Property Final Paper

8/14/2019 Property Final Paper

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/property-final-paper 1/48

University of the Philippines

College of Law

Diliman, Quezon City

Evicted by Big Brother: UDHA and the

Informal Settlers in the Philippines

Submitted by:

Ortua, Maria Christina C.

Poblacion, Krizelle F.

Rivera, Jan Michael A.

Roque, Ra ym ond R.

21 October 2007



ABSTRACT

It has been 15 years since the Urban Development and Housing Act (UDHA),

popularly known as the “Lina Law” was enacted. Since then, the law immediately

became a constant target of criticisms. Many critics say that the law did more harm

than good since it merely made the problem regarding mass housing more

complicated. On the other hand, some say that the law is beneficial since it gave the

so-called “informal settlers” the chance to start a better life by affording them the

opportunity to obtain decent housing as well as by providing some procedural

safeguards in properly effecting their resettlements.

In this paper, the authors attempt to determine the effects of the law from the

time it was enacted up to present by analyzing the existing jurisprudence related to it

as well as by conducting interviews of individuals within the affected areas. By

determining the effects, the authors want to know whether the declared policy

objectives of the law were somehow met.

The authors also formulated three basic assumptions which they will use to

analyze the law itself and to find out why it has become a source of discontent to the

affected as well as to some interested persons. In short, the authors would ascertain

whether: 1) the law is defective in itself that it must be repealed at once; or 2) the law

has only isolated flawed provisions that require some amendments so that the law

will cater to its purpose; and finally, 3) the law is already adequately crafted and the

problem only lies in its implementation.

Towards the end of this paper, the authors would also present some policy

recommendations based on their findings.



TA BLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract

Chapter I: Introduction

A Historical Perspective of Squatting……………………………………………1

The Economics of Squatting……………………………………………………...2

Squatting and its Political and Social Aspects…………………………...………4

The Need for the Law to Intervene……………………………………………...5

Chapter II: Legal Standards Affecting the Informal Settlers

UDHA and Related Laws…………………………………………………………6

Jurisprudence……………………………………………………………………10

Chapter III: Parties at Play: The Informal Settlers and the State

The Reality of Informal Settlers……………………………………..…………17

Government Intervention on the Proliferation of Informal Settlers..………..22

Chapter IV: Case Studies

The Informal Settlers of Area 17- Bukid,………………………………………25

University of the Philippines Campus, Quezon City:

An Interview with Alice Fernandez, Coordinator The Informal Settlers of Park Seven, Loyola Heights,…………………………26

Quezon City: An Interview with Lina Oliveros,

President of Samahan ng mga Mamamayan sa Park Seven

Chapter V: Analysis

On Government Intervention on the Exercise of Property Rights…………..29

On Informal Networks to Enforce the Rights of Informal Settlers…………..31

On Urban vis-à-vis Rural Development……………………………………….32

Chapter VI: Policy Recommendations and ConclusionsGovernment’s Point of View…………………………………………………..34

Informal Settler’s Point of View……………………………………………….38

Private Owner’s Point of View………………………………………………...39

Conclusion………………………………………………………………………39

Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………….40



CHAPTE R I

IN TRODUCTION

Squatting is the act of occupying an abandoned or unoccupied land by landless

and homeless persons1. The words “squatters”, “slum dwellers”, “informal settlers” and

“urban poor” are used interchangeably to signify this group of people who occupy

public and private lands without any legal authority. In the Philippines, the high

incidence of squatting has always been a major societal, economic and political issue

especially given the rapid industrialization taking place in the country. In Metro

Manila alone, studies have shown that housing is a common problem as almost 50%

of the general population is considered “squatters”2.

A Historical Perspective of Squatting

Before the Second World War, squatting was not really considered a problem

in the country. However, the devastation of Intramuros, the fortress core of the

colonial city, was the impetus that encouraged sheltered people to move out and build

their homes in the bombed-out areas. In addition, the Hukbalahap threat also drove

out the persons living in the countryside in order to search for safer abode. An influx

of people on large proportions coming into Manila soon ensued. The biggest

concentration of all grew in Tondo, located at the north of Pasig River, because of the

job opportunities for laborers in the North Harbor and in Divisoria3.

In the 1960’s, Bulacan became the new haven for squatters but it was a result

of a large scale eviction made by the Manila government pursuant to a court order

1 R. Stone. Philippine Urbanization: The Politics of Public and Private Property in Greater Manila.

(1973)2 Trade Union Congress of the Philippines. Found in

<http://www.tucp.org.ph/departments/youth/index.htm>3 D. J. Dwyer. People and Housing in Third World Cities: Perspective on the Problems of Spontaneous

Settlement (1975)



against the squatters in Intramuros. However, the lack of adequate planning,

including the failure to actualize the ambitious agricultural projects in the relocated

areas, caused more than half of the relocated families to go back to their original place

in Manila. The squatting soon spread to the nearby localities while those who

remained in Bulacan tried to eke out a miserable life4.

Amidst the massive squatting, the government either responded with outright

hostility or at best, mere indifference. On August 20, 1975, Presidential Decree 772

declared squatting a criminal offense punishable by imprisonment and a fine.

Although there was a massive move to provide for homes for the poor through the

National Housing Association, still, this was ineffective as the construction costs were

far too high to meet the needs of the target groups5. After the People’s Revolution,

Executive Order (EO) 82 created the Presidential Committee for the Urban Poor

(PCUP) to implement government policies and programs for the urban poor 6. Under

the said EO, PCUP had to approve all demolition orders issued by the government

and private agencies. However, the urban poor soon became disillusioned when

practice showed that EO 82 did not actually deter owners of land from unilaterally

and violently clearing areas covered by squatters.

In 1992, Republic Act (RA) 7279, otherwise known as the Urban Development

and Housing Act of 1992, was enacted primarily to uplift the living conditions of the

underprivileged and homeless citizens in urban and resettlement areas by making

available to them decent and affordable housing, basic services, and employment

opportunities. The most criticized provision of the law, however, is the prohibition

against demolition even of patently illegal structures before the state provides a

relocation site for the squatters.

4 Ibid 5 E. Berner. Defending a Place in the City: Localities and the Struggle for Urban Land in Metro Manila.

(1997)6 F. Schurman and T,V. Naerssen, Urban Social Movements in the Third World. (1989)



The Economics of Squatting

Different factors affect a person’s decision whether to squat on a land or not.

In Eli Remolona’s A Simple Model of Squat ters7

, an economic formulation

showed that household with incomes below a certain threshold level will most

probably choose to squat on another person’s land. This income threshold is further

determined by the rate of eviction and the income distribution within the region.

Basically, the decision to squat depends on which action yields the higher expected

utility. An increase in the rate of eviction will reduce the equilibrium number of

squatters in the city. Also, the expectation of better income in the prospective

squatting place will most likely make a person decide to squat.

In Glenda M. Uy’s The Role of Internal Migr ation on the Squatting

Problem in the Philippines 8, internal migration has been identified as the

primary cause of the proliferation of squatters in the urban area. Factors that affect

internal migration include distance, the difference in the state of economy in the

former place and the prospective place, the presence of employment opportunities in

the prospective place, education and presence of relatives in the prospective place.

The author identified certain problems and issues pertaining to urban migration. For

one, it could result in regional growth imbalance and spatially uneven allocation of

income. Second, unregulated population growth in urban areas could result in

unemployment, poverty, strained urban services, congestion, overcrowding, housing

shortage and less satisfactory physical conditions.

Concomitantly, there is the Harris -Todaro Mode l which explains some

issues regarding rural-urban migration. According to this model, the decision

whether to migrate or not is based on expected income differentials between rural

and urban areas. The Harris-Todaro model migration is regarded as the adjustment

7 Discussion Paper 79-20, November 1979, University of the Philippines, School of Economics8 University of the Philippines, School of Economics, September 1988



mechanism by which workers allocate themselves between different labor markets,

some of which are located in urban areas and some in rural areas, while attempting to

maximize their expected incomes. Equilibrium (or the discontinuance of internal

migration) is achieved when the expected wage in urban areas is equal to the

expected wage in rural areas. As such, it has been hypothesized that the development

of and investment in infrastructure in the rural areas would bring about a decline in

urban migration.

The problem of squatting arises not because of migration per se, but migration

coupled with the lack of land to use or the lack of capability to use it. For instance, for

the majority of the developing countries, the urban land market is not a free market

as it is subject to various degrees of control over land use, regulations of transfer and

others9. Also, the urban poor cannot gain access to the formal market of land and

housing because they cannot afford to do so. Slums and squatter settlements contain

the very poor, daily workers who can usually only afford to rent rooms and shacks.

Squatting and its Political and Social Aspects

The issue of land is largely a political and institutional one. Government’s

control of the urban poor’s acquisition of land is primarily determined by political

pressures exerted by various groups with differing interests upon the government10.

A study of the urban poor and the slums revealed that the poor are denied the

legitimate use of urban land because the rich use it for storing wealth, hedging against

inflation and generating speculative profits. Government agencies failed to assist the

urban poor and are usually found to further the control of the rich. Moreover, the

9 Angel, et al. Land for Housing the Poor. (1983)10 Ibid



corrupt practices continue to allow the use of public lands for private commercial

development, while large tracts of private lands remain vacant and untouched11.

In societies, squatters suffer the stigma of being considered as law breakers.

Their areas are looked down as places where prostitution exists, where criminals hide

from the law, and where there may be a high rate of juvenile crime. Consequently,

societies isolate the squatters who are believed to be best left on their own.

The Need for the Law to Intervene

The issue of squatting is a complicated matter because economic, social and

political factors are intertwined with such issue. In addition, certain civil rights of

informal settlers have to be taken into consideration in adopting policies dealing with

the eviction and resettlement of the informal sectors. As such, there is a need for an

effective law in order to harmonize the conflicting interests in connection with the

matter of squatting. By analyzing the current law in force with regards to informal

settlers, the related jurisprudence and the actual scenario of slum dwelling in the

country, it is hoped that this study could be the means to improve and correct the

conditions of informal settlers in the country.

11 M. Sarin. The Rich, The Poor and the Land Question in Land for Housing the Poor. (1983)



CHAPTE R II

LEGA L STANDARDS AFFECTING THE INFORMA L SETTL ERS

A. UD HA and Related La ws

The Urban Development and Housing Act (UDHA) originated as Senate Bill

No. 234 authored by then Senator Jose Lina as well as House Bill No. 3431012. The

consolidated bill was passed by both upper and lower houses on 3 February 1992.

Thereafter, the consolidated bill was signed into law by then President Corazon

Aquino as RA 7279 on 24 March 1992 and published in the 4 May 1992 issue of the

Official Gazette13.

The 1987 Constitution, consistent with its social justice flavor, contains

provisions regarding urban land reform and housing. These provisions have served as

basis for the enactment of UDHA. Article 13 of the Constitution provides:

Sec tion 9. The State shall, by law, and for the

common good, undertake, in cooperation with the

private sector, a continuing program of urban land

reform and housing which will make available at

affordable cost, decent housing and basic services to

12 City of Mandaluyong v. Aguilar, G.R. No. 137152, January 29, 200113 Macasiano v. NHA, G.R. No. 107921, July 1, 1993



under-privileged and homeless citizens in urban

centers and resettlement areas. It shall also promote

adequate employment opportunities to such citizens. In

the implementation of such program the State shall

respect the rights of small property owners.

Sec tion 10. Urban or rural poor dwellers shall

not be evicted nor their dwelling demolished, except in

accordance with law and in a just and humane manner.

No resettlement of urban or rural dwellers shall

be undertaken without adequate consultation with

them and the communities where they are to be

relocated.

In effect, RA 7279 became the enabling law of the abovementionedconstitutional mandates. The avowed purpose of the Lina law was to undertake a

comprehensive urban development and housing program aimed at uplifting the

conditions of the underprivileged and homeless citizens in urban as well as

resettlement areas by extending to them opportunities to obtain decent housing at

affordable costs and also to provide for the rational use and development of urban

lands.14 In line with these objectives, the law, among others, laid down the rules with

regard to use, inventory, acquisition and disposition of lands for socialized housing.

This includes the order of priorities in the acquisition of lands. The law mandates that

government-owned lands should be top priority as sites for socialized housing while

private lands should be the last, which means that private lands can only be acquired

if the government is left with no other choice even if the taking is coupled with just

compensation.

UDHA is not the first law in the country enacted for the purpose of urban

development. During the martial law era, then President Ferdinand Marcos had

promulgated Presidential Decree (PD) 1517 or the Urban Land Reform Act of 1978

for the purpose of renewing blighted areas, improving the conditions of the urban

14 Rep. Act No. 7279 (1992) Sec. 2



poor and resolving and redressing legitimate grievances arising therefrom, while at

the same time providing incentives to progressive landowners and developers who

wish to develop their lands in accordance with government plans and programs

responsive to community welfare15

. One of the pertinent provisions of the Act is

provided in Section 6 which states that legitimate tenants who have built their

homes, are residing within those lands identified as “urban zones” for ten years or

more, or have legally occupied the lands by contract continuously for the last ten

years shall not be dispossessed and shall be allowed the right of first refusal to

purchase the same within reasonable time and at reasonable price. However, the said

provision seemed to have fallen on deaf ears and closed minds since after 8 years from

its promulgation, the President has issued another presidential decree16 reiterating his

previous order to the effect that occupants or tenants and their families in Urban

Zones or Areas for Priority Development shall not be evicted from such lands.

Strangely though, considering that the passage of the second decree was to reinforce

the President’s previous command, nowhere in the subsequent Act can one find any

penal provision that would somehow deter the violation of the said law. PD 1517

provided for a penal sanction for violation of any of its provision but apparently no

one has ever been prosecuted under it. It seems to be a story of a toothless law issued

to reinforce another powerless law.

In one case17, the UDHA has essentially also become the governing law with

respect to “squatting” ever since the notorious PD 772 or the Anti-Squatting Law of

1975 was expressly repealed by RA 8368. However, RA 7279 does not punish

squatting per se , but the said law defined and penalized those who will be identified

15 Pres. Decree No. 1517 (1978) (7th Whereas Clause)16 Pres. Decree No. 2016, January 23, 1986 [PROHIBITING THE EVICTION OF OCCUPANT

FAMILIES FROM LAND IDENTIFIED AND PROCLAIMED AS AREAS FOR PRIORITY

DEVELOPMENT (APD) OR AS URBAN LAND REFORM ZONES AND EXEMPTING SUCH LAND

FROM PAYMENT OF REAL PROPERTY TAXES]17 De Castro Homesite Inc. v. Leachon, G.R. No. 124856, March 10, 2005



as “professional squatters” 18 or members of squatting syndicates19. On the other hand,

the definition of a squatter under PD 772 was all-encompassing in the sense that once

a person has been found to be occupying the land of another person against the

latter’s will, that person will be punished under it. It is therefore clear to say that on

this score, UDHA is more compassionate than PD 772. Even though the Lina Law has

provided penalty for professional squatting, the enactment of the said law did not

actually repeal, expressly or impliedly, of PD No. 772. If it were otherwise, the

Congress would not have enacted another law expressly repealing the infamous

presidential fiat.

RA 7279 is only one of the several housing laws still in force nowadays.

Examples of other statutes enacted in relation to the housing problem in the

Philippines are RA 7835 and RA 6846. RA 7835 or the Comprehensive and

Integrated Shelter Financing Act (CISFA) of 1994 was designed to strengthen,

promote and support the component activities of housing production and finance. On

the other hand, RA 6846 or the Social Housing Support Fund, popularly known as

Abot-Kayang Pabahay Fund Act, intends to enhance the affordability of low-cost

housing by low-income families, provides developmental financing for low-cost

housing projects, and eliminates risks for the funding agencies involved in housing,

namely: Social Security System (SSS), the Government Service Insurance System

(GSIS) and the Home Development Mutual Fund (HDMF).

18 “Professional Squatters" refers to individuals or groups who occupy lands without the express

consent of the landowner and who have sufficient income for legitimate housing. The term shall also

apply to persons who have been previously awarded home lots or housing units by the Governmentbut who sold, leased or transferred the same to settle illegally in the same place or in another urban

area, and non-bona fide occupants and intruders or lands reserved for socialized housing period. The

term shall not apply to individuals or groups who simply rent land and housing from professional

squatters or squatting syndicates. [Sec. 13 (m), RA No. 7279]19 “Squatting syndicates” refers to groups of persons engaged in the business of squatter housing for

profit or gain. [Sec. 13 (s), R.A. No. 7279] Both professional squatters and members of squatting

syndicates are punished with 6 years imprisonment and a fine of not less than 60,000 pesos but not

more than 100,000 pesos or both, at the discretion of the court. [Sec. 27, R.A. No. 7279]



Despite the existence of these housing laws, legislators still found them

insufficient to address the housing issues besetting the country. Proof of this fact was

that in 1998, House Bill (HB) 4120 dubbed as the “National Housing Act” was

introduced in the lower house by Congressman Prospero Pichay with the objective,

among other things, of creating a “Department of Housing and Urban Development”

which will unify all the existing key shelter agencies such as the NHA, HLURB,

HUDCC etc. But the said bill was not passed. Then in 2002, another bill called the

“Omnibus Housing and Urban Development Act”, with the same topic as HB 4120

was again introduced in the House of Representatives backed up by several

congressmen. But just the same, the bill never became a law.

Another important piece of legislation that is necessary to keep in mind in the

analysis of RA 7279 is Civil Code provisions of nuisance. Reading these laws side by

side is important especially when it comes to the subject of squatting. It is because

squatting in public places such as public parks, highways, bridges, railroads as well as

waterways are considered not only public nuisance but also nuisance per se . These

kinds of nuisance can be summarily abated without need of judicial proceedings. It is

well to remember that under RA 7279, squatting per se is not punishable but

“professional squatters or members of squatting syndicates” are. Common squatters

who really do not have financial capabilities to provide housing facilities for

themselves are not penalized under the Lina law but are, in fact, considered as its

beneficiaries. However, under the Civil Code provisions on nuisance, their shanties

might be in danger of abatement once the same are found to be nuisance per se.

B. Jurisprudence

The first case that was decided under RA 7279 was the case of Macasiano v.

National Housing Authority et. al.20 which was actually impugning the

20 G.R. No. 107921, 1 July 1993



constitutionality of some of its provisions. The case was filed by a retired police

general who was allegedly suing in his capacity as a DPWH Consultant and as a

taxpayer. He was particularly challenging Sections 2821 and 4422 of RA 7279 since

according to him, the provisions “serve as drawback to his tasks and duties regarding

demolition of illegal structures”, and that, as a taxpayer, he has a direct interest in

seeing to it that public funds are properly and lawfully disbursed. But the challenge

21 SEC 28. Eviction and Demolition. – Eviction or demolition as a practice shall be discouraged.

Eviction or demolition, however, may be allowed under the following situations:

a. When persons or entities occupy danger areas such as esteros, railroad tracks, garbage dumps,

riverbanks, shorelines, waterways, and other public places such as sidewalks, roads, parks, and

playgrounds;

b. When government infrastructure projects with available funding are about to be

implemented; or c. When there is a court order for eviction and demolition.

In the execution of eviction or demolition orders involving underprivileged and homeless citizens,

the following shall be mandatory;

1. Notice upon the affected persons or entities at least thirty (*30) days prior to the date of eviction or

demolition;

2. Adequate consultations on the matter of resettlement with the duly designated representatives of the

families to be resettled and the affected communities in the areas where they are to be relocated;

3. Presence of Local government officials or their representatives during eviction or

demolitions;

4. Proper identification of all persons taking part in the demolition;

5. Execution of eviction or demolition only during regular office hours from Mondays to Fridays and

during good weather, unless the affected families consent otherwise;

6. No use of heavy equipment for demolition except for structures that are permanent and other of

concrete materials;

7. Proper uniforms for members of the Philippines National Police who shall occupy the first line of

law enforcement and observe proper disturbance control procedures; and

8. Adequate relocation, whether temporary or permanent; provided, however, That in cases of eviction

and demolition pursuant to a court order involving underprivileged and homeless citizens, relocation

shall be undertaken by the local government unit concerned and the National Housing Authority with

the

assistance of other government agencies within forty-five (45) days from service of notice of final

judgement by the court, after which period the said order shall be executed: provided, further, That

should relocation not be possible within the said period, financial assistance in the amount equivalentto the prevailing minimum daily wage multiplied by sixty (60) days shall be extended to the affected

families by the local government unit concerned. The department of the Interior and Local

Government and the Housing and Urban Development

Coordinating Council shall jointly promulgate the necessary rules and regulations to carry out the

above provision.22 SEC. 44. Moratorium on Eviction and Demolition. – There shall be a moratorium on the eviction of

all program beneficiaries and on the demolition of their houses or dwelling units for a period of three

(3) years from the effectivity of this Act: Provided, That the moratorium shall not apply to those



authorized the City Mayor to acquire by any legal means the property in question

owned by the petitioner and to expropriate the same and to be sold and distributed to

the qualified tenants of the area pursuant to the “Land Use Development Program” of

the city. The court, through Justice Francisco, ruled that though the City of Manila

has an undeniable right to exercise its power of eminent domain within its

jurisdiction, nevertheless, the same right is not absolute. The exercise of the power of

eminent domain should not trample upon the constitutional rights of the private

individuals such as the right to due process, just compensation, etc. At this juncture,

the court identified RA 7279 as the governing law when it comes to “expropriation (of

lands) for purposes of urban land reform and housing, specifically Section 926 and 1027

of the law.28” In interpreting the two provisions, the Court has this to say:

26 SEC. 9. Priorities in the Acquisition of Land – Lands for socialized housing shall be acquired in the

following order:

a. Those owned by the Government or any of its subdivision, instrumentalities, or agencies, including

government-owned or controlled corporations and their subsidiaries;

b. Alienable lands of the public domain;

c. Unregistered or abandoned and idle lands;

d. Those within the declared Areas for Priority Development, Zonal Improvement Program sites, and

Slum Improvement and Resettlement Program sites which have not yet been acquired;

e. Bagong Lipunan Improvement or Sites and Services or BLISS sites which have not yet been acquired;

and

f. Privately owned lands.

Where on-site development is found more practicable and advantageous to the beneficiaries, the

priorities mentioned in this section shall not apply. The local government units shall give budgetary

priority to on-site development of government lands.27 SEC. 10 Modes of Land Acquisition - The modes of acquiring lands for the purposes of this Act shall

include, among others, community mortgage, land swapping , land assembly or consolidation , land

banking donation to the Government, joint-venture agreement, negotiated purchase and expropriation:

Provided, however, That expropriation shall be resorted to only when other modes of acquisition have

been exhausted. Provided, further, That where expropriations are resorted to, parcels of land owned by

small property owners shall be exempted for purpose of this Act: Provided , finally, That abandoned

property , as herein defined , shall be reverted andescheated to the State in a proceeding analogous to the procedures laid downs in Rule 91 of the Rules

of Court.

For the purpose of socialized housing, government-owned and foreclosed properties shall be acquired

by the local government units, or by the National Housing Authority primarily through negotiated

purchase: Provided, That qualified beneficiaries who are actual occupants of the land shall be given the

right of the first refusal.28 Filstream International Inc. v. CA, supra



Private lands rank last in the order of priority for purposes of

socialized housing. In the same vein, expropriation proceedings are to

be resorted to only when the other modes of acquisition have been

exhausted. Compliance with these conditions must be deemed

mandatory because these are the only safeguards in securing the right

of owners of private property to due process when their property is

expropriated for public use.29

Hence, the Court declared that the City of Manila, indeed, has violated

Filstream’s due process rights, to wit:

We have carefully scrutinized the records of this case and

found nothing that would indicate that respondent City of Manila

complied with Sec. 9 and Sec. 10 of R.A. 7279. Petitioner Filstream's

properties were expropriated and ordered condemned in favor of the

City of Manila sans any showing that resort to the acquisition of

other lands listed under Sec. 9 of RA 7279 have proved futile.

Evidently, there was a violation of petitioner Filstream's right to due

process which must accordingly be rectified.30

Six years later, the Court was confronted with almost the same issue in the

case of Lagcao et. al. v. Judge Labra31. This time it was the City of Cebu that was found

guilty of violating the due process rights of the petitioners. Again, RA 7279 was used

as basis for saying that there was a violation of due process as it was not shown that

the City of Cebu complied with Secs. 9 and 10 of the said law. The Court thus

declared that the ordinance, through which the city government has committed the

violation, is unconstitutional. In describing the act of the city government, the Court,

speaking through Justice Corona, said:

29 supra 30 supra 31 G.R. No. 155746, 13 October 2004



It was trickery and bad faith, pure and simple. The

unconscionable manner in which the questioned ordinance was

passed clearly indicated that respondent City transgressed the

Constitution, RA 7160 and RA 7279. 32

The doctrine laid down in the Filstream case was squarely applied in the 2004

case of Estate Heirs of Late Ex-Justice Jose B. L. Reyes and Edmundo Reyes v. Court

of Appeals (G.R. No. 132431 and 137146) due to the “substantial resemblance of facts

and issues” in both cases.

On the other hand, the unlawful detainer case of Serapion v. Court of

Appeals 33 presented two novel issues, namely: (1) the applicability of RA 7279 in cases

already submitted for resolution at the time the law was passed; and (2) the

interpretation of the provision on moratorium on eviction under Sec. 44 of the law.

As regards the first issue, the court held that the petitioners were not time-

barred from raising the applicability of RA 7279 in the motion for reconsideration of

the MeTC ruling/recall of the writs of execution and demolition since the trial of the

case ended in 1986, the corresponding decision was handed down in 1990, and RA

7279 was enacted only on March 24, 1992. The enactment of the law constitutes asupervening cause which rendered the execution of ruling and the writs unjust and

impossible.

Nevertheless, as to the second issue, the Court held that the eviction would

still proceed despite the applicability of RA 7279. This is due to the fact that the

eviction is based on a valid legal ground, i.e., the petitioners failed to prove that they

are covered by the provision on the moratorium on eviction. RA 7279 provides the

following requirements for the applicability of the provision on moratorium on

eviction: that the one invoking it must prove that he is a Filipino citizen; that he must

be underprivileged and homeless as defined under the law; that he must not own real

32 Lagcao v. Judge Labra, supra 33 G.R. No. 115039, 22 September 1998



property whether in rural or urban areas; and that he must not be a professional

squatter or a member of squatting syndicates as also defined under RA 7279. The

Court also stated that, even if the moratorium be considered as applicable, the same

would not stop the eviction since the period provided therein has already lapsed.

The case of City of Mandaluyong v. Aguilar et. al 34 . presented an issue under

RA 7279 which involves the size of the property being appropriated. This involves an

expropriation case filed by the city government against the Aguilars over the latter’s

real property wherein the city government planned to build a medium-rise

condominium. The main contention of the respondents was that they were exempted

from expropriation due to the size of their property. They averred that assuming that

their property was considered as an Area for Priority Development and not as a

purely private land, they are still not subject to expropriation since under Sec. 10 of

RA 7279, small property owners are exempted from expropriation. The Court in this

case sided with the private respondents. It stated that Sec. 9 should not be read in

isolation but in conjunction with the modes of acquisition of lands for purposes of

socialized housing. The Court also expounded on the exemption of small property

owners from expropriation as referred to under the 1987 Constitution and as defined

under RA 7279.

In some cases, even though RA 7279 was not directly invoked by the

parties, the Court by way of obiter dicta has pronounced that RA 7279 was the

existing law governing the squatting violations previously covered by the notorious

PD 772 or the Anti-Squatting Law. RA 7279 clearly defines and criminalizes the so-

called “professional squatters” and provides the corresponding penalties for such

violations.35

34 City of Mandaluyong v Aguilar, supra.35 Tuates and De La Paz v. Judge Bersamin, G.R. No. 138962, 4 October 2002; De Castro Homesite Inc.

v. Judge Leachon Jr., G. R. No. 124856, 10 March 2005



CHAPTER III

PARTIES AT PLAY: T HE INFOR MAL S ET TLERS AND THE STATE

A. The Rea lity of Informal S ettlers

The law is nothing if not put into practice in the lives of those it affects. On

this portion of the paper, a narrative of the actual experiences of informal settlers will

be shown based on news articles primarily gathered from the World Wide Web. This

social context, in turn, would be briefly related to the objectives and application of

RA 7279.

A major focus at the moment regarding informal settlers is the North Rail-

South Rail Linkage Project. Due to the perception of rural Filipinos that Metro Manila

is a place of greater opportunity in improving the quality of their lives, thousands

moved to areas in Metro Manila to have a new start. Now, with the said project at

hand, the plans of these urban poor Filipinos hoping for a better life are at risk of a

major overhaul.

According to a report37 of the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism

(PCIJ), “Little attention has been given to the fact that rebuilding and extending the

80-kilometer railway, a project intended to spur economic growth in Central and

Northern Luzon, also means evicting more than 200,000 poor people who live

alongside the railroad tracks” and at the same time, “the relocation of all these people

— twice the population of San Juan, Metro Manila — is expected to cost at least P6.6

billion. But it is a hidden expense, as it was not added to the total project cost.”

Relocation cannot be separated from the eviction of informal settlers. We

cannot just expect these people to be able to live on their own, considering their lack

37 Pabico, Alecks P. and Rimban, Luz. Nightmare at North Rail: Cost of Resettling 40,000 Families

Deliberately Hidden . Available <http://pcij.org/stories/2005/northrail.html> 2005 [1-4]

http://pcij.org/stories/2005/northrail.html

http://pcij.org/stories/2005/northrail.html



of financial capability and lack of options. At the same time, however, the action of

the government in evicting these informal settlers is not exactly arbitrary. This

balancing of interests is a major concern faced by the UDHA.

In a news channel report38

, “(Mayor) Lim had ordered police to secure the

cemeteries and make sure they are free of squatter families and of petty thieves and

snatchers.” This is due to the advent of All Saint’s Day where Filipinos gather to the

cemetery to honor the dead.

It seems ironic that, at this time of the year, we put greater importance to the

dead than to the living, without any disrespect to the memory of the dead. This also

shows us that these informal settlers will live in almost any place, without fear that

the dead might haunt them, just to be able to survive for one more day.

Notable provisions of RA 7279 refer to the responsibility of the local

government units to enforce and implement the law’s provisions on eviction and

relocation of informal settlers. These provisions are Secs. 2739, Sec. 2940 and Sec. 3941.

An article42 posted by the Quezon City local government in the internet

reported the following:

As of the beginning of March 2006, the Quezon City government,

through its own Housing and Urban Renewal Authority (HURA), has

turned over to a total of 77 squatter families from Barangay Escopa III

the keys to their own housing units. The units are in a 5-storey, 80-unit

38 GMA TV news. 30 cemetery dwellers rounded up in predawn saturation drive . Available

<http :// ww w.gm anew s.tv /sto ry /65 053 /30- ceme ter y-dw eller s-ro unded- up-in-p red awn-

satu ra tion-d rive> Octob er 19 , 2007 [7]39 Action Against Professional Squatters and Squatting Syndicates40 Resettlement41 Role of Local Government Units42 QC awards housing units to 77 squatter families . Available

<http://www.quezoncity.gov.ph/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=158&Itemid=2> 2006

[1-2]

http://www.gmanews.tv/story/65053/30-cemetery-dwellers-rounded-up-in-predawn-saturation-drive.%20October%2019


http://www.quezoncity.gov.ph/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=158&Itemid=2



http://www.quezoncity.gov.ph/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=158&Itemid=2



condominium built on a 1,000-square meter lot on P. Burgos Street

corner Katipunan Avenue, about a block away from Aurora Boulevard

and the MRT and LRT stations there.

Here, we see that proper steps may be taken in addressing the problem of

squatting. However, the ideal character of relocation, as in this example, that some of

these informal settlers hope to get from government relocation can hardly be

practiced at all times and in different parts of Metro Manila.

In Metro Manila, the Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA), works

in conjunction with the local government units of the different cities in Metro Manila

in the eviction and relocation of informal settlers. The MMDA’s authority in

coordinating with LGUs comes from Republic Act 7924, which states that the MMDA

shall be concerned with “metro-wide services within Metro Manila without

diminution of the autonomy of the local government units concerning purely local

matters43” and defines metro-wide services as “those services which have metro-wide

impact and transcend legal political boundaries or entail huge expenditures such that

it would not be viable for said services to be provided by the individual local

government units comprising Metropolitan Manila.44”

In a statement by the MMDA45, as reported in the Manila Times, MMDA

General Manager Nacianceno stated that:

The problem of informal settlers living along the waterways in

Metro Manila that contributes to the flood problem will be solved

within five years… The clearing of various creeks, rivers and esteros in

the metropolis is now being handled by a multiagency task force

43 Sec. 2, Rep. Act 792444 Sec. 3, Rep. Act 792445 Antiporda, Jefferson. ‘Estero’ squatter problem will be solved in 5 years, says MMDA. The Manila

Times. August 14, 2007. Also available online at

<http://www.manilatimes.net/national/2007/aug/14/yehey/metro/20070814met2.html>

http://www.manilatimes.net/national/2007/aug/14/yehey/metro/20070814met2.html

http://www.manilatimes.net/national/2007/aug/14/yehey/metro/20070814met2.html



formed by the government. This would be in charge of clearing and

relocating informal settlers… to various relocation sites outside Metro

Manila particularly in the southern part of Luzon like Laguna,

Batangas, Quezon and Rizal. The relocation of creek dwellers is

expected to be successful because other government agencies are

involved in the program including the National Housing Authority,

Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council and the

Presidential Commission on Urban Poor… The relocations sites would

be a self-supporting community where schools and job opportunities

would be available to the residents.

This belief that the greater the number of government agencies involved

would result in a greater chance of success in relocating the informal settlers is

dangerous. There are just so many factors which can affect the success or failure of

the program used in addressing the problem of squatting. Among others, the extent of

autonomy of the different agencies involved and the manner in which they interact

with each other should be looked into, keeping in mind that the people involved in

each government agency can have an effect on the agency’s efficiency in performing

its function. In all cases where there exists an inter-agency relationship, especially in

the government, redundancy is a possibility. This is a potential problem in such a set-

up.

Center on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE), an international non-

governmental organization, even awarded the Philippines the “Housing Rights

Violator Award” due to the forced evictions of thousands of informal settlers without

regard to the inherent human rights of those forcibly evicted. In a report46, COHRE

stated that:

46 Lagman, John. Forced Evictions in the Philippines . Available

<http://www.cohre.org/view_page.php?page_id=260> March 9, 2007 [1-2]

http://www.cohre.org/view_page.php?page_id=260

http://www.cohre.org/view_page.php?page_id=260



Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) personnel and armed

police forcibly evicted 141 families (about 700 people) living under the

South Superhighway Bridge in Manila and the San Andres Bridge 1 on

the Osmena Highway, Paco, in late February this year. According to

local civil society organisations, a demolition crew comprising of 200

MMDA personnel and armed police entered the community on 27

February without prior notice and forcibly evicted 54 families living

under the San Andres Bridge… Many people, mostly women and

children, were injured during the demolitions. Five men, including a

village official (Barangay Captain), were severely beaten with crowbars

and sticks by MMDA personnel.

There seems to be an international clamor for the recognition and respect for

the rights of the informal settlers here in the Philippines, as well as in other countries

where housing rights are often violated by the Government. Even granting that these

people are unlawfully occupying the lands, their rights still cannot be disregarded.

Based on all the foregoing events happening in the country, primarily in

Metro Manila, we can now relate such social context to the applicable law, RA 7279.

The government has, of course, taken action in addressing the problem of

squatting. Aside from the previously cited report of the Quezon City local

government, a 2001 ADB report47 stated that:

The Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the Philippine government

will sign an agreement for a US$1 million relocation project for

Muntinlupa railroad squatters on Monday, 13 August (2001)… The

47 ADB and Philippine Government to Sign Agreement for Relocation of Railroad Squatters . Available

<http://www.adb.org/Documents/News/2001/nr2001084.asp> August 10, 2001 [3]

http://www.adb.org/Documents/News/2001/nr2001084.asp




integrated urban development project will pilot-test a community-

based, self-help approach to resettle two urban poor communities

composed of 567 families out of an estimated 9,000 households who

live in hazardous conditions along the rights-of-way of the Philippine

National Railway. The project, to be implemented by nongovernmental

organizations (NGOs), is designed to explore new approaches to

squatter relocation in Metro Manila, and aims to establish a cooperative

relationship among local government units, NGOs and people's

organizations in both the sending and receiving municipalities to

enable the community to avoid economic dislocation.

From the foregoing, we could see that there is a need to clarify how the

objectives and strategies of the law are applied. Sec. 2 of RA 7279 states the objectives

of the law, however, these objectives seem too ideal to be properly implemented. At

the same time, there is no certainty as to how informal settlers would react to a

relocation no matter how proper and conducive it may seem to the government.

As for the strategies involved, Art. IX covering Sections 34-38, of RA 7279

states some of the plans perceived by the law. We must take note that these strategies

are not new. Some have long been used by the government even before the creation

of RA 7279. How, then, are these strategies going to help in addressing the problems

connected with informal settlers?

The rights of the squatters, and the balancing of these rights, certainly give us

an idea on the importance of the issues involved – legal, economic, political, and

social. Also, the number of government agencies involved in housing issues should

tell us something about the importance of settling some of the issues involving these

informal settlers. In dealing with informal settlers, it is important to remember that

they are people with inherent rights which the law protects. At the same time, the

government has a duty to execute the mandate it was given by the people in a proper



way. Just because this “proper way” is hard to find does not mean that the

government will just settle on a manner that only seems to comply with the mandate

imposed by law.

B. G overnmen t Intervention on t he P roli feration of Informal Set tlers

There are primarily two parties involved in addressing the issue of informal

settlers. The first is the government and the second are the families who have

occupied land that they do not legally own. Of course, parties such as non-

government organizations are also involved. However, for purposes of looking into

the effect of the UDHA to the informal settlers, it suffices that the scope be limited to

the government and the informal settlers themselves.

There is no question that the government faces a big problem in addressing the

delicate issues involved in dealing with informal settlers. The primary government

agency involved in addressing this delicate issue is the National Housing Authority48

(NHA) under the administrative supervision of the Housing and Urban Development

Coordinating Council (HUDCC). The objectives49 of the NHA are the following:

- To provide and maintain adequate housing for the greatest possible number of

people

- To undertake housing development, resettlement or other activities that

would enhance the provision of housing to every Filipino

- To harness and promote private participation in housing ventures in terms of

capital expenditures, land, expertise, financing, and other facilities for the

sustained growth of the housing industry

48 Created by Presidential Decree No. 75749 Sec. 3, Pres. Dec. No. 757



In line with these objectives, as well as the Mission50 and Vision51 of the NHA, the

following programs are instituted by the NHA.

R esettlem en t Pr og ram . This involves the acquisition and development of

large tracts of raw land to generate serviced lots or core housing units for families

displacedfrom sites earmarked for government infrastructure projects and those

occupying danger areas such as waterways, esteros, and railroad tracks. In line with

this program, assistance shall be given to the procurement of housing materials to be

used in the building of the houses to be given to the people to be relocated. Such

program, following the mandate of RA7279, shall be implemented with the

coordination of the local government units. In the process of implementing the

resettlement program, slum upgrading will be done through the introduction of roads

or alleys and basic services such as water and electricity.

C o m m unity-Base d H ousing P r o gram s . This includes both tenurial and

technical assistance to be afforded to the families in the relocation sites. Community

resources are mobilized for the resolution of land tenure issues and/or site

development through the Land Tenure Assistance Program (LTAP), the Community

Mortgage Program (CMP), and the Community Land Acquisition Support Program

(CLASP). Likewise, technical assistance shall be extended to the community

association or cooperative or local government units in terms of community

organization, negotiation with the land owner, preparation of required development

plans, formulation of disposition and collection schemes, and coordinating with other

national government agencies for the processing of required documents.

50 To provide responsive housing programs primarily to homeless low-income families with access to

social services and economic opportunities with excellence while ensuring corporate viability.51 To be a viable and self-sustaining corporate institution committed to provide homes to low-income

and homeless Filipino families and contribute to the improvement of the quality of life of the

beneficiaries.



Everything seems perfect except for the big signpost located ostensibly on one side of

the land warning trespassers that the enclosed area is a private property of the

University of the Philippines (UP).

A typical shanty in Area 17 – Bukid generally covers less than twenty square

meters. The shanties are in close proximity to each other in such a way that adjacent

shanties share the same wood as their wall. The walls of the shanties are normally

built from wood and heavy cardboard, although several houses have hollow blocks for

walls. The roofs of the shanties, on the other hand, are made up of used GI sheets.

According to Alice Fernandez who serves as coordinator of the residents with

the barangay officials, there are around 300 families in Area 17 - Bukid. This estimate

does not include yet those in nearby premises and those relocated from the White

House creek. Fernandez shared that most of the residents in the area came from the

provinces; Fernandez herself was originally from Marinduque. Moreover, some of the

residents are UP employees but most residents work outside as construction workers,

security guards and other blue collar jobs.

Fernandez recounted that in 1992, when she first settled in Area 17, there

were only few shanties in the area. Throughout the years, the population in the area

increased mainly because the relatives of existing residents came and settled in the

same place. The increase was also caused by the relocation of other informal settlers

previously residing in other parts of the UP.

The residents of Area 17 enjoy basic amenities such as water and electricity.

The narrow pathways are also cemented due to the successful lobby made by the

residents before the local government. Moreover, youths observe a curfew, while a

group of residents patrol the area at night and ensure that unruly outsiders will not

disturb its peace.

The residents do not pay any rental fee for their occupation of the land.

However, they have to secure a permit from the UP before any construction work can



be made on the existing shanties. The UP also imposes some limitations on the kind

of materials that can be used in the construction. For instance, hollow blocks are not

allowed to be used in the construction but, in cases where they are allowed, such

materials can only be used up to a certain height. Anything beyond the limit would

be demolished by the UP Task Force on squatting. The UP also prohibits construction

of new shanties in the premises.

The residents do not have any written agreement with the UP officials as

regards their occupation of the land. The only arrangement though is that the UP

would tolerate the residents’ unlawful occupation of the UP premises so long as the

UP does not need the same. Hence, in case the UP would finally need the land, the

residents should be ready to leave the premises.

According to Fernandez, the residents are actually amenable to the above

arrangement. Their only request though is that they be given notice and enough time

to find another place in which to reside. As regards laws protecting the rights of

informal settlers, Fernandez replied that they are not much familiar with them.

B. The Informal Set tlers of Par k Seven, Loyola Hei gh ts, Quezon Ci ty:

An Interview wi th Lina Oliveros, P resid ent of Samahan ng mga

Mamamayan sa Pa rk Seven

Who would have thought that a squatter’s area lies at the heart of the

exclusive village of Varsity Hills in Loyola Heights? Park Seven which covers less

than two hectares serves as home to about three hundred families. Its small,

dilapidated shanties stand in contrast to the large and expensive houses inside Varsity

Hills.

Park Seven is a strip of land owned by the government. The land was

supposed to be converted into a public park for the village, however such plan failed

to materialize. Instead, it was transformed into a stockroom and barracks for the



kamineros. Since the wages of these government employees were not enough to pay

for a lodging place near the area of work, the kamineros built shanties in the

premises. Soon, the families of the kamineros moved in. Thereafter, relatives and

other acquaintances from provinces as far as Cagayan, Bicol and the Visayas followed

suit and resided in the area.

The residents of Park Seven enjoy basic amenities such as water and electricity

mainly due to the efforts of former Congressman Franz Pumaren some ten years ago.

Moreover, a group of residents patrols the area to provide security at night.

As with other squatter areas, the informal settlers in Park Seven decided to

migrate in the cities to seek the proverbial greener pastures. Lack of employment

opportunities and adequate income forced these people to leave their provinces and

soon find themselves as informal settlers. They believe that earning money in the

cities is easier than that in the provinces. To prove this point, Oliveros shared that in

farming, one has to wait for several months so that rice can be harvested and

thereafter sold. However, in the cities, one can easily earn even just three hundred

pesos from washing the laundry of one’s neighbors. Oliveros believes that if the

government would only build factories in the countryside, then she and the other

informal settlers of Park Seven would not have migrated in the cities. After all, life in

the squatters is far from a bed of roses since one has to bear with the noise and

conflicts inevitably arise among residents due to the close proximity of their houses.

Hence, given a choice, Oliveros would still want to return to the province and enjoy

its comfortable life.

In order to effectively voice out their demands to the government, the

informal settlers of Park Seven organized the “Samahan ng mga Mamamayan ng Park

Seven,” which is registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The

association has no formal arrangement with the local government. The residents do

not pay any rental fee or real property tax. However, they have to secure a permit



from the barangay to build new shanties or to repair existing ones. Oliveros disclosed

that, more often than not, the applications for such permits are always approved

because some of the barangay officials also come from Park Seven. Moreover, there is

no move on the part of the local government to drive off the residents. As a whole,

the local government is very tolerant of the residents’ unlawful occupation of the

public lands.

Oliveros disclosed that the pressures to evict them come mainly from people

who would claim that they are the private owners of such lands. However, Oliveros

is steadfast that such lands are government-owned as evidenced by the copy of land

titles in the name of government that they have in their hands.

There had been efforts on the part of the residents to have in their names the

title to the lands, but these efforts prove futile as no councilor is willing to move for a

resolution for the privatization of such lands. Various politicians have promised to

move for such resolution, but such promises remain only as promises.

Oliveros shared that the residents are open to the possibility that the

government may, one day, decide to evict them. Their main condition though is that

they be afforded their rights as provided for by law. Oliveros specifically pointed out

that, in case of eviction, they should first be provided with a relocation site where

there are basic amenities, nearby schools for their children and sufficient employment

opportunities. Otherwise, the residents would refuse to be relocated or just go back

to Park Seven even after relocation.

CHAPTER V



ANA LYSIS

A . O n G overn m ent Interven tion on th e Exer cise of Pr operty Rights

As discussed in the previous part of this paper, under Section 9 of the Urban

Development and Housing Act of 1992, privately-owned lands stand as the least

priority in terms of acquisition for purposes of socialized housing while government-

owned lands are the top priority. The rule makes sense because such scheme entails

less need for the government to release money; whereas, if private property will be

expropriated then it has to pay “just compensation” for it. The rule also serves as a

guide on the part of the government on how to maximize land use which is really one

of the objectives of the Act. Most importantly, the rule in Section 9 also lessen the

chances that the government will exercise its eminent domain which means lesser

chances that private property rights of landowners will be invaded. It is undeniable

that once the State or any of its political subdivisions exercises its power of eminent

domain, inevitably, private property rights will be infringed. Section 9 of UDHA,

according to one case52 should not be read as a single provision but in conjunction

with Section 10 of the law. Section 10 refers to modes of acquisition that the

government, through its specialized agencies, should follow with the caveat that

expropriation should only be resorted to after all other means have been fully

exhausted. On this score, the law is adequate. In applying these provisions of the law

on issues presented before them, the Supreme Court has provided decisions consistent

with the mandate of the law.

However, on the aspect of exemptions provided under UDHA, the authors believe

that this provision could still be improved. Section 5 of R.A. No. 7279 provides those

lands53 beyond the ambit of the Act. The authors of this paper do not totally object to

52 City of Mandaluyong v. Aguilar, supra 53 Sec. 5. Exemptions - The following lands shall be exempt from the coverage of this Act:

a. Those included in the coverage of Republic Act No. 6657, otherwise known as

Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law;



the fact that these lands are taken outside the operation of the Lina Law considering

that the reason for exempting them were understandable. But the problem with these

exceptions is that almost all of them are worded in absolute terms without taking into

account what is happening in reality. To explain this apprehension, the case of the

University of the Philippines is an ideal case in point. It was mentioned in a news

article54 in 2005 that the University of the Philippines, Diliman (UPD) property is

exempted from the coverage of UDHA by reason that these lands are actually and

primarily used for educational purpose. Because of the said findings, they asserted

that UPD Administration could actually evict squatters within UPD property as soon

as it wants to. But the problem with this is that vast tracts of UPD property remain

idle for a very long time. Because of the mere fact that UPD is classified as an

educational institution, its lands cannot be covered by the law. This is quite

problematic in the sense that it somehow defeats one of the purposes of UDHA which

is to optimize the use of land and urban resources. On this issue, the UPD

Administration has stated that they have a “transgenerational responsibility” to

preserve the integrity of the UPD property.55 But the fact is, vast tracts of land of UPD

b. Those actually used for national defense and security of the State;

c. Those used, reserved or otherwise set aside for government offices, facilities and

other installations, whether owned by the National Government, its agencies and

instrumentalities, including government-owned or -controlled corporations, or

by the local government units: Provided, however, That the lands herein

mentioned, or portions thereof, which have not been used for the purpose for

which they have been reserved or set aside for the past ten (10) years from the

effectivity of this Act, shall be covered by this Act:

d. Those used or set aside for parks, reserves for flora and fauna, forests and

watersheds, and other areas necessary to maintain ecological balance or

environmental protection, as determined and certified to by the proper government agency; and

e. Those actually and primarily used for religious, charitable, or educational

purposes, cultural and historical sites, hospital and health centers, and cemeteries

and memorial parks. (Rep. Act No. 7279)54 Ibay, Cecilia A. “UPD bares plan to address squatter problem.” Found at

http://www.upd.edu.ph/~updinfo /archives/AugSept2005/articles/Squatter.htm. 200555 “RA 7972 not for UPD” Found at

http://www.upd.edu.ph/~updinfo/archives/MayJun2005/articles/ra.htm

http://www.upd.edu.ph/~updinfo%20/archives/AugSept2005/articles/Squatter.htm






are still idle and unproductive and no one is sure for how long these properties will

remain as such. It is not intended, by saying this, to propose the idea that the

Government should take a totalitarian approach in implementing its urban

development and housing agenda. What the government should actually strive at is to

forge a strategic fit between the realization of the lofty goals of the law and what is

happening in the real world.

B. O n Inform al N etw or ks to Enfor ce th e R igh ts of Inform al Se ttlers

The Philippines is the only country in Southeast Asia where squatter communities

are organized and the urban poor are able to make known their political demands 56.

Statistics showed that out of the 600,000 informal settlers who were evicted from

1986 to 1992, most of those who were affected were small clusters of houses and

sidewalk dwellings57. On the other hand, established localities have remained

resilient in the face of eviction. The reason for this is that those who can put up

effective resistance to demolition and those who can bargain for a moratorium are

usually those communities where informal settlers are organized. By forming

associations, slum dwellers are able to articulate their demands in common and can

put up effective resistance against different interest groups such as the local

government and private landowners.

The above advantages of an organized group are clearly manifested in the cases of

the informal settlers of Area 17 and Park Seven. In both cases, the informal settlers

are represented by organizations which negotiate with the private/public owners to

further the rights of the informal settlers. In the Park Seven case, although the

informal settlers’ lobby for security of land tenure has fallen on deaf ears, the

Samahan ng mga Mamamayan sa Park Seven (Samahan) was successful in bargaining

with the local government for the provision of basic services such as cemented

56 F, Schuurman and T.V. Naerssen. Supra at 657 E. Berner. Supra at 5



pathways, potable water and electricity. The Samahan also served as an effective

force against certain pressures of eviction and demolition coming from the private

sector.

The informal networks also provided group protection to the informal settlers,

which the local government failed to provide to the residents. For instance, both the

informal settlers of Area 17 and Park Seven have designated among themselves

certain persons who would guard the premises against outsiders and troublemakers

during the night time.

These informal networks do not only serve a political purpose, but they also

have a social function. Membership in the association becomes the means towards the

formation of local identity and to engender among the informal settlers the feeling of

being established - that the people belong to the place and the place belongs to the

people58. These informal organizations serve as the informal settler’s support group.

In sum, the rights of the informal settlers are better protected if they organize

themselves. From all the case studies, the organizations (as compared to individual

informal settlers) are more aware and better informed of the rights granted to

informal settlers by laws, such as RA 7292.

C . O n Urban vis-à -vis Rura l D evelop m ent

As what has been shown in the initial part of paper, the main reason for the

proliferation of informal settlers in the urban areas is the continuous internal

migration from the countryside to the city. Internal migration is principally induced

by the prospect of employment opportunities and easy money in the urban areas. The

case studies conducted by the group on the informal settlers of both Area 17 and Park

Seven revealed that majority of the residents are originally from the province who

came to the metropolis to seek greener pastures. Most of the informal settlers, in fact,

58 Ibid



have easily found employment as construction workers, security guards, restaurant

employees, laundress, househelpers and other blue-collar works.

This phenomenon actually indicates the imbalance in the development of both

urban and rural sector and the spatially uneven allocation of investments. The

government has focused on injecting large amounts of investment and capital in

industries, to the prejudice of the agricultural sector. This is manifested by the large

buildings and structures found in the urban area, as opposed to the lack of the same in

rural areas. Meanwhile, the return of investments in the agricultural sector is low due

to the lack of adequate facilities and machineries for agriculture. Also, the

government has failed to provide adequate support services for farmers and other

small businesses in the province. Without such government intervention, the

demand for workers in the rural areas would certainly be considerably low as

compared to the urban areas. During the interview made by the group on the

informal settlers of Park Seven, Lina Oliveros, herself admitted that life in the rural

areas is far better as compared to rural areas and if she only have the means, she

would return to the province and settle there permanently.

Unfortunately, the result of this imbalance in urban and rural development is

further unemployment in the urban areas. Soon, the supply of employment would not

be able to meet the demand for employment of the increasing urban migrants. Also,

the immense urban population would eventually lead to congestion in land use and

overcrowding. This is in fact the reason for the proliferation of informal settlers in the

metropolis.



CHAPTER VI

POLICY RECOMMENDA TIONS AND CON CLUSION

1. Governmen t’s Point of View

A mendm en ts t o t he Law . In the previous chapter, it was pointed out that

the exemptions provided by the law problematic. It is therefore recommended that

this part of the law should be amended. In amending this particular provision, it is not

proposed that the law should not provide for exemptions altogether. Exemptions are

justified when the reason for providing them is valid and reasonable. But the same

should be carefully worded and in tune with reality. Like in the UP case, it must not

be exempted from the operation of the UDHA because it was classified as an

educational institution. Since one of the purpose of the law is land and urban resource

use optimization, these entities shall be given a reasonable period within which they

would be exempted and also within which they could “actually” place their properties

into productive use. But if after the lapse of the given period, the property holder

could not still take advantage of the land, it is just fair to put them within the ambit of

the law.



Sup portive Polic ies. There are three broad groups of government policies

with respect to squatter settlements: laissez-faire policies; restrictive or preventive

policies; and supportive policies.59 “Laissez-faire” is simply the descriptive term

applied to the practice of some governments of officially ignoring the existence of

slum and squatter areas and allocating public resources to other development sectors.

Governments ignore them in the belief, among others, that they are of temporary

nature and may disappear with the economic development of the nation, that they

are handicapped by their limited capacities to deal with the issues, or that they are

confronted with more pressing development problems.

Restrictive policies, on the other hand, seek to eliminate or reduce the size of

low-income areas where squatter settlements are generally considered as “illegal.”

Examples of restrictive policies are the exclusion of these areas from being provided

with such urban services as public utilities, education facilities, and health and social

services; removal of residents from their existing homes and their relocation in the

rural areas or some urban periphery; and the eviction of these residents from their

homes which are usually redeveloped for more profitable uses.

In contrast with the laissez-faire and restrictive policies are the so-called

supportive policies, which are founded in the belief that squatter settlements have an

inherent potential for improvement. These policies seek the inclusion of squatter

areas in the national development process and, ultimately, in the social and economic

integration of the residents into the surrounding area. Examples of supportive

policies include providing basic amenities, building low-income public housing

projects and granting technical and administrative aid for self-help housing. Thus,

the policy offers to rehabilitate and upgrade these squatters’ areas.

In the Philippines where squatters continue to be the face of poverty, the

government cannot have a laissez-faire stance and hope that the problem will just go

59 Upgrading of Urban Slums and Squatter Areas. United Nations Centre for Human Settlements

(Habitat). 34th Sess., (A/34/8) (1981)



away on its own. That the government does not intend to keep its hands off the

housing situation in the country can be inferred from the creation of the HUDCC and

its attached agencies and the enactment of various statutes empowering informal

settlers.

On the other hand, the use of restrictive policies such as the demolition jobs

done by our task enforcers does not show to be a viable policy alternative.

Demolition of these squatter areas only resulted in deeper entrenchments into

existing footholds and violent resistance to displacements.

The supportive policies seem to be the most appropriate government policy to

be adopted. The advantages of these rehabilitation and upgrading offers are readily

apparent60. The needed public funds are considerably less than those for public

housing and relocation. The squatters are given security of tenure and the people’s

participation in terms of savings and labor can be mobilized and directed to upgrading

activities. Moreover, relocation generally removes people from employment sources

and reduces their capacity for economic survival. Relocation and public housing

destroys the social fabric of poor urban settlements.

The adoption of supportive policies is not to say that the government is

perpetuating the illegal act done by the squatters. It is more of recognizing the moral

right of the squatters based on possession. It is a concession given by the government

for its inability to provide adequate housing to the people. It is a realization that the

squatters had been forced by the circumstances and had they been given a choice,

they would not have flouted the law. Hence, although squatting is illegal, a strictly

legalistic attitude toward the settlers will not generally resolve the squatting

problem61.

It is also important to emphasize that supportive policies are to be applied only

in public lands. Private lands should be governed by a different policy as will be

60 Ibid 61 C. Abrams, Squatter Settlements the Problem and the Opportunity, Washington D.C. April 1966.



discussed later. Moreover, these policies admit exceptions such as when the land is to

be used for projects highly imbued with public interest. The details of these

exceptions and the operations of these policies are left to the sound judgment of the

government.

Prevent ive Measures . The adage prevention is still better than cure rings

true in squatter settlements. The government should anticipate population

movements and provide for them in the master plan of each city. Since industrial

areas seem most prone to squatter settlements, then these areas should be guarded

more judiciously than other areas.

Police officers or task forces should also guard against any sign of unlawful

construction of house, hut or dwelling in a private or public land. Through the

government’s vigilance, informal settlers are then prevented from asserting any color

of right in its possession of the land at the earliest moment.

D evelopm en t of Rura l A reas. Rural areas can actually be used to

cushion urban squatting in two ways. First, disputes on agricultural lands should

finally be settled. Many farmers are still claiming their rights under the

Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program. Policies may be enacted encouraging the

settlement of these agricultural disputes. Second, as what Oliveros shared with the

group, perhaps if factories are built or employment opportunities are created in the

provinces, people may not see the need to migrate in the urban areas after all. Vast

lands remain idle in the provinces which can be utilized to build houses, create jobs

and alleviate the problem of squatting.

Political Considerations. Although the government may have laudable

projects for the informal settlers, there may be political motivations that will prevent

the continuity of an otherwise laudable project. Moreover, public employees who are

tasked to carry out the housing projects should not be allowed to profit at the expense

of these informal settlers.



Consolidated efforts of al l govern m ent agencies. An attempt to

obtain just a simple statistics on informal settlers took the group from HLURB to

NHA to HUDCC to the local barangay , only to be turned away on the pretext that the

census is still ongoing. It is rather disappointing that the government agencies seem

at a loss as to who should have the statistics. It is surprising that the NHA who is the

sole government agency mandated to provide housing assistance to the lowest 30% of

urban income earners does not have the statistics on squatters. How can NHA

formulate sound policies on squatting if it does not even know the extent and nature

of the problem?

Clear delineation of duties should be part of the consolidated efforts of all

government agencies. If the government agencies are clear on their assigned tasks,

then they would in turn be able to help the people by at least pointing them towards

the right government agency.

Moreover, the importance of having the relevant information to help these

government agencies in forming sound housing policies and programs should be

emphasized. Through their consolidated efforts, government agencies and local

government units would perhaps have in their hands information that is complete,

relevant, and up-to-date.

2. Informal Settler’s poin t of vie w

G re ater Pa rtic ipa tio n. Since it is the lives of these informal settlers which

are primarily affected by any action of the government or private owner of the land,

it is but reasonable to involve them in any planned rehabilitation, eviction or

relocation. This participative process is significant for three reasons62. First, generally

speaking, program results are more successful since people will be willing to

62 Upgrading of Urban Slums and Squatter Areas. supra at 51.



participate in the actual project implementation and maintain the upgraded

community. Second, people’s participation educates the planners, administrators and

the politicians. Third, the process builds community spirit and encourages residents

to work actively on the improvement of their living conditions.

Se cu rity o f L an d T en ure. Every informal settler fears the probability that

he would the next day find himself back at the streets, the very same place he tried to

escape from in the first place. The informal settlers we talked with do not have any

definite idea as to how long they can stay in the lands they are occupying. That they

could indefinitely stay in the lands so long as the same are not needed by the owners

also mean that they have to be prepared to leave any day.

The first step to address this insecurity is to force owners and informal settlers

to negotiate with each other through statutes or some other authoritative means. The

terms of the possession or dispossession should be clear to both the owner and the

informal settler. If possible, the result of any negotiation should be put into writing.

This piece of writing would in some sense give the squatters some color of right in

their possession of the land and give them some security.

3. Private O wner’s Point of View

Secu rity of O w ners hip Rights. In many instances, private owners

complain about squatters in their lands. However, these private owners desist from

taking action to oust the squatters for fear of reprisals. Moreover, even if the private

owners already have favorable court orders in their hands, they find the actual

eviction of the squatters costly and sometimes even impossible.

Squatting on private property should be viewed as having more serious

implications than squatting on public lands. Tolerance of such seizures reduces the



confidence in government and threatens the breakdown of law and property rights63.

Hence, the government should have a firm policy to remove squatters settling on

private property and should strictly enforce the same. The government should be

quick to give succor at the earliest sign of unlawful occupation of private lands. In

case of a judgment for the private owners, the government should be able to back up

such court orders.

Con clusion

From the time the authors have decided to set out on writing this paper, they

already formulated three basic assumptions which they will use to analyze the lawitself and find out why it has become a source of discontent to the affected as well as

to some interested persons. The study was focused on ascertaining whether: 1) the

law is defective in itself that it must be repealed at once; or 2) the law have only

isolated flawed provisions that requires some amendments so that the law will cater

to its purpose; and finally, 3) the law is already adequately crafted and the problem

only lies in its implementation.

Based on the assessments made, the law itself should undergo some fine-

tuning to make it more responsive to the purposes for which it was enacted.

The problem of squatting, however, is not only concerned with the legal, but

is instead multidimensional. The study has found that different economic, social and

political responses should also be undertaken by certain interest groups in order to

uplift the conditions of the underprivileged and homeless persons in the urban area.

The study has pointed out other key areas of concern and has recommended for

policies that can be adopted by the government, private landowners and the informal

settlers, themselves.

63 C. Abrams. supra at 53.



Addressing the problem of squatting has beset the country for a long period of

time. Hopefully, through strong political will and dedicated involvement of various

interest groups, the country will finally solve the problem. Of course, the sheer

immensity of the problem should make it the top priority of everyone for, after all, no

one should be homeless in his own land.

BI BLIOGRAP HY

BOOKS

Angel,et al. Land for Housing the Poor. Thailand. The Craftsman Press Ltd., 1983

Berner, Erhard. Defending a Place in the City: Localities and the Struggle for Urban

Land in Metro Manila. Quezon City. Ateneo de Manila University Press, 1997

Dwyer, Dennis John. People and Housing in Third World Cities: Perspective on the

Problems of Spontaneous Settlement. London, Longman Group Ltd,. 1975

Sarin, Madhir. The Rich, The Poor and the Land Question in Land for Housing the

Poor Thailand. The Craftsman Press Ltd. 1983

Schurman, Frans and Ton Van Naerssen. Urban Social Movements in the Third

World. London. Routledge, 1989

Stone, Richard. Philippine Urbanization: The Politics of Public and Private Property

in Greater Manila. Illinois, Northern University Center for Southeast Asian Studies,

1973.

CASE LIST



City of Mandaluyong v. Aguilar, G.R. No. 137152, January 29, 2001

De Castro Homesite Inc. v. Leachon, G.R. No. 124856, March 10, 2005

Estate Heirs of Late Ex-Justice Jose B. L. Reyes and Edmundo Reyes v. Court of

Appeals, G.R. No. 132431 and 137146, 2004

Filstream International Inc. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 125218, January 23, 1998

Galay v Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 120132. 2005

Lagcao et. al. v. Judge Labra, G.R. No. 155746, 13 October 2004

Macasiano v. NHA, G.R. No. 107921, July 1, 1993

Samahan ng Masang Pilipino sa Makati v. Bases Conversion Development Authority,

G.R. No. 142255, January 26, 2007

Serapion v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 115039, September 22, 1998

Tuates and De La Paz v. Judge Bersamin, G.R. No. 138962, October 4, 2002

DISCUSSION PA PERS AND DISSERTAT IONS

Remolona, Eli. A Simple Model of Squatters. Discussion Paper 79-20. Quezon City.

University of the Philippines, School of Economics. 1979

Uy, Glenda. The Role of Internal Migration on the Squatting Problem in the

Philippines. Quezon City. University of the Philippines, School of Economics. 1988

IN TERNE T SOURCES

ADB and Philippine Government to Sign Agreement for Relocation of Railroad

Squatters . Found at <http://www.adb.org/Documents/News/2001/nr2001084.asp >

August 10, 2001 [3]





GMA TV news. 30 cemetery dwellers rounded up in predawn saturation drive.

Found at <ht tp:// ww w.gmanews. tv/story/65053/30 -ce metery-dwel lers-

rounded -up-in- predawn-satura tion -drive> O ct ober 19 , 2007 [7]

Ibay, Cecilia A. “UPD bares plan to address squatter problem.” Found at

http://www.upd.edu.ph/~updinfo /archives/AugSept2005/articles/Squatter.htm. 2005

Lagman, John. Forced Evictions in the Philippines . Found at <http://www.cohre.

org/view_page.php?page_id=260> March 9, 2007 [1-2]

Pabico, Alecks P. and Rimban, Luz. Nightmare at North Rail: Cost of Resettling

40,000 Families Deliberately Hidden. Found at <http://pcij.org/stories/2005/

northrail.html> 2005 [1-4]

QC awards housing units to 77 squatter families. Found at <http://www.quezoncity.gov.ph/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=158&Itemid=2> 2006 [1-

2]

“RA 7972 not for UPD” Found at

http://www.upd.edu.ph/~updinfo/archives/MayJun2005/ articles/ra.htm. 2005

Trade Union Congress of the Philippines. Found at <http://www.tucp.org.ph/

departments/youth/index.htm>

PERIODICAL ARTICLE

Antiporda, Jefferson. ‘Estero’ squatter problem will be solved in 5 years, says MMDA.

The Manila Times. August 14, 2007

REPORTS

Abrams, Charles. Squatter Settlements the Problem and the Opportunity.

Washington D.C. April 1966.

Upgrading of Urban Slums and Squatter Areas. United Nations Centre for Human

Settlements (Habitat). Nairobi, Kenya, October 1981.




http://pcij.org/stories/2005/%20northrail.html


http://www.upd.edu.ph/~updinfo/archives/MayJun2005/%20articles/ra.htm






http://www.upd.edu.ph/~updinfo/archives/MayJun2005/%20articles/ra.htm

Property Final Paper

Documents

Transcript of Property Final Paper