Dar Legal Opinions

Home
Preface
CARL (R.A. 6657, as amended) and Related Laws
History and Evolution of Major Agrarian Reform Laws
Issuances
o Index of DAR Administrative Issuances (1972-2011)
Agrarian Law Implementation (ALI)
o Administrative Orders
Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board
o General Memorandum Orders
Legal Opinions
o Digests
o Opinions
o Memoranda
o Memorandum Circulars
o Special Orders
Philippine Constitution
Laws, Statutes and Presidential Issuances
Supreme Court Decisions and Issuances
Court of Appeals Decisions
Implementing Rules and Regulations
Issuances from Other Government Agencies
Handbooks and Publications
Articles and Journals
Forms and Templates
Lecture Materials
Login
DIGESTS OF DAR LEGAL OPINIONS BY SUBJECT (1994-2010)
By
Legislative Research and Statistics Division
Bureau of Agrarian Legal Assistance
Department of Agrarian Reform
A
ABANDONMENT; AS A GROUND FOR EJECTMENT
What constitutes abandonment?
 If he sells his right as tenant and allows another person to

cultivate the farm, the same would constitute abandonment
of the landholding without the knowledge of the agricultural
lessor which could be a ground for his ejectment. However,
if the agricultural lessor eventually recognized the person
to whom possession and cultivation of the farm lot was
transferred, it is possible that his stay thereon has ripened
into tenancy.
DAR OPINION NO. 20, s. 1994

March 15, 1994
ABANDONMENT; TEMPORARY ABANDONMENT NOT A

GROUND FOR EJECTMENT
 Temporary abandonment cannot be a ground for the
ejectment of a tenant when there is a person who can
cultivate the landholding personally and temporarily, not
necessarily a son from among his immediate family or legal
heirs. Sections 7 and 8 of Republic Act No. 3844
(Agricultural Land Reform Code) provides as to when a
tenancy relationship ceases. Thus, said provisions of law
provide that the agricultural leasehold relation once
established shall confer upon the agricultural lessee the
right to continue working on the landholding until such
leasehold relation is extinguished, and that it is
extinguished by abandonment of the landholding without
the knowledge of the agricultural lessor.
 As far as abandonment of farm-holding is concerned, such

abandonment must not only be temporary, there must be a
showing that the tenant has no intention of returning.


November 14, 2008
ACCREDITATION OF NGO; NOT A CONDITION PRECEDENT

BEFORE SUCH CAN ASSIST DAR IN ITS PROGRAM; EXCEPTION;
APPLICATION FOR FUNDING WITH DAR
Is the accreditation of NGO a condition precedent before
said NGO can assist DAR in its program?
 No accreditation is required before an NGO can assist the

DAR in its programs as embodied under DAR Administrative
Order No. 11, s. 1989, otherwise known as the "Rules and
Regulations Governing the Accreditation of Non-
Government Organizations (NGOs) participating in DAR
Programs." Said guideline was issued to guarantee the
participation and involvement of non-government
organization in agrarian and agricultural development
pursuant to Sec. 16 of Art. XIII of the Constitution which
provides that the right of the people and their organizations
to effective and reasonable and economic decision-making
shall be respected. Accreditation is necessary only in
instances where an NGO will apply for funding with the
DAR.

April 24, 1997
ACQUISITION AND REDISTRIBUTION; AGRICULTURAL LANDS

OUTSIDE THE LANDOWNER'S RETAINED AREA
Can we distribute to qualified beneficiaries agricultural
lands falling outside the 5-hectare retention of
landowners?
 CARL mandates the acquisition and redistribution to

qualified beneficiaries of all agricultural lands falling
outside 5-hectare retention of landowners. Moreover, the
last paragraph of Section 6 of CARL provides that upon its
effectivity, any sale, disposition, lease, management
contract or transfer of possession of private lands executed
by the original landowner in violation thereof shall be null
and void.

November 27, 1995
ACQUISITION AND REDISTRIBUTION; FACTORS TO BE

CONSIDERED
What are the factors to be considered in the schedule of
acquisition and redistribution of all agricultural lands in
accordance with the order of priority as set by law?
 The schedule of acquisition and redistribution of all

agricultural lands in accordance with the order of priority
as set by law should take its course taking into
consideration the following: the need to distribute lands to
the tillers at the earliest practicable time; the need to
enhance agricultural productivity; and the availability of
funds and resources to implement and support the program.

September 4, 1996
ACQUISITION; AGRICULTURAL LANDS BY LOCAL GOVERNMENT

UNIT (LGU), LIMITATIONS
Can a local government unit expropriate agricultural land
without prior authority from DAR?
 The Supreme Court held in the case of Province of

Camarines Sur vs. Court of Appeals, 222 SCRA 173, that
local government units can expropriate agricultural lands
without prior authority from the Department of Agrarian
Reform as the determination of the public use of the
property subject for expropriation is considered an
expression of legislative policy. The Supreme Court further
held that neither the Local Government Code nor the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law requires a local
government unit to secure approval of the Department of
Agrarian Reform as a condition precedent to institute the
necessary expropriation proceedings. The ruling laid down
by the Supreme Court is generally applicable when an
agricultural land is expropriated by or donated to a local
government unit.

December 23, 1999
ACQUISITION; AGRICULTURAL LANDS SUBJECT OF

MORTGAGE OR FORECLOSURE
 Section 5 of DAR Administrative Order No. 01, Series of
2000 (Revised Rules and Regulations on the Acquisition of
Agricultural Lands Subject of Mortgage or Foreclosure)
provides that the mortgagee shall be considered a lien-
holder if on the date the land transfer claim was received
by the Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) from the
Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR): the mortgage debt is
not yet due and demandable; or the mortgage debt is
already due and demandable but the mortgagee has not
foreclosed on the property, or the mortgage has already
been foreclosed but the period to exercise the right of
redemption, in cases provided by law, has not yet expired;
or the foreclosure sale has not yet been confirmed by the
court in cases where there is only equity of redemption.
Section 72 (b) of R.A. No. 6657 further provides:

"(b) Mortgages and other claims
registered with the Register of Deeds shall
be assumed by the government up to an
amount equivalent to the landowner's
compensation value as provided in this Act."
Section 8.b.1 of DAR Administrative Order No. 01,
Series of 2000 likewise states:
"b) As lienholder, the bank, financial
institutions, or other concerned person shall
be entitled, among others, to:
1) Receive payment for the
obligation of the mortgagor from the land
transfer proceeds up to an amount
equivalent to the landowner's
compensation value."
March 22, 2005
ACQUISITION; AGRICULTURAL LANDS UNDER R.A. No. 6657 AND
P.D. No. 27
What are the guidelines applicable in the acquisition of
agricultural lands under R.A. No. 6657 and P.D. No. 27?
 In the acquisition of agricultural lands both under R.A. No.

6657 and P.D. No. 27, the provisions of DAR A.O. No. 02,
Series of 1996, as amended by A.O. No. 1, Series of 1998
(Revised Rules and Procedures Governing the Acquisition of
Agricultural Lands Subject of Voluntary Offer to Sell and
Compulsory Acquisition pursuant to R.A. No. 6657) and
Executive Order No. 228 (Declaring Full Land Ownership to
Qualified Farmer Beneficiaries covered by P.D. No. 27;
Determining the Value of Remaining Unvalued Rice and
Corn Lands Subject of P.D. No. 27; and Providing for the
Manner of Payment by the Farmer Beneficiary and Mode of
Compensation to the Landowner) apply.

December 23, 1999
ACQUISITION; A.O. NO. 02, SERIES OF 2005 GENERALLY HAS

PROSPECTIVE APPLICATION
 "V. Transitory provisions
This Administrative Order shall apply even to claims

pending at any level but only in so far as the subsequent
or remaining procedures/activities are concerned.
However, CFs involving landholdings with an aggregate
area of five (5) hectares and below per landowner or
those covered by patents under the "Handog Titulo"
program of the DENR shall no longer be processed
except those already officially received by the LBP.
VI. EFFECTIVITY
This Order shall take effect ten (10) days after its
publication in two (2) newspapers of general circulation
pursuant to Section 49 of R.A. No. 6657. . . ."
A reading of the abovequoted provisions
would readily disclose that generally, it prescribes a
prospective application. However, insofar as
subsequent or remaining procedures concerning
pending claims and CFs involving landholding below 5
hectares per landowner or those covered by patents
under the "Handog Titulo" program which are already
officially received by the LBP, the A.O. may be applied
retroactively.
February 13, 2007
ACQUISITION; APPLICABLE TO BOTH SMALL AND BIG

LANDOWNERS
 Pursuant to Republic Act No. 6657 ( Comprehensive Agrarian

Reform Law), the DAR is mandated to acquire agricultural
lands in excess of the retention limit of five (5) hectares.
This mandate is imperative and it applies to both small and
big landowners regardless of their status or position in the
society. In other words, the acquisition is not dependent on
the willingness of the landowners whose primary objective
is patently to unduly delay and derail the implementation of
R.A. No. 6657. Agrarian Reform is land reform and it means
the transfer of control and ownership of agricultural land to
the actual tillers.

February 2, 2006
ACQUISITION; APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION OR CONVERSION,
EFFECT THEREOF; DUTY OF DAR IN CASE OF FILING OF SAID
APPLICATIONS
What is the effect of an application for
exemption/conversion on the issuance of cash deposit
certificate?
 In cases where there are pending applications for

exemption or conversion or protests on coverage, the
issuance of Certificate of Cash Deposit shall be held in
abeyance until such time that said applications or protests
are resolved with finality. However, in so far as the
applications for exemption and conversion and protests
involving CARP coverage which are pending with the DAR,
it behooves and it is incumbent upon us that the resolution
thereof should be directed and rendered the soonest in
order that the implementation of the Program shall not be
unduly delayed or derailed.

February 9, 1999
ACQUISITION; CITIZENSHIP OF A PERSON WHO MAY ACQUIRE
PRIVATE LANDS
May a natural born citizen of the Philippines who is now an
alien acquire private lands?
 A natural born citizen of the Philippines, though now an

alien, may acquire private lands in the Philippines, subject,
however, to limitations provided by law.

August 14, 1996
ACQUISITION; CORPORATION OF FILIPINO OWNERSHIP MAY

ACQUIRE LANDS
Can a corporation of Filipino ownership acquire lands by
purchase in the Philippines?
 A corporation of Filipino ownership can acquire said lands

by purchase in the Philippines without transgressing any
constitutional provision relative to acquisition of private
agricultural lands. Specifically, this is one of the privileges
enshrined in the 1987 Constitution which can be enjoyed
solely by Filipino Citizens, corporations or associations. By
Filipino ownership, it does not mean that the corporation
must be one of hundred percent (100%) Filipino
capitalization; it is enough that at least sixty percent (60%)
of the capital is owned by Filipino Citizens.

April 3, 1997
ACQUISITION; DISTINGUISHED FROM DISTRIBUTION; TWO

SEPARATE TRANSACTIONS
How is acquisition distinguished from distribution?
 Section 18 of R.A. No. 6657 provides, quote: "Valuation and

Mode of Compensation. — The LBP shall compensate the
landowner in such amount as may be agreed upon by the
landowner and the DAR and the LBP in accordance with the
criteria provided for in Sections 16 and 17 and other
pertinent provisions thereof, or as may be finally
determined by the court as the just compensation for the
land". On the other hand, Section 26 of the same law
provides: "Lands awarded pursuant to this Act shall be paid
for by the beneficiaries to the LBP in thirty (30) annual
amortizations at six percent (6%) interest per annum."
 From the aforequoted provisions of law and learning from

the lessons in the previous agrarian reform programs, the
CARP now separates the process of acquisition from
distribution. These are now two separate transactions. The
former is a transaction between the government and the
landowner, while the latter is a transaction between the
government and the agrarian reform beneficiaries. The
landowner may still be contesting the land valuation but
title to the land may already be transferred first to the
Republic of the Philippines then to the beneficiaries.

September 3, 1997
ACQUISITION; DOCUMENTATION PROCESS MUST PROCEED

WITHOUT INTERRUPTION DESPITE NON-PAYMENT OF TAX DUE
May acquisition proceed pending non payment of tax due?
 It is the DAR's primary mandate to acquire and distribute

lands to as many tenants and farmworkers as possible,
hence, to stop or suspend the processing of land
distribution folders by reason of mere non-payment of taxes
would unduly delay or derail the implementation of the
Program and frustrate the very purpose for which the law
was enacted and envisioned. The CARP coverage
documentation process must therefore proceed without
interruption and should never be put at the mercy of other
persons' inability or delinquency in the payment of their
legally demandable tax obligations. Accordingly, proper
representation with the Office of the Bureau of Internal
Revenue (BIR) or local government unit concerned should
be made informing them, along with the landowner, that the
land subject of non-payment of tax shall nonetheless be
covered under CARP (inspite of the absence of a tax
clearance) and that should the taxes still remain unpaid,
the DAR through the LBP shall be constrained to
automatically deduct the unpaid taxes from the
compensation to which the landowner may be entitled and
the same shall out rightly be paid to the taxing authority
concerned.
December 2, 1998
ACQUISITION; EFFECT OF AN APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION/

CONVERSION ON THE ISSUANCE OF CASH DEPOSIT
CERTIFICATE
What is the effect of an application for
exemption/conversion on the issuance of cash deposit
certificate?
 "Section 16. Procedure for Acquisition of Private Lands — . . .
xxx
xxx xxx
(e) Upon receipt by the landowner of the
corresponding payment or, in case of rejection or
no response from the landowner, upon the deposit
with an accessible bank designated by the DAR of
the compensation in cash or in LBP bonds in
accordance with this Act, the DAR shall take
immediate possession of the land and shall
request the proper Register of Deeds to issue a
Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) in the name of
the Republic of the Philippines. The DAR shall
thereafter proceed with the redistribution of the
land to the qualified beneficiaries.
 The aforequoted provision of law presupposes that there is

no issue raised on the coverage, exemption and/or
conversion of the subject landholding, thus, a Certificate of
Cash Deposit could be issued and the land may be
immediately subjected to CARP coverage. Conversely, in
case there is a pending protest on coverage or an
exemption/conversion application filed by the landowner, it
necessarily follows that the issuance of the Cash Deposit
Certification should be held in abeyance, hence, the
landholding in issue could not be immediately subjected to
CARP coverage.

February 9, 1999
ACQUISITION; EXEMPT NON-AGRICULTURAL LANDS, SUBJECT

TO THE PROVISION OF CARL ON RETENTION
May a person who already owns an agricultural land of five
(5) hectares or more acquire non-agricultural lands exempt
from CARP coverage?
 The prohibition under CARL relative to retention limit in

excess of five (5) hectares applies only if the subject
landholding is agricultural, the reason being that only
agricultural lands are subject to CARP coverage. A land
which is undeveloped and untenanted and with slope of
18% or over is deemed already out of the purview of
agricultural lands over which the DAR has no more
jurisdiction.
 However, while the subject landholding is undeveloped and

untenanted with 18% slope or over, the DAR as an agency
tasked to implement the agrarian reform program of the
government should still make a declaration that the subject
landholding is indeed exempt from CARP coverage through
an order of exemption to be issued by the Regional
Director.
 Consequently, any person whether natural or juridical, can

acquire exempt landholdings which are not classified as
agricultural in nature by any of the recognized modes of
acquiring ownership because the acquisition thereof does
not circumvent the provision of CARL on retention.
December 13, 1996
ACQUISITION; FORECLOSED AGRICULTURAL LAND
 In the instant case, the bank (DBP) may, however, dispose

the subject property to a third party without applying for
the issuance of a Certificate of Exclusion/Exemption since
under DAR Memorandum Circular No. 5, Series of 1996
(Guidelines Clarifying Sections 3 and 6 of R.A. 7881
Relative to Applications For Commercial Farm Deferment
and the Turn-Over to DAR of Foreclosed Assets of
Government Financial Institutions, Respectively), pertinent
provision of which states:
2. Section 6 of R.A. 7881 provides the

following:
"Section 6. There shall be incorporated after
Section 73 of Republic Act No. 6657 a new
section to read as follows:
Section 73-A. Exception. —
The provisions of Section 73, paragraph (e)
to the contrary notwithstanding, the sales
and/or transfer of agricultural land in cases
where such sale, transfer or conveyance is
made necessary as a result of a bank's
foreclosure of the mortgaged land is hereby
permitted."
 The net effect of the aforequoted provision is to allow

government financial institutions to dispose to third parties
their properties which were foreclosed on or after the
effectivity of R.A. No. 7881, i.e., March 12, 1995, under the
General Banking Act. However, since said properties (e.g.,
the landholding in issue) fall under CARP coverage, the
same shall still be acquired by the government through the
DAR for distribution to qualified farmer-beneficiaries as
mandated under R.A. No. 6657.

November 10, 2006
 Concerning your second query in relation to the third query,

farmer beneficiaries has a better right over the subject
property, quoting the last paragraph of the said DOJ
Opinion:
". . . As the mortgage had ceased to exist upon the

transfer of title to the tenant by virtue of the
promulgation of P.D. No. 27 on October 21, 1972,
there can be no mortgage to foreclose and
therefore no subject for the foreclosure
proceedings. Whatever equitable interest the
mortgagee has in the landowners' right to receive
payment is protected under Section 80, above-
quoted, directing the Land Bank to settle existing
liens and encumbrances affecting the property."
 It is explicit therefore that LBC Bank cannot exercise the

right of retention over said agricultural properties since the
mortgage had ceased to exist upon the transfer of title to
the tenant by virtue of the promulgation of P.D. No. 27 on
October 21, 1972. It necessarily follows that the bank can
no longer offer to voluntary offer for sale the entire
property.

October 20, 2006

 Since the subject foreclosed property is agricultural, the
same shall still be subjected to acquisition and
redistribution to qualified beneficiaries pursuant to the
provisions of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law
(CARL). Simply stated, although the transfer in the name of
Planters Products of said property may be allowed or
permitted under the law, the foreclosed agricultural
property is not excluded from CARP coverage pursuant to
Section 16 and 71 of Republic Act No. 6657 and DAR
Administrative Order No. 2, Series of 1997 ( Rules and
Procedures Governing the Acquisition of Private
Agricultural Lands Subject of Mortgage or Foreclosure of
Mortgage).

October 17, 2006
 Pertinent to foreclosed agricultural land are the following

provisions of law, guidelines and DAR Opinion:
 SECTION 71, R.A. No. 6657 (Comprehensive Agrarian

Reform Law)
"Section 71. Bank Mortgages. — Banks and

other financial institutions allowed by law to hold
mortgage rights or security interests in agricultural
lands to secure loans and other obligations of
borrowers, may acquire title to these mortgaged
properties, regardless of area, subject to existing
laws on compulsory transfer of foreclosed assets
and acquisition as prescribed under Section 16 of
this Act." (underscoring and emphasis supplied)
 SECTION 1, DAR Administrative Order No. 1, Series of 2000
(Revised Rules and Regulations of Agricultural Lands
Subject of Mortgage or Foreclosure)
"Section 1. Rationale. — Section 25 of Republic

Act No. 337, otherwise known as "The General
Banking Act", provides that acquired assets and
mortgaged properties foreclosed by banks shall be
disposed of within a period of five (5) years after
foreclosure." (emphasis supplied)
 Penultimate Paragraph of DAR Memorandum Circular No 05,

Series of 1996 (Guidelines Clarifying Sections 3 and 6 of
R.A. No. 7881 Relative to Applications for Commercial
Farms Deferment and the Turn-over to DAR of Foreclosed
Assets of Government Financial Institutions, Respectively)
"As regards private banks, Section 71 of R.A. No.

6657 provides that said foreclosed assets are
subject to existing laws on their compulsory
transfer (that is, under the General Banking
Act) and acquisition under Section 16 of said Act. .
. . ." (emphasis supplied)
 4th Paragraph of DAR Opinion No. 95, Series of 1996
". . . Banks cannot exercise the right of retention

over their foreclosed agricultural properties.
Section 71 of R.A. No. 6657 mandates that
foreclosed assets of private banks are subject to
existing laws on compulsory transfer (that is under
the General Banking Act) and acquisition under
Section 16 of said Act (see attached M.C. No. 5,
Series of 1995)." (emphasis supplied)
February 8, 2005
 To preclude circuitous and complex reversion proceedings,

and pursuant to the aforequoted/aforecited more recent
special provisions of R.A. No. 6657 (CARL) and R.A. No. 337
(The General Banking Act) vis-à-vis a general provision of
the Public Land Act (Section 118 thereof), the subject
properties foreclosed by private banks, consolidated in
their favor and offered for CARP coverage may be placed
under the Program since in the final analysis said
properties will end up/revert to the State, through the DAR,
for distribution to qualified agrarian reform beneficiaries.

August 28, 2003
 Corollarily, although Section 6 of R.A. No. 7881 allows the

transfer by banks of such foreclosed assets to third parties,
they shall nonetheless be eventually acquired by the
government through the DAR, under Section 16 of R.A. No.
6657, for distribution to qualified farmer-beneficiaries.

June 7, 2002
 Although private banks my sell to third parties their

foreclosed assets, the same are still subject to acquisition
under Section 16 of R.A. No. 6557 (CARL), if warranted.

August 21, 2001
ACQUISITION; FORECLOSED ASSETS AND MORTGAGED
PROPERTIES
Could acquired assets and mortgaged properties
foreclosed by a bank be disposed of?
 Section 25 of Republic Act No. 337 (General Banking Act)

provides that acquired assets and mortgaged properties
foreclosed by the mortgagee bank shall be disposed of
within a period of five (5) years after foreclosure. Section
71 of R.A. No. 6657 further provides that "Banks and other
financial institutions allowed by law to hold mortgage rights
or security interests in agricultural lands to secure loans
and other obligations of borrowers, may acquire title to
these mortgaged properties, regardless of area, subject to
existing laws on compulsory transfer of foreclosed assets
and acquisition as prescribed under Section 16 of this Act."
Moreover, Section 6 of R.A. No. 7881 as clarified by
Memorandum Circular No. 5, Series of 1996 "allows
government financial institutions to dispose to third parties
effectivity of R.A. No. 7881, i.e., March 12, 1995. However,
since said properties fall under CARP coverage, the same
shall still be acquired by the government through this
Department for distribution to qualified farmer-beneficiaries
as mandated by R.A. No. 6657." (underscoring supplied)

March 22, 1999
ACQUISITION; FORECLOSED ASSETS; FORECLOSING BANK AS

THE LANDOWNER
When shall a foreclosing bank be treated as the
landowner?
 DAR Administrative Order No. 2, Series of 1997 treats a

foreclosing bank (i.e., Creditor) for purposes of covering a
property under CARP as the landowner: 1) when the title to
the property is in the name of the Creditor; or 2) when the
affidavit of consolidation of ownership or affidavit of non-
redemption of the property has been annotated on the title.

March 22, 1999
ACQUISITION; IN THE NAME OF MINOR CHILDREN, CONDITIONS

Can parents acquire agricultural land in the name of minor
children?
 Parents can acquire agricultural land in the name of their

minor children, provided that: 1) the land to be acquired is a
retained area; 2) the title shall be issued in the name of
their children, and 3) each child would not own more than
the five-hectare landownership ceiling, including the
property acquired.

May 28, 1996
ACQUISITION; LAND COVERED BY HOMESTEAD PATENTS

AND/OR CLOAs MAY BE TRANSFERRED THROUGH VLT
 Section 20 of R.A. No. 6657 recognizes VLT as a mode of

acquisition under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Program. While it may be true that under the said scheme,
the transfer is made directly to the beneficiaries by virtue
of an agreement between the landowner and farmer-
beneficiaries, the fact remains that said transfer is made
pursuant to the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law
(CARL), and the agreement is still subject to DAR approval
pursuant to DAR A.O. No. 08, Series of 2003. Therefore, land
covered by Homestead Patents and/or CLOAs that are
qualified for acquisition under CARP may be transferred by
landowners through the VLT mode of acquisition.

October 15, 2007
ACQUISITION; LAND UNDER P.D. 27; CONDITIONS; EXCEPTION;

PUBLIC LANDS MAY BE COVERED UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS
What are the conditions in the acquisition of agricultural
lands for distribution to qualified tenant farmers under P.D.
No. 27?
 Acquisition of agricultural lands for distribution to qualified

tenant-farmers under Presidential Decree No. 27 is subject
to the following conditions, to wit:
a. that the property is a private agricultural land;

b. that it is primarily devoted to rice and corn
under a system of share-crop or lease tenancy,
whether classified as landed estate or not; and
c. that it is tenanted.
 Specifically, the beneficent provisions of the

aforementioned law find no application to landholdings
whose ownership is still public in character. Otherwise
stated, public lands cannot be acquired and distributed to
qualified Operation Land Transfer (OLT) farmer-
beneficiaries nor can it be the subject of Emancipation
Patents for the same are outside the purview of P.D. No. 27.
However, the foregoing is not without exception.
 Alienable public lands held by a possessor, personally, or
thru his predecessors in interest, openly, continuously and
exclusively for the prescribed statutory period (i.e., 30
years under the Public Land Act, as amended) are
converted to private property by mere lapse or completion
of said period, ipso jure (Director of Land Management
vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 94525, January 27, 1992). As
likewise ruled by the Supreme Court in the case of Rural
Bank of Compostela vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 122801,
April 8, 1997, the possessor is deemed to have acquired by
operation of law, a right to a government grant, without the
necessity of a certificate of title being issued, and the land
ceases to be part of the public domain and beyond the
authority of the Director of Lands. Thus, even assuming that
the subject property is a public land for failure of the Layug
family to prove their claim of ownership, the same can still
be possibly acquired and distributed to qualified tenant
beneficiaries pursuant to P.D. No. 27 to give effect to the
mandate of this social justice legislation.

March 4, 1999
ACQUISITION; PROPERTY COVERED BY CARP CAN NO LONGER

BE THE SUBJECT OF RECLASSIFICATION BY LGU
May a property already subjected to compulsory
acquisition pursuant to CARP be the subject of
reclassification by Local Government Units?
 A property already subjected to compulsory acquisition

pursuant to CARP, the same being indisputably coverable
under the provisions of R.A. No. 6657, can no longer be the
subject of reclassification by Local Government Units. To
do so or to allow it would disturb vested rights, have
tremendous unsettling effects in the current state of things,
would serve as a bad precedent, will give rise to violent
conflict and social tension, and would in the end eventually
and effectively derail the successful implementation of the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program.

April 24, 1997
ACQUISITION; MODES OF ACQUISITION
 Under R.A. No. 6657, there are two modes of acquisition of

private agricultural lands, compulsory and voluntary.
Voluntary Offer to Sell (VOS) is a highly favored mode of
acquisition by the government. As landowner, you may
validly offer for CARP coverage your agricultural land
through the VOS Scheme and the same may be processed
under existing guidelines.

November 16, 2007
ACQUISITION; ORDER OF PRIORITIES UNDER SECTION 7 OF R.A.

NO. 6657
Is the Order of priorities provided under Section 7 of R.A.

6657 mandatory?
 The Order of Priorities set forth under Section 7 of R.A. No.

6657 is merely directory in character. The difference
between a mandatory and a directory provision is often
determined on grounds of expediency. And where a
provision, as herein, embodies a rule of procedure rather
than one of substance, the provision as to time will be
regarded as directory only notwithstanding the mandatory
nature of the language used (Marcelino vs. Cruz, Jr., 121
SCRA 51).
 It is true that Section 7 uses the word "shall", which is

generally interpreted to be mandatory in character (Guiao
vs. Figueroa, 94 Phil. 1022). However, it is also well-
recognized that the ordinary acceptation of "shall" and
"may" as being obligatory and permissive, respectively, is
not an absolute and inflexible criterion (Vda. de Mesa vs.
Mencias, 18 SCRA 533). Provisions as to time will generally
be construed as directory if there are no negative words
restraining the doing of the act afterwards (Phil. Ass'n. of
Free Labor Unions vs. Sec. of Labor, 27 SCRA 40). We find
none instant.
 The ten-year period (i.e., 3 Phases) of CARP implementation

is only a time frame given to the DAR for the acquisition
and distribution of public and private agricultural lands
covered by R.A. No. 6657. It is a schedule to guide the DAR
in setting its priorities, but it is not by any means a
limitation of authority in the absence of more categorical
language providing to that effect. On the contrary, said
schedule may even be disregarded by the Presidential
Agrarian Reform Council (PARC) upon recommendation by
the Provincial Agrarian Reform Coordinating Committee
(PARCCOM) by declaring certain provinces or regions as
priority land reform areas. In such cases, the acquisition
and distribution of private agricultural lands therein may be
implemented ahead of the schedule set forth under Section
7 thereof.

January 11, 2000
ACQUISITION; PRIVATE LANDS; CERTIFICATION OF DEPOSIT

ALREADY ISSUED
Can the Register of Deeds register the generated CLOAs
based on the Certificate of Deposit issued by the LBP?
 Section 16 (e) of R.A. No. 6657 provides that "upon the

deposit with the LBP of the compensation in cash or in LBP
bonds, the DAR shall take immediate possession of the land
and shall request the proper Register of Deeds to issue a
Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) in the name of the
Republic of the Philippines. The DAR shall thereafter
proceed with the redistribution of the land to the qualified
beneficiaries." Pursuant to said provision of law, it is very
clear that the Register of Deeds (ROD) is not restrained
from registering the generated CLOAs based on the
Certificate of Deposit in order that the DAR may thereafter
proceed with the redistribution of the land to the qualified
beneficiaries.

October 27, 1999
ACQUISITION; PROPERTY COVERED BY CARP CAN NO LONGER

BE THE SUBJECT OF RECLASSIFICATION BY LGU
May a property already subjected to compulsory
acquisition pursuant to CARP be the subject of
reclassification by Local Government Units?
 A property already subjected to compulsory acquisition

pursuant to CARP, the same being indisputably coverable
under the provisions of R.A. No. 6657, can no longer be the
subject of reclassification by Local Government Units. To
do so or to allow it would disturb vested rights, have
tremendous unsettling effects in the current state of things,
would serve as a bad precedent, will give rise to violent
conflict and social tension, and would in the end eventually
and effectively derail the successful implementation of the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program.

April 24, 1997
ACQUISITION; REFUSAL OF A TENANT TO BE A BENEFICIARY,

NOT A VALID GROUND TO REJECT THE VOS
May the refusal of the tenant to be a beneficiary
considered a valid ground to reject the VOS?
 The refusal of the tenant to be a beneficiary is not a valid

ground for a property under VOS (which is coverable under
the CARP) to be rejected and much more to delay or stop
the processing of the claim for payment of the landowner. It
is the standing policy of this Department in consonance
with Section 19 of RA 6657 to encourage VOS as a mode of
acquisition, for it ensures the cooperation of landowner.

September 2, 1997
ACQUISITION; REJECTION OF VALUATION

Should the landowner's inaction be construed as rejection
of the offered valuation?
 The inaction of the landowner should be deemed a rejection

of the offered valuation as contemplated under Section 16
(d) of Republic Act No. 6657.

November 10, 1999
ACQUISITION; RESERVED LAND, DISTRIBUTION THEREOF

Does Executive Order No. 448 cover lands which have
been reserved in favor of a private non-profit corporation?
 E.O. No. 448, which transferred to the Department of

Agrarian Reform for distribution lands reserved by
Presidential Proclamations for specific public uses, is not
applicable to the present case. The Executive Order only
covers those which have been reserved for the government,
its agencies and instrumentalities including government
corporations. The terms of the law is clear and by no
stretch of imagination can it extend to cover BSP which is a
private non-profit corporation.

December 22, 1998
ACQUISITION; TEN (10) YEAR IMPLEMENTATION OF CARP, ONLY
A TIME-FRAME
Is the 10-year period of CARP implementation mandatory?
 The ten (10) year period of implementation is only a time

frame given to DAR for the acquisition and distribution of
public and private agricultural lands covered by R.A. No.
6657. It is a schedule to guide the DAR in setting its
priorities, but it is not by any means a limitation of authority
in the absence of more categorical language providing to
that effect. Moreover, Republic Act No. 8532 provides in
Section 1 thereof the following, to quote:
"Sec. 1. Sec. 63 of R.A. No. 6657, otherwise known

as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988, is
hereby amended to read as follows:
Sec. 63. Funding source. — The amount
needed to implement this Act until the year 2008
shall be funded from the Agrarian Reform Fund."
 It is clear therefore that CARP does not end after ten (10)
years from the effectivity of R.A. No. 6657 but extends even
up to the year 2008.

March 10, 1998
ACQUISITION; VALIDITY AND LIMITATIONS OF ACQUISITION

UNDER THE PUBLIC LAND ACT
When is the validity and limitation of acquisition under the
Public Land Act determined?
 The Supreme Court in Director of Lands vs. Intermediate

Appellate Court, 146 SCRA 509, has ruled that the validity
of acquisition is determined as of the time the land was
acquired. Under the 1935 Constitution, the limit on the area
of public land which may be acquired by private individuals
was 144 hectares. The 1973 Constitution, however, set the
limit at 24 hectares. This in effect amends Section 122 of
the Public Land Act which reduced the allowance area from
144 to 24 hectares (Guiang v. Kintanar, 106 SCRA 49). The
1987 Constitution has further reduced this to 12 hectares.
Therefore, the validity of the acquisition of the subject
farms depends on the period the land was acquired.

March 22, 1999
ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUANCES; PRESUMED VALID AND

EFFECTIVE
 In the implementation of the Comprehensive Agrarian

Reform Program (CARP), administrative issuances which
include directives, rules, regulations, orders and/or
instructions issued by the Department that establish new
policies or implementing existing laws are presumed valid
and effective in order not to frustrate the very purpose of
CARP and for a speedy implementation of the program.
Besides, DAR Administrative Order No. 14, Series of 1988
was issued in reference with the pertinent provisions of the
New Civil Code of the Philippines. Hence, DAR
Administrative Order No. 14, Series of 1988 which was
issued by former DAR Secretary Philip Ella Juico, is
presumed to be valid and effective issuance of DAR. It
prescribes certain rules, requirements and procedures
relative to the implementation of the Program of the
Department.

February 22, 2006
AGRARIAN DISPUTE; DEFINITION

What is agrarian dispute?
 "Agrarian Dispute" as defined in Section 3(d) of R.A. 6657

refers to any controversy relating to tenurial arrangements
over lands devoted to agriculture.

December 11, 1995
AGRARIAN REFORM FUND; PCGG RECOVERIES

How can PCGG recovered properties be applied?
 All PCGG recoveries (except belonging to the Sugar

Restitution Fund) shall be applied to the account of the
Agrarian Reform Fund until completion of the fifty billion
pesos, after which the 60%-40% proportion shall be applied.

September 15, 1994
 All PCGG recoveries shall be applied to the account of the

Agrarian Reform Fund until completion of the total initial
amount of P50 billion, after which 60% of said recoveries
shall be automatically appropriated to the special account
of the Agrarian Reform Fund and 40% to the General Fund.
The only exception to the said provisions is that found in
Republic Act 7202 (The Sugar Restitution Law) which
mandates that any amount recovered by the government
determined to have been stolen or illegally acquired from
the sugar industry shall be used to compensate all sugar
producers from crop year 1974-1975 up to and including
crop year 1984-1985 on a pro-rata basis.

May 25, 1995
AGRARIAN REFORM FUND; PCGG RECOVERIES TO BE APPLIED
TO ITS ACCOUNT
Should PCGG recoveries be applied to the account of the
Agrarian Reform Fund?
 R.A. 7661 mandates the satisfaction and completion of the

total initial amount of fifty billion pesos within the ten-year
period of implementation of the Comprehensive Reform
Program. This means that all PCGG recoveries (except
those belonging to the Sugar Restitution Fund) shall be
applied to the account of the Agrarian Reform Fund until
completion of the fifty billion pesos, after which the 60%-
40% proportion shall be applied.

September 15, 1994
AGRICULTURAL LABOR CONTRACTOR; DEFINITION

What is the definition of an agricultural labor contractor?
 Agricultural labor contractor is one who personally

cultivates the land but hires helpers to do only the
transplanting and harvesting. Transplanting and harvesting
are not among those required by law to be personally
performed by the tenant-farmer. In such a case the law
expressly allows the employment of helpers (Co vs.
Intermediate Appellate Court, 162 SCRA 392).

October 28, 1999
AGRICULTURAL LAND; DEFINITION

What is agricultural land in the context of agrarian reform?
 An "agricultural land", in the context of agrarian reform as

found in Section 3 (c) of R.A. No. 6657, Section 1 of R.A. No.
7881 and DAR A.O. No. 01, Series of 1999 (Revised Rules
and Regulations on the Conversion of Agricultural Lands to
Non-Agricultural Uses), is limited to such lands devoted to
or suitable for the cultivation of the soil, planting of crops,
growing of trees, including the harvesting of such farm
products and other farm activities and practices performed
in conjunction with such farming operations by persons,
whether natural or juridical, and classified by law neither as
mineral land, forest or timber, or national park, nor
residential, commercial, industrial or other non-agricultural
uses before 15 June 1988 (i.e., effectivity of R.A. No. 6657).

October 6, 1999
AGRICULTURAL LAND; MEANING
 R.A. No. 7881, Section 3 defines Agricultural Lands:
(b) Agriculture, Agricultural Enterprise or

Agricultural Activity means the cultivation of the soil,
planting of crops, growing of fruits trees, including the
harvesting of such farm products, and other farm
activities and practices performed by a farmer in
conjunction with such farming operations done by
persons whether natural or juridical."
 It can be gleaned from the abovecited provision that

ricefields and cocolands are included in the
term agricultural land since the activities involved therein
are deemed as agricultural activities.

April 14, 2008
AGRICULTURAL LANDS; CHANGE IN ANOTHER AGRICULTURAL
USE NOT ILLEGAL CONVERSION
Will the change to another agricultural use constitute
illegal conversion?
 Since there is no change in the use of the land, that is, the
land remains to be agricultural, planting of orchids, G-
melina and mahogany does not constitute illegal conversion
even if such change in the land use is without order of
conversion from DAR. It is the policy of the State to protect
prime agricultural lands for food production activities and
to give highest priority to the completion of the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP).

December 23, 1999
AGRICULTURAL LANDS; RIGHT TO OWN (AND EXERCISE THE

PRIVILEGES APPURTENANT THERETO) EXCLUSIVE TO FILIPINO
CITIZENS
Is the right to own agricultural lands exclusive to Filipino
citizens?
 It could be inferred from the provisions of Section 2 of Batas

Pambansa Blg. 185 dated 16 March 1982 and the
Constitution that only Filipinos who have lost their
Philippine citizenship may only be a transferee or retain a
maximum area of one thousand square meters, in the case
of urban land, or one hectare in the case of rural land, to be
used by him as his residence. This is in consonance with
Section 1, Article XIII of the Philippine Constitution which
provides that the State shall regulate the acquisition,
ownership, use and disposition of property and its
increments in line with the State's social justice ideals to
equitably diffuse wealth and to reduce social, economic
and political inequalities.
 Otherwise stated, the right to own agricultural lands and
exercise the privileges appurtenant thereto are reserved
only to Filipino citizens.

December 12, 2000
AGRICULTURAL LEASEHOLD RELATION; NOT EXTINGUISHED BY

SALE OR TRANSFER; LESSEE'S RIGHT OF PRE-EMPTION AND
RIGHT OF REDEMPTION
Is leasehold extinguished by the transfer of legal
ownership of the property?
 Leasehold is not extinguished with the transfer of legal

ownership of the land from one landowner to another.
Section 10 of R.A. 3844, as amended, provides that the
purchaser or transferee shall be subrogated to the rights
and substituted to the obligations of the agricultural lessor.
Likewise, Sections 11 and 12 thereof provide that in case
the agricultural lessor decides to sell the landholding, the
agricultural lessee shall have the preferential right to buy
the same, and, in case the landholding is sold to a third
person without the knowledge of the agricultural lessee,
the latter shall have the right to redeem the same at a
reasonable price and consideration.

April 24, 2000
AGRICULTURAL LEASEHOLD RELATIONSHIP; EXTINGUISHMENT

When is agricultural leasehold relationship extinguished?
 Isinasaad ng Section 8 (1) ng R.A. No. 3844, as amended,

ang mga sumusunod:
"Section 8. — Extinguishment of Agricultural
Leasehold Relationship. — The agricultural leasehold
relation established under this Code shall be
extinguished by:
1) Abandonment of the landholding
without the knowledge of the agricultural lessor;
 Ang pagbebenta ng mga magsasaka ng kanilang karapatang

magsaka sa ibang tao nang hindi alam ng nagpapabuwis sa
pagsasaka ay maaari pong ituring na pag-iwan or
abandonment na kung saan ang pagsasamahang buwisan
sa pagsasaka ay maaaring magwakas. Subalit ayon sa
Section 7 ng R.A. No. 3844, as amended, ang
pagsasamahang buwisan sa pagsasaka, minsang maitatag,
ay maggagawad sa namumuwisan sa pagsasaka ng
karapatang magpatuloy sa paggawa sa hinahawakang
lupa ..... at hindi siya maaaring mapaalis doon matangi kung
ipinahihintulot ng Hukuman sa mga kadahilanang dito'y
itinatadhana.

November 8, 2000
AGRICULTURAL LEASEHOLD RELATIONSHIP; SECURITY OF

TENURE
 Sang-ayon sa Seksyon 7 ng Batas Republika Blg. 3844

(Kodigo ng Repormang Pansakahan) na ang pagsasamang
pambuwisan sa pagsasaka minsang maitatag ay
maggagawad sa namumuwisan sa pagsasaka ng
karapatang magpatuloy sa paggawa sa hinahawakang lupa
at hindi siya maaaring mapaalis doon matangi kung
ipahintulot ng Hukuman. Ibig pong sabihin, ang inyong
leasehold contract ay mananatiling umiiral maliban kung ito
ay pawalang bisa ng Hukuman o Provincial Agrarian Reform
Adjudication Board (PARAB). Kaugnay dito, sang-ayon sa
kasalukuyan umiiral na alituntunin ng DAR (DAR A.O. No. 2,
Series of 2006) na may kinalaman sa pagtatag ng
"leasehold contract" ang Municipal Agrarian Reform Office
(MARO) ay may karapatang mamagitan at sumang-ayon sa
pagtatag ng leasehold contract.

February 2, 2009
AGRICULTURAL LESSEE; EJECTMENT

What are the grounds for ejectment against an agricultural
lessee?
 He/she failed to substantially comply with the terms and

conditions of the leasehold contract or with laws governing
leasehold relations, unless the failure is caused by
fortuitous event or force majeure;
 He/she planted crops or used the land for a purpose other

than what had been previously agreed upon. DAR
Administrative Order No. 5, series of 1993 (Rules and
Procedures Governing Agricultural Leasehold and the
Determination of Lease Rental for Tenanted Lands),
however, now allows the lessee to intercrop or plant
secondary crops after the rental has been fixed, provided
he/she shoulders the expenses;
 He/she failed to adopt proven farm practices necessary to

conserve the land, improve its fertility, and increase its
productivity (with due consideration of his/her financial
capacity and the credit facilities available to him/her);
 His/her fault or negligence resulted in the substantial

damage, destruction, or unreasonable deterioration of the
land or any permanent improvement thereon;
 He/she does not pay the lease rental when it falls due
except when such non-payment is due to crop failure to the
extent of 75 percent as a result of a fortuitous event; or
 He/she employed a sublessee (Section 36, R.A. No. 3844, as

amended).
 Considering, however, that an agricultural lessee is entitled

to security of tenure, he/she cannot be rejected unless
authorized by the court (now, DAR Adjudication Board) for
the abovementioned causes, in a judgment that is final and
executory after due hearing (Sections 7 and 36, R.A. No.
3844, as amended).
May an erring tenant be ejected for non-compliance with

the terms of the leasehold contract? Where is the proper
venue?
 Where a tenant has allegedly failed to substantially comply

with the terms and conditions of the leasehold contract or
with laws governing leasehold relation, the landowner may
file an ejectment case before the Provincial Agrarian
Reform Adjudication Board where the property is located.

February 21, 2002
AGRICULTURAL LESSOR; RIGHT TO PROPOSE A CHANGE IN THE

USE OF THE LANDHOLDING TO OTHER AGRICULTURAL
PURPOSES
May an agricultural lessor propose a change in the use of
the landholding to other agricultural purposes?
 "Sec. 29. Rights of the Agricultural Lessor — it shall be the

right of the agricultural lessor:
xxx
xxx xxx
"(2) To propose a change in the use of the
landholding to other agricultural purposes, or in the
kind of crops to be planted: Provided, that in case of
disagreement as to the proposed change, the same
shall be settled by the Court according to the best
interest of the parties concerned: provided, further,
that in no case shall an agricultural lessee be
ejected as a consequence of the conversion of the
land to some other agricultural purpose or because
of a change in the crop to be planted."

August 15, 1994
AGRICULTURAL YEAR; DEFINED

How is "agricultural year" defined under R.A. No. 3844?
 "Agricultural year" has been defined in Section 166 (4) of

R.A. No. 3844, as amended, as the period of time required
for raising a particular agricultural product, including the
preparation of the land, sowing, planting and harvesting of
crops and, whenever applicable, threshing of said crops:
Provided, however, That in case of crops yielding more than
one harvest from one planting, "agricultural year" shall be
the period from the preparation of the land to the first
harvest and thereafter from harvest to harvest. In both
cases, the period may be shorter or longer than a calendar
year.

November 15, 2000
ALIENABLE LAND; RECLASSIFICATION OF LAND

Is a positive act of the government needed to declassify a
forest land into alienable land?
 Republic Act No. 397 and Presidential Proclamation 286
declassified the lands described therein into alienable
lands. The cases of Republic v. Animas (56 SCRA 499) and
Heirs of Amunategui v. Director of Lands (126 SCRA 69)
held that a positive act of the government is needed to
declassify land which is forest and convert it into alienable
land.

December 22, 1998
ALLOCATION; CERTIFICATE
What is a Certificate of Allocation?
 A Certificate of Allocation (CA) is only a proof that a holder

thereof is a potential beneficiary/awardee of the
landholding described therein. The holder merely acquires
possessory rights over the said landholding, which means
that he is occupying the property only in a possessory
capacity and not in the concept of an owner. Ownership of
which still remains with the State unless the same has
been finally awarded to him by virtue of a duly issued
corresponding patent or CLOA, as the case may be.

May 06, 1998
ALLOCATION; GROUND FOR ITS CANCELLATION

Will the transfer of right by the allocatee without the
written consent and approval of the DAR Regional Director
concerned constitute a ground for the cancellation of the
allocation?
 Under DAR Administrative Order No. 9, Series of 1989, the

transfer of rights by the allocatee without the written
consent and approval of the DAR Regional Director
concerned constitutes a ground for the cancellation of the
allocation.

November 14, 1994
AMENDMENT OR REVISION; PROCESS
 Article XVII of the 1987 Constitution provides for the

process for amendment or revision to wit:
"Section 1. Any amendment to, or revision of, this

constitution may be proposed by:
1) The Congress, upon a vote of
three-fourths of all its members; or
2) A Constitutional Convention
xxx xxx xxx
Sec. 3. The Congress may, by a vote of two-
thirds of all its members, call a constitutional
convention, or by a majority of all its members, submit
to the electorate the question of calling such a
convention."
January 11, 2006
AMORTIZATION; LBP AS CUSTODIAN OF AGRARIAN REFORM

FUNDS
Is the Land Bank of the Philippines legally bound to accept
amortization payments from farmer-beneficiaries for the
lands awarded to them?
 Section 64 of R.A. No. 6657 categorically provides that "the

Land Bank of the Philippines shall be the financial
intermediary for the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Program (CARP), and shall insure that the social justice
objectives of the CARP shall enjoy a preference among its
priorities." It is therefore incumbent upon the Land Bank,
being the legally mandated custodian of agrarian reform
funds, to accept payment from farmer-beneficiaries of their
amortizations until their landholdings have been fully paid.
This assigned duty holds true notwithstanding that it is
opposed to the previous valuation since the title of the
subject landholdings has already been transferred to the
Republic of the Philippines.
 Moreover, sound public policy dictates that qualified farmer-

beneficiaries should not be unduly stymied and accorded a
run around treatment with no place to go as their sincerity
to pay is manifest. Otherwise, this will constitute an
unwarranted derailment in the successful implementation
of the Program. Any question as to the alleged insufficiency
of the valuation should be decided by competent authority
upon proper petition by the Land Bank in accordance with
existing agrarian laws, rules and regulations but, for the
meantime, acceptance of the FBs' payment should be a
matter of ministerial duty on the part of LBP in view of its
aforequoted legally mandated task. Likewise,
documentation, generation and issuance of CLOAs may
continue pending proper determination on the merits of the
issue of valuation.

September 4, 1998
AMORTIZATION; NOT AFFECTED BY THE FINAL VALUATION
 The amount of amortization to be paid by the ARBs should

not be affected in case the landowner is granted by the
courts higher valuation than that pegged by the DAR and
the LBP during the valuation process. The only effect of this
change is to increase government assistance or subsidy
pursuant to the intent and spirit of the
affordability/government subsidy clause embodied in
Section 26 of R.A. No. 6657 and DAR A.O. No. 2, Series of
1998 (Revised Implementing Guidelines and Procedures
Governing Payment of Land Amortization by ARB’s for
Lands Covered Under E.O. No. 229 and R.A. No. 6657).
Otherwise, should the ARBs be made to shoulder the
increase in valuation, the social justice goal of the Program
to democratize wealth and reduce socio-economic
inequalities as mandated by the 1987 Constitution (Article
XIII, Section 1) will be negated.

March 11, 2009
AMORTIZATION; PAYMENTS
Should the payment made by FBs on or after 21 October
1972 be treated as land amortization?
 If the entire portion of the land have been declared part of

the land reform area and subjected to Operation Land
Transfer, the payments made on or after 21 October 1972
by the farmer-beneficiaries constituted advanced
amortization payments on the cost of the land that they
were required to pay under Presidential Decree No. 27,
hence, such payments are to be treated as land
amortizations.

June 01, 1998
ANCESTRAL LANDS; DETERMINATION OF BENEFICIARIES; TO

WHOM VESTED
Does the DAR have the authority to determine the
beneficiaries of ancestral lands?
 Section 9 of R.A. No. 6657, provides that the ancestral lands
of each indigenous cultural community shall include, but
not limited to lands in the actual continuous, and open
possession and occupation of the community and its
members, provided that the Torrens System shall be
respected. With said right already vested with the
indigenous cultural community, the DAR & DENR executed
a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) dated December 10,
1993 to put into effect Section 9 of R.A. No. 6657. By this
instance A.O. No. 4, Series of 1996, otherwise known as the
Rules and Regulations Governing the Issuance of CARP
Beneficiaries Certificates (CBCs) to Indigenous Cultural
Communities and Peoples, was enacted pursuant to Section
9 of R.A. No. 6657 which provides in its policy statement
that in recognition of their right to their ancestral land, the
DAR shall issue CARP Beneficiary Certificates to members
of the indigenous cultural communities engaged in
agricultural activities, in coordination with the issuance to
them of Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claim (CADC) or
Certificate of Ancestral Land Claim (CALC) by the DENR.

December 23, 1996
ANCESTRAL LANDS; RIGHT OF INDIGENOUS CULTURAL

COMMUNITIES
Does DAR recognizes the right of indigenous cultural
communities?
 R.A. 6657 recognizes the right of indigenous cultural

communities to their ancestral lands for the protection of
their economic, social and cultural well-being.

December 13, 1996
ANNOTATION; DOES NOT CONSTITUTE ENCUMBRANCE ON THE
AWARD
Does the listing or "annotation" of the names of the ARBs
at the back of the CLOA constitute an encumbrance on the
property?
 Listing or "annotating" the names of the ARBs at the back of

the CLOA does not constitute an encumbrance on the
property. It only shows that the listed names are the
collective owners of the land technically described in the
title. Encumbrance is a burden or lien against the property
that lessens its value.

July 14, 1999
APPEAL; BEFORE THE DARAB; REMEDY OF THE PARTY

AGGRIEVED BY THE DECISION OF THE PARAD OR RARAD
What is the remedy of the party aggrieved by the decision
of the PARAD or RARAD?
 Should the party feel aggrieved by the decision of the

PARAD or RARAD, the remedy under the New DARAB Rules
of Procedure is not to request for legal opinion from the
DAR Central Office but for the party who feels aggrieved by
the decision to file an appeal before the DAR Adjudication
Board at the Central Office.

July 8, 1994
APPEAL; DECISIONS OF RDS APPEALABLE TO THE OFFICE OF

THE SECRETARY
Is the Decision of the RD Appealable?
 In consonance with the doctrine of exhaustion of
administrative remedies, decisions of the Regional Director
shall be appealable to the Office of the Secretary. The
Provincial Reform Adjudication Board (PARAD) has no
jurisdiction over it. The Supreme Court in the case of Tijam
vs. Sibonghanoy, 23 SCRA 29, held" "It is a settled rule that
any decision rendered without jurisdiction is a total nullity
and may be struck down any time, even on appeal before
the Supreme Court.
 Any decision rendered by the Regional Director of which he
has jurisdiction shall be valid and once it has become final
and executory, the same should necessarily be executed as
a matter of course.

April 15, 1998
APPEAL; PERFECTION OF THE APPEAL; LOWER COURT LOSES

JURISDICTION
Does the lower court loses jurisdiction upon perfection of
the appeal?
 Section 9, Rule 41 of the Rules of Court provides that once

an appeal has been perfected, the trial court loses
jurisdiction over the case. In the case of Ricardo Lirio vs.
the Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 90462, 29 May 1992), the
Supreme Court held: "Upon perfection of the appeal,
jurisdiction transfers to the appellate court and the lower
court, in this case the Court of Appeals, cannot proceed in
any manner so as to affect the jurisdiction acquired by the
appellate court or to defeat the right of the appellant to
prosecute his appeal.

May 28, 1996
APPEAL; REINSTATEMENT OF THE TENANT, PENDING
RESOLUTION OF THE APPEAL
Can the tenant be reinstated pending resolution of the
appeal?
 A determination must first be made as to the date when the

landowner received a copy of the Decision, after which it
must be ascertained whether an appeal has been made
within the 15-day period from said receipt. If no such appeal
has been filed, the tenant or his representative may file a
motion for the issuance of a writ of execution ordering the
enforcement of the decision pursuant to Section 1 Rule XII
of the New DARAB Rules. However, if the appeal has been
perfected the tenant cannot be reinstated pending
resolution of said appeal because status quo shall be
maintained, which means that the condition or situation
prevailing before the controversy shall be observed.

November 6, 1995
APPEAL; TAKEN TO OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

Can the President in the exercise of his control over the
acts of the DAR Secretary affirm, modify, reverse or
substitute his judgment to that of the latter?
 The acts of the Secretary of Agrarian Reform as alter ego of

the President are presumptively the acts of the Chief
Executive himself unless disapproved or reprobated by the
President (doctrine of qualified political agency). Such
being the case, the President (or by his authority) in the
exercise of his control over the acts of the DAR Secretary
can affirm, modify, reverse or even substitute his judgment
to that of the latter.

February 25, 1999
APPEARANCE IN COURT; AUTHORITY OF LEGAL OFFICERS TO
APPEAR BEFORE THE DARAB/MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT IN
RELATION TO AGRARIAN DISPUTES
 Rule 138, Section 34 of the Rules of Court which provides,

quote:
"SEC. 34. By whom litigation

conducted. — In the court of a justice of the
peace a party may conduct his litigation in
person, with the aid of an agent or friend
appointed by him for that purpose, or with the
aid of an attorney. In any other court, a party
may conduct his litigation personally or by aid of
an attorney, and his appearance must be either
personal or by a duly authorized member of the
bar."
 Likewise, the DARAB 2003 Rules of Procedures, Rule VIII,

Section 1 thereof provides, quote:
"Section 1. Appearance. — A lawyer

appearing for a party is presumed to be
properly authorized for that purpose. A non-
lawyer may appear before the Board or any
of its Adjudicators, if:
xxx
xxx xxx
1.4 He is a DAR employee duly
authorized by the appropriate Head of
Office in accordance with the internal
regulations of the Department of
Agrarian Reform. For this purpose, the
DAR employee must have the
prescribed authorization form before
he may be allowed to appear before
the board or any of its Adjudicators."
 Applying the foregoing, a DAR Legal Officer who is not a full-

fledged lawyer, can appear before the DARAB or any of its
Adjudicators, or in a Municipal Trial Court to represent
tenants and/or farmer-beneficiaries in relation to agrarian
disputes. Hence, what the law strictly prohibits is the
appearance of a person who is not a member of the
Philippine Bar and not qualified to practice law before any
other court, i.e., the Regional Trial Court, Court of Appeals
and Supreme Court.

January 31, 2007
ARF; COLLECTIONS AND INCOMES DERIVED FROM CARP
FUNDED PROJECT INCLUDED IN ARF
 Under the rules on Statutory Construction, the significance

of the general repealing clause under Section 32 of R.A. No.
9700 is that, its presence as a later statute clearly
indicates the legislative intent to repeal all prior
inconsistent laws on the subject matter, whether or not the
prior law is a special law, i.e. RA 3601. Moreover,
considering that Section 21 RA 9700 explicitly mandates all
income and collections of whatever form and nature arising
from agrarian reform operations, projects and programs of
the DAR and other CIAs, therefore, the NIA as a CIA is
mandated to effect and implement said provision of RA
9700. Henceforth, collections and income derived from
CARP funded irrigation project should be included in the
ARF.

January 31, 2007
ARF; COLLECTIONS AND INCOMES DERIVED FROM CARP
FUNDED PROJECT INCLUDED IN ARF
 Under the rules on Statutory Construction, the significance

of the general repealing clause under Section 32 of R.A. No.
9700 is that, its presence as a later statute clearly
indicates the legislative intent to repeal all prior
inconsistent laws on the subject matter, whether or not the
prior law is a special law, i.e. RA 3601. Moreover,
considering that Section 21 RA 9700 explicitly mandates all
income and collections of whatever form and nature arising
from agrarian reform operations, projects and programs of
the DAR and other CIAs, therefore, the NIA as a CIA is
mandated to effect and implement said provision of RA
9700. Henceforth, collections and income derived from
CARP funded irrigation project should be included in the
ARF.

January 14, 2010
AUTHORITY OF THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR; CEASE AND

DESIST ORDER MAY BE ISSUED BY THE RD IN A SITUATION
OF EXTREME URGENCY
 The Regional Director may issue a Cease and Desist Order

as provided for in Section 17 of DAR Administrative Order
No. 06, Series of 2000 [Rules and Procedures for Agrarian
Law Implementation (ALI) Cases]. This contemplates of a
situation of extreme urgency to resolve a particular
conflict. The AO does not entail that the matter be certified
first as a flashpoint one before a CDO or status quo order be
issued. It is only important that grave or irreparable
damage will spring if the order will not be issued. It is
worthy to note the word "motu propio" used in this
particular provision, this only means that the Regional
Director or the DAR Official with jurisdiction is authorized
to immediately issue a CDO or status quo order because the
resulting damage is apparent.

March 21, 2007
AUTOMATIC REDISTRIBUTION CLAUSE; WHEN APPLICABLE

When is the automatic redistribution clause applicable?
 The automatic redistribution clause in Sec. 11 would only be

logical if the area is still highly suitable for agriculture. If
otherwise, then the best use would already be non-
agricultural, and therefore conversion would be proper.

April 26, 1994
AUTOMATIC REVERSION CLAUSE; WHEN APPLICABLE

When is the automatic reversion clause applicable?
 A scrutiny of Sec. 5 of PL 3608 reveals that the automatic

reversion referred to can only take place when two
conditions are present: 1) the property covered by the grant
has been deeded, conveyed and transferred in accordance
with said law, which means that title over the property has
been issued; and 2) ten years have elapsed from the date
the property was transferred without its being developed,
cultivated, leased or otherwise disposed of.
 Since no title over the property has as yet been issued,

there is not reversion to speak of which will open the land
for resettlement and disposition in accordance with the
Public Land Act.

February 4, 1994
AWARD CEILING
How many hectares of land can an awardee get? Is there
an exception to the rule?
 In no case shall the award ceiling for beneficiaries be more

than three (3) hectares. Exception may be allowed only if
the excess is negligible and it would be technically and
administratively impractical to allocate the same to
another. In the case at hand, however, the excess of 2,064
square meters may no longer be negligible because such
area may still be practically allocated or awarded to the
alleged FB's son or daughter, if qualified following the
policy guideline provided for in Item II.1 of Ministry
Administrative Order No. 03, Series of 1985 (Policy
Guidelines to Govern the Disposition of Farmlots Containing
Areas in Excess of That Prescribed for Economic Family-
Size Farms) which may find relative application in the
instant case:
"II. Disposition of Excess Area

The excess area shall be reallocated in
accordance with the following order of
preference:
1. Immediate member of the FB's
family capable of personally cultivating
the land.
November 14, 2003
AWARD CEILING; CLOA AS EVIDENCE OF OWNERSHIP

What is the award ceiling of a beneficiary and what is the
evidence of ownership thereof?
 The agricultural land covered by CARP shall be distributed

directly to the qualified beneficiaries. Pursuant to Sections
22 and 23 of R.A. No. 6657, a qualified beneficiary is
entitled to receive an area not to exceed three (3) hectares.
Ownership of the land by the beneficiary shall be evidenced
by a Certificate of Land Ownership Award (CLOA) which
shall thereafter be registered with the Register of Deeds.
The beneficiary shall then be allowed to take possession of
the land and use it for production.

December 24, 1998
AWARD CEILING; NOT MORE THAN THREE (3) HECTARES OF

AGRICULTURAL LAND
May a farmer-beneficiary be awarded an area in excess of
the 3-hectare award ceiling?
 Section 23 of CARL laid down the rule that no qualified

beneficiary may own more than three (3) hectares of
agricultural land. A farmer-beneficiary may, however, be
awarded an area in excess of the 3-hectare award ceiling
only if the excess is negligible (such as .0975 and .0099
hectare) and it would be technically and administratively
impractical to allocate the same to another.

June 26, 1995
Would the 3-hectare award ceiling for beneficiaries under

Section 25 of R.A. No. 6657 be strictly and fully complied
with?
 The 3-hectare award ceiling for beneficiaries under Section

25 of R.A. No. 6657 is only a maximum limit set by law and
need not necessarily be strictly and be fully complied with.

April 14, 1997
What is the award ceiling under P.D. 27 and under R.A.
6657?
 If the property is covered pursuant to P.D. 27 (i.e., property

is a tenanted private agricultural land and primarily devoted
to rice/corn), the award ceiling of 3/5 hectares shall be
observed. If the property is subject of redistribution under
CARL, then the award ceiling of 3 hectares shall govern.

January 11, 1994
AWARD CEILING; NOT MORE THAN THREE (3) HECTARES OF

AGRICULTURAL LAND; EXCEPTION
 In no case shall the award ceiling for beneficiaries be more

than three (3) hectares. Exception may be allowed only if
the excess is negligible and it would be technically and
administratively impractical to allocate the same to
another. In the case at hand, however, the excess of 2,064
square meters may no longer be negligible because such
area may still be practically allocated or awarded to the
alleged FB's son or daughter, if qualified following the
policy guideline provided for in Item II.1 of Ministry
Administrative Order No. 03, Series of 1985 (Policy
Guidelines to Govern the Disposition of Farmlots Containing
Areas in Excess of That Prescribed for Economic Family-
Size Farms) which may find relative application in the
instant case:
"II. Disposition of Excess Area

The excess area shall be reallocated in
accordance with the following order of
preference:
1. Immediate member
of the FB's family capable of
personally cultivating the land.
November 14, 2003
AWARD CEILING; TOLERABLE LIMIT; APPLICABLE TO BOTH
P.D. NO. 27 AND R.A.NO. 6657
 We opine that the "tolerable limit" provided for under DAR

A.O. No. 3, Series of 1985 of lands covered by P.D. No. 27
would also apply to lands awarded to FBs under R.A. No.
6657. While there is no specific provision in R.A. No. 6657
or its implementing rules and regulations regarding the
tolerable limit, it could be inferred from the said A.O. that
its applicability should likewise extend to lands awarded
under R.A No. 6657. This is in line with the objective of
CARP to promote the establishment of owner-cultivatorship
of economic-size farms which is the very essence of MAR
A.O. No. 3, Series of 1985.

January 20, 2006
AWARD CEILING; UNDER P.D. NO. 27 AND R.A. NO. 6657
 Although Section 23 of CARL laid down the rule that no

qualified beneficiary may own more than the three (3)
hectares of agricultural land, a farmer beneficiary may,
however, be awarded an area in excess of the 3-hectare
award ceiling only if the excess is negligible and it would
be technically and administratively impractical to allocate
the same to another farmer-beneficiary.
 As regards the request of COA for a DAR explanation

regarding the award to FB in excess of 3 hectares and 5
hectares for R.A. No. 6657 and PD 27 respectively, the DAR
submits that the award ceiling provided under R.A. No. 6657
and PD 27 for every farmer-beneficiary shall still be strictly
maintained except only for the "tolerable limit" or
"negligible" instance as stated above.

January 20, 2006
AWARD CEILING; UNDER R.A. NO. 6657

What is the award ceiling of a beneficiary?
 Section 25 of Republic Act No. 6657 provides that

beneficiaries shall be awarded an area not exceeding three
(3) hectares, which may cover a contiguous tract of land or
several parcels of land cumulated up to the prescribed
award limits.

July 23, 1999
AWARD TO CHILDREN
 A child who already owns three (3) hectares of agricultural

lands may still be entitled to an award from his parent/s
landholdings but only up to two (2) more hectares. Section
2.3 of Administrative Order No. 6, Series of 2006 is very
clear when it provides that a qualified child who owns less
than five (5) hectares of agricultural lands is still entitled to
an award of his/her parent’s landholdings provided his/her
total area, including the area to be awarded, shall not
exceed the five (5) hectares ownership ceiling.

March 24, 2009
AWARD TO LANDLESS WAR VETERANS

 Administrative Order No. 3, Series of 1997 provides that
beneficiaries under these guidelines shall receive the
necessary support services from the DAR and other CARP
implementing agencies.

March 24, 2009
AWARD; 10-YEAR PROHIBITION AND CONDITIONS

What are the conditions required before an awarded land
can be transferred?
 The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL), Section

27 thereof, explicitly prohibits the transfer of an awarded
land or a portion thereof within ten (10) years from award
except through hereditary succession or to the government
or to the Land Bank of the Philippines or to other qualified
beneficiaries. The provisions of Executive Order No. 228,
dated 17 July 1987 and DAR Administrative Order No. 08,
series of 1995, when taken together, provide that
ownership of lands acquired by a farmer-beneficiary may be
transferred after full payment of the amortizations, provided
the following shall be observed:
a) that the productivity of the land shall be

maintained;
b) that the buyer will not exceed the aggregate
landownership ceiling provided by law; and
c) that the ownership ceiling of five (5) hectares
shall be imposed.

September 29, 2000
AWARD; PREFERRED AWARDEE UNDER R.A. NO. 6657;

INTERPRETATION
Is the award to children of the landowner part of retention
on a preferred award?
 The official DAR interpretation on the award to children

pursuant to CARL is found in DAR Memorandum Circular No.
4, series of 1994. The award to the children of the
landowner although provided in Section 6 of CARL on
Retention Limits, is not part of retention but a preferred
award in favor of said children.
 For the child to qualify as a preferred awardee, he must

possess both qualifications that is he must have been 15
years old and actively tilling the land or directly managing
the farm as of the effectivity of CARL on 15 June 1988.

July 21, 1995
AWARD; PREFERRED AWARDEE; QUALIFICATION THEREOF

What are the qualifications of a preferred awardee?
 DAR Memorandum Circular No. 04, Series of 1994

(Clarificatory Guidelines Concerning the Award to Children
under Sections 6 and 22 of R.A. No. 6657) provides that to
qualify as preferred awardees of the lands of their parents,
the children must at least be 15 years of age and actually
tilling the land or directly managing the farm as of June 15,
1988. The same Circular explains that directly managing
the farms refers to the cultivation of the land through
personal supervision under the system of labor
administration. Clearly, for children to be preferred
awardees, CARL requires either personal cultivation or
direct management of the farm.

September 26, 1995
AWARD; PREFERRED AWARDEE; QUALIFICATIONS
What are the qualifications of a preferred awardee?
 To qualify for said award, the child must meet the following
qualifications:
1. That he was at least fifteen years of age as of the

effectivity of CARL on June 15, 1988; and
2. That he was actually tilling the land on directly
managing the farm as of June 15, 1988.

May 27, 1996

May 28, 1996
AWARD; PROHIBITION FOR ITS TRANSFER; EXCEPTION

May lands awarded to agrarian beneficiaries be sold,
transferred or conveyed?
 Section 27 of CARL which prohibits the sale, transfer or

conveyance of lands awarded to agrarian beneficiaries
within ten years makes an exception as regards transfer to
government institutions, such as the PNB. The PNB stands
in the same position as the Land Bank of the Philippines,
with respect to the duty that once the mortgaged lot is
foreclosed, the same should be transferred to a qualified
beneficiary within the ten year prohibitory period.
Therefore, there is no legal impediment in the event the
PNB forecloses on the awarded lot, provided the mortgage
deed contains a provision that in the event of foreclosure,
the lot shall be transferred to a qualified agrarian reform
beneficiary.

October 16, 1995
AWARD; TEN-YEAR RESTRICTION PERIOD
Can an awarded land illegally sold to private persons be
the subject of mortgage to a private bank for loan
purposes?
 Section 27 of R.A. No. 6657 provides, quote:
"SECTION 27. Transferability of

Awarded Lands. — Lands acquired by
beneficiaries under this Act may not be sold,
transferred or conveyed except through
hereditary succession, or to the government,
or to the LBP, or to other qualified
beneficiaries for a period of ten (10) years.
xxx
xxx xxx."
 Clearly, the subject property was transferred in favor of

parties other than those explicitly enumerated under
Section 27 of R.A. No. 6657. Since the subject property was
transferred to private persons, presumably not qualified
beneficiaries, the sale between the CLOA beneficiaries and
said private persons is therefore covered by the ten-year
restriction period. Concomitantly, it must likewise be noted
that the sale, aside from the fact that it is a clear violation
of Section 27 of R.A. No. 6657 in relation with DAR
Administrative Order No. 8, Series of 1995, is also violative
of the provisions of Section 73 (a) of the same law as
regards the legally allowable maximum landownership
ceiling of five (5) hectares only. The total area of subject
landholdings being 46.0317 hectares, all in all, is way
beyond the 5-hectare landownership ceiling. Thus, we find
such transfer as void ab initio.
 The transfer being invalid and void, the land could not,
therefore, now be the subject of mortgage much less could
this Department certify that the same may be mortgaged to
a private bank for loan purposes.

December 14, 1999
AWARD; TRANSFERABILITY OF AWARDED LANDS

When may transfer of awarded land be allowed?
 Section 24, R.A. No. 6657
"SECTION 24. Award to Beneficiaries. —

The rights and responsibilities of the beneficiary
shall commence from the time the DAR makes an
award of the land to him . . . . Ownership of the
beneficiary shall be evidenced by a Certificate of Land
Ownership Award, which shall contain the restrictions
and conditions provided for in this Act, and shall be
recorded in the Register of Deeds concerned and
annotated on the Certificate of Title." (emphasis
supplied)
"SECTION 27. Transferability of Awarded

Lands. — Lands acquired by beneficiaries under this
Act may not be sold, transferred or
conveyed except through hereditary succession, or to
the government, or to the LBP, or to other qualified
beneficiaries for a period of ten (10) years." (emphasis
supplied)
 Given the aforequoted provisions of law, it could be inferred

that if the agrarian reform beneficiaries (ARBs) who were
first issued a collective CLOA are the same persons later
issued with individual CLOAs, then the reckoning date of
the 10-year prohibitory period should be the issuance of the
collective CLOA which is the time when the rights and
responsibilities of the ARBs commenced.

January 13, 2004
AWARD; TRANSFERABILITY OF AWARDED LANDS
Can CLOAs issued to FBs be the subject of VOS back to
the government?
 Section 27 of R.A. No. 6657 allows the transfer of awarded

lands to the government even within the 10-year prohibitory
period. It follows that said lands may likewise be
transferred to the government after the 10-year prohibitory
period for eventual distribution to other qualified
beneficiaries. However, strictly speaking, such transfer
should not be termed as VOS as contemplated under
Section 19 of R.A. No. 6657 and related laws and guidelines
on VOS.
 Section II.A.5 of DAR Administrative Order No. 01, series of

1989, pursuant to Section 27 of R.A. No. 6657, further
provides:
"The following transactions are valid:

xxx
xxx xxx
5. Those executed after ten (10) years from
the issuance and registration of the Emancipation Patent
or Certificate of Land Ownership Award."
 It should be noted, however, that an awardee who shall

dispose of his/her landholding shall no longer be qualified to
become a beneficiary under CARP (Item II.9, DAR
Administrative Order No. 8, series of 1995).
September 27, 2000
AWARD; TRANSFERABILITY OF AWARDED LANDS COVERED BY

EMANCIPATION PATENTS
Are lands covered by EPs transferable?
 Transferability of lands covered by Emancipation Patents,

DAR Administrative Order No. 8, series of 1995 expressly
provides that title to lands acquired pursuant to
Presidential Decree No. 27 or the Land Reform Program of
the Government shall not be transferable except by
hereditary succession or to the government. However,
Section 6 of Executive Order No. 228 provides that
ownership of lands acquired by farmer-beneficiaries under
P.D. No. 27 may be transferred after full-payment of
amortization. Corollarily, the transfer of awarded lands
under P.D. No. 27, as amended by E.O. No. 228 and R.A. No.
6657 may be allowed, provided the following shall be
observed:

maintained;
landowner ceiling provided by law; and
shall be imposed.

July 24, 2000
May land awarded to agrarian reform beneficiaries under

PD 27 be sold or disposed?
 As a general rule, lands awarded to agrarian reform

beneficiaries (ARBs) under P.D. No. 27 may not be sold or
disposed of except when the transfer is through hereditary
succession or to the government. The reason is obviously
to encourage the ARBs to cultivate the land and make it as
productive as possible pursuant to the mandate of the
Constitution and agrarian laws to redistribute lands to the
landless. However, ownership of lands awarded under
Presidential Decree No. 27, as amended by Executive Order
No. 228, may be transferred after full payment of
amortization by the beneficiary (Section 6, E.O. No. 228)
provided that the following shall be observed:
1. that the productivity of the land shall be

maintained;
2. that the buyer will not exceed the aggregate
landowner ceiling provided by law;
3. that the ownership ceiling of five (5) hectares
shall be imposed; and
4. the awardee was identified as tenant as of 21
October 1972 (Item II. 4, DAR Administrative Order
No. 8, Series of 1995, considering that the sale was
made only within three (3) years from award).

December 14, 1999
What are the conditions required before transfer of

awarded lands are validly effected?
 Presidential Decree No. 27 prohibits the transfer of lands

acquired through the Operation Land Transfer Program
except thru hereditary succession or to the government,
Section 6 of Executive Order No. 228 which amended P.D.
No. 27 provides in part that: "ownership of lands acquired
by farmer-beneficiaries may be transferred after full
payment of amortizations". Pursuant to said amendment,
DAR issued Administrative Order No. 8, Series of 1995 of
which Item II.3 thereof provides for the following:
"II.3 Transfer of awarded lands under P.D. No. 27
as amended by E. O. No. 228 and R.A. No. 6657 may
be allowed provided the following shall be
observed:
maintained;
b) that the buyer will not exceed the
aggregate landowner ceiling provided by law;
and
c) that the ownership ceiling of five (5)
hectares shall be imposed."
 From the foregoing, it is clear that lands acquired by virtue

of P.D. No. 27, evidenced by an Emancipation Patent, may
be transferred provided that beneficiaries thereof have fully
paid the amortizations and have complied with the
conditions set forth in DAR A.O. No. 8, Series of 1995.

March 22, 1999
When may transfer of awarded land be allowed?
 DAR Administrative Order No. 8, series of 1995 expressly

provides that the title to the lands acquired pursuant to
Presidential Decree No. 27 or the Land Reform Program of
the Government shall not be transferable except by
hereditary succession or to the government. However,
Section 6 of Executive Order No. 228 provides that
P.D. No. 27 may be transferred after full-payment of
amortization. Corollarily, the transfer of awarded lands
under P.D. No. 27 as amended by E.O. No. 228 and R.A. No.
6657 may be allowed, provided that following shall be
observed:
d) that the productivity of the land shall be
maintained;
e) that the buyer will not exceed the aggregate
f) that the ownership ceiling of five (5) hectares
shall be imposed.

February 13, 1998
AWARD; TRANSFERRABILITY OF AWARDED LANDS; ITS

IMPLICATION
 The ruling in the case entitled Estate of Panlilio versus

Dizon (G.R. 148777) with regard to transferability of
awarded lands is based on the Department’s
implementation of pertinent laws and guidelines which are
P.D. No. 27, R.A. No. 6657, E.O. No. 228 and DAR A.O. No.
08, S. 1995. The implication would be the same as we
opined in DAR Opinion N0. 03, Series of 2006, quote:
". . . , any change in the nature of awarded lands’

use shall not be allowed except with the
approval of the DAR under its rules on
conversion or exemption. Further, Item II.1 of
DAR Administrative Order No. 08, Series of 1995
clearly provides that lands awarded to agrarian
reform beneficiaries (ARBs) pursuant to either
P.D. No. 27 or R.A. No. 6657 may be transferred
and registered by the Register of Deeds only
after the issuance of a DAR Clearance. The
issuance of a DAR Clearance is therefore an
essential requisite before a valid transfer could
be effected, otherwise, the sale or transfer is
void."
February 2, 2009
AWARDED LAND; TEN-YEAR PROHIBITORY PERIOD
 It is only from the date of registration of EPs and CLOAs by

the ROD by which the 10 year prohibitory period should
commence to run since it is only then that the ownership of
the awarded land has been legally and actually transferred
in the name of the farmer-beneficiary.

January 27, 2010
AWARDED LANDS; CAN BE THE SUBJECT OF MORTGAGE OR

ENCUMBRANCE
 Awarded lands may be mortgaged even within the 10-year

prohibitory period on certain conditions since ownership is
not parted with. DAR A.O. No. 1, Series of 1989 (Rules and
Procedures Governing Land Transaction) allows land
already awarded/allocated to beneficiaries to be a subject
of mortgage or encumbrance to guarantee any loan
obligation secured to develop or improve the same.
Henceforth, if the EP is made as a security for loan and
consequently foreclosed by the mortgagee, the aforesaid
conditions must first be complied with before ownership
over the awarded land is parted with.

November 14, 2008
AWARDED LANDS; CONDITIONS FOR TRANSFER

May Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries transfer the land
awarded to them?
 The following are the pertinent provisions of DAR
Administrative Order No. 8, Series of 1995 (Rules and
Procedures Governing the Transferability of Lands Awarded
to Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries (ARBs) Pursuant to
No. 228 and Republic Act No. 6657), to wit:
1. Item I, 1st paragraph

"I. PREFATORY STATEMENT
Presidential Decree No. 27 provides that title to
lands acquired pursuant thereto or the Land
Reform Program of the Government shall not be
transferable except by hereditary succession or
to the Government. However, Section 6 of
Executive Order No. 228 provides that
ownership of lands acquired by farmer-
beneficiaries may be transferred after full
payment of amortizations." (emphasis supplied)
2. Item II (Nos. 1, 2 and 7)
"II. POLICY STATEMENT
1. Lands awarded to ARBs
pursuant to either P.D. No. 27 or
R.A. No. 6657 may be transferred
and registered by the Register of
Deeds only after the issuance of a
DAR Clearance. (emphasis
supplied)
2. It shall be understood that
although the transfer or awarded
land is allowed, the productivity
of the subject land be maintained
and any change in the nature of
its use shall not be allowed
except with the approval of the
DAR under its rules on conversion
or exemption.
3. Transfer of awarded lands
under P.D. No. 27, as amended by
E.O. No. 228 and R.A. No. 6657
may be allowed, provided the
following shall be observed:
a) that the productivity of the
land shall be maintained;
b) that the buyer will not
exceed the aggregate landowner
ceiling provided by law; and
c) that the ownership ceiling of
five (5) hectares shall be imposed.
xxx xxx xxx
7. Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT)
shall be issued by the Land Registration
Authority (LRA) for lands transferred by an
awardee to a transferee. (P.D. No. 27, as
amended by E.O. No. 228)" (emphasis supplied)
Given the above provisions of the aforementioned guideline, it is
clear that since the land is not yet fully paid, it could not as yet
be transferred.
March 16, 2004
AWARDED LANDS; CONDITIONS FOR TRANSFER
When may transfer of awarded lands be allowed?
 Transfer of awarded lands under Presidential Decree No. 27,

as amended by Executive Order No. 228 and Republic Act
No. 6657 may be allowed provided the following shall be
observed:

maintained;
shall be imposed.
 This means that the total landholdings that shall be owned

by the buyer or transferee, inclusive of the land to be
acquired, shall not exceed five (5) hectares, which is the
land ownership ceiling.

July 31, 2001
AWARDED LANDS; PROHIBITION ON SALE AND TRANSFER
May ARBs sell the land awarded to them?
 ARBs, within the 10-year prohibitory period as provided in

Section 27 of R.A. No. 6657 (or even beyond said period if
the awarded lands are not yet fully paid), are under
obligation to cultivate the landholdings awarded to them
and not to lease or have them tenanted by other people
who are not members of their immediate household.

July 09, 2003

UNDER R.A. NO. 6657
 ARBs, within the 10-year prohibitory period as provided in

Section 27 of R.A. No. 6657 (or even beyond said period if
the awarded lands are not yet fully paid), are under
obligation to cultivate the landholdings awarded to them
and not to lease or have them tenanted by other people
who are not members of their immediate household.

July 9, 2003
UNDER R.A. NO. 6657
Can awarded lands be the subject of sale or transfer?
 Section 27 of R.A. No. 6657 prohibits the sale, transfer or

conveyance of lands covered by R.A. No. 6657 for a period
of ten (10) years, except through hereditary succession, or
to the government, or to the LBP, or to other qualified
beneficiaries.

January 13, 2000
AWARDED LANDS; RULES ON THE TRANSFERABILITY OF

LANDS AWARDED TO ARB's

Administrative Order No. 8, Series of 1995 ( Rules and
No. 228 and Republic Act No. 6657), to wit:
1. Item I, 1st paragraph

Presidential Decree No. 27 provides that
title to lands acquired pursuant thereto or the
Land Reform Program of the Government shall not
be transferable except by hereditary succession
or to the Government. However, Section 6 of
Executive Order No. 228 provides that ownership
of lands acquired by farmer-beneficiaries may be
transferred after full payment of amortizations."
(emphasis supplied)
2. Item II (Nos. 1, 2 and 7)

"II. POLICY STATEMENT
1. Lands awarded to ARBs
pursuant to either P.D. No. 27 or
R.A. No. 6657 may be transferred
and registered by the Register of
Deeds only after the issuance of a
DAR Clearance. (emphasis
supplied)
2. It shall be understood
that although the transfer or
awarded land is allowed, the
productivity of the subject land be
maintained and any change in the
nature of its use shall not be
allowed except with the approval of
the DAR under its rules on
conversion or exemption.
3. Transfer of awarded
lands under P.D. No. 27, as amended
by E.O. No. 228 and R.A. No. 6657
may be allowed, provided the
a) that the
productivity of the land shall
be maintained;
b) that the buyer will
not exceed the aggregate
landowner ceiling provided by
law; and
c) that the ownership
ceiling of five (5) hectares
shall be imposed.
xxx xxx xxx
7. Transfer Certificate of
Title (TCT) shall be issued by the
Land Registration Authority (LRA)
for lands transferred by an awardee
to a transferee. (P.D. No. 27, as
amended by E.O. No. 228)"
(emphasis supplied)
 Given the above provisions of the aforementioned guideline,
it is clear that since the land is not yet fully paid, it could
not as yet be transferred.

March 16, 2004
AWARDED LANDS; RULES ON THE TRANSFERABILITY OF
LANDS AWARDED TO ARB's
 Transfer of awarded lands under Presidential Decree No. 27,

No. 6657 may be allowed provided the following shall be
observed:
a) that the productivity of the land shall be maintained;

c) that the ownership ceiling of five (5) hectares shall
be imposed.
 This means that the total landholdings that shall be owned

by the buyer or transferee, inclusive of the land to be
acquired, shall not exceed five (5) hectares, which is the
land ownership ceiling.

July 31, 2001
AWARDED LANDS; TRANSFERABILITY OF AWARDED LAND
 Transfers/dispositions of awarded lands under the given

situation may be allowed as long as it falls under one of the
exceptions to the non-transferability of awarded lands
under Section 27 of R.A. No. 6657 and provided further that
the transfer to other beneficiary is subject to the condition
that the latter shall himself cultivate the land himself. Thus,
the contemplated transfer may legally be undertaken.
DAR Opinion No. 30, s. 2005
December 8, 2005
AWARDED LANDS; TRANSFERABILITY OF LANDS WITHIN

LANDED ESTATES AND RESSETLEMENT PROJECTS COVERED
WITH CLOA
 A mere certification stating that the 10-year prohibitory

period of disposition has already elapsed will not suffice as
a requirement in the transfer/sale and registration of
awarded lands. DAR Administrative Order No. 8, Series of
1995 is very specific in providing for the procedures and
requirements in the transfer and registration of awarded
lands, thus, said certification could not serve as a
substitute in lieu of the DAR Clearance/Order to be issued
by the Regional Director (RD) as contemplated under the
provisions of DAR Administrative Order No. 8, Series of
1995.
 It should be stressed further that in order that awarded
lands may be transferred and registered, the 10-year
prohibitory period should have already elapsed and said
awarded lands have been fully paid. Both conditions must
concur.
 Moreover, while the law allows the transfer of awarded
lands on conditions stated above, said transfer is still
subject to compliance with the provisions of DAR A.O. No.
8, Series of 1995, which provide:
a) that the productivity of the land shall be maintained;

c) that the ownership ceiling of five (5) hectares shall
be imposed.
December 21, 2005
AWARDED LANDS; TRANSFERABILITY OF LANDS WITHIN
RESETTLEMENT AREAS COVERED WITH CLOAs
 It is evident that awardees/allocatees of lands in the

resettlement areas under the administration of the DAR are
issued CLOAs which contain all the conditions and
restrictions provided therein. Henceforth, in the disposition
of said lands by the allocatees, the procedures and
requirements provided under DAR A.O. No. 8, Series of
1995. [Rules and Procedures Governing the Transferability
of Lands Awarded to Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries (ARBs)
Pursuant to Presidential Decree No. 27 as amended by
Executive Order No. 228 and Republic Act No. 6657], shall
be observed.

May 2, 2007
AWARDED LANDS; WHEN MAY MORTGAGE OF AWARDED

LANDS BE ALLOWED
 Mortgage of awarded lands even within the 10-year

prohibitory period may be allowed on certain conditions
even without a DAR clearance since ownership is not
parted with.
 Items II.C.4 and V.3 of DAR Administrative Order No. 1,

Series of 1989 (Rules and Procedures Governing Land
Transaction) further provide:
"II. Rules on Validity of Land Transactions

xxx xxx
xxx
C. The following are not
prohibited transactions and may be
registered by the Register of Deeds
without prior clearance from DAR:
xxx xxx
xxx
4. Deed of real estate
mortgage executed by the
original landowner or
beneficiary."
V. Lands Subject to Mortgage or
Encumbrance
The following lands may be subject matter
of mortgage, lien or encumbrance to
guarantee any loan obligation secured to
develop or improve the same:
xxx xxx
xxx
3. Land already
awarded/allocated to
beneficiaries."
December 21, 2005
B
BENEFICIARIES
May field supervisors qualify as beneficiaries of
commercial farms?
 Farmworkers who had been previously identified as

qualified beneficiaries but were promoted to managerial or
supervisory positions prior to land transfer may still qualify
as awardees if they give up their managerial or supervisory
positions. On the other hand, farmworkers who had been
previously identified as qualified beneficiaries but were
promoted to managerial or supervisory positions after land
transfer may still qualify as awardees even without giving
up their positions.
November 6, 2001
BENEFICIARIES; QUALIFICATIONS
 It is a basic principle under CARP Law specifically under

Section 22 of R.A. No. 6657, as amended, that any person
who has a willingness, aptitude and ability to cultivate the
land and make them as productive as possible is qualified
as CARP beneficiary. Only qualified agrarian reform
beneficiaries as determined by DAR pursuant to said
provision are eligible to be distributees of agricultural land.

April 6, 2010
BENEFICIARIES; AWARDED LAND, CANCELLATION/FORFEITURE

Is subsequent employment with the DAR a ground for
forfeiture of one's right as a beneficiary?
 Subsequent employment with the DAR after the issuance of

the Collective CLOA is not per se a ground for the forfeiture
of one's right as a beneficiary. However, a beneficiary's
interest or right over the property awarded may be
cancelled or forfeited on grounds provided for by law and
other pertinent rules and regulations such as neglect or
abandonment of the awarded land continuously for a period
of two (2) calendar years as determined by the Secretary or
his authorized representative (Item IV-B, DAR
Administrative Order No. 2, Series of 1994).

June 8, 1998
BENEFICIARIES; BASIC QUALIFICATION

What is the basic qualification of a beneficiary?
 It must be remembered that one of the basic qualifications
to be considered for a potential beneficiary is the
willingness to cultivate a land. Refusal to be identified
and/or registered as a potential beneficiary and failure to
question inclusion of seasonal and other farmworkers is
contrary to the "willingness" qualification. Also, it is correct
to state that the above-mentioned acts or omissions are
considered waiver of the right to be recognized as a
beneficiary. However, in cases were the regular
farmworkers are under duress, which resulted in their
refusal to be recognized as a beneficiary or failure to
question of seasonal and other farmworkers, these are
matters, which are evidentiary in nature and may be
threshed out administratively. Furthermore, the
implementors must take all necessary action to ensure that
proper notice are sent to the regular farmworkers. After
such notice, proof of receipt and the date on which they
were received must be kept as part of the file. In order to
avoid further complications, perhaps the notices should
state clearly the consequence of inaction on the part of a
potential farmer-beneficiary.

October 1, 2001
BENEFICIARIES; BASIC QUALIFICATIONS; MEANING

What are the basic qualifications of a CARP Beneficiary?
 R.A. No. 6657 (the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law or

CARL) requires that a beneficiary be landless (owns less
than 3 hectares of agricultural land) and possesses the
basic qualification of willingness, aptitude and ability to
make the land as productive as possible.
 A person need not be a tenant to qualify as a CARP

beneficiary, however, he must be a farmworker.
June 21, 1996

August 23, 1994
What is meant by qualified beneficiary?
 By qualified beneficiary is meant one who is landless (owns

less than 3 hectares of agricultural lands) and has the
willingness, aptitude and ability to cultivate and make the
land as productive as possible, as determined by the DAR.

October 10, 1994
BENEFICIARIES; BLOOD RELATION IS NOT THE SOLE

CRITERION TO SUCCEED AS TRANSFEREE-ALLOCATTEE IN
CASE OF DEATH OF FARMER BENEFICIARY
 Blood relation may not be considered as the sole criteria to

become a transferee-reallocattee in case of death of a
farmer-beneficiary. As primary compulsory heirs of the
farmer-beneficiary, the children/descendants have
precedence over and shall exclude other compulsory heirs.
However, in their default, the widow or widower, who is not
a blood relative of a deceased farmer-beneficiary, is under
the law qualified to assume as sole owner cultivator.

November 12, 2007
BENEFICIARIES; CERTIFICATE OF POSTING COMPLIANCE;

REQUIRED FOR SELECTION OF QUALIFIED BENEFICIARIES
 In view of this and considering that the basis from which

LAD-ID, SCRN & DSTRN Form No. 03 was adopted has been
deemed amended, revised and rendered irrelevant in the
light of the provisions of DLR AO 2, S. of 2005, a
Certification of Posting Compliance by the MARO may
suffice as an alternative requirement in cases the BARC
Chairman, Brgy./Municipal, Authorized Official of the
Community refuse to issue the same Certification in the
posting of the list of actual/prospective beneficiaries. This
presupposes that the MARO has in his/her possession proof
that the BARC received the copy of the document to be
posted and the date it was received.

August 15, 2005
BENEFICIARIES; CHILDREN OF P.D. 27 BENEFICIARIES ALLOWED

TO BECOME CARP FBs
Are the children of beneficiaries under PD 27 qualified to
be CARP beneficiaries in the untenanted portion of the
landholding owned by the same landowner?
 Section 22 of RA 6657 provides that lands covered by CARP

shall be distributed as much as possible to landless
residents of the same barangay, or in the absence thereof,
landless residents of the same municipality. The same
section further provides that a basic qualification of a
beneficiary shall be his willingness, aptitude and ability to
cultivate and make the land as productive as possible. For
as long as said qualifications are met, the fact that a
person is a child of a PD 27 beneficiary shall not disqualify
him from being a CARP beneficiary.

August 23, 1994
BENEFICIARIES; CONSEQUENCES IF THEY WERE PROMOTED

TO MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY POSITIONS
 Farmworkers who had been previously identified as
qualified beneficiaries but were promoted to managerial or
supervisory positions prior to land transfer may still
qualify as awardees if they give up their managerial or
supervisory positions. On the other hand, farmworkers who
had been previously identified as qualified beneficiaries but
were promoted to managerial or supervisory
positions after land transfer may still qualify as awardees
even without giving up their positions.

November 6, 2001
BENEFICIARIES; EFFECT OF CHOICE TO BE A BENEFICIARY IN

ANOTHER AGRICULTURAL LAND
May a tenant who chooses to be a beneficiary in another
agricultural land lose his right as leaseholder to the land
retained by the landowner?
 In case a tenant chooses to be a beneficiary in another

agricultural land, he loses his right as leaseholder to the
land retained by the landowner. The tenant must exercise
this option within a period of one (1) year from the time the
landowner manifests his choice of the area for retention.

December 13, 1996
BENEFICIARIES; GROUND FOR DISQUALIFICATION
 The acceptance by the farmworker of a separation pay may

be considered ground for disqualification as ARBs of the
CARP if payment is due to retrenchment of worker and the
same was not appealed or questioned before the proper
government entity as provided for under Section 5 (11) of
DAR Administrative Order No. 07, Series of 2003 {CY 2003
Guidelines on the Identification, Screening and Selection of,
and Distribution to Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries (ARBs) of
Private Agricultural Lands Under Republic Act 6657}. In
view thereof and considering that they are presently
challenging the appropriateness and legality of the alleged
separation pay given to the workers, it cannot be
considered as a ground for disqualification to become
farmer-beneficiaries of subject landholding.
 The farmer-beneficiaries have the legal personality as CLOA

holders because they have the rights and protection
provided under CARP as CLOA holders, and until the CLOAs
issued to them are cancelled, they continue to be entitled
to such protection provided under R.A. No. 6657. In
addition, it is the position of the DAR that all affected
FBs/farmworkers should also be given protection pursuant
to existing guidelines and other pertinent laws on the
implementation of CARP.

January 14, 2008
BENEFICIARIES; IDENTIFICATION, SCREENING, AND

SELECTION; HUSBAND AND WIFE MAY BECOME ARB
INDEPENDENT TO THEIR SPOUSE
 Husband and wife may become Agrarian Reform

Beneficiaries jointly or in their own right, independent to
their spouse’ right during and even prior to their marriage.
For as long as his/her right as a farmer-beneficiary have
vested and been established separately from his/her
spouse, he/she may be entitled to receive land under the

November 8, 2007
BENEFICIARIES; INSTALLATION MAY PROCEED DESPITE
PENDENCY OF A PETITION FOR EXCLUSION
 The implementation and distribution of the land to Agrarian

Reform Beneficiaries (ARBs) including their installation is
not affected by the fact that there are pending issues over
the subject lands. It is the primary objective of the Office of
the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) to prevent
unreasonable delay and derail in the implementation of
CARP over the landholdings in issue. This is in line with the
legal mandate of the DAR to distribute lands to the tillers at
the earliest practicable time. Thus, the installation of the
FBs named in the CLOAs (Medellin and Villalon properties)
may immediately proceed so as not to further delay the
implementation of CARP.
 The installation of the CLOA holders may proceed despite

the pendency of the petition for exclusion from CARP
coverage, and petition for inclusion/exclusion of FBs there
being no legal impediment or temporary restraining order
(TRO) issued by a court to restrict/prevent the ARB’s
installation. This is in consonance with the mandate of R.A.
No. 6657 to acquire and distribute lands to as many tenants
and farmworkers as possible.
 Once a CLOA is issued and registered in the name of a

beneficiary, it serves as an evidence of title to the land,
entitling him/her to occupy the land and maintain
possession of the same. Thus, the pendency of the
inclusion/exclusion proceeding is of no moment and a
justification to defer installation.

September 25, 2007
BENEFICIARIES; INSTALLATION OF FARMER BENEFICIARIES

Can the MARO proceed with the physical installation of the
FBs immediately after the harvest of the main crop?
 Physical installation of the FBs may take place immediately

after the harvest of the main crop. However, the landowner
shall retain his share of any standing crops unharvested at
the time the DAR shall take possession of the land pursuant
to Section 16 of R.A. 6657, and shall be given reasonable
time to harvest the same (Section 28, R.A. No. 6657).
 It is believed that the first, second and third ratoons are still
considered standing crops. However, the MARO may
proceed with the physical installation of the FBs since the
CLOAs had already been registered. Pursuant to Section 16
(e) of R.A. No. 6657, the initial issuance of TCT could
already pave the way for the redistribution of the land to
qualified ARBs. It follows therefore and with more reason
that the FBs could already be installed where the CLOAs
had already been registered. In fairness to the landowner,
however, he should be given reasonable time to harvest the
unharvested standing crops. Under these circumstances, it
is submitted that mutual arrangement should be arrived at
where notwithstanding the installation of the FBs, the
landowner could still harvest his standing crops. This is
imperative to all concerned in order to effect an orderly and
peaceful implementation of the Program without, however,
unduly delaying the same.

October 27, 1999
BENEFICIARIES; LANDLESS WAR VETERANS AND VETERANS OF

THE MILITARY CAMPAIGN
Can war veterans and veterans of the military campaigns
be considered in the disposition of agricultural lands of the
public domain?
 The provisions of Section 7 of Article XVI of the
Constitution, Section 40 (6) of R.A. No. 6657 and
Administrative Order No. 3, Series of 1997 which state, to
wit: "landless war veterans and veterans of military
campaigns, their surviving spouses and orphans, retirees of
the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and the
Integrated National Policy (INP now PNP), returnees,
surrenderees and similar beneficiaries shall be considered
in the disposition of agricultural lands of the public
domain." It bears stressing here that this privilege is
applicable only to landless war veterans and their surviving
spouses and orphans, among others enumerated above, but
not to those already owners of private agricultural lands.
Simply stated, what is contemplated under the aforequoted
provision of law in the disposition of agricultural lands of
the public domain are not those who are veterans,
returnees or surenderees per se, but those who are
landless among them.

January 14, 1998
BENEFICIARIES; MANAGERIAL AND SUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES

AS BENEFICIARIES OF COMMERCIAL FARMS
May managerial and supervisory employees who were
promoted before June 15, 1988 qualify as beneficiaries of
commercial farms?
 Managerial and supervisory employees who were promoted

before June 15, 1988 may still qualify as beneficiaries of
commercial farms for as long they remain employees of the
commercial farm between June 15, 1988 and June 15, 1998
or upon expiration or termination of the deferment, subject
to the pertinent provisions of DAR Administrative Order No.
2, Series of 1993 (Supplemental Guidelines on
Administrative Order No. 10, Series of 1990, and Other
Issuances on the Rights of Farmworkers) and Joint DAR-
CDA-DA Administrative Order No. 2, Series of 1997 (Rules
and Regulations Governing Membership Issues and
Concerns of Farmworkers and Employee Beneficiaries in
Agrarian Reform Plantation-Based Cooperatives).

November 5, 1999
BENEFICIARIES; MEMBERSHIP IN PLANTATION BASED

COOPERATIVES, MANDATORY
In corporate farms/commercial farms, is membership of
ARBs to association or cooperative mandatory or
directory?
 While it is true that the provisions of R.A. No. 6938 provides

for open and voluntary membership in a cooperative, the
same does not apply in the case of an agrarian reform
plantation-based cooperative considering that it is a special
cooperative composed exclusively of ARBs who were
awarded a collective CLOA.
 Thus, membership of the aforesaid ARBs to such

association or cooperative is mandatory. This can be
inferred from the provision of Section 29 of R.A. No. 6657.

July 14, 1999
BENEFICIARIES; ONLY NATURAL PERSONS CAN BE ISSUED

CLOAs
 Only natural persons as beneficiaries may be given CLOAs

as evidence of their ownership of awarded lands.

February 13, 2007
BENEFICIARIES; ORDER OF
PRIORITY; QUALIFICATIONS; BIRTH CERTIFICATE
NECESSARY REQUIREMENT
 The order of priority of land distribution as provided under

Republic Act No. 6657 (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Law), specifically Section 22, starts with the qualified
children, who are the first group entitled to be beneficiaries
of the land and are entitled to receive three (3) hectares
each. Any award to the qualified children is a result of the
children being qualified beneficiaries of the program, a
preferential right that the law only grants the children to be
awarded the land of their parents.
 As to their qualifications to become beneficiaries of the

land, the children of a landowner must be: at least 15 years
of age as of 15 June 1988, (the effectivity of R.A. No. 6657)
and actually tilling the land or directly managing the farm
from 15 June 1988 up to the time of land acquisition. The
required age and actual tillage provided for in the law must
concur at the time of the effectivity of the CARL on 15 June
1988.
 A birth certificate is a necessary documentary requirement

to prove the relationship of the child-beneficiary and the
parent-landowner.

June 4, 2008
BENEFICIARIES; ORDER OF PRIORITY;

SCREENING/SELECTION/IDENTIFICATION
What is the order of priority among the possible
beneficiaries?
 The persons mentioned in Section 22 of CARL, including

those falling under paragraph (g) thereof — others directly
working on the land enjoy priority over those not working
thereon such as the employees belonging to management.

October 17, 1994
Who has jurisdiction over the identification of farmer-

beneficiaries?
 The DAR has jurisdiction over the

screening/selection/identification of farmer-beneficiaries,
thru the MARO. The recommendation of the BARC officials
may be considered, but the MARO must exercise sound
discretion on the matter. This, however, will not bar any
person from questioning the selection of said farmer-
beneficiaries.

April 6, 1995
BENEFICIARIES; PERSONS DIRECTLY MANAGING THE FARM,

NOT QUALIFIED TO BECOME CARP BENEFICIARIES
Are persons directly managing the farm qualified as CARP
beneficiaries?
 Those directly managing the farm, do not qualify as CARP

beneficiaries since they do not fall under any of the
categories listed under Section 22 of CARL. The only
instance where persons directly managing the farm can be
CARP beneficiaries thereof is when they are children of the
landowner, as provided in paragraph 1 Section 6 and
paragraph 2 Section 22 of CARL.

June 27, 1996
BENEFICIARIES; PREFERRED; QUALIFICATIONS; ORDER OF
PRIORITY
 A child of a landowner may either be identified as preferred

beneficiary or an ordinary FB.
 As preferred beneficiary or ordinary FB, a child should meet

all the conditions set forth in Section 3 of A.O. No. 6, series
of 2006 in relation to the earlier guidelines issued, such as
A.O. No. 2, Series of 2003 and A.O. No. 7, series of 2003
except when a child of a landowner enters into VLT/DPS
agreement with his/her parent-landowner, the rule requires
that he/she is a tenant in his/her own right prior to June 15,
1988. In such cases, the rules and procedures provided
under A.O. No. 8, series of 2003 shall apply.
 The order of priority of land distribution as provided under

Law), specifically Section 22, starts with the qualified
children, who are the first group entitled to be beneficiaries
of the land and are entitled to receive three (3) hectares
each. Any award to the qualified children is a result of the
children being qualified beneficiaries of the program, a
preferential right that the law only grants the children to be
awarded the land of their parents.
 As to their qualifications to become beneficiaries of the

land, the children of a landowner must be at least 15 years
of age as of 15 June 1988, (the effectivity of R.A. No. 6657)
and actually tilling the land or directly managing the farm
from 15 June 1988 up to the time of land acquisition. The
required age and actual tillage provided for in the law must
concur at the time of the effectivity of the CARL on 15 June
1988.

December 3, 2008
BENEFICIARIES; QUALIFICATION, WAIVER OF RIGHT AS
BENEFICIARY
 A basic qualification of a beneficiary is his willingness,

aptitude and ability to cultivate and make the land as
productive as possible. A person who is found to have
waived his right and deliberately refused to enlist as CARP
beneficiary during the process of documentation is not
qualified to be a CARP beneficiary.

April 14, 1997
 It is settled that the basic qualification of a beneficiary is

his willingness, aptitude and ability to cultivate and make
the land as productive as possible. A person who is found to
have waived his right and deliberately refused to enlist as
CARP beneficiary during the process of documentation is
not qualified to be a CARP beneficiary. The refusal of the
identified farmer-beneficiaries to sign the Land Valuation
and Farmer's Undertaking and their non cooperation in the
documentation process is tantamount to waiver of rights
that would warrant their disqualifications to become CARP
beneficiaries.

June 29, 2006
 It must be remembered that one of the basic qualifications

to be considered for a potential beneficiary is the
willingness to cultivate a land. Refusal to be identified
and/or registered as a potential beneficiary and failure to
question inclusion of seasonal and other farmworkers is
contrary to the "willingness" qualification. Also, it is correct
to state that the above-mentioned acts or omissions are
considered waiver of the right to be recognized as a
beneficiary. However, in cases were the regular
farmworkers are under duress, which resulted in their
refusal to be recognized as a beneficiary or failure to
question of seasonal and other farmworkers, these are
matters, which are evidentiary in nature and may be
threshed out administratively. Furthermore, the
implementors must take all necessary action to ensure that
proper notice are sent to the regular farmworkers. After
such notice, proof of receipt and the date on which they
were received must be kept as part of the file. In order to
avoid further complications, perhaps the notices should
state clearly the consequence of inaction on the part of a
potential farmer-beneficiary.

October 1, 2001
Can a resident alien, specifically a naturalized American
Citizen be a farmer-beneficiary?
 Republic Act No. 6657, particulary Sections 22 and 25

thereof and DAR Administrative Order No. 9, series of 1998,
provide for the qualifications of an agrarian reform
beneficiary. To be an agrarian reform beneficiary, one must:
a) be landless; b) be at least 18 years old; and, c) have the
willingness, ability and aptitude to cultivate the land and
make it as productive as possible.
 By way of a backgrounder, the right of United States

citizens and corporations to acquire and exploit private or
public lands and other natural resources of the Philippines
was intended to expire when the Commonwealth ended on
04 July 1946. Thereafter, public and private agricultural
lands and natural resources of the Philippines were or
became exclusively reserved by our Constitution for Filipino
citizens. This situation lasted until the "Parity Amendment",
ratified in November 1946, once more reopened to United
States citizens and business enterprises owned or
controlled by them the lands of the public domain, the
natural resources of the Philippines, and the operation of
the public utilities, but not the acquisition or exploitation of
private agricultural lands, about which not a word is found
in the Parity Amendment (Republic vs. Quasha, 46 SCRA
160). (emphasis supplied)
 Moreover, even assuming that the acquisition by United

States citizens of private agricultural lands in the
Philippines was valid and constitutional, their rights expired
on 3 July 1974. All these rights conferred upon United
States citizens and business entities, owned or controlled
by them under the Amendment, were subject to one and the
same resolutory condition or period: they are to last "during
the effectivity of the Executive Agreement entered into on
04 July 1946", "but in no case to extend beyond the third of
July 1974."
Section 8, Article XII of the 1987 Philippine

Constitution provides, quote:
"SEC. 8. Notwithstanding the
provisions of Section 7 of this Article, a
natural-born citizen of the Philippines who has
lost his Philippine citizenship may be a
transferee of private lands, subject to
limitations provided by law." (underscoring
and emphasis supplied)
Sections 1 and 2 of Batas Pambansa Blg.
185 dated 16 March 1982 provides:
Section 1. In implementation of
Section fifteen of Article XIV of the 1973
Constitution (now Section 8 of the 1987
Constitution), a natural-born citizen of the
Philippines who has lost his Philippine
citizenship may be a transferee of private
land, for use by him as his residence, subject
to the provisions of this Act.
Section 2. Any natural-born citizen
of the Philippines who has the capacity to
enter into a contract under Philippine laws,
may be a transferee of a private land up to a
maximum area of one thousand square
meters, in the case of urban land, or one
hectare in the case of rural land, to be used
by him as his residence. In the case of
married couples, one of them may avail of the
privilege herein granted: Provided, That if
both shall avail of the same, the total area
acquired shall not exceed the maximum
herein fixed.
In case the transferee already owns urban or
rural lands for residential purposes, he shall still be
entitled to be a transferee of additional urban or rural
lands for residential purposes which, when added to those
already owned by him, shall not exceed the maximum
areas herein authorized. (emphasis supplied)
 It can be inferred from the aforequoted provisions of law

and the Constitution that a Filipino who has lost his/her
Philippine citizenship may only be a transferee of a
used by him as his residence. Nothing more.
 Section 22 of R.A. No. 6657 provides that the basic

qualification of a beneficiary shall be his willingness,
aptitude and ability to cultivate and make the land as
productive as possible. Only a natural person can possess
this qualification.

July 14, 1999
BENEFICIARIES; QUALIFICATIONS OF ARBS FOR ACQUIRED

COMMERCIAL FARMS
What are the qualifications of beneficiaries for acquired
commercial farms?
 The pertinent guideline regarding qualifications of agrarian

reform beneficiaries for acquired commercial farms is DAR
A.O. No. 9, Series of 1998 (Rules and Regulations on the
Acquisition, Valuation, Compensation and Distribution of
Deferred Commercial Farms), particularly Section 4 thereof,
quote:
"SEC. 4. Qualifications of Beneficiaries —

Agrarian reform beneficiaries for acquired commercial
farms must have the following qualifications:
(a) They must be at least 18 years old upon
filing of application as agrarian reform
beneficiary;
(b) They must have the willingness, aptitude
and ability to cultivate and make the land
productive; and
(c) They must have been employed in the
commercial farm between June 15, 1988 and June
15, 1998 or upon expiration or termination of the
deferment: Provided, That farmworkers who have
worked longest on the land continuously shall be
given priority."

November 5, 1999
BENEFICIARIES; QUALIFICATIONS; DETERMINATION
 The determination as to who may qualify to become farmer-

beneficiaries of the land lies with the DAR. Under Section
15 of R.A. No. 6657 and its implementing guidelines,
Administrative Order No. 07, Series of 2003, it is the DAR in
coordination with the Barangay Agrarian Reform Committee
(BARC) which shall identify and register all agricultural
lessees, tenants and farmworkers who are qualified to be
beneficiaries of the CARP.
 Under II-A of DAR Administrative Order No. 2, Series of

1993, qualified farmworkers include those found to be
directly working on the land at the time the DAR conducts
actual investigation and documentation. This means that
the retrenchment or separation of a farmworker prior to the
award of the CLOA does not necessarily disqualify him from
being an ARB, provided he possesses the basic
qualification of willingness, aptitude and ability to cultivate
and make the land as productive as possible.

January 14, 2008
BENEFICIARIES; QUALIFICATIONS; MEMBERSHIP IN Fos, NGOs

AND POs
Is membership to farmer's organization or non government
organization a plus factor for farmer applicants?
 Membership in farmer's organizations (FOs), Non
Government Organizations (NGOs) and People's
Organizations (POs), although generally favorable or
beneficial, does not necessarily mean a plus factor for
farmer applicants. To reiterate, one must possess all the
qualifications to be an agrarian reform beneficiary as
provided for under Section 22 of R.A. No. 6657.

July 23, 1999
 The required age and actual tillage provided for in the law
must concur at the time of the effectivity of the CARL on 15
June 1988 and not at the time when the Notice of Coverage
was issued. Given this requirement, the children could not
qualify as preferred beneficiaries.

February 22, 2006
 It appears that the awardee acquired dual citizenship

pursuant to the provisions of Republic Act No. 9225
(Citizenship Retention and Re-Acquisition Act of 2003 ). R.A.
No. 9225 contemplates that Filipino citizens who acquired
foreign citizenship are deemed not to have lost their
Philippine citizenship under conditions provided in the Act.
In other words, natural born citizens of the Philippines who,
after the effectivity of said Act, become citizens of a
foreign country shall retain their Philippine citizenship upon
taking an Oath of Allegiance to the Republic of the
Philippines. Thus, those who retain or reacquire Philippine
citizenship under said Act shall enjoy full civil and political
rights and be subject to all attendant liabilities and
responsibilities under existing laws of the
Philippines pursuant to Section 5 thereof.
In view of all the foregoing, while the awardee may

enjoy full civil and political rights as a Filipino citizen, he is
nonetheless likewise subject to all attendant liabilities and
responsibilities under existing laws of the Philippines. Under
existing Philippines laws, rules and regulations, it is required
that the awardee should personally cultivate the land (or with
the aid of the immediate members of his family) and should
continuously do so. Under the facts and circumstances
obtaining, we could infer that such is not so in the instant
case even granting that the awardee is a resident both of New
Jersey, USA and Malino, Mexico, Pampanga per his Special
Power of Attorney (SPA). Under such circumstances, the basic
requirement of continuous personal cultivation could not
possibly be complied with.
December 8, 2005
BENEFICIARIES; QUALIFIED DISTRIBUTEES OF AGRICULTURAL

LANDS UNDER CARP
Who are qualified to become beneficiaries?
 Specifically, Section 22 of R.A. No. 6657 enumerates in the

following order of priority Phase who can be the
distributees of agricultural lands, to wit:
a. agricultural lessees and share tenants;

b. regular farmworkers;
c. seasonal farmworkers;
d. other farmworkers;
e. actual tillers or occupants of public lands;
f. collective or cooperatives of the above beneficiaries;
and
g. others directly working on the land.

December 8, 1998
BENEFICIARIES; RANK AND FILE EMPLOYEES, WHEN MAY

QUALIFY AS BENEFICIARIES
When may rank and file employees qualify as CARP

beneficiaries?
 If the actual tillers on the farmholding involved have fixed

farmlot, the rank and file employees will qualify as CARP
beneficiaries only with respect to that portion of the
landholding, if any, that will be left after the same has been
apportioned in favor of the persons mentioned in Sec. 22 of
RA 6657.
 Otherwise stated, the persons mentioned in Section 22 of

CARL, including those falling under paragraph (g) thereof –
others directly working on the land – enjoy priority over
those not working thereon, such as the employees
belonging to management.

November 28, 1994
BENEFICIARIES; RETRENCHMENT OR SEPARATION OF A

FARMWORKER PRIOR TO THE AWARD DOES NOT NECESSARILY
DISQUALIFY HIM FROM BEING AN ARB
Does retrenchment or separation of a farmworker prior to
the award of the CLOA disqualify a farmworker from being
an ARB?
award of the CLOA does not necessarily disqualify him from

March 17, 1997
BENEFICIARIES; RIGHT OR DISCRETION TO SELECT

Do landowners have the right to select CARP
beneficiaries?
 Landowners are not possessed of the discretion or right to

select CARP beneficiaries. Land acquisition and distribution
involve two separate transactions, first, the government,
thru DAR, acquires the land from its owner and then
distributes it to the qualified agrarian reform beneficiaries.
It is not the landowner, therefore, who is transferring the
landholding to the farmer-beneficiaries.

July 23, 1999
BENEFICIARIES; RIGHT TO BECOME BENEFICIARY A

PERSONAL ONE; ORDER OF PRIORITY; QUALIFICATIONS
 The right to become an agrarian reform beneficiary (ARB) is

a personal right, accorded only to those who will be
qualified upon identification and screening of the DAR
pursuant to Sec. 22 of R.A. No. 6657 and Administrative
Order No. 7, Series of 2003 [CY 2003 Guidelines on the
Identification, Screening and Selection of, and Distribution
to Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries (ARBs) of Private
Agricultural Lands Under Republic Act (R.A.) No. 6657].
 In the case of the 10 deceased identified beneficiaries, the

prospective areas to be awarded to them legally should be
allocated or titled in favor of any of their heirs who may be
qualified to become beneficiaries themselves and, provided,
they are found to be directly working on the land. In other
words, the order of priority provided for under Sec. 22 of
R.A. 6657 shall by implication of law be applied.

June 30, 2008
BENEFICIARIES; RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES

COMMENCE FROM TIME OF AWARD
 Section 24 of R.A. No. 6657 provides that the rights and

responsibilities of the beneficiary shall commence from the
time the DAR makes an award to him. This means that the
beneficiary is responsible for the payment of the real
property taxes that accrue on the land only from the said
award.

November 14, 2008
BENEFICIARIES; SCREENING, SELECTION AND

IDENTIFICATION OF FARMER-BENEFICIARIES
 In the screening, selection and identification of farmer-

beneficiaries based on the criteria provided under Section
22 of R.A. No. 6657, it is the DAR through the MARO which
has jurisdiction thereof. Landowners are given the right to
choose their preferred beneficiaries, but they do not
possess the authority or right to select CARP beneficiaries.
Thus, the installation for FBs may proceed despite the
pendency of the said petition.
 Under the doctrine of presumption of regularity in the

performance of official functions, the identification of FBs
is presumed to have been made in accordance with law
absent convincing evidence to the contrary.

October 2, 2006
BENEFICIARIES; SELECTION OF QUALIFIED BENEFICIARIES IN

COMMERCIAL FARMS
What is the procedure in the selection of qualified
beneficiaries?
 In the selection of qualified beneficiaries for acquired

commercial farms, Section 6 (a) of DAR Administrative
Order No. 9, Series of 1998 provides, quote:
"SEC. 6. Procedure for Selection of

Beneficiaries. — The selection of qualified beneficiaries
for acquired commercial farms shall subscribe to the
following procedures:
(a) Beneficiary Screening Committee — A
Beneficiary Screening Committee shall be created
composed of the following:
(1) Provincial Agrarian Reform Officer
(PARO) who shall act as Chairman;
(2) Municipal-Agrarian Reform Officer
(MARO), as member;
(3) Provincial Agrarian Reform
Coordinating Committee (PARCCOM) Chairman
or his duly-authorized representative, as
member;
(4) Barangay Agrarian Reform Council
(BARC) Chairman or his duly-authorized
representative from each of the barangays
where the subject commercial plantation is
situated, as member(s); and
(5) Barangay Chairman or duly-
authorized representative, from each of the
barangays where the subject commercial
plantation is situated, as member(s).
The Beneficiary Screening Committee shall be
responsible for the qualification, identification and
selection of agrarian reform beneficiaries for acquired
commercial farms. In the performance of its tasks,
the Committee may invite representatives from the
landowners, peoples' or non-government
organizations and/or such other groups or entities as
may be necessary as resource persons."
DAR OPINION NO. 40, S. 1999

July 23, 1999
BENEFICIARIES; SUCCESSOR OF FARMER BENEFICIARIES IN A

COLLECTIVE CLOA
Who will succeed the FB in the collective CLOA in case of
his death or abandonment?
 In case a farmer beneficiary in a collective CLOA is no

longer in possession by reason of his death or
abandonment, the area awarded to him which does not
exceed three (3) hectares should legally be allocated or
titled in favor of any of his heirs who may be qualified to
become a beneficiary himself and, provided, he is found to
be directly working on the land. In other words, the order of
priority provided for under Section 22 of R.A. No. 6657 shall
by implication of law be applied. It is, however, mandatory
that said heir will judiciously use the land and make it as
productive as possible. On the other hand, if the farmer
beneficiary has no legal heir, his tillage might be
transferred to another qualified beneficiary subject to the
quasi-judicial process of listing and delisting to be properly
undertaken through the DAR Adjudication Board (DARAB).

March 4, 1999
BENEFICIARIES; TRANSFEREES OF CARP AWARDED LAND,

LIMITATIONS
Who can be transferees of agricultural lands?
 Only qualified agrarian reform beneficiaries as determined

by DAR pursuant to Section 22 of R.A. No. 6657 are eligible
to be distributees of agricultural lands and this privilege
should not by implication be extended to non-farmer
beneficiaries, otherwise, this might open the door towards
the circumvention of the provisions of R.A. No. 6657.
 Although Section 27 of R.A. No. 6657 expressly declares in

clear and categorical terms that lands acquired by
beneficiaries under R.A. No. 6657 may be sold, transferred
or conveyed to qualified beneficiaries even within the 10-
year prohibitory period from the award as one of the
exceptions, the restrictive application solely refers to
qualified farmer-beneficiaries pursuant to the legally
mandated order of their priority and on the conditions that
the land sold, transferred or conveyed should remain
agricultural in nature and its productivity maintained and
may only be converted to non-agricultural use after the
lapse of the period provided under Section 65 of R.A. No.
6657.
 Otherwise stated, the transferability of awarded lands as

enunciated under Section 27 of R.A. No. 6657 must be in
conformity with Section 22 of said law both as to the order
of priority and qualification of farmer-beneficiaries coupled
with the inherent requirements on the maintenance of the
agricultural nature of the land and its productivity. The
legislative intent of Section 27 is clear and unambiguous,
hence, we should not stretch the beneficial provision
thereof so as to include even non-farmer beneficiaries of
cooperatives.

December 8, 1998
BENEFICIARIES; USUFRUCTUARY RIGHTS OF FARMER

BENEFICIARIES
Does non-acceptance by the farmer-beneficiaries of the
conditions a ground for revocation of the usufructuary
rights?
 A reading of the MOA would indicate that what is granted to

the farmer-beneficiaries was only a usufructuary privilege
and, as such, they have the option whether or not to accept
the same. The non-acceptance by the farmer-beneficiaries
of the conditions indicated in the MOA regarding the grant
of usufructuary rights is not a violation as to be a ground for
the revocation of the MOA.

October 27, 1999
BENEFICIARIES; VESTED RIGHT; DEFINED
 The term "vested right" has been defined in the case of

Balboa vs. Farrales, G.R. No. 27059, February 14, 1928 as
some right or interest in property which has become fixed
and established and is no longer open to doubt or
controversy. The Supreme Court explained that rights are
vested when right to enjoyment, present or prospective,
has become the property of some particular person or
persons as a present interest (Agrarian Law and
Jurisprudence, DAR UNDP, page 27).

November 8, 2007
BENEFICIARY; CONSEQUENCES IF A BENEFICIARY HAS SOLD

OR ABANDONED HIS LAND
 A beneficiary who is found to have culpably sold or

abandoned his land shall be disqualified from becoming a
beneficiary pursuant to the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Law (R.A. No. 6657) and Administrative Order No. 07, Series
of 2003 [CY 2003 Guidelines on the Identification,
Screening and Selection of, and Distribution to Agrarian
Reform Beneficiaries (ARBs) of Private Agricultural Lands
Under Republic Act (R.A.) No. 6657 ]. In this case, the
landholding shall be forfeited in favor of any other qualified
beneficiary duly identified by DAR.
 The act of a beneficiary of selling or abandoning his

awarded land rather than cultivate it is a violation of R.A.
No. 6657 and is punishable by law. The very essence of
agrarian reform is for DAR to acquire all public and private
agricultural lands for redistribution to qualified farmer-
beneficiaries who are landless. Therefore, the farmer-
beneficiary in return is under obligation to cultivate the
land and make it more productive as possible.

November 10, 2005
BONDSMAN; DEFINED; DAR PERSONNEL CANNOT SERVE AS

BONDSMAN TO A CRIMINAL CASE
 A bondsman is a person who stands as surety for the
performance of a legal obligation by another as expressed
in a bond. Bondsmen usually have a standing security
agreement with local court officials, in which they agree to
post an irrevocable "blanket" bond, which will pay the court
if any defendant for whom the bondsman is responsible
does not appear.
 The function of a bondman and a personnel of this

Department is incompatible with each other. The main
concern of a bondsman is to act as a surety for the
appearance of a criminal defendant in court, while that a
personnel of the DAR is to assist in the implementation of
the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) and other
agrarian laws, rules and regulations. Therefore, a personnel
of the DAR cannot serve as bondsman to a criminal case
filed against a tenant.

March 12, 2007
BUREAU OF AGRARIAN LEGAL ASSISTANCE (BALA);

RESPONSIBILITY
What is the responsibility of the Bureau of Agrarian Legal

Assistance?
 Under Section 163 of the Code of Agrarian Reforms (RA

3844, as amended), the responsibility of the Bureau of
Agrarian Legal Assistance (BALA), as successor of the
defunct office of the Agrarian Counsel, is to represent
tenants, agricultural lessees, agricultural farmworkers, and
agricultural owner-cultivators or members of their
immediate farmhousehold who cannot engage the services
of competent private counsel.
 Said responsibility includes representation before courts,

including appellate, in cases civil or criminal, instituted by
or against said tenant, agricultural lessees, farmworkers or
owner-cultivators or the members of their immediate
farmhousehold, where the cases arise from or are
connected with, or results or effects of an agrarian dispute.

March 7, 1994
C
CANCELATION/REVOCATION ORDER OF CLOA
 The DAR Secretary's Order cannot extend to an immediate

cancellation/revocation of a registered CLOA. A proper
petition for cancellation of registered CLOA must be filed
with the DARAB.

March 24, 2009
CANCELLATION OF CLOA; FINALITY OF ORDER
May the Kauswagan Resettlement property be developed

into a residential site?
 Since a petition for the cancellation of said CLOA has been

filed, and an Order granting said petition has been issued,
the finality of said Order will pave the way for its
cancellation, thus placing the property within DAR
jurisdiction and enabling the development by NHA of the
portion designated as a housing site.

January 8, 1996
CANCELLATION OF CLOA; JURISDICTION

 It is noted that the Regional Director in the said order had
directed the cancellation of the 84 CLOAs issued over the
subject landholding. The 2003 DARAB Rules of Procedure
provides that the DARAB has the jurisdiction to cancel
registered CLOAs. Likewise, Administrative Order No. 02
Series of 1994 (Rules Governing the Correction and
Cancellation of Registered/Unregistered EPs and CLOAs
Due to Unlawful Acts and Omissions or Breach of
Obligations of ARBs and for Other Causes) provides that
registered CLOAs may only be corrected or cancelled by
the order of the Provincial or Regional Adjudicator which
has jurisdiction over the property, in accordance with the
DARAB Rules of Procedure. Hence, RD Arsenal’s order may
not be implemented since the issuance of such order is
outside his jurisdiction. (Note: Under R.A. No. 9700,
Jurisdiction is now conferred with the DAR Secretary)

March 10, 2010
CANCELLATION OF EMANCIPATION PATENTS; HOW EFFECTED
How is the cancellation of Emancipation Patents effected?
 The cancellation of Emancipation Patents is effected by the

Register of Deeds only upon presentation of an Order issued
by the Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board
(DARAB). Rule II, Section 1(f) of the DARAB New Rules of
Procedure provides that cases involving the issuance,
correction and cancellation of EPs and CLOAs which are
registered with the Register of Deeds fall within the primary
and exclusive original and appellate jurisdiction of the
DARAB. The authority to order the cancellation of
unregistered Emancipation Patents is vested with the
Regional Director, and the Secretary of Agrarian Reform on
appeal.

November 10, 1995
CANCELLATION; JURISDICTION; FREE PATENT
 The provisions of Presidential Decree No. 1529 quote:
In case of death of the grantee, the Department of

Agrarian Reform shall determine his heirs or
successors-in-interest and shall notify the Register
of Deeds accordingly."
It can be inferred from the aforementioned that the DAR is
not clothed with the authority to cancel Free Patent Titles
and issue individual CLOA titles to the heirs of property
owners who died intestate. The role of the DAR is to give
notice to the Register of Deeds of the existence of heirs
or successors-in-interest.
February 1, 2010
CANCELLATION; PETITION FOR CANCELLATION OF CLOAS: WHO

HAS THE AUTHORITY TO FILE
Who has the authority to file a petition for cancellation of

CLOAs?
 Under Executive Order No. 129-A, the Department of

Agrarian Reform is responsible for implementing the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law and other agrarian
laws, rules and regulations. This covers the power to file
petition for cancellation of CLOAs before the PARAD, in the
face of evidence showing that the FBs have committed acts
contrary to their obligation to make the lots awarded to
them as productive as possible.
 Moreover, since the Regional Offices are responsible for the

implementation of laws, policies, plans, projects, rules and
regulations of the Department in their administrative
region, the Regional Director shall represent the
Department, assisted by a DAR lawyer in the Region.

July 13, 1994
CANCELLATION; PROPER PARTY TO INITIATE ACTION FOR

CANCELLATION OF CLOA
Who is the proper party to initiate action for cancellation

of CLOA?
 A close reading of R.A. No. 6657 readily suggests that the

personality to cancel the CLOA apparently erroneously
issued pertains to the aggrieved party, that is, one who
stands to be injured by the issuance thereof.

July 7, 1998
CAPITAL GAINS TAX; LIABILITY FOR PAYMENT THEREOF
Who shall be liable for the payment of Capital Gains Tax?
 While Section 66 of R.A. No. 6657 categorically exempts

transactions under CARP involving transfer of ownership
whether for natural or juridical persons from Capital Gains
Tax, the same is not absolute. What is contemplated under
Section 66 of R.A. No. 6657 are those transactions which
are necessary for the issuance of EP/CLOA in favor of
farmer-beneficiaries.

March 11, 1997
CAPITAL GAINS TAX; PAYMENT
Is compensation paid for the construction of a conveyance

canal subject to Capital Gains Tax?
 Compensation paid to landowners as payment for the
portion used for the construction of a conveyance canal is
not subject to capital gains tax. Specifically, only
transactions which involve the disposition of property are
subject to said tax. Such being the case, the compensation
given to the landowners by reason of the expropriation of
their landholdings is exempt from capital gains tax.

May 22, 1998
CAPITAL GAINS TAX; TRANSACTIONS EXEMPTED FROM

PAYMENT
What kind of transactions are exempted from payment of

capital gains tax?
 Sec. 66 of R.A. No. 6657 (CARL) expressly provides, quote:

"transactions under this Act involving a transfer of
ownership whether from natural or juridical persons, shall
be exempted from taxes arising from capital gains". The
exemption referred to above is not, however, encompassing
so as to exempt all transactions from capital gains tax.
Specifically, only transactions which are agrarian related
are exempt. In this connection, the sale or disposition of
the subject property from the landowner to a tenant is
undoubtedly an agrarian related transaction, thus, exempt
from said tax. However, all other transactions or
subsequent transfers thereof from the tenant to third
persons are not exempt from Capital Gains Tax since the
same are no longer deemed agrarian related matters.

May 7, 1997
CEASE AND DESIST ORDER; AUTHORITY OF THE PARO TO ISSUE
Who has the authority to issue CDO?

"Upon determination of a prima facie case,
the Secretary or the duly authorized DAR official shall
issue a cease and desist order (CDO) directing the
respondent to stop any and all development activities in
the area and requiring him to explain within ten (10)
days from receipt why he should not be penalized for
violation of existing laws, rules and regulations on land
use conversion."
 From the provision of DAR Administrative Order No. 1, series

of 1999, particularly Article IX, Section 45 (b) thereof, it
explicitly provide that the Secretary or the duly authorized
DAR Official has the authority to issue a cease and desist
order (CDO). It is considered that the "duly authorized DAR
official" mentioned therein is the PARO, who is necessarily
the official representative and extension of the Secretary's
personality in the province. Thus, the PARO may issue the
CDO, upon recommendation of the Provincial Task Force on
Illegal Conversion, the latter being the authority
responsible for the investigation, gathering of evidence and
the filing of complaints against illegal, premature or
unauthorized conversion within its area of jurisdiction
pursuant to Joint DAR-DOJ Administrative Order No. 5,
series of 1994.

November 27, 2000
CEASE AND DESIST ORDER; IN RELATION TO R.A. NO. 6657
What is a Cease and Desist Order as applied under R.A.

6657?
 The Cease and Desist Order was only a temporary relief to

insure that objections to coverage are first addressed and
resolved.
 The effectual expiration of the CDO lies in the eventual
resolution of the issues of exemption, conversion and/or
coverage of subject landholding, on the basis of the
availability of evidence received in support thereto, or, the
lack of it.

April 27, 2000
CERTIFICATE OF FINALITY
When may the Order issued by the DAR Secretary be

implemented?
 Pertinently, the third paragraph of Memorandum Circular No.

3, series of 1994 states, thus:
"2) An appeal from the

decision/order issued by the Department shall be
perfected within fifteen (15) days after receipt of a copy
of the decision/order complained of by the party
adversely affected, by filing with the DAR a notice of
appeal, serving copies thereof upon the prevailing party
and the Office of the President and paying the required
fees. The DAR shall upon perfection of the appeal
transmit the records of the case to the Office of the
President." (underscoring and emphasis supplied)

November 9, 2000
CERTIFICATE OF FULL PAYMENT; ISSUANCE OF;

PURPOSE
 The LBP could issue a Certificate of Full Payment

notwithstanding the pendency of an administrative
proceeding or valuation case for the reason that under
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP),
acquisition and distribution are two (2) separate
transactions. The former is a transaction between the
government and the landowner, while the latter is a
separate and distinct transaction between the government
and the agrarian reform beneficiaries. This means that even
though the landowner may still be contesting the land
valuation, title to the land may already be transferred to the
Republic of the Philippines then ultimately to the
beneficiaries [Section 16 (e), R.A. No. 6657]. Thus, in the
event that the landholding has already been fully paid by
the beneficiary as determined by DAR and LBP, a
certification of full payment should forthwith be issued for
the purpose, among others, of registering with the Register
of Deeds the cancellation of the encumbrance annotated in
the title.

March 11, 2009
CERTIFICATE OF LAND OWNERSHIP AWARD/FREE

PATENTS; AS COLLATERAL FOR LOANS
 "CLOAs can be legally used as collateral for loans. While

Section 27 of R.A. 6657 expressly provides that lands
acquired by beneficiaries under said Act may not be sold,
transferred or conveyed except thru hereditary succession,
or to the government, or to the LBP, or to other qualified
beneficiaries for a period of ten (10) years, such prohibition
applies only to transactions where ownership is parted
with. Said provision of law does not apply to the contract of
mortgage, because ownership still remains with the
mortgagor. As held by the Supreme Court in the case
entitled "Eleazar and Elena Adlawan vs. Hon. Judge Ramon
Torres" (G.R. Nos. 65957-58, July 5, 1994), by mortgaging a
piece of property, a debtor merely subjects it to lien, but
ownership is not parted with. Such being the case, a
mortgage is not one of the transactions referred to in the
aforequoted provision."

February 8, 2005
CERTIFICATE OF LAND OWNERSHIP AWARD; AS

COLLATERAL FOR LOANS
 CLOAs may be used as collaterals for loan. While Section 27

of Republic Act No. 6657 (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Law) expressly provides that lands acquired by
beneficiaries under said act may not be transferred except
through hereditary succession or to the Government or to
LBP or to other beneficiaries for a period of ten (10) years,
such prohibition applies only to transactions where
ownership is parted with. Said provision of law does not
apply to a contract of mortgage because ownership still
remains with the mortgagor (DAR Opinion No. 25, Series of
1996).

February 11, 2005
CERTIFICATE OF LAND OWNERSHIP AWARD; AS

COLLATERAL FOR LOANS
 Since the PNOC is a Government-owned and controlled

corporation (GOCC), it is one of those contemplated under
Section 118 of the Public Land Act (Commonwealth Act No.
141) as exempt from the prohibition against encumbrance
or alienation of lands covered by free patent titles.
 In view of the foregoing, PNOC may accept Certificates of

Land Ownership Award (CLOAs) and free patent titles as
collaterals for loan.
February 8, 2005
CERTIFICATE OF LAND OWNERSHIP AWARD; AS COLLATERAL

FOR LOANS
Can CLOA be legally used as collateral for loans?
 CLOAs can be legally used as collateral for loans. While

Section 27 of R.A. 6657 expressly provides that lands
transferred or conveyed except through hereditary
succession or to the government or to the LBP, or to other
qualified beneficiaries for a period of ten (10) years, such
prohibition applies only to transactions where ownership is
parted with. Said provision of law does not apply to the
contract of mortgage because ownership still remains with
the mortgagor.

December 28, 1995

January 11, 1996

May 28, 1996
CERTIFICATE OF LAND OWNERSHIP AWARD; AS EVIDENCE OF
OWNERSHIP
What is the proof of ownership of an awarded land?
 The second sentence of Section 24 of CARL provides:

"Ownership of the beneficiary shall be evidenced by a
Certificate of Land Ownership Award which shall contain
the restrictions and conditions provided for in this Act, and
shall be recorded in the Register of Deeds concerned and
annotated on the Certificate of Title".
October 27, 1994
CERTIFICATE OF LAND OWNERSHIP AWARD; AS EVIDENCE OF

OWNERSHIP
What is the proof of ownership of an awarded land?
 Section 24 of RA 6657 provides in part that . . . "ownership

of the beneficiary shall be evidenced by a Certificate of
Land Ownership Award, which shall contain the restrictions
and conditions provided in this Act, and shall be recorded in
the Register of Deeds concerned and annotated on the
Certificate of Title.

December 13, 1996
CERTIFICATE OF LAND OWNERSHIP AWARD; CANCELLATION

THROUGH A COURT (DARAB) PROCEEDING
May a CLOA be cancelled through a court (DARAB)

proceeding?
 A CLOA may only be cancelled through a court proceeding

upon proper showing that the farmer beneficiary has
committed an act that violated the DAR rules on
cancellation, more specifically upon the grounds provided
for under A.O. No. 02, series of 1994.

September 23, 1996
CERTIFICATE OF LAND OWNERSHIP AWARD; FOR

REGISTRATION WITH THE REGISTER OF DEEDS
What kind of CLOA may be indorsed for registration with

the Register of Deeds?
 Only regularly generated/documented CLOAs may be
indorsed for registration with the Register of Deeds.

January 28, 1997
CERTIFICATE OF LAND OWNERSHIP AWARD; OFFERED AS

PROPERTY BONDS
Can a CLOA be offered as property bond?
 As regards farmlots covered by CLOAs or lands acquired

under R.A. No. 6657, within ten (10) years from award the
same cannot be offered as property bonds in view of the
prohibition provided under Sec. 27 of R.A. No. 6657, to
quote: "Lands acquired by the beneficiaries under this Act
may not be sold, transferred or conveyed except through
hereditary succession, or to the government, or to the Land
Bank of the Philippines, or to other qualified beneficiaries
for a period of ten (10) years.

March 5, 1998
CERTIFICATE OF LAND TRANSFER; AS COLLATERAL FOR AGRI-

BUSINESS LOAN
May Certificate of Land Transfer be used as collateral for

agri-business loan?
 Under P.D. No. 315 dated October 22, 1973, all financing
institutions are mandated to accept as collateral for loans
any duly registered Certificate of Land Transfer (CLT)
issued by the Government, through the DAR, to tenant-
farmers in an amount of not less than sixty percent (60%) of
the value of the landholding with the proviso that the loans
obtained shall be used in the improvement or development
of the farmholding of the tenant-farmers or the
establishment of facilities that will enhance production or
marketing of agricultural products or increase farm income.

October 18, 1995
CERTIFICATE OF LAND TRANSFER; ISSUANCE THEREOF NOT A

GROUND FOR REFUSAL OF TENANT TO PAY RENTALS
Does the issuance of a CLT vest ownership of the land?
 The mere issuance of CLT does not vest in the

farmer/grantee ownership of the land. At most, it merely
evidences the governments recognition of the grantee as
the party qualified to avail of the statutory mechanism for
the acquisition of ownership of the land tilled by him as
provided under P.D. No. 27. Neither is this recognition
permanent nor irrevocable.
 Failure on the part of the farmer/grantee to comply with his

obligation to pay his lease rentals or amortization payments
when they fall due for a period of two (2) years to the
landowner or agricultural lessor is a ground for forfeiture of
his CLT.
 The deposit of lease rentals by the tenant with the LBP is

sanctioned by law. DAR Department Memorandum Circular
No. 6, Series of 1978 allow tenants to deposit their lease
rentals with the LBP in case of refusal of landowners to
accept lease rentals/amortizations or issue receipts to
tenants evidencing payments thereof.
 Sec. 2 of PD 816 expressly provides that illegal acts

committed by tenants, shall upon hearing and final
judgment forfeit the CLT issued in his favor, if his
farmholding is already covered by such CLT. Conversely,
any agricultural lessee whose landholding is not yet
covered by a CLT, upon hearing and judgment, loses his
right to be issued a CLT under PD 27 for his farmholding.
December 13, 1996
CERTIFICATE OF LAND TRANSFER; NOT EVIDENCE OF

OWNERSHIP
Is Certificate of Land Transfer an evidence of ownership?
 The CLT is not evidence of ownership. In the case entitled

"Engracia Vinzons-Magana vs. Hon. Conrado Estrella" (G.R.
No. 60269; September 13, 1991) the Court held that "the
mere issuance of the certificate of land transfer does not
vest in the farmer-grantee ownership of the land described
therein. At most, the certificate merely evidences the
government's recognition of the grantee as the party
qualified to avail of the statutory mechanisms for the
acquisition of ownership of the land tilled by him as
provided under Presidential Decree No. 27."

September 21, 1994
CERTIFICATE OF LANDOWNER AWARD/EMANCIPATION PATENT;

EXTENT OF THE DECISION OF THE PARAD/RARAD ON
CANCELLATION OF CLOAs/EPs
What is the extent of the Decision of the PARAD/RARAD in

cases of Cancellation of Registered EP/CLOA?
 The Decision of the PARAD/RARAD in cases of cancellation

of registered EP/CLOA can extend to the screening of the
ARBs and the reallocation of the land subject of the
cancelled EP/CLOA, where the issue of
reallocation/screening is related thereto. In such cases the
MARO/PARO, thru a duly designated DAR lawyer, may
intervene for purposes of making a recommendation on the
qualified reallocatee. Where the PARAD/RARAD Decision
has already been issued and the field officer concerned
believes that there is a qualified reallocatee other than the
one named in the Decision, he may move for
Reconsideration or Appeal, where applicable.

July 23, 1996
CERTIFICATION OF DEPOSIT; ISSUED DESPITE AN

APPEAL
 A Certification of Deposit shall be issued notwithstanding

any appeal before the Court of Appeals. To do otherwise
shall amount to an act that precludes this office to perform
its powers and functions.

January 8, 2010
CERTIFICATION OF DEPOSIT; ISSUED

NOTWITHSTANDING APPEAL WITH THE OFFICE OF THE
PRESIDENT; REFERENCE
 A certification of deposit shall be issued notwithstanding

any appeal before the Office of the President or to any
regular courts. To do otherwise shall amount to an act that
precludes this Office to perform its powers and functions.

December 3, 2008
CERTIFICATION; DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE TO ISSUE

CERTIFICATION THAT LANDHOLDING NO LONGER SUITABLE
FOR AGRICULTURE
Who will issue a certification that the land is not suitable

for agriculture or that its valuation is rejected for the same
reason?
 It is the Department of Agriculture that has the authority to
issue a certification that the landholding is no longer
suitable for agriculture. The authority includes land which
was refused valuation by the LBP after it has been found to
be no longer suitable for agriculture.

October 11, 1996
CLOA/EP TITLES; PROHIBITED AS PAYMENT FOR

ATTORNEY’S FEES WITHIN THE 10 YEAR PROHIBITORY
PERIOD
 Paragraph 1, Section 27 of R.A. No. 6657 (Comprehensive

Agrarian Reform Law) insofar as pertinent, reads:
"SECTION 27. Transferability of Awarded

Lands. — Lands acquired by beneficiaries under this Act
may not be sold, transferred or conveyed except
through hereditary succession, or to the government, or
to the LBP, or to other qualified beneficiaries for a
period of ten (10) years: Provided, however, That the
children or the spouse of the transferor shall have a
right to repurchase the land from the government or
LBP within the period of two (2) years. . . ."
 Implementing aforesaid provision of law is DAR A.O. No. 8,

Series of 1995 (Transferability of Lands Awarded to ARBs
Pursuant to P.D. 27 as Amended by E.O. No. 228 and R.A.
6657), which provides, quote:
"3. Transfer of awarded lands under P.D.

No. 27, as amended by E.O. No. 228 and R.A.
No. 6657 may be allowed, provided the
a) that the productivity of the land
shall be maintained;
b) that the buyer will not exceed
the aggregate landowner ceiling provided
by law; and
c) that the ownership ceiling of five
(5) hectares shall be imposed."
 Clearly, it is believed that the ten-year period prescribed in

the foregoing provisions prohibits the use of CLOAs/EPs for
payment of attorney’s fees.

June 17, 2009
CLOA/EP; AS COLLATERAL FOR LOANS
 An awarded land covered by CLOA/EP may be used as

collateral for a loan even without necessarily securing a
DAR Clearance since it involves a transaction of which
ownership is not parted with (A.O. No. 1, Series of 1989).

April 17, 2009
CLT — CERTIFICATE OF LAND TRANSFER; NOT PROOF OF

OWNERSHIP
Is a Certificate of Land Transfer an evidence of ownership of

the land?
 A Certificate of Land Transfer, is not per se an evidence of

ownership of the land. The mere issuance thereof does not
vest in the farmer-grantee, ownership of the land described
therein. It merely provides evidence of the government's
recognition of the grantee as the party qualified to avail of
the statutory requirements for acquisition under P.D. No.
27. Failure of the farmer-beneficiary to comply with the
requirements will result in the cancellation of said CLT.
 However, in the absence of proof and determination by
legitimate authority that he has not complied with the
requirements and therefore not a bona fide beneficiary, the
presumption is that he is DEEMED OWNER of the land
awarded to him pursuant to the provisions of P.D. No. 27,
and anyone who wishes to contest said presumption and
the rights of a CLT holder has the burden of proving that he
is not a qualified and legal holder thereof.

July 1, 1998
COMMERCIAL FARM; RECKONING PERIOD FOR ACQUISITION

AND DISTRIBUTION
What is the reckoning period for the acquisition and

distribution of commercial farms?
 Section 11 of R.A. No. 6657, as amended provides that the

acquisition and distribution of commercial farms shall be
effected after the ten-year period reckoned from 15 June
1988 or from the first year of commercial production or
operation, as the case may be.

June 5, 1997
COMMERCIAL FARMS; DEFERMENT: ELIGIBILITY OF WORKERS

WHOS ENTERPRISE WAS DISCONTINUED
Are qualified ARBs remain to be such even if the farm ceases

to operate?
 Those workers who have qualified as ARBs prior to the

grant of Commercial Farm Deferment (CFD), remain as
qualified ARBs even if the farm ceases to operate, since
what is suspended only is the acquisition and distribution
aspect of the commercial farm.
 On the other hand, workers who are not qualified as of 15
June 1988 but possess the basic qualifications enumerated
under RA 6657 may be eligible as ARBs upon determination
by DAR that they possess the said qualifications and
provided that the area to be distributed is enough for all the
qualified beneficiaries.

December 23, 1996
COMMERCIAL FARMS; NOT EXEMPT FROM CARP COVERAGE
Are commercial farms exempt from CARP coverage?
 The coverage of agricultural lands under Comprehensive

Agrarian Reform Program is not affected by the fact that
they were placed under commercial deferment.
Specifically, this scheme is resorted purposely to allow
landowners the chance to recover their investments and
insulate them from possible disruptions in operations and
productivity during land acquisition and distribution. It is a
10-year transition period pending final transfer of the land
to agrarian reform beneficiaries.

April 30, 1998
COMMERCIAL FARMS; WHEN TO COMMENCE; RATIONALE
When shall coverage of commercial farms under deferment

commence?
 The acquisition and distribution of private agricultural lands

under deferment pursuant to R.A. No. 6657 shall not be
undertaken until the lapse of the ten (10) year period to be
reckoned from 15 June 1988. In case of new farms, the 10-
year deferment period shall begin from the first year of
commercial production and operation, as determined by
DAR pursuant to DAR Administrative Order No. 16, Series of
1988. The rationale for the 10-year deferment in the
acquisition of commercial farms is to allow landowners to
recover their investments and insulate them from possible
disruption in operations and production during said period
before eventual acquisition and distribution thereof take
place.

June 5, 1997
COMPENSATION; FACTORS
What are the factors attendant in the fixing of the price of

landholdings?
 As held by the SC in the case of "B.H. Berkenkotter & Co.

vs. CA (GR No. 89980 Dec. 14, 1992), the fixing of the price
of landholding may vary depending on several factors
attendant thereto, to wit: cost of acquisition, current value
of like properties, its actual or potential uses, and in the
particular case of lands, their size, shape, location and the
tax declarations thereon. As such, the price previously
charged the tenant in selling her tenancy rights should not
stand as the basis in fixing the price thereof.

December 13, 1996
COMPENSATION; SUBJECT TO THE DETERMINATION OF DAR

OFFICER/ADJUDICATOR
 As to how much share the tenants should be entitled, sound

judgment dictates that the DAR Officer/Adjudicator
concerned should determine what would be just and
equitable under the circumstances with due regard to the
tenant-lessees.
April 18, 2005
COMPOSICION CON EL ESTADO; PRINCIPLE
What is the principle of Composicion con el estado?
 The "composicion con el estado which was granted by the

Spanish Government through the Direccion General de
Administracion Civil, pursuant to the provision of the Royal
Decree of June 25, 1880 is premised upon the assumption
that all those lands to which the state has never executed
any deed were property of the state.

December 13, 1996
COMPROMISE AGREEMENT; VALID CONTRACT
 It was further stressed by the Supreme Court in a case that:
"(T)his Court, time and again, has ruled that a

compromise agreement entered into by party-
litigants, when not contrary to law, public order,
public policy, morals, or good custom is a valid
contract which is the law between the parties
themselves." (Juan-Marcelo, et al. vs. Go Kim Pah,
et al., 22 SCRA 309).
 The information that the former landowner who stands to

(re)acquire rights and interest over the subject property by
virtue of the compromise agreement as approved by the
court is bound to voluntarily offer the same for sale to the
government (VOS), should not be taken as an impediment,
but should be taken as in full support to the CARP coverage
of the subject landholdings, and in line with the same
objective of maintaining the distribution of the same to duly
qualified farmer-beneficiaries.
 It is not imperative to substantially change the

documentation of the claim folder. It will be enough to
officially inform and advise all parties concerned to execute
what was agreed upon in the Compromise Agreement, who
shall then be recognized by the DAR and LBP for purposes
of claiming the compensation/proceeds on the property.

October 3, 2007
COMPROMISE AGREEMENT; WHEN MAY BE LEGALLY

IMPLEMENTED
When may compromise agreement be legally implemented?
 The Compromise Agreement may be legally implemented so

long as it does not contravene the mandate under CARL to
redistribute the property in favor of qualified beneficiaries.

August 29, 1994
COMPULSORY ACQUISITION
What lands are covered by Compulsory Acquisition?
 Compulsory acquisition (CA) is mandatory for all private

agricultural lands which become due for coverage under
the phase of implementation provided in Section 7 of R.A.
No. 6657. CA is also done in idle and abandoned lands
regardless of their size and phasing and in lands whose
commercial farm deferment is revoked. However, CA is
suspended in those cases where the landowners opt for
other modes of compliance, such as voluntary offer to sell
or voluntary land transfer. However, CA is resumed once
the negotiations in these other modes fail.
June 7, 2002
COMPULSORY ACQUISITION: CANNOT BE BURDENED BY

CONDITIONS IMPOSED BY THE PARTIES
Can compulsory coverage under RA 6657 be burdened by

conditions which the parties may wish to impose?
 Compulsory coverage under R.A. 6657 cannot and should

never be burdened by conditions which the parties may
wish to impose because its coverage cannot be made to
depend indirectly, at least, on the party's volition.

April 24, 1997
COMPULSORY ACQUISITION; DEFINED
What is compulsory acquisition?
 Compulsory Acquisition of landholdings is a scheme done to

all agricultural lands which become due for coverage
following the phasing of CARP implementation under
Section 7 of R.A. No. 6657 (The Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Law). Agricultural lands subject for coverage
include those owned by private entities and those owned or
held by government agencies, corporations and
instrumentalities (Sections 4 and 7 (par. 2), R.A. No. 6657).

June 2, 1997
COMPULSORY ACQUISITION; LANDS COVERED BY

COMPULSORY ACQUISITION
 Compulsory acquisition (CA) is mandatory for all private

agricultural lands which become due for coverage under
the phase of implementation provided in Section 7 of R.A.
No. 6657. CA is also done in idle and abandoned lands
regardless of their size and phasing and in lands whose
commercial farm deferment is revoked. However, CA is
suspended in those cases where the landowners opt for
other modes of compliance, such as voluntary offer to sell
or voluntary land transfer. However, CA is resumed once
the negotiations in these other modes fail.

June 7, 2002
CONFIDENTIALITY OF INTER-OFFICE COMMUNICATIONS
How are inter-office communications treated?
 Memorandum Circular No. 25, Series of 1995 provides for

the observance of measures to uphold the integrity and
confidentiality of inter-office communications and draft
resolution of cases involving agrarian reform law
implementation and personnel discipline. Specifically, item
1 of said memorandum circular provides that investigation
reports, transmittal slips, memoranda, indorsement and
other communications stating the action taken or
recommendations of the officers shall be treated as
confidential. Pursuant thereto, a party to an administrative
case is thus not entitled, as a rule, to a copy of an
investigation report.

December 23, 1999
CONSULTA; WHEN IS IT NECESSARY

When is consulta necessary?
 Consulta, should it still be necessary, is proper only if said

instruments are denied registration in writing by the ROD,
setting forth the defects of the instruments or the legal
grounds relied upon.

August 21, 2001
CONSULTA; WHEN IS IT NECESSARY
 Consulta, should it still be necessary, is proper only if said

instruments are denied registration in writing by the ROD,
setting forth the defects of the instruments or the legal
grounds relied upon.

August 21, 2001
CONTEMPT; IMPLIED POWER OF THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR

Whether or not the Regional Director can cite a Party in
Contempt under Section 20 of DAR Administrative Order No.
03, series of 2003?
 The power of the Regional Director to cite a party in

contempt is implied and could be inferred under the
aforequoted provisions of law, rules and regulations. This is
particularly clear based on the 1st paragraph of DAR
Administrative Order No. 03, Series of 2003 which provides
that said guideline is issued pursuant to sections 49 and 50
of R.A. No. 6657. In Section 50, paragraph 3, last sentence
of R.A. No. 6657, DAR is expressly vested with the power to
punish direct and indirect contempts in the same manner
and subject to the same penalties as provided in the Rules
of Court.
 Moreover, a Cease and Desist Order issued by the Regional

Director would possibly be without teeth and, hence, no
force and effect if he could not cite a party in contempt.
The authority of Regional Directors to cite a party in
contempt can be deduced as an incident arising within their
jurisdiction for the effective and orderly implementation of
said Order, in particular and the Program, in general.

March 11, 2004
CONTRACT; LAW BETWEEN PARTIES
 Although permission to work on the farm was given, there

was no intention to constitute said person as the
agricultural lessee of the farm land. The agreement
(mortgage), which as a valid contract is the law between
the parties which they are expected to abide with good
faith in such contractual commitments.

August 21, 2008
CONVERSION
What is the effect of approval of conversion?
 Section 34, DAR Administrative Order No. 01, Series of 2002
"Section 34. Effects of approval of

conversion — The approval of an application for
conversion shall have, but shall not be limited to, the
following effects:
34.1 It shall be limited to the specific use of the
land authorized in the Conversion Order;
34.2 It shall be subject to the schedule indicated
in the detailed site development, work and financial
plans, but in no case shall the period of
development extend beyond five (5) years from
issuance of the Conversion Order except as
authorized by the Secretary or the approving official
on meritorious grounds, provided that, if the
development cannot be accomplished within five (5)
years, the grantee of the Conversion Order shall
submit a written request for extension within the
six (6) months before the lapse of the five (5) year
period, and provided further, that the extended
development period shall be one (1) year for every
five (5) hectares, but in no case shall the extension
exceed five (5) years.
34.3 The conditions thereof shall be binding upon
successors-in-interest of the property."
April 13, 2004
CONVERSION AND EXEMPTION; OCULAR INSPECTION FEES
 From the provisions of Sec. 1 par. 3(d) of R.A. No. 8532 and
Sec. 3.2 and 3.4 of DAR M.C. No. 2, Series of 2002, it is very
clear that inspection fees for application for conversion and
exemptions being paid by the applicants to the DAR thru
RCLUPPI as contained in DAR Administrative Order No. 1,
Series of 2002 shall be remitted to the Agrarian Reform
Fund. Payment by the applicant of such inspections fees
should be made directly to the cashier office of DAR
Regional/Central Office. As such, any disbursement of said
funds, which includes inspection fees, shall be subject to
the existing normal accounting and auditing rules and
regulations.

January 27, 2006
CONVERSION CLEARANCE
 There is no need to apply for a separate DAR conversion
clearance over a portion of the landholding where a
clearance had already been issued. The conversion
clearance issued by the PARO is encompassing as to
include amenities incidental in carrying out the thrust and
objective of the organization. It must be emphasized,
however, that the area intended for said purpose is really
within the same landholding, otherwise, application for land
use conversion is already required.

March 3, 2010
CONVERSION CLEARANCE; CONVERSION CLEARANCE NO

LONGER NEEDED ON AGRICULTURAL LANDS EXPROPRIATED BY
LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS (LGUs) PURSUANT TO THE POWER
OF EMINENT DOMAIN
Is Conversion Clearance required on agricultural lands
expropriated by LGU pursuant to the power of eminent
domain?
 Agricultural lands expropriated by Local Government Units

(LGUs) pursuant to the power of eminent domain need not
be subject of DAR conversion clearance prior to change in
use. In Camarines Sur vs. Court of Appeals, the Supreme
Court ruled:
"Resolution No. 129, series of 1988, was

promulgated pursuant to Section 9 of B.P. Blg. 337,
Local Government Code, xxx Section 9 of B.P. Blg.
337 does not intimate in the least that local
government units must first secure the approval of
the Department of Land Reform for the conversion
of lands from agricultural to non-agricultural use,
before they can institute the necessary
expropriation proceedings. Likewise, there is no
provision in the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Law which expressly subjects the expropriation of
agricultural lands by local government units to the
control of the Department of Agrarian Reform.
xxx
xxx xxx
To sustain the Court of Appeals would mean that
the local government units can no longer
expropriate agricultural lands needed for the
construction of roads, bridges, schools, hospitals,
etc., without first applying for conversion of the use
of the lands with the Department of Agrarian
Reform, because all of these projects would
naturally involve a change in the land use. In effect,
it would then be the Department of Agrarian Reform
to scrutinize whether the expropriation is for a
public purpose or public use."
July 9, 2003
CONVERSION CLEARANCE; NOT NECESSARY FOR LANDS

EXEMPTED FROM CARP COVERAGE BY REASON OF
RECLASSIFICATION BEFORE 15 JUNE 1988
 "Section 3. Applicability of Rules — These guidelines shall

apply to all applications for conversion, from agricultural to
non-agricultural uses, such as:
3.4. Conversion of agricultural lands or areas

that have been reclassified by the LGU or by way of
a Presidential Proclamation, to residential,
commercial, industrial, or other non-agricultural
uses on or after the effectivity of RA 6657 on 15
June 1988, pursuant to Section 20 of RA 7160, and
other pertinent laws and regulations, and are to be
converted to such uses. However, for those
reclassified prior to 15 June 1988, the guidelines in
securing an exemption clearance from the DAR
shall apply."
 It can be clearly inferred from the above provisions that DAR

Conversion Clearance is no longer necessary for lands
exempted from CARP Coverage by reason of its
reclassification as commercial, residential or industrial
before 15 June 1988 and, that, only an exemption clearance
is required. However, in your case, conversion clearance is
necessary before any development on the land may be
introduced because as per HLURB Certificate dated 28
August 2006 issued by Director Pilar J. Jamandre of HLURB
Region VI, the subject landholdings are reclassified after
June 15, 1988.

February 7, 2007
CONVERSION CLEARANCE; NOT NEEDED ON AGRICULTURAL

LANDS EXPROPRIATED BY LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS
(LGUs) PURSUANT TO THE POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN
 The ruling in Camarines Sur may not be applicable in the

instant case since it appears that the subject land was not
expropriated by the LGU but was acquired through a
private transaction. Only agricultural lands expropriated by
local government units (LGUs) pursuant to the power of
eminent domain may no longer be the subject of DAR
conversion clearance prior to change in use. Thus, an
application for conversion and DAR conversion clearance
shall still be required if said agricultural lands shall be
converted into residential or housing.
 On the other hand, should the subject lands be expropriated
by the LGU rather than privately acquired, DAR conversion
clearance may no longer be required pursuant to the said
ruling in Camarines Sur.

February 4, 2004
CONVERSION CLEARANCE; NOT NEEDED ON AGRICULTURAL

LANDS EXPROPRIATED BY LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS
(LGUs) PURSUANT TO THE POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN
 Agricultural lands expropriated by Local Government Units

(LGUs) pursuant to the power of eminent domain need not
be subject of DAR conversion clearance prior to change in
use. In Camarines Sur vs. Court of Appeals, the Supreme
Court ruled:
"Resolution No. 129, series of 1988, was promulgated

pursuant to Section 9 of B.P. Blg. 337, Local
Government Code, xxx Section 9 of B.P. Blg. 337 does
not intimate in the least that local government units
must first secure the approval of the Department of
Land Reform for the conversion of lands from
agricultural to non-agricultural use, before they can
institute the necessary expropriation proceedings.
Likewise, there is no provision in the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law which expressly subjects the
expropriation of agricultural lands by local government
units to the control of the Department of Agrarian
Reform.
xxx xxx xxx
To sustain the Court of Appeals would mean that the
local government units can no longer expropriate
agricultural lands needed for the construction of roads,
bridges, schools, hospitals, etc., without first applying
for conversion of the use of the lands with the
Department of Agrarian Reform, because all of these
projects would naturally involve a change in the land
use. In effect, it would then be the Department of
Agrarian Reform to scrutinize whether the expropriation
is for a public purpose or public use."
July 9, 2003
CONVERSION OR EXEMPTION; NOT AUTOMATIC
Is an application for conversion or exemption still required?
 DAR Administrative Order No. 01, Series of 2002 (2002

Comprehensive Rules on Land Use Conversion); provides:
"Section 6. Priority Development Areas and

Projects —
6.1 In accordance with RA 7916, EO-124-1993,
and EO-258-2000, the following are priority
development areas for land conversion:
xxx
xxx xxx
6.1.3 Agricultural areas intended for Eco Zone
Projects, endorsed by Philippine Economic Zone
Authority (PEZA), pursuant to RA 7916."
 Conversion or exemption is not automatic. It must be on the

merits after proper and thorough determination pursuant to
the requirements and provisions of existing law and
guidelines on conversion and/or exemption, as the case
may be. Thus, an application for and order of conversion or
exemption is still required.

December 16, 2003
CONVERSION OR EXEMPTION; PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT
AREAS AND PROJECTS
 DAR Administrative Order No. 01, Series of 2002 ( 2002

Comprehensive Rules on Land Use Conversion); provides:
"Section 6. Priority Development Areas and

Projects. —
6.1 In accordance with RA 7916, EO-
124-1993, and EO-258-2000, the following are
priority development areas for land
conversion:
xxx xxx
xxx
6.1.3 Agricultural areas intended for
Eco Zone Projects, endorsed by
Philippine Economic Zone Authority
(PEZA), pursuant to RA 7916."
December 16, 2003
CONVERSION ORDER/CLEARANCE; REQUIRED BEFORE

CHANGING THE CURRENT USE OF A LANDHOLDING
 It is the DAR's mandate to preserve and maintain

agricultural lands with increased productivity. Any act
of changing the current use of a landholding is tantamount
to conversion which requires a conversion order/clearance
from DAR. An absence of said order/clearance is prohibited
by law.

November 10, 2005
CONVERSION ORDER; ATTACHED REQUIREMENT FOR
DEVELOPMENT PURPOSES
What is the purpose of the DAR Order of Conversion?
 The DAR Order of Conversion attaches to the land and

authorizes the development of the property as specified in
the application for conversion. Whoever owns the property
must observe the conditions specified in said Order relative
to the development of the property, otherwise the same
shall be recalled.

September 2, 1994
CONVERSION ORDER; EFFECT
What is the effect of a Conversion Order?
 DAR Order of Conversion is in effect a go-signal for the use

of the property for non-agricultural purposes, which further
means that as long as said property is developed for the
purpose specified in the application for conversion, it will
no longer be distributed to farmer-beneficiaries under the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program. DAR will place
the property under CARP compulsory coverage should there
be failure to implement and complete the development of
the area within the specified time, as provided in paragraph
XVI of DAR A.O. 12, Series of 1994.
DAR OPINION No. 14, s. 1995

April 3, 1995
Can the converted lot be sold by executing a Deed of

Absolute Sale?
 After the land has been converted, the same ceases to be

agricultural over which the DAR has no more jurisdiction.
Hence, it can already be sold by executing a Deed of
Absolute Sale. This is in consonance with the legal-maxim
in statutory construction that "when the reason of the law
ceases, the law ceases."
DAR OPINION NO. 01, s. of 1997

January 9, 1997
May lands classified by the Department of Agriculture as

no longer suitable for agriculture be sold to a third party
without applying the DAR rules on conversion?
 If the agricultural land has been found to be no longer

suitable or economically feasible and sound for agricultural
purposes as determined by the Department of Agriculture, it
can already be sold to a third party who may have interest
over the same. However, in this case, conversion of the
land shall first be required applying thereof the DAR rules
on conversion.

March 20, 1997
CONVERSION ORDER; MANDATORY/LEGAL REQUIREMENT
Is DAR Conversion Order a mandatory requirement?
 Landowners are required to apply for DAR Conversion Order

to enable them to legally convert a portion of their
agricultural lands to residential purposes. The intent of said
requirement is to allow the DAR to scrutinize the proposed
conversion and ensure that the same is not done to
circumvent the mandate of CARL to redistribute the
property to qualified beneficiaries.

July 22, 1994
Is Conversion Order a legal requirement before a farmlot
may be used for piggery project?
 The use of the farmlot for the piggery project must be

covered by a DAR Order of Conversion for the change in
land use to be considered legal.

October 16, 1995
CONVERSION ORDER; NO LONGER NECESSARY FOR

PROPERTIES RECLASSIFIED AS NON-AGRICULTURAL
PRIOR TO JUNE 15, 1988
 A conversion order is no longer necessary for properties

already reclassified as non-agricultural prior to June 15,
1988 or before the effectivity of CARP. However, an
exemption clearance is required. On the other hand, a
conversion order is necessary for those agricultural
properties reclassified as non-agricultural from June 15,
1988 onwards. Please note that a conversion order is
necessary before any conversion activities may be
performed on the subject lands.

August 7, 2001
CONVERSION; AWARDED LANDS
 Lands awarded to farmer-beneficiaries can be the subject of

conversion only after five (5) years from award when the
land ceases to be economically feasible and sound for
agricultural purposes, or the locality has become urbanized
and the land will have a greater economic value for
residential, commercial and industrial purposes. In such
case, the DAR, upon application of the beneficiary or the
landowner, with due notice to the affected parties, and
subject to existing laws, may authorize the reclassification
or conversion of the land and its disposition provided, that
the beneficiary shall have fully paid his obligation.

January 27, 2010
CONVERSION; RECLASSIFIED LANDS STILL NEEDS

CONVERSION ORDER
 Section 65 of R.A. No. 6657 provides that when a land

ceases to be of sound agricultural use, and the land will
have a greater economic value for residential, commercial,
or industrial purposes, the Department of Agrarian Reform
(DAR), upon application, may authorize the reclassification
or conversion of the land and its disposition. An application
before the DAR is a condition sine qua non in facilitating
the conversion of the landholding into another purpose
aside from agricultural use.
 Thus, landholding reclassified as non-agricultural by virtue

of a City Ordinance after the effectivity of R.A. No. 6657
still needs a conversion order from the DAR.

July 7, 2010
CONVERSION; RETROACTIVE EFFECT OF A.O. NO. 5, S.

2007
 DAR A.O. No. 5, Series of 2007 was issued which prescribes

rules and procedures relative to conversion of land from
agricultural to non-agricultural use, hence, can be
considered procedural in nature and could be given
retroactive effect. In view thereof, said guideline could be
applied retroactively to the application for PARO Clearance
filed by Iglesia ni Cristo for the church they have
constructed prior to the issuance of said guideline.
January 26, 2010
CONVERSION; TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF ALL

CONVERSION APPLICATION FOR RICELAND
 Malacañang Administrative Order No. 226-A dated 14 July

2008 temporarily suspended all land use conversion
applications affecting rice lands mentioned under Republic
Act No. 8435 considered as Network of Protected Areas for
Agriculture and Agro-Industrial Development (NPAAD)
which includes and covers all irrigated area, all irrigable
lands already covered by irrigation projects for two (2)
years and, in effect, repealed moratorium dated 15 April
2008 issued by Secretary Nasser C. Pangandaman.

November 25, 2008
CONVERSION; APPLICATION FOR CONVERSION, CANNOT BE

GIVEN DUE COURSE IF THERE IS ALREADY A NOTICE OF
ACQUISITION
May the application for conversion be given due course if

the DAR has already issued a Notice of Acquisition?
 DAR A.O. No. 12, Series of 1994 entitled, "Consolidated and

Revised Rules and Procedures Governing Conversion of
Agricultural Land to Non-agricultural Uses", specifically VI-
E provides that "No application for conversion shall be
given due course if 1) the DAR has issued a Notice of
Acquisition under the Compulsory Acquisition
process; . . . ."

December 24, 1996
CONVERSION; AREAS NON-NEGOTIABLE FOR CONVERSION

Are lands covered by commercial farm deferment
negotiable for conversion?
 Administrative Order No. 7, Series of 1997 (Item VI-B, 3 and

4) enumerates the areas which shall not be subject to or
non-negotiable for conversion; and the areas classified as
highly restricted from conversion. A reading of such
enumeration reveals that lands covered by a commercial
farm deferment order is not included among them. Hence,
lands may be the subject of an application for conversion
provided that the property has not been actually distributed
to the farmer-beneficiaries thereof and, provided further,
that the requirements mentioned under said guideline are
duly complied with if the subject lands for conversion fall
within Item VI-B (4-b and c) of the guideline

February 4, 1998
What are the lands that are non-negotiable for conversion?
 Under Administrative Order No. 20 of the Office of the

President, it expressly provides that the following shall not
be subject to and non-negotiable for conversion: 1) all
irrigated lands where water is available to support rice and
other crop production, and all irrigated lands where water
is not available for rice and other crop production but are
within areas programmed for irrigation facility rehabilitation
by the Department of Agriculture and National Irrigation
Administration; and 2) all irrigable lands already covered by
irrigation projects with firm funding commitments at the
time of the application for land use conversion.

July 1, 1997
CONVERSION; AS DISTINGUISHED FROM
RECLASSIFICATION
 DAR's conversion authority is most often seen as

synonymous with the power of local government units
(LGUs) to reclassify lands within their territorial
jurisdiction. This misconception has resulted in a clash, lot
of conflicts and confusion not only between the two
agencies but among other concerned sectors.
 "Reclassification" refers to the "act of specifying how

agricultural lands shall be utilized for non-agricultural uses
as residential, industrial, commercial, as embodied in the
land use plan, subject to the requirements and procedures
for conversion. It also includes the reversion of non-
agricultural use." (Joint HLURB, DAR, DA, DILG Memo
Circular Prescribing the Guidelines to Implement OP-MC 54,
[1995], sec. 2[2.3]). On the other hand, conversion is
defined by the same Memorandum Circular as the "act of
changing the current use of a piece of land into some other
use." (Id., sec. 2 [2.2])

September 27, 2007
CONVERSION; AUTHORITY OF DAR TO APPROVE CONVERSION

WITHIN OR OUTSIDE URBAN CENTERS OR CITY LIMITS
Whether or not landowners of agricultural lands within or
outside Urban center or City Limits need to apply for
conversion?
 If a piece of land is agricultural, whether it is within or

outside urban centers or city limits, it is coverable under
CARP and any change in the nature of its use to non
agricultural may not be allowed except with the approval of
DAR under its rules on conversion or exemption. When the
law does not distinguish, we should not distinguish.
 Thus, the act or process of changing the current use of a
piece of agricultural land into some other non-agricultural
use necessitates DAR approval notwithstanding that said
land is within city limits or urban centers, or, was
already reclassified into non-agricultural on or after 15
June 1988 as provided above.

September 10, 2001
CONVERSION; AUTHORITY OF DAR TO APPROVE OR

DISAPPROVE CONVERSION
What agency of the government has the authority to
approve or disapprove conversion?
 The authority to reclassify lands is lodged with the local

government units concerned pursuant to section 20 of R.A.
No. 7160 (Local Government Code) while the exclusive
authority to approve or disapprove applications for
conversion belongs to the Department of Agrarian Reform
as provided under Sections 4 (j) and 5 (l) of Executive Order
No. 129-A and Section 4 of presidential Memorandum
Circular No. 54, series of 1993.

August 28, 2003
CONVERSION; AUTHORITY OF DAR TO APPROVE OR

DISAPPROVE CONVERSION
What agency of the government has the authority to

approve or disapprove conversion?
 Pursuant to Section 4 (j) of Executive Order No. 129-A,

Series of 1987, the Department of Agrarian Reform is
mandated to "approve or disapprove applications for
conversion, restructuring or readjustment of agricultural
lands into non-agricultural uses". Section 4 (l) of said law
likewise vests in the DAR the exclusive authority to
approve or disapprove applications for conversion of
agricultural lands for residential, commercial, industrial,
and other land uses. Applications for conversion must
comply with the documentary requirements and procedures
as laid down under DAR Administrative Order No. 07, Series
of 1997.

March 22, 1999
Is Conversion Order necessary before the land can be

legally converted?
 If the land had not been devoted to poultry raising prior to

15 June 1988 (i.e., effectivity of R.A. No. 6657) but,
nevertheless, the landowner wishes to convert his land for
said purpose, the owner must perforce apply for conversion
pursuant to the provisions of Administrative Order No. 7,
Series of 1997, otherwise, the conversion of the crop land
without the benefit of DAR conversion clearance or
approval shall be construed as an intent to avoid the
application of CARP and will thus be considered as invalid
and illegal.
 The same rule applies even if the land is purportedly

devoted to poultry raising as of 15 June 1988 and
subsequently converted unilaterally by the landowner to
residential, commercial or industrial since the presumption
is that the land is agricultural. To forego with the
requirement of DAR Conversion Clearance on or after said
date might open the floodgates towards widespread
circumvention of the provisions of R.A. No. 6657 and is
violative of the legal mandate of DAR to approve or
disapprove applications for conversion from the aforesaid
date pursuant to Section 4 (j) and Section 5 (l) of Executive
Order No. 129-A, Series of 1997, and DOJ Opinion No. 44,
Series of 1990.

October 12, 1998

March 5, 1998
CONVERSION; AUTHORITY OF REGIONAL DIRECTOR TO
APPROVE CONVERSION
Who has the authority to approve conversion?
 Conversion of agricultural lands to non-agricultural uses

insofar as those with areas of not more than five (5)
hectares is cognizable by the DAR Regional Director. This is
pursuant to DAR A.O. No. 7, Series of 1997. Hence,
application for DAR Conversion Clearance cannot be
dispensed with.

March 22, 1999
CONVERSION; AUTHORITY TO APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE
Which has the authority to approve or disapprove

conversion?
 The exclusive authority to approve or disapprove

applications for conversion of agricultural lands for
residential, commercial, industrial and other land uses is
vested with the Department of Agrarian Reform (Sections
4(j) and 5(l), Executive Order No. 129-A, Series of 1987).
Section 65 of Republic Act No. 6657 (Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law) likewise empowers the DAR to
authorize under certain conditions, the conversion of
agricultural lands.
 Corollarily, DAR Administrative Order No. 08, Series of 1995
provides that any change in the nature of awarded lands'
use shall not be allowed except with the approval of the
DAR under its rules on conversion or exemption.

January 11, 2000
CONVERSION; BASES TO SUPPORT AN APPLICATION FOR

CONVERSION
What are the bases to support an application for
conversion?
 Pursuant to Section 4 of Memorandum Circular No. 54,

series of 1993 of the Office of the President, in relation to
Section 65 of R.A. No. 6657 and Sections 4 (j) and 5 (l) of
Executive Order No. 129-A, actions on application for land
use conversions shall remain as the responsibility of DAR.
The DAR shall, in such applications, utilize as its primary
reference, documents on the Comprehensive Land Use Plan
and accompanying ordinance passed upon and approved by
the local government units concerned, together with the
National Land Use Policy. It must be stressed, however ,
that although said documents serve as bases to support an
Application for Conversion, actual land use conversion
takes place only upon the issuance of a DAR Order
approving said application.

September 10, 2001
CONVERSION; BASIS OF COMPUTATION OF FILING FEES FOR

APPLICATION
What is the basis of computing the filing fees for

application for conversion?
 Section 12, Art. III of DAR A.O. No. 01, Series of 1999
provides for the rates of filing fees in applications for
conversion, that is, the size or area of the land being sought
to be converted.

October 6, 1999
CONVERSION; BEFORE THE EFFECTIVITY OF CARL
Is the conversion of property before the effectivity of CARL

or without the authority to convert falls within the purview
of CARL?
 The conversion of the property to industrial uses long before

the effectivity of CARL, if made without the requisite
authority to convert did not have the effect of legally
placing the property outside the classification of
agricultural land, hence, the same still falls within the
purview of CARL. It follows that a DAR Clearance for
conversion must first be obtained.

July 18, 1996
CONVERSION; CARP AWARDED LAND
Are lands awarded to farmer-beneficiaries be the subject

of conversion?
 Pursuant to Section 65 of R.A. No. 6657, lands awarded to

farmer-beneficiaries can be the subject of conversion only
after five (5) years from award when the land ceases to be
economically feasible and sound for agricultural purposes,
or the locality has become urbanized and the land will have
a greater economic value for residential, commercial or
industrial purposes. In such case, the DAR, upon
application of the beneficiary or the landowner, with due
notice to the affected parties, and subject to existing laws,
may authorize the reclassification or conversion of the land
and its disposition: provided, that the beneficiary shall have
fully paid his obligation. Obviously, the construction of a
post harvest facility which is the solar dryer of the farmer
cooperative will in effect change the current use of the land
from agricultural to non-agricultural which therefore
necessitates an application for conversion pursuant to DAR
Administrative Order No. 07, Series of 1997.

December 8, 1998
CONVERSION; CARP AWARDED LANDS
 Once an application for conversion is granted by DAR, it

follows that the awarded land is eligible for
disposition/conveyance to persons outside those
enumerated under Section 27 of R.A. No. 6657 and A.O. No.
8, series of 1995.
 It is explicit from the provision of Section 65 of R.A. No.

6657 that reclassification or conversion and disposition of
awarded lands after the lapse of five (5) years is allowed
provided that the land ceases to be economically feasible
and sound for agricultural purposes, or the locality has
become urbanized and that the land have a greater value
for purposes other than agricultural.
 That the transfer of awarded lands prior to the lapse of ten

(10) years from its award is allowed only after full payment
of land amortization and provided, further that the
conditions/pre-requisites laid down in Section 65, or under
A.O. No. 8, Series of 1995 are observed.

June 2, 2009
CONVERSION; CLEARANCE FOR ROAD CONSTRUCTION

Is DAR Conversion Clearance required for purposes of
building a road within an agricultural road?
 DAR Conversion clearance is still necessary for the purpose

of building a road within an agricultural land. Building said
road is an act of conversion because it would change the
use of the land from agricultural to non-agricultural, albeit
the same would likewise facilitate the transport of
agricultural products.
 Prior DAR approval must be sought when a portion of

agricultural land is intended to be used as a road to
safeguard against indiscriminate land use conversion to the
detriment of agricultural production.

December 13, 1996
CONVERSION; COCONUT LANDS ELIGIBLE FOR LAND USE

CONVERSION
 Should the coconut land not belong to either item I or II of

Article II Sections 4 and 5 of DAR A.O. No. 1, Series of 2002,
then the same can be a subject of an application for
conversion.
 Malacañang Administrative Order No. 226 dated 16 May

2008 was to temporarily suspend all land use conversion
applications affecting rice lands mentioned under Republic
Act No. 8435 considered as Network of Protected Areas for
Agriculture and Agro-Industrial Development (NPAAD) for
two (2) years and, in effect, repealed moratorium dated 15
April 2008 issued by Secretary Nasser C. Pangandaman,
which temporarily suspended all Land Use Conversion
applications. Clearly, therefore, coconut lands are not
included in the said A.O.
October 9, 2008
CONVERSION; COMMENCES UPON THE ISSUANCES OF A

DAR ORDER APPROVING SAID APPLICATION
 Pursuant to Section 4 of Memorandum Circular No. 54,

series of 1993 of the Office of the President, in relation to
Section 65 of R.A. No. 6657 and Sections 4 (j) and 5 (l) of
Executive Order No. 129-A, actions on application for land
use conversions shall remain as the responsibility of DAR.
The DAR shall, in such applications, utilize as its primary
reference, documents on the Comprehensive Land Use Plan
and accompanying ordinance passed upon and approved by
the local government units concerned, together with the
National Land Use Policy. It must be stressed, however,
that although said documents serve as bases to support an
Application for Conversion, actual land use conversion
takes place only upon the issuance of a DAR Order
approving said application.

September 10, 2001
CONVERSION; CONDITIONS
When may the conversion of farmlot be allowed by DAR?
 The conversion of farmlot may be allowed by DAR only if the

following conditions are satisfied:
a. that 5 years have elapsed from the award thereof;

b. that the land has ceased to be economically feasible
and sound for agricultural purposes or the locality has
become urbanized and the land will have a greater
economic value for residential, commercial or industrial
purposes; and
c. that the farmlot has been fully paid.

January 25, 1996
CONVERSION; CONSTRUCTION OF FEEDER ROAD

CONSTITUTES CONVERSION
 Any change of the current use of an agricultural land to non

agricultural use is tantamount to conversion, no matter how
minimal the area that will be covered or affected by such
change. The construction of a feeder road, which is a
branch railway to a main line or minor road to a main one, is
already an act of conversion because it would change the
use of the land from agricultural to non agricultural even if
the same would likewise facilitate the transport of
agricultural products.
 Conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural use is

strictly regulated and may be allowed only when the
conditions prescribed under R.A. No. 6657 and/or R.A. No.
8435 are present and complied with (DAR A.O. No. 01,
series of 2002, 2002 Comprehensive Rules on Land Use
Conversion).

January 4, 2008
CONVERSION; CONVERSION CLEARANCE NECESSARY BEFORE

CONVERSION OF AN AGRICULTURAL LAND RECLASSIFIED AS
NON-AGRICULTURAL AFTER 15 JUNE 1988 TAKES PLACE
Whether or not conversion clearance must be secured first
before agricultural lands which are reclassified as non-
agricultural after 15 June 1988 be converted?
 With respect to agricultural lands which are reclassified to

commercial, industrial or residential in the new or revised
town plans promulgated by the local government unit (LGU)
and approved by the HLURB or by the Sangguniang
Panlalawigan (SP) after June 15, 1988 in accordance with
Section 20 of R.A. No. 7160 (Local Government Code), and
other pertinent laws and regulations, Conversion Clearance
must be secured from the DAR before these lands may be
converted to such uses.

September 10, 2001
CONVERSION; CONVERSION CLEARANCE NO LONGER NEEDED

ON AGRICULTURAL LANDS EXPROPRIATED BY LOCAL
GOVERNMENT UNITS (LGUs) PURSUANT TO THE POWER OF
EMINENT DOMAIN
Is Conversion Clearance required on agricultural lands
expropriated by LGU pursuant to the power of eminent
domain?
 The ruling in Camarines Sur may not be applicable in the

instant case since it appears that the subject land was not
expropriated by the LGU but was acquired through a private
transaction. Only agricultural lands expropriated by local
government units (LGUs) pursuant to the power of eminent
domain may no longer be the subject of DAR conversion
clearance prior to change in use. Thus, an application for
conversion and DAR conversion clearance shall still be
required if said agricultural lands shall be converted into
residential or housing.
 On the other hand, should the subject lands be expropriated
by the LGU rather than privately acquired, DAR conversion
clearance may no longer be required pursuant to the said
ruling in Camarines Sur.

February 4, 2004
CONVERSION; CONVERSION CLEARANCE REQUIRED BEFORE
LANDHOLDINGS ARE CONVERTED INTO A FARMLOT
SUBDIVISION
Is DAR Conversion Clearance required before said landholdings
are to be converted into a farmlot subdivision?
 If subject properties are to be developed into a farmlot

subdivision under such facts and circumstances as
planned, said lands will in effect revert to agricultural since
they will no longer be actually, directly and exclusively
used for the purpose for which they were exempted (i.e.,
livestock). Thus, they may be covered under the
Accordingly, conversion clearance is necessary if said
landholdings are to be converted into a farmlot subdivision.

March 2, 2004
CONVERSION; CONVERSION OF A PORTION OF AN

AGRICULTURAL LAND FOR THE PURPOSE OF ERECTING A CELL
SITE
Is conversion order required in converting a portion of an
agricultural land for the purpose of erecting a cell site?
 DAR's mandate is to preserve and maintain agricultural

lands with increased productivity. But where, as apparently
it is herein, there is need for conversion in the land use of
an agricultural land, existing laws and issuances have
provided for the conditions and requirements therefore.
Should there be non-compliance, same may constitute a
prohibited act under Section 73 of Republic Act No. 6657
and related laws and, accordingly, criminally punishable.

June 7, 2002
CONVERSION; CONVERSION OF COCONUT LAND INTO
RESIDENTIAL, BUILDING PERMIT
Is Conversion Order required in converting coconut lands

into residential?
 This Department has consistently enunciated the basic rule

that if the land is classified as agricultural, it may be used
for non-agricultural purposes, only if an application for
conversion has been approved by the Department of
Agrarian Reform (DAR). As defined in this jurisdiction,
conversion is the act of changing the current use of a piece
of agricultural land into some other uses, i.e., residential,
commercial or industrial. The conversion of subject
coconut land into residential land may be legally
undertaken only after approval thereof by the DAR as
provided in Sections 4 (j) and 5 (l) of Executive Order No.
129-A, Series of 1987 in relation with DAR Administrative
Order No. 7, Series of 1997.
 Moreover, it is a requirement under P.D. No. 1096 (Section
301 thereof) that no person, firm or corporation, including
any agency or instrumentality of the government shall
erect, construct, alter, repair, move, convert or demolish
any building or structure or cause the same to be done
without first obtaining a building permit therefor from the
Building Official assigned in the place where the building is
located or the building work is to be done.

March 22, 1999
CONVERSION; CONVERTED PROPERTY MAY BE USED AS

COLLATERAL IN A CONTRACT OF MORTGAGE WITH THE BANK
Is it proper to use the converted property as collateral in a

contract of mortgage with the bank?
 There is nothing illegal nor improper to use the converted
property as collateral in a contract of mortgage with the
bank. The rationale for the allowance of a mortgage as
security is premised on the theory that contract of
mortgage is even less burdensome than the contract of
sale. It stands to reason that if a converted property can be
the subject of a contract of sale, with more reason that it
can be the subject of a contract of mortgage. As held by the
Supreme Court in the case of "Adlawan, et al. vs. Hon.
Torres, et al." G.R. No. 65957-58, July 5, 1994, by
mortgaging a piece of property, a debtor merely subject it
to a lien but ownership thereof is not parted with.
 Moreover, after the property has been legally converted, the
same ceases to be agricultural over which the DAR has no
more jurisdiction. The aforecited interpretation is in
consonance with the legal maxim in statutory construction
that "when the reason of the law ceases, the law ceases".
Such being the case, there is no reason much less legal
impediment why the property which has been legally
converted cannot be the object of a contract of mortgage to
finance the proposed project.

January 27, 1997
CONVERSION; CREATION OF PROVINCIAL/CITY TASK

FORCES ON ILLEGAL CONVERSION
 Under Article IX, Sections 50 and 54.1 of DAR

Administrative Order No. 1, Series of 2002 (2002
Comprehensive Rules on Land Use Conversion) in relation
to Item III.A and B of Joint DAR-DOJ Administrative Order
No. 05, Series of 1994 that it is mandatory to create
Provincial/City Task Forces on Illegal Conversion which are
responsible for the investigation, gathering of evidence,
filing and monitoring of complaints against illegal,
premature or unauthorized conversion within their
respective areas of jurisdiction.
DLR OPINION NO. 24, s. 2005

September 13, 2005
CONVERSION; DAR’S AUTHORITY TO APPROVE

 Reclassification may be allowed provided there is
compliance with the requirement of DAR Certification that
subject lands are not distributed or covered by a notice of
acquisition/valuation and, provided further, that, said lands
are not classified as non-negotiable for conversion.
However, while ordinances reclassifying lands are not
subject to DAR approval, finality of the ordinance
reclassifying the land will not convert the agricultural areas
covered thereby to non-agricultural uses. It is still the DAR
which has the exclusive authority and jurisdiction to order
the conversion of agricultural lands to non-agricultural uses
as it is the DAR’s mandate to preserve and maintain
agricultural lands with increased productivity and any act
of changing the current use of a landholding is tantamount
to conversion which requires a conversion order/clearance
from DAR. Thus, an absence of said order/clearance is
prohibited by law.
 The provision of Section 20 of R.A. No. 7160 is explicit when
it provides a city or municipality may, through an ordinance
passed by the sanggunian after conducting public hearings
for the purpose, authorize the reclassification of
agricultural lands and provide for the manner of their
utilization or disposition in the following cases: (1) when
the land ceases to be economically feasible and sound for
agricultural purposes as determined by the Department of
Agriculture or (2) where the land shall have substantially
greater economic value for residential, commercial, or
industrial purposes, as determined by the sanggunian
concerned.
February 2, 2009
CONVERSION; DAR's AUTHORITY TO APPROVE OR

DISAPPROVE AS MANDATED UNDER E.O. NO. 129-A
 The mandate of the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) in

the area of land use conversion is found in the following
provisions of law:
1. Sections 4 (j) and 5 (l) of Executive Order No.

129-A (Modifying Executive Order No. 129 Reorganizing
and Strengthening Department of Agrarian Reform and for
Other Purposes):
"Section 4. Mandate. — The Department shall be responsible
for implementing the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program
and, for such purpose, it is authorized to:
xxx xxx
xxx
j) Approve or disapprove the conversion,
restructuring or readjustment of agricultural lands into
non-agricultural uses;
xxx xxx xxx
Section 5. Powers and Functions. — Pursuant to the
mandate of the Department and in order to ensure the
successful implementation of the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Program, the Department is hereby authorized to:
xxx xxx xxx
l) Have exclusive authority to approve or

disapprove conversion of agricultural lands for
residential, commercial, industrial, and other
land uses as may be provided for by law."
2. Section 65 of Republic Act No. 6657, otherwise

known as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law:
"SECTION 65. Conversion of Lands. —
After the lapse of five (5) years from its award,
when the land ceases to be economically feasible
and sound for agricultural purposes, or the locality
has become urbanized and the land will have a
greater economic value for residential, commercial
or industrial purposes, the DAR, upon application of
the beneficiary or the landowner, with due notice to
the affected parties, and subject to existing laws,
may authorize the reclassification or conversion of
the land and its disposition: Provided, That the
beneficiary shall have fully paid his obligation."
February 7, 2007
CONVERSION; DAR'S EVALUATION AND APPROVAL
Is the use of an agricultural land for non-agricultural

purposes subject to DAR's evaluation and approval?
 Since land use conversion falls within the jurisdiction of the

DAR, the use of an agricultural land for non-agricultural
purposes is subject to DAR's evaluation and approval. This
means that before an agricultural land embraced by
Ordinance No. 10 may be used for non-agricultural purposes
an application for conversion thereof must be filed with the
DAR
 Land Use Conversion is the actual change in land use from
agricultural to non-agricultural and goes through the DAR's
evaluation process, which takes into account the tenants
and farmworkers, if any, on the landholding and the
ascertainment of disturbance compensation.

March 27, 1996
CONVERSION; DEFINED
How is conversion defined?
 Conversion is defined as the act of changing the current use

of a piece of agricultural land into some other uses, i.e.,
residential, commercial or industrial. The conversion of an
agricultural land to non-agricultural use may be legally
undertaken only after approval thereof by the DAR.

November 7, 2000

December 23, 1999
CONVERSION; DEFINED, ROLE OF DAR
What is conversion?
 Conversion is defined as the act of changing the current use

of a piece of agricultural land into some other uses, i.e.,
residential, commercial or industrial. There is no
conversion to speak of if the change of crop will not change
the use of the land as agricultural.

February 22, 1995
Who shall approve or disapprove the conversion of

agricultural lands into other land uses?
 The authority to approve or disapprove application for land

use conversion vests exclusively in the Department of
Agrarian Reform (E.O. No. 129-A, Series of 1987). Likewise,
A.O. No. 12, series of 1994 provides that the DAR is
mandated to approve or disapprove applications for
lands into non-agricultural uses. It can be logically inferred
therefrom that the formulation of guidelines relative thereto
shall also be within the jurisdiction of the DAR.

December 13, 1996
CONVERSION; DISTINCTION BETWEEN LAND USE CONVERSION

AND FARMLOT SUBDIVISION
What is the difference between Land Use Conversion and
Farmlot Subdivision?
 As defined in DAR Administrative Order No. 01, Series of

1999, "land use conversion" refers to the act or process of
changing the current use of a piece of agricultural land into
some other use as approved by DAR. On the other hand, a
"farmlot subdivision" had been defined under the Human
Settlements Regulatory Commission (now Housing and
Land Use Regulatory Board) Rules and Regulations
Implementing Farmlot Subdivision Plan as "a Planned
community intended primarily for intensive agricultural
activities, and secondarily for housing."

August 9, 2001
CONVERSION; DISTINCTION BETWEEN LAND USE

CONVERSION AND FARMLOT SUBDIVISION

1999, "land use conversion" refers to the act or process of
changing the current use of a piece of agricultural land into
some other use as approved by DAR. On the other hand, a
"farmlot subdivision" had been defined under the Human
Settlements Regulatory Commission (now Housing and
Land Use Regulatory Board) Rules and Regulations
Implementing Farmlot Subdivision Plan as "a Planned
community intended primarily for intensive agricultural
activities, and secondarily for housing."

August 9, 2001
CONVERSION; DISTINGUISHED FROM LAND RECLASSIFICATION
Are reclassification and conversion synonymous with each

other?
 Reclassification and conversion are not synonymous and

therefore do not refer to one and the same thing. Land
reclassification is a power exercised by the municipal or
city government through the town planning process,
subject to review and approval by the Provincial
Sanggunian through the Provincial Land Use Council
(PLUC). Land Use Conversion, on the other hand, is the
actual change in land use from agricultural to non-
agricultural and goes through the DAR's evaluation process,
which takes into account the tenants and farmworkers, if
any, on the landholding and the ascertainment of
disturbance compensation. It bears stressing here that
ordinances reclassifying lands are not subject to DAR
approval, however, the finality of the ordinance
reclassifying the land will not convert the agricultural areas
covered thereby to non-agricultural uses. Land use
conversion legally falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of
the DAR, thus, the change in the use of an agricultural land
for non-agricultural purposes is subject to DAR's evaluation
and approval.

February 11, 1999
Is conversion under RA 6657 the same as reclassification

under the Local Government Code?
 Conversion refers to the "change of the current use" of an
agricultural land to non-agricultural use which is within the
legal jurisdiction of DAR pursuant to the provisions of
Section 4 (j) and 5 (l) of Executive Order No. 129-A, Series
of 1987, Section 65 of R.A. No. 6657, Section 4 of
Memorandum Circular No. 54, Series of 1993 of the Office of
the President, Malacañang Administrative Order No. 363,
Series of 1997 and DAR Administrative Order No. 07, Series
of 1997. On the other hand, R.A. No. 7160 or the Local
Government Code speaks of reclassification not
conversion. Land use reclassification by the Local
Government Unit does not place the subject property
outside the purview of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Program since it merely specifies how agricultural lands
shall be utilized for non-agricultural uses such as
residential, industrial, commercial as embodied in the land
use plan. In other words, R.A. No. 7160 speaks only of
reclassification not conversion which is still within the
legal jurisdiction of the Department of Agrarian Reform.

July 7, 1998
CONVERSION; DOCUMENTS REQUIRED FOR APPLICATION

FOR CONVERSION
 Please be reminded that in the implementation of the

Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP), the
pertinent administrative orders, memorandum and other
rules and guidelines applicable on the matter must be
observed, unless they are abrogated, suspended, repealed,
or superseded. Henceforth, applicant Iglesia Ni Cristo must
comply the required submission of documents, otherwise
the said application will be denied. The DAR personnel
cannot do away such rules and guidelines without infringing
the procedural due process in the implementation of the
CAR Program. The applicable rule on the matter is
Administrative Order No. 1, Series of 2002, entitled
Comprehensive Rules on Land Use Conversion. Thus, the
aforementioned administrative order should be your guiding
rule on the issue.

July 25, 2006
CONVERSION; DOCUMENTS REQUIRED FOR APPLICATION OF

CONVERSION
What are the documents required to support the
application for conversion?
 As to the documents required to support the application for

conversion, you my refer to Administrative Order No. 01,
series of 1999 for your general guidance and reference.

July 9, 2001
CONVERSION; EFFECT OF FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE

CONDITIONS OF CONVERSION ORDER
What is the effect of failure to comply with the conditions
of conversion order?
 Effect of Failure to Comply with the Conditions Enumerated

in Section 33 (Conditions of Conversion order) of Article V
(Issuance of Conversion Order and its Effects), Particularly
the Period Within Which the Applicant Must Submit
Documents to the Regional Center for Land Use Policy
Planning and Implementation (RCLUPPI)
Pertinent to the above issue are the following

provisions of DAR Administrative Order No. 01, series of
2002:
Section 47. Grounds. — The following acts or
omissions shall warrant revocation of the Conversion Order:
xxx
xxx xxx
47.3. Non-compliance with the conditions of the
Conversion Order. (emphasis supplied)
Section 61. Administrative Sanctions. — The DAR may
impose any or all of the following sanctions after determining,
in an appropriate administrative proceeding, that a violation of
these Rules has been committed:
61.1. Revocation or withdrawal of the authorization
for land use conversion;
61.2. Blacklisting of the applicant, developer or
representative;
61.3. Automatic disapproval of pending and
subsequent conversion applications that the
offender may file with the DAR;
61.4. Issuance of cease and desist order by the
Secretary or Regional Director, as the case may
be, upon verified reports that premature, illegal or
unauthorized conversion activities are being
undertaken; or
61.5. Forfeiture of cash bond or performance bond."
(emphasis supplied)
 Given the above provisions, the time frame stated in the

conditions of the Conversion Order must be complied with.
Otherwise, corresponding sanctions could be imposed, as
may be warranted.

December 9, 2003
CONVERSION; EFFECT OF REVOCATION OF CONVERSION
ORDER
 Pursuant to Section 49 of Administrative Order No. 1, Series

of 2002 (2002 Comprehensive Rules on Land Use
Conversion), the effect of the revocation of the conversion
order is that the land subject thereof shall be reverted to
the status of agricultural lands and shall be subjected to
CARP coverage as circumstances may warrant. Thus, the
landholding subject of the revocation order can be
subjected to CARP acquisition for distribution to qualified
beneficiaries.

May 3, 2005
CONVERSION; EFFECTS OF APPROVED CONVERSION

ORDER
 Section 34, DAR Administrative Order No. 01, Series of 2002
"Section 34. Effects of approval of conversion. — The

approval of an application for conversion shall have, but
shall not be limited to, the following effects:
34.1 It shall be limited to the specific use of
the land authorized in the Conversion Order;
34.2 It shall be subject to the schedule
indicated in the detailed site development, work
and financial plans, but in no case shall the period
of development extend beyond five (5) years from
issuance of the Conversion Order except as
authorized by the Secretary or the approving
official on meritorious grounds, provided that, if
the development cannot be accomplished within
five (5) years, the grantee of the Conversion Order
shall submit a written request for extension within
the six (6) months before the lapse of the five (5)
year period, and provided further, that the
extended development period shall be one (1) year
for every five (5) hectares, but in no case shall the
extension exceed five (5) years.
34.3 The conditions thereof shall be binding
upon successors-in-interest of the property."
April 13, 2004
CONVERSION; EXEMPTION FROM CONVERSION CLEARANCE OF

GOVERNMENT OWNED AND CONTROLLED CORPORATIONS
Is a government-owned and controlled corporation exempt

from Conversion Clearance thru the exercise of its right to
eminent domain?
 Landholdings acquired by NPC, a Government-Owned and

Controlled Corporation, thru the exercise of its right to
eminent domain shall be exempt from Conversion
Clearance since the intention for which said landholdings
has been expropriated is for public use and public purpose.
Permits/clearances are required only to conversion or
reclassification submitted by landowners or tenant
beneficiaries but not to lands taken by the government for
public use or purpose.
 It has to be established, however, that the expropriation is
indeed for public use and that the subject agricultural lands
are not to be owned by the National Power Corporation
and/or its partner-entity in their proprietary capacity
actually and primarily intended for profit or pecuniary
purposes, otherwise, the project partakes of the nature of a
private endeavor where the provisions of DAR
Administrative Order No. 7, Series of 1997 will apply. Item
No. IV (c) of said guideline provides:
"IV. Who may apply for conversion:

xxx
xxx xxx
Government agencies, including government owned or
controlled corporations."

May 19, 1998
Is a Conversion Clearance condition sine qua non before

conversion can be legally undertaken?
 The issuance of DAR Conversion Order by the Department of

Agrarian Reform is a mandatory requirement intended to
preserve prime agricultural lands for food production
purposes, and to give highest priority to the completion of
the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP). In
line with this declared policy, the DAR as the agency
tasked to implement the agrarian reform program of the
government is mandated pursuant to Section 4 (j) of
Executive Order No. 129-A, Series of 1987 to approve or
disapprove the conversion, restructuring or readjustment of
agricultural lands into non-agricultural uses. Clearly, the
imposition of DAR Conversion Order as a condition sine qua
non before conversion can be legally undertaken is a
compulsory one, which exempts no one from compliance
therewith including government agencies and government-
owned or controlled corporations.

March 05, 1998
CONVERSION; FARMLOT SUBDIVISIONS STILL NEED

 The fact that there is a housing requirement is an indication

to change the use of an agricultural land to residential and
this is covered by the definition of "land use conversion". In
other words, the slightest change in the agricultural land
use to some other non-agricultural use (which in this case
is residential), no matter how minimal the area to be
covered by such change and even if housing is a secondary
purpose, will be interpreted as land use conversion. As
such, there is a need to apply for conversion clearance from
the DAR.
 The issuance of HLURB Resolution No. 750 (Liberalizing the
Requirements and License to Sell for Farmlot Subdivisions)
is no in accordance with DAR A.O. No. 1, Series of 2002
(Comprehensive Rules on Land Use Conversion). It appears
that the Board has put emphasis only on the definition of
farmlot subdivisions as a planned community intended
primarily for agricultural activity that became their basis in
the issuance of said Resolution without regard on the other
use of the land.

January 31, 2006
CONVERSION; FILING FEE, INSPECTION FEE AND

FORFEITED CASH BOND TO BE REMITTED TO ARF 158
 Section 1.d of R.A. No. 8532 [An Act Strengthening Further

the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP), by
Providing Augmentation Fund Therefor, Amending for the
Purpose Section 63 of Republic Act No. 6657, Otherwise
Known as "The CARP Law of 1988"] provides that among
the sources of funding or appropriations of the Agrarian
Reform Fund (ARF) include "all income and collections
arising from the agrarian reform operations, projects and
programs of CARP implementing agencies."
 Section 9.3.7 of DAR Memorandum Circular No. 02, Series of
2002 (Guidelines for the Processing of Land Use Conversion
Application's Pursuant to AO No. 1, Series of 2002) further
provides that "the bond forfeited pursuant to this
Memorandum Circular shall be remitted to ARF 158 in
accordance with Section 1.d of Republic Act No. 8532,
subject to existing accounting and auditing rules and
regulations."
 In view of the foregoing, collected filing and inspection fees
and forfeited cash bonds shall be remitted to ARF 158 and
may not therefore be allowed to be deposited in your local
trust account.

February 9, 2005
CONVERSION; GROUNDS THEREOF
What are the grounds for conversion?
 Sec. 65 of RA 6657 expressly provides for 2 grounds under

which the DAR may authorize the reclassification or
conversion and disposition of agricultural land awarded
pursuant to said law, to wit: when the land ceases to be
or the locality has become highly urbanized and the land
will have a greater economic value for residential,
commercial or industrial purposes.

December 13, 1996
CONVERSION; GUIDING PRINCIPLE
 The guiding principle for the policies on conversion is the

prevention of indiscriminate conversion of agricultural
lands to non-agricultural uses which may lead to the
diminution of CARP coverage and the undue displacement
of tenants and beneficiaries.
DAR OPINION NO. 03-A, s. 2009

March 6, 2009
CONVERSION; ILLEGAL CONVERSION CASE SHALL PROSPER
NOTWITHSTANDING THE ABSENCE OF A CEASE AND DESIST
ORDER
Whether or not a case for illegal conversion shall prosper
notwithstanding the absence of a cease and desist order?
 A case for illegal conversion shall prosper notwithstanding

the absence of a cease and desist order. It is not a
prerequisite for filing an illegal conversion case. What is
important is the existence of a prima facie case of illegal,
premature, or unauthorized conversion and the issuance of
a Cease and Desist Order is, at best, procedural and when
warranted by the circumstances to prevent further damage
to the agricultural state of the land involved.

October 1, 2001
CONVERSION; ILLEGAL CONVERSION, DAR AS COMPLAINANT
Can the DAR serve as complainant in illegal conversion

cases?
 Pursuant to Joint DAR-DOJ Administrative Order No. 04,

Series of 1993 as amended by Joint DAR-DOJ
Administrative Order No. 5, Series of 1994, it expressly
provides that the DAR Members of the Provincial/City Task
Force have the duty to file the necessary complaint-
affidavit together with supporting documents before the
task force member prosecutor. In turn, it is the duty and
responsibility of the DOJ Prosecutor Member to recommend
and file criminal cases before the courts against the
landowners and developers involved in illegal conversion of
agricultural lands under R.A. No. 6657. Likewise stated
therein is that the Provincial/City Task Force is jointly
headed by the DAR Chief Legal Officer in the province and
the Provincial or City Prosecutor. It has for its members
thereof the Chief Agrarian Reform Program Officer in the
said province including two (2) MAROs to be designated by
the PARO and, likewise, the Assistant Provincial/City
Prosecutors to be designated by the Provincial/City
Prosecutor.
 From the aforesaid circumstances, the Department of
Agrarian Reform which may be properly represented by the
Provincial Agrarian Reform Officers may serve as the
complainants in illegal conversion cases, considering that
they are in the best position to determine the factual
incidents regarding the matter.

April 08, 1998
CONVERSION; ILLEGAL, ELEMENTS
What are the elements of illegal conversion?
 Under paragraph (c) of Section 73 of R.A. no. 6657 there are

two elements of the crime of illegal conversion; first is the
conversion by any landowner of his agricultural land into
non-agricultural use with intent to avoid the application of
R.A. No. 6657, and second to dispossess his tenant farmers
of the land tilled by them. Absence of either of the elements
mentioned would result in the dismissal of the illegal
conversion case.
Does illegal conversion take place if the land is untenanted?
 There is no illegal conversion if the land is untenanted.

However, although the two elements must concur under
Sec. 73 par. © the absence of either may still cause the
prosecution of the crime of illegal conversion for the willful
prevention or obstruction by any person, association, or
entity of the implementation of the CARP under Section 73,
par. (d) of the same law.

MAY 8, 1997
CONVERSION; INSTANCES WHEN CONVERSION CLEARANCE

MAY BE DISPENSED WITH
What are the instances when we can dispense with
conversion clearance?
 DAR conversion clearance is no longer needed for lands

exempted from CARP coverage by reason of its
reclassification as commercial, residential or industrial
before 15 June 1988. Thus, in DAR Opinion No. 11, series of
2001, we stated that a conversion order is no longer
necessary for properties already classified as non-
agricultural prior to June 15, 1988 or before the effectivity
of CARP and, that, only an exemption clearance is required.
 Although in said opinion it was opined that exemption from
CARP coverage is not in the same nature as conversion of
agricultural land from agricultural use to non-agricultural
use, we qualified the same in the penultimate paragraph of
the same opinion that "DOJ Opinion No. 44, series of 1994
(sic) is the only ground for exemption which does not
require a conversion order/clearance". Thus, exemption
from CARP coverage pursuant to DOJ Opinion No. 44, series
of 1990 as implemented by DAR Administrative Order No. 6,
series of 1994 partakes in effect, as in the instant case, of
the nature of a conversion of agricultural lands from
agricultural to non-agricultural use since said lands
reclassified as non-agricultural prior to 15 June 1988 are no
longer deemed agricultural and covered by CARP pursuant
to DOJ Opinion No. 44, series of 1990 and Sections 3 (c)
and 4 of R.A. No. 6657.

July 12, 2002
CONVERSION; INSTANCES WHEN THE REQUISITE CLEARANCE
MAY BE DISPENSED WITH (ESTABLISHMENT OF POST-HARVEST
FACILITIES)
What are the instances when the requisite clearance for

conversion may be dispensed with?
 Prior DAR approval of a conversion application with all the

requirements thereof is no longer necessary should the
following conditions and qualifications are present after the
DAR had duly conducted the proper study, ocular inspection
and investigation in the area, to wit:
1. that the area applied for conversion into

rice/corn mill, warehouse or solar drier is virtually
insignificant relative to the total area affected;
2. that the conversion (i.e., establishment of
said post-harvest facilities) will not unduly tend to
endanger food security or self-sufficiency;
3. that the subject area is not an irrigated or
irrigable land already covered by an irrigation project with
firm funding commitment;
4. that the conversion will not be prejudicial to
the tenants or agrarian reform beneficiaries, if any, in the
area; and
5. that if the applicant is a leaseholder, consent
of the landowner is necessary (Section 36 (3), R.A. No.
3844, as amended).
 Under the above conditions and qualifications and upon

judicious review, a certification to that effect to be issued
by the DAR Regional Director on the basis of the findings
and recommendations of the PARO and MARO may suffice,
without necessarily requiring a formal application for
conversion and the concomitant issuance of a conversion
clearance pursuant to existing agrarian laws, rules and
regulations.
October 28, 1999
CONVERSION; IRRIGATED AND IRRIGABLE LANDS NOT

SUBJECT TO CONVERSION
 Section 22 of R.A. No. 9700 [An Act Strengthening the

Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP),
Extending the Acquisition and Distribution of All
Agricultural Lands, Instituting Necessary Reforms,
Amending for the Purpose Certain Provision of Republic Act
No. 6657, Otherwise Known as the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Law of 1988, As Amended, and Appropriating Funds
Therefor] provides that irrigated and irrigable lands shall
not be subject to conversion. Simply put, Malacanang
Administrative Order No. 226-A suspending for two (2) years
the processing and approval of all land conversion
applications for all rice lands is deemed repealed in view of
the latter law prohibiting the conversion of irrigated and
irrigable lands.

October 8, 2009
CONVERSION; IRRIGATED LANDS NON-NEGOTIABLE FOR

CONVERSION
Are irrigated lands subject to conversion?
 Administrative Order No. 20 of the Office of the President

provides that all irrigated lands are not subject to and non-
negotiable for conversion.

May 28, 1996
Are government agencies allowed to develop for
residential purposes lands which are irrigated?
 While transfer in favor of NHA is highly favored for

undoubtedly, it is the indigent that would benefit from it,
the same is not without limitation. Administrative Order No.
20, S. 1992 of the Office of the President expressly provides
that "all irrigated lands shall not be subject to and non-
negotiable for conversion". In this light, transfer in favor of
NHA cannot be granted as a matter of right even if it is a
government agency if the subject landholding is irrigated.
Conversely, if the landholding is un-irrigated, the same can
be devoted to the purpose intended provided the
requirements prescribed under DAR Administrative Order
No. 12, Series of 1994 on land use conversion are complied
with. Such being the case, the NHA should still file an
application for conversion.

January 28, 1997
CONVERSION; ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF ELIGIBILITY
Is the issuance of Certificate of eligibility required before

conversion of agricultural lands?
 Pursuant to Department of Agriculture Memorandum dated

07 October 1998, Certificates of Eligibility shall be issued
and approved by the Office of the Secretary of Agriculture
to ensure proper evaluation and monitoring of land use
conversion within the Strategic Agriculture and Fisheries
Development Zones (SAFDZs) and other prime agricultural
lands within the Network of Protected Areas for
Agricultural and Agro-industrial Development (NPAAD). The
DA Regional Field Units shall continue to document,
investigate and recommend action on applications for land
use conversion.
October 6, 1999
CONVERSION; LAND FALLING OUTSIDE AREAS NON-

NEGOTIABLE FOR CONVERSION
May an application for conversion be given course if the
land falls outside areas non-negotiable for conversion?
 If it falls outside areas non-negotiable for conversion then it

may be given due course. Hence, the existence of the said
provision in the penultimate paragraph of DAR Opinion No.
14, Series of 2001. The word "may" thereof is purposely to
emphasize that the granting of conversion in this instance
shall be on a case to case basis. This provision is in accord
with Section 8 (a) of DAR Administrative Order No. 01,
Series of 1999 which states that "Conversion may be
allowed if the land subject of application is not among
those considered non-negotiable for conversion"

October 16, 2002
CONVERSION; LANDHOLDING IS WITHIN PRIORITY

DEVELOPMENT AREA AND OUTSIDE AREAS NON-
NEGOTIABLE FOR CONVERSION
 The subject areas which fall under any of those cases

enumerated therein, although they form part of priority
development areas for conversion, are non-negotiable for
conversion. Consequently, DAR is thus mandated to place
them under CARP coverage for redistribution to qualified
agrarian reform beneficiaries. In which case, we could not
in principle indorse said areas for the issuance of a
Presidential Proclamation converting the same to non-
agricultural uses. On the other hand, should subject areas
fall within priority development areas for conversion and
are found to be outside areas-non-negotiable for
conversion, then your request for conversion may be given
due course.

August 21, 2001
CONVERSION; LANDS NON-NEGOTIABLE FOR CONVERSION

May an application for conversion involving areas non-
negotiable for conversion be given due course regardless
of whether all or some portions thereof are within priority
development areas for conversion?
 The subject areas which fall under any of those cases

enumerated therein, although they form part of priority
development areas for conversion, are non-negotiable for
conversion. Consequently, DAR is thus mandated to place
them under CARP coverage for redistribution to qualified
agrarian reform beneficiaries. In which case, we could not
in principle indorse said areas for the issuance of a
Presidential Proclamation converting the same to non-
agricultural uses. On the other hand, should subject areas
fall within priority development areas for conversion and
are found to be outside areas-non-negotiable for
conversion, then your request for conversion may be given
due course.

August 21, 2001
CONVERSION; LANDS NON-NEGOTIABLE FOR CONVERSION
Are applications for conversion involving irrigated and

potentially irrigable lands be given due course?
 On land classification, you stated that a letter from the

Director of the Department of Agriculture, Region III,
declares that the area is classified to be within the prime
agricultural zone consisting of irrigated lands; that Republic
Act No. 8435 (Agricultural & Fisheries Modernization Act)
refers to the Network of Protected Areas for Agricultural
and Agro-Industrial Development (NPAAAD) which includes
all irrigated lands; that Administrative Order No. 363, Series
of 1997 (Office of the President) states that Network for
Protected Agricultural Areas refers to lands reserved for
agricultural activities and which includes all irrigated and
potentially irrigable land; and that in all cases, applications
for conversion involving lands protected from and non-
negotiable for conversion shall not be given due course by
the DAR.

September 24, 1999
CONVERSION; LANDS SUBJECT OF DISAPPROVED PETITIONS

FOR CONVERSION NOT AUTOMATICALLY PLACED UNDER CARP
Are lands covered by petition for conversion which had

been disapproved automatically covered by CARP?
 The effect of the express repeal of A.O. No. 12, Series of

1994 by A.O. No. 01, Series of 1999 is the revocation or
superseding of the provisions of the former which are
inconsistent with that of the latter. Inasmuch as the former
A.O. had already been expressly repealed and the
substance of paragraph XVI of said Administrative Order is
not reproduced in the repealing Administrative Order, those
lands covered by a petition for conversion which had been
disapproved or covered by conversion order which had been
cancelled or withdrawn are not automatically placed under
CARP compulsory coverage. Under A.O. No. 01, Series of
1999 (Sec. 37, Art. VII), "the land subject thereof shall
revert to the status of agricultural lands and shall be
subject to CARP coverage as circumstances may warrant".

October 6, 1999
CONVERSION; LICENSE TO SELL, DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, NOT A

VALIDATION FOR THE CONVERSION OF LANDHOLDING FROM
AGRICULTURAL TO NON-AGRICULTURAL USE
Can license to sell and development permit validate

conversion of lands from agricultural to non-agricultural
uses?
 The mere issuance per se of License to Sell by the HLURB

and Development Permit by a local government unit does
not by itself validate the conversion of the landholding from
agricultural to non-agricultural use and dispense with the
requirements of existing laws, rules and regulations on
conversion. Stated otherwise, said License to Sell and
Development Permit should not serve as substitutes for the
compliance of the laws and rules on conversion since the
issuance of the same presupposes that the property had
earlier been lawfully converted to non-agricultural uses
upon previous application and due issuance of prior DAR
Conversion Order.

January 11, 2000
CONVERSION; LIMITATION
 DAR's authority to allow conversion is not limited only to

lands awarded under CARP. As stated in DOJ Opinion No.
44 (1990):
Being vested with exclusive original jurisdiction

over all matters involving the implementation of agrarian reform,
it is believed to be the agrarian reform law’s intention that any
conversion of a private agricultural land to non-agricultural uses
should be cleared beforehand by the DAR. True, the DAR’s
express power over land use conversion is limited to cases in
which agricultural lands already awarded have, after five years,
ceased to be economically feasible and sound for agricultural
purposes, or the locality has become urbanized and the land will
have a greater economic value for residential, commercial or
industrial purposes. But to suggest that these are the only
instances when the DAR can require conversion clearances
would open a loophole in R.A. No. 6657, which every landowner
may use to evade compliance with the agrarian reform program.
Hence, it should logically follow from the said department’s
express duty and function to execute and enforce the said
statute that any commercial or industrial property should first be
cleared by the DAR.
 With respect to conversion of agricultural lands covered by

RA No. 6657 to non-agricultural uses, the authority of DAR
to approve such conversion may be exercised from the date
of the law’s effectivity on June 15, 1988. This conclusion is
based on a liberal interpretation of R.A. No. 6657 in the light
of DAR’s mandate and the extensive coverage of the
agrarian reform program.

September 27, 2007
CONVERSION; LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY SUBJECT OF

AN APPLICATION FOR CONVERSION ALREADY
INCORPORATED IN THE CERTIFICATE OF TITLE
 While the "location of the property" may not be listed under

Section 32, the same, is already incorporated in the
technical description of a property contained in the
Certificate of Title. Such description indicates the specific
area and location of the property covered by any OCT/TCT,
subject of an application for conversion. It is a given fact
that the location of the property is required as this is
evident under DAR A.O. No. 15, Series of 1988 (Rules and
Procedures Governing Conversion of Private Agricultural
Lands to Non-agricultural Uses) which explicitly indicates
under Item VII (A) thereof the necessity of providing the
location of the property in the filing of an application for
conversion.

December 26, 2007
CONVERSION; MECHANICS/REQUIREMENTS
What are the mechanics/requirements for the conversion

of agricultural lands?
 DAR Administrative Order No. 12, Series of 1994 prescribed

the requirement in applying for land use conversion. One of
the mandatory requirements therein is the issuance of
zoning certification from the HLRB Regional Officer when
the subject land is within a city/municipality with a land use
plan/zoning ordinance approved and certified by the HLRB.
 Reclassification takes precedence over conversion in the
order of preference when it comes to application for land
use conversion. Reclassification specify how agricultural
lands shall be utilized for non-agricultural uses such as
residential, commercial, industrial as embodied in the land
use plan. In other words, it merely allocates lands to
different activities or classes of land uses, evolved and
enacted through the town planning and zoning process. It is
not synonymous with conversion under Section 65 of R.A.
No. 6657 for while the authority to reclassify is lodged with
the local government units, the authority to convert
remains with the DAR.

January 9, 1997
CONVERSION; MORATORIUM APPLIES TO
RICELANDS; EXCEPTION
 It is clear from Administrative Order No. 226-A and

Memorandum of Usec. Renato Herrera dated 23 April 2008
that the moratorium applies to all pending and new
applications for land use conversion of all rice lands from
the time Administrative Order No. 226 took effect.
Notwithstanding the advent of Administrative Order No.
226-A amending the former Order, there are only two
exceptions of the moratorium as per Memorandum dated 23
April 2008. These are, when the application is a
Government-Initiated and/or Private Sector-led in
consideration of mass housing program of the government,
and to address the relocation/resettlement project for the
urban poor.

November 28, 2008
CONVERSION; NECESSARY BEFORE EXEMPTED LANDS

UNDER DAR A.O. NO. 13, S. OF 1990 AND DAR A.O. NO. 3,
S. OF 1995 BE CONVERTED TO OTHER NON-
AGRICULTURAL USES
 It bears noting that aforesaid exemption does not include

or contemplate exemption orders or clearances
issued not in pursuance of DOJ 44 or Section 3 (c) of R.A.
No. 6657 in relation to DAR Administrative Order No. 6,
series of 1994 such as those exempted pursuant to DAR
Administrative Order No. 13, series of 1990 (Section 10,
R.A. No. 6657 as amended), DAR Administrative Order No. 9,
series of 1993 (Livestock, Poultry and Swine) and DAR
Administrative Order No. 3, series of 1995 (Fishponds and
Prawn Farms). The lands under the latter-enumerated
exemptions may revert to agricultural if they are no
longer actually, directly and exclusively used for the
purpose for which they were exempted. Thus, they would
still necessitate a conversion clearance should they later
be converted to other non-agricultural uses such as
residential, commercial or industrial.

March 19, 2003
CONVERSION; NECESSARY IF AN AGRICULTURAL LAND IS

RECLASSIFIED AS NON-AGRICULTURAL AFTER 15 JUNE
1988
 With respect to agricultural lands which are reclassified to

commercial, industrial or residential in the new or revised
town plans promulgated by the local government unit (LGU)
and approved by the HLURB or by the Sangguniang
Section 20 of R.A. No. 7160 (Local Government Code), and
other pertinent laws and regulations, Conversion Clearance
must be secured from the DAR before these lands may be
converted to such uses.

September 10, 2001
CONVERSION; NOT AN ALTERNATIVE OPTION FOR

LANDOWNERS
Is Conversion absolute?
 While conversion of agricultural lands to non-agricultural

uses is allowed, the same is not absolute. Administrative
Order No. 363 of the Office of the President and DAR
Administrative Order No. 07, Series of 1997 laid down the
procedures together with the documentary requirements in
applying for land use conversion. It has to be stressed in
the context, however, that conversion of an agricultural
land shall be determined on the merits thereof and is not
suppose to be an alternative option available to the
landowners to spare their agricultural lands from CARP
coverage. Section 73 (c) of R.A. No. 6657 does not sanction
this practice by specifically prohibiting the conversion by
any landowners of this agricultural land into any non-
agricultural use with intent to avoid the application of this
Act to his landholdings and to dispossess his tenant
farmers of the land tilled by them.

April 30, 1998
May the HLURB issue the license to sell involving

agricultural lands prior to the issuance of DAR clearance?
 The issuance of license to sell involving agricultural lands

prior to the issuance of pertinent DAR clearance in a way
pre-empts the action that may be taken by this Department
on any application for conversion/exemption. The HLURB is
not barred however from issuing said license in areas
already legally devoted to other uses. This holds true
because while the license to sell is not one among the
requirements which are obtained from other government
agencies for review of the DAR in application for
exemption/conversion, its premature issuance will in effect
render nugatory the purposes and may possibly circumvent
the implementation of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Program (CARP).

February 9, 1998
CONVERSION; ORDER OF CONVERSION
May a land covered by an approved conversion order be

certified as eligible for mortgage?
 Said properties should comply with the Order of Conversion,
particularly, for the landowner to implement the land
development phase of the area. To mortgage the land may
eventually possibly prejudice the implementation of the
development phase of the area (i.e., in case of default in the
payment of mortgage loan), non-implementation of which is,
as stated, a ground for cancellation or withdrawal of the
authorization for conversion. To issue a certification
allowing that said properties could be mortgaged to a
private commercial bank without any restrictions and
conditions (underscoring supplied as per letter
suggestion/requirement of Metrobank dated 12 February
1999) would not therefore be in consonance and may run
counter with the dispositive clause of the abovementioned
Order of Conversion.

December 14, 1999
CONVERSION; PARO/MARO LIABLE FOR FAILURE TO ACT ON

ILLEGAL CONVERSION
Can MAROs/PAROs be held administratively liable if they

fail to act expeditiously on illegal land conversion.
 MAROs/PAROs who are personally charged with knowledge

of any ongoing illegal land conversion undertaken in their
area of jurisdiction fails to take positive and appropriate
action within the prescribed time from discovery thereof,
cannot in any manner feign ignorance to escape
administrative liability.

December 24, 1996
CONVERSION; PAYMENT OF DISTURBANCE COMPENSATION

When is the tenant entitled to a disturbance
compensation?
 Payment of disturbance compensation as provided and
contemplated under Section 36 of R.A. No. 3844, as
amended by Section 7 of R.A. No. 6389, pertains to the
compensation given to the agricultural lessee who is
dispossessed of the land he tills in cases of legal
conversion, that is, in cases where the use of the land for
purposes other than agricultural is approved by DAR upon
application of the landowner. As held by the Supreme Court
in the case of Pagtalunan vs. Tamayo, G.R. No. 54281,
March 19, 1990, payment of disturbance compensation only
covers legal conversion undertaken at the instance of the
landowner.

May 2, 2001
CONVERSION; PAYMENT OF DISTURBANCE COMPENSATION
What is the basis of computing the disturbance

compensation given to farmer beneficiaries affected in
case of land conversion?
 Farmer beneficiaries whose landholdings fall outside those

highly restricted from conversion or non-negotiable for
conversion, must be paid disturbance compensation which
should not be less than five (5) times the average of the
annual gross value of the harvest on their actual
landholdings during the last five (5) preceding calendar
years. In addition thereto, the DAR shall exert efforts to see
to it that free homelots and assured employment are
provided by the applicant/developer.

February 11, 1999
CONVERSION; PROOF OF RECEIPT OF PAYMENT OF

DISTURBANCE COMPENSATION AS ONE OF THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE APPROVAL; PROPERTY
COVERED BY CONVERSION ORDER NO LONGER SUBJECT
TO LEASEHOLD CONTRACT
 Please be informed that under 8.0 of Memorandum Circular

No. 9, Series of 1999 (Internal/Clarificatory Guidelines for
the Processing of Land Use Conversion Applications
Pursuant to Administrative Order No. 1, Series of 1999
entitled "Revised Rules and Regulations on the Conversion
of Agricultural to Non-agricultural Uses"), provides that the
approval of conversion application shall be subject to
conditions, among which, is a disturbance compensation to
affected tenants, and Administrative Order No. 04, Series of
2003 [2003 Rules on Exemption of Lands from CARP
Coverage under Section 3 (c) of Republic Act No. 6657 and
Department of Justice (DOJ) Opinion No. 44, Series of 1990]
which listed as a requirement proof of receipt of payment of
disturbance compensation or a valid agreement to pay or
waive payment of disturbance compensation.
 Applying the above provisions of the aforecited
administrative orders to your query, it is clear that the
property covered by a conversion order with certificate of
finality can no longer be subjected to a leasehold contract
considering that tenancy relationship is terminated from
the moment the required disturbance compensation have
finally been settled, it being a condition for the approval of
the application for conversion. Hence, in effect, a leasehold
contract is no longer possible.

January 16, 2007
CONVERSION; PROPERTIES WITHIN LUNGSOD SILANGAN

TOWNSITE
Are properties falling within Lungsod Silangan Townsite be

subject of conversion?
• If the properties fall within the Lungsod Silangan
Townsite as duly proved and certified, and the same are not
tenanted rice and corn lands with Certificates of Land
Transfer/Emancipation Patents (CLTs/EPs), the provisions of DAR
Memorandum Circular No. 25, Series of 1997 (particularly Item 7
thereof) as amended by Memorandum Circular No. 5, Series of
1998 may apply.

March 22, 1999
CONVERSION; PURPOSE OF FIXING MANDATORY PERIOD TO

COMPLETE DEVELOPMENT OF THE AREA
What is the purpose of fixing a mandatory period to

complete development of the area?
 It is beyond cavil that the purpose of DAR Administrative

Order No. 07, Series of 1997 in imposing said condition as
an integral part for the issuance of DAR Conversion Order is
to prevent circumvention of coverage under Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Program (CARP). Without such restriction,
a landowner/developer who is granted a DAR Conversion
Clearance would be at liberty to render such condition at
naught by abandoning indefinitely the land development
phase of the area covered by DAR Conversion Order. To
prevent such occurrence, the law mandatorily requires that
the development phase of the area shall be completed
within the period fixed by law depending on the area
involved.
 Considering the mandatory character of the Conversion
Order to complete the development phase within the
periods fixed, the filing of the aforesaid Petition for
Exemption from Compliance with the condition for the
development of the property will not necessarily have the
effect of suspending the mandatorily required land
development phase.
May 28, 1999
CONVERSION; REQUEST FOR EXTENSION TO COMPLETE THE

DEVELOPMENT OF THE LAND
Whether or not a new landowner who has purchased a
portion of a property covered by Land Use Conversion
Order has the legal personality to request for an extension
of period to complete the development of the land?
 While the attached Conversion Orders dated 07 December

1994 and 12 July 1999 issued by the DAR, mandate the
observation/compliance on the conditions stipulated
therein, otherwise, the same may be cancelled or recalled,
the circumstances which led to the delay in the
development of the land however, appear not to be
attributable to their fault or negligence. Thus, in
accordance with justice, fairness and equity, the herein
request of the AFP MBAI for the extension of development
of the 10.239 hectares which they had purchased from the
V.A. Realty Inc. is imperative. Their request for extension
on the said property is inherent and appurtenant to the
exercise of one's right of ownership.

January 28, 2002
CONVERSION; REQUIRED BEFORE AN AGRICULTURAL

LAND IS TO BE USED AS A CELL CITE
 DAR's mandate is to preserve and maintain agricultural

lands with increased productivity. But where, as apparently
it is herein, there is need for conversion in the land use of
an agricultural land, existing laws and issuances have
provided for the conditions and requirements therefore.
Should there be non-compliance, same may constitute a
prohibited act under Section 73 of Republic Act No. 6657
and related laws and, accordingly, criminally punishable.

June 7, 2002
CONVERSION; REQUIREMENTS
Who may apply for conversion?
 An application for land use conversion is a personal

undertaking which can be filed only at the instance of the
following:
1. owners of private agricultural lands or other

persons duly authorized by the landowner;
2. farmer beneficiaries of the agrarian reform
program after the lapse of five (5) years from award,
reckoned from the date of registration of their
landholdings and who have fully paid their obligations and
are qualified under DAR Administrative Order No. 12,
Series of 1994, or persons duly authorized by them; and
3. government agencies, including government-
owned or controlled corporations.

June 26, 1997
CONVERSION; REQUIREMENTS
What are the requirements for DAR conversion clearance?
 Although the reclassification of an agricultural land to non-

agricultural uses through a municipal ordinance could be
used to support an application for a DAR conversion
clearance, what is needed is a DAR Order approving said
conversion.
March 23, 1995
CONVERSION; REQUISITE NUMBER OF DAYS WITHIN

WHICH AN APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO POST A
PERFORMANCE BOND
 Requisite Number of Days Within Which an Applicant is

Required to Post a Performance Bond
Section 26, Article III (Procedures) of DAR

Administrative Order No. 01, series of 2002 pertinently provides:
"Section 26. Performance Bond. — Within five (5) days
from receipt of a copy of the Conversion Order, the
applicant shall post a performance bond in the form of
either of the following . . . . ."
On the other hand, Section 33.2, Article V (Issuance

of Conversion Order and its Effects) of the same Administrative
Order provides:
"Section 33. Conditions of Conversion Order. — The

approval of the application for conversion shall be
subject to the following conditions:
xxx xxx xxx
Section 33.2. Within fifteen (15) days from
receipt of the Conversion Order, the landowner shall
post a performance bond in accordance with Sections
25 or 26 hereof."
 Basic is the rule in statutory construction that where there

is a particular or special provision and a general provision
in the same statute, and the latter in its most
comprehensive sense would overrule the former, the
particular or special provision must be taken to effect only
the other parts of the statute to which it may properly
apply. In other words, the particular or special provision is
construed as an exception to the general provision.
 Here, we could infer that Section 26 is the special provision
regarding the posting of performance bond while Section 33
is the general provision, in which case the former shall
prevail. Thus, an applicant for conversion should post a
performance bond within five (5) days from receipt of a
copy of the conversion order.

December 9, 2003
CONVERSION; ROLE OF DAR
What is the role of DAR in the conversion of agricultural

lands?
 Under Section 4 (j) of EO 129-A, Series of 1987, the DAR is

mandated to approve or disapprove applications for
lands into non-agricultural uses. Under Section 5 (1) of the
same EO, the DAR has exclusive authority to approve or
disapprove conversion of agricultural lands for residential,
commercial, industrial and other land uses as may be
provided by law. Moreover, under Section 50 of RA 6657,
the DAR is vested with primary jurisdiction to determine
and adjudicate agrarian reform matters and has exclusive
original jurisdiction over all matter involving the
implementation of agrarian reform.

March 28, 1994
CONVERSION; SUSPENSION OF ISSUANCE OF LAND

When may conversion be allowed? When is it suspended?

 Agricultural lands classified or zonified for non-agricultural
uses by LGUs and approved by the HLURB before June 15,
1988 (i.e., effectivity of R.A. No. 6657 — CARL), shall be
governed by DAR Administrative Order No. 6, Series of 1994
(guidelines on exemption from CARP coverage). On the
other hand, conversion may be allowed if at the time of
application, the lands are reclassified as commercial,
industrial, residential or non-agricultural in the new or
revised town plans promulgated by the Local Government
Unit (LGU) and approved by the Housing and Land Use
Regulatory Board (HLURB) or by the Sangguniang
Section 20 of Republic Act No. 7160, as implemented by
M.C. No. 54, and E.O. No. 72 Series of 1993 of the Office of
the President. Under Memorandum Circular No. 1, Series of
1999 and in line with the President's directive dated
December 28, 1998, however, the issuance of land
conversion clearances is suspended, and new applications
shall not be accepted in the meantime that DAR is
reviewing the guidelines and until such time the new
revised rules and regulations on land use conversion are
issued. Thereafter, new applications for land use
conversion may be accepted pursuant to the new/revised
guidelines.

March 22, 1999
CONVERSION; WHEN ALLOWED
When may an agricultural land be used for non-agricultural

purposes?
 If the area is classified as agricultural, it may be used for

non-agricultural purposes (e.g., residential) only if an
application for conversion have been filed with the DAR and
have obtained a DAR Order approving the same. In such a
case, only the tenants thereof will be entitled to the
payment of disturbance compensation. Persons applying as
CARP beneficiaries in the area cannot hinder conversion
thereof so long as DAR has approved said conversion.

August 23, 1994
 The conversion of an agricultural land to non-agricultural

use may be legally undertaken only after approval thereof
by the DAR. Section 4(j) of E.O. No. 129-A series of 1989
specifically provides that the Department shall be
responsible for implementing the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Program and, for such purpose is authorized to
approve or disapprove the conversion, restructuring or
readjustment of agricultural lands into non-agricultural
uses. Sec. 5 (1) of the same E.O. also provides that
pursuant to its mandate and in order to ensure the
successful implementation of the CARP, the DAR has
exclusive authority to approve or disapprove conversion of
agricultural lands for residential, commercial, industrial and
other land uses as may be provided for by law.

March 23, 1995
 "Section 65. Conversion of Lands. — After the lapse of five

(5) years from its award when the lands ceases to be
or the locality has become urbanized and the land will have
a greater economic value for residential, commercial or
industrial purposes, the DAR upon application of the
beneficiary or the landowner, with due notice to the
affected parties, and subject to existing laws may authorize
the reclassification or conversion on the land and its
disposition: Provided that the beneficiary shall have fully
paid his obligation.

January 25, 1996
When may the conversion of agricultural lands be allowed?
 If it could be adequately proven that the land is no longer

economically feasible for agriculture or the area is
urbanizing and the greater economic value is non-
agricultural then Sec. 65 of the same law allows conversion
by the landowner.

April 26, 1994
CONVERSION; WHEN CONSIDERED ILLEGAL
When is the conversion of agricultural lands considered

illegal?
 The conversion of agricultural land covered by the CARL

(R.A. No. 6657) is deemed illegal if undertaken after 15
June 1988 without the required order of conversion from
the DAR.

June 13, 1994
CONVERSION; WHEN IS CONVERSION ORDER NECESSARY

Is Conversion Order necessary before the land can be
legally converted?
 A conversion order is no longer necessary for properties

already reclassified as non-agricultural prior to June 15,
1988 or before the effectivity of CARP. However, an
exemption clearance is required. On the other hand, a
conversion order is necessary for those agricultural
properties reclassified as non-agricultural from June 15,
1988 onwards. Please note that a conversion order is
necessary before any conversion activities may be
performed on the subject lands.
August 7, 2001
CONVERSION;
WHEN MAY BE ALLOWED, DOMINANT USE OF THE
SURROUNDING AREA — NO LONGER DETERMINATIVE
When is conversion allowed?
 Pursuant to A.O. No. 12, Series of 1994, conversion may be

allowed if the dominant use of the area surrounding the
land subject of the application for conversion is no longer
agricultural, or if the proposed use is similar to, or
compatible with the dominant use of the surrounding areas
as determined by the DAR. However, with the enactment of
DAR A.O. No. 01, Series of 1999, which expressly repealed
DAR A.O. No. 12, Series of 1994 and A.O. No. 7, Series of
1997, this criterion ceased to be determinative.

October 6, 1999
CONVERSION; WHEN NECESSARY

Is an application for conversion still required?
 Should the subject land be converted into non-agricultural

uses such as residential, commercial or industrial, the
provisions of DAR Administrative Order No. 1, series of 2002
shall apply. Hence, application for conversion shall still be
required.

September 2, 2003
CONVERSION; WHICH OFFICE HAS THE AUTHORITY TO

APPROVE
 Under Sec. 4 and 5 of EO 129-A (1982), the DAR is mandated
to "approve or disapprove the conversion, restructuring or
readjustment of agricultural lands into non-agricultural
uses." It authorizes DAR to "have exclusive authority to
approve or disapprove conversion of agricultural land for
residential, commercial, industrial, and other land uses as
may be provided for by law." Also, Sec. 4 of OP-MC 54
(1993), provides that "action on application for land use
conversion on individual landholdings shall remain as the
responsibility of the DAR, xxx, pursuant to RA No. 6657 and
EO 129-A."

September 27, 2007
COOPERATIVE OWNERSHIP; AS A FORM OF COLLECTIVE

OWNERSHIP
What is collectivism in relation to CARP awarded lands?
 Cooperative ownership of an awarded land is actually just a

kind or form of collective ownership by the individual
beneficiaries (Section 25, R.A. No. 6657 and Item I, DAR
Administrative Order No. 3, Series of 1993). In collectivism,
there is an aggregate participation of individuals relating to
a co-ownership. Thus, as far as CARP- awarded lands are
concerned:
a) Where the collective CLOA is issued in the

name of the cooperative without the names of individual
ARBs listed at the back thereof, which were resorted to in
the past to speed up, simplify and facilitate the
distribution process of awarded lands, it presupposes that
a cooperative had already been organized even prior to
the acquisition and eventual distribution of the lands
wherein the beneficiaries may not yet have been
identified or were only partially identified. This is what is
contemplated under Section 22 (f) of R.A. No. 6657.
Notwithstanding the issuance of the collective CLOA in
the name of the cooperative alone, the ownership of the
land is, however, still actually vested with the individual
beneficiaries to the extent of their respective shares
based on the aforementioned legal premises but in no
case to exceed the equivalent of the award ceiling.
b) Where the collective CLOA is issued in the
name of the cooperative with the name of the ARBs listed
at the back thereof, it presupposes that during the
acquisition and distribution process of the land to be
awarded, there were already identified ARBs who opted to
collectively own the awarded land through a cooperative.
This may also be the case where the land is not
economically feasible and sound to divide among the
worker-beneficiaries pursuant to Section 29 of R.A. No.
6657. The annotation or listing of the names of ARBs at
the back of the collective CLOA is intended to protect the
farmer-beneficiaries from possible summary and unjust
separation by the cooperative or association (Items III.A
and IV.A.1, DAR A.O. No. 3, Series of 1993).
c) Where the collective CLOA is issued in the
name of Juan dela Cruz, et al. with names of individual
ARBs listed at the back, it presupposes that the awarded
land is co-owned by each individual ARBs listed therein. A
collective CLOA on a co-ownership basis shall indicate
the approximate area actually occupied by each ARB
(Item III.B, A.O. No. 3, Series of 1993).
d) Where specific number of hectarage is
included in the CLOA, it indicates that the different
portions of the awarded land are owned by different ARBs.
There is already a concrete determination and
identification of each ARB's corresponding area of award,
which should not exceed three (3) hectares, even if not
yet technically described. Where no specific number of
hectarage is indicated per ARB, it connotes that there is a
juridical concept of co-ownership. Each ARB, being a co-
owner, is the owner of an undivided aliquot part thereof
(not to exceed the award limit of 3 hectare) which is
presumed to be equal with the respective aliquot shares
of the other co-owners, unless the contrary is proved
(Article 485, Civil Code and Section 25, R.A. No. 6657).

July 14, 1999
COOPERATIVE; JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENT WITH THE LGU
May a cooperative enter into a joint venture agreement

with the LGU for a housing project?
 A cooperative may enter into a joint venture agreement with

the LGU for a housing project, provided that said agreement
contains a provision that in case of default by the original
housing beneficiaries, the lot shall be transferred to
qualified agrarian reform beneficiaries/cooperative
members. It goes without saying that said agreement shall
be subjected to a review by DAR.

December 22, 1995
COOPERATIVE; LAND AS ASSET, PURPOSES OF ITS CREATION
Is the awarded considered as cooperative asset?
 Cooperative is only a vehicle created for practical

necessity, convenience and purposes towards the ARBs'
upliftment. Legally, the owners are the ARBs. Therefore, the
land cannot be made as part of the cooperative's assets.
However, for accounting purposes, the land may be
recorded as "asset" of the cooperative but this is
counterbalanced by the ownership claim of the ARBs over
such land as reflected in the equity section of the balance
sheet. Thus, when the awarded land is recorded as "asset"
of the cooperative for accounting purposes, there is
actually no transfer of title or ownership over the land,
hence, ownership thereof by the cooperative cannot be said
to have legally taken.
 Whether in voluntary or involuntary dissolution,

the awarded land may be included in the liquidation
process only if said land was used as security in the
fulfillment of a principal obligation incurred with the
consent and for the general benefit of the ARBs. In this
case, the ARBs may thereby lose the award. Any of the
foregoing, however, shall be without prejudice to the right
given a CLOA holder under Executive Order No. 26, Series
of 1998.

July 14, 1999
CORRECTION AND CANCELLATION OF REGISTERED EPs AND

CLOAs; PROCEDURE
What is the procedure for the correction and cancellation

of registered EPs and CLOAs?
 Under DAR Administrative Order No. 2, S. 1994, otherwise

known as the "Rules Governing the Correction and
Cancellation of Registered Emancipation Patent (EPs) and
Certificates of Land Ownership Award (CLOAs)…", it
provides in the transitory provision thereof that: "the
implementation of these rules shall be governed by the
procedure of the DARAB to include the concept of
designating a nominal party and the concept of exhaustion
of administrative remedies". From the aforequoted, it is
very clear that prior to the filing of a Petition for
Cancellation of registered Emancipation Patents to the
DARAB, the ground for the cancellation of the EP title
should first be determined by the Secretary or his
authorized representative under the principle of exhaustion
of administrative remedies. Likewise, the same procedure
applies where the land is found exempt/excluded from P.D.
No. 27/E.O. No. 228 or CARP coverage or to be part of the
landowner's retained area.

April 4, 1997
CORRECTION OF EPs; AUTHORITY TO ISSUE EMANCIPATION

PATENTS
May the Department of Agrarian Reform issue

emancipation patents?
 Section 5(g) of Executive Order No. 129-A on Powers and

Functions provides that the Department of Agrarian Reform,
pursuant to its mandate and in order to ensure the
successful implementation of CARP, is authorized to issue
emancipation patents to farmers and farm workers covered
by agrarian reform for both private and public lands and
when necessary make administrative corrections of the
same.

May 28, 1996
CORRECTION OF TITLE; DAR TO CAUSE THE INSCRIPTION OF

THE CORRECTED TECHNICAL DESCRIPTIONS IN THE TITLES
Does DAR has the authority to cause the inscription of the

corrected technical description in the titles of
landholdings?
 The DAR being constitutionally and legally aptly clothed

with more than ample authority and personality should
strongly undertake whatever necessary action to cause the
inscription of the corrected technical descriptions in the
titles of the subject landholdings and accordingly to cover
the subject landholding under the compulsory acquisition
scheme of the Program.

April 14, 1997
CORRECTION OR CANCELLATION OF CLOAs
Are CLOAs issued to ARBs be cancelled or corrected?
 CLOAs issued to agrarian reform beneficiaries (ARBs) may

be corrected or cancelled for violation of agrarian laws,
rules and regulations. This include cases of lands which are
found to be exempt/excluded from P.D. No. 27/E.O. No. 228
or CARP coverage, or part of the landowners retained area.

July 3, 1997
COVERAGE
 Bilang tugon po sa inyong mga katanungan, mangyari po

lamang na pag-ukulan ng pansin ang mga probisyon ng DAR
Administrative Order No. 2, Series of 2009 [Rules and
Procedures Governing the Acquisition and Distribution of
Agricultural Lands Under Republic Act (R.A.) No. 6657 as
Amended by R.A. No. 9700], Statement of Policies A.5, kung
saan isinasaad na:
In the case of lands for which NOCs have already been

issued, the DAR Provincial Office (DARPO) shall send a
memorandum to the Municipal Agrarian Reform Officer
(MARO), copy furnished the LO, directing him/her to
proceed with the process of land acquisition and
distribution of the landholdings under the CARP, either
immediately or on the specific schedule provided under
Item IV (A) (2) of this Order.
Ibig pong sabihin nito, maaring ipagpatuloy ang
pagsaklaw sa lupa ayon sa lumang batas (R.A. No. 6657)
kung ang NOC ay naisyu na ng Kagawaran bago sumapit
ang Mayo 30, 2009.
January 5, 2010
COVERAGE
 Coverage under CARP does not cancel the right of the

mortgagee to foreclose said properties. In a contract of
mortgage, the mortgagor is duty bound to fulfill his
obligation with the mortgagee. Accordingly, in case the
mortgagor defaults in his obligation with the mortgagee,
the latter has the legal right to demand payment from the
former or to foreclose the mortgage, as the case may be.
However, Section 71 of R.A. No. 6657 on bank mortgages
must be taken into consideration where it provides that
agricultural properties mortgaged to banks and other
financial institutions are subject to existing laws on
compulsory transfer of foreclosed assets and acquisition as
prescribed under Section 16 of said law.
 DAR need not to be informed of the mortgage. Nonetheless,
DAR may still proceed with CARP coverage regardless of
whether or not it was informed thereof in view of its legal
mandate under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law
(CARL) to acquire all public and private agricultural lands
falling outside the 5-hectare retention area of landowners
for redistribution to qualified beneficiaries.

March 22, 2005
 As regards alienable and disposable lands (A & D), it is

provided under Section 4 of R.A. No. 6657 that public and
private agricultural lands and lands of the public domain
suitable for agriculture are covered by CARP. It provides,
among others, that all alienable and disposable lands of the
public domain devoted or suitable to agriculture and all
lands of the public domain in excess of the specific limits of
the public domain as determined by congress shall be
covered by CARP.

February 2, 2006
COVERAGE, PROPERTIES UNDER LEASE CONTRACTS
Can the lessor sell properties under lease contracts to the

lessee?
 Section 72 of R.A. No. 6657 explicitly provides, quote:
"SECTION 72. Lease . . .. — Lands covered by

this Act under lease . . . contracts shall be disposed of
as follows:
(a) Lease . . . contracts covering private lands may
continue under their original terms and conditions until
the expiration of the same even if such land has, in the
meantime, been transferred to qualified beneficiaries.

November 8, 2000
COVERAGE; ACQUISITION OF A LANDHOLDING WITH A

STOCK DISTRIBUTION OPTION (SDO) PLAN UNDER THE
VOLUNTARY OFFER TO SELL SCHEME (VOS)
 Section 4 of Republic Act No. 6657 (Comprehensive Agrarian

Reform Law) provides that all public and private lands
devoted to or suitable for agriculture regardless of the
agricultural products raised or that can be raised thereon
are covered by CARP. It follows that coverage may proceed
irrespective of whether or not the landholding is titled or
not, or whether there is an adverse claim of ownership over
the same, for as long as the landholding is agricultural and
is not declared to be exempt or excluded from CARP
coverage.
 Acquisition under CARP may be effected pursuant to Item E
of DAR Administrative Order No. 01, Series of 2006
[Supplemental Guidelines in the Implementation and
Monitoring of Approved Stock Distribution Option (SDO)
Plans], that an approved SDO Plan/Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA) may be revoked by the Presidential
Agrarian Reform Council (PARC) and once the decision by
the PARC or by other appropriate forum canceling the
approved SDO Plan/MOA became final and executory and
upon receipt of such decision by DAR, the latter shall
proceed with the immediate coverage of the landholding
under CARP.
 Item II (2) of DAR Administrative Order No. 4, Series of 2005
(Revised Rules Governing the Issuance of Notice of
Coverage in the Acquisition of Agricultural Lands Under
R.A. No. 6657) and DAR Administrative Order No. 2, Series
of 1996 (Acquisition of Agricultural Lands Subject of VOS
and Compulsory Acquisition Pursuant to RA 6657) that any
transaction involving acquisition of agri-lands under CARP
is transparent not only to an heir or to any party-in-interest
but to the public as well, considering the requirement of
posting and publication of the Notice of Coverage in a
newspaper of general circulation. However, generally, for
purposes of transacting any VOS, the same can only be
done by the landowner or his authorized representative.
Where the landowner is a juridical person, a Board
Resolution is required, authorizing any person to transact
with DAR regarding its property for CARP coverage.

July 11, 2008
COVERAGE; GFIs FORECLOSED PROPERTIES
 Considering that the LBP is a government financial

institution, and considering further that the provisions of
the General Banking Law of 2000, the LBP is permitted to
dispose of the real properties it acquired to third persons,
subject to their eventual coverage under the CARP. It is
therefore clear that the rights of the tenants/farmers are
still protected under the law; moreover, their preferential
rights as such will not be affected and shall still be
respected.
 That said, it is our considered view that limiting the
conveyance of the subject property by LBP in favor of WCC
to only five (5) hectares is apparently not in conformity with
the provisions of the General Banking Law in relation to
pertinent agrarian reform laws and issuances.

December 29, 2010
COVERAGE; PROSPECTIVITY OF LAW
 The law which shall govern the coverage of subject

landholding is PD 27 since it was the law existing and being
implemented at the time of the coverage.
 Using the basic rule in statutory construction anchored in
the provision of the New Civil Code that laws shall be
applied prospectively, RA 6657 cannot be applied in the
instant. Retrospective application is not tenable since it
will impair vested rights which have been acquired by the
tenants under PD 27.

April 14, 2008
COVERAGE; AGRICULTURAL LANDS NOT EXCEEDING FIVE
(5) HECTARES NOT SUBJECT TO ACQUISITION AND
DISTRIBUTION
 Section 4, Art. XIII of the 1987 Constitution subjects the

distribution of agricultural lands for agrarian reform to
reasonable limits as Congress may prescribe. Section 6 of
R.A. No. 6657 operationalizes this mandate and observes
the right of persons to own, or retain, directly or indirectly,
any public or private agricultural land, the size of which
shall vary according to the factors governing a viable
family-size farm such as commodity produce, terrain,
infrastructure, and soil fertility, but in no case shall exceed
five (5) hectares.

June 15, 2007
COVERAGE; AGRICULTURAL LANDS WHICH ARE SUBJECT TO

LEGAL EASEMENTS
Whether or not agricultural lands which are subject to
legal easements may be covered under CARP?
 Given the above provisions of law, rules and regulations, we

could infer that portions of titled or registered private
agricultural lands subject of legal easements form as
inseparable part of the landholding of the landowner, thus,
they may be covered under Republic Act No. 6657
(Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law) and accordingly be
compensated by the Land Bank of the Philippines.

February 4, 2004
COVERAGE; CANNOT BE AFFECTED BY A NEW ZONING

ORDINANCE
May the lands distributed to qualified beneficiaries
pursuant to CARL be affected by any zoning ordinance of
the Local Government Unit?
 Once a landholding has been acquired and redistributed to

qualified beneficiaries pursuant to the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law, said coverage under CARL cannot be
affected by a new zoning ordinance declaring as residential
the area wherein the property is located. This must be so
since Sec. 20 (e) of RA 7160 (The Local Government Code)
provides that nothing therein shall be construed as
repealing, amending or modifying in any manner the
provisions of RA 6657".

July 25, 1994
COVERAGE; CLAIM FOR ATTORNEY'S FEE SHALL NOT SERVE AS

A STUMBLING BLOCK IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF R.A. NO.
6657
Can a claim for Attorney's fees derails the implementation

of CARP?
 Attorney's lien on the landholding should not serve as a

stumbling block in the smooth implementation of the
Specifically, Section 4 of Republic Act No. 6657 expressly
provides that "the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of
1988 shall cover, regardless of tenurial arrangement and
commodity produced, all public and private agricultural
lands as provided in Proclamation No. 131 and Executive
Order No. 229, including other lands of the public domain
suitable for agriculture." Stated differently, the right of a
lawyer to claim attorney's fees for services rendered is
subordinate to the right of the State to acquire agricultural
lands for distribution to qualified farmers-beneficiaries
pursuant to said laws.
 The issue as to the claim of attorney's fees is a distinct and
separate matter personal to counsel and client which they
alone should resolve (through the corresponding payment
by the latter to the former after the land in issue has been
acquired under CARP and paid by the Land Bank of the
Philippines) without unduly affecting the coverage of the
subject landholding.

June 23, 1998
COVERAGE; COMMERCIAL FARMS, EFFECT TO LOI NO. 790
Does the full implementation of CARL now render LOI 790

moot and academic?
 LOI No. 790, which allows the development of additional

banana plantation areas over the total acreage previously
authorized under LOI No. 58, is not inconsistent with
Section 11 of Republic Act No. 6657, as amended, it
remains in full force and effect. The only perceived possible
effect, by the coverage of commercial farms (devoted to
banana plantation) pursuant to the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Program (CARP) whose deferment had expired, is
the mandated change in their ownership and management
as adverted to above.
 In fine, LOI 790 was not repealed by Republic Act No. 6657.
It was only modified to some extent as discussed and
explained above.

November 10, 1999
COVERAGE; CORPORATE FARM ENGAGED IN EXPORT-ORIENTED

PRODUCTION
Are corporate farms engaged in export-oriented production

covered by CARL?
 CARL mandates the acquisition and redistribution to
qualified beneficiaries of all agricultural lands falling
outside the 5-hectare retention of landowners. Said
mandate is immediate in the case of lands subject of VOS,
because under paragraph 2, Section 7 of CARL, private
lands voluntarily offered by the owners for agrarian reform
fall under Phase One of CARL implementation. This
mandate to immediately redistribute is not amended by RA
7844, as there is no provision in said law to that effect.

February 15, 1996
COVERAGE; DETERMINATION OF OWNERSHIP
What lands are covered by CARP pursuant to R. A. No.

6657?
 Section 4 of R.A. No. 6657 provides that all private lands

agricultural products raised or that can be raised thereon
are covered by the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Program. It follows that agricultural lands covered by Tax
Declarations though untitled are also private properties
which may likewise be the subject of coverage under CARP.

April 30, 1998
COVERAGE; DOCUMENTARY REQUIREMENTS
 This office concur with the opinion of the Land Bank of the
Philippines that there is no substitute for the form for Land
Valuation and Farmer's Undertaking since it is in such
document that the amount in which the farmer beneficiary
acknowledges/undertakes to pay the amortization is fixed
and determined.
June 29, 2006
COVERAGE; EFFECT OF COURT OF APPEALS DECISION
 The Court of Appeals decision will not affect the coverage

of the subject property as land acquisition is done through
the mandate of the law whether or not the landowner
disagrees to part with his property. Moreover, it appears
that the Court of Appeals has only ruled for the cancellation
of the titles issued to the children and for the reinstatement
of the title of spouses Ferreras.

November 16, 2007
COVERAGE; EFFECT OF ISSUANCE OF INJUNCTION,

RESTRAINING ORDER, PROHIBITION OR MANDAMUS
May coverage proceed notwithstanding the issuance of
injunction, restraining order, prohibition or mandamus from
the lower courts?
 Section 68 of R.A. No. 6657 contemplates a different

situation from that of Section 14, DAR Administrative Order
No. 6, series of 2000. The former provides that no
injunction, restraining order, prohibition or mandamus shall
be issued by the lower courts against the government
agencies named therein, including the DAR, in their
implementation of CARP. In other words, CARP coverage
may proceed notwithstanding the issuance by the lower
courts of the aforesaid injunction, restraining order,
prohibition or mandamus in matters concerning the
implementation of CARP brought before said courts (e.g.,
subject agrarian law implementation cases). Section 55 of
R.A. No. 6657 further provides, quote:
"SECTION 55. No Restraining Order or
Preliminary Injunction. — No court in the Philippines
shall have jurisdiction to issue any restraining order or
writ of preliminary injunction against the PARC or any of
its duly authorized or designated agencies in any case,
dispute or controversy arising from, necessary to, or in
connection with the application, implementation,
enforcement, or interpretation of this Act and other
pertinent laws on agrarian reform."
 Section 14 (a-c) of DAR Administrative Order No. 06, series

of 2000, on the other hand, speaks of the effects of filing
with the DAR of agrarian law implementation (ALI) cases,
such as application or petition for exemption, exclusion,
conversion, retention, or protest against coverage, on land
acquisition and distribution. Under said section of the
guideline, particularly paragraphs b and c thereof, the
coverage and land compensation process may continue,
except that the Certification of Deposit (COD) to the PARO
shall not be issued until the application, protest or petition
is finally resolved. The rationale for this is given in DAR
Opinion No. 9, series of 1999 which is to preclude the
government from incurring unnecessary wastage of
valuable time, effort and resources incident to the coverage
in case the petition, application or protest will later be
resolved against the coverage of the land in issue.

June 7, 2002
COVERAGE; EFFECT OF PARTIAL COVERAGE
What is the effect of partial coverage?
 DAR Administrative Order No. 03, S. 1996 expressly provides

that if the landholding is partially covered but an R.P. title
or CLOA has been issued for the whole property, a
segregation survey of the landholding shall be conducted.
The Deed of Transfer shall be amended to include only the
CARP covered areas. The portion not covered shall be
reconveyed to the concerned government instrumentality or
landowner-offeror through the execution of a Deed of
Reconveyance. Said implementing rules and regulations
likewise provide that Emancipation Patents (EPs) or
Certificates of Land Ownership Award (CLOAs) already
generated for landholding to be reconveyed shall have to be
cancelled first pursuant to DAR Administrative order No. 2,
Series of 1994 prior to the actual reconveyance. The
cancellation shall either be through administrative
proceedings in cases where EP/CLOA has not yet been
registered with the ROD or through quasi-judicial
proceedings in cases where the said EP/CLOA has already
been registered.

April 14, 1997
COVERAGE; EFFECT WHEN THERE IS A PENDING APPLICATION

FOR CONVERSION
What is the effect on coverage when an application for
conversion is filed?
 Under Section 14 (a) of DAR Administrative Order No. 6,

series of 2000 [Rules of Procedure for Agrarian Law
Implementation (ALI) Cases], a notice of coverage may not
be issued if there is already a pending application for
conversion. However, it appears that there was no
application for conversion filed in the instant case. What
was filed was a complaint for illegal conversion, hence, the
coverage of subject landholding may proceed.

December 21, 2001
COVERAGE; E.O. NO. 407 LANDS; STEPS IN THE
REDISTRIBUTION OF LANDS
What are E.O. 407 lands?
 Executive Order No. 407 mandates all government

instrumentalities to surrender to the DAR all landholdings
for agriculture all pertinent documents in their custody. It is
understood, however, that the government financing
institutions and government-owned or controlled
corporations cannot sell or dispose of their lands which are
suitable for agriculture directly to private individuals since
the DAR has the right of first refusal in the sale or
disposition of their lands which are suitable for agriculture.
 Under the aforecited Order and in consonance with Section
69 of R.A. No. 7881, while it is mandated that said provision
allows government financial institutions and government-
owned or controlled corporations to dispose to third parties
effectivity of RA 7881, i.e., March 12, 1995, the same shall
still be acquired if they fall under CARP coverage for
distribution to qualified farmer beneficiaries as mandated
under RA 6657. It goes without saying, however, that a
former owner can no longer redeem his foreclosed property
after the lapse of the prescribed redemption period, for the
same has already been transferred or must be transferred
to DAR for distribution to qualified beneficiaries.

January 16, 1997
What are the basic steps in the redistribution of lands

under E.O. No. 407?
 Applying Section 1 of EO 407 properties foreclosed by

abovementioned institutions shall not be vested upon them.
Rather said institutions shall execute immediately. Deed of
Transfer in favor of the DAR. The DAR will cause the
transfer of ownership to it and once ownership has been
transferred, the DAR, in coordination with the concerned
agencies, will not determine who the qualified beneficiaries
will be. In choosing the qualified beneficiaries, the DAR
shall give preference to the farmer owners and their
children.

January 29, 1997
COVERAGE; E.O. NO. 407, PROPOSED AMENDMENT EXCLUDING

PASTURE FROM COVERAGE
Are Pasture lands excluded from CARP coverage?
 Section 4 of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law

(CARL) of 1988 (Rep. Act No. 6657) is explicit in its
mandate of coverage, regardless of tenurial arrangement
and commodity produced, all public and private lands
agricultural products raised or that can be raised therein.
Moreover, the basic principle of land-to-the-tiller and policy
of the State to promote and pursue a Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Program, where the welfare of the landless
farmers and farmworkers shall receive the highest
consideration to promote social justice (Section 21, Article
II, Philippine Constitution and Section 2, R.A. No. 6657).

December 12, 2000
COVERAGE; EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 407
What is the mandate of E.O. No. 407?
 Executive Order No. 407 is very explicit by providing that

the government through the DAR shall accelerate the
acquisition and distribution of agricultural lands, agro-
forestry lands and other lands of the public domain suitable
for agriculture. Corollarily, Section 7 of R.A. No. 6657
mandates, among others, that all lands foreclosed by
government financial institution, all lands acquired by the
Presidential Commission on Good Government, and all other
lands owned by the government devoted to or suitable for
agriculture, shall be acquired and distributed immediately
upon the effectivity of the said Act on 15 June 1988.
Moreover, Executive Order No. 360, Series of 1989, enjoins
all government financial institutions and government-owned
or controlled corporations to grant the Department of
Agrarian Reform the right of first refusal in the sale or
disposition of all lands owned by them which are suitable
for agriculture.
 VLT/DPS scheme is not an ordinary transaction which can
be placed outside the ambit of Executive Order No. 407.
Such being the case, it is E.O. No. 407 that will govern the
mode of coverage as regards the landholdings in issue.

December 24, 1998
COVERAGE; EXPIRED FISHPONDS LEASE AGREEMENTS
May lands covered by expired FLAs be included within the

scope of CARP?
 Lands covered by expired FLAs like those lands covered by

cancelled or amended FLAs under Executive Order No. 407,
be included within the scope of the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform program for distribution to qualified
beneficiaries.

October 8, 1996
COVERAGE; FORECLOSED AGRICULTURAL LANDS

May foreclosed agricultural lands be covered under CARP?
 Corollarily, although Section 6 of R.A. No. 7881 allows the
transfer by banks of such foreclosed assets to third parties,
they shall nonetheless be eventually acquired by the
government through the DAR, under Section 16 of R.A. No.
6657, for distribution to qualified farmer-beneficiaries.

June 7, 2002
COVERAGE; FORECLOSED ASSETS

May the subject properties foreclosed by private banks be
covered under CARP?
 To preclude circuitous and complex reversion proceedings,

and pursuant to the aforequoted/aforecited more recent
special provisions of R.A. No. 6657 (CARL) and R.A. No. 337
(The General Banking Act) vis-à-vis a general provision of
the Public Land Act (Section 118 thereof), the subject
properties foreclosed by private banks, consolidated in
their favor and offered for CARP coverage may be placed
under the Program since in the final analysis said
properties will end up/revert to the State, through the DAR,

August 28, 2003

Are foreclosed assets of banks subject to acquisition
under CARP?
 Although private banks my sell to third parties their

foreclosed assets, the same are still subject to acquisition
under Section 16 of R.A. No. 6557 (CARL), if warranted.

August 21, 2001
Are land foreclosed by Government Financial Institutions

(GFI) covered under CARP?
 Under Section 7 of CARL, all lands foreclosed by

government financial institutions shall fall under Phase I of
CARP implementation. Under E.O. No. 407, all government
instrumentalities including government financial
institutions are mandated to immediately execute Deeds of
Transfer in favor of the Republic of the Philippines as
represented by the DAR.

April 11, 1995
COVERAGE; FORECLOSED PROPERTIES OF FINANCIAL

INSTITUTIONS
 Private agricultural lands foreclosed/owned by financial

institutions are still subject to R.A. No. 6657 and not
exempt for acquisition by SPVs under R.A. No. 9182.
 Under Section 7 of Republic Act No. 6657, the schedule of
acquisition and distribution of agricultural lands covered by
CARP include, among others, all lands (that means private
and public lands) foreclosed by government financial
institutions. Moreover, mortgage rights or security interests
in agricultural lands of banks and other financial
institutions are subject to existing laws on compulsory
transfer of foreclosed assets and acquisition as prescribed
under Section 16 of R.A. No. 6657 (Section 71, R.A. No.
6657).

March 1, 2005
COVERAGE; FREE PATENTS
Are lands covered by Free Patents within the scope of R.A.

No. 6657?
 Lands covered by Free Patents may be the subject of

Voluntary Offer to Sell Scheme under CARP even within the
5-year prohibitory period from and after the issuance of said
patents. This is so because an exception to the prohibition
against transfer within the said 5-year period has been
provided with respect to transfers in favor of the
government or any of its branches, units or institutions.
This exception is believed to cover transfers made under
the land redistribution program of the government,
specifically the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law
(CARL). In fine, the coverage under CARL of lands covered
by Free Patents, specifically thru the VOS scheme, is
believed legally tenable, as the 5-year period limitation will
not apply.

October 16, 2000
COVERAGE; GFI'S FORECLOSED LANDS
What is the mandate of R.A. No. 6657 regarding GFI's

foreclosed lands?
 Section 7 of R.A. No. 6657 mandates that all lands

foreclosed by government financial institutions (GFIs) shall
be acquired and distributed immediately upon the
effectivity of said Act on 15 June 1988. Moreover,
Executive Order No. 360, Series of 1989, enjoins all
government financial institutions to grant the DAR the right
of first refusal in the sale or disposition of all lands owned
by GFIs which are suitable for agriculture. A similar
provision is enunciated under Executive Order No. 407,
Series of 1990, which mandates the immediate execution of
Deeds of Transfer in favor of the Republic of the Philippines
as represented by DAR and surrender to the latter
department all landholdings suitable for agriculture. The
foregoing laws and executive orders altogether maintain
that agricultural landholdings foreclosed by GFIs are within
the coverage of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Program (CARP).

May 22, 1998
COVERAGE; IMMEDIATE SURRENDER OF FORECLOSED ASSET

TO THE GOVERNMENT FOR CARP COVERAGE
What is the proper procedure in the acquisition of lands

pursuant to E.O. 407?
 Said law permits government financial institutions to

dispose of their properties foreclosed by them to third
parties only on or after the effectivity of R.A. No. 7881 (i.e.,
March 12, 1995) and not those foreclosed prior to said date.

May 26, 1999
COVERAGE; INCLUDES PUBLIC LANDS
 Ang isinasaad sa Seksyon 4 (Lawak) ng Batas sa

Komprehensibong Repormang Pansakahan ng 1988:
"SEKSIYON 4. Lawak. — Ang Batas sa

Komprehensibong Repormang Pansakahan ng 1988 ay
dapat sumaklaw sa lahat ng mga lupang agricultural na
pampubliko at pribado, ano pa naman ang kaayusan sa
pagmamay-ari at inaani, ayon sa itinatadhana sa
Proklamasyon Blg. 131 at Kautusang Tagapagpaganap
Blg. 229, kasama ang iba pang mga lupaing pambayan
na angkop sa agrikultura."
Malinaw po na isinasaad na ang mga lupang
pampubliko ay saklaw ng nabanggit na batas.
February 2, 2009
COVERAGE; INTEGRATED SOCIAL FORESTRY

PROGRAM/COMPREHENSIVE AGRARIAN REFORM PROGRAM
(ISFP/CARP)
Whether or not the subject property can be covered under
ISFP/CARP?
 It is clear that subject 1,400 hectare property is part of the

public forest. As such, its reclassification to agricultural
land cannot be undertaken, in view of the prohibition found
in Section 4 (a) of R.A. No. 6657 against the reclassification
of forest or mineral lands to agricultural lands until
Congress has determined by law the specific limits of the
public domain
 In view of the foregoing, coverage of the property under the
Integrated Social Forestry Program/Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Program, as embodied in the Memorandum
of Agreement signed between and among the DENR, U.P.
and DAR, should be pursued to its completion." (Emphasis
supplied)
 However, should, in the process, a vested right stands to be
adversely affected, considering that pursuant to Article I,
Section 5 of DENR Administrative Order No. 96-29, the
Community-Based Forest Management Program (CBFMP) is
subject to prior vested right, then it behooves upon the
implementing agency to have it resolved before full
implementation is effected. For the University of the
Philippines, the UP Land Grant Law of 1930 shall be the
basis of its vested rights, if any.

February 20, 2002
COVERAGE; LAND COVERED BY ESCHEAT ORDER MAY BE
COVERED BY CARP
 Since the Municipality of Baliangao, Misamis Occidental has

inherited subject property by operation of law thru an
escheat order, said municipality now possesses, as a rule,
all the rights over the property. Hence, the land covered by
the escheat order may now be covered under the agrarian
reform program for its subsequent transfer to the qualified
beneficiaries, and to further hold in trust the funds out of
the land value as may be determined by the DARAB or
Special Agrarian Court.
 In Roman Catholic Archbishop of Caceres vs. Secretary of
Agrarian Reform and DAR Regional Director (Region V), the
Supreme Court ruled that, quote:
"The laws simply speak of the "landowner" without

qualification as to under what title the land is held or what
rights to the land the landowner may exercise. There is no
distinction made whether the landowner holds "naked
title" only or can exercise all the rights of ownership. To
do so would be to frustrate the revolutionary intent of the
law, which is the redistribution of agricultural land for the
benefit of landless farmers and farmworkers."
June 17, 2009
COVERAGE; LANDOWNERS NOT REQUIRED TO PAY REAL

PROPERTY TAXES DURING THE PERIOD OF ERRONEOUS
COVERAGE
 On grounds of fairness and equity, it is our view that since

there appears to be an erroneous coverage by DLR of the
subject landholding the fault of which could not be
attributed to the landowners, they may not therefore be
penalized by requiring them to pay the real property taxes
during the period of erroneous coverage of said landholding.

March 10, 2005
COVERAGE; LANDS ALREADY COVERED UNDER PD 27

CANNOT BE DECLARED AS "PROTECTED AREAS"
THROUGH A PRESIDENTIAL PROCLAMATION
 Lands already covered under P.D. No. 27 may not

subsequently be declared as "protected areas" through a
later Presidential Proclamation since, meanwhile, vested
rights could have already set in. It should be stressed that
both proclamations in issue provide for an exclusionary
clause, that is, the provisions thereof are "subject to
existing recognized and valid private rights."

February 21, 2002
COVERAGE; LANDS COVERED BY PRESIDENTIAL

PROCLAMATIONS
May CARP coverage be effected?
 Executive Order No. 506 dated 18 February 1992 which

amended Executive Order No. 407 and Executive Order No.
448 states, quote:
 "Section 1. Section 1.A. of Executive Order No. 407, series
of 1990, as amended by Executive Order No. 448, series of
1991, is hereby further amended to read as follows:
Section 1.A. Except national parks and other

protected areas, all lands or portions of the public
domain reserved by virtue of proclamation or law for
specific purposes or uses by departments, bureaus,
offices and agencies of the Government, which are
suitable for agriculture and no longer actually, directly
and exclusively used or necessary for the purpose for
which they have been reserved as determined by the
Department of Agrarian Reform in coordination with the
government agency or instrumentality concerned in
whose favor the reservation was established, shall be
segregated from the reservations and transferred to the
Department of Agrarian Reform for distribution to
qualified beneficiaries under the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Program."
 Section 2. A new section is hereby added to Executive

Order No. 407, as amended, to read as follows:
"Section 1.B. All existing and proposed

National Parks, Game Refuge and Bird Sanctuaries,
Wildlife Reserves, Wilderness Areas and Other
Protected Areas, including old growth or virgin forests,
and all forests above 1,000 meters elevation or above
50 percent slope, are hereby excluded from the present
segregation, acquisition and distribution procedures
being conducted by the Department of Agrarian Reform
until such time as these areas shall have been
identified, studied and determined to be either retained
and reclassified under the National Integrated
Protected Areas System of DENR or to be segregated
for agricultural purposes." (emphasis supplied)
 Section 3. All proclamations establishing such reservations

and falling within the coverage of this Executive Order are
hereby revoked, amended or modified accordingly.
 Given the above-quoted provisions of law, the CARP
coverage of subject landholdings may not be effected until
they are segregated for agricultural purposes by the
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR)
in coordination with DAR.

February 21, 2002
COVERAGE; LANDS FORECLOSED/OWNED BY FINANCIAL

INSTITUTIONS
 Section 6 of CARL provides that no person may own or

retain directly or indirectly, any agricultural land in excess
of five (5) hectares. It shall be understood that the term
"person" includes both natural and juridical persons.
 Private agricultural lands foreclosed/owned by financial
institutions are still subject to the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Program (CARP) pursuant to R.A. No. 6657, E.O. No.
407 and E.O. No. 360, and not exempt for acquisition by
SPVs under R.A. No. 9182.

February 16, 2007
COVERAGE; LANDS PREVIOUSLY EXEMPT FROM CARP

WHEN SUBSEQUENTLY DEVELOPED FOR AGRICULTURAL
PRODUCTION MAY BE COVERED UNDER R.A. NO. 6657
 Pertinent provision of the Civil Code of the Philippines,

provides, quote:
"Art. 428 The owner has the right to enjoy and dispose
of a thing, without other limitations than those established by
law."
xxx xxx xxx

Likewise, DAR Administrative Order No. 01, Series of
2004 (2004 Rules and Regulations Governing the
Exclusion of Agricultural Lands Used for Cattle Raising
from the Coverage of the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Program) insofar as pertinent, provides:
"Sec. 14. Permanent/Continuous Exclusion of Lands

Devoted to Cattle Raising Issued Exclusion Orders by the DAR.
— Lands devoted to cattle raising which have been issued
exclusion orders by the DAR may be permanently excluded
from the coverage of the CARP, subject to the following
conditions:
14.1 The subject lands which have been excluded must be

continuously utilized for cattle production; or
14.2 The Stocking Rate (SR) should not fall below the
prescribed SR. SR is considered below the prescribed
ratios when:
xxx xxx xxx
14.3 The landowner shall submit, under oath, an

annual report on the status of compliance with the
conditions imposed under this Section to the MARO,
copy furnished PARO and DAR Regional Office
covering the subject property."
The abovequoted provisions of the Civil Code and A.O. No.
01, Series of 2004, when taken together, would clearly
and explicitly reveal that landowner may exercise his
rights, i.e., to develop the 10-hectare portion of his
property into saba banana farm, but the same shall be
subject to existing laws, the Republic Act No. 6657,
otherwise known as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Law (CARL), in particular. Since the portion of the
property will eventually be devoted to agricultural
activity, it will cease to be exempt from the CARP
coverage. The government through the DAR will acquire
the property to be distributed to qualified farmer-
beneficiaries as mandated under R.A. No. 6657 subject
however to the landowner’s right of retention.
February 7, 2007
COVERAGE; LANDS UNDER E.O. 407 AS AMENDED BY E.O. 448
What are the conditions in order that lands reserved by

Presidential Proclamations may be covered under CARP?
 All lands or portions thereof reserved by virtue of

Presidential Proclamation which are suitable for agriculture
and no longer actually, directly and exclusively used or
necessary for the purpose for which they have been
reserved, as determined by the DAR in coordination with
the government agency or instrumentality concerned, shall
be covered by CARP.

October 27, 1999
COVERAGE; LANDS UNDER PD 27 CANNOT BE DECLARED AS
"PROTECTED AREAS" THROUGH A PRESIDENTIAL
PROCLAMATION
May lands already covered under PD 27 be declared as
"protected areas" through a later Presidential
Proclamation?
 Lands already covered under P.D. No. 27 may not

subsequently be declared as "protected areas" through a
later Presidential Proclamation since, meanwhile, vested
rights could have already set in. It should be stressed that
both proclamations in issue provide for an exclusionary
clause, that is, the provisions thereof are "subject to
existing recognized and valid private rights."

February 21, 2002
COVERAGE; LUNGSOD SILANGAN TOWNSITE
Are lands falling within Lungsod Silangan Townsite

excluded from CARP coverage?
 Executive Order No. 448, mandates the segregation for

CARP coverage of said lands suitable for agriculture, if the
same are no longer actually, directly and exclusively used
or necessary for the purpose for which they have been
reserved. Thus, portions of lands not actually, directly and
exclusively used or necessary for townsite purposes within
the boundaries of the Lungsod Silangan Townsite may be
excluded from the operation of Presidential Proclamation
1283, Presidential Proclamations 1637 and Letter of
Instruction 625 and placed under the coverage of the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program for distribution to
qualified beneficiaries. However, there should be a joint
coordinative determination by DAR and the government
agency concerned pursuant to the aforequoted provision of
E.O. No. 448.

September 16, 1999
COVERAGE; NOT DEPENDENT ON THE WILLINGNESS OF THE

LANDOWNERS TO HAVE THEIR PROPERTIES COVERED
Is acquisition of agricultural lands in excess of the

retention area imperative?

Reform Law) expressly provides that said law shall cover,
regardless of tenurial arrangement and commodity
produced, all public and private agricultural lands as
provided in Proclamation No. 131 and Executive Order No.
229, including other lands of the public domain suitable for
agriculture. Specifically, paragraph (d) thereof provides that
all private lands devoted to or suitable for agriculture
regardless of the agricultural products raised or that can be
raised thereon are subject to compulsory acquisition by the
government through DAR for distribution to qualified farmer-
beneficiaries. Section 7 of the same law (first and fifth
paragraphs) further provides that "The DAR, in coordination
with the PARC, shall plan and program the acquisition and
distribution of all agricultural lands through a period of ten
(10) years from the effectivity of said Act (i.e., 15 June
1988)" and that there is "the need to distribute lands to the
tillers at the earliest practicable time" (underscoring
supplied). Moreover, DAR Administrative Order No. 12,
Series of 1989 likewise provides that in order to hasten the
implementation of the CARP, compulsory acquisition shall
be the priority mode of land acquisition.
 The acquisition of agricultural lands in excess of the
retention area is imperative and should in no case be
dependent on the willingness of the landowners to have
their properties covered. To continuously accede to their
will and to indefinitely wait for the subject evidences to be
submitted to DAR, despite the lapse of already more than
one year from the time the Office of the President had
issued the aforesaid directives, would obviously place the
coverage of the lands in issue at the mercy of landowners
whose primary objective is patently to unduly delay and
derail the implementation of R.A. No. 6657. This should not
be countenanced.

July 1, 1998
COVERAGE; OLT
What is the effect if the requisites of OLT coverage is not

in existence prior to effectivity of P.D. No. 27?
 If the requisites of OLT coverage were in existence as of the

effectivity of PD 27 on 21 October 1972, the property should
be covered under OLT notwithstanding the transfer of the
property in favor of the Bank. PD 27 is inapplicable, the
property should be placed under CARL coverage.

August 5, 1994
COVERAGE; OLT COVERED LANDS NOT SUBJECTED UNDER THE

VOS SCHEME
Can OLT covered lands be the subject of VOS Scheme?
 OLT covered lands cannot be subjected under the Voluntary

Offer to Sell scheme as it is not a mode allowed under P.D.
No. 27.

December 23, 1996
 Operation Land Transfer coverage is pursuant to
Presidential Decree No. 27. Said Decree mandates the
transfer of private agricultural lands primarily devoted to
rice/corn to the tenants thereof.

December 2, 1994
COVERAGE; ONLY LANDS SUITABLE FOR AGRICULTURE
Can the lot on which a house stands be awarded pursuant

to R.A. 6657?
 The lot on which a house stands cannot be awarded

pursuant to R.A. 6657 because only lands suitable for
agriculture are subject to redistribution under said law.
Moreover, the qualified beneficiaries of CARL are tenants,
tillers and farmworkers.

July 2, 1996
COVERAGE; PASTURE LAND
Are farms primarily used as a pasture land be covered

under CARP?
 DAR Administrative Order No. 9, Series of 1993 pertinently

provides, quote:
"III. POLICY STATEMENT

A. Private agricultural lands or portions
thereof exclusively, directly and actually used for
livestock, poultry and swine raising as of June 15,
1988 shall be excluded from the coverage of
CARP.
B. In determining the areas qualified for
exclusion under this Administrative Order, the
following ratios of land, livestock, poultry and
swine raising shall be adopted.
1.0 Grazing
1.1 Cattle, Carabao and Horse Raising
— cattle, carabao and horses (regardless of
age) — the maximum ratio is one (1) head to one
(1) hectare."
 If the subject farms conform with the requirements

prescribed by the above-quoted Administrative Order, the
same shall be exempted from CARP coverage, after the
landowner has duly applied for exemption and such has
been adjudicated on the merits to be indeed exempt from
CARP coverage.

September 8, 1999
COVERAGE; P.D. NO. 399: PROVISION
What does P.D. No. 399 provide?
 A perusal of Presidential Decree No. 399 shows that lands of

the public domain as well as lands owned by private
persons within the strip of one thousand meters along
existing, proposed or on-going public highways or roads
may be covered by the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
program (CARP). Said Presidential Decree specifically
provides that the use of such land shall first be available for
human settlement sites, land reform, relocation of
squatters from congested urban areas, tourism
development, agro-industrial estates, environmental
protection and improvement, infrastructure and other vital
projects in support of the socio-economic development
program of the Government.

July 7, 1997
COVERAGE; PENDING INVESTIGATION
Can the DAR proceed with the acquisition of properties

subject of investigation or litigation?
 Under Section 4 of Republic Act No. 6657, the DAR is

mandated to cover, regardless of tenurial arrangement and
commodity produced, all public and private agricultural
suitable for agriculture. Thus, although ownership of said
landholdings is under investigation or litigation, the DAR
may still proceed with their acquisition considering that no
matter what the outcome of the investigation or litigation
may be, the lands are still covered under CARP.

October 23, 2000
COVERAGE; PROPERTIES DISPOSED OF BY A GFI
May the properties disposed of by a GFI, such as DBP be

covered by the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program
(CARP)
 Properties disposed of by a GFI, such as DBP may be

transferred in the name of the vendees. However, the
properties transferred shall still be subjected to acquisition
and redistribution to qualified beneficiaries pursuant to
CARL. Simply stated, although the transfer of said
properties is allowed under RA 7881, the same are not
excluded from CARP coverage.

September 27, 1995
COVERAGE; QUESTION OF OWNERSHIP NOT A BAR IN THE

COVERAGE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND
Is a question of ownership a bar in the coverage of
agricultural land?
 It could be inferred from the provision of Section 16 (e) of

RA 6657 that question of ownership is not a bar in the
coverage of an agricultural land under the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) especially so if it is clear
that no matter what the outcome of the litigation may be,
the land is still covered under CARP. Thus, the DAR could
immediately take possession of the land and proceed with
the coverage upon deposit in cash or in LBP bonds of the
compensation for the land pending the resolution of the
ownership dispute. Furthermore, it bears stressing likewise
that in Republic of the Philippines vs. Eduardo M.
Cojuangco, Jr., et al., Sandiganbayan Resolution No. 0033
dated January 16, 1996, the Sandiganbayan had ruled that
in cases where ownership of the land is under litigation, the
DAR may proceed without leave of Court to implement R.A.
No. 6657, as well as related laws and implementing
regulations under its own authority over agricultural lands
covered by CARP.

October 16, 2000
COVERAGE; RESERVED LANDS PURSUANT TO PRESIDENTIAL

PROCLAMATION
Are reserved lands pursuant to a Presidential Proclamation

be covered by CARP?
 Executive Order No. 448 which amends Executive Order No.

407 provides for the following:
"Sec. 1-A. All lands or portions thereof

reserved by virtue of Presidential Proclamations
for specific public uses by the government, its
agencies and instrumentalities, including
government-owned or controlled corporations
suitable for agriculture and no longer actually,
directly and exclusively used or necessary for the
purposes for which they have been reserved, as
determined by the Department of Agrarian Reform
in coordination with the government agency or
instrumentality concerned in whose favor the
reservation was established, shall be segregated
from the reservation and transferred to the
Agrarian Reform Program."
 It is very explicit that reserved lands by virtue of a

Presidential Proclamation may be covered by CARP for
distribution to qualified farmer-beneficiaries provided these
are no longer actually, exclusively and directly used or
necessary for the purposes for which they have been
reserved as determined by the DAR in coordination with the
government agency or instrumentality concerned in whose
favor the reservation was established. This joint
determination must first be made in order that said lands
may be covered under R.A. No. 6657 (CARL).
 Pursuant to Executive Orders Nos. 407 and 448, all
government agencies or government owned and controlled
corporations or financial institutions, as the case may be,
shall immediately execute a Deed of Transfer in favor of the
Republic of the Philippines as represented by the
Department of Agrarian Reform and surrender to the latter
Department all landholdings suitable for agriculture for
distribution to qualified agrarian reform beneficiaries. This
is anchored on the State principle that land has a social
function and land ownership has a social responsibility,
thus, agricultural lands should be turned into their wisest
and most productive use for the material upliftment of the
many and the prosperity of all.
September 4, 1998
COVERAGE; RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF LANDOWNER AND

TENANT UNDER OLT
What are the rights and obligations of landowner and
tenant under OLT, on land pending transfer and payment?
 In a situation wherein the owner of an agricultural land

covered under Operation Land Transfer (OLT) is not yet
compensated by either the government or the tenant-
beneficiary. In such case, the landowner has the right to
receive the land compensation from the Land Bank, while
the tenant-beneficiary has the obligation to pay the value of
the land to the Land Bank by way of land amortization
payment.

February 21, 2002
COVERAGE; RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF LANDOWNER

AND TENANT UNDER OLT WHEN OWNERSHIP HAS NOT
YET BEEN TRANSFERRED BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT
HAS YET TO PAY DUE COMPENSATION TO LANDOWNER
 In a situation wherein the owner of an agricultural land

covered under Operation Land Transfer (OLT) is not yet
compensated by either the government or the tenant-
beneficiary. In such case, the landowner has the right to
receive the land compensation from the Land Bank, while
the tenant-beneficiary has the obligation to pay the value of
the land to the Land Bank by way of land amortization
payment.

February 21, 2002
COVERAGE; SCOPE OF CARL
What is the scope of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform

Law?
 The provision of R.A. No. 6657 which particularly deals with

coverage is Section 4, quote:
"SECTION 4. Scope — The

Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988 shall
cover, regardless of tenurial arrangement and
commodity produced, all public and private
agricultural lands as provided in Proclamation No.
131 and Executive Order No. 229, including other
lands of the public domain suitable for agriculture.
More specifically, the following lands are
covered by the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Program:
xxx
xxx xxx
d) All private lands devoted to or
suitable for agriculture regardless of the
agricultural products raised or that can be raised
thereon."

October 6, 1999
 As regards the coverage of agricultural lands under CARP, it

is basic that the application of the law to a particular
property is made only once. That is, if a landowner's
property has been subjected to CARP coverage, at no
instance shall his retention be taken again without his
consent for redistribution to farmer-beneficiaries.
However, any other agricultural land of a
landowner beyond his retention area shall likewise be
covered under CARP.

December 14, 1999
 Section 4(a) of R.A. No. 6657 provides that CARP covers all
alienable and disposable lands of the public domain
devoted to or suitable for agriculture. Section 7 of the same
law includes alienable and disposable public agricultural
lands in Phase Two of CARP implementation.

October 27, 1994

December 2, 1998
 Section 4 of R.A. No. 6657 covers, regardless of tenurial

arrangement and commodity produced, all public and
private lands devoted to or suitable for agriculture and not
classified as mineral, forest, residential, commercial or
industrial land. For purposes of determining whether or not
the said agricultural land falls under CARP coverage, the
aggregate area of the said agricultural land shall be
considered. Accordingly, all agricultural lands in excess of
the five (5) hectare retention allowed a landowner and the
three (3) hectare award to each of his children if qualified,
are subject to acquisition and distribution to qualified
beneficiaries pursuant to the provisions of R.A. No. 6657
(Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law).

October 5, 1999

March 4, 1999
December

July 3, 1997

October 27, 1994

February 9, 1994
Does CARL cover those areas within the geothermal

block?
 CARL does not cover those areas within the geothermal

block, considering that they are reserved by Proclamation
for geothermal exploration/development and have been
confirmed as active area for said purpose.
DAR OPINION NO. 80, S. 1994

September 24, 1994
What is the scope of the CARL?
 It bears stressing here, moreover, Sections 4 (d) and 6 (1st

paragraph) of R.A. No. 6657 (Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Law), which provide:
"SECTION 4. Scope — The Comprehensive

Agrarian Reform Law of 1988 shall cover, regardless of
tenurial arrangement and commodity produced, all
public and private agricultural lands as provided in
Proclamation No. 131 and Executive Order No. 229,
including other lands of the public domain suitable for
agriculture.
More specifically, the following lands are covered by
the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program:
xxx
xxx xxx
d) All private lands devoted to or suitable for
agriculture regardless of the agricultural products
raised or that can be raised thereon." (emphasis
supplied)
"SECTION 6. Retention Limits. — . . . In no
case shall retention by the landowner exceed five (5)
hectares. . ."
 From the aforequoted provisions of R.A. No. 6657, it is clear

that all private lands devoted to or suitable for agriculture
in excess of the 5-hectare retention limit shall be acquired
under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP)
for distribution to qualified agrarian reform beneficiaries (as
defined and contemplated under existing agrarian laws,
rules and regulations) and not to "weekend farmers."
 It is the spirit and intent of the law to cover all agricultural
lands devoted to or suitable for agriculture. Moreover, since
R.A. No. 6657 is a social welfare legislation, the rules on
exemptions, exclusions and/or conversions must be
interpreted restrictively and any doubt as to the
applicability of the law should be resolved in favor of
inclusion. Thus, the subject agricultural landholding which
is beyond the 5-hectare retention area, if not converted,
may be acquired under the CARP for distribution to agrarian
reform beneficiaries.

September 17, 2003
Law?
 Section 4 of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (R.A.

No. 6657) is explicit. It mandates the coverage, regardless
of tenurial arrangement and commodity produced, all public
and private lands devoted to or suitable for agriculture,
regardless of the agricultural products raised or that can be
raised therein. Thus, for as long as the land in issue is
agricultural and coverable, we may proceed with the
coverage.

December 21, 2001
Law?
 It should be stressed that all agricultural lands are

automatically covered under the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Program. Landowners whose agricultural lands are
covered by CARP have really no choice except to submit to
the program. Only those lands specifically exempted from
the coverage of CARP may be transferred irrespective of
agrarian laws. Since your queries involve agrarian matters,
such as the lands being agricultural, the transfer being in
favor of alleged farmers, and the segregation and titling of
the lands, then the transfer agreement should still comply
with all the requirements of agrarian laws.

May 24, 2001
COVERAGE; SEQUESTERED AGRICULTURAL LANDS
Are sequestered agricultural lands covered under CARP?
 The DAR can proceed with the acquisition and distribution

under CARL of sequestered agricultural lands subject of
pending cases in Court provided that a Court Order allowing
said CARL coverage has been secured by DAR.
August 17, 1994
COVERAGE; SUGARLANDS
Should sugarlands within the Ormoc Sugar Mill District be

covered by CARL?
 Since the mandate of CARL is for the acquisition and

distribution of agricultural lands, the coverage of
sugarlands within the Ormoc Sugar Mill District should not
be affected by the allegation that it is not economically
feasible to divide sugarlands into small farms. The mandate
under CARL to acquire and redistribute to qualified
beneficiaries all lands suitable for agriculture outside of the
retention limits subsists.

December 13, 1996
COVERAGE; SUGARLANDS FORECLOSED BY GFIs
Are sugarlands already foreclosed by GFIs as of the

effectivity of R.A. No. 7202 excluded from CARP Coverage?
 DOJ Opinion No. 91, Series of 1995, holds the view that
"sugarlands already foreclosed by GFIs as of the effectivity
of RA 7202 are not excluded from CARP coverage although
their respective owners are entitled to the benefit of
recomputation of their paid loan accounts for the purpose
of determining if they had made any excess payments on
interests, penalties and surcharges which are condoned,
and if so, for such excess payments to be credited to
payment of their remaining accounts, if any or refunded to
them."
 In fine, the DOJ concludes that "RA 7202 (Sugar Restitution
Law) has not repealed RA 6657 insofar as the latter covers
foreclosed sugarland, referring to foreclosed land where
title has fully vested in the purchaser after the lapse of the
period of redemption without the previous owner having
exercised his right of redemption.

December 13, 1996
COVERAGE; TOURIST ZONE PURSUANT TO PROCLAMATION

NOS. 1520 (1975) AND 1801 (S. 1978)
Are the Tourist Zones pursuant to Proclamation Nos. 1520

(1975) and 1801 (S. 1978) within the coverage of CARP?
 Proclamation No. 1520 and 1801, Series of 1975 and 1978,

respectively, declaring certain areas as Tourist Zones, have
the force and effect of law. However, effective 15 June
1988, R.A. No. 6657 placed all agricultural lands, public and
private, regardless of tenurial arrangements and commodity
produced, under the coverage of Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Program (CARP).
 As a consequence, Section 1 of E.O. No. 448 which amends
E.O. No. 407 provides: "All lands or portions thereof
reserved by virtue of Presidential Proclamations for specific
public uses by the government, its agencies and its
instrumentalities including government-owned or controlled
corporations suitable for agriculture and no longer actually
directly and exclusively used or necessary for the purposes
for which they have been reserved as determined by the
Department of Agrarian Reform in coordination with the
government agency or instrumentality concerned in whose
favor the reservation was established, shall be separated
from the reservation and transferred to the Department of
Agrarian Reform for distribution to qualified beneficiaries
under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP).

March 20, 1997
COVERAGE; UNDER E.O. NO. 407 AS AMENDED BY E.O. NO. 448

Are agricultural lands or portions thereof reserved by
virtue of a Presidential Proclamation for public uses be
segregated from the reservation and transferred to the
DAR for distribution to qualified FBs?
 Malinaw ang mga sumusunod na isinasaad ng Executive

Order No. 407 na may petsang Hunyo 14, 1990 na sinusugan
ng Executive Order No. 448 na may petsa Pebrero 14, 1991:

reserved by virtue of a Presidential Proclamation for
specific public uses by the government, its
Agrarian Reform Program." (underscoring and
emphasis supplied)
 Kung mapapatunayan na ang mga lupang sinasaka ay

tumutugon sa mga kadahilanang nabanggit sa itaas at
magkakaroon ng "joint determination" ang DAR at
Fil-Oil/PNOC tungkol dito, ang mga lupang ito ay
maibubukod at maisasalin sa Department of Agrarian
Reform (DAR) upang maipamahagi sa mga qualified
beneficiaries. Kung ang nasabing pagbubukod ay hindi
maisasakatuparan, ang Kagawaran ng Repormang
Pansakahan ay sumusuporta sa kahilingan na mapawalang-
bisa o maamiyendahan ang Proclamation Nos. 971 at 1980
na nauukol sa mga lupaing nabanggit sa kadahilanan na
ang mga ito ay mga "prime agricultural lands" na dapat
lamang panatilihin bilang pansakahan upang tunay na
mapangalagaan ang seguridad sa pagkain at ang
kapakanan ng mga maliliit na magsasaka.

September 22, 1999
COVERAGE; UNDER PD 27
What lands are covered under P.D. 27?
 Only tenanted private agricultural lands primarily devoted to

rice/corn are covered by P.D. No. 27.

May 27, 1996
COVERAGE; UNDER P.D. NO. 27
What does P.D. No. 27 cover?
 P.D. No. 27 covers tenanted private agricultural lands

primarily devoted to rice/corn which fall outside of the
landowners 7-hectare retention. However, if a landowner
owns 24-hectares or more of tenanted rice/corn lands, the
entire area is subject to Operation Land Transfer (OLT)
coverage pursuant to P.D. No. 27.
 Moreover, tenanted rice/corn lands of 7 hectares or less
shall be subject to redistribution to the tenants thereof if
the same are owned by landowners who, as of the
effectivity of LOI 474 on 21 October 1976, own other
agricultural lands of more than 7 hectares of aggregate
areas or lands used for residential, commercial, industrial
or other urban purposes from which they derive adequate
income to support themselves and their families. P.D. No.
27 does not set a limit to the number of hectares that a
corporation can own but rather prescribes the conditions
under which tenanted rice/corn lands shall be placed under
the coverage of PD 27.
August 8, 1994
COVERAGE; UNTITLED A & D LANDS
Are untitled public A & D lands subject to CARP coverage?
 As a general rule, untitled public A & D lands are within the

jurisdiction of DENR pursuant to C.A. No. 141 (Public Land
Act). Item II.C of Joint DAR-DENR Memorandum Circular No.
14, Series of 1997 specifically provides that all agricultural
A & D lands classified as such after April 16, 1960, as
herein, shall be under the exclusive jurisdiction of the
DENR. Moreover, Item II.D of Joint DAR-DENR M.C. 19,
Series of 1997 provides that untitled A & D lands over
which the land claimant lacks the required thirty (30) years
or more continuous occupancy, whether tenanted or not,
shall be under the jurisdiction of the DENR. It does not
mean, however, that it is not coverable by CARP,
specifically the applicable provisions of Republic Act No.
6657.

September 17, 1999
COVERAGE; WHEN COMMERCIAL FARMS COVERED UNDER CARP
When will commercial farms be covered under CARP?
 Under existing laws (Section 11 of Republic Act No. 6657,

as amended by Section 3 of R.A. No. 7881), commercial
farms shall be subject to immediate compulsory acquisition
and distribution after ten (10) years from effectivity of the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL). Meanwhile,
the Government (DAR) shall initiate steps necessary to
acquire said lands and, upon payment of just compensation
for the land and the improvements thereon, distribute them
preferably in favor of organized cooperatives or
associations which shall thereafter manage said lands for
the worker-beneficiaries. For new farms, landowners were
allowed the chance to recover their investments and
insulate them from possible disruptions in operations and
production by prescribing that the ten-year deferment
period shall be made to commence only on their first year
of commercial production and operation.
 All commercial farms whose deferment expired as of June
15, 1998, shall be subject to immediate acquisition and
distribution under CARP pursuant to the aforecited laws
and DAR Administrative Order No. 09, Series of 1998 (Rules
and Regulations on the Acquisition, Valuation,
Compensation and Distribution of Deferred Commercial
Farms).

November 10, 1999
CULTIVATION; DEFINED
Is cultivation limited to the plowing and harrowing of the

land?
 Cultivation is not limited to the plowing and harrowing of

the land, but also the husbanding of the ground to forward
the products of the earth by general industry, the taking
care of the land and fruits growing thereon, fencing of
certain areas, and the clearing thereof by gathering dried
leaves and cutting of grasses. In coconut lands, cultivation
includes the clearing of the landholding, the gathering of
the coconuts, their piling, husking and handling as well as
the processing thereof into copra, although at times with
the aid of hired laborers.

May 17, 1994

May 28, 1996
D
DAMAGES; WHEN TENANTS ARE ENTITLED
When are tenants entitled to claim for damages?
 Tenants are by law entitled to claim for damages from the

sale of lumber by the landowner. Under DAR Administrative
Order No. 05, Series of 1993, the cutting of coconut trees
shall be with the consent of the tenants which clearly
implies that it affects the rights and interests of the latter
over the subject landholding including the preservation of
the land according to the use for which it has been
intended.
 Likewise, under DAR Administrative Order No. 16, S. 1989,
the indiscriminate cutting of coconut trees by the
landowner is under regulation since this may lead to the
unlawful ejectment or dispossession of the tenant-tillers
and/or farmworkers. As to how much should the tenant
claim, sound judgment dictates that the DAR Officer
concerned should determine the same such as would be
just and equitable under the circumstances with due regard
to the tenants.

March 20, 1997
DAR CLEARANCE
Whether or not the Provincial Office can issue a DAR

Certification pursuant to Administrative Order No. 1, series
of 1989 taking into consideration that there is a legal
question on the authority to do so especially that the
property to be cleared was supposedly donated to the
DAR?
 DAR Administrative Order No. 1, series of 1989 is

inapplicable considering that the certification sought to be
issued by the PARO partakes of the nature of clearance for
transfer of subject property to the DECS which only the DAR
Secretary or his duly authorized representative may issue.
By the donation, the property is now property of the
Department.

April 5, 2000
DAR CLEARANCE
Is DAR clearance necessary in the acquisition of

foreclosed properties?
 It is necessary that a DAR clearance be secured since the

property that is to be acquired by the buyer from the bank
is a foreclosed agricultural land coverable under the

May 19, 1998
DAR CLEARANCE
Is DAR Clearance still required in order to effect

registration of the Deed of Absolute Sale with the Register
of Deeds?
 DAR clearance is still required in order to effect registration

of the Deed of Absolute Sale with the Register of Deeds.
The DAR Clearance for the registration of the transaction
signifies that the sale, transfer or conveyance covered
thereby is not in contravention of R.A. No. 6657.

October 8, 1996

January 29, 1997
May a DAR Clearance be construed as a validation of any

transaction affecting properties previously covered by
CARP?
 A DAR Clearance is no longer necessary in landholdings not
covered by CARP. DAR Clearance only signifies and
guarantees that transaction (sale, transfer or conveyance)
affecting properties previously covered by CARP were made
not in circumvention of RA No. 6657. However, the DAR
Clearance is not to be construed as a validation of any
transaction affecting properties previously covered by the
Program.

June 2, 1997
DAR CLEARANCE: EFFECT
Is DAR Clearance required for the registration of

disposition or sale by the ROD.
 A DAR Clearance is required for the registration by the

Register of Deeds of the disposition or sale. The DAR
Clearance signifies that the transaction is not in
circumvention of CARL and may therefore be registered.

May 27, 1996
DAR CLEARANCE; LANDS TO BE USED FOR CHURCH

PURPOSES; LIMITATIONS
 The clearance of the Provincial Agrarian Reform Officer of

the province is necessary and in the grant thereof, the
PARO shall be guided on the criteria prescribed in A.O. No.
5, Series of 2007. The Administrative Order is explicit that
the area to be devoted to churches and other places of
worship should be reasonable, taking into consideration the
need therefor, the custom of the place, the size of its
congregation and other peculiarities of the place, once
ascertained, it is further allowed half the size thereof for
churchyard.
October 9, 2008
DAR CLEARANCE; SALE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND WHEN

VALID
 A sale of an agricultural land (a ricefield) is valid when the

necessary DAR clearance as required under DAR A.O. No.
01, Series of 1989 (Rules and Procedures Governing Land
Transactions), is obtained by the seller. An "alleged tenant"
cannot validly dispose a property that does not belong to
him. No one can give what he does not have. Further, a
conversion of an agricultural land to non-agricultural use
may be legally undertaken only after approval thereof by
the Department of Agrarian Reform pursuant to RA No. 6657
or the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988.

February 19, 2008
DAR CLEARANCE; ACQUISITION BY THE GOVERNMENT

THROUGH EMINENT DOMAIN; EXEMPTED
May NPC be exempted from DAR clearance?
 A careful reading of the aforequoted provisions of DAR

Administrative Order No. 1, series of 1989 and DAR
Administrative Order No. 8, series of 1995 [Rules and
Presidential Decree No. 27 as amended by Executive Order
No. 228 and Republic Act No. 6657] would still call/require
for a DAR Clearance.
 Here, since the acquisition is by the government through
expropriation for public use or national interest in the
exercise of the power of eminent domain, your request for
DAR clearance which is necessary for registration is hereby
granted. However, it must be stressed that this clearance is
solely for purposes of registration without prejudice to NPC
still applying for conversion.

June 6, 2003
DAR CLEARANCE; CANNOT BE ISSUED WHEN THERE IS

ILLEGAL TRANSFER
 Since the sale is considered an illegal transfer which is

prohibited under Section 73 of R.A. No. 6657, the DAR
Clearance cannot be granted. Section 6 of the same Act
only allows the retention limit of the landowner of up to five
(5) hectares. This means that the landowner is only allowed
to dispose of his property within his retention limit and the
excess of the five (5) hectares shall be covered by CARP for
distribution to qualified farmer beneficiaries.

August 29, 2006
DAR CLEARANCE; CARP COVERED NOT SUBJECT TO DAR

CLEARANCE
Can CARP covered lands be the subject of application for

DAR Clearance?
 DAR Clearance signifies that the transaction covered

thereby is not in violation of RA 6657 and therefore, the
registration of the landholding eventually follows. If the
landholding falls under CARP coverage, the application for
DAR Clearance shall be denied and the property shall be
acquired and distributed to qualified tenant/beneficiaries
pursuant to CARL.

March 6, 1996
DAR CLEARANCE; DAR's OBLIGATION TO ISSUE CLEARANCE
Is DAR Clearance necessary in the registration of

agrilands disposed of by banks as a result of foreclosure of
mortgage?
 The DAR may not decline the issuance of a clearance for the
registration of agrilands disposed of by banks as a result of
foreclosure of mortgage. This is in accord with the
provision of R.A. No. 7881 which allows the bank to dispose
of their foreclosed agricultural lands to third persons. It
must be understood however that the subject property
though allowed to be disposed of to third persons is still
covered under the CARP, regardless of its area.

May 19, 1998
DAR CLEARANCE; EXEMPTED TRANSACTIONS

What are the transactions exempted from DAR Clearance?
 DAR Administrative Order No. 01, Series of 1989 (Rules and

Procedures Governing Land Transactions), enumerates the
transactions which may be registered by the Register of
Deeds without prior clearance from DAR, to wit:
"II. RULES ON VALIDITY OF LAND TRANSACTIONS
(a) The following are not prohibited

transactions and may be registered by
the Register of Deeds without prior
clearance from DAR:
a. Deed of extra-judicial partition of the
property of deceased who died prior to June
15, 1988.
b. Deed of partition of property owned in
common by co-owners prior to June 15,
1988.
c. Sub-division of title without change of
ownership.
d. Deed of real (es)state mortgage
executed by the original landowner or
beneficiary."

August 25, 2003
DAR CLEARANCE; EXEMPTED TRANSACTIONS
What are the transactions exempted from DAR Clearance?
 DAR A.O. No. 01, series of 1989 enumerated the

transactions that may be registed by the Register of Deeds
even without clearance from the Department of Agrarian
Reform, to wit:
1. Deed of extrajudicial partition of the

property of a deceased who died prior to June 15,
1988.
2. Deed of partition of property owned in
common by co-owners prior to June 15, 1988.
3. Sub-division of title without change of
ownership.
4. Deed of real estate mortgage executed
by the original landowner or beneficiary.

October 23, 1996
DAR CLEARANCE; ISSUANCE THEREOF

When should DAR clearance be issued?
 Provided there is no violation of the provisions of Sections
6, 70 and 73 (a) of R.A. No. 6657 as regards the 5-hectare
retention limit and landownership ceiling, DAR clearance
may be issued pursuant to the provisions of DAR
Procedures Governing Land Transactions). However, the
productivity of the land shall be maintained and any change
in the nature of its use shall not be allowed except with
approval of the DAR under its rules on conversion or
exemption.

January 20, 2003
DAR CLEARANCE; ISSUANCE THEREOF
When should DAR clearance be issued?
 Notwithstanding the provision of Sec. 6 R.A. No. 6657 which

provides that upon its effectivity on June 15, 1988, "any
sale, xxx xxx transfer of possession of private agricultural
land executed by the original landowner in violation of this
act shall be null and void," any requested DAR clearance for
the registration of the transfer and consolidation of
ownership of parcels of farmlots be issued, without
prejudice however, to CARP coverage of said parcels of
farmlots.

December 13, 1996
Is DAR Clearance necessary in transfer of ownership?
 Compliance with the DAR Clearance requirement prior to

registration with the Register of Deeds is compulsory for
transactions involving transfer of ownership. Specifically,
the issuance of DAR Clearance signifies and guarantees
that the transaction does not violate agrarian laws and
their implementing rules and regulations. The issuance
thereof is however not to be construed in itself as a
validation of the transaction for it only serves as a
safeguard against possible circumvention of agrarian laws.

September 17, 1997
DAR CLEARANCE; MANDATORY REQUIREMENT
Is DAR Clearance prior to registration a mandatory

requirement?
The compliance of DAR Clearance prior to registration is a
mandatory requirement that its compliance cannot be left
to the discretion of the parties nor can it be dispensed
with at their own volition considering that it serves as a
safeguard against possible circumvention of RA 6657.

December 23, 1996
DAR CLEARANCE; MANDATORY REQUIREMENT FOR

DISPOSITION OR ALIENATION OF AGRCIULTURAL LANDS
LESS THAN 5 HECTARES
 The provision of Section 70 of R.A. No. 6657 implies that

Retention Order and/or Certificate of Retention are not
mandatorily required before a retained area could be sold or
alienated. It is enough that the total landholdings that shall
be owned by the transferee thereof inclusive of the land to
be acquired shall not exceed the landholding ceilings
provided for by CARL. It submitted that our Provincial
Agrarian Reform Officer (PAROs) are intelligent, capable
and trustworthy enough to arrive at a fair and honest
finding as to what constitute the retention area from which
finding he must necessarily base his decision on whether or
not to issue the mandatorily required DAR Clearance to
prevent circumvention of the Program. What is mandatory
as far as the sale/alienation of agricultural lands less than
five (5) hectares are concerned is the DAR Clearance and
not the Retention Certificate or Order.

February 13, 2007
DAR CLEARANCE; NO LONGER NEEDED FOR TRANSFER OF

RESIDENTIAL LANDS
May residential lands be transferred without DAR

Clearance?
 Only public and private lands suitable for agriculture are

mandated for coverage under CARL to be redistributed to
qualified farmer-beneficiaries. This means that the
residential land may be transferred without the need for a
DAR Clearance.

March 20, 1997
DAR CLEARANCE; NOT SYNONYMOUS WITH DAR CONVERSION

ORDER
What is the difference between DAR Clearance and
Conversion Order
 The issuance of a DAR clearance involving the disposition or

transfer of agricultural lands coverable under the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) merely
signifies that the transaction is not in circumvention of the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) and may
therefore be registered. It is not synonymous with a DAR
Conversion Order/Clearance which is issued only after
determination on the merits of a duly filed application for
conversion the effect of which is to change the current
physical use of a piece of agricultural land into some other
use.
February 4, 2004
DAR CLEARANCE; PERSON AUTHORIZED TO ISSUE DAR

CLEARANCE
Who issues the DAR Clearance?
 It is explicit from the immediately aforequoted provision of

said guideline that it is the PARO who is authorized to issue
the DAR Clearance. It is worthy to note, moreover, that no
appeal process to the DAR Regional Director was provided
therein. The Regional Director may not, therefore, issue a
DAR Clearance in case the applicant brings the case to the
Regional Office on appeal.

October 14, 2003
DAR CLEARANCE; RELEVANCE
What is the relevance of a DAR clearance?
 DAR clearance is still necessary before the sale could be

effected to foreclose possible circumvention of the CARL
pursuant to Sections 6 (4th paragraph), 70 and 73 (a) of R.A.
No. 6657, as implemented by DAR Administrative Order No.
1, Series of 1989.

December 23, 1999
DAR CLEARANCE; REQUIRED IN TRANSACTIONS

INVOLVING TRANSFER OR SALE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND
 In all transactions involving the transfer or sale of

agricultural land to another, the issuance of a DAR
Clearance is an essential requisite in order that it may be
considered a valid transfer. This is in view of the DAR's
policy to protect the rights of tenants and other
farmworkers who may be displaced therein.

March 21, 2006
DAR CLEARANCE; REQUIREMENT BEFORE TRANSFER IS

ALLOWED
 DAR Administrative Order No. 08, Series of 1995 [Rules and

Presidential Decree No. 27 as Amended by Executive Order
No. 228 and Republic Act No. 6657], provides that the lands
awarded to ARBs pursuant to either PD 27 or RA 6657 may
be transferred and registered by the Register of Deeds only
after the issuance of DAR Clearance. Corollary thereto,
although the transfer of awarded land is allowed the
productivity of the subject land be maintained and any
change in the nature of its use shall not be allowed except
with the approval of the DAR under its rules on conversion
or exemption.

June 2, 2009
DAR CLEARANCE; REQUIREMENT BEFORE TRANSFER IS
ALLOWED
Is the transfer of awarded land allowed?
 DAR Administrative Order No. 8, Series of 1995 provides

that the lands awarded to ARBs pursuant to either PD 27 or
RA 6657 may be transferred and registered by the Register
of Deeds only after the issuance of DAR Clearance.
Corollary thereto, although the transfer of awarded land is
allowed, the productivity of the subject land be maintained
and any change in the nature of its use shall not be allowed
except with the approval of the DAR under its rules on
 While we welcome the suggestion that the titles should be
indorsed directly to the Register of Deeds instead of
passing it from MARO, PARO and then to Register of Deeds,
we regret to inform that said suggestion cannot be
considered because until said procedure are amended or
abrogated the same will continue to be applied on matters
dealing with the cancellation of titles.

January 21, 1997
DAR CLEARANCE; REQUIREMENTS
What are the requirements for DAR Clearance?
 The DAR Clearance for the registration of the transaction

shall be issued only if the following documents are
submitted:
1. Certificate of Full payment of Amortizations

to be issued by the LBP on lands financed by the said
bank or by DAR in the case of lands covered by the
Voluntary Land Transfer/Direct Payment Scheme
(VLT/DPS);
2. Certification regarding Full Payment of
Irrigation Fees (NIA);
3. Certification regarding Loans (equipment),
production, etc. (DAR/LBP);
4. Tax Clearance (Treasurer's Office); and
5. Affidavit of the transferor stating that the
subject property has no pending case at the DARAB or any
of its Adjudicators, the DAR, the Courts or at the Office of
the President.
July 2, 1996
DAR CLEARANCE; REQUIREMENTS
What documents are needed to support the application for

DAR Clearance?
 The DAR Clearance signifies that the sale is not in violation

of CARL, and may therefore be registered in the name of the
vendee. To support the application for DAR Clearance, proof
must be submitted to show that the property sold is within
the retained area of the landowner and that the vendees
agricultural lands do not exceed the five-hectare
landownership ceiling, inclusive of the property acquired.

December 20, 1995
DAR CLEARANCE; REQUISITE AFFIDAVIT OF PROPERTY

HOLDINGS WHEN NOT NECESSARY
When can we dispense with the Submission of an Affidavit
attesting that the transferee's aggregate landholding does
not exceed five (5) hectares?
 Normally, we require the submission of an affidavit attesting

that transferee's aggregate landholding does not exceed
five (5) hectares. However, in the case at hand, we are
foregoing the said requirement, for the reason that
Economic Zones like the CEZA, would naturally possess
vast tracts of land exceeding five (5) hectares. Limiting
acquisition of lands (particularly agricultural) would defeat
the national interest and public purpose of their creation.

August 25, 2003
DAR CLEARANCE; REQUISITE BEFORE A VALID TRANSFER

COULD BE EFFECTED
 Compliance with the required DAR clearance prior to
registration with the Register of Deeds pursuant to DAR
Procedures Governing Land Transactions) is compulsory for
transactions involving transfer of ownership. The issuance
of DAR clearance signifies and guarantees that the
transaction does not violate agrarian laws and its other
related implementing rules and regulations.

August 1, 2006
DAR CLEARANCE; REQUISITE BEFORE A VALID TRANSFER
COULD BE EFFECTED
 Any change in the nature of the awarded lands' use shall not
be allowed except with the approval of the DAR under its
rules on conversion or exemption. Further, Item II.1 of DAR
Administrative Order NO. 08, Series of 1995 clearly provides
that lands awarded to agrarian reform beneficiaries (ARBs)
pursuant to either P.D. No. 27 or R.A. No. 6657 may be
transferred and registered by the Register of Deeds only
after the issuance of a DAR Clearance. The issuance of a
DAR Clearance is therefore an essential requisite before a
valid transfer could be effected, otherwise the sale or
transfer is void.

January 20, 2006
DAR CLEARANCE; SIGNIFICANCE
What is the significance of a DAR Clearance?
 A DAR Clearance for registration signifies that the

transaction involved does not contravene the mandate
under CARL to acquire and distribute agricultural land to
April 5, 1994
 The DAR Clearance signifies that the transaction covered

thereby is not in violation of CARL and may therefore be
registered in favor of the transferee.

October 19, 1995
What does the DAR Clearance signify?
 The DAR Clearance signifies that the transaction involved

does not contravene R.A. 6657 and its implementing
guidelines and therefore, registration follows as a matter of
course.

May 28, 1996
 A DAR Clearance for the registration of the transaction

signifies that the sale, transfer or conveyance covered
thereby is not a circumvention of the CARL.

March 20, 1996
 DAR clearance serves as a safeguard against circumvention

of RA 6657. Specifically, it signifies that the sale, transfer
or conveyance covered thereby is not in contravention of
RA 6657 and therefore, registration of the property follows
as a matter of course.

October 23, 1996
What does the DAR Clearance signify?
 As stated in DAR Opinion No. 07, s. 2003, dated June 6,
2003, "please note that the issuance of a DAR clearance
involving the disposition or transfer of agricultural lands
coverable under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Program (CARP) merely signifies that the transaction is not
in circumvention of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Law (CARL) and may therefore be registered. It is not
synonymous with a DAR Conversion Order/Clearance which
is issued only after determination on the merits of a duly
filed application for conversion the effect of which is to
change the current physical use of a piece of agricultural
land into some other use."

August 25, 2003
What does the DAR clearance signify?
 DAR clearance involving the disposition or transfer of

agricultural lands coverable under the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) merely signifies that the
transaction is not in circumvention of the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) and may therefore be
registered. It is not synonymous with a DAR Conversion
Order/Clearance which is issued only after determination on
the merits of a duly filed application for conversion the
effect of which is to change the current physical use of a
piece of agricultural land into some other use.

June 6, 2003
 DAR Clearance is not synonymous with DAR Exemption

Clearance. A DAR Clearance for registration signifies that
the transaction involved does not contravene the mandate
under Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL). It is
only issued upon showing that the subject of the deed in
the case of sale for example, is the retention area of the
vendor and that the total landholding that shall be owned
by the vendee inclusive of the land to be acquired shall not
exceed the landownership ceiling provided in R.A. No. 6657.

October 20, 2006
DAR CLEARANCE; SUCCESSION

Is DAR Clearance necessary in the transfer of property to the
heirs of the landowner who died prior to 15 June 1988?
 No DAR Clearance is necessary to register the transfer of

the properties to the heirs of the deceased landowner who
died prior to the effectivity of RA 6657 on 15 June 1988.

February 8, 1996
DAR CLEARANCE; WHEN ISSUED
When shall the DAR Clearance for the registration of the

transfer be issued?
 The DAR Clearance for the registration of the transfer shall

be issued only if the following are presented as required
under DAR Administrative Order No. 01, Series of 1989: The
Affidavit of Retention by the Landowner/Mortgagor; Affidavit
of the Buyer or Transferee (that his landholdings, including
the new acquisition do not exceed 5 hectares) and the
PARO Certificate of Retention. If the property is tenanted,
the tenant shall continue to enjoy the rights granted to him
under the Agrarian Reform Code, including his right to
security of tenure, which means that he may not be ejected
from his tillage unless authorized by the court for causes
provided in said law.
August 5, 1994
DAR CLEARANCE; WHEN MAY BE ISSUED
 Provided there is no violation of the provisions of Sections

6, 70 and 73 (a) of R.A. No. 6657 as regards the 5-hectare
retention limit and landownership ceiling, DAR clearance
may be issued pursuant to the provisions of DAR
Procedures Governing Land Transactions). However, the
productivity of the land shall be maintained and any change
in the nature of its use shall not be allowed except with
approval of the DAR under its rules on conversion or
exemption.

January 20, 2003
DAR CLEARANCE; WHEN NECESSARY

When is DAR Clearance necessary?
 The DAR clearance would be necessary whether the land is

originally owned by government, or acquired through
expropriation, so long as the agency involved is an agent of
the national government.

September 9, 2002
DAR LAWYER/PERSONNEL; ENTITLED TO A SPECIAL

COUNSEL ALLOWANCE
 Section 50 of the General Appropriations Act readily

suggests that a lawyer-personnel can automatically claim
for a Special Counsel Allowance without being deputized by
the Office of the Solicitor General. This is in view of the
conjunction "and" as used in the provision which simply
signifies the intent to include both the lawyer-personnel
and those officials or employees who were deputized by the
Solicitor General who may not be full-pledged lawyers,
however, subject to the availability of funds of their
respective offices.
 Said provision however, is silent as regards to the type of
cases that should be handled under such circumstances. It
is presumed that it includes both civil and criminal cases
and irrespective of whether or not the party represented is
the department, its personnel or a tenant, agricultural
lessee, agricultural farmworker or agrarian reform
beneficiary. It is settled under our jurisdiction that "when
the law does not distinguish, we should not distinguish".

January 9, 2006
DAR LAWYERS; AUTHORITY OF DAR LAWYERS TO

APPEAR AS COUNSEL
 DAR lawyers may render free legal assistance to tenants

only in cases arising from or are connected with an
agrarian dispute as defined under Section 3 (d) of R.A. 6657.
It is necessarily followed that there is no tenancy
relationship if the party ceases to be an alleged tenant as
decided by the court. Further, DAR lawyers may only render
legal assistance if the forcible entry arises from or are
connected with an agrarian dispute.
 If the requirements set by law for the existence of tenancy
relationship have been met, regardless of the location of
the property, a DAR lawyer may represent the tenant but
not a farm-owner.
December 8, 2005
DAR LAWYERS; AUTHORITY TO NOTARIZE FREE OF CHARGE

DEED OF TRANSFER OR DEED OF CONVEYANCE
Whether or not DAR lawyers in the BALA in Central Office
may notarize free of charge the Deed of Transfer or Deed
of Reconveyance?
 The general mandate of Bureau of Agrarian Legal

Assistance (BALA) to render legal assistance and services
necessarily includes by implication notarization free of
charge of said documents. Thus, DAR lawyers in the BALA
in Central Office may also notarize free of charge the Deed
of Transfer or Deed of Reconveyance like their counterparts
in the DAR field offices provided they have applied for
commission. This is implied in DAR Special Order No. 597
and the aforequoted provisions of law. Moreover, it can be
inferred that BALA being the legal arm of the Department
can and should perform said task.

January 20, 2004
DAR LAWYERS; DEPUTIZED AS SPECIAL ATTORNEYS OF THE

OSG
Are DAR lawyers duly deputized as special Attorneys of

the Office of the Solicitor General to represent the DAR
Secretary?
 DAR lawyers duly deputized as Special Attorneys of the

Office of the Solicitor General may represent the DAR
Secretary, in all cases where the Secretary is impleaded as
a party in his official capacity and must continue
representing the Secretary even if a new person is
appointed to the said Office, for the following reasons:
1. the DAR lawyers concerned are not

representing the individual holding the Office of DAR
Secretary in the latter's private capacity;
2. the lawyer-client relationship is not
personally between the DAR lawyer and the DAR
Secretary in a way that whenever the person occupying
the post of DAR Secretary is replaced, the attorney-client
relationship is severed; and
3. the party impleaded in these cases is
actually the Office of the DAR Secretary as occupied by
the incumbent Official duly appointed and exercising the
functions and powers of said Office, the exercise of which
is necessarily continuous and uninterrupted no matter
who is presently appointed as Secretary.

March 25, 1999
DAR LAWYERS; NOT AUTHORIZE TO PERFORM NOTARIZATION

OUTSIDE DAR'S OFFICE
Is a DAR lawyer authorized to notarize outside DAR's

Office?
 The commission issued to DAR lawyers for them to notarize

a document does not by itself confer them an unbridled
right to perform notarization even outside DAR's Office. For
them to legally and validly perform the functions of a notary
public, clearance from the DAR Secretary and court official
concerned is necessary. Since a notarial acknowledgment
attaches not only full faith and credit to the document
concerned but also vests upon the document the
presumption of regularity unless it is impugned by strong,
complete and conclusive proof (Severo Sales vs. Court of
Appeals, G.R. No. L-40145, July 29, 1992), public policy
dictates that the same should be duly regulated and
authorized accordingly.

October 28, 1999
DAR PARA-LEGAL OFFICERS; NOT AUTHORIZED TO APPEAR

BEFORE THE RTC
Can DAR Para-Legal Officers appear before the RTC?
 Persons not entitled to practice law, i.e. Para-Legal Officers,

are not authorized to appear in Court (RTC), only members
of the Bar are authorized to appear in the RTC.

December 13, 1996
DAR REGIONAL DIRECTOR AS SUBORDINATE

OFFICIALS DO NOT HAVE THE POWER OF REVIEW OVER
OFFICIAL ACTS OF THE PRESIDENT
 The issue on whether or not a DAR Regional Director can

defy a Presidential Proclamation (i.e., P.P. No. 128), the
answer is in the negative. The DAR RDs, as subordinate
officials, do not have the power of review over official acts
of the President. Article VII, Section 17 of the Constitution
explicitly provides, quote: "The President shall have control
of all the executive departments, bureaus, and offices. He
shall ensure that the laws be faithfully executed".

October 16, 2009
DAR SECRETARY; AUTHORITY TO SIGN/EXECUTE
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
Who has the authority to sign the Memorandum of

Agreement that will benefit the agrarian reform
beneficiaries?
 It is only the Secretary who is clothed with authority to sign

or execute documents relative to the implementation or in
furtherance of the agrarian reform program, such as
execution of Memorandum of Agreement that will benefit
the agrarian reform beneficiaries.

September 4, 1996
DAR; AUTHORITY TO ADMINISTER ALIENABLE AND DISPOSABLE

AGRICULTURAL LAND
Does the said property fall within the domain of the DAR
for administration purposes?
 The authority of the DAR to administer as provided for in

Sec. 4 (b) of E.O. No. 129-A applies only to all cultivable
portion of the public domain declared as alienable and
disposable for agricultural purposes transferred to it by the
DENR. Since the property does not fall within the category
provided for, it goes without saying that said property is not
within the domain of the DAR for administration purposes.
The provision of Sec. 4 (e) of the same E.O. provides that
once the DAR has acquired agricultural land, the
administration is for the purpose of distributing said land to
qualified beneficiaries set forth in Sec. 22 of R.A. 6657.

December 23, 1996
DECISION; DECISION OF DAR SECRETARY
Is the Decision of the DAR Secretary on administrative

matters final and executory?
 The Decision of the DAR Secretary on administrative

matters is not the end of the litigation because parties
adversely affected by the decision can elevate the same to
the Office of the President, Court of Appeals and even to
the Supreme Court for proper review.

December 13, 1996
DECISION; DECISION OF THE DARAB; IMMEDIATELY EXECUTORY
Is the decision of the DARAB immediately executory

notwithstanding an appeal to the Court of Appeals?
 Section 1, Rule XIV (Judicial Review) of the Revised New

Rules of Procedure of the Department of Agrarian Reform
Adjudication Board (DARAB) pertinently provides that
"notwithstanding an appeal to the Court of Appeals, the
decision of the Board appealed from shall be immediately
executory pursuant to Section 50, R.A. No. 6657.
Undoubtedly, said procedure is intended to provide an
expeditious means of protecting actual possession or right
to possession of tenants. To require Entry of Judgment and
Certificate of Finality as conditions sine qua non before the
DAR can issue EPs is to defeat the very purpose of the law
requiring immediate execution.

March 11, 1997
DEED OF DACION
Can the transaction be considered as within the scope of
Section 71 of R.A. No. 6657?
 Although the final result of the Deed of Dacion is the

payment of the loan to the bank, the transaction cannot be
considered as within the scope of Section 71 because the
properties over which banks are allowed to acquire title
under Section 71 of CARL are those landholding used to
secure loans, whereas, in the instant case the loan is
unsecured.

May 28, 1996
DEED OF DONATION; DENIAL
Is the DAR's action to deny the Deed of Donation

consistent with agrarian reform laws?
 The DAR's action to deny the Deed of Donation is consistent

with Section 1 item (d) of MC 54 which reaffirms that
agricultural lands under the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Law shall not be covered by said classification.

September 23, 1996
DEEDS OF DONATION; EXECUTION IN FAVOR OF THE

MUNICIPALITIES OF CABADBARAN AND TUBAY:
Are the Deeds of Donations executed in favor of

Municipalities of Cabadbaran and Tubay valid?
 No registration of the donation can be legally effected, nor

can title to said properties be legally transferred in favor of
the Municipalities of Cabadburan and Tubay since the
Deeds of Donation executed by JC Agri-Development, Inc.
cover an aggregate area of 52.9351. They are clearly in
violation of the mandate under CARL to redistribute the
landholdings involved in favor of qualified beneficiaries,
hence, are null and void.

November 27, 1995
DEFERMENT; RECKONING DATE, RATIONALE, PURPOSE
What is the reckoning date of the ten (10) year deferment

period?
 Section 11 of R.A. No. 6657 (as amended by Section 3 of

R.A. No. 7881) provides in part: "Commercial farms, which
are private agricultural lands devoted to . . . . . shall be
subject to immediate compulsory acquisition and
distribution after ten (10) years from effectivity of this Act.
In the case of new farms, the ten-year period shall begin
from the first year of commercial production and operation,
as determined by the DAR." DAR Administrative Order No.
16, Series of 1988, which serves as the implementing
guidelines of Section 11, R.A. No. 6657, specifically Section
5 thereof, provides for the following:
"Sec. 5. DETERMINATION OF
DEFERMENT PERIOD — Deferment period for
qualified commercial farms shall be as follows:
A. For commercial farms already in
commercial production and operation as of June
15, 1988, the deferment period immediately
begins as of that date and ends on June 15, 1998.
The farm shall then be subject to compulsory land
acquisition and distribution by DAR after June 15,
1998.
B. For commercial farms established
before June 15, 1988, but which are not yet in
commercial production and operation, the
deferment starts from the first year of commercial
production and operation, or at the end of the
gestation periods for that crop or commodity. The
allowable gestation period for specific
commercial crops/commodities are listed in
Annex A.
C. In case of multi-crop farms (i.e., one
large farm divided into several areas, each
planted or devoted to different crops), the area
which are already in commercial production and
operation shall follow the deferment period
prescribed in Section 5.A above, while areas
which are not yet in commercial production and
operation shall follow Section 5.B above.
D. Where a commercial crop is
intercropped with another commercial crop, the
ten (10) year period shall be based on the main
crop or the crop most prevalent in that farm area.
E. In case of areas with varying crop
ages, the ten (10) year period shall be based on
the most prevalent age group in that area."

October 29, 1999

October 26, 1998

June 5, 1997

December 24, 1996
DE-LISTING AND LISTING OF AGRARIAN REFORM
BENEFICIARIES (ARBs); UNDER COLLECTIVE CLOA
 The PARO shall file petitions for delisting and listing of

ARBs with either the PARAD or the RARAD after a list of
proposed qualified and disqualified ARBs are submitted by
the Board of Directors of the Cooperative. The
PARAD/RARAD shall then hear and decide on the petition
for de-listing and listing of agrarian reform beneficiaries
(ARBs) involving members of cooperatives, farmworker’s
associations and co-owners under a collective CLOA, as
well as those issued individual CLOAs.

July 17, 2008
DEVOLUTION OF POWERS (E.O. NO. 482) AUTHORITY TO

SIGN AND ISSUE CLOAS VESTED ON THE ARMM
GOVERNOR
 Executive Order No. 482 (Devolving to the Autonomous

Regional Government of the Autonomous Region for Muslim
Mindanao and the Powers and Functions of the Department
of Agrarian Reform [DAR] and the Control and Supervision
of it Offices within the Region) and a Memorandum of
Agreement dated 15 June 1993 executed by and between
the Department of Agrarian Reform and the Autonomous
Regional Government of the Autonomous Region for Muslim
Mindanao in order to effect the transfer of the DAR
Provincial and Municipal Offices.
Section 1 (f) of the aforecited E.O. states:
Section 1. Transfer of Powers and Functions.

— All powers and functions of the Department of
Agrarian Reform under Section 5 of Executive Order No.
129-A and as enumerated hereunder are hereby
transferred to the Autonomous Regional Government
(ARG) in the implementation of the CARP in the four (4)
provinces covered by the ARMM.
xxx xxx
xxx
f. Issue emancipation patents to farmers and

farmworkers covered by agrarian reform or both private
and public lands and when necessary, make
administrative corrections of the same; Provide free
legal service to agrarian reform beneficiaries and
resolve agrarian conflicts and land tenure related
problems as may be provided for by law.
Also noteworthy is Section 2, Article IV of RA. No.
6734:
Section 2. The powers devolved to the Autonomous

Region shall be exercised through the Regional
Assembly, the Regional Governor, and the special
courts as provided in this Act.
 As can be gleaned from the above quoted provisions, the

authority to sign and issue CLOAS is vested on the ARMM
Governor in line with the devolution of powers from
National Government to the Autonomous Regional
Government.

December 22, 2009
DEVOLUTION OF POWERS TO THE ARMM; IMPLICATION
 Executive Order No. 482 mandates the transfer of all the

powers and functions of the Department of Agrarian Reform
to the Autonomous Regional Government (ARG) in the
implementation of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Program (CARP) in the DAR Provincial and Municipal Offices
of the four (4) provinces covered by the ARMM. Relating
thereto, a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) dated 15 June
1993 was executed by and between the DAR and the ARG in
order to effect the orderly transfer of the DAR Provincial
and Municipal Offices concerned.
 Thus, on the basis of the aforementioned Executive Order
and MOA, it is our view that the requisition for Judicial
Forms may no longer be properly forwarded to the DLR
Central Office since the powers and functions of the DLR
insofar as said provinces and municipalities are concerned
had already been devolved to the Autonomous Regional
Government in Muslim Mindanao.

March 2, 2005
DIRECT PAYMENT SCHEME
Can a deed of Direct Sale under R.A. No. 6657 be executed

to would-be buyers?
 The Policy Statement of Administrative Order No. 02, Series

of 1995 provides that a landowner whose land is subject to
acquisition under R.A. No. 6657 may, with the concurrence
of his qualified agrarian reform beneficiaries (ARBs),
voluntarily transfer his land directly to them. Negotiations
for VLT/DPS between the landowner and his qualified
beneficiaries must be completed and the agreement arrived
at must be submitted within one (1) year from date of
receipt by the DAR of the Notice or Application for VLT/DPS.
Otherwise, the land shall be acquired by the government
and transferred to qualified ARBs pursuant to R.A. No. 6657.
 The procedures under the Voluntary Land Transfer/Direct
Payment Scheme are outlined under the operating
procedures of DAR A.O. No. 02, Series of 1995 as amended
by A.O. No. 08, Series of 1997.

December 14, 1999
DIRECT PAYMENT SCHEME; APPLICATION THEREOF,

REQUISITES
What are the requisites of a Direct Payment Scheme?
 Sec. 21 of R.A. No. 6657 provides that: "direct payment in

cash or in kind may be made by the farmer-beneficiary to
the landowner under terms to be mutually agreed upon by
both parties, which shall be binding upon them, upon
registration with the approval by the DAR". Furthermore,
DAR Administrative Order No. 6, Series of 1995 otherwise
known as the Supplemental Guidelines to Administrative
Order no. 7, Series of 1994, Re: New Implementing
Guidelines Strengthening the Formation, Organization and
Operation of the PARCCOM pursuant to R.A. No. 7905
provides for the adoption of the Direct Payment Scheme
between the landowner and the farmer and/or farm worker-
beneficiary provided that the following provisions shall be
followed:
1. amount and terms of payment are not more

burdensome to the agrarian reform beneficiary than under
the compulsory acquisition coverage provision of the
CARP;
2. the ARBs agree to the amount and the terms
of payment;
3. the DAR shall act as mediator in cases of
disagreement between the landowner and the farmer;
4. the farmer and/or farm worker-beneficiary
shall be eligible to borrow from the Land Bank of the
Philippines an amount equal to eighty-five (85%) of the
selling price of the land they have acquired pursuant to
the said bank's credit loan assistance program.

May 20, 1997
DIRECT PAYMENT SCHEME; INCLUDES IMMEDIATE TRANSFER

OF POSSESSION AND OWNERSHIP
What does the direct payment scheme include?
 Under existing agrarian laws, rules and regulations, the

terms and conditions of the Direct Payment Scheme should
include the immediate transfer of possession and
ownership of the land in favor of the identified
beneficiaries.

May 20, 1997
DIRECT PAYMENT SCHEME; NOT ABSOLUTE
Is Direct Payment Scheme between tenant and a

mortgagee bank valid and not violative of agrarian laws?
 Although Sections 20 and 21 of Republic Act No. 6657

(Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law) allow VLT/DPS
scheme as valid and legal, the same is not absolute.
Specifically, DAR Administrative Order No. 8, Series of 1997
categorically provides that lands mortgaged with banking
and/or financial may not be the subject of VLT/DPS (Item
II.L). This prohibition was incomparable by the DAR to
simplify VLT/DPS transactions particularly to facilitate the
immediate transfer of title to the Agrarian Reform
Beneficiaries (ARBs). Without this safeguard, tenants might
enter into VLT/DPS agreements with banks which might sell
agricultural lands foreclosed by them under a selling price
or terms and conditions grossly disadvantageous and
prejudicial to the tenants, which is violative of Section 20
(b) of R.A. No. 6657.
DAR OPINION NO. 124, s 1998

December 24, 1998
DISTRIBUTION; SCHEDULE OF IMPLEMENTATION
Is the ten-year period of implementation under Section 5 of

R.A. No. 6657 mandatory?
 The 10-year time frame provided in Section 5 of R.A. No.

6657 (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law) is not
mandatory. Well accepted is the rule that provisions as to
time are generally construed as directory if there are, as
herein, no negative words restraining the doing of the act
afterwards (Philippine Association of Free Labor Unions vs.
Sec. of Labor, 27 SCRA 40). Department of Justice (DOJ)
Opinion No. 9, Series of 1997 had already put this issue to
rest declaring that the schedule of CARP implementation is
merely directory rather than mandatory.

December 23, 1999
DISTURBANCE COMPENSATION
Are tenants entitled to Disturbance Compensation in cases

of conversion?
 The provision of Republic Act No. 3844, as amended by R.A.

No. 6389, prescribes payment of disturbance compensation
to agricultural lessee in cases of conversion in land use of
tenanted land to non-agricultural.
Section 7 of R.A. No. 3844, as amended, it
provides:
"Sec. 7. Tenure of Agricultural
Leasehold Relation — The agricultural leasehold
relation once established shall confer upon the
agricultural lessee the right to continue working
on the landholding until such leasehold relation is
extinguished. The agricultural lessee shall be
entitled to security of tenure on his landholding
and cannot be ejected therefrom unless
authorized by the Court for causes herein
provided."
 It is, thus, clear that a landowner-lessor cannot eject or

demand his lessee to vacate his property, unless authorized
by the Court (now, DAR Adjudication Board), after due
hearing, for causes as provided for in Section 36 of R.A. No.
3844, as amended.

November 27, 2000
Is the tenant entitled to disturbance compensation?
 Section 36, paragraph 1 of R.A. No. 3844 as amended by

Sec. 7 of R.A. No. 6389 states that disturbance
compensation is mandated to be given to the tenant only if
the said tenant will be dispossessed of the land because
the land is converted or is declared by DAR to be suited for
purposes other than agricultural (e.g., residential,
commercial or industrial). A tenant is entitled to
disturbance compensation only if the land is legally
converted to non-agricultural use wherein in the process he
is dispossessed thereby. If said land is intended to be sold
to a third person but the tenant opts to buy the same,
logically, there is no disturbance compensation to speak of
since, clearly, there is no conversion and he is not at all
dispossessed of the land.

March 31, 1998
When is the tenant entitled to a disturbance

compensation?
 Should the tenant decide to leave the landholding on their

own choice, they are no longer obligated to give any
disturbance compensation to them. The payment of
disturbance compensation as provided for in Section 36 of
R.A. No. 3844, as amended by R.A. 6389, pertains to the
compensation given to the affected agricultural lessee in
cases of legal conversion, that is, in cases where the use of
the land for purposes other than agricultural is approved by
DAR upon the application of the landowner. Otherwise
stated, the payment of disturbance compensation only
covers cases of legal conversion undertaken at the
instance of the landowner (Pagtalunan vs. Tamayo, G.R. No.
54281, March 19, 1990). Since the tenants acted on their
own volition, it is a clear indication that they no longer
wanted to be tenants of said landholding commensurate
compensation as may be deemed just and reasonable, may
however still be due and demanded as a token of fairness
and gesture of goodwill.

February 4, 1998
Who are entitled to the payment of disturbance

compensation?
 Only recognized and qualified tenant-farmers are entitled to

payment of disturbance compensation. The payment of
disturbance compensation as provided and contemplated
under Section 36 of R.A. No. 3844 pertains to the
compensation given to the agricultural lessee in cases of
legal conversion, that is, in cases where the use of the land
for purposes other than agricultural is approved by DAR
upon the application of the landowner. As held by the
Supreme Court in the case of Pagtalunan vs. Tamayo, G.R.
No. 54281, March 19, 1990, payment of disturbance
compensation only covers legal conversion undertaken at
the instance of the landowner. The award of disturbance
compensation is designed to provide qualified tenant
farmers with the wherewithal during the period that they
are looking for another employment.

February 9, 1998
Who has the authority to determine the payment of

disturbance compensation?
 The jurisdiction to determine the payment of disturbance

compensation is lodged with the PARAD in the exercise of
his adjudicatory function. This is so because it is classified
as an agrarian dispute or case which the PARAD alone
could determine as provided for by law.

February 9, 1998
Does the PARO have the authority to determine the

payment of disturbance compensation?
 The PARO who assumes jurisdiction over the payment of

disturbance compensation clearly encroaches on matters
which do not belong to him. In other words, he shall be
overstepping in the exercise of his authority.

February 9, 1998
DISTURBANCE COMPENSATION; BASIS IN CASE OF
LEGAL CONVERSION
 It is clear under Section 16 (a) DAR A.O. No. 1, S. 1999

(Conversion of Agricultural Lands to Non-Agricultural Uses)
that disturbance compensation is based on terms as may
be mutually agreed upon between the affected tenants,
farmworkers or occupants and the landowner or the
developer covering the actual tillage of the former but it
should not be less than five (5) times the average of the
gross harvests on their landholding during the last five (5)
preceding calendar years. Any agreement for the payment
between them shall be subject to DAR's approval and
compliance monitoring.

application of the landowner.

June 13, 2008
DISTURBANCE COMPENSATION; AGRICULTURAL LESSEES

RIGHT TO PAYMENT OF DISTURBANCE COMPENSATION
 The existing arrangement appears to be a "share-tenancy".

Hence, your cousin as tenant must be given the rights
provided for under Section 7 of R.A. 6389 (An Act Amending
R.A. No. 3844, as amended, otherwise known as The
Agricultural Land Reform Code and For Other Purposes)
which expressly provides that "the agricultural lessee shall
be entitled to disturbance compensation equivalent to five
times the average of the gross harvests on his landholding
during the last five preceding calendar years". The said law
clearly suggests that it is only in cases of land use
conversion that displaced tenants are entitled to the
payment of the disturbance compensation.

January 19, 2007
DISTURBANCE COMPENSATION; AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 36

(1) OF R.A. NO. 3844
Is the tenant entitled to disturbance compensation when

the land is subjected to expropriation?
 It is well-settled that disturbance compensation provided in

Section 36 (1) of R.A. No. 3844, as amended covers cases of
legal conversion undertaken at the instance of the
landowner, i.e., cases where the use of the land for
purposes other than agricultural is approved by the
Department of Agrarian Reform. Based on the foregoing
premise, it is clear that one can/could not be entitled to a
disturbance compensation since there is actually no legal
conversion rather, there is an expropriation presumably
undertaken at the instance of the government in the
exercise of its power of eminent domain.

April 30, 1998
DISTURBANCE COMPENSATION; AT THE INSTANCE OF THE

LANDOWNER
Is an agricultural lessee entitled to disturbance

compensation in case of conversion?
 Under Section 36 (1) of RA 3844, as amended, in case of
conversion of an agricultural land, the agricultural lessee is
entitled to disturbance compensation. The claim for
compensation, under said provision is based on the
claimants being a tenant/agricultural lessee of the
converted land.

September 7, 1995
Can the State be held liable for disturbance compensation

in legal conversion undertaken at instance of the
landowner?
 The disturbance compensation provided in Section 36 (1) of

RA 3844 covers cases of legal conversion undertaken at the
instance of the landowner. This is anchored on the decision
in the case entitled "Pagtalunan versus Tamayo" (G.R. No.
54281, March 19, 1990), where the Supreme Court ruled:
"Sec. 36 (1) of Rep. Act No. 3844, as amended by Rep. Act
No. 6389, cannot be invoked to hold the State liable for
disturbance compensation (see Campos v. CA, G.R. No.
51904, October 1, 1980) where this Court by resolution
denied for lack of merit therein petitioners claim that, as
agricultural lessee or tenant, he was entitled to disturbance
compensation against the State. It refers to situations
where the peaceful enjoyment and possession by the
agricultural tenants or lessees of the land is disturbed or
interrupted by the owner/lessor thereof.

June 23, 1995
DISTURBANCE COMPENSATION; BASIS OF ENTITLEMENT
What is the basis of computation of disturbance

compensation?
 Section 7 of RA 6389 expressly provides that "the
agricultural lessee shall be entitled to disturbance
compensation equivalent to five times the average of the
gross harvest on his landholdings during the last five
preceding calendar years."

December 13, 1996

December 23, 1996
DISTURBANCE COMPENSATION; FARMWORKERS ENTITLED A

SHARE TO THE FRUITS
Are farmworkers entitled to disturbance compensation?
 In conversion cases resulting to ejectment of tenants from

their landholdings, Section 7 of R.A. No. 6389 amending
R.A. No. 3844 (otherwise known as the Code of Agrarian
Reform of the Philippines) provides that the agricultural
lessee shall be entitled to disturbance compensation
equivalent to five times the average of the gross harvests
on his landholding during the last five preceding calendar
years. In case, however, of other farmworkers, they are
entitled to receive a just share of the fruits thereof. (Sec. 2,
R.A. No. 6657 and Sec. 4, Art. XIII of the 1987 Philippine
Constitution).

March 20, 1997
DISTURBANCE COMPENSATION; HOW MUCH A TENANT

ENTITLED
 The case of Ernesto Bunye vs. Lourdes Aquino, et al. (Oct. 9,

2000, G.R. No. 138979), contemplates that in the event that
the tenanted land is converted pursuant to Sec. 36 of RA
No. 3844, a disturbance compensation shall be given to the
tenants. This is equivalent to five times the average of the
gross harvest on his landholding during the last five (5)
preceding calendar years.

April 14, 2008
DISTURBANCE COMPENSATION; IN THE EXERCISE OF THE

GOVERNMENT'S POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN
Are agricultural lessees entitled to disturbance

compensation when the property is taken at instance of
the government?
 Section 36 (1) of RA 3844, providing for disturbance

compensation to the agricultural lessee, is given to
affected agricultural lessees in cases of legal conversion,
i.e. cases where the use of the land for purposes other than
agricultural is approved by DAR upon the application of the
landowner. Otherwise stated, the disturbance
compensation provided in Section 36 (1) of RA 3844 covers
cases of legal conversion undertaken at the instance of the
landowner. Since expropriation is undertaken at the
instance of the government in exercise of its power of
eminent domain, it is not covered by said Section 36 (1) of
RA 3844.

February 8, 1994
Does Section 36(1) of R.A. No. 3844 cover cases of legal

conversion undertaken at the instance of the government?
 The disturbance compensation provided in Section 36 (1) of

RA 3844 covers cases of legal conversion undertaken at the
instance of the landowner. Since expropriation is
undertaken at the instance of the government in exercise of
its power of eminent domain, it is not covered by said
Section 36 (1) of RA 3844.

January 11, 1995
DISTURBANCE COMPENSATION; LIMITED ONLY TO TENANTS OF

LANDHOLDING
Is the award of Disturbance Compensation limited only in

favor of tenant-lessees of the subject landholding.
 An assidous examination of DAR Administrative Order No.

15, S. 1988 and DAR Administrative Order No. 2, Series of
1990 readily reveals that in all cases of land use conversion
that will involve the displacement of tenant-lessees, such
lessees shall be entitled to a disturbance compensation
equivalent to five (5) times the average of the gross
harvests on their landholding during the last five (5)
preceding calendar years, pursuant to Section 36 of R.A.
No. 3844, as amended by Section 7 of R.A. No. 6389. The
aforesaid implementing rules and regulations dealing on the
payment of disturbance compensation unmistakably
mandate and provide that the award of disturbance
compensation thereunder is confined and limited only in
favor of tenant-lessees of the subject landholding.

May 7, 1997
DISTURBANCE COMPENSATION; WHEN AVAILABLE
Are mere tillers within the declared non-agricultural zone

entitled to disturbance compensation.
 As elucidated by the Supreme Court in the case of
"Pagtalunan vs. Tamayo", 138 SCRA 252, Section 36 (1) of
R.A. 3844, as amended, is applicable only when it is the
owner/lessor who voluntarily opts for the conversion of his
land into non-agricultural use. The said law clearly
suggests that it is only in cases of land use conversion that
displaced tenants are entitled to the payment of
disturbance compensation. Such being the case, mere
tillers within the declared non-agricultural zone does not
ipso facto entitle them to the payment of disturbance
compensation unless a land use conversion is taking place.
The reason for this is the fact that reclassification is not
synonymous with conversion under Section 65 of RA 6657
for while the authority to reclassify is lodged with the local
government units, the authority to convert remains with the
DAR. Again, it is only in land use conversion that displaced
tenants are entitled to disturbance compensation and not
by a mere reclassification effected through an ordinance.

March 11, 1997
When are displaced tenants entitled to payment of

disturbance compensation?
 Section 7 of R.A. 6389 (An Act Amending R.A. No. 3844, as

amended, otherwise known as The Agricultural Land
Reform Code and For Other Purposes) expressly provides
that "the agricultural lessee shall be entitled to disturbance
compensation equivalent to five times the average of the
gross harvests on his landholding during the last five
preceding calendar years". The said law clearly suggests
that it is only in cases of land use conversion that displaced
tenants are entitled to the payment of the disturbance
compensation.

January 9, 1997
DISTURBANCE COMPENSATION; WHEN GIVEN TO
TENANTS
 The payment of disturbance compensation as provided for in

Section 36 of R.A. No. 3844, as amended by R.A. 6389,
pertains to the compensation given to the affected
agricultural lessee in cases of legal conversion, that is, in
cases where the use of the land for purposes other than
agricultural is approved by DAR upon the application of the
landowner. Otherwise stated, the payment of disturbance
compensation only covers cases of legal conversion
undertaken at the instance of the landowner (Pagtalunan
vs. Tamayo, G.R. No. 54281, March 19, 1990).

June 29, 2009
DISTURBANCE COMPENSATION; WHEN IS IT GIVEN

application of the landowner. As held by the Supreme Court
in the case of Pagtalunan vs. Tamayo, G.R. No. 54281,
March 19, 1990, payment of disturbance compensation only
covers legal conversion undertaken at the instance of the
landowner.

May 2, 2001
DONATION; IN EXCESS OF THE RETENTION LIMIT NOT VALID
Is donation in excess of the retention limit valid?
 Since the excess area of 1,138 square meters is already

beyond the legally allowed retention limit or landownership
ceiling, the entire property cannot be the subject of a valid
donation for it would violate Section 73 (a) of R.A. No. 6657
making it a prohibited act and omission the ownership or
possession, for the purpose of circumventing the provisions
of said Act, of agricultural lands in excess of the total
retention limits or award ceilings by any person, natural or
juridical, except those under collective ownership by
farmer beneficiaries.
 The proposed donation of the entire area of 5.1138 hectares

cannot be registered with the Register of Deeds since it
contravenes Sections 6 and 73 (a) of R.A. No. 6657 on
retention limits and ownership ceilings. Thus, to thwart
possible circumvention of said law, DAR Administrative
Order No. 01, Series of 1989 compulsorily requires that the
transferees of agricultural lands shall furnish the
appropriate Register of Deeds and the Barangay Agrarian
Reform Council (BARC) an affidavit attesting that their
respective total landholdings as a result of the said
acquisition do not exceed the landholding ceiling. The
Register of Deeds shall not register the transfer of any
agricultural land without the submission of such sworn
statement together with proof of service of a copy thereof
to the BARC.

September 4, 1998
DONATION; WHEN ALLOWED
May lands acquired by beneficiary under CARP be the

object of a donation?
 Section 27 of R.A. No. 6657 provides that lands acquired by
beneficiaries under said Act "may not be sold, transferred
or conveyed except through hereditary succession, or to
the LBP, or to the other qualified beneficiaries for a period
of ten (10) years. From the said legal provision, it is clear
that the donation of the property may be legally done only
after the lapse of 10 years from the award of the land
involved.

September 13, 1994
DUE PROCESS; WHAT IT INCLUDES
May lands be distributed without due process of law.
 In covering lands under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform

Law, due process must be observed, and this includes the
sending of notices to landowners as required in DAR
Administrative Order No. 1, S. 1993. Indeed, the non-
observance of procedural due process in the redistribution
of lands under CARL constitutes a ground for the
cancellation of the CLOAs covering said properties.

January 17, 1995
E
EASEMENT; LEGAL EASEMENT, COMPENSABLE
Is legal easement compensable?
 To subscribe to the view of DAR and the Bureau of Lands

that the value of the property occupied by legal easement
be deducted from the total value due the landowner would
not only substantially reduce the total value of the property,
but above all will cause injustice to the landowner
concerned. Hence, payment should speedily be effected
without deduction as to the value of the property occupied
by the legal easement.

January 29, 1997
EASEMENT; RIGHT OF WAY DOES NOT CONSTITUTE

CONVERSION; SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS
Is Conversion Order required in an easement of right of

way?
 Building a road to be used for the conveyance of

construction materials and laborers on the site and
ultimately for the use by students to access the school is
only incidental and an imperative component of the overall
operation of the school, thus, it does not constitute
conversion that would require prior DAR Conversion Order.
This is without prejudice, however, to the rights of farmer-
beneficiaries or farmer occupants, if any, who will be
affected or displaced thereby, pursuant to existing agrarian
laws, rules and regulations.
In addition, said right of way shall likewise be

a) there must be consent in writing by the
owners of the affected areas;
b) there must be compensation or indemnity
which includes the value of the land occupied and the
amount of damage caused to the servient estates;
c) there must be no adequate outlet to a public
highway;
d) the right of way must be established at a point
least prejudicial to the servient estates; and
e) the construction of right of way should be
specifically limited in area to the purpose intended and
subject to the provisions of the Civil Code.

May 19, 1998
EASEMENT; RIGHT OF WAY: WHEN TO AVAIL
When may the easement of right of way be demanded?
 The easement claimed is the easement of right of way under

Article 649 of the Civil Code of the Philippines, pursuant to
which one may be entitled to demand a right of way should
it be established that there is no adequate outlet to a public
highway.

June 15, 1994
EJECMENT: ITS CAUSES
 The security of tenure of an agricultural lessee once

established is supreme and he cannot be ejected from his
landholding without authority from the Department of
Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB), for causes
provided for by law. Dispossession to be validly carried out
requires proofs of existence of a cause for ejectment and
court authority is necessary. Under Section 36 of R.A. No.
3844 it provides that notwithstanding any agreement as to
the period or future surrender of the land, an agricultural
lessee shall continue in the enjoyment and possession of
his landholding except when his dispossession has been
authorized by the Court in a judgment that is final and
executory if after due hearing it is shown that there is valid
ground to dispossess or order the ejectment of the tenant.
Ejectment is premised on an offense committed by the
lessee or the exercise of the lessor of his superior right
over the use of the land, and in either case, the lessee is
entitled to be heard before he is dispossessed.

June 29, 2009
EJECTMENT: ITS CAUSES
When may the tenants be ejected?
 The security of tenure of an agricultural lessee once

established is supreme and he cannot be ejected from his
landholding without authority from the Department of
Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB), for causes
provided for by law. Simply stated, dispossession to be
validly carried out requires proofs of existence of a cause
for ejectment and court authority is necessary. Under
Section 36 of R.A. No. 3844 it provides that notwithstanding
any agreement as to the period or future surrender, of the
land, an agricultural lessee shall continue in the enjoyment
and possession of his landholding except when his
dispossession has been authorized by the Court in a
judgment that is final and executory if after due hearing it
is shown that there is valid ground to dispossess or order
the ejectment of the tenant. Ejectment is premised on an
offense committed by the lessee or the exercise of the
lessor of his superior right over the use of the land, and in
either case, the lessee is entitled to be heard before he is
dispossessed.

October 29, 1997
EJECTMENT; GROUNDS FOR EJECTMENT
 He/she failed to substantially comply with the terms and

conditions of the leasehold contract or with laws governing
leasehold relations, unless the failure is caused by
fortuitous event or force majeure;
 He/she planted crops or used the land for a purpose other
than what had been previously agreed upon. DAR
Procedures Governing Agricultural Leasehold and the
Determination of Lease Rental for Tenanted Lands),
however, now allows the lessee to intercrop or plant
secondary crops after the rental has been fixed, provided
he/she shoulders the expenses;
 He/she failed to adopt proven farm practices necessary to
conserve the land, improve its fertility, and increase its
productivity (with due consideration of his/her financial
capacity and the credit facilities available to him/her);
 His/her fault or negligence resulted in the substantial
damage, destruction, or unreasonable deterioration of the
land or any permanent improvement thereon;
 He/she does not pay the lease rental when it falls due
except when such non-payment is due to crop failure to the
extent of 75 percent as a result of a fortuitous event; or
 He/she employed a sublessee (Section 36, R.A. No. 3844, as
amended).
 Considering, however, that an agricultural lessee is entitled
to security of tenure, he/she cannot be rejected unless
authorized by the court (now, DAR Adjudication Board) for
the abovementioned causes, in a judgment that is final and
executory after due hearing (Sections 7 and 36, R.A. No.
3844, as amended).
 Where a tenant has allegedly failed to substantially comply
with the terms and conditions of the leasehold contract or
with laws governing leasehold relation, the landowner may
file an ejectment case before the Provincial Agrarian
Reform Adjudication Board where the property is located.

February 21, 2002
ELECTIVE OFFICIALS; APPOINTMENT OF REGIONAL DIRECTORS,
LEGALITY THEREOF
What is the legality in the appointment of Regional

Directors in areas where their spouses and/or relatives are
incumbent elective officials?
 The proposal to prevent the appointment and assignment of

Regional Directors or Provincial Directors in areas where
their spouses and/or relatives within the fourth degree of
affinity or consanguinity are incumbent elective officials is
without legal basis and contrary to the civil service rule
that promotions and/or appointment to a position should be
based on merit and fitness and not on their being
"unrelated" to an elective government official in their
locality.
 There are existing laws, e.g., Omnibus Election Code of the
Philippines, which can properly address the issue raised in
the Resolution – that some Regional Directors or Provincial
Directors, using their power and influence, have helped the
election or re-election of their relatives in their areas of
jurisdiction. If there are sufficient evidence, these officials
can be charged for violation of the provisions of the
Omnibus Election Code, particularly Section 261 thereof.

December 21, 1998
EMANCIPATION PATENT; AS A COLLATERAL FOR LOAN
Can an EP be used as collateral for loan?
 If the Emancipation Patent covers a fully paid farmlot then

the same can be legally used as collateral for loan,
otherwise, it is not allowed. This is so because EPs are
proofs of ownership which can be the subject of a contract
of sale or mortgage.
 Although transfer of awarded lands under Presidential
Decree No. 27, as amended by Executive Order No. 228 and
Republic Act No. 6657 may be allowed if their amortization
has been fully paid, DAR Administrative Order No. 08, Series
of 1995 provides certain conditions that must be met in
order that valid transfer thereof can be made, to wit:
a. that the productivity of the land shall be

maintained;
b. that the buyer will not exceed the aggregate
c. that the ownership ceiling of five (5) hectares
shall be imposed.
 Clearly, therefore, if an EP is made as security for loan and

consequently foreclosed by the mortgagee, the aforesaid
conditions must first be complied with before ownership
over the awarded land is parted with.

September 15, 1998
EMANCIPATION PATENT; AS A PROOF OF OWNERSHIP
Is it legal for a son to take the place of his

sick/incapacitated parent as beneficiary of the land
granted by the government?
 If the parent-beneficiary is sick or is incapacitated to work

on the land it is but right and proper for his children, not
necessarily a son, to personally cultivate or work on the
land in his behalf. Ownership of the land should, however,
still remain with the parent-beneficiary to whom the
Emancipation Patent was awarded. It would be different if
the parent is merely a tenant wherein the following
provision of Republic Act No. 3844, as amended will be
applied:
September 15, 1998
EMANCIPATION PATENT; EFFECT OF ISSUANCE
What is the effect of the issuance of an Emancipation

Patent?
 An Emancipation Patent (EP) is awarded pursuant to

Presidential Decree No. 27 dated 21 October 1972. Under
said Decree, the farmer is deemed full owner of the land
awarded to him as evidenced by the EP thus issued which,
as such, is considered as full and legal title to the land.
Accordingly, the award can only be cancelled for cause as
provided for by law.

July 1, 1998
 The issuance of EPs/CLOAs pertains to the Department of

Agrarian Reform, being the agency tasked to implement the
Agrarian Reform Program of the government. The issuance
of said titles creates a presumption which yields only to
clear and cogent evidence that the awardee is the qualified
and lawful owner thereof. The burden of proving the
ineligibility or disqualification of the awardee is on him who
avers it through clear and satisfactory proof. Corollarily,
pursuant to Joint DAR-LRA Memorandum Circular No. 20,
Series of 1997 in relation with Joint DAR-LRA Memo
Circular No. 09, Series of 1996, the DAR shall ensure that
all CARP transactions for registration with the Registry of
Deeds shall be supported with documents required under
the Joint DAR-LRA Operations Manual on Land, Tilling,
Registration and Distribution under R.A. No. 6657. Such
being the case, the authority to convert the EPs into CLOAs
if warranted, pursuant to existing agrarian laws, rules and
regulations, is likewise lodged with the DAR and not with
any person, agency or corporation.

April 08, 1998
EMANCIPATION PATENT; EFFECT OF ISSUANCE
Is an Emancipation Patent issued a conclusive proof of

ownership?
 As elucidated by the Supreme Court in the case of Engracia

Vinzons-Magana vs. Hon. Conrado Estrella, et al., 201 SCRA
536, the issuance of Emancipation Patent confers on the
farmer-grantee a vested right of absolute ownership in the
landholding a right which has become fixed and established
and is no longer open to doubt and controversy. Thus,
Emancipation Patent is a proof of ownership which can be
the subject of a contract of sale in the exercise of one's
right of ownership without violating the prohibitions
embodied in Section 27 of R.A. No. 6657 (Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law) relative to sale or disposition of
awarded lands for a period of ten (10) years from their
award because said provision of law solely applied to
awarded lands under R.A. No. 6657 covered by Certificates
of Land Ownership Award (CLOAs) and not to PD 27 lands
covered by EPs.

July 1, 1997
EMANCIPATION PATENT; INCAPACITY OF FARMER BENEFICIARY
Is ownership of the awarded land automatically

transferred to a child who assumed the loan obligation of
the incapacitated parent-beneficiary?
 Whether the son can assume the loan, we see no legal

impediment for a child to assume the loan obligation of his
parent when the latter is incapacitated to fulfill his
obligation. It has to be reiterated, however, that ownership
of the subject land shall remain with the still living
incapacitated parent-beneficiary who shall personally owe
and is now indebted to his child by implication of law of the
amount paid for the loan. Ownership of the land will not
automatically be transferred to the child who assumed the
mortgage obligation of his incapacitated parent-beneficiary
for if such will be the case, it will in effect unduly prejudice
the legitime or inheritance of the other children who
likewise have rights to the succession in case of death of
their parent-beneficiary pursuant to the provisions of the
Civil Code, Ministry Memorandum Circular No. 19, Series of
1978, Ministry Memorandum Circular No. 5, Series of 1984
and DAR Administrative Order No. 14, Series of 1988.

September 15, 1998
EMANCIPATION PATENT; MAY BE CANCELLED FOR CAUSE
When may emancipation patents be cancelled?
 Emancipation Patents are awarded pursuant to Presidential

Decree No. 27 dated 21 October 1972 and not under CARP
(pursuant to RA 6657). Under said Decree, the tenants
private agricultural lands primarily devoted to rice/corn are
deemed full owners of a family-size farm of five (5) hectares
if unirrigated and three (3) hectares if irrigated, with a
maximum allowable 10% additional area pursuant to MAR
Administrative Order No. 3-85 (that is a maximum award of
5.5 hectares if unirrigated and 3.3 hectares if irrigated). The
award in favor of a tenant may be cancelled for cause, in
which case the farmlot is reallocated in favor of another
person who must be landless and willing to assume the
responsibilities of a beneficiary under said law.
September 6, 1994
EMANCIPATION PATENT; SUSPENSION OF THE PROCESSING
Can the PARO suspend the processing of an Emancipation

patent pending resolution/disposition by the courts as to
the merits of the case?
 A PARO can suspend the processing of an Emancipation

Patent pending resolution/disposition by the courts as to
the merits of the case. The suspension is predicated on the
theory that premature processing of EPs in the name of a
tenant is an implied determination of the issue of ownership
as EPs represents ownership.

December 13, 1996
EMANCIPATION PATENT; TRANSFER BY ORIGINAL TENANT TO

HEIRS
May the transfer of awarded lands by the original tenant or

his heirs be allowed?
 The original transfer of awarded lands from the government

through the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) shall be
evidenced by Emancipation Patent. This is clear from Policy
Statement (No. 4) of DAR Administrative Order No. 08,
Series of 1995 which expressly provides that : If awardee
was identified as tenant as of 21 October 1972 and
amortizations were fully paid, transfer of awarded lands by
the original tenant or his heirs may be allowed, regardless
of date of issuance of Emancipation Patent (EP) (P.D. No.
27, as amended by E.O. No. 228).

March 10, 1997
EMANCIPATION PATENT; USED AS PROPERTY BAIL BOND
Can an EP be used as property bail bond?
 As regards farmlots covered by EPs which are fully-paid, we

submit that they may now be used as property bail bonds.
This can be deduced from Sec. 6 of Executive Order No. 228
which allows the transfer of ownership of lands acquired by
farmer beneficiaries under P.D. No. 27 after full payment of
amortization and even if the transfer is made within the ten
(10) year prohibitory period. However, this provision does
not operate as a blanket authority for the indiscriminate
transfer of awarded lands, and certain criteria which are
set forth under DAR Administrative Order No. 8, Series of
1995 (Item II.3) must be satisfied in order that transfer over
awarded lands can be effected. On the other hand, if the
land has not yet been fully paid, the rights to the land may
be transferred or conveyed, only with prior approval of the
DAR, to a qualified beneficiary who shall cultivate the
same.
 While it is true that the above provision of law speaks only
of sale or transfer of awarded lands, the same may
relatively apply by analogy to your request considering that
if the property bond is confiscated, ownership over the
property may now be parted with and the same may be
subjected to DAR guidelines on the transfer of awarded
lands.

March 5, 1998
EMANCIPATION PATENTS/CETIFICATES OF LANDOWNERSHIP

AWARD; ANNOTATION OF LIEN
Can the annotation of lien at the back of the Emancipation
Patents/Certificates of Land Ownership Award issued to
farmer-beneficiaries be dispensed with?
 Sec. 62 of PD 1529 and LRA Circular No. 54 requires that the

liens or encumbrances be carried over to the EP/CLOA
presented for registration, unless the appropriate
instrument for its cancellation is likewise presented.
 While it is admitted that the annotation of such
lien/encumbrance for the titles issued to farmer-
beneficiaries is unfair as they are not privies to the
previous transaction of the mortgagor and mortgagee yet
this does not mean that they will have to repay the balance
of the mortgage loan.

November 19, 1996
EMINENT DOMAIN: DAR CLEARANCE NO LONGER NECESSARY
May a local government unit exercise the power of

eminent domain without serving a DAR clearance.
 A local government unit such as Toledo City may exercise

the power of eminent domain, expropriation of the property
will be more expedient under the circumstances. There
would then be no longer any need for the requested DAR
Clearance.

September 16, 1994
ENCUMBRANCE; MEANING; EFFECT; HOW DISCHARGED
 An encumbrance is a burden or lien against the property

that lessens its value. Once the property is encumbered
with the bank, the latter has a lien by way of mortgage on
the land to secure full payment of its value. Please note,
that encumbrance of a property shall be carried over to the
title until cancelled by an appropriate authority. Land
Registration Authority (LRA) Memorandum Circular No. 54
requires that the liens or encumbrances shall be carried
over to the EP/CLOA presented for registration, unless the
appropriate instrument for its cancellation is likewise
presented. Likewise, Section 62 of Presidential Decree No.
1529 (The Property Registration Decree) provides, quote:
"A mortgage or lease on registered land may be

discharged or cancelled by means of an instrument
executed by the mortgage (sic) or lessee in a form
sufficient in law, which shall be filed with the Register of
Deeds who shall make the appropriate memorandum upon
the certificate of title."
January 19, 2007
E.O. NO. 447; LANDS USED AND ADMINISTERED BY KKK-

NLSF
 Those lands used and/or administered by the KKK-NLSF and

actually classified as agricultural land, as mandated, shall
have to be turned over to the farmer beneficiaries in
accordance with Executive Order No. 407 and if it involves
lands belonging to the second kind of lands, the same
should be for the disposition by the DAR after a joint
determination has been undertaken of the areas
reclassified as alienable and disposable agricultural land.
Nothing in said order would show that said agricultural land
and those that were reclassified as alienable and
disposable agricultural lands are for lease purposes only
and/or for any other mode of disposition by the DAR or by
the DENR.
January 29, 2008
ESTATE TAX: NOT EXEMPTED UNDER SEC. 66 OF R.A. No. 6657
What transactions are exempt from payment of taxes?
 Only transactions involving transfer of ownership under R.A.

No. 6657 is tax exempt. Strictly speaking, "estate tax is not
among the taxes included as exempt under Section 66 of
R.A. No. 6657. Considering, however, that since estate tax
is mandated by law to be levied on the transmission of the
properties of the decedent to his heirs by reason of the
former's death, the same is of the same class or nature as
that of a real property tax as contemplated under the
abovequoted proviso.

October 7, 1997
EXCLUSION/EXEMPTION; MEANING
 The term "exclusion and exemption", both meaning that the

land involved is not within the scope of CARP. If the
landholding ceases to be agricultural and the requirements
have been met as determined by DAR upon an application
for exemption/exclusion, the land is exempt, therefore,
there is no longer any need to apply for conversion.
 If the subject property had been reclassified in 1977 as
residential/church site the same may not be a proper
subject of an application under Administrative Order No. 05,
Series of 2007.

October 9, 2008
EXCLUSION/EXEMPTION; EXEMPT LANDHOLDING NOT
CONSIDERED IN THE DETERMINATION OF TOTAL LANDHOLDING
Are exempt landholdings considered in the determination

of total landholdings?
 Exempt landholdings are not considered in the

determination of total landholdings since only lands
suitable for agriculture are covered under CARP. This is
clear from Section 4 of RA 6657 which provides that the
CARL of 1988 shall cover, regardless of tenurial
private agricultural lands as provided in Proclamation No.
131 and EO No. 229, including the lands of the public
domain suitable for agriculture.

December 13, 1996
EXCLUSION: PROPERTY SUBJECT OF A PETITION FOR REVIEW

ON CERTIORARI
Is a property subject of a petition for review on certiorari

excluded from CARP coverage?
 While Section 16 of R.A. No. 6657 (Comprehensive Agrarian

Reform Law) in particular mandates the acquisition of
private agricultural lands for distribution to qualified-
beneficiaries, the same is not encompassing so as to
include properties the very basis of their exemption from
CARP coverage is currently the subject of a Petition for
Review on Certiorari before the Supreme Court.

July 3, 1997
EXCLUSION: RESIDENTIAL LOT NOT SUBJECT TO CARP

Are residential lots included in CARP coverage?
 Section 4 of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law

(CARL) provides for the scope thereof wherein only public
and private agricultural lands including other lands of the
public domain suitable for agriculture are covered. Hence,
only agricultural lands may be put under the coverage of
the CARP. Since your lot is residential, the same is
excluded from CARP coverage.
DAR OPINION NO. 66(A), s. 1997

June 5, 1997
EXCLUSION; CATTLE RAISING; SUBSTITUTION
 DAR Administrative Order No. 03, Series of 2003 (2003 Rules

for Agrarian Law Implementation Cases), provides for the
rules and procedures of application for exclusion from
CARP coverage of agricultural land used for livestock,
swine, and poultry raising. Rule II, Section 7 thereof
provides that the Regional Director shall exercise primary
jurisdiction over all agrarian law implementation cases
except when a separate special rule vests primary
jurisdiction in a different DAR office.
 It is within the discretion of the Regional Director to decide
if the proposed substitution is tenable, subject to the
necessary field investigation/ocular inspection and payment
of corresponding fees and submission of requirements
under existing rules and regulations particularly
Administrative Order No. 01, Series of 2004 (2004 Rules and
Regulations Governing the Exclusion of Agricultural Lands
Used for Cattle Raising from the Coverage of the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program).

June 30, 2008
EXCLUSION; COMMERCIAL FARM NOT AUTOMATICALLY
EXCLUDED FROM CARP
Are agricultural lands devoted to livestock poultry and

swine raising excluded from CARP coverage?
 All agricultural lands devoted to livestock, poultry and

swine raising are not automatically deemed excluded from
CARP coverage. In order to qualify for exclusion, there are
requirements that must be met, to wit:
1. The land or portions thereof must have been

exclusively, directly and actually used for livestock,
poultry and swine raising as of 15 June 1988; and
2. The farm devoted to the above purposes
must satisfy the animal/land ratio, as well as
animal/infrastructure ratio as provided for in Section III-B
of DAR Administrative Order No. 9, Series of 1993 entitled,
"Rules and Regulations Governing the Exclusion of
Agricultural Lands Used for Livestock, Poultry and Swine
Raising from the Coverage of CARP".
 An application for exemption/exclusion must first be filed

and the same shall be adjudicated on the merits thereof
pursuant to the provisions of DAR Administrative Order No.
9, Series of 1993.

September 4, 1998
 Even if said lot or a portion thereof is indeed exempt from

CARP coverage, still the exemption is not automatic as the
law requires that an application for exemption clearance is
to be filed pursuant to DAR Administrative Order No. 06,
Series of 1994 or DAR Administrative Order No. 13, Series
of 1990, as the case may be. However, the agricultural
portions of said lot shall still be covered under CARP.
December 14, 1999
 Even if the subject properties are indeed exempt from CARP

coverage, still the exemption is not automatic as the law
further requires that an application for exemption clearance
has to be filed pursuant to DAR Administrative Order No. 06,
Series of 1994 or Administrative Order No. 13, Series of
1990, as the case may be. The presumption is that subject
properties are agricultural as per tax declaration.

October 27, 1999
EXCLUSION; EXCLUSION OF LANDS DEVOTED TO COMMERCIAL

LIVESTOCK
Are all lands devoted to commercial livestock, poultry and

swine raising excluded from the coverage of CARP?
 DAR Administrative Order No. 09, Series of 1998 defines

Commercial Farms as private agricultural lands devoted to
salt beds, fruit farms, orchard, vegetables and cut-flower
farms, cacao, coffee and rubber plantations (Section 11,
R.A. No. 6657, as amended by Section 3, R.A. No. 7881).
This definition is limited to these commodities produced. In
other words, other farms although commercial in nature are
not covered by the definition. Actually, lands devoted to
commercial livestock, poultry and swine raising used to be
included in the list. However, the Supreme Court in the
landmark case of Luz Farms vs. The Secretary of Agrarian
Reform (128 SCRA 568) has removed these farms from the
coverage of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program
(CARP).
 Following said ruling, DAR Administrative Order No. 9,
Series of 1993 came into effect purposely to provide rules
and regulations governing the exclusion of agricultural
lands used for livestock, poultry and swine raising from the
coverage of CARP.

March 22, 1999
EXCLUSION; HOMESTEAD LAND
What are the conditions for the exclusion of a homestead

land from CARP coverage?
 The law imposes two conditions for the exclusion of a

homestead land from CARP coverage, namely: 1) the
original homestead grantee or direct compulsory heir was
still the owner of the original homestead at the time of the
approval of R.A. No. 6657 (otherwise known as the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law or CARL) on 15 June
1988; and 2) the grantee or heir was cultivating the
homestead as of 15 June 1988 and continues to cultivate
the same.

June 22, 1994
EXCLUSION; LANDS DEVOTED TO LIVESTOCK, POULTRY AND

SWINE RAISING
What are deemed excluded from the coverage of CARP?
 The parcel of land devoted to piggery although under the

Tax Declaration of Real Property they are classified as
agricultural, DAR Administrative Order No. 9, Series of 1993
qualifies that only private agricultural lands or portions
thereof exclusively, directly and actually use for livestock,
poultry and swine raising as of June 15, 1988 shall be
excluded from the coverage of the CARP. Thereafter, any
act of the landowner to change or convert his agricultural
land to livestock, poultry and swine raising after 15 June
1988, with intent to avoid the application of R.A. No. 6657
to his landholding, shall be considered invalid and illegal
and shall not effect the coverage of his landholding under
CARP. The abovementioned pronouncement is in line with
the Supreme Court decision in the case of "Luz Farms vs.
Hon. Secretary of the DAR (G.R. No. 86889, 04 December
1990) which excludes livestock, poultry and swine raising
from CARP coverage on the ground that these activities are
no longer agricultural. In this regard, an application for
exemption shall be filed and must be duly approved by DAR
pursuant to the aforesaid guideline before the subject
landholdings could be legally considered exempt from CARP
coverage.

March 10, 1998
EXCLUSION; PROCEDURE FOR ISSUANCE OF ORDER OF

EXCLUSION
How is an Order of Exclusion issued?
 DAR Administrative Order No. 09, Series of 1993 expressly

declares that landowners whose private agricultural lands
or portions thereof are exclusively, directly and actually
used for livestock, poultry and swine raising as of 15 June
1988 should file an Application for Exclusion together with
the documentary requirements with the Provincial Agrarian
Reform Officer (PARO) of the place where the property is
situated. Upon receipt of the application, the PARO with the
assistance of the Barangay Agrarian Reform Council
(BARC), the MARO, the Municipal Livestock Inspector, and a
livestock/poultry and swine specialist of the Department of
Agriculture (DA), shall conduct an investigation of the land
to determine, among others, the ownership, legal status,
type and area of the land sought to be excluded, and to
ascertain whether the property has been devoted to
livestock, poultry and swine as of 15 June 1988 (i.e.,
effectivity of R.A. No. 6657 – CARL). Should a landowner
change or convert his agricultural land to livestock, poultry
and swine raising after 15 June 1988, with the intent to
avoid the application of Republic Act No. 6657 to his
landholdings, the same shall be considered invalid and
illegal and shall not affect the coverage of his landholding
under CARP.
 Thus, if the subject landholding is indeed devoted to
livestock, poultry and swine raising prior to the effectivity
of the CARL and all the documentary requirements are
complied with, the Regional Director (RD) shall issue an
Order of Exclusion and the Notice of Coverage shall
perforce be lifted, otherwise, it shall issue an Order of
Denial and shall subject said property to CARP coverage.

October 9, 1998
EXCLUSION; REQUIREMENT
What are the requirements for the application for

exemption/exclusion under DAR A.O. No. 09, series of
1993?
 The Supreme Court has made a pronouncement in the

landmark case of Luz Farms vs. The Honorable Secretary of
Agrarian Reform (G.R. No. 86339, 4 December 1990) that
those lands which are devoted to poultry, swine and
livestock farms are not included within the scope of the
agrarian reform program. To qualify for exclusion from
CARP coverage, however, the following requirements must
be met upon proper application for exemption/exclusion
pursuant to the provisions of DAR Administrative Order No.
9, Series of 1993:
1. The land or portions thereof must have been
exclusively, directly and actually used for livestock,
poultry and swine raising as of 15 June 1988 (i.e.,
effectivity of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law);
and
2. The farm devoted to the above purposes
must satisfy the animal/land ratio, as well as
animal/infrastructure ratio, as provided for in Section III-B
of Administrative Order No. 09, Series of 1993 entitled,
"Rules and Regulations Governing the Exclusion of
Agricultural Lands Used for Livestock, Poultry and Swine
Raising from the Coverage of CARP".
 If the requirements stated above have been met as

determined by DAR upon an application for
exemption/exclusion, the land is exempt, therefore, there is
no longer any need to apply for conversion. In other words,
if there is already an Exemption Order, application for
conversion shall no longer be required. Instead, the
applicant may proceed to the Local Government Unit
concerned for the issuance of a Development Clearance.
Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) from the DENR
must likewise be secured.

March 22, 1999

October 12, 1998
EXCLUSION; UNDER SECTION 2 OF R.A. No. 7881
What are those lands exempted and excluded from CARP

coverage?
 The terms "exclusion" and "exemption" are used

interchangeably, both meaning that the land involved is not
within the scope of CARP. They are: those falling under
Section 2 of R.A. No. 7881, amending Section 10 of R.A. No.
6657 (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law) which, insofar
as pertinent, reads:
"Section 2. Section 10 of Republic Act

No. 6657 is hereby amended to read as follows:
SECTION 10. Exemptions and
Exclusions. —
a) Lands actually, directly and
exclusively used for parks, wildlife, forest
reserves, reforestation, fish sanctuaries and
breeding grounds, watersheds and mangroves
shall be exempt from the coverage of this Act.
b) Private lands actually, directly and
exclusively used for prawn farms and fishponds
shall be exempt from the coverage of this Act:
Provided, That said prawn farms and fishponds
have not been distributed and Certificate of Land
Ownership Award (CLOA) issued to agrarian
reform beneficiaries under the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Program.
xxx
xxx xxx
c) Lands actually, directly and
exclusively used and found to be necessary for
national defense, school sites and campuses,
including experimental farm stations operated by
public or private schools for educational
purposes, seeds and seedlings research and pilot
production center, church sites and convents
appurtenant thereto, communal burial grounds
and cemeteries, penal colonies and penal farms
actually worked by the inmates, government and
private research and quarantine centers and all
lands with eighteen percent (18%) slope and over,
except those already developed shall be exempt
from the coverage of this Act."

September 8, 1999
EXECUTION; MTC'S ORDER OF EXECUTION CANNOT BE STAYED

BY THE ORDER OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
Can an MTC order be stayed by the Order of an

Administrative Officer?
 Execution of the MTC's order directing the ejectment of

farmer-occupants cannot as a matter of good policy and in
deference to the principle of jurisdictional independence be
stayed by the order of an administrative office like the
PARO; the rationale is that they perform their function
independently. Specifically, a Court of Justice like the MTC
exercises its judicial functions , whereas the PARO is
limited to the exercise of his administrative function.

February 9, 1998
EXEMPTION
When may an exemption from CARP coverage be deemed
to partake of the nature of a conversion?
 Exemption from CARP coverage pursuant to DOJ Opinion

No. 44, series of 1990 as implemented by DAR
Administrative Order No. 6, series of 1994 may be deemed
to partake, in effect, of the nature of a conversion of
agricultural lands to non-agricultural use since said lands
and 4 of R.A. No. 6657. In both instances, said exemption
and conversion exempt or remove the lands subject thereof
from CARP coverage except that in the case of conversion,
if a conversion order is revoked or withdrawn, the lands
subject thereof shall revert to the status of agricultural
lands and shall be subject to CARP coverage as
circumstances may warrant (Section 49, DAR
 It should be stressed, however, that in order that an
exemption clearance/order may be deemed as of the same
nature and effect as a conversion clearance/order, said
exemption order or clearance should have been issued on
the basis of a duly filed application for exemption and
approved on the merits by the DAR Secretary pursuant to
the provisions of DAR Administrative Order No. 6, series of
1994, since exemption is not automatic.

March 19, 2003
EXEMPTION CLEARANCE
 The 400 square meters lots intended for cell sites within
agricultural lands need not go through the conversion
process. What is needed is just an Exemption Clearance to
be issued by the Provincial Agrarian Reform Officer (PARO)
upon submission of duly notarized Lease Contract.

March 6, 2009
EXEMPTION FROM OLT COVERAGE; SIGNIFICANCE OF

MARO/PARO CERTIFICATION
What does the certification from the MARO/PARO signify?

 Certification from the MARO/PARO signifies that the
exemption of the subject landholding from OLT coverage
does not contravene P.D. 27 and its implementing
guidelines. Briefly stated, it is a safeguard against possible
circumvention of the said law to the prejudice of the
tenants affected.

March 14, 1996
EXEMPTION ORDER
Is application for exemption necessary if there is no valid

order of exemption?
 If there is no valid order of exemption yet from DAR

pursuant to existing agrarian laws, rules and regulations,
there is still a need to apply for exemption and the
application shall be accordingly resolved on the merits
thereof pursuant to the provisions and legal requirements of
DOJ Opinion No. 44, Series of 1990, DAR Administrative
Order No. 6, Series of 1994, DAR Memorandum Circular No.
09, Series of 1997.

April 15, 1998
EXEMPTION ORDER; EFFECT
 The grant of exemption of an agricultural land from

coverage pursuant to R.A. No. 6657 has an effect of merely
removing it from possible acquisition and distribution under
the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP). This
does not render a total exemption from the application of
Agrarian Reform Laws and other applicable laws. However,
it is incumbent upon the landowner to prove that his land is
exempted from CARP coverage. An exemption order or
clearance must be issued on the basis of a duly filed
application for exemption and is thereby approved pursuant
to existing applicable laws on the matter since exemption
is not automatic.

October 20, 2006
 The effect of an exemption granted pursuant to the said

provision of R.A. No. 6657 is merely to remove the land from
its possible acquisition and distribution under the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP). This does
not render a total exemption from the application of
Agrarian Reform laws and their implementing rules and
regulations. The DAR may still implement the other
components of the program, i.e., leasehold and the
Integrated Social Forestry Program, where applicable. In
this case, a DAR Order of Exemption must be secured
because the exemption referred hereto is not automatic. It
is incumbent upon the landowner to prove that his land is
exempted from CARP coverage.
 A DAR Order of Exemption does not operate as a sanction
for the landowner to modify the actual use of the land.
When the land is removed from CARP coverage, it does not
follow that conversion of the land into other uses is
authorized. If the intention of the landowner is to convert
the agricultural land into residential, commercial or
industrial, thereby changing the agricultural use of the land
into non-agricultural use, a DAR Order of Exemption will not
suffice. Instead, a DAR Order of Conversion must still be
obtained.

September 10, 2001
What is the effect of a DAR Order of Exemption?
 A DAR Order of Exemption signifies that the parcel of land

cannot be acquired and distributed under CARP. However,
this does not render total exemption from the application of
the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law. DAR A.O. No. 1,
series of 1990 provides that "DAR has exclusive authority
to approve or disapprove application for conversion of
agricultural lands for residential, commercial, industrial and
other land uses as may be provided for by law.

December 23, 1996
EXEMPTION ORDER; NEEDED ON THE PROPERTIES BEING

USED FOR RELIGIOUS ACTIVITIES
 A DAR Clearance involving transfer of the subject land may

not be issued if the same is in violation of CARP. On the
issue of the subject property being used for religious
activities, there must be a DAR Order of Exemption from
CARL coverage issued that is final and executory pursuant
to the applicable guidelines on the basis of a duly filed
application thereof.

October 20, 2006
EXEMPTION ORDER; NOT ABSOLUTE
Is an Order of Exemption absolute?
 While it is admitted that a DAR Order of Exemption

signifies that a landholding may not be acquired and
distributed under CARP, this does not render, total and
absolute, the exemption from the application of the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL). DAR
Administrative Order No. 13, series of 1990 provides that
"in all cases, the DAR shall conduct a continuing review
and verification of exempted lands to ascertain which of
the areas declared exempt or which portions thereof are no
longer, actually, directly and exclusively used and found
necessary for said purpose. If the purpose for the grant of
exemption no longer exists, the area or portion involved
shall be covered under CARP pursuant to the guidelines on
land acquisition and distribution." Accordingly, lands which
have already been declared exempt pursuant to a DAR
Order may, nonetheless, not be freely acquired or disposed
of without a DAR Clearance.

September 1, 2000
EXEMPTION ORDER; WHAT IT SIGNIFIES UNDER CARP

AND A.O. NO. 2, SERIES OF 2006
 The coverage of Administrative Order No. 02, Series of 2006

extends only to landholdings which are not yet covered by
either exemption/exclusion or conversion order. However,
while it is admitted that a DAR Order of Exemption signifies
that a landholding may not be acquired and distributed
under CARP, this does not render total and absolute the
exemption from the application of the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law (CARL). DAR Administrative Order No.
13, Series of 1990 provides that in all cases, the DAR shall
conduct a continuing review and verification of exempted
lands to ascertain which of the areas declared exempt or
which portions thereof that no longer actually, directly and
exclusively used and found necessary for said purpose. If
the purpose for the grant of exemption no longer exists, the
area or portion involved shall be covered under CARP
pursuant to the guidelines on land acquisition and
distribution. Accordingly, lands which have already been
declared exempt pursuant to a DAR order may,
nonetheless, be subjected to Leasehold Contract, if the
same remains agricultural.

January 16, 2007
EXEMPTION; EXCEPTION; FISHPOND
 It can be gleaned that the said exemption still admits an

exception. A fishpond may be subject of CARP coverage by
Voluntary Offer to Sell (VOS) when made before the
effectivity of the Act which is March 12, 1995

February 1, 2010
EXEMPTION; PROPERTY CLASSIFIED AS RESIDENTIAL
 All private lands devoted to or suitable for agriculture in

excess of the 5-hectare retention limit shall be acquired
under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP)
Clearly, only agricultural lands in excess of the 5 hectare
retention limit are coverable under CARP. Thus, properties
classified as residential are exempt from the coverage of
CARP. In addition, nothing under CARP Law that provides
an instance or by way of exemption that residential land
may be covered under CARP.

May 29, 2008
EXEMPTION; PUBLIC FOREST
 Considering that the subject land has been categorized as

public forest and part of the public domain, it shall
therefore be exempt from CARP coverage. This conclusion
is in conformity with Joint DENR-DAR Memorandum Circular
No. 2003-1, Series of 2003, specifically, sub-paragraph II-B
thereof.

October 21, 2010
EXEMPTION; REQUIREMENTS
 When a landholding is applied for Exemption from the

coverage of CARP there is a requirement for the submission
of ownership documents and other muniments of title, and
that incomplete documentary requirements is a ground for
non-acceptance of an application for exemption. In short, it
would not be possible to process and evaluate any
application in the absence of any ownership documents and
other muniments of title. It follows therefore that an Order
of Finality may not be issued in the absence of any
muniments of title to prove ownership. nevertheless, please
be informed that the aforesaid guidelines did not impose
that a landholding applied for exemption/exclusion
necessarily be registered with the Register of Deeds. It is
essential that the landowner applicant, must comply with
the requirements, documents laid down under A.O. No. 13,m
Series of 1990 to justify the application for exemption on
the ground that the subject landholding has a slope of 18%
over and undeveloped.

February 16, 2010
EXEMPTION; AGRICULTURAL LAND WITH EIGHTEEN PERCENT

(18%) SLOPE
Are lands with 18% slope and over exempt from CARP?
 It must be noted, however, that under Section 10 of R.A. No.
6657 (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law) on exemptions
and exclusions, it is expressly provided therein that lands
with eighteen percent (18%) slope and over, except those
already developed, shall be exempt from the coverage of
the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP). This
clear and unequivocal declaration is a manifestation that
uplands with a slope gradient exceeding 18% as defined in
the proposed Executive Order is not exempt from CARP
coverage if the same is developed and suitable for
agricultural production.

April 15, 1998
EXEMPTION; AGRICULTURAL LAND WITH EIGHTEEN PERCENT
(18%) SLOPE
What are the documentary requirements needed to justify

exemption on the ground that the land has eighteen
percent (18%) slope?
 DAR Administrative Order No. 13, Series of 1990 laid down

the requirements/documents needed to justify the
exemption on the ground that the subject landholding has a
slope of 18% and over and undeveloped. Under the
aforesaid implementing rules and regulations, it is
imperative that a written application for exemption
pursuant to Section 10 of R.A. No. 6657 should be filed with
the Municipal Agrarian Reform Officer (MARO) of the place
where the subject property is situated. Said written
application shall be accompanied by the following:
a) ownership documents and other muniments

of title; and
b) Evidence to support application and convince
DAR that the area qualifies for exemption under Sec. 10 of
R.A. No. 6657, such as: copy of proclamation topographic
map, sketch map, area development plan, affidavit,
certification from relevant government agency, etc.
 Compliance with Administrative Order No. 20 of the Office of

the President is not however a requirement for the
exemption of landholdings with a slope of 18% and over and
undeveloped. The said implementing guidelines specifically
deal with agricultural land use conversion mandating that
all irrigated and irrigable lands are non-negotiable for
conversion. Said expressed prohibition has nothing to do
with the exemption of landholdings pursuant to Section 10
of R.A. No. 6657.

April 15, 1998
EXEMPTION; AGRICULTURAL LANDS CLASSIFIED AS NON-

AGRICULTURAL PRIOR TO CARL
Are agricultural lands classified as non-agricultural prior to

CARL excluded from CARP?
 Pursuant to Department of Justice Opinion No. 44, Series of

1990, agricultural lands that have been classified as non-
agricultural prior to the effectivity of CARL on 15 June 1988
shall be excluded from CARP coverage upon proper
application for exemption and approval thereof by DAR. It is
essential, however, that said classification of an
agricultural land into non-agricultural use must have been
validly made by the courts or proper government agency
concerned legally authorized for that purpose and not by
private individuals themselves. In this regard, we submit
that the mere annotation stating that "The property shall be
used for residential purposes only and for no other purpose
or purposes" is not sufficient to form a belief that the same
is indeed classified as such by proper authority or upon
lawful order of a court.
 A careful scrutiny of the records does not show under what
authority the above restriction was made since there might
be the possibility that said restriction was unwittingly or
matter of factly annotated by the Register of Deeds merely
upon the request of the private parties to reflect the terms
and conditions unilaterally set forth by said private parties
in the sales or alienations that transpired without the
requisite authorization or approval by the proper court or
government agency concerned. Hence, in the absence of
clear and conclusive proof by what authority the restriction
in the annotation was made, the subject landholding could
be deemed as not validly and legally classified as
residential within the contemplation of Section 3 (c) of R.A.
No. 6657, thus, DOJ Opinion No. 44 is not applicable, and,
accordingly the same is still an agricultural land as it really
is. It has to be stressed here, as gleaned from the records,
that the landholding in issue was formerly and actually an
agricultural public land awarded pursuant to a Free Patent
covered under TCT No. T-30597.

November 17, 1998
EXEMPTION; AGRICULTURAL LANDS CLASSIFIED AS

RESIDENTIAL ZONE
Is there a need to file an application for exemption of an

agricultural lands classified as residential zone?
 Pursuant to DAR Administrative Order No. 6, Series of 1994

(Guidelines for the Issuance of Exemption Clearance Based
on Section 3 (c) of Republic Act No. 6657 and Department
of Justice (DOJ) Opinion No. 44, Series of 1990), there is
still a need to file an application for a DAR exemption
clearance as regards the subject landholdings and the
same must be adjudicated on the merits thereof. The
requirements are detailed under the aforesaid guidelines.
November 3, 1998
EXEMPTION; AGRICULTURAL LANDS DEVOTED TO COMMERCIAL

LIVESTOCK RAISING
Are pasture lands exempt from CARP coverage based on

the Luz Farm doctrine?
 From the facts presented and evaluation of the records on

file, the subject property is actually devoted to commercial
livestock raising. Under the clear pronouncement of the
Supreme Court in Luz Farms vs. the Honorable Secretary of
Agrarian Reform, G.R. No. 86889, Dec. 4, 1990, Sec. 11 of
R.A. No. 6657, which includes private agricultural lands
devoted to commercial livestock, poultry and swine raising
in the definition of commercial farm, is invalid to the extent
that the aforecited agro-industrial activities are made to be
covered by the agrarian reform program of the State. Said
Supreme Court Ruling excludes livestock and poultry lands
from the coverage of agrarian reform. Accordingly, in the
light of said Ruling and DAR Administrative Order No. 9,
Series of 1993, the subject landholding upon proper
application and due issuance of a DAR exemption clearance
could be considered as outside the ambit of the agrarian
reform program.

September 8, 1999
EXEMPTION; AGRICULTURAL LANDS WHICH HAD LOST THEIR

AGRICULTURAL CHARACTER
Are lands which had lost their agricultural character by

reason of force majeure still covered by CARP?
 Lands which had lost their agricultural character by reason
of force majeure are perforce taken out of the purview of
CARP coverage. To rule otherwise will be to defeat the very
purpose for which the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
program (CARP) has been conceived and envisioned since
the subject landholdings are no longer agriculturally
productive and viable.

July 3, 1997
EXEMPTION; AGRICULTURAL LANDS WITH 18% SLOPE AND

UNDEVELOPED
Are lands with more than 18% slope and undeveloped be

permanently ceased to fall within the ambit of the term
agricultural lands.
 Rejection by DAR to cover landholdings with more than 18%

slope and undeveloped does not necessarily mean that said
landholdings shall permanently cease to fall within the
ambit of the term agricultural lands for purposes of the
CARP. The exemption of said landholdings is based on the
Forestry Code which provides that such lands should not be
disposed of and developed for agriculture because this type
of land is highly susceptible to soil erosion. However, in the
light of cultural practices which could anyhow make said
landholdings economically productive and the preservation
of the ecological balance in said areas feasible, the same
may still be considered as agricultural. Nonetheless, until
and unless the laws are changed, such lands are not
covered by CARP.

June 2, 1997
EXEMPTION; BEACH/SHORE AREAS

Are beach/shore areas exempted from the coverage of
CARP?
 Section 51 of Presidential Decree No. 1067 (The Water Code

of the Philippines provides, quote: "The banks of rivers and
streams and the shores of the seas and lakes throughout
their entire length and within a zone of three (3) meters in
urban areas, twenty (20) meters in agricultural areas and
forty (40) meters in forest areas, along their margins, are
subject to the easement of public use in the interest of
recreation, navigation, flotage, fishing and salvage. No
person shall be allowed to stay in this zone longer than
what is necessary for recreation, navigation, floatage,
fishing or salvage or to build structures of any kind.
 From the foregoing, beach/shore areas within the aforesaid

limits may be deemed exempt from the coverage of CARP.

October 28, 1997
EXEMPTION; CONDITIONS FOR EXEMPTION OF FISHPONDS AND
PRAWN FARMS FROM CARP COVERAGE
What are the conditions for exemption from CARP

coverage of fishponds and prawn farms?
 The conditions for exemption expressly provided in Section

2 of RA 7881, are:
1. That said prawn farms and fishponds should

not have been distributed and no CLOA shall have been
issued to Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries under CARP; and
2. That the provisions of Section 32-A of the
same law on incentives should apply. Said Section 32-A
mandates individuals or entities owning or operating
fishponds and prawn farm to execute, within 6 months
from the effectivity of RA 7881, an incentive plan with
their regular fishpond or prawn farm workers or fishpond
or prawn organizations, if any, in accordance with the
conditions therein specified.

September 8, 1995
EXEMPTION; CONDITIONS FOR EXEMPTION OF FISHPONDS

FROM CARP COVERAGE
What are the conditions needed to exempt fishponds and
prawn farm from CARP?
 Please be informed that pursuant to Section 2 of R.A. No.

7881, which amends Section 10 of R.A. No. 6657
(Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law), private lands
actually, directly and exclusively used for fishponds as
of 12 March 1995 are exempt from CARP
coverage, provided that said lands have not been
distributed and no Certificates of Land Ownership Award
(CLOAs) have been issued to agrarian reform beneficiaries
(ARBs).
 However, applications for exemption/exclusion should still
be filed with the DAR to determine on the merits whether
landholdings subject of applications are indeed
exempt/excluded from CARP coverage pursuant to the
provisions of DAR Administrative Order No. 03, series of
1995 (Rules and Regulations Governing the
Exemption/Exclusion of Fishponds and Prawn Farms from
the Coverage of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law
(CARL), Pursuant to Republic Act (R.A.) No. 6657, as
Amended by R.A. No 7881).

February 21, 2002
EXEMPTION; CONDITIONS FOR EXEMPTION UNDER

SECTION 10 OF R.A. NO. 6657
 Section 10 of R.A. No. 6657 requires that the subject
landholding must be actually, directly and exclusively used
and found to be necessary for church sites and convents
appurtenant thereto.
 DAR OPINION NO. 25, s. 2006
August 29, 2006
EXEMPTION; DAR CLEARANCE AS A CONDITION PRECEDENT
Is DAR Clearance still necessary before the Municipal

Council can act on the location clearance application
 If the subject landholding was already reclassified as non-

agricultural prior to the effectivity of the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) on 15 June 1988, an
application for exemption by the landowner shall be
required pursuant to the provisions and requirements of
DAR Administrative Order No. 6, Series of 1994. On the
other hand, if said landholding had been reclassified as non-
agricultural after 15 June 1988, an application for
conversion shall be required pursuant to the provisions and
requirements of DAR Administrative Order No. 7, Series of
1997.

December 2, 1998
EXEMPTION; DEADLINE FOR FILING APPLICATION
Is there a deadline for filing an application for exemption

of fishpond farms?
 Pertinent agrarian laws and regulations do not provide for a

deadline for filing of the application for exemption of
fishpond farms and of the application for exemption
clearance pursuant to DOJ Opinion No. 44, Series of 1990.
May 25, 1998
EXEMPTION; DISTINCTION BETWEEN EXEMPTION ORDER AND

CONVERSION ORDER
What is the difference between Exemption Order and
Conversion Order?
 Exemption clearance/order issued pursuant to DOJ Opinion

No. 44, series of 1990 differs from a conversion
order/clearance. Said exemption clearance or order stems
from a petition/application filed pursuant to the
requirements, rules, conditions and procedures laid down
under DAR Administrative Order No. 06, series of 1994,
while a conversion clearance or order is based on an
application filed pursuant to the requirements, rules,
conditions and procedures detailed under DAR
Administrative Order No. 01, series of 2002. Section 23 of
DAR Administrative Order No. 01, series of 2002
enumerates the effects of approval of Conversion which are
not necessarily the effects of an approval of Exemption
pursuant to DOJ 44 or Section 3 (c) of R.A. No. 6657.

March 19, 2003
EXEMPTION; DOCUMENTARY REQUIREMENTS FOR EXEMPTION

CLEARANCE
What are the requirements for exemption clearance?
 The requirements for exemption clearance under DAR

Administrative Order No. 06, Series of 1994 are the
following:
1. Certification from the Deputized Zoning
Administrator that the land has been reclassified to
residential, industrial or commercial use prior to June 15,
1988; and
2. Certification from the HLURB that the
pertinent zoning ordinance has been approved by the
Board prior to June 15, 1988.
Both certifications are required in order for an

application for exemption clearance to be proceeded.

March 9, 1995
EXEMPTION; DOCUMENTARY REQUIREMENTS NEEDED FOR THE

ISSUANCE OF THE ORDER OF EXEMPTION
What are the documentary requirements under DAR A.O.

No. 13, s. 1990?
DAR Administrative Order No. 13 Series of 1990, as amended by
Administrative Order No. 10, Series of 1994 (copies herewith
attached) clearly provides that the Municipal Agrarian Reform
Office (MARO) of the place where the property is situated shall
accept written application for exemption from CARP coverage
which shall be accompanied by the following: Ownership
documents and other muniments of title
Evidence to support application and convince DAR that the area
qualifies for exemption under Section 10, R.A. No. 6657 such as:
copy of proclamation, topographic map, sketch map, area
development plan, affidavit, certification from relevant
government agency, etc.
Upon receipt of the application for exemption, the Municipal
Agrarian Reform Officer (MARO) shall conduct, with the
assistance of the Barangay Agrarian Reform Council (BARC), an
investigation of the land to determine, among others, the
ownership, legal status and type of area of the land sought to be
exempted. The MARO shall likewise ascertain whether or not the
land is actually, directly and exclusively used or necessary for
the purpose stated in the application pursuant to Section 10 of
R.A. No. 6657. Thereafter, the Application for Land Exemption
Folder (ALEF) shall be transmitted to the Provincial Agrarian
Reform Officer (PARO), who shall review and evaluate the ALEF
and indicate his comments, findings and recommendations. If
ALEF documentation is found in order, he shall forward the same
to the DAR Regional Director, otherwise, he shall return the ALEF
to the MARO for further action. The Regional Director shall then
approve or disapprove the subject application for exemption
based on the merits thereof.

October 12, 1998
EXEMPTION; EFFECT
What is the effect of exemption pursuant to Section 10 of
R.A. No. 6657?
 The effect of an exemption granted pursuant to the said

provision of R.A. No. 6657 is merely to remove the land from
its possible acquisition and distribution under the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP). This does
not render a total exemption from the application of
Agrarian Reform laws and their implementing rules and
regulations. The DAR may still implement the other
components of the program, i.e., leasehold and the
Integrated Social Forestry Program, where applicable. In
this case, a DAR Order of Exemption must be secured
because the exemption referred hereto is not automatic. It
is incumbent upon the landowner to prove that his land is
exempted from CARP coverage.
 A DAR Order of Exemption does not operate as a sanction
for the landowner to modify the actual use of the land.
When the land is removed from CARP coverage, it does not
follow that conversion of the land into other uses is
authorized. If the intention of the landowner is to convert
the agricultural land into residential, commercial or
industrial, thereby changing the agricultural use of the land
into non-agricultural use, a DAR Order of Exemption will not
suffice. Instead, a DAR Order of Conversion must still be
obtained.

September 10, 2001
EXEMPTION; EFFECT
What is the effect of a DAR Order of Exemption?
 While it is admitted that a DAR Order of Exemption signifies

that a landholding may not be acquired and distributed
under CARP, this does not render, total and absolute, the
exemption from the application of the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law (CARL). DAR Administrative Order No.
13, Series of 1990 provides that "in all cases, the DAR shall
conduct a continuing review and verification of exempted
lands to ascertain which of the areas declared exempt or
which portions thereof are no longer actually, directly and
exclusively used and found necessary for said purpose. If
the purpose for the grant of exemption no longer exists, the
area or portion involved shall be covered under CARP
pursuant to the guidelines on land acquisition and
distribution." Accordingly, lands which have already been
declared exempt pursuant to a DAR Order may,
nonetheless, not be freely acquired or disposed of without a
DAR Clearance.

December 14, 1999
EXEMPTION; EFFECT OF EXEMPTION PURSUANT TO DOJ

OPINION NO. 44, SERIES OF 1990
What is the effect of exemption under DOJ Opinion No. 44,
Series of 1990?
 DOJ Opinion No. 44, Series of 1990 rules that all lands
already classified as commercial, industrial or residential
before June 15, 1988 pursuant to a Municipal/City
Ordinance or zoning plan duly approved by the Housing and
Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) before June 15, 1988
is exempted from CARP coverage. However, the landowner
or his duly authorized representative of the properties
falling under this category must still apply for an Exemption
Clearance from the DAR before any change in its actual use
may be introduced.

September 10, 2001
EXEMPTION; EFFECT OF ISSUANCE OF THE ORDER OF

EXEMPTION
What is the effect of the issuance of an Order of

Exemption/Exclusion?
 The Order of Exemption/Exclusion issued by the DAR

pursuant to Section 10 of R.A. No. 6657 is an affirmation
that the subject property is beyond the purview of CARP
coverage over which the DAR has no jurisdiction. It is an
administrative declaration that the property in question is
not suitable for agricultural purposes which can be
compulsorily acquired and distributed by the government
thru DAR to qualified-beneficiaries.
 Pursuant to DAR Administrative Order No. 10, Series of
1994, the Order of Exemption/Exclusion has already
become final and executory since, presumably, no appeal
has been made to the DAR Secretary within 15 days from
receipt thereof. Thus, the same can no longer be reopened
for reason of public policy. Equity and justice demands that
every controversy must come to an end at some future
time. Having been declared as exempt by virtue of an Order
of Exemption/Exclusion, the property covered thereby can
now be devoted to other purposes.
 In all cases, however, the DAR shall conduct a continuing
review and verification of exempted lands to ascertain
which of the areas declared exempt or which portions
thereof are no longer actually, directly and exclusively used
and found necessary for said purpose. If the purpose for the
grant of exemption no longer exists, the area or portion
involved shall be covered under CARP pursuant to the
guidelines on land acquisition and distribution (Item II. F,
DAR Administrative Order No. 13, Series of 1990).

February 9, 1999
EXEMPTION; EFFECT OF THE APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION

FROM CARP COVERAGE
What are the effects of the supervening application for

exemption from CARP coverage?
 While DAR, not LBP, is the one legally mandated to

determine and recommend whether a particular landholding
is covered by P.D. No. 27 or R.A. No. 6657 and to issue the
corresponding EP or CLOA, as the case may be, the
supervening applications for exemption on the subject
landholdings have perforce interposed on the previous
issue such that there is likewise of necessity the need to
resolve said applications for exemption before all the other
attendant issues could properly be addressed. In view
thereof, we are constrained to wait for the final resolution
of the subject applications for exemption, afterwhich, we
could then act accordingly.

September 25, 1998
EXEMPTION; EFFECT OF THE ORDER OF EXEMPTION
What is the effect of an order of exemption issued by DAR?
 The Order of Exemption issued by the Dar produces the

same force and effect as an Order of Conversion for it
perforce already dispenses with the requirement of
conversion clearance. Thus, upon issuance of an Order of
Exemption, any other requirement that add nothing but
rather demands unnecessarily more sets of requisites shall
be deemed as entirely superfluous, hence, the same must
accordingly be disregarded.

March 24, 1998
EXEMPTION; EXEMPTION OF FISHPONDS
Are fishponds exempt from CARP coverage?
 DAR Memorandum Circular No. 32, Series of 1997 has now

officially lifted the suspension relative to the
implementation of R.A. No. 7881 and its implementing rules
(DAR A.O. 3, Series of 1995). The legal effect of such lifting
is that fishponds shall be exempt from CARP coverage
under certain conditions and, therefore, may be the subject
of disposition in favor of third parties. However, before it
could be disposed, application for exemption/exclusion is
still necessary to prove that the same are indeed fishponds,
actually, directly and exclusively used as such prior to 12
March 1995, pursuant to DAR A.O. No. 3, Series of 1995. It
bears stressing here that what is contemplated as
permissible for sale, transfer or conveyance under Sec. 6 of
R.A. 7881 (i.e., Section 73-A of R.A. No. 6657, as amended
by R.A. 7881), are those agricultural lands foreclosed by
government financial institution (e.g., DBP) on or after 12
March 1995 and not before said date, as in the instant case
(DAR Memorandum Circular No. 5, Series of 1996).

February 09, 1998
EXEMPTION; EXERCISE OF THE RIGHT OF RETENTION
How will the issue on whether or not a landholding is

exempt/excluded from CARP coverage by reason of the
exercise of the right of retention be resolved?
 The issue on whether or not the landholding of your client is

exempt/excluded from CARP coverage by reason of the
exercise of the right of retention and the issue on whether
or not it may be compulsorily acquired is to be resolved not
by way of rendering legal opinion on the matter but by
following the procedure laid down under DAR
Administrative Order No. 9, Series of 1994 (Authorizing All
Regional Directors to hear and Decide all Protest Involving
Coverage Under R.A. 6657 or P.D. No. 27 and Defining the
Appeal Process from the Regional Director to the
Secretary).

January 14, 1998
EXEMPTION; FISHPOND AND PRAWN FARMS ARE EXEMPTED

FROM CARP COVERAGE
Are fishponds and prawnfarms excluded from CARP?
 With the enactment of Republic Act No. 7881 which took

effect on 12 March 1995, fishponds and prawn farms were
exempt/excluded from the coverage of the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law. However, for it to be exempt or
excluded from the coverage of CARP, owners thereof
should still have to file an Application for Land
Exemption/Exclusion with the DAR Provincial Office where
the property is situated, and shall state and prove that their
lands have been actually, directly and exclusively used for
fishpond and prawn farms purposes even prior to the
effectivity date of R.A. No. 7881 on 12 March 1995. The
consequential effect of the latter law is that guidelines for
valuation of lands used as fishponds and prawn farms are
no longer necessary since said lands are already exempt or
excluded from the coverage of CARP.

December 24, 1998
What are the conditions needed to exempt fishponds and

prawnfarm from CARP?
 For fishponds and prawn farms to be exempt from the

coverage of CARP, they must be actually, directly and
exclusively used for such purpose as of 12 March 1995, the
date when R.A. 7881 took effect. However, compliance with
this requirement does not automatically exempt fishponds
and prawn farms from CARP coverage. The owners are still
required to apply for Exemption or Exclusion from the
coverage of CARP with the DAR and comply with all the
requirements set forth in the cited Administrative Order.
 On the other hand, agricultural lands which are not yet
actually, directly and exclusively used as fishponds or
prawn farms as of March 12, 1995, prior DAR Conversion
Clearance is necessary. The owners concerned must first
apply with the appropriate DAR Office and comply with the
requirements for conversion pursuant to Administrative
Order NO. 03, Series of 1995.

October 26, 1998
EXEMPTION; FISHPONDS AND PRAWNFARMS
Are fishponds and prawn farms exempted from CARP

coverage?
 R.A. No. 7881 which amends RA 6657 declares that

fishponds and prawn farms which satisfy the conditions
specified in said law are exempt from CARL coverage. It is
DAR that determines whether or not the conditions for said
exemption have been met, on the basis of the guidelines
specified in DAR A.O. No. 03, Series of 1995. A DAR Order of
Exemption from CARL coverage that is final and executory
pursuant to said guidelines may be used to support thereof,
registration of a transaction involving the property subject
thereof, hence, there would no longer be any need for a
PARO Clearance for said registration.

October 16, 1995

September 8, 1995
EXEMPTION; FISHPONDS/PRAWN FARMS
Are fishponds/prawn farms exempted from CARP

coverage?
 The enactment of RA 7881 brought some amendments to RA

6657, to be specific, exempting fishponds/prawn farms from
the coverage of the CARP. However, pursuant to the
subject Supreme Court Resolution, specific provisions of RA
7881 and its implementing guideline have been suspended.
As a result of which the DAR issued Memorandum Circular
No. 27, Series of 1995 to hold in abeyance the
implementation of said provisions of RA 7881 together with
its implementing guideline (i.e., A.O. No. 3, S. 1995).
March 11, 1997
EXEMPTION; INCOMPLETE DOCUMENTARY

REQUIREMENTS, A GROUND FOR NON ACEPTANCE OF AN
APPLICATION
 When a landholding is applied for Exemption from the

coverage of CARP there is a requirement for the submission
of ownership documents and other muniments of title, and
that incomplete documentary requirements is a ground for
non- acceptance of an application for exemption. In short, it
would not be possible to process and evaluate any
application in the absence of any ownership document and
other muniments of title. It follows therefore that an Order
of Finality may not be issued in the absence of any
muniments of title to prove ownership. Nevertheless,
please be informed that the aforesaid guidelines did not
impose that a landholding applied for exemption/exclusion
necessarily be registered with the Registered of Deeds. It is
essential that the landowner applicant, must comply with
the requirements, documents laid down under A.O. No. 13,
Series of 1990 to justify the application for exemption on
the ground that the subject landholding has a slope of 18%
over and undeveloped.

February 16, 2010
EXEMPTION; ISSUANCE OF THE ORDER OF EXEMPTION
When will the Order of Exemption be issued?
 Exemption of agricultural lands from CARP coverage

pursuant to Section 10 of Republic Act No. 6657
(Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law or CARL) is not
automatic, and it cannot be granted simply on the bare
allegations that the subject property could well be
accordingly subdivided by the sisters to meet the legal
requirements, or is intended for some inchoate agricultural
or religious purposes. The rule is that all agricultural lands
are covered under R.A. No. 6657 pursuant to Section 4 of
said law which provides that the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Law of 1988 shall cover, regardless of tenurial
private agricultural lands as provided in Proclamation No.
131 and Executive Order No. 229, including other lands of
the public domain suitable for agriculture. Thus, the burden
is on the claimant or landowner to prove by clear and
convincing evidence that the landholding is exempt from
CARP coverage pursuant to Section 10 of said law.
Otherwise, the same shall be covered subject to the
maximum retention limit or landownership ceiling of five (5)
hectares as provided for under Sections 6 and 73 (a) of R.A.
No. 6657.

October 12, 1998
EXEMPTION; LAND RECLASSIFIED AS NON-AGRICULTURAL

BEFORE 15 JUNE 1988
Are lands reclassified as non-agricultural prior to 15 June
1988 exempt from Conversion Clearance?
 On the assumption that said lands were classified as

residential and non-agricultural before 15 June 1988, the
date of effectivity of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Law (CARL), no further conversion order or clearance may
be necessary. However, there is still the need to apply for
exemption clearance pursuant to the aforequoted
provisions of the DAR guidelines abovementioned to
ascertain that said lands are indeed exempt from CARP
coverage and no agrarian laws, rules and regulations are
violated. The provisions of P.D. No. 1474 do not warrant
automatic exemption of subject landholdings from the
requirement of DAR exemption clearance.

August 29, 2001
EXEMPTION; LAND RECLASSIFIED AS NON-AGRICULTURAL
BEFORE 15 JUNE 1988
Are lands reclassified as non-agricultural before 15 June

1988 still need conversion clearance?
 Pursuant to DOJ Opinion No. 44, Series of 1990, all lands

which have been reclassified as commercial, industrial or
residential before 15 June 1988 (effectivity of the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law) no longer need any
conversion clearance. This unmistakable conclusion is
further reiterated in DAR Administrative Order No. 6, Series
of 1994, which provides that the authority of the DAR to
approve conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural
uses commences only from the date of effectivity of said
law. Consequently, any landowner or his duly authorized
representative whose lands are covered by DOJ Opinion No.
44, Series of 1990, and desires an exemption clearance
from DAR, should file an application for exemption.

March 24, 1998
EXEMPTION; LAND THAT ARE EXEMPTED FROM CARP
What lands are not covered by CARP?
 The following lands are not covered by CARP:

a) those which are not suitable for agriculture,
and those which are classified as mineral, forest,
residential, commercial or industrial land;
b) those which have been classified and
approved as non-agricultural prior to 15 June 1988 as
ruled under Department of Justice Opinion No. 44, Series
of 1990;
c) those which are devoted to poultry, swine, or
livestock raising as of June 15, 1988 pursuant to the
Supreme Court ruling in Luz Farms vs. The Honorable
Secretary of Agrarian Reform (G.R. No. 86339, 4 December
1990); and
d) those which are retained by the landowner
(not covered insofar as land acquisition and distribution
but covered with respect to other provisions of agrarian
laws, particularly leasehold).
In view of the foregoing, landholdings which fall under the

category of any of the above-enumerated lands may be
declared exempt from CARP coverage upon proper
application thereof and determination by the DAR, on the
merits, pursuant to existing agrarian laws, rules and
regulations.

September 8, 1999
EXEMPTION; LANDHOLDING EXCLUSIVELY DEVOTED TO

LIVESTOCK
 In light of the substantial evidences presented and the

applicable laws and jurisprudence, this Office opines, as it
hereby confirms, that the subject landholdings of Highbreed
Livestock Corporation, consisting of 21 parcels with total
area of 121.8542 hectares, located at Barangays
Magmarale, Pulong Bayabas, Biclat and Tibagan, San
Miguel Bulacan, as enumerated above, are exempt or
excluded from CARP coverage for being exclusively
devoted to livestock raising prior to the effectivity of CARL
(RA6657) on June 15, 1988 up to the present. The fact that
the DAR has not placed the subject landholdings under
CARP since 1988 (or for 19 years) is recognition of its
exempt or excluded status.

October 24, 2007
EXEMPTION; LANDHOLDING WITH A SLOPE OF 18% AND

UNDEVELOPED
Is a landholding having a slope of 18% or more and

undeveloped exempt from CARP coverage?
 The law is categorically clear that a landholding having a

slope of 18% or more and undeveloped is not within the
coverage of CARP. However, an application for exemption
and a DAR Clearance are required pursuant to Section 10 of
R.A. No. 6657 and DAR A.O. No. 13, Series of 1990.

October 6, 1999
EXEMPTION; LANDS CLASSIFIED AS COMMERCIAL BEFORE

JUNE 15, 1988
Are lands classified as commercial before 15 June 1988

exempt from securing exemption clearance?
 Since the land in issue has in effect been previously

classified as commercial (i.e., tourist zone) before 15 June
1988, the date of effectivity of CARL, there is still the need
to apply for exemption clearance. The provisions of DOJ
Opinion No. 44, in relation to DAR Administrative Order No.
6, Series of 1994 could still be relatively applied in the
instant case. Accordingly, notwithstanding the provisions of
P.D. No. 1801, the same do not afford automatic exemption
of the landholding in issue.

September 17, 1997
EXEMPTION; LANDS CLASSIFIED AS INDUSTRIAL ZONE PRIOR

TO CARL
Can the development of an area proceed pending

submission of the required exemption clearance from
DAR?
 As regards your query on whether the development of an

area can proceed pending submission of the required
exemption clearance from the DAR, it is submitted that
though the area subject matter of your query had allegedly
been classified as Industrial Zone prior to effectivity of
CARL, a DAR Exemption Clearance must first be secured
pursuant to DOJ Opinion No. 44, Series of 1990 to foreclose
possible circumvention of existing agrarian laws, rules and
regulations.

September 4, 1998
EXEMPTION ; LANDS COVERED BY FREE PATENTS
Are properties covered by Free Patent exempted from

CARP coverage?
 The broad and encompassing scope of R.A. No. 6657 so

provides that it shall cover, regardless of tenurial
arrangement and commodity produced, all public or private
agricultural lands, as provided in Proclamation No. 131 and
Executive Order No. 229 including other lands of the public
domain suitable for agriculture (Section 4, R.A. No. 6657).
The only exemptions therein, and no other, are those lands
mentioned under Section 10 of R.A. No. 6657, as amended
by R.A. No. 7881; those which are devoted to poultry, swine
and livestock pursuant to the Supreme Court Ruling in the
Luz Farms case; those which have been classified and
approved as non-agricultural prior to 15 June 1988
(effectivity of R.A. No. 6657 – CARL) as ruled under
Department of Justice Opinion No. 44, Series of 1990; those
which are officially and duly declared as not suitable for
agriculture; and those which are classified as mineral,
forest, residential, commercial or industrial land as
provided for under Section 3 (c) of R.A. No. 6657.
 To extend or expand the aforesaid exemptions/exclusions,

and to further apply by analogy the provisions of R.A. No.
6657, specifically Section 6 thereof as regards Homestead
lands vis-à-vis Commonwealth Act No. 141 on Free Patent
lands would therefore constitute a violation of the well-
entrenched and time-honored principle in our jurisprudence,
viz: "Exclusio Unios est Exclusio Alterios" (what the law
does not include it excludes). Accordingly, what is not
specifically exempted is covered by CARP.

September 15, 1998
EXEMPTION; LANDS COVERED UNDER DOJ NO. 44
Is there an ambiguity between DAR A.O. No. 06, series of

1994 and DOJ Opinion No. 44, series of 1990?
 No ambiguity exists between the two and that the former

was issued in consonance with the latter for the purpose of
streamlining the issuance of exemption clearances based
thereon.
 It should be stressed that DOJ Opinion No. 44, Series of
1990 upholds DAR's general authority under the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) to approve or
disapprove applications for conversion of agricultural lands
to non-agricultural uses from and after the effectivity of
CARL on June 15, 1988. Thus, it should be made clear that
before any conversion of said agricultural lands to non-
agricultural uses may be undertaken, the same must first
be cleared or approved by DAR through an Order of
Conversion. The application for a DAR Exemption
Clearance, on the other hand, for lands reclassified to non-
agricultural uses prior to June 15, 1988, is likewise not
optional and does not depend upon the desire of the
landowner or his duly authorized representatives.

September 4, 1998
EXEMPTION; LANDS DEVOTED TO POULTRY, SWINE OR

LIVESTOCK RAISING
Are lands devoted to poultry, swine or livestock raising

exempt from CARP coverage?
 Pursuant to the SC ruling on Luz Farms vs. The Honorable

Secretary of Agrarian Reform (192 SCRA 51, December 4,
1990), what are exempted or deemed excluded from CARP
coverage are those lands which are devoted to poultry,
swine or livestock raising as of 15 June 1988 (date of the
effectivity of RA 6657 or CARL).

August 28, 1996
EXEMPTION; LANDS DIRECTLY AND EXCLUSIVELY USED FOR
FISHPOND AND PRAWNFARMS
Are lands directly and exclusively used for fishponds and

prawn farms exempt from CARP coverage?
 Lands directly and exclusively used for fishponds and prawn

farms as of 12 March 1995 are by operation of RA 7881
exempt from CARP coverage. Indeed, this exemption is
clearly provided in Section 2 of RA 7881 which amends
Section 10 of RA 6657.

September 8, 1995
EXEMPTION; LANDS THAT ARE EXEMPTED FROM CARP

COVERAGE
 Exclusion/Exemption of lands from CARP coverage shall

apply only to the following, to wit:
1) those which are not suitable for agriculture,

and those which are classified as mineral, forest,
residential, commercial or industrial land;
2) those which have been classified and
approved as non-agricultural prior to 15 June 1988 as
ruled under Department of Justice Opinion No. 44 , Series
of 1990;
3) those which are exempt pursuant to Section
10, R.A. No. 6657, as amended by R.A. No. 7881;
4) those which are devoted to poultry, swine or
livestock raising as of June 15, 1988, pursuant to
Supreme Court ruling on Luz Farms vs. The Honorable
Secretary of Agrarian Reform (G.R. No. 86339, 4 December
1990); and
5) those which are retained by the landowner
(not covered insofar as acquisition and distribution but
covered with respect to other provisions of agrarian laws,
particularly leasehold).
 The Exclusion Clearance based on Nos. 1 and 2 above shall

be governed by DAR Administrative Order No. 6, Series of
1994 (Guidelines for the Issuance of Exemption Clearances
Based on Sec. 3 (c), R.A. 6657 and Department of Justice
Opinion No. 44, Series of 1990). The procedures for the
issuance of exemption/exclusion clearance are detailed
under said Administrative Order.

November 10, 2006
EXEMPTION; LANDS UTILIZED AS SCHOOL SITE
Is a lot utilized as school site exempt from CARP

coverage?
 Since the lot has, since 1930, been utilized as a school site,
it is exempted from CARP coverage as clearly provided in
Section 10 of R.A. 6657. As such, it is believed that the
matter of acquisition of the property by DECS is between
said Department and PNB.

February 11, 1994
EXEMPTION; LANDS UTILIZED AS SCHOOL SITES AND

CAMPUSES AND EXPERIMENTAL FARM
Are lands actually, directly and exclusively used and found

to be necessary for school sites and campuses including
experimental farm exempt from CARP coverage?
 Under Section 10 of R.A. No. 6657, lands actually directly
and exclusively used and found to be necessary for "school
sites and campuses including experimental farm stations
operated by public or private schools for educational
purposes" are exempt from the coverage of said Act.

February 10, 1994
EXEMPTION; LAW GOVERNING EXEMPTION
What law governs the exemption and exclusion from CARP

coverage?
 The exemption and exclusion from CARP coverage are found

in Section 10 of CARL, which is quoted as follows:
"SECTION 10. Exemptions and

Exclusion. — Lands actually, directly and
exclusively used and found to be necessary for
parks, wildlife, forest reserves, reforestation, fish
sanctuaries and breeding grounds, watersheds
and mangroves, national defense, school sites
and campuses including experimental farm
stations operated by public or private schools for
educational purposes, seeds and seedlings
research and pilot production centers church
sites and convents appurtenant thereto, mosque
sites and Islamic centers appurtenant thereto,
communal burial grounds and cemeteries, penal
colonies and penal farms actually worked by the
inmates, government and private research and
quarantine centers and all lands with eighteen
percent (18%) slope and over, except those
already developed shall be exempt from the
coverage of this Act.
August 22, 1994
EXEMPTION; NOT AUTOMATIC
Are exempt properties automatically excluded from CARP

coverage?
 Even the subject properties are indeed exempt from CARP

coverage, still the exemption is not automatic as the law
further requires that an application for exemption clearance
is to be filed pursuant to DAR Administrative Order No. 06,
Series of 1994.

September 23, 1996
EXEMPTION; NOT AUTOMATIC FOR LAND RECLASSIFIED

AS NON-AGRICULTURAL BEFORE 15 JUNE 1988
 On the assumption that said lands were classified as

residential and non-agricultural before 15 June 1988, the
date of effectivity of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Law (CARL), no further conversion order or clearance may
be necessary. However, there is still the need to apply for
exemption clearance pursuant to the aforequoted
provisions of the DAR guidelines abovementioned to
ascertain that said lands are indeed exempt from CARP
coverage and no agrarian laws, rules and regulations are
violated. The provisions of P.D. No. 1474 do not warrant
automatic exemption of subject landholdings from the
requirement of DAR exemption clearance.

August 29, 2001
EXEMPTION; NOT IN PURSUANCE OF DOJ OPINION NO. 44
What is the effect of exemption orders or clearances
issued not in pursuance of DOJ 44 or Section 3 (c) of R.A.
No. 6657/When may an exempted landholding revert to its
original agricultural state?
 It bears noting that aforesaid exemption does not include or

contemplate exemption orders or clearances issued not in
pursuance of DOJ 44 or Section 3 (c) of R.A. No. 6657 in
relation to DAR Administrative Order No. 6, series of 1994
such as those exempted pursuant to DAR Administrative
Order No. 13, series of 1990 (Section 10, R.A. No. 6657 as
amended), DAR Administrative Order No. 9, series of 1993
(Livestock, Poultry and Swine) and DAR Administrative
Order No. 3, series of 1995 (Fishponds and Prawn Farms).
The lands under the latter-enumerated exemptions may
revert to agricultural if they are no longer actually, directly
and exclusively used for the purpose for which they were
exempted. Thus, they would still necessitate a conversion
clearance should they later be converted to other non-
agricultural uses such as residential, commercial or
industrial.

March 19, 2003
EXEMPTION; PENDENCY OF APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION;

EFFECT THEREOF
What is the effect of pendency of application for

exemption?
 After a careful evaluation of the consequences that may

arise therefrom, it is deemed wise and prudent to resolve
first the pending petition for exemption filed by Rizal
Cement Corporation, Inc. before proceeding to the coverage
of the landholding in issue to avoid possible absurdity
where the property subject of the request might later on be
declared as exempt from CARP coverage. This policy
procedure aims to prevent the government from probable
wastage of time, effort and resources incident to the
coverage.
 Hence, the coverage process should momentarily be
deferred to give way to the resolution of the pending
application for exemption/exclusion. In order not to unduly
prejudice the members of the Pag-asa Samahang Nayon,
however, the resolution of the subject application should be
directed and rendered the soonest.

January 7, 1999
EXEMPTION; PENDING APPLICATIONS; COVERAGE PROCESS

HELD IN ABEYANCE
Can there be documentation and coverage process

pending applications for exemption or conversion or
protests on coverage with the DAR?
 In cases where there are pending applications for

exemption or conversion or protests on coverage, the
documentation and coverage process shall be held in
abeyance until such time that said applications or protests
are resolved with finality. However, insofar as the
applications for exemption and conversion and protests
involving CARP coverage which are pending with the DAR,
it behooves and it is incumbent upon us that the resolution
thereof should be directed and rendered the soonest in
order that the implementation of the Program shall not be
unduly delayed or derailed. Earnest efforts and
representations shall likewise be accordingly exerted and
made by the Department in cases where said applications
or protests are already with the Office of the President or
the courts in order that the same shall likewise be resolved
the soonest time possible.

October 27, 1999
EXEMPTION; PURSUANT TO DOJ OPINION No. 44, SERIES OF

1990
When is a parcel of land considered non-agricultural?
 Under DOJ Opinion No. 44, Series of 1990, a parcel of land is

considered non-agricultural, if it has been classified as
residential, commercial or industrial in the City or Municipal
Land Use Plan or Zoning Ordinance approved by the HLURB
before 15 June 1988, date of effectivity of the CARL, and
therefore beyond the coverage of the CARP.
 Exemption clearance, on non-agricultural land - The
landowner is no longer required to file an application for
conversion with the DAR, but he must have to apply for an
exemption clearance with the DAR regional office where
the land is located.

December 23, 1996
Are lands reclassified as non-agricultural prior to 15 June

1988 exempt from CARP coverage?
 In the case of reclassified lands duly exempted pursuant to

DOJ 44, series of 1990 and Section 3 (c) of R.A. No. 6657 in
relation to DAR Administrative Order No. 6, series of 1994,
it is explicit in the abovequoted provisions of DAR rules and
regulations on exemption/conversion that they no longer
need any conversion clearance. An exemption order to that
effect suffices.

March 19, 2003
 If, indeed, subject properties fall within the purview of the

aforesaid DOJ Opinion, the landowner may no longer be
required to secure conversion clearance. What he/she or
his/her duly authorized representative basically needs,
however, is an exemption clearance from the DAR pursuant
to DAR Administrative Order No. 06, series of 1994 as
amended.

July 9, 2001
 The aforesaid Opinion sets forth that agricultural lands

reclassified to non-agricultural uses prior to 15 June 1988
are exempted from the coverage of CARP.

October 6, 1999
EXEMPTION; PURSUANT TO DOJ OPINION NO. 44, SERIES
OF 1990
 Exemption from CARP coverage pursuant to DOJ Opinion

No. 44, series of 1990 as implemented by DAR
Administrative Order No. 6, series of 1994 may be deemed
to partake, in effect, of the nature of a conversion of
agricultural lands to non-agricultural use since said lands
and 4 of R.A. No. 6657. In both instances, said exemption
and conversion exempt or remove the lands subject
thereof from CARP coverage except that in the case of
conversion, if a conversion order is revoked or withdrawn,
the lands subject thereof shall revert to the status of
agricultural lands and shall be subject to CARP coverage as
circumstances may warrant (Section 49, DAR
 It should be stressed, however, that in order that an
exemption clearance/order may be deemed as of the same
nature and effect as a conversion clearance/order, said
exemption order or clearance should have been issued on
the basis of a duly filed application for exemption
and approved on the merits by the DAR Secretary pursuant
to the provisions of DAR Administrative Order No. 6, series
of 1994, since exemption is not automatic.

March 19, 2003
EXEMPTION; PURSUANT TO DOJ OPINION NO. 44, SERIES
OF 1990
 In the case of reclassified lands duly exempted pursuant to

DOJ 44, series of 1990 and Section 3 (c) of R.A. No. 6657 in
relation to DAR Administrative Order No. 6, series of 1994,
it is explicit in the abovequoted provisions of DAR rules and
regulations on exemption/conversion that they no longer
need any conversion clearance. An exemption order to that
effect suffices.

March 19, 2003
 If, indeed, subject properties fall within the purview of the

aforesaid DOJ Opinion, the landowner may no longer be
required to secure conversion clearance. What he/she or
his/her duly authorized representative basically needs,
however, is an exemption clearance from the DAR pursuant
to DAR Administrative Order No. 06, series of 1994 as
amended.

July 9, 2001
EXEMPTION; PURSUANT TO SECTION 10 OF R.A. NO. 6657
INCLUDED IN THE TOTAL AGRICULTURAL LANDHOLDINGS OF
THE LANDOWNER
Are lands with slope of 18% or over included in the

determination of total agricultural landholdings of a
landowner?
 Even if a parcel of land is exempted from CARP pursuant to

Section 10 of R.A. No. 6657, for having a slope of 18% or
over and undeveloped, said exempted land, though not to
be subjected to acquisition and distribution under CARP,
may nevertheless be included in determining the total
agricultural landholdings of the landowner. This is in
consonance with the social justice provision of the
Constitution to reduce social and economic inequalities by
equitably diffusing wealth for the common good and
regulating the acquisition, ownership, use and disposition
of property and its increments (Section 1, Article XIII of the
Philippine Constitution). Please note that your exempted
land has not ceased to be agricultural.

December 14, 1999
EXEMPTION; REQUIREMENTS FOR LANDHOLDING

CLASSIFIED AS MINERAL LAND
 Paragraphs 2.4.1, 2.4.2 and 2.4.3 of DAR A.O. No. 4, Series of

2003 provide:
"II. REQUIREMENTS
2.4. Land Classification certification:
Certification from the Housing and

Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) Regional
Officer on the actual zoning or classification of
the subject land in the approved comprehensive
land use plan, citing the municipal or city
zoning ordinance number, resolution number,
and date of its approval by the HLURB or its
corresponding board resolution number.
 Likewise, we also agree that paragraph 2.4.2 may apply in

your case, but there must be a certification issued by the
DENR Mines and Geosciences Bureau that your landholding
is classified as mineral. Considering that there is no
certification as yet issued in this regard, you are therefore
required to secure it first from the Office of the DENR.

August 1, 2006
EXEMPTION; SIGNIFICANCE OF A DAR ORDER OF EXEMPTION

What is the significance of a DAR Order of Exemption?
 While it is admitted that a DAR Order of Exemption pursuant

to DOJ Opinion No. 44 signifies that a landholding may not
be acquired and distributed under the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Program (CARP), this does not render, total
and absolute, the exemption from the application of the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) and other
applicable existing laws, rules, regulations, agreements
and practices.

May 6, 2003
EXEMPTION; UNLIMITED AS TO THE TOTAL NUMBER OF

LANDHOLDINGS
What is the required number of landholdings that must be

exempt from CARP coverage?
 R.A. No. 6657 appears not to impose any limitation insofar
as the total number of landholdings that may be exempted
from CARP coverage is concerned. However, all exemptions
presuppose due determination thereof on the merits upon
proper application for exemption pursuant to existing laws,
rules and regulations.

December 14, 1999
EXEMPTION; VALID CLASSIFICATION OF LAND INTO

RESIDENTIAL
Is a clear and conclusive proof of valid classification

needed to exclude an agricultural land from CARP?
 The transfer of the property to the DAR may be given due

course pursuant to the provisions of Section 4 of R.A. 6657,
unless clear and conclusive proof of valid classification into
residential land as authorized and approved by legitimate
authority is presented. In the absence of said proof, proper
petition should be made by DAR before the proper forum to
nullify and/or cancel the subject restrictions annotated at
the back of the titles, and, forthwith, the coverage and
documentation process shall immediately proceed even
pending the formal nullification or cancellation of the same
so as not to further delay the implementation of the CARP
over the landholdings in issue, in line with the legal
mandate of the need to distribute lands to the tillers at the
earliest practicable time (5th paragraph, Section 7, R.A. No.
6657).

November 17, 1998
EXEMPTION; WHEN LANDS CONSIDERED NON-AGRICULTURAL

When is a parcel of land considered non-agricultural and
therefore, beyond the coverage of CARP?
 Under DOJ Opinion No. 44, Series of 1990, a parcel of land is

considered non-agricultural and therefore, beyond the
coverage of CARP if it has been classified as residential,
commercial or industrial in the city or municipality land use
plan or zoning ordinance approved by the HLURB before 15
June 1988, the date of effectivity of CARL. However, the
landowner falling under this category no longer need any
conversion clearance but application for an Exemption
Clearance should be filed with the Regional Office of the
DAR where the land is located. The procedures and
requirements are detailed in A.O. No. 08, Series of 1994.

May 8, 1997
EXPROPRIATION OF LGUs
 The power of expropriation or eminent domain admits

certain limitations and procedures provided for by law. This
fundamental power of the State is essentially a legislative
function exercised by Congress which may be delegated to
the President, Administrative Bodies, Local Government
Units (LGUs) and even private enterprises performing public
services.
 The grant of the power of eminent domain to LGUs under
R.A. No. 7160 (An Act Providing for a Local Government
Code of 1991) cannot be understood as equal to the
pervasive and all encompassing power vested in the
legislative branch of government (Republic vs. CA G.R. No.
146887 July 2, 2002).

April 28, 2008
EXPROPRIATION; ONLY FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE IS
GIVEN, NOT DISTURBANCE COMPENSATION
 We speak only of disturbance compensation in cases of land

use conversion duly approved by the Department of
Agrarian Reform and only at the instance of the landowner.
There is no disturbance compensation to speak of but only
financial assistance, in expropriation duly undertaken by
the government pursuant to its power of eminent domain.
Pertinent is Section 18 of Executive Order No. 1035
(Providing the procedures and guidelines for the
expeditious acquisition by the government of private real
properties or rights thereon for infrastructure and other
government development projects), which provides that
payment of financial assistance shall be made at the time
of relocation of the tenants/farmers.
 In cases where private properties are acquired by the
government for infrastructure or other government
development projects, the implementing agency shall be
responsible in giving financial assistance to the displaced
tenants.

November 28, 2008
EXPROPRIATION; POWER OF LGU ON EMINENT DOMAIN
 A local government unit such as the province of Zamboanga

del Norte may expropriate lands pursuant to its power of
eminent domain.

January 11, 2008
EXPROPRIATION; AUTHORITY OF PRIVATE PARTIES TO

ACQUIRE LANDHOLDINGS INTENDED FOR PUBLIC PURPOSE
May private parties compulsory acquire landholdings
intended for public purposes?
 Though the subject landholdings are covered under the

agrarian program it is believed that there is no obstacle for
the Pampanga Delta Development project to compulsory
acquire the affected landholdings as the intended purpose
is for public welfare which is paramount over and above the
interest of the few. The acquisition can be done either by
tendering to the landowner the value of the subject
property or by instituting expropriation proceedings should
the landowner refuse to part their landholdings or being
willing but cannot agree to the conditions of the transfer.
However, the payment of the purchase price provided under
Section 14 of Executive Order No. 1035 should only be
extended to bona fide farmer-beneficiary owning such land
by virtue of an Emancipation Patent issued by the DAR, free
from all liens and encumbrances. If the land is not yet
covered by an Emancipation Patent but the farmer-
beneficiary is still amortizing the same with the Land Bank,
payment shall be made by the government, implementing
agency/instrumentality to the landowner, or the Land Bank,
as the case may be: Provided, further, that the farmer-
beneficiary shall be entitled to the financial assistance
provided for under Section 18 thereof.

January 21, 1997
EXPROPRIATION; AUTHORITY OF THE PRESIDENT UNDER CA

NO. 539
Is the President of the Philippine authorized to acquire

private lands for resale to bona fide tenants or private
individual?
 Section 1 of CA No. 539 provides:

"Section 1. The President of the
Philippines is authorized to acquire private lands
or any interest therein, through purchase or
expropriation, and to subdivide the same into
home lots or small farms for resale at reasonable
prices and under such conditions as he may fix to
their bona fide tenants or occupants or to private
individual who will work the lands themselves and
who are qualified to acquire and own lands in the
Philippines.

May 8, 1996
EXPROPRIATION; PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES
 Executive Order No. 1035 provides the procedure and

guidelines for the expedition acquisition by the government
of private real properties or right thereon for infrastructure
and other government development project. Section 6
thereof states:
"Section 6. Acquisition Through Negotiated

Sale. — As an initial step, the government
agency/instrumentality concerned shall negotiate with
the owner of the land that is needed for the project for
the purchase of said land, including improvements
thereon. In the determination of the purchase price to
be paid, the Ministry of Finance and
Provincial/City/Municipal Assessors shall extend full
assistance and coordinate with personnel of the
government implementing agency concerned in the
valuation of lands and improvements thereon taking
into consideration the current and fair market value
declared by the owner or administrator of the land, or
such current market value as determined by the
assessor, whichever is lower, prior to the negotiation."
November 3, 2006
EXPROPRIATION; PROPERTY COVERED BY OPERATION

LAND TRANSFER
 Section 14 thereof provides that in case the land acquired is

covered by the Operation Land Transfer of the Ministry of
Agrarian Reform under P.D. No. 26, payment of the
purchase price shall be made by the implementing
agency/instrumentality concerned to the farmer-beneficiary
owning such land by virtue of an emancipation patent
issued by the Ministry of Agrarian Reform, free from all liens
and encumbrances. If the land is not covered by an
emancipation patent, or even if covered by an emancipation
patent by the farmer-beneficiary is still amortizing the same
with the Land Bank, payment shall be made by the
government implementing agency/instrumentality to the
landowner, or the Land Bank, as the case may be: Provided,
That any amortization payments made by the farmer-
beneficiary to the landowner, or the Land Bank, as the case
may be, shall be deducted by the government implementing
agency/instrumentality from the purchase price and shall be
paid to the farmer-beneficiary: Provided, further, That the
farmer-beneficiary shall be entitled to the financial
assistance provided for under Section 18 hereof.

November 3, 2006
EXPROPRIATION; PURPOSE IS FOR PUBLIC USE
 Pursuant to the Supreme Court ruling in the Province of

Camarines Sur vs. CA (222 SCRA 173, 17 May 1993), a local
government unit, a municipality in this case, can
expropriate agricultural lands under the power of eminent
domain, for public use or public purposes. It must be
stressed, however, that the expropriation would indeed
satisfy the constitutional requirement of public use or
public purpose, and that the subject agricultural lands are
not to be owned by the municipality in its proprietary
capacity actually and primarily intended for profit or
pecuniary purposes, otherwise, it would partake of the
nature of a private endeavor where the provisions of DAR
rules on conversion will apply.

October 8, 2009
EXPROPRIATION; PURPOSE IS FOR PUBLIC USE OR

WELFARE
 The government can, nonetheless, expropriate agricultural

lands if the intended purpose is for public use or welfare as
held by the Supreme Court in the case of Province of
Camarines Sur vs. Court of Appeals (222 SCRA 173) and in
accordance with Presidential Administrative Order No. 50,
series of 1999 (Guidelines for the Acquisition of Certain
Parcels of Private Land Intended For Public Use Including
the Right-Of-Way Easement of Several Public Infrastructure
Projects). It should, however, be limited to such area
actually needed for the purpose and there must be a
showing that the entire area proposed to be transferred is
necessary for use of the AFCS in order for DAR Approval to
be granted.

June 13, 2006
EXPRORIATION; JUST COMPENSATION, INDESPENSABLE

 This Office is of the view that just compensation must still
be paid even if the ARBs have not yet fully paid the
amortization with the proper agency because of the
principle under the Constitution that "private property shall
not be taken for public use without payment of just
compensation." Thus, just compensation is indispensable in
an expropriation of the property for public purpose.

November 3, 2006
F
FARMER'S ASSISTANCE; EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 1035, SECTION
18 — FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO DISPLACED
TENANTS/OCCUPANTS
What is the mandate of E.O. No. 1035, Section 16?
 Section 18, E.O. No. 1035 – Financial Assistance to

Displaced Tenants/Occupants. The Amount of financial
assistance to be given to tenants/farmers of agricultural
lands which is to be determined by the implementing
agency concerned in consultation with appropriate
agencies, shall be equivalent to the value of the gross
harvest for one year on the principal and secondary crops
of the area acquired, based on the average annual gross
harvest for the last three preceding crop years. Provided,
that in no case shall the financial assistance be less than
P15,000.00 per hectare.
 Thus, applying the above provision of law, a displaced
tenant/farmworkers affected by the expropriation of a
portion of agricultural land subject of a proposed
construction of Diversion Road shall accordingly be given
financial assistance as set forth therein.

April 30, 1998
FARMLOT; AUTHORITY OF LGU TO AWARD FARMLOT
Does the local government unit have the authority to

expropriate farmlot?
 Although we cannot prevent the local government unit from

filing a case for expropriation, we believe that the award of
the farmlots in favor of the beneficiaries, having been made
pursuant to the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program of
the government holds precedence over the expropriation
thereof for purposes of deer farming by the local
government. Besides, local government units have no
inherent power of eminent domain and can exercise it only
when expressly authorized by the legislature. Such power
being merely delegated must be clearly expressed, either in
the law conferring the power or in other legislations
(Province of Camarines Sur vs. Court of Appeals, 222 SCRA
173).

February 23, 1998
FARMWORKERS; AS BENEFICIARIES OF CARP
Can farmworkers qualify as beneficiaries?
 Farmworkers can qualify as beneficiaries if they are found

to be directly working on the land, whether as regular,
seasonal or other farmworkers at the time the field
implementors conduct actual investigation and
documentation and they meet the basic qualifications
under Section 22 of R.A. No. 6657. As a general rule,
acquired commercial farms shall be distributed to qualified
beneficiaries based on the order of priority prescribed
under Section 22. Those who have worked longest on the
land shall be given preference.

July 23, 1999
FARMWORKERS; FARMWORKER WHO BECOMES TENANT OF THE

LAND HE TILLS
Is it prejudicial to the overseer in the event farmworker

becomes tenants?
 In Nipolo vs. Jancian, CA-G.R. No. 04605-R, September 22,

1976, the Court of Appeals had an occasion to rule that the
overseer is an extension of the personality and authority of
the owner. Therefore, as such, there will be no prejudice to
the overseer in the event that the farmworker becomes a
tenant of the land he tills since the contract of an overseer
is different from the contract of a tenant. This rule is
without prejudice, however, if it could be duly established
that aside from being an overseer, he himself is a tenant in
his own right based on the foregoing premises and
requisites as declared by competent authority.

April 23, 1998
FEES AND CHARGES; COURT CERTIFICATION EXEMPT
Is court certification included in the exemption provided

under Section 66 of R.A. No. 6657?
 Section 66 of R.A. No. 6657 includes and contemplates

exemptions from payment of court certification considering
that such court certification as a requirement in Claim
Compensation Folders documentation is a necessary
preliminary step in the transfer of lands acquired by the
government for distribution to qualified beneficiaries.
DAR OPINION NO. 66 (b), s. 1997

June 26, 1997
FEES; EXEMPTION FROM PAYMENT OF TAXES
Is exemption from payment of taxes also include payment

of registration fees and all other fees for the conveyance
or transfer thereof?
 Section 66 of CARL provides: "Transaction under this Act

involving a transfer of ownership, whether from natural or
juridical persons, shall be exempted from taxes arising from
capital gains. These transactions shall also be exempted
from the payment of registration fees, and all other taxes
and fees for the conveyance or transfer thereof; Provided,
that all arrearages in real property taxes, without penalty or
interest shall be deductible from the compensation to
which the owner may be entitled.

October 25, 1994
FEES; EXEMPTION FROM TAXES AND FEES; INTENT OF CARL
What is the intent of the law in providing for exemptions

from taxes and fees of Land Transfers under CARP?
 The intent of the law in providing for said exemption is to

free the beneficiaries of CARL from the burden of paying the
same prior to the transfer of their awarded lots in their
names.

June 7, 1996
What does Section 66 of CARL provides?
 Section 66 of CARL exempts from taxes and fees all

documents and certifications issued by all government
agencies and instrumentalities which are required for the
processing of the land transfer claim and strictly for CARP
implementation.

November 28, 1995
FEES; PAYMENT OF REGISTRATION FEES
Does exemption from payment of taxes also include

payment of registration fees and all other fees for the
conveyance or transfer thereof?
 Section 66 of RA 6657 clearly provides that "Transactions

under this Act involving a transfer of ownership, whether
from natural or juridical person, shall be exempted from
taxes arising from capital gains. These transactions shall
also be exempted from the payment of registration fees,
and all other taxes and fees for the conveyance or transfer
thereof; Provided, that all arrearages in real property taxes
without penalty or interest shall be deductible from the
compensation to which the owner may be entitled."

December 13, 1996

July 6, 1994
FINAL AND EXECUTORY ORDER ISSUED BY THE DAR

SECRETARY; IMPLEMENTATION THEREOF
Is the Regional Director tasked to implement final and

executory DAR Orders involving cases within his Region?
 Executive Order No. 129-A provides that the Regional Office

within its administrative region is responsible for the
implementation of laws, policies, plans, programs, projects,
rules and regulations of the Department. Moreover,
Department M.C. No. 10, series of 1994 provides that the
Order/Resolution of cases arising from the Administrative
Implementation of Agrarian Reform Law issued by the
Secretary shall be sent to the field office for purposes of
implementation. It is therefore clear that the Regional
Director is tasked to implement final and executory DAR
Orders/Resolutions involving cases within his region.

December 11, 1995
FORECLOSED AGRICULTURAL LANDS; MAY BE DISPOSED OF TO

THIRD PERSONS; TO BE EVENTUALLY COVERED UNDER CARP
May foreclosed agricultural lands be disposed of to third

persons?
 Under DAR M.C. No. 05, Series of 1996, DBP can directly
dispose of their foreclosed assets to third persons, anyway,
subject property is still within the coverage of CARP.
 R.A. No. 7881 was enacted to afford GFIs the right to
dispose of their foreclosed agrilands to third persons. Such
being the case, we are of the view that DAR has to respect
the transaction to be undertaken by the GFIs and the
qualified buyer/bidder by issuing, without unduly imposing
any condition or qualification, a DAR Clearance for its
registration, after all, the same regardless of area is still
within the coverage of CARP.
 A GFI could sell its foreclosed agricultural lands to third
persons pursuant to Section 6 of R.A. No. 7881 with the
corresponding DAR clearance and registration thereof to be
allowed and accorded as a matter of course subject,
however, to the eventual coverage of said landholdings
under CARP irrespective of the aggregate agricultural
landholdings of the winning bidder/buyer after the
transaction (i.e., whether it be less or more than 5 (five)
hectares).

May 22, 1998
FORECLOSED ASSET; PUBLIC BIDDING OVER FORECLOSED

AGRICULTURAL LAND?
Is public bidding necessary over foreclosed agricultural

land?
 It is submitted that all the aforesaid provisions of law when

taken together would obviously connote that any financial
institution, such as the DBP, may validly conduct a public
bidding over their foreclosed agricultural land. However,
since said properties fall under CARP coverage, the same
shall still be acquired by the government through DAR for
distribution to qualified farmer-beneficiaries pursuant to the
provisions of R.A. 6657 (Sec. 16 and 71), DAR
Administrative Order No. 2, Series of 1997 and
Memorandum Circular No. 5, Series of 1996.

January 14, 1998
FORECLOSED ASSETS; COMPULSORY TRANSFER AND

ACQUISITION THEREOF
Are foreclosed assets subject of compulsory acquisition

under CARL?
 A mere administrative order could not prevail over a

substantive law. However, pertinent to the issue you
brought before us are the provisions of Section 25 of
Republic Act No. 337 (General Banking Act) which provides
that acquired assets and mortgaged properties foreclosed
by the mortgagee banks shall be disposed of within a period
of five (5) years after foreclosure; and Section 71 of R.A. No.
6657 which provides that "Banks and other financial
institutions allowed by law to hold mortgage rights or
security interest in agricultural lands to secure loans and
other obligations of borrowers, may acquire title to these
mortgaged properties, regardless of area, subject to
and acquisition as prescribed under Section 16 of this Act."
The aforecited provisions of laws were only clarified by
DAR Administrative Order No. 02, Series of 1997 which
provides in its Policy Statement (III.B and D) the following,
quote:
"The Creditor is considered a lien-holder

and/or mortgagee if as of the date the land
transfer claim was received by the Land Bank of
the Philippines (LBP) from the Department of
Agrarian Reform (DAR):
1. The mortgage on the property is still
existing; or
2. The mortgage on the property has
been foreclosed and the period of redemption has
not yet expired; or
3. When there is as yet no
consolidation of title of the mortgaged property
even if the redemption has expired.

March 25, 1999
FORECLOSED ASSETS; FORECLOSING BANK AS A LIEN-HOLDER
When can a foreclosing bank considered a lien-holder?

 Considering that a Certificate of Deposit had already been
issued on 06 April 1998, it is this Department's position that
as a foreclosing bank, the Rural Bank of Isulan is still
considered as a lien-holder and/or mortgagee, thus, the
property subject of the mortgage cannot be the subject of a
DAR clearance since the property is already covered under
CARP.

March 25, 1999
FORECLOSED LAND; ACQUISITION THEREOF
May the government through DAR acquire foreclosed

assets of the GFI's?
 Executive Order No. 407 is very explicit by providing that

the government through the DAR shall accelerate the
acquisition and distribution of agricultural lands, agro-
forestry lands and other lands of the public domain suitable
for agriculture. Corollarily, Section 7 of R.A. No. 6657
mandates, among others, that all lands foreclosed by
government financial institutions, all lands acquired by the
Presidential Commission on Good Government, and all other
lands owned by the government devoted to or suitable for
agriculture, shall be acquired and distributed immediately
upon the
 effectivity of the said Act on 15 June 1988. Moreover,

Executive Order No. 360, Series of 1989, enjoins all
government financial institutions and government-owned or
controlled corporations to grant the Department of Agrarian
Reform the right of first refusal in the sale or disposition of
all lands owned by them which are suitable for agriculture.

December 24, 1998
FORECLOSED LAND; CREDITOR MAY BE CONSIDERED AS
LANDOWNER
 The provisions of DAR A.O. No. 02, Series of 1997 (Rules and
Regulations Governing the Acquisition of Private
Agricultural Lands Subject of Mortgage or Foreclosure of
Mortgage), provides, quote:
"III. POLICY STATEMENT

B. For purpose of covering the properties
under the agrarian reform program, a Creditor shall be
considered as the landowner, under the following
circumstances:
1. When the title to the property
is in the name of the Creditor; or
2. When the affidavit of
consolidation of ownership or affidavit of
non-redemption of the property has been
annotated on the title.
C. The Creditor is considered a lien-holder
and/or mortgagee if as of the date the land transfer
claim was received by the Land Bank of the
Philippines (LBP) from the Department of Agrarian
Reform (DAR):
1. The mortgage on the property is
still existing; or
2. The mortgage on the property
has been foreclosed and the period of
redemption has not yet expired; or
3. When there is as yet no
consolidation of title of the mortgaged
property even if the redemption has expired.
xxx xxx
xxx
 A creditor is considered as the landowner for failure of

debtor to exercise his right of redemption and the former
has successfully consolidated in its name the title over the
property. The creditor, having gained absolute ownership of
the property is entitled to the land compensation.

February 7, 2007
FORECLOSED LANDS
May private banks sell to third parties their foreclosed

assets?
 As regards private banks, Section 71 of RA 6657 provides

that said foreclosed assets are subject to existing laws on
their compulsory transfer (that is under the General
Banking Act) and acquisition under Section 16 of said Act.
This means that private banks may sell to third parties their
foreclosed assets but still subject to acquisition under
Section 16 of RA 6657.

May 28, 1996

December 13, 1996

December 23, 1996
FORECLOSED LANDS; COMPULSORY TRANSFER
May banks acquire title to mortgaged properties?

 Section 71 of RA 6657 provides that banks may acquire title
to mortgaged properties, subject to existing laws on
prescribed under Section 16 of said Act.

September 28, 1994
FORECLOSED LANDS; GFIs RIGHT TO DISPOSE OF THEIR

FORECLOSED AGRILANDS TO THIRD PERSONS
May the GFI's dispose of their foreclosed agrilands to third

persons?
 R.A. No. 7881 was enacted to afford GFIs the right to

dispose of their foreclosed agrilands to third persons. In
clarification to this, the DAR issued M.C. No. 05, Series of
1996. The proper interpretation of Section 6 of R.A. No.
7881 which is the pertinent provision clarified by DAR M.C.
No. 5, Series of 1996, would be that agrilands already
foreclosed by GFIs on or after the effectivity of said law (12
March 1995, the effectivity of R.A. No. 78781) are permitted
to be disposed to third persons. It should be noted,
however, that while Section 6 of R.A. No. 7881 has the
effect of allowing the GFIs to dispose of their agrilands, the
provision does not exclude such lands from the CARP.

May 22, 1998

May 28, 1996

July 2, 1996

October 19, 1995
FORECLOSED LANDS; ISSUANCE OF DAR CLEARANCE
What is the effect of Section 6, R.A. No. 7881 on purchase

of foreclosed agricultural lands?
 Issuance of DAR Clearance will be in order pursuant to

Section 6 of Republic Act No. 7881 as implemented by
Memorandum Circular No. 05, Series of 1996. We hereby
quote the pertinent provision of M.C. No. 05, Series of 1996:
"2. Section 6 of R.A. No. 7881 provides

the following:
SEC. 6. There shall be incorporated
after Section 73 of Republic Act No. 6657 a new
section to read as follows:
"SECTION 73-A. Exception. — The
provisions of Section 73, paragraph (E), to the
contrary notwithstanding, the sale and/or transfer
of agricultural land in cases where such sale,
transfer or conveyance is made necessary as a
result of a bank's foreclosure of the mortgaged
land is hereby permitted.
The net effect of the aforequoted provision is
to allow government financial institutions to
dispose to third parties their properties which
were foreclosed on or after the effectivity of R.A.
No. 7881, i.e., March 12, 1995, under the General
Banking Act. However, since said properties fall
under CARP coverage, the same shall still be
acquired by the government through the DAR for
distribution to qualified farmer beneficiaries as
mandated under R.A. No. 6657.
As regards private banks, Section 71 of R.A.
No. 6657 provides that said foreclosed assets are
subject to existing laws on their compulsory
transfer (that is, under the General Banking Act)
and acquisition under Section 16 of said Act. This
means that private banks may sell to third parties
their foreclosed assets but still subject to
acquisition under Section 16 of R.A. No. 6657."
(underscoring and emphasis supplied)

October 5, 1999
FORECLOSED LANDS; PRIOR TO RA 7881; EFFECT
Should foreclosed assets of GFIs prior to RA 7881 be

immediately transferred to the government?
 If foreclosure took place before the effectivity of R.A. 7881

by the GFI the effect would be for the latter to immediately
transfer their foreclosed assets to the government through
DAR under EO 407, Series of 1990. As clearly stated under
M.C. No. 5, Series of 1995, the cut-off period for GFIs to be
allowed to dispose their foreclosed assets to third parties
is "on or after March 12, 1995 (that is the effectivity of RA
7881), contrary to your observation that GFIs are allowed to
dispose their foreclosed asset "on or before" the effectivity
of R.A. 7881. It goes without saying that if the foreclosure
took place prior to March 12, 1995 no sale to third parties
of foreclosed assets by the GFI shall be made, such
properties shall be immediately transferred to the
government through the DAR, whereas foreclosed
properties of private bank is subject to Section 71 of R.A.
6657.

January 28, 1997
Are GFIs and private banks allowed to sell their foreclosed
assets?
 GFIs and private banks are now allowed to sell their

foreclosed assets. In such a case, however, it is submitted
that the DAR Certification Clearance required under A.O.
No. 01, Series of 1989, is no longer necessary as the buyer
cannot legally exercise any retention right on the land
purchased.

January 28, 1997
May private banks acquire title to mortgaged properties?
 As regards the foreclosed assets of private banking

institutions, Section 71 of RA 6657 provides that banks may
acquire title to mortgaged properties, subject to existing
laws on compulsory transfer of foreclosed assets and
acquisition as prescribed under Section 16 of said Act.

January 22, 1996
FORECLOSED LANDS; SUBJECT OF ACQUISITION AND

DISTRIBUTION
 Agricultural lands foreclosed by government financial

institutions are one of the priorities that the DAR shall
acquire and distribute pursuant to the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Program (CARP). It bears stressing that if
the subject properties were foreclosed prior to the
effectivity of R.A. No. 7881 amending R.A. No. 6657, the
same should be surrendered to the government through the
DAR for coverage and distribution to qualified beneficiaries
under R.A. No. 6657 pursuant to E.O. No. 407, Series of
1990, and the necessary DOT shall be executed by the LBP.
However, , if foreclosure took place after the effectivity of
R.A. No. 7881, the LBP being a government financial
institution is permitted by said law to dispose of its
foreclosed properties to third parties. This means that a
Notice of Coverage may be issued for the compulsory
acquisition of said properties.

June 20, 2007
FORECLOSED LANDS; SUBJECT TO ACQUISITION
Are foreclosed assets of banks subject to acquisition

under CARP?
 Section 71 of RA 6657 (the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform

Law or CARL) provides that foreclosed assets of banks are
subject to acquisition as prescribed under Section 16 of
said Act.

September 16, 1994
 Section 7 paragraph 2 of CARL includes in Phase 1 of CARP

implementation all lands foreclosed by government
financial institutions.

May 25, 1995
FORECLOSED LANDS; VALIDITY OF THE SALE OR TRANSFER OF

AGRICULTURAL LAND
Is the sale or transfer of agricultural land subject of the

foreclosure valid?
 DAR submits that the sale or transfer of agricultural land by

DBP's foreclosure of the mortgaged land, on or after 12
March 1995, is in accordance with law and therefore can be
considered as valid. Section 71 of R.A. 6657 provides that
banks may acquire title to mortgaged properties, subject to
and acquisition as prescribed under Sec. 16 of said Act.
Section 25 of R.A. 337 (General Banking Act) provides that
no bank shall hold the possession of any real estate under
mortgage or trust, deed or the title or possession of any
real estate purchased to secure any debt due to it, for a
longer period than five (5) years. Moreover, Section 6 of
R.A. 7881 provides that the transfer by banks of such
foreclosed assets is permitted. The aforesaid provisions of
pertinent laws clearly manifest the legislative intent to
allow banks and other financial institutions to dispose of
their properties under the General Banking Act.

January 14, 1998
FORECLOSED LANDS; WITH CLTs/EPs NOT REVERTED TO THE

LAND BANK
Do lands covered by CLT or EP subject of foreclosure

revert to the Land Bank?
 CLT or EP lands subject of foreclosure are not reverted to

the Land Bank but are reallocated to qualified beneficiaries,
if said lots have not yet been fully-paid and the 10-year
period mentioned in A.O. 8 have not yet lapsed.

August 14, 1996
FORECLOSED PROPERTIES OF PRIVATE

BANKS; SUBJECT TO ACQUISITION
 Section 6 of Republic Act No. 7881, amending certain
provisions of R.A. No. 6657, which took effect on 12 March
1995, provides that the transfer and/or sale by banks of
agricultural lands in cases where such sale, transfer or
conveyance is made necessary as a result of a bank’s
foreclosure of the mortgaged land is permitted. It can be
clearly gleaned that the legislative intent is to allow banks
and other financial institutions to dispose of their property
under the General Banking Act, especially those assets
which are agricultural lands. However, it must be
emphasized that although banks can dispose of their
foreclosed agricultural assets, they are still subject to the
aforequoted provisions of existing laws and guidelines on
their eventual compulsory transfer and acquisition under
CARP.
 DAR Memorandum Circular No. 05, Series of 1996 was

issued contemplating that the asset involved is an
agricultural land foreclosed on or after 12 March 1995. It
must be noted, likewise, that although private banks may
sell to third parties their foreclosed agricultural assets, the
same are still subject to acquisition under Section 16 of
R.A. No. 6657 (CARL), if warranted.

June 4, 2008
FORECLOSED PROPERTIES; CONDITIONS FOR ITS TRANSFER
Can GFIs transfer their foreclosed properties under

VLT/DPS?
 GFIs as juridical persons may transfer their foreclosed

properties under VLT/DPS provided that the purchasers are
determined by DAR to be the same individuals who would
be eligible to purchase the land in case the government
through Compulsory Acquisition (CA) or Voluntary Offer to
Sell (VOS); acquired the land for sale; that the area of land
to be transferred to the ARBs should not be less than the
area which the government through CA would otherwise
acquire for redistribution; and that the terms and conditions
of the VLT/DPS should not place the ARBs in
disadvantageous position.

December 13, 1996
FORECLOSED PROPERTIES; DISPOSITION THEREOF OF GFIs
May foreclosed assets of private banks be disposed to

third parties even though they are CARP covered?
 As gleaned from Section 6 of R.A. 7881 government financial

institutions are permitted to dispose of their properties
pursuant to the General Banking Act. However, since said
properties fall under CARP coverage, the same shall be
acquired by the government through the DAR for
distribution to qualified farmer-beneficiaries, as mandated
under R.A. 6657.

September 27, 1995
FORECLOSURE BY PRIVATE BANK PLACED UNDER

RECEIVERSHIP/LIQUIDATION STILL UNDER ACQUISITION
AND DISTRIBUTION TO QUALIFIED BENEFICIARIES
 Private bank's foreclosed assets, regardless of the area, are

subject to existing laws on their compulsory transfer under
the General Banking Act as a consequence of foreclosure
and acquisition under Section 16 of R.A. No. 6657. As long
as the subject property is agricultural, the same shall still
be subjected to acquisition and redistribution to qualified
beneficiaries pursuant to the provisions of the CARL.
Private bank may sell to third parties their foreclosed asset,
as a consequence of foreclosure but still subject to
acquisition under CARP.
 Even if the subject foreclosed property was placed under

receivership or liquidation by the BSP, the same shall still
be subjected to acquisition under CARL. In case said
foreclosed property was sold or will be sold as a
consequence of liquidation or receivership by the BSP, the
same will still be subjected to acquisition and eventual
distribution to agrarian reform beneficiaries pursuant to
CARL.

October 9, 2008
FORECLOSURE OF MORTGAGE; COVERAGE
Can CLOA be subject of mortgage without the consent of

the DAR?
 DAR Memorandum Circular No. 05, s. 1996 allows private

banks to foreclose assets mortgaged to them subject to
existing laws on their compulsory transfer (that is, under
the General Banking Act) and acquisition under Section 16
of R.A. No. 6657.

March 20, 1997
FORECLOSURE OF MORTGAGE; EXISTENCE OF THE

REDEMPTION RIGHT OF MORTGAGOR
Is the mortgagor's certificate of title cancelled after the

foreclosure proceeding?
 Section 63 of Presidential Decree No. 1529 enumerates the
procedures on foreclosure of mortgage, that is, judicial and
extrajudicial foreclosures. In both cases, the certificate of
title of the mortgagor shall not automatically be cancelled
if there exists a redemption right of the mortgagor.

September 25, 1998
FORECLOSURE OF MORTGAGE; OWNERSHIP NOT PARTED WITH
Is ownership parted with if property is mortgaged?
 As held by the Supreme Court in the case entitled, "Eleazar

and Elena Adlawan vs. Hon. Judge Ramon Torres" (G.R.
Nos. 65957-58; July 5, 1994), by mortgaging a piece of
property, a debtor merely subjects it to a lien, but
ownership is not parted with. Such being the case, a
mortgage is not the transaction referred to under the
aforequoted provision (Section 27, R.A. No. 6657).
Moreover, since one of the exceptions to the aforecited
prohibition against transfer is that made to other qualified
beneficiaries, the DAR sees no legal impediment in the
event the bank forecloses on the mortgage, provided the
mortgage deed contains a provision that in the event of
foreclosure, the lot shall be transferred to qualified agrarian
reform beneficiaries.

December 28, 1995
FOREIGN CORPORATION; DISQUALIFIED TO OWN LARGE TRACT

OF AGRICULTURAL LAND
May foreign corporations or associations hold alienable

lands of the public domain?
 The disqualification of a foreign corporation to own
agricultural lands is anchored on Section 7 of Art. XII
(National Economy and Patrimony) of the 1987 Constitution
which expressly provides that: "save in cases of hereditary
succession, no private lands shall be transferred or
conveyed except to individuals, corporations or
associations qualified to acquire or hold lands of the public
domain." Furthermore, Section 3 of the same Article of the
1987 Constitutions provides that corporations or
associations may not hold alienable lands of the public
domain except by lease.

June 5, 1997
G
GARNISHMENT; PUBLIC FUNDS NOT EXEMPT THEREOF
Are public funds exempted from garnishment?
 It could be legally inferred under Secs. 63 and 64 of R.A. No.

6657 and the Supreme Court ruling in the case of Philippine
National Bank vs. Pabalan (83 SCRA 595, June 15, 1978)
wherein it was declared that government-owned and
controlled corporations have a personality of their own,
separate and distinct from the government, thus, their
funds although considered to be public in character are not
exempt from garnishment. Furthermore, the High Court
likewise ruled that garnishment is the appropriate remedy
for the prevailing party which could proceed against the
funds of a corporation entity even if owned or controlled by
the government. (PNB vs. CID, 81 SCRA 314).

February 09, 1998
GOVERNMENT; TECHNICAL DEFINITION UNDER SECTION 27,

R.A. NO. 6657
Whether or not a Local Government Unit (LGU) is
considered "government" by technical definition under
Section 27, R.A. No. 6657?
 Pursuant to the aforequoted provisions of Section 27 of R.A.

No. 6657 in relation to Item II.1.d of DAR Administrative
Order No. 1, Series of 1989, it is clear that the government
(which includes LGUs) falls under the exceptions and
should not be interpreted in the light of those falling under
the 10-year prohibitory period. However, under the
aforequoted provisions of DAR Administrative order No. 08,
Series of 1995, the transfer contemplated is that which will
maintain the use of the land for agricultural production or
purposes where the buyer should not exceed the aggregate
landownership ceiling of five (5) hectares. This is to
preclude possible violation and/or circumvention of agrarian
 Thus, since the transfer of awarded lands to the government
may be allowed provided the productivity of the land be
maintained, and, considering that the transfer of said lands
appears to be through a private transaction and not through
expropriation, DAR land transfer clearance may be issued
but only up to the maximum/aggregate 5-hectare
landownership ceiling pursuant to Sections 6 and 73 (a) of
R.A. No. 6657 and the abovequoted provisions of DAR

February 4, 2004
GOVERNMENT; THE PHRASE "TO THE GOVERNMENT" DEFINED
What is meant by the phrase "to the Government"?
 The phrase "to the Government" refers to the Republic of

the Philippines through the DAR, and said exception
allowing transfer to the Government is to enable it to
reallocate the farmlot to another beneficiary for the
purpose of production in case the need arises.

September 5, 1994
How is term "Government" interpreted in relation with

Section 27 of R.A. No. 6657?
 Section 27 of R.A. No. 6657 on transferability of awarded

lands readily reveals that the term "Government" is not to
be accorded a narrow or restrictive interpretation so as to
confine its application solely to the national government
through the Department of Agrarian Reform.

July 3, 1997
H
HARVEST NOTIFICATION; NO LONGER REQUIRED
Is pre-reaping and pre-threshing without notice to

landholder an offense?
 The responsibility to notify is no longer required. By virtue of

R.A. No. 3844 (Code of Agrarian Reforms) which took effect
on 8 August 1963, agricultural share tenancy was declared
to be contrary to public policy and was, thereby, abolished.
This was further strengthened in Section 4 of R.A. 6389
which provided that agricultural share tenancy throughout
the country shall be automatically converted to agricultural
leasehold. Under the leasehold system, the prohibition
against pre-threshing has no more raison' d' etre because
the lessee is obligated to pay a fixed rental as prescribed in
section 34 of R.A. No. 3844, as amended by R.A. No. 6389,
Thus, the legal maxim, cessante ratione legis cessat ipsa
lex (the reason for the law ceasing, the law itself also
ceases), applies to this case (People vs. Almuete, G.R. No.
L-26551, Feb. 27, 1976).
 As further ruled by the Supreme Court in People vs. Adillo, L-
23785, November 17, 1975, the act of pre-reaping and pre-
threshing without notice to the landlord, which is an
offense under the Agricultural Tenancy Law (R.A. No. 1199),
had ceased to be an offense under the subsequent law, the
Code of Agrarian Reforms (R.A. No. 3844). To prosecute it
as an offense when the Code of Agrarian Reforms is already
in force would be repugnant or abhorrent to the policy and
spirit of that Code and would subvert the manifest
legislative intent not to punish anymore pre-reaping and
pre-threshing without notice to landholder.

October 23, 2000
HAZARD DUTY PAY; EMPLOYEES WHO ARE ENTITLED THEREOF

Who are entitled to hazard duty pay?
 Item 2 of National Budget Circular No. 451 dated 14 March

1996 (copy likewise attached) expressly provides:
"Hazard duty pay is a compensation premium or

allowance which is generally paid to officials and
employees who, because of the nature and/or location
of their work are exposed to hazards."
 Thus, the payment of said hazard duty pay may only be

granted to officials and employees who are exposed to
physical, health, weather and/or environmental hazards
in hazardous work areas as defined/contemplated in Item
5 of NBC No. 451 and as declared/duly certified by the
agency officials concerned mentioned therein.

November 28, 2003
HOMELOT; DEFINED UNDER DAR M.C. NO. 23, S. 1998
How is homelot defined under Memorandum Circular No.

23, series of 1998?
 A homelot has been defined as a contiguous area where the

tenant-farmer beneficiary has established his permanent
dwelling with the consent of the landowner, including the
area utilized for raising vegetables, poultry, pigs and other
animals or for engaging in minor home industries (DAR
Memorandum Circular No. 23, series of 1978). Said
guideline further provides that the homelot actually
occupied by the tenant-farmer beneficiary, whether located
inside or outside the farmlot, shall be transferred to him,
provided that the area to be transferred shall not exceed
one thousand (1,000) square meters. If the area actually
occupied exceeds the maximum area fixed herein, the
acquisition of such excess area shall be the subject of a
separate private transaction between the landowner and
the tenant-farmer beneficiary.

April 24, 2000
HOMELOT; DEFINED UNDER R.A. 6657
How is homelot defined under Republic Act No. 6657?
 Homelot under Republic Act No. 6657 (Comprehensive

Agrarian Reform Law) is similarly defined as a parcel of
agricultural land used by the agrarian reform beneficiary
(ARB) as the site of his permanent dwelling, including the
area utilized for raising vegetables, poultry, pigs and other
animals and engaging in minor industries. The area of the
homelot may not exceed 1,000 square meters (DAR

April 24, 2000
HOMELOT; DEFINITION
 A homelot is defined as a parcel of land used by an agrarian

reform beneficiary (ARB) as the site of his permanent
dwelling, including the area utilized for raising vegetables,
poultry, pigs and other animals. The area of the homelot
that may be awarded to agrarian reform beneficiaries may
not exceed 1,000 square meters [Item II.A. of DAR
Procedures to Govern the Acquisition and Distribution of
Homelots Under the CARP)]. Thus, your first query is
answered in the affirmative.

February 11, 2005
HOMELOT; REASONS FOR PROHIBITION; EXCEPTION
May a tenant be entitled to more than one homelot?
 A tenant, together with his immediate farm household, is

entitled to just one homelot. Thus, strictly speaking, the
privilege of having a homelot may not be extended to any
member of his family considering that the law apparently
allows only one homelot for each tenant.
 The reason for the prohibition is that the construction of
separate houses by the child/children of the ARB-tenant
may substantially reduce the area of the landowner's
landholding. This practice is not sanctioned under R.A. No.
3844, as amended, P.D. No. 27 and R.A. No. 6657, for it
would be prejudicial to the landowner who would be facing
the realities in the future where the children and relatives
of the ARB-tenant may settle and establish their permanent
dwellings on the landholdings of the landowner.
 The only possible exception here is when the dwelling to be
established by the member of the immediate household of
the tenant-beneficiary is within the 1,000 meter area as
provided by law, and, the establishment thereof is with the
consent of the landowner.

April 24, 2000
HOMELOT; RIGHT OF TENANT TO DEMAND HOMELOT
Has the tenant the right to demand a homelot?
 The basic rule is that a tenant-farmer is entitled to a

homelot actually occupied by him, whether located inside
or outside the farmlot. The pertinent legal provisions read:
Sec. 22(3), R.A. No. 1199

"The tenant shall have the right to demand
for a homelot suitable for dwelling with an area of
not more than 3 percent of the area of his
landholding provided it does not exceed one
thousand square meters and that it shall be
located at a convenient and suitable place within
the land of the landholder to be designated by the
latter where the tenant shall construct his
dwellings and may raise vegetables, poultry, pigs
and other animals and engage in minor industries,
the product of which shall accrue to the tenant
exclusively. Xxx"
 Ministry Memo Circular No. 23, Series of 1978 (Implementing

Guidelines of LOI No. 705, entitled: Transferring of Homelot
to Tenant-Tillers who are Beneficiaries of P.D. No. 27). Par.
III, 1.C
 "For this purpose, "vicinity" or "reasonable distance" shall
mean a distance of not more than three (3) kilometers
reckoned from homelot to farmlot."
 A tenant-farmer who was awarded an agricultural lot under
P.D. No. 27 may be entitled to acquire a homelot outside
the agricultural lot that he brought or awarded to him.

March 19, 1998
HOMELOT; RIGHT TO A HOMELOT
Is an agricultural lessee entitled to a homelot?
 One of the rights of a lessee is to have peaceful possession

and enjoyment of the land. The construction of a cottage
which is incident to his right to a homelot and enjoyment of
the land is allowed even without the consent of the lessor,
provided it will not result in the substantial damage or
destruction of the land or any permanent improvement
thereon.

November 27, 2000
 Section 24 of R.A. No. 3844 expressly provides that "the

agricultural lessee shall have the right to continue in the
exclusive possession and enjoyment of any homelot he may
have occupied upon the effectivity of this Code, which shall
be considered as included in the leasehold." A homelot is
an integral part of the farm and an indispensable factor in
farm operations used by a lessee as the site of his
permanent dwelling including the area utilized for raising
vegetables, poultry, pigs and other animals and engaging in
minor industries which area may not exceed 1,000 square
meters. The tenant, including her children, are legally
entitled thereto and they cannot be ejected therefrom
except for cause as provided for by law.

February 9, 1999
What is the tenant's right to a homelot?
 Isinasaad din po sa Seksyon 24 ng B.R. Blg. 3844 na ang

isang magsasaka ay may karapatan na ipagpatuloy ang
eksklusibong posisyon sa bahagi ng lupaing sinasaka na
kinatatayuan ng kanyang tahanan simula pa noong
pinagtibay ang B.R. Blg. 3844 (Agosto 8, 1963). Seksyon
bilang 24 ng B.R. Blg. 3844, na sinusugan ng Batas
Republika Blg. 6389 ay nagsasaad ng sumusunod:
"Sek. 24. Karapatan sa isang Loteng

Pamahayan.. — Magkakaroon ng karapatan ang
namumuwisan sa pagsasaka na magpatuloy sa
tanging pag-okupa at pagtatamasa sa alin mang
loteng pamahayan na maaaring tinatahanan na
niya sa pagkakabisa ng Kodigong ito, na
ipalalagay na kasama sa pamumuwisan."

October 28, 1999
Who may be granted homelot?
 Pursuant to Administrative Order No. 12, Series of 1991, an

agrarian reform beneficiary (ARB) under the CARP may be
awarded the homelot he actually occupies if it is subject of
land distribution under the Program, provided said homelot
does not form part of the retained area of the landowner.

April 8, 1998
Should the homelot be within the landholding being tilled
by the agricultural lessee?
 If the tenant chooses to remain in the retained area, he

shall be considered a leaseholder and shall lose his right to
be a beneficiary under R.A. No. 6657 (Sec. 6, par. 2). In this
instance, the homelot actually occupied by the agricultural
lessee shall be considered included in the leasehold.
Hence, said homelot being an integral part of his farm and
is an indispensable factor in his farm operation may be
located within the retained area where the landholding he
is tilling is as it is likewise located.

April 8, 1998
What is the agricultural lessee's right to a homelot?
 The basic rule is that an agricultural lessee is entitled to a

homelot. Section 24 of R.A. No. 3844, as amended provides:
"Right to a homelot – The agricultural lessee

shall have the right to continue in the exclusive
possession and enjoyment of any homelot he may
have occupied upon the effectivity of this Code,
which shall be considered as included in the
leasehold."
 If the residential lot claimed by OLT beneficiary are

considered his homelot pursuant to the aforequoted
provision, then he has the right to be maintained therein,
and shall enjoy first priority in the acquisition thereof,
should the same be sold.

February 09, 1998

July 02, 1996
Is homelot an integral part of the farm?
 Item No. 1 of DAR Administrative Order No. 12, Series of

1991 provides, quote: Pursuant to Sections 22 (3) and 26 (a)
of Republic Act No. 1199, Section 24 of R.A. 3844, as
amended, Section 16 of R.A. No. 6389, Sections 30 and 40
(4) of R.A. 6657, and the provisions of LOI 705 and other
related laws, the homelot, as an integral part of the farm
and as an indispensable factor in farm operations, may be
acquired and distributed to the agrarian reform beneficiary
(ARB) in accordance with the land transfer process of
CARP.
 Further, item No. II-A of the same Administrative Order
provides: "A homelot refers to a parcel of agricultural land
used by the ARB as the site of his permanent dwelling
including the area utilized for raising vegetables, poultry,
pigs and other animals and engaging in minor industries.
The area of the homelot may not exceed 1,000 square
meters". From the aforequoted provisions, it is clear that a
homelot is an "an integral part of the farm" and is "a parcel
of an agricultural land".

September 3, 1997
HOMELOTS; WHO MAY BE GRANTED
May homelots be granted to non-CARP beneficiaries?
 Only the CARP beneficiaries may be legally provided with

homelots in the landholding awarded to them. Said right is
granted under Section 30 of CARL. As regards non-CARP
beneficiaries, however, there is no legal basis for granting
in their favor homelots within the awarded lands. Section
27 of CARL explicitly prohibits the transfer of the awarded
land or a portion thereof within ten years from award
except through hereditary succession or to the government
or to the Land Bank of the Philippines or to other qualified
beneficiaries. It follows that no transfer of the homelot in
favor of non-CARP beneficiaries can be legally effected.

December 22, 1995
HOMESTEAD LAND; NOT THE SAME AS FREE PATENT LAND
Are homestead lands considered in the determination of

total landholdings?
 Homestead land is not the same as free patent land. While

its disposition are governed by CA 141 (Public Land Act),
they are treated differently. Notably, they differ in the
manner of acquisition because the law prescribes different
procedures in obtaining homestead and free patents like
the number of years of occupation/possession, area
requirement of cultivation, etc.

December 13, 1996
HOMESTEAD LAND; WHEN RETAINED, CONDITIONS FOR ITS

EXEMPTION
When may a land covered by a Homestead Patent be

retained?
 A homestead may be retained if it is established that it is

untenanted as of 15 June 1988 and the homesteader or his
heirs were in cultivation as of said date and will continue to
cultivate the same. Note that a field determination and
report on non-tenancy must be made, in addition to the
BARC Certification already issued.
September 16, 1994
What are the conditions for the exemption of homestead

lands from Operation Land Transfer?
 The applicable provision of law and guideline are Section 6

of R.A. No. 6657 and DAR Memorandum Circular No. 4,
Series of 1991, entitled: "Guidelines Governing Agricultural
Lands Covered by Homestead Patents Pursuant to the
Public Land Act (Commonwealth Act No. 141)". DAR's policy
as regards Homestead Patents is laid down under Section 6
of R.A. No. 6657 which provides that agricultural lands
covered by Homestead Patents shall not be covered under
CARP if the following conditions are present:
1. The original homestead grantee or his/her

direct compulsory heir still owns the land at the time of
the effectivity of R.A. No. 6657 (15 June 1988); and
2. The original homestead grantee, or his/her
direct compulsory heirs, was cultivating the land as of 15
June 1988 and continues to cultivate the same.
(underscoring and emphasis supplied)
 The two (2) abovementioned conditions must concur,

otherwise, the homestead will not be exempt from
Operation Land Transfer (P.D. No. 27) or CARP coverage
(R.A. No. 6657) but the grantee or his/her heir(s) may retain
seven (7) or five (5) hectares, as the case may be. Under
either, however, the security of tenure of the farmers and
farmworkers shall be respected (Section 6, R.A. No. 6657).

September 8, 1999
Is the disposition of a homestead land in favor of qualified

ARBs through VLT be legally feasible under RA 6657?
 It is evident that the disposition of a homestead land in
favor of qualified agrarian reform beneficiaries through the
Voluntary Land Transfer Scheme is legally feasible both
under the spirit and intent of C.A. No. 141 and R.A. No. 6657
regardless of the date of transfer, for the same falls under
the exception to the aforementioned rules on prohibitory
periods. Consequently, registration must perforce and of
necessity eventually follow as a matter of course.

March 05, 1998
Are lands covered by Homestead Patents be the subject of

disposition or mortgage?
 While Sec. 118 of Commonwealth Act 141 (Public Land Act)

as amended expressly prohibits the disposition of
homestead lands without the approval of DENR Secretary
within twenty-five (25) years from the issuance of the title,
the same admits of exception as clearly provided under the
very same provision of law itself (Sec. 118) when it initially
states, quote: "except in favor of the Government or any of
its branches, units or institutions, lands acquired under free
patents or homestead provisions shall not be subject to
encumbrance or alienation xxx".
 While VLT is a direct transfer from the landowner to the

beneficiary and not to the government per se, the spirit and
intent of Sec. 118 of C.A. No. 141 is nonetheless sufficiently
complied with. It must be noted that under the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program, the government
covers or acquires agricultural lands which likewise include
homestead lands under certain conditions (Paragraph 1,
Section 6 of R.A. No. 6657 and DAR M.C. No. 4, S. of 1991)
for distribution to qualified beneficiaries. In agrarian reform,
the ultimate beneficiaries are therefore the ARBs
themselves, thus, transfer of homestead lands through the
VLT scheme may also be deemed contemplated within the
exclusionary clause of Section 118 of C.A. No. 141, as
earlier quoted. Accordingly, the above prohibition is not
absolute so as to practically restrict all kinds of disposition.
 Sec. 27 of R.A. No. 6657 expressly provides "lands acquired
by beneficiaries under this Act may not be sold, transferred
or conveyed except through hereditary succession, or to
the government, or the LBP, or to other qualified
beneficiaries for a period of ten (10) years." From the
aforequoted provision of law and by relative application,
clearly, what the law seeks to prevent is the indiscriminate
disposition made by awardees in favor of third person and
does not in any way include disposition made in favor of
qualified beneficiaries since they are excepted from the
aforequoted prohibition of law.

March 5, 1998
HOMESTEAD PATENTS; AS COLLATERAL
May homestead patent be accepted as a collateral?
 When the property has been determined by DAR to be

exempt as a homestead pursuant to Section 6 of CARL, the
same may be accepted as collateral and foreclosure is
legally feasible, subject, however, to the condition under
Section 73 (a) of CARL that the transferee should not own
more than the 5-hectare landownership ceiling, including
the property acquired.

October 16, 1995
HOMESTEAD; CONDITIONS BEFORE AGRICULTURAL

LANDS COVERED BY HOMESTEAD BE EXEMPTED FROM
CARP COVERAGE
Reform Law) in relation to DAR Memorandum Circular No.
04, Series of 1991 [Guidelines Governing Agricultural Lands
Covered by Homestead Patents Pursuant to the Public Land
Act (Commonwealth Act No. 141)] provides two (2)
conditions that must be met in order that agricultural lands
covered by homestead may be exempted from CARP
coverage. The first condition is that the original homestead
grantee or his/her direct compulsory heir (s) still owns the
land at the time of the effectivity of R.A. No. 6657 on 15
June 1988. And secondly, the original homestead grantee or
his/her direct compulsory heir (s) was cultivating the land
as of 15 June 1988 and continues to cultivate the same.
Both conditions must concur in order that homestead lands
may be exempted from CARP coverage, otherwise, they
shall be covered.

July 22, 2005
HOMESTEAD; DIRECT COMPULSORY HEIR
Who is considered a direct compulsory heir?
 The term "direct compulsory heir" is understood to mean

the surviving spouse of the original homestead grantee or
his children and descendants or illegitimate children who
must prove their filiation in accordance with the provisions
of the Family Code. In the absence of all the foregoing, the
surviving parents of said original homestead grantee shall
be considered. Moreover, since the law does not
distinguish, there is no limit as to degree of filiation.

June 22, 1994
HOMESTEAD; ISSUANCE OF THE NEW TCT SHALL CANCEL
THE ORIGINAL HOMESTEAD PATENT TITLE
 The subsequent transfer of title shall be in the form of a

Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) which shall be issued by
the Land Registration Authority after the compliance of the
formalities prescribed by law. The issuance of the new TCT
shall cancel the original homestead patent title.
 The subsequent transfer of title of the homestead does not
change it from being a homestead. Homestead laws were
designed to distribute disposable agricultural lots of the
State to land-destitute citizens for their home and
cultivation. It aims to preserve and keep in the family of the
homesteader that portion of public land which the State
had gratuitously given to him.

January 27, 2006
HOMESTEAD; MEANING OF DIRECT COMPULSORY HEIR
 The term "direct compulsory heir" is understood to mean

the surviving spouse of the original homestead grantee or
his children and descendants or illegitimate children who
must prove their filiation in accordance with the provisions
of the Family Code.

July 22, 2005
HOMESTEAD; WHEN MAY BE EXEMPTED FROM CARP COVERAGE
What are the conditions that must be met in order that

agricultural lands covered by Homestead may be
exempted from CARP coverage?
 Section 6 of R.A. No. 6657 in relation to DAR Memorandum
Circular No. 4, Series of 1991 provides for two (2)
conditions that must be met in order that agricultural lands
covered by Homestead may be exempted from CARP
coverage. The first condition is that the original homestead
grantee or his/her direct compulsory heir (s) still own the
land at the time of the effectivity of R.A. No. 6657 on 15
June 1988. Secondly, the original homestead grantee or
his/her direct compulsory heirs was cultivating the land as
of 15 June 1988 and continues to cultivate the same. Both
aforesaid conditions must concur in order that homestead
lands may be exempted from CARP coverage, otherwise,
they shall be covered.
DAR OPINION NO. 66 (A), s. 1997

June 5, 1997
HONORARIA
Is it legal to grant honorarium to lawyers of the Public

Assistance Office (PAO)
 As defined under National Compensation Circular (NCC) No.

75 dated 01 March 1995, Honoraria is a form of
compensation or reward paid over and above the regular
pay in recognition of gratuitous services rendered by a
government personnel covered under said Circular. In
general, it is paid to government personnel for additional
work rendered which is not among his regular functions
(underscoring supplied). Sections 3 and 4 of the same
Circular pertinently provide:
"COVERAGE AND EXEMPTIONS

3.1 This Circular shall cover the
following:
3.1.1 agency personnel performing or
discharging duties in agency activities or special
projects in addition to or over and above their
regular functions regardless of the source of fund;
xxx
xxx xxx
4.1 Agency Activity/Special Project — an
undertaking by a composite group of
officials/employees from one or more
bureaus/offices of a department/agency or from
one or more departments/agencies which is not
among their regular functions. An agency
activity/special project which shall hereinafter be
referred to as project shall have a specific
timeframe of not less than one month, and shall
result in an output or sets of outputs which are
not part of the regular outputs of the departments
or agencies concerned."
 On the basis of the aforequoted definition and coverage, it

can fairly be inferred that the services rendered by the PAO
Lawyers do not fall within the purview of the aforecited
NCC No. 75, Series of 1995.

November 9, 1999
I
ILLEGAL CONVERSION; WHO MAY INITIATE A CASE FOR
ILLEGAL CONVERSION
May a private individual initiate a criminal case for illegal

conversion against the offender?
 A perusal of Joint DAR-DOJ Administrative Order No. 5,

Series of 1994 reveals that it does not prohibit a private
individual from filing or initiating a criminal case for illegal
conversion against the offender. He can file the necessary
complaint-affidavit together with supporting documents
before the Provincial/City Task Force. If the Task Force
(DAR) is convinced that there was indeed an illegal
conversion of the property, then it will recommend to the
DOJ Prosecutor members the filing of the criminal case
against the landowner or developer.

December 13, 1996
INCREMENT OF 6 PERCENT (6%) YEARLY INTEREST GIVEN TO

LANDOWNERS WHO HAVE NOT YET BEEN PAID FOR THE VALUE
OF THEIR LANDS
 Pursuant to Administrative Order No. 13, Series of 1994, it

provides for the grant of an increment of six percent (6%)
yearly interest compounded annually based on the land
value as determined under existing valuation formula. This
means that landowners who have not yet been paid for the
value of their lands are entitled to the 6% increment in
addition to the compensable value of the land, and this
applies to your case provided you have not yet received any
amount of compensation. On the other hand, if you have
been given the partial payment thereof, the yearly interest
of six percent (6%) compounded annually shall be applied
to the unpaid balance.

December 24, 1998
INDEMNITY OR COMPENSATION; IN CASE OF ACQUISITION OF

RIGHT OF WAY FOR PUBLIC USE
Who should be entitled to the damages?
 It is of no doubt then that when said construction of the

power lines over the subject property transpired, the same
was already owned by the beneficiaries as evidenced by
the CLOAs issued to them and registered in their names by
the Registry of Deeds, thus they should be the persons to
be paid the damages as owners thereof.

April 1, 1997
J
JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENT; OWNERSHIP IS NOT
TRANSMITTED, MERELY USUFRUCTUARY RIGHTS
 DAR AO 2, 1999, which implements Section 44 of RA 6657,

as amended, expressly provides for Joint Venture as one of
the post-land transfer arrangements available for
distributed lands (Sec. 5 [c] [i]; Sec. 7 [a]). The said
implementing rules define the parameters under which
agribusiness partnerships or arrangements involving
distributed lands may be entered into between ARBs and
private investors. It explicitly mandates that "the joint
venture shall acquire merely usufructuary, but not
ownership, rights over the land for an agreed period, . . . . .,
and that "ownership of the land remains with the
beneficiaries…" (Sec. 7[a] [ii]). It further prescribes that
"the equity participation of the beneficiaries shall be
determined based on the value of the use of the land…"
(Sec. 7[a] [iv].

November 28, 2006
JUDGMENT; EFFECT ON CARP COVERAGE OF FINAL AND

EXECUTORY JUDGMENT
What is the effect of a final and executory judgment?
 In view of the finality of the subject Court of Appeals

decision on 17 September 1990 and the considerable period
of time that had already transpired from said date, the DAR
has to abide by the aforesaid decision in recognition of the
court's authority. In the judicial and quasi-judicial hierarchy
of authority, administrative agencies like the DAR are
subordinate to the Court of Appeals of which the former are
bound by the dispositions or decisions of the latter.
 However, the decision of the Court of Appeals upholding the
judgment for the rescission of contract with damages
rendered by the Regional Trial Court does not ipso facto
spare the subject property from CARP coverage. Otherwise
stated, the property of Nieves Vda. de Saulog is not
necessarily exempt from CARP coverage by reason of such
decision. Thus, the same can still be placed under CARP
coverage subject to the retention right of the landowner
and award to her children or heirs, if qualified, pursuant to
Section 6 of R.A. No. 6657.

January 22, 1999
JUDGMENT; FINAL AND EXECUTORY JUDGMENT EFFECT

THEREOF
 In view of the finality of the Order of Exemption, the same

can no longer be reopened. Following the time-honored
doctrine of finality of judgment, every case or controversy
must come to an end at some point in time as matter of
public policy, sound practice and the orderly administration
or justice.

March 7, 2005
JUDGMENT; FINAL AND EXECUTORY JUDGMENT; EFFECT
THEREOF
What is the effect of a final and executory judgment?
 It is a time-honored rule in our jurisprudence that every

litigation must come to an end at some other future time
after the issues raised therein have been thoroughly
resolved. Judgment is the final consideration and
determination by the court of the rights of the parties as
those rights presently exists, upon matters submitted to it
in action and proceedings. It is the law's word on a judicial
controversy. Corollarily, where a final judgment of an
executory character had been rendered in a suit, the
mission of the court is limited to the execution and
enforcement of the said final judgment in all of its part and
in accordance with its express orders.

January 22, 1999
JUDICIAL CONFIRMATION OF IMPERFECT TITLE
Has the VOS offeror in the instant case already acquired

an imperfect title to the lot in issue?
 In Republic of the Philippines (represented by Opal National

Secondary Technical School) vs. Nicanor Doldol, G.R. No.
132963, promulgated on September 10, 1998, the Supreme
Court held: "The law as presently phrased requires that
possession of lands of the public domain must be from June
12, 1945 or earlier, for the same to be acquired through
judicial confirmation of imperfect title."
 From the foregoing, the VOS offeror in the instant case has
already acquired an imperfect title to the lot in issue since
his occupation of the same or his predecessors-in-interest
was even prior to July 4, 1926, much earlier than the date
set forth by law which is June 12, 1945. Such being the
case, Mr. Teodoro Salvaro (VOS Offeror) has a superior right
over one granted under the subject Presidential
Proclamation (which is generally subject to existing private
rights) declaring the said property to be within the PNOC
reservation area.
November 8, 1999
JURISDICTION OF THE DAR; ALL MATTERS INVOLVING THE

IMPLEMENTATION OF AGRARIAN REFORM
 Section 50 of R.A. No. 6657 or CARL provides that the DAR

is vested with the power to determine and adjudicate
agrarian reform matters and shall have exclusive original
jurisdiction over all matters involving the implementation of
agrarian reform. Likewise, Section 55 thereof provides that
no court in the Philippines shall have jurisdiction to issue
any restraining order or writ of preliminary injunction
against the PARC or any of its duly authorized or designated
agencies in any case, dispute or controversy arising from,
necessary to, or in connection with the application,
implementation, enforcement, or interpretation of CARP and
other pertinent laws on agrarian reform. Taken together,
said legal provisions clearly manifest the legislative intent
of empowering the DAR with the jurisdiction to try all cases
involving the implementation of the agrarian reform
program.

April 30, 1998

February 10, 1994
JURISDICTION OF THE DARAB; VIS-À-VIS THE JURISDICTION OF

THE SECRETARY OF AGRARIAN REFORM
What is the delineation of the jurisdiction of the DARAB

vis-à-vis the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Agrarian
Reform?
 By express provision of the New Rules of Procedure of the
(DARAB), matters involving strictly the administrative
implementation of R.A. No. 6657 and other agrarian laws as
enunciated by pertinent rules shall be the exclusive
prerogative of and cognizable by the Secretary of Agrarian
Reform. The decision of the Secretary of Agrarian Reform
on the matter is appealable to the Office of the President
for proper review and in compliance with the doctrine of
exhaustion of administrative remedies. On the other hand,
the jurisdiction of the DARAB is limited to quasi-judicial
functions enumerated under the New Rules of Procedure of
the DARAB.

July 30, 1997
JURISDICTION OF THE PARAD; DETERMINATION ON THE

PAYMENT OF DISTURBANCE COMPENSATION
 The jurisdiction to determine the payment of disturbance

compensation is lodged with the Provincial Agrarian Reform
Adjudicator (PARAD) in the exercise of his adjudicatory
function. This is so because it is classified as an agrarian
dispute or case which the PARAD alone could determine as
provided for by law.

June 29, 2009
JURISDICTION OF THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR
 The decision of the Regional Director shall prevail over the

decision of the PARAD. The fact that jurisdiction over the
said controversy has been vested by law with the Regional
Director, the decision rendered by him shall perforce be
valid and binding upon all the parties involved and such
shall be enforceable unless properly appealed. The decision
rendered by the PARAD, which has no jurisdiction over the
controversy, will have no force and effect.
 Cases within the jurisdiction of the Regional Officers shall
henceforth be heard/investigated therein and thereafter
resolved by the Regional Directors concerned. These cases
include those arising from the implementation of Operation
Land Transfer pursuant to P.D. 27 and amendatory and
related decrees, letters of instructions, rules and
regulations, as well as conflicts of claim in landed estates
and resettlement areas and such other lands as have been
placed under the administration and disposition of this
Department. The abovecited provision of DAR Memorandum
Circular No. 5, Series of 1987 has been affirmed by DAR

April 15, 1998
JURISDICTION; ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLEMENTATION OF

AGRARIAN LAWS
Who has jurisdiction over cases of administrative
implementation of agrarian laws?
 It is the Regional Director who has the jurisdiction over the

matter since it is an issue involving strictly the
administrative implementation of agrarian laws.

June 7, 2002
JURISDICTION; ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLEMENTATION OF CARP
Who has the jurisdiction over the administrative

implementation of CARP?
 In matters involving the administrative implementation of
the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP), such
as the coverage of the property of Isabela Cultural
Corporation, the Order issued by the Office of the
Undersecretary for PPLAO by virtue of Administrative Order
No. 13, Series of 1990 should be implemented. This finds
support under the DARAB New Rules of Procedure which
provides that the Board shall have jurisdiction over all
agrarian disputes involving the implementation of the CARP
under R.A No. 6657 and other agrarian laws and their
implementing rules and regulations. However, matters
involving strictly the administrative implementation of R.A.
No. 6657 and other agrarian laws, rules and regulations
(e.g., coverage, exemption and retention) shall be the
exclusive prerogative of and cognizable by the Secretary of
DAR.

February 20, 1998
JURISDICTION; APPROVING AUTHORITY OF THE OIC REGIONAL

DIRECTOR
Whether or not the signing of the conversion orders of the
OIC Regional Director is valid?
 Since there was concurrence by no less than the Secretary

himself (who, within the DAR, has the power to resolve
questions on jurisdiction of the approving authority) of the
designation of ARDO Renato B. Alano as OIC for DAR Region
I by way of Special Order No. 466, series of 2002
(Designation of OIC for DAR Region I), then it follows that
the signing of the conversion orders (which was in keeping
with the rationale of the issuance of Regional Special Order
No. 95, Series of 2002 signed by Regional Director Wilfredo
B. Leaño, that is, "In the interest of the service and in order
to ensure the smooth flow of operation in the region") was
in order and in accordance with Section 12.1 of DAR
Administrative Order No. 01, series of 2002. There was,
therefore, no want of jurisdiction as would warrant
revocation of the conversion orders.

December 9, 2003
JURISDICTION; CANCELLATION OF CLTs

Whether or not cancellation of CLT's falls within the
jurisdiction of the Regional Director?
 Pursuant to DAR Memorandum Circular No. 05, series of

1987 (Authorizing Regional Offices to Hear/Investigate and
Resolve), cases within the jurisdiction of the Regional
Offices to be resolved by the Regional Directors concerned,
include those arising from the implementation of Operation
Land Transfer (OLT) pursuant to P.D. 27 and amendatory
and related decrees, letters of instructions, rules and
regulations. Said jurisdiction includes the cancellation of
CLTs, as in the instant case. Unless a motion for
reconsideration or appeal was filed within the 15-day
reglementary period from receipt of copy of the Order.

June 7, 2002
JURISDICTION; CANCELLATION OF REGISTERED EP/CLOA
 The DARAB Rules is applicable when there is an agrarian

dispute between the landowner and tenants to whom
CLOAs have been issued by the DAR Secretary.
 However, when the case does not involve agricultural
tenants or lessees but it is an administrative
implementation of agrarian reform laws, it falls within the
jurisdiction of the DAR. The aforecited jurisprudence clearly
provides, thus:
"the case involving the issuance, cancellation of the

CLOAs by the DAR in the administrative
implementation of agrarian reform laws, rules and
regulations to parties who are not agricultural tenants
or lessees are within the jurisdiction of the DAR and not
of the DARAB." (underscoring ours)
 The jurisdictional boundaries of the DARAB and the DAR

Secretary through its Regional Directors on the
cancellation of registered CLOAs/EPs are clearly mapped
out. Thus, it is our considered view that no conflict exists
between the DARAB 2003 Rules of Procedure and the Heirs
of Julian dela Cruz vs. Heirs of Albert Cruz case.

December 29, 2006
JURISDICTION; CANCELLATION OF STOCK DISTRIBUTION

OPTION (SDO) PLANS
Which entity has the jurisdiction over cancellation of
Stock Distribution Option (SDO) plans?
 As to the first issue, since the SDO plan is subject to the

approval of the PARC pursuant to Section 1(b), 2nd
paragraph of DAR Administrative Order No. 10, Series of
1988, and since the Certificate of Compliance issued by the
DAR Secretary may be revoked for non-compliance with
any of the requirements of Section 31 of R.A. No. 6657
(Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law) pursuant to Section
12 of DAR Administrative Order No. 10, Series of 1988, and,
considering furthermore that SDO Agreement cancellation
is an agrarian law implementation (ALI) case strictly
involving the administrative implementation of R.A. No.
6657 and other agrarian laws and guidelines, it is therefore
the DAR Secretary, through and with
the recommendation/approval of the PARC, who/which has
jurisdiction on the matter.

February 3, 2004
JURISDICTION; CASES INVOLVING THE ANNULMENT OR

RESCISSION OF LEASE CONTRACTS AND DEEDS OF SALE
Which has the Jurisdiction on the Petition for Review of
the Lease Contract?
 It is our considered opinion that DARAB has jurisdiction over

the matter. However, voluntary methods such as
negotiation, mediation and/or conciliation shall be preferred
in resolving the issue.
 Further, it should be stressed that the provisions of PARC
EXECOM Policy No. 1, series of 1997 (Policy Guidelines on
Joint Venture Agreements Between DAR and Other
Interested Parties and on the Processing of Applications for
Lease Back Arrangements, Joint-Venture Agreements and
Other Schemes That May be Recommended by the
PARCCOM to the PARC) and DAR Administrative Order No.
2, series of 1999 (Rules and Regulations Governing Joint
Economic Enterprises in Agrarian Reform Areas) may not be
applicable since the lease contract in issue was executed
and long been consummated (i.e., 26 June 1992) prior to the
issuance of the aforementioned guidelines.
 Accordingly, neither the DAR-SSO/AVA-TF nor the PARCCOM
may evaluate and/or review the lease contract for purposes
of determining whether or not it legally infirmed, or, null
and void.

August 29, 2003
JURISDICTION; DAR HAS NO JURISDICTION TO MODIFY
OR REVOKE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT APPROVED
CONVERSION ORDER
 The DAR, pursuant to the President's power of control over

all executive departments, bureaus and offices (Sec. 17,
Art. VII, 1987 Constitution), has no jurisdiction to modify,
much less, cancel and/or revoke the OP-approved
conversion of the subject property. The Supreme Court, has
ruled: "The final order of this Court upholding the
conversion of the property in question from agricultural to
industrial has rendered the matter beyond the coverage of
the comprehensive agrarian reform law". (Rodolfo
Buclasan, et al. vs. The Honorable Court of Appeals, et al.,
G.R. No. 143280, July 26, 2000,pp. 3-4). Thus, the OIC-
Secretary of the DAR has dismissed the petition to cancel
and/or revoke the conversion of the subject property in an
Order dated October 27, 2006 for want of jurisdiction
(DARCO Order No. RCON-0610324, Series of 2006).
 The DAR, as the agency vested with "exclusive authority"
over land use conversion (Sec. 5[k], E.O. 129-A [1982]), can
determine whether the proposed project, as amplified in the
Revised Development Plan submitted to this Office,
conforms to the authorized use under the OP Decision
approving the conversion.

November 27, 2006
JURISDICTION; DAR IS NOT CLOTHED WITH THE

AUTHORITY TO DECLARE MOU AS NULL AND VOID
 The DAR is not clothed with the authority to issue a final

statement declaring the Memorandum of Understanding
between Farley Gustilo and the members of Cambuktot
Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Association (CARBA) as null
and void. A Memorandum of Understanding partakes the
nature of a contact, and as such, its validity can be
challenged or attacked in the court which has jurisdiction
over the same.

July 13, 2006
JURISDICTION; DAR'S JURISDICTION ON COVERAGE
What is the jurisdiction of the DAR?
 It is the DAR that has jurisdiction to determine whether or

not agricultural lands fall under CARP coverage. Moreover,
the determination of the exclusion of a property from CARP
coverage on the ground that the same is used for the
raising of livestock, poultry and swine-raising is governed
by DAR Administrative Order No. 9, series of 1993.

August 24, 1995
JURISDICTION; INCLUSION OF IDENTIFIED FARMER

BENEFICIARIES IN TITLES/CLOAS
 Section 2.2 and Section 7 of DAR Administrative Order No.

3, Series of 2003 (2003 Rules for Agrarian Law
Implementation Cases) provide, to wit:
"Section 2. ALI Cases. — These Rules shall govern all

cases arising from or involving:
xxx xxx xxx

2.2. Classification, identification, inclusion,
exclusion, qualification, or disqualification of
potential/actual farmer-beneficiaries.
xxx xxx xxx
Section 7. General Jurisdiction. — The

Regional Director shall exercise primary jurisdiction
over all agrarian law implementation cases except
when a separate special rule vests primary jurisdiction
in a different DAR office." (emphasis supplied)
 Furthermore, Section 1.6, Rule II of the 2003 DARAB Rules

and Procedures provides:
"Those involving the correction, partition, cancellation,

secondary and subsequent issuances of Certificates of
Landownership Award (CLOAs) and Emancipation
Patents (EPs) which are registered with the Land
Registration Authority fall within the primary and
exclusive original jurisdiction of the DARAB."
 Given the foregoing provisions, the petition for inclusion

must first be filed with the Regional Director before
resorting to the correction of the title/CLOA with the
Provincial Agrarian Reform Adjudicator.

September 1, 2005
JURISDICTION; ISSUANCE, CORRECTION AND CANCELLATION

OF CLOA
Which has jurisdiction on the issuance, correction and

cancellation of registered CLOAs and EPs?
 The Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board
(DARAB) has the jurisdiction to cancel, if warranted, the
CLOA previously awarded to BOLODECO. This infallible
conclusion is apparent under Rule II, Section 1, par. (f) of
the DARAB New Rules of Procedure which expressly
provides that the DARAB shall have primary and exclusive
jurisdiction, both original and appellate, to determine and
adjudicate all agrarian disputes involving the
implementation of the CARP under R.A. No. 6657, Executive
Order Nos. 228, 229 and 129-A, R.A. No. 3844 as amended
by R.A. No. 6389, P.D. No. 27 and other agrarian laws and
their implementing rules and regulations.
 Specifically, such jurisdiction shall include those involving
the issuance, correction and cancellation of CLOAs and EPs
which are registered with the Land Registration Authority.
Since the CLOAs covering the disputed properties was
registered with the Register of Deeds for the province of
Pangasinan on 29 November 1993 as shown by the Original
Certificate of Title No. 2077, it is the DARAB that should
take cognizance over the case upon filing of petition by the
Philippine Tourism Authority (PTA). This is without
prejudice, however, on the findings and recommendations
of our concerned field officers and the rights of the affected
beneficiaries after due investigation/ocular inspection,
consultation, and proper determination on the merits of the
case pursuant to existing agrarian laws, rules and
regulations.

March 10, 1998
JURISDICTION ; LEASE CONTRACT
Does the DARAB have jurisdiction over lease contract?
 In view of the allegation that the lease contract is a ploy to

circumvent agrarian reform, laws and the fact that as
explained in the DAR decision of 16 May 1994, the DAR
cannot rule administratively on the issues pertaining to said
lease contract (including entitlement to the fruits by virtue
thereof), the same properly fall within the jurisdiction of the
DARAB and must be raised before it.

June 10, 1994
JURISDICTION; MARKETING AGREEMENTS NOT SUBJECT

TO PARCCOM/DAR-SSO/PARC REVIEW AND APPROVAL
PROCESS

Regulations Governing Joint Economic Enterprises in
Agrarian Reform Areas), to wit:
"Section 12. Review and Approval of Contracts. — Contracts

for joint economic enterprises such as lease back, joint
venture and other schemes, which comprise all the following
elements:
(a) it will optimize the operating size for agricultural

production;
(b) the investor is the former landowner;
(c) it will require conveyance of the use and possession

of the land in favor of the investor (or farmer landowner).
shall be submitted to the Provincial Agrarian Reform

Coordinating Committee (PARCCOM) for endorsement to the
Presidential Agrarian Reform Council (PARC) in accordance
with Section 44 (a) of RA 6657, as amended by RA 7905. The
DAR Support Services Office (SSO) shall review the contract
before approval by the PARC. Optimization of operating size
shall mean consolidating more than three (3) hectares
distributed lands for agricultural production.
All other contracts without any of the elements enumerated

above, such as production, processing and marketing
agreements, management contracts, or service
contracts, shall not be required to go through the
PARCCOM/DAR-SSO-/PARC review and approval process.
However, they shall be witnessed by the Provincial Agrarian
Reform Officer (PARO) or the Municipal Agrarian Reform
Officer(MARO) and copy thereof furnished to the DAR Regional
Office which shall, in turn, forward a copy to DAR-SSO.
Contracts shall take effect upon signing by the parties.

However, in case of contracts that require PARCCOM/DAR-
SSO/PARC review and approval, they shall take effect upon
approval by PARC. In this connection, Sec. 30 (h) of DAR
Administrative Order No. 9, Series of 1998, which provides for
the effectivity of agribusiness venture agreements involving
distributed commercial farms is hereby amended or modified.
xxx xxx
xxx
Any amendment that will substantially affect the rights

and obligations of the parties or materially change the
contract shall go through the same review and approval
process." (underscoring and emphasis supplied)
 From the foregoing, marketing agreements are not required
to go through the PARCCOM/DAR-SSO/PARC review and
approval process.

February 10, 2005
JURISDICTION ; MAROs JURISDICTION ON VOLUNTARY

SURRENDER
Can the MARO issue certification that the tenants

voluntarily surrendered their farmlots?
 If the Municipal Agrarian Reform Officer (MARO) having

jurisdiction over the property is convinced that the tenants
have voluntarily surrendered their farm lots, a certification
to that effect may be issued by said Officer.

May 28, 1996
JURISDICTION; MATTERS INVOLVING ADMINISTRATIVE

IMPLEMENTATION OF CARP
Does DARAB has jurisdiction over cases or matters

involving strictly the administrative implementation of
CARP?
 The New DARAB Rules of Procedure excludes from its

jurisdiction, matters involving strictly the administrative
implementation of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Program (CARP) and agrarian laws and regulations which
are deemed to be the exclusive prerogative of and
cognizable by the DAR Secretary (Section 1(g), Rule II).

September 2, 1998
JURISDICTION; OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY NOT THE DARAB
HAS THE JURISDICTION ON ISSUE OF CARP COVERAGE
Which has the jurisdiction to issue whether or not the land

is covered under RA 6657?
 A careful scrutiny of the New DARAB Rules of Procedure,

specifically on matters pertaining to the Board's primary
and exclusive original and appellate jurisdiction, readily
reveals that the issue on whether or not the property is
covered under Republic Act No. 6657 (Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law) is an strictly administrative matter
which falls squarely under the jurisdiction of the Secretary
of Department of Agrarian Reform. Thus, since the DARAB
is devoid of competence to assume jurisdiction on the issue
of CARP coverage, it follows that the judgment rendered
therein on said particular point (not necessarily the whole
decision) is void.
 Jurisdiction is conferred only by the Constitution or by law.
It cannot be fixed by the will of the parties nor can it be
acquired or diminished by any act of the parties. In
determining whether a case lies within or outside the
jurisdiction of a court or quasi judicial body, reference to
the applicable statute on the matter is indispensable
(Municipality of Sogod v. Rosal, September 24, 1991, 201
SCRA 632). An assiduous examination of the provisions of
R.A. No. 6657 and the DARAB New Rules of Procedure
clearly show that it is the Secretary of Agrarian Reform who
is vested with the exclusive jurisdiction to rule on the issue
of whether or not the subject property is covered under
CARP.

February 25, 1999
JURISDICTION; ON COVERAGE OR EXEMPTION

Is coverage or exemption within the exclusive jurisdiction
of the DAR Secretary?
 There can be no gainsaying to the fact that the Secretary of

Agrarian Reform is possessed of exclusive jurisdiction to
rule on the issues of coverage or exemption under OLT,
retention and the like. The reason is simple. Said issues, by
their nature and character, are strictly administrative
matters. This is even explicitly provided in the DARAB New
Rules of Procedure.
 On all other litigious matters, like payment of back rentals,

the jurisdiction is with the DARAB. Please note, in this
regard, the provisions of paragraph (b), Section 1 (Rule II) of
the DARAB New Rules of Procedure.

October 4, 2000
JURISDICTION ; OVER CASES OF VOS WITHDRAWAL
 The determining criterion is the size of the area under VOS

and not the size of the area being sought to be withdrawn.
The latter is but an incident of the former.

November 15, 1999
JURISDICTION; PREJUDICIAL QUESTION
Is a pending case before the DARAB a pre-judicial question

which must first be resolved before a criminal action may
be instituted in a regular court?
 It is believed that notwithstanding the repeal of P.D. Nos.

316 and 1038 by Section 76 of R.A. No. 6657 and the
provisions of DAR Memorandum Circular No. 7, Series of
1988 (particularly second paragraph, nos. 2 and 3), the
pending case for "Peaceful Possession, Fixing of Lease
Rental, etc." before the DARAB is a pre-judicial question
which must first be resolved before the criminal cases for
estafa may be instituted or may proceed (Article 36, Civil
Code of the Philippines). Moreover, considering that the
material issues of tenancy relationship and fixing of lease
rental are essentially involved in this case, the same is
basically an agrarian matter or controversy of which the
DAR Adjudication Board has exclusive and original
jurisdiction (Section 50, R.A. No. 6657 and Section 1, Rule II
of the DARAB New Rules of Procedure).
 Considering that a case for "Peaceful Possession, Fixing of
Lease Rental, etc." is still on appeal before the DARAB, we
submit that the prosecution of the criminal cases for estafa
in the MTC should await the finality of the DARAB decision
on the ground of "pre-judicial question".

February 10, 1999
JURISDICTION; PRIMARY AND EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL AND

APPELLATE JURISDICTION OF DARAB
What are the cases or matters falling within the
jurisdiction of the DARAB?
 Kaugnay po dito ay isinasaad sa letrang (a), (b) at (g) ng

Section 1, Rule II ng Department of Agrarian Reform
Adjudication Board (DARAB) Rules of Procedure ang mga
sumusunod:
"Section 1. Primary and Exclusive Original and

Appellate Jurisdiction. The Board shall have primary
and exclusive jurisdiction, both original and appellate,
to determine and adjudicate all agrarian disputes
involving the implementation of the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) under Republic Act
No. 6657, executive Order Nos. 228, 229 and 129-A,
Republic Act No. 3844 as amended by Republic Act No.
6389, Presidential Decree No. 27 and other agrarian
laws and their implementing rules and regulations.
Specifically, such jurisdiction shall include but not
limited to cases involving the following:
a) The rights and obligations of persons, whether
natural or juridical, engaged in the management,
cultivation and use of all agricultural lands covered by
the CARP and other agrarian laws;
b) The valuation of land, and the preliminary
determination and payment of just compensation, fixing
and collection of lease rentals, disturbance
compensation, amortization payments, and similar
disputes concerning the function of the Land Bank of
the Philippines (LBP). (Emphasis supplied)
xxx xxx xxx
g) Those cases previously falling under the

original and exclusive jurisdiction of the defunct Court
of Agrarian Relations under Section 12 of Presidential
Decree No. 946, except sub-paragraph (Q) thereof and
Presidential Decree No. 815. (Emphasis supplied)
It is understood that the aforementioned cases,
complaints or petitions were filed with the DARAB after
August 29, 1987.
xxx
xxx xxx
 Sa mga nasabing probisyon ay maaaring idaing ang di

pagbayad ng buwis o renta sa Provincial Agrarian Reform
Adjudicator (PARAD) na may sakop sa usaping lupa.

February 21, 2002
JURISDICTION; PROSECUTION OF CRIMINAL OFFENSES UNDER

R.A. NO. 6657
Who acquires jurisdiction over criminal offenses under R.A.
No. 6657?
 Section 5, Rule of the New Rules of Criminal Procedure is

categorical, quote:
"Section 5. Who must prosecute criminal actions. —

All Criminal actions commenced by a complaint or
information shall be prosecuted under the direction and
control of the prosecutor. . ."
The phrase "all criminal actions" needs no interpretation, and
this includes violation of special laws with penal provisions, such
as R.A. No. 6657.
February 20, 2002
JURISDICTION; RE-DOCUMENTATION OF COLLECTIVE CLOA

(CLOA) UNDER NORMAL CONDITION
Which has jurisdiction on the re-documentation of
collective CLOA (CCLOA) under normal condition where
there is no change/correction of FB's areas or whatever?
 Please be informed that even assuming arguendo that the

provisions of DAR Administrative Order No. 02, Series of
1994 (Rules Governing the Correction and Cancellation of
Registered/Unregistered Emancipation Patents (EPs) and
Certificate of Land Ownership Award (CLOAs) Due to
Unlawful Acts and Omissions or Breach of Obligations of
Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries (ARB's) and Other Causes)
did not supersede the provisions of DAR Administrative
Order No. 03, Series of 1993 (Rules and Procedures
Governing the Issuance of Collective CLOAs and
Subsequent Issuance of Individual Titles to the Owners),
the Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board
(DARAB) still has jurisdiction in the instant case (i.e. re-
documentation of collective CLOA under "normal" condition
where there is no change/correction of FBs, areas or
whatever) pursuant to Section 1.6, Rule II of the 2003
DARAB Rules of Procedure as reiterated in Section 3.6, Rule
I of the 2003 Rules for Agrarian Law Implementation Cases
(DAR Administrative Order No. 03, s. 2003) which provide,
quote:
Section 1, Rule II 2003 DARAB Rules of Procedure
"SECTION I. Primary and Exclusive Original

Jurisdiction. The Adjudicator shall have primary and
exclusive original jurisdiction to determine and
adjudicate the following cases:
xxx
xxx xxx
1.6. Those involving the correction, partition,
cancellation, secondary and subsequent issuances of
Certificates of Land Ownership Award (CLOAs) and
Emancipation Patents (EPs) which are registered with
the Land Registration Authority;" (emphasis supplied)
Section 3.6, 2003 Rules for Agrarian Law
Implementation Cases
"Section 3. DARAB cases. The Rules shall not apply
to cases falling within the exclusive original jurisdiction
of the Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication
Board (DARAB) and its Regional or Provincial Agrarian
Reform Adjudicators (RARAD or PARAD) which include:
xxx
xxx xxx
"3.6. Those involving the correction, partition,
cancellation, secondary and subsequent issuances of
CLOAs which are registered with the Land Registration
Authority;" (emphasis supplied)
June 17, 2003
JURISDICTION; REFERRAL OF CASES
 If, indeed, said "transfer action" cases fall within the

contemplation of the aforecited provisions of
Administrative Order No. 06, series of 2000, the remedy is
explicitly provided for under Section 4 of the same
guideline, quote:
"SECTION 4. Referral of Cases. — If a

case covered by Section 2 herein is filed before the
DARAB, the concerned DARAB official shall refer the
case to the proper DAR Office for appropriate action
within five (5) days after said case is determined to be
within the jurisdiction of the Secretary. . . ." (emphasis
supplied)
February 21, 2002
JURISDICTION; REGIONAL DIRECTORS/SECRETARY, DARAB,

SPECIAL AGRARIAN COURTS
What are the cases or matters falling within the

 The DARAB has the jurisdiction to try cases involving the

issuance, correction and cancellation of Certificates of
Landownership Award (CLOAs) and Emancipation Patents
(EPs) which are registered with the Land Registration
Authority. Accordingly, questions concerning titles (TCTs)
derived from Emancipation Patents issued by the DAR,
especially if there are allegations of illegalities or
irregularities in the transfer of the subject landholdings and
subsequent alleged conversions, shall likewise fall under
the jurisdiction of the DARAB (Section 1(f), Rule II of the
New DARAB Rules of Procedure and DAR Administrative
Order No. 2, Series of 1994). The issue of whether or not the
landholdings in issue could be transferred shall, however,
be cognizable by the DAR Regional Director or the
Secretary pursuant to Administrative Order No. 8, Series of
1998 since the same involves the administrative
implementation of the agrarian reform program. On the
other hand, criminal offenses, if any, that may have been
committed in the instant case shall fall under the
jurisdiction of the Special Agrarian Courts pursuant to
Section 57 of R.A. No. 6657.

September 2, 1998
JURISDICTION; RIGHTS OF PERSONS ENGAGED IN THE

CULTIVATION AND USE OF AGRICULTURAL LANDS
What is the jurisdiction of the DARAB?
 Cases involving the rights and obligations of persons

engaged in the cultivation and use of all agricultural lands
fall within the primary and exclusive original and appellate
jurisdiction of the DAR Adjudication Board.

July 2, 1996
JURISDICTION; SPECIAL AGRARIAN COURT
What is the jurisdiction of the Special Agrarian Court?

 Section 56 of RA 6657 expressly provides that the Supreme
Court shall designate at least one (1) branch of the
Regional Trial Court within each province to act as Special
Agrarian Court. The Special Agrarian Court has jurisdiction
over two areas only; (1) just compensation and (2) criminal
cases arising out of implementation of CARP.

December 23, 1996
JURISDICTION ; TENANCY RELATIONSHIP
Are issues involving tenancy relationship within the

 Problem on tenancy relationship in the agricultural portion

of the estate is under the DARABs jurisdiction while
jurisdiction over the commercial and residential areas of
the estate is cognizable by the Regional Director or in other
words to be resolved administratively for instance, petition
for conversion of the part of the estate to commercial or
residential use.

December 13, 1996
JURISDICTION; UNTITLED PUBLIC ALIENABLE AND

DISPOSABLE LANDS
 Untitled public alienable and disposable lands are still

within the exclusive jurisdiction of DENR pursuant to C.A.
No. 141 (Public Land Act).
DENR Administrative Order No. 47, Series of

2004 provides:
"1. Pursuant to Section 13, of PD 705, otherwise known as
the Revised Code of the Philippines, as amended, I hereby
declare and certify an aggregate area of 1,547.67 hectares as
agricultural land (alienable and disposable) for cropland and
other purposes for disposition under the Public Land Act."
(emphasis supplied)
Thus, the subject landholding are still within the
jurisdiction of the DENR.
 For your further information and clarification, attached is a

copy of Joint DAR-DENR Memorandum Circular No. 9, Series
of 1995 [Clarifying and Restating the Jurisdiction and
Authority of the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) and
the Department of Environment and Natural Resources
(DENR) Over Certain Types of Lands of the Public Domain
Covered by the CARP].

February 23, 2005
JUST COMPENSATION; ADDITIONAL INCENTIVES
May landowner be granted 5% cash payments as

incentives?
 Sec. 19 of R.A. 6657 (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law)

even grant the landowners other than banks and other
financial institutions an additional five percent (5%) cash
payment as incentives. The grant of additional incentives
which is intended to ease the burden of landowners in
losing their properties negates the claim of the DAR and the
Bureau of Lands that the value of properties covered by
legal easements be deducted from the total value due the
landowner.

January 29, 1997
JUST COMPENSATION; COMPUTATION UNDER R.A. 6657
 The Supreme Court in several rulings held that the

determination of the proper land valuation to compute the
just compensation for purposes of agrarian reform under
P.D. No. 27 should be in accordance with processes under
R.A No. 6657. The more recent case on the matter is Land
Bank of the Philippines vs. Pacita Agricultural Multi-
purpose, Inc. (G.R. No. 177607, January 19, 2009).

July 20, 2009
JUST COMPENSATION; DEPOSIT IN CASH OR LBP BOND

Does full payment mean payment in cash directly to the
landowner?
 The CARP Law conditions the transfer of possession and

ownership of the land to the government on receipt by the
landowner of the corresponding payment or the deposit by
the DAR of the compensation in cash or LBP bonds with an
accessible bank (Association of Small Landowners in the
Philippines, Inc. vs. Secretary of Agrarian Reform, 175
SCRA 343).
 Thus, upon deposit with an accessible bank (i.e., Land Bank)

of the compensation in cash or in LBP bonds, it already
constitutes as compliance with the full payment
requirement. The DAR may then take immediate possession
of the land, request issuance of title in the name of the
Republic of the Philippines and, thereafter, proceed with
the redistribution of the land to qualified beneficiaries.

February 6, 2004
JUST COMPENSATION; DEPOSIT IN CASH OR LBP BOND
What will happen to all trust accounts issued pursuant to

A.O. No. 1, Series of 1993 covering landholdings not yet
transferred in the name of the Republic of the Philippines
as of July 5, 1996?
 Under Administrative Order No. 2, Series of 1998, otherwise

known as the "Revised Rules and Procedures Governing the
Acquisition of Agricultural Lands Subject of Voluntary Offer
to Sell and Compulsory Acquisition Pursuant to Republic
Act No. 6657" which was issued in compliance with the
Supreme Court Resolution dated 5 July 1996 in the cases of
Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) versus Court of Appeals
(CA), Pedro L. Yap, et al. (G.R. No. 118712) and Department
of Agrarian Reform (DAR) versus CA, Pedro Yap, et al. (G.R.
No. 118745), it provides in its transitory provision the
following, to wit: "all trust accounts issued pursuant to
Administrative Order No. 1, Series of 1993 covering
landholdings not yet transferred in the name of the Republic
of the Philippines as of July 5, 1996 shall immediately be
converted to deposit accounts in the name of the
landowners concerned.

September 3, 1997
JUST COMPENSATION; EXPROPRIATION
Are affected FBs entitled to the compensation of the

property subject of expropriation?
 Affected FBs entitled to the compensation of the property

subject of expropriation they being the new owners by
virtue of the CLOAs issued in their favor. The fact that
landowners Tay, Hermo and Encinas voluntarily offered
their agricultural properties for coverage under CARP, the
contract of sale is deemed perfected upon the acceptance
by the DAR and by the execution of the Deed of Transfer.

January 28, 1997
JUST COMPENSATION; LBP's PROPERTY CANNOT BE

SUBJECTED TO LEVY FOR NON-PAYMENT OF JUST
COMPENSATION
 There is no provision in the Department of Agrarian Reform

Adjudication Board (DARAB) 2003 Rules of Procedure nor in
any existing agrarian laws, rules and regulations that
allows the property of the Land Bank of the Philippines
(LBP) to be subjected to levy for non-payment of just
compensation.

May 9, 2005
JUST COMPENSATION; MODE OF COMPENSATION

What constitutes as compliance with the full payment
requirement?
 Thus, upon deposit with an accessible bank of the

compensation in cash or in LBP bonds, it already
constitutes as compliance with the full payment
requirement. The DAR may then take immediate possession
of the land, request issuance of title in the name of the
Republic of the Philippines and, thereafter, proceed with
the redistribution of the land to qualified beneficiaries.

June 7, 2002
JUST COMPENSATION; PAYMENTS OF OLT LANDS
What is the mechanics for the payment of just

compensation of lands covered under OLT?
 The Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) shall compensate

the landowner. Considering that landowner Marina B.
Santos is now deceased, the legal heirs of the latter will be
the parties to be paid just compensation for the land.
Executive Order No. 228 dated 17 July 1987, entitled:
"Declaring Full Land Ownership To Qualified Farmer
Beneficiaries Covered by Presidential Decree No. 27 and
Providing For The Manner Of Payment By The Farmer
Beneficiary And Mode Of Compensation To The
Landowner", provides the mechanics for the payment of
just compensation of lands covered under Operation Land
Transfer. On the other hand, if the land is covered under
R.A. No. 6657, the pertinent guideline covering the just
compensation thereof is A.O. No. 5, Series of 1998 (Revised
Rules and Regulations Governing the Valuation of Lands
Voluntarily Offered or Compulsorily Acquired Pursuant to
R.A. No. 6657).

February 11, 1999
JUST COMPENSATION; PRELIMINARY AND FINAL

DETERMINATION
 Pursuant to DAR Administrative Order No. 4, Series of 2005

(Revised Rules Governing the Issuance of Notice of
Coverage in the Acquisition of Agricultural Lands Under
R.A. No. 6657) as amended by Administrative Order No. 4,
Series of 2007 (Amendment to DAR Administrative Order
No. 2, Series of 2005, Entitled, Rules and Procedures
Governing the Acquisition of Agricultural Lands Subject of
Voluntary Offer to Sell and Compulsory Acquisition and
Those Covered Under Executive Order No. 407) if the
landowner rejects the offer or fails to reply within thirty (30)
days from receipt of the Notice of Land Valuation and
Acquisition (NLVA), the DAR Provincial Office should advise
the PARAD to conduct summary administrative
proceedings. Thereafter, in case the landowner rejects the
DARAB decision, the landowner may go to regular court for
final determination of just compensation.

July 20, 2009
JUST COMPENSATION; PRELIMINARY AND FINAL
DETERMINATION
Which court has jurisdiction to determine just
compensation?
 The matter of "just-ness" of the compensation, if raised by

the landowner, may initially be determined by the DAR
Adjudication Board but final determination thereof is with
the courts of justice of competent jurisdiction. In other
words, if the landowner refuses to accept the
compensation offered to him, the issue of just
compensation is perforce brought before the DARAB for its
preliminary determination and if the landowner is not yet
satisfied, the same may be brought before the Special
Agrarian Court (SAC) for final determination of just
compensation [Sections 16 (d and f) and 57 of R.A. No.
6657).

February 6, 2004
JUST COMPENSATION; PRELIMINARY DETERMINATION OF JUST

COMPENSATION CASES
Who may initially determine the "just-ness" of the
compensation?
 On the matter of "just-ness" of the compensation, if raised
by the landowner, it may initially be determined by the DAR
Adjudication Board but final determination thereof is with
the courts of justice of competent jurisdiction. In other
words, if the landowner refuses to accept the
compensation offered to him, the issue of just
compensation is perforce brought before the DARAB for its
preliminary determination and if landowner is not yet
satisfied, the same may be brought before the Special
Agrarian Court (SAC) for final determination of just
compensation [Sections 16 (d and f) and 57 of R.A. No.
6675].

June 7, 2002
JUST COMPENSATION; RECKONING DATE
 Anent your 6th query, the reckoning date in the computation

of land compensation of the land shall be from the time of
taking of the subject property. This was enunciated in the
case of Fernando Gabatin, et al. vs. LBP (G.R. No. 148223,
Nov. 25, 2004), where the Supreme Court ruled that in
determining the value of the land for the payment of just
compensation, the time of the taking should be the basis.
The Gross Selling Price (GSP) should be pegged at the time
of taking of the properties.

November 16, 2007
L
LAND ACQUISITION AS DISTINGUISED TO LAND
REDISTRIBUTION
 Land acquisition is a transaction between the government

and the landowner, while land redistribution is a
transaction between the government and the farmer
beneficiaries. Acquisition is validly undertaken only after
payment of just compensation, while redistribution may be
undertaken after the property has already been acquired
and transferred to the Republic of the Philippines, and that
just compensation has already been paid to landowners
either in cash or in LBP bonds.
 Section 16 (c) and (e) of R.A. No. 6657 (the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law), as amended, provides, quote:
"SEC. 16. Procedure for Acquisition and Distribution of

Private Lands.
xxx xxx
xxx
(c) If the landowner accepts the offer of the DAR, the LBP
shall pay the landowner the purchase price of the land within
thirty (30) days after he executes and delivers a deed of
transfer in favor of the Government and surrenders the
Certificate of Title and other muniments of title.
xxx xxx xxx
(e) Upon receipt by the landowner of the

corresponding payment or, in case of rejection or no
response from the landowner, upon the deposit with an
accessible bank designated by the DAR of the
compensation in cash or in LBP bonds in accordance
with this Act, the DAR shall take immediate possession
of the land and shall request the proper Register of
Deeds to issue a Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) in
the name of the Republic of the Philippines. The DAR
shall thereafter proceed with the redistribution of the
land to the qualified beneficiaries."
December 11, 2009
LAND ACQUISITION; LANDOWNERSHIP CEILING OF A

CORPORATION
What is the landownership ceiling of a corporation?
 To give merely 10% of agricultural lands to the CARP

beneficiaries is not in conformity with the provisions of R.A.
No. 6657 (the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law or
CARL). What the law mandates under said Act is that the
DAR, being the lead implementing agency in agrarian
reform, shall acquire and redistribute to qualified farmer-
beneficiaries all agricultural lands falling outside the 5-
hectare retention of landowners. In this regard, a
corporation is entitled to a retention limit of only five (5)
hectares and the rest shall be distributed to qualified
farmer-beneficiaries.

September 29, 2000
LAND ACQUISITION; UNTITLED OR UNREGISTERED PRIVATE

AGRICULTURAL LANDS
Are untitled or unregistered private agricultural lands

covered under CARP?
 DAR's position on the issue of placing untitled or

unregistered private agricultural lands under the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) is that if
there is no adverse claimant over the subject landholdings,
that is, there is no court case, then submission of
documentary and/or testimonial evidence may already be
deemed as substantive proofs of ownership. The
landholdings may then be acquired under CARP and the
landowners entitled to payment in accordance with
pertinent laws and DAR rules and regulations, as opined
and resolved under DOJ Opinion No. 176, Series of 1992.

October 16, 2000
LAND AMORTIZATION; DEPOSITS MADE BY FB TO LBP
Are deposits made by the farmer-beneficiaries to the Land

Bank of the Philippines pending final determination of land
valuation constitutes amortization of the land?
 When CLOAs were issued to farmer-beneficiaries and the

same are already registered, the only obligation of said
farmer-beneficiaries is to pay regularly and religiously the
land amortization to the Land Bank of the Philippines. Thus,
deposits made by the farmer-beneficiaries to the Land Bank
pending final determination of land valuation shall already
constitute as amortization of the land.

September 3, 1997
LAND COMPENSATION; MODE OF PAYMENT; SHALL ONLY BE

MADE IN THE FORM OF CASH OR LBP BONDS
What are the modes of payment recognized under R.A. No.

6657?
 The transitory provisions of DAR Administrative Order No. 2,

Series of 1996 expressly provides that: "All previously
established trust deposits which served as the basis for the
transfer of the landowners title to the Republic of the
Philippines shall likewise be converted to deposits in cash
and in bonds. The aforecited implementing rules and
regulations clearly provides that payment shall only be
made in the form of "cash or LBP bonds", a mode of
payment recognized under Sec. 16(e) of R.A. No. 6657 and
not by means of "trust deposits". This is in line with the
Supreme Court Resolutions dated 05 July 1996 in the cases
of Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) vs. Court of Appeals
(CA), Pedro L. Yap., et al., (G.R. No. 118712) and
Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) vs. Pedro L. Yap, et
al., (G.R. No. 118745).

February 9, 1998
Would the establishment of trust account produce the

effect of payment?
 Since the establishment of "trust account" in the name of

Salvador Encinas, Jr. did not produce the effect of payment
to extinguish their obligations, the farmer-beneficiaries are
still duty bound to pay their lease rental from 1990 until
such time that a "cash or LBP bonds", the only mode of
payment recognized under Sec. 16 of R.A. No. 6657, has
been made in the name of the said landowner. This is so
because prior to the conversion of trust deposits into cash
or LBP bonds, there could be no payment to speak of. When
the trust account in the name of Salvador Encinas, Jr., was
opened, the same produced no legal effect per se for this
mode of payment is not the one contemplated under the
law as ruled by the Supreme Court.

February 9, 1998
LAND DISTRIBUTION; ORDER OF PREFERENCE

What is the order of preference in the distribution of the
land?
 Section 22 of CARL clearly states that lands covered by the

CARP shall be distributed as much as possible to landless
residents of the same barangay or in the absence thereof,
landless residents of the same municipality in the order of
priority stated therein, with the proviso that the children of
landowners who are qualified under Section 6 of CARL shall
be given preference in the distribution of the land of their
parents.

August 8, 1995
LAND RECLASSIFICATION; DISTINGUISHED FROM LAND

CONVERSION
Are reclassification and conversion synonymous with each

other?
 Reclassification is different from that of conversion. Land

use reclassification by itself does not place an agricultural
property outside the purview of the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) since it merely specifies
how agricultural lands shall be utilized for non-agricultural
uses as embodied in the land use plan. In other words, it
merely allocates land to different activities or classes of
land uses, evolved and enacted through the town planning
and zoning process. It is not synonymous with conversion
for while the authority to reclassify is lodged with the Local
Government Unit (LGU), the authority to convert remains
with the DAR.

March 22, 1999

March 22, 1999
LAND TRANSACTION; DAR CLEARANCE A MANDATORY

REQUIREMENT
Is DAR Clearance a mandatory requirement?
 A DAR Clearance should be mandatorily required in order

that a valid transaction (i.e., one not contrary to the
provisions of R.A. No. 6657) may later be registered with
the Register of Deeds. A DAR Clearance should never serve
or be unduly construed as a validation of what is otherwise
at the outset a null and void transaction (4th paragraph,
Section 6 and Section 70 of R.A. No. 6657 and DAR
Administrative Order No. 1, Series of 1989). Concomitant
thereto, any intended sale or disposition of agricultural
lands by landowners, whether they are allegedly owning
more than or less than five (5) hectares, shall always be
subject to DAR Clearance before the same could be validly
registered with the Register of Deeds, to prevent possible
circumvention of the provisions of R.A. No. 6657 and its
related implementing guidelines."

February 9, 1999
LAND TRANSACTION; ISSUANCE OF DAR CLEARANCE; ABSENCE

OF EXEMPTION CLEARANCE, EFFECT THEREOF
Is DAR clearance required before transfer of agricultural

land be legally effected?
 The transfer of the subject 37-hectare agricultural

landholdings to the Wesleyan University purportedly for
agricultural educational purposes is violative of said
provisions of law. Under DAR Administrative Order No. 1,
Series of 1989, a DAR clearance is required before transfer
could be legally effected to foreclose possible
circumvention of the provisions of R.A. No. 6657 and its
implementing guidelines. Moreover, an application for
exemption is necessary to determine on the merits whether
or not the subject landholdings are exempt from CARP
coverage pursuant to Section 10 of R.A. No. 6657 and DAR
 In view of all the aforegoing, it could be inferred that the
possible real intent in transferring the property in issue to
Wesleyan University purportedly for agricultural
educational purposes is apparently to evade the coverage
of the same under CARP. This would in effect be a
circumvention of the provisions of Republic Act No. 6657
which should not be countenanced. Thus, in the absence of
an application for exemption, said landholdings may now be
covered under the Program.

January 5, 1999
LAND TRANSACTION; PRIVATE ENTITY CANNOT BE A

TRANSFEREE
Can a private entity be a transferee of lands?
 The NIT, if it is a private entity (unlike the PNP which is a

government agency), cannot be the subsequent transferee
by virtue of a MOA of the same nature as previously
executed. Moreover, even assuming that NIT is a
government entity, the same could neither be a transferee
if the conveyance would eventually vest ownership of the
subject area to NIT in a proprietary or private capacity.
 From the foregoing, NIT could possibly be a transferee of
the proposed area through a MOA only if it is a government
entity and the conveyance is for public purpose without
prejudice, however, to the rights of affected or potential
agrarian reform beneficiaries, if any, and the rightful and
effective implementation of the Program.

January 11, 2000
LAND TRANSACTION; VALIDITY OF LAND TRANSACTION BY

BENEFICIARIES IN FAVOR OF THE GOVERNMENT
Are transactions executed by beneficiaries covering lands

acquired under the CARP valid?
 The provisions of DAR Administrative Order NO. 8, Series of

1995 contemplate a transfer of awarded lands to private
individuals. This can be gleaned from the Policy Statement
thereof when it requires the following, to wit: a)
maintenance of the productivity of the land; b) buyer's
aggregate landholding not to exceed the landownership
ceiling provided by law; and c) imposition of the ownership
ceiling of five hectares. Moreover, the rules on validity of
land transactions (DAR Administrative Order No. 1, Series
of 1989) allow transactions executed by beneficiaries
covering lands acquired under agrarian reform laws in favor
of the government.
 In DAR Opinion No. 45, Series of 1995, we opined that the
registration of the sale of the farmlots may be effected
without prior DAR Clearance, considering that said
acquisition by NPC (though short of judicial proceedings)
was undertaken by virtue of the expropriation powers of the
government.
 In fairness to the CLOA or EP awardees whose lands shall
be expropriated, they should however still be entitled as
agrarian reform beneficiaries or awardees in other
landholdings.

November 10, 1998
LAND TRANSACTION; VOLUNTARY LAND TRANSFER/DIRECT
PAYMENT SCHEME
Whether or not the subject properties may be sold
THROUGH VLT/DPS?
 As regards your 3rd query, the subject properties may

possibly, if warranted, be sold through VLT/DPS but only to
qualified agrarian reform beneficiaries (ARBs) as defined
and contemplated under existing agrarian laws, rules and
regulations and, provided, further, that the provisions of
DAR Administrative Order No. 08, Series of 2003 [2003
Guidelines on the Acquisition and Distribution of
Compensable Agricultural Lands Under Voluntary Land
Transfer/Direct Payment Scheme (VLT/DPS)] shall be
observed.

March 2, 2004
LAND TRANSACTIONS; AMERICAN CITIZEN AS PURCHASER OF

AGRICULTURAL LAND
Can an American citizen purchase agricultural lands?
 Although Section 8 of Article XII of the 1987 Constitution

(National Economy and Patrimony) expressly provides that
a natural-born citizen of the Philippines who has lost his
Philippine citizenship may be a transferee of private lands,
subject to the limitations provided by law, the same is not
encompassing so as to extend the enjoyment of the
privilege to all classes of lands. What the Constitution
referred to in the aforequoted provision is for the former
Filipino citizen to own residential lands only. This is
apparent in Batas Pambansa Blg. 185 Section 2 thereof
which provides that "any natural-born citizen of the
Philippines who has capacity to enter into a contract under
Philippine laws may be a transferee of a private land up to a
used by him as his residence. In the case of married
couples, one of them may avail of the privilege herein
granted: Provided, That if both shall avail of the same, the
total area acquired shall not exceed the maximum herein
fixed. In case the transferee already owns urban or rural
lands for residential purposes, he shall still be entitled to be
a transferee of additional urban or rural lands for residential
purposes which, when added to those already owned by
him, shall not exceed maximum areas herein authorized."

December 8, 1998
LAND TRANSACTIONS; DONATION OF AN AGRICULTURAL LAND,

VALIDITY THEREOF
 The 4-hectare area donated to the DECS cannot be taken

from that part of the agricultural land of the landowner
which is subject for acquisition and redistribution to
qualified beneficiaries under CARP. In other words, the
donated 4-hectare portion constitutes and forms part of his
retention area.
 It should be noted that out of the aggregate area of nine (9)
hectares owned by the landowner, only five (5) hectares
may be retained by him (inclusive of the 4 hectares
donated), while the remaining four (4) hectares are
mandated by CARP to be acquired and redistributed to
qualified farmer-beneficiaries. Thus, it follows that said
remaining 4-hectare portion (which is already beyond his 5-
hectare retention area/limit) shall be covered under CARL
which took effect way back 15 June 1988 even before the
donation took place in 1989.
 Finally, notwithstanding the foregoing, the donation of the 4-
hectare agricultural property may have been tainted with
invalidity or irregularity since the same should have been
effected only upon prior issuance of a DAR Clearance
pursuant to Section 6, last paragraph of Republic Act No.
6657 (CARL) and the provisions of DAR Administrative Order
No. 1, Series of 1989. This is in order to foreclose possible
circumvention of the provisions of R.A. No. 6657,
particularly Sections 6, 70 and 73 (a) thereof and to ensure
that the agricultural productivity of the land is maintained
and not otherwise unduly or illegally converted into non-
agricultural uses conversion of which is subject to DAR
approval pursuant to existing agrarian laws, rules and
regulations.

November 3, 1998
LAND TRANSACTIONS; MAY BE REGISTERED WITHOUT DAR

CLEARANCE
What are the transactions that may be registered without

DAR Clearance?
 Item II-3 of DAR Administrative Order No. 1, Series of 1989

enumerates the transactions that may be registered by the
Register of Deeds without clearance from DAR, to wit:
1. Deed of extrajudicial partition of the property

of a deceased who died prior to June 15, 1988;
2. Deed of partition of property owned in
common by co-owners prior to June 15, 1988;
3. Sub-division of title without change of
ownership; and
4. Deed of Real Estate Mortgage executed by
the original landowner or beneficiary.
 It is very clear from the above-cited provision that the

transfer, sale, disposition and/or conveyance of agricultural
lands involving the retained area of the landowner is not
among those enumerated or contemplated therein.

September 8, 1997
LAND TRANSACTIONS; MODE OF ACQUISITION THAT AN ALIEN

CAN OWN PRIVATE LAND
Can an alien national purchase private lands in the

Philippines which include fishponds?
 No. Section 7 of Article XII of the 1987 Constitution

(National Economy and Patrimony) provides that save in
cases of hereditary succession, no private lands shall be
transferred or conveyed except to individuals, corporations,
or associations qualified to acquire or hold lands of the
public domain. Obviously, it is only through this mode of
acquisition (i.e., hereditary succession) that an alien
national can own said private lands in the Philippines.

December 8, 1998
LAND TRANSACTIONS; NO ACTUAL TRANSFER IN CASE OF

MORTGAGE
Is ownership of the land transferred in case of mortgage?
 A mortgage is a contract by which the debtor secures for

the creditor the fulfillment of a principal obligation
specifically subjecting to such security real property or real
rights over real property in case of non-fulfillment of said
obligation at time specified. This means that there is no
actual transfer of ownership over the real property subject
of the contract of mortgage, and that the ownership of the
land shall only be consolidated in the mortgagee or
purchaser upon the failure of the mortgagor-debtor to
exercise his right of redemption or upon the expiration of
the redemption period. Thus, agricultural lands may be
mortgage to banking institutions without need for DAR
clearance.
 However, the aforesaid lands could either way still be

subject to acquisition pursuant to sections 16 and 71 of
R.A. No. 6657 (if perchance later foreclosed by banks) and,
if not foreclosed, shall nonetheless still be acquired for
distribution to qualified farmer-beneficiaries even beyond
the original ten (10) year period of CARP implementation
has elapsed, considering the aforecited DOJ Opinion No. 9,
Series of 1997 and R.A. No. 8532.

March 10, 1998
Are lands not yet acquired by DAR be the subject of

mortgage?
 A Deed of Real Estate Mortgage executed by the original

landowner is a transaction that can be registered by the
Register of Deeds even without clearance from the DAR.
This is provided for under DAR Administrative Order No. 1,
Series of 1989, Rule II-C (4). The same Administrative Order
also provides that lands not yet acquired by DAR under R.A.
No. 6657 may be the subject matter of mortgage, lien or
encumbrance to guarantee any loan obligation to secure to
develop or improve the same (Rule V-1)

March 10, 1998
LAND TRANSACTIONS; PRE-EMPTION RIGHT OF TENANT
What is the tenant's right of pre-emption?

 The prohibition to dispose agricultural lands to avoid the
implementation of the CARP is explicit under Section 6 of
R.A. No. 6657 which provides that: "upon effectivity of the
law (i.e., 15 June 1988) any sale, disposition, lease,
management contract or transfer of possession of private
lands executed by the original landowner in violation of this
Act shall be null and void." Should the landowner decide to
sell his tenanted or leased land, the landowner must first
offer to sell the landholding to his tenant or lessee, who has
the preferential right to buy the same under reasonable
terms and conditions. This is in accordance with the right
of pre-emption under Section 11 of R.A. No. 3844 as
amended by Section 2 of R.A. No. 6389. On the other hand,
if the landholding is sold to a third person without the
knowledge of the tenant, he may exercise his right of
redemption, in which case, the tenant may repurchase the
said landholding at a reasonable price and consideration
(Section 12, R.A. No. 3844, as amended).
 The law does not, however, altogether prohibit the sale or
disposition of agricultural lands by the landowner if the
same is his retained area. Section 70 of R.A. No. 6657
provides that the disposition of the retained area shall be
valid as long as the total landholding, including the land to
be acquired by the buyer/transferee shall not exceed the
landholding ceiling of five (5) hectares. This, however, is
still subject to the right of pre-emption or redemption
mentioned earlier. Please be advised that in all cases, the
security of tenure of the tenant shall be respected.

December 24, 1998
LAND TRANSACTIONS; PURPOSE, CONDITIONS FOR THE

ISSUANCE OF DAR CLEARANCE
What does the PARO Clearance signify?

 The PARO Clearance for registration signifies that the
transaction is not in circumvention of CARL.

December 13, 1996
What is the purpose of the Certification/Clearance issued

by the PARO?
 The PARO issues the Certification/Clearance under A.O. No.

1, Series of 1989 for purposes of registration of the Deed of
Sale of an agricultural land with the Register of Deeds.
However, the Certification/Clearance will be issued only
upon showing that the subject of the Deed is the retention
area of the vendor and that the total landholding that shall
be owned by the vendee inclusive of the land to be acquired
shall not exceed the landownership ceiling provided in RA
6657.

December 23, 1996
LAND TRANSACTIONS; SALE OF LAND PLACED UNDER OLT AS

WELL AS LANDS COMPULSORILY ACQUIRED
 The 11.8813-hectare landholdings which were placed under

OLT and wherein thirteen (13) Emancipation Patents were
generated, registered and distributed in favor of eleven (11)
qualified-beneficiaries in 1995, the same are already legally
owned by the farmer-beneficiaries which may only be
disposed by them subject to agrarian laws, rules and
regulations and by no other (e.g., Maria Nieva Toledo who is
no longer the owner thereof), and the EPs may only be
cancelled by the DAR Adjudication Board (DARAB) upon
proper showing that the farmer-beneficiaries have
committed acts and/or omissions violative of agrarian laws,
rules and regulations (DAR Administrative Order No. 2,
Series of 1994).
 The remaining portion of 36.1816-hectares which was
compulsorily acquired wherein a Notice of Coverage was
already issued and duly received on 27 May 1997, it is
submitted that a property which is agricultural, and more so
if already subjected to compulsory acquisition pursuant to
the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law, can no longer be
the subject of a valid sale by the landowner to any third
party including government agencies or government owned
or controlled corporations without first securing a DAR
clearance.
 . . . the sale of the entire 48.0629 hectares of agricultural
land by the partial owner to the National Housing Authority
is not a valid transaction. Said sale is a clear violation of
the provisions of the Civil Code on ownership, Sections 6
(last paragraph) and 73 (a) of the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Law, and the provisions of DAR Administrative
Order No. 1, Series of 1989.

October 26, 1998
LAND TRANSACTIONS; SALE OF LAND WITHOUT DAR

CLEARANCE
Is the sale of an agricultural land covered by a Notice of

Coverage and without a DAR clearance valid?
 The DAR, as the lead agency mandated to implement the

CARL (R.A. No. 6657), can file a petition before the proper
court or forum for: 1) the cancellation of title issued to NHA
on the ground of nullity of the sale and/or fraud and; 2) the
registration of the pending collective CLOAs for
registration. The sale was a patent nullity because despite
the DAR Notice of Coverage and the legal requirement for a
DAR Clearance the landowner sold the same to a third
party, in this case the NHA, without the knowledge and
consent of the farmer-beneficiaries and the necessary DAR
Clearance, and considering, moreover, that the subject
application for exemption was likewise subsequently
denied.
 Thus, the coverage and documentation process may
immediately proceed even pending the cancellation
proceedings of the title issued to NHA so as not to further
delay the implementation of the CARP over the landholdings
in issue, in line with the legal mandate of the need to
distribute lands to the tillers at the earliest practicable
time (5th paragraph, Section 7, R.A. No. 6657 and
Sandiganbayan Resolution dated 16 January 1996, Civil
Case No. 0033, Republic of the Philippines vs. Cojuangco, et
al.).

October 26, 1998
LAND TRANSACTIONS; TRANSACTION MADE BEFORE 15 JUNE

1988
Are registered lands subject of transfers before 15 June

1988 but has not been registered within the 3-month
period required by law be covered by CARP?
 We should not deviate from the provisions of Section 6 (4th

paragraph) of R.A. No. 6657 as implemented by DAR
Administrative Order No. 1, Series of 1989 generally
declaring as null and void all transactions made before 15
June 1988 which were not registered within 3 months from
the effectivity of CARL. The only exception is where the
properties in issue are voluntarily offered for sale to the
government through the DAR for purposes of CARP
coverage (DOJ Opinion No. 141, Series of 1992).
 In the instant case, since the transactions do not appear to
fall within the abovementioned exception, no legal
impediment exists for us to cover subject eight (8) parcels
of land for distribution to qualified beneficiaries. It shall,
however, be without prejudice to the landowners' right of
retention and award to their children, if qualified, pursuant
to the same Section 6 of R.A. No. 6657 and related
guidelines. On the same vein, the mandate of law that the
security of tenure of the farmers and farmworkers, if any,
shall be respected in all cases.

September 17, 1999
LAND TRANSFER
What is the legal effect of the prohibition on alienation as

provided in Section 3 of Republic Act No. 397 on BSP's
voluntary offer to sell the land in question?
 As against a general prohibition to sell or alienate as

provided in Section 3 of RA No. 397, the provision in Section
19 of R.A. No. 397 specifically allowing the sale and
transfer of lands covered by the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Program, to which Lot No. 1 SWO 29502 is subject
to, it is submitted that the latter should prevail. Moreover,
as the earlier law, R.A. No. 397 should give way to R.A.
6657 being the more recent law.

December 22, 1998
LAND TRANSFER; BY CARP BENEFICIARIES IN FAVOR OF LGU
May CARP beneficiaries legally transfer in favor of the

local government any portion of the landholding acquired
pursuant to CARL within a period of 10 years.
 CARP beneficiaries cannot legally transfer in favor of the

local government any portion of the landholding acquired
pursuant to CARL within a period of 10 years. This is clearly
provided in Section 27 of RA 6657. Although the transfer in
favor of the government is one of the exceptions to the
prohibition against transfer within 10 years from award
found in said Sec. 27, the transfer contemplated is that
which will maintain the use of the land for agricultural
production pursuant to the CARP. It follows that any
transfer in favor of the government within the 10-year
prohibitory period for a purpose other than that
contemplated is not allowed and this was expressly
enunciated in DAR A.O. No. 08, s. 1995.

December 13, 1996
LAND TRANSFER; EXEMPTION FROM PAYMENT OF
CERTIFICATION FEES
Are Certification fees charged for the surveyed of

landholdings included in the exemption?
 Section 66 and 67 of the CARL enumerate the transactions

and the taxes and fees they are exempted from, these are
intended exclusively for the benefit of the farmer
beneficiaries.
 Certification fees being charged by the CENRO (DENR) to
private surveyors contracted by the DAR to conduct survey
of untitled landholdings are not included in the said
exemption.

December 23, 1996
LAND TRANSFER; ISSUANCE OF TCT NOT EP ON TRANSFER OF

LAND FROM FARMER-BENEFICIARIES TO THIRD PERSON
Is transfer of awarded land by a tenant idenfied as of 21

October 1972 allowed?
 Under P.D. No. 27, the original transfer of
awarded lands to farmer-beneficiaries from
the government through the Department of
Agrarian Reform (DAR) is evidenced by
Emancipation Patent. This is clear from
Policy Statement No. 4 of DAR
Administrative Order No. 8, Series of 1995
which expressly provides, quote: "If
awardee was identified as tenant as of 21
October 1972 and amortizations were fully
paid, transfer of awarded lands by the
original tenant or his heirs may be allowed,
regardless of date of issuance of
Emancipation Patent (P.D. No. 27, as
amended by E.O. No. 228)." By contrast,
the subsequent transfer of awarded lands
from farmer beneficiaries to third persons
shall be evidenced by Transfer Certificate
of Title (TCT) and no longer that of EP.
Policy Statement No. 7 of said DAR
Administrative Order expressly provides
that TCT shall be issued by the Land Registration
Authority (LRA) for lands transferred by an awardee to a
transferee (P.D. No. 27, as amended by E.O. No. 228).

March 22, 1999
LAND TRANSFER; UNDER PD 27; CONDITIONS
When may transfer of awarded lands under P.D. No. 27 be

allowed?
 Transfer of awarded lands under P.D. No. 27, as amended by

Executive Order No. 228 may be allowed, provided the

maintained;
shall be imposed.

July 1, 1997
What are the conditions before the transfer of OLT

acquired lands may be allowed?
 Although the transfer of OLT acquired lands is allowed after

full payment of amortizations, the following should be
noted:
a. The total agricultural land owned by the

transferee, inclusive of the land to be acquired shall not
exceed the 5-hectare landownership ceiling provided in
RA 6657;
b. No conversion of the farmholding for
purposes other than agricultural shall be undertaken
without a DAR Order of Conversion; and
c. Under A.O. No. 20, s. 1992 of the Office of the
President, all irrigated and economically irrigable lands
covered by irrigation projects with firm funding
commitments shall be non-negotiable for conversion.
March 17, 1994
LAND USE AGREEMENT; JURISDICTION OF DAR TO

RENEW
 The DAR may still intervene to review the results of the

renegotiation of the LUA. The jurisdiction of the DAR
applies whether or not a nullification case is filed before
the DARAB as it is the mandate of the DAR to ensure the
protection of the rights and welfare of the ARBs and their
cooperatives/association.

November 18, 2009
LAND USE AGREEMENT; SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND

APPROVAL BY THE PARC
 The DARAB's resolution/determination on the issue of

nullification must precede the PARC’s review of the LUA.
The renegotiation, renewal and extension of the contract
hinges upon the determination by the DARAB of validity of
the LUA. Thereafter, it will proceed to the PARCCOM for the
necessary recommendation before it can be reviewed and
later finally be approved or disapproved on the merits by
the PARC.
 Section 4.14 of A.O. No. 09, Series of 2006 treats of a
situation where renegotiated, renewed or extended
contacts do not have pending issues filed in any court or
any quasi-judicial body, in which event, the PARC may
outrightly review and approve the same.

November 18, 2009
LAND VALUATION; BASIS AND/OR FORMULA
What is the basis and/or formula of land valuation?
 The governing guidelines is Administrative Order No. 6,

Series of 1992 which provides for the basic formula for the
valuation of lands covered by Voluntary Offer to Sell (VOS)
and Compulsory Acquisition (CA) regardless of the date of
offer or coverage of the claim.

September 13, 1996
When is the land valuation made?
 Land valuation is made after the DAR has identified the

land, the landowners, the beneficiaries and has sent notice
to acquire the land.

September 13, 1996
LAND VALUATION; DISTRIBUTION OF REGISTERED CLOA

PENDING CASE FOR VALUATION
May the MARO proceed with the distribution of the

registered CLOAs and physically install the FBs pending
land valuation cases with the DARAB?
 Where there are land valuation cases pending at the DARAB

or Special Agrarian Court in view of the refusal of the
landowner to accept the value offered by the government or
is likewise contesting the valuation of the land, the
government through the MARO may proceed with the
distribution of the registered CLOAs and physically install
the farmer beneficiaries thereon upon deposit in cash or
LBP bond of the land value offered. The issue of just
compensation should not be a bar in the continuity of the
coverage process since the landowner may still bring said
issue before the DARAB for preliminary determination
thereof and if not yet satisfied, the same may be brought
before the Special Agrarian Court (SAC) concerned for final
determination of just compensation (Sections 16 (f) and 57
of R.A. No. 6657).
 It must be noted however that although the final
determination of the value of the land is a judicial function,
the Land Bank valuation may be contested in the DARAB,
and, unless the landowner or any party-in-interest files a
case with the SAC within fifteen (15) days from receipt of
the decision, the decision of the adjudicator/s shall become
final and executory.

October 27, 1999
LANDLESS; DEFINED
How is landless defined under CARL?
 Under CARL, landless means one who owns less than 3

hectares of agricultural land.

August 23, 1994
LANDOWNERS RIGHT TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT

UNDER THE CIVIL CODE
 The landowners relationship with the barangay-based

association finds no legal anchor in the CARL but may be
allowed based on the meeting of the minds/mutual consent
of the parties.
 It is noteworthy to quote the pertinent provisions of the New
Civil Code of the Philippines, to wit:
"Art. 1306. The contracting parties may establish such
stipulations, clauses, terms and conditions as they may deem
convenient, provided they are not contrary to law, morals,
good customs, public order, or public policy.
Art. 1308. The contracts must bind both

contracting parties, its validity or compliance cannot
be left to the will of one of them." (underscoring ours)
 As landowner may enter into an agreement with the an

association if it would result to their mutual benefit.

January 19, 2007
LANDOWNERS RIGHT TO USE AND ENJOY HIS PROPERTY
When may landowners exercise their right to use and

enjoy their properties?
 Any landowner is free to assume the cultivation of his land,

directly or through the use of hired labor, after the court
(DARAB) orders the ejectment of a tenant. This is in
consonance with the right of the owner to use and enjoy his
property.

October 29, 1997
LANDOWNERSHIP CEILING
May an FB own 5-hectare of agricultural land?
 Although Section 25 of RA 6657 requires that to be a

beneficiary under CARL a person must be landless, there is
no prohibition against the acquisition by the FB of an
additional area to complete the 5-hectare landownership
ceiling under Sec. 6 of CARL after the award to him of 3
hectares.

September 1, 2000

July 12, 1994
May a person, natural or juridical own more than 5

hectares of agricultural land?
 Under Sections 6 and 73 (a) of RA 6657, no person, natural

or juridical, may own more than five hectares of agricultural
lands. This means that a corporation may acquire only such
area that would complete the five-hectare landownership
ceiling allowed under CARL.

July 5, 1995
LANDOWNERSHIP CEILING OF FIVE (5) HECTARES; SALE OR

DISPOSITION THEREOF
 Landowners of private agricultural lands, except those who

have already been granted full retention under Presidential
Decree No. 27, may exercise their right of retention granted
under R.A. No. 6657. In no case, however, shall their total
agricultural landholdings exceed five (5) hectares, the
landownership ceiling prescribed under R.A. No. 6657.
 Pursuant to Section 70 of R.A. No. 6657, the sale or
disposition of agricultural lands retained by a landowner as
a consequence of Section 6 of said law shall be valid as
long as the total landholdings that shall be owned by the
transferee thereof inclusive of the land to be acquired shall
not exceed the landholding ceilings provided for in R.A. No.
6657
December 14, 1999
LANDOWNERSHIP CEILING; THE WORD PERSON

DEFINED
 Section 6 of R.A. No. 6657 (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform

Law of 1988), as amended, provides that no person may
own or retain any public or private agricultural land
exceeding five (5) hectares.
 The word "person" in the aforementioned provision refers
not only to natural persons but also juridical persons, such
as a JVC. Hence, the JVC may only acquire agricultural
land within the prescribed limits and apply for its
conversion to non-agricultural uses, subject to existing
guidelines on land use conversion.

September 20, 2010
LANDOWNERSHIP CEILING; DISPOSITION THEREOF
May a landowner dispose of his property to third person?
 The disposition of agricultural land (assuming it is your

retention) is valid as long as the total landholding that shall
be owned by the transferee thereof inclusive of the land to
be acquired shall not exceed the landholding ceiling
provided in R.A. No. 6657. As far as DAR is concerned,
where all the documentary requirements for Application for
DAR Clearance are submitted to DAR and the land
transaction is thereafter evaluated to be not in violation of
the provisions of R.A. No. 6657 and its implementing
guidelines, a DAR Clearance shall be issued which in effect
clears the transfer as regular and valid.

December 14, 1999
LANDOWNERSHIP CEILING; LIMIT UNDER SECTION 6 OF RA No.

6657
Is the term "landholding ceilings" expressly provided under

Section 70 refer to award to beneficiaries?
 Section 70 expressly covers the sale or disposition of

retained areas, hence, the term "landholding ceilings" as
used therein does not refer to award to beneficiaries but to
the 5-hectare landownership limit under Section 6 of RA
6657.

July 13, 1994
LANDOWNERSHIP CEILING; LIMITATON PROVIDED BY

LAW APPLICABLE TO CORPORATION
 Agrarian laws do not prohibit the creation of a corporation

involving an agricultural land. However a corporation is
bound by the limitation provided for by law (R.A. No.6657),
that is, it cannot legally acquire more than five (5) hectares
of agricultural land.
 Section 73 (a) of R.A. No. 6657 states that it is prohibited to
own and possess, for the purpose of circumventing the
provisions of this Act of agricultural lands in excess of the
total retention limits or award ceilings by any person,
natural or judicial, except those under collective ownership
by farmer-beneficiaries.
 So long as the purpose and productivity of an agricultural
land shall be maintained, and no further change in the
nature of its use, the change of the title of the property in
the name of the corporation shall have no effect to CARP.
December 22, 2006
LEASE CONTRACT ON PRIVATE LANDS; EXPIRATION

PERIOD PURSUANT TO SECTION 11 OF EO 229
 While Section 72 (a) of R. A. No. 6657 explicitly provides

that the lease on private lands may continue under their
original terms and conditions until the expiration of the
same even if such land has already been transferred to
qualified farmer-beneficiaries, the same is not absolute as
Section 11 of EO 229 provides a period of not exceeding
five (5) years in which to continue with the terms and
conditions. Applying these provisions to the instant, it
appears that subject contract is already a long way beyond
the 5-year period, in which case, the period to continue
with the contract’s original terms and conditions has
deemed expired.

June 17, 2009
LEASE CONTRACT; MUST YIELD TO VALID EXERCISE OF

POLICE POWER
 While we recognize the rights of AVINA and RISHI in their

contract of lease over the landholdings now covered by
CLOAs, and while we adhere to the constitutional
guarantee of non-impairment of obligations of contracts as
provided under Section 10, Article III of the 1987
Constitution, we submit that any contract validly executed,
like in this case, the Lease Contract, though protected by
the contract clause must also yield to valid exercise of
police power. It is beyond question that R.A. No. 6657 is
social justice legislation and likewise a police power
measure (as it acquires agricultural lands for redistribution
to qualified beneficiaries). Hence, whatever rational degree
of constraint it exerts on freedom of contract and existing
contractual obligations is constitutionally permissible. This
is also pursuant to the settled rule underscored by the
Supreme Court in a long line of decisions that the
constitutional guarantee of non-impairment of obligations is
limited by the exercise of the police power of the State (i.e.,
public welfare is superior to private rights) of which the
implementation of R.A. No. 6657 is being undertaken in the
exercise thereof.
Given the foregoing, we do not see any impediment in

undertaking the installation of the farmer-beneficiaries
named in the two (2) CLOAs (TCT-CLOA No. 12989 and
123047), provided that there are no other issues/problems
involving the land covered by the aforesaid CLOAs.
June 17, 2009
LEASE RENTAL; BASIS
 What is required by law as consideration for the lease of the

land is only up to twenty-five percent (25%) or the
equivalent of 1/4 of the average normal harvest during the
three (3) agricultural years immediately preceding the date
the leasehold was established after deducting the amount
used for seeds and the cost of harvesting, threshing,
loading, hauling and processing whichever is applicable.
The only instance, however, that a landowner-lessor can
demand for an increase in the fixed or agreed lease rental
as provided under said Section 34 of R. A. No. 3844 is that
when he introduced capital improvements on the farm. In
such a case, the rental shall be increased proportionately
to the resulting increase in production due to said
improvements.
July 17, 2008
LEASE RENTAL; LBP OR ANY BANKING INSTITUTIONS

AUTHORIZED TO RECEIVE PROVISIONAL LEASE RENTALS
 The provision of Republic Act No. 3844 as implemented by

DAR Administrative Order No. 2, Series of 2006, clearly
state that the LBP or any duly authorized banking
institution in the locality are authorized banking institutions
to receive provisional lease rentals of the lessees in the
event the landowner refuses to receive the same. Since the
LBP of Tarlac City refused to receive the said provisional
lease rentals due to the existence of their internal banking
policy requiring the lessees to secure an authorization from
or consent of the landowner before they can open an
account in the name of the landowner, it is suggested that
the lessees may tender their provisional lease rentals
to any duly authorized banking institution in the locality
where the property is located. However, this shall take
effect only upon order of the PARAD and after due hearing.
Moreover, this is the least reasonable way for the lessees
to perform their obligations to pay the lease rentals to the
agricultural lessor when it falls due, as explicitly provided
in Section 26 (6) of Republic Act No. 3844.

April 2, 2008
LEASE RENTAL; TREATED AS ADVANCE

PAYMENT/AMORTIZATION
 Necessarily, the amount paid as lease rental shall be

treated as advance payment/amortization and deducted
from the total cost of the property.
April 14, 2008
LEASE RENTAL: COMPUTATION
How is lease rental computed?
 Sec. 34 of RA 3844 (the Agricultural Land Reform Code)

provides that the amount of lease rentals to be paid by the
agricultural lessee shall not be more than the equivalent of
twenty-five percent (25%) of the average normal harvest
during the three (3) agricultural years immediately
preceding the date the leasehold was established after
deducting the amount used for seeds and the cost of
harvesting, threshing, loading, hauling and processing,
whichever is applicable. The computation of the lease
rental shall include both the primary and secondary crops
existing at the time of the establishment of the leasehold.
We advise you to request our Municipal Agrarian Reform
Officer (MARO) to assist you and your tenant in the
execution of your agricultural leasehold agreement.

August 15, 1994
What is the amount of consideration for the lease of an

agricultural land?
 Under Section 34 thereof, that the consideration for the

lease of an agricultural land shall not be more than the
equivalent of 25% of the average normal harvest during the
three (3) agricultural years immediately preceding the date
the leasehold was established after deducting the amount
used for seeds and the cost of harvesting, threshing,
loading, hauling and processing, whichever are applicable.
DAR Administrative Order No. 05, Series of 1993, provides
appropriate rules and procedures for the proper
implementation of this statutory mandate.
September 24, 1999
LEASE RENTAL; LANDOWNER MAY DEMAND INCREASE
Can a landowner demand for an increase in the fixed or

agreed lease rental?
 R.A. No. 3844 or the Agricultural Land Reform Code provides

that, a landowner (lessor) can demand for an increase in
the fixed or agreed lease rental only if he introduced capital
improvement on the farm. In such a case, the rental shall
be increased proportionately to the resulting increase in
production due to said improvement.

November 27, 2000
LEASE RENTAL; NON PAYMENT A GROUND FOR

DISPOSSESSION
 The deliberate non-payment of lease rentals is one of the

grounds provided in Section 36 of R.A. No. 3844 for the
dispossession of a tenant. If the tenant deliberately failed
to pay the rentals, he may be ejected from his farmlot on
the basis of a court judgment that is final and executory.
After said ejectment the landowner is free to choose a
replacement if he so desires. However, if said non-payment
is due to crop failure as a result of a fortuitous event, the
same is not a ground for dispossession, although the
obligation to pay is not extinguished.

June 29, 2009
LEASE RENTAL: NON-PAYMENT A GROUND FOR DISPOSSESSION
Is the deliberate non-payment of lease rentals considered
a ground for the dispossession of a tenant?
 The deliberate non-payment of lease rentals is one of the

grounds provided in Section 36 of R.A. No. 3844 for the
dispossession of a tenant. If the tenant deliberately failed
to pay the rentals, he may be ejected from his farmlot on
the basis of a court judgment that is final and executory.
After said ejectment the landowner is free to choose a
replacement, if he so desires. However, if said non-payment
is due to crop failure as a result of a fortuitous event, the
same is not a ground for dispossession, although the
obligation to pay is not extinguished.

October 25, 1994
LEASE RENTAL: NON-PAYMENT

Whether or not non-payment by the tenant of lease
rentals to the landowner will disqualify him from being a CLT
holder.
 Non-payment by the tenant of lease rentals to the

landowner will not necessarily disqualify him from being a
CLT holder of the farmlot under his cultivation. This is so
because non-payment of rentals can be a ground for the
tenant's ejectment from the landholding only if there is a
judgment by the court which is final and executory finding
that said non-payment is deliberate and not due to crop
failure by reason of force majeure. This presupposes that
there must first be a case filed for non-payment of lease
rentals and a finding that the tenant was deliberately
remiss. Only after the tenant has been declared by the
court as remiss will be disqualified from being a CLT
recipient. However, once a property is identified as falling
under Operation Land Transfer (OLT) coverage pursuant to
PD 27, the disqualification of the tenant will not affect said
OLT coverage. The property will be reallocated to a
deserving farmer-beneficiary.

September 21, 1994
LEASE RENTAL; PAGHAHAWAK NG LUPA; MGA KATALIWASAN
Is failure to pay lease rental a ground to dispossessed a

tenant from the land he is tilling?
 Section 36 (5) ng R.A. No. 3844, as amended ay nagsasaad

na ang hindi pagbabayad ng buwis sa kaukulang araw nito
ay maaaring dahilan ng pagpapaalis ng magsasaka kung
ang pagpapaalis sa kanya ay ipinahintulot ng Hukuman sa
isang hatol na pangwakas makaraan ang kaukulang
paglilitis. Subalit, kung ang di pagbabayad ng buwis ay
dahil sa pagkasira ng ani na umaabot sa pitumpu't limang
porsiyento, bunga ng isang pangyayaring di maiiwasan, ang
di pagbabayad ay di magiging matwid sa pagpapaalis,
bagaman ang pananagutang magbayad ng buwis ukol sa
aning iyon ay di nawawala sa gayon.

November 8, 2000
LEASE RENTAL: PAYMENT BY AGRICULTURAL LESSEES

How much lease rental should the lessees pay?
 The lease rental to be paid by all the agricultural lessees

shall not be more than the equivalent of 25% of the average
normal harvest during the three (3) agricultural years
immediately preceding the following dates:
1. Sept. 10, 1971 – the date of effectivity of R.A.

No. 6389 for tenanted rice and corn lands;
2. Date of leasehold agreement by the parties
concerned or June 15, 1988, whichever is sooner for all
other agricultural lands after deducting the amount used
for seeds and the cost of harvesting, threshing, loading,
hauling and processing whichever is applicable.
 It is clear from the foregoing that your tenant is no longer

allowed under the law to share with you the produce of the
land but instead to pay you lease rentals for he is
considered now as an agricultural lessee and you as the
lessor/owner of the subject property.

May 7, 1997
LEASE RENTAL: PAYMENT IS INCUMBENT UPON THE LESSEE
May payment of lease rental be dispensed with?
 Once the lease rental is established, payment thereof is

incumbent upon the lessee regardless of the produce,
hence, the landowner need not be made a party to the
milling contract nor in the issuance of quedans and
warehouse receipts.

February 16, 1994
LEASE RENTAL; PAYMENTS: SUBSTANTIATED BY PROOF OR

EVIDENCE
May lease rental payments made by tenants of lands under

P.D. No. 27 be considered as land amortization due to the
landowner?
 Lease rental payments made by tenants of lands under P.D.

No. 27 to be considered as land amortizations due to the
landowner must be substantiated by proof or evidence of
such payments and the same must be confirmed by the
landowner.

March 3, 1997
LEASE RENTAL; UNDER THE LEASEHOLD SYSTEM
 Under the leasehold system, the lease rental to be paid by

the lessee is predetermined and fixed on the basis of the
average normal harvest. Once fixed, it constitutes the
consideration for the use of the land, and the lessee is
under obligation to pay the same even in case of crop
failure to the extent of seventy-five percent (75%) as a
result of fortuitous event.

February 16, 1994
LEASE RENTAL; WHEN LANDOWNER REFUSES TO ACCEPT
Is the lessee required to deliver to the owner the

consideration of the lease in case the Provisional Lease
Rental (PLR) is pending with the PARAD/RARAD for
approval?
 While the PLR is pending with the PARAD or RARAD for

approval, same shall already, and continue to, be in force.
In other words, the tenants-lessees are required to deliver
to the owner the consideration of the lease, as fixed by the
MARO, in compliance with the tenants' obligation to pay the
lease rental when it falls due. In case the owner refuses to
accept it, the tenants-lessees may deposit the same with
the proper PARAD or RARAD.
September 24, 1999
LEASE RENTALS/AMORTIZATION PAYMENTS; WHEN MAY

BE WITHDRAWN
 DAR Administrative Order No. 4, Series of 1997 allows the

withdrawal of farmer beneficiaries lease
rentals/amortization payments deposited with the Land
Bank of the Philippines (LBP) for lands covered by areas
retained by landowners. However, the lease rental or
amortization payment may be withdrawn only upon
favorable endorsement by the concerned DAR Provincial
Agrarian Reform Officer (PARO).

March 10, 2005
 Section 5.4 of DAR Administrative Order No. 06, series of

2003 provides:
"The lease rental for coconut lands shall not be more

than twenty-five percent (25%) of the average normal
harvest for a specific area for the preceding three (3)
calendar years less the value of production cost."
April 18, 2005
LEASE; ADDITIONAL LAND THROUGH AVA
 It could be inferred that a company under Stock Distribution

Option (SDO) may enter into lease agreement of additional
land through AVA whether such land is a retention area, or
land covered with EP or CLOA subject to the conditions and
procedural requirements set forth under the above quoted
guideline. Likewise such proposals necessitate approval by
PARC.

September 30, 2010
LEASE; FIXING OF LEASE RENTALS
Which has the authority to determine and fix lease

rentals?
 Pursuant to Section 12 of Republic Act No. 6657

(Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program Law), the DAR is
mandated to determine and fix lease rentals in accordance
with Section 34 of Republic Act No. 3844, as amended.
Relative thereto, DAR Administrative Order No. 5, series of
1993 provides for the guidelines governing agricultural
leasehold and the determination of lease rental for
tenanted lands, the pertinent provisions of which are as
follows:
a) Item III.D
The lease rental to be paid by all agricultural lessees
shall not be more than the equivalent of twenty-five
percent (25%) of the average normal harvest during
the three (3) agricultural years immediately preceding
15 June 1988 (i.e., effectivity of R.A. No. 6657), after
deducting the amount used for seeds and the cost of
harvesting, threshing, loading, hauling and
processing, whichever is applicable.
b) Item III.F
The lease rental shall cover the whole farmholding
attended to by the lessee and that the computation
shall include both primary and secondary crops
existing as of 15 June 1988. Secondary crops which
are planted to an aggregate area of half a hectare or
less shall not be included in the computation of the
lease rental. (underscoring supplied)
c) Item III.G.
Where the rental has been fixed, whether in cash or in
kind, such rental shall constitute the consideration
for the use of the land and the lessee may diversify
and/or plant secondary crops, provided that all the
expenses are shouldered by him/her. (underscoring
supplied)
 Item III.G connotes that the lessee may not be compelled to

pay additional rent for the secondary crops raised by
him/her after the execution of the contract, provided all the
expenses are shouldered by him/her.

October 23, 2000
LEASE; LAND SUBJECT OF CONVERSION ORDER
 Agricultural lands which are the subject of a Conversion

Order duly issued by the DAR, may be eligible for lease. If
the JVC is able to own converted lands, it may enter into a
contract of lease with any person not disqualified under
existing laws. The JVC shall, however, be held responsible
for complying with the Conversion Order provided for in
Section 51 of the 2002 Comprehensive Rules on Land Use
Conversion.

September 20, 2010
LEASE; LEGALITY TO ENTER INTO ANY CONTRACT WITH THE

AWARDEE OF LAND
May the DOTC legally enter into any contract with the
awardee without the approval or intervention of the DAR?
 The DOTC cannot legally enter into any contract with the
awardee without the approval or intervention of the DAR.
The intercession of DAR is required obviously to safeguard
the rights of farmer-beneficiaries affected, without which
they may be entering into a contract which might be
grossly prejudicial to them. To obviate such possibility and
to place farmer-beneficiaries on equal footing, intervention
of DAR is imperative and necessary.

January 9, 1998
LEASE; MAXIMUM PERIOD FOR THE INITIAL CONTRACT
What is the maximum period for the initial contract of

agricultural land lease?
 The maximum period for the initial contract is 50 years, with

a maximum renewal period of 25 years. This means that the
initial lease contract cannot cover a period exceeding 50
years.

August 1, 1996
LEASE; OBLIGATIONS, SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES
Can an agricultural lessor close the drainage system of the

land?
 Section 30 of R.A. No. 3844, as amended, provides that the

agricultural-lessor has the obligation to keep intact such
permanent useful improvements existing on the land at the
start of the leasehold relation such as irrigation and
drainage systems. Thus, the agricultural lessor may be held
liable if he purposely closes the drainage system of the land
to the detriment of the crops planted therein. In all cases,
the agricultural-lessor shall respect the peaceful
possession and cultivation of his tenant-lessee.
Significantly, should the agricultural lessor fail to respect
the peaceful possession and cultivation of his tenant-
lessee, the latter may seek the assistance of the Municipal
Agrarian Reform Officer (MARO) and the Barangay Agrarian
Reform Committee (BARC) concerned to jointly conduct
mediation conference between the landowner and the
tenant for the purpose of threshing out any differences
between them. If no agreement is reached, the Provincial
Agrarian Reform Officer (PARO) may assume jurisdiction
over the matter. Again, if they fail to resolve the conflict on
that level, the aggrieved party may file a case with the
(DARAB).

September 29, 2000
LEASEHOLD CONTRACT; DETERMINATION AND

CONSIDERATION FOR THE LEASE; CONTINUITY OF
CONDITIONS
 Ayon sa Seksiyon 12 ng R.A.No.6657 (CARL), inatasan ang

DAR na kagyat na tiyakin at itakda ang halaga ng
pamumuwisan doon alinsunod sa Seksiyon 34 ng B.R. Blg.
3844, ayon sa pagkakasusog. Ang porsiyento/bahagdan na
75-25 na itinakda ayon sa nabanggit na probisyon ay di
hihigit sa katumbas ng dalawampu't limang porsiyento,
pabor sa namumuwisan. Ito ay naayon sa puntong mas
malaki ang kontribusyon lamang ng nagpapabuwis ay ang
kanyang lupa. Samakatuwid, ang pamumuwisan ay
magpapatuloy hanggang sa baguhin ito ng magkabilang
panig alinsunod sa Seksiyon 16 sa nabanggit na batas at
habang naka-apela ang nasabing isyu ng exemption.

November 16, 2006
LEASEHOLD CONTRACT: EFFECT OF DEATH OF THE

AGRICULTURAL LESSEE ON THE AGRICULTURAL LAND
Is leasehold contracts extinguished by the death or

permanent incapacity of the lessor and lessee?
 The law clearly provides that the leasehold relation

between the agricultural lessor and the agricultural lessee
is not extinguished by the death or permanent incapacity of
the parties and mandates that the leasehold shall continue
between the agricultural lessor and the person who can
cultivate the landholding personally, chosen in accordance
with the provisions of Section 9 (par. 1) of R.A. No. 3844.
However, Section 8(3) of the Code provides that the
absence of the persons under Section 9 to succeed to the
lessee in the event of death or permanent incapacity shall
extinguish the agricultural leasehold relation.

March 16, 1994
LEASEHOLD CONTRACT; PARTIES MAY FREELY ENTER INTO

ANY KIND OF TERMS: CONDITIONS OR STIPULATIONS
Are the agricultural lessor and the agricultural lessee be

free to enter into any kinds of terms, conditions or
stipulations?
 Sec. 15 of RA 3844 expressly provides that the agricultural

lessor & agricultural lessee shall be free to enter into any
kinds of terms, conditions or stipulations in a leasehold
contract, as long as they are not contrary to law, morals or
public policy. While the parties are given wide latitude to
freely enter into contracts, the same is subordinated by the
limitations provided by law.
 Strictly speaking, a leasehold contract entered into
between the agricultural lessor and agricultural lessee is
only limited to a specific area as stated in a leasehold
contract. It cannot encroach or extend to other
landholdings even if owned by the same landowner.
 A tenant is not at liberty for his personal gain or benefit
without the latter's consent as he is bound by the leasehold
contract limiting his right of cultivation to a specific area
designated.

December 13, 1996
LEASEHOLD RELATIONSHIP; REQUISITES
 In a string of jurisprudence, the Supreme Court held that

there is a landlord-tenant relationship when the following
requisites concur: that the parties are the landlord and the
tenant; that the subject is an agricultural land; that there is
consent by the landowner for tenant to work on the land
given either orally or in writing, expressly or impliedly; that
the purpose is agricultural production; and that there is
compensation in terms of payment of a fixed amount in
money and/or produce.

January 19, 2007
LEASEHOLD RENTAL, NOT MORE THAN 25%
What is the consideration for the lease of a riceland?

 Section 4 of R.A. No. 3844, as amended provides in part:
"Agricultural share tenancy, as herein defined, is hereby
declared to be contrary to public policy and shall be
abolished ….." Section 5 of the same law further provides:
"The agricultural leasehold relation shall be established by
operation of law in accordance with Section four of this
Code." Pursuant to the aforequoted provisions of law,
agricultural share tenancy has been abolished, and, in its
stead, agricultural leasehold relation has been established.
Thus, a landowner shall now receive leasehold rental for
the use of his land rather than his share on the harvest.
 Under Section 34 of R.A. No. 3844, as amended, the
consideration for the lease of riceland shall not be more
than the equivalent of twenty-five per centum of the
average normal harvest during the three agricultural years
immediately preceding the date the leasehold was
established, after deducting the amount used for seeds and
the cost of harvesting, threshing, loading, hauling and
processing, which ever are applicable.

November 15, 2000
LEASEHOLD RENTALS; DETERMINATION OF LEASE

RENTALS
 Item III.D of DAR Administrative Order NO. 05, series of

1993 (Rules and Procedures Governing Agricultural
Leasehold and the Determination of Lease Rental for
Tenanted Lands) provides, quote:
"The lease rental to be paid by all agricultural lessees

shall not be more than the equivalent of twenty-five
percent (25%) of the average normal harvest during the
three (3) agricultural years immediately preceding 15
June 1988, after deducting the amount used for seeds
and the cost of harvesting, threshing, loading and
processing, whichever is applicable."
June 7, 2002
LEASEHOLD RENTALS; DETERMINATION OF LEASE RENTALS
How is lease rental determined?
 Ayon po sa Seksyon 12 ng B.R. Blg. 6657 (Comprehensive

Agrarian Reform Law) at Seksyon 34 ng B.R. Blg. 3844,
upang mapangalagaan at mapabuti ang kalagayan ng
pagmamay-ari at pangkabuhayan ng mga magsasaka sa
mga lupaing may kasama sa ilalim ng retensyong limit at
mga lupang hindi pa natatamo alinsunod sa batas na ito,
inatasan ang DAR na kagyat na tiyakin at itakda ang halaga
ng pamumuwisan at ang dapat na upa ng isang
nananakahan ay hindi dapat humigit sa katumbas ng
dalawampu't limang porsiyento (25%) ng katamtamang
karaniwang ani sa loob ng tatlong (3) taong pansakahan na
kagyat na nauuna sa Hunyo 15, 1988 (noong pinagtibay ang
B.R. Blg. 6657), matapos maawas ang halagang ginamit sa
mga binhi at ang ginastos sa pag-aani, paggiik, pagkakarga,
paghahakot at pagpoproseso, kung alinman ang
magagamit. At kung sakaling tumanggi o walang tinanggap
na tugon mula sa may-ari sa nasabing bahaginan, maaari
kayong dumulog sa MARO o Municipal Agrarian Reform
Officer kasama ang BARC Chairman sa inyong lugar upang
itakda ang dapat na upa na naaayon sa nasabing mga batas
at Kautusang Pampangasiwaan Blg. 5, Serye 1993.

October 28, 1999
 Section 12 of CARL mandates the DAR to determine and fix

immediately the lease rentals in tenanted lands under
retention and those not yet acquired under CARL in
accordance with Section 34 of R.A. 3844 as amended.
Pursuant to said provision, DAR Administrative Order No. 5,
Series of 1993 was issued, providing the guidelines for the
execution of agricultural leasehold agreements. However,
as tenancy relationship may be express or implied, the
refusal of any party to sign a leasehold contract shall not
affect the tenants status as a lessee.

July 2, 1996

July 15, 1996
 Sections 12 and 76 of R.A. No. 6657 mandated the DAR to

determine and fix immediately the lease rentals in
accordance with Section 34 of R.A. No. 3844. And with the
repeal of Section 35 of R.A. No. 3844, all tenanted
agricultural lands (coconut lands, among others, included)
are now subject to leasehold. DAR Administrative Order No.
9, Series of 1991, as amended by Administrative Order No.
5, Series of 1993, prescribes the rules and procedures on
leasehold operations in tenanted coconut lands.

September 8, 1999
LEASEHOLD SYSTEM; CONVERSION OF THE SHARING

SYSTEM INTO THE LEASEHOLD SYSTEM
 The proviso as to the functions of the National Land Reform

Council (NLRC) ceased to subsist with the advent of
Presidential Decree No. 2 (Proclaiming the Entire Country a
Land Reform Area) issued in September 26, 1972 and PD 27
(Decreeing the Emancipation of Tenants from the Bondage
of the Soil Transferring to Them the Ownership of the Land
They Till and Providing the Instruments and Mechanism
Thereof) issued on October 21, 1972. According to Justice
Milagros German’s book on Share and Leasehold Tenancy,
the former Presidential Decree provided for the compulsory
conversion of the sharing system into the leasehold system
in rice and corn lands. Proclamations by the NLRC had also
been rendered obsolete. Corollary, the latter P.D. abolished
the existence of the council.

March 24, 2009
LEASEHOLD; 3-HECTARE LIMIT DOES NOT APPLY;

SUBLEASING PROHIBITED
 There is no specific provision limiting the area that a lessee

may cultivate. While it is true that RA 6657 only speaks of
the three (3) hectare-limit with respect to the award that
may be given to the ARB, this ceiling does not apply under
the leasehold system. On the other hand, the act of a
tenant in letting another person till his farmholding would
be tantamount to subleasing. Section 27 of RA 3844
prohibits the agricultural lessee to employ a sub-lessee on
his landholding except in case of illness or temporary
incapacity where he may employ laborers whose services
on his landholding shall be on his account.

July 17, 2008
LEASEHOLD; ABOLITION OF AGRICULTURAL SHARING SYSTEM
Is agricultural share tenancy still operative under R.A. No.

3844?
 Ang "agricultural sharing system" ay ipinawalang bisa ng

Batas Republika Bilang 3844, na sinususugan ng Batas
Republika Blg. 6389 na nagkabisa noong ika-10 ng
Setyembre 1971. Sa pamamagitan ng nasabing batas, ang
lahat ng "agricultural share tenancy" ay magiging
agricultural leasehold na. Ang Administrative Order No. 5,
Series of 1993 (Rules and Procedures Governing
Agricultural Leasehold and the Determination of Lease
Rental for Tenanted Lands) ay nagsasaad ng mga
sumusunod:
"I. Prefatory Statement

xxx
xxx xxx
By virtue of R.A. No. 3844 which took effect
on 8 August 1963, agricultural share tenancy was
declared to be contrary to public policy and was,
thereby, abolished. This was further strengthened
in Section 4 of R.A. No. 6389 which provided that
agricultural share tenancy throughout the
country shall be automatically converted to
agricultural leasehold.

November 10, 1998
LEASEHOLD; AGRICULTURAL LEASEHOLD RELATION IS

EXTINGUISHED UPON TRANSFER OF RIGHT BY THE
LESSEE FATHER TO HIS SON/MEMBER OF IMMEDIATE
FARM HOUSEHOLD TENANCY; PERSONAL CULTIVATION
AS REQUIREMENT
 Section 23 of Republic Act No. 3844 (Agricultural Land

Reform Code) provides, quote:
"Sec. 23. Rights of Agricultural Lessee in General — It

shall be the right of the agricultural lessee:
(1) To have possession and peaceful enjoyment of the
land;
(2) To manage and work on the land in a manner and

method of cultivation and harvest which conform to
proven farm practices;
(3) To mechanize all or any phase of his farm work;

and
(4) To deal with millers and processors and

attend to the issuance of quedans and warehouse
receipts for the produce due him."
 That one of the conditions for a tenancy relationship to

exist is that, there is personal cultivation or with the help of
the immediate farm household. There is personal
cultivation if the tenant cultivates the land himself or with
the aid of his immediate farm household. Immediate farm
household refers to the members of the family of the lessee
and other persons who are dependent upon him for support
and who usually help him in the farm activities, and he may
continue to work as tenant if the conditions laid down
under Sec. 9 of R.A. No. 3844 are complied.
 Leasehold is not extinguished with the transfer of legal
ownership of the land from one landowner to another.
Section 10 of R.A. No. 3844, as amended, provides that the
purchaser or transferee shall be subrogated to the rights
and substituted to the obligations of the agricultural lessor.

February 13, 2007
LEASEHOLD; AGRICULTURAL LESSEE'S RIGHT TO A HOMELOT
Is an agricultural lessee entitled to a homelot?
 Section 24 of R.A. No. 3844 expressly provides that "the

agricultural lessee shall have the right to continue in the
exclusive possession and enjoyment of any homelot he may
have occupied upon the effectivity of this Code, which shall
be considered as included in the leasehold." A homelot is
an integral part of the farm and an indispensable factor in
farm operations used by a lessee as the site of his
permanent dwelling including the area utilized for raising
vegetables, poultry, pigs and other animals and engaging in
minor industries which area may not exceed 1,000 square
meters. The tenant, including her children, are legally
entitled thereto and they cannot be ejected therefrom
except for cause as provided for by law.

February 9, 1999
LEASEHOLD; AMOUNT OF LEASE RENTAL; BASES THEREOF
What is the basis of computing the amount of lease rental?

 Isinasaad sa Seksiyon 12 ng Batas Republika Blg. 6657 na
upang mapangalagaan at mapabuti ang kalagayang
pagmamay-ari at pangkabuhayan ng mga magsasaka sa
mga lupaing may kasama, inaatasan ang DAR na kagyat ng
tiyakin at itakda ang halaga na pamumuwisan alinsunod sa
Seksiyon 34 ng B.R. Blg. 3844. Gayundin, alinsunod sa
Kautusang Pampangasiwaan Blg. 5, Serye 1993
(Administrative Order No. 5, Series 1993), (Mga Alintuntunin
At Pamamaraang Namamahala Sa Buwisang Pansakahan At
Ang Pagtatakda Ng Upa Sa Buwisan Para Sa Mga Lupaing
May Kasama), ang halaga ng buwisan na babayaran ng
lahat ng mga namumuwisan ay hindi dapat humigit sa
katumbas ng dalawampu't-limang porsiyento (25%) ng
katamtamang karaniwang ani sa loob ng tatlong (3) taong
pansakahan, matapos maawas ang halagang ginamit at
ginastos sa pag-aani, paggiik, pagkakarga, paghahakot at
pagpoproseso. Sang-ayon din sa nabanggit na kautusan,
tungkulin ng Municipal Agrarian Reform Officer (MARO) sa
tulong ng Barangay Agrarian Reform Committee (BARC) ang
magtakda ng upa sa buwisan sa isang komperensiya
kaharap ang may-ari at ang magsasaka at kung sakaling
hindi magkasundo ang may-ari ng lupa at namumuwisan sa
nabanggit na upa sa buwisan, itatakda ng MARO ang
pansamantalang upa sa buwisan na kung saan ito ay
isusumite sa Provincial Agrarian Reform Adjudicator
(PARAD) upang muling pag-aralan bago magpalabas ng
kautusan na nagtatakda ng upa sa buwisan.

March 4, 1999
LEASEHOLD; BENEFICIARIES OF LAND COVERED BY P.D. 27
Can immediate family members qualify as beneficiaries?
 Ayon sa Presidential Decree No. 27, ang kapatid ay

maaaring maging benepisaryo ng lupang kanyang sinasaka,
subalit kung ang palayan ay nasasakop ng "retained area"
ng nagmamay-ari ng palayan ay nararapat lamang na
magtatag ng "leasehold agreement" para mapangalagaan at
mapaunlad ang kabuhayan ng magsasaka. Ang ugnayan ng
magsasaka at ang may-ari ng lupa ay nararapat na naaayon
sa nabanggit na alituntunin.

Nov. 10, 1998
LEASEHOLD; CAUSES AND CONDITIONS FOR DISPOSSESSION OF

AGRICULTURAL LESSEE
Is failure to comply with any of the terms and conditions of the

contract a ground for dispossession of agricultural lessee?
 Section 36 of R.A. No. 3844 (par. 2) expressly provides that

one of the causes for dispossession of agricultural lessee is
that he/she failed to substantially comply with any of the
terms and conditions of the contract or any of the
provisions of said law unless his failure is caused by
fortuitous event or force majeure. This presupposes,
however, that the dispossession has been authorized by the
Court in a judgment that is final and executory and after
due hearing. Moreover, Section 37 of the aforementioned
law likewise provides that the burden of proof to show the
existence of a lawful cause for the ejectment of an
agricultural lessee shall rest upon the agricultural lessor.
Ejectment of a tenant without authorization by a Court
constitutes unauthorized dispossession punishable by law
(Section 31, R.A. No. 3844, as amended).

February 9, 1999
LEASEHOLD; COCONUT PLANTATION

What law governs the leasehold of coconut plantation?
 Section 35 of R.A. No. 3844 (Code of Agrarian Reforms, as

amended by R.A. 6389) expressly provides that a coconut
plantation is exempt from leasehold wherein the
consideration, as well as the tenancy system prevailing,
shall be governed by the provisions of R.A. No. 1199, as
amended. Under Section 41 of R.A. No. 1199 (the
Agricultural Tenancy Act of the Philippines), the landholder
and the tenants on lands which produce crops other than
rice shall be free to enter into any contract stipulating the
ratio of crop division. In the absence of a stipulation, the
custom of the place shall govern.
 The foregoing provisions were however already expressly
repealed by Section 76 of R.A. No. 6657. Section 4 of R.A.
No. 6657 now categorically provides, quote: "The
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988 shall cover,
regardless of tenurial arrangement and commodity produce,
all public and private agricultural lands as provided in
Proclamation No. 131 and E.O. No. 229, including other
lands of the public domain suitable for agriculture".
Accordingly, a coconut plantation is covered by CARP.

February 4, 1998
LEASEHOLD; CONDITIONS TO ESTABLISH TENANCY

RELATIONSHIP
 To establish tenancy relationship, the following conditions

must be present: 1) the parties are the landowner and the
tenant; 2) the subject is agricultural land; 3) there is
consent by the landowner for tenant to work on the land,
given either orally or in writing, expressly or impliedly; 4)
the purpose is agricultural production; 5) there is personal
cultivation or with the help of the immediate household; 6)
there is compensation in terms of payment of a fixed
amount in money and/or produce. All the conditions set
forth must be present and absence of any of said conditions
would defeat the purpose and essence of tenancy
relationship.

August 21, 2008
LEASEHOLD; CONSENT OF AGRICULTURAL LESSOR NEEDED

IN INSTALLING OTHER TENANTS; MEANING OF PERSONAL
CULTIVATION
 The said heir cannot install another person to occupy and

cultivate the same without the consent of the owner. As
mentioned above, the consent of the true and lawful lessor
who could be the owner is required.
 In agrarian reform, there is personal cultivation where a
person, in order to be considered a tenant, must himself
and with the aid available from his immediate farm
household cultivate the land. Therefore, the said heir who
hire others whom he pays for doing the cultivation of the
land does not satisfy the meaning of personal cultivation.

February 7, 2007
LEASEHOLD; CONSIDERATION OF LEASE RENTAL
What is the consideration for the lease of riceland and lands

devoted to other crops?
 Section 34 of R.A. No. 3844, as amended by Section 5 of

R.A. 6389, provides that the consideration for the lease of
riceland and lands devoted to other crops shall not be more
than the equivalent of twenty-five per centum of the
average normal harvest or if there have been no normal
harvests, then the estimated normal harvest during the
three agricultural years immediately preceding the date the
leasehold was established after deducting the amount used
for seeds and the cost of harvesting threshing, loading,
hauling and processing which ever are applicable.

July 15, 1996
What is the consideration for the lease of riceland and lands

devoted to other crops?
 The consideration for the lease of riceland and lands

devoted to other crops shall not be more than the
equivalent of twenty-five per centum of the average normal
harvest or if there have been no normal harvest, then the
estimated normal harvest during the three agricultural
years preceding the date the leasehold was established
after deducting the amount used for seeds and the cost of
harvesting, threshing,, loading, hauling and processing,
whichever are applicable.
 If capital improvements are introduced on the farm not by
the lessee to increase its productivity, the rental shall be
increased proportionately to the consequent increase in
production due to said improvements. In case of
disagreement, the court shall determine the reasonable
increase in rental.

Undated
LEASEHOLD; DEATH OF THE AGRICULTURAL LESSEE; ORDER OF

PREFERENCE
Is the agricultural leasehold relation extinguished by the death

or permanent incapacity of any of the parties?
 Under Section 9 of RA 3844, as amended (the Agrarian

Reform Code), in case of death of the agricultural lessee
the leasehold shall continue between the agricultural lessor
within one month from such death or permanent incapacity,
from among the following: a) the surviving spouse; b) the
eldest direct descendant by consanguinity; c) the next
eldest descendant or descendants in the order of their
ages. In case the agricultural lessor fails to exercise his
choice within the period stated, the priority shall be in
accordance with the order established.

August 26, 1994
LEASEHOLD; DEDUCTIBLE ITEMS
 It is crystal clear that only those enumerated under Section

34 of R.A. No. 3844, as implemented by Section III (10) of
A.O. No. 2, Series of 2006 are allowed as deductible items.
Since the enumeration as deductible items are exclusive in
character, no other item can be claimed or considered as
deductible item. Accordingly, the cost of fertilizer should
not be considered a deductible item in the computation of
lease rental.

January 28, 2009
LEASEHOLD; DEDUCTIBLE ITEMS ON LEASE RENTALS
What are the deductible items for computation of lease

rentals?
 Based on the aforecited provisions of Sec. 32 in conjunction

with Section 34 of R.A. No. 3844, it is crystal clear that only
those enumerated under Section 34 of said Act are allowed
as deductible items, namely, the cost of harvesting,
threshing, loading, hauling and processing. Since the
enumeration as deductible items under Republic Act No.
3844 are exclusive in character, no other item can be
claimed or considered as deductible item. Accordingly, the
cost of irrigation should not be considered a deductible
item in the computation of lease rental.

March 04, 1998
LEASEHOLD; EFFECT OF FORTUITOUS EVENT OR FORCE

MAJEURE
 Under the leasehold system, the lease rental to be paid by

the lessee is predetermined and fixed on the basis of the
average normal harvest. Once fixed, it constitutes the
consideration for the use of the land, and the lessee is
under obligation to pay the same even in case of crop
failure to the extent of 75% as a result of fortuitous event.
 In case the tenant-lessee suffers crop failure due to a
fortuitous event or force majeure, the parties need not
enter into another contract. The lessee may defer payment
of the lease rental due for agricultural year affected by a
fortuitous event or force majeure causing crop failure to the
extent of 75%. The lease rental shall be paid on a staggered
basis subject to the agreement of both parties. Normally,
such rental is paid in installments every harvest time
beginning the next agricultural year and to continue until
the lessee is fully paid.

March 30, 2007
LEASEHOLD; EVOLUTION OF THE LAW ON LEASEHOLD
 In the prefatory statement of DAR Administrative Order No.

06, Series of 2003 (Rules and Procedures Governing
Leasehold Implementation on Tenanted Agricultural Land),
it is stated that:
"The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) or R.A. No.

6657, which took effect on 15 June 1988, expressly repealed
Section 35 of R.A. No. 3844. The significant implications of this
evolution of the law are as follows:
The abolition of share tenancy now covers all agricultural

landholdings without exceptions;
Leasehold tenancy is no longer just an option which exists by

operation of law; and
Agricultural leasehold can be a preliminary step to land

ownership. Hence, all share-crop tenants were
automatically converted into agricultural lessees as of
15 June 1988, whether or not a leasehold agreement
had been executed."
Thus, since share tenancy is already abolished having
been declared as contrary to public policy under Republic
Act No. 3844 (Agricultural Land Reform Code), your
tenants are now therefore agricultural lessees.
April 18, 2005
LEASEHOLD; EXTINGUISHMENT OF LEASEHOLD RELATION
Is agricultural leasehold relation extinguished by the sale,

alienation or transfer of the legal possession of a landholding?
 Ang ugnayan ng magsasaka at dating may-ari ng lupa ay
hindi natatapos kung sakaling ito ay maibenta sa iba at sa
halip ay nalilipat lang ang karapatan at obligasyon sa
nakabili ayon sa Seksyon 10 ng B.R. Blg. 3844. Kung ito ang
sinasaad ng batas ay lalo nang walang karapatan ang taong
hindi pa nabibili ang lupa na alisan ng karapatang magsaka
ang dati nang nagsasaka rito.

October 28, 1999
LEASEHOLD; FIXING OF PROVISIONAL RENTALS
How is provisional lease rentals in coconut lands are

computed?
 Administrative Order No. 4 prescribes the fixing of

provisional lease rentals in coconut lands at 75% - 25%
with 75% as the share of the agricultural lessees and the
remaining 25% as the share of the landowner from the
produce of the land.

December 13, 1996
How much lease rental should the lessee pay?
 DAR A.O. 5, Series of 1993 provides the guidelines for

implementing the DAR mandate under Section 12 of RA
6657 (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law or CARL) to
determine and fix immediately the lease rentals in lands
under leasehold in accordance with Section 34 of RA 3844,
as amended. Said Section 34 provides that the
consideration for the lease of riceland and lands devoted to
other crops shall not be more than the equivalent of 25% of
the average normal harvest during the three agricultural
years immediately preceding the date the leasehold was
established after deducting the applicable deductible
items. In coconut land, the deductible items are
enumerated in paragraph VI-B2 of DAR Administrative Order
No. 5, Series of 1993.

October 27, 1994
LEASEHOLD; LEASEHOLD RELATION WHEN EXTINGUISHED
When may agricultural leasehold relation be extinguished?
 The agricultural leasehold relation is not extinguished by

the death or permanent incapacity of the parties and
mandates that the leasehold shall continue between the
agricultural lessor and the person who can cultivate the
landholding personally, chosen in accordance with the
provisions of Section 9, R.A. No. 3844. Otherwise stated, it
is only in the absence of the persons enumerated under
Section 9 to succeed the deceased lessee that the
agricultural leasehold relation could be extinguished. The
son of the deceased tenant-spouses can succeed to the
tenancy, provided there is no other direct descendant more
qualified to succeed, in accordance with the order of
priority mentioned in said Section 9 of R.A. No. 3844.

April 8, 1998

January 2, 1998
LEASEHOLD; LESSEES RIGHT OF PRE-EMPTION/RIGHT OF

FIRST REFUSAL
 A tenant must be given the first priority in buying the land

he tills. However, it should be stressed that the said right
may only be availed of by bona fide tenants. In the case of
Castillo v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 161959, February 2,
2007, a bona fide tenant is defined as a person cultivating
the land himself and with the aid available from his
immediate farm household. Therefore, for a farmer to be
given the right of first refusal, he must show proof that he
has been cultivating the land personally or with the aid of
his immediate family members under a tenancy
relationship.

April 14, 2008
LEASEHOLD; NO RENTAL ON THE SECOND CROP
Can a landowner claim leasehold rentals on the second crop?
 The answer is in the negative. After the rental has been

fixed, such rental shall serve as payment for the use of the
land. And the lessee may diversify and/or plant secondary
crops without paying additional rent provided that all the
expenses are shouldered by him/her.
LEASEHOLD; NOT EXTINGUISHED BY DEATH, INCAPACITY OR

EXPIRATION OF THE TERM
Is the agricultural leasehold relation extinguished by the death

or incapacity of parties?
 Republic Act No. 3844 (Agricultural Land Reform Code),

specifically Sections 9 and 10 thereof, provides the
following:
"Sec. 9. Agricultural Leasehold

Relation Not Extinguished by Death or Incapacity
of Parties.
xxx
xxx xxx
In case of death or permanent incapacity of
the agricultural lessor, the leasehold shall bind
his legal heirs.
Sec. 10. Agricultural Leasehold
Relation Not Extinguished by Expiration of Period,
etc. — The agricultural leasehold relation under
this Code shall not be extinguished by mere
expiration of the term or period in a leasehold
contract nor by the sale, alienation or transfer of
the legal possession of the landholding. In case
the agricultural lessor sells, alienates or transfers
the legal possession of the landholding, the
purchaser or transferee thereof shall be
subrogated to the rights and substituted to the
obligations of the agricultural lessor."
 With the abovecited safeguards guaranteed by law, any

sale, alienation or transfer by the landowner of his property
would not terminate the lessor-lessee relationship between
the new owner and the tenant-lessee. The new owner or
lessor shall be subrogated to the rights and substituted to
the obligations of the former agricultural lessor.

February 9, 1999
Is leasehold relaltionship extinguished by the death of a

lessor?
 The obligation of the legal heirs toward their tenants is not

affected by the death of their parents (agricultural lessors)
since such relationship continues to remain despite their
death. This is evident under Section 9 of R.A. No. 3844
(Agricultural Land Reform Code) which provides that "in
case of death or permanent incapacity of the agricultural
lessor, the leasehold shall bind his legal heirs." Thus, the
legal heirs shall be subrogated to the rights and substituted
to the obligations of their late parents (agricultural lessors).

February 9, 1999
When may leasehold relations be terminated?
 The tenant is entitled to security of tenure on the farmlot

and may not be ejected therefrom except upon final order
of the court. However, under Sec. 28 (5) of RA 3844, as
amended, the leasehold relations may be terminated if the
tenant voluntarily surrenders the farmlot "due to
circumstances more advantageous to him and his family".

August 24, 1994
LEASEHOLD; NOT EXTINGUISHED BY DEATH, INCAPACITY OR

EXPIRATION OF THE TERM; ORDER OF PRIORITY OF
SUCCESSORS/ORDER OF PREFERENCE
 The law accords the landholder the right to initially choose

his tenant to work on his land. Section 9, R.A. 3844
(Agricultural Land Reform Code) provides:
"Section 9. Agricultural Leasehold Relation

Not Extinguished by Death or Incapacity of the Parties.
— In case of death or permanent incapacity of the
agricultural lessee to work his landholding, the
leasehold shall continue between the agricultural
lessor and the person who can cultivate the landholding
personally, chosen by the agricultural lessor within one
month from such death or permanent incapacity, from
among the following: (a) the surviving spouse; (b) the
eldest direct descendant by consanguinity; or (c) the
next eldest descendant or descendants in the order, of
their age: . . ."
 It could be inferred that tenancy relationship can only be

created with the consent of the person who furnished the
landholding, either as owner, civil lessee, usufructuary, or
legal possessor. Even assuming that there was such a sale
of tenancy rights, the same cannot bind the owner since no
consent either by word or action was given by the owner.

February 7, 2007
LEASEHOLD; NOTIFICATION BEFORE HARVESTING NOT

NECESSARY
 Once the rental is fixed, whether in cash or in kind, reduced

into writing and affirmed by the PARO concerned, such
agreed rental shall be paid by the lessee when it falls due
without need for the latter to notify the lessor for the
harvesting or threshing.

March 24, 2009
LEASEHOLD; OBLIGATION OF THE LESSEE TO PAY LEASE

RENTAL
What is the effect of failure of the lessee to pay lease rental?
 Pertinent are the provisions of Sections 26 (6) and 36 (6) of

Republic Act No. 3844, as amended, otherwise known as
the Agricultural Land Reform Code, to wit:
"Section 26. Obligation of the Lessee — It shall be the

obligation of the agricultural lessee:
xxx
xxx xxx
(6) To pay the lease rental to the agricultural lessor when
it falls due."
"Section 36. Possession of Landholding; Exceptions. —
Notwithstanding any agreement as to the period or future
surrender of the land, an agricultural lessee shall continue in
the enjoyment and possession of his landholding except when
his dispossession has been authorized by the Court in a
judgment that is final and executory if after due hearing it is
shown that:
xxx
xxx xxx
(6) The agricultural lessee does not pay the lease rental
when it falls due: Provided, That if the non-payment of the
rental shall be due to crop failure to the extent of seventy five
per centum as a result of a fortuitous event, the non-payment
shall not be a ground for dispossession, although the
obligation to pay the rental due that particular crop is not
thereby extinguished."
February 6, 2004
LEASEHOLD; ORDER OF PRIORITY OF SUCCESSORS IN CASE OF

DEATH OR PERMANENT INCAPACITY OF AGRICULTURAL
LESSEE
Is leasehold relation extinguished by the death or permanent

incapacity of the lessee?
 Section 9 of R.A. No. 3844 provides, quote: "In case of death

or permanent incapacity of the agricultural lessee to work
his landholding, the leasehold shall continue between the
landholding, personally chosen by the agricultural lessor
within one month from such death or permanent incapacity,
from among the following: (a) the surviving spouse; (b) the
eldest direct descendant by consanguinity; or (c) the next
eldest descendant or descendants in the order of their age .
. . . . in the event the agricultural lessor fails to exercise his
choice within the periods herein provided, the priority shall
be in accordance with the order herein established." The
son of a tenant may therefore take the place of his
deceased parent as tenant of the land subject to the
conditions as legally provided above.

February 9, 1999
LEASEHOLD; PARTIES THERETO AND BASIS THEREOF
Who are the parties to and what is the legal basis of entering
into an agricultural leasehold relation?
 Section 6 of R.A. No. 3844, as amended provides that the

"agricultural leasehold relation shall be limited to the
person who furnishes the landholding either as owner, civil
law lessee, usufructuary or legal possessor and the person
who personally cultivates the same". It is clear from said
provision that the legal possessor of a landholding may
enter into an agricultural leasehold contract with another
person, instituting him as agricultural lessee thereon.

August 14, 1996
 The law provides that in case of death of the agricultural

lessee, "the leasehold shall continue between the
landholding personally, chosen by the agricultural lessor
within one month from such death x x x from among the
following: a) the surviving spouse; b) the eldest direct
descendant by consanguinity; c) the next eldest
descendant or descendants in the order of their age:
Provided, that in case the death x x x of the agricultural
lessee occurs during the agricultural year, such choice
shall be exercised at the end of the agricultural year:
Provided, further, that in the event the agricultural lessor
fails to exercise his choice within the period herein
provided, the priority shall be in accordance with the order
herein established".

January 11, 1994
LEASEHOLD; PERSONAL CULTIVATION

Is personal cultivation a ground to terminate tenancy
relationship?
 It should be stressed that personal cultivation is no longer a

ground to terminate tenancy relationship, considering that
the same has already been deleted as a ground for
ejectment of the tenant under Section 7 of R.A. No. 6389,
which amended Section 36 (l) of R.A. No. 3844. Such being
the case, a landowner may not dispossess his tenant of his
farmlot on the ground that the landowner will now
personally cultivate the landholding.

February 21, 2002
relationship?
 Personal cultivation is no longer a ground to terminate

tenancy relationship considering that it has already been
deleted as a ground for ejectment of the tenant under
Section 7 of R.A. no. 6389, which amended Section 36 (l) of
R.A. No. 3844. Such being the case, the landowner may not
dispossess the tenant of his farmlot on the ground that the
landowner will now personally cultivate the landholding.

May 2, 2001
Is personal cultivation required before a person can be

considered tenant in a coconut land?
 Personal cultivation is not necessarily required before a

person can be considered tenant. This is so in view of the
S.C. decisions in the cases of Coconut Cooperative
Marketing Association, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, 164 S 568,
August 19, 1988 and Wenceslao Hernandez, 189 S 758,
September 21, 1990, to quote: "Cultivation is not limited to
the plowing and harrowing of the land, but also husbanding
of the ground to forward the products of the earth by
general industry, the taking care of the lands and fruits
growing thereon, fencing of certain areas and the clearing
thereof by gathering dried leaves and cutting of grasses. IN
coconut lands, cultivation includes the clearing of the
landholdings, gathering of coconuts, their pilling, husking,
and handling, as well as the processing thereof into copra,
although at times with the aid of hired laborers.

January 2, 1998
LEASEHOLD; PERSONAL CULTIVATION: AS A GROUND TO

TERMINATE TENANCY RELATIONSHIP

relationship?
 Personal Cultivation is no longer a ground to terminate
tenancy relationship because the same has been deleted as
a ground for the ejectment of the tenant under Section 7 of
Republic Act No. 6389 which amended Section 36 (1) of RA
3844.

February 2, 1994

January 26, 1994

February 16, 1994

October 10, 1994
LEASEHOLD; POLICIES FOR LAND PRIMARILY DEVOTED TO

COCONUT
 Section 5.1 of DAR Administrative Order No. 06, series of

2003 provides, to wit:
"Section 5. Specific Policies for Land Primarily

Devoted to Coconut. — In the implementation of the
leasehold system, particularly in coconut lands, the
following policies shall apply:
5.1 The indiscriminate cutting of coconut trees by the

landholder/tenant shall be deemed prima facie evidence to
dispossess the tenant/landholder of his landholding. To
rebut this presumption:
5.1.1 The party who wishes to cut coconut trees shall
secure the written consent of the other party; and
5.1.2 The proposing party shall secure a permit to cut

coconut trees from the Philippine Coconut Authority, in
accordance with R.A. No. 8048 (Coconut Preservation Act
of 1995) and its implementing rules and regulations."
 Likewise, under DAR Administrative Order No. 16, Series of

1989 (Rules and Regulations Governing Cutting of Coconut
Trees and/or Change in Use of Lands Primarily Devoted to
Coconut), the indiscriminate cutting of coconut trees by the
landowner is under regulation since this may lead to the
unlawful ejectment or dispossession of the tenant-tillers
and/or farmworkers.

April 18, 2005
LEASEHOLD; PROHIBITION ON INSTALLATION OF PUMP WELL
Can a landowner stop a lessee from irrigating other lots/crops

from the pump well he installed in a landholding?
 If there is no substantial damage, destruction or

unreasonable deterioration of the land or any improvement
thereon, the lessee may not be prohibited in installing the
pump well and using it in irrigating other lots. What is
strictly prohibited by R.A. No. 3844 is the lessee entering
into a contract to work additional landholdings belonging to
a different agricultural lessor, or acquiring and personally
cultivating an economic family size farm, without the
knowledge and consent of the lessor with whom he had
first entered into leasehold, if the first landholding is of
sufficient size to make him and the members of his
immediate farm household fully occupied in its cultivation.

November 27, 2000
LEASEHOLD; PROHIBITIONS TO AGRICULTURAL LESSEE

May an agricultural lessee employ a sub-lessee?
 It is worthy to note Section 27 (2) of R.A. No. 3844, as

amended which provides, quote:
"Section 27. Prohibitions to Agricultural Lessee. It

shall be unlawful for the agricultural lessee:
xxx xxx
xxx
To employ a sub-lessee on his landholding: Provided,
however, that in case of illness or temporary incapacity,
he may employ laborers whose services on his
landholding shall be on his account."
February 21, 2002
LEASEHOLD; REQUISITES
What are the requisites of agricultural leasehold relation?
 The following requisites must be present in order for

agricultural leasehold relation to exist (as decided by the
SC in the case of "Julio Beranda and Roberto Beranda vs.
Hon. Alfonso Baguio", Vol. 189 SCRA 194):
1. the parties are the landowner and the tenant;

2. the subject is agricultural land;
3. there is consent
4. the purpose is agricultural production;
5. there is personal cultivation; and
6. there is sharing of harvests.
 If one of the above requisites is absent, no agricultural

leasehold relation exists between the parties. Hence, if the
cultivation of the farmlot is without the consent of the
landowner, there can be no tenancy relation between him
and the transferee. Moreover, the tenant is under obligation
to personally cultivate his farmlot, performing the major
phases of farmwork, except when he is temporarily
incapacitated to do so, in which case he may, during such
period of temporary incapacity, hire other persons to
cultivate the land for him.

October 10, 1994

January 30, 1995

August 1, 1995

May 28, 1996

April 23, 1998
LEASEHOLD; RETAINED AREA NOT COVERED UNDER LAND

ACQUISITION AND DISTRIBUTION
Are lands within the retention right of a landowner and under

leasehold be covered by CARP?
 Although lands within the retention right of a landowner are

covered by the provisions of existing agrarian laws, rules
and regulations with respect to leasehold rights of a tenant-
lessee (e.g., right to security of tenure), the same are not
covered insofar as the land acquisition and distribution
aspect of the agrarian reform program is concerned. It is
only when said lands are beyond the legally allowable
retention area of the landowner that the same could be
covered by CARP.

August 24, 1998
LEASEHOLD; RICELAND SUBJECT OF LEASEHOLD CANNOT BE

SUBJECT OF MORTGAGES
May the tenant legally mortgage his leasehold on the riceland

under his tillage?
 The tenant cannot legally mortgage his leasehold on the

rice land under his tillage. This is because under Section 26
of R.A. 3844, as amended the agricultural lessee has the
obligation, among others, to cultivate and take care of the
farm, growing crops and other improvements on the
landholding as a good father of a family and perform all the
work therein in accordance with proven farm practices and
to keep his farm and growing crops attended to during the
work season. Should the tenant contract with another for
the cultivation of the land, he would remiss in his obligation
to work thereon and may be held liable for abandonment of
his farm lot.

July 2, 1996
LEASEHOLD; RIGHTS OF AGRICULTURAL LESSEE, RIGHTS TO BE

PROTECTED
What are the rights of agricultural lessee in general?

 The rights of agricultural lessee in general are the following:
1) to have possession and peaceful enjoyment of the land;
2) to manage and work on the land in a manner and method
of cultivation and harvest which conform to proven farm
practices; 3) to mechanize all or any phase of his farm
work; and 4) to deal with millers and processors and attend
to the issuance of quedans and warehouse receipts for the
produce due him.

October 25, 1994
 Section 23. Rights of Agricultural Lessee in General. – It

shall be the right of the agricultural lessee:
1. To have possession and peaceful enjoyment

of the land;
2. To manage and work on the land in a manner
and method of cultivation and harvest which conform to
proven farm practices;
3. To mechanize all or any phase of his farm
work; and
4. To deal with millers and processors and
attend to the issuance of quedans and warehouse
receipts for the produce due him.

July 2, 1996
What are the rights of agricultural lessee?
 Section 7 of R.A. 3844, as amended gives the agricultural

lessee the right to work on the landholding once the
leasehold relationship is established. It is also entitled him
to security of tenure on his landholding.

August 14, 1996
Is the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) in a position to
pursue remedies involving the prosecution of actions?
 The DAR shall consider legal options recommended in order

to protect the rights of the agricultural lessees and in order
not to derail the effective implementation of CARP.
 However, the DAR is of the view that the DOJ is in a better
position than the DAR to pursue whatever remedies to take
insofar as it involves the prosecution of actions. Stated
otherwise, it is within the competence and expertise of the
DOJ to initiate moves that would secure the lessees
against the harassment of some landowners.

December 13, 1996
LEASEHOLD; RIGHTS OF AGRICULTURAL LESSOR AND

AGRICULTURAL LESSEE
 The rights of agricultural lessees are provided for under

Sections 23, 24 and 25 of R.A. No. 3844 while the rights of
an agricultural lessor are provided for under Section 29 of
the same Code.

April 18, 2005
LEASEHOLD; SECURITY OF TENURE
 Considering that Mr. Sorio, the second hired caretaker, is a

tenant, he is entitled to the security of tenure and can not
be ejected therefrom unless authorized by the DAR
Adjudication Board (DARAB), in a judgment that is final and
executory after due hearing in accordance with Sections 7
and 36 of Republic Act No. 3844 (Agricultural Land Reform
Code).
July 6, 2006
 Security of tenure, which means that they may not be

ejected from their tillage unless authorized by the Court
(now DAR Adjudication Board) for causes provided in said
law.

April 18, 2005
 However, the children may acquire the land not as preferred

beneficiaries but as tenants in the landholding provided
that their tenancy will be established. This is anchored in
the third paragraph of Section 6.
"Section 6.
xxx xxx xxx
In all cases, the security of tenure of the farmers or

farmworkers on the land prior to the approval of this
Act shall be respected."
 Section 22 further provides that actual tenant-tillers in the

landholding shall not be ejected or removed therefrom.
Hence, a thorough evaluation must be done to ascertain if
the children have been in actual cultivation prior to the
CARP coverage.

February 22, 2006
 Under Section 7 of Republic Act No. 3844 (Agricultural Land

Reform Code), tenants are entitled to a security of tenure
and they continue to enjoy it despite the sale of the
property. The leasehold contract is not extinguished by the
transfer of legal ownership of the land from one landowner
to another. In such cases, the purchaser or transferee shall
be subrogated to the rights and substituted to the
obligations of the original agricultural lessor. Likewise, in
Sections 11 and 12 of said law, it is explicit that in case the
agricultural lessor decides to sell the landholding, the
agricultural lessee shall have the preferential right to buy
the same, and, in case the landholding is sold to a third
person without the knowledge of the agricultural lessee,
the latter shall have the right to redeem the same at a
reasonable price and consideration.

March 21, 2006
LEASEHOLD; SECURITY OF TENURE OF AGRICULTURAL LESSEE

Can a tenant enjoy security of tenure?
 Under Section 7 of Republic Act No. 3844, as amended (The

Agricultural Land Reform Code), the agricultural leasehold
relation, once established, shall confer upon the
agricultural lessee the right to continue working on the
landholding until such leasehold relation is extinguished.
He/she shall be entitled to security of tenure on his/her
landholding and he/she cannot be ejected therefrom unless
authorized by the Court (now DAR Adjudication Board) for
causes provided by law.
 Time and again, the Supreme Court has guaranteed the
continuity and security of tenure of tenant. As elucidated in
the case of Bernardo vs. Court of Appeals (168 SCRA 439),
security of tenure is a legal concession to agricultural
lessees which they value as life itself and deprivation of
their landholding is tantamount to deprivation of their only
means of livelihood.

February 21, 2002
Is leasehold relation extinguished by the sale of the
landholding?
 Isinasaad sa mga nasabing probisyon ng batas na kung

sakali man na ipagbili o magkaroon ng paglilipat sa
pagmamay-ari ng lupang sinasaka, magpapatuloy ang
samahang buwisan sa pagsasaka, nararapat lamang na
kayo po ay magbigay pa rin ng buwis sa bagong may-ari ng
lupang sinasaka.

October 30, 2001
Can a tenant enjoy security of tenure?
 A tenant enjoys security of tenure on his landholding, which

means that he/she cannot be ejected therefrom unless
authorized by the court for cause. Section 7 of R.A. No.
3844 provides that "the agricultural leasehold relation once
leasehold relation is extinguished." Time and again, the
Supreme Court has guaranteed the continuity and security
of tenure of tenant even in cases of a mere transfer of legal
possession. As elucidated in the case of Bernardo vs. Court
of Appeals (168 SCRA 439), security of tenure is a legal
concession to agricultural lessees which they value as life
itself and deprivation of their landholding is tantamount to
deprivation of their only means of livelihood.

February 9, 1999
 Moreover, Section 7 of R.A. No. 3844, as amended, provides

that agricultural leasehold relation, once established, shall
confer upon the agricultural lessee the right to continue
working on the landholding until such leasehold relation is
extinguished. The agricultural lessee shall be entitled to
security of tenure on his landholding and cannot be ejected
therefrom unless authorized by the Court (now, DAR
Adjudication Board) for causes provided for in said law.
Section 36 of Republic Act No. 3844, as amended, further
provides in part: "xxxxx an agricultural lessee shall
continue in the enjoyment and possession of his
landholding except when his dispossession has been
authorized by the Court in a judgment that is final and
executory xxxxx".

May 2, 2001
 Mortgage of agricultural land by a landowner, as a rule, is

not prohibited by law, it being an attribute of ownership.
However, pursuant to Section 7 of Republic Act No. 3844,
as amended by R.A. 6389 (Code of Agrarian Reforms), the
agricultural lessee shall be entitled to security of tenure on
his landholding, and, he cannot be ejected therefrom unless
authorized by the Court (now, the DAR Adjudication Board)
for causes provided under said law. As elucidated in the
case of Bernardo vs. Court of Appeals (168 SCRA 439),
 More specifically, section 10 of R.A. No. 3844, as amended
provides that the leasehold relation is not extinguished by
the sale, alienation or transfer of the legal possession of
the landholding. And, in case the agricultural lessor sells,
alienates or transfers the legal possession of the
landholding, the purchaser or transferee thereof shall be
subrogated to the rights and substituted to the obligations
of the agricultural lessor (owner)

April 27, 2001
LEASEHOLD; TENANCY RELATIONSHIP NOT EXTINGUISHED

BY TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP
 Ang isang lehitimong kasamang namumuwisan ay may

karapatan na magpatuloy sa paggawa sa hinahawakang
lupa kung sakali man na ipagbili o magkaroon ng paglilipat
sa pagmamay-ari ng lupang sinasaka. Ang isang
namumuwisan sa pagsasaka, gayunman, ay maaring
magkusa ng pagsasauli sa hinahawakang lupa at ito ay
isang paraan ng pagwawakas ng pagsasamahang buwisan
sa pagsasaka alinsunod sa Seksyon 8 (Pagwawakas sa
Pagsasamahang Buwisan sa Pagsasaka) ng nasabing batas.

September 18, 2008
LEASEHOLD; TENANCY RELATIONSHIP NOT EXTINGUISHED
BY TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP
 Under Section 7 of Republic Act No. 3844 (Agricultural Land

Reform Code), a tenant is entitled to a security of tenure on
his landholding until such leasehold relations is
extinguished. Such tenant continues to enjoy it despite the
transfer of the property to another because tenancy
relationship is not extinguished by the transfer of
ownership of the land. Where there is transfer of ownership,
the transferee shall be subrogated to the rights of the
transferor. The rights and obligations arising from the
tenancy relationship shall continue to subsist until modified
by the parties (the new owner and the tenant).

November 25, 2008
LEASEHOLD; TENANT-LESSEE'S RIGHT OF REDEMPTION
 There are two (2) mutually exclusive remedies provided

under the aforequoted Section 12 of R.A. No. 3844, as
amended by Section 2 of R.A. No. 6389 for the exercise of
the tenant-lessee's right of redemption. One is the filing of
the corresponding petition or request with the Department,
and, the other is the filing of a corresponding case in court
(now DARAB), as herein resorted to.

February 21, 2002
LEASEHOLD; TENANT-LESSEES'S RIGHT OF REDEMPTION
 Section 12 of Republic Act No. 3844 (Agricultural Land

Reform Code), as amended by Section 2 of R.A. No. 6389,
which provides:
"Section 12. Lessee's Right of Redemption. — In case

the landholding is sold to a third person without the
knowledge of the agricultural lessee, the latter shall
have the right to redeem the same at a reasonable
price and consideration: Provided, That where there are
two or more agricultural lessees, each shall be entitled
to said right of redemption only to the extent of the
area actually cultivated by him. The right of redemption
under this Section may be exercised within one
hundred eighty days from notice in writing which shall
be served by the vendee on all lessees affected and the
Department of Agrarian Reform upon the registration of
the sale, and shall have priority over any other right of
legal redemption. The redemption price shall be the
reasonable price of the land at the time of the sale.
Upon the filing of the corresponding petition or request with

the department or corresponding case in court by the
agricultural lessee or lessees, the said period of one hundred
and eighty days shall cease to run.
Any petition or request for redemption shall be resolved

within sixty days from the filing thereof; otherwise, the
said period shall start to run again."
 Clearly, the right of redemption must be exercised within

the specified time limit. Although this right may not be
possible at this point, the leasehold relation is not
extinguished by the sale, alienation or transfer of the legal
possession of the landholding, the purchaser or transferee
thereof shall be subrogated to the obligations of the new
owner in accordance to Section 10 of R.A. No. 3844.

October 17, 2006
LEASEHOLD; TENANTS ENTITLED TO SECURITY OF TENURE
 Tenants are by law entitled to security of tenure, which

means that they can only be ejected from their tillage for
just cause and after payment of disturbance compensation.
However, please note that we speak of disturbance
compensation only in cases of legal conversion approved by
the DAR upon the application of the landowner pursuant to
Section 36(1) of R.A. No. 3844. In cases if expropriation
undertaken at the instance of the government in the
exercise of its power of eminent domain, the provision of
Section 18 of Executive Order No. 1035 shall be the
applicable law.

January 11, 2008
LEASEHOLD; TENANTS NOT ENTITLED TO PENSION OR

RETIREMENT BENEFITS
Are the tenants entitled to pension or retirement benefits?
 Bukod pa sa mga nabanggit, ang isang magsasaka o

naglilinang ay hindi maihahalintulad sa isang empleyado na
karaniwang pinagkakalooban ng pensiyon o "retirement
benefits" ayon sa itinakda ng batas, subalit manapa'y ang
isang tenant ay ipinapalagay o tunay na may-ari ng lupa na
kaniyang sinasaka. Hindi siya naninilbihan o nagtatrabaho
para kaninuman kundi para sa kanyang sariling kapakanan.

April 19, 2001
LEGAL OPINION; REFUSAL TO RENDER OPINION

May the Department of Agrarian Reform render an opinion in
matters which involve a review of the decision by the DARAB?
 This Office regrets that it has decline to render an opinion

for it would inevitably involve a review of the decision by
the Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board
(DARAB) which allegedly resulted in the issuance of TCT
No. NT-273396 dated March 16, 2000 in the names of
Renato Romero and Librada Romero. Said query involves
matters which falls within the exclusive authority of the
DARAB and any opinion that we may render thereon might
be taken as an unwarranted intrusion upon the powers and
functions of the Board. As a matter of policy, this Office has
consistently declined to render opinion on issues which are
justiciable in nature or which could be the subject of court
litigation.

January 29, 2002
LEGAL OPINION; REFUSAL TO RENDER AN OPINION
May the DAR render an opinion in matters which are the

subject of a pending litigation or controversy?
 It is the Department's declared policy to maintain a hands-

off stance in matters which are the subject of a pending
litigation or controversy. The rationale behind the refusal to
take cognizance of the issues raised is based on ethical
ground, that is, to avoid conflicting opinions on the matter,
and in order not to pre-empt any decision the DARAB may
render. In effect, they are sub judice.

November 10, 1999
Can the DAR render legal opinion on matters which are the
subject of pending litigation or controversy before a judicial or
quasi-judicial body?
 This Office has consistently adhered to the standing policy

of maintaining a hands-off stance on mailers which are the
subject of pending litigation or controversy before judicial
or quasi-judicial bodies. Said policy is founded both on
ethical and practical ground, that is to avoid, conflicting
opinions and pre-judgment of the issues raised therein.

March 24, 1998
LEGISLATIVE POWER
What is the legislative power of the State?

 Legislative power is the power of lawmaking, framing and
enactment of laws and is effected through the adoption of a
bill, or a proposed or projected law introduced by any
member of the House of Representatives or the Senate
which once approved, becomes the law of the state.

August 23, 1995
LIENS AND ENCUMBRANCES; CARRIED OVER TO THE EP/CLOA
Are liens and encumbrances carried over to EPs issued to FBs

be dispensed with?
 The carry-over of liens to the EPs issued to farmer-

beneficiaries is a legal requirement and cannot be
dispensed with. Section 62 of P.D. No. 1529 (the Property
Registration Decree) provides, quote:
"A mortgage or lease on registered land may

be discharged or cancelled by means of an
instrument executed by the mortgage (sic) or
lessee in a form sufficient in law, which shall be
filed with the Register of Deeds who shall make
the appropriate memorandum upon the
certificate of title."
 Land Registration Authority Circular No. 54 requires that the

liens or encumbrances shall be carried over to the EP/CLOA
presented for registration, unless the appropriate
instrument for its cancellation is likewise presented.
 DOJ Opinion No. 92, Series of 1978 pointed out that, the
farmer-beneficiaries are already deemed owners of the land
as of 21 October 1972 by operation of law and, as such, it
could no longer be transferred except to the heirs of the
tenants or to the government, and the same could not
accordingly be the subject of foreclosure proceedings. This
is pursuant to the settled rule underscored by the Supreme
Court in a long line of decisions that the constitutional
guarantee of non-impairment of obligations is limited by the
exercise of the police power of the State (i.e., public
welfare is superior to private rights) of which the
implementation of P.D. No. 27 is being undertaken in the
exercise thereof.

June 01, 1998
LIENS; LAND BANK'S ROLE WITH REGARD TO LIENS CARRIED

OVER TO EPs
May the Land Bank take notice of the encumbrance carried

over to EPs?
 The Land Bank must therefore take notice of such

encumbrance and pay the amount of the loan (minus the
amount already paid by the farmer-beneficiaries) which
amount shall be deducted from the total land
compensation. However, should the amount of loan be
greater than the actual land valuation as provided for by
law, the excess thereof must necessarily be shouldered by
the landowner, and the mortgagee bank should perforce
correspondingly issue a Certificate of Release of Mortgage
as a matter of course in order not to unduly prejudice the
farmer-beneficiaries who, at the inception of OLT
implementation and even before the contract of mortgage,
are already deemed owners of the lands in issue.

June 01, 1998
M
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT; EXECUTION OF MOA BETWEEN
DAR AND DOH
What does a MOA partakes of?

 The execution of a Memorandum of Agreement between the
DAR and the DOH, provided it is pursuant to and in
compliance with existing agrarian laws, rules and
regulations, is a step in the right direction insofar as the
transfer of the subject landholdings to the DAR is
concerned. The execution of a MOA will facilitate the
transfer and will ensure the strict compliance of the terms
and conditions therein stated. As the MOA partakes of the
nature of a contract, the same will constitute as the law
between the contracting parties which will serve as
a safeguard against possible breach.

June 23, 1998
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT; EXECUTION OF MOA BETWEEN

DECS AND DAR
What is the effect of a MOA? Would the existence of the

MOA hinder DAR from indorsing the request for re-
proclamation to the Office of the President?
 The existence of the MOA between the DECS and DAR will
not necessarily hinder the latter from indorsing request for
re-proclamation of the area to the Office of the President.
However, in view of Executive Order No. 448 dated 14
February 1991 (amending E.O. No. 407, Series of 1990),
such indorsement may not appropriately be the immediate
legal recourse. Section 1 of the abovecited Executive Order
provides:
Sec. 1. Executive Order No. 407 is hereby amended by

adding a new section to read as follows:
reserved by virtue of Presidential Proclamations
for specific public uses by the government, its
Agrarian Reform Program." (underscoring
supplied)

October 27, 1999
MINERAL LAND; ELEMENTS IN CONSIDERATION THEREOF
What are the elements in consideration of a mineral land?
 As earlier declared in the Memorandum of MGB dated 26

October 1999, the three elements in the consideration of a
Mineral Land are as follows: 1) The presence of Mineral
Resources; 2) the conduct of mining operations, i.e.,
exploration/development/extraction activities; and 3) a valid
and subsisting mining permit/contract.

October 9, 2000
MORTGAGE OF CLOA
Can CLOA properties be mortgaged by landowners to
secure the loan of the Nation Petroleum Corporation (NPC)
from various banking institutions?
 In order not to possibly unduly put the ARBs of risk, it is our

considered opinion that subject lands should not be
mortgaged by the ARBs. We have to safeguard and protect
the welfare and interests of the ARBs since there is the
possibility that should the business venture (petroleum
depot) not prosper or materialize the agrarian reform
beneficiaries will be at risk of losing their lands in case of
foreclosure.
 Moreover, it is worthy to note that in Nos. 2 and 3 of the
terms and conditions in the subject Joint Venture
Agreement dated 08 August 2002, "the Landowners shall
cede and deliver possession and use of their landholdings
to the Corporation" while "the Corporation shall
undertake conversion of the landholdings by putting up its
facilities for petroleum depot, shouldering all the expenses
therefore until its completion."

April 13, 2004
MORTGAGE; CANCELLATION
Should all liens or encumbrances appearing on the title be

cancelled?
 Only liens or encumbrances on the title or CLOA as a result

of a mortgage or other encumbrance equivalent to the
landowner's compensation value as provided in Section 72
of R.A. No. 6657 and DAR Administrative Order No. 2, Series
of 1997 shall be cancelled. Otherwise stated, not all liens or
encumbrances appearing on the title shall be assumed by
the government in its entirety for the latter's obligation is
only limited to the landowner's compensation value and any
excess thereof would be carried over to the title or CLOA.

July 1, 1997
MORTGAGE; ESSENTIAL REQUISITES
 In other words, they are deemed mortgages and as such are

bound by the terms and conditions stated in the contract.
Article 2085 of the Civil Code of the Philippines provides:
"Article 2085. The following requisites are essential to

the contract of pledge and mortgage:
(1) That they be constituted to secure the fulfillment of a

principal obligation;
(2) That the pledges or mortgagor be the absolute owner of

thing pledged or mortgaged;
(3) That the persons constituting the pledge or

mortgage have the free disposal of their property, and
in the absence thereof, that they be legally authorized
for the purpose."
 As such, the total area of 16,441 square meters as

embraced in the Emancipation Patent shall be the subject
of foreclosure in addition to other cooperative's assets to
satisfy a just and demandable debt.

October 28, 2005
MORTGAGE; ESSENTIAL REQUISITES OF CONTRACT OF
PLEDGE AND MORTGAGE
 Article 2085. The following requisites are

essential to the contracts of pledge and mortgage:
(1) That they be constituted to secure the

fulfillment of a principal obligation;
(2) That the pledge or mortgagor be the absolute
owner of the thing pledged or mortgaged;
(3) That the persons constitution the pledge or
mortgage have the free disposal of their property, and in
the absence thereof, that they be legally authorized for
the purpose.
October 28, 2005
MORTGAGE; REGISTERED WITH THE REGISTER OF DEEDS

SHALL BE ASSUMED BY THE GOVERNMENT
When shall the government assume the mortgage and

other claims registered with the Register of Deeds?
 Sec. 72 (b) of R.A. No. 6657 provides that mortgages and

other claims registered with the Register of Deeds shall be
assumed by the government up to an amount equivalent to
the landowner's compensation value as provided in this
Act. If in the process of valuation, the amount of the
property turns out to be lower than the amount of loan
granted by the creditor bank, and the offeror does not agree
with such valuation, he may bring the matter to the DAR
Adjudication Board (DARAB) for the preliminary
determination of just compensation and if he disagrees with
the decision of the Board, he may elevate the matter to the
Special Agrarian Court which shall have original and
exclusive jurisdiction over all petitions for the final
determination of just compensation to landowners.

March 11, 1997
N
NATIONAL LIVELIHOOD SUPPORT FUND (NLSF); MOA BETWEEN
DAR AND LBP/NLSF
What is the function of the Bagong Kilusang Kabuhayan sa

Kaunlaran (BKKK)?
 Section 37 of R.A. 6657 provides that the BKKK Secretariat

shall be transferred and attached to the LBP, for its
supervision including all its applicable and existing funds,
personnel, properties, equipment and records. Likewise,
Section 64 of the same Act provides that the Land Bank of
the Philippines shall be the financial intermediary for the
CARP, and shall insure that the social justice objectives of
the CARP shall enjoy a preference among its priorities
(Underscoring supplied). On the other hand, Administrative
Order No. 4511, Series of 1998 in its final whereas clause
states that the objectives and programs of BKKK/NLSF and
PCFC are similar . . . (underscoring supplied).
 The transfer of the functions of the BKKK to the PCFC

pursuant to A.O. No. 4511 will not necessarily divert or
rechannel the aforementioned P211 million DAR-NLSF
program fund for other non-agrarian poverty alleviation
purposes. The statement in the dispositive portion of A.O.
No. 4511 (no. 3 thereof) that the trust fund shall be used
exclusively for microfinance services for the poor perforce
includes and contemplates, likewise, livelihood credit
assistance for the ARBs who definitely belong to the
category of the poor in our society.

January 25, 1999
NGO; CAN A REGULAR GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE
REPRESENT AN NGO? QUALIFICATION AS
REPRESENTATIVE OF AN NGO IN THE PROVINCIAL LEVEL
OF PARCCOM
 Administrative Order No. 7, Series of 1994 [New

Implementing Guidelines Strengthening the Formation,
Organization, and Operation of the Provincial Agrarian
Reform Coordinating Committee (PARCCOM)] defines a Non-
Government Organization as a civic, religious or non-
sectarian organization or association which is peasant-
oriented, organized primarily for rural development and
operating in the province. The same A.O. state as basic
qualification of a representative to be a bonafide member of
an association/organization/cooperative as certified by the
said organization/cooperative/NGO.
 This implies that a sectoral representative must represent

the special interest/concern of the sector in which he/she is
a member. A government employee therefore, cannot
simply represent an NGO because of varied interest.

October 10, 2008
NOTARY PUBLIC; AUTHORITY OF DAR FIELD LAWYERS
 Significantly, Department Special Order No. 597, Series of

1989 (Authority for DAR Field Lawyers to Apply for
Commission as Notaries Public) was issued which provides
that in the interest of the service, DAR Regional Directors
are authorized to allow their lawyers, one lawyer for every
province or city, to apply for Commission as Notaries Public
for this Department in the cities or provinces where they
are assigned; that as official Notaries Public of this
Department, they shall notarize, free of charge, not only
documents and transactions of this Department and those
executed by DAR officials and employees in their official
capacities but also agricultural leasehold contracts; that as
to other documents, notarial fees shall be collected in
accordance with the schedule prescribed under Section 9
of Rule 141 of the Rules of Court by the DAR cashier
concerned; that the official notaries public of this
Department shall submit to the Auditor/Accountant for
examination and notation their reports before submitting
them to the Clerk of Court concerned; and that the
expenses for filing petition for Commission as Notary
Public, notarial books, loose leaves, and notarial seal shall
be chargeable to the Department.

right to perform notarization even outside DAR’s Office. For
concerned is necessary to put a stamp of validity to their
authority. Since a notarial acknowledgement attaches not
only full faith and credit to the document concerned but
also vests upon the document the presumption of regularity
unless it is impugned by strong, complete and conclusive
proof (Severo Sales vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-40145,
July 29, 1992), public policy dictates that the same should
be duly regulated and authorized accordingly.

July 28, 2009
NOTARY PUBLIC; AUTHORITY OF DAR FIELD LAWYERS
Are DAR Field Lawyers allowed to notarize documents not

related in the performance of official duties and functions
and can therefore charge notarial fees?
 Department Special Order No. 597, Series of 1989 (Authority

for DAR Field Lawyers to Apply for Commission as Notaries
Public) was issued which provides that in the interest of the
service, DAR Regional Directors are authorized to allow
their lawyers, one lawyer for every province or city, to apply
for Commission as Notaries Public for this Department in
the cities or provinces where they are assigned; that as
official Notaries Public of this Department, they shall
notarize, free of charge, not only documents and
transactions of this Department and those executed by DAR
officials and employees in their official capacities but also
agricultural leasehold contracts; that as to other
documents, notarial fees shall be collected, in accordance
with the schedule prescribed under Section 9 of Rule 141 of
the Rules of Court, by the DAR cashier concerned; that the
official notaries public of this Department shall submit to
the Auditor/Accountant for examination and notation their
reports before submitting them to the clerk of court
concerned; and that the expenses for filing petition for
Commission as Notary Public, notarial books, loose leaves,
and notarial seal shall be chargeable to the Department.

a document does not itself confer them an unbridled right
to perform notarization even outside DAR's Office. For them
to legally and validly perform the functions of a notary
concerned is necessary. Since a notarial acknowledgment
attaches not only full faith and credit to the document
concerned but also vests upon the document the
presumption of regularity unless it is impugned by strong,
complete and conclusive proof (Severo Sales vs. Court of
Appeals, G.R. No. L-40145, July 29, 1992), public policy
dictates that the same should be duly regulated and

October 28, 1999
Are DAR lawyers authorized to perform the functions of a
notary public outside DAR's office?

right to perform notarization even outside DAR's Office. For
public, clearance from the DAR Secretary is necessary to
put a stamp of validity to their authority. Since a notarial
acknowledgement attaches not only full faith and credit to
the document concerned but also vest upon the document
the presumption of regularity unless it is impugned by
strong, complete and conclusive proof (Severo Sales vs.
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-40145, July 29, 1992), public
policy dictates that the same should be duly regulated and
 A clearance from the DAR Secretary is a condition sine qua

non before DAR lawyers can perform the function of a
notary public outside DAR's Office.

June 23, 1998
Are Provincial Agrarian Reform Adjudicators (PARADs)

allowed to notarize in a place where he is temporarily
assigned?
 The authority of a notary public to acknowledge documents

is only limited to those executed within his/her territorial
jurisdiction (Severo Sales & Esperanza Sales Bermudez vs.
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-40145, July 29, 1992). By its
terms, a PARAD appointed in one province but temporarily
assigned with the DAR Central Office could not comply with
the aforesaid notarial rule. Notarization is only limited to
one particular place as implied in the jurat itself.

November 09, 2000
NOTARY PUBLIC; DAR LEGAL OFFICERS NOT

AUTHORIZED TO SIGN AS NOTARY PUBLIC
 A DAR Legal Officer who is not a full-fledged lawyer is not

authorized to sign as Notary Public in any kind of legal
document. The 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice provides for
the qualifications of a petitioner for a commission as Notary
Public. Rule III, Section 1 thereof provides, quote:
"Section 1. Qualifications. — A notarial commission may be

issued by an Executive Judge to any qualified person who submits a
petition in accordance with these Rules.
To be eligible for commissioning as notary public, the petitioner:
xxx xxx xxx
4. must be a member of the Philippine Bar in good standing

with clearances from the Office of the Bar Confidant of the
Supreme Court and the Integrated Bar of the Philippines.
xxx
xxx xxx."
 Clearly, only members of the Philippine Bar are eligible for a

commission to act as a Notary Public.

January 31, 2007
O
OATH; JUDGES AUTHORIZED TO ADMINISTER
 It could be gleaned from said provision of R.A. No. 9700

specifically Section thereof, that there is an express and
specific mention that the contemplated taking of oath by
the intended beneficiary shall be administered only by the
judge of the municipal or city court. It should be
emphasized that where the law is clear, by its terms, is
expressly limited to certain matter, it may not, by
interpretation or construction, be extended to other
matters. Likewise, it is a settled rule on statutory
construction that the express mention of one person, thing
or consequence implies the exclusion of all others. This is
under the rule in expressio unius est exclusion alterius.
 In view of the foregoing, and considering that there is no
express mention under R.A. No. 9700, Sharia’h Court
Judges cannot be considered as authorized to administer
the required oath.

January 12, 2010
OFFICE OF THE AGRARIAN COUNSEL; FUNCTIONS
 Section 163 of R.A. No. 3844 as amended by R.A. No. 6389

provides:
"Section 163. Functions of the Office of

the Agrarian Counsel. — It shall be the responsibility of
the Office of the Agrarian Counsel upon proper
notification by the party concerned or by the
association or organization to which he belongs, to
represent tenants, agricultural lessees, agricultural
farmworkers and agricultural lessees and agricultural
farm household referred to in this Code who cannot
engage the services of competent private counsel in
cases before the Court of Agrarian Relations. This
responsibility shall include representation before the
courts, including appellate, in cases civil or criminal,
instituted by or against said tenant, agricultural
lessees, agricultural farmworkers and agricultural
farm household, where the cases arise from, or are
connected with, or results or effects of an agrarian
dispute, The decision of the Office of the Agrarian
Counsel to provide legal assistance shall be final."
January 9, 2006
ORDER OF AWARD
Are lands covered by an Order of Award be subjected to

the Land Improvement Tenure Program?
 The land covered by an Order of Award can be subjected to

the Land Improvement Tenure Program if, prior to October
21, 1972, the awardee had paid in full the purchase price
and had complied with the cultivation requirement of the
land.

December 13, 1996
ORDER OF AWARD; TO BE IMPLEMENTED BY DAR AND

LBP
 In view of the aforementioned DAR CLT Cancellation Order

and since the Order of Award dated 08 December 2003
signed by no less than the Secretary of DAR was already
issued to the new awardee, Warren Francis Hernandez,
after passing the criteria and requirements set forth by
pertinent laws and regulations, it is therefore but proper
and incumbent upon DAR and LBP to respect and
implement said Order of Award.
February 11, 2005
ORDER OF PRIORITY; BENEFICIARIES
 The order of priority with respect to beneficiaries has been

adopted in the provisions of R.A. No. 6657 particularly
Section 22, to wit:
"Section 22. Qualified Beneficiaries. — The lands covered by

the CARP shall be distributed as much as possible to landless
residents of the same Barangay, or in the absence thereof,
landless resident of the same municipality in the following order
of priority:
a) agricultural lessees and share tenants;
b) regular farmworkers;
c) seasonal farmworkers;
d) other farmworkers;
e) actual tillers or occupants of public lands;
f) collectives or cooperatives of the above

beneficiaries; and
g) others directly working on the land.
Provided, however, that the children of landowner who are

qualified under Section 6 of this Act shall be given preference in
the distribution of the land of their parents; And provided, further,
that actual tenant-tillers in the landholding shall not be ejected or
removed therefrom.
xxx
xxx xxx
 Thus, it can be construed that the NLRC is now a defunct

body; the order of priority of beneficiaries remains to be in
effect subject to certain modifications in keeping with the
present agrarian laws.

March 24, 2009
ORDER OF REALLOCATION; APPEAL MAY BE FILED WITH THE

OFFICE OF THE DAR SECRETARY
Where may an Order of Reallocation be appealed?
 An appeal from an order of reallocation may be filed with

the Office of the DAR Secretary to enable the heirs to prove
that said reallocation is erroneous and that they have a
better right to said reallocation as heirs of the beneficiary.

January 11, 1996
ORDER/RESOLUTION BY THE DAR SECRETARY;

IMPLEMENTATION THEREOF
Can the Regional Director implement orders/resolution

issued by the DAR Secretary?
 Executive Order No. 129-A provides that the Regional Office

within its administrative region is responsible for the
implementation of laws, policies, plans, program, projects,
rules and regulations of the Department. Moreover,
Department M.C. No. 10, Series of 1994 in relation with DAR
M.C. No. 3, 1994 provides that the Order/Resolution of the
Secretary on cases arising from the administrative
implementation of Agrarian Reform Law shall be sent to the
field office for purposes of implementation. It is therefore
clear that the Regional Director is tasked to implement final
and executory DAR Orders/Resolutions involving cases
within his region.

April 30, 1998
OUTSIDE OF URBAN CENTERS AND CITY LIMITS; DEFINED
What is the meaning the phrase "outside of Urban Centers

and City Limits?
 The phrase "outside of urban centers and city limits" means

outside the boundaries of urban centers and cities.
Although Section 73 (e) of RA 6657 (the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law) refers only to lands outside of urban
centers and city limits, Section 73 © covers agricultural
lands both within and outside of urban centers and cities by
declaring as a prohibited act the conversion of agricultural
land into non-agricultural use with intent to avoid the
application of CARL on the landholding.

January 31, 1995
OWNERSHIP; OWNER OF THE LAND BECOMES OWNER

OF WHAT HAS BEEN ERECTED TO HIS LAND BY ANOTHER
 The owner of the land becomes the owner of what had been
erected on his land by another. However, determination is
required on whether the builder was in good faith or in bad
faith. Assuming that the builder was in good faith, the
landowner should he desire to appropriate the fence, must
first give the proper indemnification to the builder (i.e., the
alleged tenant and his sons).
February 19, 2008
OWNERSHIP; EXISTENCE OF COLLECTIVE OWNERSHIP
When does collective ownership exist?
 CARP lands are generally distributed directly to individual

worker-beneficiaries. However, for purposes of facilitating
the distribution of these lands to agrarian reform
beneficiaries, these are preferably transferred collectively
to groups of farmers. This collective ownership is either by
the option of the beneficiaries pursuant to Sec. 25 of CARL,
or because the DAR has determined that it is not
economically feasible and sound to divide the land among
the beneficiaries, as provided under Sec. 29 of the same
Act.

December 23, 1996

December 13, 1996

November 28, 1994
OWNERSHIP; OF PROCESSING PLANT; DAR AS

STOCKHOLDER
 When the NCFSJC incorporated the CQPICPP, a corporation

was established under BP Blg. 68 (the Corporation Code of
the Philippines) for which the CQPICPP legitimately became
a juridical person. A reading of the Memorandum of
Understanding reveals that the DAR invested P30 Million in
the corporation; in effect, DAR became a major stockholder
of the corporation holding a stock certificate with a
corresponding 30 million capital stock. It must be
emphasized that substantial ownership of stocks in a
corporation does not make a shareholder/stockholder, such
as DAR, the owner of the corporation. The CQPICPP, as a
corporation is invested by law with a personality separate
and distinct from its stockholders. The stockholders are not
owners but have only indirect interests over corporate
assets.

May 13, 2009
P
PACTO DE RETRO SALE; PRINCIPLE
 On pacto de retro sale, title to and ownership of property

are immediately vested in the vendee a retro, subject only
to the resolutory condition that the vendor repurchases it
within the stipulated period. Pending the redemption, the
vendor loses all ownership rights over the property, save for
the right to repurchase it.
 The vendee can be protected under Article 1606 of the New

Civil Code as to the repurchase period, if no period was
agreed upon, vendor must exercise the right to repurchase
within four (4) years from the execution of the contract
providing for the period to repurchase. If there is an
agreement, the period cannot extend ten (10) years.
Moreover, in case of failure to redeem, there shall be
consolidation of ownership in the vendee a retro and such
failure results in the loss of the right to repurchase.

November 14, 2008
PARA-LEGAL OFFICER OF DAR AS COUNSEL IN CASES OF

AGRARIAN DISPUTE
Whether or not a para-legal officer may appear as counsel
in ejectment cases.
 The issue dealing on the sharing of harvest and the deposit

of lease rentals for refusal of the landowner to accept lease
rentals is an agrarian dispute which falls squarely under the
jurisdiction of the DARAB and not the regular courts.
 Sec 3 (d) of RA 6657 (CARP) defines AGRARIAN DISPUTE as
any controversy relating to tenurial arrangements, whether
leasehold tenancy, stewardship or otherwise, over lands
devoted to agriculture, including disputes concerning
farmworkers association or representation of persons, in
negotiating, fixing, maintaining, changing or seeking to
arrange terms or conditions of such tenurial arrangements.
 A para-legal officer of the DAR, who is a non-lawyer can
appear as counsel in an ejectment case because the
dispute is an agrarian matter.

December 13, 1996
PARC’s RESOLUTION; SUFFICIENT AUTHORITY TO

GOVERN PROVISION OF GOVERNMENT’S SUBSIDY
 A PARC Resolution may already be sufficient to govern the

government’s subsidy in keeping with its mandate "to
ensure the timely and effective delivery of the necessary
support services" (Section 18, Executive Order No. 229).
Likewise, under the same Section of Executive Order No.
229, it provides that "the PARC shall formulate and/or
implement the policies, rules and regulations necessary to
implement each component of the CARP, and may authorize
any of its members to formulate rules and regulations
concerning aspects of agrarian reform falling within
their area of responsibility".
 Further, Section 49 of R.A. No. 6657 expressly provides:
"The PARC and the DAR shall have the power to issue rules
and regulations, whether substantive or procedural, to
carry out the objects and purposes of this Act".
 Accordingly, with these legal mandate and function of
PARC, a Resolution from their end would be sufficient
without necessarily going through the process of
legislation.

March 11, 2009
PARCCOM CHAIRMAN; INELIGIBILITY TO HOLD APPOINTIVE

OFFICE OR POSITION
May a Vice-Mayor be considered automatically resigned as

PARCCOM Chairman upon the filing of his certificate of
candidacy?
 "Sec. 66. Candidates holding appointive office or position. –

Any person holding a public appointive position including
active members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines and
officers and employees in government owned or controlled
corporations shall be considered ipso facto resigned from
his office upon the filing of his certificate of candidacy.
 From the foregoing, it is clear that a Vice-Mayor is
considered automatically resigned as PARCCOM Chairman
upon the filing of his certificate of candidacy. It follows that
as of said date of filing, he no longer possessed the power
vested in the PARCCOM Chairman, hence, could no longer
legally discharge his duties as such.

August 3, 1995
PARCCOM MEMBERS; BASIC QUALIFICATIONS
What are the basic qualifications of PARCCOM members?

 The basic qualifications of PARCCOM members were
enumerated in PARC Executive Committee Adm. Order No.
01, series of 1997 mentioned PARC Executive Committee
Administrative Order. On the surface, it appears that a
natural-born Filipino citizen who had renounced his
Philippine citizenship and became an American citizen may
still be qualified as a member of the PARCCOM for as long
as he possesses all the basic qualifications enumerated
therein.
 To become a PARCCOM member or a member in the
Screening Committee of Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries
contemplates occupancy of a public office or, at least, calls
for the discharge of a public function, a prerogative that is
exclusively reserved for Filipino citizens.
 That one has been nominated to represent a particular
sectoral group is inconsequential. Involved herein are
public offices or functions.

November 5, 1999
PARCCOM; CHAIRMAN ARE CONSIDERED PUBLIC OFFICER
Is the PARCCOM Chairman considered a public officer?
 A Chairman of the PARCCOM, is considered public officer,

for he is appointed by the President to whom the power to
appoint has been vested.
SECTION 26. Every person holding

a public appointive office or position ipso facto
ceases in his office or position on the date he files
his certificate of candidacy.
 The mere filing of said certificate would constitute and

result in the cessation from the appointed public official.
February 16, 1998
PARCCOM; DISQUALIFICATION OF MEMBERS FROM HOLDING

OTHER POSITION IN GOVERNMENT
Are PARCCOM members qualified to hold other office in

government?
 As ruled by the Supreme Court, the constitution being the

fundamental and paramount law of the nation is also the
supreme law to which all other laws must conform and in
accordance with which all private rights must be
determined and all public authority administered (Manila
Prince Hotel vs. G.S.I.S. et al., G.R No. 122156,
Promulgated, February 3, 1997). This implies that in the
discharge and administration of public authority or office, it
must be in conformity and consonance with the
constitution, otherwise, the same will have no force or
effect in law.
 The prohibition shall accordingly apply to both categories of
members in the House of Representatives, whether he be a
Congressman by the direct vote of the people or a Party-list
Representative.

November 5, 1998
PARCCOM; FUNCTION
What is the function of the PARCCOM?
 DAR A.O. No. 7, Series of 1994 provides that the PARCCOM

shall serve as a forum for resolving operational problems
and issues, for policy formulation and inter-agency work
programming and shall provide overall direction in inter-
agency coordination and work programming at the
provincial level.

December 13, 1996
PARCCOM; MEMBERS WHO ARE CONSIDERED PUBLIC OFFICERS
Are PARCCOM Members considered public officers?
 As to the Chairman of the PARCCOM, since the power to

appoint is vested in the President, the fact that he is
appointed by the President who is a competent authority
makes him a public officer. As to the other members of
PARCCOM, they are likewise considered public officers. As
members, they are occupying other position in the
government by virtue of a valid appointment, thereby
making them public officers as well.
 However, with respect to the last category of members of
PARCCOM which are the "elective members" they are not
considered public officers. The term election as used in Art.
203 of the Revised Penal Code shall mean popular or
election by the voters at large. Since the elected members
being referred hereto are not elected by direct vote of the
people at large, they cannot be deemed as public officers
as defined and contemplated in the abovecited provision of
law and Supreme Court Ruling. Accordingly, said elective
members of the PARCCOM who filed their candidacy in the
recently concluded Election are not considered ipso facto
resigned from office upon filing of their certificates of
candidacy.

February 16, 1998
PARCCOM; MEMBERSHIP; CANNOT BE INCREASED OR

DECREASED BY MERE RESOLUTION OR ORDINANCE
May the composition of PARCCOM be increased or
decreased?
 Sec. 44 of RA 6657 enumerates the composition of every

PARCCOM Administrative Order No. 7, Series of 1994 which
serves as the Implementing Guidelines of the said provision
of the law, also enumerates the composition of each
PARCCOM.
 The composition of each PARCCOM is exclusive, and being
such, the membership may not be increased or decreased
by merely approving a resolution or ordinance to that
effect.
 It is a settled rule that a resolution or ordinance cannot
amend a statute which is an act of the legislative for the
simple reason that only a statute can amend a statute.

December 13, 1996
May the composition of PARCCOM be amended?
 The composition of every PARCCOM has been set forth in

Sec. 44 of R.A. 6657. Membership in the PARCCOM is
provided for by law. It is a settled rule that a law can only
be amended by another law.

December 13, 1996
PARITY AMENDMENT; PRIVILEGE TO ACQUIRE AND EXPLOIT

AGRICULTURAL LANDS EXTENDED TO US CITIZENS
Is the privilege to acquire and exploit agricultural lands

extended to US Citizens?
 As originally drafted by the framers of the 1935 Constitution,

the privilege to acquire and exploit agricultural lands of the
public domain and other natural resources of the
Philippines, and to operate public utilities, were reserved to
Filipinos and entities owned or controlled by them, but the
"Parity Amendment" expressly extended the privilege to
citizens of the United States of America and/or to business
enterprises owned or controlled by them. Section 127 of
Commonwealth Act 141 (the Public Land Act of 1936)
prescribes:
"Sec. 127. During the existence and

continuance of the Commonwealth, and before
the Republic of the Philippines is established,
citizens and corporations of the United States
shall enjoy the same rights granted to citizens
and corporations of the Philippines under this
Act."
 The right of United States citizens and corporations to

acquire and exploit private or public lands and other natural
resources of the Philippines was intended to expire when
the Commonwealth ended on 04 July 1946. Thereafter,
public and private agricultural lands and natural resources
of the Philippines were or became exclusively reserved by
our Constitution for Filipino citizens. This situation lasted
until the "Parity Amendment", ratified in November, 1946,
once more reopened to United States citizens and business
enterprises owned or controlled by them the lands of the
public domain, the natural resources of the Philippines, and
the operation of the public utilities, exclusively, but not the
acquisition or exploitation of private agricultural lands,
about which not a word is found in the Parity Amendment
(Republic vs. Quasha, 46 SCRA 160).
 Moreover, even assuming that the acquisition by United
States citizens of private agricultural lands in the
Philippines is valid and constitutional, their rights expire on
3 July 1974. All the exceptional rights conferred upon
United States citizens and business entities owned or
controlled by them, under the Amendment, are subject to
one and the same resolutory form or period: they are to last
"during the effectivity of the Executive Agreement entered
into on 04 July 1946", "but in no case to extend beyond the
third of July 1974." None of the privileges conferred by the
"Parity Amendment" are excepted from this resolutory
period (supra).

December 12, 2000
PARTITION; COLLECTIVELY AWARDED LAND CANNOT BE A

SUBJECT OF PARTITION
Are lands collectively awarded be the subject of partition?
 Whether the land is awarded collectively or through the

cooperative the same cannot be the subject of a partition
within ten (10) years from issuance of the CLOA unless the
following conditions and requirements are all complied
with:
1. Determination by DAR that it is economically

feasible and sound to divide in coordination with the
Department of Agriculture and other concerned agencies;
2. Majority vote of the ARBs to partition the
land; and
3. Approval by the DAR considering that it
retains the option to generate individual CLOAs within the
10-year period.
 That the provision of law under Section 29 of R.A. No. 6657

that "in case it is not economically feasible and sound to
divide the land, then it shall be owned collectively by the
worker beneficiaries" is a specific limitation to the general
right of a co-owner to demand at any time the partition of
the thing owned in common (Article 494, Civil Code). Well-
entrenched is the rule that provisions of a specific law (e.g.,
R.A. No. 6657) prevail over that of a general law (e.g., Civil
Code). Our Constitution itself recognizes the need to
regulate the acquisition, ownership, use and disposition of
property (Section 1, paragraph 2, Article XIII, Philippine
Constitution) and that the exercise of one's rights of
ownership is subject to limitations as established by law
(Article 428, Civil Code).

July 14, 1999
PATRIMONIAL LOTS; WHO SHOULD PROCESS THE TITLE

Who should process the title of patrimonial lots already
turned-over to the Local Government Unit (LGU) and to
other patrimonial lots still to be turned-over?
 Under the provisions of the guide MOA by and between the

DAR and Local Government Unit concerned, said MOA being
attached to and forming part of DAR Memorandum Circular
No. 26, series of 1995, the PARO Office shall assist the
Municipality or LGU in securing the corresponding title/s
from the proper Register of Deeds (ROD). As provided in the
7th WHEREAS Clause of the guide MOA,
". . . . the DEPARTMENT do hereby turn over and convey

unto and in favor of the MUNICIPALITY/CITY all the
items enumerated in Appendix "A" and shall cause,
through its Provincial Agrarian Reform Office, the
issuance of corresponding Certificate/s of Title in favor
of the MUNICIPALITY/CITY from the Register of Deeds
concerned xxxxx." (emphasis supplied)
February 20, 2002
PAUPER LITIGANT; EXEMPT FROM ANY LEGAL FEE

Is a pauper litigant farmer/tenant exempt from payment of
any legal fee as an incident of a pending case before the
DARAB?
 A pauper litigant farmer/tenant is exempt from payment of

any legal fee as an incident of a pending case before the
DARAB. Accordingly, a pauper litigant under the
abovementioned rule is exempt from bond requirement in
injunction cases arising from a tenancy relationship issue
to be decided by the DARAB. Although, under Section 1,
Rule X (Preliminary Injunction) of the New DARAB Rules
which states among others that "should the Board or the
Adjudicator believe that it is necessary to post a bond, it
shall fix the amount of the bond to be executed by the party
applying for the injunction…", such requirement should not
as a matter of general policy apply anymore considering
that the Board or Adjudicator has the discretion whether or
not to require the posting of a bond in injunction cases filed
by a pauper litigant farmer/tenant. It is more in keeping
with the spirit and intent of the law for the Board or
Adjudicator in such instance to no longer require the
litigant farmer/tenant to post a bond.
 A pauper litigant is also exempt from the fragment of

kilometrage for the DARAB Sheriff as this is still within the
import and contemplation of the statement emphasized in
the aforequoted provision of law that a pauper litigant
"shall continue to enjoy such status as a pauper litigant in
all the levels of adjudication until the case is terminated".

October 28, 1999
PAYROLL DEDUCTION; WHEN ALLOWED

When may payroll deduction be allowed?
 ARTICLE III, SECTION 7 OF THE CNA

"Section 7. Check-Off. The DAR recognizes the
right of the ASSOCIATION to check-off or to deduct from
the payroll of ASSOCIATION dues, assessments and
other fees from salaries of the members of the
ASSOCIATION upon receipt of written authorization
from said members and to remit the same to the
ASSOCIATION Treasurer within a reasonable number of
working days after the deductions have been made,
provided that personal debts and obligations shall be
excluded from this check-off authority." (emphasis
supplied)
 ARTICLE VI, SECTION 1.1 OF THE CNA
"Section 1. The DAR shall set aside or allocate a

budget intended for the benefits as herein adopted subject
to availability of funds. For the purpose of ensuring the
grant of such benefits, the DAR and the ASSOCIATION
shall also establish a system for prioritizing the utilization
of savings and available funds for purposes of granting the
following benefits:
1. Medical Health Maintenance Program. The
DAR shall grant annual allowance amounting to
Four Thousand Pesos (P4,000.00) to all
employees. Said benefits shall not be given in
cash but will serve as membership contribution
to the self-managed health care program
operated and managed by the ASSOCIATION's
Foundation." (emphasis supplied)
 IN VIEW of the aforequoted provisions which are all geared

for the promotion of unity, cooperation, mutual support,
harmonious and beneficial relations by, between and among
the DAR and DAREA managements and DAREA member
employees of which this present administration subscribes
to, the Regional and Provincial Offices and all others
concerned should, therefore, take heed and be reminded of
said provisions to protect the gains and carry on the
visions/objectives of the Association in partnership with the
DAR Administration. Towards this end, all positive efforts
should be undertaken by all concerned to encourage full
support and cooperation in all the plans and programs of
the Association to effect an orderly and continuous payroll
deductions of all DAREA members' dues and obligations
pursuant to the aforequoted provisions of the First
Collective Negotiation Agreement (CNA) and DAREA
National Constitution and By-Laws.

July 9, 2003
PCGG SURRENDERED PROPERTIES; PROCEEDS ACCRUED

TO ARF UNDER E.O. NO. 323
 If they are non-agricultural, they are deemed exempt and

are beyond the ambit of R.A. No. 6657. However, since they
are surrendered properties to PCGG and there is a plan to
privatize the same, it is mandated under E.O. No. 323 that
the proceeds shall accrue to the Agrarian Reform Fund
(ARF) pursuant to Section 63 of R.A. No. 6657.

January 20, 2006
PERFORMANCE BOND; PERIOD WITHIN WHICH TO COMPLY

When is an applicant required to post a performance bond?
 Requisite Number of Days Within Which an Applicant is

Required to Post a Performance Bond
Section 26, Article III (Procedures) of DAR Administrative Order

No. 01, series of 2002 pertinently provides:
"Section 26. Performance Bond. — Within five (5) days from
receipt of a copy of the Conversion Order, the applicant shall
post a performance bond in the form of either of the following .
. . . ."
On the other hand, Section 33.2, Article V (Issuance of
Conversion Order and its Effects) of the same Administrative
Order provides:
"Section 33. Conditions of Conversion Order. — The approval

of the application for conversion shall be subject to the
following conditions:
xxx
xxx xxx
Section 33.2. Within fifteen (15) days from receipt
of the Conversion Order, the landowner shall post a
performance bond in accordance with Sections 25 or 26
hereof."
 Basic is the rule in statutory construction that where there

is a particular or special provision and a general provision
in the same statute, and the latter in its most
comprehensive sense would overrule the former, the
particular or special provision must be taken to effect only
the other parts of the statute to which it may properly
apply. In other words, the particular or special provision is
construed as an exception to the general provision.
 Here, we could infer that Section 26 is the special provision
regarding the posting of performance bond while Section 33
is the general provision, in which case the former shall
prevail. Thus, an applicant for conversion should post a
performance bond within five (5) days from receipt of a
copy of the conversion order.

December 9, 2003
POLICE POWER OF THE STATE; ENACTMENT OF AGRARIAN
LAWS PURSUANT THERETO
Is the enactment of agrarian laws a valid exercise of the

police power of the State?
 The enactment of agrarian laws is pursuant to valid

exercise of the police power of the State. In its exercise,
the State may interfere with property, business and
occupation. The rationale for the interference is that public
welfare or interest is superior to private rights, thus, well-
settled is the rule as underscored by the Supreme Court in
a long line of decisions that the constitutional guarantee of
non-impairment of obligations is limited by the exercise of
the police power of the State.

June 23, 1998
PRAWN FARMS OR FISHPONDS; COLLATERAL FOR A MORTGAGE

LOAN
May prawn farms or fishponds be used as collateral for a

mortgage loan?
 So long as there is a DAR determination on the exemption of

the property as a prawn farm or fishpond in accordance
with DAR Administrative Order No. 3, Series of 1995, the
same can stand as collateral for a mortgage loan and may
be foreclosed and transferred in case of non-payment.

October 16, 1995
PRE-EMPTION/REDEMPTION RIGHT
 In case the agricultural lessor decides to sell the
landholding, the agricultural lessee shall have the
preferential right to buy the same, and, in case the
landholding is sold to a third person without the knowledge
of the agricultural lessee, the latter shall have the right to
redeem the same at a reasonable price and consideration.

July 30, 2010
PRE-EMPTION/REDEMPTION RIGHT
What are the rights given to lessee in case of sale or

transfer of the land to 3rd persons?
Ang mga may-ari ay may karapatan na ipagbili ang
kanilang lupa kung ito ay kanilang nanaisin. Subalit ang
magsasaka ay may tinatawag na "right of pre-emption" at
"right of redemption" ayon sa Sections 11 and 12 of R.A.
No. 3844, as amended, na nagsasaad ng ganito:
"SEK. 11. Karapatan ng Namumuwisan

na Unang Pagbigyan sa Pagbili — Sakaling ipasiya
ng nagpapabuwis sa pagsasaka na ipagbili ang
hinahawakang lupa, ang namumuwisan sa
pagsasaka ay magkakaroon ng karapatan upang
unang pagbigyan sa pagbili ng naturan sa ilalim
ng mga makatwirang katakdaan at kondisyon.
SEK. 12. Karapatan ng Namumuwisan
sa Pagtubos. — Sakaling ipagbili ang lupa sa
ibang tao nang hindi alam ng namumuwisan sa
pagsasaka, magkakaroon ng karapatan itong huli
na tubusin ang naturan sa katamtamang halaga at
kabayaran."
 Tangi sa riyan, ang pagsasalin ng pagmamay-ari ng lupa sa

nakabili ay hindi rin magiging sanhi ng pag-papaalis sa
magsasaka. Sa madaling salita, ang dating magsasaka ay
mananatili pa ring magsasaka ng bagong may-ari sa
dahilang ang pagsasalin ng pagmamay-ari ng lupa sa
pamamagitan ng bentahan ay hindi kinikilala ng batas para
tuluyang mapa-alis ang isang namumuwisan (Section 10,
R.A. No. 3844, as amended).

November 15, 2000
Does the agricultural lessee have the right of pre-emption

and redemption?
 Corollary thereto, Section 2 of Republic Act No. 6389 which

amended Sections 11 and 12 of R.A. No. 3844 mandates
that should the agricultural lessors decide to sell the
landholding, the agricultural lessee ("kasama") shall have
the preferential right to buy the same under reasonable
terms and conditions. However, should the landholding be
sold to a third person without the knowledge of the
agricultural lessee, the latter shall have the right to redeem
the same at a reasonable price and consideration within
one hundred eighty (180) days from notice in writing which
shall be served by the vendee on all lessees affected.

February 9, 1999
PRE-EMPTION/REDEMPTION; NOT AVAILABLE TO BUYER OF

TENANCY RIGHTS
Is the right of pre-emption or redemption available to buyer

of tenancy rights?
 The right of pre-emption or redemption conferred upon a

lessee to buy or redeem the property is not available to
buyer of tenancy rights because tenancy status cannot be
bargained away for consideration without the consent and
knowledge of the landowner.
December 13, 1996
PRE-EMPTION; WHEN MAY BE EXERCISED
When may the right of pre-emption be exercised?
 The right of pre-emption may be exercised within one-

hundred eighty (180) days from notice in writing, which
shall be served by the owner on all lessees affected and the
Department of Agrarian Reform. Likewise, the right to
redeem the property may be exercised within one hundred
eighty (180) days from notice in writing which shall be
served by the vendee on all lessees affected and the
Department of Agrarian Reform upon registration of the sale
and shall have priority over any other right of legal
redemption.

August 15, 1994

February 19, 1997
PRESCRIPTION; STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS; SECTION 38 R.A.

NO. 3844
When does the 3-year period begin for purposes of

prescription?
 For purposes of prescription, the three (3) year period starts

running from the time of discovery by the landowner of the
mortgage contract entered into by the tenant.
 It was held that the running of the 3-year prescriptive period
was stopped by the filing of letter-complaint with DAR. The
law does not specifically require a judicial action, hence, it
can be an administrative action. Ubi lex non distinguit nec
nos distinguere debemos (Where the law does not
distinguish, we should not distinguish) - Dolorfino vs. Court
of Appeals, 191 SCRA 880, 03 December 1990.
 One of the essential requisites of a contract of mortgage is
that the mortgagor should be the absolute owner of the
thing mortgaged.

October 13, 2000
PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 27; WHO SHALL PAY REAL

ESTATE TAXES
 The Secretary of Justice has rendered on February 27, 1973,

Opinion No. 35, Series of 1973 (copy attached) stating who
shall pay real estate taxes pursuant to Presidential Decree
No. 27. Under said Opinion, the following tenant/farmers are
to pay the real estate taxes due on their farmholdings:
1. Those who actually till their farmholdings

located on large estates primarily devoted to rice and/or
corn containing areas of 100 hectares or more, regardless
of whether or not such tenant-farmers have been issued
Certificates of Land Transfer; and
2. Those who have been issued Certificates of
Land Transfer although their farmholdings are located in
estates, the area of which are less than 100 hectares.
 On the other hand, the landowners are the ones to pay said
real estate taxes due on their lands not covered by the
foregoing paragraphs.

March 21, 2006
PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 27; WHO SHALL PAY REAL
ESTATE TAXES
 With respect to landholdings covered by OLT, the pertinent
guidelines are embodied in DAR Memorandum Circular No.
5, Series of 1973 in relation to DOJ Opinion No. 35, Series of
1973. Under said guidelines, the following tenant-farmers
are to pay real estate taxes due on their farmholdings:
1. Those who actually till their landholdings

located on large estates primarily devoted to rice and/or
corn containing areas of 100 hectares or more, regardless
of whether or not such tenant-farmers have been issued
Certificates of Land Transfer; and
2. Those who have been issued Certificates of
Land Transfer although their farmholdings are located in
estates, the area of which are less than 100 hectares.
 On the other hand, landowners are the ones to pay said real
estate taxes on their lands not covered by the above.

February 2, 2006
PRIVATE AGRICULTURAL LAND; DEFINED
How are private agricultural lands defined in DAR A.O. No.

7, Series of 1997?
 Administrative Order No. 7, Series of 1997 (Omnibus Rules

and Procedure Governing Conversion of Agricultural Lands
to Non-agricultural Uses) defines private agricultural lands
as lands devoted to or suitable to agriculture, as defined in
R.A. No. 6657 and owned by natural or juridical persons or
by the government in its proprietary capacity. Item V of
said Administrative Order provides the following, quote:
"These rule shall cover all private agricultural lands as
defined herein regardless of the tenurial arrangement and
commodity produced. It shall also include all untitled
agricultural lands and agricultural lands reclassified by
LGUs into non-agricultural uses after June 15, 1988,
pursuant to Memorandum Circular No. 54, Series of 1993 of
the Office of the President and those proposed to be used
for livestock, poultry and swine raising as provided in DAR

February 09, 1998

February 09, 1998
PROCLAMATION NO. 446; PROPRIETY OF AMENDMENT THEREOF
Is the amendment of Presidential Proclamation No. 446

dated 15 August 1994 proper?
 As explained by DENR, the amendment seeks to correct the

clerical error in the technical description of the area
covered by PP No. 446, as well as to transfer the
administration and disposition thereof from DAR to DENR,
considering that said parcel of land is more suitable for
residential rather than agricultural purposes. Our field
officers report that the track of land covered by PP No. 446
is fully occupied by B'laan and Muslim immigrants, some of
whom have constructed semi-permanent houses.
Considering that said area is actually used for residential
purposes, the DAR interposes no objection to the proposed
amendment.

June 27, 1996
PRODUCTION AND PROFIT SHARING; INTERIM SCHEMES

EMPLOYED ADOPTED BY CORPORATE FARMS PENDING FINAL
DISTRIBUTION OF THE LAND TO THE FBS
What are the interim schemes employed or adopted by
corporate farms pending final distribution of the land to
the farmer-beneficiaries?
 The interim schemes employed or adopted by corporate

farms pending final distribution of the land to the farmer-
beneficiaries are the production and profit sharing
mandated under Section 16 of Executive Order No. 229 and
Sections 13 and 32 of RA 6657 and Commercial Farm
Deferment as provided in Section 11 of RA 6657 as
implemented by DAR Administrative Order No. 16, Series of
1988.

December 13, 1996
PRODUCTION AND PROFIT SHARING; MAY CONTINUE

AFTER THE LAPSE OF THE TEN-YEAR DEFERMENT
PERIOD
Whether or not the Production Profit Sharing (PPS) of
deferred commercial farms may continue after lapse of the
ten-year deferment period?
 Section 13, R.A. No. 6657 (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform

Law)
"Section 13. Production Sharing Plan. — Any enterprise

adopting the scheme provided for in Section 32 or operating
under a production venture, lease, management contract or
other similar arrangement and any farm covered by Sections 8
and 11 hereof is hereby mandated to execute within ninety
(90) days from the effectivity of this, a production-sharing plan,
under guidelines prescribed by the appropriate government
agency.
Nothing herein shall be construed to sanction the diminution of
any benefits such as salaries, bonuses, leaves and working
conditions granted to the employee beneficiaries under
existing laws, agreements, and voluntary practice by the
enterprise, nor shall the enterprise and its employee-
beneficiaries be prevented from entering into any agreement
with terms more favorable to the latter."
 Article 100, P.D. No. 442, as amended (The Labor Code)
"ART.100. Prohibition against elimination or

diminution of benefits. — Nothing in this book shall be
construed to eliminate or in any way diminish
supplements, or other employee benefits being enjoyed
at the time of promulgation of this Code."
 Section 12, R.A. No. 6971 (An Act to Encourage Productivity

and Maintain Industrial Peace by Providing Incentives to
Both Labor and Capital)
"Sec. 12. Non-Diminution of Benefits. —

Nothing in this Act shall be construed to diminish or
reduce any benefits and other privileges enjoyed by the
workers under existing laws, decrees, executive orders,
company policy or practice, or any agreement or
contract between the employer and employees."
 Given all the above-quoted provisions of law, considering

that the grant of production and profit shares appears to
have already been an established practice, and since the
lands are still devoted to agricultural production, it is our
considered opinion on equitable considerations that
production and profit sharing (PPS) should continue.
Accordingly, the submission of reports of compliance may
still be required pursuant to the provisions of DAR
Administrative Order No. 8, series of 1988 (Guidelines and
Procedures Implementing Production and Profit Sharing
Under Republic Act No. 6657).

May 6, 2003
PRODUCTION AND PROFIT SHARING; PROFIT INCENTIVE

PAYMENT BY FISHPOND OPERATORS
When are the fishpond operators required to pay profit

incentive?
 R.A. No. 7881 requires the execution of incentive plan

within six (6) months from the effectivity of said law. The
implementation of R.A. No. 7881 was suspended only on 13
November 1995, hence, the deadline for execution of
incentive plan has expired before said law was suspended.
Therefore, fishpond operators are still obliged to pay profit
incentive for the year 1995, that is, from the effectivity of
R.A. No. 7881 on 12 March 1995 up to the date the law was
suspended on 13 November 1995. This is in keeping with
the spirit and intent of the law pursuant to Article 1702 of
the New Civil Code which provides that in case of doubt, all
labor legislation and all labor contracts shall be construed
in favor of the safety and decent living for the laborer.
Consequently, fishpond operators are not obliged to pay the
profit incentive reckoned from the date of suspension on 13
November 1995 up to the time of lifting thereof on 6 August
1997 when the Decision of the Court of Appeals had
become final and executory, afterwhich payment of said
profit incentive shall again resume.

May 25, 1998
PROFIT-SHARING ARRANGEMENT; SUSPENDED WITH APPROVAL
OF DAR
Can profit-sharing arrangement be unilaterally suspended?
 Any existing Production/Profit Sharing Arrangement once

granted by the employer shall remain to be enforced and
cannot be unilaterally suspended without the approval of
the Department of Agrarian Reform. Section 2 of R.A. No.
6657 (otherwise known as the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Law or CARL) is founded on the right of the farmers
and regular farmworkers, who are landless, to own directly
or collectively the lands they till or in the case of other
farmworkers, to receive a just share of the fruits thereof.
This production and profit sharing plan is in pursuit of this
avowed principle of agrarian reform and is mandated under
Sections 13 and 32 of R.A. No. 6657 in order that
farmworkers can realize an improvement in their farm
income.

January 02, 1998
PROSPECTING; WHEN NOT ALLOWED
When is prospecting not allowed?
 Sec. 28 (a) of Commonwealth Act No. 137 (The Mining Act)

provides the following :
"Sec. 28. No prospecting shall be

allowed:
a. In a mineral reserve which has been
proclaimed closed to mining locations, and in
reservations established for other purposes,
except by the government."

July 22, 1994
PROTEST; ON COVERAGE
What is the effect on coverage in case there is a pending

protest or applications for exemption or conversion?
(Note: Superseded by Section 14 of A.O. No. 06, s. 2000)
 As clarified in DAR Opinion No. 9, series of 1999, to quote:
". . . it is deemed wise and prudent to resolve

first the pending petition for exemption filed . . .
before proceeding to the coverage of the
landholding in issue to avoid possible absurdity
where the property subject of the request might
later on be declared as exempt from CARP
coverage. This policy procedure aims to prevent
the government from probable wastage of time,
effort and resources incident to the coverage.
Hence, the coverage process should momentarily
be deferred to give way to the resolution of the
pending application for exemption/exclusion.
In view of all the foregoing, we submit that in
cases where there are pending applications for
exemption or conversion or protests on coverage,
the issuance of Certificate of Cash Deposit shall
be held in abeyance until such time that said
applications or protests are resolved with
finality."

November 9, 2000
PROTEST; ON COVERAGE, RETENTION, EXEMPTION, EXCLUSION
OR CONVERSION; DOCUMENTATION TO BE SUSPENDED
PENDING RESOLUTION OF PROTEST
Should the coverage documentation proceed pending

resolution of protest?
(Note: Superseded by Section 14 of A.O. No. 06, s. 2000)
 Documentation of CARP-covered properties with protests or

pending application for retention exemption, exclusion or
conversion should be discouraged pending resolution
thereof. DAR Opinion No. 9, Series of 1999 provides, quote:
". . . it is deemed wise and prudent to resolve

first the pending petition for exemption filed . . .
before proceeding to the coverage of the
landholding in issue to avoid possible absurdity
where the property subject of the request might
later on be declared as exempt from CARP
coverage. This policy procedure aims to prevent
the government from probable wastage of time,
effort and resources incident to the coverage.
Hence, the coverage process should momentarily
be deferred to give way to the resolution of the
pending application for exemption/exclusion."

November 10, 1999
PUBLIC DOMINION; CREEK CLASSIFIED AS PROPERTY

OF PUBLIC DOMAIN
 Art. 502 of the Civil Code of the Philippines provides that

rivers and their natural beds are of public dominion.
 In the case of Mercado vs. Mun. President of Macabebe, 59
Phil 592, a creek is merely an arm of a river, and must
therefore be classified as property of public dominion. A
creek is really property of public dominion, being an arm or
extension of a river. But even granting that it is private,
still, if used by the general public for a long time it has
ceased to be private, and the alleged owner or claimant has
no right to prevent the public from using the same.
 No person shall have a right over bodies of water classified
as property of public dominion such as a creek. However,
the discharge of domestic waters (such as water for
washing, bathing, cooking or other household needs, home
gardens and watering of lawns or domestic animals) to a
creek may not be restricted except when the same is
deemed hazardous to the life and limb of the inhabitants of
the community near the creek.

February 19, 2008
PUBLIC FOREST; CANNOT BE RECLASSIFIED TO AGRICULTURAL

LAND
May a property which is part of the public forest be

reclassified to agricultural land?
 A property which is part of the public forest cannot be

reclassified as agricultural land in view of the prohibition
found in Section 4 (a) of RA 6657 against the
reclassification of forest or mineral lands to agricultural
lands until Congress has determined by law the specific
limits of the public domain.

March 13, 1994
PUBLIC LAND ACT; COMMONWEALTH ACT NO. 141

Is it valid under the Public Land Act to sell or mortgage
lands without the approval of the Secretary of Agriculture
and Natural Resources? What is its effect?
 Section 29 of Commonwealth Act No. 141, as amended,

otherwise known as the "Public Land Act" provides in part:
" . . . Any sale and encumbrance made

without the previous approval of the Secretary of
Agriculture and Natural Resources, shall be null
and void and shall produce the effect of annulling
the acquisition and reverting the property and all
rights thereto to the State, and all payments on
the purchase price theretofore made to the
Government shall be forfeited . . ."
 Any sale or encumbrance by the original claimants or

pioneer settlers of their landholdings acquired under the
abovementioned law without prior approval of the
concerned government agency (i.e., NARRA, then Land
Authority and now DAR) is null and void. It bears stressing
that holders of Certificates of Allocation acquire only
possessory rights over the properties allocated to them. In
case of violation of the conditions and requisites for the
eventual issuance of title, cancellation proceedings must
necessarily be undertaken to revoke the CAs awarded, and,
to determine who would be the next qualified beneficiaries
to the subject landholdings.

May 6, 1998
PUBLIC LAND; ACQUISITION UNDER R.A. NO. 6657
Are lands of the public domain suitable for agriculture

subject of CARP coverage?
 Even assuming that farmer-claimants are not deemed
owners with acquired private rights (i.e., ten (10) or thirty
(30) years prescriptive possession), nevertheless, since it is
the mandate of R.A. No. 6657 to cover, regardless of
tenurial arrangement and commodity produced, all public
and private agricultural lands including lands of the public
domain suitable for agriculture, pursuant to Executive
Order No. 407, Series of 1990, as amended by E.O. No. 448,
Series of 1991, those portions of subject parcels of land
which are suitable for agriculture can still be covered under
CARP if they are no longer actually, directly or exclusively
used or necessary for the purposes for which they have
been reserved as determined by DAR in coordination with
the agency concerned (City Government of Palayan — CGP).

May 05, 1999
PUBLIC LAND; ACQUISITIVE PRESCRIPTION; CONDITIONS

THEREOF
What are the conditions set by law before a possessor of

public land acquires a right to a government grant?
 The Supreme Court has ruled in a long line of cases that the
Public Land Act requires an applicant to prove: (a) that the
land is alienable public land; and (b) that his open,
continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and
occupation of the same must either be since time
immemorial or for the period prescribed in the Public Land
Act.
 When the conditions set by law are complied with, the
possessor of the land, by operation of law, acquires a right
to a government grant, without a necessity of a certificate
of title being issued, and the land ceases to be a part of the
public domain.
 It was likewise ruled by the High Court that alienable public
lands held by a possessor, personally, or thru his
predecessors in interest, openly, continuously and
exclusively for the prescribed statutory period (i.e., 30
years under the Public Land Act, as amended) are
converted to private property by mere lapse or completion
of said period, ipso jure (Director of Land Management vs.
Court of Appeals, G. R. No. 94525, January 27, 1992).
 The Civil Code further provides, quote:
"Article 1134. Ownership and

other real rights over immovable property are
acquired by ordinary prescription through
possession of ten years.
xxx xxx
xxx
Article 1137. Ownership and
other real rights over immovables also prescribe
through uninterrupted adverse possession thereof
for thirty years, without need of title or of good
faith."
 Considering that claimant-farmers are presumably

possessors in good faith for more than ten (10) years now
as could be inferred in the second WHEREAS Clause as
herein aforequoted (i.e., rightfully resettled as displaced
residents pursuant to previous Presidential Proclamation
No. 983 dated 09 March 1972), they have already acquired
private vested rights by operation of law, thus, they are
accordingly entitled to the lands long occupied by them.
 Moreover, even assuming that they are not possessors in
good faith but should it be proven that they have
uninterrupted adverse possession of the subject lands for
at least thirty (30) years (Article 1137, Civil Code), they are
still lawfully entitled as owners of the same.

May 5, 1999
PUBLIC LAND; NECESSITY OF AN OCULAR

INVESTIGATION/INSPECTION
Is it necessary to conduct ocular inspection on lands

before coverage takes place?
 It is recommended that an ocular inspection/investigation

be conducted within the area, and judicious determination
as regards the private possessory or ownership rights of
the farmer-claimants shall be made pursuant to pertinent
laws and jurisprudence. Should they be found to be
possessors with acquired private rights, the lands in issue
should accordingly be awarded to them as rightful private
owners thereof. On the other hand, should they be found as
not deemed owners of the lands in issue, this Department
should coordinate with the agency concerned (CGP in the
instant case) as regards the possibility of CARP coverage of
said lands pursuant to the pertinent provisions of E.O. 407,
as amended by E.O. 448 and other pertinent DAR guidelines.

May 5, 1999
PUBLIC LAND; P.D. 1073 SHOULD NOT HAVE RETROACTIVE

EFFECT
Should P.D. No. 1073 be accorded retroactive effect?
 When Proclamation No. 983 was issued on 09 March 1972

legally resettling the subject residents of Pantabangan,
Nueva Ecija within the parcel "E" area, Presidential Decree
No. 1073 was not yet in effect at that time. Rather it is R.A.
No. 1942 which was still in force then. Well-entrenched is
the rule that a law should not have a retroactive effect
especially so if it will prejudice the existing rights of a
person prior to its enactment or issuance. A more liberal
interpretation of the law in favor of the farmer-settlers
would better serve the ends of justice and will more
effectively realize the ideals of social justice and the
concept of land-to-the-tiller as enshrined in our
Constitution.

May 5, 1999
PUBLIC LANDS; WHEN CONSIDERED PRIVATE
What are the situations where public lands are considered

private property as of October 21, 1972?
1) Land covered by sales application — The area should
have been sold at public auction awarded to the successful
bidder, who may be either the applicant or another person, prior
to October 21, 1972 and the awardee must have complied with
the cultivation requirement of the law and fully paid the purchase
price thereof prior to said date;
2) Land covered by homestead application — The
application had been approved and applicant had complied with
all requirements of the law regarding occupancy, cultivation and
residence as of said date by the applicant for approval by the
Bureau of Lands; and
3) Land covered by free patent application — In all
cases, the land may be considered private property if application
has been accepted, processed and found to be patentable under
the provisions of the free patent law considering that under the
said law the right of the applicant to the title to such land which
is being confirmed administratively retroacts on the date of
occupancy and cultivation thereof, either by himself or his
predecessor-in-interest on June 12, 1945, or prior thereto.

September 2, 1997
PUBLIC OFFICIAL; MULTIPLE DIRECTORSHIP; LEGALITY
THEREOF
Is it legal for public officials or employees to hold multiple

directorship in other government agencies?
 The Department fully supports the prohibition of public

officials or employees to hold multiple directorships in
other government offices, agencies and instrumentalities
including Government Owned and Controlled Corporations
(GOCCs) or their subsidiaries, even if there is no law
allowing the same or even if the appointment is not related
to the primary functions of their positions. The resolution
calling for an inquiry is in line with the provision of Rule
XVIII, Section 1 of the Omnibus Rules Implementing Book V
of Executive Order No. 292 and other Pertinent Civil Service
Laws.

December 21, 1998
PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES; NOT ABSOLUTELY

PROHIBITED TO PRACTICE PRIVATELY THEIR PROFESSION
Are public officials and employees allowed to practice

their profession?
 Section 7 (b) (2) of Republic Act No. 6713 (Code of Conduct

and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees)
which provides that public officials and employees during
their incumbency shall not engage in the private practice of
their profession unless authorized by the Constitution or
law, provided that such practice will not conflict or tend to
conflict with their official functions. It is clear from the
foregoing provision of law that private practice of
profession of government employees is not absolutely
prohibited provided authority for limited practice is granted
by the proper Department Head under such terms and
conditions prescribed by law and pertinent executive
issuances.

October 28, 1999
PUBLICATION; "NEWSPAPER OF GENERAL CIRCULATION

IN SUCH PLACES" HOW CONSTRUED
 The provisions stated under Item Nos. 4.6 and 4.7 of said
Order are very explicit. The phrase "NEWSPAPER OF
GENERAL CIRCULATION IN SUCH PLACES" implies that
publication could be made in a local newspaper of general
circulation in the province or region where the property is
located. It need not be published in a national newspaper of
general circulation. The phrase "in such places" suggests
specific or particularity of place/location.

January 26, 2006
Q
QUARRYING; VALID GROUND FOR DISPOSSESSION OF
TENANT
 If the alleged quarrying was without your consent, and the

landholding was used for a purpose other than what had
been previously agreed upon, this is a valid ground for the
dispossession of the tenant under Section 36, par. 3 of R.A.
No. 3844.

June 29, 2009
R
RECLASSIFICATION; DOES NOT AUTHORIZE
CONVERSION OF AGRICULTURAL LAND
 A reclassification of an agricultural by the Local

Government Units based on their mandate under the Local
Government Code (RA7160) does not in effect authorize the
conversion of an agricultural land. In other words the
slightest change in the agricultural land use to some other
non-agricultural use (which in this case is a housing
project), no matter how minimal the area to be covered by
such change will be interpreted as land use conversion. As
such, the reclassification is not sufficient, there is a need
to apply for conversion clearance from the DAR before any
development or act is executed on any agricultural land.

November 25, 2008
RECLASSIFICATION; RECLASSIFICATION TO NON

AGRICULTURAL USE BEFORE EFFECTIVITY OF CARL
DOES NOT OPERATE TO DIVEST TENANT-FARMERS OF
THEIR RIGHTS OVER THE LAND
 Reclassification as early as 1980, prior to effectivity of R.A.

No. 6657 on June 15, 1988, to non-agricultural uses did not
operate to divest tenant-farmers of their rights over lands
covered by Presidential Decree No. 27, which have already
been vested prior to 15 June 1988. As held by the Supreme
Court in the case entitled Anderson Co. vs. Intermediate
Appellate Court (G.R. No. L-65928 June 21, 1988).

November 14, 2008
RECLASSIFICATION; AS DISTINGUISHED FROM LAND USE

CONVERSION; EXEMPTION FROM CARP COVERAGE
How is reclassification distinguished from conversion?
 Reclassification, which is the Local Government Unit's

(LGU's) act of specifying how agricultural lands shall be
utilized for non-agricultural uses, such as residential,
industrial, commercial as embodied in the land use plan, is
not synonymous with land use conversion, which is the
actual change of agricultural land to non-agricultural uses
as duly approved by DAR. Approval of applications for land
use conversion remains the exclusive responsibility of DAR.
 Agricultural lands classified or zonified for non-agricultural
uses by LGUs and approved by the HLURB before June 15,
1988 (effectivity of R.A. No. 6657), shall be governed by
DAR Administrative Order No. 6, Series of 1994, as
amended (guidelines on exemption from CARP coverage).
Thereafter, the provisions of DAR Administrative Order No.
1, Series of 1999 shall apply as regards applications for
conversion.

December 23, 1999
How is reclassification distinguished from conversion?
 Reclassification is the act of specifying how agricultural

lands shall be utilized for non-agricultural uses. It also
includes reversion of non-agricultural lands to agricultural
use. Land Use Conversion, on the other hand, is defined as
the actual change of agricultural lands to non-agricultural
uses. Although seemingly, reclassification and conversion
are similar in the sense that they both determine whether a
parcel of land should be used for agricultural or other
purposes, they differ in approach. Land Reclassification is
done through the town planning process, subject to review
and approval by the Provincial Sanggunian while the
conversion of agricultural lands to non-agricultural uses
goes through the DAR's evaluation process subject to
existing agrarian laws, rules and regulations, as provided
for under DAR Administrative Order No. 07, Series of 1997.
 Thus, insofar as the legality and propriety for conversion of
agricultural lands or lands classified as such into non-
agricultural uses are concerned, the same must be
adjudicated by DAR which has the exclusive authority and
legal mandate to approve or disapprove the conversion of
agricultural lands into non-agricultural uses (Sections 4(j)
and 5(l) of Executive Order No. 129-A, Series of 1987).

November 10, 1998
RECLASSIFICATION; AUTHORITY OF LGU TO DISPOSE REAL

PROPERTY
Is the local government unit authorized to dispose real

property?
 A local government unit is thus authorized to dispose of real

property held by them in their proprietary capacity.
Therefore, if the City of Marikina holds the said park lots
(assuming that they are not classified as agricultural) in its
proprietary capacity, the city council has the authority to
reclassify (not convert) said park lots into relocation sites
or to pursue any lawful project which the City Council may
deem proper and beneficial for the City of Marikina.
However, if the said park lots are classified as public lands,
the awarding or selling thereof cannot be made by the
city/municipal council through a mere ordinance. Instead,
Commonwealth Act No. 141, otherwise known as the Public
Land Act, shall govern, which in turn provides that public
lands cannot be subsequently alienated unless authorized
by Congress.

November 10, 1998
Where does the authority of the local government unit to
reclassify emanate?
 The authority of the local government units to reclassify

lands emanate from Section 20 of Republic Act No. 7160
(Local Government Code of 1991) which pertinently
provides in part that "a city or municipality may, through an
ordinance passed by the sanggunian after conducting
public hearing for the purpose, authorize the
reclassification of agricultural lands and provide for the
manner of their utilization or disposition in the following
cases: (1) when the land ceases to be economically
feasible and sound for agricultural purposes as determined
by the Department of Agriculture or (2) where the land shall
have substantially greater economic value for residential,
commercial, or industrial purposes, as determined by the
sanggunian concerned."
 Clearly, the authority to enact zoning ordinance and
reclassify lands is lodged with the local government units
concerned while the authority to approve or disapprove
applications for conversion belongs to the Department of
Agrarian Reform. The provisions of DAR Administrative
Order No. 07, Series of 1997 (cited earlier) shall likewise
serve as guide for local government units on matters
pertaining to applications for land use conversion.

December 2, 1998
RECLASSIFICATION; AUTHORITY OF LGU TO RECLASSIFY

AGRICULTURAL LAND
 The LGU and the DAR have both derived their mandate from
laws which are R.A. No. 7160 (Local Government Code of
1991) and R.A. No. 6657 (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Law) respectively. Both stand on equal footing. However, it
is well-settled that agricultural lands subjected to
acquisition and redistribution under CARL are excluded
from the reclassification which LGUs may authorize by
ordinance.

November 10, 2005
RECLASSIFICATION; AUTHORITY OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT

TO RECLASSIFY LANDHOLDINGS; NOT SYNONYMOUS WITH
DAR'S AUTHORITY TO CONVERT
Is the authority of local government unit to reclassify
landholdings synonymous with DAR's authority to convert?
 Reclassification, which is the Local Government Unit's

(LGU's) act of specifying how agricultural lands shall be
utilized for non-agricultural uses, such as residential,
industrial, tourism or commercial, as embodied in the land
use plan, is not synonymous with land use conversion,
which is the act or process of changing the current physical
use of a piece of agricultural land to non-agricultural uses
as duly approved by DAR. Under the law, approval of
applications for land use conversion remains the exclusive
responsibility of DAR.
 Thus, landowners are still required to file an application for
conversion to be determined on the merits and duly
approved by the proper DAR authorities (not the MARO)
before agricultural lands may be converted into non-
agricultural uses pursuant to the provisions of
existing/applicable laws and DAR guidelines on conversion.

September 9, 2003
RECLASSIFICATION; AUTHORITY OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT
TO RECLASSIFY LANDHOLDINGS; NOT SYNONYMOUS WITH
DAR'S AUTHORITY TO CONVERT
Is the authority of local government unit to reclassify
landholdings synonymous with DAR's authority to convert?
 R.A. No. 7160 (Local Government Code of 1991), Sec. 20

thereof grants to the Local Government Units (LGUs) the
power to reclassify lands. Under the law and existing rules
and regulations it is still the DAR which has the exclusive
authority and jurisdiction to order the conversion of
agricultural lands to non-agricultural uses.

April 24, 1997
RECLASSIFICATION; CARP — COVERED PROPERTIES; EXCLUDED

FROM RECLASSIFICATION BY LGUs
Are agricultural lands subjected under CARP excluded

from reclassification by LGUs?
 Agricultural lands subjected to acquisition and

redistribution under CARL are excluded from the
reclassification which LGUs may authorize by ordinance.

June 27, 1995
RECLASSIFICATION; CIRCUMSTANCES THAT AUTHORIZE

RECLASSIFICATION
 Under Section 20 of RA 7160 (1991) or the "Local

Government Code of 1991," a city or municipality may
authorize the reclassification of agricultural lands and
provide for the manner of their utilization or disposition
under the following circumstances:
a) when the land ceases to be economically
feasible and sound for agricultural purposes as
determined by the DA; or
b) where the land shall have substantially
concerned.
September 27, 2007
RECLASSIFICATION; EFFECT OF LAND RECLASSIFICATION
Should land use reclassification place the property outside

the purview of CARP?
 Land use reclassification by itself does not place the

subject property outside the purview of the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Program because it merely specifies how
agricultural lands shall be utilized for non-agricultural uses
such as residential, industrial, commercial, as embodied in
the land use plan.

February 27, 1997

December 13, 1996
RECLASSIFICATION; LANDHOLDING EXCLUDED THERETO
What types of agricultural lands shall not be covered by

reclassification?
 Malacañang Memorandum Circular No. 54 dated 8 June

1993 provides in part that: "In addition the following types
of agricultural lands shall not be covered by said
reclassification:
a. Agricultural lands distributed to agrarian reform

beneficiaries subject to Section 65 of R.A. No. 6657;
b. Agricultural lands already issued a notice of
coverage or voluntarily offered for coverage under CARP;
c. Agricultural lands identified under Malacañang
Administrative Order No. 20, Series of 1992 as non-
negotiable for conversion:
1. All irrigated lands where water is available

to support rice and other crop production;
2. All irrigated lands where water is not
available for rice and other crop production but
within areas programmed for irrigation facility
rehabilitation by the Department of Agriculture (DA)
and the National Irrigation Administration (NIA);
3. All irrigable lands already covered by
irrigation projects with firm funding commitments
at the time of the application for land use
conversion or reclassification".

April 24, 1997
RECLASSIFICATION; LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS NOT

AUTHORIZED TO RECLASSIFY AGRICULTURAL LANDS COVERED
BY CARP
Does the Local Government Unit have the authority to

reclassify agricultural lands subjected to acquisition and
redistribution to qualified farmer-beneficiaries?
 The authority of Local Government Units to reclassify

agricultural lands does not cover those subjected to
acquisition and redistribution to qualified farmer-
beneficiaries pursuant to CARL. This is expressly provided
in the following:
1) Paragraph (e) Section 20 of RA 7160 which

clearly provides that nothing in said Section shall be
construed as repealing amending or modifying in any
manner the provisions of R.A. No. 6657;
2) Article 39 (b) of Rule VII of the Implementing
Rules and Regulations of the Code which provides that
agricultural lands distributed to agrarian reform
beneficiaries pursuant to Republic Act 6657 shall not be
affected by the reclassification.
3) Section 1(d) nos. 1 & 2 of Memorandum
Circular No. 54 dated June 8, 1993 of the Office of the
President which provides that agricultural lands
distributed to agrarian reform beneficiaries as well as
those already issued a notice of coverage or voluntarily
offered for coverage under CARL shall not be covered by
the reclassification made by LGUs.

June 27, 1995
RECLASSIFICATION; MEANING
Is reclassification synonymous with conversion under Sec.

65 of R.A. No. 6657?
 Reclassification is not synonymous with conversion under

Section 65 of RA 6657 for while the authority to reclassify
is lodged with the local government units, the authority to
convert remains with the DAR.

December 13, 1996
What is land reclassification?
 Land reclassification is a power exercised by the municipal

or city government through the town planning process
subject to review and approval by the Provincial
Sanggunian through the Provincial Land Use Council
(PLUC).

March 27, 1996
RECLASSIFICATION; MINERAL TO AGRICULTURAL
What must be done before a land may be reverted to its

previous classification?
 As to the issue of the necessity of a positive act of the

government in order that a land may be reverted to its
previous classification or converted into agricultural,
proper determination thereof as to its suitability or non-
suitability for agriculture should first be made and dealt
certified as such by the Department of Agriculture before
the DAR would resolve the question of exemption or
coverage of said landholding.

October 9, 2000
RECLASSIFICATION; PUBLIC HEARING IS REQUIRED
 RA 7160 mandates that the reclassification should be made

after conducting public hearing and that it shall be limited
to the following percentage of the total agricultural land
area at the time of the passage of the ordinance: (a) for
highly urbanized and independent component cities, fifteen
percent (15%); (b) for component cities and third class
municipalities, ten percent (10%); and (c) for fourth to sixth
class municipalities, five percent (5%): Provided, further,
that agricultural lands distributed to agrarian reform
beneficiaries pursuant to RA 6657 shall not be affected by
the said reclassification and the conversion of such lands
into other purposes shall be governed by Section 65 of said
Act. This percentage ceiling on the land area which the
LGUs can reclassify is not absolute. The President may,
when public interest so requires and upon recommendation
of the National Economic and Development Authority
(NEDA), authorize a city or municipality to reclassify lands
in excess of the limits cited above (Rep. Act No. 7160
[1991], sec. 20[b]).

September 27, 2007
RECLASSIFICATION; REQUIREMENTS
What are the requirements for land reclassification?
 Lots surrounded by properties already classified into

residential/commercial use are not deemed automatically
classified as such. The following are the requirements for
reclassification.
a. The city or municipal development council shall

recommend to the Sangguniang Panglunsod or
Sangguniang Bayan, as the case may be, the
reclassification of agricultural lands within its
jurisdiction.
b. Before enacting the ordinance reclassifying
agricultural lands, the Sanggunian concerned must first
secure the following certificates:
1. Certification from the Department of

Agricultural (DA) indicating the total area of
existing agricultural lands in the city or
municipality; that such lands are not classified as
non-negotiable for conversion or reclassification;
and that the land has ceased to be economically
feasible and sound for agricultural purposes.
2. Certification from DAR indicating that
such lands are not distributed, or not covered by a
notice of coverage or not voluntarily offered for
coverage under CARP.

March 22, 1999

November 10, 1998

December 2, 1998
RECLASSIFICATION; TENANTS-FARMERS NOT DIVESTED OF

THEIR RIGHTS
Is the reclassification of lands to non-agricultural uses

divest tenant-farmers of their rights over lands covered by
P.D. 27?
 . . . . we believe that the reclassification thereof to non-

agricultural uses did not operate to divest tenant-farmers of
their rights, especially the transfer of ownership if
applicable, over lands covered by Presidential Decree No.
27, which have already been vested prior to 15 June 1988
(Item II, 3rd paragraph, DAR Administrative Order No. 6,
Series of 1994; Sec. 7, R.A. 3844 in conjunction with Sec.
75, R.A. 6657).

September 24, 1999
RECLASSIFICATION; WHEN MAY BE ALLOWED

are not classified as non-negotiable for conversion. Be
informed, however, that while ordinances reclassifying
lands are not subject to DAR approval, finality of the
ordinance reclassifying the land will not convert the
agricultural areas covered thereby to non-agricultural uses.
It is still the DAR which has the exclusive authority and
jurisdiction to order the conversion of agricultural lands to
non-agricultural uses as it is the DAR’s mandate to preserve
and maintain agricultural lands with increased productivity
and any act of changing the current use of a landholding is
tantamount to conversion which requires a conversion
order/clearance from DAR. Thus, an absence of said
order/clearance is prohibited by law.
 The provision of Section 20 of R.A. No. 7160 is explicit when

it provides a city or municipality may, through an ordinance
passed by the sanggunian after conducting public hearings
for the purpose, authorize the reclassification of
agricultural lands and provide for the manner of their
utilization or disposition in the following cases: (1) when
the land ceases to be economically feasible and sound for
agricultural purposes as determined by the Department of
Agriculture or (2) where the land shall have substantially
concerned.

February 2, 2009
RECLASSIFICATION; WHEN MAY BE ALLOWED?
When may reclassification be allowed?
are not classified as non-negotiable for conversion.
 It is worthy to note and it may be inferred that what is now
being required under Presidential Administrative Order No.
363 is a Certification from DAR that such lands are not
covered as yet by a Notice of Acquisition/Valuation under
CARP and no longer a DAR Certification indicating that such
lands are not covered by a Notice of Coverage. The earlier
requirement that there should be no Notice of Coverage
issued as yet under Memorandum Circular No. 54, series of
1993 of the Office of the President appears to have now
been amended by the latter requirement that there should
be no Notice of Acquisition/Valuation under Administrative
Order No. 363, series of 1997, likewise of the Office of the
President.
DAR OPINION NO. 2-B, s. 2003

March 7, 2003
RECONVEYANCE; WHEN MADE TO GOVERNMENT FINANCING

INSTITUTIONS (GFI)
Are properties turned over to DAR exempt from CARL

coverage by virtue of their having been reclassified as non-
agricultural prior to the effectivity of CARL?
 If the GFIs are convinced that the properties turned over to

DAR are exempt from CARL coverage by virtue of their
having been reclassified as non-agricultural prior to the
effectivity of CARL, and would like their properties
reconveyed, cancellation proceedings should be made at
their instance and filed with the Provincial Adjudicator
having jurisdiction thereon. Reconveyance to the GFI shall
be made only after a final and executory decision has been
rendered on the exemption of the property from CARL.

October 4, 1995
REDEMPTION RIGHT
What are the remedies available for the exercise of the
tenant-lessees right of redemption?
 There are two (2) mutually exclusive remedies provided

under the aforequoted Section 12 of R.A. No. 3844, as
amended by Section 2 of R.A. No. 6389 for the exercise of
the tenant-lessee's right of redemption. One is the filing of
the corresponding petition or request with the Department,
and, the other is the filing of a corresponding case in court
(now DARAB), as herein resorted to.

February 21, 2002
REDEMPTION; TWO YEAR REDEMPTION PERIOD NOT WAIVABLE
Within what period can the spouse of the transferor-

beneficiary be allowed to redeem the land?
 Section 27 of R.A. 6657 provides that if the land has been

transferred to the government or to the Land Bank of the
Philippines, the children or spouse of the transferor-
beneficiary shall still have the right to repurchase the land
within two (2) years from the date of transfer. From the
mandatory tenor of said provision of law, giving the children
or spouse the right to redeem the land within the two (2)
year redemption period, it could readily be inferred that
said right is not waivable for it would be unduly prejudicial
to the beneficiary and his family.
January 9, 1998
REGIONAL DIRECTOR; AUTHORITY TO GRANT THE

CONSTRUCTION OF A BARANGAY ROMAN CATHOLIC CHAPEL
Does the Regional Director have the authority to grant the

construction of a Barangay Roman Catholic Chapel?
 The Regional Director is without authority to grant request

for the construction of a Barangay Roman Catholic Chapel
on a property under the administration of DAR. The specific
duties and functions of a Regional Director has been clearly
set forth under Sec. 24 of E.O. No. 129-A wherein the
granting of such request is not among those mentioned in
said section.

July 15, 1997
REGIONAL DIRECTOR; POWER TO CITE A PARTY IN

CONTEMPT
 The power of the Regional Director to cite a party in

contempt is implied and could be inferred under the
aforequoted provisions of law, rules and regulations. This is
particularly clear based on the 1st paragraph of DAR
Administrative Order No. 03, Series of 2003 which provides
that said guideline is issued pursuant to sections 49 and 50
of R.A. No. 6657. In Section 50, paragraph 3, last sentence
of R.A. No. 6657, DAR is expressly vested with the power to
punish direct and indirect contempts in the same manner
and subject to the same penalties as provided in the Rules
of Court.
 Moreover, a Cease and Desist Order issued by the Regional
Director would possibly be without teeth and, hence, no
force and effect if he could not cite a party in contempt.
The authority of Regional Directors to cite a party in
contempt can be deduced as an incident arising within their
jurisdiction for the effective and orderly implementation of
said Order, in particular and the Program, in general.

March 11, 2004
REGISTER OF DEEDS; MINISTERIAL DUTY TO REGISTER FREE

PATENT
What is the ministerial duty of ROD as regards free patent?
 It is ministerial for the Register of Deeds to register free

patent title. However, if the subject property, together with
other agricultural lands owned by the patentee, will exceed
the 5-hectares ceiling, the excess has to be covered under
the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) for
redistribution to qualified beneficiaries.

November 8, 2000
REGISTRATION; BY LANDOWNERS WHO OWN AGRICULTURAL

LAND; PROCEDURE
What is the procedure for the registration of landowners

who own or claim to own agricultural lands whether in
their names or in the name of others?
 Section 14. Registration of Landowners. — Within one

hundred eighty (180) days from the effectivity of this act, all
persons, natural or juridical, including government entities,
that own or claim to own agricultural lands whether in their
names or in the name of others except those who have
already registered pursuant to Executive Order No. 229,
who shall be entitled to such incentives as may be provided
for by the PARC, shall file a sworn statement in the proper
assessor's office in the form to be prescribed by the DAR
stating the following information:
a. the description and area of the property;

b. the average gross income from the property
for at least three (3) years;
c. the names of all tenants and farmworkers
therein;
d. the crops planted in the property and the
area covered by each crop as of June 1, 1987;
e. the terms of mortgage, leases, and
management contracts subsisting as of June 1, 1987; and
f. the latest declared market value of the land
as determined by the city or provincial assessor.

July 2, 1996
REGISTRATION; MINISTERIAL DUTY OF THE REGISTER OF

DEEDS
What is the duty of the Register of Deeds where the
instrument to be presented for registration complies with
all the requisites for registration?
 Where the instrument to be presented for registration

complies with all the requisites for registration, the
Register of Deeds is duty-bound to immediately register
said instrument. The duties enjoined upon the Register of
deeds pursuant to Section 57 of P.D. No. 1529 (Property
Registration Decree) are clearly ministerial and mandatory
in character.

August 21, 2001
REGISTRATION; ON SALE OF FARMLOTS; DAR CLEARANCE MAY
BE DISPENSED WITH
May the registration of the sale of farmlots be affected

without prior DAR Clearance?
 The registration of the sale of the farmlots may be effected

without prior DAR Clearance considering that the
acquisition was undertaken by virtue of the expropriation
powers of the government. This is anchored on the ruling of
the Supreme Court in the case entitled "Province of
Camarines Sur vs. Court of Appeals".

August 31, 1995
REGISTRATION; OPERATIVE ACT TO CONVEY THE LAND

REGISTERED
What is the effect of registration of a land?
 The five (5) year prohibitory period within which an awarded

land should not be converted or reclassified as provided for
under Section 65 of R.A. No. 6657 is reckoned from the date
of registration of Emancipation Patents (EPs) or Certificates
of Land Ownership Award (CLOAs) with the Register of
Deeds and not from the issuance of Certificates of
Allocation. This is evident under Joint DAR-LRA
Memorandum Circular No. 20, Series of 1997 which
provides that the reckoning date of the registration of the
EPs and CLOAs shall be the date of entry in the Primary
Entry Book. The same reckoning date is likewise provided
for under Item IV-B of DAR Administrative Order No. 7,
Series of 1997. As held by the Supreme Court in the case of
Virginia Calalang vs. Register of Deeds of Quezon City (G.R.
No. 76265, March 11, 1994), it is the act of registration of
the deed of conveyance which serves as the operative act
to convey the land registered. The act of registration
creates constructive notice to the whole world of the fact
of such conveyance.

June 23, 1998
REPEALING CLAUSE
Did DAR A.O. No. 7, Series of 1997 which deals with the
rules and procedure governing conversion of agricultural
lands to non-agricultural uses repeal DAR A.O. No. 12,
Series of 1990 (Policy Guidelines and Operative Procedure
in the Identification and Acquisition of Idle or Abandoned
Lands)?
 Obviously, there could be no repeal to speak of because the

implementing rules and regulations deal with different
subject matters. Specifically, DAR A.O. No. 07, Series of
1997 deals with the rules and procedure governing
conversion of agricultural lands to non-agricultural uses,
whereas DAR A.O. No. 12, Series of 1990 deals with the
policy guidelines and operative procedure in the
identification and acquisition of idle or abandoned lands. As
such, there could be no possible repeal of the previous
implementing rules and regulations by the latter one. What
the Department rightfully intends is to repeal or put an end
to the efficacy of DAR A.O. No. 12, Series of 1994 since the
two involves identical subject matters. Upon the discovery
of this glaring error, DAR Administrative Order No. 10,
Series of 1997 was immediately issued to rectify the error
in the repealing clause of DAR A.O. No. 7, Series of 1997. As
it is, the confusion is now a settled issue.

February 4, 1998
REPRESENTATION AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCE (RATA)

Who are authorized to collect RATAs?
 Item No. 2 of the DAR Secretary's Memorandum dated 07

July 1997 provides, quote:
"xxx
xxx xxx
2. Holders of the above mentioned positions who
are reassigned or in full-time detail to another
organization unit or special project for one full calendar
month or more, which detail or reassignment is without
consent or involuntary in nature are authorized to
continue to collect commutable RATA chargeable
against their mother units, provided that the duties and
responsibilities they perform are comparable with those
of their regular positions as certified by the Head of
Office concerned. . ."
 The above Memorandum may be made to apply in the

instant case. As per records and pertinent certifications of
Regional Adjudicator Fe Arche Manalang along with that of
Provincial Adjudicator Macario S. Bautista and the
recommendation of the Committee on RATA, DAR Region
IV, the full-time detail in issue of herein petitioner Honorato
A. Victoria is without consent and involuntary in nature, and
that he is performing the duties and responsibilities in his
new assignment as officer-in-charge, Personnel
Administration and Discipline and concurrently, as Deputy
Regional Sheriff comparable with his regular positions as
CARPO and Chief of the Legal Division in Boac, Marinduque.

June 23, 1998
REPRESENTATION AND TRAVELLING ALLOWANCE (RATA);

PERSONNEL ASSIGNED TO FAP
Who are entitled to RATA to a Foreign Assisted Projects?
 DAR Memorandum Circular No. 21, dated 21 May 1997,

which states:
"IV.1. Representation and

Traveling Allowance. Personnel assigned to
Foreign Assisted Projects (FAPs) who are entitled
to Representation and Travelling Allowance
(RATA) shall draw such allowance from GOP
counterpart funds effective upon his assignment
to FAPs."
 The abovecited provision would bring to light that not all

personnel assigned to FAPs are entitled to RATA. The
phraseology of the said provision was couched in very plain
and simple term wherein there is no room for other
interpretation. The wordings "personnel assigned to FAPs
who are entitled to RATA……" presuppose that even prior to
their assignment, said personnel subsequently assigned to
FAPs were already entitled to receive RATA by virtue of
their original permanent positions. Thus, conversely, if prior
to their assignment to the FAPs, they are not entitled to
receive RATA, their assignment to such project will not
entitle them to receive the same. Accordingly, only those
holding ratable positions are generally entitled to RATA.
This is evident from the provisions of DBM National
Compensation Circular No. 67, Series of 1992 as amended,
particularly, Sections 2 and 3 and subsections thereof, and
No. 1 of the Memorandum of the DAR Secretary dated 07
July 1997.

September 25, 1998

PERSONNEL WHO ARE ENTITLED THEREOF
 In the payment of RATA, the provisions of DAR Memorandum
Circular No. 05, Series of 2000 [Payment of Representation
and Transportation Allowance (RATA) to DAR Officials] and
DAR Memorandum Circular No. 07, Series of 2000
(Addendum to MC No. 05, Series of 2000 on the Payment of
RATA to DAR Officials) shall be observed.

August 11, 2005

REASSIGNMENT OF OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES
Are MAROs entitled to RATA?
 The MAROs may be allowed RATA if they are likewise

performing the duties and responsibilities comparable with
and interrelated if not higher in scope and latitude to their
original official functions. Another reason is that, pursuant
to the DAR Secretary's Memorandum dated 07 July 1997,
specifically No. 6 thereof, a MARO position, although below
Division Chief level, is classified by the Department of
Budget and Management as equivalent to Chief of Division.
Accordingly, holders of MARO positions who are on official
and involuntary detail to another units may be entitled to
RATA, and much more so if they are performing duties and
responsibilities comparable with and interrelated to those
of their regular functions.

September 4, 1998
 |It has to be emphatically stressed that this opinion should

not be unduly used as a precedent or construed as an
implied condonation or toleration of the obnoxious practice
of purporting to detail involuntarily an employee or
personnel for official reasons or exigencies (in order to
continuously avail of the privilege of receiving a RATA)
when in truth and in fact it is privately sought or initiated by
the employee himself for some personal reasons of his own
or is merely an accommodation made upon his request and
is not actually in the official and/or to the best interest of
the service. Such is not sanctioned and is strongly
condemned in this jurisdiction. Accordingly, to foreclose
commission and possible perpetuation in the Department of
the aforesaid abominable practice, careful inquiry,
evaluation and verification, on a case to case basis, must
be conducted before the payment of RATA may be validly
authorized.

September 4, 1998

SOURCES OF FUNDS THEREOF
What are the sources of fund for claims of RATA?
 As to the issue regarding the sources of fund for claims of

RATA by employees assigned to FAPs (on the assumption
that the foregoing rules and regulations are duly observed
and complied with), the following provisions are instructive:
1. No. 11, Dar Secretary's Memorandum dated 07 July

1997:
"Commutable RATA shall be paid from the

amount appropriated for the purpose under the personal
services fund. Reimbursable RATA shall be charged
against the amount appropriated under maintenance and
operating expenses, i.e. transportation allowance to
object classification code 02 and representation
allowance to object classification code 29."
2. Section 4, DBM National Compensation Circular No.
67, Series of 1992 as amended:
"In all cases, commutable and reimbursable

RATA shall be paid from the amount appropriated for the
purpose and other personal services savings of the
agency or project from where the officials and employees
covered under this Circular draw their salaries. No one
shall be allowed to collect RATA from more than one
source."
3. IV.1, Memorandum Circular No. 21, Series of 1997:
"Representation and Travelling Allowance

(RATA). Personnel assigned to FAPs who are entitled to
Representation and Travelling Allowance (RATA) shall
draw such allowance from GOP counterpart funds
effective upon his assignment to FAPs."
 It necessarily follows that the source of fund for payment of

RATA of said employees should come from the same source
as that of regular employees of DAR holding ratable
positions who are not detailed but discharging the actual
duties and responsibilities of their positions, pursuant to
the aforequoted provisions of No. 11 of DAR Secretary's
Memorandum dated 07 July 1997, Section 4 of DBM NCC
No. 67, Series of 1992 as amended and IV.1 of DAR MC No.
21, Series of 1997. In other words, both category of
employees, whether detailed or not, shall be entitled to
RATA in the same manner and from the same source for
there is actually no substantial distinction between them so
as to warrant a different or unequal treatment.

September 25, 1998
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 6657; REVISION OR AMENDMENT
VESTED WITH THE CONGRESS
 With respect to the repeal of the Comprehensive Agrarian

Reform Law (CARL), it is the Congress who can properly act
on the revision or amendment since the legislative power of
making laws, altering and repealing them is vested with the
Congress of the Philippines as mandated by the 1987
Constitution.
 The separability clause or Section 77 of the CARL (R.A. No.
6657) also states that if there are sections or provisions of
this act is declared null and void, the other sections or
provisions shall stand and the same shall remain in full
force and effect.
 Unless and until the court finds reasons to declare the law
unconstitutional, Congress will have no basis to repeal the
law.

January 11, 2006
RESERVOIR; RESERVOIR LOT CANNOT BE PRIVATELY

APPROPRIATED
Is a reservoir lot be a subject of award to private

individual?
 Reservoir is a place where water collects naturally, or is

stored for use when wanted, and since the subject lot is
designated as reservoir lot and was not the subject of an
award to private individual, we are of the opinion that the
same cannot be appropriated by any private individual for
his exclusive use. Moreover, the water that is contained
therein or flows therefrom is considered as public waters
for the use of the general public. No private individual,
therefore, may monopolize its use, or obstruct its use by
another. Construction of any form of structure thereon will
require prior authorization from the proper government
agency.

July 22, 1999
RETAINED AREA; NOT A BAR TO ACQUISITION OF ANOTHER

AGRICULTURAL LAND; LANDOWNER MAY DISPOSE HIS
RETAINED AREA
Is the transfer or disposition of the retained area a bar to

acquisition of another agricultural land? May a landowner
donate or dispose more than his retained area?
 Where the sale or disposition of agricultural lands retained

by a landowner as a consequence of Section 6 of R.A. No.
6657 is valid, there appears to be no legal impediment for
such landowner to subsequently acquire another
agricultural land provided, however, that, in all cases, the
legally mandated 5-hectare aggregate landownership
ceiling be observed.
 The area donated to DECS cannot be taken from that part of
the agricultural land of the landowner in excess of the 5-
hectare retention limit which is subject for acquisition and
redistribution to qualified beneficiaries under the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP). In other
words, a landowner could only validly donate or dispose
that which constitutes part of his retained area and the rest
shall be covered under CARP. Thus, the donated portion
forms part of his retained area.

December 23, 1999
RETENTION
 The right of retention is a constitutionally guaranteed right,
which is subject to qualification by the legislature. The
right serves to mitigate the effects of the program. A
retained area is a land which is not supposed to leave the
landowner’s dominion. R.A. No. 6657, Section 6 thereof
provides 5 hectares as the landowners retention area.

November 16, 2007
RETENTION/EXEMPTION; AUTHORITY TO APPROVE/DENY

APPLICATION FOR RETENTION/EXEMPTION: UNDER PD 27
Which has authority to approve/deny application for

retention/exemption under P.D.27?
 In the years 1977 to 1987, it was the DAR Secretary who

approved or disapproved application for
retention/exemption pursuant to P.D. 27. However, due to
increasing backlog of unresolved cases which delayed the
completion of the program, DAR Memorandum Circular No.
5, series of 1987 was issued delegating this authority to the
Regional Director.

October 23, 1996
RETENTION LIMIT, UNDER R.A. NO. 6657

Can we issue a clearance or certification for the sale or
disposition of agricultural lands in excess of the retention
limit?
 Paragraph 1 and 4, Section 6, R.A. No. 6657
". . . . . In no case shall retention by the landowner

exceed five (5) hectares. . . . .
xxx
xxx xxx
Upon the effectivity of this Act, any sale, disposition,
lease management contract or transfer of possession of
private lands executed by the original landowner in
violation of this Act shall be null and void. . . . . "
(emphasis supplied)
"Section 70. Disposition of Private Agricultural Lands.

— The sale or disposition of agricultural lands retained
by a landowner as a consequence of Section 6 hereof
shall be valid as long as the total landholdings that shall
be owned by the transferee thereof inclusive of the land
to be acquired shall not exceed the landholding ceiling
provided in this Act.
Any sale or disposition of agricultural lands after the
effectivity of this Act found to be contrary to the
provisions hereof shall be null and void." (emphasis
supplied)
 Section 73 (a), R.A. No. 6657
"Section 73. Prohibited Acts and Omissions. — The

following are prohibited:
(a) The ownership or possession, for the purpose of
circumventing the provisions of this Act, of agricultural
lands in excess of the total retention limits or award
ceiling by any person, natural or juridical, except those
under collective ownership by farmer-beneficiaries."
(emphasis supplied)
 Item II.2.a of DAR A.O. No. 1, series of 1989
"2. The following transactions are not valid:

a) Sale, disposition, lease, management contract
or transfer of possession of private lands executed by
the original landowner prior to June 15, 1988, which are
not registered on or before September 13, 1988, or
those executed after June 15, 1988, covering an area in
excess of the five-hectare retention limit in violation of
R.A. No. 6657." (emphasis supplied)
 The above provisions of law and guideline, taken together,

clearly delimit the ownership and/or transfer/sale of
agricultural lands to not more than the legally mandated
retention limit or landownership ceiling of five (5) hectares.
Thus, to issue a clearance or certification for the sale or
disposition of agricultural lands in excess of the 5-hectare
retention limit or landownership ceiling would be violative
of the aforequoted provisions of law and guideline.

May 9, 2003
RETENTION LIMIT; UNDER R.A. NO. 6657
What is the retention limit pursuant to R.A. No. 6657?
 Subject acquisition will be violative of the provisions of

Law) mandating a landownership ceiling and/or retention
limit of not more than five (5) hectares (paragraphs 1 and 4,
Section 6, Section 70 and Section 73 (a) of R.A. No. 6657).
DAR OPINION NO. 08, 2001

July 13, 2001
RETENTION LIMIT; UNDER R.A. NO. 6657
What is the retention limit pursuant of R.A. No. 6657?
 Under Section 6 of RA 6657, each landowner is entitled to

retain a maximum of five (5) hectares of his agricultural
land, while the rest shall be redistributed to qualified
beneficiaries. Pursuant to said provision, if your parents
died prior to 15 June 1988, your total landholdings,
including the properties inherited by you, shall be computed
and the area in excess of 5-hectare retention shall be
redistributed under CARL. If your parents died on or after
the effectivity of CARL, only 5 hectares of their total
agricultural lands may be claimed as their retention and the
excess shall be subject of redistribution.

January 26, 1994
 Under Section 6 of R.A. No. 6657, it provides in part, quote:

"Except as otherwise provided in this Act, no person may
own or retain directly or indirectly, any public or private
agricultural land, . . . . .but in no case shall retention by the
landowner exceed five (5) hectares. Three (3) hectares may
be awarded to each child of the landowner, subject to the
following qualifications: 1) the he is at least fifteen (15)
years of age; and 2) that he is actually tilling the land or
directly managing the farm….

September 16, 1994

June 27, 1994

August 22, 1994

September 22, 1994

September 25, 1995

September 29, 1995
May 20, 1997

March 20, 1997
RETENTION RIGHT
 Right of succession is transmitted from the moment of the

death of the decedent, the right of ownership over their
respective shares in the inheritance is automatically and by
operation of law is vested in them (legal heirs). Further,
applying the principle of law under the Civil Code of the
Philippines that the relative nearest in degree excludes the
more distant ones, the legal heir of the landowner who shall
inherit pursuant to said principle of law shall be entitled to
a maximum of five (5) hectares as retention area or
payment of the land compensation, as the case maybe. The
legal heir acquires the rights and obligations of a deceased
landowner. Said legal heir shall now be considered as the
new landowner.

April 6, 2010
RETENTION RIGHT; EXTENT THEREOF
What is the extent of the right of retention?
 The right of retention must be confined only to landholdings

which belong to them. It cannot extend to landholdings
whose ownership belongs to different persons because the
law restricts the landowners right of retention to their own
landholding.

October 15, 1996
RETENTION RIGHT; WAIVER
When is a landowner deemed to have waived his right of

retention?
 A landowner is deemed to have waived his right of retention

if he performed any of the following acts:
a. Signing of the Landowner Tenant production

Agreement and Farmer's Undertaking (LTPA-FU) covering
the subject property;
b. Entering into a direct payment scheme
agreement as evidenced by a Deed of Transfer over the
subject property or
c. Signing/submission of other documents
indicating consent to have the subject property covered
such as the form letter of the Land Bank of the Philippines
(LBP) on the disposition of the cash and bond portions of a
land transfer claim for payment, and the Deed of
Assignment Warranting and Undertaking executed in favor
of the LBP.

February 8, 1996
RETENTION; BANKS AND GFIs NO RIGHT OF RETENTION

OVER FORECLOSED PROPERTIES
 It is clear that Quedancor may acquire title to foreclosed

agricultural properties regardless of area (that is, even
more than the five (5) hectare retention limit). However,
banks and other similar institutions, cannot exercise the
right of retention over said foreclosed agricultural
properties since they are subject to the aforeqouted
provisions of existing laws and guidelines on their eventual
compulsory transfer under the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Program (CARP).

January 14, 2010
RETENTION; EXCEPTION
 There is no legal obstacle to the expropriation of the

subject landholdings by the Province of Camarines Norte so
long as the requisites of the exercise of the power of
eminent domain pursuant to Section 19 of R.A. No. 7160 are
met. It is to be stressed that the exercise of the power of
eminent domain by LGUs must strictly follow the
requirements provided for by law. Section 6-A creates an
exception to the general rule on retention limits which
govern agricultural lands and this, it must be followed in
cases of expropriation of agricultural lands. In addition to
the general requirements of the exercise of the power of
eminent domain by LGUs, the requirements imposed by
Section 6-A of R.A. No. 6657, as amended by R.A. No. 9700,
must be strictly complied with.
 Pursuant to the first proviso of Section 6-A, what is required,

prior to expropriation by an LGU, is that the agricultural
land subject of expropriation must be first covered,
awarded, and distributed to qualified agrarian reform
beneficiaries pursuant to existing agrarian reform laws and
regulations. Then pursuant to the last proviso of Section 6-
A, the lawful ARBs shall receive just compensation from the
LGU concerned as the lawful private owners thereon. From
the very tenor of the first proviso of Section 6-A, it can be
inferred that the acquisition and distribution of the land
must first be complied with before expropriation may
commence, to wit:
Provided, That lands subject to CARP shall first
undergo the land acquisition and distribution process of
the program.
The ineluctable conclusion therefore is that, by the
explicit provision of substantive law, the expropriation of
the agricultural landholding may not precede the
coverage and award of the agricultural landholding sought
to be expropriated.
October 19, 2010
RETENTION; GFIs CANNOT EXERCISE RIGHT OF

RETENTION OVER FORECLOSED AGRICULTURAL LANDS
 Banks may acquire title to mortgaged agricultural

properties regardless of area (that is, even more than the 5-
hectare retention limit) pursuant to Section 71 of R.A. No.
6657. However, banks cannot exercise the right over said
foreclosed agricultural properties since they are subject to
the aforequoted provisions of existing laws and guidelines
on their eventual compulsory transfer and acquisition under
the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP).

December 20, 2010
RETENTION; HEIRS SUCCEED TO RETAINED AREAS OF

DECEASED PARENTS
 The heirs are not entitled to a retention area in their own

right. They succeed to the retained area of their deceased
parents which is seven or five hectares, as the case may
be.
 Moreover, under the law on succession, only the property,
rights and obligations of a decedent were transmitted to
his/her heirs from the moment of death.

April 14, 2008
RETENTION; LANDOWNER RIGHT OF RETENTION IS

PERSONAL
 Owners of agricultural lands may voluntarily offer their

private agricultural lands for coverage under the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) without
exercising their rights of retention. The right of retention is
personal to the landowner hence, said right can be waived.

August 21, 2008
RETENTION; AGRICULTURAL LAND NOT MORE THAN FIVE HAS.,

LANDOWNER NOT REQUIRED TO APPLY FOR RETENTION
Are landowners owning less than five (5) hectares still

need to apply for retention?
 Only landowners owning agricultural lands of more than five

(5) hectares may apply for retention before they can sell or
otherwise dispose of the same. As regards landholdings
covering an area of five (5) hectares or less, the owners
thereof are no longer required to apply for retention before
they can sell or otherwise dispose of the same. It is
sufficient that the evaluating officer (in this case the
MARO) establishes with certainty the accuracy and
truthfulness of the evidences presented, i.e., Listasaka,
Ownership Title, Affidavit of transferor stating that the land
subject of deed is a retention or portion of the retention
area, Affidavit of the transferee that he/she has a total
landholding inclusive of the land to be acquired of not more
than five (5) hectares, as well as the Certifications of
Assessors as to the total aggregate area of the
landholdings to be acquired which do not exceed the 5-
hectare retention limit. If he finds said documents to be in
order, he shall forward the same to the PARO with his
comments and recommendations. The PARO, upon
examination of all the attached documents and finding the
same to be in order, shall then issue a clearance for the
registration of the subject deed.

September 4, 1998
RETENTION; APPLICATION FOR RETENTION INVOLVING

LANDHOLDING FIVE (5) HAS. AND BELOW
Can there still be a need to issue Certificate or Order of

Retention if the total landholding area is 5 hectares and
below?
 While it is true that Administrative Order No. 11, Series of

1990 provides that a landowner who owns five (5) hectares
or less may file an application for retention, the import of
said provision in the filing thereof is only directory
considering that the word "may" has been used. In other
words, the implication of said provision is that the
landowner has the option to file an application for retention
before he can sell or dispose of the same provided it is
established that he owns agricultural landholdings with an
aggregate area of five (5) hectares and below. It goes
without saying then that the Regional Director may still
issue a Certificate or Order of Retention as regards lands of
less than 5 hectares if the landowner opts to apply. This is
so because retention right is a substantive right under the
law and the Constitution. Thus, to mandatorily require all
landowners actually owning less than five (5) hectares to
apply for retention might constitute an undue limitation of
their inherent right to dispose their lands.

February 9, 1999
RETENTION; APPLICATION FOR RETENTION MAY BE FILED WITH

THE OFFICE OF THE MARO
May the application for retention be filed with the Office of

the Municipal Agrarian Reform Officer?
 The application for retention may be filed with the Office of

the Municipal Agrarian Reform Officer of the place where
the property is situated. The Regional Director concerned
has jurisdiction to issue the Order resolving the application,
which is appealable to the Office of the DAR Secretary
within 15 days from receipt of the party who wishes to file
said appeal.

February 8, 1996
RETENTION; AREA SHALL BE COMPACT AND CONTIGUOUS
What is the maximum retention area of a landowner?
 The landowner may retain a maximum area of five (5)

hectares as provided for under Section 6 of R.A. No. 6657
which shall be compact and contiguous. Three (3) hectares
may likewise be awarded to each child of the landowner,
subject to qualifications provided for by law. The
landowner's retained area is not subject to compulsory
acquisition by the government for distribution to qualified
beneficiaries.

December 24, 1998
RETENTION; CERTIFICATE OF RETENTION NOT A MANDATORY

REQUIREMENT; AUTHORITY OF PARO TO ISSUE DAR
CLEARANCE
Can the PARO issue DAR Clearance without the need for a
Certificate of Retention?
 Section 70 of R.A. No. 6657 implies that Retention Order

and/or Certificate of Retention are not mandatorily required
before a retained area could be sold or alienated. It is
enough that the total landholdings that shall be owned by
the transferee thereof inclusive of the land to be acquired
shall not exceed the landholding ceilings provided for by
CARL. PAROs are intelligent, capable and trustworthy
enough to arrive at a fair and honest finding as to what
constitute the retention area from which finding he must
necessarily base his decision on whether or not to issue the
mandatorily required DAR Clearance to prevent
circumvention of the Program.
 What is mandatory as far as the sale/alienation of
agricultural lands less than five (5) hectares are concerned
is the DAR Clearance and not the Retention Certificate or
Order. As far as landowners who own more than five (5)
hectares are concerned, the Regional Director is still the
one authorized to issue the Certificate and/or Order of
Retention. Accordingly, the provisions of A.O. No. 11, S. of
1990 are not actually negated by DAR Opinion No. 89,
Series of 1998.

February 9, 1999
RETENTION; DAR CLEARANCE STILL NECESSARY

Is DAR Clearance still necessary before the sale of
retained area could be validly effected?
 DAR Clearance is still necessary before the sale could be

validly effected to foreclose possible circumvention of the
CARL pursuant to Section 6 (4th paragraph), 70 and 73 (a)
of R.A. No. 6657 and DAR Administrative Order No. 1, Series
of 1989.

January 9, 1998
RETENTION; ESTATE OF DECEASED PARENTS ENTITLED

TO THE RETENTION OF FIVE (5) HECTARES
 In no case shall retention limit or landownership ceiling of a

landowner exceed five (5) hectares upon the effectivity of
R. A. No. 6657 on 15 June 1988. Any agricultural
landholding in excess thereof shall perforce, by operation of
law, be acquired and distributed to a qualified agrarian
reform beneficiary except only if the children of the
landowner are qualified beneficiaries or awardees.
 If the parents died after 15 June 1988, the estate of the
deceased parents is entitled to the retention of five
hectares, the area in excess of the retention shall be
distributed to qualified beneficiaries, following the
provision of R.A. No. 6657 specifically Section 22. This is
without prejudice to the preferential right of the
landowner’s children to three (3) hectares each in the
distribution of the land of their parents.
 Item II. C. 1 of DAR Administrative Order No. 1, Series of
1989 (Rules and Procedures Governing Land Transactions),
what is considered as not a prohibited transaction
(necessitating no prior clearance from DAR before
registration) is a Deed of Extrajudicial Partition of the
property of a deceased who died prior to June 15, 1988.
Thus, conversely, we could infer that a Deed of Extra-
Judicial Partition of the property of the deceased insofar as
the excess of his/her 5-hectare retention limit or
landownership ceiling is concerned, who died after June 15,
1988 is a prohibited transaction precisely because said
agricultural landholdings are, by operation of law,
immediately put under the coverage of CARP upon the
effectivity of R.A. No. 6657. His heirs will thus only be
entitled to the compensation for the land. To hold otherwise
would be violative of the provisions of Sections 6 and 73 (a)
of R.A. 6657 that in no case should the retention limit or
landownership ceiling of landowner exceed five (5)
hectares.

April 3, 2007
RETENTION; EXECUTION OF FINAL AND EXECUTORY ORDER
Is it imperative to execute a final and executory Order of

the Secretary?
 The issue on the alleged 25-hectare sugarland was never

the subject of the Order after having verified the same with
the Claims and Conflicts Division, Bureau of Agrarian Legal
Assistance, DAR Central Office. However, considering that
the Order of the Secretary dated 29 October 1998 may
already be deemed as final and executory, it is believed
that execution thereof in accordance with its express
orders is now imperative to effect an orderly
implementation of the Secretary's Order. This is without
prejudice, however, to the eventual probable coverage
under CARP of the alleged 25-hectare sugarland co-owned
by Clemente and Maria Alipit pursuant to existing agrarian

April 13, 1999
RETENTION; EXERCISE OF RETENTION RIGHT UNDER CARP
Can landowners exercise their right of retention under R.A.

6657 if such right have not been availed of under P.D. 27?
 All landowners of private agricultural lands with a total area

of more than five (5) hectares, except those who have
already been granted full retention under Presidential
Decree No. 27, may exercise their right of retention under
Republic Act No. 6657. In no case, however, shall the total
landholding exceed five (5) hectares, the ceiling prescribed
under Republic Act No. 6657.
 Whether or not there is still a need to file application for
retention as to the other 4-hectare property, a self-
explanatory DAR Opinion No. 89, series of 1998, which,
insofar as pertinent, is quoted as follows:
" . . . . . As regards landholdings covering an

area of five (5) hectares or less, we submit that
the owners thereof are no longer required to apply
for retention before they can sell or otherwise
dispose of the same. It is sufficient that the
evaluating officer (in this case the MARO)
establishes with certainty the accuracy and
truthfulness of the evidence presented, i.e.,
Listasaka, Ownership Title, Affidavit of transferor
stating that the land subject of deed is a retention
or portion of the retention area, Affidavit of the
transferee that he/she has a total landholding
inclusive of the land to be acquired of not more
than five (5) hectares, as well as the
Certifications of Assessors as to the total
aggregate area of the landholdings to be acquired
which do not exceed the 5-hectare retention limit.
If he finds said documents to be in order, he shall
forward the same to the PARO with his comments
and recommendations. The PARO, upon
examination of all the attached documents and
finding the same to be in order, shall then issue a
clearance for the registration of the subject deed.
It has to be made clear, however, that any
intended sale or disposition of agricultural lands
by landowners, whether they are allegedly owning
more or less than five (5) hectares, shall always
be subject to DAR Clearance before the same
could be validly registered with the Register of
Deeds, to prevent possible circumvention of the
provisions of R.A. No. 6657 and its related
implementing guidelines." (Underscoring and
emphasis supplied)

September 8, 1999
What is the retention limit of a landowner?
 Section 6 of R.A. No. 6657 together with other pertinent

provisions of R.A. No. 6657 (e.g., Section 73 (a) clearly
restrict and limit the retention area and landownership
ceiling of agricultural lands to only five (5) hectares without
providing any alternative option to prevent actual land
transfer and distribution thereof to qualified farmer-
beneficiaries. In other words, labor administration cannot
be resorted to as a subterfuge to spare a CARP covered
property from distribution. The express provision of law
diverting the acquisition and distribution of agricultural
lands in excess of the retention area cannot be
subordinated to nor rendered nugatory by any agreement
purportedly to be entered into by and between the
landowner on one hand and the farmer-beneficiaries on the
other hand, because the same constitutes circumvention of
the Program and is not sanctioned in this jurisdiction. The
law mandates the acquisition of agricultural lands to effect
a more equitable distribution and ownership thereof, with
due regard to the rights of landowners to just compensation
and to the ecological needs of the nation, in order to
provide farmers and farmworkers with the opportunity to
enhance their dignity and improve the quality of their lives
through greater productivity of the agricultural lands they
till.

April 23, 1998
 Section 6 of R.A. No. 6657 expressly provides that "in no

case shall retention by the landowner exceed five
hectares". The clear intent of the aforequoted provision
suggest that all landholdings in excess of the retention
area shall be the subject of compulsory acquisition by the
Department of Agrarian Reform for distribution to qualified
farmer-beneficiaries. The right of the farmer-beneficiaries
to own directly or collectively the lands they till is premised
on Section 2 of R.A. No. 6657 (Declaration of Principles and
Policies) for them to enhance their dignity and improve the
quality of their lives through greater productivity of
agricultural lands.

June 26, 1998
RETENTION; FORECLOSED AGRICULTURAL PROPERTIES

CANNOT BE PART OF BANKS RETAINED AREA
Whether or not the banks may exercise the right of
retention over their foreclosed agricultural properties?
 It is explicit that banks may acquire title to mortgaged

agricultural properties regardless of area (that is, even
more than the 5-hectare retention limit) pursuant to Section
71 of R.A. No. 6657. However, banks cannot exercise the
right of retention over said foreclosed agricultural
properties since they are subject to the aforequoted
provisions of existing laws and guidelines on their eventual
compulsory transfer and acquisition under the

October 8, 2003
RETENTION; FORECLOSED AGRICULTURAL PROPERTIES
CANNOT BE PART OF BANKS RETAINED AREA
Can banks exercise the right of retention over their

foreclosed agricultural properties?
 Banks cannot exercise the right of retention over their

foreclosed agricultural properties. Section 71 of R.A. 6657
mandates that foreclosed assets of private banks are
subject to existing laws on compulsory transfer and
acquisition.

October 23, 1996
RETENTION; FREE PATENT LAND
May a Free Patent holder retain his landholding?
 Moreover, even assuming arguendo, without necessarily

admitting, that the provision of Section 6 of R.A. No. 6657
on homestead patents could be made to apply by analogy to
free patents, the indispensable requirement of PERSONAL
CULTIVATION is a condition sine qua non in order that
awardees of free patents may retain their landholdings.
Said essential requirement of personal cultivation is
likewise mandated under the provisions of P.D. No. 1529,
amending C.A. No. 141 (Public Land Act), which requires
that the free patent awardee should cultivate the subject
landholding HIMSELF and that the employment or use of
share tenants in whatever form for the purpose of
complying with the requirements of the Public Land Act as
regards cultivation is prohibited. This is so because it is the
State's policy and objective to altogether abolish share
tenancy which was declared as contrary to public policy
(Section 4, R.A. No. 3844, Code of Agrarian Reform).

September 15, 1998
RETENTION; HOMESTEADS; REQUIREMENT OF PERSONAL

CULTIVATION
Whether or not personal cultivation by landowner is

required to tenanted lands.
 The cultivation required for the retention of homesteads is

personal cultivation by the landowner, which includes the
assistance of his immediate farm household. However, if
the farmlot is the subject of an agricultural leasehold
contract (that is, tenanted), one of the rights of the
agricultural lessee is to manage the land. It follows that if a
property is under agricultural leasehold, there can be no
cultivation by the landowner to speak of. The requirement
that the landholder should cultivate the homestead in order
to retain the same could therefore not be satisfied if the
land is tenanted. In fine, tenanted homesteads cannot be
the subject of cultivation by landowners, except with
respect to the five-hectare limit.

December 9, 1994
RETENTION; ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF RETENTION

Is a Certificate of Retention still required even if the
aggregate area of the landholdings does not exceed 5
hectares?
 Section 6 of R.A. No. 6657 (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform

Law) expressly provides: "except as other provided in this
Act, no person may own or retain, directly or indirectly, any
public or private agricultural land x x x but in no case shall
retention by the landowners exceed five hectares."
Corollarily, although the aggregate area of the subject
landholdings does not exceed the maximum ceiling of five
(5) hectares, landowners are still mandated to file an
application for retention with the DAR Office having the
jurisdiction over their landholdings for the purpose of
issuance of a Certificate of Retention. This is pursuant to
DAR Administrative Order No. 11, Series of 1990 which
requires that landowners must execute an affidavit as to
the aggregate area of their landholdings to prevent possible
circumvention of R.A. No. 6657.

March 10, 1998
RETENTION; LANDOWNER'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE
May the landowner choose patches or portions from his

agricultural lands to complete his retained area?
 The law requires that when the landowner chooses the area
to be retained by him, it should not consist of portions or
patches of his different agricultural lands, but rather should
as far as practicable, constitute a separate landholding.

August 14, 1996
 The right to choose the retained area is a statutory right

granted under the CARL. This being a statutory right, the
landowners, whose landholdings are covered under CARP
are bound to exercise such right within the period specified
under A.O. No. 11, Series of 1990 (Rules and Procedures
Governing the Exercise of Retention Rights by Landowners
and Award to Children Under Section 6 of R.A. 6657).
Otherwise, the DAR shall be the one to choose the retained
area in their behalf in order to attain the purposes of the
law.

February 27, 1997
RETENTION; NO RETENTION RIGHT OF A VENDEE OVER

FORECLOSED ASSETS
Is the vendee of a foreclosed property entitled to

retention?
 As regards private banks, Section 71 of R.A. No. 6657

provides that said foreclosed assets are subject to existing
laws on their compulsory transfer (that is under the General
Banking Act) and acquisition under Section 16 of said Act.
This means that private banks may sell to third parties their
foreclosed assets but still subject to acquisition under
Section 16 of R.A. No. 6657. In such a case, it is submitted
that the DAR Certification/Clearance required under A.O.
No. 1, series of 1989, is no longer necessary as the buyer
cannot legally exercise any retention right on the land
purchased." (emphasis supplied)

March 26, 1999
RETENTION; OPTION AVAILABLE TO TENANT
What is the option given to a tenant?

 The law provides available options to the tenants of the
subject 9-hectare agricultural land. Section 6 of R.A. No.
6657 provides that the tenants may choose to remain in the
retained area as lessees or may alternatively opt to be the
beneficiaries in the excess portion thereof (i.e., beyond the
retained area) or in another agricultural land. If the tenants
choose the first option, the landowner may not eject them
in the retained area since although the retained area is not
covered by the land acquisition components of CARP, it is
still covered by the leasehold provisions under existing
agrarian laws, rules and regulations. On the other hand, in
case the tenants choose to be the beneficiaries in the
excess portion to be covered by CARP or in another
agricultural land, they lose their right as leaseholders to the
land retained by the landowner. The right to exercise this
option must be done within a period of one (1) year from the
time the landowner manifests his choice of the area to be
retained.

December 24, 1998
 In case the tenant chooses to remain in the retained area,

he shall be considered a leaseholder and shall lose his right
to be a beneficiary under this Act. In case the tenant
chooses to be a beneficiary in another agricultural land, he
loses his right as a leaseholder to the land retained by the
landowner.

November 8, 1996
RETENTION; REGIONAL DIRECTOR; AUTHORITY THEREOF TO

ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF RETENTION
Who has the authority to issue a certificate of retention on

landholdings covered under P.D. No. 27 or R.A. No. 6657?
 The authority to issue a certificate of retention on
landholdings covered under P.D. 27 or R.A. 6657 lies
exclusively with the Regional Director (AO 11, Series of
1990, AO 4, Series of 1991).

October 11, 1996
RETENTION; RETAINED AREA AS COLLATERAL FOR A LOAN
May a retained area be used as a collateral for a loan?
 So long as there is a DAR determination that it is a retained

area pursuant to DAR Administrative Order No. 11, Series of
1990, the same may be used as a collateral for a loan,
provided that in case of foreclosure the transferee does not
own more than the landownership ceiling of 5 hectares
including the property acquired, pursuant to Section 73 (a)
of RA 6657.

October 16, 1995
RETENTION; RETENTION AREA DEFINED
What does retention area refer to?

1989, retention area refers to that parcel of land selected
by the landowner as such to remain under his full
ownership and control after his landholding has been
acquired by the government or covered by CARP and
distributed to the beneficiaries , as evidenced by a
Certificate of Retention issued by the Provincial Agrarian
Reform Officer (PARO) of the province where the land is
situated. Under Sec. 6 of R.A. 6657 said retention should
not exceed five (5) hectares.
August 5, 1994
RETENTION; RETENTION LIMIT OF JURIDICAL PERSON
What is the retention limit of a corporation?
 Section 6 of R.A. No. 6657 provides in part:
"SECTION 6. Retention Limits —

Except as otherwise provided in this Act … in no
case shall retention by the landowner exceed five
(5) hectares. Three (3) hectares may be awarded
to each child of the landowner, subject to the
following qualifications: (1) that he is at least
fifteen (15) years of age; and (2) that he is
actually tilling the land or directly managing the
farm . . ."
 Section 73(a) of R.A. No. 6657 further provides that the

ownership or possession, for the purpose of circumventing
the provisions of this Act, of agricultural lands in excess of
the total retention limits or award ceilings by any person,
natural or juridical, except those under collective
ownership by farmer-beneficiaries, is prohibited.
 From the foregoing, an individual can only own a maximum
of five (5) hectares, a limit set forth by the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law (CARL). However under P.D. No. 27,
landowners may be entitled to retain a maximum of seven
(7) hectares under certain circumstances or conditions. As
regards a corporation, since the same is in legal
contemplation regarded as a person (juridical person)
having a personality separate and distinct from its
stockholders, it is thus likewise entitled to own an
agricultural landholding not more than the maximum limit of
five (5) hectares, provided it shall maintain the productivity
of the land and any change in the nature of its use shall not
be allowed except with the approval of the DAR under its
rules on conversion or exemption.

March 22, 1999

December 24, 1998
RETENTION; RETENTION LIMIT OF THE VENDEE-

CORPORATION
 R. A. No. 6657 grants a natural or juridical person a

retention limit of not exceeding five (5) hectares of
agricultural lands. As understood, this covers the total
aggregate landholdings that a landowner may validly own.
Hence, the request for DAR clearances on the above-
mentioned landholdings may be given due course provided
that the acquisition of the agricultural lands by the vendee-
corporation does not exceed the five (5) hectares retention
limits provided by law and such other requirements.
 On the other hand, please be informed that a corporation
which is a juridical person, has a separate personality
distinct from its stockholders and incorporators. What must
be cautiously taken into consideration is the purchase of an
agricultural land by the vendee-corporation in its own
separate and distinct personality as such, although it is
also a major stockholder of another corporation. Anyhow,
possible circumvention of CARL must be guarded upon so
as not to frustrate the aim of CARP.

October 17, 2006
RETENTION; RETENTION LIMIT UNDER P.D. 27

What is the retention limit under P.D. No. 27?
 The retention area of the landowner under Presidential

Decree No. 27 (Decreeing the Emancipation of Tenants from
the Bondage of the Soil Transferring to them the Ownership
of the Land They Till and Providing the Instruments and
Mechanism Therefor) is a maximum of seven (7) hectares.
Specifically, DAR Administrative Order No. 04, Series of
1991 expressly provides that landowners covered by PD 27
are entitled to retain seven hectares, except those whose
entire tenanted rice and corn lands are subject of
acquisition and distribution under Operation Land Transfer
(OLT).

May 7, 1997
RETENTION; RETENTION LIMIT; APPLICABLE TO A DOMESTIC

CORPORATION
May a domestic corporation purchase agricultural lands

outside of the 5-hectare retention?
 Section 6 of CARL provides that no person may own or

retain directly or indirectly, any agricultural land in excess
of five hectares. The term "person" includes both natural
and juridical persons. The purchase by any person, natural
or juridical of agricultural lands outside of the 5-hectare
retention is null and void for being violative of CARL.

September 13, 1994
Are Filipino corporations allowed to retain or own private

agricultural lands?
 Filipino corporations are allowed to retain or own private

agricultural lands but only up to five (5) hectares. Section 6
of R.A. No. 6657 expressly provides: "no person may own or
retain, directly or indirectly, any public or private
agricultural land x x x but in no case shall retention by the
landowner exceed five hectares." The aforecited provision
clearly limits the ownership or right of retention of
corporations to only five (5) hectares regardless of whether
it is titled or not. The term "person" has been interpreted in
the generic sense so as to include both natural and juridical
persons. However, qualified Filipino stockholders can
likewise own a maximum area of five (5) hectares in their
individual names or personal capacity since it is a settled
rule in corporation law that a corporation has a personality
distinct and separate from that of its stockholders. By
Filipino ownership, it does not mean that the corporation
must be one hundred percent (100%) Filipino capitalization;
it is enough that at least sixty percent (60%) of the capital
is owned by Filipino citizens (Section 2, Article XII of the
1987 Philippine Constitution).

June 5, 1997
RETENTION; RETENTION RIGHT
What is the legal interpretation of the provision of Section

6, R.A. No. 6657 vis-à-vis the provisions of DAR A.O. No. 6,
series of 1997, in the light of Supreme Court rulings in
Bagatsing vs. Committee on Privatization, 246 SCRA 334
and Land Bank of the Philippines vs. Court of Appeals, 249
SCRA 149?
 It is an elementary rule in administrative law that

administrative regulations and policies enacted by
administrative bodies interpretative of the law that was
entrusted them to enforce have the force and effect of law
and are entitled to great respect. They have in their favor a
presumption of legality. However, administrative orders
should not defeat the purpose for which a law (in this case,
Republic Act No. 6657) was enacted. DAR Administrative
Order No. 6, series of 1997, which is an implementing rule
should not be interpreted in a manner in conflict with the
provision of Section 6 of R.A. No. 6657, on retention right. A
landowner then who has voluntary offered his land should
still be allowed to avail of the substantive right of retention
that was conferred him under the aforecited Section 6.
 Moreover, Administrative Order No. 11, Series of 1990,
particularly Item III.D.2 thereof, provides that a landowner
who voluntarily offered his retained area for CARP coverage
may be allowed to withdraw his offer.
 Likewise, DAR Memorandum Circular No. 2, Series of 1998
(Compulsory Acquisition (CA) of Landholdings Covered by
Voluntary offer to Sell (VOS)), a more recent guideline
relative to DAR Administrative Order No. 6, series of 1997,
expressly acknowledges the retention right of a landowner
who has voluntarily offered his land when it provided that:
"3. If after 15 days these documents

have not been received, inform the LO that the
property will be acquired under CA, that he/she
may choose or pinpoint his/her retained area,
otherwise, the DAR will choose his/her retained
area (Sec. 6, RA 6657), and that he/she will no
longer be entitled to an additional 5% cash
payment (Sec. 19, RA 6657)." (underscoring and
emphasis supplied)

November 15, 1999
RETENTION; RETENTION RIGHT OF JURIDICAL PERSON
 Pertinent are the provisions of Section 6 (1st and 4th

paragraphs), 70 and 73 (a) of R.A. No. 6657 (Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law) and Item II.2 (a) of DAR
Procedures Governing Land Transactions) quoted in DAR
Opinion No. 06, Series of 2003 (copy attached). Based on
the aforequoted provisions of law and guideline, we could
infer that a landowner, whether a natural or juridical person
(corporation), is only entitled to a maximum retention limit
or landownership ceiling of five (5) hectares of agricultural
lands upon the effectivity of R.A. No. 6657 on 15 June
1988. Thus, what is prohibited is the retention or
ownership of agricultural lands in excess of said retention
limit or landownership ceiling.
 In the instant case, the Corporation is not anymore qualified

to acquire the 1.5475-hectare land in question as this will
exceed already the 5-hectare retention right of the
Corporation.

August 11, 2005
RETENTION; RETENTION RIGHT OF JURIDICAL PERSON
Can a cooperative legally acquire more than five hectares

of agricultural land?
 As a general rule, a cooperative cannot legally acquire more

than five (5) hectares of agricultural land. This is expressly
provided in Section 73 (a) of R.A. No. 6657 which prohibits
the ownership or possession, for the purpose of
circumventing CARL, of agricultural lands in excess of total
retention limits or award ceilings by any person natural or
juridical. The only exception to this is when the land is
under collective ownership by farmer-beneficiaries
pursuant to paragraph 3, Section 25 and paragraph 3
Section 29 of CARL.

July 6, 1995
January 29, 1997

June 2, 1997
RETENTION; RIGHT OF THE HEIRS OF LANDOWNERS

Are the heirs of the landowners who died after June 15,
1988, entitled to 5-hectare retention each?
 It is clear from the aforecited provisions of law and policy

pronouncement that in no case shall the retention limit or
landownership ceiling of a landowner exceed five (5)
hectares upon the effectivity of R.A. No. 6657
(Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law) on 15 June 1988.
Any agricultural landholding in excess thereof shall
perforce, by operation of law, be acquired and distributed to
qualified agrarian reform beneficiaries except only if the
children of the landowner are qualified beneficiaries or
awardees.
 It is also worthy to note that pursuant to Item II.C.1 of DAR
Procedures Governing Land Transactions), what is
considered as not a prohibited transaction (necessitating
no prior clearance from DAR before registration) is a deed.
Extra-judicial Partition of the property of a deceased who
died prior to June 15, 1988. thus, conversely, we could infer
that a Deed of Extra-judicial Partition of the property of the
deceased insofar as the excess of his/her 5-hectare
retention limit or landownership ceiling is concerned, who
died after June 15, 1988, is a prohibited transaction
precisely because said agricultural landholdings are, by
operation of law, immediately put under the coverage of
CARP upon the effectivity of R.A. No. 6657 on 15 June 1988.
His/her heirs will thus only be entitled to the compensation
for the land. To hold otherwise would be violative of the
provisions of Sections 6 and 73 (a) of R.A. No. 6657 that in
no case should the retention limit or landownership ceiling
of a landowner exceed five (5) hectares.

October 18, 2002
RETENTION; RULES AND REGULATIONS REGARDING THE SALE

OF RETAINED AREA
What are the rules and regulations governing the sale of

the retained area?
 DAR Administrative Order No. 01, Series of 1989 requires

the landowner to execute an affidavit that the property sold
is his retained area or is a portion of said retention.
Moreover, the buyer must execute an affidavit that the
aggregate area of his agricultural lands, together with the
property acquired, does not exceed 5 hectares pursuant to
the first paragraph of Section 70 of RA 6657
(Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law or CARL). The
landowner must likewise file an application for PARO
Certification that the property involved is part of his
retained area.

July 25, 1994
RETENTION; SALE OR DISPOSITION OF THE RETAINED AREA
Is the sale or disposition of the landowner's retained area

valid?
 Section 70 of CARL provides that its sale or disposition shall

be valid as long as the total landholdings that shall be
owned by the transferee thereof inclusive of the land to be
acquired shall not exceed the 5-hectare limit.
September 13, 1994
RETENTION; TENANTED RICE/CORN LANDS; WHEN

LANDOWNERS ARE NOT ENTITLED TO RETAIN THEM
What are the situations when landowners are not entitled

to retain any of their corn lands?
 If as of October 21, 1972 (the date of effectivity of PD 27)

they owned 24 hectares or more of tenanted rice/corn
lands;
 If as of 21 October 1976 (the date of effectivity of LOI 474)
they owned other agricultural lands of more than seven
hectares or lands used for residential, commercial,
industrial or other urban purposes from which they derived
adequate income to support themselves and their families.
 Landowners who do not fall under either of the
aforementioned situations are entitled to retain seven
hectares of their tenanted rice/corn lands provided they
registered their landholdings pursuant to LOI 41, 45 or 52 or
they filed their application for retention under PD 27 on or
before 27 August 1985, the deadline set by DAR A.O. No. 1,
Series of 1985.

February 8, 1996
RETENTION; TOLERABLE LIMIT, APPLICATION THEREOF
How is "tolerable limit" defined?
 The term "tolerable limit" applies only to award to farmer

beneficiaries and cannot be made to apply on the retention
limit of a landowner as provided for under R.A. No. 6657
(CARL). This is in order to preclude the setting of a bad
precedent and to foreclose possible circumvention of the
Program.

September 4, 1998
RETENTION; UNDER P.D. 27
May lands that have been determined by DAR to be a

retained area under PD 27 be used as collateral for loan?
 A property that has been determined by DAR to be a

retained area under PD 27 may be used as collateral for a
loan. However, in case of foreclosure, the transferee should
not own more than the landownership ceiling of five
hectares including the land acquired, pursuant to Section
73 (a) of CARL.

October 16, 1995
RETENTION; UNDER P.D. 27 IN RELATION TO LOI 474
May a landowner retain his 1-hectare landholding?
 A landowner may retain his 1-hectare landholding provided

it is his only agricultural land. However, under P.D. 27 in
relation to LOI 474, said one-hectare property cannot be
retained if (1) it is tenanted; (2) planted to rice/corn; and (3)
the landowner has "other agricultural lands of more than
seven hectares in aggregate areas or lands used for
residential, commercial, industrial or other urban purposes
from which he derives adequate income to support himself
and his familty". In such a case, the tenanted rice/cornland
will be covered under P.D. No. 27 regardless of area.

September 21, 1994
RETENTION; WHEN MAY BE INCREASED WITHIN THE

TOLERABLE LIMIT
May the retention limit of a landowner be increased within

the tolerable limit?
 The mandate of the law is clearly to distribute CARP-

covered lands to the landless or to qualified farmer-
beneficiaries who have the aptitude, willingness and ability
to make said lands as productive as possible. To increase
the retention limit of a landowner within the so-called
tolerable limit, though it may be perceived as negligible,
would nonetheless defeat the very purpose for which the
law (R.A. No. 6657) was enacted. Accordingly, in such
excess area, the same should rather be allocated or
awarded in favor of a qualified agrarian reform beneficiary.

March 20, 1997
RETENTION; WHEN NOT ALLOWED
When is retention not allowed?
 An owner of tenanted rice and corn lands may not retain

those lands under the following cases:
a. if he as of 21 October 1972 owned more than 24

hectares of tenanted rice or corn land, or
b. by virtue of LOI 474, if he as of 21 October 1976
owned less than 24 hectares of tenanted rice or corn
lands but additionally owned the following:
- other agricultural lands of more than seven

hectares, whether tenanted or not, whether
cultivated or not, and provided he derives adequate
income therefrom; or
- lands used for residential, commercial,
industrial or other urban purposes, from which he
derives adequate income to support himself and his
family.

July 4, 1997
What is the retention limit under P.D. 27?
 With regard to the retention right of landowners under P.D.

No. 27, said law provides that the landowner may retain not
more than seven (7) hectares if such landowner is
cultivating such area or will now cultivate it. Under R.A. No.
6657, the retention right is limited to a maximum of five (5)
hectares, provided, that landowners whose lands have been
covered by P.D. No. 27 shall be allowed to keep the area
originally retained by them thereunder; further, original
homestead grantees or their direct compulsory heirs, who
still own the original homestead as of 15 June 1988 (i.e.,
effectivity of R.A. No. 6657), are allowed to retain the same
areas as long as they continue to cultivate the said
homestead.

December 23, 1999
If the subject land is tenanted, can the landowner retain if

he owns more than 24 hectares of tenanted rice or corn
lands as of 21 October 1972?
 Considering the subject property is covered by Operation

Land Transfer under Presidential Decree No. 27 and/or R.A.
No. 6657, the applicable laws, rules and regulations are
Letter of Instruction (LOI) No. 474, dated 21 October 1976
and Administrative Order No. 4, Series of 1991. Under
Administrative Order No. 4, Series of 1991, otherwise
known as the "Supplemental Guidelines Governing The
Exercise of Retention Rights by Landowners Under
Presidential Decree No. 27", it expressly provides in its
policy statements the following, quote:
"B. Policy Statements

1. Landowners covered by P.D. No. 27 are
entitled to retain seven (7) hectares, except those
whose entire tenanted rice and corn lands are
subject of acquisition and distribution under
Operation Land Transfer (OLT). An owner of
tenanted rice and corn lands may not retain those
lands under the following cases:
a) If he as of 21 October 1972 owned
more than 24 hectares of tenanted rice or corn
lands;
xxx
xxx xxx"

February 11, 1999

February 4, 1998

January 9, 1998
When may a landowner sell his retained area?
 A landowner may sell the land within his retention right to

anybody including to one not qualified to be a beneficiary
except those prohibited under the law to be a transferee,
provided that after the sale, the buyer will not own more
than five (5) has. of agricultural land. However, the
transferee may not convert the use of the land from
agricultural to non-agricultural without the approval of the
DAR through an Order of Conversion.

January 9, 1998
Is the sale or disposition of retained agricultural lands

valid?
 Section 6 of R.A. No. 6657 is very explicit by providing that

in no case shall retention by the landowner exceed five (5)
hectares. Corollarily, Section 70 of the same law likewise
provides that the sale or disposition of agricultural lands
retained by landowner as a consequence of Section 6
hereof shall be valid as long as the total landholdings that
shall be owned by the transferee thereof inclusive of the
land to be acquired shall not exceed the landholding
ceilings provided for in said Act. Taken together, the
language of the aforementioned provisions of law are
couched in mandatory terms, which means that any excess
thereof is subject to compulsory acquisition by the
government through the Department of Agrarian Reform
(DAR) for distribution to qualified farmer beneficiaries.
Clearly, the law sets the maximum ownership ceiling at
only five (5) hectares.

September 4, 1998
RETRENCHMENT/SEPARATION; NOT NECESSARILY DISQUALIFY

A FARMWORKER
Whether or not the retrenchment or separation of a

farmworker prior to the award of the CLOA disqualifies a
farmworker from being an ARB?

award if the CLOA does not necessarily disqualify him from

March 17, 1997
REVERSION; PUBLIC LAND; CANCELLATION OF PATENT
Is reversion under the Public Land Act automatic?
 The reversion contemplated in Section 122 of the Public

Land Act is not automatic. The government has to take
action to cancel the patent and the certificate of title in
order that the land involved may be reverted to it (Villacorta
vs. Ulanday, 73 Phil. 655). Hence, until the government has
taken steps towards reverting such land to the public
domain, the ownership thereof by the registered owner
must perforce still be recognized.

March 22, 1999
May pasture lands be the subject of reversion under the

Public Land Act?
 The law which governs reversion of ownership of a parcel of

land to the Republic of the Philippines is Section 122 of the
Public Land Act. Under the said law, reversion is not
automatic. The government, if there is legal and factual
basis therefor, has to initiate an action to cancel the patent
and certificate of title in order that the land involved may
be reverted to it (Villacorta vs. Olanday, 73 Phil. 655).
September 8, 1999
RIGHT OF WAY; E. O. 1035
What does E.O. 1035 covers?
 E. O. 1035 clearly provides in Section 1 thereof that the

same covers "all acquisitions of private real properties or
rights of way (ROW) thereon needed for infrastructure
projects and other development projects of the government
which are undertaken by the ministry, agency, office or
instrumentality of the government including government-
owned or controlled corporations and state colleges and
universities". Section 18 of the same Executive Order
provides for the basis for determining the amount of
financial assistance to be given to tenants/farmers of
agricultural lands.

June 23, 1995
RIGHT OF WAY; REQUISITES AND CONDITIONS THEREOF
What are the requisites and conditions of an easement of

right of way?
 Easement of right or way may be established between the

owner of the dominant estate, in favor of which the
easement is established, and the servient estate which is
the estate subject of the easement. Article 613 of the New
Civil Code provides that an easement or servitude is an
encumbrance imposed upon immovable for the benefit of
another immovable belonging to a different owner. Said
provision of law may likewise be deemed applicable to
awarded lands under the CARP. However, the legal
easement of right of way shall only be established in favor
of the dominant estate upon proof of existence of the
requisites and compliance with the conditions as provided
for under the New Civil code and in a long line of decisions
by the Supreme Court, to wit:
In addition, said right of way shall likewise be

a. there must be consent in writing by the CLOA
holders;
b. the construction of the right of way should be
limited and subject to the provisions of the Civil Code; and
c. the agricultural value of the land where
easement of right of way may be established shall not be
unduly affected unless a conversion order had been duly
secured.

March 24, 1998

April 13, 2000
RIGHT TO HARVEST; WHEN MAY BE EXERCISED
When may the right to harvest be exercised?
 If the lease contract is precisely to exercise the right to

harvest said crops, then this will not be in violation of the
law. However, a clearance to this effect has to be secured
from our Provincial Officer, pursuant to Adm. Order No. 01,
S. 1989.

August 22, 1994
RUBBER TREES; CUTTING OF SAID TREES UNDER CARP
COVERAGE
Can the landowner cut down rubber trees in the

landholding subject of CARP coverage?
 Although the landowner may retain his share in the standing

crops unharvested at the time the DAR shall take
possession of the land and is given reasonable time to
harvest the same, standing crops refer only to the
harvestable agricultural produce or a portion thereof (e.g.,
fruits, sap, root) (Section 3 (o) of DAR Administrative Order
No. 9, Series of 1998). Accordingly, only the sap of the
rubber trees may be harvested but not the trees
themselves.

December 23, 1999
S
SALE; AGRICULTURAL LAND OF MORE THAN FIVE HECTARES;
VOID
Is the sale of an agricultural land of more than five

hectares valid?
 The sale of an agricultural land of more than five hectares is

void, even if said property is the subject of an application
for conversion with complete supporting documents. This is
with because prior to the issuance of the DAR approval for
conversion, the property remains to be agricultural and is
therefore subject to the prohibition against transfer under
the last paragraph of Section 6, R.A. No. 6657.

September 2, 1994
SALE; AGRICULTURAL LANDS; NON-REGISTRATION THEREOF

 Sec. 6 of RA 6657 (CARL) expressly provides that "upon the
effectivity of this Act, any sale, disposition, lease,
management contract or transfer of possession of private
lands executed by the original landowner in violation of this
Act shall be null and void. Provided, however, that those
executed prior to this Act shall be valid only when
registered with the Register of Deeds within a period of
three (3) months after the effectivity of this Act."
 DOJ opinion No. 41, Series of 1992 allows registration of
transactions even after the period prescribed by law for
registration. The allowance for late registration is
predicated on the theory that after all the excess in the
retention area of the landowner will end in DAR hands
anyway. There can be no circumvention of landholding in
excess of retention area because the government thru the
DAR will acquire the same for distribution to qualified-
beneficiaries.

December 13, 1996
SEAFDEC – AQD; FUNCTION
What is the function of the SEAFDEC-AQD?
 The Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Center-

Aquaculture Department was organized as one of the
principal departments of SEAFDEC to be established in
Iloilo for the promotion of research in aquaculture.
 Being an intergovernmental organization SEAFDEC including
its Departments (AQD) enjoys functional independence and
freedom from control of the state in whose territory its
office is located.

September 27, 1995
SEASONAL FARMWORKERS; RIGHT TO INTERVENE
Whether or not seasonal farmworkers have the right to
intervene?
 The Supreme Court ruling on the right of seasonal

farmworkers over the subject land seem to pertain to the
cases with similar facts. In the said case, the basis of the
seasonal farmworkers for claiming a right to the subject
land was premised on a "Win-Win" Resolution which was
declared void. Since no right can emanate from a void
resolution the seasonal farmworkers right to intervene
must necessarily fail. However, given a different set of
facts, it is submitted that the Supreme Court might have
entertained the intervention in a positive note.

October 1, 2001
SECURITY OF TENURE
 Tenants are entitled to a security of tenure and they

continue to enjoy it despite the sale of the property. The
leasehold contract is not extinguished by the transfer of
legal ownership of the land from one landowner to another.
In such cases, the purchaser or transferee shall be
of the original agricultural lessor.

July 30, 2010
SECURITY OF TENURE
What is the tenant's security of tenure?
 Bawat magsasaka ay may karapatan na magpatuloy sa

pagbubungkal sa kanyang lupang sinasaka. Siya ay
pinagkalooban ng batas ng "security of tenure" na
nagpapatibay sa kanyang karapatan bilang isang
magsasaka (Section 7 ng R.A. No. 3844)
 Ayon pa sa Section 36 ng Republic Act No. 3844, as
amended, ang isang namumuwisan sa pagsasaka ay
mapapaalis lamang sa kanyang lupang sinasaka sa mga
dahilang nakapaloob sa nasabing probisyon ng batas
matapos ang masinsinang paglilitis. Isa sa mga dahilang
nakasaad dito ay ang hindi pagbabayad ng upa sa takdang
oras. Subalit kung ang dahilan ng hindi pagbabayad ay sa
isang sakuna o "fortuitous event", ito ay hindi sapat na
dahilan para mapaalis ang isang magsasaka. Ganoon pa
man, ang kanyang pananagutan sa pagbabayad ay
mananatili pa rin.

November 15, 2000
Is a lessee entitled to a security of tenure?
 The provisions of Section 7 of R.A. No. 3844 provides that

the agricultural lessee shall be entitled to security of
tenure on his landholding and cannot be ejected therefrom
unless authorized by the Court for causes provided by law.
It follows that tenants may not be ejected from their tillage
unless authorized by the court, now the Department of
Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board, and for causes
provided by law. Moreover, since personal cultivation is no
longer a ground to terminate tenancy relationship as the
same has been deleted as a ground for ejectment of a
tenant under Section 7 of R.A. No. 6389 which amended
Section 36 (1) of R.A. No. 3844, a tenant may not therefore
be dispossessed of his farmholding on the ground that the
landowner will personally cultivate the same.

September 29, 2000
Are tenants entitled to security of tenure?

 A tenant enjoys security of tenure on his/her landholding.
Section 7 of R.A. No. 3844, as amended, provides that "the
agricultural leasehold relation once established shall confer
upon the agricultural lessee the right to continue working
on the landholding until such leasehold relation is
therefrom unless authorized by the Court for causes herein
provided." Security of tenure is a legal concession to
agricultural lessees which they value as life itself and
deprivation of their landholding is tantamount to being
deprived of their only means of livelihood.

April 24, 2000
SECURITY OF TENURE
Is the agricultural lessee entitled to security of tenure?
 "Sec. 7. Tenure of Agricultural Leasehold Relation

— The agricultural leasehold relation once established shall
therefrom unless authorized by the court for causes herein
provided."

May 17, 1994
SECURITY OF TENURE
Can a tenant enjoys security of tenure?
 A tenant enjoys security of tenure on his landholding, which

means that he/she cannot be ejected therefrom unless
authorized by the court for cause. Section 7 of R.A. No.
3844 provides that "the agricultural leasehold relation once
leasehold relation is extinguished." Time and again, the
Supreme Court has guaranteed the continuity and security
of tenure of tenant even in cases of a mere transfer of legal
possession. As elucidated in the case of Bernardo vs. Court
of Appeals (168 SCRA 439), security of tenure is a legal
concession to agricultural lessees which they value as life
itself and deprivation of their landholding is tantamount to
deprivation of their only means of livelihood.

February 9, 1999
SECURITY OF TENURE; APPLICABLE IF THE RETAINED PORTION

IS TENANTED
Is security of tenure applicable if the retained portion is

tenanted?
 Since under Republic Act No. 3844, as amended (The

Agricultural Land Reform Code) the tenant enjoys security
of tenure, if the retained portion is tenanted, said tenancy
shall continue unless the same is legally extinguished.

May 28, 1996
SECURITY OF TENURE; FUTURE SURRENDER OF THE

LANDHOLDING; NOT ALLOWED
Is future surrender of the landholding allowed?
 Future surrender of the landholding is not allowed under

Section 36 of R.A. No. 3844 as it is violative of the security
of tenure of the tenant. In reiteration the tenant shall be
dispossessed only in a judgment that is final and executory.
October 29, 1997
SECURITY OF TENURE; GROUNDS/CAUSES BY WHICH AN

AGRICULTURAL LESSEE MAY BE DISPOSSESSED OF
HIS/HER TILLAGE
 An agricultural lessee may be dispossessed of his/her tillage

on the following grounds:
a. The lessee failed to substantially comply

with the terms and conditions of the contract or with
pertinent laws unless the failure is caused by a fortuitous
event or force majeure;
b. The lessee planted crops or used the land for
a purpose other than what has been previously agreed
upon;
c. The lessee failed to adopt proven farm
practices necessary to conserve the land, improve its
fertility and increase its productivity taking into
consideration the lessee’s financial capacity an the credit
facilities available to him;
d. There has been substantial damage,
destruction or unreasonable deterioration of the land or
any permanent improvement thereon due to the fault or
negligence of the lessee;
e. The lessee failed to pay lease rental on time
except when such non-payment is due to crop failure to
the extent of 75% as a result of a fortuitous event;
f. The lessee employed a sub-lessee; or
g. The landholding is declared by the DAR to be
suited for residential, commercial, industrial or some
other urban purposes subject to payment of disturbance
compensation to the lessee.
 It is very explicit in the provisions of Sections 7 and 36 of
R.A. No. 3844 (Agricultural Land Reform Code), as amended,
that an agricultural lessee is entitled to security of tenure.
He/she cannot be ejected unless authorized by the court
(now, DAR Adjudication Board) for the abovementioned
causes, in a judgment that is final and executory after due
hearing. Thus, ejectment may be filed in the proper court
against an erring tenant if any of the abovementioned
causes exists.

June 15, 2007
SECURITY OF TENURE; MEANING
What is the meaning of security of tenure?
 Security of tenure means that tenants cannot be ejected or

removed from their tillage except upon final order of the
court for cause. Said security of tenure continues even if
the farmlot is sold, in which case the new owner takes the
place of the former landowner vis-à-vis the tenant. The
tenant may, however, choose to voluntarily surrender the
farmlot, and this is one way of extinguishing his tenancy on
the land.

March 8, 1996
SECURITY OF TENURE; TENANCY RELATIONSHIP
Can tenants be ejected from their tillage without Court

Order?
 Under Section 7 of R.A. No. 3844, tenants are entitled to

security of tenure, which means that they may not be
ejected from their tillage unless authorized by the court for
causes provided in said law. Moreover, personal cultivation
is no longer a ground to terminate tenancy relationship
because the same has been deleted as a ground for
ejectment of the tenant under Section 7 of R.A. No. 6389
which amended Section 36 (I) of R.A. No. 3844. Such being
the case, an agricultural lessor may not dispossess his/her
tenant of his farmlot on the ground that former will
personally cultivate your landholding.

April 08, 1998
SECURITY OF TENURE; TENANTED FARMLOT; EFFECT OF

CHANGE OF OWNERSHIP
May the change in ownership of a tenanted farmlot affect

the status of the tenant agricultural lessee?
 A change in ownership of a tenanted farmlot does not affect

the status of the tenant/agricultural lessee he enjoys
security of tenure thereon which means that he cannot be
ejected or removed therefrom, except by final order of the
court.

June 21, 1995
SECURITY OF TENURE; TENANTS ENTITLED THEREOF

May the tenants enjoy security of tenure?
 Moreover, Section 7 of R.A. No. 3844, as amended, provides

that agricultural leasehold relation, once established, shall
therefrom unless authorized by the Court (now, DAR
Adjudication Board) for causes provided for in said law.
Section 36 of Republic Act No. 3844, as amended, further
provides in part: ". . . . an agricultural lessee shall continue
in the enjoyment and possession of his landholding except
when his dispossession has been authorized by the Court in
a judgment that is final and executory . . . . ".

May 2, 2001
SECURITY OF TENURE; TENANTS ENTITLED THEREOF
May the tenants enjoy security of tenure?
 Under Section 7 of Republic Act No. 3844, tenants are

entitled to security of tenure, which means that they may
not be ejected from their tillage unless authorized by the
court for causes provided in said law.

February 2, 1994
SECURITY OF TENURE; TENANTS ENTITLED THEREOF DESPITE

THE MORTGAGE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND BY THE LANDOWNER
Are the tenants entitled to security of tenure on the
farmholding when the same is mortgaged by the
landowner?
 Mortgage of agricultural land by a landowner, as a rule, is

not prohibited by law, it being an attribute of ownership.
However, pursuant to Section 7 of Republic Act No. 3844,
as amended by R.A. 6389 (Code of Agrarian Reforms), the
agricultural lessee shall be entitled to security of tenure on
his landholding, and, he cannot be ejected therefrom unless
authorized by the Court (now, the DAR Adjudication Board)
for causes provided under said law. As elucidated in the
case of Bernardo vs. Court of Appeals (168 SCRA 439),
 More specifically, section 10 of R.A. No. 3844, as amended
provides that the leasehold relation is not extinguished by
the sale, alienation or transfer of the legal possession of
the landholding. And, in case the agricultural lessor sells,
alienates or transfers the legal possession of the
landholding, the purchaser or transferee thereof shall be
of the agricultural lessor (owner)

April 27, 2001
SECURITY OF TENURE; TENANTS ENTITLED THEREOF DESPITE

THE SALE OF THE PROPERTY
Are tenants entitled to security of tenure on the

farmholding when the same is subject of sale ?
 The tenant continues to enjoy security of tenure on the

farmholding despite the sale of the property and he cannot
be ejected therefrom by reason of said sale.

March 15, 1994
SELLING PRICE; DEFINITION
What is the definition of selling price?
 Selling price is defined as the "average price for the

immediately preceding calendar year from the date of
receipt of the claim folder by LBP.
April 25, 1994
SETTLEMENT PROJECTS; STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE
What is the DAR Standard Operating Procedure on the

disposition of lots in DAR Settlement Project?
 The provision of the DAR Standard Operating Procedure on

the disposition of lots in DAR Settlement Projects states
that with respect to portions of townsite lots designated as
church and educational sites the same may be sold at
private sales for such terms, conditions and stipulations
and for such price as may be determined by Management.

Undated
SHARE TENANCY; CONVERSION TO AGRICULTURAL LEASEHOLD
Is agricultural share tenancy still valid?
 Agricultural share tenancy was declared to be contrary to

public policy and was thereby abolished. Section 4 of R.A.
No. 6389 mandates that agricultural share tenancy
throughout the country shall automatically be converted to
agricultural leasehold.

September 24, 1999
SHERIFF'S FEE; DISBURSEMENT THEREOF VALID IF IN

ACCORDANCE WITH ACCOUNTING RULES
Is Sheriff's Fee considered as an income?

 Sheriff's fee is not an income but a monetary allotment or
payment which must be duly receipted for expenses
incurred by reason, or as an incident, of the service of legal
processes. Thus, disbursement thereof should always be in
accordance with the usual accounting rules and regulations
and approved by the Board/Adjudicator concerned. Should it
be deemed advisable or necessary, deposits or withdrawals
in a bank shall be at the instance and approval of the Board
or Adjudicator and not of the interested party or sheriff
concerned.

November 9, 1999
SOLICITOR GENERAL; ACTING AS COUNSEL FOR THE

GOVERNMENT
Is the head of an executive department liable to a civil suit

on account of official conduct?
 It is well-settled rule that the head of an executive

department is not liable to a civil suit on account of official
conduct made by him pursuant to law and in respect of
matters within his authority. In cases wherein the head of
an executive department or government officials are sued
in their official capacity, it is mandatory upon the Office of
the Solicitor General to act as counsel for the government
official and agency. Pursuant to the provision of P.D. No.
478 entitled, "Defining the Powers and Functions of the
Office of the Solicitor General", particularly Section 1(h) of
the same law, the Solicitor General may deputize legal
officers of the government, department, bureaus, agencies
and offices to assist the Solicitor General and appear or
represent the Government in cases involving the respective
offices, brought before the courts.

March 25, 1999
SOLUTIO INDEBITI; PRINCIPLE
 Under the principle of solutio indebiti, Article 2154 of the

Civil Code of the Philippines provides that if something is
received when there is no right to demand it, and it was
unduly delivered through mistake, the obligation to return it
arises.

November 28, 2008
SPANISH MORTGAGE LAW; ABOLITION OF THE SYSTEM OF

REGISTRATION
What is the effect of the abolition of the system of

registration under the Spanish Mortgage Law?
 Presidential Decree No. 892 which took effect on February

16, 1976 abolished the system of registration under Spanish
Mortgage Law provides that all holders of Spanish Titles or
grants should cause their lands covered thereby to be
registered under the Land Registration Act (Act No. 496)
within six (6) months from the effectivity of this Decree or
until August 16, 1976. Otherwise, non-compliance therewith
will result in a reclassification of their lands into
unregistered private lands.

February 9, 1998
SPANISH TITLES; VALIDITY
Are Spanish titles still valid?

 P.D. No. 892 has outlawed all Spanish titles including
possessory information titles, unless they were
authenticated in appropriate registration proceedings
before August 16, 1976.

February 9, 1998
SPECIAL ORDER; DETAIL, TRANSFER OR REASSIGNMENT

OF ANY OFFICIAL OR EMPLOYEE
 Special Orders are orders for special assignments or

missions to be accomplished by officials and employees
concerned. Department Special Order No. 284 and DAR M.C.
No. 14-97 give special assignments to be performed by the
concerned employees. Neither issuances have been
repealed nor revoked, therefore, the same are still valid.
 General Memorandum Order No. 04 Series of 2005

(Delegation of Signing and other Financial and
Administrative Authorities to Central and Field Offices),
provides:
"D. Paragraphs 3 and 5, Item I D, General

Memorandum Order No. 04 Series of 2005
Transfer or reassignment of any official or employee

within the Department shall be made only with the
concurrence of both heads of the original office/unit where
the item belongs and the proposed office/unit of
assignment.
xxx xxx xxx
All details, transfer or reassignments shall be

subject to observance of and compliance with
relevant standards and guidelines such as CSC MC
2, Series of 2005." (emphasis supplied)
January 26, 2006
STANDING CROPS ; DISPOSITION OF UNHARVESTED STANDING

CROPS
Should standing crops unharvested be disposed of in

accordance with the agreement in force at the time the
DAR acquired the property?
 The general intent is to allow said standing crops

unharvested to be disposed of in accordance with the
agreement in force at the time the DAR acquired the
property. The provision does not confine itself to that
situation where the landowner is at the same time the
operator of the land, but comprehends situations like the
instant case where at the time of CARP coverage, another
person was legally acting in place of the landowner in
relation to the landholding.
DAR OPINION NO. 90, s.

1995
December 28, 1995
STARE DECISIS; DOCTRINE
What is the doctrine of "stare decisis"?
 Under the doctrine of "stare decisis", when the court has

once laid down a principle of law as applicable to a certain
state of facts, it will adhere to that principle and apply it to
all future cases where the facts are substantially the same,
even though the parties may be different (Gov't. v.
Jalandoni, 44 OG 1840).
July 8, 1994
STOCK DISTRIBUTION OPTION (SDO)

Is the PARC the appropriate forum to resolve issues of
cancellation of the implementation of the Stock
Distribution Option (SDO)?
 The stock distribution plan shall be agreed upon by both

the corporate landowner-applicant and the qualified
beneficiaries and subject to approval by PARC.
 Section 11. Implementation. — Monitoring of Plan. — The
approved stock distribution plan shall be implemented
within three (3) months from receipt by the corporate
landowner-applicant of the approval thereof by the
PARC and the transfer of the shares of stock in the names
of the qualified beneficiaries shall be recorded in the stock
and transfer books and submitted to the Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC) within sixty (60) days from the
said implementation of the stock distribution plan.
 Section 12. Revocation of Certificate of Compliance. —
Non-compliance with any of the requirements of Sec. 31 of
R.A. No. 6657, as implemented by this Implementing
Guidelines shall be grounds for the revocation of
the Certificate of Compliance issued to the corporate
landowner-applicant." (emphasis supplied)
 If PARC has the authority to approve the SDO plan, then it
also has the power to review, monitor and cancel the
implementation of said SDO scheme. The power to approve
inherently carries with it the power to revoke or cancel.

March 23, 2004
STOCK DISTRIBUTION OPTION (SDO) PLANS; LIFESPAN OF SDO

PLAN
Are the approved SDO plans held in perpetuity?
 SDO plan could not therefore be held in perpetuity

considering that, as already mentioned, the Certificate of
Compliance may be revoked on the ground of non-
compliance with any of the requirements of Section 31 of
R.A. No. 6657 as implemented by DAR A.O. No. 10, Series
of 1988 (Section 12, DAR A.O. No. 10, Series of 1988).

February 3, 2004
STOCK DISTRIBUTION OPTION (SDO); COMPANY UNDER

SDO SUBJECT TO PARC SUPERVISION
 A company under SDO may avail of the technical/financial

service of a service company with a staff of not more than
five (5) persons subject to the terms and conditions to be
agreed upon by the concerned beneficiaries under the SDO
plan. The proposal to avail such services must be duly
approved by the PARC pursuant to Section 31 of Republic
Act No. 6657 (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law).
A corporation operating business under an approved SDO

scheme shall be subject to the supervisory and monitoring
authority by the PARC. The proposal of the company to
avail of the technical/financial service of a service
company, whatever the proposed terms and the condition
would be, will definitely affect its operation and the
interests of the beneficiaries. Thus, any proposal shall be
subject to the approval by the PARC under its supervisory
and monitoring authority over corporations under SDO. In
short, operational matters of company under SDO
affecting the interest of the beneficiaries shall be subject
to the provisions of Section 31 of R.A. No. 6657 and its
implementing rules.
September 30, 2010
STOCK DISTRIBUTION OPTION (SDO); PRESUMPTION OF

LAW MUST BE IN FAVOR OF ACQUISITION
 Compliance with the requirements of R.A. No. 6657, as

mandated, and the agrarian reform program, through the
SDO, is more of the exception rather than the rule. As such,
the provisions regarding its requirements and availment
must be strictly construed as it runs counter to the state
policy on agrarian reform. As such, the presumption of law
must be in favor of the acquisition and distribution of the
land under CARP so that in cases of doubt between
compliance by way of SDO or LAD under CARP, such doubt
must be resolved in favor of the latter.

December 9, 2010
STOCK DISTRIBUTION OPTION (SDO); THE PROVISION

AUTHORIZING SDO IS AN EXCEPTION
 Section 2, Par. 3, R.A. No. 6657 explicitly mandates the

state to undertake the distribution of all agricultural lands
subject only to the priorities as enunciated by Section 7 of
R.A. No. 6657 and the retention limits of landowners under
Section 6 of R.A. No. 6657. To be sure, there exists no right,
by law or by equity, which guarantees the entitlement of
corporate landowners to be granted approval for their
compliance of the CARP by way of SDO. More so, the mere
filing of an application for SDO does not automatically mean
that the same will be approved by the PARC, even with the
unanimous support of the affected FWBs, for the simple
reason that the applicable law on the matter, which should
strictly construed, requires more than a colorable or
substantial compliance with its provisions. To reiterate, the
provision authorizing SDO as a means of complying with the
CARP is but an exception and will only be granted on
clearly meritorious grounds after full compliance with the
requirements explicitly provided by law.

December 9, 2010
SUCCESSION; WHAT IS INCLUDED IN THE INHERITANCE
 The Civil Code contemplates that inheritance includes all

the property, rights and obligations of a person which are
not extinguished by his death.

June 30, 2008
SUCCESSION; FARMHOLDING COVERED BY OLT; LIMITATIONS
What are the limitations provided under the Civil Code as

regards succession covered by Operation Land Transfer?
 Under Ministry Memorandum Circular No. 19, Series of 1978,

the succession to the farmholding covered by Operation
Land Transfer shall be governed by pertinent provisions of
the New Civil Code of the Philippines subject to the
following limitations:
a) The farmholding shall not be partitioned or

fragmented;
b) The ownership and cultivation of the
farmholding shall ultimately be consolidated in one heir
who is a full-fledged member of a duly recognized farmers'
cooperative, capable of personally cultivating the
farmholding and willing to assume the obligations and
responsibilities of a tenant-beneficiary; and
c) Such owner-cultivator shall compensate the
other heirs to the extent of their respective legal interest
in the land, subject to the payment of whatever
outstanding obligations of the deceased tenant-
beneficiary.
 Item II.1 of DAR Administrative Order No. 8, Series of 1995

categorically provides, quote: "lands awarded to ARBs
after the issuance of a DAR Clearance." The purpose of said
DAR clearance is to ensure that the productivity of awarded
lands is maintained and to foreclose possible circumvention
of existing agrarian laws, rules and regulations.

June 10, 1998
SUCCESSION; ITS EFFECTIVITY
When does succession takes effect?
 Under Article 777 of the Civil Code of the Philippines, the

rights to the succession are transmitted from the moment
of death of the decedent.

May 20, 1994

September 13, 1994

April 6, 1995
SUCCESSION; OWNERSHIP OF A PARCEL OF LAND OF A FORMER
FILIPINO CITIZEN
May a former Filipino Citizen sell his agricultural lands in

the Philippines?
 A naturalized American citizen who was formerly a natural-

born citizen of the Philippines who remains to be the true
and lawful owner of the property, can sell the same.
Furthermore, by reason of succession, his spouse and
children can also inherit the property notwithstanding the
fact that the latter are already American Citizens since
under the 1987 Philippine Constitution, private lands may
be transferred through hereditary succession even if the
person who inherits the property is not a person qualified to
hold lands of the public domain.

July 15, 1997
SUCCESSION; PROVISIONS OF CARL WILL PREVAIL OVER THE

WILL
Would the provision of CARL prevail over the last will and
testament?
 The provisions of CARL will prevail over the last will and
testament of the decedent if he dies after CARL became
effective on 15 June 1988.

April 19, 1994
SUCCESSION; SUCCESSOR OF FBs AWARDED WITH COLLECTIVE

CLOAs
Who will succeed the FB in the collective CLOA in case of
his death or abandonment?
 In case a farmer beneficiary in a collective CLOA is no

longer in possession by reason of his death or
abandonment, the area awarded to him which does not
exceed three (3) hectares should legally be allocated or
titled in favor of any of his heirs who may be qualified to
become a beneficiary himself and, provided, he is found to
be directly working on the land. In other words, the order of
priority provided for under Section 22 of R.A. No. 6657 shall
by implication of law be applied. It is, however, mandatory
that said heir will judiciously use the land and make it as
productive as possible. On the other hand, if the farmer
beneficiary has no legal heir, his tillage might be
transferred to another qualified beneficiary subject to the
quasi-judicial process of listing and delisting to be properly
undertaken through the DAR Adjudication Board (DARAB).

March 4, 1999
SUCCESSION; TENANCY RIGHTS
Can the son of the deceased tenant-spouses succeed to

the tenancy?
 The son of the deceased tenant-spouses can succeed to the

tenancy, provided there is no other direct descendant more
qualified to succeed in accordance with the order of priority
mentioned in said Section 9 of RA 3844. Otherwise stated,
the eldest child (son or daughter) who is willing and
capable of performing the duties of a tenant on the farmlot
may succeed to his/her parent's tenancy.

January 11, 1994
SUPPORT SERVICES FOR THE LANDOWNERS UNDER
SECTION 16 OF R.A. NO. 9700
 Section 16 of R.A. No. 9700 enumerates the Support

Services that shall be provided to the affected landowners.
These include the following:
a. investment information, financial and

counseling assistance;
b. facilities, programs and arrangements for
exchange and marketing of LBP Bonds; and
c. other services designed to assist
landowners in productivity utilizing the proceeds of
the sales of the land for rural industrialization.
 In relation to these Support Services and in order for DAR to

facilitate assistance to landowners, Special Order No. 172,
Series of 1993 has mandated the creation of a Landowner’s
(LO) Desk in every DAR provincial office. The LO desk will
be handled by one full-time staff, and shall handle
exclusively and specifically landowners’ problems, issues
and concerns.

December 11, 2009
SURVEY PROJECTS
Is a Survey Plan/Sketch Subdivision Plan more reliable

than that of mere parcellany mapping?
 The area of the landholding shall be determined based on

the duly approved survey plan or sketch subdivision plan of
the property prepared and undertaken by legitimate
authorities, for it is presumably more reliable than that of
mere parcellany mapping. This is without prejudice,
however, to more conclusive proofs or titles of ownership
specifying the metes and bounds and the specific area of
the landholding in issue as officially and duly validated and
verified or declared by the courts.

April 8, 1998
SWEDE SURVEY CADASTRAL PROJECT; QUALIFIED BIDDERS

ARE ALLOWED TO JUST ONE BID
What are the conditions before one qualifies to be a

bidder?
 One of the instructions for bidders as a condition to the

award for the Swede Survey Cadastral Project is that
"participation is open on equal terms to all natural and legal
persons, firms and companies in the Philippines as well as
abroad". This unqualified invitation is designed to attract
qualified bidders towards competitive bidding among the
participants so as to yield the best possible desired bid.
Implied from this instruction is that bidders must observe
honesty, integrity and fairplay and, above all, the bidding
process must be above suspicion so as to dispel any doubts
incident thereto.

February 9, 1999
T
TASK FORCE ALA EH
What is the primary purpose of "Task force ala eh"?
 "Task force ala eh" was created to ensure the speedy and
smooth implementation of CARL in the specified
municipalities within the schedules outlined in Section 7 of
S.O. No. 442 as well as to pinpoint responsibility therefor.
January 17, 1995
TAX DECLARATION; SIGNIFICANCE OF THE DATE OF ISSUANCE
Can it be determined if the transaction is in violation of the

law?
 Under Joints DAR-DOJ Administrative Order No. 5, series of

1994, however, . . . the date of issuance of the tax
declaration to the transferee of the property with respect to
unregistered lands . . . shall be made the basis of any action
to be filed against the violator". Agricultural lands covered
by Tax Declaration though untitled are also private
properties which may also be the subject of conversion.
Clearly, Joint DAR-DOJ A.O. No. 5, Series of 1994 points out
that the date of the issuance of the tax declaration to the
transferee of the property with respect to unregistered
lands is for the determination as to whether or not the
transaction is in violation of the provisions of the law.

February 9, 1998
TAX; ESTATE TAX FOR PROPERTIES UNDER CARP
 There is no provision in the National Internal Revenue Code

(NIRC) exempting the payment of Estate Tax for properties
under CARP.
 An Estate Tax is an excise tax on the right of transmitting
property at the time of death and on the privilege that a
person is giving in controlling to a certain extent the
disposition of his property to take effect upon death. This is
different from the exemption contemplated under Section
66 of R.A. No. 6657 which speaks of exemption from
transfer taxes and fees of land transfer.
February 1, 2010
TAXES AND FEES; EXEMPTED IF TRANSFER OF LAND IS CARP

RELATED
What are those transactions and documents that are
exempt from taxes and fees?
 Based on the foregoing, it is our considered opinion that

transactions involving the transfer of lands which are
CARP-related or connected are deemed exempt from the
payment of taxes and fees contemplated therein. But with
respect to the real property taxes from the time the
landholdings are transferred to the Republic of the
Philippines up to the time CLOAs are generated and
registered in the name of the farmer beneficiaries, they
shall be deemed exempt as, meanwhile, the owner is the
government itself.

May 2, 2001
TAXES AND FEES; EXEMPTION OF LAND TRANSFERS FROM

TAXES ARISING FROM CAPITAL GAINS
Are taxes and fees arising from capital gains exempt in

cases of Land Transfers?
Section 66. Exemptions from Taxes and Fees of Land
Transfers. — Transactions under this Act involving a transfer
of ownership, whether from natural or juridical persons, shall
be exempted from taxes arising from capital gains. These
transactions shall also be exempted from the payment of
registration fees, and all other taxes and fees for the
conveyance or transfer thereof: Provided, That all arrearages
in real property taxes, without penalty or interest, shall be
deductible from the compensation to which the owner may be
entitled. (underscoring supplied)
 Section 66 of R.A. No. 6657 speaks of arrearages in real

property taxes to be deducted from the landowner's
compensation. Once ownership has been parted with, it
follows that there are no more arrearages in real estate
taxes to be paid.

July 20, 2000
TAXES AND FEES; EXEMPTION THEREOF DOES NOT INCLUDE

REAL PROPERTY TAXES
Are real property taxes deductible from the landowner's
compensation?
 Section 66 of R.A. No. 6657 (Comprehensive Agrarian

Reform Law) provides, quote:
"Section 66. Exemption from Taxes and Fees of Land

Transfers. — Transactions under this Act involving a
transfer of ownership, whether from natural or juridical
persons, shall be exempted from taxes arising from
capital gains. These transactions shall also
be exempted from the payment of registration fees,
and all other taxes and fees for the conveyance or
transfer thereof: Provided, that all arrearages in real
property taxes, without penalty or interest, shall be
deductible from the compensation to which the owner
may be entitled." (underscoring supplied)
 Section 9 of Executive Order No. 229 should be read and

interpreted in conjunction with Section 66 of R.A. No. 6657.
The contemplated exemption from "other taxes and fees"
as provided in both provisions of law refers specifically to
other taxes and fees related to the subject conveyance or
transfer under said laws and does not include real property
taxes which are deductible from the landowner's
compensation.
 It is clear under Section 66 of R.A. No. 6657 that arrearages
in real property taxes, without penalty or interest, shall be
deducted from the compensation due the landowner.
Moreover, it should be noted that under Section 24 of R.A.
No. 6657, the rights and responsibilities of the beneficiary
shall commence from the time the DAR makes an award to
him, which means that the FB is responsible for the
payment of the real property taxes that accrue on the land
only from the date of said award.

January 9, 2003
TAXES AND FEES; EXEMPTIONS IN THE PROCESS OF CARP

IMPLEMENTATION; COVERAGE CONTINUES INSPITE OF NON-
PAYMENT OF TAX DUE
What are those transactions and documents that are

exempt from taxes and fees?
 Transactions and documents which are required or

necessarily related to or connected with the
implementation of the mandate under CARL to acquire and
redistribute the land are exempt from taxes and fees.
Otherwise stated, Section 66 of CARL exempts from taxes
and fees all documents and certifications issued by all
government agencies and instrumentalities which are
required for the processing of the land transfer claim in
pursuance of CARP implementation.
 CARP implementors can proceed in the processing of Land
Distribution Folders. Moreover, even assuming that there is
non-payment of taxes, where the same are due (e.g., estate
taxes), CARP implementation should nonetheless continue.
Taxes partake of the nature of a personal obligation which
are legally due and demandable by the government from the
landowner or his heirs, thus, the same should perforce be
paid and settled by the latter to the former. Furthermore, as
explicitly provided in the aforecited provision of law, all
arrearages in real property taxes shall necessarily be
deductible from the compensation of the landowner or his
heirs.

December 2, 1998
TAXES: ARREARAGES
Are arrearages in taxes deductible from the compensation

due the landowner?
 It is clear in Sec. 66 of RA 6657 that arrearages in taxes

shall be deducted from the compensation due the
landowner. Moreover, it should be noted that under Sec. 24
of RA 6657, the rights and responsibilities of the beneficiary
shall commence from the time the DAR makes an award to
him, which means that the FB is responsible only for the
payment of the taxes that accrue on the land from the date
of said award.

August 1, 1994
TAXES; ARREARS IN REAL PROPERTY TAXES

Who should pay the arrears in real property taxes?
 Section 66 of Republic Act No. 6657 provides:
"Section 66. Exemption from Taxes and Fees of Land

transfers. — Transactions under this Act involving a
transfer of ownership, whether from natural or juridical
persons, shall be exempted from taxes arising from
capital gains. These transactions shall also be
exempted from the payment of registration fees, and all
other taxes and fees for the conveyance or transfer
thereof: Provided, that all arrearages in real property
taxes, without penalty or interest, shall be deductible
from the compensation to which the owner may be
entitled." (underscoring supplied)
 It is clear under said provision of law that it is the previous

landowner who should pay the arrearages in real property
taxes. Thus, awardees/beneficiaries should not be
penalized or made to suffer, through foreclosure by Local
Government Units (LGUs) of their awarded lands, due to
non-payment of said taxes by previous landowners. Such
foreclosure is unwarranted.

September 21, 2001
TAXES; LANDOWNERS EXEMPT FROM PAYMENT OF CAPITAL

GAINS TAX
Is the landowner exempt from payment of capital gains

tax?
 Presidential Decree No. 57 expressly provides that a

"landowner shall be exempt from capital gains tax on the
proceeds of the amortization paid him by the tenant-
purchaser and likewise from income tax due on the
accruing interest paid as an addition to the total cost of the
land". As held by the Supreme Court in the case of Ramona
R. Locsin vs. Honorable Judge Vicente P. Valenzuela dated
19 February 1991, the exemption of the old landowner from
the capital gains tax on the amortization payments made to
him by the tenants-purchasers, under P.D. No. 57,
underscores the fact, referred to above, that ownership or
dominion over the land moved immediately from landowner
to tenant-farmer, rather than upon completion of payment
of the price of the land. In general, capital gains are
realized only when the owner disposes of his property.

May 22, 1998
TAXES; PAYMENT OF REAL PROPERTY TAXES OF LAND UNDER

P.D. 27
Who should pay the real property tax under P.D. 27?
 With respect to landholdings covered by Operation Land

Transfer, the pertinent guidelines are embodied in DAR
Memorandum Circular No. 5, Series of 1973 in relation to
DOJ Opinion No. 35, Series of 1973. Under said guidelines,
they provide that with respect to tenanted rice and/or corn
lands consisting an area of 100 hectares or more, the
tenant farmers should pay the real property taxes
assessable on the said lands regardless of whether or not
land transfer certificates have been issued because by
then, they are deemed owners of the lands they till.
However, with respect to lands with an area of less than
100 hectares, it is provided that all things considered, it
would be more logical to conclude that pending
implementation of P.D. No. 27 as to those lands (i.e., less
than 100 hectares), the ownership of the land remain with
present landowners, and as such, the real estate taxes
should, accordingly, be paid by the landowners.
 By virtue of LOI No. 227, Series of 1974, in order to
accelerate the implementation of the agrarian reform
program, the present operations implementing the land
reform program pursuant to P.D. No. 27 is now down to
landholdings of over seven (7) hectares. This means that
the tenant-farmers are now likewise deemed owners of the
awarded areas in excess of the 7-hectare retention limit of
a landowner. As such, they are legally bound to pay the real
property taxes assessable on said lands.

March 22, 1999
TAXES; PAYMENT OF TAXES ON LANDS COVERED BY PD 27
Who has the duty to pay taxes on lands covered by PD 27?
 DAR Memorandum Circular No. 5, Series of 1973 in relation

to DOJ Opinion No. 35, Series of 1973 provide that with
respect to tenanted rice and/or corn lands consisting an
area of 100 hectares or more the tenant farmers should pay
the real property taxes assessable on the said lands
regardless of whether or not land transfer certificates have
been issued because by then they are deemed owners of
the lands they till. However with respect to lands with an
area of less than 100 hectares, it is provided that all things
considered it would be more logical to conclude that
pending implementation of P.D. No. 27 as to those lands
(i.e., less than 100 hectares), the ownership of the lands
remains with the present landowners, and as such, the real
estate taxes should, accordingly be paid by the landowner.

October 28, 1997
TAXES; REAL PROPERTY TAXES; OBLIGATION TO PAY IMPOSED

ON EITHER THE LANDOWNERS AND TENANTS DEPEND ON THE
EXTENT OF THEIR AGGREGATE LANDHOLDINGS
Who should pay the real property tax on tenanted rice

and/or corn lands? And when is the duty to pay real estate
tax begins?
 Obligation to pay estate, transfer and documentary taxes
relative to the operation of P.D. No. 27 are imposed on
either the landowners and tenants depending on the extent
of their aggregate landholdings. DAR Memorandum Circular
No. 5, Series of 1973 in relation to DOJ Opinion No. 35,
Series of 1973 declares in unequivocal terms that with
respect to tenanted rice and/or corn lands consisting an
area of 100 hectares or more, the tenant farmers should
pay the real property taxes assessable on the said lands
regardless of whether or not land transfer certificates have
been issued because by then they are deemed owners of
the lands they till. However, with respect to lands with an
area of less than 100 hectares, it is provided that all things
considered, it would be more logical to conclude that
pending implementation of P.D. No. 27 as to those lands
(i.e., less than 100 hectares), the ownership of the lands
remains with the present landowners, and as such, the real
estate taxes should, accordingly, be paid by the
landowners.
 By virtue of LOI No. 227, Series of 1974, in order to
accelerate the implementation of the agrarian reform
program, the present operations implementing the land
reform program pursuant to P.D. No. 27 is now down to
landholdings of over seven (7) hectares. This means that
the tenant-farmers are now likewise deemed owners of the
awarded areas in excess of the 7-hectare retention limit of
a landowner. As such, they are legally bound to pay the real
property taxes assessable on said lands.
 The duty of the landowner to pay real estate taxes ends
from the time the ownership of the subject property is
deemed transferred to the farmer beneficiaries, that is,
even before the issuance of Emancipation Patents (EPs).
Stated otherwise, the duty of the farmer beneficiaries to
pay real estate tax begins when the property in issue is
subjected under the coverage of OLT pursuant to P.D. No.
27 since from that time on they are already deemed owners
thereof.
 Presidential Decree No. 57 expressly provides that a
"landowner shall be exempt from capital gains tax on the
proceeds of the amortization paid him by the tenant-
purchaser and likewise from income tax due on the
accruing interest paid as an addition to the total cost of the
land". As held by the Supreme Court in the case of Ramona
R. Locsin vs. Honorable Judge Vicente P. Valenzuela dated
19 February 1991, the exemption of the old landowner from
the capital gains tax on the amortization payments made to
him by the tenants-purchasers, under P.D. No. 57,
underscores the fact, referred to above, that ownership or
dominion over the land moved immediately from landowner
to tenant-farmer, rather than upon completion of payment
of the price of the land. In general, capital gains are
realized only when the owner disposes of his property.

May 22, 1998
TAXES; RESPONSIBILITY OF BENEFICIARY TO PAY REAL

PROPERTY TAXES
When shall payment of real property tax by CARP

beneficiaries commence?
 Payment of the real property tax by CARP beneficiaries to

LGUs shall commence from the time the DAR awards the
lands to them. This is clear under Section 24 of R.A. No.
6657 which states, among others, that the rights and
responsibilities of the beneficiary shall commence from the
time the DAR makes an award of the land to him, which
award shall be completed within one hundred eighty (180)
days from the time the DAR takes actual possession of the
land. On the other hand, prior to the award of the land to
the CARP beneficiary, the landowners shall pay the real
property tax to the LGUs. This is clear under Section 66 of
R.A. No. 6657 which states that "all arrearages in real
property taxes, without penalty, or interest, shall be
deductible from the compensation to which the owner may
be entitled."

March 22, 1999
TENANCY RELATIONSHIP; CONDITIONS
What are the conditions set for a tenancy relationship to

exist?
 To establish tenancy relationship, the following conditions

must be present: 1) the parties are the landowner and the
tenant; 2) the subject is agricultural land; 3) there is
consent by the landowner for tenant to work on the land,
given either orally or in writing, expressly or impliedly; 4)
the purpose is agricultural production; 5) there is personal
cultivation or with the help of the immediate household; 6)
there is compensation in terms of payment of a fixed
amount in money and/or produce. All the conditions set
forth must be present and absence of any of said conditions
would defeat the purpose and essence of tenancy
relationship.

January 9, 1998
TENANCY RELATIONSHIP; DUTY OF AN OVERSEER
Is an overseer considered a tenant?
 Well-settled is the rule that the duty of an overseer is to

manage and administer the landholding of the landowner. In
the case of Nipolo vs. Janician, CA-G.R. No. 04605 – R, 22
September 1976, the Court of Appeals had ruled that an
overseer is an extension of the personality and authority of
the owner. However, if it could be duly established that
aside from being an overseer, he himself is a tenant in his
own right based on the requisites of tenancy relationship as
enumerated above, then he may assert his right as a
tenant.

March 25, 1999
TENANCY RELATIONSHIP; EFFECT OF CHANGE OF OWNERSHIP
What is the effect of discharge by the landowner of his

landholding over the existing tenancy relationship?
 Discharge by the landowner of his landholding will not

discharge the tenants (if any) therefrom. The change of
ownership over the land will not make the tenancy
relationship with the new owner cease to exist. The new
owner merely steps into the shoes of the former owner and
he is bound by the tenancy relationship existing prior to his
acquisition of the land. It goes without saying that change
of ownership over the landholding will not automatically
amount to the displacement of tenants over the said
landholding. The new owner has to recognize the tenants
because they enjoy security of tenure.

February 4, 1998
TENANCY RELATIONSHIP; ESSENTIAL REQUISITES
 The following essential requisites of tenancy relationship as

mentioned in Isidro vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 105586,
December 15, 1993, to wit: (1) the parties are the
landowner and the tenant; (2) the subject matter is
agricultural land; (3) there is consent; (4) the purpose is
agricultural production; (5) there is personal cultivation by
the tenant; and (6) there is sharing of harvests between the
parties. All these requisites must concur in order to create
a tenancy relationship between the parties.

February 7, 2007
TENANCY RELATIONSHIP; ESSENTIAL REQUISITES
What are the essential requisites of a tenancy

relationship?
 It is a settled doctrine that mere cultivation without proof of

the conditions of tenancy does not suffice to establish
tenancy relationship. All the following conditions must be
present for tenancy relationship to exist:
a. That the parties are the landholder and the

tenant;
b. That the subject is agricultural land;
c. That there is consent by the landowner for
tenant to work on the land, given either orally or in
writing, expressly or impliedly;
d. That the purpose is agricultural production;
e. That there is personal cultivation or with the
help of the immediate farm household; and
f. That there is compensation in terms of
payment of a fixed amount in money and/or produce.
 Basic is the rule that in lands covered under P.D. No. 27, the
supposed beneficiary should be a tenant or there should be
a tenancy relationship which exists between the landowner
and the farmer beneficiary.

September 4, 1998
TENANCY RELATIONSHIP; ESSENTIAL REQUISITES THEREOF
What are the essential requisites of a tenancy

relationship?
 The Department of Agrarian Reform on several occasions,

had opined that to support a claim of tenancy, all the
essential requisites of tenancy relationship must be
present. To repeat, the essential requisites of a tenancy
relationship are as follows: 1) the parties are the landholder
and the tenant; 2) the subject is agricultural land; 3) there
is consent, given either orally or in writing, expressly or
impliedly; 4) the purpose is agricultural production; 5) there
is personal cultivation; and 6) there is compensation, either
in terms of share in the harvest or payment of a fixed
amount in money and/or produce. (DAR Opinion Nos. 25, S.
1994; 53, S. 1998, citing Graza vs. Court of Appeals, 163
SCRA 41). The above-cited DAR Opinion No. 53, S. 1998
further states in part, quote:
". . . In the absence of any of said requisites,

an occupant of a parcel of land, or a cultivator
thereof or a planter thereon, cannot claim tenancy
relations over the landholding."
 It is clear that a farmworker may be considered a tenant if

the above requisites are present.

March 25, 1999
TENANCY RELATIONSHIP; GROUND FOR EJECTMENT OF

TENANT

relationship?
 Personal cultivation is no longer a ground to terminate
tenancy relationship because the same has been deleted as
a ground for the ejectment of the tenant under Section 7 of
Republic Act No. 6389 which amended Section 36 (1) of
R.A. No. 3844. A landowner may not dispossess his/her
tenant of his farmlot on the ground that you will personally
cultivate your landholding.

February 9, 1999
TENANCY RELATIONSHIP; HOW CREATED
How is tenancy relationship created?
 Under Section 6 of RA 3844, as amended, tenancy

relationship is created between the person who furnishes
the landholding, either as owner, civil law lessee,
usufructuary or legal possessor, and the one who
personally cultivates the land. It follows that a person who
is neither the owner, civil law lessee, usufructuary or legal
possessor of a landholding cannot legally instituted a
tenant thereon.

January 26, 1994
TENANCY RELATIONSHIP; HOW IT IS CREATED
How is tenancy relationship created?
 The farmer-beneficiary did not acquire ownership of the

subject land by virtue of the award by the Department of
Agrarian Reform. The Supreme Court, in the case of Angel
Cunanan vs. Hon. Andres Aguilar, et al., 85 SCRA 47, has
pronounced that tenancy relationship can only be created
with the consent of the true and lawful landowner who is
the owner, lessee, usufructuary or legal possessor of the
land. It cannot be created by the act of a supposed
landowner, who has no right to the land subject to the
tenancy, much less by one who has been dispossessed of
the same by final judgment.

September 4, 1998
TENANCY RELATIONSHIP; LANDOWNER'S RIGHT OF

ASSIGNMENT
Has the duly authorized representative of a landowner the

right to assign a tenant of the landholding?
 The landowner or his duly authorized representative has the

right to assign a tenant of his landholding subject to prior
rights of an incumbent de jure tenant and subject, further,
to existing agrarian laws, rules and regulations.

March 25, 1999
TENANCY RELATIONSHIP; NOT EXTINGUISHED BY THE

DONATION OF THE PROPERTY
Would the donation of the property extinguish the tenancy

relations between the agricultural lessor and the
agricultural lessee?
 The donation of the property will not result in the

extinguishment of the tenancy relations between the
agricultural lessor and the agricultural lessee. Under
Section 10 of RA 3844, the agricultural leasehold shall not
be extinguished by mere expiration of the term or period in
a leasehold contract nor by the sale, alienation or transfer
of the legal possession of the landholding.
June 30, 1994
TENANCY RELATIONSHIP; OUSTER OF TENANT BY COURT

ORDER
What is the option available to a tenant in case he was

ousted from the landholding by reason of a court order?
 The winning party can validly deprive the tenant of an

ousted landholder of the subject riceland because without
the consent of the lawful landholder, the alleged tenant
could not validly say that his illegal possession has ripened
into a legal one by reason of an assumed tenancy
relationship. Said tenant can, however, file an action in
court against the ousted landholder. Moreover, the ousted
farmer-beneficiary may be considered a beneficiary not
under P.D. No. 27 but under Section 22 of R.A. No. 6657.
Thus, he may opt to be a beneficiary in other lands that may
be available for distribution provided he meets the basic
qualifications of a beneficiary as enumerated in the
aforesaid provision of law.

September 4, 1998
TENANCY RELATIONSHIP; REQUISITES
What are the requisites of a tenancy relationship?
 The following essential requisites must be present to

establish a tenancy relationship, to wit:
1. the parties are the landowner and the tenant;

2. the subject is agricultural land;
3. the purpose is agricultural production;
4. there is consideration or compensation in
terms of payment of a fixed amount in money and/or
produce;
5. there is consent by the landowner for the
tenant to work on the land; and
6. there is personal cultivation by the tenant.
 In Caballes vs. DAR, et al., G.R. No. L-78214, December 5,

1988, all these requisites must concur in order to create a
tenancy relationship between the parties. The absence of
one does not make an occupant of a parcel of land, or a
cultivator thereof, or a planter thereon a de jure tenant.
 Considering that there is a consideration in the form of a
fixed rental after each harvest, such constitutes as price
certain for the cultivation and use of the land as
contemplated in Section 166 (2&3) of R.A. No. 3844, as
amended. Thus, there is tenancy which, however, under
said law has been restructured as agricultural leasehold.

November 27, 2000
TENANCY RELATIONSHIP; REQUISITES
What are the requisites for tenancy relationship to exist?
 The Supreme Court in a long line of decisions held that to

establish a tenancy relationships, the following essential
requisites must be present, to wit:
a. the parties are the landowner and the tenant;

b. the subject is agricultural land;
c. the purpose is agricultural production;
d. there is consideration and that consideration
consist of the sharing of harvests;
e. there is consent to the tenant to work on the
land; and
f. there is personal cultivation by him (tenant)
 All these requisites must concur in order to create a
cultivator thereof, or a planter thereon a de jure tenant.
Unless a person has established his status as de jure
tenant, he is not entitled to security of tenure nor is he
covered by the Land Reform program of the government
under existing laws (Caballes vs. DAR, et al., G.R. No.
78214, December 5, 1988).

April 4, 1997
TENANCY RELATIONSHIP; SECURITY OF TENURE MAY BE

INVOKED ONLY BY TENANTS DE JURE
Who may invoke security of tenure?
 A court judgment is enforceable against a person not

actually a party to the case where he was instituted as
tenant by the losing selling-landowner. The Decision/Order
of the court, is binding upon the farmer-beneficiary. Thus,
the cultivation and tenurial rights of the herein farmer-
beneficiary shall necessarily cease since it is settled that
security of tenure may be invoked only by tenants de jure
and not by those who are not true and lawful tenants.

September 4, 1998
TENANCY RELATIONSHIP; SECURITY OF TENURE; NOT

EXTINGUISHED BY EXPIRATION OF PERIODS, ETC.
Is tenancy relationship extinguished by expiration of the

period?
 Isinasaad sa Seksyon 7 ng Batas Republika Blg. 3844 na
sinusugan ng Batas Republika Blg. 6389 (ang mga batas na
nagpapawalang bisa sa tinatawag na "agricultural sharing
system" at automatikong paglilipat nito sa tinatawag na
"agricultural leasehold") na pagkatapos maitatag o
magkaroon ng ugnayan sa pagitan ng isang mananakahan
at ng nagmamay-ari ng lupa sang-ayon sa itinakda ng batas
(Tenancy Relationship), ang isang magsasaka ay may
karapatang manatili sa lupang kanyang sinasaka at maaari
lamang siyang tanggalan ng nasabing karapatan bilang
isang nananakahan sa mga kadahilanang naaayon sa batas.
 Kaugnay nito, isinasaad din sa Seksyon 10 ng nabanggit na
batas na kung sakali man na ipagbili o magkaroon ng
paglilipat sa pagmamay-ari ng lupaing sinasaka,
magpapatuloy ang ugnayan ng magsasaka at ng bagong
nagmamay-ari ng lupa. Isinasaad sa Seksyon 10 ng
nabanggit na batas ang mga sumusunod:
"Sek. 10. Ang Pagsasakang Buwisan

sa Pagsasaka ay Di Nagwawakas sa Pagkatapos
ng Takdang Panahon, atb. — Ang pagsasamahang
buwisan sa pagsasaka sa ilalim ng Kodigong ito di
magwawakas dahil lamang sa pagkatapos ng
taning o takdang panahong nasa kasunduan sa
pamumuwisan ni sa pagbibili, pag-aalis o
paglilipat ng pag-okupang legal sa hinahawakang
lupa. Sakaling ipagbili, ialis o ilipat ng
nagpapabuwis sa pagsasaka ang pag-okupang
legal sa hinahawakang lupa, ang nakabili o
pinaglipatan niyon ay malalagay sa mga
karapatan at mahahalili sa mga pananagutan ng
nagpapabuwis sa pagsasaka."

October 28, 1999
TENANCY RIGHTS
 May higit na karapatan ang taong itinalaga ng kinatawan ng

may-ari kaysa sa taong illegal na pumasok.

Hunyo 21, 2010
TENANCY RIGHTS; HOW IS IT ACQUIRED
Can a buyer who acquires tenancy rights from the lessee

without the consent of the landowner makes him a bona
fide tenant?
 The buyer who acquires tenancy rights from the lessee

without the consent and knowledge of the landowner does
not make him a bona fide tenant entitled to security of
tenure under RA 3844. In other words, his rights are nothing
as he merely stepped into the shares of the lessee who
cannot exercise rights higher or superior to that of the
lessor.
 Briefly, his status is in consonance with the legal truism
that "the spring cannot rise over its source". However, if
the agricultural lessor eventually recognized the person to
whom possession and cultivation of the farmlot was
transferred, it is possible that his stay thereon has ripened
into tenancy.
 The brothers and sisters of the buyer cannot devote subject
landholdings for poultry or residential purposes. As the
acquisition of said tenancy rights is tainted with illegality,
the same cannot be validated by another illegal act by
devoting it to poultry or residential purposes.

December 13, 1996
TENANCY RIGHTS; KARAPATAN NG NAMUMUWISAN SA
PAGTUBOS
Is a lessee entitled to a right of redemption of land sold to

3rd persons?
 Isinasaad ng batas na kung sakaling ang lupa ay naipagbili

sa ibang tao nang hindi alam ng namumuwisan sa
pagsasaka, magkakaroon ng karapatan itong huli na
tubusin ang naturan sa katamtamang halaga at kabayaran
(Seksyon 12 ng B.R. Blg. 3844, sa sinusugan ng Seksyon 2
ng B.R. Blg. 6389, Karapatan ng Namumuwisan sa
Pagtubos). Samakatuwid, naaayon sa batas na bago ipagbili
ang lupa na mayroong nangangalaga ay dapat malaman
muna ng huli.
 Isinasaaad sa Seksyon 10 ng Kodigo ng Repormang
Pansakahan (R.A. No. 3844, na sinusugan ng R.A. No. 6389)
na kung sakali man na ipagbili o magkaroon ng paglilipat sa
pagmamay-ari ng lupang sinasaka, magpapatuloy ang
ugnayan ng magsasaka at ng bagong nagmamay-ari ng
lupa.

September 27, 2000
TENANCY RIGHTS; PROHIBITION
Can a tenant legally sell his tenancy right to another

person?
 The tenant cannot legally sell the tenancy right as such to

another person. As a tenant, he has the duty under Sec. 26
of RA 3844 as amended (Code of Agrarian Reform) to
cultivate and take care of his farm, growing crops and other
improvements on the landholding as a good father of a
family and perform all the works thereon.
 If he sells the right as tenant and allows another person to
cultivate the farm, the same would constitute abandonment
of the landholding without the knowledge of the agricultural
lessor which could be a good ground for ejectment. Such
act of the tenant can be viewed as desertion of his right to
cultivate the landholding.

December 13, 1996
TENANCY RIGHTS; SALE THEREOF PROHIBITED
Is the sale of tenancy right strictly prohibited?
 Sale of tenancy rights is strictly prohibited under R.A. No.

6657. Section 27 of said law provides in part, quote: "Lands
acquired by beneficiaries under this act may not be sold,
succession, or to the government, or to the Land Bank of
the Philippines, or to other qualified beneficiaries for a
period of ten (10) years: Provided, however, That the
children or spouse of the transferor shall have the right to
repurchase the land from the government or LBP within a
period of two (2) years…" The law is quite clear and
exclusive as to whom transfer of acquired lands by the
beneficiaries may be effected. Outside of those transfer
provided for by law will make the same null and void. If the
sale, transfer, or conveyance was made within the
prohibited period and to other persons not mentioned in the
above enumeration, such sale, transfer or conveyance
would be rendered ineffective or without force and effect
being violative of the provisions of R.A. No. 6657.

January 9, 1998
TENANCY RIGHTS; SUCCESSION
When does tenancy relationship exist?

 Section 9 of R.A. No. 3844, as amended, providing that the
leasehold relation between the agricultural lessor and the
agricultural lessee is not extinguished by the death or
permanent incapacity of the lessee, and, the leasehold
shall continue between the agricultural lessor and the
person who can cultivate the landholding personally,
chosen by the agricultural lessor within one (1) month from
such death or incapacity, from among the following: (a) the
surviving spouse; (b) the eldest direct descendant by
consanguinity; or (c) the next eldest descendant or
descendants in the order of their age . . . . . Provided,
further, That in the event the agricultural lessor fails to
exercise his choice within the periods herein provided, the
priority shall be in accordance with the order herein
established. (underscoring and emphasis supplied)

November 27, 2000
TENANCY; AGRICULTURAL LEASEHOLD TENANCY NOT

EXTINGUISHED BY DEATH OR INCAPACITY OF THE PARTIES
Is agricultural leasehold tenancy extinguished by the

death or incapacity of the parties?
 Ayon sa seksyon 9 ng nasabing batas, na sinusugan ng

Batas Republika Blg. 2263, isinasaad dito na kung sakaling
mamatay ang isang tagapangalaga o gumagawa sa lupa,
magpapatuloy ang pagsasaka o paggawa sa pamamagitan
ng paglilipat o pagmamana ng karapatang magsaka sa
malalapit na katulong na kasambahay na nauugnay sa
namatay na tagapangalaga sa loob ng ikalawang digri ng
pagka-kadugo na kung saan ay siya mismo ang personal na
magsasaka sa lupa.

September 27, 2000
Is a farmworker qualified to be a Tenant in the
landholding?
 The Court of Appeals in Viernes vs. Reyes, CA-G.R. No. SP-

05989, February 24, 1977, has ruled that a person who does
not work or till the land is not a tenant. Therefore, a
farmworker can qualify as tenant of the landholding on
account of his personal cultivation, coupled with his
possession of the landholding for a period of years, and
presence of all the other requisites constitutive of a
tenancy relationship.

April 23, 1998
TENANCY; ALL REQUISITES MUST CONCUR
 The following six (6) requisites must be considered in order

for a tenancy relationship to exist:
1. The parties are the landowner and the

tenant;
2. The subject is agricultural land;
3. There is consent by the landowner for the
tenant to work on the land, given either orally or in
writing, expressly or impliedly;
4. The purpose is agricultural production;
5. There is personal cultivation or with the help
of the immediate farm household; and
6. There is sharing of harvests.
 The Supreme Court emphasized in numerous cases that all

of the above-elements must concur in order to create a
cultivator thereof, or a planter thereon, a de jure tenant.
This is so because unless a person has established his
status as a de jure tenant, he is not entitled to security of
tenure nor he is covered by the Land Reform Program of the
Government under existing tenancy laws. (Caballes v. DAR,
168 SCRA 254 [1988]).

June 15, 2007
TENANCY; APPLICABLE LAWS

What law governs the sharing of tenants and owners?
 By virtue of Republic Act No. 3844 (Agricultural Land Reform

Code), which took effect on 08 August 1963, agricultural
share tenancy was declared to be contrary to public policy
and was, thereby, abolished. This was further strengthened
in Section 4 of Republic Act No. 6389, which provided that
agricultural share tenancy throughout the country shall be
automatically converted to agricultural leasehold.
 Item III.D of DAR Administrative Order NO. 05, series of
1993 (Rules and Procedures Governing Agricultural
Leasehold and the Determination of Lease Rental for
Tenanted Lands) provides, quote:
"The lease rental to be paid by all agricultural lessees shall not

be more than the equivalent of twenty-five percent (25%) of
the average normal harvest during the three (3) agricultural
years immediately preceding 15 June 1988, after deducting the
amount used for seeds and the cost of harvesting, threshing,
loading and processing, whichever is applicable."
June 7, 2002
TENANCY; PROOF OF TENANCY

Are proofs necessary to prove the allegation of non-
tenancy?
 It requires clear and convincing proof apart from allegations

to substantiate the same. Strictly speaking, mere
allegations are not proof and have not probative value
unless fully substantiated by the party alleging the same.
Thus, proper proofs, investigations or ocular inspections
are still necessary to prove said allegation of non-tenancy.

June 26, 1997
TENANCY; RECEIPTS OR ANY OTHER SIMILAR EVIDENCE
 In lieu of a leasehold agreement, and so long as there is

consent by the landowner for the tenant to work on the land
which is given either orally or in writing, a receipt or any
other similar evidence may be presented by the claimants
to prove their tenancy over the land.

June 1, 2010
TENANT; DEFINITION
How is tenant defined under Sec. 5 (a) of R.A. No. 1199?
 In the case entitled "Matienzo vs. Servidad" (107 SCRA 276),

the Supreme Court had occasion to explain that a tenant as
defined under Section 5 (a) of R.A. No. 1199, is a person
who himself and with the aid available from within his
immediate household cultivates the landholding belonging
to or possessed by another with the latter's consent for the
purpose of production sharing the produce with the
landholder under the share tenancy system or paying to the
landholder a price certain or ascertainable in produce or in
money, or both under the leasehold system.

August 1, 1995

May 28, 1996
TENANTS ; AS OCCUPANTS OF PUBLIC LANDS
Who are qualified/legal and disqualified/illegal tenants or

occupants of a public agricultural land?
 In public agricultural lands, there is no distinction on legal

or illegal occupants since any citizen of the Philippines can
be a tiller thereof, provided he has the ability to make the
land as productive as possible. This is so in view of the
policy of the government to assist landless tenants in
acquiring full ownership of the lands occupied or cultivated
by them.

December 13, 1996
TILLER; EXPANDED CONCEPT OF TILLER
When does the expanded concept of tiller apply?
 If the tillers have no fixed farmlots, the expanded concept of

tiller shall apply and the entire landholding shall be treated
as a collective tillage, in which case, the awardees shall
include not only those engaged in actual cultivation of the
land but also those involved in processing, administrative,
operations, medical and technical work (technical
farmworkers). This is based on the principle that all
individuals who contribute to making the land productive
are considered tillers.

November 28, 1994
TITLE; ISSUANCE OF
 With the affectivity of R.A. No. 9700, titles generated and

distributed pursuant to the agrarian reform program still
form an integral part of the property registration and enjoy
the same respect accorded to other modes of acquiring
land titles pursuant to P.D. No. 1529 (Amending and
Codifying the Laws Relative to Registration of Property and
for Other Purposes). On the other hand, issuance of a
derivative title emanating from voluntary transaction
covered by EP or CLOA still lies with the ROD. Pertinent is
Section 43 of Presidential Decree No. 1529 which provides,
quote:
"Chapter IV-Certificate of Title
Section 43. Transfer Certificate of Title. — The

subsequent certificates of title that may be issued by
the Register of Deeds pursuant to any voluntary
instrument relating to the same land shall be in like
form, entitled "Transfer Certificate of Title", and
likewise issued in duplicate. The certificate shall show
the number of the next previous certificate covering the
same land and also the fact that it was originally
registered, giving the record number, the number of the
original certificate of title, and the volume and page of
the registration book in which the latter is found."
 Section 12 par 2 of said R.A. No. 9700 does not divest the
ROD of its authority to issue titles to land pursuant to the
land registration law. Said provision merely provides as
additional requirement that title of the awarded land must
indicate whether it is an EP or CLOA, including its
subsequent transfer thereof, purposely to ensure a
generation of farmers and preserve the classification of the
land which is agricultural. This is in line with the policy of
the state to pursue a comprehensive agrarian reform
program.

November 9, 2009
TITLE; ON AWARDED LANDHOLDING; WHEN DOES IT PASS TO

THE AWARDEE
When does the title to the awarded landholding pass to the

awardee?
 It is a recognized rule that when a landholding is awarded to

qualified beneficiaries, title does not pass to the awardee
unless the landowner is paid just compensation thereon.

November 5, 1996
TORRENS TITLE; TITLE ISSUED PRESUMED VALID
Is a title issued under the Torrens System valid?
 The Supreme Court has ruled that, a title issued under the
Torrens System enjoys the conclusive presumption of
validity (Ramos vs. Rogrigues, 244 SCRA 418). Hence, a
registered owner thereof cannot be unjustly deprived of the
same.

October 16, 2000
TRANSFER ACTION; AUTHORITY OF DARAB TO TAKE
COGNIZANCE THEREOF
May DARAB take cognizance of cases involving transfer
action?
 If, indeed, said "transfer action" cases fall within the

contemplation of the aforecited provisions of
Administrative Order No. 06, series of 2000, the remedy is
explicitly provided for under Section 4 of the same
guideline, quote:
"SECTION 4. Referral of Cases — If a case covered

by Section 2 herein is filed before the DARAB, the concerned
DARAB official shall refer the case to the proper DAR Office for
appropriate action within five (5) days after said case is
determined to be within the jurisdiction of the Secretary. . . ."
(emphasis supplied)
February 21, 2002
TRANSFER CERTIFICATE OF TITLE; EVIDENCE OF SUBSEQUENT

TRANSFER OF AWARDED LANDS FROM FARMER-BENEFICIARIES
TO THIRD PERSONS
May the Transfer Certificate Title be issued for lands

transferred by an awardee to a transferee?
 The subsequent transfer of awarded lands from farmer-

beneficiaries to third persons shall be evidenced by
Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) and no longer that of
Emancipation Patent. Specifically, the Policy Statement
(No. 7) of DAR Administrative Order No. 08, Series of 1995
expressly provides that Transfer Certificate of Title shall be
issued by the Land Registration Authority (LRA) for lands
transferred by an awardee to a transferee (P.D. No. 27 as
amended by E.O. No. 228). However, this presupposes that
the transfer from original awardee to third person was
made with the prior written consent of the Department of
Agrarian Reform (DAR). Absent of such consent taints the
transfer with invalidity.

March 10, 1997
TRANSFER OF AWARDED LAND; PROHIBITION
 The foregoing, and under Section 27 of R.A. No. 6657 as

amended, explicitly prohibit the transfer of an awarded land
or a portion thereof within ten (10) years from award except
through hereditary succession, to the government, to the
Land Bank of the Philippines or to other qualified
beneficiaries. It is very clear that in all transactions
involving transfer or sale of awarded land by farmer
beneficiaries to their persons is allowed only with the
consent of the DAR. Absent such consent taints the
transfer with invalidity. This in view with the DAR policy to
prevent possible circumvention and its amendatory laws,
related implementing guidelines.

January 5, 2010
TRANSFER OF MEMBERS' LAND SHARES
Under "transfer through hereditary succession", who will

succeed?
In case of transfer in land share, how can we effect the

change in the title?
 In case a beneficiary dies, his land share shall be

transferred and registered in the name of the heir who gets
the land as his/her share in the inheritance as stipulated in
the Settlement of Estate among the heirs. However in case
the estate is not yet settled, the land share shall be
transferred and registered collectively in the names of all
the heirs of the deceased beneficiary. In the latter
situation, the heirs shall choose among themselves who
will represent the deceased beneficiary in the cooperative.
Such representative-heir should qualify as beneficiary and
as member of the cooperative.
 However, where the surviving heir or heirs are minors and
could not yet qualify as beneficiary/ies, he or they, as the
case may be, shall be represented by the guardian in
cultivating or directly managing the land until the eldest
minor, or if he shall not qualify, the next eldest, and so on,
shall have qualified.
 In the following cases, where the land has not yet been fully
paid and the 10-year period from award has not yet lapsed,
the land shall be reallocated by DAR to a deserving ARB:
(1) where the beneficiary dies without an heir; and

(2) except where the surviving heir or heirs are
minors and not yet qualified as beneficiary/ies, where no
surviving heir is a qualified beneficiary.
 In the second case above, the deceased member's land

share shall, however, be monetized for distribution to his
heirs. The rationale behind the aforestated reallocation is
to uphold the time-honored principle and policy of land-to-
the-tiller/owner-cultivatorship and to foreclose a return of
absentee landlordism which is the very social problem
sought to resolved by the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Program (CARP).
 In case of transfer of member's land share, the title (TCT-
CLOA) may be corrected through a petition for
administrative correction of registered EP/CLOA filed before
the DAR Adjudication Board where the land is located (DAR
Administrative Order No. 2, Series of 1994).
July 14, 1999
TRANSFER; CONDITIONS
 Although transfer of awarded lands under Presidential

Decree No. 27 may be allowed if amortization thereof has
been fully paid, such transfer is still subject to the
compliance with the provisions of Administrative Order No.
8, Series of 1995 [Rules and Procedures Governing the
Transferability of Lands Awarded to Agrarian Reform
Beneficiaries (ARBs) Pursuant to Presidential Decree No. 27
as Amended by Executive Order No. 228 and Republic Act
No. 6657].

November 14, 2008
TRANSFER; FORECLOSED PROPERTIES
 Sec. 6 of R.A. No. 7881 allows banks to dispose to third

parties their properties which were foreclosed on or after
the effectivity of R.A. No. 7881, on March 12, 1995.
Nonetheless, they may be eventually acquired by the
government through DAR for distribution to qualified farmer
beneficiaries as mandated under R.A. No. 6657, as
amended.

December 22, 2010
TRANSFER; 10-YEAR PROHIBITORY PERIOD
 Section 27 of R.A. No. 6657 which provides that lands

succession, to the Land of Bank of the Philippines (LBP), or
to other qualified beneficiaries for a period of ten (10)
years. Furthermore, the provisions of Executive Order N0.
228 dated July 17, 1987 and DAR A.O. No. 08, Series of
1995 [Rules and Procedures Governing the Transferability
Pursuant to Presidential Decree No. 27 as Amended by
Executive Order No. 228 and Republic Act No. 6657], when
taken together provide that ownership of lands acquired by
farmer-beneficiary may be transferred after full payment of
amortizations.
 The transfer of awarded lands is allowed only after full

payment of land amortization and provided further, that the
conditions laid down in said Administrative Order are
observed.

February 2, 2009

Reform Law), provides that lands acquired by beneficiaries
under said Act may not be sold, transferred or conveyed
except through hereditary succession, or to the
government, or to the Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP), or
years.

August 2, 2006
Are lands awarded to CARP beneficiaries be sold or

transferred?
 Section 27 of Republic Act No. 6657 explicitly provides that

lands awarded to beneficiaries of the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) may not be sold,
succession, or to the government, or to the LBP, or to other
qualified beneficiaries for a period of ten (10) years. Said
provision of law allows, as an exception to the rule, the
transfer of awarded lands to the government even within
the 10-year prohibitory period. However, a careful analysis
of Section 27 would indubitably bring us to the conclusion
that the contemplated transfer to the "government" may be
accorded meaning only within the context of agrarian
reform and without withdrawing it therefrom.
 Be it that as it may, the government can, nonetheless,
expropriate agricultural lands if the intended purpose is for
public use or welfare as held by the Supreme Court in the
case of Province of Camarines Sur vs. Court of Appeals (222
SCRA 173) and in accordance with Presidential
Administrative Order No. 50, series of 1999 (Guidelines for
the Acquisition of Certain Parcels of Private Land Intended
For Public Use Including the Right-Of-Way Easement of
Several Public Infrastructure Projects). It should, however,
be limited to such area actually needed for the purpose and
there is no other alternative route.

November 8, 2000
TRANSFER; AWARDED LANDS
 The provisions of Executive Order No. 228 dated July 17,

1987 and DAR Administrative Order No. 8, Series of 1995
[Rules and Procedures Governing the Transferability of
Lands Awarded to Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries (ARBs)
Pursuant to Presidential Decree No. 27 as amended by
Executive Order No. 228 and Republic Act No. 6657], when
taken together provide that ownership of lands acquired by
a farmer-beneficiary may be transferred after full payment
of amortizations.
 It is clear that the transfer of awarded lands is allowed only
after full payment of the land amortization, which you failed
to disclose however in your letter, and provided further,
that the conditions laid down in A.O. No. 8, Series of 1995,
copy attached, are observed. The procedures in the transfer
of awarded lands are laid down in the said Administrative
Order.

August 2, 2006
 The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL), Section

27 thereof, explicitly prohibits the transfer of an awarded
land or a portion thereof within ten (10) years from award
except through hereditary succession or to the government,
Land Bank of the Philippines or other qualified
beneficiaries. The provisions of Executive Order No. 228,
dated 17 July 1987 and DAR Administrative Order No. 08,
Series of 1995 [Rules and Procedures Governing the
Transferability of Lands Awarded to Agrarian Reform
Beneficiaries (ARBs) Pursuant to Presidential Decree No. 27
No. 6657], when taken together, provide that ownership of
lands acquired by a farmer-beneficiary may be transferred
after full payment of the amortizations, provided the

maintained;
shall be imposed.
 Accordingly, the transfer of awarded land can be allowed

provided that the conditions stated above shall be complied
with in order that the same shall be considered valid and
legal. This is in accordance with the mandate of law and
consistent with the government's policy to preserve prime
agricultural lands. Moreover, the conditions thus
enumerated shall apply not only to first transfers made but
also to the subsequent ones, as long as the agricultural
condition of the land continue to exist. This is based on the
principle that agricultural lands should rightfully be
considered a finite natural resource, further exhaustion of
which would threaten national food security.

January 20, 2006
What are the conditions required before transfer of

awarded lands are allowed?
 Transfer of awarded lands under P.D. No. 27, as amended by

E.O. No. 228 and R.A. No. 6657 may be allowed after full
payment of amortizations. However, in order to effect valid
transfer thereof, DAR A.O. No. 8, Series of 1995 provides for
certain conditions that must be met, to wit:

maintained;
b) that the buyer will not exceed the
aggregate landowner ceiling provided by law; and
c) that the ownership ceiling of five (5)
hectares shall be imposed.

September 24, 1999
Is the transfer of awarded land is allowed?

 Transfer of awarded land is allowed only after full payment
of the land amortization and provided the conditions laid
down in A.O. 8, Series of 1995 are observed.

October 1, 1996
TRANSFER; BY VIRTUE OF THE POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN
May the transfer by virtue of the power of eminent domain

contravenes P.D. No. 27?
 Considering that the transfer of the farmlots covered by P.D.

27 was made by virtue of the power of eminent domain, the
same does not contravene P.D. 27 and its implementing
guidelines, hence, an ordinary title may be issued in favor
of the NPC by the Register of Deeds.

March 15, 1996
TRANSFER; CONDITIONS
What are the conditions for transfer of agricultural lands?
 The following are the conditions:
1) The total agricultural land owned by the

transferee, inclusive of the land to be acquired, shall not
exceed the 5-hectare landownership ceiling provided in
RA 6657;
2) No conversion of the farmholding for purposes
other than agricultural shall be undertaken without a DAR
Order of Conversion; and
3) Under Administrative Order No. 20, Series of
1992 of the Office of the President, all irrigated and
economically irrigable lands covered by irrigation projects
with firm funding commitments shall be non-negotiable for
conversion.

August 16, 1994
TRANSFER; CONDITIONS REQUIRED BEFORE TRANSFER

OF AWARDED LANDS ARE ALLOWED
 Pursuant to the aforequoted provisions of Section 27 of R.A.

No. 6657 in relation to Item II.1.d of DAR Administrative
Order No. 1, Series of 1989, it is clear that the government
(which includes LGUs) falls under the exceptions and
should not be interpreted in the light of those falling under
the 10-year prohibitory period. However, under the
aforequoted provisions of DAR Administrative order No. 08,
Series of 1995, the transfer contemplated is that which
will maintain the use of the land for agricultural production
or purposes where the buyer should not exceed the
aggregate landownership ceiling of five (5) hectares. This is
to preclude possible violation and/or circumvention of
agrarian laws, rules and regulations.
 Thus, since the transfer of awarded lands to the government
may be allowed provided the productivity of the land be
maintained, and, considering that the transfer of said lands
appears to be through a private transaction and not
through expropriation, DAR land transfer clearance may be
issued but only up to the maximum/aggregate 5-hectare
landownership ceiling pursuant to Sections 6 and 73 (a) of
R.A. No. 6657 and the abovequoted provisions of DAR

February 4, 2004
TRANSFER; DAR CLEARANCE REQUIRED
Is DAR Clearance required for a valid transfer?
 In all transactions involving the transfer or sale of

agricultural land to another, the issuance of a DAR
Clearance is an essential requisite in order that it may be
considered a valid transfer. This is so in view of the DAR's
policy to protect the rights of the tenants and other
farmworkers who may be displaced therein.

December 23, 1996
 Section 6 of R.A. No. 6657 provides that upon the effectivity

of said law (15 June 1988), transfer of possession of private
lands executed by the original landowner in violation of the
CARL shall be null and void. Furthermore, in all transactions
involving the transfer or sale of agricultural lands to
another, the issuance of DAR Clearance is an essential
requisite in order that it may be considered a valid transfer.
This is in view of DAR's policy to protect the rights of
tenants and other farmworkers. Moreover, Section 70 of
R.A. No. 6657 allows the sales or disposition of agricultural
lands retained by a landowner provided that the total
landholdings that shall be owned by the transferee thereof
inclusive of the land to be acquired shall not exceed the
landholding ceiling of five (5) hectares.
DAR OPINION NO. 66(A), s. 1997

June 5, 1997
TRANSFER; FORECLOSED ASSETS
Is the transfer by banks of foreclosed assets permitted?
 Section 71 of CARL provides that banks may acquire title to

mortgaged properties, subject to existing laws on
prescribed under Section 16 of said Act. Moreover, Section
6 of RA 7881 provides that the transfer by banks of such
foreclosed assets is permitted. Taken together, these legal
provisions means that while there is no prohibition against
the transfer of foreclosed assets of private banks to third
persons, said assets are subject to acquisition and
redistribution pursuant to CARL.

August 9, 1995
TRANSFER; FORECLOSED ASSETS
Is the transfer by banks of foreclosed assets permitted?
 Section 71 of CARL provides that banks may acquire title to

mortgaged properties, subject to existing laws on
prescribed under Section 16 of said Act. Moreover, Section
6 of RA 7881 provides that the transfer by banks of such
foreclosed assets is permitted. Taken together these legal
provisions mean that while there is no prohibition against
the transfer of foreclosed assets of private banks to third
persons, said assets are subject to acquisition and
redistribution pursuant to CARL.

August 9, 1995
TRANSFER; IN FAVOR OF A COOPERATIVE
May the transfer of the farmlot in favor of a cooperative be

favorably considered?
 The transfer of the farmlot within a settlement site in favor

of a cooperative may be favorably considered provided that
the following are duly established:
1. That the cooperative is authorized under its
Articles of Cooperation to engage in the business for
which the lot is to be used;
2. That the cooperative has financial capability
to engage in said business;
3. That the intended use of the farmlot is
agricultural in nature or will benefit the settlers and CARP
beneficiaries within the area; and
4. That the area to be transferred should
correspond to the intended use.

March 22, 1995
TRANSFER; INCONSISTENCY BETWEEN THE PROVISION OF PD

27 AND THE PROVISION IN SECTION 6, EO 228
How do you reconcile the inconsistency between the

provision of PD 27 and the provision in Sec. 6 of EO 228?
 Since both PD 27 and EO 228 cover rice/corn lands awarded

to tenants thereof, and EO 228 is the later law, it is
believed that the provision in Section 6 thereof allowing the
transfer of said lands after full payment repeals the
inconsistent provision in PD 27 prohibiting said transfer.

January 3, 1994
TRANSFER; LOT COVERED BY CLOA
Can a lot covered by CLOA be transferred?
 The lot covered by CLOA No. 00011688 cannot be

transferred in favor of the Municipality of Dupax Del Monte,
Nueva Vizcaya. Said CLOA clearly provides that the parcel
of land covered thereby "shall not be sold, transferred or
conveyed except through hereditary succession, or to the
Government, or to the Land Bank of the Philippines, or to
other qualified beneficiaries for a period of ten (10) years".

September 5, 1994
TRANSFER; MADE IN FAVOR OF THE GOVERNMENT
Is the transfer of agricultural lands made in favor of the

government, DAR or the LBP valid?
 Paragraph II-A-2 of DAR Administrative Order No. 1, Series

of 1989 (Rules and Procedures Governing Land
Transactions) which provides that transfer of agricultural
lands made in favor of the government, DAR or the Land
Bank of the Philippines are valid does not cover all
transactions made in favor of the government but refers
only to those transactions made for agrarian reform
purposes that is, those transfer which are in pursuance of
the land redistribution program of the government.

May 28, 1996
TRANSFER; NECCESITY OF DAR CLEARANCE FOR ITS

REGISTRATION
Is DAR Clearance necessary for the registration of transfer

of agricultural lands?
 All transfers or disposition of agricultural lands must be

evaluated by DAR to determine whether or not the same are
in conformity with RA 6657. Should DAR find the transfer to
be in violation of CARL, no clearance for its registration will
be issued.
July 28, 1995
TRANSFER; PROHIBITION
Is the transfer of awarded land or a portion thereof

prohibited?
 Section 27 of CARL explicitly prohibits the transfer of an

awarded land or a portion thereof within ten years from
awarded except through hereditary succession or to the
government or to the Land Bank of the Philippines or to
other qualified beneficiaries.

October 11, 1996
TRANSFER; PROHIBITION
Is transfer made in favor of the government within the 10-

year period from award allowed?
 One of the exceptions to the prohibition against the transfer

of lands acquired under R.A. 6657 within the 10-year period
from award is the transfer made in favor of the government.
Hence, the contemplated transfer to the DAR for donation
to the DECS to be used as a school site to serve the
students in the community may legally be undertaken.

June 23, 1995
TRANSFER; PROHIBITION OF CORPORATION TO BE

TRANSFEREE OF LOTS IN LANDED ESTATES
Are corporations qualified to be transferee of lots in

landed estates?
 Corporations are not qualified to be transferee of lots in
landed estates considering that the same were intended for
distribution to bona-fide tenants; occupants or private
individuals who will work the lands themselves.

July 2, 1996
TRANSFER; TAX EXEMPT
Is the transfer of ownership tax exempt?
 Transactions involving a transfer of ownership under

Republic Act No. 6657 is tax exempt.

September 17, 1997
TRANSFER; THRU HEREDITARY SUCCESSION
May the landholding acquired under the Agrarian Reform

Code be transferred thru hereditary succession?
 Section 62 of RA 3844, as amended allows the transfer of

landholdings acquired under the Agrarian Reform Code thru
hereditary succession. Since the provisions of a will take
effect upon the death of the testator, the transfer of farmlot
by will may legally be done. However, it should be noted
that the law allows transfer in favor of one heir only. This
must be so, because transferring the farmlot to more than
one heir would result in a fragmentation of the property and
defeat the intent of the law to distribute economic family
size farms.

December 7, 1994
TRANSFER; UNDER PD 27
May the land acquired pursuant to P.D. No. 27 be

transferred?
 Transfer of title to land acquired pursuant to PD 27 and

other agrarian laws, EO 228 provides that ownership of
lands acquired by the farmer-beneficiary may be transferred
after full payment of amortizations. However, aforesaid
provision for the indiscriminate transfer of awarded lands,
and certain criteria which are set forth in RA 6657 must be
satisfied in order that transfer over awarded lands can be
effected. On the other hand, if the land has not yet been
fully paid, the rights to the land may be transferred or
conveyed, with prior approval of the DAR, to a qualified
beneficiary who shall cultivate the same.

December 11, 1995
TRANSFER; VALIDITY THEREOF
Is transfer valid?
 The validity of the transfer depends on the provisions of the

law under which the award was made. For example, of the
award was made pursuant to RA 6657, said sale is valid.
This is because Sec, 27 of said law provides that lands
acquired by beneficiaries under said Act "may not be sold,
qualified beneficiaries for a period of ten (10) years", which
means that after said 10-year period, the land awarded may
be transferred to persons other than the heirs, the
government, LBP or other qualified beneficiaries.

October 6, 1994
TRANSFER; WHEN ALLOWED
What are the requirements for transfer to be valid?
 Policy Statement No. 2 of DAR A.O. No. 8 which clarifies

that although the transfer of awarded lands is allowed the
productivity of the land shall be maintained, and any
change in the nature of its use shall not be permitted

July 15, 1996
TRANSFER; WHEN EFFECTED
When is transfer of property effected?
 Once it has been ascertained that full payment has been

made, and the property does not fall under A.O. No. 20, the
transfer may be effected. However, the transferee must file
an application for conversion with DAR.

May 12, 1994
 The last sentence of Section 6 of E.O. 228 providing that the

ownership of lands acquired by beneficiaries may be
transferred after full payment of amortization does not
operate as a blanket authority for the indiscriminate
transfer of OLT lands and that certain criteria (other than
full payment) which are set forth in CARL must be satisfied
in order for said transfer to be legally effected.

March 23, 1995
TRANSFER; WHEN SUBJECT TO CAPITAL GAINS TAX
When is the transfer of property subject to capital gains

tax?
 If the transfer is under an approved Voluntary Offer to Sell, a

landowner need not pay capital gains tax pursuant to Sec.
66 of CARL. However, if it is not made in favor of a CARP
beneficiary then each sale is subject to capital gains tax.

July 25, 1994
TRANSFERABILITY OF AWARDED LAND; CONDITIONS THEREOF
Are transfer of awarded lands to government entities

allowed through ordinary sale?
 Administrative Order No. 08, Series of 1995, specifically,

Item II.2 and 3 thereof, in relation with Section 27 of R.A.
No. 6657, although the transfer in favor of the government
is one of the exceptions to the prohibition against transfer
within ten (10) years from award, the transfer contemplated
is that which will maintain the use of the land for
agricultural production or purposes. It follows therefore
that any transfer through ordinary sale in favor of
government entities in their private capacity within the 10-
year prohibitory period for a purpose other than that
contemplated is not allowed as expressly enunciated under
Items II.2 and 3 of DAR Administrative Order No. 08, Series
of 1995.

March 25, 1999
Are transfer of awarded lands to government entities

allowed through ordinary sale?
 If the transfer to government entities is for public use
through expropriation proceedings in the proper exercise of
their delegated power of eminent domain and not in their
proprietary capacity, the same may be allowed even in the
absence of approval by the DAR to convert or reclassify
agricultural properties from agricultural to non-agricultural
use, upon payment of just compensation to the affected
ARBs (Province of Camarines Sur vs. Court of Appeals, 222
SCRA 173). In fairness to the CLOA or EP awardees whose
lands shall be expropriated, they should, however, still be
entitled as agrarian reform beneficiaries or awardees in
other landholdings.

March 25, 1999
TRANSFERABILITY OF AWARDED
LANDS; TRANSFERABILITY OF AWARDED LANDS A
MINISTERIAL DUTY

Reform Law of 1988) provides that lands acquired by
beneficiaries under this Act may not be sold, transferred or
conveyed except through hereditary succession. Said
provision of law is an exception on the non-transferability of
awarded lands under P.D. No. 27 and R.A. No. 6657.
 DAR Administrative Order No. 8, Series of 1995
(Transferability of Lands Awarded to ARBs Pursuant to PD
27 as Amended by EO No. 228 and RA 6657) particularly
Item No. II (1) thereof provides that lands awarded to ARBs
after the issuance of DAR clearance.
 The only requirement needed for the transfer of an awarded
land is the DAR clearance which may be issued by the DAR
Regional Director. Nothing is mentioned in said guideline
that there shall be prior declaration/order of the DAR-
Adjudication Board (DARAB) for the cancellation of the
Emancipation Patent before the same should be
transferred.
 A petition before the DARAB is no longer necessary and that
it is ministerial on the part of the Register of Deeds to
cause the transfer of the title after compliance with the
documentary requirements and upon showing that all the
conditions/limitations/proscriptions prescribed by law in the
disposition of agrarian reform awarded lands have been
complied with.

April 28, 2008
TRANSFERABILITY OF LAND ACQUIRED UNDER P.D. 27
Are lands acquired under PD 27 be transferred?
 Lands acquired under P.D. 27 may be transferred to anyone,

even if not qualified beneficiaries, provided the
amortizations have been fully paid and even within the 10-
year period from the award thereof. There are exceptions,
however, to the foregoing rule as provided for under Policy
Statements Nos. 5 and 6 of A.O. No. 8, Series of 1995,
quote:
5) If the land was identified as tenanted after

1972, the transfer may be allowed only after the lapse of
ten (10) years from the date of recognition of the tenants
as stated in the Order of Placement issued pursuant to
DAR M.C. No. 2, Series of 1978.
6) If awardee is a transfer action reallocatee
pursuant to an Order of Reallocation, transfer may be
allowed provided ten (10) years have lapsed from the date
of recognition of the reallocatee or stated in the final
Order of Reallocation issued by the Regional Director/DAR
Secretary. However, transfer to a reallocatee by virtue of
succession by an heir shall not be subject to the ten (10)
year period prohibition.

March 10, 1998
TRANSFERABILITY; AWARDED LAND
Are lands awarded pursuant to PD 27 and RA 6657 be

transferred, sold or conveyed? What are the exceptions?

Reform Law) expressly provides that lands acquired by
beneficiaries under said Act may not be sold, transferred or
conveyed except through hereditary succession, or to the
government, or to the Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP), or
years. Moreover, the provisions of Executive Order No. 228
dated July 17, 1987 and DAR A.O. No. 8, Series of 1995,
when taken together, provide that ownership of lands
acquired by a farmer-beneficiary (whether under P.D. No. 27
or R.A. No. 6657) may be transferred after full payment of
amortizations, provided the following conditions shall be
observed:

maintained;
landownership ceiling provided by law;
shall be imposed.

March 10, 1998
TRANSFERABILITY; AWARDED LAND; OWNERSHIP
TRANSFERRED FROM THE DATE OF REGISTRATION
When shall ownership of an awarded land deemed

transferred to farmer-beneficiaries?
 It is only from the date of registration of EPs and CLOAs

with the Register of Deeds by which the five (5) year
prohibitory period should commence to run since it is only
then that the ownership of the awarded land has been
legally and actually transferred in the name of the farmer-
beneficiaries. Ownership is not transferred upon mere
issuance of Certificate of Allocation for the same does not
constitute as proof of ownership unlike that of EPs and
CLOAs.

June 23, 1998
TRANSFERABILITY; AWARDED LAND; TRANSFERABILITY

ALLOWED ONLY AFTER THE ISSUANCE OF A DAR CLEARANCE;
PENALTY FOR WILLFUL VIOLATIONS OF THE SAME
May an ARB legally and validly sell the land awarded to

him without prior DAR clearance?
 Item II.1 of DAR Administrative Order No. 08, Series of 1995

clearly provides that lands awarded to ARBs pursuant to
either P.D. No. 27 or R.A. No. 6657 may be transferred and
registered by the Register of Deeds only after the issuance
of a DAR Clearance. The issuance of a DAR Clearance is
therefore an essential requisite before a valid transfer
could be effected. Otherwise, the sale or transfer is void.
 The issuance of a DAR clearance does not validate what is
otherwise an invalid sale or transaction. Rather, it serves
as a safeguard that only valid transactions pursuant to P.D.
No. 27 and R.A. No. 6657 (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Law) could be registered to foreclose possible
circumvention of agrarian laws.
 The transfer from the original awardee to third person
presupposes that the same was made with prior consent of
the DAR. Absent such consent taints the transfer with
invalidity. Section 74 of R.A. No. 6657 provides for penalties
in cases of willful violations of the provisions thereof,
quote:
"Any person who knowingly or willfully

violates the provisions of this Act shall be
punished by imprisonment of not less than one (1)
month to not more than three (3) years or a fine of
not less than one thousand pesos (P1,000.00) and
not more than fifteen thousand pesos
(P15,000.00), or both, at the discretion of the
court."

October 6, 1999
TRANSFERABILITY; AWARDED LANDS: APPLICABILITY OF

PROHIBITION RELATIVE TO TRANSFERABILITY EXTENDS TO
QUALIFIED CHILDREN AS PREFERRED BENEFICIARIES
What is the extent of the prohibition relative to

transferability of awarded lands?
 The prohibitions embodied in Sec. 27 of R.A. No. 6657

relative to transferability of awarded lands shall likewise
apply and operate even on the non-amortizing qualified
heirs/children of the landowner as preferred beneficiaries.

April 14, 1997
TRANSFERABILITY; AWARDED LANDS; REQUIREMENTS FOR A
VALID SALE OR TRANSFER; CANCELLATION OF EPs OR CLOAs
IN CASE OF NON-COMPLIANCE; DISPOSITION OF AWARDED
LAND DISQUALIFIES ONE TO BECOME AN ARB
What are the requirements for a valid sale or transfer of

awarded lands?
 Section 6 of Executive Order No. 228 provides that

P.D. No. 27 may be transferred after full payment of
amortizations. However, this provision does not serve as a
sweeping authority for the injudicious transfer or sale of
awarded lands as there are certain criteria that must be
satisfied in order that a valid transfer thereof can be made.
DAR Administrative Order No. 8, Series of 1995 provides
that lands awarded to ARBs pursuant to either P.D. No. 27
or R.A. No. 6657 may be transferred and registered by the
Register of Deeds only after the issuance of a DAR
Clearance (Item II.1). Moreover, said guideline enumerates
the criteria that must be observed in the transfer of
awarded lands, to wit:
"a. that the productivity of the land shall be

maintained;
shall be imposed."
 If a farmer-beneficiary and a transferee satisfy all the

conditions set forth under DAR A.O. No. 8, Series of 1995,
the former could validly transfer or sell the awarded land to
the latter. However, non-compliance or violation of any of
the conditions may be deemed a valid ground to cancel the
EP or CLOA (Item IV-B.5, DAR Administrative Order No. 2,
Series of 1994) and/or to forfeit the sale or transfer, the
same being null and void, hence, the lands shall be
reacquired by DAR for redistribution to other qualified
farmer-beneficiaries. Likewise, an awardee who shall
dispose of his/her landholding shall no longer be qualified to
become a beneficiary under CARP (Item II.9, A.O. No. 8,
Series of 1995).
 The foregoing conditions and guidelines would ensure that
the productivity of awarded lands is maintained, to
foreclose possible circumvention of existing agrarian laws,
rules and regulations, and to provide sanctions in case of
violations thereof.

June 23, 1998
TRANSFERABILITY; AWARDED LANDS; RIGHT TO TRANSFER
May awarded lands under P.D. No. 27 be transferred?
 Under DAR Administrative Order No. 8, series of 1995 as

supplemented by DAR Administrative Order No. 6, Series of
1996, it expressly allows the transfer of awarded lands but
the same is not absolute.
 Section 6 of Executive Order No. 228 provides that
ownership of lands acquired by farmer-beneficiaries may be
transferred only after full payment of amortization.
Moreover, the aforesaid implementing rules and regulations
likewise provide that transfer of awarded lands under P.D.
No. 27, as amended by E.O. No. 228 and R.A. No. 6657 may
be allowed, provided the following shall be observed:

maintained;
shall be imposed.
March 11, 1997
TRANSFERABILITY; CONDITIONS FOR THE TRANSFER OF

AWARDED LANDS
What is required to effect valid transfer of awarded lands?
 Transfer of awarded land is allowed pursuant to the

provisions of DAR A.O. No. 8, Series of 1995. However, the
conditions stated thereon shall be complied with in order
that the same shall be considered valid and legal. This is in
accordance with the mandate of law and consistent with
the government's policy to preserve prime agricultural
lands. Moreover, the conditions thus enumerated shall
apply not only to first transfers made but to subsequent
ones as well for as long as the agricultural condition of the
land continues to exist. This is based on the principle that
agricultural lands should rightfully be considered a finite
natural resource, further exhaustion of which would
threaten national food security. Any change, therefore, in
the nature of the awarded lands' use shall not be allowed

October 4, 1999
TRANSFERABILITY; OF AWARDED LAND UNDER CARP
Can awarded lands acquired under R.A. No. 6657 be the

subject of a valid transfer or conveyance within the ten
(10) year prohibitory period from the award
notwithstanding the prohibition under Sec. 27 of said law?
 The prohibition relative to transferability of awarded lands

under Section 27 of R.A. No. 6657, which provides that
lands acquired by beneficiaries under said Act may not be
sold, transferred or conveyed except through hereditary
qualified beneficiaries for a period of ten (10) years, is
mandatory and absolute. This simply means that the
prohibition relative to disposition shall stand during the ten
(10) year period from the award even if the supporting
documents have been complied with, and even if the
conditions laid down under Item II-3 of Administrative Order
No. 08, Series of 1995 shall be observed and the subject
landholding has already been fully paid by the farmer-
beneficiaries.
 To immediately allow the transfer or conveyance during the
ten (10) year prohibitory period would circumvent R.A. No.
6657 on the non-transferability of awarded lands, render
nugatory the social justice purposes for which the said law
had been enacted, and would likewise run counter to the
well-entrenched concepts of land to the tiller and owner-
cultivatorship. While DAR A.O. No. 08, Series of 1995 as
supplemented by DAR A.O. No. 06, Series of 1996 allows the
disposition or transfer of awarded lands, the same clearly
refers only to transfers or dispositions after the ten (10)
year prohibitory period has elapsed. Moreover, even
assuming arguendo that said Administrative Order allows
the disposition or transfer of awarded lands within the 10-
year prohibitory period, it was categorically held by the
Supreme Court in the case of Vassar Industries Inc. vs.
Vassar Industries Employees Union, 177 SCRA 323, that
administrative regulations issued by government agencies
to implement a law cannot by any means expand nor
supplant a law. The rules must be in harmony with the law
and cannot operate to amend it.

November 11, 1998
TRANSFERABILITY; OF AWARDED LANDS UNDER CARP
May awarded lands under PD 27 be transferred?

 Pursuant to Section 27 of Republic Act No. 6657
(Transferability of Awarded Lands), it provides the
following, quote:
"Lands acquired by beneficiaries under this

Act may not be sold, transferred or conveyed
except through hereditary succession, or to the
government, or to the LBP, or to other qualified
beneficiaries for a period of ten (10) years."
 Moreover, the provisions of Executive Order No. 228 dated

17 July 1987 in relation with DAR Administrative Order No.
8, Series of 1995 provide that ownership of lands acquired
by a farmer-beneficiary (whether under P.D. No. 27 or R.A.
No. 6657) may be transferred after full payment of
amortizations, provided the following conditions shall be
observed:
(a) That the productivity of the land shall be

maintained;
(b) That the buyer will not exceed the
aggregate landownership ceiling provided by law; and
(c) That the ownership ceiling of five (5)
hectares shall be imposed.

January 9, 1998

December 2, 1998
TRANSFERABILITY; PD 27
When may transfer of PD 27 awarded lands be allowed?
 P.D. No. 27 expressly provides that title to lands acquired

pursuant thereto or the Land Reform Program of the
Government shall not be transferable except by hereditary
succession or to the Government. However, Section 6 of
E.O. No. 228 provides that ownership of lands acquired by
farmer-beneficiaries may be transferred after full payment
of amortizations.

January 28, 1997
TRANSFERABILITY; PROHIBITION TO SELL; TRANSFER OR

CONVEY LANDS
Who are the persons qualified to purchase the land after

10 years from the award made by the government?
 Sec. 27 of RA 6657 prohibits for a period of ten years from

award, the sale, transfer or conveyance of lands except (1)
through hereditary succession or (2) to the government, or
(3) to the LBP, or (4) to other qualified beneficiaries. If the
sale is made in favor of a qualified beneficiary, it may be
done even during the ten year period from award.

October 6, 1994
TRANSFERABILITY; PROHIBITION TO TRANSFER; EXCEPTION
What are the exceptions on the prohibition to transfer

pursuant to R.A. No. 6657?
 Section 27 of RA 6657 provides that lands awarded to

agrarian reform beneficiaries may not be sold, transferred
to conveyed within ten years. However, the same Section
makes an exception as regards transfer to government
institutions.

October 3, 1995
TRUST ACCOUNTS; OPENING OF
Is the opening of a trust account considered actual

payment?
 The opening therefore of a trust account is not considered

actual payment. However, if emancipation patents were
already issued to the farmer-beneficiaries, the trust
account shall be considered a deposit account as of the
date of the opening of the trust account.

December 13, 1996
TRUST ACCOUNTS; WHEN CONVERTED TO DEPOSIT ACCOUNTS
Should trust accounts covering landholdings not yet

transferred in the name of the Republic of the Philippines
be converted to deposit accounts?
 DAR Administrative Order No. 2, series of 1996 provides

that, "all trust accounts issued pursuant to Administrative
Order No. 1, S. 1993 covering landholdings not yet
transferred in the name of the Republic of the Philippines as
of July 5, 1996 shall immediately be converted to deposit
accounts in the name of the landowners concerned.

December 12, 1996
TRUST FUND ACCOUNT; DECLARED INVALID
Is a trust fund account valid?

 Since there was still no valid payment made to the
landowners when they decided to withdraw their VOS, then
they should be allowed to do so pursuant to A.O. No. 5, S.
1992 considering that there are several landowners of the
subject lands consisting of 28.0012 hectares and their
shares on these lands will just be a part of their retained
area of not more than five (5) hectares.

April 4, 1997
U
UNTITLED A & D LANDS WHICH LACKS THE REQUIRED 30
YEARS OR MORE UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE DENR
Are untitled A & D lands under the jurisdiction of DENR?
 Pursuant to Joint DAR-DENR M.C. No. 19, Series of 1997,

untitled alienable and disposable lands, which lacks the
required 30 years or more continuous occupancy, whether
tenanted or not, shall be under the jurisdiction of the DENR.
But if the lands are found to be suitable for agriculture, the
DENR shall transfer the same to DAR for CARP coverage
pursuant to the mandate of the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Law (CARL) to distribute lands to qualified
beneficiaries.
 Joint DAR-DENR Memorandum Circular No. 19, Series of

1997 further provides, quote:
"in the case of an entire municipality or

portion thereof which was classified as A & D
after 16 April 1960, the MARO concerned shall
immediately exclude from his land acquisition and
distribution (LAD) scope such landholdings as may
be located therein and report the matter to the
DAR Undersecretary for Field Operations through
the PARO and DAR Regional Director, copy
furnished the DENR CENRO."
 Following the procedures laid down under said circular, the

DENR shall make available to DAR officials concerned all
the records necessary to implement the circular while the
latter, on the other hand, shall provide the DENR the list of
untitled properties identified or documented for CARP
coverage. As soon as the DAR and DENR are able to jointly
identify specific properties that may be covered under
CARP, the DENR shall issue the certification required and
the MARO shall initiate the compulsory acquisition process,
proceed to generate CLOAs in accordance with existing
guidelines, register the same with the Register of Deeds
and, thereafter, distribute them to qualified beneficiaries.
 Until such time, therefore, the above procedure is followed,

any and all issued or to be issued titles will be of doubtful
validity.

December 23, 1999
UNTITLED ANCESTRAL LAND; CARP COVERAGE
Does the DAR have the jurisdiction to determined the

coverage of untitled ancestral land pursuant to CARP?
 Considering that the landholding is located in a province

within the ARMM, it is not the DAR but the DAR-ARMM that
has jurisdiction on the CARP coverage thereof. Moreover,
the 3rd paragraph of Section 9 of CARL provides:
 "Any provision of law to the contrary notwithstanding the
PARC may suspend the implementation of this Act with
respect to ancestral lands for the purpose of identifying and
delineating such lands. Provided that in the autonomous
regions, the respective legislatures may enact, their own
laws on ancestral domain subject to the provisions of the
Constitutions and the principles enunciated in this act and
other national laws."

June 3, 1996
URBAN CENTERS AND CITY LIMITS UNDER SEC. 73 (e) of R.A.

No. 6657
Does Sec. 73 (e) of R.A. No. 6657 apply to agricultural

lands situated inside urban centers and city limits?
 A categorical statement made by Secretary Ernesto D.

Garilao appearing in the DAR Infoline dated 23 October
1996, it says that the subject provision (Section 73 (e) of
R.A. No. 6657) does not apply to agricultural lands situated
inside urban centers or city limits.

April 14, 1997
V
VALUATION; AMENDMENTS ON; NO RETROACTIVE EFFECT
Does the amendments made on the valuation of the

properties as determined by BCLP have retroactive effect?
 The average gross production for three normal crop years as

determined by Barangay Committee on Land Production
(BCLP) on July 12, 1988 shall remain effective. Any
amendment made thereto shall have no retroactive effect
to said valuation. Rather, amendments made thereto shall
only have prospective effect. It goes without saying that
Resolution No. 06-94 passed by the BCLP of Sefaran, Dinaig,
Maguindanao on 24 November 1994, will not affect the
annual gross production for three normal crop years as
determined by said BCLP on July 12, 1988.
January 16, 1997
VALUATION; BASIS
What is the basis for the valuation of lands?
 Executive Order No. 228 which took effect on 18 August

1987 mandates that the valuation of rice and corn lands
covered by PD 27 which were unvalued as of said date shall
be based on the AGP determined by the BCLP, in
accordance with Department Memorandum Circular No. 26,
s. 1973 and related issuances and regulations of the DAR
pursuant to said provision, DAR A.O. No. 2, Series of 1987
provides that the production agreement between the
landowner and the tenants shall be the basis for land
compensation only if said agreement had been forwarded to
DAR Central Office as of 18 August 1987.

November 14, 1995
VALUATION; FISHPONDS AND PRAWN FARMS
What is the guidelines for the valuation of fishponds and

prawn farms covered by CARP prior to the effectivity of RA
7881?
 Valuation of fishponds and prawnfarms covered by CARP

prior to the effectivity of R.A. No. 7881 shall be covered
under DAR Administrative Order No. 05, series of 1998
entitled, "Revised Rules and Regulations Governing the
Valuation of Lands Voluntarily Offered or Compulsorily
Acquired Pursuant to Republic Act No. 6657",

December 24, 1998
VALUATION; FORMULA
Which has the authority to determine land valuation?
 DAR Administrative Order No. 6, Series of 1992 (as amended

by DAR A.O. 11, Series of 1994) provides that basic formula
for the valuation of lands covered by Voluntary Offer to Sell
or Compulsory Acquisition pursuant to CARL. Under
Executive Order No. 405, the Land Bank of the Philippines
has the primary responsibility of determining the land
valuation and compensation for all lands covered under RA
6657.

November 28, 1994
How does the valuation of properties apply?
 The valuation of properties subject to CARP coverage is

fixed by law and invariably applies without distinction. This
valuation holds true regardless of whether the acquisition
of the subject property is the result of Voluntary Offer to
Sell (VOS) or Compulsory Acquisition (CA).

February 27, 1997
VALUATION; GRANT OF 6% INCREMENT
Is the landowner entitled to a 6% increment?
 Pursuant to Administrative Order No. 13, Series of 1994, it

provides for the grant of an increment of six percent (6%)
yearly interest compounded annually based on the land
value as determined under existing valuation formula. This
means that landowners who have not yet been paid for the
value of their lands are entitled to the 6% increment in
addition to the compensable value of the land, and this
applies to a case wherein a landowner have not yet
received any amount of compensation. On the other hand, if
he has been given the partial payment thereof, the yearly
interest of six percent (6%) compounded annually shall be
applied to the unpaid balance.

December 24, 1998
VALUATION; GUIDELINES UNDER A.O. 6, S. 1989 AS AMENDED

BY A.O. 6, S. 1992
Are the existing valuation guidelines applicable to all

agricultural lands enumerated under Section 4 of RA 6657?
 DAR Administrative Order No. 06, Series of 1989, as

amended by Administrative Order No. 6, Series of 1992 and
other succeeding guidelines on valuation, explicitly
provides that this valuation guideline shall apply to all
agricultural lands as enumerated under Section 4 of
Laws), which includes all public and private agricultural
suitable for agriculture, more specifically, as applied in the
instant case, Section 4 (c) thereof covering all other lands
owned by the government devoted to or suitable for
agriculture.

June 23, 1998
VALUATION; HIGHER PRICE FOR LAND COVERED BY P.D. 27
What does the law provide as the factors to be considered

in the valuation of lands?
 The valuation of lands covered by PD 27 is governed by Sec.
2 of EO 228 which expressly provides that "the valuation of
rice and corn lands covered by PD 27 shall be based on the
average gross production determined by the Brgy.
Committee on Land Production in accordance with
Memorandum Circular No. 26, Series of 1973 and related
issuances and regulation of the DAR.
 The average gross production per hectare shall be
multiplied by two and a half (2.5) the product of which shall
be multiplied by thirty five pesos (P35.00), the government
support price for one cavan of 50 kilos of palay on October
21, 1972, or thirty one pesos (P31.00), the government
support price for one cavan of 50 kilos of corn or rice and
corn lands, as the case may be, for the purpose of
determining its cost to the farmer and compensation to the
landowner.
 To address the problems of landowners who are
complaining of the lower valuation of their landholding, DAR
issued A.O. No. 13 Series of 1994 granting the increment of
six percent (6%) yearly interest compounded annually on
lands covered by PD 27 and EO No. 228.

December 13, 1996
VALUATION; HOW IS IT DONE
How is valuation done?
 If the sale is made in favor of private individuals, the

landowner may sell it at the price agreed upon between him
and the vendees. However, under VOS, valuation shall be
determined by the Land Bank of the Philippines according
to DAR Administrative Order No. 06, Series of 1992.

July 25, 1994
VALUATION; LAND VALUATION AND DETERMINATION OF JUST
COMPENSATION
How is just compensation determined?
 The basic provisions of law on land valuation and the

determination of just compensation are embodied in
Sections 16, 17 and 18 of R.A. No. 6657 in relation to DAR
Administrative Order No. 5, Series of 1998. Furthermore,
Executive Order No. 405 dated 14 June 1990, has vested in
the Land Bank of the Philippines the primary responsibility
to determine land valuation and compensation of all lands
covered under R.A. No. 6657.

December 23, 1999
VALUATION; LANDS COVERED BY P.D. NO. 27 (EXECUTIVE

ORDER NO. 228)
What is the valuation formula to lands covered by PD 27?
 Executive Order No. 228 has provided a fixed valuation

formula applicable to all lands covered by P.D. No. 27 which
shall be based on the Average Gross Production (AGP) as
determined by the Barangay Committee on Land Production
(BCLP). Land value is computed using the following formula:
Rice Lands LV = AGP x 2.5 x

P35*
Corn Lands LV = AGP x 2.5 x
P31**
* government support price for one cavan of 50
kilos of palay on 21 October 1972
** government support price for one cavan of 50
kilos of corn on 21 October 1972
July 17, 2000
VALUATION; LANDS COVERED UNDER P.D. 27
How are lands covered under P.D. No. 27 valued?
 Lands covered under P.D. 27 were valued by the DAR in

accordance with the formula specified therein, to wit: "two
and one-half (21/2) times the average harvest of three
normal crop years immediately preceding the promulgation
of the Decree." In lieu thereof, landowners and tenants
were allowed to enter into Landowner-Tenant Production
Agreements and the valuation of the lands covered thereby
was made in accordance therewith. For PD 27 lands not yet
valued as of the effectivity of E.O. No. 228 on 18 August
1987 Section 2 of said E.O. provides that "the valuation of
rice and corn lands covered by P.D. 27 shall be based on
the average gross production determined by the Barangay
Committee on Land Production in accordance with
Department Memorandum Circular No. 26, Series of 1973
and related issuances and regulation of the Department of
Agrarian Reform. The average gross production per hectare
shall be multiplied by Thirty Five pesos (P35.00), the
government support price for one cavan of 50 kilos of palay
on October 21, 1972, or Thirty One Pesos (P31.00) the
government support price for one cavan of 50 kilos of corn
on October 21, 1972, and the amount arrived at shall be the
value of the rice and corn land, as the case may be, for the
purpose of determining its cost to the farmer and
compensation to the landowner.

September 21, 1994
What laws shall govern the valuation of land under P.D.

27?
 The valuation of rice and corn lands covered by the decree
is governed by Executive Order No. 228, Section 2 which
provides that it "shall be based on the average gross
production determined by the Barangay Committee on Land
Production in accordance with Department Memorandum
Circular No. 26, series of 1973 and related issuances and
regulation of the Department of Agrarian Reform.

October 15, 1996
VALUATION; LANDS PLANTED TO SUGARCANE

What is the law governing the valuation of lands planted to
sugarcane?
 We could infer that the valuation of lands planted to

sugarcane is still based on the same basic formula as
established in DAR Administrative Order No. 6, series of
1992 and as amended under DAR Administrative Order No.
5, series of 1998. Said basic formula and the attendant
provisions of the aforementioned guidelines were not
repealed by Joint DAR-LBP Memorandum Circular No. 15,
series of 1999. The coverage of the latter guideline focuses
on the specific procedures prescribed therein for the
uniform application in the computation of the Capitalized
Net Income (CNI) factor, which is just one of a number of
factors to be considered in land valuation, and, where the
computed CNI shall still be applied in the applicable land
value formula under DAR Administrative Order No. 5, series
of 1998.
 Moreover, basic is the principle in statutory construction
that where two or more acts/rules cover the same subject
matter, the latter act or guideline will not operate as a
repeal of the earlier one if by any reasonable construction
they can be reconciled. The language of the
statute/guideline must be construed in relation to the
subject matter with which it deals. While DAR
Administrative Order No. 6, series of 1992, as amended by
DAR Administrative Order No. 05, series of 1998, covers the
basic formula for the valuation of lands covered by
voluntary offer to sell and compulsory acquisition, joint
DAR-LBP Memorandum Circular No. 15, series of 1999
merely included the effect of ratooning in the valuation of
sugar lands.
 Accordingly, the "whichever is lower" provision of DAR
Administrative Order No. 6, series of 1992, which was later
reworded as "shall in no case exceed" in case of VOS under
DAR Administrative Order No. 5, series of 1998, remains.

March 7, 2003
VALUATION; MEMBERS' LAND SHARES
Will DAR be involved in the determination of the value of

members' land shares? If yes, how will DAR value land
shares of the transferee and the transferor.
 Within the ten (10) year prohibitory period under Section 27

of R.A. No. 6657, the DAR shall be involved in the
determination of the value of member's land shares to
safeguard possible abuse in the transfer of awarded lands.
The qualified transferee may assume the rights of the
transferor or outgoing cooperative member, where the
transferee shall be obliged to pay the transferor's land
share based on the regular amortization cost of the land at
six percent (6%) interest rate per annum reckoned from the
date of award of the land.

July 14, 1999
VALUATION; OBJECTION; REMEDY THEREOF

What is the recourse of the landowners in case he
disagrees with the valuation of his landholding?
 The proper action in case the landowner is not amenable to

the valuation is to file a petition for the determination of
just compensation before the DARAB. The compensation for
the land shall be the amount agreed upon by the DAR, LBP
and the landowner in accordance with the criteria provided
for in Sections 17 & 18 and other pertinent provisions of
R.A. No. 6657 and existing guidelines, or the value set
under summary administrative proceedings conducted by
DAR pursuant to Section 16 (d) of R.A. No. 6657 and the
DAR Adjudication Board Revised Rules of Procedures, or as
may be finally determined by a competent court.

February 9, 1999
VALUATION; REMEDY IF THE LANDOWNER IS NOT SATISFIED
What is the remedy of the landowner who is not satisfied

with the valuation of his landholding?
 As for lands falling under the coverage of RA 6657, the

responsibility of determining compensation rests with the
Land Bank of the Philippines pursuant to E.O. No. 405 ,
Series of 1990. DAR Administrative Order No. 06 series of
1992 provides a basic formula for the valuation of lands
covered by Voluntary Offer to Sell and Compulsory
acquisition pursuant to CARL, taking into account the
factors enumerated in Section 17 thereof. If the landowner
is not satisfied with the valuation of his property, he may
file a case questioning the same before the Provincial
Adjudicator of the place where the property is situated.
Should he still not be satisfied with the decision of the DAR
Adjudication Board, he may petition the Special Agrarian
Court to resolve the issue of valuation.
September 21, 1994
VALUATION; UNREALISTIC VALUATION, WHERE TO APPEAL
Where to appeal in case of unrealistic valuation of the

landholding?
 If the valuation is unrealistic, it can be appealed to the

Office of the Secretary pursuant to DAR Memo Circular No.
01, Series of 1995, which provides:
"2. All land valuation cases which

involve just compensation issues under
Presidential Decree No. 27, may upon proper
motion be returned to the LBP for recomputation,
in accordance with the mandate under
Administrative Order No. 13, s. 1994. We would
like to inform all Adjudicators that the DARAB
does not have jurisdiction to hear and decide
valuation cases relative to PD No. 27, such
matters being considered as part of the
Administrative implementation of PD 27, and
therefore cognizable exclusively by the Office of
the Secretary . . . "
and may later appeal to the Special Agrarian
Court concerned for the final determination of just
compensation.

December 24, 1998
VENUE; SUMMARY PROCEEDING OF REFERRED CASES

 Section 7 (2) of Administrative Order No. 04, Series of 2009
explicitly stated that the venue of the proceeding shall be
in the province where the property involved is located.
However, the venue may be transferred to the Regional
Office if the parties to the referred case may move for the
transfer of venue for the conduct of the summary
proceeding and provided that said transfer will not cause
delay in the issuance of the certification.

June 29, 2010
VENUE; AGRARIAN DISPUTE
Where is the proper venue for agrarian dispute?
 Lahat ng usapin na may kaugnayan sa pagpapatupad ng

repormang pansakahan ay maaaring idulog sa
pinakamalapit na Tanggapan ng Repormang Pansakahan sa
lugar na kung saan ang lupain ay matatagpuan at doon ay
maaaring humingi ang isang magsasaka ng libreng serbisyo
ng abogado para kumatawan sa mga usaping may
kaugnayan sa pagpapatupad ng repormang pansakahan.

October 28, 1999
VLT; PROCESSING
 Processing of VLT transactions submitted by June 30, 2009

are still governed by RA 6657. Thus, issuance of collective
CLOAs can still be made, provided that the VLT had been
submitted by June 30, 2009 by the concerned landowners,
and the masterlist of ARBs has been finalized on or before
July 1, 2009, the effectivity of R.A. No. 9700.
September 9, 2010
VOLUNTARY LAND TRANSFER; INVOLVING LANDS COVERED BY

FREE PATENT
May lands covered by Free Patents be the subject of VLT-

Direct Payment Scheme under CARP?
 Lands covered by Free Patents may be the subject of

Voluntary Land Transfer – Direct Payment Scheme under
the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program of the
government, even within the 5-year prohibitory period from
and after the issuance of said patent.

August 14, 1996
VOLUNTARY LAND TRANSFER; MEANING
What is a Voluntary Land Transfer?
 Voluntary Land Transfer (VLT) is one of the scheme legally

recognized under R.A. No. 6657 which validly transfers the
ownership of an agricultural land. Pursuant to this scheme,
the landowner and the qualified beneficiaries agree to the
direct transfer of the ownership of land, as provided for
under Sec. 20 and 21 of R.A. No. 6657. The efficacy of VLT
is, however, subject to the terms to be mutually agreed
upon by both parties, which shall be binding upon
registration and approval of the DAR. Obviously, the
approval of the DAR is a pre-condition to the validity of said
scheme to ensure that the terms and conditions of the VLT
shall not be less favorable to the ARB than those of the
government's standing offer to purchase from the
landowner and to resell to the beneficiary, of such offer has
been made and is fully known to both parties. In any case,
it is incumbent upon the DAR to ensure that the ARB's are
made fully aware of and understand the options available to
them.

March 5, 1998
What does the VLT/DPS refer to?
 Acquisition of the property is clearly mandated by law and

that VLT/DPS Agreement only refers to the mode by which
the beneficiaries have chosen to pay the compensation on
the land.

October 10, 1994
VOLUNTARY LAND TRANSFER; REPRESENTATIVE

APPOINTED BY THE HEIRS OF THE DECEASED
LANDOWNER TO SIGN DOCUMENTS
 The children are the primary heirs of their deceased parent

and that the rights and obligations are automatically
transmitted to the children from the moment of the death of
their parents. (Art. 774 of the Civil Code of the Philippines)
Since the children acquire ownership by operation of law,
they may appoint anyone of them or any qualified person
thru a Special Power of Attorney to act as their
representative in any transaction that they may enter into
particularly in the administration of their deceased parent's
property.
 The representative appointed by the children may sign the
documents i.e., Notice/Application for VLT/DPS (Form No. 1,
VLT/DPS Agreement, Form No. 2) in case of Voluntary Land
Transfer/Direct Land Transfer (VLT/DLT). Accordingly, said
acts of representation by the representative shall produce
the same legal and binding effects as if they were
personally done by the other children.

December 20, 2007
VOLUNTARY LAND TRANSFER; VLT/DPS ALTHOUGH LEGAL IS

NOT ABSOLUTE
Is Voluntary Land Transfer/Direct Payment Scheme

(VLT/DPS) absolute?
 Although Sections 20 and 21 of Republic Act No. 6657

(Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law) allow VLT/DPS
scheme as valid and legal, the same is not absolute.
Specifically, DAR Administrative Order No. 02, series of
1995 expressly provides that "land titles with existing liens
and encumbrances shall not be covered under the VLT/DPS
scheme". Moreover, DAR Administrative Order No. 8, series
of 1997 categorically provides that lands mortgaged with
banking and/or financial institutions may not be the subject
of VLT/DPS (Item II. L). This prohibition was incorporated by
the DAR to simplify VLT/DPS transactions, particularly to
facilitate the immediate transfer of title to the Agrarian
Reform Beneficiaries (ARBs). Without this safeguard,
tenants might enter into VLT/DPS agreements with banks
which might sell agricultural lands foreclosed by them
under a selling price or terms and conditions grossly
disadvantageous and prejudicial to the tenants, which is
violative of Section 20 (b) of R.A. No. 6657.

December 24, 1998
VOLUNTARY OFFER TO SELL (VOS) APPLICATION; INSTANCES

IN WHICH THE DAR MAY REJECT
What are the instances in which the DAR may reject a VOS
application?
 "The DAR may reject a voluntary offer to sell under the

following instances:
There are no takers or willing agrarian reform beneficiaries

(ARBs) for valid reason (e.g., peace and order situation
prevailing in the area). This is without prejudice to future
coverage of the area under the CARP." (emphasis supplied)
February 27, 2002
VOLUNTARY OFFER TO SELL (VOS) APPLICATION; WHEN

MAY DAR REJECT A VOS?
 "The DAR may reject a voluntary offer to sell under the

following instances:
There are no takers or willing agrarian reform

beneficiaries (ARBs) for valid reason (e.g., peace and
order situation prevailing in the area). This is without
prejudice to future coverage of the area under the
CARP." (emphasis supplied)
February 27, 2002
DAR OPINION 2001-2006
April 25, 2006
VOLUNTARY OFFER TO SELL (VOS); AMENDMENT
Is amendment of VOS allowed?
 Amendment of VOS shall not as a matter of policy be

allowed or condoned except for just and valid ground in
order that CARP implementation will not be unduly delayed
or derailed. Furthermore, in no case should amendment of
VOS be allowed upon receipt by the landowner of the
corresponding payment or after deposit in cash or in LBP
bonds had been made. Section 16 (e) of R.A. No. 6657 is
explicit that in such cases, the DAR shall take immediate
possession of the land and shall request the proper
Register of Deeds to issue a Transfer Certificate of Title
(TCT) in the name of the Republic of the Philippines and
thereafter proceed with the distribution of the land to

February 9, 1999
VOLUNTARY OFFER TO SELL (VOS); PROPERTY WITH

ADVERSE CLAIMANT
 It is settled that registration under the Cadastral Act and

under Act 496 (An Act to Provide for the Adjudication and
Registration of Titles to Lands in the Philippine Islands),
both fall within the purview of the Torrens System.
 A Torrens title is incontrovertible against any "information
possessoria" or title existing prior to the issuance thereof
not annotated on the title. Also, in Rodriguez vs. Toreno,
G.R. No. L-29596, October 14, 1977, the High Court
pronounced that claims and liens of whatever character are
cut off by such certificate if not noted thereon, and the
certificate so issued binds the whole world, including the
government.
 If it is clear that no matter what the outcome of the
litigation may be, the land is still covered under CARP, then
the documentation of the Voluntary Offer to Sell may
proceed.

February 21, 2007
VOLUNTARY OFFER TO SELL (VOS); WITHDRAWAL, WHEN
ALLOWED
 As a general rule, withdrawal of VOS shall no longer be

allowed after the receipt by the DAR of the letter offer for
VOS. This is pursuant to DAR Administrative Order No. 06,
Series of 1997 (Revision of Administrative Order No. 5,
Series of 1992, Entitled: "Clarificatory Guidelines and
Amendments to Administrative Order No. 9, Series of 1990).
However, DAR may allow the withdrawal of voluntary offer
to sell if the withdrawal of VOS is for the purpose of
acquisition and compensation through the Voluntary Land
Transfer/Direct Payment Scheme (VLT/DPS), provided, that
the claim folder has not yet been forwarded to the LBP for
the computation of the land value (Item II[A] 2nd par.)

July 30, 2009
VOLUNTARY OFFER TO SELL; AGRICULTURAL LANDHOLDINGS

ACQUIRED ON OR AFTER 15 JUNE 1988
Whether or not agricultural landholdings transferred on or
after 15 June 1988 may be offered and subjected under the
VOS Scheme?
 We have to qualify, clarify and make distinctions with

respect to agricultural landholdings subject of VOS
acquired and/or transferred on or after 15 June 1988
(effectivity of R.A. no. 6657):
1. If what is transferred/acquired is the

retention area and the transferee will not own an
aggregate of more than 5 hectares, and, where there is a
DAR clearance issued pursuant to the provisions of DAR
Administrative Order No. 1, Series of 1989, the transfer is
legal and proper. The 3-month grace period is
immaterial/not applicable even if the execution and/or
registration of the deed of transfer is within or after the 3-
month period. The 3-month period mentioned under
paragraph 4, section 6 of R.A. No. 6657 contemplates only
those transfers executed prior to 15 June 1988. Thus,
subsequent VOS of said lands is legally allowed.
2. However, if what is transferred/acquired is
more than the 5-hectare retention area and/or the
transferee will own an aggregate of more than five (5)
hectares, the transfer is null and void insofar as the
excess of the 5-hectare retention limit or landowner
ceiling is concerned (Section 6, 1st and 4th paragraphs,
70, 73 (a) and DAR A.O. No. 1, series of 1989).
September 23, 2003
VOLUNTARY OFFER TO SELL; AMENDMENT OF VOS DUE TO

TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR
When is amendment to a VOS allowed?
 The landowner could be considered estopped from claiming

typographical error as a ground in amending its earlier offer
(Article 1431, Civil Code of the Philippines). Hence, cogent
and convincing proof must be presented to show that the
typographical error was indeed an honest oversight. We
should not just take the landowner's word for it for the
same might have been resorted to in order that a higher
compensation for the land might possibly be arrived at. It is
worth noting that it is eventually the determination of just
compensation pursuant to existing laws, rules and
regulations and not the amendment of a VOS offer which
should be the controlling guide or factor in the resolution of
the valuation of the property in the instant case. The
landowner should therefore wait for the revaluation by the
LBP and if it is not yet satisfied, it may file with the Special
Agrarian Court a petition for final determination of just
compensation since the DARAB had already initially acted
thereon.

February 9, 1999
VOLUNTARY OFFER TO SELL; APPLICATION FOR VOS

INVOLVING RETAINED AREAS
 "III. STATEMENT OF POLICIES
xxx xxx xx
x
Applications for VOS involving retained areas or those

landholding with an aggregate area of five (5) hectares
and below per landowner shall not be accepted."
 The above provision shall apply only to cases where the

total aggregate landholdings involved is 5 hectares and
below. In other words, its applicability would depend on the
total aggregate landholdings being offered for sale. If it is 5
hectares and below, the application for VOS shall be
denied.
 In the example given, it appears that the landowner owns 10
hectares. He is willing to offer entirely the 10 hectares
under the VOS Scheme without any intention of retaining
even just a portion of it. Under such circumstance, the
entire 10 hectares shall be accepted for VOS. This is the
intrinsic meaning of Section 2, Title III of A.O. No. 2, Series
of 2005.

October 18, 2006
VOLUNTARY OFFER TO SELL; AS A WAIVER OF THE RIGHT OF
RETENTION OVER AGRICULTURAL LANDS FORECLOSED OR
ACQUIRED
What does voluntary offer to sell constitute?
 With the issuance of A.O. No. 6, Series of 1997, the

voluntary offer to sell constitute a waiver of the right of
retention over agricultural lands foreclosed or acquired by
them because said lands are covered under CARP through
the compulsory acquisition scheme pursuant to Section 71
of R.A. No. 6657. Said provision of law provides that banks
may acquire title to mortgaged properties, subject to
and acquisition as prescribed under Section 16 of said Act.

January 09, 1998
 A landholding could not be the subject of VOS scheme since

the alleged landowner has no valid title over the land, the
same being still within the presidentially proclaimed
agrarian resettlement area owned by the state.
Accordingly, said landholding should be titled and
distributed to qualified beneficiaries, without prejudice to
the improvements introduced and right becoming a
beneficiary if likewise qualified pursuant to the provisions
of DAR Administrative Order No. 9, Series of 1989. Said
guideline implements and is in keeping with the legally
mandated principle that land has a social function and
there is a social responsibility in its ownership, hence, the
land shall be distributed to the actual tillers thereof within
the award limits as established by law.

May 6, 1998
VOLUNTARY OFFER TO SELL; INSTANCES WHERE LANDOWNERS
ARE ALLOWED TO WITHDRAW THEIR APPLICATION FOR THE
COVERAGE OF THEIR LANDHOLDING UNDER THE VOS SCHEME
Are landowners allowed to withdraw their application for

the coverage of their landholding under the VOS scheme?
 DAR Administrative Order No. 5, Series of 1992 provides the

instances under which landowners are allowed to withdraw
their application for the coverage of their landholding under
the VOS Scheme, to wit:
1. if the subject landholding is part of the

landowners retained area, provided the landowner has not
yet received any payment;
2. if the landowners want to shift the mode of
acquisition from VOS to Voluntary Land Transfer/Direct
Payment Scheme.
3. if the offered land is to be covered in 1994
and the landowner wants to wait for the compulsory
coverage under Phase III-B. If the Notice of Valuation has
been served, however, the withdrawal may no longer be
allowed.
4. if the DAR determines the landholding to be
more suitable for a town site, resettlement or institutional
site to address a calamity situation. It should be noted
that this case is limited to calamity situations. Further,
the approval of the withdrawal of the VOS does not
automatically authorize the land use conversion of the
land. The owner must still apply for conversion.

May 28, 1996
VOLUNTARY OFFER TO SELL; LAND PREVIOUSLY
DISTRIBUTED BY THE GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO P.D.
NO. 27
May land previously distributed by the government
pursuant to P.D. No. 27 be voluntary offered for sale?
 The following are the pertinent provisions of R.A. No. 6657,

P.D. No. 27 and DAR Administrative Order No. 8, series of
1995 (Rules and Procedures Governing the Transferability
Pursuant to Presidential Decree No. 27 as Amended by
Executive Order No. 228 and Republic Act No. 6657), to wit:
Section 4 (d), R.A. No. 665

"Section 4. Scope. —
xxx xxx xxx
(d) All private lands devoted to or suitable for

agriculture regardless of the agricultural products raised
or that can be raised thereon." (Emphasis supplied)
Section 7, R.A. No. 665
"Section 7. Priorities. — The DAR, in coordination with the

PARC shall plan and program the acquisition and distribution
of all agricultural lands through a period of ten (10) years from
the effectivity of this Act. Lands shall be acquired and
distributed as follows:
Phase One: Rice and corn lands under Presidential

Decree No. 27; all idle or abandoned lands; all private
lands voluntarily offered by the owners for agrarian
reform; all lands foreclosed by government financial
institutions. . . . (emphasis supplied)
Section 19, R.A. No. 6657
"Section 19. Incentives for Voluntary Offers for Sale.

— Landowners, other than banks and other financial
institutions, who voluntarily offer their lands for
sale shall be entitled to an additional five percent (5%)
cash payment." (emphasis supplied)
Paragraph 13, P.D. No. 27
"Title to land acquired pursuant to this Decree or the

Land Reform Program of the Government shall not be
transferable except by hereditary succession or to the
Government in accordance with the provisions of this
Decree, the Code of Agrarian Reform and other existing
laws and regulations." (emphasis supplied)
Item 1, 1st paragraph of DAR Administrative
Order No. 08, series of 199
Presidential Decree No. 27 provides that title to lands

acquired pursuant thereto or the Land Reform Program
of the Government shall not be transferable except by
hereditary succession or to the
Government." (emphasis supplied)
 In view of the aforementioned provisions of law, the

voluntary offer for sale to the government of lands devoted
to or suitable for agriculture may be allowed and given due
course.

May 9, 2003
VOLUNTARY OFFER TO SELL; RECOGNIZED MODE OF

ACQUISITION, PURPOSE
What is the purpose of VOS?
 VOS as one of the recognized modes of acquisition under RA

6657 is highly favored and encouraged because it ensures
the cooperation of landowners in having their properties
covered. Their cooperative acts as shown by their
willingness save not only the government valuable time in
acquiring agricultural lands for distribution to qualified-
beneficiaries but also from incurring tremendous expenses
incident thereto.

January 29, 1997
VOLUNTARY OFFER TO SELL; WITHDRAWAL
May the withdrawal of Voluntary Offer to Sell be allowed?
 Under the governing rules of Administrative Order No. 6,

Series of 1997 (Revision of Administrative Order No. 05,
Series of 1992, Entitled "Clarificatory Guidelines and
Amendments to Administrative Order No. 9, Series of 1990")
the same provide that "withdrawal of VOS shall no longer
be allowed after the latter of VOS, i.e., CARP Form No. 1
(Annex "A") is received by DAR. However, the DAR may
allow the withdrawal of VOS if the withdrawal of VOS is for
the purpose of acquisition and compensation through the
Voluntary Land Transfer/Direct Payment Scheme (VLT/DPS);
provided that, the claimfolder has not yet been forwarded
to the Land Bank of the Philippines for the computation of
the Land Value". Landholding subject of a VOS can no
longer be withdrawn under the aforestated Administrative
Order considering that the documentation of the
claimfolder have already been completed. Moreover, if the
reason for the VOS withdrawal does not fall under the
legally allowed exceptions since his justification was the
expropriation of the subject landholding by the provincial
government.

February 23, 1998

November 27, 1995
 Letter B and C of item No. III of DAR Administrative Order

No. 9, Series of 1990, provides that all lands which are
voluntary offered for sale to the government, may no longer
be withdrawn and shall immediately fall under Phase I, as
provided for in Section 7 of R.A. No. 6657. If the land is
tenanted, the farmer beneficiaries shall continue to pay
lease rental based on leasehold agreement until such time
as the landowner signs a Deed of Transfer or the Land Bank
of the Philippines makes a deposit in cash or in LBP bonds.
Moreover, Administrative Order No. 6, Series of 1997 further
provides that withdrawal of VOS shall no longer be allowed
after the letter offer of VOS is received by DAR. However,
the DAR may allow the withdrawal of the VOS if the same is
for the purpose of acquisition and compensation through
the Voluntary Land Transfer/Direct Payment Scheme and
provided that, the claim folder has not yet been forwarded
to the LBP for the computation of the land value.

January 9, 1998
VOS AS DISTINGUISHED TO VLT
 The Department had the occasion to elucidate on VLT in

DAR Opinion No. 32, Series of 1998 dated March 5, 1998.
"Voluntarily Land Transfer (VLT) is one of the scheme

legally recognized under R.A. No. 6657 which validly
transfers the ownership of an agricultural land.
Pursuant to this scheme, the landowner and the
qualified beneficiaries agree to the direct transfer of
the ownership of land, as provided for under Sec. 20
and 21 of R.A. No.6657. The efficacy of VLT is, however,
subject to the terms to be mutually agreed upon by both
parties, which shall be binding upon registration and
approval of the DAR. Obviously, the approval of the DAR
is a pre-condition to the validity of said scheme to
ensure that the terms and conditions of the VLT shall
not be less favorable to the ARB than those of the
government’s standing offer to purchase from the
landowner and to resell to the beneficiary, if such offer
has been made and is fully known to both parties. In
any case, it is incumbent upon the DAR to ensure that
the ARB’s are made fully aware of and understand the
options available to them."
This is different from VOS which is a scheme wherein
landowners come forward and offer their agricultural lands for
coverage under the agrarian reform program of the government.
March 24, 2009
VOS; WITHDRAWAL OF RETAINED AREA OFFERED UNDER VOS
May a landowner who voluntarily offered his retained area

for CARP coverage be allowed to withdraw his offer?
 Administrative Order No. 11, Series of 1990, particularly

Item III.D.2 thereof, provides that a landowner who
voluntarily offered his retained area for CARP coverage may
be allowed to withdraw his offer.
 Likewise, DAR Memorandum Circular No. 2, Series of 1998
(Compulsory Acquisition (CA) of Landholdings Covered by
Voluntary offer to Sell (VOS)), a more recent guideline
relative to DAR Administrative Order No. 6, series of 1997,
expressly acknowledges the retention right of a landowner
who has voluntarily offered his land when it provided that:
"3. If after 15 days these documents

have not been received, inform the LO that the
property will be acquired under CA, that he/she
may choose or pinpoint his/her retained area,
otherwise, the DAR will choose his/her retained
area (Sec. 6, RA 6657), and that he/she will no
longer be entitled to an additional 5% cash
payment (Sec. 19, RA 6657)." (underscoring and
emphasis supplied)

November 15, 1999
W
WRIT OF GARNISHMENT; ITS PURPOSE
What is the purpose of the writ of garnishment?
 The writ of execution issued by the DARAB Central Office

and the Notice of Garnishment issuance pursuant thereto
by the RTC-Manila cannot be primarily charged against the
assets of the Land Bank of the Philippines. While the writ of
garnishment is intended to protect the prevailing party
against possible fraudulent disposition of the bank's assets
to the prejudice of its creditors, the same is not exclusive.
Specifically, the satisfaction of the judgment should
necessarily be charged primarily against the ARF as
provided for by law and any other obligations which remain
unsettled, if any, may be satisfied against the asset of LBP.

February 9, 1998
HELP CENTER
How to Use the ERC Legal Information Archive
CONTACT INFORMATION
Department of Agrarian Reform
Elliptical Road, Diliman
Quezon City, Philippines
Tel. No.: (632) 928-7031 to 39
Copyright Information
All material contained in this site is copyrighted by the Department of Agrarian Reform unless
otherwise specified. For the purposes of this demo, information are intended to show a
representative example of a live site. All images and materials are the copyright of their
respective owners.

Dar Legal Opinions

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

Dar Legal Opinions

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Home

CARL (R.A. 6657, as amended) and Related Laws

History and Evolution of Major Agrarian Reform Laws

o Index of DAR Administrative Issuances (1972-2011)

Agrarian Law Implementation (ALI)

Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board

o General Memorandum Orders

 If he sells his right as tenant and allows another person to

DAR OPINION NO. 20, s. 1994

ABANDONMENT; TEMPORARY ABANDONMENT NOT A

 As far as abandonment of farm-holding is concerned, such

DAR OPINION NO. 29, s. 2008

ACCREDITATION OF NGO; NOT A CONDITION PRECEDENT

 No accreditation is required before an NGO can assist the

DAR OPINION NO. 45, s. 1997

ACQUISITION AND REDISTRIBUTION; AGRICULTURAL LANDS

 CARL mandates the acquisition and redistribution to

DAR OPINION NO. 76, s. 1995

ACQUISITION AND REDISTRIBUTION; FACTORS TO BE

 The schedule of acquisition and redistribution of all

DAR OPINION NO. 75, s. 1996

ACQUISITION; AGRICULTURAL LANDS BY LOCAL GOVERNMENT

 The Supreme Court held in the case of Province of

DAR OPINION NO. 81, s. 1999

ACQUISITION; AGRICULTURAL LANDS SUBJECT OF

Section 72 (b) of R.A. No. 6657 further provides:

 In the acquisition of agricultural lands both under R.A. No.

DAR OPINION NO. 83, s. 1999

ACQUISITION; A.O. NO. 02, SERIES OF 2005 GENERALLY HAS

 "V. Transitory provisions

This Administrative Order shall apply even to claims

ACQUISITION; APPLICABLE TO BOTH SMALL AND BIG

 Pursuant to Republic Act No. 6657 ( Comprehensive Agrarian

DAR OPINION NO. 12, s. 2006

 In cases where there are pending applications for

DAR OPINION NO. 09, s. 1999

 A natural born citizen of the Philippines, though now an

DAR OPINION NO. 70, s. 1996

ACQUISITION; CORPORATION OF FILIPINO OWNERSHIP MAY

 A corporation of Filipino ownership can acquire said lands

DAR OPINION NO. 34, s. 1997

ACQUISITION; DISTINGUISHED FROM DISTRIBUTION; TWO

 Section 18 of R.A. No. 6657 provides, quote: "Valuation and

 From the aforequoted provisions of law and learning from

DAR OPINION NO. 102, s. 1997

ACQUISITION; DOCUMENTATION PROCESS MUST PROCEED

 It is the DAR's primary mandate to acquire and distribute

ACQUISITION; EFFECT OF AN APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION/

 "Section 16. Procedure for Acquisition of Private Lands — . . .

 The aforequoted provision of law presupposes that there is

DAR OPINION NO. 09, s. 1999

ACQUISITION; EXEMPT NON-AGRICULTURAL LANDS, SUBJECT

 The prohibition under CARL relative to retention limit in

 However, while the subject landholding is undeveloped and

 Consequently, any person whether natural or juridical, can

ACQUISITION; FORECLOSED AGRICULTURAL LAND

 In the instant case, the bank (DBP) may, however, dispose

2. Section 6 of R.A. 7881 provides the

 The net effect of the aforequoted provision is to allow

DAR OPINION NO. 33, s. 2006

ACQUISITION; FORECLOSED AGRICULTURAL LAND

 Concerning your second query in relation to the third query,

". . . As the mortgage had ceased to exist upon the