Daco v. Cabajar
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Ruben E. Cabajar, a member of the Tagbanua indigenous cultural community and president of the Panlaitan San Isidro Cultural Minorities Development Association (PASICMIDA), was authorized by the Council of Elders to file a complaint against Arnolfo A. Daco. Cabajar alleged that Daco, accompanied by barangay tanods, forcibly took over Isla Malajem, an area within the Tagbanuas' ancestral domain application, and began constructing a nipa hut despite protests. Daco claimed ownership based on payment to the municipal government and tax declarations, while the elders asserted native title and possession since time immemorial. Daco subsequently barred Cabajar and other Tagbanuas from returning to Isla Malajem, impacting their livelihood derived from gathering edible bird nests. Procedural History: The National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) Regional Hearing Office ruled that it had jurisdiction over the complaint, finding Isla Malajem to be part of the Tagbanuas' ancestral domain, a finding previously established in another case. The NCIP ordered Daco to vacate the ancestral domain and pay damages. Daco appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA), which dismissed his appeal due to numerous procedural infirmities, including failure to pay docket and legal fees, incomplete petition details, lack of proper authorization for co-petitioners, improper service, defective notarization, outdated counsel information, and missing supporting documents. Daco's motion for reconsideration was also denied. This led to the filing of the present petition before the Supreme Court. The Petition: Petitioner Arnolfo A. Daco filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, seeking to reverse the CA's dismissal of his appeal. Daco argued that the CA erred in dismissing his appeal on purely technical grounds without considering the merits, asserting that Isla Malajem was owned by his father and that the NCIP lacked jurisdiction over the case, which he claimed was criminal in nature. He also contended that the NCIP had not yet issued a title for Isla Malajem as ancestral land. Respondent Cabajar maintained that the CA correctly dismissed the petition due to procedural flaws and argued that the NCIP had jurisdiction as the complaint was civil and involved a violation of customary law. The Supreme Court considered whether the CA erred in dismissing the appeal on procedural grounds, whether the NCIP had jurisdiction, and whether Daco had a legitimate claim of ownership.
Issue(s)
Whether or not the Court of Appeals erred in dismissing the Petition outright due to procedural grounds. Whether or not the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples has jurisdiction over the complaint for violation of Section 10 of the Indigenous Peoples' Rights Act. Whether or not petitioner Arnolfo A. Daco has a legitimate claim of ownership or possession over Isla Malajem.
Ruling
The petition is denied. The Resolutions of the Court of Appeals are affirmed. Petitioner Arnolfo A. Daco is found to have unlawfully and without authority intruded into the ancestral domain of respondent Ruben E. Cabajar and the Tagbanuas he represents. Petitioner is ordered to immediately vacate the ancestral domain and pay damages.
Ratio Decidendi
On the first issue (Court of Appeals' dismissal due to procedural grounds): The Supreme Court held that the Court of Appeals erred in dismissing the appeal solely on technicalities. While acknowledging the procedural defects, the Court emphasized that remedial laws are designed to facilitate adjudication and that rules of procedure should not subvert the objective of attaining justice. Citing established jurisprudence, the Court enumerated instances where procedural rules may be relaxed, including matters of property and livelihood, compelling circumstances, the merits of the case, and lack of prejudice to the other party. The Court noted that Daco's motion for reconsideration cured the defects and that the lapses were not prejudicial to the respondent. Therefore, the CA should have decided the appeal on its merits rather than on pure technicalities. On the second issue (Jurisdiction of the NCIP): The Supreme Court affirmed the NCIP's jurisdiction. It clarified that Section 66 of the Indigenous Peoples' Rights Act (IPRA) grants the NCIP jurisdiction over claims and disputes involving rights of ICCs/IPs when parties belong to the same ICC/IP. In this case, both petitioner and respondent are members of the Tagbanua indigenous cultural community. While the exhaustion of customary law remedies and a certification from the Council of Elders are generally required, the Court found that exceptions under Rule IV, Sections 13 and 14 of the NCIP's Implementing Rules and Regulations applied. The complaint sought to prevent grave, imminent, and irreparable damage, and Cabajar was authorized by the Council of Elders to file the complaint, thus falling under the exceptions. On the third issue (Petitioner's claim of ownership): The Supreme Court ruled that petitioner Daco does not have a legitimate claim of ownership or possession over Isla Malajem. The Court reiterated that ancestral domains and lands are held under a claim of ownership since time immemorial and are considered to have never been public lands, thus being incapable of private ownership under the concept of native title. While Daco presented tax declarations, these are not conclusive evidence of ownership and cannot defeat native title. The Regional Hearing Office's finding that Isla Malajem is ancestral domain, supported by an "Assumption Over Ancestral Domain" and its traditional use by the Tagbanuas, was upheld. The Court emphasized that a Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title (CADT) is merely a formal recognition of native title, which already vests ownership.
Main Doctrine
While procedural rules are essential, courts should not dismiss cases solely on technicalities, especially when matters of property and livelihood are involved. Substantial compliance, particularly when defects are cured in a motion for reconsideration and do not prejudice the other party, may warrant the relaxation of procedural rules to attain substantial justice. The National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) has jurisdiction over disputes involving rights of indigenous cultural communities (ICCs/IPs) when parties belong to the same ICC/IP, and exceptions to the exhaustion of customary law remedies may apply in cases of imminent damage.