June 7, 2010

DOJ DEPARTMENT CIRCULAR NO. 040-10

SUBJECT : Guidelines on the Investigation and Referral

of Cases to the Department of Agrarian Reform
Pursuant to Section 19 of Republic Act No. 9700 1

In the interest of expeditious administration of justice in agrarian reform cases

and to effectively implement Section 19 ofRepublic Act (R.A.) No. 9700, the
following guidelines on the handling of agrarian reform cases, to be known as the
GUIDELINES ON THE INVESTIGATION AND REFERRAL OF CASES TO THE
DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM PURSUANT TO SECTION 19
OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9700, is hereby adopted.

SECTION 1. Prefatory Statement. — It is one of the policies of the

Department of Justice, as shown by its creation of the National Task Force on
Agrarian Cases in 2007, among other measures, to ensure the speedy resolution of
agrarian cases by the agency with the jurisdiction over the same and to address the
persistent problem of disputes that are agrarian in nature but are being filed with the
National Prosecution Service. Indeed, if genuine agrarian justice is to be achieved,
this problem characterized by conflict of jurisdiction, legal harassment of farmers,
tenants and farmworkers (i.e., through the filing of nuisance suits in regular courts)
must be addressed.

On 1 July 2009, R.A. No. 9700 became effective. One of the more critical
sections (Section 19) of the said Act pertains to the referral of cases filed before the
prosecutors and the courts. Clearly intended to address the problem of conflict of
jurisdiction and legal harassment of farmers, tenants, and farmworkers, Section 19,
provides:

"SEC. 19. Section 50 of Republic Act No. 6657, as amended,

is hereby further amended by adding Section 50-A to read as follows:

"SEC. 50-A. Exclusive 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 ofRepublic Act No.
6657, as amended. If 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 DAR which shall determine and
certify within fifteen (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."
 It is in the light of the above policy of this Department and the adoption of the
referral system under Section 19 of R.A. No. 9700 that this Circular is issued.

SECTION 2. Definition of Terms. — As used in this Rule, the following

terms are defined as shown:

a. Agrarian Dispute — refers to any controversy relating to tenurial

arrangements, whether leasehold, tenancy, stewardship or otherwise, over lands
devoted to agriculture, including disputes concerning farmworkers' associations or
representation of persons in negotiating, fixing, maintaining, changing or seeking to
arrange terms or conditions of such tenurial arrangements. It includes any
controversy relating to compensation of lands acquired under this Act and other
terms and conditions of transfer of ownership from landowners to farmworkers,
tenants and other agrarian reform beneficiaries, whether the disputants stand in the
proximate relation of farm operator and beneficiary, landowner and tenant, or lessor
and lessee (R.A. No. 6657, Section 3-d).

As used in this Guidelines, the term also includes disputes over the
interpretation of agrarian reform laws, rules and regulations, including those
pertaining to the rights and obligations of agrarian reform beneficiaries and
landowners/former landowners.

b. Agricultural Enterprise — means the cultivation of the soil, planting of

crops, growing of fruit trees, raising of livestock, poultry or fish, including the
harvesting of such farm products, and other farm activities and practices performed
by a farmer in conjunction with such farming operations done by person whether
natural or juridical. AISHcD

c. Agricultural Leasehold Contract — A formal tenurial arrangement

reduced into writing between a lessor-landholder and lessee-farmer where the
former consents to the latter's cultivation in consideration for fixed rental either in
money or produce or both.

d. Agricultural Leasehold Relation — It is limited to the person who

furnishes the landholding, either as owner, civil law lessee, usufructuary, or legal
possessor, and the person who personally cultivates the same (R.A. No. 3844, Sec.
166 [2]).
 e. Agricultural Lessee — A person who, by himself and with the aid
available from within his immediate farm household, cultivates the land belonging to,
or possessed by another, with the latter's consent for purposes of production, for a
price certain in money or in produce or both. It is distinguished from civil lessee as
understood in the Civil Code of the Philippines (R.A. No. 3844, Sec. 166 [2]).

f. Agricultural Lessor — A person, natural or juridical, who either as

owner, civil law lessee, usufructuary or legal possessor, lets or grants to another the
cultivation and use of his land for a certain price (R.A. No. 3844, Sec. 16b [3]).

g. Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries or Farmer-Beneficiaries— Actual

agrarian reform or farmer-beneficiaries of the agrarian reform program are those
which have been awarded either Certificates of Land Ownership Award (CLOAs)
under the CARP (R.A. 6657) or Emancipation Patents (EPs) under Operation Land
Transfer (P.D. 27), or have been confirmed as tenants or leaseholders by the DAR
or the DARAB. Potential agrarian reform or farmer-beneficiaries of the agrarian
reform program are those who are eligible to be awarded CLOAs or EPs, and
recognized as such by the DAR, but are still awaiting their actual award; also those
who are eligible to be tenants or leaseholders.

h. Farmworker — is a natural person who renders services for value as an

employee or laborer in an agricultural enterprise or farm, regardless of whether his
compensation is paid on a daily, weekly, monthly or "pakyaw" basis. The term
includes an individual whose work has ceased as a consequence of, or in
connection with, a pending agrarian dispute and who has not obtained a
substantially equivalent and regular farm employment (R.A. 6657, Section 3-g).

As used in this Rule, the term also includes the following:

1) Regular Farmworker — a natural person who is

employed on a permanent basis by an agricultural enterprise
or farm (R.A. 6657, Section 3-h).
2) Seasonal Farmworker — a natural person who is
employed on a recurrent, periodic or intermittent basis by an
agricultural enterprise or farm, whether as a permanent or non-
permanent laborer, such as "dumaan", "sacada", and the like
(R.A. 6657, Section 3-i).
 3) Other Farmworker — a farmworker who does not fall
under any of the foregoing categories (R.A. 6657, Section 3-j).
SECTION 3. Scope. — This Guidelines shall cover offenses
committed under the following:

1) Title 9, Chapter 2 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), as

applicable;
2) Title 10 of the RPC, as applicable; and
3) Such other provisions of the RPC and other laws, as
applicable.
SECTION 4. Procedure. —

A. Preliminary Investigation.

(1) Grounds of Referral. — When a complaint for a felony

or a criminal offense is filed before the Office of the City or
Provincial Prosecutor, the investigating prosecutor shall refer
the case to the Provincial Agrarian Reform Officer (PARO) who
has jurisdiction over the place of the incident when:
(a) there is an allegation by any of the parties
(e.g., allegation in the complaint, affidavit or counter-
affidavit, etc.) that the case is agrarian in nature or an
agrarian dispute and one of the parties is a tenant,
lessee, farmer-beneficiary, farmer, or farmworker; or
(b) the case pertains to the implementation of the
CARP except those provided under Section
57 2 of Republic Act No. 6657, as amended.

(2) Process of Referral.

(a) The investigating prosecutor shall, within three

(3) days from receipt of the complaint or pleading that
alleges either of the above grounds of referral,
 recommend to the chief of office the referral of the case,
stating therein the basis for his/her recommendation;
(b) Within two (2) days from receipt of the
recommendation, the chief of office shall endorse the
same to the PARO together with the records of the case,
copy furnished the parties concerned.
(c) While the case is on referral with the PARO, the
investigating prosecutor shall defer further proceedings
and shall await the certification from the PARO as to
whether the case is "PROPER FOR TRIAL" OR "NOT
PROPER FOR TRIAL". 3 aHCSTD
(d) If the Certification states that the case is not
proper for trial, the investigating prosecutor shall dismiss
the case within five (5) days from receipt of the
certification.
(e) If the Certification states that the case is proper
for trial, the investigating prosecutor shall proceed with
the preliminary investigation and resolve the case,
accordingly.
(f) After the lapse of fifteen (15) days required by
law for the PARO to issue a Certification and none was
issued, the investigating prosecutor may dispose of the
case pending before him in accordance with his
appreciation of law and evidence attendant to the case.
B. Inquest

When the case is subject of inquest and there is an allegation by any of the
parties that the case is agrarian in nature or an agrarian dispute and one of them is
a farmer, farmworker or tenant, or involves the implementation of the CARP, the
inquest prosecutor shall immediately refer the case to the PARO and release the
respondent for further preliminary investigation. The above allegations must be
written, made under oath, and the party making such allegations signs the Minutes
of the Inquest.
 SECTION 5. Transitory Provision. — For cases that are already
pending and are under preliminary investigation (at the time of the effectivity of this
Circular), upon motion by any of the parties or motu propio, if previous pleadings
filed contain allegations which may be the grounds for referral, the investigating
prosecutor shall proceed in accordance with Section 4.A.2 hereof.

SECTION 6. The provisions of the Rules of Court shall apply in a

suppletory manner.

SECTION 7. This Circular shall take effect immediately.

(SGD.) ALBERTO C. AGRA

Acting Secretary
Footnotes

1. 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.
2. Section 57. Special Jurisdiction. — The Special Agrarian Courts shall
have original and exclusive jurisdiction over all petitions for the determination
of just compensation to landowners, and the prosecution of all criminal
offenses under this Act. The Rules of Court shall apply to all proceedings
before the Special Agrarian Courts, unless modified by this Act.
The Special Agrarian Courts shall decide all appropriate cases
under their special jurisdiction within thirty (30) days from submission of the
case for decision.
3. DAR Administrative Order No. 04, Series of 2009.

April 28, 2010

OCA CIRCULAR NO. 62-10

 TO : All Judges of Lower Courts

SUBJECT : Implementation of Sections 7 and 50-A of R.A. No.

6657, Also Known as the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform 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 toRepublic Act No. 6657 (R.A. No. 6657) otherwise
known as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988. Among others, Section
5 of R.A. No. 9700 amended Section 7 of R.A. No. 6657on the priorities in the land
acquisition and distribution, while Section 19 of R.A. No. 9700 amended Section 50
of R.A. No. 6657on 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, DAR 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:

"xxx xxx xxx

 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 and to assume
the obligation of paying the amortization for the compensation
of the land and the land taxes thereon; . . . ." (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 agricultural lands 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 number 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

DAR 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
(DENR).
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:

"SEC. 19. Section 50 of Republic Act No. 6657, as

amended, is hereby further amended to read as follows:
'SEC. 50-A. Exclusive 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 ofRepublic Act No.
6657, as amended. If 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 DAR which shall determine and
certify within fifteen (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."' (Emphasis
Supplied.)
 This is in consonance with Department of Agrarian Reform v.
Cuenca, 1 where the Court stated that "[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 matters. 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
of R.A. No. 6657, as amended byR.A. No. 9700, and refer all cases before it alleged
to involve an agrarian dispute to the DAR for the necessary determination and
certification.

For your information, guidance, and strict compliance.