LEONARDO A. PAAT (OIC-DENR), JOVITO LAYUGAN, JR.

(CENRO-DENR)
vs.
COURT OF APPEALS, HON. RICARDO A. BACULI, SPOUSES BIENVENIDO AND
VICTORIA DE GUZMAN
G.R. No. 111107, JANUARY 10, 1997

FACTS:
On May 19, 1989, the truck of Victoria de Guzman was seized by the DENR
personnel in Aritao, Nueva Ecija when it was on its way to Bulacan because the driver
was not able to produce the required forest documents for the forest products found
concealed in the truck. The CENRO of Aritao issued on May 23, 1989 an order of
confiscation and gave the owners 15 days to submit an explanation. However, the
owners failed to submit the required explanation. The DENR Regional Director
Baggayan sustained the confiscation and order of forfeiture. The private respondents
filed a case of replevin to the Regional Trial Court Branch 2 of Cagayan. They
contended that the DENR has no authority to confiscate and forfeit conveyances used
in transporting illegal forest products in favour of the government but rather the court,
based on the second paragraph of Section 68 of PD 705, as amended by EO 277. In
addition, they argued that since there is no crime punishable is the same Section other
than qualified theft, and the petitioners admitted that they could not be charged with
such offense, hence, their truck should not be confiscated. The RTC decided in favour
of the respondents. The petitioners filed a petition for certiorari to the Supreme Court.

ISSUE:
Whether or not the petitioners violated Section 68 of PD 705, as amended by EO
277, which shall, therefore, be a ground for confiscation of their truck?

HELD:
When the statue is clear and explicit, there is hardly room for any extended court
ratiocination or rationalization.
It is clear in the introduction of EO 277 amending Sec. 68 of PD 705 that to ―cut,
gather, collect, remove….or possess any timber or other forest products without the
legal documents as require by the existing forest laws and regulations, shall be
punished with the penalties imposed under Art. 309 and 310 of the RPC‖. Then it is
obvious that petitioners have the violated EO 277 when its truck which contains forest
products was not able to present legal documents. The truck should, therefore, be
subject for confiscation.