Chance for modernization and social justice for the Philippines

There are many indicators and elements for modernization for a country such as the Philippines. Some would look at infrastructure like high-rise buildings. Others look at education while others will look at media development.

But a fundamental change promoting modernization for any country is agrarian reform. This is what Taiwan and South Korea implemented as a basic condition towards their industrialization.a

Agrarian reform frees peasants from serfdom to landlords. It redistributes land as the prime agricultural resource to the peasants who till the farms who can become farmer-entrepreneurs. This reform is the base for modernization towards industrialization.

Our society has long stood for social justice and our Constitution provides assurance for that. The 1935 Constitution provides: “The promotion of social justice to ensure the well-being and economic security of all the people should be the concern of the State.” (Section 5, Article II)

The 1973 Constitution continues this tradition — “The State shall promote social justice to ensure the dignity, welfare and security of all the people. Towards this end, the State shall regulate the acquisition, ownership, use, enjoyment and disposition of private property and equitably diffuse property ownership and profits.” (Section 6, Article II).

The 1987 Constitution further improves it in Section 9, Article II: “The State shall promote a just and dynamic social order that will ensure the prosperity and independence of the nation and free the people from poverty through policies that provide adequate social services, promote full employment, a rising standard of living and an improved quality of life for all.”

Indeed, out of a total Philippine land area of 299,404 square kilometers or approximately 30 million hectares, there were 14.1 million hectares agricultural land as of 1991 of which around 10 million hectares were devoted to farmlands and 4 million to swine and chicken farms.

But seven out of 10 farmers are landless. Of every 100 farmers, 21 are agricultural workers, 28 are unpaid family workers, 26 are under some form of tenancy relation and only 25 own land. The latter own or lease an average of 1/2 to one hectare. [All these data come from the Department of Agrarian Reform or DAR].

On 21 October 1972, Marcos issued Presidential Decree 27 implementing agrarian reform but it only covered tenanted rice and corn lands. It also was essentially a land sale since tenants had to pay for the land through regular amortizations at 6 percent interest.

After a series of presidential decrees, Republic Act 6657, otherwise known as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law, was enacted into law under the late Corazon Aquino on 10 June 1988. The law became effective on 15 June 1988 30 years ago.

But several infirmities hound the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) which lay doubt to its effectivity to achieve social justice for the rural poor. First is coverage – In 1989, the target for distribution was 10.3 million hectares in 10 years. 3.8 million is to be distributed by DAR and 6.6 million by Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). But in 1995, the target was lowered to 7.8 million due to several exceptions; 4.3 million to be distributed by DAR and 3.5 million by DENR.

Second, not unlike the Marcos land reform program, CARP remains a land sale where the DAR is the broker and the Land Bank collects the 30-year annual amortization at 6 percent. Thus, the social justice element of the reform is negated. Land Bank data show that only 10 percent of beneficiaries are amortizing and the rest face foreclosure for three years non-payment of amortizations.

Agricultural land should be distributed free to the peasants if we want to achieve social justice and similar to Taiwan 70 years ago, the government can enact a scheme where the landowners can be paid from government funds through bonds.

Third, the CARP loopholes allow for land use conversion which has resulted in a lot of disputes and loss of livelihood for tenants as their lands are forced to lie fallow towards conversion to housing estates, development schemes and plantations for commercial crops.

Worse, market-oriented land reform schemes promoted by the World Bank found its way into the program. Section 8 of RA 6657 legalized and allowed Multi-National Corporations to maintain their control and operation of vast tracts of agricultural lands through lease, management, grower or service contracts for a period not exceeding 25 years, renewable for not more than 25 years.

Corporate schemes were implemented such as leaseback arrangements, contract growing and corporative schemes. Section 31 of RA 6657 provided for the Stock Distribution Option (SDO) as alternative to actual land distribution. Which has been implemented in Hacienda Luisita and 15 other SDO in Negros Occidental.

It is 30 years since CARP – 4,726,604 hectares reportedly acquired and distributed with 2,790,644 agrarian reform beneficiaries. Only that much?

How much has CARP impacted the lives of the farmers? Do the lands still remain in the hands of the farmers? Has it made a dent on rural poverty?

We suffer from low agricultural production and the Philippines is now a net importer of food products for over $1 billion every year. Poverty incidence is worst in agricultural areas with farmers among the least-paid workers. Land use conversion is rampant and we see the gradual decrease in agricultural lands hampering food security and displacing thousands of farmers.

Shouldn’t we do better and learn our lesson? We need another better agrarian reform program now.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.