Case Digest (G.R. No. 226176)
Facts:
National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP), together with several Pala’wans, filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45, Rules of Court against Macroasia Corporation seeking to reverse the Court of Appeals' Amended Decision directing NCIP to issue a Certification Precondition. The parties subsequently entered into a Compromise Agreement (dated February 1, 2023), with Macroasia Corporation assigning its rights to Macroasia Mining Corporation, and jointly moved for judgment based on that agreement.Issues:
- Whether the Compromise Agreement was validly executed and not contrary to law so as to justify dismissal of G.R. No. 226176.
- Whether the Court should grant the Joint Motion to Render Judgment Based on Compromise Agreement and close and terminate the cas
Case Digest (G.R. No. 226176)
Facts:
- Parties and procedural posture
- National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) and individual petitioners Zenaida Brigida Hamadapawid, Dionesia O. Banua, Conchita C. Calzado, Percy Brawner, Cosme Lambayon, Santos Unsad, and Basilio Wandag (collectively, petitioners) filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 seeking to reverse and set aside the Court of Appeals' Amended Decision dated March 14, 2016 and Resolution dated August 9, 2016, and to reinstate the CA Decision dated April 22, 2015 in CA-G.R. SP No. 124632.
- Macroasia Corporation (respondent), later represented and assigned by Macroasia Mining Corporation, opposed the petition and subsequently filed a Joint Motion to Render Judgment Based on Compromise Agreement dated February 21, 2023, submitting a Compromise Agreement dated February 1, 2023.
- The Office of the Solicitor General, on behalf of NCIP, manifested and joined the Motion to Render Judgment Based on Compromise Agreement in a Manifestation and Motion dated March 30, 2023.
- Mineral titles, administrative processes, and prior agency determinations
- Macroasia Corporation was issued Mineral Production Sharing Agreement (MPSA) No. 220-2005-IVB in December 2005 following conversion of old mining leases, covering 1,114 hectares in Barangays Ipilan, Mambalot, and Maasin, Municipality of Brooke’s Point, Province of Palawan.
- On the strength of MPSA No. 220-2005-IVB, Macroasia Corporation conducted exploration and pursued permits from the Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB), which required endorsement to NCIP for the conduct of the *Free and Prior Informed Consent* (*FPIC*) process and issuance of a Certification Precondition.
- NCIP issued a Certificate of Compliance on March 17, 2006, certifying that Macroasia Corporation complied with procedures including the Field Based Investigation (FBI).
- In March 2010, the NCIP Regional Office directed the conduct of the FPIC process; the FPIC Team conducted FPIC with respect to the Pala'wan Indigenous Cultural Communities/Indigenous Peoples (ICCs/IPs) of Barangays Ipilan, Mambalot, and Maasin.
- On April 21, 2010, Pala'wan leaders of Barangays Ipilan, Mambalot, and Maasin issued a Joint Resolution of Consent and executed a Memorandum of Agreement/Kalatas ng Kasunduan with Macroasia Corporation; the FPIC Team recommended issuance of a Certification Precondition.
- The NCIP Regional Review Team (RRT) recommended validation of the decision-making process and securing the FPIC of indirectly affected barangays, among other recommendations; a Validation Team constituted by the NCIP Chairperson on February 28, 2011 recommended issuance of the Certification Precondition.
- The NCIP En Banc issued Resolution No. 001-2012 denying issuance of a Certification Precondition primarily because a separate FBI was required for two indirectly affected barangays, Barangay Aribungos and Barong-barong; Macroasia Corporation moved for reconsideration and NCIP denied the motion on February 23, 2012.
- Judicial proceedings prior to compromise
- Macroasia Corporation elevated the matter to the Court of Appeals via petition for review docketed as CA G.R. SP No. 124632; on March 14, 2016 the CA issued an Amended Decision directing NCIP to issue a Certification Precondition in favor of the Corporation; NCIP's motion for reconsideration of the CA Amended Decision was denied in a Resolution dated August 9, 2016.
- NCIP filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari with the Supreme Court docketed as G.R. No. 226176 contesting the CA rulings.
- Assignment, subsequent FPIC, and administrative approvals leading to compromise
- On June 7, 2019, Macroasia Corporation assigned all its rights, title, interests, and obligations under MPSA No. 220-2005-IVB to Macroasia Mining Corporation.
- Pursuant to Section 46 of DENR Administrative Order No. 21-10, the Secretary of the DENR issued an Order on February 1, 2021 approving the assignment of MPSA No. 220-2005-IVB to Macroasia Mining.
- Macroasia Mining, as lawful assignee, initiated FPIC processes for the indirectly affected barangays Barangay Aribungos and Barong-barong, citing compliance with Administrative Order No. 03 series of 20212 on August 9, 2022; the FPIC process culminated in execution of a Memorandum of Agreement/Kalatas ng Kasunduan between IP leaders of the indirectly affected barangays.
- Macroasia Mining was duly authorized by Macroasia Corporation to enter agreements and to act for and bind it concerning MPSA No. 220-2005-IVB, including settlement of pending issues in G.R. No. 226176.
- Terms and operative provisions of the Compromise Agreement submitted to the Court
- The Compromise Agreement dated February 1, 2023 recited the foregoing antecedents and contained the parties’ factual acknowledgments that:
- Macroasia Mining conducted separate FBI/FPIC for Barangay Aribungos and Barong-barong in August 2022 in compliance with NCIP En Banc Resolution No. 001-2012.
- The FPIC pro...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Whether the Supreme Court should render judgment based on the parties' Compromise Agreement and declare G.R. No. 226176 closed and terminated
- Whether the Joint Motion to Render Judgment Based on Compromise Agreement dated February 21, 2023, as joined by the Office of the Solicitor General on behalf of NCIP, warranted approval and adoption by the Court.
- Whether dismissal with prejudice and termination of the case is proper upon a valid compromise agreement.
- Whether the Compromise Agreement is validly executed and not contrary to law, morals, good customs, public policy, or public order
- Whether the factual allegations and administrative actions recited in the Compromise Agreement (assignment of MPSA, DENR approval, FPICs, Joint Resolut...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)