OCA Circular No 62-2010

3['\cpllblir of tIle ~bilillilines
~l\vrelHe ([ollrt
aI?ffi re of tbe Qeo IIrt %romi nifj'trator
Jtilnll i1n
OCA CIRCULAR NO. 62-2010
TO ALL JUDGES OF LOWER COURTS
SUBJECT IMPLEMENTATION OF SECTIONS 7 AND 50A OF

R.A. No. 6657, ALSO KNOWN AS THE
COMPREHENSIVE AGRARIAN RE}'ORM LAW OF
1988, AS RESPECTIVELY AMENDED BY SECTIONS 5
AND 19 OF R.A. No. 9700 (AN ACT STRENGTHENING
THE COMPREHENSIVE AGRARIAN REFORM
PROGRAM [CARP], EXTENDING THE
ACQUISITION AND DISTRIBUTION OF ALL
AGRICULTURAL LANDS, INSTITUTING
NECESSARY REFORMS, AMENDING FOR THE
PURPOSE CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF REPUBLIC
ACT NO. 6657, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE
. COMPREHENSIVE AGRARIAN REFORM LAW OF
1988, AS AMENDED, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS
THEREFOR)
Republic Act No. 9700 (R.A No. 9700), extending the implementation
of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) for the next five (5)
years, introduced several reforms to Republic Act No. 6657 (R.A. No. 6657)
otherwise known as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 19R8. Among
others, Section 5 of R.A. No. 9700 amended Section 7 of R.A. No. 6657 on the
priorities in the land acquisition and distribution, while Section 19 of R.A. No.
9700 amended Section 50 of R.A. No. 6657 on the quasi-judicial powers of the
Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR).
With respect to Section 7 of R.A. No. 6657 as amended by Section 5 of

R.A. No. 9700, the Presidential Agrarian Reform Council (PARC), through
Hon. Nasser C. Pangandaman, OAR Secretary and Chairman, PARC Executive
Committee, invited the attention of this Court concerning the refusal of some
municipal judges to administer the oath in applications of intended
beneficiaries under the CARP, pursuant to paragraph 2 thereof, to wit:
"xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx
Provided, finally, as mandated by the Constitution, Republic Act No. 6657,

as amended, and Republic Act No. 3844,as amended, only farmers (tenants or
lessees) and regular farmworkers actually tilling the lands, as certified under
oath by the Barangay Agrarian Reform Council (BARC) and attested under
oath by the landowners, are the qualified beneficiaries. The intended
beneficiary shall state under oath before the judge of the city or
municipal court that he/she is willing to work on the land to make it
productive llnd to assume the ohligation of paying the amortization for
the compensation of the land and the land taxes thereon; x x x."
(Emphasis supplied.)
Henceforth, all concerned are hereby DIRECTED to judiciously and

faithfully OBSERVE the above-mentioned provision of the law in order to
ensure the prompt and smooth acquisition and distribution of agriculLurallands
to our farmers in the countryside.
With respect to Section 50 of R.A. No. 6657, it should be noted that as

early as 1 July 2002, Administrative Circular No. 29-2002 was issued to
remind all trial court judges of the need for a careful and judicious application
of R.A. No. 6657, in view of the increasing numher of complaints on matters of
jurisdiction over agrarian disputes. The circular cited therein Section 50 as
follows:
Section 50. Quasi-Judicial Powers of the DAR. -- The OAR is hereby

vested with primary jurisdiction to determine and adjudicate agrarian reform
matters and shall have exclusive original jurisdiction over all matters
involving the implementation of agrarian reform, except those falling under
the exclusive jurisdiction of the Department of Agriculture (DA) and the
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DEN R).
With the enactment of R.A. No. 9700, Section 19 thereof further

amended Section 50 of R.A. No. 6657 by adding Section 50-A, thus:
"SECo 19. Section 50 of Republic Act No. 6657, as amended, is hereby

further amended to read as follows:
-SEe. 50-A. Rxclusive Jurisdiction on Agrarian Dispute.- No

court or prosecutor's office shall take cognizance of cases
pertaining to the implementation of the CARP except those
provided under Section 57 of Republic Act No. 6657, as
amended. H there is an allegation from any of the parties that
the case is agrarian in nature and one of the parties is a farmer,
farmworker, or tenant, the case shall be automatically
referred by the judge or the prosecutor to the OAR which
shall determine and certify within tifteen (15) days from
referral whether an agrarian dispute exists: Provided, That
from the determination of the DAR, an aggrieved party shall
have judicial recourse. In cases referred by the municipal trial
court and the prosecutor's office, the appeal shall be with the
proper regional trial court and in cases referred by the regional
trial court, the appeal shall be to the Court of Appeals.
In cases where regular courts or quasi-judicial bodies have
competent jurisdiction, agrarian reform beneficiaries or
identified beneficiaries and/or their associations shall have
legal standing and interest to intervene concerning their
individual or collective rights and/or interests under the CARP.
The fact of non-registration of such associations with the

Securities and Exchange Commission, or Cooperative
Development Authority, or any concerned government agency
shall not be used against them to deny the existence of their
legal standing and interest in a case filed before such courts
and quasi-judicial bodies. n, (Emphasis Supplied.)
This is in consonance with Department of Agrarian Reform v. Cuenca, I

where the Court stated that "r
a]ll controversies on the implementation of the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) fall under the jurisdiction
of the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR), even though they raise
questions that are also legal or constitutional in nature. All doubts should
be resolved in favor of the DAR, since the law has granted it special and
original authority to hear and adjudicate agrarian matters." (Emphasis supplied)
In Salazar v. de Leon,2 the Court dismissed the Complaint for recovery

of possession of real property and declared that the dispute between the parties
as landowner and tenant is agrarian in nature falling within the domain of the
DARAB. The Court also noted that such ruling is "in line with the doctrine of
primary jurisdiction which precludes the regular courts from resolving a
controversy over which jurisdiction has been lodged with an administrative
body of special competence."
This jurisprudential trend shows the Court's recognition of DAR as the

administrative body of special competence and expertise granted by law with
primary and exclusive original jurisdiction over agrarian reform maLLers. In
furtherance of the Court's policy to expedite the resolution of cases involving
agrarian disputes and to fully implement the objectives of agrarian reform laws,
all courts and judges concerned are hereby enjoined to strictly observe Section
50-A uf R.A. No. 6657, as amended by R.A. No. 9700, and refer all cases
before it alleged to involve an agrarian dispute to the DAR for the necessary
determi nation and certification.
For your information, guidance, and strict compliance.
28 April 2010.
I G.R. o. 154112,23 September 2004,439 SeRA 15.

G.R. o. 127'165, 2U January 2UU,)

OCA Circular No 62-2010

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

OCA Circular No 62-2010

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

OCA Circular No 62-2010

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

3['\cpllblir of tIle ~bilillilines

OCA CIRCULAR NO. 62-2010

TO ALL JUDGES OF LOWER COURTS

SUBJECT IMPLEMENTATION OF SECTIONS 7 AND 50A OF

With respect to Section 7 of R.A. No. 6657 as amended by Section 5 of

"xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

Provided, finally, as mandated by the Constitution, Republic Act No. 6657,

Henceforth, all concerned are hereby DIRECTED to judiciously and

With respect to Section 50 of R.A. No. 6657, it should be noted that as

Section 50. Quasi-Judicial Powers of the DAR. -- The OAR is hereby

With the enactment of R.A. No. 9700, Section 19 thereof further

"SECo 19. Section 50 of Republic Act No. 6657, as amended, is hereby

-SEe. 50-A. Rxclusive Jurisdiction on Agrarian Dispute.- No

The fact of non-registration of such associations with the

This is in consonance with Department of Agrarian Reform v. Cuenca, I

In Salazar v. de Leon,2 the Court dismissed the Complaint for recovery

This jurisprudential trend shows the Court's recognition of DAR as the

For your information, guidance, and strict compliance.

I G.R. o. 154112,23 September 2004,439 SeRA 15.

You might also like