1) Private ownership is permanently lost once titled land is submerged; the previously titled but submerged land then becomes the property of the State, as the State owns all waters; reclaiming such submerged, previously titled land is treated in the same manner as reclaiming from coastal waters;

2) Lakeshore reclamation and coastal reclamation are treated differently, as the former refers to riparian rights (from moving or flowing water) while the latter refers to littoral rights (from large, static water bodies x x x); the applicable landmark case is Government of the Philippine Islands v. Colegio de San Jose (G.R. No. 30829), decided on August 28, 1929. In that case, the PH Supreme Court ruled that “seasonal or extraordinary inundation by Laguna de Bay does not convert private contiguous land into public dominion, affirming that the submerged portions remained the private property of the Colegio de San Jose.” Also stated in the same decision are “ownership and use of the waters of the sea are not applicable to the ownership and use of lakes, which are governed by special provisions.” While said decision held that the “natural bed or basin of Laguna de Bay is the ground covered by its waters at their highest ordinary depth during the dry season” (emphases supplied), the same may perhaps now also be made to apply to the lake’s highest ordinary depth resulting from the excessive deposition of soil and organic debris periodically but regularly over the last century, i.e., carried by storm runoff and drainage waters coming from the hinterlands located well outside Metro Manila’s borders, now largely denuded. If the very same 97-year-old SC ruling (i.e., valid and subsisting to this day) is applied to the previously titled but submerged lands at the foreshore areas of Laguna de Bay now forming part of the municipal water areas (MWA) of Taguig City, then those submerged titled lands should not be lawfully considered the property of the State or lands of the public dominion; as such, agencies such as the PRA and even the LLDA may potentially not acquire lawful jurisdiction over reclaimed lands bordering Laguna de Bay;

3) Mainly LGUs (as corporate and juridical persons) and individual Filipinos (as natural persons) can own reclaimed land; other public or private corporations (as juridical entities) may only lease from them; it is unclear whether Authorities (such as the PRA), which may have charters based on statutes or special laws, are able to lawfully own and control vast tracts of reclaimed land, other than through vested ownership of the State-owned reclaimed land or through lease; essentially, the PRA acts as the manager (or steward) of the reclaimed land for the State, the real owner of coastal land reclamation;

4) Section 14, Chapter 4, Title I, Book III of the Administrative Code of 1987 states:

“SEC 14. Power to Reserve Lands of the Public and Private Dominion of the Government.-
(1) The President shall have the power to reserve for settlement or public use, and for specific public purposes, any of the lands of the public domain, the use of which is not otherwise directed by law. The reserved land shall thereafter remain subject to the specific public purpose indicated until otherwise provided by law or proclamation.

Per G.R. No. 191109, July 18, 2012, reclaimed lands x x x are reserved lands for public use. They are properties of public dominion. The ownership of such lands remains with the State unless they are withdrawn by law or presidential proclamation from public use.

Under Section 2, Article XII of the 1987 Constitution, the foreshore and submerged areas of Manila Bay are part of the “lands of the public domain, waters x x x and other natural resources” and consequently “owned by the State.” As such, foreshore and submerged areas “shall not be alienated,” unless they are classified as “agricultural lands” of the public domain. The mere reclamation of these areas by PEA does not convert these inalienable natural resources of the State into alienable or disposable lands of the public domain. There must be a law or presidential proclamation officially classifying these reclaimed lands as alienable or disposable and open to disposition or concession. Moreover, these reclaimed lands cannot be classified as alienable or disposable if the law has reserved them for some public or quasi-public use.

As the Court has repeatedly ruled, properties of public dominion are not subject to execution or foreclosure sale. Thus, the assessment, levy and foreclosure made on the subject reclaimed lands by respondent, as well as the issuances of certificates of title in favor of respondent, are without basis.”

(emphases and underscoring supplied)

5) The 1949 Philippine (PH) Civil Code apparently does not grant LGUs a right to reclaim land and, more importantly, does not govern artificial or engineered reclamation;

6) Land reclamation in the PH is governed by special laws such as Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 3-A and P.D. No. 1084; P.D. No. 1084 created the Public Estates Authority (PEA), now the Philippine Reclamation Authority (PRA), to serve as the central clearinghouse for all national and local reclamation initiatives; P.D. No. 3-A stipulates that all reclamation projects done without government approval are illegal and subject to forfeiture in favor of the State;

7) The Local Government Code empowers LGUs to undertake local infrastructure and economic development projects, and authorizes them to fund and undertake reclamation projects as part of their basic infrastructure and public service delivery (i.e., specifically limited to servicing the direct needs of their local residents); as LGUs may not have an absolute or unilateral right to reclaim foreshore or offshore areas at will, LGUs must still comply with national environmental laws and secure national regulatory permits; if LGUs were to reclaim land, they will still need to go through the processes prescribed by agencies like the PRA, DENR, LLDA, and perhaps even DEPDev (the former NEDA) and the DA, i.e., as reclaimed land is considered alienable and disposable (A&D) only if first classified as agricultural and certified as no longer needed for public use.

Nothing follows.