Chavez vs. PEA
Gr.
No. 133250, July 9, 2002
Carpio, J.
Parties
of the Case:
Francisco I. Chavez(petitioner)
Public Estates Authority and Amari Coastal Bay
Development Corporation (respondent)
Nature: This is an original Petition for Mandamus
with prayer for a writ of preliminary injunction and a temporary restraining
order. The petition seeks to compel the Public Estates Authority (PEA for
brevity) to disclose all facts on PEAs then on-going renegotiations with Amari
Coastal Bay and Development Corporation (AMARI for brevity) to reclaim portions
of Manila Bay. The petition further seeks to enjoin PEA from signing a new
agreement with AMARI involving such reclamation.
Keywords: manila
bay, reclaimed foreshore lands
Summary: The Public Estates Authority (PEA) is the
central implementing agency tasked to undertake reclamation projects
nationwide. It took over the leasing and selling functions of the DENR
(Department of Environmental and Natural Resources) insofar as reclaimed or
about to be reclaimed foreshore lands are concerned.
PEA sought the transfer to the Amari Coastal
Bay and Development Corporation, a private corporation, of the ownership of
77.34 hectares of the Freedom Islands. PEA also sought to have 290.156 hectares
of submerged areas of Manila Bay to Amari.
Facts: In 1973, the Comissioner on Public Highways
entered into a contract to reclaim areas of Manila Bay with the Construction
and Development Corportion of the Philippines (CDCP).
PEA (Public Estates Authority) was created by
President Marcos under P.D. 1084, tasked with developing and leasing reclaimed
lands. These lands were transferred to the care of PEA under P.D. 1085 as part
of the Manila Cavite Road and Reclamation Project (MCRRP). CDCP and PEA entered
into an agreement that all future projects under the MCRRP would be funded and
owned by PEA.
By 1988, President Aquino issued Special Patent
No. 3517 transferring lands to PEA. It was followed by the transfer of three
Titles (7309, 7311 and 7312) by the Register of Deeds of Paranaque to PEA
covering the three reclaimed islands known as the FREEDOM ISLANDS.
Subsquently, PEA entered into a joint venture
agreement (JVA) with AMARI, a Thai-Philippine corporation to develop the
Freedom Islands. Along with another 250 hectares, PEA and AMARI entered the JVA
which would later transfer said lands to AMARI. This caused a stir especially
when Sen. Maceda assailed the agreement, claiming that such lands were part of
public domain (famously known as the “mother of all scams”).
Peitioner Frank J. Chavez filed case as a
taxpayer praying for mandamus, a writ of preliminary injunction and a TRO
against the sale of reclaimed lands by PEA to AMARI and from implementing the
JVA. Following these events, under President Estrada’s admin, PEA and AMARI
entered into an Amended JVA and Mr. Chaves claim that the contract is null and
void.
Issue:
w/n: the transfer to AMARI lands reclaimed or
to be reclaimed as part of the stipulations in the (Amended) JVA between AMARI
and PEA violate Sec. 3 Art. XII of the 1987 Constitution
w/n: the court is the proper forum for raising
the issue of whether the amended joint venture agreement is grossly
disadvantageous to the government.
Held: On the issue of Amended JVA as violating the
constitution:
1. The 157.84 hectares of reclaimed lands
comprising the Freedom Islands, now covered by certificates of title in the
name of PEA, are alienable lands of the public domain. PEA may lease these
lands to private corporations but may not sell or transfer ownership of these
lands to private corporations. PEA may only sell these lands to Philippine
citizens, subject to the ownership limitations in the 1987 Constitution and
existing laws.
2. The 592.15 hectares of submerged areas of
Manila Bay remain inalienable natural resources of the public domain until
classified as alienable or disposable lands open to disposition and declared no
longer needed for public service. The government can make such classification
and declaration only after PEA has reclaimed these submerged areas. Only then
can these lands qualify as agricultural lands of the public domain, which are
the only natural resources the government can alienate. In their present state,
the 592.15 hectares of submerged areas are inalienable and outside the commerce
of man.
3. Since the Amended JVA seeks to transfer to
AMARI, a private corporation, ownership of 77.34 hectares110 of the Freedom
Islands, such transfer is void for being contrary to Section 3, Article XII of
the 1987 Constitution which prohibits private corporations from acquiring any
kind of alienable land of the public domain.
4. Since the Amended JVA also seeks to transfer
to AMARI ownership of 290.156 hectares111 of still submerged areas of Manila
Bay, such transfer is void for being contrary to Section 2, Article XII of the
1987 Constitution which prohibits the alienation of natural resources other
than agricultural lands of the public domain.
PEA may reclaim these submerged areas.
Thereafter, the government can classify the reclaimed lands as alienable or
disposable, and further declare them no longer needed for public service.
Still, the transfer of such reclaimed alienable lands of the public domain to
AMARI will be void in view of Section 3, Article XII of the 1987Constitution
which prohibits private corporations from acquiring any kind of alienable land
of the public domain.
Ruling: WHEREFORE, finding the Motions for
Reconsideration to be without merit, the same are hereby DENIED with FINALITY.
The Motion to Inhibit and for Re-Deliberation and the Motion to Set Case for
Hearing on Oral Argument are likewise DENIED.
SO ORDERED.
No comments:
Post a Comment