Professional Documents
Culture Documents
CARP and CARPER Distinctions
CARP and CARPER Distinctions
those who fought for say it is better. You be the judge. Considering the
context where Congress castrated CARP last December 2008, CARPER has
restored Compulsory Acquisition with 150 Billion budget and 26 reform
provisions.
Congress approved the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program extension
with reform (CARPER) bill separately. The House of Representatives version
is HB 4077 and the Senates version is SB 2666. The Senate passed its
version earlier which gave some pressure to the House to pass a better
version. Although each version has its strengths and weaknesses, the
Bicameral Committee Conference (BICAM) came out to be the best of both
versions. Generally, the BICAM version of CARPER is better than the Senate
or the House version and closely approximates the Civil Society CARPER
proposal. Definitely, the BICAM version comes as a strengthened CARP to
face to the challenge of fierce landlord resistance and bureaucratic
inefficiencies. The passage of the CARPER law was fought by able Champions
in the House through Rep. Risa and Rep. Lagman and in the Senate by Sen.
Pimentel and Sen. Honasan and the countless farmers march, hunger
strikes, fora and dialogues with the Church, Academe and Agrarian Reform
Advocates.
The RA 9700 or the CARPER law which was signed by GMA on August 7, 2009
contains an extension of the budget for CARP especially the Land Acquisition
and Distribution (LAD) program for five years starting July 1, 2009 and the
necessary reforms to complete the acquisition and distribution of the
remaining One Million Hectares of private agricultural lands to landless
farmers[1]. Moreover, CARPER law provides for clarification of policies and its
interpretation by CARP implementation agencies including the decision of
judicial courts.
RA 6657, the original CARP law (CARL) has not been superseded by the
CARPER law but strengthens or improves the CARL. Some provisions of the
CARL were amended like the provision on the award to beneficiaries and the
schedule of acquisition and distribution, new provisions were introduced like
the Gender provisions and the Congressional Oversight Committee and a
number of Supreme Court decisions legislated like the indefeasibility of titles
after five (5) years and even after 5 years when the LAD is completed, DAR
will continue with the delivery of support services and agrarian justice [3].
Section 30 of the CARPER law provides a way to legally continue the
implementation of pending CARP cases after the 5-year extension [4] by filing
the initiatory process of CARP.
The CARPER law strengthens the ban on any conversion of irrigated and
irrigable lands and mandates the National Irrigation Administration to identify
these[7]. Moreover, it also legislates the resolution of the Sumilao farmers
case that the non-implementation or violation of the conversion plan will
result to automatic coverage of the subject by CARP.
Under the CARPER law, any conversion to avoid CARP coverage is a
prohibited act. The word any makes the defense of good faith or ignorance
of the law untenable[8]. Moreover the penalty for conversion is heavier. It will
merit imprisonment of 6 to 12 years and/ or a penalty of 200,000 pesos to 1
million pesos[9].
cover the landholdings 24 hectares and above which have been issued
notice of coverage by December 10, 2008, government lands and those
offered under Voluntary Land Transfer (VLT) and Voluntary Offer to Sell (VOS).
This phase will start on July 1, 2009 and should be completed on June 30,
2012. The second phase will cover the landholdings 24 hectares and above
which have not been issued notice of coverage by December 10, 2008 and
all landholdings below 24 but above 10 hectares which have been issued
notice of coverage by December 10, 2008. This phase will start on July 1,
2012 to June 30, 2013. The last phase covers below 10 hectares. However,
this last phase will only begin if all the previous phase has been 90%
completed in a particular province. The last phase will start on July 1, 2013
and end on June 30, 2014. Public Agricultural lands will not be covered by the
phasing and can be covered anytime.
Another important improvement for this provision is the deletion of the
phrase insofar as the excess hectarage in the CARL. The phrase was
interpreted to limit the coverage to the excess area of a piece of landholding
for that phase. Then cover the next excess for the next phase and so on. To
illustrate the interpretation before, given 51 hectares; for the first phase, 1
hectare will be covered being the excess of 50 hectares, the next phase will
cover the 26 hectares the excess from 24 hectare and the next phase the
entire 24 hectares. Such interpretation was absurd, expensive and would
definitely prolong the LAD. In the CARPER law, a particular landholding above
10 hectares can be acquired and distributed only once.
There is a mandate in the CARPER law to resolve by June 30, 2012 all the
valuation cases pending in the DAR.
No More Voluntary Land Transfer (VLT) After June 30, 2009
Compulsory Acquisition and Voluntary Offer To Sell will be the main mode of
land acquisition when the law takes effect. Many studies have shown that
VLT has been abused by the landowners to put people who are not qualified
or people who are loyal to them as beneficiaries. A cut-off date for VLT
applications has been set on June 30, 2009. No VLT applications will be
allowed after July 1, 2009.
LGUs except the Barangays can own agricultural lands beyond the five
(5)-hectare limit set by CARL. This privilege is only applicable to lands
that will be used for public purposes such as roads, bridges, public
markets, school, resettlement, LGU facilities, public parks and
barangay plazas. There are two limitations to this exemption: 1.) the
use of the land must be actual, direct and exclusive; and 2.) the
use must be consistent with the approved comprehensive land use
plan[17]. Moreover, if the land is covered under CARP and the LGU
wants to use it for one of the public purpose mentioned earlier then it
must be expropriated first and the farmers therein must be justly
compensated.
The law on conversion will still apply to the LGUs because the public
purpose projects will entail conversion of agricultural lands to nonagricultural uses. The LGUs are not exempted from the application of
the Conversion Order from DAR.
Review of Land Size Limits For Each Type of Crop
For the next six (6) months, DAR will submit a study to Congress for the
appropriate land size of each crop[18]. The purpose is for a possible review on
the limit of land sizes. For instance, for coconut what is the most productive
land size to maximize yield and minimize cost. However, before the 3
hectare award be adopted, a new law is needed.
tenants or regular farmworkers. Most of the time, the Tenants and Regular
Farmworkers are the most loyal workers to the landowners and it will be
easier for the landowner to get back, lease back or consolidate the lands
distributed under CARP.
Attestation Requirement of Farmer Beneficiary
Another Garcia Amendment[20], under the CARPER law a new procedure for
the identification of agrarian reform beneficiaries requires the Barangay
Agrarian Reform Council (BARC) to first certify that the potential beneficiaries
are Farmers or Regular Farmworkers actually tilling the lands and the list
should by attested under oath by the Landowner and lastly will state under
oath before a judge that he/she is willing to work on the land and make it
productive and assume the obligation of paying the amortization. The
problem will arise because landowners are not the most available persons to
make an attestation. The attestation requirement can be used as leverage
against the farmers. Secondly, with this requirement the Landowner can
choose the beneficiaries and only those favorable to him/her will be on the
list. Another problem is the proximity of the Judge from the place of the
farmer beneficiaries which are far from the farms. This requirement will
actually pose a serious problem to the farmer beneficiaries and hamper the
selection process of beneficiaries.
A provision to check the correctness of the attestation and the undue delay
in giving out the attestation might cause in the implementation is in place.
Section 25 provides penalties to the landowner who will cause undue delay in
complying with the obligation of attestation and/or falsification of the
certification or attestation required is prohibited and is punishable with 6 to
12 years imprisonment or up to 1 million pesos penalty.
Encourage Empowerment and Organizing of Farmer Beneficiaries
The CARPER law has a bias for organized farmers to be beneficiaries.
Congress believes that the success rate of organized farmers is high and can
make their awarded lands productive. The DAR is mandated to conduct
seminars and trainings for the farmers to organize. The DAR shall also assist
the farmers form or join cooperatives.
Individual Titles of Award
The CARPER law adopted the recommendation from the economists that
individualized Certificate of Land Ownership Award (CLOA) and Emancipation
Patent (EP) is beneficial for the farmer beneficiaries. This will encourage
farmers to invest in the awarded land and will have a sense of ownership. As
a matter of policy in the CARPER law, land awarded should be in the form of
individual title. The DAR will do the parcelization of the existing collective
CLOAs and must be completed within three (3) years from the effectivity of
the law. However, this is without prejudiced to collective CLOAs that are
effective and need not be parcelized. A group of farmer beneficiaries can
also decide to have a collective CLOA subject to the conditions [21] in section
10 of CARPER. Their collective CLOA must indicate the names of the
beneficiaries.
Shortened Period For Installation of Farmer Beneficiaries
The CARPER law mandates that the award of the land must be completed
within 180 days from the date of registration of title in the name of the
Republic of the Philippines. Such period is shorter than that of CARL. Another
reform that can help shorten the period for installation is the inclusion of the
standing crop in the computation of the just compensation for the land [22].
This is the learning from the Hacienda Malaga Case were the only reason for
the delay in installation is the standing crop. From experience, delay in
installation causes violence and insecurity to the farmers.
The CARPER law emphasize that farmer beneficiaries will only start payment
of amortization if they have been physically installed on the awarded land for
one (1) year.
Ministerial Duty for the Registry of Deeds To Register Land in the
Name Republic of the Philippines and CLOA
The unfortunate experience in Negros (especially the Arroyo Lands in Bacan,
Negros) where Registry of Deeds refuse to register the title in the name of
the Republic of the Philippines bring about the provision under the CARPER
law which states
it is the ministerial duty of the registry of deeds to register
the title of the land in the name of the republic of the
Philippines, after the Landbank of the Philippines (LBP) has
certified that the necessary deposit in the name of the
landowner constituting full payment in cash or in bond with