THE MUNICIPALITY OF TANGKAL, PROVINCE OF LANAO DEL NORTE vs. HON. RASAD B. BALINDONG ET. AL. G.R. No. 193340, January 11, 2017 Jardeleza, J: FACTS
The private respondents, heirs of the late Macalabo Alompo led a Complaint against the petitioner Municipality of Tangkal (Municipality) before the with the Shari'a District Court of Marawi City for the recovery of possession and ownership of a 25-hectare parcel of land located at Barangay Banisilon, Tangkal, Lanao del Norte. They alleged that in 1962, Macalabo Alompo entered into an agreement with the Municipality allowing the latter to “borrow” the land to pave the way for the construction of the municipal hal l and a health center building, on the condition that the Municipality will pay the value of the land within 35 years, or until 1997; otherwise, ownership of the land would revert to Macalabo. Private respondents claimed that the Municipality neither paid the value nor returned the land to its owner. The Municipality led an Urgent Motion to Dismiss on the ground of improper venue and lack of jurisdiction. It argued that since it has no religious affiliation affiliation and and represents represents no cultural cultural or ethnic ethnic tribe, it cannot be considered as a Muslim under the Code of Muslim Personal Laws. Moreover, since the complaint for recovery of land is a real action, it should have been led in the appropriate Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Lanao del Norte. In its Order dated Order dated March 9, 2010, the Shari'a Distric t Court denied the Municipality’s Municipality’s motion to dismiss and held that since the mayor of Tangkal, Abdulazis A.M. Ba tingolo, is a Muslim, the case “ is an action involving Muslims, hence, the court has original jurisdiction concurrently concurrently with that of regular/c r egular/civil ivil courts.” It courts.” It added that venue was properly laid because the Shari'a District Court has territorial jurisdiction over the provinces of Lanao del Sur and Lanao del Norte. In response to an Order by Shari'a District Court to file an answer within 10 days, the Municipality, in its answer, raised as an affirmative defense the court's lack of jurisdiction. jurisdiction. Within the 60-day reglementary period, the Municipality elevated the case to the Supreme Court via petition for certiorari, prohibition, and and mandamus mandamus with prayer for a temporary restraining order (TRO) and reiterated the Shari'a District Court ’s lack of jurisdiction. jurisdiction . In their Comment, the heirs of Alompo echo the reasoning of the Shari'a District Court that since both the plaintiffs below and the mayor of defendant municipality are Muslims, the Shari'a District Court has jurisdiction over the case. ISSUE
Whether or not the Code of Muslim Personal Laws vests the Shari'a District Court jurisdiction over the Municipality of Tangkal. RULING
No, the Code Code of Muslim Muslim Personal Personal Laws does does not vests the Shari'a Shari'a District Court Court jurisdiction jurisdiction over the Municipality of Tangkal. Article 143 (2) (b) of the Code of Muslim Personal Laws qualifies the conferment conferment of jurisdiction j urisdiction to actions “wherein “wherein the parties parties involved are Muslims,” the word “parties” necessarily refers to the real parties in interest. “Muslim” is “a person who testifies testifi es to the oneness of God and the Prophethood of
Muhammad and professes professes Islam." The ability to testify to the “ oneness of God and the Prophethood of Muhammad” and to profess Islam is restricted to natural persons. In contrast, juridical persons are artificial beings considered as persons only by virtue of legal action. The Municipality of Tangkal falls under this category. Under the Local Government Code, a municipality is a body politic and corporate that exercises powers as a political subdivision of the national government and as a corporate entity representing the inhabitants of its territory. Another manifested error on the part the part of Shari’a Shari’a District Court is the attribution of the religious affliation of the mayor to the Municipality. It is an elementary principle that a municipality has a personality that is separate and distinct from its mayor, vice-mayor, sanggunian, and other offers composing it. And under no circumstances can this corporate veil be pierced on purely religious considerations — as as the Shari'a District Court has done — done — without without running afoul the inviolability of the separation of Church and State enshrined in the Constitution. Constitution. In view of the foregoing, the Shari'a District Court had no jurisdiction under the law to decide private respondents’ complaint respondents’ complaint because not all of the parties involved in the action are Muslims.
