Course: Plan 203 C – Land Use Planning

Professor: Ernesto M. Serote

Submitted by: Janeille Aloha B. Kasala
Student Number: 202320090
Subject: Essay no. 4: The Concepts of Territory and Sovereignty

1. Territory as defined by the Oxford dictionary, is an area of land under the

jurisdiction of a ruler or state. For almost five years working as an architect, I also believed
that territory pertains to any physical or geographical area but as I read some chapters
from “The Urban Village” by Alberto Magnaghi, I realized that there is more to the word
itself.
According to Magnaghi, territory isn’t just a land or space, it is a highly complex
living organism, a neo-ecosystem continuously being transformed, the outcome of a
combination of cultural events and nature, made up of places (areas or settlement
environments) endowed with identity, history, a character, and the long term structure
forming territorial and urban ‘types’ with individual features.1
Therefore, territory cannot simply be limited and put in a box. A man’s life revolves
around his territory, his whole being is shaped by his environment, culture, and traditions,
along with the laws and regulations that govern his surroundings. Now, looking outward
from the learned definition and out of the bounds and constraints of territories, it is highly
important for any people or community to carve out their exclusive territory for these
reasons:
a. Identifying one’s self-identity and preserving the community’s culture and
traditions. The worldwide spread of globalization has westernized the world. As
Edward Casey stated, the concept of place has been slowly fading since the
evolution of settlements due to urban and unlimited sprawl. Different evolutions of
cities going back from the Romans, up to today’s contemporary metropolis have
resulted in dying identities of places that focused mostly on the economic functions
of a territory. Thus, neglecting the cultural forms and environmental features of the
region being developed. Communities with distinct territories allow the people and
the territory itself to preserve their unique identities, culture, and traditions. It
becomes a living, physical, breathing space where their customs, language,
heritage, and way of life can thrive with minimal and subdued influences from
external factors and conditions. Through, preservation, community members gain
a sense of belongingness and there will be a continuity of identity among future
generations.

b. By establishing exclusive territories, communities learn to manage and utilize their

resources effectively within a unified environment resulting in a planned resource
management and utilization. This encompasses land for agriculture and forestry,
sewage and waste management systems, and access to water resources and
 minerals. Having control over the territory, the people can prevent overexploitation,
and ensure proper and sustainable use of these resources so that future
generations can also frugally enjoy their natural environment over time.

c. Security and Governance. Politics is a crucial part and a highly sensitive element
of any territory. Establishing exclusivity in territories often leads to better security
and governance for the inhabitants. Society can share its ideals and can set up
systems of governance, laws, and regulations to help them achieve their desires
and basic needs. A sense of responsibility grows in the community and allows for
more effective management, leading to enhanced security and stability within the
territory and giving birth to an autonomous community.
Overall, carving out exclusive territories serves as a means for communities to protect
their identity, manage resources sustainably, and govern themselves according to their
unique needs and values.
2. Land disputes and territorial wars have been going on for centuries since the
beginning of time when man occupied land on earth. From these wars, different laws and
policies have been made and presented by winning cities or empires to enable them to
regulate the people and establish boundaries of the places they conquered.
From its colonization under the Spaniards and Americans, the Philippines has
adopted different rules when it comes to settling disputes between land grabbing and
ownership. Today, laws regarding the autonomy of the local government are found in
Administrative Order No. 270 prescribing the implementing rules and regulations of the
local government code of 1991.
Whereas, Sec. 25, Article II of the Constitution mandates that the State shall ensure the
autonomy of local governments;
Whereas, pursuant to this declared policy, Republic Act No. 7160, otherwise known as
the Local Government Code of 1991, affirms, among others, that the territorial and
political subdivisions of the State shall enjoy genuine and meaningful local autonomy to
enable them to attain their fullest development as self-reliant communities and make them
more effective partners in the attainment of national goals; 2
It is known that the state can exercise its absolute rights of ownership over its own
territory and any group of people, from tribes, and clans, to barangays, municipalities, or
cities can claim exclusive rights to a territory. As it is stated, “territorial jurisdiction of a
State covers the land within its boundary limits, over its inland and territorial waters, and
to a reasonable extent, over the airspace above and subsoil below such land and waters,
and over all persons and things within those areas subject to its control (as on its vessels
in the high seas or its aircraft in the air). Because the ownership rights exercised by the
State over its territory cover not only land, broadly defined, but also all persons within it,
such ownership rights are expanded beyond the concept of property into that of
sovereignty.” 3
 Today, despite the many laws and regulations mandated by the government, land
disputes among the marginalized and prominent people are still at large. It is said that,
problems of boundary disputes at all administrative levels, i.e. between two barangays,
between two cities/municipalities, or between two provinces in the Philippines. 3 From the
evolution of cities and settlements, economic growth has been the major focus and goal
of any government or state. Most of them, strive for success by any means, thus
neglecting the other important aspects of the state and forgetting the welfare of the
people. The land dispute between LGUs is one great example of this.
One of the major reasons for the disputes between LGUs is the Internal Revenue
Allotment (IRA) to local governments. The IRA is the main intergovernmental fiscal
transfer in the Philippines. It is the biggest source of operating revenues for local
government units (LGUs) to provide basic goods and services and finance other
development activities. One of the bases for the allocation is the land area of a particular
municipality or city, thus, disputant LGUs refuse to settle for fear of possible reduction in
their IRA shares. This leads to double counting of territories under dispute, resulting in an
unfair manner of the distribution of IRA, satisfying the disputants with additional IRA
allocation and penalizing the remaining LGUs with no disputes. The politicians’ desire to
have more economic funds for the LGU, creates a bigger economic crisis for the nation.
On the other hand, there is also a lack of technical basis for negotiation between
the local officials concerned. One of the many cases is the lack of supporting maps of the
land area of the LGUs that are certified by the Land Management Bureau. The technical
descriptions in the proclamations of LGUs along their boundary markers are also
indefinite and problematic. Moreover, the government seems to lack concern and action
in resolving this problem. The rising problem of disputes in the country should be settled
properly and right away to avoid major economic outbreaks. The policy and procedures
for the settlement of boundary disputes are specified in Rule III of the Implementing Rules
and Regulations of RA 7160.
It states that there is a boundary dispute when a portion or the whole of the
territorial area of an LGU is claimed by two or more LGUs. Boundary disputes between
or among LGUs shall, as much as possible, be settled amicably. 4
Involved parties must follow the prescribed procedures for settling boundary disputes
mandated also in Rule III of the IRR of RA 7160, Articles 17, and 18.
The following procedures shall govern the settlement of boundary disputes:
(a) Filing of petition — The sanggunian concerned may initiate action by filing a petition,
in the form of a resolution, with the sanggunian having jurisdiction over the dispute.
(b) Contents of petition — The petition shall state the grounds, reasons or justifications
therefore.
(c) Documents attached to petition — The petition shall be accompanied by:
(1) Duly authenticated copy of the law or statute creating the LGU or any other document
showing proof of creation of the LGU;
(2) Provincial, city, municipal, or barangay map, as the case may be, duly certified by the
LMB;
(3) Technical description of the boundaries of the LGUs concerned;
(4) Written certification of the provincial, city, or municipal assessor, as the case may be,
as to territorial jurisdiction over the disputed area according to records in custody;
(5) Written declarations or sworn statements of the people residing in the disputed area;
and
(6) Such other documents or information as may be required by the sanggunian hearing
the dispute.
(d) Answer of adverse party — Upon receipt by the sanggunian concerned of the petition
together with the required documents, the LGU or LGUs complained against shall be
furnished copies thereof and shall be given fifteen (15) working days within which to file
their answers.
(e) Hearing — Within five (5) working days after receipt of the answer of the adverse
party, the sanggunian shall hear the case and allow the parties concerned to present their
respective evidences.
(f) Joint hearing — When two or more sanggunians jointly hear a case, they may sit en
banc or designate their respective representatives. Where representatives are
designated, there shall be an equal number of representatives from each sanggunian.
They shall elect from among themselves a presiding officer and a secretary. In case of
disagreement, selection shall be by drawing lot.
(g) Failure to settle — In the event the sanggunian fails to amicably settle the dispute
within sixty (60) days from the date such dispute was referred thereto, it shall issue a
certification to that effect and copies thereof shall be furnished the parties concerned.
(h) Decision — Within sixty (60) days from the date the certification was issued, the
dispute shall be formally tried and decided by the sanggunian concerned. Copies of the
decision shall, within fifteen (15) days from the promulgation thereof, be furnished the
parties concerned, DILG, local assessor, COMELEC, NSO, and other NGAs concerned.
(i) Appeal — Within the time and manner prescribed by the Rules of Court, any party may
elevate the decision of the sanggunian concerned to the proper Regional Trial Court
having jurisdiction over the dispute by filing therewith the appropriate pleading, stating
among others, the nature of the dispute, the decision of the sanggunian concerned and
the reasons for appealing therefrom. The Regional Trial Court shall decide the case within
one (1) year from the filing thereof. Decisions on boundary disputes promulgated jointly
by two (2) or more sangguniang panlalawigans shall be heard by the Regional Trial Court
of the province which first took cognizance of the dispute. 5
ARTICLE 18. Maintenance of Status Quo. — Pending final resolution of the dispute, the
status of the affected area prior to the dispute shall be maintained and continued for all
purposes. 6
By following these laws and provisions, together with the assistance of the national
government, specifically, the Department of National Resources (DENR) and Land
Management Bureau (DENR) among others, fairness in the trial shall be observed and
justice among disputants shall prevail, as well as to elude and abolish the concept of
“changing conditions”, as T. Nicolaus Tideman explains, “lead potential claimants to think
it likely that current boundaries would not prevail in a showdown.” 3

References:
1 Alberto Magnaghi. The Urban Village: A Charter for Democracy and Local Self-
sustainable Development.
2 Section 25, Administrative Order 270, Local Government Code of 1991
3Ernesto M. Serote, 2023. Property, Patrimony & Territory: Foundations of Land Use
Planning
4 Article 15, Rule III of the IRR of RA 7160
5 Article 17, Rule III of the IRR of RA 7160
6 Article 18, Rule III of the IRR of RA 7160