Title
Supreme Court
Agnes vs. Republic
Case
G.R. No. 156022
Decision Date
Jul 6, 2015
Calauit settlers relocated in 1977 for a wildlife sanctuary challenged resettlement agreements. Supreme Court dismissed case as moot after CADT issuance to Tagbanua community under IPRA.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 217837)

Applicable Law

The case primarily references provisions from the 1987 Philippine Constitution, notably Article XII, Section 2, governing ownership of public lands and ancestral domains, as well as pertinent laws such as Republic Act No. 8371 (Indigenous Peoples' Rights Act of 1997).

Background and Factual Context

The petitioners claim to be descendants of early settlers in Calauit Island, asserting they were forcibly relocated to Halsey and Burabod by the government due to the establishment of a wildlife sanctuary. Allegations of harassment during relocation surfaced, along with claims that the resettlement areas were unsuitable for habitation. The government had promised agricultural lots and compensation for improvements on vacated properties but failed to fulfill these obligations adequately.

Government Actions and Legal Instruments

In 1976, Presidential Proclamation No. 1578 designated Calauit as a Game Preserve and Wildlife Sanctuary, limiting human activities and occupancy. Subsequently, resettlement terms were formalized in individual Resettlement Agreements, wherein the settlers waived claims to the land in exchange for relocation allowances and land elsewhere. After the Marcos administration, a movement to reclaim rights over Calauit emerged, culminating in a fact-finding commission's recommendation to revoke the proclamation due to violations of settlers' rights.

Proceedings and Judicial Outcomes

The initial suit, filed by the Republic against the petitioners, aimed to reclaim possession of Calauit, claiming the petitioners had unlawfully reoccupied the land despite waiving their rights. The Regional Trial Court ruled in favor of the Republic, upholding the Resettlement Agreements and ordering the petitioners to vacate Calauit, highlighting national interest in conserving the area as a wildlife sanctuary. The Court of Appeals affirmed this decision.

Petitioners' Claims on Appeal

The petitioners challenged the lower court's rulings, arguing their right to ownership based on longtime occupation and the allegedly unlawful nature of the Resettlement Agreements, which they claimed were signed under duress and deceit. They contested the admissibility of the Resettlement Agreements and requested damages.

Supreme Court Ruling and Justiciability

The Supreme Court ultimately found the case moot due to the issuance of a Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title (CADT) in favor of the Tagbanua Indigenous Cultural Community in 2008, which recognized their rights over the ancestral domain, including Calauit Island. The Court determined that the presence of the CADT superseded earlier ag

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.