CAGAYAN DE ORO CITY — The government can still legally reclaim the 64-hectare Xavier University (XU)-Ateneo de Cagayan Manresa property, even if massive commercial development on the site has already begun.

This warning was issued by Atty. Ralph Angelo Metrillo, legal counsel for the Concerned XU Parents, Teachers, Alumni and Communities, Inc. (COPTAC), amid an escalating dispute over the land's original legal restrictions.

According to Metrillo, the government holds a "potent remedy" through *reversion proceedings*—the legal mechanism used to strip a land title from a private entity and return it to public ownership if state-imposed conditions are violated.

'Government’s Right to Reclaim Does Not Expire'

Addressing concerns that ongoing construction might make the project irreversible, Metrillo explained that the legal issues surrounding Manresa are *"imprescriptible."* In property law, this means the state's right to seek reversion does not have an expiration date.

You may also like: DENR Manila presses Region 10 over XU Manresa probe

Even if old structures have already been demolished, hundreds of trees cut down, or titles transferred to third parties, the courts can still order the project to a grinding halt if a violation of the Public Land Act is proven.

"Even if development has already started... the project can be stopped if the court orders the return of the land to the government," Metrillo emphasized.

This warning follows a strict directive from the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) Central Office in Manila. 

A memorandum signed by Assistant Secretary Norlito A. Eneran, chairperson of the Anti-Illegal Land Titling Committee, ordered the DENR Region 10 office to submit an urgent status report regarding allegations of possible violations of Section 70 of the Public Land Act on the property.

The background: A 1950s legacy at risk

To understand the current legal battle, one must look back to the origin of the Manresa campus:

Read also: Manresa reversion probe: Coptac locks eyes on DENR

  • 1952: Visionary Jesuit Father William Masterson acquired the land specifically to nurture XU’s College of Agriculture, establishing it as a sanctuary for agricultural training and ecological balance in uptown Cagayan de Oro.
  • 1958: The land was formally secured via a government land grant (a Sales Patent under Commonwealth Act 141). Because it was a state grant meant to uplift education, the land was sold to XU at a very low price. 

However, it came with a strict, non-negotiable caveat: the land must remain dedicated to educational purposes and cannot be used for commercial speculation.

  • The Modern Deal: The dispute ignited when XU entered into a joint venture with VisMin real estate giant Cebu Landmasters Inc. (CLI) to transform 14.6 hectares of the historical agricultural campus into a massive commercial estate dubbed "Manresa Town." XU intends to use the proceeds to fund a 21-hectare "Campus of the Future" along Masterson Avenue. 

Construction has already advanced, including a ₱120-million Manresa Access Road project launched by the developers.

Local environmentalists, alongside COPTAC, blew the whistle on the project after noting that the commercialized development risks obliterating a crucial mini-forest that serves as a vital green space and flood protection zone for the uptown area.

The legal showdown: The defense vs. the challenge

The two camps remain locked in a heavy debate over how property laws apply to the nearly 70-year-old land grant, presenting two entirely different interpretations of Philippine land laws:

The XU & CLI defense

Xavier University and its development partner, Cebu Landmasters Inc. (CLI), rest their legal arguments on two core pillars:

  • Torrens System Protection: The university argues that its land title is absolute, indefeasible, and fully protected under the highest legal standards of land ownership in the Philippines. 

They maintain that a registered title cannot be easily questioned or overturned after decades of undisputed ownership.

  • Expired Restrictions: XU maintains that any administrative restrictions tied to the original 1958 government grant expired after a standard 10-year period, which ended back in 1968.

Because of this, the university believes it has the full legal right to enter into commercial joint ventures to fund its modernization plans.

The COPTAC & alumni challenge

On the other side of the dispute, Atty. Metrillo and the alumni group present a starkly different legal challenge:

  • Permanent Conditions Persist: COPTAC counters that simply registering a patent under the Torrens System does not erase the permanent restrictions attached to a government grant. 

They argue that because the land was given by the state for a specific public purpose, those conditions follow the title permanently. XU, as the original grantee, is directly privy to the contract made with the State in 1958.

  • Sales Patents Do Not Expire: Metrillo strongly argues that Sales Patents issued under Section 70 of the Public Land Act do not carry a 10-year expiration date. 

According to the alumni's legal team, the ban on commercial exploitation remains permanent, meaning the university cannot legally convert the agricultural land into a commercial estate.

Current status

While the DENR Central Office clarified that its recent memorandum is an administrative oversight process and not yet a final ruling of liability against the university, it marks a critical escalation. 

DENR's local Community Environment and Natural Resources Office (CENRO) has already summoned XU and CLI, demanding written explanations and supporting documents to prove what specific laws authorize the commercial transformation of the protected public land grant.