Military camps cannot be object of a lease contract with a telco

The much-talked-about use of military camps in the country by a new player in telecommunications for its cellular sites is actually much ado about nothing. Military camps are beyond the commerce of man. They cannot be the object of a lease contract between the government and the telco. Most military camps are reservations.

In Republic vs. Bacas (2013), the Supreme Court declared that when a property is officially declared a military reservation, it becomes inalienable and outside the commerce of man. It may not be the subject of a contract or of a compromise agreement. A property continues to be part of the public domain, not available for private appropriation or ownership, until there is a formal declaration on the part of the government to withdraw it from being such.

Being inalienable, military camps cannot even be registered as private property, pursuant to the Property Registration Decree, in the name of a private individual after open, continuous, peaceful, and adverse possession since time immemorial by such individual. These camps cannot even be registered in the name of the government or any of its instrumentalities as patrimonial property because they are inalienable. Only the alienable portion of the public domain may be the subject of land registration.

By ownership, military camps are considered property of public dominion, being devoted to public service, i.e., the maintenance of state security, territorial integrity, and protection of the people. The 1987 Constitution declares the armed forces as the protector of the people. In the performance of this constitutional duty, the armed forces are stationed in military camps. Pursuant to Art. 1113 of the Civil Code, a property of public dominion is beyond the commerce of man. Any military camp cannot be the object of a lease contract between the Department of National Defense and a telco. The contract would be void ab initio.

It would be sheer folly for the third telco player to spend billions to build towers in military camps on the basis of a void lease contract. The contract may not undergo legal challenge soon, but it is vulnerable to a citizen’s suit. If the lease contract is declared void on the sheer illegality of its object, under Art. 1412 of the Civil Code the telco will forfeit its right over the cellular towers. What a way it would be to start a business.

FRANK E. LOBRIGO
President
Integrated Bar of the Philippines-Sorsogon Chapter