Tenants’ Rights When a Certificate of Land Ownership Award (CLOA) Is Issued to Another Party
Philippine Legal Context
1. Background and Legal Framework
Pillar | Key Sources |
---|---|
Constitutional Mandate | Art. XIII, §§4–6 (agrarian reform and tenants’ rights) |
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) | Republic Act (RA) No. 6657 (1988), as amended by RA 9700 (2009) & RA 11953 (2023 New Agrarian Emancipation Act) |
Agricultural Land Reform Code | RA 3844 (1963) & RA 6389 (1971) |
Implementing Rules | DAR Administrative Orders (AO) No. 2‑1989, AO No. 2‑1994, AO No. 7‑2011, etc. |
Key Case Law | Spouses Abelo v. CA, G.R. 146772 (20 July 2010); Gamboa v. Heirs of Malate, G.R. 170421 (19 June 2018); DAR v. Roble, G.R. 193439 (18 Apr 2012); Gonzales v. IAC, G.R. L‑65668 (9 Sept 1986), among others |
CLOA is the title issued to Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries (ARBs) after land transfer. Because some agricultural lands already have tenants (agricultural lessees/share‑tenants) in actual cultivation, the award may create overlapping interests between (a) the tenant and (b) the ARB or transferee named in the CLOA. Philippine agrarian law is designed to protect security of tenure while pursuing land redistribution.
2. Who Is a “Tenant” vs. an “Agrarian Reform Beneficiary”?
Concept | Core Elements |
---|---|
Tenant / Agricultural Lessee (RA 3844 §4) | 1) Personal cultivation, 2) consent of the landowner, 3) compensation by sharing of produce or fixed rent, 4) land devoted to agriculture. Tenants acquire security of tenure and cannot be ejected except for specific causes (RA 3844 §§7 & 36). |
Agrarian Reform Beneficiary (ARB) | Qualified farmer/workers who receive land under CARP. Awarded land via CLOA (RA 6657 §§22–26). |
Key Distinction: A tenant’s right is a real property right to cultivate and possess; an ARB’s right is a prospective ownership right. They may coexist in one person or conflict when the CLOA names someone else.
3. Effects of Issuing a CLOA to Someone Other Than the Existing Tenant
Security of Tenure Persists
- A CLOA does not automatically extinguish tenancy. Both DAR AOs and Supreme Court jurisprudence insist that the vested tenancy relationship survives unless validly terminated for statutory causes and with DAR adjudication.
- Spouses Abelo v. CA confirmed that “[t]enant’s possession cannot be disturbed by the mere issuance of a CLOA in favor of another.”
Tenant’s Right of First Priority to Become ARB
- RA 6657 §22 lists “actual tenant‑farmers” first among preferred beneficiaries. An award that skips the tenant may be challenged via petition for inclusion/reinstatement before the DAR Provincial Agrarian Reform Office (PARO) or DARAB.
Restriction on Disposition
- CLOA land is encumbered for 10 years (RA 6657 §27). Transfers in circumvention of a tenant’s right—including simulated sales to evade tenancy—are void and can prompt cancellation of the CLOA.
Obligation of the New Awardee
- Until lawful ejectment, the ARB holds a naked title; produce‐sharing or lease rentals remain due to the tenant, not to the awardee.
- Where cultivation by the ARB is physically impossible without ejecting the tenant, DAR may order co‑tenancy or joint cultivation schemes pending resolution.
4. Statutory Rights Specifically Available to the Tenant
Right | Statutory Anchor | Practical Note |
---|---|---|
Security of Tenure | RA 3844 §7; RA 6657 §10 | Ejectment only via DARAB for the causes in §36 (e.g., land conversion with clearance, willful non‑payment, gross negligence). |
Disturbance Compensation | RA 3844 §36, ¶3 | If legally ejected (e.g., due to approved conversion), the tenant is entitled to disturbance compensation of not less than five times the average gross harvest of the last five years. |
Option to Purchase | RA 6657 §22, §24 | The tenant may be installed as co‑ARB if qualified, requiring re‑issuance or subdivision of the CLOA. |
Right to Homelot & Support Services | RA 3844 §24; RA 6657 §30–31 | DAR and DA must provide credit, irrigation, post‑harvest facilities, housing. |
Succession | RA 3844 §9; DAR AO 2‑1994 | Heirs who personally cultivate inherit tenancy rights. |
Protection vs. Harassment/Extra‑Legal Eviction | DAR AO 08‑2003 (Rule II, §§9‑10) | DAR regional offices may issue Cease‑and‑Desist or Status Quo Ante Orders within 72 hours. |
5. Remedies When a Tenant’s Rights Are Threatened or Violated
Administrative (DARAL/DARAB)
- Inclusion/Exclusion Petitions – Question the erroneous identification of the ARB.
- Cancellation of CLOA – For violation of laws, rules, or misrepresentation (DAR AO 6‑2011).
- Ejectment Cases – Landowner/awardee must file before DARAB; tenants can counterclaim.
- Cease‑and‑Desist Orders – Immediate relief against dispossession.
Judicial
- Special Agrarian Court (RTC‑designated) – Appellate jurisdiction over DARAB decisions on just compensation; limited scope.
- Regular Courts – Only after DAR determines that the dispute is agrarian‑free (e.g., ownership controversy after CARP coverage is lifted).
Criminal Sanctions
- Harassment, threats, illegal ejectment can constitute agrarian law violations punishable under RA 6657 §74 and §75.
Alternative Dispute Resolution
- Bantay Bukid/BARC Mediation under DAR AO 03‑2018 encourages barangay‑level settlement.
6. Common Real‑World Scenarios & How the Law Responds
Scenario | Protective Rule |
---|---|
Land sold after CARP Notice of Coverage; buyer seeks possession | Sale does not bind the tenant or DAR; buyer steps into shoes of landowner but must respect tenancy (§70). |
Land converted to residential without DAR clearance | Conversion is void; tenant remains and may demand restoration. |
Tenant branded as “illegal settler” by incoming ARB | Tenant shows proof of leasehold (tenancy contract, receipts) → DAR issues Status Quo Order and may cancel CLOA if ARB “unjustly evicts.” |
CLOA issued but tenant already 70 years old or incapacitated | Tenant’s heirs may be installed as ARBs; if none, DAR re‑allocates but still pays disturbance compensation. |
Multiple tenants on same parcel but only one CLOA issued to single ARB | DAR may subdivide or issue collective CLOA with individual transfer certificates (DAR AO 7‑2011). |
7. Impact of RA 11953 (2023)**
The New Agrarian Emancipation Act condoned outstanding amortizations and related interest of ARBs. Tenancy rights are unaffected, but practical effects include:
- Removal of amortization arrears may reduce pressure on ARBs to evict tenants for economic reasons.
- Government subsidy programs are expected to integrate tenancy protection clauses as a condition for support service grants.
8. Best‑Practice Guide for Tenants
- Document Your Status – Keep copies of leasehold contracts, receipts, barangay certifications of actual cultivation, and DAR IDs.
- Monitor DAR Notices – Publication of Notices of Coverage and CLOA generation are posted at barangay hall; file oppositions within 15 days.
- Use Barangay Agrarian Reform Council (BARC) – First line of mediation; quicker than formal DARAB litigation.
- Request DAR Legal Assistance – DAR’s Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Development & Sustainability Program (ARBDSP) assigns lawyers or paralegals.
- Beware of “Voluntary Surrender” Schemes – Signing quitclaims without DAR supervision is void; disturbance compensation must be paid.
9. Conclusion
Philippine agrarian reform law shields existing tenants from displacement even when the government grants a CLOA to another individual. The statutory design favors the integration of tenants as agrarian reform beneficiaries whenever feasible; where integration is impossible, it guarantees due process, disturbance compensation, and continued possession until lawful termination.
For tenants, vigilance—grounded in knowledge of their statutory and jurisprudential rights—is essential. For landowners and incoming ARBs, compliance with DAR adjudicatory procedures and respect for tenancy security are non‑negotiable, lest the CLOA be cancelled and criminal or civil liabilities attach.
This article synthesizes the pertinent constitutional provisions, statutes, implementing regulations, and Supreme Court rulings current as of 27 July 2025.