Tadeco - Bucor Joint Venture Agrement - Laws and Proclamations

Legality of the Tadeco-Bucor Joint Venture Agreement

Law: Commonweath Act 141 of 1936. Chapter II. SECTION 8.

Only those lands shall be declared open to disposition or concession which have been officially delimited and classified and, when practicable, surveyed, and which have not been reserved for public or quasi-public uses, nor appropriated by the Government, nor in any manner become private property, nor those on which a private right authorized and recognized by this Act or any other valid law may be claimed, or which, having been reserved or appropriated, have ceased to be so. However, the President may, for reasons of public interest, declare lands of the public domain open to disposition before the same have had their boundaries established or been surveyed, or may, for the same reason, suspend their concession or disposition until they are again declared open to concession or disposition by proclamation duly published or by Act of the National Assembly.

Fact: In October 7, 1931, Proclamation No. 131 declared a reservation of 8,000 ha for Davao Penal Colony. I have not found this Proc. No 131 but there was a Proc. No. 2450 of 1985:

Law: "Proclamation No. 2450

Amending Proclamation No. 414 dated October 7, 1931, which established the Davao Prisons and Farm Penal Colony Reservation in the municipalities of Kapalong and Panabo, province of Davao, island of Mindanao by excluding from its operation a portion of five (5) hectares of the land embraced therein and reserving the same for school site purposes of the Sto. Tomas Barangay High School."

This proclamation provides the fact that indeed there is a reservation for Davao Penal Colony.

Law: Republic Act 10575 of 2012. Sec. 6.

Lands of the Bureau of Corrections - (a) Aside from administrative purposes, all BuCor lands shall be used for inmate security, reformation programs and as a means to promote sustainability, both for income and non-income generating programs, with or without partnership among non-government organizations, civic organizations or other government entities. (b). As a way to maximize its assets' value for effective and extensive reformation (corrections) programs for national inmates, the BuCor shall have the absolute authority to design, formulate and implement land-use development plans and policies.

Issue: On the Tadeco-Bucor issue that since the land in question is an inalienable land of the public domain, it cannot be the subject of any Joint Venture Agreement, such as the one entered into between BuCor and TADECO. Other issues on the subject matter revolve around this.

My One Cent: As the land in question is not alienable, it is not covered for lease by the Commonwealth Act 141 of 1936 as it is reserved for the Bureau of Corrections; has not been ceased to be so and has not been declared by a president to be open for disposition. As inalienable, the land cannot be leased, I repeat, cannot be leased. The Bureau has the absolute authority over its lands, be it with government or non-government entities, even for income and non-income programs as long as it is for the effective and extensive reformation of national inmates. BuCor is mainly exercising its mandate when it ventured into a Joint Venture Agreement for the rehabilitation of inmates, I repeat, Joint Venture Agreement. It's not a lease as there is no leasor nor tenant.  If it is a lease agreement, BuCor should have no more power over the area nor inmates allowed to be rehabilitated. The bureau still maintains the integrity and security of the property while Tadeco maintains and secures the structures for production, produce and marketing. Both Bucor and Tadeco have a common intention of effectively rehabilitating and reforming convicted persons in the penal colony. Using the above laws and proclamations, to declare that the Tadeco-Bucor JVA is illegal, solely focused on voiding the agreement for the purpose of halting the effective rehabilitation of the inmates and the peaceful employment of thousands of workers and the livelihood of even more people surrounding the area.  

I am not a lawyer but I can read and can understand.

Again, my plea, is to look at the feasibility and effectiveness of this agreement in carrying the mandate of government agencies. It should be emulated and not condemned.