Title
City Government of Baguio City vs. Masweng
Case
G.R. No. 180206
Decision Date
Feb 4, 2009
Baguio City officials challenged NCIP's injunctive writ against demolition orders on Busol Watershed, claiming ancestral land rights. SC ruled NCIP has jurisdiction but denied injunction, upholding the reservation's inalienability.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 180206)

Procedural History

Private respondents filed a petition for injunction with NCIP–CAR, seeking TROs and a writ of preliminary injunction against enforcement of demolition orders. NCIP Regional Hearing Officer Atty. Brain S. Masweng issued TROs (October 16 and 19, 2006) and, upon posting of bonds, granted a preliminary injunction (November 10, 2006). The City Government sought certiorari relief in the Court of Appeals, which upheld NCIP’s jurisdiction and affirmed the injunctive orders. The Supreme Court then granted review.

Petitioners’ Arguments

  1. NCIP lacks jurisdiction over main actions for injunction; its power is limited to auxiliary remedies.
  2. Baguio City is governed exclusively by its charter (Sec. 78, IPRA) and therefore exempt from NCIP authority and ancestral land provisions.
  3. Private respondents are not entitled to injunctive relief because they encroached upon an inalienable forest reservation without permit.
  4. Any ancestral land claim is at best contingent and cannot sustain injunctive protection.
  5. The demolition orders were valid exercises of municipal police power over public lands.

Respondents’ Arguments

  1. IPRA vests NCIP with original and exclusive jurisdiction over disputes involving indigenous peoples’ ancestral lands, including actions for injunction.
  2. Baguio City is not exempt from IPRA coverage, and Sec. 78’s non-application to post-effectivity territory does not bar ancestral claims recognized before IPRA.
  3. As holders of native title, respondents cannot secure building permits for ancestral lands, exposing them to demolition without redress.
  4. Proclamation No. 15 identified Molintas and Gumangan families as claimants within the forest reserve, without extinguishing their rights.

NCIP Jurisdiction under the IPRA

Under RA 8371, NCIP has “original and exclusive jurisdiction” over disputes concerning ancestral lands/domains of ICCs/IPs, including actions for injunction (Sec. 5, Rule III, NCIP Circular 1-03). IPRA empowers NCIP to issue TROs and writs of injunction to prevent acts that may cause grave or irreparable harm (Sec. 69). Private respondents’ petition alleged membership in the Ibaloi indigenous community and ancestral claims recognized in Proclamation No. 15, thereby invoking NCIP–RHO’s jurisdiction. No provision in IPRA limits injunctive relief to auxiliary proceedings.

Baguio City’s Exemption and Proclamation No. 15

Section 78 of IPRA provides that Baguio City remains governed by its charter, but expressly preserves “prior land rights and titles recognized and/or acquired” before IPRA’s effectivity. Proclamation No. 15 (1922) established the Busol Forest Reservation and named Molintas and Gumangan families as claimants; however, it did not definitively vest private respondents with proprietary rights. The proclamation withdrew the reservation from sale or settlement but did not extinguish ancestral possessory claims that predated the reservation declaration.

Inalienability of Busol Forest Reservation

The Court previously held in Heirs of Gumangan v. Court of Appeals (1

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.