Below is a comprehensive legal discussion on the eviction of professional squatters in the Philippines. This article covers the legal framework, key definitions, procedures, penalties, and jurisprudential guidelines. It is meant for general reference and does not constitute legal advice.

I. Introduction

In the Philippines, “professional squatters” occupy land, whether public or private, to which they have no legal claim or right, despite having financial means or having benefited from previous government housing assistance. Their presence raises concerns related to land use, urban development, and social justice. Recognizing the complexities of informal settlements, Congress enacted the Urban Development and Housing Act (UDHA), or Republic Act No. 7279, in 1992. Among its provisions, the UDHA outlines how professional squatters can be lawfully evicted and penalized.

The concept of professional squatters differs from those of ordinary informal settlers who may be living on a property purely out of economic necessity. Professional squatters abuse the law’s social justice thrust, thus undermining genuine housing programs and the rule of law. Understanding the legal framework that governs professional squatters is essential for property owners, government authorities, and communities.

II. Definition of Professional Squatters

1. Statutory Definition Under RA 7279

Section 3(m) of Republic Act No. 7279 (UDHA) defines professional squatters as:

“Individuals or groups who occupy lands without the express consent of the landowner and who have sufficient income for legitimate housing. This also refers to persons who have previously been awarded home lots or housing units by the government but who sold, leased, or transferred the same and settled illegally in the same place or in another urban area, and non-bona fide occupants and intruders of lands reserved for socialized housing.”

Crucially, the law sets these individuals apart from poor and homeless settlers who genuinely lack the financial capacity to secure housing. By explicitly mentioning they possess resources for legitimate housing or have received government housing assistance in the past, RA 7279 denies them the protections and entitlements typically afforded to underprivileged informal settlers.

2. Distinction from Ordinary Informal Settlers

Ordinary Informal Settlers: Often impoverished and do not have sufficient resources to rent or own legitimate housing. They remain vulnerable and are entitled to relocation or financial assistance during eviction under RA 7279.
Professional Squatters: May appear to be ordinary informal settlers but have a history of exploiting housing programs or have the financial means to pay for housing. They do not qualify for socialized housing privileges or relocation assistance.

III. Legal Framework on Eviction

1. Constitutional Provisions

Article XIII, Section 9 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution mandates the State to promote a just, equitable distribution of urban land and provide affordable housing. However, this provision, while protective of the underprivileged, does not shield individuals who are abusing the system or illegally profiting from State-funded housing initiatives. The Constitution’s social justice directives are not meant to foster or condone exploitative conduct by professional squatters.

2. The Urban Development and Housing Act of 1992 (RA 7279)

RA 7279 embodies the government’s policy to:

Provide adequate social housing to legitimate, underprivileged residents.
Regulate eviction and demolition procedures to ensure fairness and humanitarian considerations.
Criminalize and penalize professional squatting as a deterrent to system abuse.

Key sections under the UDHA relevant to professional squatters:

Section 27 (Eviction and Demolition) sets general conditions under which eviction and demolition can be conducted. It mentions, among others:
1. The persons or entities involved are given adequate notice (at least 30 days).
2. There is proper consultation.
3. The presence of local government officials or their representatives during demolition.
4. Use of heavy equipment only when absolutely necessary.
Section 28 delineates exceptions to the general prohibition against eviction of underprivileged or homeless citizens, clarifying that professional squatters do not enjoy the same statutory protections.
Section 44 (Penalties) outlines penalties against professional squatters, persons who sponsor squatting, and other violators. This may include imprisonment and/or fines.

3. Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of RA 7279

The IRR of RA 7279 provides further guidelines. They reaffirm that professional squatters can be evicted following summary procedures if they are proven to have the financial capability to acquire housing or if they have been beneficiaries of past government housing projects but relinquished their rights.

4. National Laws, Local Ordinances, and Executive Issuances

Local Ordinances: Many local government units (LGUs) have ordinances that complement UDHA, forming local inter-agency task forces to identify, monitor, and evict professional squatters.
Executive Orders: Some Presidents have issued executive orders or memoranda directing LGUs and the National Housing Authority (NHA) to inventory public lands, relocate qualified informal settlers, and enforce evictions against professional squatters.

IV. Identification of Professional Squatters

1. Criteria

The following factors can help establish that someone is a professional squatter:

Previous Housing Benefit: Proof that the individual or family was a beneficiary of a government socialized housing program and subsequently relinquished or sold the awarded property.
Financial Capability: Evidence that they have the economic capacity to rent or purchase legal housing, typically ascertained via income documents, personal property, or other assets.
Multiple Property Occupancy: Engaging in repeated occupation of land, whether public or private, in different locations over time.
Organized Syndicate or Sponsor: Involvement of a third party who encourages or facilitates the illegal occupation to gain profit.

2. Role of LGUs and the NHA

Local government units, in coordination with the National Housing Authority (NHA), commonly conduct surveys, censuses, or profiling of informal settlers. Through a “tagging” or inventory process, officials attempt to differentiate legitimate informal settlers from professional squatters. Once identified, professional squatters may face expedited eviction proceedings and criminal charges.

V. Eviction Procedures

1. Notice Requirements

RA 7279 requires that persons to be evicted receive a 30-day written notice prior to demolition or eviction. While the law aims to protect genuine informal settlers, professional squatters are still entitled to proper notice as part of due process. The notice typically contains:

Identification of the property and its lawful owner.
The legal ground or court order authorizing eviction.
The schedule or timetable for eviction and demolition.
Contact details of relevant government agencies or offices.

2. Consultation and Dialogue

Local authorities usually facilitate public meetings or consultations with residents to explore the possibility of voluntary relocation. This is required for legitimate underprivileged settlers but is often extended to occupants in general. Professional squatters generally cannot negotiate for the same benefits, but the consultation process remains a prerequisite under the law.

3. Court Order or Summary Eviction

Court Order: For private land disputes or complicated evictions, landowners often need to obtain an ejectment order (unlawful detainer or forcible entry) from the appropriate trial court. The presence of professional squatters does not nullify a landowner’s right to reclaim property; it may, however, expedite the process if proven that the occupants are professional squatters.
Summary Eviction: Under certain circumstances, particularly in government land or critical areas (like danger zones, roads, sidewalks), summary eviction is allowed. If the occupants are proven professional squatters, the law expressly states that standard relocation assistance is not mandatory. Still, LGUs typically coordinate with law enforcement to ensure proper procedures and to avoid violent confrontations.

4. Demolition Guidelines

Demolition can proceed if:

A court order or a valid notice of eviction is in place.
Adequate consultations have taken place.
A 30-day notice has been served.
It is carried out during daytime (except when the affected persons consent otherwise).
Local government officials or their representatives are present.
Appropriate safety measures are observed to prevent injury and loss of property.

VI. Penalties and Enforcement

1. Penal Provisions

Section 44 of RA 7279 imposes criminal penalties on professional squatters and “squatting syndicates.” Individuals found guilty may face imprisonment and/or a fine. Although exact penalties can vary, violators can be subject to:

Imprisonment typically ranging from a few months to a few years.
Fines commensurate with damages and the severity of the offense.

2. Enforcement Agencies

Local Government Units: Primarily in charge of identifying and removing professional squatters, in coordination with the NHA and police authorities.
Philippine National Police (PNP): Provides law enforcement support during evictions and demolition to maintain peace and order.
Presidential Commission for the Urban Poor (PCUP): Often monitors compliance with proper eviction and demolition guidelines to protect legitimate informal settlers.

VII. Relevant Jurisprudence

While there is no single Supreme Court case that exclusively addresses “professional squatters” from A to Z, several decisions reference RA 7279’s provisions and clarify eviction procedures. Generally, courts have upheld the right of legal property owners to reclaim possession from illegal occupants, especially where these occupants have no genuine claim to socialized housing benefits.

Some recurring themes in case law:

Strict Compliance with Notice and Consultation
Even if occupants are eventually proven to be professional squatters, the government or private landowner must still follow procedural due process.
No Entitlement to Relocation Assistance
Professional squatters are not considered underprivileged or homeless, thus have no absolute right to be relocated at government expense.
Criminal Liability for Organized Squatting
Courts affirm that those who facilitate or encourage illegal occupation for profit can be held criminally liable under the UDHA, a stark warning against squatting syndicates.

VIII. Practical Considerations and Best Practices

1. For Landowners

Obtain Legal Counsel: Engaging lawyers experienced in property law and ejectment proceedings is crucial.
Gather Evidence: Document the occupants’ history of prior eviction or government housing benefits, and financial capability, if any, to establish their status as professional squatters.
Coordination with Authorities: Work with the local government, the barangay (village) officials, and law enforcement to ensure that eviction is properly conducted and does not lead to violence.

2. For Local Government Units

Conduct Thorough Profiling: Proper identification of genuine informal settlers versus professional squatters is vital. LGUs should maintain updated records.
Compliance with Procedural Safeguards: Even if professional squatters are not entitled to relocation, they must still be given notice and an opportunity to be heard.
Public Awareness Campaigns: Informing citizens about the legal ramifications of professional squatting, along with offering legitimate housing programs to the truly needy, helps minimize exploitation.

3. For Occupants or Residents

Determine Eligibility for Social Housing: Persons who do not qualify (due to prior benefits or sufficient income) risk sanctions if they occupy land illegally.
Seek Legal Aid: If in doubt about status, consult legal aid offices, NGOs, or the Public Attorney’s Office (PAO). Understanding your rights and obligations is crucial.
Avoid Syndicates: Organized syndicates may lure unsuspecting individuals with promises of cheap land titles; participation could result in criminal liability.

IX. Conclusion

Eviction of professional squatters in the Philippines is governed by Republic Act No. 7279 (UDHA) and its Implementing Rules and Regulations, along with various local ordinances and executive issuances. The law’s primary intent is to protect underprivileged informal settlers who lack adequate housing, while also penalizing individuals who manipulate or exploit these protections.

Professional squatters are characterized by their financial capacity or previous receipt (and disposition) of government housing assistance. They do not enjoy the protective provisions on eviction and relocation afforded to genuine informal settlers. Landowners—private or public—may evict them through judicial or administrative means, subject to proper notice and procedural safeguards. Violations can result in criminal penalties for professional squatters or the syndicates behind them.

Ultimately, while Philippine law promotes social justice and housing rights for underprivileged citizens, it also seeks to ensure that resources are not misappropriated by those who do not qualify. Balancing compassion for the truly homeless with firmness against professional squatters remains a continuous challenge for government authorities, communities, and the courts.

References

Republic Act No. 7279 (Urban Development and Housing Act of 1992)
1987 Philippine Constitution, Article XIII (Social Justice and Human Rights)
Implementing Rules and Regulations of RA 7279
Local Government Unit Ordinances (various)
Supreme Court decisions interpreting or applying RA 7279.

Disclaimer: This article is intended for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific concerns, it is best to consult with a qualified attorney or the appropriate government agencies.