Illegal buildings and land “squatting” in Baguio

EDITORIAL

The problem of land “squatting” had been a problem the Baguio City government had to contend with over the years. The issue had been controversial as some who squatted over public or private lands were deemed “informal settlers.” Then there were those who settled  or claimed to have been staying “since time immemorial”and made houses or buildings over “government or private lots” but are now the object of contention even if they have certificates of ancestral land titles (CALTs).

The city government is set to demolish illegal buildings and structures for one at Busol Watershed after issuing demolition notices to owners.  Investigation of alleged new structures and filing of new cases against those who will continue to defy the law would be done, according to Mayor Mauricio Domogan.

Last May 7, anti-squatting operatives set to demolish five structures but were fended off by occupants who barricaded the area.

The Supreme Court in a decision issued last year sustained the city government’s bid to demolish illegal structures numbering 33 located in three sections of the watershed during the time of former mayor Reinaldo Bautista Jr. in July, 2009 which did not materialize after the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) issued temporary restraining order and later a preliminary injunction.

The High Court upheld its decision in February 4, 2009 quashing the jurisdiction of the NCIP to issue similar orders in 2006 to stop implementation of the demolition orders issued by then Mayor Braulio Yaranon for dismantling of illegal structures owned by three lot claimants. 

In said case, the structure occupants filed a petition for injunction and restraining orders before the NCIP Cordillera claiming lots within the watershed were their ancestral lands and that their ownership of said lots “have been expressly recognized in Proclamation No. 15 dated April 27, 1922” which declared the areas as a forest reservation.

In the order, the higher court maintained lot occupants’ ancestral land claim was not expressly recognized by Proclamation No. 15 which should have justified issuances made by the NCIP.

The court said Proclamation No. 15 “does not appear to be a definitive recognition of private respondents’ ancestral land claim.”

“The proclamation merely identifies the Molintas and Gumangan families, the predecessors-in-interest of private respondents, as claimants of a portion of the Busol Forest Reservation but does not acknowledge vested rights over the same.  In fact, Proclamation No. 15 explicitly withdraws the Busol Forest Reservation from sale or settlement,” the decision reads.

“The fact remains, too, that the Busol Forest Reservation was declared by the Court as inalienable in Heirs of Gumanagan v. Court of Appeals.  The declaration of the (reservation) as such precludes its conversion into private property.  Relatedly, the courts are not endowed with the jurisdictional competence to adjudicate forest lands,” the court added.

With impending demolition of illegal structures within Busol, it would do well for the city government to do a detailed study of the metes and bounds of Busol Watershed as some ancestral land claimants are now saying their lots lie outside Busol and they have titles issued by the government under the Americans even dating before World War 2 to prove this.