Dissenting Opinion - 19 - G.R. No. 224469 One cannot mistake the discussion in Cruz to be more than a mere characterization of ancestral domains vis-a-vis the traditional concepts of public and private lan,,ds, with the objective of tracing the source of IPs' ancestral ownership. It only distinguished such ancestral lands from lands of public domain and in fact, likened the same to lands held in private ownership. Nothing more. Thus, in the absence of any indication that these jurisprudential teachings meant to exempt such domains from the penal provisions of P.D. No. 705, We must refrain from making interpretations that are unintended by the proponents thereof. For purposes of the classification under P.D. No. 705, therefore, ancestral lands and domains undoubtedly fall within the ambit of "private lands." At this juncture, it must nevertheless be stressed that however way we characterize ancestral domains, the trees, timber, forest products, and all other natural resources found thereon are still, and have always been, owned by the People, as represented by the State. Recently, the Court, in Maynilad Water Se-rvices, Inc. v. Secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), 53 expressly acknowledged the following Section 2, Article XII, ~of tµe 1987 Constitution as the embodiment of Jura regalia, or the Regalian doctrine, which reserves to the State the authority over all natural resources: All lands of the public domain, waters, minerals, coal, petroleum, and other mineral oils, all forces of potential energy, fisheries, forests or timber, wildlife, flora and fauna, and other natural resources are owned by the State. With the exception of agricultural lands, all other natural resources shall not be alienated. The exploration, development, and utilization of natural resources shall be under the full control and supervision of the State. The State may directly undertake such activities, or it may enter into co-production, joint venture, or production-sharing agreements with Filipino citizens, or corporations or associations at least sixty per centum of whose capital is owned by such citizens. Such agreements may be for a period not exceeding twenty-five years, renewable for not more than twenty-five years, and under such terms and conditions as may be provided by law. In cases of water rights for irrigation, water supply, fisheries, or industrial uses other than the development of water power, beneficial use may be the measure and limit of' the grant. 54 Maynilad bore emphasis on the State's role over the nation's natural resources as having a duty to regulate the same in the context of, and with due regard for, public interest. For the People, the State shall protect, foster, promote, preserve, and control the natural resources of the People. 55 53 54 55 G.R. Nos. 202897, 206823 & 207969, August 6, 2019. Id. (Emphasis ours) Id.