The NO STICKER NO ENTRY policy if you DONT have a subd.

/village vehicle
sticker, is there a legal premise and provision in the Magna Carta of Homeowner
(RA 9904)? And youll not be allowed /prevented to enter in any of the subdivision
entry gates eventhough youve presented a valid I.D. that youre a resident of
Greenland Cainta subdivision?

Answer : NONE (WALANG Provision) and it is ILLEGAL as per the laws.

As per section 11 of RA 9904 (Magna Carta of Homeowner) they can ONLY SUSPEND
The rights, see below. Theres no such provision in section 11 that they could PREVENT
a Delinquent member without CAGRECA vehicle sticker from entering the gate as well
as into their residence.
If theyll institute section 49 Rights and Powers of the Association, is there a public
consultation to the effect ever conducted?

Now what are those laws that are not met & violation against the HOA member relative
thereunto?

A. RA 9904, Rule 12- section 72 Prohibited Acts (f) To exercise rights

and powers as stated in Section 10 of the act in violation of the
required consultation and approval of the required number of
homeowners or members.

There is a clear violation of section 49 (d) Rights and Powers of the

Association- in the Implementation of NO STICKER NO ENTRY
policy.

PUBLIC CONSULTATION never been conducted. And Existing laws and

regulations are never met. As prescribed below.

(d). Regulate access to, or passage through the subdivision/village roads

for purposes of preserving privacy, tranquility, internal security, safety
and traffic order: Provided, that: [1] public consultations are held; [2] existing
laws and regulations are met;

Therefore, Section 73. Penalties and Sanctions will be applied for the said
violation against the members, officers, directors or trustees of the
association who have actually participated in, authorized, or ratified the
prohibited act.

And shall be punished with a fine of not less than Five Thousand Pesos
(Php5,000.00) but not more than Fifty Thousand Pesos (Php50,000.00) and
Ground for permanent disqualification from being elected or appointed as
member of the board, officer or employee of the association, without prejudice
to being charged before a regular court for violations of the provisions of the
Revised Penal Code, Civil Code and other pertinent laws.
B. And under our constitution THE 1987 CONSTITUTION OF THE
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES ARTICLE III -BILL OF RIGHTS Section
6

Section 6. The liberty of abode and of changing the same within the limits prescribed
by law shall not be impaired except upon lawful order of the court. Neither shall the
right to travel be impaired except in the interest of national security, public safety, or
public health, as may be provided by law.

The liberty of abode is the right of a person to choose one's residence to leave it
whenever one pleases, within the limits prescribed by law, to travel where one wills,
and to return to his place of residence, except in the interest of national security,
public safety, and health.

The liberty of travel is the right of a person to go where he pleases, without

interference from any source

C. CIVIL CODE of the PHILIPPINES, RA 386 chapter 2 article 32 (6) which

states:

Any public officer or employee, or any private individual, who directly or indirectly
obstructs, defeats, violates or in any manner IMPEDES or impairs any of the
following rights and liberties of another person shall be liable to the latter for
damages:

(6) The right against deprivation of property without due process of law.

The right to Ingress and Egress to property. Which mean the right to enter or
leave property involves access to a public road.

D. And under our constitution THE 1987 CONSTITUTION OF THE

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES ARTICLE II -BILL OF RIGHTS Section 1.

No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due

process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of
the laws.

WE had a right of free access to and from our residential abode.

Second, under the law, HOA have the obligation to respect this right.

They could not INVOKE that it's the POLICY or RESOLUTION OF THE
BOARD or ADMINISTRATION.
 PLEASE TAKE NOTE :

1. POLICIES, ORDINANCES, ORDERS & REGULATIONS SHALL BE VALID ONLY

WHEN THEY ARE NOT CONTRARY TO LAWS. Art. 7 REPUBLIC ACT NO. 386
Civil Code of the Philippines - CHAPTER 1 - Effect and Application of Laws
2. Art. 11 Customs which are contrary to law, public order or public
policy shall not be countenance. Republic Act No. 386- Civil Code of the
Phil.

3. That a mere passage of a board resolution is not a ground to justify

or regularize an act that is unwarranted or contrary to laws or
constitution.
Resolutions are mere expressions of opinion, they differ fundamentally from laws
They are neither intended to be permanent nor to be enforceable. Nor do they
carry the weight of court opinions.

4. Laws are REPEALED ONLY by another law. Reference Art. 7 New

Civil Code.

5. Article 3. Ignorance of the law excuses no one from compliance

therewith.
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 386 Civil Code of the Philippines - CHAPTER 1
Effect and Application of Laws