GENERAL SANTOS CITY — A long-standing and increasingly contentious land dispute involving a 104-hectare property in Purok 11, Lanton, Barangay Apopong, General Santos City, has drawn renewed attention following allegations of unauthorized land occupation, the construction of fences, and a confrontation between groups claiming rights over the disputed property.
The dispute involves the family of Robie Puntuan Lubaton, who maintains that their family possesses a land title covering the 104-hectare property, and members of the Guhay Clan, who are also asserting ownership and questioning the validity of the title being presented by the Puntuan family.
The disagreement has reportedly escalated into a tense confrontation after individuals allegedly hired to install fencing around the property entered the area, prompting objections from members of the indigenous community who claim ancestral and ownership rights over the land.
Conflicting claims over 104-hectare property
In a public account, Robie Puntuan Lubaton presented documents that he said support his family’s claim to the property, which they maintain has been passed down through their parents and is associated with their rights as members of the indigenous community.
Lubaton expressed frustration over what he described as the government’s failure to adequately protect their claimed property despite their possession of ownership documents.
SPONSORED LINK: https://lightlypowerfulgourmet.com/u9i107dsea?key=63025114fa6eb96108de24ad21ec0671
He also questioned the response of law enforcement authorities during the confrontation, particularly after allegations that members of the opposing group threw stones, threatened them with firearms, and fired shots during the incident.
According to Lubaton, their family had sought police assistance to prevent the confrontation from escalating and to stop the alleged destruction of fences they had installed around the property.
He claimed that members of their group had initially managed to prevent the other party from entering the area but that the situation changed after police personnel arrived.
Lubaton further alleged that security personnel associated with the Alcantara group fired shots during the confrontation, raising questions about the handling of the incident. These allegations have yet to be independently established.
Meanwhile, netizen James Aguilar Lepalim also publicly expressed dissatisfaction with the police response, claiming that personnel who arrived at the scene failed to intervene effectively when members of their group were allegedly attacked and their property damaged.
In his social media statement, Lepalim said they had repeatedly requested police assistance to stop the disturbance, but alleged that the confrontation continued despite the presence of law enforcement personnel.
He also questioned why security personnel allegedly fired shots instead of police officers controlling the situation through established procedures.
The allegations have not been independently verified, and the police have not been reported to have issued a detailed public response to the specific accusations raised in the social media post.
Guhay Clan disputes ownership and questions title
However, the opposing claimants have presented a different account of the property’s ownership and history.
Ronald Gandam Salukan, speaking on behalf of the Guhay Clan, questioned the authority of the Puntuan family to claim the entire 104-hectare property.
Salukan said that Commander Ronnie Puntuan had previously been granted a Special Power of Attorney (SPA) concerning the land, but that the authority was subsequently revoked by the clan.
He alleged that the revocation stemmed from concerns over the purported sale of portions of the property, which he said should not have been disposed of because of its connection to the Blaan indigenous community.
Salukan also questioned Commander Ronnie Puntuan’s claim over the property, arguing that the land belongs to the Guhay Clan.
He further maintained that the title being presented by the Puntuan family no longer carries legal effect and claimed that the Guhay Clan currently holds the ownership documents.
These assertions, however, remain claims made by the opposing party and have not been independently verified through a review of the property’s title history, land registration records, or relevant court and administrative decisions.
The Guhay Clan also expressed concern over the presence of residents who have reportedly purchased portions of the disputed property without allegedly being fully informed about the ownership controversy.
The clan reportedly plans to address the situation involving those who have settled or acquired interests in the area.
Police respond as land dispute raises public safety concerns
Police personnel from Makar Police Station reportedly responded to the area following information about a disturbance involving groups allegedly carrying firearms.
The confrontation has raised concerns about the potential escalation of the dispute, particularly given the competing ownership claims, the reported presence of armed security personnel, and the involvement of residents and indigenous community members.
Security personnel from the company associated with the disputed property are also reportedly maintaining a presence in the area.
The situation underscores the need for law enforcement to maintain impartiality, prevent armed confrontations, and ensure that neither party resorts to intimidation, violence, or unauthorized occupation while the ownership issue remains unresolved.
GSCPO convenes inter-agency meeting on Pontuan-Alcantara dispute
In a separate development, the General Santos City Police Office (GSCPO) participated in an inter-agency meeting on November 12, 2026, to address the land dispute involving the Pontuan and Alcantara parties.
City Police Director PCOL Ariel B. Acala attended the meeting, accompanied by Police Station 2 Commander PMAJ Ari Noel H. Cardos.
The meeting was held at the City Administrator’s Office at Dadiangas West Central Elementary School in Barangay Dadiangas West, General Santos City. It was spearheaded by City Administrator’s Office head Shandee Theresa Llido-Pestano and attended by representatives of concerned government agencies.
Discussions focused on strengthening coordination among government offices, addressing public safety concerns, and preventing further confrontations or disturbances arising from the land dispute.
According to the GSCPO, its participation is intended to help maintain peace and order, protect the public, and support lawful and peaceful processes through which the parties can resolve their conflicting claims.
The police office also reiterated its commitment to impartial and professional law enforcement, encouraging all parties to pursue the appropriate legal and administrative remedies rather than resorting to confrontation.
NCIP, land authorities urged to clarify ownership
Beyond the immediate security concerns, the dispute raises important questions about land ownership, indigenous peoples’ rights, the validity of competing documents, and the protection of families and communities affected by conflicting land claims.
The Puntuan family has appealed to the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) to intervene and give attention to the situation, particularly because the disputed property is being claimed in connection with indigenous land rights.
The conflicting statements from the two sides make an independent examination of the property’s legal and ancestral ownership particularly important.
The relevant government agencies, including the NCIP and land registration authorities, need to establish the property’s legal status, determine the history and validity of the documents being presented, and clarify whether the land is covered by an ancestral domain claim, an ancestral land title, or another form of registered ownership.
The authorities must also determine whether any previous authority to manage, transfer, or dispose of portions of the property was legally granted and subsequently revoked, as alleged by the Guhay Clan.
For residents who may have purchased or occupied portions of the disputed property, clarification is equally urgent to prevent further uncertainty and possible displacement.
Ultimately, the dispute cannot be settled through competing assertions of ownership, the erection or destruction of fences, or the presence of armed security personnel. It requires a transparent review of official land records, recognition of applicable indigenous peoples’ rights, and a determination by the proper legal authorities.
Until the ownership issue is resolved, all parties are expected to exercise restraint and refrain from actions that could endanger lives or further aggravate tensions in the community.