2. Municipality of Tangkal v Balindong - Greta Garcia

2. Municipality of Tangkal v Hon Balindong, GR No. 193340 !an 11 201"# $onc%pt& Municipal $o'po'ation, d%fin%d ()$T*& Privat Private e respon responden dents ts as heirs heirs of Macala Macalabo bo Ampo Ampo filed filed a complaint for recovery of possession against Municipality of  Tang Tangka kall with with the the Shar Shari' i'a a Dist Distri rict ct Court Court The The priv privat ate e respondents contend that since the parties to the case are muslim! then Shari'a District Court has "urisdiction over the case The premise is that since the Mayor of Tangkal is a Muslim Muslim then as the represen representat tativ ive e of Tangka Tangkall it is now considered under Article #$%&(&b( of the Code of Muslim Personal Personal )aws actions actions *wherein *wherein the parties involved are Muslims+  Municipality of Tangkal filed a motion to dismiss &MTD( on the ground of improper venue and lack of "urisdiction ,t argued that the municipality has no religious affiliation and repr repres esen ents ts no cult cultur ural al or ethn ethnic ic trib tribe! e! it cann cannot ot be considered as a Muslim under the Code of Muslim Personal )aws )aws The The Mayo Mayorr was was only only a repr repres esen enta tati tive ve of the the Municipality but the real party in interest is the municipality and not the mayor +**-& -hether or not the Shari'a District Court of Marawi City has "urisdiction in an action for recovery of possession filed filed by Muslim Muslim individua individuals ls against against a municipal municipality ity whose mayor is a Muslim R+NG& ./ Although Although the definitio definition n does not e0plicit e0plicitly ly distingu distinguish ish betwee between n natural natural and "uridi "uridical cal person persons! s! it noneth nonethele eless ss connotes the e0ercise of religion! a personal right which by nature is restricted to natural persons 1uridical persons are consid considere ered d person personss only only by virtue virtue of legal legal ficti fiction on The Municipality of Tangkal falls under this category nd%' t/% ocal Gov%'n%nt $od%, a unicipality i a ody politic and co'po'at% t/at %%'ci% po%' a a political udiviion of t/% national gov%'n%nt and a a co'po'at% %ntity '%p'%%nting t/% in/aitant of  it t%''ito'y. 2urt 2urthe herm rmor ore! e! as a gover overnm nmen entt instrumentality! the Municipality of Tangkal can only act for secular purposes and in ways that have primarily secular effects3consistent effects3consistent with the non3establishment clause The Shari'a District Court appears to have understood the foregoing principles! as it conceded that the Municipality of  Tangkal Tangkal *is neither neither a Muslim Muslim nor a Christian Christian* *  4et it still proceeded to attribute the religious affiliation of the mayor to the municipality This is manifest error on the part of the Shari'a District Court The municipality has a separate and distinct personality form the officers composing it ,n view of the foregoing! the Shari'a District Court had no  "urisdiction under the law to decide private respondents' compl complain aintt becaus because e not all of the parties parties involv involved ed in the action are Muslims