Friday, September 1, 2023

REPUBLIC VS. PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT OF PALAWAN [G.R. No. 170867 & 186941, December 04, 2018]

 CASE DIGEST

REPUBLIC VS. PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT OF PALAWAN

G.R. No. 170867 & 186941, December 04, 2018

EN BANC, LEONEN, J.

 

National Territory; Natural Resources belongs to the State

 

 

Province of Palawan not entitled in the proceeds of Camago-Malampaya natural gas project as natural resources belongs to the State. Sovereignty over the waters between and surrounding the archipelago, pertains to the coastal state, and not to the LGUs.

 

The national government entered a contract with a certain company. The contract entails the use of natural resources in Camago-Malampaya area which is approximately near the Municipality of Kalayaan, Palawan Province. It argued that since the reservoir is located within its territorial jurisdiction, it is entitled to said share under Section 290 of the Local Government Code. The National Government disputed the claim, arguing that since the gas fields were approximately 80 k.ms from Palawan's coastline, they are outside the territorial jurisdiction of the province and is within the national territory of the Philippines.

 

 

Is the reservoir within the territorial jurisdiction of Palawan so that it is entitled to 40% share of the proceeds?

 

NO.  The Supreme Court ruled that Palawan was not entitled to share in the proceeds of the Camago-Malampaya natural gas project.

 

The SC held that there was no debate that the natural resource in the Camago-Malampaya reservoir belongs to the State under the Regalian Doctrine, noting that Palawan’s claim is anchored not on ownership of the reservoir but on a revenue-sharing scheme, under Section 7, Article X of the 1986 Constitution and Section 290 of the LGC, that allows local government units (LGUs) to share in the proceeds of the utilization of national wealth provided they are found within their respective areas.

 

Territorial jurisdiction is defined, not by the local government, but by the law that creates it; it is delimited, not by the extent of the LGU's exercise of authority, but by physical boundaries as fixed in its charter. The Court, however, found that existing laws do not include the Camago-Malampaya reservoir within the area or territorial jurisdiction of the Province of Palawan. It stressed that “As defined in its organic law, the province of Palawan comprises merely of islands. The continental shelf, where the Camago-Malamapaya reservoir is located, was clearly not included in its territory.

 

 

 CLICK TO READ FULL TEXT

 

 

 

 

 

 

No comments:

Post a Comment

Easycall Communications Phils., Inc. vs. Edward King, G.R. No. 145901, December 15, 2005

 CASE DIGEST Easycall Communications Phils., Inc. vs. Edward King G.R. No. 145901, December 15, 2005 THIRD DIVISION, CORONA J.     C...