Court decisionSource checked
Cruz and Europa v. Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources
G.R. No. 135385 · 2000 · Indigenous peoples and ancestral domains
Source checked. The source check identifies the document; it does not verify every transcribed word or its current legal effect. Recovered or scanned text may contain errors. Compare the wording and subsequent history with the linked legal source.
DIGITAL P. 86 / 101
x x x
Part II: NCIP as an Independent Agency Under the Office of the President
Section 1. The NCIP is the primary agency of government for the formulation and implementation
of policies, plans and programs to recognize, promote and protect the rights and well-being of
indigenous peoples. It shall be an independent agency under the Office of the President. As such,
the administrative relationship of the NCIP to the Office of the President is characterized as a
lateral but autonomous relationship for purposes of policy and program coordination. This
relationship shall be carried out through a system of periodic reporting. Matters of day-to-day
administration or all those pertaining to internal operations shall be left to the discretion of the
Chairperson of the Commission, as the Chief Executive Officer.
Petitioners asseverate that the aforecited rule infringes upon the power of control of the President over the NCIP
by characterizing the relationship of the NCIP to the Office of the President as "lateral but autonomous...for
purposes of policy and program coordination."
Although both Section 40 of the IPRA and Section 1, Part II, Rule VII of the Implementing Rules characterize
the NCIP as an independent agency under the Office of the President, such characterization does not remove said
body from the President's control and supervision.
The NCIP has been designated under IPRA as the primary government agency responsible for the formulation
and implementation of policies, plans and programs to promote and protect the rights and well being of the
indigenous peoples and the recognition of their ancestral domain as well as their rights thereto.[182] It has been
granted administrative,[183] quasi-legislative[184] and quasi-judicial powers[185] to carry out its mandate. The
diverse nature of the NCIP's functions renders it impossible to place said agency entirely under the control of
only one branch of government and this, apparently, is the reason for its characterization by Congress as an
independent agency. An "independent agency" is defined as an administrative body independent of the
executive branch or one not subject to a superior head of department, as distinguished from a "subordinate
agency" or an administrative body whose action is subject to administrative review or revision.[186]
That Congress did not intend to place the NCIP under the control of the President in all instances is evident in
the IPRA itself, which provides that the decisions of the NCIP in the exercise of its quasi-judicial functions shall
be appealable to the Court of Appeals,[187] like those of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) and
the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Nevertheless, the NCIP, although independent to a certain
degree, was placed by Congress "under the office of the President" and, as such, is still subject to the President's
power of control and supervision granted under Section 17, Article VII of the Constitution[188] with respect
to its performance of administrative functions, such as the following: (1) the NCIP must secure the President's
approval in obtaining loans to finance its projects;[189] (2) it must obtain the President's approval for any
negotiation for funds and for the acceptance of gifts and/or properties in whatever from and from whatever
source;[190] (3) the NCIP shall submit annual reports of its operations and achievements to the President, and
advise the latter on all matters relating to the indigenous peoples;[191] and (4) it shall exercise such other powers
as may be directed by the President.[192] The President is also given the power to appoint the Commissioners of
the NCIP[193] as well as to remove them from office for cause motu proprio or upon the recommendation of
any indigenous community.[194]
To recapitulate:
(1) The provisions of the IPRA (specifically Sections 3, paragraphs (a) and (b), 5, 6, 7, and 8) affirming the
ownership by the indigenous peoples of their ancestral lands and domains by virtue of native title do not
diminish the State's ownership of lands of the public domain, because said ancestral lands and domains are
If your browser cannot display the PDF, use Download original. Original access follows the same document permissions.