Association of Small Landowners in the Philippines vs.

Honorable
Secretary of Agrarian Reform
Facts:
The subjects of this petition are a 9-hectare riceland worked by four
tenants and owned by petitioner Nicolas Manaay and his wife and a 5-
hectare riceland worked by four tenants and owned by petitioner
Augustin Hermano, Jr. The tenants were declared full owners of these
lands by E.O. No. 228 as qualified farmers under P.D. No. 27.
The petitioners are questioning P.D. No. 27 and E.O. Nos. 228 and 229
on grounds inter alia of separation of powers, due process, equal
protection and the constitutional limitation that no private property shall
be taken for public use without just compensation.
They contend that President Aquino usurped legislative power when
she promulgated E.O. No. 228. The said measure is invalid also for
violation of Article XIII, Section 4, of the Constitution, for failure to
provide for retention limits for small landowners. Moreover, it does not
conform to Article VI, Section 25(4) and the other requisites of a valid
appropriation.
Issue:
Whether agrarian reform is an exercise of police power or eminent
domain
Ruling:
There are traditional distinctions between the police power and the
power of eminent domain that logically preclude the application of both
powers at the same time on the same subject. Property condemned
under the police power is noxious or intended for a noxious purpose,
such as a building on the verge of collapse, which should be
demolished for the public safety, or obscene materials, which should be
destroyed in the interest of public morals. The confiscation of such
property is not compensable, unlike the taking of property under the
power of expropriation, which requires the payment of just
compensation to the owner.