Sunday, March 02, 2008

16 years of Agrarian Reform: Lands Are Back in the Hands of the Lords - Part 1 of 2

"How can a genuine agrarian reform program be legislated by a landlord-dominated Congress and signed by a landlord President?"

Notes: Bold, colored and/or underlined words are HTML links. Click on them to see the linked posting/article. Forwarding the postings to relatives and friends,especially in the homeland, is greatly appreciated. To share, use all social media tools: email, blog, Google+, Tumblr,Twitter,Facebook, etc. THANKS!!


16 Years of Agrarian Reform:
Lands are Back in the Hands of the Lords (Part 1 of 2)

Click for --> 16 Years of Agrarian Reform – Part 2 of 2

The government claims that the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) is a success, even if it was supposed to end in 1998 but got extended until 2008 due to delays in the distribution of land and lack of funds. Farmers, on the other hand, claim to still experience feudal bondage and brand CARP as a bogus reform program. What is the truth behind the CARP’s accomplishment? How are the tenant-beneficiaries doing at present? This special report seeks to shed light on what has happened to the program, and, more importantly, the farmers, 16 years after CARP’s supposed implementation.

Sixteen years ago – or just two years after the fall of the Marcos dictatorship - an agrarian reform law was passed. The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Act (CARP) was the fifth land reform law in 50 years after those proclaimed under Presidents Manuel Quezon, Ramon Magsaysay, Diosdado Macapagal and Ferdinand Marcos. CARP was declared the centerpiece program of then President Corazon C. Aquino but organized peasants and other sectors did not expect much from it, however. 

As a farmer leader then quipped, "how can a genuine agrarian reform program be legislated by a landlord-dominated Congress and signed by a landlord President?"

Fast forward to 2004. If official pronouncements were to be believed, genuine agrarian reform is a pipe dream no more. A full-page government advertisement in a leading newspaper last June 10 described CARP as “a tribute to the sturdy and resilient Filipino farmers.” “After 16 years of meeting the challenges of providing productive lives to millions of farmers all over the country, the farmers are finally realizing their dreams,” the ad, published by the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR), said further.

Remembering the past

CARP was mandated by Republic Act No. 6657 signed by President Aquino on June 10, 1988. Upon its passage, the government promised to distribute lands in 10 years, i.e., until 1998, to about 8.5 million landless peasants, share tenants and agricultural workers “to liberate them from the clutches of landlordism and poverty.” CARP covered “all public and private lands regardless of tenurial arrangement and commodity produced.” 

It included “the totality of factors and support services” such as credit extension, irrigation, roads, bridges and marketing facilities, among others. Overall, it envisioned “a nation where there is equitable land ownership with empowered agrarian reform beneficiaries who are effectively managing their economic and social development for a better quality of life.”

The next three presidents after Aquino echoed the promise of distributing lands and a better life to Filipino farmers. However, something else happened under Aquino herself and the presidencies of Fidel V. Ramos, Joseph Estrada and now, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. 

  • the original land distribution target of 24 million hectares was reduced by phases until it became just 4.7 million hectares. 
  • the 1998 deadline for the “full implementation” of CARP was extended by Congress for another 10 years. 

The main reason cited is the lack of budget allocations.

DAR figures: “distorted, bloated and unreliable”

According to DAR, around 3.4 million hectares of lands have been distributed to some 1.9 million beneficiaries as of May this year. DAR Policy Research Officer Narcisa S. Martinez said that these statistics are best proof that the agency is doing well on its task to implement the land reform act. 

On closer look, however, the DAR reports tend to hide the fact that only half of the reported figures (or the final targets after a process of reductions) have actually been distributed. Tenant-beneficiaries, on the other hand, are losing their lands back to the landlords, industrialists and real estate developers.

A DAR insider dismissed the department’s accomplishment reports as “distorted, bloated and unreliable.” Its latest accomplishment report, according to the agrarian reform officer in Central Luzon who spoke to this author on condition of anonymity, is unreliable. Having been assigned in various local and regional DAR offices in the past 21 years, he admitted witnessing “so many ways of fooling around with the law.”

In Zambales province, for example, some 12,755 hectares of land reportedly distributed by the agrarian department have been under investigation since 1999. The lands are supposed to be inalienable, being seashores, rivers, roads, titled properties and protected areas. In other words, they cannot be used for agricultural production. Initial investigation confirmed the bogus land distribution in this case. 

Surprisingly, those responsible were not sanctioned. The provincial DAR office was believed to carelessly rely on barangay (village) census as basis of land distribution targets. The local agrarian officials overlooked the fact that many supposed beneficiaries were no longer residing in the targeted CARP communities.

The DAR source cited many other land distribution cases including Certificates of Land Ownership Award (CLOA) cancellations that remained unsolved due to lack of evidence and witnesses. Eventually, many lands were excluded from CARP coverage after secret deals between land reform officials, local government executives and landowners, he said.

The whistle-blower ends up in hot water as “corruption is systematic from the field surveyor/technician up to the high levels. Ang matapat ang siya pang maiiba at mapapahamak” (The true public servant is the one who finds himself intimidated).

Laments the DAR official: “It is a lonely, frustrating battle…When I was assigned in the province some years back, the regional director called me a few times. He said I should play it cool and that I should refrain from touching some landowners. Huwag ko daw isama sa CARP coverage” (Their properties should be exempted).

There are other ways by which DAR accomplishment reports are distorted. David Erro, executive director of the Sentro para sa Tunay na Repormang Agraryo
(Center for Genuine Agrarian Reform)
- a Quezon City-based foundation offering legal services and assistance to poor farmers said, for instance, that to beat targets and deadlines, the DAR in the past released many certificates of land ownership award (CLOAs) although the beneficiaries have neither paid the required amount nor met other requisites.

To differentiate these CLOAs from those held by complying beneficiaries, DAR officials stamped the label “encumbered” or other annotations of encumbrances on the back of the certificates. The latter are as good as the original, many holders of encumbered CLOAs were told. The number of holders of the defective CLOAs is then padded to the accomplishment report.

Erro, who is a lawyer, clarified however that holders of this kind of CLOAs “cannot exercise acts of ownership unlike those holding regular certificates.” In fact DAR officials withhold the generated titles until the farmers themselves fulfill the requirements such as documents and payments.

Cancelled and taking back what was given

Another serious concern in CARP is the pattern of farmer-beneficiaries losing lands for different reasons. One of such reasons is government cancellation of the farmers’ land titles.

In a March 2004 report titled, “Cancellation of Land Titles: Pulling the Rug from Under Agrarian Reform,” peasant group Kaisahan tungo sa Kaunlaran ng Kanayunan at Repormang Pansakahan (Kaisahan) or Coalition for Rural Progress and Land Reform) described the alarming trend of title cancellation among holders of CLOA and of emancipation patent (EP) as bigay tapos bawi (give, and then take back) scheme.

EPs have been issued since 1972 under Presidential Decree No. 27, the land reform program of the late President Ferdinand Marcos. The issuance of EPs lasted until 1989 when the Supreme Court (SC) ruled to stop their release.

As of May this year, DAR’s Management Information System (MIS) revealed that titles for about 380,000 hectares of farmlands have been cancelled. The incidence of title cancellation was highest in Southern Tagalog, followed by CARAGA region which comprises the provinces of Surigao del Norte and Sur and Agusan del Norte and Sur.

While DAR has yet to show dis-aggregated data on the current numbers and the reasons for cancellation, the usual reasons for the department’s action to cancel included:

  • erroneous coverage of land, 
  • erroneous entry of data and transfer action (or change of documents from EP to CLOA). 
  • Decisions of the DAR Adjudication Board (Darab) on cases involving retention, exemption, re-issuance of owner’s title, and correction of farmer-beneficiaries were also cited.
  • the reclassification of land under which lands distributed, for unknown reasons, have suddenly been reclassified for residential, commercial and industrial uses by a local zoning ordinance or land use plan.
In the past 16 years, around 800,000 hectares of agricultural lands have been converted to other uses, based on government records. Land conversion, according to a source from DAR, is the “easiest way of circumventing the law.”


Based on DAR records, foreclosed properties due to non-payment of amortization totaled around 100,000 hectares. This implies that the economic conditions of farmer-beneficiaries did not improve significantly to enable them to sustain payment.

Recent surveys by the Center for Peasant Education and Services (CPES) in Southern Tagalog and Central Luzon regions showed that three out of five holders of CLOA or EP have sold their rights or mortgaged then abandoned their properties without payment.

Asked to explain why they sold their land, farmers surveyed by CPES said:
  • they lack capital to sustain or improve farm production
  • some farms were also converted to residential or commercial uses. This was resorted to often because farming prospects were compromised by water drain, pollution and other problems brought about, so the farmers said, by non-agricultural activities around the farms.

The same surveys revealed that those who bought the CARP-awarded lands were the landlords themselves as well as businessmen and real estate developers.

Corroborating the CPES surveys, the DAR source said that when a beneficiary sells his farm to his former landlord, the latter pays the remaining obligations of the farmer. When fully paid, the landlord, through the farmer, applies for change of owner’s name after claiming wrong identification of the beneficiary.

Project Development Institute (PDI), a non-government organization, shared the same observation. In an interview with this author, Julio Rodrigo de Guia of PDI said that in one of the institute’s areas of operation in Tarlac, about 30 out of 100 CARP beneficiaries gave up their lands in the past five years after realizing that farming was no longer a viable source of income. But in other areas where PDI facilitated socio-economic projects to improve production and to introduce other sources of income, the farmer-beneficiaries stayed.

For PDI, DAR’s mishandling the delivery of support services could partly explain CARP’s failure. The law allots only 25 percent of the total CARP funds to be used exclusively for support services like farm-to-market roads, bridges, irrigation facilities, etc. The remaining 75 percent will be sourced out from the donor communities or international funding agencies.


Poverty, according to Research Officer Raul Espere of CPES, remains the major reason why tenant-beneficiaries are forced to surrender their rights and lands to buyers and mortgagees.

“It is quite ironic that this is the reason why CARP was implemented - to solve rural poverty. If this is the same reason why lands are being given up, then, it only shows that CARP dismally failed in meeting its objectives,” Espere said.

Danilo Ramos, secretary general of the militant Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (KMP – Peasant Movement in the Philippines), offered his own assessment of CARP. He said: “Pagkatapos ng CARP sa 2008 (when the extension period ends), naibenta na ulit ng mga benepisyaryo ang lupa sa mayayaman dahil wala namang pag-asang umunlad ang kabuhayan ng magsasaka sa taas naman ng gastos sa produksyon. Wala namang suportang pautang at iba pang serbisyo ang gobyerno kaya magigipit uli ang benepisyaryo, mababaon sa utang, mapipilitang ibenta ang lupa” (When the CARP ends in 2008, the beneficiaries would have re-sold the land to the rich because their livelihood cannot be expected to improve with the high cost of production. There is no credit support and other services from the government so the beneficiaries end up in a tight fix, go indebted and are forced to sell the land.)

Ramos argues that the root of this flawed land reform program is in the very concept of compensating the landlords and making the farmers pay for the lands. Nasaan naman doon ang katarungan? Ang naging papel lang ng gobyerno sa programang ito ay ang pagiging middleman sa bentahan ng lupa sa pagitan ng may-ari at ng magsasaka. Reporma ba ‘yun? (Where is justice in this case? The only role of the government in this program is to serve as a middleman in the sale of land between the owner and the farmer. Is this reform?), he says.

Given a distorted DAR accomplishment report, Ramos said the sum of failures would offset the claimed number of distributed lands or outbalance whatever “little gains” CARP has accomplished.

By 2008, the KMP leader says, another land reform program would be needed as the CARP lands – or those that government claims were transferred to tenants - are back in the hands of the landlords.Wala nang katapusan ang pagrereporma sa lupa dahil ayaw naman talaga ng gobyerno na tapusin (Land reform is never-ending. The government does not want to end it anyway). 


Click to read:

  1.  16 Years of Agrarian Reform – Part 2 of 2
  2. Agrarian Reforms - Conflicts during Implementation
  3. More on Hacienda Luisita and the Farce of Philippine Agrarian (Land) Reform
  4. The Friar Lands Scandal - How Filipinos Were Being Robbed of The Soil

**************************************END OF POST**********************************

PLEASE DONATE CORE/FUNDAMENTAL SUBJECT BOOKS TO OUR HOMELAND (i.e. your hometown public schools, Alma Mater, etc.). Those books that you and/or your children do not need or want; or buy books from your local library during its cheap Book Sales. Also, cargo/door-to-door shipment is best.  It is a small sacrifice.  [clean up your closets or garage - donate books.THANKS!]

Hi All,

The below link will show a short list of my past posts (out of 540 posts so far) which I consider as basic topics about us native (indio)/ Malay Filipinos. This link/listing, which may later expand, will always be presented at the bottom of each future post.  Just point-and-click at each listed item to open and read. 

Thank you for reading and sharing with others, especially those in our homeland.

- Bert


THE FILIPINO MIND blog contains 533 published postings you can view, as of December 20, 2012. Go to the sidebar to search Past & Related Postings, click LABEL [number in parenthesis = total of related postings]; or use the GOOGLE SEARCH at the sidebar using key words [labels, or tags] for topics of interest to you. OR click a bottom label or tag to open related topics.

The postings are oftentimes long and a few readers have claimed being "burnt out."  My apologies. As the selected topics are not for entertainment but to stimulate deep thought (see MISSION Statement) and hopefully to rock the boat of complacency (re MISSION).

(1) Bold/Underlined words are HTML links. Click to see linked posts or articles.

(2) Scroll down to end of post to read or enter Comments. Any comment sent to my personal email will be posted here.

(3).Visit my other website SCRIBD/TheFilipinoMind; or type it on GOOGLE Search.View/Free Download pdf versions of: postings, eBooks, articles (120 and growing). Or another way to access, go to the sidebar of the THE FILIPINO MIND website and click on SCRIBD. PLEASE Share!
Statistics for my associated website:SCRIBD/theFilipinoMind :
148,510 reads

(4). Some postings and other relevant events are now featured in Google+BMD_FacebookBMD_Twitter and BMD_Google Buzz

(5) Translate to your own language. Go to the sidebar and Click on GOOGLE TRANSLATOR (56 languages - copy and paste sentences, paragraphs and whole articles, Google translates a whole posting in seconds, including to Filipino!!).
(6).  From suggestions by readers, I have added some contemporary music to provide a break. Check out bottom of posting to play Sarah Brightman, Andrea Bocelli, Sting, Chris Botti, Josh Groban, etc. 

(7) Songs on Filipino nationalism: please reflect on the lyrics (messages) as well as the beautiful renditions. Other Filipino Music links at blog sidebar.  Click each to play.:
(8) Forwarding the postings to relatives and friends, ESPECIALLY in the homeland, is greatly appreciated. Use emails, Twitter, Google+, Facebook, etc. below. THANKS!!

1 comment :

Bert M. Drona said...

Hi All,

In addition to H.L. issue, let us not forget the dwindling of our national patrimony due to alien/foreign encroachment, which our past and present, including Aquino III's, governments allow. Please note the below statement regarding a major and disastrous impact of Parity Rights on our national patrimony:

CONCLUDING OBSERVATIONS: (Extracted from " Alien Interests in the Land (1900- Present)" - Prof. Perfecto V. Fernandez, U.P. Claro M. Recto Professorial Chair on Constitutional Law, 1984-1986.)


Under the Constitution of the Philippines (1935 as well as 1973), one of the broad objectives postulated for the Government is "to conserve and develop the patrimony of the Nation" which is set forth in the Preamble.

From the foregoing exposition, however, the National Patrimony (in the sense of public domain) has been steadily dwindling, and may reach the vanishing point before the century ends.

Stress must be given the fact that, to begin with, the National Patrimony had been greatly reduced by the beginning of this century. Much of the best lands had been taken over by the Church and its religious orders, and vast tracts had been deeded by the Spanish monarchs under royal grants.

All these became vested rights under the Treaty of Paris, and the episode of the Friar Lands only underscore the problem of getting back choice lands once they get into alien hands.

During the long period of Spanish rule, the lands taken by the colonizers were arable and residential lands.

During the much shorter period of American colonial rule, the choice of the colonizers shifted to mineral and timber lands.

Some of the richest deposits of valuable ore were taken over by Americans and their companies, and most of what was taken have remained in their hands.

Such alien acquisitions continued during the Commonwealth period, and also during most of the life of the Republic up to this time, by force of the Parity Amendment.

Under the present Constitution, the alienation of the remaining National Patrimony has taken other forms. Large tracts have been given away under management or service contracts with the Government, and even larger areas could be placed under alien hands through international

The situation is aggravated by alien take-over of private landholdings under management contracts, and to a lesser degree, under increasing resort to growers' agreements.

There is bitter irony in the situation that has emerged, that the sovereign power of the Filipino people expressed through their fundamental law, is used to maintain alien control and enjoyment of the lands taken from the Nation.

(Source: U.P Philippine Law Journal, Volume 59-1984)