Separate Concurring Opinion 26 G.R. No. 224469 sustainably use the natural resources found in ancestral domains. 125 He postulates that ownership over the natural resources remains with the State and the ICCs/IPs' right is limited to managing and conserving these resources for future generations. 126 Associate Justice Estela M. Perlas-Bernabe shares Associate Justice Caguioa's sentiment that the right accorded to ICCs/IPs with respect to natural resources found in their ancestral domain is limited to the utilization of these resources. 127 With utmost respect to my colleagues, it is my opm10n that the indigenous concept of ownership covers not only the ancestral domains and land, but also the natural resources found there. The State's alleged ownership over the natural resources is founded on the doctrine of Jura regalia, which provides that "all lands of the public domain as well as all natural resources enumerated therein, whether on private or public land, belong to the State." 128 I reiterate my opinion previously expressed in Heirs of Malabanan v. Republic, 129 Republic v. Tan, 130 and Maynilad Water Services, Inc. v. Secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, 131 that the 1987 Constitution does not provide for the Regalian Doctrine. A perusal of Article XII, Section 2 of the 1987 Constitution reveals that the State's ownership of lands is limited to "lands of the public domain[.]" Further, "[l]ands that are in private possession in the concept of an owner since time immemorial are considered never to have been public[,]" since the state never owned them. 132 In addition, the doctrine of Jura regalia is a feudal theory introduced by the Spaniards. However, its application in the Philippines was put to an end upon the arrival of the Americans. The landmark case of Carino v. Insular Government 133 clarified on this matter. 134 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 Id. at 13-14. See J. Caguioa, Separate Opinion, p. 16 citing J. Puno, Separate Opinion in Cruz v. Secretary of Natural Resources, 400 Phil. 904 (2000) [Per Curiam, En Banc]. J. Perlas-Bernabe, Separate Opinion, pp. 3-4. J. Brion, Separate Opinion in La Tondena, Inc. v. Repu/Jlic, 765 Phil. 795, 823 (2015) [Per J. Leonen, Second Division]. J. Leonen, Separate Opinion in Heirs of Malabanan v. Republic, 717 Phil. 141, 203-209 (2013) [Per J. Bersamin, En Banc]. J. Leonen, Separate Opinion in Republic v. Tan, 780 Phil. 764, 776-778 (2016) [Per J. Brion, Second Division]. J. Leonen, Separate Opinion in Maynilad Water Services, Inc. v. Secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, G.R. Nos. 202897, 206823 & 207969, August 6, 2019 <https://elibrary.judiciary.gov .ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/65416> [Per J. Hernando, En Banc]. J. Leanen, Separate Opinion in Republic v. Tan, 780 Phil. 764, 776 (2016) [Per J. Brion, Second Division]. Carino v. Insular Government, 212 U.S. 449, 456 (I 909). f