SPECIAL REPORT
18 Years of CARP
Reclassification and Unfavorable Rulings Take Land Away from Tillers
While government
boasts of having placed under the agrarian reform program millions of
hectares of land, farmer-beneficiaries complain they lose the lands
awarded to them because of land-use reclassification. A Bulatlat
study shows how decisions on the CARP coverage ultimately lie in the hands
of the local government units which decide on land-use reclassification
and the Supreme Court which usually confirms the conversion in its
rulings.
BY DABET CASTAÑEDA
Bulatlat
Part I: Still A Dream
DASMARIÑAS, Cavite – Fruit-bearing trees
like mango, avocado, guava and coconut grow in this one-and-a-half hectare
lot tended by spouses Melia Vargas, 62, and Celestino Romano, 69, in
Barangay (village) Paliparan, this town, some 36 kms. south of Manila.
Aside from fruits, the old couple also
cultivates root crops such as gabi (taro) and kamote (sweet
potato) and palay (uncooked rice). Ornamental plants such as
orchids, daisies and roses fill the garden. Ducks and chickens roam the
area.
There are two houses in the middle of this
farm – the one made of hollow blocks and cogon belongs to their daughter
while the other, made of iron scrap, is the couples’ new home.
|
DEMOLISHED: Ruins of
farmers’ houses in Brgy. Paliparan, Dasmariñas, Cavite, torn down to
make way for a corporation that filed a case for CARP exemption
PHOTO BY DABET CASTAÑEDA |
Despite the simplicity of their house’s
structure, one easily appreciates the landscape and the cool breeze even
at noontime.
All these, however, may be gone anytime
soon. Romano said he and his neighbors have received a demolition notice
on April 16. Seventeen houses along the highway were already demolished on
April 21, including the couple’s old house.
CARP coverage
Another resident, 73-year-old Aling
Meding, who said she was born right in Paliparan in 1933, said the
village’s name, which literally means “airport”, was derived from the fact
that it was where children and adults alike used to fly their kites.
“Konti lang kasi ang bahay dito
noon. Konti pa lang kaming
nagtatanim noon at ang malaking bahagi ng lupa ay tinutubuan lang ng damo,”
(There were only a few houses here before. There were only a few of us
who tilled the land here, grass grew around the bigger part of the land.)
she said. She said she paid rental fees to a certain Pura Ledesma who
they came to know as the original owner of the land.
Aling
Meding’s house along the highway was among the 17 houses demolished. She
then built a shanty from iron and wood scraps on a half -hectare land
where she plants vegetables. She will also lose this area soon.
The Romano couple, on the other hand,
transferred to the area in 1971 after their house in Tondo burned down.
“Nung dumating kami
dito matatas ang damo, masukal na masukal.
Ang pwede lang dumaan sa
kalsada ay kalabaw kasi hanggang tuhod ng tao ang putik,”
(When we came here the grass was very tall. Only a carabao could use the
road because the mud was up to our knees.) he said.
Romano said he and his wife started to
plant trees and rootcrops in 1981, which has been their source of
livelihood ever since.
The Romano couple’s property sits on a 217
ha. agricultural land owned by Tropical Land Corp. Their house was ordered
demolished by the Municipal Trial Court of Dasmarinas April 11, 2006.
The Romanos, Aling Meding and other
tenants in the area thought they would finally own the land when the
Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR), the agency tasked to implement the
government’s Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP), placed the
subject landholdings under the program on March 6, 1995.
DAR, however, revoked this on Dec. 22,
1995 without notifying the farmers, after Tropical Land Corp. filed a
petition for exemption.
The farmers filed an appeal before the
Court of Appeals (CA). But Tropical Land Corp. argued that the area has
been reclassified as early as 1981. The CA ruled in favor of the
landowner.
The farmers petitioned the Supreme Court
(SC) on July 19, 2005 to reverse the CA decision. The said petition was
denied on Aug. 24, 2005 and the case was decided with finality two months
later on Oct. 19. The SC decision was based on technicalities.
According to the SC, the farmers failed to
submit a valid affidavit of service of the petition and that they also
failed to state the date of the petition. However, a copy of the petition
showed that there was an affidavit of service on page 20 while the
material dates were stated on page 3.
CARP implementation
In the 18 years of CARP, DAR records show
it has covered 3,493,781 hectares of its 4.29-million hectare target
coverage for the whole program. It has reportedly given Emancipation
Patents (EP) or Certificate of Land Ownership Awards (CLOA) to 1,907,309
farmer-beneficiaries.
In a press conference at the Office of the
Secretary on June 5, Agrarian Reform Secretary Nasser Pangandaman said he
would ask Congress to legislate another five-year extension for the
program that started in 1988. Former Pres. Corazon Aquino declared
agrarian reform as her administration’s centerpiece program.
DAR Field Operations Undersecretary
Narciso Nieto Jr. said in the same press conference that the department
would not be able to meet its 2008 deadline because they still have to
cover more than 1.2 million hectares. Half of this, or 600,000 ha., is the
balance of the 4.29 ha. target. Nieto added that his office discovered
another 600,000 ha. for coverage.
Dante de Leon, chief of staff of DAR
Assistant Secretary for Field Operations Renato Herrera, told Bulatlat
the agrarian reform law recognizes the landowners’ right to the land. He
said landowners have the right to file for an exemption from CARP coverage
and are entitled to a retention limit of five hectares per heir.
Nieto admitted that they are encountering
problems covering the remaining 600,000 ha. because these are “contentious
lots” that would most probably be decided in court.
Records of the DAR Adjudication Board (DARAB)
show it has 11,508 pending cases. The Policy Planning and Legal Affairs
Office (PPLAO) lists 33,854 caseloads.
From June 2001 to May 2006 alone, the
PPLAO recorded 145 agrarian cases decided by the SC.
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.
