LEGAL OPINION

FOR THE WEEK

DILG Opinion No. 62 S. 2019

 ISSUES:

Whether or not mere sanggunian resolutions are

sufficient to validate and effect the exchange of
barangay road with a private property.

Whether or not DILG MC 2019-121 covers then

barangay road turned into private property by
virtue of said sanggunian barangay and
sanggunian bayan resolutions.
2
 FACTS:
◉ A Barangay road in Sitio Buybuyan, Locloc,
Bauan was sandwiched between two parcels of
land owned by Mr. Maramot;
◉ Mr. Maramot suggested that his property on the
east side be donated to the barangay in
exchange of the part of the barangay road
adjacent to his property on the west side;
◉ Barangay issued a resolution blessing the
construction of the barangay road on the
property of Mr. Maramot on the west side.
3
 FACTS:
◉ Thereafter, Sanggunian Bayan of Bauan,
Batangas also issued a resolution allowing
Mr. Maramot to construct a barangay road on
his lot;
◉ This Department issued Memorandum
Circular No. 2019-121 relative to the
Presidential Directive during the 4th State of
the Nation Address of the President to Clear
Roads of Illegal Structures and Constructions
4
 FIRST ISSUE:

Whether or not mere sanggunian

resolutions are sufficient to validate
and effect the exchange of barangay
road with a private property.

5
 Barangay road is a property for public
use and is outside the commerce of
man. It cannot be subject of a
contractual undertaking. Accordingly,
the subject barangay road and property
owned by Mr. Maramot would have to
be covered by a contractual undertaking
for said exchange to be effected.

6
 DACANAY VS. ASISTIO
“There is no doubt that the disputed areas from
which the private respondents’ market stalls are
Accordingly,
sought any agreement
to be evicted on theassame
are public streets, found
would be considered
by the trial void.
court in Civil CaseBeing void, any
No. C-12921. A
subsequent
public street resolution
is property onfor the same
public usewould
hence
have no legal
outside the commerce of manbasis.
(Arts. 420, 424,
Civil Code). Being outside the commerce of man,
it may not be the subject of lease or other
contract.
7
 Notwithstanding, we deemed it prudent to emphasize that in
this case, the Sanggunian Bayan and Sanggunian Barangay
caused Mr. Maramot to believe that said exchange of
properties and consequential constructions are legal by virtue
of issuance of said resolutions. Also, for seven (7) years from
the time the consequential constructions were accomplished,
said local governments did not object nor disapprove the
same through the non-issuance of building permit, if any. It is
also noted that the barangay started using the west-wing
property of Mr. Maramot as the new barangay road.
Consequently, damages may be sustained on the part of Mr.
Maramot if clearing of said structures will be conducted.
8
 SECOND ISSUE:

Whether or not DILG MC 2019-121

covers then barangay road turned
into private property by virtue of said
sanggunian barangay and
sanggunian bayan resolutions.

9
 The subject property is under DILG MC No. 2019-
121. However, please note that what the MC
directs the pertinent LGUs to revoke are permits.
What was issued here was not merely a permit but
sanggunian resolutions. MC Provides that when it
comes to legislative measures, such as in this case
i.e. Sanggunian resolutions, the local sanggunians
are enjoined to revisit to ensure responsiveness to
this presidential directive and consistency with
related laws and policies.
10
 “
Thus, the respective LGUs herein
involved are expected to revisit
legislative measures issued for
purposes as above-mentioned.
11
12