Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Doj 44 Case Template
Doj 44 Case Template
I.
INTRODUCTION
This template serves as a guide in resolving exemption cases which fall under
DOJ Opinion No. 44, specifically exemptions based on reclassification to industrial,
residential and commercial zones. DOJ Opinion No. 44 states that "the authority of
the DAR to approve or disapprove conversions of agricultural lands to nonagricultural uses applies only to conversions made on or after June 15, 1988, the
date of effectivity of R.A. No. 6657".
II.
[ ]
[ ]
OR of inspection fee
[ ]
Sworn Application for CARP Exemption or Exclusion, duly accomplished, and
subscribed and sworn to before a notary public or any person authorized to
administer oaths.
[ ]
Special Power of Attorney (SPA) if the applicant is not the registered owner
nor one of the co-owners of the property.
[ ]
Notarized secretary's certificate of a corporate or cooperative board
resolution authorizing the applicant's representative to file the Sworn Application for
CARP Exemption if the applicant is a corporation or cooperative or some other
juridical entity.
[ ]
[ ]
True copy of the Original Certificate of Title (OCT) or Transfer Certificate of
Title (TCT) of the subject land, certified by the Register of Deeds not earlier than
thirty (30) days prior to the application filing date.
[ ]
Certification from the DENR Community Environment and Natural Resources
Officer (CENRO) that the landholding has been classified as alienable and
disposable, and
[ ]
Certification from the DENR CENRO (for administrative confirmation of
imperfect title) or the Clerk of Court (for judicial confirmation of imperfect title) that
the titling process/proceeding has commenced and there are no adverse claimants.
[ ]
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.
[ ]
Certification of the National Irrigation Administration (NIA) that the area is
not irrigated nor scheduled for irrigation rehabilitation nor irrigable with firm funding
commitment.
[ ]
Certification of the Municipal Agrarian Reform Officer (MARO) attesting
compliance with the public notice requirement in Part III hereof and its
corresponding report in 7.6 hereof.
[ ]
Photographs, size 5R (five [5] inches by seven [7] inches), using color film,
and taken on the landholding under sunlight. The applicant shall attach the pictures
to a paper background and the photographer who took said pictures shall sign on
said paper background to certify the authenticity of the pictures. On each
background paper shall be written a short description of each picture. The pictures
shall consist of:
[ ]
Four (4) photographs taken from the center of the landholding: one (1)
facing north, one (1) facing east, one (1) facing south, and one (1) facing west;
[ ]
One (1) photograph per corner, taken from each corner of the landholding's
borders;
[ ]
Two (2) photographs each for all distinct man-made structures existing on
the land, taken from opposite angles;
[ ]
Two (2) photographs each of the front view of the billboard(s) required in
Section 11 hereof.
[ ]
Sufficient number of photographs of the most conspicuous landmarks from
the nearest barangay center and leading to and from the ingress and egress routes
at the subject landholding, for the purpose of assisting the ocular inspection team in
locating the site.
[ ]
Proof of receipt of payment of disturbance compensation or a valid
agreement to pay or waive payment of disturbance compensation.
[ ]
[ ]
The number and names of the farmers, agricultural lessees, share tenants,
farmworkers, actual tillers, and/or occupants in the landholding; if there are no such
persons, a statement attesting to such fact;
[ ]
That the applicant has erected the required number of billboards and
undertakes not to remove, deface or destroy said billboard, and that he shall repair
or replace the same when damaged, until after the approving authority disposes of
the application with finality;
[ ]
That he has not committed any act of forum shopping as defined in the
rules governing Agrarian Law Implementation (ALI) cases; and
[ ]
That when there is a dispute on the fixing of disturbance compensation
pending before the Provincial Agrarian Reform Adjudicator (PARAD) or Regional
Agrarian Reform Adjudicator (RARAD) or DAR Adjudication Board (DARAB), the
applicant shall abide with the decision of the Adjudicating Authority on the fixing of
disturbance compensation.
[ ]
Lot plan
[ ]
[ ]
Certifications issued by HLURB 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.
[ ]
For lands classified as mineral: certification issued by the DENR Mines and
Geosciences Bureau or the proper DENR office attesting that the subject land is
classified as mineral and covered by a mining permit issued by said Bureau or
proper Local Government Unit in case of small scale mines.
[ ]
For lands classified as forest: certification issued by the DENR Forestry
Sector or the proper DENR office attesting that the subject land is classified within
the forest zone.
Tourism (Note: this template applies by analogy but this is not covered by DOJ
Opinion No. 44):
[ ]
Presidential Decree/Law
[ ]
[ ]
Find out if the application was accompanied by the required supporting documents
in the checklist above.
1.
If the documents are complete, proceed with the decision of the case.
2.
The RCLUPPI/CLUPPI must return the application to the applicant and require
him to submit the lacking documents (see accompanying flowchart)
3.
If the incomplete application was inadvertently accepted, the
RCLUPPI/CLUPPI may issue an interlocutory order, within a specific period, requiring
the applicant to complete the documentary requirements. If the order was not
complied with, DISMISS.
III.
JURISDICTION
The Secretary upon recommendation of Center for Land Use Policy Planning
and Implementation 2 (CLUPPI-2), if the land has an area larger than five (5)
hectares.
the same barangay or within two (2) or more barangays that are adjacent to each
other and the sum of the areas of said parcels of land exceeds five (5) hectares.
IV.
STANDING
1.
Any landowner
2.
Must present a duly notarized Special Power of Attorney (within 1 year from
execution)
3.
a.
If estate is settled, present Deed of Settlement/Partition, or decree of
partition issued by the court;
b.
If estate is not yet settled, present death certificate and SPA which
authorizes him/her to represent all the heirs.
Any person may file a written protest against the application within thirty (30)
days from posting of the requisite billboard(s) or within fifteen (15) days from the
conduct of ocular inspection whichever is later. (Item IX, 9.1 of DAR A.O. 4, Series of
2003)
V.
TIMELINESS
Upon DAR receipt of the protest for coverage, landowner is given another thirty
(30) days to substantiate his or her application for exemption from CARP coverage.
If there are CLOAs/EPs registered over the land, consider the indefeasibility
principle. Deny if the application was filed more than 1 year from registration.
VI.
DECISION
(Basis: Administrative Order No. 03, series of 1995 and R.A. No. 6657, as
amended)
1.
2.
a.
If the subject landholding is within the protected area but its use is
agricultural (or not actually, directly, and exclusively and not found to be necessary
for protected areas)
If the agricultural use is still consistent with its being a protected area as in
agro-forestry, the landholding is exempt from CARP. Otherwise, deny the application
for exemption and place the subject landholding under the coverage of CARP.
b.
Deny the application for exemption. The use of the land may still be
regulated in order to avoid or minimize harm to the protected area.
c.
If there is an allegation that the title of the application is void on the ground
that the subject landholding has not been declared alienable and disposable
1.
What if the land was reclassified prior to 15 June 1988 but the actual use is
still for agricultural purposes? (If it is still an irrigated land?)
Answer:
a)
Exempt if there is valid reclassification prior to 15 June 1988. Legal Basis:
DOJ 44
b)
2.
What if there are tenants occupying the land or Notice of Coverage was
already issued when the exemption application was filed?
Answer:
a)
If the land is tenanted, the tenants have the right to be paid disturbance
compensation.
b)
If Notice of Coverage has already been issued, the application will serve as
an opposition/protest.
Note further that Notice of Coverage is different from Notice of Valuation and
Acquisition, the latter being a Notice that the property has already been transferred
to the government.
3.
Answer:
Also, Anderson Co. vs. IAC (G.R. No. L-65928, June 21, 1988) provides that the
ordinance should be given prospective operation only.
No exemption/conversion.
4.
What if the land was reclassified for non-agricultural use prior to 15 June
1988, but then subsequently reclassified for agricultural use after 15 June 1988?
Answer:
Reverted to agricultural classification. Take note of the time when the Order of
Reversion was issued and the exemption clearance.
5.
Answer:
If there are already improvements on the land to the effect that it can no
longer be used for agricultural purposes, NO.
If the land has never been touched or used for purposes other than
agricultural, YES.
6.
What if the basis for reclassification is only a resolution (instead of the
original question referring to an ordinance) which is in turn a general Land Use Plan
without specifying the metes and bounds for such reclassification?
Answer:
7.
Note that the DAR does not have jurisdiction to determine the validity of an
ordinance. In such a case where the oppositor goes to court in an effort to
determine the validity of the ordinance, what will the DAR do in the meantime?
8.
Answer:
a)
Deny Application
b)
Accept?
9.
What if city approves before June 15, 1988 but HLURB certification states
only after June 15, 1988?
DENY. Two requirements must be complied with before June 15, 1988.
1.
The subject landholding is classified as within the agricultural zone based on
the Zoning Ordinance or Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) of the LGU approved
by the HLURB prior to 15 June 1988. A protest based on this ground shall not be
given due course unless the oppositor invoking said ground submits the necessary
certification from the HLURB Regional Office or the proper government agency.
2.
The subject property has been covered by Operation Land Transfer (OLT)
under P.D. No. 27.
VII.
APPEALS
The appeals from the decision of the Regional Director may be filed within
fifteen (15) days from receipt of said decision in the same regional office which
issued the adverse decision.
VIII.
1.
LAWS:
a.
Section 3 (C) of RA 6657, "Agricultural Land refers to land devoted to
agricultural activity as defined in this Act and not classified as mineral, forest,
residential, commercial or industrial land."
b.
Section 4, of RA 6657, "The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1989
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.
(a)
All inalienable and disposable lands of the public domain devoted to or
suitable for agriculture. No reclassification of forest or mineral lands to agricultural
lands shall be undertaken after the approval of this Act until Congress, taking into
account ecological, developmental and equity considerations, shall have
determined by law, the specific limits of the public domain.
(b)
All lands of the public domain in excess of the specific limits as determined
by Congress in the preceding paragraph;
(c)
All other lands owned by the Government devoted to or suitable for
agriculture; and
(d)
All private lands devoted to or suitable for agriculture regardless of the
agricultural products raised or that can be raised thereon."
2.
RULES:
DOJ Opinion No. 44 Series of 1990 "The authority of the DAR to approve or
disapprove conversions of agricultural lands to non-agricultural uses applies only to
conversions made on or after June 15, 1988, the date of effectivity of R.A. No. 6657"
3.
JURISPRUDENCE:
Sec. 4 of R.A. No. 6657 states that the CARL covers "regardless of tenurial
arrangement and commodity produced, all public, and, private and agricultural
lands" and as the transcripts of the Constitutional Commission show, "agricultural
lands" covered by agrarian reform refers only to those which are "arable and
suitable lands" and "do not include commercial, industrial and residential lands."
The land subject of the controversy has been set aside for the Lungsod Silangan
Reservation by Proclamation No. 1637 prior to the effectivity of R.A. No. 6657 and in
effect converted these lands into residential use. Since the Natalia lands were
converted prior to 15 June 1988, DAR is bound by such conversion, and thus it was
an error to include these within the coverage of CARL. (Natalia Realty, Inc. vs. DAR,
225 SCRA 278)
"In the case at bar, there is no final order of conversion. The subject landholding
was merely reclassified. Conversion is different from reclassification. Conversion is
the act of changing the current use of a piece of agricultural land into some other
use as approved by the Department of Agrarian Reform. Reclassification, on the
other hand, is the act of specifying how agricultural lands shall be utilized for non-
Thus, the DAR Regional Office VII, in coordination with the Philippine Tourism
Authority, has to determine precisely which areas are for tourism development and
excluded from the Operation Land Transfer and the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Program. And suffice it to state here that the Court has repeatedly ruled that lands
already classified as non-agricultural before the enactment of RA 6657 on 15 June
1988 do not need any conversion clearance. (DAR v. Franco, G.R. No. 147479,
September 26, 2005, 471 SCRA 74)
The power to determine whether Haciendas Palico, Banilad and Caylaway are
non-agricultural, hence, exempt from the coverage of the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Law lies with the Department of Agrarian Reform, not with this Court.