Decision G.R. No. 1711012
―dramatizing the increasingly urgent demand of the dispossessed
x x x for a
plot of earth as their place in the sun.‖
As administrations and politicalalignments change, policies advanced, and agrarian reform laws enacted, thelatest being what is considered a comprehensive piece, the face of landreform varies and is masked in myriads of ways. The stated goal, however,remains the same: clear the way for the true freedom of the farmer.
, or the broader term ―
has been agovernment policy even before the Commonwealth era. In fact, at the onsetof the American regime, initial steps toward land reform were already takento address social unrest.
Then, under the 1935 Constitution, specificprovisions on social justice and expropriation of landed estates fordistribution to tenants as a solution to land ownership and tenancy issueswere incorporated.In 1955, the Land Reform Act (Republic Act No. [RA] 1400) waspassed, setting in motion the expropriation of all tenanted estates.
On August 8, 1963, the Agricultural Land Reform Code (RA 3844)was enacted,
abolishing share tenancy and converting all instances of sharetenancy into leasehold tenancy.
RA 3844 created the Land Bank of thePhilippines (LBP) to provide support in all phases of agrarian reform.As its major thrust, RA 3844 aimed to create a system of owner-cultivatorship in rice and corn, supposedly to be accomplished byexpropriating lands in excess of 75 hectares for their eventual resale totenants. The law, however, had this restricting feature: its operations were
Association of Small Landowners in the Philippines, Inc. v. Secretary of Agrarian Reform
, G.R.No 78742, July 14, 1989, 175 SCRA 343, 352.
Id. at 392.
Yujiro Hayami, et al.,
Bureau of Agrarian Reform Information and Education (BARIE) & CommunicationsDevelopment Division (CDD), A
Salmorin v. Zaldivar
, G.R. No. 169691, July 23, 2008, 559 SCRA 564, 572.