REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, represented by the Director of Forest Development and the

Director of Lands,petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, and MARTINA

CARANTES for and in behalf of the Heirs of SALMING PIRASO,respondents.

Facts:

Martina S. Carantes for and in behalf of the Heirs of Salming Piraso filed with the Court of First
Instance of Baguio and Benguet, Land Registration No. N-287, covering property in Mountain
Province

A decision was rendered by the land registration court adjudicating the parcel of land to the
applicants Carantes

The CA affirmed the decision in toto and the government appealed contending that during the
ocular inspection, the land was found to be rolling and stony in nature and that the land is
covered with trees, bushes and grasses and being also stony is not suitable for agricultural
purposes and thus a part of the public forest

Issue:

Whether or not the land in question is part of the public forest within the Central Cordillera
Forest Reserve [Yes.]

Ruling:

Forest lands or forest reserves are not capable of private appropriation and possession thereof,
however long, cannot convert them into private property

Unless such lands are reclassified and considered disposable and alienable by the Director of
Forestry, but even then, possession of the land by the applicants prior to the reclassification of
the land as disposable and alienable cannot be credited as part of the thirty-year requirement
under Section 48 (b) of the Public Land Act (Director of Lands v. Court of Appeals, supra).In this
case, there is no showing of reclassification by the Director of Forestry that the land in question
is disposable or alienable. This is a matter which cannot be assumed. It calls for proof.

The "forest land" started out as a "forest" or vast tracts of wooded land with dense growths of
trees and underbush. However, the cutting down of trees and the disappearance of virgin forest
and not automatically convert the lands of the public domain from forest or timber land to
alienable agricultural land.

More important than the appearance of the land is its status, as stated in the separate report
dated April 6, 1970 submitted to the Provincial Fiscal of Benguet Province by Forester Ricardo
D. Zapatero which declares that the whole area applied for by the applicant falls within the
Central Cordillera Forest Reserve and that the same has not been released for agricultural
purposes by the Director of Forestry who has administrative jurisdiction over the same

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner, vs. CELESTINA NAGUIAT

Facts:

This is an application for registration of title to four parcels of land located in Zambales

Filed by Celestina Naguiat, she alleges that she is the owner of the said parcels of land having
acquired them by purchase from the LID Corporation which likewise acquired the same from
Demetria Calderon, Josefina Moraga and Fausto Monje and their predecessors-in-interest who
have been in possession thereof for more than thirty (30) years; and that to the best of her
knowledge, said lots suffer no mortgage or encumbrance of whatever kind nor is there any
person having any interest, legal or equitable, or in possession thereof.

The Republic of the Philippines filed an opposition to the application on the ground that neither
the applicant nor her predecessors-in interest have been in open, continuous, exclusive and
notorious possession and occupation of the lands in question since 12 June 1945 or prior
thereto

The trial court rendered judgment for herein respondent Celestina Naguiat, adjudicating unto
her the parcels of land in question

Issue:

Whether the Court of Appeals was correct in affirming the trial court [No.]

Ruling:

Public forest lands or forest reserves, unless declassified and released by positive act of the
Government so that they may form part of the disposable agricultural lands of the public
domain, are not capable of private appropriation. As to these assets, the rules on confirmation
of imperfect title do not apply.

Forests, in the context of both the Public Land Act and the Constitution classifying lands of the
public domain into "agricultural, forest or timber, mineral lands and national parks," do not
necessarily refer to a large tract of wooded land or an expanse covered by dense growth of
trees and underbrush

In the present case, the CA assumed that the lands in question are already alienable and
disposable.
Here, respondent never presented the required certification from the proper government agency
or official proclamation reclassifying the land applied for as alienable and disposable. Matters of
land classification or reclassification cannot be assumed. It calls for proof.

Aside from tax receipts, respondent submitted in evidence the survey map and technical
descriptions of the lands, which, needless to state, provided no information respecting the
classification of the property. As the Court has held, however, these documents are not
sufficient to overcome the presumption that the land sought to be registered forms part of the
public domain.

It cannot be overemphasized that unwarranted appropriation of public lands has been a

notorious practice resorted to in land registration cases. For this reason, the Court has made it
a point to stress, when appropriate, that declassification of forest and mineral lands, as the case
may be, and their conversion into alienable and disposable lands need an express and positive
act from the government.

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, represented by the Department of Environment and Natural

Resources (DENR), petitioner, vs. PAGADIAN CITY TIMBER CO

Facts:

DENR, and Pagadian City Timber Co., Inc. executed Industrial Forest Management Agreement
whereby Pagadian was authorized to develop, utilize, and manage a specified forest area
covering 1,999.14 hectares located in Barangays Langapod, Cogonan, and Datagan,
Municipality of Labangan, Zamboanga del Sur, for the production of timber and other forest
products subject to a production-sharing scheme.

The Subanen tribe alleged that Pagadian Timber disrespected their rights as indegenous people
and was harassed by armed men employed by them, in response the DENR reevaluated the
Agreement

DENR Secretary issued an Order canceling IFMA for failure of the lessee to protect the area
from forest fires and failure to implement the agreement

CA ruled against Pagadian Timber on appeal and reconsideration

Issue:

Whether the DENR can cancel the agreement with Pagadian [Yes.]

Ruling:
IFMA No. R-9-040 is a license agreement under Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 705 (Revised
Forestry Code), the law which is the very basis for its existence.

Under Section 3, paragraph thereof, a license agreement is defined as "a privilege granted by
the State to a person to utilize forest resources within any forest land with the right of
possession and occupation thereof to the exclusion of others, except the government, but with
the corresponding obligation to develop, protect and rehabilitate the same in accordance with
the terms and conditions set forth in said agreement"

Jurisprudence has been consistent in holding that license agreements are not contracts within
the purview of the due process and the non-impairment of contracts clauses enshrined in the
Constitution

All Filipino citizens are entitled, by right, to a balanced and healthful ecology as declared under
Section 16, Article II of the Constitution. This right carries with it the correlative duty to refrain
from impairing the environment, particularly our diminishing forest resources. To uphold and
protect this right is an express policy of the State.

Thus, private rights must yield when they come in conflict with this public policy and common
interest. They must give way to the police or regulatory power of the State, in this case through
the DENR, to ensure that the terms and conditions of existing laws, rules and regulations, and
the IFMA itself are strictly and faithfully complied with.

International Hardwood and Veneer Co. of the Philippines v. University of the Philippines, G.R.
No. 52518

Facts:

A member of the Provincial Task Force on Illegal Logging received a reliable information that a
ten-wheeler truck bearing plate number PAD-548 loaded with illegal lumber would pass through
Ilocos Norte. Two weeks later, while members of the Provincial Task Force were patrolling
along General Segundo Avenue, they saw the ten-wheeler truck described by the informant.
When they apprehended it at the Marcos Bridge, Que the owner of the truck and the cargo,
admitted that there were sawn lumber in between the coconut slabs. When the police officers
asked for the lumber's supporting documents, accused-appellant could not present any.

Que was then charged before the RTC of violation of P.D. 705 and was found guilty for
possessing timber or other forest products without the legal documents as required under
existing forest laws and regulations

Issue:

Whether his conviction by the trial court was valid [Yes.]

Ruling:

Section 68 of P.D. 705 provides:

Sec. 68. Cutting, Gathering and/or Collecting Timber, or other Forest Products Without License.
— Any person who shall cut, gather, collect, remove timber or other forest products from any
forest land, or timber from alienable or disposable public land, or from private land without any
authority, or possess timber or other forest products without the legal documents as required
under existing forest laws and regulations,shall be punished with the penalties imposed under
Articles 309 and 310 of the Revised Penal Code

DENR Administrative Order No. 59 series of 1993 specifies the documents required for the
transport of timber and other forest products. Section 3 of the Administrative Order provides:

Section 3. Documents Required.

Consistent with the policy stated above, the movement of logs, lumber, plywood, veneer, non-
timber forest products and wood-based or nonwood-based products/commodities shall be
covered with appropriate Certificates of Origin,issued by authorized DENR officials, as specified
in the succeeding sections.

When apprehended on March 8, 1994, accused-appellant failed to present any certificate of

origin of the 258 pieces of tanguile lumber

Accused-appellant's possession of the subject lumber without any documentation clearly

constitutes an offense under Section 68 of P.D. 705.

Mere possession of forest products without the proper documents consummates the crime.
Whether or not the lumber comes from a legal source is immaterial because E.O. 277 considers
the mere possession of timber or other forest products without the proper legal documents as
malum prohibitum.

International Hardwood v. UP

Facts:

Hardwood sought to declare the University of the Philippines of having no rights to supervise
and regulate the cutting and removal of timber and other forest products, to scale, measure and
seal the timber cut and/or to collect forest charges, reforestation fees and royalties from
petitioner and/or impose any other duty or burden upon the latter in that portion of its
concession, covered by a License Agreement

The trial court rendered a decision in favor of Hardwood

Issue :

Whether UP has a right to collect forest charges from Hardwood [Yes.]

Ruling:

Legislative grants must be construed strictly in favor of the public and most strongly against the
grantee, and nothing will be included in the grant except that which is granted expressly or by
clear implication.

Under Proclamation No. 791, a parcel of land of the public domain described therein, with an
area of 3,500 hectares, which is the very parcel of land subject of R.A. No. 3990, was withdrawn
from sale or settlement and was reserved for the College of Agriculture of the UP as experiment
station for the proposed Dairy Research and Training Institute and for research and production
studies of said college, subject however to private rights, if any, and to the condition that the
disposition of timber and other forest products found thereon shall be subject to forestry laws
and regulations.

The above reservation is within the area covered by petitioner's timber license.

Pursuant, to R.A. No. 3990 which establishes a central experiment station for the use of the UP
in connection with its research and extension functions, particularly by the College of
Agriculture, College of Veterinary Medicine and College of Arts and Sciences, the above
"reserved" area was "ceded and transferred in full ownership to the University of the Philippines
subject to any existing concessions, if any."

When it ceded and transferred the property to UP, the Republic of the Philippines completely
removed it from the public domain and, more specifically, in respect to the areas covered by the
timber license of petitioner, removed and segregated it from a public forest; it divested itself of
its rights and title thereto and relinquished and conveyed the same to the UP; and made the
latter the absolute owner thereof, subject only to the existing concession.

In the instant case, that exception is made for the Hardwood as licensee or grantee of the
concession, which has been given the license to cut, collect, and remove timber from the area
ceded and transferred to UP until 1 February 1985.

However, it has the correlative duty and obligation to pay the forest charges, or royalties, to the
new owner, the UP, at the same rate as provided for in the Agreement. The charges should not
be paid anymore to the Republic of the Philippines through the Bureau of Internal Revenue
because of the very nature of the transfer as aforestated. Consequently, even the Bureau of
Internal Revenue automatically lost its authority and jurisdiction to measure the timber cut from
the subject area and to collect forestry charges and other fees due thereon.