GR 180206; (February, 2009) (Digest)
G.R. No. 180206 February 4, 2009
THE CITY GOVERNMENT OF BAGUIO CITY, represented by REINALDO BAUTISTA, JR., City Mayor; THE ANTI-SQUATTING COMMITTEE, represented by ATTY. MELCHOR CARLOS R. RAGANES, CITY BUILDINGS and ARCHITECTURE office, represented by OSCAR FLORES; and PUBLIC ORDER and SAFETY OFFICE, Represented by EMMANUEL REYES, Petitioners, vs. ATTY. BRAIN MASWENG, Regional Officer-National Commission on Indigenous People-CAR, ELVIN GUMANGAN, NARCISO BASATAN and LAZARO BAWAS, Respondents.
FACTS
The City Mayor of Baguio City issued Demolition Orders against structures built by respondents (Elvin Gumangan, Narciso Basatan, and Lazaro Bawas) on a portion of the Busol Watershed Reservation without building permits, alleging violations of pertinent laws. The respondents, members of the Ibaloi indigenous community, filed a petition for injunction with the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP), claiming the land is their ancestral land, occupied since time immemorial, and recognized under Proclamation No. 15 (1922). The NCIP issued temporary restraining orders and a writ of preliminary injunction against the demolition. The petitioners (City Government, et al.) challenged the NCIP’s jurisdiction and the injunction before the Court of Appeals, which upheld the NCIP’s actions and ruled that Baguio City is not exempt from the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA). The petitioners elevated the case to the Supreme Court, arguing the NCIP lacks jurisdiction over main injunction suits, that Baguio City is governed by its Charter and exempt from IPRA, that the Busol Forest Reservation is inalienable and not subject to ancestral claims, and that the demolition orders were a valid exercise of police power.
ISSUE
1. Whether the NCIP has jurisdiction to hear and decide a main action for injunction involving claims over ancestral lands within a forest reservation.
2. Whether the respondents are entitled to the injunctive relief granted by the NCIP to prevent the demolition of their structures on the Busol Forest Reservation.
RULING
The Supreme Court GRANTED the petition, REVERSED and SET ASIDE the Court of Appeals Decision and Resolution, and DISMISSED the NCIP case.
1. On Jurisdiction: The Court held that the NCIP has jurisdiction over the dispute. Based on the allegations in the respondents’ petition—that they are Ibaloi tribe members asserting ownership of ancestral lands—the case qualifies as a “dispute or controversy over ancestral lands” under the NCIP’s jurisdiction as defined by the IPRA and NCIP Administrative Circular No. 1-03. The IPRA expressly grants the NCIP the power to issue injunctive writs, which is not limited to auxiliary remedies.
2. On the Entitlement to Injunction: The Court ruled that the respondents are not entitled to injunctive relief. The Busol Forest Reservation is an inalienable forest land, as previously declared by the Court in Heirs of Gumangan v. Court of Appeals. Possession, no matter how long, cannot convert forest reserves into private property. Proclamation No. 15, which established the reservation, explicitly states its purpose is to protect the water supply and withdraws the land from sale or settlement. The Court found that the respondents’ claim of ancestral land, even if recognized in the proclamation, does not override the land’s inalienable status as a forest reservation needed for public welfare. The demolition orders were a valid exercise of police power for public interest.