Laws

Persons Date Important Features

(Land Reform in Disadvantages Resolution
Involved Enacted (Advantages)
the Philippines)

 This law paved the way for the

government to integrate the
fundamental principle on social justice
to protect the well-being and economic
security of all the people.
 This law protects the working class both
in industry and agriculture.
 Sakdalista
 The intent of the law was to control
Movement
share-tenancy contracts by establishing
founded by
minimum standards.
Benigno Ramos
The Philippine Rice  This law paved the way for the
Share Tenancy Act  President 1935 partnership of the landlord and the
(Public Act 4054) Manuel L. tenant.
Quezon  Both tenant and landlord will have a
joint pursuit of rice agricultural work
 Tenants and
within common interest in which both
Landlords
parties divide between them the
resulting profits as well as the losses.
 It aims to strengthen tenant-landlord
relationship through a 50-50 crop
sharing.
 The landlord and the tenant will have
equal share of the crop.
The Agricultural  President 1954  This Act paved the way for the
Tenancy Act Ramon government to establish a clear
(Republic Act No. Magsaysay agricultural tenancy relations between
1199) landholders and tenants.
 Landholders
 It also protects the rights of both tenant
and Tenant-
and landholders.
Farmers
 It also insures the more equitable
 Court of sharing of the produce profits and
Agrarian income from the crops and provide
Relations tenant-farmer’s incentives to greater
and more efficient agricultural
production.
 The Court of Agrarian Relations was
also established at this time.
 This law gave a clear basis of crop
sharing and regulation of relationships
of landowners and tenants.
 This law is more organized and clear as
 The law could only be implemented if
majority of the municipal council in a
province voted to implement it.
However, if they decided not to, then it
will not be possible to be implemented.
 Since the landowners or the landlords
are rich, they themselves has the power
to control the municipal councils, so
there is a big possibility that the
municipal council will not implement it.
 There are no limitations for the size of
the landholdings that one can possess,
so which means that the land ownership
and tenancy will be concentrated in the
hands of individuals who are able to
buy, register, and acquire fixed titles of
their properties.
 Because of high tenancy at this time,
there were widespread peasant
uprisings headed by the armed
peasant’s group known as the
Sakdalistas.
 During the time of President
Magsaysay, there were some bills that
have been passed for the distribution of
the targeted 300 haciendas to Filipino
Farmers but only 41 haciendas were
able to be distributed in after the 7 years
of implementation of the said law.
 Lack of funds and lack of support
services provided for these programs
were the core reasons why this law was
partially and not fully implemented.
 Because of this, landlords continued to
be uncooperative and precarious to the
program.
 Moreover, landownership and tenancy
problems continued to dominate the
society.
 This law can possibly stop the
concentration of lands to rich people
in our country, however in my own
point of view, this law is not being
strictly observed in our society.
 There are still some that implements
and observed this type of Tenancy Act
however, they do not have the legal
papers and they do not follow the
exact by-laws and constitutions that
are mentioned in the contract
supposedly.
 This law can possibly make the
contract of the tenant and landholders
more clearly and organized.
 However, in our society nowadays it is
not being observed since the law was
passed many years ago.
 Our fellow Filipino landholders and
landowners wanted to have things
much easier so they do not strictly
follow this law.
 Furthermore, tenancy of the land is
also prevalent in our society nowadays
but the problem is that, the contract is
only being discussed by the
landowners and tenants themselves
and they do not strictly follow what
the law is telling them to do so.
 compared to the first laws regarding the
tenancy.
 Furthermore, this Act was able to
address the failures and loopholes of the
previous land reform laws.
 This law guaranteed a fair tenancy and
it facilitated the conversion of tenants
into leaseholders.
 This law was also able to provide for the
basis of sharing crops and income from
the land as well as incentives for tenant-
farmers to improve their agricultural
production.
 This law paved the way for the
establishment of Land Tenure
Administration (LTA) which was
responsible for the gaining and
distribution of large tenanted rice and
corn lands which was over 300 hectares
for individuals and 600 hectares for
 Land Tenure corporations.
Land Reform Act of Administration  Through LTA, they were able to conduct
1955 (LTA) studies and focused on the land tenure
1955
(Republic Act No. problem and prepare over-all long range
 Farmers or
1400) plans to solve such problems.
Tenants
 The LTA can also initiate immediate
investigation in areas that reports land
tenancy difficulties and recommend
appropriate action without delay.
 They are also able to prepare a plan for
the systematic opening of virgin islands
of the public domain for distribution of
tenants and other landless citizens.
The Agricultural  President 1963  This law is said to be a genuine agrarian
Land Reform Code Diosdado reform program under President
(Republic Act No. Macapagal Diosdado Macapagal’s reign.
3844)  Through the enactment of this Law the
 Presidential
government was able to provide and
Land Reform
distribute private farmlands to the poor
Committee
and to the landless tenants.
 Land Bank of  In this law, tenancy or the kasama
the Philippines system was abolished and a clear
leasehold system was established in
 Since the said lands were owned by the
government, the tenant-farmers or the
tenants themselves will not be able to
subdivide the land, sell it or in any
manner transfer it without the prior
consent of the Administration.
 Only the qualified farmers or tenants or
to government banking institutions or
agencies will be allowed to do so after
the thorough investigation that will be
conducted.
 This law is more complex and contains a  This law became the solution for the
lot of constitutions and by-laws as
compared to other land reform acts that
were passed.
 Furthermore, because most of the
members of the Congress at that time
were landowners, they agreed to
terminate and kill the law and the
program by not giving funds for the said  Moreover, this law also paved the way
law.
 This law was also one of the solution
for the problems that are being
experienced by our farmers because
the LTA was able to purchase private
agricultural lands for resale at cost to
deserving tenants or occupants, or to
private individuals.
 This law was able to divide the land
equally to certain individuals thus
preventing the accumulation of land to
rich and powerful landowners.
 When it comes to this law, I think the
government is seldom implementing
this law. In addition, in locale, it is not
being practiced nor we experience its
effect.
problems of our farmers who don’t
have their own farmlands particularly
those poor and landless tenants.
 It became a way of the government to
provide help for our fellow farmers
who don’t have the financial capacity
be a tenant for the said farmlands.
for the distribution of land to avoid
  Furthermore, the law was only
implemented in the provinces of
Bulacan, Tarlac, Pampanga, Nueva
Ecija, Pangasinan, Occidental Mindoro,
which farmers will pay fixed rentals to
Misamis Oriental and Camarines Sur.
landlords instead of percentage of
 The Beneficiaries of the program were
harvest.
also limited since it only benefited a
 The Law was able to establish the accumulation of ownership of land
total of 7,466 famer beneficiaries.
Presidential Land Reform Committee and as well as the concentration of
 Moreover, there was a limitation for the
including the Land Bank of the farmlands to rich people.
scope of lands since it only covered rice
Philippines that would assist in the  This law was very helpful because as
and corn lands thus excluding
purchase of agricultural estates for we all know, some of our farmers were
farmlands planted with sugarcane,
division and resale to small landholders able to acquire their own farmlands
coconut, and other crops.
and the purchase of land by agricultural because of this law. It is beneficial for
 In this case, the farmers could easily
lessee. them and for their family as well.
change or alter their plant crops.
 In addition, it also lowered the retention
 Lastly, there was no sanction regarding
limits to 75 hectares, whether owned by
the transferring of land ownership to
private individuals or corporations.
family members when the owner
themselves will die which is a common
means of sabotaging the land reform
implementation.

 This law is considered to be the first

most ever comprehensive land reform
 There were no land titles that were
act in the country despite that it only
presented to the tenant-farmers under
covered rice and corn lands.
this law.  This law was the solution to the land
 Through this law the government was
 There was a limitation in the lands that ownership problems that our farmers
able to grant more than 530,000
were covered by the law because it only are experiencing at that time.
 President tenant-farmers their ownership of
covered the land that are used for farm  Through this law, land farmers were a
Ferdinand agrarian lands.
production by 1972. portion of land in which they can crop
Marcos  Because of the systematic conversion of
 The areas which were placed under their plants.
large masses of lands into small masses
Presidential Decree  Tenant- cultivation in the year 1973 were  Because of this, they were able to gain
1981 that were given to the tenant-farmers,
No. 2 Farmers exempted from the law. profit that they can use for their daily
there were abundant supplies and
 In this law, Landlords were allowed to living.
 Sharecroppers production of grain, corn, sugarcane,
retain 7 hectares.  Most of the farmers but not all were
tobacco, and other plant crops.
 Leaseholders  Only rice and corn farmlands were able to get a portion of the farmlands.
 The tenant-farmers who were given a
subjected to the redistributive measure  Increase in production of the crops
portion of the farmlands were
despite land distribution in other crops also resulted in the increase of
recognized as the owner of the
were highly unequal. economic growth of our country.
farmlands themselves.
 There were severe limitations in the
 This law is simple and straight to the
scope/coverage of program.
point, it is not complex as compared to
other laws or acts.
  This law has a more comprehensive
coverage of lands that includes the
establishment of support services, the
 President
dreams of landless farmers of becoming
Ferdinand
owners of agricultural land and an
Marcos
Comprehensive improved quality of life became closer.
Agrarian Reform  Agrarian  The landless farmers became
Law of 1988 Reform 1988 beneficiaries of this program provided
(Republic Act No. Coordinating that they are willing to till the land.
6657) Council  The law also provides for the delivery
support services to program
 Landless
beneficiaries.
Farmers
 In addition, it also increased a
settlement body that will resolve
agrarian problems.
 There were a lot of farmlands that were
distributed by some government offices.  One of the hindrances of the law is the
 A total of 3.8 million hectares have been
acquired and distributed by Department
of Agrarian Reform.
 Department of  A total of 2.4 million hectares were
Agrarian distributed by Department of
Reform Environment and Natural Resources.
 Department of  As of December 31, 2013, through this
Republic Act. No. Environment law the government was able to acquire
9700 and Natural and distribute a total of 6.9 million
(CARPer Law) Resources hectares of land equivalent to 88% of
the total land subject to CARP.
 President  It outlawed the “voluntary land
Noynoy Aquino transfer” scheme, which had been used
 Farmers by the landlords to retain control of the  The land owners can also remove and
land via the “Stock Distribution Option”
as a method of land redistribution.
 The law created a P150 Billion Pesos
budget for land acquisition and support
services over five years.
 The law has a limited coverage because
it excluded a long list of land types such
as public lands for school sites, parks,
and wildlife.  The said law continued the legacy of
 The law also exempts landowners who past Act which aimed to give the
have large portion of lands provided landless farmers their own farmlands.
that they have many children that will  Through this law, the government was
share the land. able to help the landless farmers
 The law has a lot of limitations that acquire their own farmlands and
would delay the implementation of the distribute the land to prevent
said law. concentrations.
 The political influence and economic
capability allowed some owners to keep
their lands as long as possible.
 In the implementation of this law, there
were delay proceedings due to incorrect
technical description in the land titles.
deliberate attempt of landowners to
delay the legal proceedings by asserting
their rights.  This law was the solution for the
 There were a lot of pending cases before acquisition of lands by our farmers.
the DAR Adjudication Board and  Many farmers were given the
judicial courts to revoke some issued opportunity to acquire their own
Certificate of Land Ownership Awards lands.
(CLOA).  Furthermore, the government
 Some landlords have also hired supported the law which made the law
assassins that would kill and eliminate partially successful.
peasant leaders in order for them to still  Moreover, there were a lot of
acquire and accumulate the land improvements and developments in
ownership. the agrarian department because of
this law.
alter qualified beneficiaries under the
Section 5 of the Law.
 The main problem of the law is the
resistance of the landlords and the lack
of political will of the Department of
Agrarian Reform that was considered as
a weak and fearful agency.