What's the story behind the recent demolition of houses in Cudal, Tabuk City?

On August 31, 2023, the demolition of houses at Sitio Magabbangon, Cudal happened. Videos and images of houses being demolished circulated online, drawing flak from the netizens on Facebook and Messenger with various comments and opinions traded.

Most of the questions posed were whether such act was legal and why it has to be done even at night time.

Another discussion was “who really owns the land?”

High Plains Agro-Industrial Enterprises, Inc. represented by Dr. Lorenzo Pilando claimed it was theirs based on various documents and that the defendants on the case are merely caretakers.

Spouses Grace Ann and Boston Tarnate, on the other hand, asserted they occupied the land since 1999 and secured a tax declaration in 2009.

What do available legal documents say?

Based on the decision released by the Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC), Second Judicial Region in Tabuk City, Kalinga on January 9, 2017, the court ruled that the High Plains Agro-Industrial Enterprises, Inc. has the right to physical possession over the land where those demolished houses were erected.

The court recognized the Socialized Industrial Forest Management Agreement (SIFMA) entered into between High Plains Agro-Industrial Enterprises, Inc. and Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) on April 05, 2005. Thus, giving them the right to occupy, possess, develop, and manage the 302.22-hectare land for 25 years.

Said parcel of land previously formed part of the Pasture Lease Agreement (PLA) entered into by the DENR and Arnulfo Pilando in 1975 that succeeded the Pasture Lease Agreement of his father, Teofilo Pilando, and the government.

What are the assertions of the defendants – caretakers?

Defendants on the case, Grace Ann and Boston Tarnate, asserted they ‘entered, occupied, and possessed’ 26-hectare of the disputed land in 1999. They also denied signing a Memorandum of Agreement with Dr. Pilando for Boston to be a caretaker of the subject land.

The MTCC, in its ruling, acknowledged that while the land in dispute was declared for tax purposes by the defendants in 2009, said tax declarations cannot indicate ownership of the property.

“In fact, the declaration of the property in dispute was in bad faith, and made only in 2009. They knew fully well that they are mere caretakers,” the court wrote.

MOA termination

The MTCC likewise recognized that the High Plains terminated the MOA when its counsel sent a demand letter to the defendants to vacate the property on October 27, 2015. Hence, the defendants’ stay on the land became ‘illegal’ and that they received the demand letter but they ignored it.

Within a year, the case was filed at the MTCC.

What is the MTCC’s ruling?

The MTCC ruled in favor of the High Plains in 2017, ordering the defendants to vacate the disputed area ‘peacefully’; pay P20,000 for attorney’s fee and cost of litigation; pay the cost of the suit; and for the High Plains to exercise its option under Article 448 of the New Civil Code.

What is the Higher court’s decision?

The defendants filed for a motion for reconsideration at the Regional Trial Court Branch 25 in Bulanao, Tabuk City. The higher court, however, denied the said appeal and affirmed the MTCC’s January 9, 2017 decision.

Defendants filed their appeal before the Court of Appeals but the latter likewise denied their motion. The court wrote, “for failure to file the Appellant’s Brief within the extended period which expired on November 3, 2019 and to comply with the February 11, 2020 Resolution, the appeal is ordered dismissed pursuant to Sec. 1(e) and (h), Rule 50, Revised Rules of Civil Procedure.”

When was the demolition ruling given?

The MTCC through the sheriff issued a notice to vacate to the defendants on February 18, 2019, giving them 15 days to comply. The sheriff further served the writ of execution of MTCC’s decision on March 6, 2019.

On March 18 of same year, High Plains filed for a special order of demolition since the defendants and their representatives refused to fully comply with the writ of eviction and further introduced improvements on the property.

The writ of execution was partially implemented by the sheriff on June 16, 2021 with part of the subject land turned over to the High Plains, while the rest where the houses were constructed and those farmed by the defendants and representatives remained with them.

On January 7, 2022, the MTCC granted the writ of demolition, ordering the defendants and all individuals residing at the disputed property to voluntarily remove their structures within 10 days upon receipt of the order. Failure to comply, the sheriff was directed to demolish the houses.

More than a year later, on August 31, 2023, with clearances issued by the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) and the Presidential Commission on Urban Poor (PCUP), authorities demolished the houses.

Did the demolition team start demolishing the houses at night?

The demolition teams denied destroying the structures at night, saying they started the demolition at daytime but were delayed by the various schemes employed by the defendants and their representatives to stop the enforcement of the court order (use of women and children), thus, the demolition had to push through until late afternoon.