Home PEx News and Tech Local and Foreign Issues

sumilao farmers : walking for 2 months for justice

2

Comments

  • Ang tanong? effective ba ang CARP? simula na implement ang carp, eh bumagsak na ang production natin sa agricultural products. tapos, meron bang naging successful na magsasaka na yumaman dahil nabigyan sya ng lupa? diba wala? kasi kapag asa kanila na yung lupa, binebenta nalang daw at yung pera eh binabaon papuntang maynila.

    for me, the intention of carp was good, but the rules and the implementation were the worst! dapat dyan ma repeal na!
  • Ghost RiderGhost Rider PEx Influencer ⭐⭐⭐
    No offense guys, pero hindi ako pabor sa ginawa ni GMA. Hindi ko kinakampihan ang San Miguel, but I've seen many things na ganito dahil sa kind of work ko. In Nestle Lipa plant alone, dati ganito rin daw ang problema, but naayos din. Nakakatuwa kasi ang mga magsasaka at nagtatanim, nakikinabang sila sa planta. May mga open areas ang planta na eto at ipinapataniman nila sa mga magsasaka, pati irigasyon at patubig sa area inayos ng nestle.

    Katulad din eto ng sa San Miguel. May mga tao kasing nagalit dahil mawawalan sila ng negosyo, eto yung mga taong lumalabas na nagpopondo sa mga magsasaka. Ayoko silang sisihin, the farmers think that the land will salvage them from poverty, which I think, they are brainwashed by these people. Maraming gustong kumuha ng lupa ng mga farmers na eto, and dahil San Miguel nakakuha, mahihirapan na sila, unlike kung mababawi eto ng mga magsasaka, madali nilang mauuto at masisilaw ng pera. Malalaking tao din ang nasa likod nito, gusto nilang magkaroon ng mga hacienda at alipinin ang mga magsasaka na eto kagaya sa Negros.

    Malaking pakinabang sana sa mga farmers, magkakaroon sila ng fixed na kabuhayan at matutulungan sila ng company. Lahat kasi ng itatatnim nila, San Miguel na bibili as their raw material, hindi na sila mahihirapan sa marketing nito at wala ng middleman na babaratin sila. Magkakaroon ng sistema at uunlad sila. Sayang dahil hindi ito nakikita ng mga eto. Kaya hindi ako pabor sa CARP na eto, dahil matapos ibigay sa mga magsasaka, ibenibenta din nila.

    pakibasa etong excerpts ni Horacio Paredes, isang peryodista at may background sa agrikultura.
    Plano kasi ng San Miguel ang magpautang sa mga magsasaka upang magtanim ang mga ito para sa SMFI. Bibilhin din ng SMFI ang mais, cassava at iba pang mga produkto ng mga magsasaka sa mas mataas na presyo dahil sa hindi dadaan ang SMFI sa mga tinatawag na "middlemen" na sa ngayon ay mga suki ng mga magsasaka.

    Malaki ang utang ng mga magsasaka sa mga negosyante ng Sumilao. Ganyan naman talaga ang nangyayari kapag maraming mga maliliit na magsasaka na walang kapital at kwarta. Umuutang sila sa mga negosyante sa bayan at doon din nila binebenta sa mababang presyo ang kanilang naaani dahil na rin nagkautang sila sa negosyanteng bumibili rin ng kanilang inaani.

    Kapag nagsimula ang SMFI na magpautang at mamili sa Sumilao, tiyak na mawawalan ng negosyo ang mga ganitong namumuhunan.

    Maling-mali kasi ang ating batas sa Land Reform. Sobrang binigyan ng kahalagahan ng mga sumulat ng batas ang titulo sa lupa. Hindi naman talaga mahalaga kung sino ang may-ari ng lupain basta sana maaaring mabuhay ang magsasaka sa kanyang pagtatrabaho sa lupaing iyon.
  • drhenry4drhenry4 PEx Veteran ⭐⭐
    James Putzel, in his book "Land Reform in Asia" stated that an effective agrarian reform program requires "technical expertise, planning, mapping, administration, taxation extension services and a range of other functions." Before land could be distributed, the govt must have reliable account of what is to be distributed in the first place. This was the basic flaw of this "Compromised Agrarian Reform Program": It lacks a reliable and durable system of landownership registration.
    Another is the speed of redistributive program. What we had is a ten-year implementation which we saw how the landowners found legal loopholes and used them to evade CARP. See what happened in the famous "Hacienda Luisita."
    And after giving the land to the farmers, they were left alone, with no funds to finance their crops due to inefficient credit system the DAR has, leaving them preys to financiers (who are previously landowners) by giving them loans with high interests, ending up giving back their own lands. Although this practice is a clear violation of the CARL, it has been tolerated for years.
  • Ghost RiderGhost Rider PEx Influencer ⭐⭐⭐
    gien25 wrote: »
    if ever na ibigay ang lupa sa mga farmers claiming na dapat sa kanila iyon, use them sa farming...... Ang hirap kasi pag naibigay mo na ang rights na kanila yun, ibebenta nila sa iba para kumita kaagad. I heard yung news about DOLE (pineapple) and the people claiming na ang ginagawang pineapple planting area ng DOLE ay pag-aari ng mga taong lumaki sa lugar ng yun. I dont remember what province sa mindanao is it. Dole grant their request na ibigay uli yun sa mga tao na taga-roon, Even though na binayaran ng DOLE to own that farm lot. Ang ginawa ng mga tao is ibenta ang mga lupa, bumili ng tricycle, pinanggawa ng bahay and other materials things instead na ipagpatuloy na lang nila ang pineapple planting. So nangyari wala rin naging hanapbuhay ang mga taga-roon but instead iba nag-abroad or naging empleyado ng DOLE. nakakalungkot isipin. Is there any law ba dapat before ibigay ang lupa claiming na meron anotations kung ano ang dapat gawin sa lupa....

    Eto ang nakakalungkot na katotohanan.

    That's why I'm looking forward that our country will adapt the agricultural program Taiwan is doing. The government of Taiwan is buying all the available agricultural lands, which means the properties will be owned by the government and country and not by single or group of people. Sa paraang eto, the agricultural lands will be protected from land use change, kagaya dito sa atin na ang mga bukirin ay ginagawang mga subdivision at planta. They created a cooprative of farmers in every area, partly pag-aari pa rin kasi ng mga farmers ang lupa. The farmers have monthly salary sa government, tapos kalahati ng inaani nila napupunta din sa mga farmers. Yung kalahati na nakuha ng gobyerno, sila ang nagbebenta sa market through their agencies kaya mura. May sistema din sila at scientific farming ang ginagawa nila, kaya maunlad ang agrikultura nila. By the way, karamihan sa kanila dito nag-aral, sa IRRI ng UP Los Banos. Dahil sa sistemang eto, maganda ang buhay nila, mas mataas pa ang kinikita ng mga magsasaka sa mga nag-oopisina, kaya isa sa highest form of job ang farming sa Taiwan. Hindi sila minamaliit ng mga tao doon kaya marami ang nahihikayat na magtanim. Unlike dito, kinahihiya ng mga kabataan ang pagtatanim, madumi daw kasi, isang dahilan ito kaya bumabagsak ang agrikultura natin.
  • drhenry4drhenry4 PEx Veteran ⭐⭐
    These are the flaws of CARL.
    Eto ang nakakalungkot na katotohanan.

    That's why I'm looking forward that our country will adapt the agricultural program Taiwan is doing. The government of Taiwan is buying all the available agricultural lands, which means the properties will be owned by the government and country and not by single or group of people. Sa paraang eto, the agricultural lands will be protected from land use change, kagaya dito sa atin na ang mga bukirin ay ginagawang mga subdivision at planta. They created a cooprative of farmers in every area, partly pag-aari pa rin kasi ng mga farmers ang lupa. The farmers have monthly salary sa government, tapos kalahati ng inaani nila napupunta din sa mga farmers. Yung kalahati na nakuha ng gobyerno, sila ang nagbebenta sa market through their agencies kaya mura. May sistema din sila at scientific farming ang ginagawa nila, kaya maunlad ang agrikultura nila. By the way, karamihan sa kanila dito nag-aral, sa IRRI ng UP Los Banos. Dahil sa sistemang eto, maganda ang buhay nila, mas mataas pa ang kinikita ng mga magsasaka sa mga nag-oopisina, kaya isa sa highest form of job ang farming sa Taiwan. Hindi sila minamaliit ng mga tao doon kaya marami ang nahihikayat na magtanim. Unlike dito, kinahihiya ng mga kabataan ang pagtatanim, madumi daw kasi, isang dahilan ito kaya bumabagsak ang agrikultura natin.
    Plano kasi ng San Miguel ang magpautang sa mga magsasaka upang magtanim ang mga ito para sa SMFI. Bibilhin din ng SMFI ang mais, cassava at iba pang mga produkto ng mga magsasaka sa mas mataas na presyo dahil sa hindi dadaan ang SMFI sa mga tinatawag na "middlemen" na sa ngayon ay mga suki ng mga magsasaka.

    Malaki ang utang ng mga magsasaka sa mga negosyante ng Sumilao. Ganyan naman talaga ang nangyayari kapag maraming mga maliliit na magsasaka na walang kapital at kwarta. Umuutang sila sa mga negosyante sa bayan at doon din nila binebenta sa mababang presyo ang kanilang naaani dahil na rin nagkautang sila sa negosyanteng bumibili rin ng kanilang inaani.

    Kapag nagsimula ang SMFI na magpautang at mamili sa Sumilao, tiyak na mawawalan ng negosyo ang mga ganitong namumuhunan.

    Maling-mali kasi ang ating batas sa Land Reform. Sobrang binigyan ng kahalagahan ng mga sumulat ng batas ang titulo sa lupa. Hindi naman talaga mahalaga kung sino ang may-ari ng lupain basta sana maaaring mabuhay ang magsasaka sa kanyang pagtatrabaho sa lupaing iyon.

    The Cory govt didn't have any program at all on how to improve farmers' lives. And because of the "respect" each regime has with Cory, nobody dared to revise the CARL and even right now, they are planning to extend it further, even if the system doesn't work.
  • ^^ Hence the need to amend the CARL. We find so many legal loopholes in the existing program which makes it more difficult to implement the objective of giving to the tenants the land they till. In most instances, those who were awarded lands do not have sufficient funds to the point of borrowing to former landlords and in the end, giving back as payment the very own land that was awarded to them.

    It's very difficult to implement a law which has many loopholes in it.
  • The Sumilao farmers still have a long way to go. The executive order needs to become final and executory first. And this will only happen after 15 days with no appeal from San Miguel. The process of formally turning the land over to these farmers from Bukidnon will have to be followed of course to ensure that all legitimate farmers will receive the awards of the lands.
  • Ghost RiderGhost Rider PEx Influencer ⭐⭐⭐
    ^the problem in amending it, most of the congressmen and Senators, and influential people own many lands at sila pa ang pasimuno. That's the reason walang gustong mag-initiate dahil pader ang babanggain mo. If only the president is serious about amending it, magagawa niya, kaya lang, gagawin niya ba eto samantalang mga puppet niya ang tatamaan? Baka bigla siyang ma-impeach. Maling-mali si GMA sa desisyon niya, sa huli, etong mga magsasakang ito ang kawawa.
  • drhenry4 wrote: »
    These are the flaws of CARL.

    The Cory govt didn't have any program at all on how to improve farmers' lives. And because of the "respect" each regime has with Cory, nobody dared to revise the CARL and even right now, they are planning to extend it further, even if the system doesn't work.

    malabo talaga for the system to work, to start with CARP has a communist flavor...DAR does not even have the budget to implement the program, some farmers think this is free, most of them do not have the capacity to pay back the govt in 5 yrs, so they end up selling it back...the Sumilao farmers issue will be a bad precedent for the future I believe...
  • drhenry4drhenry4 PEx Veteran ⭐⭐
    area1 wrote: »
    malabo talaga for the system to work, to start with CARP has a communist flavor...DAR does not even have the budget to implement the program, some farmers think this is free, most of them do not have the capacity to pay back the govt in 5 yrs, so they end up selling it back...the Sumilao farmers issue will be a bad precedent for the future I believe...

    With the Sumilao farmers' case, GMA just reversed the old Ruben Torres decision of allowing the land to be converted into industrial thus escaping CARP (which originally not for conversion as ordered by Ramos). And according to CARL, the 144 hectare is included to land distribution. So GMA only has to implement what is just and lawful which is according to CARL.
    The next question is, can the farmers make their land productive on their own? According to CARL, the govt should provide them the infrastructures (from roads to irrigation) and credit that is indirectly thru private banks. The problem is CARL prohibits them using their land as collateral.
    And it seems the govt is not serious in implementing CARP due to its perennial budget crunches of CARP.

    So in summary, we have a flawed law, with long term of implementation and less budget.
    Look now at the statistics of our agricultural growth.
  • ^the problem in amending it, most of the congressmen and Senators, and influential people own many lands at sila pa ang pasimuno. That's the reason walang gustong mag-initiate dahil pader ang babanggain mo. If only the president is serious about amending it, magagawa niya, kaya lang, gagawin niya ba eto samantalang mga puppet niya ang tatamaan? Baka bigla siyang ma-impeach. Maling-mali si GMA sa desisyon niya, sa huli, etong mga magsasakang ito ang kawawa.

    GMA only did what is just and lawful under the CARL. She did not make the law, nor is she the one who has the authority to amend it. That is the jurisdiction of our honorable senatongs and tongressmen. But you're right in saying that it would be difficult to push any amendment to the CARL that would affect the interests of big landowners because many if not most of our lawmakers are themselves members of landed families.
  • I guess the side of San Miguel should be heard as well to make the issue balanced. These workers may have been misled into thinking it would be more beneficial for them to own the land. Perhaps San Miguel should provide a timeframe that they will develop the land for the good of all. We’re only witnessing the side of the farmers.
  • abcxyz wrote: »
    pic-12181201460461.jpg


    Farmers asked to pay P2.4B for Sumilao land--militant leader


    By Veronica Uy
    INQUIRER.net
    First Posted 12:55pm (Mla time) 12/26/2007


    MANILA, Philippines -- The farmers from Sumilao town in Bukidnon province will need to pay the owners of the 144-hectare land -- San Miguel Food Inc. (SMFI) -- at least P2.4 billion under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program, the head of a farmers group said Wednesday.

    In an exchange of text messages, Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas chairman Rafael Mariano said this was because under the CARP, the owners would set the price for the property, and SMFI has indicated that it had spent P2.4 billion in investments.

    According to Chapter VI, Section 17 of the law, or the Determination of Just Compensation provision, “In determining just compensation, the cost of acquisition of the land, the current value of like properties, its nature, actual use and income, the sworn valuation by the owner, the tax declarations, and the assessment made by government assessors, shall be considered.”

    “The social and economic benefits contributed by the farmers and the farm workers and by government to the property as well as the non-payment of taxes or loans secured from any government financing institution on the said land shall be considered as additional factors to determine its valuation,” it says further.

    “Why isn’t [the President] or her cabinet men telling this to the farmers? It is a good thing that the Sumilao farmers have learned from experience and are taking the executive order with a grain of salt,” the KMP leader said.

    He said that while Malacañang and SMFI were now haggling over the price of the property, the cost would be steep for the Sumilao farmers.

    With this big amount, the Sumilao farmers, who marched from Bukidnon to Malacañang to emphasize their plight and fight, are “doomed to indebtedness,” said Mariano.

    “Yes, technically the land may be theirs but practically speaking they will forever be in debt just trying to pay for that land. This has happened to majority of the so-called beneficiaries of the CARP. Most farmers find it hard enough to feed their families, now they have to contend with another intolerable burden,” he said.

    “The only acceptable evidence that the struggle of peasants for their land has been won are their actual cultivation of the land and their non-eviction from their land,” he added.

    Mariano called CARP a failure and opposed its proposed extension.

    Citing Department of Agrarian Reform figures, Mariano said that since 1988, only 1.9 million hectares of the targeted 10 million hectares of agricultural lands had been distributed to farmers.

    “Of those 1.9 million hectares, more than 82 percent are under court litigations -- meaning, still no actual land distribution,” he said.

    “Generally speaking, only three farmers of 10 own the land they till,” he added.

    Mariano said 75 percent of Filipinos or about 66 million still depended on agriculture for livelihood.

    He also pointed out that arrangements such as “growerships,” joint ventures, cooperatives, leaseholds, and lease-backs only benefited big landlords and corporations.

    “Under these schemes, the land is eventually taken over by the landlord. In fact, according to DAR itself, in the year 2000, more than 375,000 hectares of land given to farmers have reverted back to landlords,” Mariano said.
  • pian wrote: »
    I guess the side of San Miguel should be heard as well to make the issue balanced. These workers may have been misled into thinking it would be more beneficial for them to own the land. Perhaps San Miguel should provide a timeframe that they will develop the land for the good of all. We’re only witnessing the side of the farmers.

    There seems to be a dearth of arguments in the media in favor of SMFI. I agree that its side should be heard as well. As it is, the farmers may have to pay a huge sum to own the land. The farmers should be properly guided so that they can weigh the benefits of owning the land themselves against the possible benefits from working for SMFI.
  • There seems to be a dearth of arguments in the media in favor of SMFI. I agree that its side should be heard as well. As it is, the farmers may have to pay a huge sum to own the land. The farmers should be properly guided so that they can weigh the benefits of owning the land themselves against the possible benefits from working for SMFI.


    hoy, mag post ka naman ng original mo, puro rah rah rah ka lang at pang insulto, sige na boybabs...kahit magtanong ka sa kapitbay mo...you have so much hatred, you hate the media, you hate the survey, you hate ABS CBN sino pa ang dami...
  • As it is, the farmers may have to pay a huge sum to own the land. The farmers should be properly guided so that they can weigh the benefits of owning the land themselves against the possible benefits from working for SMFI.

    your statement seems to point to your idol & not to anyone else.
  • DAR chief waiting for Palace ‘order of finality’ on Sumilao

    By Katherine Adraneda
    Sunday, January 6, 2008

    Agrarian Reform Secretary Nasser Pangandaman said his office needs the “order of finality” from the Office of the President (OP) before it could begin distribution of the controversial 144-hectare property to farmer-beneficiaries in Sumilao, Bukidnon.

    This, as the agrarian reform chief insisted that the government has to exercise due process in resolving the land dispute between Higaonon farmers and the San Miguel Foods Inc. (SMFI), a subsidiary of food and beverage giant San Miguel Corp. (SMC), which is currently constructing a state-of-the-art hog farm in the contested landholding.

    “We are just waiting for the order of finality from the Office of the President. Like I said before, we have to exercise due process on this case. We have to wait until the President’s order becomes final and executory and then we would begin the process of coverage and distribution (of the land) to the Sumilao farmers,” Pangandaman said.

    But Pangandaman reiterated his appeal to the Sumilao farmers to give the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) more time and to the SMFI to just give up the land for the farmers.

    Pangandaman said he is unaware if SMFI has contested President Arroyo’s Dec. 18 order, which revoked the conversion order granted to the property and effectively reverted the land to agricultural use.

    The SMFI was given 15 days to appeal or challenge the order before the OP.

    “I just hope the SMFI would not anymore question the order and just give in so this issue would not take long,” he said.

    The farmers, who walked 1,700 kilometers from Bukidnon to Manila from October to December 2007, have been pressing the government to immediately give them back their ancestral land after President Arroyo issued the executive order.

    The farmers maintained that the DAR should immediately issue a notice of coverage and cease-and-desist order to stop SMFI from further putting up more structures in the controversial property located in Barangay San Vicente in Sumilao town.

    They have camped outside the DAR-Region 10 office since Thursday and vowed to stay there until the agency heeds their demand.

    In 1996, then Executive Secretary Ruben Torres granted the application for conversion order of Norberto Quisimbing Sr., former owner of the 144-hectare estate, which consequently annulled the collective certificates of land ownership award (CLOA) previously given to Sumilao farmer-beneficiaries by the DAR.

    In 2002, Quisumbing sold the property to the SMFI, which began construction of its P2.4-billion hog farm two years later.

    However, farmer-claimants insisted that the sale of the property by Quisumbing to the SMFI was illegal, as Quisumbing and SMFI violated the conditions set in the conversion order, thus, the need to revoke and immediately cover and distribute the land under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program.


    http://www.philstar.com/index.php?Headlines&p=49&type=2&sec=24&aid=20080105115
  • sadirmatasadirmata PEx Veteran ⭐⭐
    aber, yang mayayamang mga obispo at pari at madre na mga hacenderos ba't di nila ibigay sa mga farmers at squatters at poor ang libo-libong ektaryang lupain ng simbahan kagaya nung nasa camarines?
  • Sumilao land case battle shifts to SC
    01/17/2008 | 09:38 PM


    The former landowner of the controversial Sumilao estate in Bukidnon on Thursday asked the Supreme Court to restrain Malaca?ang from implementing an order issued last December revoking the conversion of the contested property from agricultural to agro-industrial.

    In a 50-page petition for certiorari, the Norberto Quisumbing Sr. Management and Development Corp. (NQSRMDC), which previously owned the 144-hectare lot in San Vicente, Sumilao, Bukidnon, before selling it to San Miguel Foods Inc, asked the high court to declare null and void the December 18, 2007 Order of the executive department.

    According to lawyer Froilan Bacungan, the public respondents Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita and Agrarian Reform Secretary Nasser Pangandaman committed grave abuse of discretion in granting the petition of the Sumilao farmers to revoke the conversion of the property considering that the SC already ruled with finality that they have no legal, actual and substantial interest in the estate.

    The assailed order, said Bacungan, was just a "political decision" that violated the corporation's right to due process and equal protection under the Constitution.

    "The alarming haste in which the Order was issued, combined with the highly publicized actions and statements of the Office of the President which clearly show not just a mere tendency but an open bias in favor of the so-called Sumilao farmers has left the NQSRMDC no other recourse but to come the Highest Court of the land to protect its rights," petitioner said.

    The case made headlines this month after members of the Sumilao farmers' group, also called the Mapadayonong Panaghiusa Sa Mga Lumad Alang sa Damlag (MAPALAD), reached Manila after a 60-day protest march they started on November 17, 2007 from their village in Sumilao to present their appeal to the President herself.

    According to the petitioner, the order "unlawfully impaired the warranties" covering its sale of the property to the SMFI on February 2, 2002.

    In the sale of the land to SMFI, NQSRMDC said it bound itself to several specific warranties and undertakings, which include, among others, the warranty that all existing cases filed by the Sumilao farmers involving the property have been dismissed with finality and that the SMFI shall have a free hand in determining and implementing whatever development plans it may have on the property.

    In their deed of absolute sale, the petitioner said, it assured that the property is free from all liens and any encumbrances and is not occupied by other persons or parties.

    The President's decision to cancel the conversion order, the NSQRMDC said, opens them to suits by SMFI.

    Prior to their 60-day march, the Sumilao farmers filed a petition to the Office of the President seeking to revoke the conversion order covering the property, with a plea for the issuance of a cease of desist order, before the office of the DAR secretary.
    The Mapalad farmers claimed that more than five years have elapsed since the issuance of the conversion authority and that no industrial development has yet been completed in the area.

    In an order dated October 27, 2006, Pangandaman dismissed the farmers? petition "for want of jurisdiction."

    A month after, the DAR issued an opinion confirming that SMFI's project being implemented in the property is consistent with the authorized agro-industrial use under the OP conversion order.

    On October 3, 2007, the OP dismissed the appeal due to the Mapalad farmers' lack of legal standing, being "merely recommendee farmer beneficiaries," their "interest over the land in question is a mere expectancy" and "they are not real parties in interest."

    Pangandaman has been quoted to have said that the DAR will start identifying the qualified beneficiaries for the 144 hectares of land and said the directive of the President was to come out with a "win-win solution" to address the issue.


    www.gmanews.tv/story/76938/Sumilao-land-case-battle-shifts-to-SC
  • sadirmata wrote: »
    aber, yang mayayamang mga obispo at pari at madre na mga hacenderos ba't di nila ibigay sa mga farmers at squatters at poor ang libo-libong ektaryang lupain ng simbahan kagaya nung nasa camarines?

    Before you consider these priests and nuns as hypocrites, they do not necessarily have to be actually poor themselves, otherwise their attention will always be distracted to meet their basic needs. They are simply detached from wealth, as the saying goes, ‘Blessed are the poor IN SPIRIT.’ The properties they accumulate are not for themselves once their basic needs are met, but for a greater purpose. They responded to their calling, and made these vows which are unfathomable to ordinary civilians.
Sign In or Register to comment.