Arecar A.

Reforsado
5YP - Set C
LEGAL RESEARCH
Statement of the Problem:
What are the remedies of a landowner whose property is occupied by informal settlers?
a. Against government officials
b. Against the informal settlers
Brief Background:
In the Philippines, it has been a common notion of the poor that their lives will be better and
improved in the urban areas. Hence, they leave their homes and families in the province and
rural areas for a greener pasture where opportunities await them only to realize later on that the
opportunities and requirements do not meet their qualifications. Moreover, they face the
dilemma of finding a cheap and affordable house. When the needs and means do not meet, the
option of illegally occupying a vacant piece of land to build their shelter for them and their
families comes into mind. When the families are already situated and comfortably living in the
untitled land for a significant period of time, they tend to claim it as their own until the
landowners decide to claim their ownership of the land. Such is called squatting or illegal
settling.
Squatting as defined by Wikipedia, consists of occupying an abandoned or unoccupied area of
land and/or a building usually residential that the squatter does not own, rent or otherwise
have lawful permission to use. On the other hand, a squatter as defined in The Concise Oxford

Dictionary, is a person who settles on new especially public land without title; a person who
takes unauthorized possession of unoccupied premises. Therefore, a residential area occupied
by squatters becomes a squatter settlement. But the narrow generalization, especially of
settlement type is evident: everything from a brick-and-concrete multistoried house to an
"occupied" cardboard carton become "squatter settlements". For the purpose of this paper, we
shall limit the discussion into urban squatting.
Republic Act No. 7279 or otherwise known as the Urban Development and Housing Act of 1992
(R.A. 7279) has added professional squatters in the categories of squatters. It is defined in the
law as individuals or groups who occupy lands without the express consent of the landowner
and who have sufficient income for legitimate housing. It also apply to persons who have
previously been awarded homelots or housing units by the Government but who sold, leased or
transferred the same to settle illegally in the same place or in another urban area, and non-bona
fide occupants and intruders of lands reserved for socialized housing. Also, it defined urban
areas as all cities regardless of their population density and to municipalities with a population
density of at least five hundred (500) persons per square kilometer.
Pertinent Rules and Regulations and Major Related Jurisprudence:
The Philippine government has been aware of this issue for a long time. In fact, the 1987
Constitution provides for the protection of informal settlers under Section 9, Article XIII:
The State shall, by law, and for the common good, undertake, in cooperation with the
public sector, a continuing program of urban land reform and housing which will make available
at affordable cost decent housing and basic services to underprivileged and homeless citizens
in urban centers and resettlements areas. It shall also promote adequate employment

opportunities to such citizens. In the implementation of such program the State shall respect the
rights of small property owners.
In addition, Section 10, Article XIII, provides that, urban or rural poor dwellers shall not be
evicted nor their dwellings demolished, except in accordance with law and in a just and humane
manner. No resettlement of urban or rural dwellers shall be undertaken without adequate
consultation with them and the communities where they are to be relocated.
The above provisions of the Constitution provided for the protection of the informal settlers,
however, we should also contemplate on the hardship that informal settlers are causing to the
landowners whose property rights are being violated. Basically, one who does not own or
possess a property has limited rights. On the other hand, there are two types of legal action that
the landowner can take against the informal settler: first, ejectment (accion interdictal); or
second, plenary action to recover the better right of possession or accion publiciana.
An action for unlawful detainer and forcible entry must be filed within one year from the date
possession is lost or the date the unlawful possession started. The distinction between forcible
entry and unlawful detainer is premised on the nature of the possession. An action for forcible
entry is proper when the dispossession was by means of force, threat, intimidation, strategy or
stealth. An action for unlawful detainer, on the other hand, is proper when the possession is
originally lawful and turned unlawful upon the expiration of the right to possess. Cases for
ejectment are filed with the Metropolitan or Municipal Trial Courts, and proceedings are
summary in nature.
An accion publiciana, on the other hand, may be filed only after the expiration of the one-year
period, based on the same grounds as ejectment, and may be filed only with the Regional Trial

Courts. Proceedings in this case require the full presentation of evidence.

(http://www.accralaw.com/publications/how-evict-illegal-settler, 2014)
Under Section 28 of R.A. 7279, it allows the eviction of settlers and demolition of structures
when government infrastructure projects with available funding are about to be implemented
and when there is a court order for eviction and demolition. Moreover, eviction may be effected
under the following conditions: (1) Notice upon the affected persons or entities at least thirty
(30) days prior to the date of eviction or demolition; (2) Adequate consultations on the matter of
settlement with the duly designated representatives of the families to be resettled and the
affected communities in the areas where they are to be relocated; (3) Presence of local
government officials or their representatives during eviction or demolition; (4) Proper
identification of all persons taking part in the demolition; (5) Execution of eviction or demolition
only during regular office hours from Mondays to Fridays and during good weather, unless the
affected families consent otherwise; (6) No use of heavy equipment for demolition except for
structures that are permanent and of concrete materials; (7) Proper uniforms for members of
the Philippine National Police who shall occupy the first line of law enforcement and observe
proper disturbance control procedures; and (8) Adequate relocation, whether temporary or
permanent.
If the eviction is by way of a court order, relocation shall be undertaken by the local government
unit concerned and the National Housing Authority with the assistance of other government
agencies within forty-five (45) days from service of notice of final judgment by the court. Should
relocation not be possible within the said period, financial assistance in the amount equivalent to
the prevailing minimum daily wage multiplied by sixty (60) days shall be extended to the
affected families by the local government unit concerned. It must be noted that these
requirements are imposed on government, and not imposed on the private entity or individual

asserting the right to possess. (http://www.accralaw.com/publications/how-evict-illegal-settler,

2014)
Indeed, it causes inconvenience to the landowner to take action to claim ownership on his
property. On the other hand, it is very unlawful, on the part of the illegal settlers to occupy a
property or land that is not theirs but we cannot also use threat and force for them to leave. We
also need to consider their human rights which should be protected by our government. Hence,
our government leaders should provide for decent relocation sites where these informal settlers
can enjoy the right to possess own property and live a decent life.