Cancellation of titles issued under the Agrarian Reform Program

The State recognizes the indefeasibility of Certificate of Land Ownership Award (CLOA), Emancipation Patent (EP) and other titles issued under any agrarian reform program. However, CLOAs, EPs and other titles erroneously issued do not attain indefeasiblity.

The titles generated and distributed pursuant to the agrarian reform program form an integral part of the property registration and enjoy the same respect accorded to other modes of acquiring title to lands. Taking into account the detailed procedure in the generation of these titles, flaws and issues may arise resulting to the erroneous issuance of the defined titles. As a consequence, titles of this nature shall be cancelled but only on grounds prescribed by existing rules and regulations and strictly observing the provisions of PD1529. The cancellation of the registered EPs, CLOAs and other titles issued under any agrarian reform program are within the exclusive and original jurisdiction of the Secretary of DAR. 

Dismissal based on pure technicality

Rules of procedure are tools to facilitate a fair and orderly conduct of proceedings. Strict adherence thereto must not get in the way of achieving substantial justice. So long as their purpose is sufficiently met and no violation of due process and fair play takes place, the rules should be liberally construed, especially in agrarian cases. There is nothing sacred about the forms of pleadings or processes, their sole purpose being to facilitate the application of justice to the rival claims of contending parties. Hence, pleadings as well as procedural rules should be construed liberally. Dismissal of appeals purely on technical grounds is frowned upon because rules of procedure should not be applied to override substantial justice. Courts must proceed with caution so as not to deprive a party of statutory appeal; they must ensure that all litigants are granted the amplest opportunity for the proper and just ventilation of their causes, free from technical constraints. If the foregoing tenets are followed in a civil case, their application is made more imperative in an agrarian case where the rules themselves provide for liberal construction. It must be stressed that the purpose of the notice of appeal is not to detail one's objections regarding the appealed decision; that is the purpose of the appellants' memorandum. In the context of a DARAB case, the notice of appeal serves only to inform the tribunal or officer that rendered the appealed decision of the timeliness of the appeal and the general reason for the appeal, and to prepare the records thereof for transmission to the appellate body (RARAD, San Fernando, Pampanga, et al v. CA, et al; G.R. No. 165155. April 13, 2010).

HAM Radio, a hobby of a lifetime.

HAM Radio is my hobby. With my High Frequency (HF) Kenwood TS 430S radio, communication with the world is just amazing. Known as DU4ABA in the association of HAM radio operators around the globe, keeping in touch with people through the medium of wireless communication, without seeing or meeting them, foster international friendship and camaraderie.
Such a unique hobby, however, must not interfere with the duties you owe to your work, home & family.

The Supreme Court has finally spoken

We cannot permit the meaning of the Constitution to be stretched to any unintended point in order to suit the purposes of any quarter.

It has been insinuated as part of the polemics attendant to the controversy we are resolving that because all the Members of the present Court were appointed by the incumbent President, a majority of them are now granting to her the authority to appoint the successor of the retiring Chief Justice.

The insinuation is misguided and utterly unfair.

The Members of the Court vote on the sole basis of their conscience and the merits of the issues. Any claim to the contrary proceeds from malice and condescension. Neither the outgoing President nor the present Members of the Court had arranged the current situation to happen and evolve as it has. None of the Members of the Court could have prevented the Members composing the Court when she assumed the Presidency about a decade ago from retiring during her prolonged term and tenure, for their retirements were mandatory. Yet, she is now left with an imperative duty under the Constitution to fill up the vacancies created by such inexorable retirements within 90 days from their occurrence. Her official duty she must comply with. So must we ours who are trusted by the Constitution to settle the controversy (Arturo M. De Castro, et al v. Judicial Bar Council and Pres. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo; denying with finality the Motion for Reconsideration of Petitioners).

Landowners' rights

The noble purpose of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law to emancipate the tenants from the bondage of the soil and to transfer to them the ownership of the lands they till should not be the guise to trample upon the landowners' rights by including lands that are unquestionably outside the coverage of the CARL. Neither should such noble intention be frustrated by designating beneficiaries who are neither tenants or tillers of the land, nor otherwise qualified under the law to be the beneficiaries of land reform (DAR v. Pablo Berenguer, et al. G.R. No. 154094. March 9, 2010).