Land & Agrarian Reform in the Philippines PDF

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...

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.