July 2, 1996

DAR OPINION NO. 47-96

Mrs. Natividad C. Faralan

14 F. Ventura St.

B. F. Homes, Quezon City

Dear Mrs. Faralan:

This refers to your request for the issuance of DAR guidelines for the implementation of the Supreme Court ruling in the cases Patricio V. Bayog and Alita v. Court of Appeals which recognize the superiority of homesteaders' rights over the rights of tenants. In view of said decisions, you contend that tenants of homestead lands do not enjoy security of tenure.

Your instant request has reference to a specific case involving your homestead land covered by Title No. P-947 with an area of 14.0000 hectares, more or less. It appears that the DAR Region II Director issued an Order, 1) exempting your homestead land from the coverage of P.D. 27; and 2) directing the execution of a leasehold contract between you and your tenant. We understand that you do not conform with the second directive because you believe that one cannot be forced to enter into a contract against one's will.

Information obtained from the Regional Legal Division of DAR Region II reveals that you filed a motion for the reconsideration of the said Order, specifically relative to the directive to execute a leasehold contract; that said Motion has been denied; and that you have filed a Notice of Appeal from the said resolution of denial.

DAR Memorandum Circular No. 04, Series of 1991 provides the guidelines governing agricultural lands covered by Homestead Patents pursuant to the Public Land Act (Commonwealth Act No. 141). Said Circular explains, among others, that R.A. No. 6657 (The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law or CARL), expressly provides that in all cases, the security of tenure of farmers or farmworkers on the land prior to its approval shall be respected (Sec. 6) and that tenants shall not be ejected or removed from the farmlots under their tillage (Sec. 22). Moreover, in its Resolution dated 23 August 1990 in the case "Association of Small Landowners in the Philippines, Inc. et al. versus the Honorable Secretary of Agrarian Reform (G.R. No. 78742), the Supreme Court had occasion to explain that the said provisions make explicit the prohibition of the ejectment of the tenant farmers even on the lands that are retained by the landowners and that it is clear from these provisions that the landowners right to eject their tenant has been impliedly repealed". Accordingly, tenants of lands covered by homestead patents exempted from P.D. 27 or retained under RA 6657 shall not be ejected therefrom but shall remain as leaseholders therein.

Moreover, Section 12 of CARL mandates the DAR to determine and fix immediately the lease rentals in tenanted lands under retention and those not yet acquired under CARL in accordance with Section 34 of R.A. No. 3844 as amended. Pursuant to said provision, DAR Administrative Order No. 5, Series of 1993 was issued, providing the guidelines for the execution of agricultural leasehold agreements (among others). However, as tenancy relationship may be express or implied, the refusal of any party to sign a leasehold contract shall not affect the tenant's status as a lessee.

We wish to add that the foregoing merely seeks to render a clarification on the issue raised, and does not constitute a decision on the appeal you have filed on the same issue.

Attached are a copy each of DAR M. C. No. 04, S. of 1991 and DAR A.O. No. 05, S. of 1993, for ready reference.

Very truly yours,

(SGD.) LORENZO R. REYES

OIC-Undersecretary
LAFMA

Copy furnished:

Atty. Carmelo Lasam

74 Taft St.

Tuguegarao, Cagayan

Atty. Manuel B. Tomacruz

5th Floor, Fortune Bldg.

160 Legaspi St.

Makati City