Hacienda Luisita

Both Pahilga and Neri consider the Hacienda Luisita case as the most controversial they have handled in their early years as lawyers.

The farm and mill workers of Hacienda Luisita, a 6,000-hectare sugar estate owned and operated by the family of former Pres. Corazon Cojuangco-Aquino, figured in a labor and agrarian dispute that claimed seven lives and wounded scores of others in what is known as the Hacienda Luisita Massacre.

Pahilga assisted the farm workers in filing a petition for land distribution as early as October 2003. Their law office, PLACE, assisted the mill workers in their strike in 2003 and the simultaneous strike of farm and mill workers in Nov. 2004.

Neri said that he could still remember the backdoor negotiations they held with the Luisita owners. He and his co-counsel Nenita Mahinay, also a lawyer from PLACE, went with the union officers in the morning of Nov 16 to the mansion of Jose “Peping” Cojuangco and his wife Margarita “Tingting” Cojuangco in Makati.

“Hindi namin bibitawan ang hacienda dahil may sentimental value ito sa amin. (We will not let go of the hacienda because it has a sentimental value to us.) We will fight for the land at all costs,” he quoted the Cojuangcos as saying.

After the failed negotiations, the two labor lawyers went to Malacanang Palace to seek the intervention of government officials. But while meeting with Cabinet official Ed Pamintuan, they received a call from union officers telling them that the military fired on the picketline.

Harassments against Pahilga and the PLACE increased when the Nov 2004 strike started. Although the strike has ended in Dec. 2005, the harassment of union leaders and members and their lawyers continued.

Rebellion case

Neri is also the lead counsel for Bayan Muna (People First) Rep. Joel Virador while Pahilga is lawyer for Anakpawis (Toiling Masses) Rep. Rafael Mariano and Randal Echanis, an official of the same partylist group. The two representatives are part of the Batasan 6, a group of legislators who were ordered arrested and charged with rebellion by the Department of Justice. Except for Rep. Crispin Beltran of Anakpawis, the other lawmakers, who were taken into custody by the House of Representatives, have been released. But all of the Batasan 6 lawmakers are still facing charges of rebellion.

Both lawyers also assist activists who are arrested and detained during violent dispersals of protest actions and rallies. “Suki na nga ako ng CPD (Central Police District),” (I am always seen at the CPD) Pahilga said.

Clients affected

The harassments on these two young lawyers have affected not just their families but most especially their clients.

Their clients, who consult with their lawyers after office hours so as not to jeopardize their jobs, now find it hard to go to the PLACE office due to security considerations.

SENTRA clients have also been tailed from the office to their homes. One of them was even told, “Wag kayo sumasama ke Atty Pahilga kasi baka madamay kayo.” (Do not associate with Atty Pahilga because you might also be included.)

Humble beginnings

Both lawyers shared similar experiences during their younger years. They were both involved in youth activism in their hometowns. Pahilga used to be a member of the League of Filipino Students (LFS) and chair of the Sangguniang Kabataan (Youth Council) in Antique while Neri volunteered in non-government organizations involved in the plight of workers in Davao, Southern Philippines.

They also supported themselves while in law school, juggling their studies and their work. Two years before he graduated from Lyceum, Pahilga was already working for SENTRA. “Humahawak na ako ng mga kaso nuon kaya pagkatapos ng mga hearings sa mga probinsya, sa bus na lang ako nag-aaral para sa mga exam,” (I was already handling cases then. So after the hearings in the provinces, I studied for my exams while commuting in buses.) he said.

Neri was already a part-time employee at the Quezon City Regional Trial Court (RTC) while he studied law at the Manuel L. Quezon University in Manila.

At first, Pahilga said he found it difficult handling agrarian cases because agrarian laws were not taught in school except for short discussions on Presidentiasl Decree No. 27 (PD 27), the agrarian reform law of former Pres. Ferdinand Marcos. He said the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1987 was not taught in law school. “Kaya lahat ng batas sa lupa sa practice ko lang natutunan,” (Thus, I only became knowledgeable about laws concerning agrarian cases through practice.) he said.

Neri, meanwhile, is enraged over the country’s labor laws. “Biased,” was how he described it. He added that while the law recognizes the right to strike of workers and that it is their most effective weapon against capitalists, it is still biased against workers. It allows, he said, the issuance of an Assumption of Jurisdiction (AJ) order by the labor secretary. Once the labor department assumes jurisdiction over a strike, the workers are bound by law to lift it.

Although both lawyers know that the threats on their lives are real, both Neri and Pahilga are still committed to pursue their cases against big landlords and capitalists who “trample on the rights of their clients.”

“Hindi kami ipokrito para sabihing hindi kami takot pero hindi nila kami mapapatigil sa trabaho namin,”(We do not want to be hypocrites by claiming that we are not afraid. But they cannot stop us from doing our work.) said Neri.

”It’s just a matter of commitment,” Pahilga said. (Bulatlat.com)

 Save as PDF