Judicarlo Magno V.

Ulep Social Science 12

BSA – 1A Mrs. Fontanilla

AGRARIAN REFORM HISTORY

Uncovering the Roots of Land Ownership Problems

Pre-Colonial Times (Before 16th Century)

The Philippines, even before being colonized by different countries, already have developed an
organization for their communities. The land owned by these communities is known as barangay which
consists of 30-100 families which is administered by different chiefs.

In these barangays, everyone regardless of status had access on the land and mutually shares resources
to the rest of the community. They believed in and practiced the concept of “stewardship” where
relationship between man and nature is important.

Land cultivation was done commonly by kaingin system or the slash and burn method wherein land was
cleared by burning the bushes before planting the crops or either land was plowed and harrowed before
planting. On the other hand, food production was intended for family consumption only at first but later on
neighboring communities where engaged in a barter trade, exchanging their goods with others. Some
even traded their agricultural products with luxury items of some foreign traders like the Chinese, Arabs
and Europeans.

The only recorded transaction of land sale during that time was the Maragtas Code. This is the selling of
the Panay Island to the ten Bornean datus in exchange for a golden salakot and a long gold necklace.
Although the Code of Luwaranwas one of the oldest written laws of the Muslim society which contains
provision on the lease of cultivated lands, there was no record how the lease arrangement was practiced.
Evolution of Initiatives on Land Reform

Manuel L. Quezon (1935-1944)

Some of the Agrarian Reform laws were passed during the administration of Manuel L. Quezon:

RA 4054 or the Rice Tenancy Law was the first law on crop sharing which legalized the 50-50 share
between landlord and tenant with corresponding support to tenants protecting them against abuses of
landlords. However, this law was hardly implemented because most of the municipal councils were
composed of powerful hacienderos and big landlords. In fact, only one municipality passed a resolution
for its enforcement and majorities have petitioned its application to the Governor General.
The 1935 Constitution provided specific provisions on social justice and expropriation of landed estates
for distribution to tenants as a solution to the land ownership and tenancy problems.

Commonwealth Act No. 461 specified that dismissal of a tenant should first have the approval of Tenancy
Division of the Department of Justice.
Commonwealth Act No. 608 was enacted to establish security of tenure between landlord and tenant. It
prohibited the common practice among landowners of ejecting tenants without clear legal grounds.

Manuel Roxas (1946-1948)

The Republic Act No. 34 was passed during the administration of Manuel Roxas and it enacted to
establish a 70-30 sharing arrangement between tenant and landlord. The 70% of the harvest will go to the
person who shouldered the expenses for planting, harvesting and for the work animals. With this, it
reduced the interest of landowners’ loans to tenants at not more than 6%.

President Roxas also negotiated for the purchase of 8,000 hectares of lands in Batangas owned by the
Ayala-Zobel family. These were sold to landless farmers.

However, due to lack of support facilities, the farmers were forced to resell their lands to the landowning
class. This failure gave basis to doubt the real meaning of land reform program.
 Elpidio R. Quirino (1948-1953)

In Elpidio Quirino’s administrations, the Executive Order No. 355, the Land Settlement Development
Corporation (LASEDECO) was established to accelerate and expand the peasant resettlement program
of the government. However, due to limited post-war resources, the program was not successful.

Ramon Magsaysay (1953-1957)

When President Magsaysay was elected as the president of the country he realized the importance of
pursuing a more honest-to-goodness land reform program. So he convinced the elite controlled congress
to pass several legislation to improve the land reform situation in the county. Some of these are:

R.A. No. 1199 (1954): Agricultural Tenancy Act basically governed the relationship between landholders
and tenant-farmers. This law helped protect the tenure rights of tenant tillers and enforced fair tenancy
practices.

R.A. No. 1160 (1954): Free distribution of Resettlement and Rehabilitation and Agricultural land and an
Act establishing the National Resettlement and Rehabilitation Administration (NARRA).

R.A. No. 1400 (1955): Land Reform Act or known as “Land to the Landless” Program which sought
improvement in land tenure and guaranteed the expropriation of all tenanted landed estates.

R.A. No. 1266 (1955) Expropriation of Hacienda del Rosario, situated at Valdefuente, Cabanatuan City

He implemented the Agricultural Tenancy Act by establishing the Court of Agricultural Relations in 1955
to improve tenancy security, fix the land rentals on tenanted farms and to resolve the many land disputes
filed by the landowners and peasant organizations.

He also created the Agricultural Tenancy Commission to administer problems arising from tenancy.
Through this Commission 28,000 hectares were issued to settlers.
 Carlos P. Garcia (1957-1961)

There was no legislation passed in Carlos Garcia’s term but he continued to implement the land reform
programs of President Magsaysay.

Diosdado Macapagal (1961-1965)

It was during Diosdado Macapagal that the Agricultural Land Reform Code or RA No. 3844 was enacted,
more specifically on August 8, 1963. This was considered to be the most comprehensive piece of
agrarian reform legislation ever enacted in the country that time. Because of this, President Diosdado
Macapagal was considered as the “Father of Agrarian Reform.”

diosdado macapagalThe RA No. 3844 was considered as such because this Act abolished share tenancy
in the Philippines. It prescribed a program converting the tenant farmers to lessees and eventually into
owner-cultivators. Moreover, it aimed to free tenants from the bondage of tenancy and gave hope to poor
Filipino farmers to own the land they are tilling. Finally, it emphasized owner-cultivator relationship and
farmer independence, equity, productivity improvement and the public distribution of land.

However, the landed Congress did not provide effort to come up with a separate bill to provide funding for
its implementation. The act was piloted in the provinces of Pangasinan, Bulacan, Nueva Ecija,
Pampanga, Tarlac, Occidental Mindoro, Camarines Sur and Misamis Oriental. It acquired a total of
18,247.06 hectares or 99.29% out of the total scope of 18,377.05 hectares. The program benefited 7,466
farmer beneficiaries. (BLAD-DAR Official Records)
 Ferdinand E. Marcos (1965-1986)

When President Marcos assumed office, he immediately directed the massive implementation of the
leasehold phase of the land reform program by signing into law the Code of Agrarian Reforms in the
Philippines or RA No. 6389 and its companion bill RA No. 6390. The Code of Agrarian Reforms or RA No.
6389 governed the implementation of the agrarian reform in the Philippines. This law instituted the Code
of Agrarian Reforms and significantly amended several provisions of Agricultural Land Reform Code or
RA 3844 of President Macapagal. It created the Department of Agrarian Reform, a separate
administrative agency for agrarian reform, replacing the Land Authority.

RA 6390 was enacted to accelerate the implementation of the of the agrarian reform program in the fields
of land acquisition and agricultural credit. Through the Code, an AR Special Account in the General Fund
was created that exclusively finance the agrarian reform program.

The core of the Agrarian Reform Program of President Marcos was Presidential Decree No. 2,
proclaiming the entire country as a land reform area and Presidential Decree No. 27, decreeing the
emancipation of tenants from the bondage of soil, transferring to them the ownership of the land they till
and providing the needed instruments and mechanisms. This law provided for tenanted lands devoted to
rice and corn to pass ownership to the tenants. It also lowered the ceilings for landholdings to 7 hectares.
The law stipulated that share tenants who worked from a landholding of over 7 hectares could purchase
the land they tilled, while share tenants on land less than 7 hectares would become leaseholders.

This agrarian reform program was designed to uplift the farmers from poverty and ignorance and to make
them useful, dignified, responsible and progressive partners in nation-building. This AR program was a
package of services extended to farmers in the form of credit support, infrastructure, farm extension, legal
assistance, electrification and development of rural institutions.

President Marcos’ Agrarian Reform Program is characterized by five major components and these are
Land Tenure Program, Institutional Development, Physical Development, Agricultural Development, and
Human Resources.

The Agrarian Reform Programs was also labeled as “revolutionary” by some sectors because it was
pursued under Martial Law and intended to make quick changes without going through legislative or
technical processes and another reason is that it was the only law in the Philippines ever done in
handwriting.
 Corazon C. Aquino (1986-1992)

The 1987 Philippine Constitution set the direction of agrarian reform in the Aquino administration. The
1987 Constitution affirmed that “The State shall promote comprehensive rural development and agrarian
reform.’ (Article 2, Section 21)

When President Cory Aquino seated as the President of the country, several legislations and issuances
on Agrarian Reform were passed. Some of them are:

Proclamation 131instituted the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) as a major program of
the government. It provided for a special fund known as the Agrarian Reform Fund (ARF) in the amount
of 50 billion pesos to cover the estimated cost of the program for the period 1987-1997.

EO 129-Areorganized the Department of Agrarian Reform and expanded in power and operations. It is
known that the record and legacy of the Aquino Administration in Agrarian Reform is the Executive
Summary, Planning Service, and DAR.

EO 228 declared full ownership of the land to qualified farmer-beneficiaries covered by PD 27. It also
regulated the value of remaining rice and corn lands for coverage provided for the manner of payment by
the farmer-beneficiaries and the mode of compensation to the landowners.

EO 229 provided the administrative processes for land registration or LISTASAKA program, acquisition of
private land and compensation procedures for landowners. It specified the structure and functions of units
that will coordinate and supervise the implementation of the program.

RA 6657 or Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law 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.

To strengthen CARP and fast track its implementation, President Aquino issued the following Executive
Orders (EO):

E.O. No. 405 gave the Land Bank of the Philippines the primary responsibility for the land valuation
function in order for DAR to concentrate its efforts on the identification of landholdings and beneficiaries,
the distribution of acquired lands, and the other sub-components of the program.

E.O. 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 CARP.

This created CARP implementing teams from the national to the municipal levels and gave priority to 24
strategic operating provinces where the bulk of CARP workload lies.

E.O. No. 407 directed all government financing institutions (GFIs) and government owned and controlled
corporations (GOCCs) to immediately transfer to DAR all their landholdings suitable for agriculture.
 Fidel V. Ramos (1992-1998)

The Ramos administration is recognized for bringing back support of key stakeholders of CARP by
bridging certain policy gaps on land acquisition and distribution, land evaluation, and case resolution. It is
also credited for enhancing internal operating systems and strengtheningthe capabilities of the DAR
bureaucracy and for tapping more resources to help implement the program.

During this time guidelines and procedures were formulated to facilitate acquisition and distribution of
lands:

DAR AO No. 2 (1992) consists of rules and procedures governing the distribution of cancelled or expired
pasture lease agreements and Timber License Agreements under EO 407.

DAR AO No. 1 (1993) is the amendment to certain provisions of the Administrative Order No. 9 Series of
1990, entitled “Revised Rules and Regulations Governing the Acquisition of Agricultural Lands Subject of
Voluntary Offer to Sell and Compulsory Acquisition Pursuant to RA 6657.”

Joint DAR-LBP AO No. 3 (1994) is the policy guidelines and procedures governing the acquisition and
distribution of agricultural lands affected by the Mt. Pinatubo eruption.

DAR AO No. 1 (1995) consists of the rules and procedures governing the Acquisition and Distribution of
all Agricultural Lands Subject of Sequestration/Acquisition by the PCGG and APT whose ownership in
Under Court Litigation.

DAR AO No. 2 (1995) is the revised rules and procedures governing the Acquisition of Private Agricultural
Lands Subject of Voluntary Land Transfer or a Direct Payment Scheme (VLT/DPS) Pursuant to RA 6657.

DAR AO No. 2 (1996) is the rules and regulations governing the Acquisition of Agricultural Lands subject
of Voluntary Offer to Sell and Compulsory Acquisition Pursuant to RA 6657.

DAR AO No. 2 (1997) is the rules and regulations for the Acquisition of Private Agricultural Lands Subject
of Mortgage or Foreclosure of Mortgage.

DAR AO No. 8 (1997) is the revised guidelines on the Acquisition and Distribution of Compensable
Agricultural Lands under VLT/Direct Payment Scheme.

DAR MC No. 7 (1993) refers to the implementing guidelines on the Distribution and Tilling of the Public
Agricultural Lands turned over by the National Livelihood and Support Fund to the DAR for distribution
under the CARP pursuant to EO 407, Series of 1990 as amended by EO 448, Series of 1991 and as
clarified under Memorandum Order No. 107 of the President of the Philippines dated March 23, 1993.

Despite all of these, there are challenges that the administration faced during implementation of the
program. One of which is the failure in enforcing the installation of some farmer beneficiaries on awarded
lands. Critics also say that “non-physical installation of FBs has been the norm rather than the exception.
 Joseph Ejercito Estrada (1998-2001)

During this administration the Magkabalikat Para sa kaunlarang Agraryo (MAGKASAKA) which was
launched which is directed for the investors to bring in capital, technology and management support while
the farmers will contribute, at most, the use of their land itself.

The MAGKASAKA aims to encourage investors to bring investments into the countryside and to enhance
the income of the farmers through joint venture schemes and contract growing schemes. The program
also aims to enable the farmers to be more efficient and be globally competitive.

This administration saw the urgency of land distribution, and believed that it can be served if it is built on
farmers’ capacities to pursue their own development. One of the first things this administration did was to
rework performance targets – by focusing on the number of hectares of land distributed coupled with an
accounting of farmer beneficiaries and the specific croplands and farm systems covered. This approach
sought to integrate land distribution and support services. It was during this period that DAR launched a
series of land occupations by working with farmer claimants, the LGU and government security forces.

To help speed up litigation, DAR also helped set up the agrarian justice fund for farmer beneficiaries as
well as DAR field workers who, due to the nature of the job, are named as respondents in cases filed by
recalcitrant landowners. Support services took a much more entrepreneurial approach during this
administration. Sustainable rural development district program, were designed to help farmers attain a
level of economic viability.

It has forged alliances among countries implementing AR through the International Conference on
Agrarian Reform and Rural Development. The department then began aggressively to assert its place in
national development planning processes to raise DAR’s profile both in national and international fora.
With this, DAR was able to secure a seat in the annual consultative group meeting between the
Philippines’s economic management team and the donor community. This period also launched the DAR-
DA-DENR convergence initiative.

But there were also some hindrances that the administration faced like the fiscal constraints encountered
that resulted to unpaid or delayed payment of landowners covered under the compulsory acquisition and
VOS schemes.

There were also issues on inter and intra ARBs conflicts due to arguments for control over negotiations
with prospective joint venture partners, some of which became violent.
 Gloria Macapagal – Arroyo (2001 – 2010)

The GMA administration has adopted the BAYAN-ANIHAN concept as the implementing framework for
CARP. Bayan means people and Anihan means harvest and Bayanihan means working together. Applied
to CARP, Bayan Anihan means a united people working together for the successful implementation of
agrarian reform.

The Bayan-Anihan Framework has different implementing strategies namely:

Salin-Lupa: Accelerating land transfer and improving land tenure.

Katarungan: Prompt and fair settlement of agrarian disputes and delivery of agrarian reform justice.

Bayanihan: Better delivery by the government of appropriate support services to ARBs and the
mobilization of the ARBs themselves in the transformation of the agrarian reform communities into an
agrarian reform zones and into progressive farming.

Kabayanihan or the Konsehong Bayan Para sa Anihan: Institutionalization not only of the system of
dialogue and consultation but also joint problem solving with AR stakeholders, particularly people’s
organizations, cooperatives and NGOs.

Kamalayan: Raising the awareness of DAR personnel, agrarian reform beneficiaries and the general
public on agrarian reform and its contribution to social justice and development.

Under Arroyo’s administration introduced the Kapit Bisig sa Kahirapan Agrarian Reform Zones
(KARZONEs) as a program strategy of the DAR in CARP Implementation. KARZONEs is a partnership
and convergence strategy aimed at achieving asset reform, poverty reduction, food sufficiency, farm
productivity, good governance, social equity and empowerment of agrarian reform beneficiaries (ARBs)
both in ARCs and non-ARCs.

Other specific programs under this administration to enhance CARP were also implemented like the
Gulayan Magsasakang Agraryo. This intends to add income and food security to farmers and their
communities. Educational opportunities were also ushered in to farmer’s children and dependents
through the Diosdado Macapagal Scholar Program.

This administration is also credited in heightening agrarian case resolution by introducing a quota system
to compel adjudicators to work faster on agrarian cases and train farmers into paralegals.
 Benigno Simeon “Noynoy” C. Aquino III (2010–up to present)

Under the governance of President Noynoy Aquino, the DAR which is the lead agency for CARP
implementation is bent on sustaining the gains of agrarian reform through its three major components–
Land Tenure Improvement (LTI), Program Beneficiaries Development (PBD) and Agrarian Justice
Delivery (AJD). The following are the strategic directions of the Aquino Administration for the agrarian
reform program:

To substantially complete asset reform as mandated by R.A. No. 9700 by:

1. Completing the land acquisition and distribution (LAD) in the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program
Extension with Reforms (CARPER) or Republic Act 9700 balance through: Focus on large-sized private
agricultural lands; Redeployment of competent DAR personnel to the 20 high LAD provinces; Streamline
LAD processes and procedures; and Enhance the database of landholdings for ease in targeting and
monitoring the LAD;

2. Prioritizing the subdivision of collective Certificates of Land Ownership Awards (CLOAs) involving LBP-
compensable lands;

3. Fast tracking the documentation and settlement of landowner compensation for already distributed
lands;

4. Synergizing and rationalizing the efforts of the CARP implementing agencies in all processes of LAD;

5. Partnering with the civil society organizations (CSOs) in the delivery of LTI services, particularly the
large-sized private agricultural lands (PAL);

6. Adopting a job-sharing scheme wherein under the ONE-DAR concept, provinces will share
responsibilities (low-LAD provinces with high LAD provinces) to minimize the need to hire new personnel;
and

7. Increasing the utilization of the services of geodetic engineers to assist the provincial and municipal
offices in land acquisition considering the difficulty of hiring new personnel and the demands of a post-
2014 scenario.

Under President Aquino’s administration, the DAR’s Program Beneficiaries Development (PBD) priorities
are geared in:

1. Undertaking convergence initiatives with rural development agencies to complement the resources and
streamline the efforts of DAR, DA and DENR;

2. Inking public-private partnerships (PPPs) develop models of collaboration and business models in AR
areas with the participation of the CSOs, academe, research and development institutions and LGUs;
3. Expanding official development assistance (ODA) portfolio in order to augment incomes for PBD;

4. Integrating LTI and PBD on a province-to-province basis;

5. Shifting focus of low-LAD balance provinces to PBD; and

6. Unlocking credit facilities for the agrarian reform beneficiaries through capacity development for credit
providers and farmer-borrowers.

To speed up resolution of AR related cases, the Agrarian Justice Delivery component is geared at:

1. Putting the legal framework in place to expedite the LAD process and undertake PBD lawyering to
ensure ARBs’ free and informed consent on agribusiness agreements;

2. Developing common templates and legal outlines in order to rationalize the DAR lawyers’ and
paralegals’ appreciation and decision on cases;

3. Improving the capabilities of DAR lawyers and legal officers; and

4. Utilizing information, communication technology (ICT) to enhance legal work.

Together with the efforts to fight graft and corruption by the President, it is imperative to have institutional
reforms within DAR as acomplement to the abovementioned DAR components as well as give credence,
transparency and accountability at all sectors of the DAR bureaucracy.
 OBJECTIVES:
There are many objectives of agrarian reform. Majority of the laws are formulated during periods of
unrest. As a result, the reforms are not formulated with much precision. The objectives of the agrarian
reform are flexible due to lack of precision.
The objectives of agrarian reform are discussed below.

Objectives of agrarian reform- political:

The main objective was to put an end to conflicts pertaining to land ownership. Aim to bring about
harmony between the rural people and the urban residents is also called for.

Therefore, bringing stability in the political set up of the country is also regarded as one of the objectives
of agrarian reform. The political set up of the country plays an important role. If there is political unrest,
leaders would usually concentrate on resolving the crisis, instead of dealing with land conflicts.

Objectives of agrarian reform-social:

The socio agrarian reform include bringing about equality in terms of opportunities, income as well as
wealth. This leads to a dispute between the people who own land and those who do not possess land.
The dispute cannot be avoided unless some steps are taken for the betterment of the rural population.

Objectives of agrarian reform- economic:

The economic objectives can be listed below:

 Enhancing agricultural production

 Enhancing agricultural productivity
 Bettering capital formation
 Providing employment to more agricultural workers
 Enhancing demand for raw materials and services
 Improving balance of payments by facilitating export activities
 Trying to increase production at home so that imports do not have to be relied upon.
 Enhancing cooperation as well as regulation between agricultural sector and the non-agricultural sector.
The aims and objectives have become more and more complex with every passing day. In earlier times,
more stress was laid on equality among the people. However, things have changed a lot these days. The
focus has shifted to collectivization and rights to use land.
Conclusion:

What we can gather from the above scenario is that the objectives cannot become stagnant or static. The
objectives change or are rather updated as per requirements. Just as the reforms offer flexibility so do the
objectives in an effort to restore equilibrium whenever necessary.

ROLES AND FUNTIONS OF DAR (Department of Agrarian Reform)

 To lead in the implementation of agrarian reform & sustainable development in the country
through land tenure improvement and the provision of integrated development services to
landless farmers, farmworkers and small-landowners-cultivators & the delivery of agrarian
justice as key to long lasting peace and development of the countryside.
 It undertakes land tenure improvement, development of program beneficiaries, and agrarian
justice delivery.

VIRGILIO R. DE LOS REYES, Secretary, DAR (August 2009 up to present)

Secretary Virgilio R. De Los Reyes is the incumbent Secretary of DAR who faces the daunting task of
completing the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program with Reforms (CARPER) or RA 9700. With only
until 2016 to complete the program, the current DAR management instituted policy and operational
measures to speed up land distribution through the institutionalization of the ONE-DAR Concept and the
following strategies and interventions:

1. Streamlining of the LAD Process. DAR Administrative Order (AO) No. 7, Series of 2011, simplified the
LAD process and shortens the time standard to 182 working days under normal conditions. AO 7 also
strengthened the due process requirements in land acquisition and distribution. DAR AO No. 8, Series of
2011 provides remedial measures for CARP-covered lands subject to unauthorized transfers or
conveyances, commonly referred to as chop-chop titles. DAR AO 9, Series of 2011 issued last October
2011 provides rules for the survey and field investigation of landholdings where DAR and LBP personnel
were denied entry.

2. Inventory and Review of all Claim folders. Mass inventory and review of all claim folders was
undertaken from February to May 2012 to determine the actual magnitude and status of the LAD balance
identify the issues and problems that need to be resolved so that timely interventions can be provided.

3. Intensification of the Monitoring and Performance of the PAROs and MAROs. The progress of
acquisition is being monitored on a per landholding basis and time standards and cost parameters per
LAD activity have been instituted to track deviations, immediately identify problems and put in place
remedial measures.

4. Systems-Wide Solutions to Problem Encountered in land Acquisition. Global solutions to technical and
administrative issues that delay the acquisition process have been put in place and further solutions are
explored as well. For this, DAR is working closely with its partner agencies, the Land registration
Authority, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR and the Land Bank of the
Philippines (LBP)

Under the ONE-DAR Concept, frontline services are provided where the manpower services are badly
needed. Convergent efforts, talents and manpower are shared to help meet targets. Field offices assists
each other, Central Office units take on tasks that need global solutions. In other words, the ONE-DAR
Concept means that the problem of one is the problem of the whole Department.

Incidentally, it is during the incumbency of Secretary de los Reyes that Hacienda Luisita has been ruled
by the Supreme Court to finally distribute the undistributed agricultural lands to the 2,600 plus original
tenants, farm workers, farmer tillers of HLI when it scrapped the stock distribution option plan originally
opted by the HLI agricultural workers and farmers.
PROBLEMS AND CONFLICTS DURING CARP IMPLEMENTATION

AGRARIAN REFORM AND LAND CONFLICT

The core of agrarian reform is change. It is change resulting from the transfer of ownership from
landowner to landless farmer, change from being formerly landless to being an owner cultivator, and
change from being powerless to being empowered. Its very nature, therefore, easily becomes a source of
resistance, dispute, controversy and conflict.

In the case of the Philippines, agrarian reform is being implemented by the state as a social justice
measure to change the prevailing situation of unjust and inequitable ownership of land and resources by
a few individuals in society. For hundreds of years, from the Spanish occupation of the Philippines in the
1500s to the present, agricultural lands have been in the possession of a few powerful landlords and
corporations.

The majority of people have remained as tenants, farm workers and landless agricultural labourers, a
factor that has contributed to the poverty in the countryside. Land conflict stems mainly from agrarian
disputes brought about by the prevailing agrarian situation.

Hayami, Quisumbing and Adriano (1990)1 relate three major sources of agrarian unrest in the
Philippines to the social transformations that occurred in the evolution of the Philippine agrarian
structures.

First, the emergence of agrarian institutions in the Central Luzon and Southern Tagalog regions in the
Philippines represent disputes between tenants and landlords.

Second, the development of the sugar industry in Luzon, based on tenanted haciendas, and then Negros
Islands, based on centrally managed haciendas employing hired labour, represent confrontations
between wage labourers and hacendero planters in traditional plantations.

Third, the emergence of modern plantations and commercial farms in the southern island of Mindanao
represents confrontation between wage labourers and corporate management in modern agribusiness
plantations.

Agrarian conflict in tenanted lands

Landownership was communal in pre-Hispanic Philippine society. Land was owned by
the barangay (village) and individuals had rights to use the land and make it productive. The Spaniards
introduced private ownership through the granting of legal titles. Thus began the accumulation of land by
indigenous elite groups in connivance with the Spanish authorities. Landlord-ism proliferated in the
Central Luzon and Southern Tagalog regions, where the main crops planted were rice and coconut.

The transformation of smallholders to tenants was aided by the usurious and oppressive practices of
landlords. Hans Bobek (1962)2 calls "rent capitalism"what arises from the commercialization of a feudal
economy in such a way that the original claims of the aristocracy upon peasant services are transferred
into more explicitly profit-seeking obligations. According to Bobek, "it is an absolute ideal of the rent
capitalist to get as many peasants as possible into debt so permanently that with all their yearly payments
they can never liquidate the initial debt, which soon becomes legendary." Being deeply mired in debt,
therefore, has become a condition of tenancy and has added stress to the already strenuous landlord-
tenant relationship.

It is not surprising that the early government land reform programmes from 1933 to 1972 were designed
to address tenancy regulations and redistribute lands in the tenanted rice and maize areas. Yet, after
almost 30 years of Marcos' Operation Land Transfer (OLT, in 1972), which sought to emancipate the
tenant from the bondage of the soil, there still remain a sizeable number of tenanted farms that have not
been placed under land reform

Approximately 50 000 hectares, half of which are considered problematic, are still targeted for distribution
from an original scope of more than 600 000 ha (DAR, Land Acquisition and Distribution Status as of 31
July 2001).

A more recent source of tension and conflict in OLT areas is the growing number of cancellations of
emancipation patents or land reform titles under the OLT programme. Organized peasant groups have
criticized the DAR for what it calls "land reversion" because the DAR bodies adjudicating the petitions
made by the former landlords were cancelling land titles already given to farmers.

The farmer who has been given the title has legal recourse to object to the cancellation. In most cases,
farmers who have access to legal or paralegal support have better chances of winning their cases.
Otherwise, the landlords are able to use their money and power to get their lands back.

Agrarian conflict in sugar haciendas

The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP), ratified by President Corazon Aquino in 1988,
was hailed as an important piece of legislation because it went beyond the scope of previous land reform
programmes by including in its coverage the acquisition and distribution of all private agricultural land
regardless of the crop produced. Finally, there was hope that the thousands of hectares of land planted to
sugar under the hacienda system that had been in existence since the time of Spanish occupation would
be given to thousands of poor landless workers.

But more than ten years after the implementation of CARP, the sugar haciendas, especially in the Negros
Islands, have barely been touched. These haciendas continue to be the last bastion of feudalism in the
Philippines.

The sugar industry in the Philippines employs more than half a million workers. The Spanish introduced
sugar in the 1500s through the encomienda system, whereby lands were awarded by the colonial
government to the church (friar lands) and to the local elite. The industry developed further when the
Americans came and opened up trade with the United States. Sugar was booming until 1985, when a
crisis hit the industry, the price of sugar went down and the Americans cancelled the sugar quota.

Most hacienda owners were forced to sell or mortgage their properties or convert their farms to other
commercial uses. However, for several years these planters had enjoyed accumulating profits that were
then channeled to other investments.The hardest hit by the crisis were the farm workers, who belong,
together with agricultural labourers in the sugar haciendas, to the poorest of the poor in the Philippines.

To illustrate the gravity of the slow-paced implementation of agrarian reform in the sugar haciendas in the
Negros Islands, a report3 from the Regional Director of the Department of Agrarian Reform to the Under-
secretary for Operations shows that, as of September 1999, in Negros Occidental alone, more than 90
000 ha of lands measuring 50 ha and larger had still not been distributed to farm workers.

Furthermore, in the same report, a section entitled "Problematics" refers to properties undergoing
difficulties in terms of proceeding with the land reform process. These "problematic" lands constitute
about 10 000 of the 90 000 ha. Hence, these problems are the causes of various forms of land conflict.
For instance, problems relating to land that is subject to applications for exclusion and exemption from
land reform, or applications for the conversion of land from agricultural to commercial and industrial uses,
or where the landlord has protested against the coverage of his or her farm under the agrarian reform
programme often lead to conflict between the landlord and the farm workers.

The farm workers react to attempts by the landlord to evade the land reform programme. They counter
these attempts by filing legal opposition with the DAR. The landlord retaliates by dismissing from the farm
those workers who have signed up under the agrarian reform programme or filed opposition to his or her
application for exemption and conversion. The dismissed farm workers then file complaints with the
Department of Labour for illegal dismissal.

Organized farm workers have the advantage of providing safety nets for fellow workers who have been
illegally dismissed. They also have the advantage of extralegal action to force the government to act in
their favour. However, farm workers who do not have access to organized action can become easy prey
to recruitment by communist insurgents advocating armed struggle against the government.

The conflict in the sugar areas is such that the DAR has hundreds of cases docketed in its adjudication
bodies. The case study on Task Force Mapalad, presented below, demonstrates how organized farm
workers have used extralegal methods to achieve social justice through agrarian reform.

Agrarian conflict in commercial farms and plantations

Mindanao, the southernmost part of the Philippines, is home to thousands of hectares of commercial
farms and modern plantations. These farms are planted mainly to bananas, pineapples and rubber.
Corporations such as Del Monte, Dole and B.F. Goodrich operate in the area. Although Philippine law
prohibits land ownership by foreign companies, these corporations have gained control over lands
through lease arrangements or through local Philippine companies.

A more recent phenomenon is a leaseback arrangement in which farmer beneficiaries of the agrarian
reform programme surrender to the multinational corporation the use of their farm for a period of 10-15
years. In exchange, they are given cash advances equivalent to five years of the annual lease rate. This
offer is especially attractive to farmers in need of cash.

The majority of conflict cases in commercial farms emanate from labour relations. Farm wage labourers
are usually organized into labour unions that deal with the agribusiness corporations. Thus the most
common issues include, among others, the provision of mandated wages and benefits, observance of fair
labour practices and ensuring occupational safety.

AGRARIAN CONFLICT AND THE LEGAL SYSTEM

Agrarian reform in the Philippines has a fundamental legal mandate. It is embodied in the 1986
Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines, which alsoemphasizes the importance of agrarian reform
as a social justice programmethat must be given priority by the government.

On 10 June 1988, President Corazon Aquino ratified Republic Act 6657 otherwise known as
the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP). This law is considered to be an improvement over
the earlier agrarian laws primarily because it covers all agricultural lands regardless of the crops
produced.

The plight of farmers within the legal system was tackled in the first alternative law conference organized
by the Alternative Law Group Network and the University of the Philippines College of Law.4 The
conference identified three major problems obstructing the administration of justice through agrarian
reform.These are: acute ignorance of the agrarian reform law by the legal system's key institutions; a
muddled agrarian reform policy climate; and a bureaucracy that seems ill-prepared to carry out its
mandated task.

An article in the conference proceedings, "Stalled: the legal struggles of farmers for agrarian reform", cites
several cases where judges or justices have made comments and voiced opinions that show ignorance of
the law. One example cited is that of a justice of the Second Division of the Court of Appeals who
expressed surprise that a cooperative was eligible to become a beneficiary of the agrarian reform
programme.

Even though Section 50 of RA 6657 clearly confirms that agrarian cases fall under the jurisdiction of the
DAR, this has also proved to be as a contentious issue. Conflicts emanate from the filing of agrarian
cases in the regular courts by landlords who naturally feel that they have better chances in the municipal
or regional trial courts than with the adjudication bodies of the DAR, which are perceived, correctly or
mistakenly, as biased towards farmers. The conflicts escalate when the regular courts entertain the
cases, sometimes even issuing injunction orders against the DAR, instead of dismissing the cases at the
onset.

REFERENCES:
http://www.thefilipinomind.com/2006/04/agrarian-reform-conflicts-
during.html
http://www.dar.gov.ph/about-us/about-the-department
http://www.economywatch.com/agrarian/objectives.html
http://www.dar.gov.ph/past-leaders/365-secretary-virgilio-r-de-los-
reyes