the PARC after a follow-up referendum conducted by the DAR on October 14, 1989, in which5,117 FWBs, out of 5,315 who participated, opted to receive shares in HLI.
On August 15, 1995, HLI applied for the conversion of 500 hectares of land of thehacienda from agricultural to industrial use, pursuant to Sec. 65 of RA 6657. The DAR approvedthe application on August 14, 1996, subject to payment of three percent (3%) of the gross selling
price to the FWBs and to HLI’s continued compliance with its undertakings under the SDP,
among other conditions.On December 13, 1996, HLI, in exchange for subscription of 12,000,000 shares of stocksof Centennary Holdings, Inc. (Centennary), ceded 300 hectares of the converted area to thelatter. Subsequently, Centennary sold the entire 300 hectares for PhP750 million to LuisitaIndustrial Park Corporation (LIPCO), which used it in developing an industrial complex. From this
area was carved out 2 parcels, for which 2 separate titles were issued in the name of LIPCO.Later, LIPCO transferred these 2 parcels to the Rizal Commercial Banking Corporation(RCBC)
in payment of LIPCO’s PhP431,695,732.10 loan obligations to RCBC.
were cancelled and new ones were issued to RCBC. Apart from the 500 hectares, another 80.51hectares were later detached from Hacienda Luisita and acquired by the government as part ofthe Subic-Clark-Tarlac Expressway (SCTEX) complex. Thus, 4,335.75 hectares remained of theoriginal 4,915 hectares Tadeco ceded to HLI.Such, was the state of things when two separate petitions reached the DAR in the latterpart of 2003. The first was filed by the Supervisory Group of HLI (Supervisory Group), praying for
a renegotiation of the SDOA, or, in the alternative, its revocation. The second petition, praying forthe revocation and nullification of the SDOA and the distribution of the lands in the hacienda, wasfiled by
Alyansa ng mga Manggagawang Bukid ng Hacienda Luisita
(AMBALA). The DAR thenconstituted a Special Task Force (STF) to attend to issues relating to the SDP of HLI. Afterinvestigation and evaluation, the STF found that HLI has not complied with its obligations underRA 6657 despite the implementation of the SDP. On December 22, 2005, the PARC issued theassailed Resolution No. 2005-32-01, recalling/revoking the SDO plan of Tadeco/HLI. It further
resolved that the subject lands be forthwith placed under the compulsory coverage or mandatedland acquisition scheme of the CARP.From the foregoing resolution, HLI sought reconsideration. Its motion notwithstanding,HLI also filed a petition before the Supreme
Court in light of what it considers as the DAR’s hasty
placing of Hacienda Luisita under CARP even before PARC could rule or even read the motion
for reconsideration. PARC would eventually deny HLI’s motion for reconsideration
via ResolutionNo. 2006-34-01 dated May 3, 2006.
Does the PARC possess jurisdiction to recall or revoke HLI’s SDP?
[Issue raised by intervenor FARM (group of farmworkers)]
Is Sec. 31 of RA 6657, which allowsstock transfer in lieu of outright land transfer, unconstitutional?(3)
Is the revocation of the HLI’s SDP valid?
[Did PARC gravely abuse its discretion in revoking the
subject SDP and placing the hacienda under CARP’s c
ompulsory acquisition and distribution scheme?]
those portions of the converted land within Hacienda Luisita that RCBC and LIPCOacquired by purchase be excluded from the coverage of the assailed PARC resolution?
the PARC gravely abuse i
ts discretion when it included LIPCO’s and RCBC’s respective
properties that once formed part of Hacienda Luisita under the CARP compulsory acquisition scheme via the assailed Notice of Coverage?]