G.R. No. 183409 - Chamber of Real Estate and Builders Associations, Inc. vs. Secretary of Agrarian Reform

Petitioner: Chamber of Real Estate and Builders Associations, Inc. (CREBA), a private, non-stock, non-profit corporation representing approximately 3,500 entities involved in land and housing development, construction, engineering, architecture, community planning, and related services.
Respondent: Secretary of Agrarian Reform, head of the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR), whose administrative issuances are challenged.
Nature of the Case: Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition under Rule 65 of the 1997 Revised Rules of Civil Procedure to nullify and prohibit enforcement of DAR Administrative Order No. 01-02 (as amended by AO No. 05-07) and DAR Memorandum No. 88, alleging grave abuse of discretion, illegality, and unconstitutionality.

DAR AO No. 07-97 (issued 29 October 1997): Omnibus Rules for conversion of agricultural lands to non-agricultural uses consolidating existing guidelines; covered private agricultural lands regardless of tenure and implement LGU reclassifications after 15 June 1988.
DAR AO No. 01-99 (issued 30 March 1999): Revised rules on land use conversion updating previous order; covered conversion to residential, commercial, industrial, or institutional uses, conversions exempting CARP coverage, reclassifications after 15 June 1988, among others.
DAR AO No. 01-02 (issued 28 February 2002): Comprehensive Rules further amending previous AO No. 07-97 and AO No. 01-99; repealed inconsistent issuances; covered all applications for land use conversion.
DAR AO No. 05-07 (issued 2 August 2007): Amended provisions of AO No. 01-02, particularly regarding land conversion during exigencies and calamities.
DAR Memorandum No. 88 (issued 15 April 2008): Temporarily suspended processing and approval of all land use conversion applications to address the unabated conversion of prime agricultural lands and associated issues like rice shortage.

Petitioners argue that the DAR Secretary lacks jurisdiction over lands already reclassified by LGUs or presidential proclamation to residential, commercial, industrial, or other non-agricultural uses.
AO No. 01-02 as amended improperly expands the legal definition of "agricultural lands" to include lands reclassified after 15 June 1988, effectively subjecting them to DAR’s conversion authority, which petitioners contend is ultra vires and unconstitutional.
The administrative order violates Section 65 of RA 6657 (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law), which does not confer jurisdiction over non-awarded or reclassified lands post-reclassification.
Petitioners claim that AO No. 01-02 infringes on local government units’ (LGUs) autonomy under Section 20 of RA 7160 (Local Government Code) and constitutional mandates on local autonomy (Sections 2 and 25, Articles II and X, 1987 Constitution).
Alleged violation of due process and equal protection clauses due to arbitrary deprivation of property rights and discriminatory treatment favoring the peasantry.
DAR Memorandum No. 88 is challenged as an invalid exercise of police power and unconstitutional for suspending land use conversion without legal basis.
Petitioner argues there is a slowdown in housing projects causing housing shortage, unemployment, and squatting, prejudicing the public and petitioner’s members.

Whether the DAR Secretary has jurisdiction over lands that have been reclassified as residential, commercial, industrial, or for other non-agricultural uses.
Whether the DAR Secretary acted in excess of jurisdiction and grave abuse of discretion by issuing and enforcing DAR AO No. 01-02 (as amended) which regulates reclassified lands.
Whether DAR AO No. 01-02 (as amended) violates local autonomy of LGUs under the Local Government Code and the Constitution.
Whether DAR AO No. 01-02 (as amended) violates due process and equal protection constitutional guarantees.
Whether DAR Memorandum No. 88 is a valid exercise of police power.