Case Summary (G.R. No. L-630)
Petitioner and Respondent
Petitioner/Applicant: Alexander A. Krivenko (alien purchaser)
Respondent/Appellee: Register of Deeds of the City of Manila
Procedural History
· May 1945: Krivenko applied to register the lot; registration was denied.
· November 1945: Krivenko filed a consulta in the Court of First Instance (Fourth Branch) of Manila, which upheld the denial.
· Krivenko appealed to the Supreme Court.
· During briefing, petitioner moved to withdraw the appeal, with the Solicitor General’s concurrence; the motion was denied by split vote.
· The Supreme Court proceeded to decide the constitutional question on the merits.
Fundamental Issue
Whether, under the 1935 Philippine Constitution, an alien may acquire private residential land—that is, whether “private agricultural land,” as used in Article XIII, Section 5, includes residential lots.
Constitutional Classification of Public Lands
Article XIII, Section 1, of the 1935 Constitution provides that all public-domain lands are classified as agricultural, timber, or mineral, and that only public agricultural lands may be alienated, with the other two classes retained permanently by the State.
Definition and Treatment of Residential Lands
By long-standing jurisprudence (Mapa v. Insular Government and its progeny), public lands not classified as timber or mineral—including residential, commercial, and industrial lots—have been treated as agricultural public lands. Residential lots are deemed susceptible to cultivation and therefore fall under the broad category of agricultural lands for purposes of disposition.
Legislative Interpretation and Acts
· Commonwealth Act No. 141 (Public Land Law revision, 1936) treats “alienable agricultural lands” of the public domain as including residential and other lots and limits their disposition to Filipino citizens.
· Sections 122–123, Commonwealth Act No. 141, likewise prohibit disposition of private lands originally acquired under public-land statutes to aliens, except by hereditary succession—removing the reciprocity privilege previously granted under Act No. 2874.
Executive Interpretation
· 1939 & 1941 Opinions of the Secretary of Justice held that “public agricultural lands” include residential, commercial, and industrial lots, but that “private agricultural lands” under Section 5 do not include residential lots when alien-ownership prohibition is at issue.
· 1947 Department of Justice Circular No. 128 directed Registers of Deeds to accept transfers of private residential, commercial, and industrial lands to non-enemy aliens, construing these as outside the scope of “private agricultural land.”
Constitutional Intent and Convention Debates
Delegates to the 1934–35 Constitutional Convention debated an initial proposal to bar aliens from all private land and amended it to bar only “private agricultural land.” Reports and speeches reveal a deliberate narrowing—excluding non-agricultural lands (e.g., residential sites or industrial tracts) from the constitutional prohibition against alien land ownership.
Supplementary Constitutional Safeguards
Article XIII, Section 3, empowers Congress to fix the maximum area of private agricultural lands an individual or entity may hold; Secti
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. L-630)
Facts
- Alexander A. Krivenko, an alien, purchased a residential lot from Magdalena Estate, Inc. in December 1941.
- World War II interrupted the registration proceedings.
- In May 1945 Krivenko attempted to register title but was refused by the Register of Deeds of Manila because, as an alien, he was deemed ineligible to acquire land under the Philippine Constitution.
Procedural History
- Krivenko filed a “consulta” before the Fourth Branch of the Court of First Instance of Manila; that court sustained the Register’s refusal.
- Krivenko appealed to the Supreme Court.
- After briefs were submitted and the case was voted, Krivenko moved to withdraw his appeal, with the Solicitor General’s consent.
- While the motion was pending, the Department of Justice issued a circular instructing registers of deeds to accept and register transfers of residential lots to aliens.
- The Supreme Court denied the motion to withdraw; it held that once briefs were filed and the case voted, the Court would decide on the merits and the unavoidable constitutional question.
Constitutional Provision at Issue
- Article XIII, Section 1: Classifies public domain lands into agricultural, timber, and mineral, and limits their alienation or exploitation to citizens or qualifying Philippine corporations.
- Article XIII, Section 5: Provides that, “Save in cases of hereditary succession, no private agricultural land shall be transferred or assigned except to individuals, corporations, or associations qualified to acquire or hold lands of the public domain in the Philippines.”
Scope and Interpretation of “Public Agricultural Lands”
- Under the Philippine Bill (July 1, 1902) and Public Land Act No. 926, “public agricultural lands” were defined to include all public domain lands that were neither timber nor mineral.
- This Court’s long-standing jurisprudence held that public residential, commercial, and industrial lots—being neither forest nor mineral—are classified as “public agricultural lands.”
- The framers of the Constitution and subsequent legislative and judicial acts adopted this technical classification.
Scope and Interpretation of “Private Agricultural Lands”
- The Court examined whether “agricultural land” in Section 5 likewi