3 Inherent Powers of the State:
FOLLOWING—
1. Police Power;
2. Power of Eminent Domain or Power of Expropriation; and
3. Power of Taxation
Purpose:
1. for public good or welfare - Police Power
2. for public use - Power of Eminent Domain
3. for revenue - Power of Taxation
1. POLICE POWER is the power of promoting the public welfare by
restraining and regulating the use of both liberty and property of all the
people. It is considered to be the most all-encompassing of the three powers. It
may be exercised only by the government. The property taken in the exercise of
this power is destroyed because it is noxious or intended for a noxious purpose.
It lies primarily in the discretion of the legislature. Hence, the President, and
administrative boards as well as the lawmaking bodies on all municipal levels,
including the barangay may not exercise it without a valid delegation of
legislative power. Municipal governments exercise this power by virtue of the
general welfare clause of the Local Government Code of 1991. Even the courts
cannot compel the exercise of this power through mandamus or any judicial
process.
Requisites of a valid police measure:
(a.) Lawful Subject – the activity or property sought to be regulated affects the
public welfare. It requires the primacy of the welfare of the many over the
interests of the few.
(b.) Lawful Means – the means employed must be reasonable and must
conform to the safeguards guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.
2. POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN affects only property RIGHTS. It
may be exercised by some private entities. The property forcibly taken under
this power, upon payment of just compensation, is needed for conversion to
public use or purpose.
The taking of property in law may include:
- trespass without actual eviction of the owner;
- material impairment of the value of the property; or
- prevention of the ordinary uses for which the property was intended.
The property that may be subject for appropriation shall not be limited to
private property. Public property may be expropriated provided there is a
SPECIFIC grant of authority to the delegate. Money and a chose in action are
the only things exempt from expropriation.
Although it is also lodged primarily in the national legislature, the courts have
the power to inquire the legality of the right of eminent domain and to
determine whether or not there is a genuine necessity therefore.
3. POWER OF TAXATION affects only property rights and may be
exercised only by the government. The property taken under this power shall
likewise be intended for a public use or purpose. It is used solely for the
purpose of raising revenues, to protect the people and extend them benefits in
the form of public projects and services (I hope so). Hence, it cannot be
allowed to be confiscatory, except if it is intended for destruction as an
instrument of the police power.
It must conform to the requirements of due process. Therefore,
taxpayers are entitled to be notified of the assessment proceedings and to be
heard therein on the correct valuation to be given the property. It is also subject
to the general requirements of the equal protection clause that the rule of
taxation shall be uniform and equitable.
Regalian Doctrine
All lands of the public domain belong to the State, which is the source of any asserted right
to ownership of land. All lands not otherwise appearing to be clearly within private
ownership are presumed to belong to the State. [1] All lands not otherwise clearly appearing
to be privately-owned are presumed to belong to the State.[2]
WHAT IS THE CONCEPT OF JURE REGALIA?
(REGALIAN DOCTRINE)
> Generally, under this concept, private title to land must be traced to some
grant, express or implied, from the Spanish Crown or its successors, the
American Colonial Government, and thereafter, the Philippine Republic
> In a broad sense, the term refers to royal rights, or those rights to which the
King has by virtue of his prerogatives
> The theory of jure regalia was therefore nothing more than a natural fruit of
conquest
CONNECTED TO THIS IS THE STATE’S POWER OF DOMINUUM
> Capacity of the state to own or acquire property—foundation for the early
Spanish decree embracing the feudal theory of jura regalia
> This concept was first introduced through the Laws of the Indies and the
Royal Cedulas
> The Philippines passed to Spain by virtue of discovery and conquest.
Consequently, all lands became the exclusive patrimony and dominion of the
Spanish Crown.
> The Law of the Indies was followed by the Ley Hipotecaria or the Mortgage
Law of 1893. This law provided for the systematic registration of titles and
deeds as well as possessory claims
> The Maura Law: was partly an amendment and was the last Spanish land law
promulgated in the Philippines, which required the adjustment or registration
of all agricultural lands, otherwise the lands shall revert to the State
TAKE NOTE THAT THE REGALIAN DOCTRINE IS ENSHRINED IN OUR
PRESENT AND PAST CONSTITUTIONS THE 1987 CONSTITUTION
PROVIDES UNDER NATIONAL ECONOMY AND PATRIMONY THE
> “ Section 2. All lands of the public domain, waters, minerals, coal, petroleum,
and other mineral oils, all forces of potential energy, fisheries, forests or timber,
wildlife, flora and fauna, and other natural resources are owned by the State.
With the exception of agricultural lands, all other natural resources shall not
be alienated. The exploration, development, and utilization of natural
resources shall be under the full control and supervision of the State. The State
may directly undertake such activities, or it may enter into co-production, joint
venture, or production-sharing agreements with Filipino citizens, or
corporations or associations at least sixty per centum of whose capital is owned
by such citizens. Such agreements may be for a period not exceeding
twenty-five years, renewable for not more than twenty-five years, and under
such terms and conditions as may be provided by law. In cases of water rights
for irrigation, water supply fisheries, or industrial uses other than the
development of water power, beneficial use may be the measure and limit of
the grant.”
> The abovementioned provision provides that except for agricultural lands for
public domain which alone may be alienated, forest or timber, and mineral
lands, as well as all other natural resources must remain with the State, the
exploration, development and utilization of which shall be subject to its full
control and supervision albeit allowing it to enter into coproduction, joint
venture or production-sharing agreements, or into agreements with foreign-
owned corporations involving technical or financial assistance for large-scale
exploration, development, and utilization
THE 1987 PROVISION HAD ITS ROOTS IN THE 1935 CONSTITUTION
WHICH PROVIDES—
> Section 1. All agricultural timber, and mineral lands of the public domain,
waters, minerals, coal, petroleum, and other mineral oils, all forces of potential
energy and other natural resources of the Philippines belong to the State, and
their disposition, exploitation, development, or utilization shall be limited to
citizens of the Philippines or to corporations or associations at least sixty per
centum of the capital of which is owned by such citizens, subject to any
existing right, grant, lease, or concession at the time of the inauguration of the
Government established under this Constitution. Natural resources, with the
exception of public agricultural land, shall not be alienated, and no license,
concession, or lease for the exploitation, development, or utilization of any of
the natural resources shall be granted for a period exceeding twenty-five years,
renewable for another twenty-five years, except as to water rights for irrigation,
water
supply, fisheries, or industrial uses other than the development of water power,
in which cases beneficial use may be the measure and limit of the grant.
THE 1973 CONSTITUTION REITERATED THE REGALIAN DOCTRINE
AS FOLLOWS—
> Section 8. All lands of public domain, waters, minerals, coal, petroleum and
other mineral oils, all forces of potential energy, fisheries, wildlife, and other
natural resources of the Philippines belong to the State. With the exception of
agricultural, industrial or commercial, residential, or resettlement lands of the
public domain, natural resources shall not be alienated, and no license,
concession, or lease for the exploration, or utilization of any of the natural
resources shall be granted for a period exceeding twentyfive years, except as to
water rights for irrigation, water supply, fisheries, or industrial uses other than
development of water power, in which cases, beneficial use may by the measure
and the limit of the grant.
THE REGALIAN DOCTRINE DOESN'T NEGATE NATIVE TITLE. THIS IS
IN PURSUANCE TO WHAT HAS BEEN HELD IN CRUZ V. SECRETARY OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
> Petitioners challenged the constitutionality of Indigenous Peoples Rights Act
on the ground that it amounts to an unlawful deprivation of the State’s
ownership over lands of the public domain and all other natural resources
therein, by recognizing the right of ownership of ICC or IPs to their ancestral
domains and ancestral lands on the basis of native title.
> As the votes were equally divided, the necessary majority wasn’t obtained and
petition was dismissed and the law’s validity was upheld
> Justice Kapunan: Regalian theory doesn’t negate the native title to lands
held in private ownership since time immemorial, adverting to the landmark
case of CARINO V. LOCAL GOVERNMENT, where the US SC through Holmes
held: “xxx the land has been held by individuals under a claim of private
ownership, it will be presumed to have been held in the same way from before
the Spanish conquest, and never to have been public land.”
> Existence of native titie to land, or ownership of land by Filipinos by virtue of
possession under a claim of ownership since time immemorial and
independent of any grant from the Spanish crown as an exception to the theory
of jure regalia
> Justice Puno: Carino case firmly established a concept of private land title
that existed irrespective of any royal grant from the State and was based on the
strong mandate extended to the Islands via the Philippine Bill of 1902. The
IPRA recognizes the existence of ICCs/IPs as a distinct sector in the society. It
grants this people the ownership and possession of their ancestral domains and
ancestral lands and defines the extent of these lands and domains
> Justice Vitug: Carino cannot override the collective will of the people
expressed in the Constitution.
> Justice Panganiban: all Filipinos, whether indigenous or not, are subject to
the Constitution, and that no one is exempt from its allencompassing
provisions