Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Carp and Carl
Carp and Carl
THE PHILIPPINES
Land Scam
Agrarian "Reform," Ramos Style
by Anotnio Ma. Nieva
Landlords openly harass peasants, driving them off their farms at gunpoint,
fencing them out with barbed wire, bulldozing crops. Certificates of land
titles are worthless; in some areas they are confiscated. The countryside
seethes with tension while the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) itself
is hobbled by legal constraints.
For all intents and purposes, land reform is dead, killed by the government's
consuming pre-occupation with becoming a NIC (newly industrializing
country) by the year 2000.
More of nothing
"We had nothing then, now we have more of nothing," says an embittered
Elias Kasunuran, president of Damayan rig Mga Magbubukid sa Bayan ng
Binan, a farmers' group locked in a life-and-death struggle with land
developers.
Land use conversion is authorized by CARL, itself. The law charges the
DAR with reviewing conversion applications according to lenient criteria.
These government data do not reflect the full extent of land conversions,
according to the Philippine Peasant Institute (PPI). The PPI reports, for
example, that the DAR's office in Santa Cruz, in the Southern Tagalog
province of Lagima, documented the conversion of 1,568 hectares in the
municipality, but the DAR's national records listed only two cases covering
218 hectares. Southern Tagalog-Agenda, a farmers' organization, reports an
additional 2,464 hectares converted elsewhere in Laguna, a development
which the PPI claims also escaped the DAR's master list. The DAR's
statistics also ignore illegal conversions that occur without its knowledge.
Overall, the PPI estimates more than 100,000 hectares of land have been
converted to industrial, commercial, tourist and residential use.
A May 1993 position paper by the PPI identifies Southern Tagalog as the
area hardest hit by land conversion on the island of Luzon because of two
ambitious industrial projects - the Calabarzon estate (located on lands in five
provinces south of Manila) and the Bondoc Peninsula Integrated Area
Development Program. Sixty-eight percent of the rice lands converted to
nonagricultural use was concentrated in this area, according to the PPI.
Another impetus for massive land conversions are the 23 Rural Industrial
Centers (RICs) to be set up under President Fidel Ramos's development plan.
Sixteen of them alone require 10,547 hectares of agricultural land, says
Economic Planning Secretary Cielito Habito. Seven of the RICs are to be
constructed within irrigated and irrigable areas that, until 1989, were covered
by land reform. Thirteen more such estates are being planned for Mindanao,
on top of the two already set up in Cagayan de Oro and General Santo cities.
Land conversions for the RICs, says the PPI's Canlas, will cause untold
hardships for farmers, who have no guarantee whatsoever ofany livelihood
more productive and socially edifying than a hired hand once they are
dislodged from their farms.
The Filipino magbubukid (farmer) is fighting a lost cause. One sheet of paper
bearing the signature of President Fidel V. Ramos is all that stands between
the small farmers and the night stalkers standing in line to take away what
little land they till.
But even Administrative Order No. 20 (AO 20) is not protection against the
persistent battering of the landlord and big-business lobby that equates land
reform with a big leap backward for the country, a social deadweight to
economic growth. In the government's frenzied drive to industrialize, the
spirit and intent of an inherently flawed CARP is inexorably being bulldozed
under.
The Code stipulates two bases for reclassifying lands: that the lands to be
converted cease to be "economically feasible and sound for agricultural
purposes," as determined by the Department of Agriculture; and that the city
or municipal council determine that the lands have greater economic value
for residential, commercial or industrial purposes. The Code's only express
injunction is a prohibition on reclassification of lands already distributed
under CARL and other relevant agrarian laws.
If there is any doubt that the Code means to favor landlords, Article 42 of
Section 20 erases it by providing that approval of applications for
reclassification "shall not unreasonably be withheld." It furthermore
stipulates, "failure to act on a proper and complete application for
reclassification within three months from receipt of the same shall be deemed
as approval thereof."
Plagued by loopholes
"CARL is like a sack of rice - the sack is full of holes, and is now almost
empty," says Ed Mora, chairperson of KASAMA, an alliance of farmers'
groups in Southern Tagalog.
Only recently, the president signed into law RA 7652, which allows foreign
investors to lease agricultural lands up to 50 years, renewable for another 25
years. The KMP, a mass-based peasants' association, charges that RA 7652 is
patently anti-farmer. The new law legitimizes the forcible eviction of tenant-
tillers, legalizes conversion of agricultural lands and institutionalizes the
expansion and control of multinational corporations over vast tracts of
plantation lands planted with export crops, the organization claims.
The PPI's Canlas sums up the uphill legislative struggle facing farmers'
advocates. "The landlord lobby is very aggressive, attending all sessions in
the House committee on agrarian reform," says Canlas. "The PPI can only
present position papers, and hope that the committee chairman is sympathetic
to the farmers' cause."
Enforcement sham
The DAR's mandate is to implement land reform, Garilao says. "And we're
doing it within the scope defined by [ RA 16657. "The government agency,
he points out, cannot do more than what is provided for in the law, without
violating the same law.
But precisely because the law is flawed, the DAR now finds its time and
resources strained to the limits by legal challenges initiated by landowners in
municipal and regional trial courts. Judges abet the frivolous suits, issuing
decisions on agrarian disputes that CARL places under the legal jurisdiction
of the DAR Adjudication Board. Many judges were uninformed about the
issue of jurisdiction until recently, when Supreme Court Chief justice Andres
Narvasa issued a circular reminding them to remand all agrarian cases to the
DAR's Adjudication Board. The critical situation raises the specter of justice
being methodically miscarried on a nationwide scale, with farmers at the
receiving end.
"We have had to `slug it out,"' says Garilao, citing an instance where a
municipal court in Bago City issued a temporary restraining order on a
motion by a disgruntled landowner, to stop the DAR from redistributing his
estate in Bacolod. The DAR won the case, says Garilao.
Much of the energy that the DAR is able to muster is sapped by its
responsibility of approving conversions of farm lands to nonagricultural use.
"Conversion is tying us down," Garilao admits.
As if this were not enough, the DAR's Adjudication Board's decisions, orders
and writs are often left unenforced by the Philippine National Police (PNP),
which is more inclined to side with landowners than farmers. In don Jose, a
community in Santa Rosa, for example, 22 farmers fighting to retain 17
hectares of land awarded them by the DAR won a favorable decision from
the DAR Adjudication Board stopping their eviction - but were evicted
nevertheless. The Laguna PNP flatly refused to enforce the Board's order and
instead is helping keep them out, according to peasant activist Graciano
Manto.
The final bludgeon against farmers is the most vicious. Landlords frequently
use the military and police to muzzle, intimidate or soften opposition to land
consolidation or conversion. Some of the most brutal repression is unleashed
in connection with the military's counterinsurgency program. Aimed at
dismantling guerrilla fronts, the military's clear-and-hold strategy, which
depends on concentrated and prolonged troop deployments, provides a
standing security force for landlords and developers, say leaders of the KMP,
the peasant organization.
The land conversion was preceded in 1988 by the entry in the villages of
Mamplasan and Ganado of Army special operations teams which harassed
leaders, of a local farmers' organization. The total-war units imposed a dusk-
to-dawn curfew, controlled movement, conducted spot checks and
surveillance operations and broke up meetings. Four years later, the farmers
were totally cowed - and more than willing to sell their lands.
Mass deception
Unless the government moves fast to redress it, the problem may derail the
peace process initiated by President Ramos and abort the country's drive to
achieve full industrialization by the year 2000.
Land reform is a major demand of both rightist rebel soldiers and the
Marxist Left that the Ramos administration has been trying to coax to the
negotiation table. Social justice, encompassing agrarian reform, is one of
the talking points raised by the RAM group of rebel soldiers, while the leftist
National Democratic Front is pressing for "genuine land reform" as one of
its conditions for ending its more than two-decade old insurgency.
Antonio Ma. Nieva is a writer with the Philippine Daily Inquirer. This article
is based on a series of articles that ran in the Manila-based newspaper.
The stock-option loophole was not an oversight that just slipped through
the legislative process; according to the PPI, these provisions were tacked
on as compromise concessions for CARP's approval by Congress. And the
Cojuangco family played a major role in guaranteeing these concessions
would be made.
In the stormy debates that attended the turbulent passage of House Bill
400, which became CARL, the pro-landlord Congress succeeded in killing
the proposals forzero-retention for landowners, for the mandatory all-
inclusiveness of land reform and for fair-market valuation of lands
surrendered to the CARP.
At the head of the landlord juggernaut was Rep. Jose Cojuangco, Cory
Aquino's younger brother, who also administers Hacienda Luisita. He is
on record as having asked Congress on March 18, 1988 to delay passage
of the land reform bill, despite an urgent appeal by the Catholic Church
for quick passage.
"I don't know if the Church really understands what [HB 4001 is," retorted
Cojuangco, saying it was in the interest of the people that Congress delay
the bill's passage. 'We need to study the proposal thoroughly by digesting
all agrarian reform-related data and statistics," he said. Congress did,
and the result is the package of anguish called CARL.
Proponents of genuine land reform knew at the time what had happened.
Scoring the "gang of landlords" in Congress, Rep. Edcel Lagman, then
chair of the House Committee on Agrarian Reform, said the amended
bill "protects the landed families at the expense of the intended
beneficiaries." "Definitely," he added, it's "land to the landed.
- A. M. N.
First, SEI took advantage of the 10-year deferment from the land reform
available to commercial farms. In exercising its right to a 10-year
exemption, the company was required to put in place a production/profit-
sharing (PPS) program, through which workers would be given 3 percent
of the SEI plantation's income.
But the SEI workers charged that Ayala was cheating them out of their
share of the income, undercounting the number of boxes and undervaluing
the amount received for each box. The workers' PPS payments varied but
were always low, amounting to 40 pesos (US$1.60) for each worker in the
last quarter of 1992 and more than 200 pesos (US$8.00) in the first quarter
of 1993, for example.
SEI's second move to circumvent the land reform involved spinning off
parts of its plantation, putting it under the control of local growers who are
integrated into SEI's operations. These small landowners, according to
PAPAWI's Ariet Sionosa, are in charge of growing the bananas and
running the farm, but they sell their produce to SEl. They purchase
various inputs for their plantation, but the money is provided by SEI.
By summer 1993, three portions of the plantation had been separated, and
SEI's plantation had shrunk from 247 to 164 hectares. The SEI workforce
dropped from 276 to 171; many of the SEI workers who lost their jobs
were rehired as non-union employees on the spin-off plantations, but were
forced to accept wage rates less than two-thirds of what they had been
paid by SEI. Most importantly, says Sionosa, when the workers were
fired, they received a "separation fee," which amounts to a waiver of their
rights to the land under the land reform law.
The SEI story is exemplary not only of the failure of CARP, but also of
the structure of the Philippine agricultural sector, the plight of
agricultural workers and the interconnections between Philippine
agriculture and the international economy.
Ayala and SEI's adversary on the other side of the bargaining table,
NAMASEI, emerged out of a company union formed by management
initiative in the mid-1970s. In a 1987 election, the union voted to affiliate
itself with the National Federation of Labor, a member of the KMU labor
center. Joining with the KMU brought the workers harassment from
company security guards, civilian defense patrols and government military
forces.
Even with the wage gains made in recent years, however, SEI workers'
daily compensation amounted to about US$4.50, less than half of the
government-defined poverty line.
The 111 pesos - which was the amount the highest paid worker received-
was simply too little to live on, says Marquita. "As a result, we are buried
in debt," he says. Most of the workers' children only go to sixth grade,
since their parents cannot afford the cost of sending them to secondary
school, and families routinely go with inadequate housing and clothing.
"However," jokes one SEI worker, "we do have air conditioned housing -
open air houses."
- Robert Weissman
multinationalmonitor.org/hyper/issues/1994/01/nieva.html