Four of the largest rural-based organizations in the Philippines have issued a statement opposing five proposed farmland-as-collateral bills in the House of Representatives, claiming they would lead to massive cancellations of land titles currently held by farmers who have benefited from the country’s agrarian reform program.
BY GERRY ALBERT CORPUZ
Politics in Command / UPI Asia Online
Posted by Bulatlat.com
Vol. VIII, No. 30, August 31-September 6, 2008
Manila, Philippines – Four of the largest rural-based organizations in the Philippines have issued a statement opposing five proposed farmland-as-collateral bills in the House of Representatives, claiming these would lead to massive cancellations of land titles currently held by farmers who have benefited from the country’s agrarian reform program.
“The proposed farmland-as-collateral bills in Congress are shotgun pieces of legislation. They are meant to re-concentrate lands in the hands of landed monopolies and deny peasant land rights all over the country,” the groups said in a press briefing last week.
The five bills currently in the House of Representatives seek to allow agrarian reform beneficiaries to mortgage farmlands awarded to them to obtain loans from banks and other financial institutions, using their land titles, such as their certificates of land ownership awards and emancipation patents, to gain broader access to credit.
“The House of Representatives should realize that a farmland-as-collateral bill, if enacted into law, would not provide farmers broader access to credit. They should consider that most of the agrarian reform beneficiaries are impoverished and bankrupt and would find it difficult to repay loans. Thus, it would lead to cancellation of the EPs (emancipation patents) and CLOAs (certificate of land ownership awards) through foreclosure of the mortgages. This would lead to re-concentration of the lands back to the hands of the landowners or the moneyed few,” the rural-based groups said.
One strong argument against these bills is the fact that the data on cancellations of CLOAs and EPs is shocking. Such cancellations proceed from farmers’ nonpayment of amortization for the awarded lands either under Presidential Decree No. 27 or the defunct Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP).
In September 2007, the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) reported that 5,049 EPs and 103,092 CLOAs had been cancelled, involving 204,579 hectares of land. “This figure does not include pending cases of cancellation of EPs and CLOAs before the DAR. The agrarian reform department records likewise show that there are almost 50,000 cases pending before it, which involve exemption, conversion, and cancellation of EPs and CLOAs,” asserted Danilo Ramos, secretary general of the Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (KMP or Peasant Movement in the Philippines), one of the rural groups.
To date, the DAR has not made an actual determination and inventory of how many land titles currently in the possession of farmers were cancelled.
Citing a study by the independent think tank IBON Foundation, the groups said more than 2,000 EPs and CLOAs, covering 380,000 hectares of land, were cancelled by mid-2004 alone. This shows a huge discrepancy with the report of the DAR.
These figures show that farmers could not afford to pay the amortization of the lands and that it would be even more difficult for them to pay back loans given their present situation. Thus, if farmlands were ever mortgaged, the result would most likely be the foreclosure of the mortgage for nonpayment of the loan.
The opposition bloc against the farmland-as-collateral bills said these would have the same effect as Section 26 of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (Republic Act No. 6657), which places the burden of “owning” the land on the farmers by compelling them to pay for the value thereof without providing sufficient support services to them.
In essence, this type of bill would allow for a “second mortgage” of farmlands to persons or entities. The first mortgage is that provided under Section 26 of RA 6657. It would therefore only exacerbate farmers’ indebtedness, usury and landlessness.
Section 26 of the defunct law provides that the awarded lands “shall be paid for by the beneficiaries to the LBP (Land Bank of the Philippines) or the landowner in thirty (30) annual amortizations at six percent interest per annum” and that “the Land Bank of the Philippines shall have a lien by way of mortgage on the land awarded to beneficiary and this mortgage may be foreclosed by the LBP for non-payment of an aggregate of three annual amortizations.” Also, “a beneficiary whose land as provided herein has been foreclosed shall thereafter be permanently disqualified from becoming a beneficiary under this Act.”
The truth of the matter is that a farmland-as-collateral bill, if enacted, is like offering the remaining lands in the possession of farmers on the altar of bankruptcy and extreme landlessness.
At present, a general interest rate in farmers’ loans of 15-35 percent per cropping season or four-month period is imposed by landowners and moneylenders. There are cases, however, where interest rates are more than 100 to 300 percent per cropping. Aside from interest, usurers extract bigger profits from the farmers through conditions tied to their money-lending business. These include cornering and undervaluing the farmer’s harvest, selling overpriced farm input, and renting out farm equipment at higher rates.
With the farmland-as-collateral bill, this situation would not be alleviated but instead reinforced. It would legalize usury and the unconscionable conditions attached to the money-lending business of the landowners and investors, to the detriment of the farmers.
It is not surprising that rural people are supporting the passage of House Bill No. 3059, or the Genuine Agrarian Reform Bill, principally authored by the late Anakpawis (Toiling Masses) Rep. Crispin Beltran. This progressive bill essentially has provisions that would answer all the needs of the farmers, in contrast to the farmland-as-collateral bills or the revival of the bankrupt agrarian reform law.
Beltran’s HB 3059 primarily seeks to break land monopolies and distribute land for free to farmer beneficiaries to achieve social justice. This can only happen if farmers are secure in the lands awarded to them; if they can use the land according to the manner they deem best, for agricultural production; and if they are enjoying the fruits of their labor and of the land.
If the elements of security of tenure, the right to use, and the enjoyment of the fruits of the land awarded to the farmers, coupled with adequate support services, are all in place, then in all probability farmer beneficiaries will not be tempted to sell, mortgage, alienate or transfer the land. On the contrary, they will endeavor to make it more productive.
HB 3059 provides for the maximum guarantee and protection of a farmer’s right to security of tenure and the fruits of his land. There would be no reason to sell, mortgage or alienate the land, which was given to him for free in the first place.
The Manila government must drop its intention to collateralize the peasants’ right to land. UPI Asia Online / Posted (Bulatlat.com)
