Despite gov't decision favoring land
distribution
Hacienda Luisita Workers Still Face
Uphill Battle
The
strike may have been lifted last December 8, 2005, but the struggle of the
farm workers of Hacienda Luisita, Inc. (HLI) is far from over. Among the
unresolved issues are coverage of land distribution and number of agrarian
reform beneficiaries.
BY
ABNER BOLOS
Bulatlat
Farm workers in
Hacienda Luisita asked the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) to put
under land distribution the entire 6,453 has. that originally comprised
the plantation before it was placed under the stock distribution plan (SDP).
The United Luisita
Workers’ Union (ULWU), Alyansa ng mga Manggagawang Bukid sa Asyenda
Luisita (AMBALA, or the Alliance of Farm Workers in Hacienda Luisita) and
the supervisory group, which petitioned for the investigation of the SDP,
also asked DAR to compel Hacienda Luisita, Inc. (HLI) to render an
accounting of its business operations and the proceeds of the sale of
portions of the estate since the approval of the SDP in 1989.
These were among the
nine pleadings contained in the farm workers’ response to Hacienda Luisita
management’s appeal regarding the revocation of the SDP. The response was
submitted to the Presidential Agrarian Reform Council (PARC) last January
16 and was signed by four lawyers from the Public Interest Law Center (PILC)
headed by United Nations judge ad litem Romeo Capulong.
Frivolous and
dilatory
Brushing aside
management’s appeal as “frivolous and dilatory,” the farm workers asked
DAR secretary Nasser Pangandaman to “take immediate appropriate steps to
execute and implement” the PARC decision that called for the compulsory
acquisition of 4,915 has. covered by the SDP for distribution to the farm
workers.
“The arguments they
raised have long been settled by the courts in favor of land reform
beneficiaries. Aside from our counter-arguments we also presented specific
proposals, which will bring to light what really happened in the decades
that the Cojuangco family controlled the hacienda,” Capulong told union
officers and former plantation supervisors in a meeting held on the day
the union’s response was submitted to the DAR.
In its January 2
motion for reconsideration, the HLI management argued that the PARC has no
jurisdiction to revoke the SDP because only “a proper action in court and
not an administrative body like the PARC” can nullify the 1989 agreement
between the corporation and the farm workers which served as the basis for
the SDP.
The HLI management
also argued that there was no due process in the revocation of the SDP and
that the PARC violated the right to property guaranteed by the Philippine
constitution. The union lawyers, however, cited a 2004 Supreme Court
decision that states, “All controversies on the implementation of the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) fall under the jurisdiction
of the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR), even though they raise
questions that are also legal or constitutional in nature.”
The union lawyers also
said that the HLI management and its lawyers were “duly notified and had,
in fact, actively participated” when the DAR special task force started
investigations on the SDP in November 2004.
Historic and legal
right
“We are asserting our
historic and legal right to the entire 6,435 has. that originally
comprised the hacienda. The records will prove that management arbitrarily
excluded some 1,538 has. immediately before SDP took effect in 1989,” ULWU
president Rene Galang told Bulatlat in an interview.
Galang explained that
before the Cojuangco family assumed control of the hacienda from the
Compania General de Tabacos de Filipinas (Tabacalera) in 1958, the farm
workers had petitioned the government to distribute the land.
But the Cojuangco
family managed to secure loans from the government, which enabled them to
purchase the land from the Spanish owners on the condition that the land
will be distributed to the tillers after 10 years, Galang said.
The Cojuangco family
reneged on the agreement and was ordered by the Manila Trial Court in 1985
to distribute the land to the farm workers, Galang recalled.
“The clan did not
legally own even a single square foot of hacienda land before the SDP took
effect. But when a member of the family, former president Corazon
Cojuangco-Aquino became president, it was all too easy for them to ignore
our claim and manipulate the implementation of the SDP. In the process,
they arbitrarily reduced the CARP coverage,” Galang said.
The 120-hectare
Luisita Industrial Park, one of the hubs of Central Luzon’s growth
triangle used to be a sugar plantation and was not subjected to
application for land use conversion because it has been excluded in the
CARP coverage of the hacienda, according to Jojo Zuniga, one of the
supervisors who petitioned against the SDP in 2003.
Review transactions
By virtue of the SDP
revocation, the union also wants a review of all transactions involving
the land after 1989 in order to see how the HLI and other corporations
formed by the Cojuangco family generated income from the estate.
HLI is the corporate
owner of the sugar plantation where the farm workers supposedly own 33%
shares of stocks. It is a spin-off corporation of the Tarlac Development
Corp. (TADECO), the Cojuangco-owned corporation that took over the
plantation and the sugar mill in 1958.
“We would like also to
validate through official records that the clan unjustly amassed wealth
from the land while we were driven deeper into destitution. We will apply
legal remedies to recover what is rightfully ours,” Galang said.
Earlier, ULWU asked
DAR to declare void all land use conversion orders previously granted on
areas forming part of the original 6,453 has. property. The union also
asked DAR to order HLI not to sell or mortgage any portion of the land. In
1996, HLI sold a 500-hectare lot for P1.2 billion ($22658610.27, based on
an exchange rate of P52.96 per US dollar).
In its January 16
response to management’s appeal, ULWU also asked DAR to order the Register
of Deeds of Tarlac Province and Tarlac City to annotate the PARC
Resolution on the Registrars’ copies of the titles to the HLI properties
and to desist from registering all future transactions involving hacienda
land.
Against saboteurs
ULWU and Alyansa ng
Magbubukid sa Gitnang Luzon (AMGL or Alliance of Farmers in Central Luzon)
have also moved against “saboteurs” who allegedly seek to benefit from the
expected land distribution.
Last January 18, ULWU
officers along with AMGL chair Joseph Canlas asked provincial agrarian
reform officer Alfredo Reyes not to recognize and grant assistance to
members of Peace Foundation, a non-government organization based in
Manila.
Canlas told Reyes that
the group which was “not in any way involved in the strike suddenly
emerged and is trying to grab credit and gains” from the SDP revocation.
“Wala ang mga
mananabotaheng iyan noong panahon ng sakripisyo at kahirapan ng mga
manggagawang bukid sa pakikipaglaban para sa karapatan sa lupa. Ngayon ay
gusto nilang katawanin ang mga manggagawang bukid at pakinabangan ang
kanilang pinaghirapan,” (These saboteurs were not present when the farm
workers endured sacrifices and hardships in their struggle for their right
to the land. Now, they want to represent the farm workers and benefit from
their sacrifices.) Canlas said.
In response, Reyes
said, “all parties who intend to take part in the validation and land
distribution process will have to do so under the umbrella of ULWU.”
AMGL, a regional
chapter of the Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (Peasant Movement of the
Philippines), is one of the principal supporters and advisers of ULWU
along with party-list organizations Bayan Muna (People First), AnakPawis
(Toiling Masses) and Gabriela Women’s Party.
Elizabeth Magcalas,
municipal agrarian officer of Concepcion town, told union officers that
the Peace Foundation, represented by Noel Mallari, received some P49,000
($925.23) worth of seedlings as assistance to the land reform
beneficiaries in the hacienda.
Reynaldo Bulanadi,
ULWU director for Barangay Pando, Concepcion said that during the
dialogue, Mallari's group refused to give the seedlings to the farm
workers unless they join the Peace Foundation.
Other issues
One of the contentious
issues in the CARP coverage is the number and identification of
beneficiaries. ULWU said that there were originally about 5,500 union
members. But the company master list totaled 6,296 in 1989.
During the PARC
hearing held last December, management lawyer Vigor Mendoza claimed that
the number of farm workers in the company master list reached 11,955.
ULWU argued that
management has arbitrarily included in the master list people who are not
farm workers. The additional names in the list are personal or
confidential agents of the company.
Reyes announced that
DAR validation teams will conduct field investigations in the barangays
inside the hacienda from January 16 to 30 and that the preliminary
screening of beneficiaries and the survey of the lots covered by the
titles subject to CARP will last from February 18 to April 18. He said
that he expects the validation and documentation of Luisita beneficiaries
will be accomplished before the end of June.
Union officials also
decried alleged continuing human rights violations in the hacienda.
ULWU director Joey
Romero of Barangay (Village) Mapalacsiao said that five union officers
received death threats recently. He also told Bulatlat that on the
night of December 24, a van full of armed men parked near his home and
waited for him. He said that soldiers continue to conduct surveillance
operations and harass union leaders.
On January 13, the
wife of Balete barangay chair Rodel Galang was slapped by goons who were
in the company of soldiers. A week before, a barangay tanod of Balete was
mauled by soldiers resulting in severe head wounds that required 12
stitches. The victims have filed complaints with the police.
The union asked DAR
“to create the proper conditions necessary to effectively implement the
PARC Resolution by ordering the de-militarization and dismantling of the
private army of management” in the 10 barangays comprising the hacienda.
Bulatlat
BACK TO
TOP ■
PRINTER-FRIENDLY VERSION ■
COMMENT
© 2006 Bulatlat
■
Alipato Publications
Permission is granted to reprint or redistribute this article, provided
its author/s and Bulatlat are properly credited and notified.