An Agrarian Crisis in the Making

8/3/2019 An Agrarian Crisis in the Making

1/20

An Agrarian Crisis in the MakingBy Carmina B. Flores-Obanil and Mary Ann Manahan

As the importance of agrarian reform and rural development is underscored, given themultiple crises in our midst, the country's agrarian reform program has been furtherundermined. In 2008, demonstrations, rallies, long marches abounded as pro-agrarian

reform forces waged a campaign to introduce major reforms and have the funding of theComprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) extended. The landowning elites who havelong opposed agrarian reform waged their battle against the program more silently, usingtheir influence (probably their riches) to ensure that the program will not continue. Thereare also those who rallied for the junking of CARP and called for a "genuine agrarian reformprogram" but in the end made unwitting allies of the landowners.

Despite winning some battles (the Banasi farmers who marched from Bicol got their landsthrough a DAR decision) and despite the efforts expended by the farmers themselves, withthe long marches and the hunger strike, to highlight and dramatize the critical demand foragrarian reform, a critical round in the war for agrarian reform has been lost.

The fate of CARP, the country's 20-year old social justice and poverty reduction program,was decided by Congress, in favor of the landed and powerful. A day before the sessionended last December, Congress passed Joint Resolution No. 19 (Senate version) and 29(House version) which ostensibly gave CARP a leash of six (6) months but which removedthe "heart and soul" of the agrarian reform programthe compulsory acquisition schemewhich has so far given the government power to compel resisting landowners to have theirlands subjected under CARP.

Betrayal of Farmers' Trust

For the farmers, the passage of the Joint Resolutions was a bitter betrayal. The farmershave been actively lobbying for the extension of CARP to the various representatives of both

Senate and the House for more than a year. They were happy that in the Senate,Committee on Agrarian Reform Chairman and main author Senator Gregorio Honasan,already gave his sponsorship speech and that the deliberations in the Upper House pushedthrough. They even thought that they have secured Speaker Prospero Nograles'commitment to at least have the bill discussed in a plenary and voted upon as soon aspossible. They were surprised therefore when instead of the bill, the discussion in the lastthree session days last December centered on the Joint Resolutions (JR) ostensibly comingfrom an agreement hammered between House Speaker Nograles, Senate President JuanPonce Enrile and Malacaang. These were House Resolution No. 26 (signed by SpeakerNograles, Reps. Edcel Lagman, Luis Villafuerte and Pablo Garcia) and Senate Resolution No.19 (signed by Senate President Enrile, Senators Honasan, Jinggoy Estrada and MiguelZubiri) which will ostensibly maintain the status quo in the implementation of RA 6657 orCARP until June 30, 2009.

What stunned the farmers however was, after a day, a new Joint Resolution was againbeing discussed. This time the Joint Resolution extends CARP for another six (6) months butit removes the compulsory acquisition (CA) scheme as a mode of distribution while the JointResolution is in effect. When Rep. Lagman questioned the validity of introducing anotherJoint Resolution while the House deliberated on the first Joint Resolution, the authors of thesecond Joint Resolution in the House backtracked. As related to the farmers by Rep. CarlosPadilla, rather than push for the Joint Resolution in the House, the authors of the secondJoint Resolution found a loophole in the Rules that allows either the House or the Senate to


2/20

adopt en toto a proposed bill or resolution on third reading. Thus, instead of ramming theamendments, they called on the Senate to sponsor the amendments to the Joint Resolution.Given that there was already a prior agreement between the House, the Senate andMalacaang, it was not hard for the Senate to accept the amendments on the JointResolution. In fact, the officials of the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) were equallystunned when Senator Honasan suddenly introduced amendments to the original Joint

Resolution No. 19 which removed the compulsory acquisition scheme under CARP. After theSenate voted on the Joint Resolution, it became an easy matter of transmitting the JointResolution from the Senate to the House and of the House adopting the Senate version.Last January 23, the Joint Resolution was allowed by Malacaang to lapse into law as JointResolution No. 1.

From the view of the farmers who were lobbying for CARP extension, the extension of six(6) months contained in the Joint Resolutions was nothing but a sham meant to misleadthem and even the public into believing that Congress is giving an additional six (6) monthsto thresh out reforms for the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP). What isclear though is that the Joint Resolution effectively crippled CARP, derailing itsimplementation, and making it problematic for the next six (6) months. At least 639,582hectares, or 60% of DAR's remaining target, which would have benefited more than200,000 farmers (if they will be given 3 hectares each, more if the lot sizes to be distributedis smaller), will remain undistributed.

CARP's Twilight

Congress' decision last December marks the twilight of CARP's era. That Congress managedto emasculate an already compromised program, robbing it of its remaining teeth and bite,only showed that we still live in a world ruled by landed elite and interests. Indeed lastDecember, the landlords (especially those in Negros whose lands have yet to be coveredunder CARP) came back with a vengeance--using the window created by the fundingdeadline for CARP as an opportunity to consolidate their bloc, flex their muscle, and showthe whole country their power.

Unfortunately, the events of last December showed that the peasant movements are not asstrong as they used to be. The deep divisions and fragmentations caused by ideologicaldifferences have indeed weakened the very movement that could have saved agrarianreform. Though several local struggles (Sumilao and Banasi) have been won through theefforts of the farmers, who have managed to capture the imagination of the country throughthe national media, Banasi might very well be the last palpable victory in the struggle foragrarian reform.

Dimensions of an Agrarian Crisis

This early, the Joint Resolution is already wreaking havoc in the countryside. Before the

passage of the Joint Resolution, landowners had to bring their cases to the Courts to delayagrarian reform implementation. But with the Joint Resolution in place, landowners areeffectively stopping the program by withdrawing their voluntary offers to sell (VOS) andtheir offers for voluntary land transfer (VLT). Worse, all activities on properties coveredunder compulsory acquisition were halted since the DAR issued an operational directivedirecting its personnel to defer the processing and distribution of all lands under CA,including those already in the pipeline. This too has been used by landowners to proclaimthe end of agrarian reform in their respective areas.


3/20

This is an alarming situation, not only because of its possible implications to the peacesituation in the countryside but, because of the fact that the world is in a midst of a financialcrisis. In a crisis, land remains a key asset. Not only can access to land and tenurial security(both after-effects of agrarian reform) reduce land holding inequalities and prevent ruralconflicts, but most importantly it can help increase the incomes of the rural poor, contributeto improved food security, and over-all help mitigate the effects of the financial crisis.

With agrarian reform implementation in limbo, landowners would not hesitate to converttheir lands to permanently remove it from the scope of agrarian reform. And they can do itin various ways, thanks to the measures that Congress has so far approved. For example,the controversial Arroyo lands are supposed to be exempt from agrarian reform because itis intended for bio-fuel production under the recently passed Biofuels law. This is aworldwide trend-- the race to become energy independent fuelling the drive of shiftingproduction from food to fuel. The last food crisis was in fact blamed in part to the surgingdemand for agricultural commodities like biofuels.

The pressure of urbanization will also likely convert the few remaining farmlands near MetroManila, mostly, in Central Luzon, considered as the rice bowl of the Philippines. The rampant

conversions of farmlands to residential and other uses continue to put pressure in thecountry's capacity to be rice self-sufficient.

The government's unabashed promotion of mining has led to the entry of large-scale mininginvestments that threaten not only indigenous peoples' rights but also agrarian reform. TheCalatagan case is but one example of the impact of mining on agrarian reform.

On the other hand, those who have yet to secure their land rights, will reel from thelooming impacts of the global financial, food, and economic crises. Of particular concern, areMindanaons, who will also have to address the crisis created by a failed peace talks.

In the same vein, landless farmers and farmworkers may be forced to shift to other jobs--mostly in the informal sector--especially those that have waged the battle for agrarianreform and who are now being chased off the lands they have been cultivating by virtue ofthe Joint Resolution.

In the meantime, we have to brace ourselves and watch out for agrarian hotspots and thevery real possibility that the incidence of agrarian-related violence as well as incidence ofland grabbing, etc. will increase in the next six (6) months. Some landless farmers andpotential agrarian reform beneficiaries have signified that they might resort to landoccupation and self-installation (especially those that are already title holders) should DARcontinue its stance to defer the processing of all lands under compulsory acquisition. On thepart of the landowners, they might employ more force to secure their landholdings and wardoff and prevent such self-installations.

A Bleak Future

It remains to be seen whether Congress will extend, reform and give CARP new teeth, orsimply let CARP lapse come June.

This early, however, agrarian reform advocates fear that CARP extension will not be tackleduntil Joint Resolution No. 1 expires in June 2009. Although the reform and extend bills--HB4077 and SB 2666--are still categorized as unfinished business, Congress, specifically


4/20

Speaker Nograles, has seemingly mastered the art of exclusion and intends to permanentlyleave the reform bills in limbo.

However, due to political pressure, Congress may opt to follow the track which it pavedsince 2008-- extending CARP for another six (6) months, as if it's a contract; and finallyextend it but without land distribution through compulsory acquisition, confining DAR to

support services provision instead.

Congress can also redeem itself and pass a harmonized HB 4077 and SB 2666- institutingimportant reforms that will strengthen the law and program including accelerating landdistribution through CA, providing much needed funds for land acquisition, distribution andtitling, streamlining and reorganizing the DAR bureaucracy, among other importantmeasures.

The worst scenario is that the law will not be extended and agrarian reform dies.

Most likely, however, CARP will continue in its current form, if not a degenerated version,one with compulsory acquisition permanently out of the equation.

The scenario that will ensue, will largely depend on the confluence of factors and actors, andessentially, who has the most musclepolitical and economic clout in decision making andon the other side, how agrarian reform advocates can push for their agenda.

But with Congress busy peddling Charter Change, the hope that CARP will be tackled inCongress grows dimmer. The recent passage of House Resolution No. 737 which wouldallow foreign ownership of lands (again this is very detrimental to CARP since CARP has anexpress provision disallowing the sale of agricultural lands for a period of ten (10) years) issaid to be the start of other Constitutional amendments for the benefit President GloriaMacapagal-Arroyo and her cohorts, and to the detriment of farmers and agrarian reform.

What Can Be Done?

While we might indeed be looking at a future which is bleaker than ever and a countrysidewhich might never find its peace, there are still things that can be done to avert this.

In the short-term, the peasant movements still need to push hard to save and reform CARP.It must work hard to seek allies both among the organized sectors, the general public, andbest of all inside the halls of power. While indeed it is an emasculated law, there are manystudies conducted by academics and researchers like Reyes (2001), Balisacan (2006),Gordoncillo (2006), Dy (2006), Flores-Obanil (2008), etc. and personal experiences sharedby farmers which attest that the program worked and many landless farmers benefittedfrom the program.

In the long-term, the peasant movement and agrarian reform advocates should think of anew land reform policy which can respond to the present junctureone which includesaddressing the conflicting claims and use in land; development objectives andrequirements; support services; as well as the overall thrust of the agriculture sector.The countryside is already in a constant flux of unrest. With the added impact of the globalcrisis--that has yet to unleash its full wrath in the country-- rural folks will have to brave thetempest.


5/20

*Carmina Flores-Obanil is the head of the Land Tenure Center of Centro Saka, Inc.Mary Ann Manahan is a research associate with Focus on the Global South, PhilippinesProgramme.

1. In a dialogue betweeen House Speaker Propero Nograles, various farmers leaders and some Bishops last September 30,Speaker Nograles grudgingly committed to push the bill in the plenary, though he told them (farmers and bishops) that heis afraid that it will not pass since he can only vote once and it is a contentious bill.2. Even Reps. Edcel Lagman and Risa Hontiveros were stunned when they saw another version (Joint Reoslution No. 29which removed compulsory acquisition) being discussed in the Executive Session on December 17 after the Housedicussed Joint Resolution No. 26 on December 16. The second Joint Resolution was signed by Speaker Nograles, Reps. MatDefensor, Luis Villafuerte and Pablo Garcia. This actually prompted Rep. Lagman to question why another Joint Resolutionwas being offered for discussion in the plenary when there was already an expressed agreement on Joint Resolution No.26.3. The second Joint Resolution was authored by Speaker Nograles, Reps. Mat Defensor, Luis Villafuerte and Pablo Garcia.4. The Calatagan case involves a 507-hectare tenanted rice and corn land (formerly owned by Ceferino Ascue) distributedto 318 tenant farmers under the Operation Land Transfer of the Marcos land reform law Presidential Decree No. 27. Atotal of 818 Emancipation Patents were distributed to the agrarian reform beneficiaries who have fully paid their landamortizations to the government. In 1995, the heirs of Ceferino Ascue sold the property to Asturias Industries. Theyignored the fact that the land was no longer theirs and were aided by the fact that the Register of Deeds of Batangas failedto annotate the distribution of that the land in the land title. In July 1997, Asturias Industries was able to obtain from theDENR a Mineral Production Sharing Agreement (MPSA) and an Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) covering2,336.8 hectare including the land in question. In 2005, the Supreme Court upheld the decision of the DAR stating that:(1) the disputed land was erroneously covered by PD 27; (2) the land was "mineralized" based on the DAR decision, the1965 Bureau of Mines study and DENR's issuance of an MPSA and ECC to Asturias Industries; and (the cancellation of theEmancipation Patents issued to the farmers5. The Reform CARP Movement (RCM), the main coalition advocating for reforms to and the extension of CARP, wasapprised recently that Speaker Nograles has convened another AdHoc committee to tackle the reforms for CARP. TheSpeaker has already convened a Speaker's group that was supposed to tackle and finalize these reform amendments butwhich has yet to deliver these final reform amendments.

Agrarian reform in the Philippines

prepared bythe Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ANGOC)

Manila, Philippines

fromAgrarian reform, land settlement and cooperatives, 1997(FAO, 1997)

IN THE PHILIPPINES, as the country is about to celebrate 100 years of independence, thecentury-old struggle of the small farmers for agrarian rights continues. Skewed landownershippatterns remain unsolved and continue to plague agriculture. It is estimated that 2.9 million smallfarms (25 ha) account for 11.5 percent of the total farmland. In mostcases, the farmer-owner relationship is still feudal, and landownership is concentrated among a

few who are not so much interested in agricultural sustainability and productivity but incontrolling the use of their land and consolidating their political power in the rural areas.

Tenancy rates in the countryside range from 50 to 70 percent. Just like other marginal farmers,tenants - whether sharecropping or leasehold - have to contend with a rural lite which not onlyenjoys a monopoly in land resources, but also single-handedly controls the distribution oftechnological inputs, rural banking, the renting out of farm machinery as well as the storage,transportation, processing and marketing of farm produce. Taken as a whole, marginal farmers,
http://www.fao.org/sd/ltdirect/LR97/LANDRF.HTMhttp://www.fao.org/sd/ltdirect/LR97/LANDRF.HTMhttp://www.fao.org/sd/ltdirect/LR97/LANDRF.HTMhttp://www.fao.org/sd/ltdirect/LR97/LANDRF.HTM


6/20

tenants and farm workers total 10.2 million, 70 percent of whom are landless. TheComprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL or RA 6657) was passed in 1988 to change thissituation. With an allotment from the Congress of about p 50 billion (US$1.92 billion), the ten-year law has a remaining balance of p 4.91 billion (US$0.18 billion) to date. However,distribution of lands to the tillers is below the expected targets and may not be accomplished

during the last year of CARP. After a quarter of a century, from 1972 to 1996 the governmentdistributed a cumulative total of 2.56 million ha or 60 percent of the planned allocation of 4.3million ha.

The government's slowness in land transfer activities is due to its lack of political will toimplement agrarian reform, manifest in operational and legal bottlenecks and in blockades by biglandowners who have seats in Congress and posts in the government bureaucracy. As a result,massive agricultural land conversions are being carried out under the government's fast-trackindustrialization programme. The legal moves by Congress to stop CARP include: exemptions ofbig prawn farms, fish ponds and aquaculture areas from CARP coverage; foreign investors'leasing of private lands for up to 75 years; and the proposed 25-year moratorium on CARP

implementation in the Mindanao region.

A number of undocumented farmers' testimonies and agrarian cases regarding the plight of thefarmers mention harassment and, at times, murder. Those who have been issued land titles werenot physically given lands while those who had secured ownership of their farms were notreceiving the support and resources that were supposed to enable them to enhance their welfare.Despite the farmers' grave situation, big landowners continue to threaten CARP beneficiaries andexplicitly mock the agrarian reform law.

Agrarian reform: the case of CARP beneficiaries in Bukidnon

The situation

The Certificate Land Ownership Awards (CLOAs) may be the next best proof of ownership ofan actual land title for most landless farmers. A total of 111 CARP beneficiaries in BarangayBarobo, Valencia, Bukidnon received their CLOAs but not without military death threats andlegal delays.

The farmland in question is a 147.95 ha sugar estate owned by the Carpo-Rufino AgriculturalCorporation (CARRUF). There are claims that one member of Carpo is the treasurer of theadministration party, Lakas-NUCD, while a member of Rufino owns a large percentage of amajor daily newspaper. CARRUF, whose owners are reportedly friends of the former Philippine

President Ferdinand Marcos, was sequestrated by the Philippine Commission on GoodGovernment (PCGG) on 19 April 1986. Subsequently, the estate was subjected to CARP.

More than ten years after the sequestration, in February 1997 the Department of AgrarianReform (DAR) issued CLOAs to farmer beneficiaries. CARRUF filed a case before the DARAdjudicatory Board in Bukidnon to stop the issuance of CLOAs to the farmer beneficiaries andthen hired the services of the Tagbagani Security Agency, a private army owned by the formerColonel Alexandre Noble (one of the leaders of the Reform Armed Forces of the Philippine


7/20

Movement or RAM) to guard the estate. With the consent of Valencia's town mayor BerthobalAncheta, the guards of Tagbagani occupied the disputed farmland on 31 December 1996.

Henceforth, they fenced a total of 150 ha, including adjoining public lands. The guardsreportedly prevented the farmers from harvesting their produce: corn, sugar cane and vegetable

crops. The farmers have said that they have been constantly harassed and have been warned notto enter, or else there will be bloodshed. Last April, the farmers resorted to a policy dialoguewith the national government through the DAR and Department of Interior and LocalGovernment (DILG)/ Philippine National Central Police Offices. The DAR and DILG assuredprotection and immediate installation of farmer beneficiaries. However, while negotiations wereunder way, Tagbagani security guards reportedly burned about 30 ha of the sugar estate.

After long and tense negotiations, the farmers finally entered their lands. However, theTagbagani security guards are still in the area, harassing the farmers. ANGOC, together withother NGOs and farmers' groups, urged President Fidel V Ramos to take stronger and decisivemeasures and, in response, in May 1997 the president ordered the DILG and DAR to investigate

this reported case of harassment by Tagbagani security guards against the farmers. To date, noreport has been issued.

Assessment

CARRUF still considers the land as its property and is questioning its acquisition by the DAR.The corporation maintains that it hired Noble's private army to exercise its "proprietary rights".Such a statement is a clear indication that landlords will continue to mock the law through legaltactics and outright use of force. The struggle for farmers' rights is thus far from over. The caseof the CARRUF estate in Bukidnon epitomizes the fact that the goals of agrarian reform have notyet been attained. As of March 1997, the DAR has failed to install 1 950 farmer beneficiaries in

4 910.30 ha of private agricultural lands. In fact, of the land that is up for compulsoryacquisition, the DAR has only distributed 2 percent of the titles for properties of 25 to 50 ha and2.8 percent of the titles for properties of 5 to 24 ha. It is with these private lands that DAR needsto speed up the implementation of CARP.

There are bound to be more incidents like that of the CARRUF sugar estate. Thus, there must bestronger political will on the side of the government and more involvement of all governmentline agencies, local government units and Philippine National Police in ensuring theimplementation of the agrarian reform programme and the security of its beneficiaries. Thegovernment is expected to be accountable in upholding the CARL, despite its many loopholesand limitations. NGOs and people's organizations in the Philippines will be ever-vigilant againstthe forces that impede agrarian reform while, at the same time, continuing to collaboratecritically with government to expedite the implementation of CARP.

Agrarian reform requires a redistribution of political and economic power so thatdemocratization, social justice and peace can be created. Ultimately, the struggle for a genuineagrarian reform lies beyond the implementation of CARP.


8/20

Agrarian Reform(Issues & Campaigns)

An Agrarian Crisis in the Making

Land Acquisition and Distribution

State Abandonment of Agrarian Reform

Farmers Condemn Landlord-Solons for Blocking CARP Extension

Landlord-Solons Obstructing Social Justice

House AR Committee Supports CARP Extension with Reforms

RESOLVE THE RICE CRISIS, REFORM CARP NOW!

ENACT CARP EXTENSION WITH REFORMS!

Farmers' Group prod Congress to enact CARP Extension with Reforms Bill

Expand Land Conversion Moratorium Proposal Says NGO

Public Hearing of the House Committee on Agrarian Reform

The Sumilao Farmer's Saga and a Callous Government

Agrarian Reform in Coconut Areas Vital to Development

PASSAGE OF 'CARP EXTENSION WITH REFORMS' BILL DEEMED URGENT

Sprint to the Line Scenario

Mere Extension is a Hollow Measure Says Farmers Groups

Agrarian Reform in Coconut AreasVital to DevelopmentBy Menchie Flores-Obanil

Despite its seemingly good performance, the country's coconut industry is in crisis. It isplagued by poor productivity, unstable prices, under-utilization of coconut farms andinadequate industrialization. Poverty among coconut farmers and farm workers is alsowidespread. All of these problems are rooted in government's apparent indifference over thedevelopment of the coconut industry.

This apathy is ironic because the coconut industry has been a consistent contributor to thePhilippine economy. It adds an average of 5.97 percent annually to the country's grossvalue added (GVA) and 1.14 percent to the gross national product (GNP). Coconut productsare among the top five net foreign exchange earners, averaging at least US$760 millionannually. In fact, the industry has a 59 percent share in world coconut exports.

An Agrarian Crisis in the Making

Documents

Transcript of An Agrarian Crisis in the Making