DENR vs.

YAP
G.R. No. 167707; G.R. No. 173775
8 October 2008

Nature: G.R. No. 167707: Petition for review on certiorari of CA decision; and Special Civil Action in
the SC.
G.R. No. 173775: Prohibition, Mandamus and Nullification of Proclamation No. 1064, 8 Oct. 2008
Ponente: J. Reyes, R.T.

Facts:
- GR 167707:
o 10-Nov-1978: Pres. Marcos issued Proclamation 1801, declaring Boracay, among others, as
a tourist zone & marine reserves under the administration of the Philippine Tourism Authority
(PTA).
o 3-Sep-1982: Issuance of PTA-Circular 3-82, which implemented Proc. 1801.
o Respondents-claimants Mayor Jose S. Yap, et. al., filed for declaratory relief with the RTC-
Kalibo, Aklan claiming that said Proclamation and PTA-Circular precluded them from filing an
application for judicial confirmation of imperfect title or survey of land for titling purposes.
o OSG opposed their petition countering that Boracay was:
(1) An unclassified land of the public domain,
(2) It formed part of the mass of lands classified as public forest, which was not
available for disposition pursuant to Sec. 3 (a) of PD 705 (Revised Forestry Code), as
amended
Thus, whatever possession respondent-claimants have cannot ripen into ownership.
o RTC rendered judgment in favor of respondent-claimants, i.e., Proc. 1801 and PTA-Circular 3-
82 posed no legal obstacle to their lands, and upheld their right to have their occupied lands
titled in their name. CA affirmed in toto.
o Hence, this petition.
- GR 173775:
o 22-May-2006 Pres. Macapagal-Arroyo issued Proclamation No. 1064, which classified
Boracay into, 400-hectares of reserved forest land (protection purposes), and 628.96-
hectares of agricultural land (alienable and disposable).
o 10-Aug-2006 Petitioner-claimants Dr. Orlando Sacay, et. al., landowners in Boracay, filed
with the SC an original petition for prohibition, mandamus, and nullification of Proc. 1064.
They alleged that said proclamation infringed on their prior vested rights over portions of
Boracay and that they have been in continued possession of their respective lots since time
immemorial.
- 21-Nov-2006: SC ordered consolidation of both petitions, which principally involve the same issues
on the land classification of Boracay

Issue: Whether private claimants have a right to secure titles over their occupied portions in Boracay
Held: NO.
G.R. No. 167707: CA DECISION REVERSED and SET ASIDE.
G.R. No. 173775: DISMISSED for lack of merit.

Ratio:
- Before Proc. 1604, Boracay had never been expressly and administratively classified under any of
the grand divisions. It was an unclassified land of the public domain.
- Regalian Doctrine dictates that all lands of the public domain belong to the State, that the State is
the source of any asserted right to ownership of land and charged with the conservation of such
patrimony.
- All lands not otherwise appearing to be clearly within private ownership are presumed to belong to
the State. It determines if lands of the public domain will be disposed of for private ownership.
- As agent of the state, the government has plenary power to determine who shall be the favored
recipients of public lands, as well as the terms that grants such privilege, not excluding the placing
of obstacles in the way of their exercise of what otherwise would be ordinary acts of ownership.
- A positive act declaring land as alienable and disposable is required. In keeping with the
presumption of State ownership, the Court has time and again emphasized that there must be a
positive act of the government (e.g. official proclamation) declassifying inalienable public land into
disposable land for agricultural or other purposes.
- To overcome the presumption of State ownership of lands of the public domain, the person applying
for registration (or claiming ownership), has the burden of proving that the land subject of the
application is alienable or disposable. Incontrovertible evidence must be established that the land
subject of the application/claim is alienable or disposable; such as:
o (1) A positive act declaring the land of the public domain as alienable and disposable, or
o (2) A certification from the government that the land claimed to have been possessed for
the required number of years is alienable and disposable.
- In the case at bar, no such proclamation/executive order/administrative action/report/statute or
certification was presented to the Court. There is no evidence presented showing that, prior to
2006, the portions of Boracay occupied by private claimants were subject of a govt. proclamation
that the land is alienable and disposable.
- Absent such incontrovertible evidence, the Court cannot accept the submission that lands occupied
by private claimants were already open to disposition before 2006. Matters of land classification or
reclassification cannot be assumed. They call for proof.