May 25, 2004

DAR OPINION NO. 15-04

MEMORANDUM

TO                :     Director Martha Carmel C. Salcedo
                          Policy and Strategic Research Service

SUBJECT    :     Legal Opinion on the Reckoning Date of the Qualifications for Landowner's Child-Awardee Under Section 6 of R.A. No. 6657

This refers to your memorandum dated 27 April 2004, requesting for legal opinion on the aforementioned reckoning date.   HIETAc

You stated, among others, that the Policy and Planning Strategic Research Service (PSRS) is undertaking the review and revision of Memorandum Circular No. 04, Series of 1994, entitled: "Clarificatory Guidelines Concerning the Award to Children Under Section 6 and 22 of R.A. No. 6657"; that said Memorandum Circular provides the qualification of the prospective child-awardee to be: ". . . . . at least 15 years of age and actually tilling the land or directly managing the farm as of June 15, 1988. . . . . ."; that Section 6, paragraph 1 of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) was not explicit on the reckoning date from which such qualifications should have been met by the landowner's child to be entitled to an award of his/her parent's agricultural land, i.e., whether on June 15, 1988 or at the time of CARP coverage; and that in this regard, you are requesting that a legal opinion be rendered on the matter as input to the revision of said guideline.

The 1st paragraph of Section 6, R.A. No. 6657 (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law) has to be interpreted in relation to Section 78 thereof for the purpose of determining the reckoning period. Section 78 of R.A. No. 6657 provides, quote:

"Section 78.   Effectivity Clause. — This Act shall take effect immediately after publication in at least two (2) national newspapers of general circulation. " (emphasis supplied)

From the above-cited provision, it can be inferred that the reckoning date is the effectivity of the CARL itself, which is 15 June 1988, obviously since Section 6, paragraph 1 forms part of said law.

Moreover, the setting of the reckoning date by the DAR, which in the instant case was deemed as effective 15 June 1988 pursuant to DAR Memorandum Circular No. 04, Series of 1994 (and not at the time of coverage or notice of coverage), is an exercise of its sound discretion and authority under Section 49 of R.A. No. 6657 that "the DAR shall have the power to issue rules and regulations, whether substantive or procedural, to carry out the objects and purposes of this Act. . . . . "

Finally, it bears noting that the reckoning date of 15 June 1988 was expressly reiterated and underscored in DAR Administrative Order No. 2, Series of 2003 (2003 Rules and Regulations Governing Landowner Retention Rights), particularly Section 7.4 thereof, to wit:

"Section 7.     Criteria/Requirements for Award of Retention — The following are the criteria in the grant of retention area to landowners:   ASDCaI

xxx                      xxx                      xxx

7.4.   The landowner must submit a list of his children who are fifteen (15) years old or over as of 15 June 1988 and who have been actually cultivating or directly managing the farm since 15 June 1988 for identification as preferred beneficiaries, as well as evidence of such." (emphasis supplied)

We hope to have clarified the matter and please be guided accordingly.

Thank you.

(SGD.) RICARDO S. ARLANZA
Undersecretary for Policy, Planning and Legal Affairs Office