.png)
Eminent domain is the inherent power of a nation or a sovereign state to take, or sanction the taking of, private property for a public use without the owner's consent, conditioned upon payment of just compensation. In other words, eminent domain is a coercive measure on the part of the state whereby private interests are impaired for the general welfare.
While eminent domain is an inherent power, it is not absolute such that it is subject to limitations imposed under the 1987 Constitution. Section 1, Article III provides that "no person shall be deprived of property without due process of law", while Section 9 thereof states that "private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation". These constitutionally enshrined restrictions ensure that private individuals are not unduly prejudiced by the capricious or oppressive exercise of the State's powers.
In other words, Eminent domain, also known as expropriation, is a power vested in the State to take private property for public use upon payment of just compensation. In the Philippines, this is a constitutional principle governed by the 1987 Constitution, Republic Act No. 10752 (The Right-of-Way Act), as well as jurisprudence.
Article III, Section 9 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution states that private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation. Republic Act No. 10752 further elaborates the rules, providing specific requirements that the government must meet to expropriate property.
Thus, in order for the State to exercise its power of eminent domain, the following requirements must be present:
(a) that it is for a public purpose; and
(b) that just compensation is paid to the property owner.
Public use means its usefulness to the public, utility or advantage, or what is productive of general benefit. This will ensure that any appropriation of private property by the state should be for public use. In the historical perspective, public use should be mean of a constant growth and not static. As society advances, individual demands increases and new demand use of the resources be devoted. In determining the genuinely of necessity for the exercise of eminent domain is a judiciable question, and the power exercised by the legislature is essentially a political question.
Just compensation is the full and fair equivalent of the property taken from its owner by the expropriator, the true measure of which is not the taker's gain but the owner's loss. Further, it does not only refer to the payment of the correct amount but also to the payment within a reasonable time from its taking because without prompt payment, the compensation cannot be considered just. In other words, just compensation in the context of eminent domain or expropriation proceedings pertains to the timely or prompt payment of an adequate value sufficient to recoup the loss suffered by the property owner.
In the case of REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND HIGHWAYS (DPWH), PETITIONER, VS. JOSE GAMIR-CONSUELO DIAZ HEIRS ASSOCIATION, INC., RESPONDENT. G.R. No. 218732, November 12, 2018, it stated:
"Furthermore, the determination of just compensation in expropriation cases is a function addressed to the discretion of the courts owing to the constitutional mandate that no private property shall be taken for public use without payment of just compensation. As such, legislative enactments, as well as executive issuances, fixing or providing for the method of computing just compensation are tantamount to impermissible encroachment on judicial prerogatives. As such, they are not binding on courts and are treated as mere guidelines in ascertaining the amount of just compensation. Even the enumeration of the standards for the assessment of the value of the land for purposes of expropriation under Section 5 of Republic Act No. 8974 reflects the non-exclusive, permissive and discretionary character thereof."
Steps in the Expropriation Process
1. Identification of Property. The government identifies the property required for a public purpose.
2. Offer to Buy. An initial offer to buy the property is made to the owner.
3. Payment of Just Compensation. Full payment of the property’s value must be made before the government takes possession.
The affected landowner upon the implementation of the expropriation, will file in court of their claim for just compensation. However, if the filing will be delayed, the legal payment will be applied from the time of taking.
Also, the entry into the property prior to full payment, Section 10 of R.A. 7160 requires a deposit with the proper court of at least fifteen percent (15%) of the fair market value of the property based on the current tax declaration of the property to be expropriated. As a rule, there is a difference if the expropriation involve infrastructure projects, it’s not only deposit rather than the full payment of the value of property.
Owners only have the right to question the sufficiency of the compensation, the public use of the property, or the government’s compliance with legal procedures through appropriate legal action. They can also negotiate for better terms or take the matter to court for fair judgment. owners cannot Refuse if expropriation for public purpose and just compensation is paid.
In certain circumstances, affected property owners may be entitled to additional benefits such as relocation support or compensation for loss of livelihood.
To question the expropriation:
1. Administrative Remedy: Property owners can first seek an administrative remedy by negotiating with the government entity involved.
2. Judicial Remedy: If an agreement is not reached, government agency concern can seek judicial intervention by filing an expropriation case.
No comments:
Post a Comment