4.

1 Land and Agrarian Reform in the Philippines

What is land/ agrarian reform?

Land reform refers to a wide variety of programs and measures usually by the government to
bring about more effective control and use of land for the benefit of the community. Land reform
generally comprise the takeover of land by state from big land lords with compensation, and
transfer it to small farmers or landless workers. It is aimed at changing the agrarian structure to
bring equity and to increase productivity. The structure includes both the relationship of man to
his land, and man’s relationship with others(tenant and landlord).
Agrarian reform is more complex. Along with land reform it also includes measures to modernize
the agricultural practices and improving the living conditions of everyone within the entire
agrarian community. It includes various supports to agricultural education, the establishment of
cooperatives; development of institutions to provide agricultural credit and other inputs;
processing and marketing of agricultural produce; and establishment of ago-based industries,
and others.
The desire to obtain social justice and full development of the dignity of man within given
situations of land reform has gained great importance across the years in many countries of the
world especially in agricultural countries.
One of the effects of colonizing periods was the concentration of landholdings in the hands of
the law. These few people whom they call as landlords or “caciques” have yielded tremendous
influence in the social and economic life of the nation that they had been able to dictate to their
dependents (the tenants and their families) to such matters as to whom to vote for in political
elections. They have also influenced political action in various ways in order to maintain the
status quo.

History of Land Reform in the Philippines

Pre-Spanish Era

Before the Spaniards came to the Philippines, the Filipino social system was feudal. Like the
feudalistic system in the medieval Europe, a warrior class existed bound by fealty to a warlord.
This class lived on the labor of the serfs and slaves but in exchange, this warrior class protected
them and exercised a ready though rough kind of justice.
Within the Filipino social structure, the datus (chiefs) comprised the nobility (maharlikas). Then
there are the timawas (freemen), followed by the aliping namamahay (serfs) and aliping
saguiguilid (slaves).
The freeborn did not pay tributes or taxes to the datu, but were bound to follow him to war. They
provided their own weapons and gears, manned the cars when they set sail, built their houses,
and planted their rice fields.
The serfs served his master or lord, who may be a datu or someone else who is a maharlika,
and tilled his land. Both master and serfs equally divided the produce of the land. They had
houses of their own, maintained private property, and passed these on to their children as
legacy. They were also allowed the free disposal of their chattels (movable personal properties)
and their lands. The serfs corresponded to the aparceros (tenants) of the late 19th century
Spanish era. The slaves served the lord or master in both his house and farm. They were
allowed some share of the harvest, but they were their master’s property. Thus they could be
sold, particularly those captured in wars, or born and reared as farm hands.
In the subsistence economy of the early Filipinos, money was unknown, and rice served as the
medium of exchange.

Spanish Era (1565-1898)

During the Spanish colonial period, lands were divided and granted to encourage Spanish
settlers or reward soldiers who served the Crown. These were called encomiendas. The
conditions of this grant state that the encomendero must defend his encomienda from external
attack, maintain peace and order within, and support the missionaries. In consideration of these
services, the encomendero acquired the right to collect tribute from the indios (natives) in the
amount and form determined by the royal government.
The encomienda system was originally established more for the benefit of the natives than of
the encomenderos. Thus the latter could not be called lords because they were considered
protectors, advocates and tutors of the natives. The system, however, degenerated into abuse
of power by the encomenderos. The tributes they were authorized to collect soon became land
rents, and the people living within the boundaries of the encomienda became tenants.
The encomenderos became the first group of hacenderos in the country. Meanwhile, the
colonial government took the place of the datus. The datu was now called cabeza de barangay,
but it was the proprietors of the estates who held the real power in the barangay or community.
There were four classes of estate proprietors in the Philippines during the Spanish period: first,
the religious orders Dominican and Augustinian; second, the Spanish peninsulares; third, the
criollos and mestizos; and lastly, the native principales.
The Dominican friars leased their lands to both the natives and mestizos, who became known
as inquilinos. Each inquilino paid a fixed ground rent for the area he cultivated, and the estate
owner was not allowed to lease the land to others unless the incumbent leaseholder failed to
pay the rent for two consecutive years.
However, the inquilinos abused this policy by disposing off the lands as if they owned them.
They sold their interest in them or mortgaged to wealthy takers, or sub-leased them at rents
higher than what they themselves paid. Thus by being inquilinos, they earned more than the
estate owners without doing virtually any work.
This became the root of a system in which native agricultural entrepreneurs that tilled and
cleared the land with the aid of tenants whom they hired on a sharecropping basis had to lease
the land. In time, the system evolved a set of practices that soon began to exploit the tenant
tillers.
Although Spanish authorities were aware of these pernicious practices, no effective measures
were made in spite of two royal decrees issued in 1880 and 1184 urging landholde rs to secure
titles. Under these decrees, the government granted a term of one year within which claims for
free titles were to be filed. But because the large majority of peasants either did not understand
the law or found the procedure too complicated and alien to tradition, only a few took advantage
of the offer.
Those few were mostly of the cacique class, who claimed more lands than they actually had a
right to. As a result, the actual tillers were driven out of their land or forced to become tenants of
the caciques.
Spanish land practices came to a halt with the outbreak of the Philippine Revolution when
Spanish land owners started to sell off their lands as brought about by the power shift in
government where Spain was on a losing side against the Filipinos who had declared their
independence in 1898 and the Americans who were insisting to stay.

First Philippine Republic (1899-1901)

Immediately after the establishment of the First Republic of the Philippines on January of 1899,
the government of President Emilio Aguinaldo declared its intention to confiscate large estates,
especially the so-called Friar Lands.
The declaration was contained in the Malolos Constitution: “All the lands, buildings, and other
properties belonging to the religious corporations in these islands shall be understood to have
been restored to the Filipino state.” However, as the Republic was short-lived, Aguinaldo’s plan
was never implemented.

American Regime (1901-1935)

During the American era, several laws were passed to regulate and improve land tenure.
Among the significant legislative pieces:
1. Philippine Bill of 1902 – imposed specific conditions on the disposition of public lands
2. Land Registration Act of 1902 (Act No. 496) – provided for a comprehensive registration of
land titles under the Torrens system
3. Rice Share Tenancy Act of 1933 (Act No. 4054) – regulated relationships between
landowners and tenants of rice lands
4. Tenancy Act of 1933 (Act No. 4113) – regulated relationships between landowners and
tenants of sugar cane fields

At the start of the American era, some 400,000 native farmers were without titles because of the
defective land system rooted in Spanish institutions, and of the farmers’ ignorance of various
laws. The situation was aggravated by the absence of records of issued titles and accurate land
surveys. Land disputes began and agrarian troubles worsened.
To remedy the problem, the Americans introduced the Torrens system of land registration
whereby government-purchased titles were granted only after the completion of a survey and
land ownership had been proven in court. This, however, did not solve the problem completely.
As with the Spanish system, the majority of farmers did not avail of the government’s offer.
Either they were not aware of the law or if they did, they could not pay the survey cost and other
fees required in applying for a Torrens title.
As for the Friar Lands, even American authorities could not touch them as these were covered
by valid land titles issued during the Spanish era. Furthermore, the Treaty of Paris of 1898
bound the U.S. government to protect the property interests of religious orders.
The best solution offered for such condition was the outright purchase of the lands. By 1919,
about 69 percent of all Friar Lands had been bought and disposed of by the U.S. Civil
Government of the Philippines.
Commonwealth Period (1935-1946)

Manuel Quezon (1935-1944)

By the time the Commonwealth was established under Manuel L. Quezon, the malingering
problem of land tenure relationships had already given cause to armed discontent among
oppressed tenants of estates. Pedro Calosa spearheaded the so-called Colorum Revolt in
Tayug, Pangasinan in 1931 and four years later, Benigno Ramos mounted the Sakdal Revolt in
Cabuyao, Laguna.
In response to the spreading unrest, Quezon championed the tenants’ plight and faced the
agrarian crisis squarely by implementing a program of social justice.
During his administration, Quezon improved and strengthened existing laws on land tenure by
giving more freedom to landowners and tenants to enter into tenancy contracts not contrary to
laws, morals and public policy. These laws likewise provided for the compulsory arbitration of
agrarian conflicts, and suspend any action to eject tenants from the land they till and live in.
Dictated by Quezon’s social justice program, the expropriation of landed estates and other big
landholdings was started.
Another key policy was the orderly settlement of virgin public agricultural lands, with focus on
Mindanao under the National Land Settlement Administration.
The Quezon administration began under the 1935 Constitution which declares, “The promotion
of social justice to ensure the well-being and economic security of all people should be the
concern of the State.”
In 1933, the Republic Act No. 4054 or the Rice Share Tenancy Act was passed. The act
provided for a 50-50 sharing arrangement between landowners and tenants.

The Third Republic

The following are the accomplishments in land and agrarian reform of the administrations under
the Third Republic.

Manuel Roxas (1946-1948)

Republic Act No. 34 – Amends RA 4054; established a 70-30 sharing arrangement between
tenant and landlord. It provided that whoever shouldered the expenses of planting and
harvesting and provided the work animals would be entitled to 70 percent of the harvest. It also
reduced the interest on landowner loans to tenant at no more than 6 percent instead of 10
percent.

Elpidio Quirino (1948-1953)

Executive Order No. 355 – Replaced the National Land Settlement Administration with Land
Settlement Development Corporation (LASEDECO), which took over the responsibilities of the
Agricultural Machinery Equipment Corporation and the Rice and Corn Production
Administration.

Ramon Magsaysay (1953-1957)

Under the Magsaysay administration, the following were accomplished:

● Republic Act No. 1166 – Creation of National Resettlement and Rehabilitation
Administration (NARRA). It was particularly aimed at the peasant of the HUK movement
and was successful in attracting rebels to return back to a peaceful life by giving them
home lots and farms in NARRA settlement in Palawan and some parts of Mindanao.
● Republic Act No. 1199 – Agricultural Tenancy Act provided security of tenure for tenants.
It also granted tenants the choice of shifting from share tenancy to leasehold. It also
created the Courts of Agrarian Relations.
● Republic Act No. 1400 – Land Reform Act provided for the acquisition of large tenanted
rice and corn lands over 200 hectares if owned by individuals; 600 hectares if owned by
corporations.

Diosdado Macapagal (1961-1965)

Under the Macapagal administration, the Republic Act No. 3844, otherwise known as the,
Agricultural Land Reform Code was enacted. It abolished share tenancy; institutionalized
leasehold; invested rights of preemption and redemption for tenant farmers; provided for
administrative machinery for implementation; institutionalized a judicial system of agrarian
cases; incorporated extension, marketing and supervised credit system of services to farmer
beneficiaries.

Martial Law and the Fourth Republic

Ferdinand Marcos (1965-1986)

Under the Marcos administration, the following were accomplished:

● Republic Act No. 6389 – Instituted Code of Agrarian Reform and created the Department
of Agrarian Reform
● Presidential Decree No. 2 – Placed the whole country under the land reform program
● Presidential Decree No. 27 – Restricted land reform scope to tenanted rice and corn
lands

Presidential Decree (P.D.) 27

On October 21, 1972, a month after the proclamation of martial law, President Marcos issued
P.D. 27 with the main goal of emancipating farmers from the bondage of the soil. To the decree,
there is no more leasehold in tenanted rice and corn land. The tiller automatically becomes the
amortizing owner of the land he tills.

Two Aspects of Land Distribution

1. Determination of the land to be transferred – Rice and corn areas were selected because
they were the areas of urgent reforms because of social unrest associated with rice tenancy.
2. Financing – The - decree solved the problem of financing by fixing the value of land at a
relatively modest rate, and directing compensation that may be paid directly by the tiller to the
landowner or converted into three-way arrangement.Coverage of P.D. 27

All private tenanted agricultural land devoted to rice and corn in excess of seven (7) hectares.
Priorities of coverage shall be:
1. Larger than 24 hectares
2. Less than 24 but not below 12 hectares
3. 12 hectares less retention limit

Beneficiaries of P.D. 27
Bonafide tenant farmer of private agricultural land devoted to rice and corn are benefited with an
economic size farm fixed at three (3) hectares of irrigated lands and maximum of five (5)
hectares for non-irrigated.

Retention Limit of P.D. 27

Landowners may retain an area not more than seven (7) hectares, on conditions that each
landowner is cultivating such area.

Letter of Instruction 143 (October 31, 1973) compels landowner to transfer to their tenant, if
determined by DAR to be absentee-farmer, with sources of income other than their holdings.

Letter of Instruction 474 (October 21, 1976) provides that tenanted areas of seven (7) hectares
or less could be placed under P.D. 27, if the owner own other agricultural lands not devoted to
rice and corn, or other lands used for residential, industrial, or other urban purposes from which
they receive adequate income to support themselves and their families.

The Fifth Republic

Corazon Aquino (1986-1992)

The achievements of the Cory Aquino administration on agrarian reform:

● 1987 Constitution (Art. II, Sec. 21) – “The State shall promote comprehensive rural
development and agrarian reform.”
● Proclamation No. 131 – Institutionalized the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program
(CARP) and Agrarian Reform Fund (ARF). It covers all agricultural lands regardless of
tenurial arrangement and commodity produced, all public and private agricultural lands
and other lands of public domain suitable to agriculture.
● Executive Order No. 129-A – Reorganized, streamlined and expanded power and
operation of DAR. Executive Order No. 228 – Declared full ownership to qualified
farmer-beneficiaries covered by P.D. 27. It also provided for the manner of payment by
the farmer beneficiary and mode of compensation to the landowners.
 ● Executive Order No. 229 – Provided mechanism for the implementation of CARP such
as administrative procedures and mechanics for land registration, private land
acquisition, and mode of compensation to the landowners.
● Republic Act No. 6657 – Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law. It is an act instituting a
comprehensive agrarian reform program to promote social justice and industrialization
providing the mechanism for its implementation and for other purposes.

Republic Act (R.A.) 6657

Accordingly, the centerpiece of the Cory Aquino administration was the launching of the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program by virtue of Proclamation 131 and Executive Order
229 which was signed by President Cory Aquino on July 22, 1987. The latter provided the
mechanism needed initially to implement the CARP.
The implementation of the CARP is supported into law by the enactment of Republic Act 6657
otherwise known as the “Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law” which was signed by President
Aquino on June 10, 1988; thus all matters involving the implementation of agrarian reform are
nor governed by the said act.
Existing laws such as R.A. 3844 as amended, P.D. 27, and other laws consistent with the Act
shall have only suppletory effect.
Executive Order No. 129-A provided for the strengthening of the DAR as the lead agency
responsible for the implementation of CARP.
The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law otherwise known as RA 6657 emerged nearly after a
year of debates, pressure demonstrations and deadlocks between interest groups. President
Aquino signed it on June 10, 1988 and it became effective on June 15, 1988.
Since then, various measures were adopted to facilitate CARP implementation such as the
formulation of implementing guidelines, institutionalization of implementing and coordinating
mechanisms, information dissemination and initial registration of lands, landowners and farmer
beneficiaries.
To strengthen CARP and speed up its implementation, President Aquino issued in June 1990
three key executive orders namely:
1. Executive Order No. 405 – vested in the Land Bank of the Philippines the primary
responsibility for land valuation.
2. Executive Order No. 406 – emphasized that CARP is central to the government’s efforts to
hasten countryside agro-industrial development and directed the implementing agencies to align
their respective programs and projects with the CARP; created CARP implementing teams from
the national to the municipal levels; and, identified and gave priority to 24 Strategic Operating
Provinces (SOP) where the bulk of CARP workload lies, without prejudice to the program
implementation in the other provinces of the country.
3. Executive Order No. 407 – directed all government instrumentalities, including financial
institutions and corporations, to turn over to DAR all lands suitable for agriculture for coverage
under CARP. Furthermore, the 1987 Constitution, which was ratified on February 2, 1987,
contains several provisions directly dealing with agrarian reform.