Boracay: Beach or Forest?

Secretary vs. Yap
(G.R. No. 167707,October 8, 2008)

Several persons want to secure titles over lands in Boracay. They declared that they had been in open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession and occupation in Boracay since time immemorial. They also argued that they invested billions of pesos in developing their lands and building internationally renowned first class resorts on their lots. Do these give them the right to apply for a title to the land they are presently occupying?

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

No. Boracay Island (prior to Proclamation No. 1064 of May 22, 2006) had not been classified as alienable and disposable, whatever possession they had cannot ripen into ownership. The Regalian Doctrine dictates that all lands of the public domain belong to the State, that the State is the source of any asserted right to ownership of land and charged with the conservation of such patrimony. (visit fellester.blogspot.com) All lands not otherwise appearing to be clearly within private ownership are presumed to belong to the State. xxx A positive act declaring land as alienable and disposable is required. In keeping with the presumption of State ownership, the Court has time and again emphasized that there must be a positive act of the government, such as an official proclamation,] declassifying inalienable public land into disposable land for agricultural or other purposes. (G.R. No. 167707, Secretary of DENR v. Yap, October 8, 2008)

The 1987 Constitution classified lands of the public domain into agricultural, forest or timber and National Parks. Of these, only agricultural lands may be alienated. Prior to Proclamation No. 1064 of May 22, 2006, Boracay Island had never been expressly and administratively classified under any of these grand divisions. What is then the classification of Boracay prior to Proc. No. 1064?

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

Forest. PD No. 705 categorized all unclassified lands of the public domain as public forest. xxx Nevertheless, that the occupants of Boracay have built multi-million peso beach resorts on the island; that the island has already been stripped of its forest cover; or that the implementation of Proclamation No. 1064 will destroy the island’s tourism industry, do not negate its character as public forest. The classification is descriptive of its legal nature or status and does not have to be descriptive of what the land actually looks like. (Heirs of Amunategui v. Director of Forestry)


President can classify lands of Public Domain

Sometime in 2006, President Arroyo issued Proclamation No. 1064 classifying Boracay into reserved forest and agricultural land. It was such Proclamation which positively declared part of Boracay as alienable and opened the same to private ownership. Petitioners filed petition to nullify Proc. No. 1064. They argued that since Boracay is a public forest under PD No. 705, President Arroyo can no longer convert it into an agricultural land without running afoul the provisions of the CARL. Is the argument of the petitioners tenable?

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

No. In issuing Proclamation No. 1064, President Arroyo merely exercised the authority granted to her to classify lands of the public domain, presumably subject to existing vested rights. Classification of public lands is the exclusive prerogative of the Executive Department, through the Office of the President. Courts have no authority to do so. Absent such classification, the land remains unclassified until released and rendered open to disposition. Proclamation No. 1064 does not violate the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law. Moreover, the prohibition under the CARL applies only to a “reclassification” of land. If the land had never been previously classified, as in the case of Boracay, there can be no prohibited reclassification under the agrarian law. (G.R. No. 173775, Sacay v. Secretary of DENR, October 8, 2008)