
undertaken by the municipality in relation to Calanggaman.
Vice-Mayor Surigao wrote a communication to the OIC Municipal Assessor

Enriquita Lubiano requiring the latter to explain before the Sangguniang Bayan the
circumstances of the transfer of Calanggaman Island to the so-called “owners”.
On March 2, Lubiano appeared before the SB during the “Question Hour”55. (In
view of transparency and public accountability, the Sangguniang Bayan of Palompon is
regularly holding the “Question Hour” wherein heads of the different
offices/departments of the municipality, government agencies, and institutions in
Palompon are called to present information aimed to enlighten not only the municipal
officials but the townspeople as well on certain issues that are of public interest. The
“Question Hour” which is done during the regular sessions of the Sangguniang Bayan at
the Municipal Session Hall also serves as an inquiry in aid of legislation.).
The inquiry ascertained facts as to how and why Lubiano caused for the issuance
of tax declarations despite receipt of a resolution passed on February 19, 2004 –
Municipal Resolution No. 029-190204 “Expressing the Municipality‟s Strong Objection
and Vehement Opposition to the Sale, Transfer and Land Titling of Kalanggaman
Island, a Public Land and Directing the Municipal Assessor to Cause for the Revocation
and cancellation of the Tax Declaration Issued Thereof”.
During the said inquiry, Lubiano admitted to have indeed caused for the issuance
of Tax Declaration in the name of Joel Retuya and Celso De Los Angeles in 2004.
Lubiano said she pushed through with the issuance of tax declaration in the name
of Retuya and De Los Angeles despite the increase in land area by 9.5462 hectares after
having personally conferred the matter to the Provincial Assessor Atty. Rafael Iriarte.
55
Attached hereto is the Minutes of the SB Session held at Palompon Municipal Hall on March 2, 2009
and marked as Annex vv and made an integral part hereof.
When asked during the Question Hour “What did Atty. Iriarte said to you after
pointing out the difference in terms of land area?” Lubiano answered “To use the area
as indicated in the technical description in effecting the transfer.” (page 10, Minutes of
the 73rd Regular Session of the Sangguniang Bayan, March 2, 2009). She further said “Nag-
approve man siya nga mao to ako gamiton that is why I proceeded with the
transfer.”(page 15, Minutes of the 73rd Regular Session of the Sangguniang Bayan, March 2,
2009).
Lubiano even admitted that her office did not receive a copy of any Deed of
Conveyance to justify the expansion of the claimed area. She stressed that her work is
“subject for review and approval of the Provincial Assessor. And that she is “just a
recommending authority.” (page 16, Minutes of the 73rd Regular Session of the
Sangguniang Bayan, March 2, 2009)
The Technical Description of the subject property was prepared by Geodetic

Engineer Venerando Lubiano. Such Technical Description was and still remains
unapproved by the DENR up to this very day. (The Geodetic Engineer happens to be the
nephew of the OIC Municipal Assessor).
The admissions of Lubiano was coupled with a finger implicating Iriarte for the
issuance of the Tax Declaration covering the same property but with an increased land
area as reflected in the technical description which was and still is unapproved by the
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).
“The Provincial Assessor will be the one liable to that”, Lubiano said. (page 19,
Minutes of the 73rd Regular Session of the Sangguniang Bayan, March 2, 2009)
Lubiano even recommended for an investigation of the Provincial Assessor

regarding the matter.
Lubiano disclosed that Retuya went to her office and facilitated the transfer of
Calanggman from Andres Toring to his and De Los Angeles‟ name and paid the
corresponding taxes. When the property was transferred to Rural Bank of Carmen Cebu
Inc., a certain Mae Bacusmo dealt with her office despite absence of a Special Power of
Attorney (SPA). The same Mae Bacusmo also facilitated the subsequent transfer of
Calanggaman Island from Rural Bank of Carmen Cebu Inc. to Edifice Realty and
Development Corporation in October 2008.
The SB had admonished Lubiano not to entertain any transfers of the

Calanggaman Island and to inform the august body and the Office of the Mayor of
whatever transactions involving the said island.
Vice Mayor Surigao conferred with Mayor Tupa on the SB‟s inquiry on
Lubiano. Thereafter, the Mayor met with the legal team that is handling the
Calanggaman case for appropriate legal actions against Lubiano and other personalities
involved in the fiasco.
On March 6, 2009, Mayor Tupa issued Office Order Nos. 15 56 and 1657 directing
Municipal Assessor Gloria P. Bongbong to reassume as the Department Head of the
Office of the Municipal Assessor, and for Enriquita Lubiano to relieve the post as OIC
of the said office, respectively.
That same day, the Municipality of Palompon upon its request was issued a
certification58 from the DENR-VIII officially stating that “Kalanggaman Island is not
appearing on our Land Classification Map No. 647, certified on April 25, 1927 by the
Acting Director of Forestry”. DENR Regional Technical Director-FMS Felipe S. Calub
signed the said certification.
After Lubiano‟s appearance in the SB, on March 9, 2009, a resolution59

(Municipal Resolution No. 248-090309) was passed requesting Provincial Assessor
Iriarte to explain in writing why he allowed the increase in the claimed land area of
Celso De Los Angeles in Calanggaman Island sans any legal basis and to perform acts to
rectify such errors.
The Office of the Ombudsman-Visayas was furnished a copy of the said

resolution.
Upon receipt of Iriarte‟s letter-reply60 dated March 31, 2009 encompassing his
denial to have allowed the increase in the claimed area of the Tax Declaration of Joel
Retuya and Celso de los Angeles, Jr. relative to the Calanggaman Island, the
Sangguniang Bayan (SB) of Palompon has endorsed the same to the Office of the
Mayor.
In his letter Iriarte laid the premise to quote:
“When I assumed as provincial assessor on August 23, 1993 and up to

now, existing records at the Provincial Assessor‟s Office were only:
Year Tax Declaration No. Declared Owner
2004 02-31048-00722 R11 Jose Retuya & Celso de los Angeles, Jr.
2006 05-31048-00577 R12 Jose Retuya & Celso de los Angeles, Jr.
56
Attached hereto as Annex ww and made an integral part hereof.
57
Attached hereto as Annex xx and made an integral part hereof.
58
Attached hereto as Annex yy and made an integral part hereof.
59
Attached hereto as Annex zz and made an integral part hereof.
60
Attached hereto as Annex aaa and made an integral part hereof.
2007 08-31048-00730 R12 Rural Bank of Carmen Cebu

2009 08-31048-00773 R13 Edifice Realty & Dev. Corp.”
He also stressed that “the area is always 9.8158 hectares”.
These assertions were coupled with a strong declaration on the part of Iriarte that
he was not the signatory to any of the four (4) tax declarations abovementioned covering
Calanggaman Island issued from 2004 in the name of Retuya and De Los Angeles, Jr. up
to the most recent recorded transfer in 2008 as evidenced by Tax Declaration 08-31048-
00773 in the name of Edifice Realty and Development Corporation. Hence, according to
him, he has “not allowed the increase in the claimed area” from .2696 hectares to
9.8158 hectares.
It is worth to mention again, that as per records from the Registry of Deeds, the
property subject of the controversy was covered under Tax Declaration No. 6664 under
Revision 3. It also appeared that the same has been subsequently transferred in the name
of a certain Pablo Sitoy with Tax Declaration No. 7755. The same property was then
transferred to Agripino Ensoy as shown in Tax Declaration No. 2880 R4. Later on, Tax
Declaration No. 2880 R4 was cancelled by Tax Declaration 15645. The same property
was further transferred to Andres Toring. Tax Declaration 15645 was cancelled with the
issuance of Tax Declaration No. 12819 R 6.
Under Tax Declaration Nos. 6664 R3, 7755, 2880 R4, 15645 and 12819 R6, the
land area is .2696 hectares.
Surprisingly though, the land area as reflected in Tax Declaration No. 02-31048-
00722 R11, increased to 9.8158 hectares. In fact, inscribed at the lower most part of the
document is the phrase which reads to quote:
“Pls. collect back tax of increased area: A. V. P39,780.00 effc. 20000.”
Further investigation by the municipality also confirmed that indeed there were
no other Deed of Conveyance whatsoever covering the increased land area kept on
record in custody of the Municipal Assessor. Moreso, there was no approved Technical
Description and Survey.
The irregularities involved in the transfer of Calanggaman, particularly the

increase of the land area without legal basis were corroborated by the statements of Ms.
Lubiano who appeared before the Question Hour of the SB Palompon, last March 2,
2009.
The local leadership abhors and will not tolerate this.
Claiming as not the signatory of the issued tax declarations is but a lame excuse.
The correctness of the land area covered in any tax declaration is a critical matter. The
Provincial Assessor has the command responsibility over all his subordinate officers and
personnel including the Municipal Assessors. Passing the fault of this inexcusable
negligence (the unconscionable increase of the land area) to other people is
unprofessional for any public officer and a head of office at that. Further, it has been
observed that Iriarte has not done anything to prevent or took measures to arrest or
correct such happenstance.
The SB in its March 9, 2009 session61 passed and approved Municipal

Resolution No. 254-09030962 requesting the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas to issue a
Cease and Desist Order over the Edifice Realty and Development Corporation in
relation to its claim over the Calanggaman Island.
By way of reply63, BSP Office of Special Investigation Director Alfonso C.

Penaco said that the BSP has no authority over realty corporations. Its authority to issue
Cease and Desist Order is limited to unsafe and unsound banking practices committed
by banks.
On March 14, Saturday, Mayor Tupa through the MESDO scheduled the first
clean-up activity in the island. Over 250 people from the different government and
private agencies joined the activity. It was also made a venue to give the townspeople
up-to-date information on the developments of the municipality‟s efforts relative to the
Calanggaman island. A news team from ABS-CBN Tacloban covered the event.
Two weeks thereafter, ABS-CBN Central Visayas Regional TV sent forth a news
team to visit the island of Calanggaman and interviewed the mayor and other
personalities on the issue. Anchor-reporter Rico Lucena with his cameraman came to
Palompon using the network‟s chopper.
Apart from word of mouth, newspaper, radio and television, the use of the
internet was maximized in the information drive of the municipality. Palomponganons
now based in the different parts of the world were informed of the cause of the
municipality. The local leadership got an overwhelming support from Palomponganon
Association Global Inc. (PAGI) and other concerned Palomponganons.
The Mayor has ordered the Municipal Environmental and Sustainable

Development Office (MESDO) to request the DENR Regional Office through the Land
Administration Management Project (LAMP) for the immediate conduct of a resurvey
of the Calanggaman Island.
61
Attached hereto as Annex bbb is the Minutes of the March 9, 2009 Session of the SB and made an
62
Attached hereto as Annex ccc is Municipal Resolution No. 254-090309 and made an integral part
hereof.
63
Attached hereto as Annex ddd is a letter from the BSP Office of Special Investigation and made an
The insistence of the municipality on the issue of Calanggaman is not at all a

scheme to get into the picture of the De Los Angeles‟ investigation before the Senate. It
should be noted that the efforts of the municipality are geared towards protecting the
interest of the people of Palompon. Accordingly, should the Senate decide to call the
officials of the Municipality of Palompon to appear before the Committee handling the
De Los Angeles ((Legacy Group) inquiry, the local officials are more than willing to
shed light and assist the committee.
On March 26, Councilor Jesus Villardo III, personally brought the issue of
Calanggaman to the Office of the Solicitor General in Makati City. Villardo met with
Assistant Solicitor General to discuss the matter.
The letters-appeal addressed to various government agencies and the extensive

media coverage on the Calanggaman Island generated positive results.
On March 19, the Office of the Mayor was informed by Mr. Juan De Zuniga,
64
Jr. , Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas Assistant Governor and General Counsel, that upon
receipt of the Mayor‟s letter, the same was referred to the Director of the Office of
Special Investigation (OSI) of the BSP with a corresponding directive to conduct an
investigation. The OSI Director was advised to report to Zuniga on the development of
the investigation. In turn, Director Alfonso C. Penaco of the OSI, in his letter65 to Mayor
Tupa, said that his office has endorsed the municipality‟s concern to the PDIC.
In his February 27, 2009 letter66, PDIC President Jose C. Nograles informed
Mayor Tupa that the issue together with the documents provided by the municipality has
been referred to Ms. Imelda S. Singzon, PDIC Operations Division Executive Vice
President and Atty. Romeo M. Mendoza, Jr., General Legal Counsel, for appropriate
action.
In reply67, Atty. Mendoza informed Mayor Tupa that his office could not
positively respond to the municipality‟s request for assistance pending receipt by the
PDIC of the information from the DENR as to the status and/or classification of
Calanggaman Island.
“Unless it is indubitable that Calanggaman Island forms part of the public

domain and is, therefore, inalienable or beyond the commerce of man, PDIC is
constrained to take the appropriate legal action to protect the interests and assets of the
closed bank (Rural Bank of Carmen Cebu Inc.)”, the letter said.
64
Attached hereto as Annex eee is a letter from BSP Assistant Governor and General Counsel and made
an integral part hereof.
65
Attached hereto as Annex fff and made an integral part hereof.
66
Attached hereto as Annex ggg and made an integral part hereof.
67
Attached hereto as Annex hhh and made an integral part hereof.
BSP Integrated Supervision Department Director Chuchi G. Fonacier 68 also

wrote Mayor Tupa thanking the latter for the pertinent information provided to the BSP.
Fonacier said the matter has been referred to the OSI-BSP for whatever possible
assistance the bank may render and to the PDIC, being the receiver of the Legacy-
identified bank in whose name the Calanggaman island is registered.
Department of Tourism Secretary Ace Durano in his response 69 to the letter of

Mayor Tupa, expressed his appreciation on the vigorous efforts consistently pursued by
the local officials in protecting its claim of jurisdiction over the island.
Although the legal issues tied on the matter is not within the purview of the
DOT, Durano said “We note the great concern your municipality has expressed in terms
of protecting the area and preventing private parties to claim ownership of it”. He then
referred the concern to the DENR for its evaluation and action.
The Municipality of Palompon was furnished a copy of the letter70 of Assistant

Solicitor General Amparo M. Cabotaje-Tang dated March 30, 2009, requiring the DENR
Secretary Jose L. Atienza, Jr. to conduct an investigation on the classification of the
Calanggaman Island and to further provide the OSG a report and recommendation on
the propriety of filing an appropriate suit to recover the island from De Los Angeles.
Undersecretary Charito R. Elegir of the Office of the President in her letter 71

dated March 10, 2009, informed Mayor Tupa that the issue has been referred to the
DENR Secretary Jose L. Atienza, Jr. for appropriate action.
Lawyer Mary Ann Lucille L. Sering, DENR Undersecretary for Administration,

Finance and Legal has issued a Memorandum72 dated March 24, 2009 to the Regional
Executive Director, DENR Region VIII directing the latter to coordinate with the
Municipality of Palompon in addressing the issue brought before it.
“In this regard, you are hereby directed to coordinate with the Municipality of
Palompon through its Honorable Mayor for possible action that can be taken on the
request but with the observance of due process to the claimant/occupant, and thereafter
submit your recommendation to this Office soonest,” the memorandum reads.
68
Attached hereto as Annex iii is the letter from Fonacier and made an integral part hereof.
69
Attached hereto as Annex jjj and made an integral part hereof.
70
Attached hereto as Annex kkk and made an integral part hereof.
71
Attached hereto as Annex lll and made an integral part hereof.
72
Attached hereto as Annex mmm and made an integral part hereof.
DENR Undersecretary for Staff Bureaus Manuel D. Gerochi73 formally informed

Mayor Tupa that the matter has been referred to the Regional Executive Director DENR-
VIII for investigation and appropriate action.
On April 18, during the signing of the Memorandum of Agreement between the
local government of Palompon and the DENR on the Co-Management of the Palompon
Watershed Forest Reserve, OIC Regional Technical Director of the DENR-Land
Management Service Ramon Unay74 confirmed that Undersecretary Gerochi who visited
the regional office instructed him for the conduct of an investigation and to request the
Provincial Assessor of Leyte for the cancellation of the Tax Declarations issued
covering Calanggaman Island.
“I have already coordinated with Provincial Assessor Atty. Iriarte and I was told
that the Tax Declarations will be cancelled only upon request by the DENR. But before
we do that, we have to conduct first an investigation,” Unay said.
Regional Executive Director Rejidor De Leon who also graced the MOA signing
activity assured the local officials of Palompon that his office will immediately proceed
with the investigation.
“The municipality requested assistance for the reversion of Calanggaman

Island. We don‟t have anything to revert here because in the first place we didn‟t
dispose it”, De Leon stressed.
“I‟ll make sure that Director Unay is working for the cancellation of the Tax
Declarations”, he added.
De Leon said that after the issue will be settled, Calanggaman Island should also
be covered under a Co-Management scheme between the municipal government and the
DENR for its protection, conservation and sustainable management and development.
On April 21, 2009, the Municipality was relieved to finally receive a copy of a
Memorandum letter75 issued by NAMRIA Administrator Undersecretary Diony A.
Ventura to DENR Undersecretary for Staff Bureaus. The memorandum pertains to the
request of DENR VIII for a certification on the status/classification of Calanggaman
Island.
In the said memorandum, Ventura said that based on their initial verification,
“Calanggaman has not yet been plotted on any Land Classification Map, per LC
control map of the Province of Leyte. Hence, it still forms part of the unclassified
lands of the public domain.”
73
Attached hereto as Annex nnn is a letter from DENR Undersecretary Garochi and made an integral part
hereof.
74
As contained in a video file of LGU-Palompon.
75
Attached hereto as Annex ooo and made an integral part hereof.
Ventura said that as early as July 1999, NAMRIA has already done
preliminary verification that the subject island is still Unclassified Public Forest
and that the Municipality was informed thereof through a letter dated July 29,
1999 addressed to then SB Secretary Rodolfo Canson. Unfortunately though, no copy
of said letter was found in the records of the SB.
In connection with this development, last May 28, 2009, Mayor Tupa wrote a
76
letter to Director De Leon relaying NAMRIA‟s official position on the land
classification of Calanggaman Island. In the same letter, the Mayor requested the DENR
VIII to facilitate the cancellation of the Tax declarations covering the island issued to
certain persons.
The SB has passed and approved Municipal Resolution No. 282-11050977,

entitled “Requesting the DENR to Direct the Provincial Assessor to Cancel All the Tax
Declarations Regarding Calanggaman”.
Having furnished with a copy of the above resolution, Provincial Assessor Rafael
Iriarte in his letter78 to Mayor Tupa said that “cancellation of assessments made prior to
the Forestry Code or P.D. 705 (enacted in May 19, 1975) shall be done only through
representation of the National Government or relevant agency, which is DENR and
which shall request the courts for an order of its cancellation”.
Apart from continuously appealing to the concerned government agencies for

appropriate actions, the municipality has taken steps for the protection and promotion of
the Calanggaman island as an eco-tourism destination of Palompon.
The municipality sought the assistance of Ocean Beacons Inc. to conduct

biophysical assessment on Calanggaman Island. OBI is a non-government, an
internationally recognized non-stock, non-profit organization involved in the
implementation of Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM). With the funding
from the Lighthouse Foundation in Germany, it is actively engaged in capacity building
projects for Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Management Council (FARMC) in various
municipalities in the country. It is backed by experts on development management,
biological oceanography, marine biology, integrated zome management
In celebration of the Earth Day (The Municipality actually celebrates Earth Week
with various activities.), the Sangguniang Bayan79 held its 80th Regular Session80 in
Calanggaman Island.
76
Attached hereto as Annex ppp and made an integral part hereof.
77
Attached hereto as Annex qqq and made an integral part hereof.
78
Attached hereto as Annex rrr and made an integral part hereof.
79
SB approved Resolution No. 268-130409 and attached hereto as Annex sss and made an integral part
hereof.
Mayor Tupa was in attendance during the session. With him were Mr. Amos
Calda, General Manager, LIDE Management Corp., a partner of the Municipality on its
environmental programs; and Mrs. Marit Stinus Remonde, an environmentalist,
columnist of the Manila Times and the “Adopted Daughter of Palompon”.
There was suspension of the rules during the session to give way to the clean-up
and tree-planting activities81 spearheaded by the SB members and office staff, MESDO,
and the Office of the Mayor. Some 70 members of the Philippine Guardians
Brotherhood Inc.-Palompon Chapter headed by its President Eduardo “Danny” Fernan
also joined the activities.
A draft ordinance entitled “An Ordinance Declaring Calanggaman Island as a

Marine Reserve, Providing Regulations Thereto, Imposing Certain User Fees and
Charges, and for Other Purposes” was indorsed by the Office of the Mayor for
consideration and approval. The said ordinance was treated as an urgent matter and was
approved on 1st reading.
On May 13, 2009, a public hearing on the said ordinance was held at the Session
Hall.
As of current time, the municipality of Palompon vehemently abhorred its

predicament in relation to its proprietary rights over Calanggaman Island. It is
determined to pursue the fitting legal procedures to bring back Calanggaman Island to
the territorial jurisdiction of Palompon as well as its absolute ownership thereof. Hence,
this legal perspective on how to revert back Calanggaman Island to said municipality.
LEGAL ISSUES
1. WHETHER OR NOT CALANGGAMAN ISLAND IS CONSIDERED
AS INALIENABLE AND INDISPOSABLE LAND?
2. WHETHER OR NOT CALANGGAMAN ISLAND IS A PUBLIC
FOREST AS DEFINED BY LAW?
3. WHETHER OR NOT THE PRESENT CLAIMANT OF THE
CALANGGAMAN ISLAND HAS VESTED RIGHT OVER THE SAID ISLAND?
80
Attached hereto as Annex ttt is the Minutes of the 80th SB Session at Calanggaman held last April 13,
2009 and made an integral part hereof.
81
Attached hereto as Annex uuu is the Resolution No. 257-160309 and made an integral part hereof.
a) Whether or not private claimant is entitled to apply for judicial

confirmation of imperfect title under CA No. 141?
4. WHETHER OR NOT REVERSION IS THE PROPER LEGAL
REMEDY TO INSTITUTE? IF YES, WHO HAS THE LEGAL PERSONALITY TO
INITIATE THE ACTION FOR REVERSION IN COURT?
DISCUSSION
I. CALANGGAMAN ISLAND AS INALIENABLE
AND INDISPOSABLE LAND
Previous inquiries by the concerned Sangguniang Bayan Member of Palompon,

Leyte relative to the land classification of the Calanggaman Island would appear that
indeed there was NO LAND CLASSIFICATION at all of the said island from the
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) and National Mapping
Resource Information Authority (NAMRIA). Worst, as afore-stated, Calanggaman
Island does not appear on the Map of Palompon. Neither does it appear in the land
classification map of the municipality.
With these factual antecedents, it is the contention of the municipality that

Calanggaman Island is an UNCLASSIFIED LAND of public domain that is inalienable
and indisposable and which exclusively belongs to the State under the Regalian
Principle of Law.
Banking on the recent landmark Boracay case 82 decided by the Supreme Court,
the same high court pronounces that:
“ The 1935 Constitution classified lands of the public domain into

agricultural, forest or timber.83 Meanwhile, the 1973 Constitution
provided the following divisions: agricultural, industrial or commercial,
residential, resettlement, mineral, timber or forest and grazing lands, and
such other classes as may be provided by law, 84 giving the government
great leeway for classification. 85 Then the 1987 Constitution reverted to
the 1935 Constitution classification with one addition: national parks. 86
82
DENR, et al vs Mayor Yap, et al. [G.R. No. 167707, October 8, 2008].
83
CONSTITUTION (1935), Art. XIII, Sec. 1.
84
CONSTITUTION (1973), Art. XIV, Sec. 10.
85
Bernas, S.J., The Intent of the 1986 Constitution Writers, 1995 ed., p. 830.
86
CONSTITUTION (1987), Art. XII, Sec. 3.
Of these, only agricultural lands may be alienated.87(underscoring

supplied)
Noteworthy, until of present, Calanggaman Island had never been expressly and
administratively classified under any of these grand divisions. Calanggaman Island is an
unclassified land of the public domain that is incapable of private appropriation.
The Regalian Doctrine dictates that all lands of the public domain belong to the
State, that the State is the source of any asserted right to ownership of land and charged
with the conservation of such patrimony. 88 The doctrine has been consistently adopted
under the 1935, 1973, and 1987 Constitutions.89
In the Boracay case, the Supreme Court further reiterated the Regalian Principle
of Law, as afore-quoted:
“All lands not otherwise appearing to be clearly within private

ownership are presumed to belong to the State.90 Thus, all lands that have
not been acquired from the government, either by purchase or by grant,
belong to the State as part of the inalienable public domain. 91
Necessarily, it is up to the State to determine if lands of the public
domain will be disposed of for private ownership.92 The government, as
the agent of the state, is possessed of the plenary power as the persona in
law to determine who shall be the favored recipients of public lands, as
well as under what terms they may be granted such privilege, n ot
excluding the placing of obstacles in the way of their exercise of what
otherwise would be ordinary acts of ownership.”
The same principle of law has been repeatedly cited by the Supreme
Court in a line of land cases, such as the case of Republic vs Candymaker Inc.
(G.R. No. 163766, June 22, 2006), couched in this manner:
“Under the Regalian doctrine, all lands not otherwise appearing to

be clearly within private ownership are presumed to belong to the State.
The presumption is that lands of whatever classification belong to the
State. Unless public land is shown to have been reclassified as alienable
87
Id.
88
Zarate v. Director of Lands, G.R. No. 131501, July 14, 2004, 434 SCRA 322; Reyes v. Court of
Appeals, 356 Phil. 606, 624 (1998).
89
Chavez v. Public Estates Authority, G.R. No. 133250, July 9, 2002, 384 SCRA 152.
90
Zarate v. Director of Lands, supra; Collado v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 107764, October 4, 2002, 390
SCRA 343; Director of Lands v. Intermediate Appellate Court, G.R. No. 73246, March 2, 1993, 219
SCRA 339.
91
Republic v. Estonilo, G.R. No. 157306, November 25, 2005, 476 SCRA 265; Zarate v. Director of
Lands, supra.
92
De los Reyes v. Ramolete, G.R. No. L-47331, June 21, 1983, 122 SCRA 652, citing Gonzaga v. Court of
Appeals, G.R. No. L-27455, June 28, 1973, 51 SCRA 381.
or disposable to a private person by the State, it remains part of the

inalienable public domain. Property of the public domain is beyond the
commerce of man and not susceptible of private appropriation and
acquisitive prescription.”
It bears stressing that our existing land law in the Philippines has its roots to the
Regalian Doctrine. Also to this day, CA No. 141, as amended, remains as the existing
general law governing the classification and disposition of lands of the public domain
other than timber and mineral lands 93, and privately owned lands which reverted to the
State.94
The Highest Court further elucidated in the above-mentioned Boracay case, that:
“A positive act declaring land as alienable and disposable is

required. In keeping with the presumption of State ownership, the Court
has time and again emphasized that there must be a positive act of the
government, such as an official proclamation,95 declassifying inalienable
public land into disposable land for agricultural or other purposes.96 In
fact, Section 8 of CA No. 141 limits alienable or disposable lands only to
those lands which have been “officially delimited and classified.” 97
The burden of proof in overcoming the presumption of State

ownership of the lands of the public domain is on the person applying for
registration (or claiming ownership), who must prove that the land
subject of the application is alienable or disposable. 98 To overcome this
presumption, incontrovertible evidence must be established that the land
subject of the application (or claim) is alienable or disposable. 99 There
must still be a positive act declaring land of the public domain as
alienable and disposable. To prove that the land subject of an application
for registration is alienable, the applicant must establish the existence of a
positive act of the government such as a presidential proclamation or an
executive order; an administrative action; investigation reports of Bureau
93
Collado v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 107764, October 4, 2002, 390 SCRA 343, see separate opinion
of Justice Puno in Cruz v. Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources, G.R. No. 135385, December
6, 2000, 347 SCRA 128, and Chavez v. Public Estates Authority, G.R. No. 133250, July 9, 2002, 384
SCRA 152.
94
Sec. 2.
95
Republic v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 48227, August 21, 1991, 201 SCRA 1; Director of Lands v.
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 83609, October 26, 1989, 178 SCRA 708.
96
Heirs of the Late Spouses Pedro S. Palanca and Soterranea Rafols Vda. De Palanca v. Republic, G.R.
No. 151312, August 30, 2006, 500 SCRA 209; Director of Lands v. Intermediate Appellate Court, citing
Director of Lands v. Aquino, G.R. No. 31688, December 17, 1990, 192 SCRA 296.
97
Chavez v. Public Estates Authority, supra.
98
Republic v. Lao, G.R. No. 150413, July 1, 2003; 405 SCRA 291; Director of Lands v. Intermediate
Appellate Court, supra note 47, citing Director of Lands v. Aquino, supra.
99
Republic v. Lao, supra; Pagkatipunan v. Court of Appeals, 429 Phil. 377, 389-390 (2002).
of Lands investigators; and a legislative act or a statute.100 The applicant

may also secure a certification from the government that the land claimed
to have been possessed for the required number of years is alienable and
disposable.” 101
In the instant case of Calanggaman Island, there was never in existence showing
a positive act on the part of State reclassifying the said island to be an agricultural or
alienable and disposable land of public domain. Neither was there any legal document or
act (e.g. such as presidential proclamation or an executive order, an administrative
action, investigation reports of Bureau of Lands investigators, and a legislative act or a
statute) evidencing the fact that such land had been released for private appropriation or
disposition. Matters of land classification or reclassification cannot be assumed. They
call for proof.102 Hence, the municipality of Palompon is definite that Calanggaman
Island is an UNCLASSIFIED, INALIENABLE AND INDISPOSABLE land of public
domain.
II. CALANGGAN ISLAND AS PUBLIC FOREST
Emphasis be made that the physical geography of Calanggaman is composed of

grown coconut trees all over it. This is not what is referred here. The legal status of the
island is what is being determined under the applicable law.
In similar circumstances as in the Boracay case, the Supreme Court applied the
rationale of a public forest, it stated to wit:
“PD No. 705 issued by President Marcos categorized all

unclassified lands of the public domain as public forest. Section 3(a) of
PD No. 705 defines a public forest as “a mass of lands of the public
domain which has not been the subject of the present system of
classification for the determination of which lands are needed for forest
purpose and which are not.” Applying PD No. 705, all unclassified lands,
including those in Boracay Island, are ipso facto considered public forests.
PD No. 705, however, respects titles already existing prior to its
effectivity.”
The Supreme Court categorically expressed that the Island of Boracay is

considered as public forest despite the present realities of the said island where multi-
100
Republic of the Philippines v. Muñoz, G.R. No. 151910, October 15, 2007.
101
Heirs of the Late Spouses Pedro S. Palanca and Soterranea Rafols Vda. De Palanca v. Republic, supra;
Gutierrez Hermanos v. Court of Appeals, G.R. Nos. 54472-77, September 28, 1989, 178 SCRA 37.
102
Republic v. Naguiat, G.R. No. 134209, January 24, 2006, 479 SCRA 585.
million investments such as high-end beach resorts, hotels, and other entertainment
facilities and commercial centers are established. Comparatively, this is not the physical
phase of development of the Calanggaman Island. Calanggaman Island is devoid yet of
any developments.
Regardless of its physical layout, the classification of forest land, or any land for
that matter, is descriptive of its legal nature or status, and does not have to be descriptive
of what the land actually looks like. 103
The prominent jurisprudential reference on the classification of a forest land is

the case of Heirs of Amunategui v. Director of Forestry 104, where the Supreme Court
discussed in this manner, to wit:
“A forested area classified as forest land of the public domain does

not lose such classification simply because loggers or settlers may have
stripped it of its forest cover. Parcels of land classified as forest land may
actually be covered with grass or planted to crops by kaingin cultivators or
other farmers. “Forest lands” do not have to be on mountains or in out of
the way places. Swampy areas covered by mangrove trees, nipa palms,
and other trees growing in brackish or sea water may also be classified as
forest land. The classification is descriptive of its legal nature or status
and does not have to be descriptive of what the land actually looks like.
Unless and until the land classified as “forest” is released in an official
proclamation to that effect so that it may form part of the disposable
agricultural lands of the public domain, the rules on confirmation of
imperfect title do not apply.” (emphasis supplied)
Also of note is a prior decision105 of the Highest Court which enunciated

that:
“Forest lands, being the self-replenishing, versatile and all-

important natural resource that they are, need to be reserved and saved to
promote the people's welfare. By their very nature106 or by executive or
statutory fiat, they are outside the commerce of man, unsusceptible of
private appropriation in any form107, and inconvertible into any character
103
Dela Cruz v. Court of Appeals, 286 SCRA 230, 236 [1998]
104
G.R. No. L-27873, November 29, 1983, 126 SCRA 69, also cited in the Boracay case,
PAGKATIPUNAN, et al. vs RP [G.R. No. 129682. March 21, 2002]
105
Gordula, et al vs R.P. (G.R. No. 127296. January 22, 1998).
106
Director of Land Management v. Court of Appeals, 172 SCRA 455, 461-464 [1989], citing Republic v.
Court of Appeals, 154 SCRA 476 [1987].
107
Republic v. Intermediate Appellate Court, 186 SCRA 88, 92-93 [1990], citing Vano v. Government of
the Philipppine Islands, 41 Phil. 161 [1920]; Adorable v. Director of Forestry, 107 Phil. 401 [1960];
Director of Forestry v. Munoz, 132 Phil. 637 [1968]; Republic v. De La Cruz, 67 SCRA 221 [1975];
Director of Lands v. Reyes and Alinsunurin v. Director of Lands, 68 SCRA 177 [1975]; Republic v. Court
less than of inalienable public domain, regardless of their actual state, for
as long as the reservation subsists and is not revoked by a subsequent valid
declassification.108
"Once again, we reiterate the rule enunciated by this Court in

Director of Forestry vs. Muñoz and consistently adhered to in a long line
of cases the more recent of which is Republic vs. Court Appeals, that
forest lands or forest reserves are incapable of private appropriation, and
possession thereof, however long, cannot convert them into private
properties. This ruling is premised on the Regalian doctrine enshrined not
only in the 1935 and 1973 Constitution but also in the 1987
Constitution.”109
Furthermore, in Heirs of the Late Spouses Pedro S. Palanca and Soterranea

Rafols v. Republic110 as alluded in the Boracay case, the Court stated that unclassified
lands are public forests. So, it declares the following:
“While it is true that the land classification map does not

categorically state that the islands are public forests, the fact that they
were unclassified lands leads to the same result. In the absence of the
classification as mineral or timber land, the land remains unclassified land
until released and rendered open to disposition. 111” (Emphasis supplied)
From the foregoing jurisprudence and applicable law, Calanggaman

Island‟s legal status is a public forest for being an unclassified land. FOREST
lands are outside the commerce of man and unsusceptible of private appropriation
in any form.
III. PRESENT CLAIMANT OF CALANGGAMAN

NO VESTED INTEREST OVER THE ISLAND
The present claimant of the subject island is no other than the Chairman of the
controversial Legacy Group of Companies, Mr. Celso de los Angeles. In fact as of date,
he succeeded in transferring the tax declaration of the Calanggaman Island by way of a
Deed of Assignment to the RURAL BANK OF CARMEN (CEBU) INC. as evidenced
of Appeals, 89 SCRA 648 [1979]; Republic v. Animas, 56 SCRA 499 [1974]; Director of Lands v. Court
of Appeals, 133 SCRA 701 [1984]; and Director of Lands v. Rivas, 141 SCRA 329 [1986]
108
Republic v. Court of Appeals, 154 SCRA 476, 481 [1987]); Republic v. Bacus, 176 SCRA 376, 381-
384 [1989].
109
Director of Lands v. Aquino, 192 SCRA 296, 302 (1990).
110
Heirs of the Late Spouses Pedro S. Palanca and Soterranea Rafols Vda. De Palanca v. Republic, G.R.
No. 151312, August 30, 2006, 500 SCRA 209
111
id. at 222-223.
by Tax Declaration No. 05-31048-00730 R12. The Municipality of Palompon is utterly

doubtful of such transaction when said transfer transpired on the same date, June 5,
2006, when Mr. de los Angeles made his feigned apology to the SB and former Mayor
Marcelo Onate and presented his development plans of Calanggaman Island.
Mr. Celso de los Angeles claim of ownership is relied heavily on the tax
declarations declared under his name and his predecessors-in-interest. He kept assumed
possession of the disputed island from the time he purchased the same thru a “Deed of
Extrajudicial Partition with Deed of Absolute Sale” from the previous possessors/alleged
owners thereof by deputizing armed guards. In fact, it is public knowledge that
inhabitants/settlers of the said island who were registered voters of Brgy. Tinabilan,
Palompon, Leyte, were being forcefully driven out of the island by armed men
ostensibly commissioned by said claimant. Until at present, the Kalanggaman island is
heavily guarded by armed men alleged to be employed by the same claimant.
It is the argument of the Municipality that possession of the island by no less

than the present claimant does not vest possession in the concept of an “owner”. Mere
reliance on a tax declaration, which is only an indicia of ownership, does not give title to
the present claimant over the island. Nor his consistent payment of the realty taxes vests
ownership of the same. Occupation thereof in the concept of owner no matter how long
cannot ripen into ownership and be registered as a title. 112 Neither does his continued
possession thereof create the presumption that subject land is alienable.
Time and again, the Supreme Court explained that no public land can be
acquired by private persons without any grant, express or implied from the government;
it is indispensable that there be a showing of a title from the state. 113
Moreover, the original text of Section 48 (b), Chapter VIII of the Public Land
Act, which took effect on December 1, 1936, expressly provided that only agricultural
land of the public domain are subject to acquisitive prescription, to wit:
“ Section 48. x x x
(a) xxx
(b) Those who by themselves or through their predecessors-in-
interest have been in open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious
possession and occupation of agricultural lands of the public domain,
under a bona fide claim of acquisition of ownership, except as against the
Government, since July twenty-six, eighteen hundred and ninety-four,
except when prevented by war or force majeure. These shall be
conclusively presumed to have performed all the conditions essential to a
Government grant and shall be entitled to a certificate of title under the
provisions of this Chapter. (Emphasis supplied)”
112
Pagkatipunan v. Court of Appeals, 429 Phil. 377, 389-390.
113
Lee Hong Hok v. David, 48 SCRA 372, 379 [1972].
Thus, in the case of Pagkatipunan, et al. vs Republic of the Philippines [G.R. No.
129682. March 21, 2002], the Court ruled that the applicant must prove not only his open,
continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and occupation of the land either since
time immemorial or for the period prescribed therein, but most importantly, he must
prove that the land is alienable public land. 114(underscoring provided)
Sections 6 and 7 of CA No. 141115 provide that it is only the President, upon the
recommendation of the proper department head, who has the authority to classify the
lands of the public domain into alienable or disposable, timber and mineral lands. 116
Classification of public lands is the exclusive prerogative of the Executive

Department, through the Office of the President. Courts have no authority to do so. 117
Absent such classification, the land remains unclassified until released and rendered
open to disposition.118
Consequently, present claimant cannot invoke prescription relative to

Calanggaman Island, as it is an iron-clad dictum that prescription can never lie against
the Government. Granting the lengthy occupation of the disputed land by present
claimant such cannot be counted in his favor, as it remained part of the patrimonial
property of the State, which property, as stated earlier, is inalienable and indisposable.
Under Article 1113 of the Civil Code:
“All things which are within the commerce of men are susceptible of
prescription, unless otherwise provided. Property of the State or any of its
subdivisions not patrimonial in character shall not be the object of
prescription.” (Italics supplied).
As sustained by the Court in several instances 119, forest lands cannot be owned
by private persons. 120 Possession thereof, no matter how long, does not ripen into a
registrable title. The adverse possession which may be the basis of a grant of title or
114
Republic v. Doldol, 295 SCRA 359, 364 [1998].
115
SEC. 6. The President, upon recommendation of the Secretary of Agriculture and Commerce (now the
Secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources), shall from time to time classify
lands of the public domain into –
(a) Alienable or disposable,
(b) Timber, and
(c) Mineral lands,
116
Director of Lands v. Intermediate Appellate Court, supra note 47; Manalo v. Intermediate Appellate
Court, G.R. No. 64753, April 26, 1989, 172 SCRA 795.
117
Republic v. Register of Deeds of Quezon, G.R. No. 73974, May 31, 1995, 244 SCRA 537; Director of
Lands v. Intermediate Appellate Court, supra note 47.
118
Director of Lands v. Intermediate Appellate Court, supra note 47, citing Yngson v. Secretary of
Agriculture and Natural Resources, G.R. No. L-36847, July 20, 1983, 123 SCRA 441; Republic v. Court
of Appeals, G.R. No. L-45202, September 11, 1980, 99 SCRA 742.
119
VILLARICO, et al vs
120
Palomo v. Court of Appeals, 266 SCRA 392.
confirmation of an imperfect title refers only to alienable or disposable portions of the

public domain. 121
In the same vein, as in the case of Republic of the Philippines vs Naguiat (G.R.
No. 134209, January 24, 2006) , it was held that:
“xxx The foregoing considered, the issue of whether or not

respondent and her predecessor-in-interest have been in open, exclusive
and continuous possession of the parcels of land in question is now of
little moment. For, unclassified land, as here, cannot be acquired by
adverse occupation or possession; occupation thereof in the concept of
owner, however long, cannot ripen into private ownership and be
registered as title.”
IV. REVERSION AS LEGAL REMEDY;

SOLICITOR GENERAL AS PROPER
PARTY-IN-INTEREST
Under the Public Land Act 122 as amended, only titles to alienable and disposable
lands of the public domain may be judicially confirmed. Unless a public land is
reclassified and declared as such, occupation thereof in the concept of owner, no matter
how long ago, cannot confer ownership or possessory rights. A suit for the reversion of
such property to the State may be instituted only by the Office of the Solicitor General
(OSG).123
As held in Republic v. Lozada124:
x x x. It is to the public interest that one who succeeds in

fraudulently acquiring title to a public land should not be allowed to
benefit therefrom, and the State should, therefore, have an ever existing
authority, thru its duly authorized officers, to inquire into the
circumstances surrounding the issuance of any such title, to the end that
the Republic, thru the Solicitor General or any other officer who may be
authorized by law, may file the corresponding action for reversion of the
land involved to the public domain, subject thereafter to disposal to other
qualified persons in accordance with law. In other words, the
indefeasibility of a title over land previously public is not a bar to an
investigation by the Director of Lands as to how such title has been
121
Ibid.; see also Republic v. Court of Appeals, 258 SCRA 223.
122
Section 48 of the Public Land Act.
123
Sec. 101 of the Public Land Act. This provision reads:
§ 101. All actions for reversion to the Government of lands of the public domain or improvements
thereon shall be instituted by the Solicitor General or the officer acting in his stead, in the proper
courts, in the name of the Republic of the Philippines.
124
Palomo v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 95608, 266 SCRA 392 [1997].
acquired, if the purpose of such investigation is to determine whether or

not fraud has been committed in securing such title in order that the
appropriate action for reversion may be filed by the Government.”
Suffice it to state that complaint for reversion involves a serious controversy,

involving a question of fraud and misrepresentation committed against the government
and it seeks the return of the disputed portion of the public domain. It seeks to cancel
the original certificate of registration, and nullify the original certificate of title,
including the transfer certificate of title of the successors-in-interest because the same
were all procured through fraud and misrepresentation. 125
The State, as the party alleging that fraud and misrepresentation attended the
application for free patent, bears the burden of proof. The circumstances evidencing
fraud and misrepresentation are as varied as the people who perpetrate it in each case. It
assumes different shapes and forms and may be committed in as many different ways.126
Therefore, fraud and misrepresentation are never presumed but must be proved by clear
and convincing evidence127; mere preponderance of evidence not even being
adequate.128
In point is a case of Land Bank of the Philippines vs Republic of the

Philippines129 which the Supreme Court pronounces that:
“The inclusion of forest land in a title, whether title be issued

during the Spanish regime or under the Torrens system, nullifies the title.
It is, of course, a well-recognized principle that the Director of Lands
(now Land Management Bureau) is bereft of any jurisdiction over public
forest or any lands not capable of registration. It is the Bureau of Forestry
that has jurisdiction and authority over the demarcation, protection,
management, reproduction, occupancy and use of all public forests and
forest reservations and over the granting of licenses for the taking of
products therefrom. And where the land applied for is part of the public
forest, the land registration court acquires no jurisdiction over the land,
which is not yet alienable and disposable.
Thus, notwithstanding the issuance of a sales patent over the

subject parcel of land, the State may still take action to have the same land
reverted to the mass of public domain and the certificate of title covering
said forest land declared null and void for having been improperly and
125
Republic vs. Sebastian, 166 SCRA 140, 144 (1988).
126
Republic vs. Heirs of Felipe Alejaga, St., 393 SCRA 361, 367 (2002), citing Siguan vs. Lim, 218
SCRA 725 (1999), and Destura vs. Court of Appeals, 325 SCRA 341 (2000).
127
Cuizon vs. Court of Appeals, 260 SCRA 645, 671 (1996); Atilano vs. Inclan, 45 Phil. 246, 252 (1923).
128
Palmares vs. Court of Appeals, 288 SCRA 422, 434 (1998); Inciong, Jr. vs. Court of Appeals, 257
SCRA 578, 586 (1996); and, Cu vs. Court of Appeals, 195 SCRA 647, 657 (1991).
129
G.R. No. 150824, February 04, 2008.
illegally issued. Titles issued over non-alienable public lands have been
held as void ab initio. The defense of indefeasibility of title issued
pursuant to such patent does not lie against the State. Public land
fraudulently included in patents or certificates of title may be recovered or
reverted to the State in accordance with Section 101 of the Public Land
Act. In such cases, prescription does not lie against the State. Likewise,
the government is not estopped by such fraudulent or wrongful issuance of
a patent over public forest land inasmuch as the principle of estoppel does
not operate against the Government for the acts of its agents. x x x”
LEGAL ANALYSIS
Prescinding on the above-mentioned premises, the proprietary claims of the
Municipality of Palompon over the Calanggaman is substantially founded in law and
recent jurisprudence. The case of Boracay as repeatedly referred to in the previous
discussions is the nearest in comparison with the status of Calanggaman. Antecedent
facts of the land in question is closely related to the circumstances presented in the
Boracay case.
In the Boracay case, facts reveal that several multi-million investments were
already put up in most of the area. It is a known destination for international and local
tourists. Nevertheless, setting aside its physical set-up at present, the Court laid down the
law that it is still a public forest in the context of the Forestry Code statute.
Calanggaman island despite its being raw in development as compared to Boracay
cannot escape the fact of its being an unclassified land that automatically falls to its
being a public forest as defined by P.D. 705.
More, importantly, there were already a number of people who succeeded in

acquiring a certificate of title over the portion of lands they occupied in Boracay for
more than ten years. However, the Court only recognizes their vested interests over their
respective occupancies after May 22, 2006 when President Arroyo issued Proclamation
No. 1064 classifying Boracay Island into four hundred (400) hectares of reserved forest
land (protection purposes) and six hundred twenty-eight and 96/100 (628.96) hectares of
agricultural land (alienable and disposable). The Proclamation likewise provided for a
fifteen-meter buffer zone on each side of the centerline of roads and trails, reserved for
right-of-way and which shall form part of the area reserved for forest land protection
purposes. The Court upheld that prior to this date, Boracay was completely an
unclassified land and a public forest which is beyond the commerce of men and
unsusceptible for private appropriation regardless of its present realities.
Considerably, two previous acts in relation to the Boracay Island were made, one
on November 10, 1978, Proclamation No. 1801 issued by then President Ferdinand
Marcos declaring Boracay Island, among other islands, caves and peninsulas in the
Philippines, as tourist zones and marine reserves under the administration of the
Philippine Tourism Authority (PTA). Later, said president approved the issuance of
PTA Circular 3-82 dated September 3, 1982, to implement Proclamation No. 1801.
This prompted claimants to file in lower court a petition for declaratory relief upon
contention, inter alia, that they were precluded from filing an application for judicial
confirmation of imperfect title or survey of land for titling purposes. In this regard, the
Supreme Court pointed out that aforesaid proclamation did not address the areas’
alienability instead the proclamation is aimed at administering the islands for tourism
and ecological purposes.
Suffice it to say that the claim of the municipality over the Calanggaman Island
has a strong anchor in fact and in law. No present nor previous executive acts were
known to have been issued as to effect the alienability of the Calanggaman Island.
Simply, Calanggaman Island was and is never been released for private disposition.
CONCLUSION
The Municipality of Palompon, Leyte, as headed by the Office of the Mayor and
strongly supported by its present Sanggunian Bayan Members, stands on a solid ground
to take back the legal and actual ownership of the Calanggaman Island. For several
years, it is unyielding to the capitalist unlawful acquisition and possession of the entire
island. Although it is sad to note the inaction of a number of the concerned government
agencies to which this small municipality previously sought for assistance and
involvement for the Island‟s proper reversion to the state. This municipality is
continuously hoping that this time around, with this comprehensive case report with
attachments on it, concerned government agencies/offices would be noble enough to
address this issue at the soonest possible time.
This particular island is a treasure to the constituents of Palompon, with its

enormous environmental relevance being a haven of different sea creatures like
dolphins, big sea turtles (a.k.a. pawikan), sea corals, and the like. It is discovered as one
of the best dive sites in the Philippines with its umbrella shape plate. It is a beauty to
behold. It needs the proper care and protection for a sustainable development and
preservation.
Thus, the LGU of Palompon, particularly plea for the aid of the Malacañang in
responding to the matter in issue and catering to order immediately the proper
government agencies for the reversion of the same.
Thank you very much!
------------------------- end --------------------------------

This case report is done for the Municipality of Palompon, as initiated by the Office of
the Mayor. Updated as of July 8, 2009.
Prepared by:
Atty. Donna Villa Gaspan

Palompon, Leyte
legal consultant
Rezza Boy Omega

Palompon, Leyte
legal consultant
Atty. Naomi Chiong

Palompon, Leyte
legal consultant

Updated Kalanggaman Case Report 9-23

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Updated Kalanggaman Case Report 9-23

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CASE BACKGROUND

Calanggaman Island 1, a strip of land with an area of less than 10 hectares is

The peaceful exercise of territorial jurisdiction and ownership of the

Later on in 1979, Tax Declaration No. 2880 R4 was cancelled by Tax

Regular Session, the SB recognized Calanggaman as part of Barangay Tinabilan,

In October 27, 1993, SB passed Resolution No. 158-27109313 requesting the

In August 3, 1994, during the 29th Regular Session of the SB of Palompon,

1. Resolution No. 104-080997, “Urging the DENR Not To Declare

2. Resolution No. 105-080997, “Reiterating The Request of the

To further strengthen the municipality‟s jurisdiction over Calanggaman Island,

With the approval of the municipality‟s Strategic Agriculture and Fisheries

Section 6, par. B of Municipal Ordinance No. 257-15119920 otherwise known as

The Ordinance was approved in November 15, 1999.

The Comprehensive Land Use Plan21 of the Municipality of Palompon passed

In January 13, 200423, Former Mayor Marcelo Onate wrote a communication to

In January 19, 2004, Municipal Council passed Resolution No. 008-19020424,

The Municipality intensified its claim of jurisdiction and ownership over

1. Resolution No. 024 - 190204, “Expressing the Municipality‟s Strong

Titling of Kalanggaman Island, a Public Land, of the Municipality of

Agitated by the moves of the municipality, CELSO DE LOS ANGELES, JR.26

In 2006, Tax Declaration No. 02-31048-00722 underwent a general revision

Surprisingly though, on January 21, 2004, Retuya executed a Deed of Absolute

Unknown to the Municipality, Celso De Los Angeles, Jr. successfully transferred

This is evidenced by Tax Declaration No. 05-31048-00730 R1231. This tax

The following resolutions were adopted by the Sangguniang Bayan:

1. Municipal Resolution No. 233-23020937, “Reasserting the Municipality‟s

Kalanggaman Island Before the Provincial Assessor‟s Office and the

The strong assertion of the Municipality‟s proprietary rights over Calanggaman

In a very diplomatic manner, Mayor Tupa, Vice-Mayor Lloyd Surigao,

A profound discussion on the issues surrounding the Calanggaman controversy

In keeping with Municipal Resolutions No. 233-230209 and 234-230209, the

The Municipality through Mayor Tupa sent communications to concerned

Vice-Mayor Surigao wrote a communication to the OIC Municipal Assessor

The Technical Description of the subject property was prepared by Geodetic

Lubiano even recommended for an investigation of the Provincial Assessor

The SB had admonished Lubiano not to entertain any transfers of the

After Lubiano‟s appearance in the SB, on March 9, 2009, a resolution59

The Office of the Ombudsman-Visayas was furnished a copy of the said

In his letter Iriarte laid the premise to quote:

“When I assumed as provincial assessor on August 23, 1993 and up to

Year Tax Declaration No. Declared Owner

2007 08-31048-00730 R12 Rural Bank of Carmen Cebu

He also stressed that “the area is always 9.8158 hectares”.

“Pls. collect back tax of increased area: A. V. P39,780.00 effc. 20000.”

The irregularities involved in the transfer of Calanggaman, particularly the

The local leadership abhors and will not tolerate this.

The SB in its March 9, 2009 session61 passed and approved Municipal

By way of reply63, BSP Office of Special Investigation Director Alfonso C.

The Mayor has ordered the Municipal Environmental and Sustainable

The insistence of the municipality on the issue of Calanggaman is not at all a

The letters-appeal addressed to various government agencies and the extensive

“Unless it is indubitable that Calanggaman Island forms part of the public

BSP Integrated Supervision Department Director Chuchi G. Fonacier 68 also

Department of Tourism Secretary Ace Durano in his response 69 to the letter of

The Municipality of Palompon was furnished a copy of the letter70 of Assistant

Undersecretary Charito R. Elegir of the Office of the President in her letter 71

Lawyer Mary Ann Lucille L. Sering, DENR Undersecretary for Administration,

DENR Undersecretary for Staff Bureaus Manuel D. Gerochi73 formally informed

“The municipality requested assistance for the reversion of Calanggaman

The SB has passed and approved Municipal Resolution No. 282-11050977,

Apart from continuously appealing to the concerned government agencies for

The municipality sought the assistance of Ocean Beacons Inc. to conduct

A draft ordinance entitled “An Ordinance Declaring Calanggaman Island as a