Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Secretary of DENR
Facts:
In 1997, RA 8371 (Indigenous Peoples Rights Act/IPRA) was passed. Isagani Cruz
and Cesar Europa filed a petition for prohibition and mandamus, questioning the
constitutionality of certain provisions of IPRA: a) It allows the indigenous
people/cultural community to OWN NATURAL RESOURCES ; b) It defines ancestral
lands and ancestral domains in such a way that it may include private lands owned
by other individuals; c) It categorizes ancestral lands and domains held by native
title as never to have been public land; d) It violates due process in allowing NCIP
(National Commission on Indigenous Peoples) to take jurisdiction over IP land
disputes and making customary law apply to these. In the first deliberation of the
SC, the votes were 7‐7, so the case was re‐deliberated upon.
Issue:
Did the IPRA violate the Regalian Doctrine?
A. IPRA: Under the IPRA law, lands which have not been registered before, if
granted with a CADT/CALT, will be recognized as privately owned by the IPs
from the beginning‐ thus, has never been part of public domain.
B. Regalian Theory: Lands which has not been recognized as privately owned
belongs to the State
Held:
No Final Decision. Petition dismissed due to lack of votes; Law remained valid and
constitutional (7 to grant ‐7 to dismiss).
Justice Puno’s Separate Opinion: The IPRA Law DID NOT VIOLATE the Regalian
Theory
1. These lands claimed by the IPs have long been theirs BY VIRTUE OF
NATIVE TITLE; they have lived there even before the Spanish colonization.
“Native title refers to ICCs/IPs’ pre ‐conquest rights to lands and domains held
under a claim of private ownership as far back as memory reaches. These lands
are deemed never to have been public lands and are indisputable presumed to
have been held that way since before the Spanish Conquest.”