Research on Agrarian Reform: CARP vs GARB

By:

Aytona, Marie Rose

Blanco, Elijah

Derecho, Abigael

Francia, Aliah

Tutor, Kyle

Political Science 190

Prof. Bobby Tuazon
July 18, 2016

Abstract:
Agrarian Reform is one of the most important issues to be discussed in the context of the

Philippines. With the agrarian reform of the Philippines, The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform

Program or CARP, since 1988 being the same up to date, many problems and issues are still left
by the law namely the inability of land distribution and the lack of protection of the beneficiaries.

With the Incoming administration filled with progressive leaders, the possibility of the Genuine

Agrarian Reform Program or GARB, being the official agrarian reform of the Philippines might

be the solution for the problems left out by CARP. The Researchers aim to compare both of the

agrarian reforms, by studying the condition of agriculture in the Philippines and discussing both

reforms extensively. The researchers also aim to discuss the possible solutions that GARB offers

for the issues encountered in CARP, and provide some case studies to back up the researchers

perspective.

Outline:
I. Current Condition of agriculture in the Philippines.
II. Simple introduction of CARP
III. The problems and achievements of CARP
IV. Introduction of GARB
IV. How will GARB solve the problems left by CARP

I. Current condition of agriculture in the Philippines - Aliah Francia

Agriculture is one of the Philippines most important industries. Although the total percentage of

agricultural land has been decreasing through the years because of conversion for industrial use,

the Philippines remains to be a predominantly agricultural country. The agricultural sector

constituted 32% of the total employment in 2012, according to the Philippine Statistics Authority

(PSA) relatively lower compared with that of the previous years but still a significant figure.

In 1985, agricultures share in the economy of the country was 24.6%. Twenty-seven years later,
in 2012, according to a report by the World Bank, it decreased to only 12.8%. Despite the

abundance in natural resources, its climate and land itself being suitable for agriculture, the

agricultural sectors contribution in the countrys overall economic growth continues to decline.

Among the many reasons why this happens, one is trade agreements that are mostly to the

disadvantage of local farmers. Because the Philippines trades agricultural products with other

countries, naturally there is an import quota that must be achieved. According to PSA, import

expenditures increased by 3.6% while export earnings decreased by 7.9%. Another reason is that

the countrys technology when it comes to agriculture falls behind that of other countries. Even

irrigation, one of the essentials in basic farming, is still a problem for farmers. In addition, most

of them do not have enough income to buy farming equipment for production of a larger scale.

As a result, other countries will most likely be able to produce more than what the Philippines

produces, lowering their prices and making their products more preferable than ours. There is

lack in disaster preparedness, as well. For instance, there could have been ways to prevent a

significant decrease in crop production during the first few months of 2016 due to recent

typhoons and the dry spell had the government made it one of their priorities. The agricultural

sector in the country, evidently, continue to be neglected by the government itself.

Filipino farmers are still living in poverty, lessening their productivity; some are driven away

from the lands they till because of greedy landlords, some are forced to find other ways to make

ends meet. Help from the government is scarce, if not none at all. Some farmers from Hacienda

Luisita, for example, say that former Secretary Virgilio Delos Reyes never had a dialogue with

them and thus had not helped them during his term in the Department of Agrarian Reform
(DAR). Moreover, the few efforts of DAR for agrarian reform were not beneficial to the farmers.

Take for example the tambiolo system. Because of Supreme Courts decision on 2012 that the

lands in Hacienda Luisita should be distributed to the farmers, DAR devised a way that is, in

their opinion, the most unbiased. They decided to distribute lands through a raffle, which seems

to be a great idea until you realize that Hacienda Luisita is vast; farmers could possibly be given

a land in a baranggay far from where they reside, they would thus have to leave their own

houses and the land they have been tilling for years or spend a significant amount of money just

to get to the land they would be given through the said system every single day. Ka Pong, a

Hacienda Luisita farmer, said that she was given a land in Brgy. Pando, a 150-peso tricycle ride

away from her own home. To be able to work, she would have to spend 300 pesos on back and

forth transportation alone every day an amount of money that can already go a long way for a

common farmers life. Also, the land distributed through the tambiolo system is only 0.66

hectare, instead of the promised 1 hectare for each farmer. Besides these, farmers continue to

experience physical harassment, especially those from Hacienda Luisita. One may remember the

Hacienda Luisita Massacre back in 2004, where farmers who are merely fighting for their rights

were showered with bullets. Their situation before Ka Paeng assumed the position of DAR

secretary was not very far from that. Guns were pointed at them, their crops were poisoned if not

bulldozed, some of them were beaten (there is a farmer who is now paralyzed for being beaten

by the PNP stationed in Hacienda Luisita), made-up cases were filed against them, their houses

were torn down the list goes on.

Up to this day, millions of hectares of land owned by hacienderos are not yet distributed to their

rightful owners the farmers themselves. During the Aquino administration as well as the past
administrations, private companies and entities were prioritized. Agricultural lands were

converted for commercial use; laws were implemented, in the guise of agrarian reform, to

prolong the landlords ownership of their land even that is supposed to be distributed; farmers

continue to be neglected, or worse, met with violence. It would not be surprising if the

performance of agriculture in the coming years declined even more, especially when the

mentioned issues remain unresolved.

Nonetheless, there is hope now that Ka Paeng has been appointed as DARs new secretary. He

has been fighting for peasant rights for most of his life, being a farmer himself. Also, President

Rodrigo Duterte claimed during his campaign that he is a leftist, which signifies change in the

current system, particularly with how industries such as agriculture are dealt with. Improvement

in the agricultural sector, which in turn will boost the economy and foster inclusive economic

growth, can only be achieved once the welfare concerns of farmers are truly addressed. In the

present, the state of agriculture in the country has yet to see better days because the Duterte

administration and its leftists appointees have only been in position for barely a month. There are

great expectations that in the next six years, needed improvements in the agricultural sector will

soon be achieved.

II. Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program or CARP- Kyle Tutor

Agrarian reform is very vital to the development of any country whether it be focused on

industrialization or more so on agriculture. This has been recognized by the leaders of the

Philippines who have chosen to develop the country industrially while helping its mostly
dominant agricultural sector. With that said, the government of the country has thought of a

program to help the farming sector especially the landless farmers and farmworkers, and has

enacted it to law which would last for a considerably long time.

Background

The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program, more popularly known as the CARP, is the

redistribution of private and public agricultural lands to landless farmers and farmworkers

regardless of tenurial arrangement. The CARPs objective is to have an equitable land

ownership with empowered agrarian reform beneficiaries who can effectively manage their

economic and social development to have a better quality of life. The Comprehensive Agrarian

Reform Programs legal basis is the Republic Act No. 6657 also known as the Comprehensive

Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) which was signed into law by President Corazon C. Aquino on

June 10, 1988. It is an act which aims to promote social justice and industrialization, providing

the mechanism for its implementation, and for other purposes (dar.gov.ph, 2013). On the

programs final year, the Congress of the Philippines enacted a law, Republic Act No. 8532,

appropriating additional funds for the program and extending the automatic appropriation of ill-

gotten wealth recovered by the Presidential Commission on Good Governance (PCGG) for

CARP until 2008 (gov.ph: Official Gazette, 2014).

On August 7, 2009, the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program Extension with

Reforms otherwise known as CARPER was signed into law. The CARPER is an amendatory

law that extends yet again the deadline of distributing agricultural lands to farmers for five years,

which also amends other provisions stated in the CARP (dar.gov.ph, 2013). The lead agency

with regards to the implementation of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program or CARP is
the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) which undertakes land tenure improvement,

development of program beneficiaries, and agrarian justice delivery (dar.gov.ph, 2013).

Key Components

One of the major programs of CARP is Land Tenure Improvement which looks to accelerate the

distribution of lands to landless farmers or farmworkers. CARP also includes the offering of

Support Services by the said Department to the beneficiaries such as infrastructure facilities,

marketing assistance programs, credit assistance programs, and technical support programs.

Furthermore, CARP also requires the Department to facilitate, resolve cases and agrarian

disputes, and deliver Agrarian Justice (dar.gov.ph, 2013).

SECTION 2. Declaration of Principles and Policies The agrarian reform program is founded
on the right of farmers and regular farmworkers, who are landless, to own directly or collectively
the lands they till or, in the case of other farm workers, to receive a just share of the fruits
thereof. To this end, the State shall encourage and undertake the just distribution of all
agricultural lands, subject to the priorities and retention limits set forth in this Act, having
taken into account ecological, developmental, and equity considerations, and subject to
the payment of just compensation. The State shall respect the right of small landowners, and
shall provide incentives for voluntary land-sharing.

SECTION 35. Creation of Support Services Office. There is hereby created the Office of
Support Services under the DAR to be headed by an Undersecretary. The Office shall provide
general support and coordinative services in the implementation of the program particularly in
carrying out the provisions of the following services to farmer-beneficiaries and affected
landowners: 1) Irrigation facilities, especially second crop or dry season irrigation facilities; 2)
Infrastructure development and public works projects in areas and settlements that come under
agrarian reform, and for this purpose, the preparation of the physical development plan of such
settlements providing suitable barangay sites, potable water and power resources, irrigation
systems and other facilities for a sound agricultural development plan; 3) Government subsidies
for the use of irrigation facilities; 4) Price support and guarantee for all agricultural produce; 5)
Extending to small landowners, farmers' organizations the necessary credit, like concessional and
collateral-free loans, for agro-industrialization based on social collaterals like the guarantees of
farmers' organization: 6) Promoting, developing and extending financial assistance to small-and
medium-scale industries in agrarian reform areas; 7) Assigning sufficient numbers of agricultural
extension workers to farmers' organizations; 8) Undertake research, development and
dissemination of information on agrarian reform and low-cost and ecologically sound farm
inputs and technologies to minimize reliance on expensive and imported agricultural inputs; 9)
Development of cooperative management skills through intensive training; 10) Assistance in the
identification of ready markets for agricultural produce and training in other various prospects of
marketing; 11) Administration operation management and funding of support services, programs
and projects including pilot projects and models related to agrarian reform as developed by the
DAR.

SECTION 50. Quasi-Judicial Powers of the DAR. The DAR is hereby vested with the
primary jurisdiction to determine and adjudicate agrarian reform matters and shall have exclusive
original jurisdiction over all matters involving the implementation of agrarian reform except
those falling under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Department of Agriculture (DA) and the
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). It shall not be bound by technical
rules of procedure and evidence but shall proceed to hear and decide all cases, disputes or
controversies in a most expeditious manner, employing all reasonable means to ascertain the
facts of every case in accordance with justice and equity and the merits of the case. Toward this
end, it shall adopt a uniform rule of procedure to achieve a just, expeditious and inexpensive
determination for every action or proceeding before it. It shall have the power to summon
witnesses, administer oaths, take testimony, require submission of reports, compel the production
of books and documents and answers to interrogatories and issue subpoena, and subpoena duces
tecum, and enforce its writs through sheriffs or other duly deputized officers. It shall likewise
have the power to punish direct and indirect contempts in the same manner and subject to the
same penalties as provided in the Rules of Court. Responsible farmer leaders shall be allowed to
represent themselves, their fellow farmers, or their organizations in any proceedings before the
DAR: Provided, however, That when there are two or more representatives for any individual or
group, the representatives should choose only one among themselves to represent such party or
group before any DAR proceedings. Notwithstanding an appeal to the Court of Appeals, the
decision of the DAR shall be immediately executory.

The scope of the program includes most agricultural land whether it is private or public.

The schedule or plan of implementation of CARP according to its provision is supposed to be ten

(10) years.

SECTION 4. Scope. The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1989 shall cover,
regardless of tenurial arrangement and commodity produced, all public and private agricultural
lands, as provided in Proclamation No. 131 and Executive Order No. 229, including other lands
of the public domain suitable for agriculture.
SECTION 5. Schedule of Implementation. The distribution of all lands covered by this Act
shall be implemented immediately and completed within ten (10) years from the effectivity
thereof.

The beneficiaries of CARP are farmers who are landless, including agricultural lessees,

tenants, as well as regular, seasonal and other farmworkers. Potential beneficiaries are identified

and screened, and have their qualifications validated by the Department of Agrarian Reform or

DAR. An example of qualification would be being at least 15 years old, a resident of the

barangay where the land holding is located, and not own more than three (3) hectares of

agricultural land. (dar.gov.ph, 2013)

SECTION 22. Qualified Beneficiaries. The lands covered by the CARP shall be distributed
as much as possible to landless residents of the same barangay, or in the absence thereof,
landless residents of the same municipality in the following order of priority: (a) agricultural
lessees and share tenants; (b) regular farmworkers; (c) seasonal farmworkers; (d) other
farmworkers; (e) actual tillers or occupants of public lands; (f) collectives or cooperatives of the
above beneficiaries; and (g) others directly working on the land. Provided, however, that the
children of landowners who are qualified under Section 6 of this Act shall be given preference in
the distribution of the land of their parents: and Provided, further, That actual tenant-tillers in the
landholdings shall not be ejected or removed therefrom. Beneficiaries under Presidential Decree
No. 27 who have culpably sold, disposed of, or abandoned their land are disqualified to become
beneficiaries under this Program. A basic qualification of a beneficiary shall be his willingness,
aptitude, and ability to cultivate and make the land as productive as possible. The DAR shall
adopt a system of monitoring the record or performance of each beneficiary, so that any
beneficiary guilty of negligence or misuse of the land or any support extended to him shall forfeit
his right to continue as such beneficiary. The DAR shall submit periodic reports on the
performance of the beneficiaries to the PARC. If, due to the landowner's retention rights or to
the number of tenants, lessees, or workers on the land, there is not enough land to accommodate
any or some of them, they may be granted ownership of other lands available for distribution
under this Act, at the option of the beneficiaries. Farmers already in place and those not
accommodated in the distribution of privately-owned lands will be given preferential rights in
the distribution of lands from the public domain.

SECTION 23. Distribution Limit. No qualified beneficiary may own more than three (3)
hectares of agricultural land.
 Other details and guidelines of CARP such as the cases of farms owned by corporations,

and the conversion of lands from agricultural to industrial or commercial are provided so in the

law.

SECTION 29. Farms Owned or Operated by Corporations or Other Business Associations. In

the case of farms owned or operated by corporations or other business associations, the following
rules shall be observed by the PARC: In general, lands shall be distributed directly to the
individual worker-beneficiaries. In case it is not economically feasible and sound to divide the
land, then it shall be owned collectively by the workers' cooperative or association which will
deal with the corporation or business association. Until a new agreement is entered into by and
between the workers' cooperative or association and the corporation or business association, any
agreement existing at the time this Act takes effect between the former and the previous
landowner shall be respected by both the workers' cooperative or association and the corporation
or business association.

SECTION 65. Conversion of Lands. After the lapse of five (5) years from its award, when the
land ceases to be economically feasible and sound for agricultural purposes, or the locality has
become urbanized and the land will have a greater economic value for residential, commercial or
industrial purposes, the DAR, upon application of the beneficiary or the landowner, with due
notice to the affected parties, and subject to existing laws, may authorize the reclassification or
conversion of the land and its disposition: Provided, That the beneficiary shall have fully paid his
obligation.

(dar.gov.ph)

III. The Problems and Achievements of CARP- Abigael Derecho

Most rural development scholars and advocates would argue that the unjust parcelling of land,
commonly favoring the landlords and corporations, is one of the main cause why a supposedly
agriculturally-blessed country continues to suffer from rural poverty and food insecurity. In an
article, Teves (2011) pointed out that a pro-farmer and land-oriented poverty reduction reforms
are the best way out of the monopoly of land that undermines the ranks of the rural poor that
incapacitates the work force that has been one of the key pillars of every economy. However,
these agrarian reform policies that is supposed to be in aid of the poor farmers has turned out to
be nothing but a expedient tool by those vested with interests. Some reform law gave
opportunities to the landlords to have their land exempted, if not by delaying the inclusion,
through legal means. (Elvinia, 2011) Perhaps, one of the most known and controversial agrarian
reform policy implemented was the CARP.

As mentioned earlier, CARP which was the fruit of RA 6657 (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Law) and the extension program of RA 8532 (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program
Extension with Reforms) was created and implemented under the administration of the late
Pres. Corazon Aquino who envisioned this program as the centerpiece of her administration's
social legislative agenda (ibid., 2011). Its flagship principle was the land-to-the-tiller that
intended to achieve its main endgoals prioritize land tenure improvement and deliver service
support and increase productivity of the farmers. Under this program, the tenurial security for the
private and government-owned agricultural lands falls under the supervision of the Department
of Agrarian Reform (DAR) through two main program components: Land Tenure Improvement
(LTI) and Program Beneficiaries Development (PBD). while public owned lands, such as
forestries, were managed by Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). Has
the program provided assistance to the farmer or has it failed to fulfill its promises?

Assessing the Key Provisions of CARP

Time Period. Unlike the previous agrarian reform programs, the CARP extended the payment
period. Instead of 15 years, the years were doubled to 30 years.

Support Service Delivery. First of the many problems with CARP is the screening of
beneficiaries. Farmers, either regular or seasonal workers, tenants, and landless peasants can
become a beneficiary unlike from the previous land reforms that limits it beneficiaries to the
tenants. However, for a farmer to be a beneficiary of the program, he/she needs to file an
application that he/she is eligible for the land. In this case, not all farmers become beneficiaries.
Many are still tenants or leaseholders. Indeed, who may qualify as rightful beneficiaries has
become a deeply contentious affair (Rutten, 2010).

In terms of support service delivery, the program's strategy is to concentrate on Agrarian Reform
Communities (ARCs) by continually increasing the degree of support services given in the said
communities to achieve greater agro-productivity (Elvinia, 2011). As cited by Teves, according
to the DAR accomplishment reports, CARP's support service programs has provided a number of
job opportunities which initiated and aided the following infrastructure support projects:

Completed Infrastructure Support Projects:

Farm-to-market road 12,245 kilometers

Communal irrigation 212,549 hectares

projects
Bridges 9,069 linear meters

Pre/post harvest facilities 280 units

Potable water supply 812 systems

Rural electrification 63 kilometers of cables installed

Solar Power technology 6,240 systems

School buildings 518 classrooms

Health center 127 units

(Source: DAR accomplishment report, as cited by Teves)

Criticisms

The CARP may not be a complete failure; however, it possessed serious deficiencies to succeed
as an agenda on poverty reduction (Elvinia, 2011). The battle for genuine and pro-poor agrarian
reform is certainly far from over. Genuine agrarian reform advocates would account the CARP as
a compromise law that serves the interest of three sectors: the feudal lords, agri-business, and
the peasantry. (Gomez-Magdaraog, 2013) In a ideological sense, Teves identified that CARP was
created as a way to provide economic growth, diminish poverty and food scarcity, and decrease
violent conflicts.

Other factors will also come into play in explaining why the CARP has fall short in expectations.
For one, the lack of political will in implementation has been very evident during the past
implementing years of the program. One good example is the insufficient support financially,
technical, and institutional and inept bureaucratic processes for CARP (ANGOC, 2012).

As a result, the CARP only provided a little to no improvement to the lives of the peasants who
were supposed the ones to be assisted by the program. In addition to that, what made it worse
was the failure of government to render efficient land reform policies and programs. As assessed
by Elvinia, the end results have been far from the goals after more than two decades of
implementation.

IV. Genuine Agrarian Reform Bill (GARB)- Marie Rose Aytona

The Philippines lacks genuine agrarian reform. Despite the fact that there had been eleven

(11) laws passed regarding agrarian reform, there were no substantial changes that happened. Big

landlords and local and foreign corporations have monopolistic control over vast agricultural

lands in the country. The farmers, as before, are still fighting for their rights for lands until now.

Foreign agri-corporations exploited vast agricultural lands with the aid of local landlords. With

the export-oriented and import-oriented economy, these vast agricultural lands were used for the

production of export materials. This made the national industry and the economy to be

backward-oriented, and there is no opportunity for the national industry to proliferate and

develop.
According to Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (KMP), the twenty-eight years of CARP is

already enough. It is the longest and most expensive agrarian reform program in the world and is

not meant to address the problem of landlessness and rural poverty. The law was crafted to

exempt Hacienda Luisita and other vast haciendas in the country from land distribution. Hon.

Rafael Ka Paeng Mariano, the Chairman of KMP and now the Secretary of Department of

Agrarian Reform, said in an interview that continuing land monopoly and control of a few

landlord family shows that the bogus CARP was not meant to break land monopoly and was

instead implemented only to appease peasant unrest in the countryside and to create an illusion

of land reform. In order to break this landlord control and monopoly over lands, the peasants

campaign for the exact opposite of CARP, the Genuine Agrarian Reform Bill (GARB).

Background

The Genuine Agrarian Reform Bill (GARB), now known as the House Bill 555, is a bill

instituting genuine agrarian reform in the country and creating the mechanism for its

implementation and for other purposes. The GARB will replace CARPER or the Comprehensive

Agrarian Reform Program Extension with Reforms that has been proven to be a failure when it

comes to genuine agrarian reform. It was during the National Peasant Summit last November 4-

5, 2007, which was attended by the representatives of different peasants organizations from

different region in the country, that the major component of GARB was decided.

It was first filed in the 14th Congress as House Bill 3059 by the late labor leader and Anakpawis

Representative Crispin B. Beltran together with the representatives of Bayan Muna, Gabriela
Womens Party, and the Kabataan Party-list. It was re-filed in the 15th Congress as House Bill

374 by peasant leader and Anakpawis Representative Rafael V. Mariano. Because of the

aspiration of the peasants and individuals who push for genuine agrarian reform, public hearings

and regional public consultations conducted with regards to GARB by the House Committee on

Agrarian Reform has garnered strong support from all over the Philippines- Luzon, Visayas and

Mindanao. It was refiled in the 16th Congress by party-list representatives Fernando L. Hicap,

Neri Javier Colmenares, Luzviminda C. Ilagan, Emmi De Jesus, Antonio Tinio, and James Mark

Terry Ridon on July 1, 2013. This bill was refiled to further push the demand for genuine

agrarian reform. It was refiled again in the 17th Congress as House Bill 555 by Anakpawis

Party-list representative Ariel Ka Ayik Casilao and other Makabayan lawmakers-Carlos

Isagani Zarate, Emmi De Jesus, Antonio Tinio, Arlene Brosas, France Castro, and Sarah Jane

Elago.

Objectives

The centerpiece of GARB are: 1) the dissolution of the control of landlords, local and

foreign corporations over vast agricultural lands; 2) the nationalization of these agricultural

lands; 3) and then subsequently redistributing them for free to landless tillers, who have been

tilling the lands that they do not own for decades already, agrarian reform beneficiaries or not; 4)

raising the standard of living and the productivity and income of farmer beneficiaries through

cooperatives and other forms; 5) empowering women; 6) recognizing and respecting ancestral

lands of the indigenous people; 7) strengthening agriculture and national industrialization for the

improvement of the economy of the country; 8) developing farmers beneficiaries through giving

them quality and adequate program when it comes to support services; 9) creating a scheme or

system that will protect the beneficiaries against the land grabbers in order to avoid the re-
concentration of vast agricultural lands in the hands of the few. This bill is believed to be the

solution to historical social injustices that have been experienced by the peasants and the root

cause of poverty and of the feudal and semi-feudal exploitation.

In a television interview of Jessica Soho with Secretary Mariano, he reiterated that with him

being the DAR secretary, peasants will not be evicted from the lands they till. He also mentioned

that the Presidential Agrarian Reform Council, the highest policy making body in terms of

implementing agrarian reform, will convene under the Duterte Administration. In Aquinos six

years in office, not once did the PARC convened. Moreover, he also said with conviction that it

is now time to pass a law which central objective is to genuinely redistribute lands to the

peasants. He also recited his Letter of Intent to Serve submitted to President Rodrigo Duterte:

"Your honor, it is my unwavering commitment to fulfill my part in the realization of the Filipino

peasants aspirations to emancipate themselves of the bondage of the soil they till through

genuine agrarian reform."

V. CARP vs GARB: Which is better?- Elijah Blanco

Twenty-eight years ago, CARP/CARL was made known as the agricultural land reform

law of the Philippines. the Philippine government constructed this law as a form of a social

justice system for farmers, to avoid being exploited as well as to promote land distribution for

aspiring farmers. But until today, majority of the farmers are still unable to have their proper

permanent lands and are continuing to till on lands that they cant still say their own. According

to the Philippine Institute for Development Studies, the poverty Gaps highest majority lies in the

households of fishermen, farmers, miners and foresters with 13.6% in 2009. They also have the

Highest poverty incidence with 46.2% of the entire population (Datu, M.B. ,et.al, 2012). Until
now, the Gap between these sectors are gradually increasing, with farmers being 38.3 percent of

the poverty population (National Statistical Coordination Board, 2012) even with CARP starting

in 1988, there are still so many hectares of land that are not distributed to landless farmers. DAR

stated that there was still 1,034,661 hectares of land that has not been distributed to almost 621,

154 farmers in 2014.(NSCB,2014) besides the undistributed lands, issues concerning stubborn

land owners, useless documents and titles, and the continuous worries of the beneficiaries of the

reform are on the rise.

With the Genuine Agrarian Reform Bill being one of the priorities of the incoming

administrations Department of Agrarian Reform, Rafael Mariano, the problems left by the

CARP/CARL at its time would largely be solved. But how will GARB solve the problems left by

CARP/CARL? We need to study the different aspects of the Bill and the law and compare them

to see how GARB will solve these Problems, Namely Scope, Time Frame, Retention Limits,

Land Distribution, Beneficiaries, protection of the lands of beneficiaries , and support services.

Scope

In CARP, there is a lot of exemptions as well as exclusions regarding agricultural lands. Section

10 of CARP/CARPER follows all exemptions and exclusion of lands such as:

a) Lands actually, directly or exclusively used for parks and wild-life, forest reserves,
reforestation, fish sanctuaries and breeding grounds, watersheds and mangroves

b) Private lands actually, directly and exclusively used for prawn farms and fishponds: Provided,
That said prawn farms and fishponds have not been distributed and Certificate of Land
Ownership Award(CLOA) issued to agrarian reform beneficiaries (ARBs) under CARP

c) Lands actually, directly and exclusively used and found to benecessary for national defense,
school sites and campuses, including experimental farm stations operated by public or private
schools for educational purposes, seeds and seedling research and pilot production center, church
sites and convents appurtenant thereto, mosque sites and Islamic centers appurtenant thereto,
communal burial grounds andcemeteries, penal colonies and penal farms actually worked by
theinmates, government and private research and quarantine centers and alllands with eighteen
percent (18%) slope and over, except those already developed.

Source: section 10 of RA 6657, amended by RA 7881(1995)

Meaning that many lands are not distributed even though they are considered agricultural

lands. Schemes such as SDO, or stock distribution options allow farmers to become stock

owners, being able to buy from landowners and associations of their stocks, shares or equities.

( BARIE, CDD, n.d.) but according to the interviews we conducted in Hacienda Luisita on

July,13 2016, the papers for SDO that the farmers have has no value, and the government does

not allow them to exchange it for anything else.Ranmil Enchanis, one of the writers for The

Philippine Inquirer stated Cory Aquinos CARP provided for a non-land transfer scheme, the

stock distribution option (SDO), which turned farmworkers into stockholders with slave wages

P9.50 per payday in HLI. In 2012, the Supreme Court revoked HLIs oppressive SDO. The

scheme, however, is still in effect in a dozen haciendas in Negros and elsewhere, affecting

thousands of farmworkers up to this day. ( Enchanis,R., 2015) Schemes concerning the

postponement of paying amortization such as leasebacks, lease, Farm management contracts, and

joint ventures allows for landlords to monopolize the lands near to them in exchange for

postponing the payments for the land that these farmers have, which makes it more of a

disadvantage for the farmers who have small plots of land.

In GARB however, there are no exemptions or exclusions for any agricultural lands. It doesnt

matter if the legal name of the lands is different, but relies on the purpose of that public or

private agricultural lands.(ANAKPAWIS,2009) Including everything that CARP excluded in

their agricultural lands. This means that GARB will be able to provide for more agricultural

lands for Farmers, as well as being able to easily distribute lands to any farmer who wants them,

as well as increasing the hectares to be distributed to farmers with a lower barrier for entry.
Time Frame and Priorities

CARPs first time frame was 10 years, but was extended for another 10 years by CARPER and

was being planned to be extended for another 10 years having a total of 30 years.

With GARB, they have a mandatory provision that the law shall be accomplished in a 5 year

time frame which prioritizes the distribution of all agricultural lands. (ANAKPAWIS, 2009)

Retention Limit

Under Sec. 6 of CARP, a landowners retention limit shall not exceed 5 hectares. Three (3)

hectares may be awarded to a child of the landowner subject to the following qualifications:

1. at least 15 years of age during the CARP coverage; and

2. actually tilling the land or directly managing the farm
Source: section 6 of RA 6657
In GARB, there are no retention limits, but still have specifications regards other cases such as

small landlords are able to sell their lands and lands that are smaller than 5 hectares are

encouraged to be sold.

Land Distribution

CARPs Land distribution was made so that Farmers who has distributed lands to themselves

should pay for the land in 30 years, and landlords have the right to tax or make the farmers pay

for amortization and land rent which is very unfair for poor farmers. (ANAKPAWIS,2009)

For GARB, land is distributed fairly as long as it is an agricultural land to any aspiring farmer.

All of the remaining balances of all beneficiaries of CARP will be written off as well as farmers

who were removed from their lands due to non-payment will reclaim their land back and the
government shall ensure a proper documentation or title of the land or a title of Full

emancipation that was given, and not just a CLOA that was distributed in CARP. A 5 year tax

holiday is also given to farmers and beneficiaries of GARB. (ANAKPAWIS,2009)

Beneficiaries

In CARP, there are screenings in which farmers need to apply to become a beneficiary of CARP

as well as be under the support of CARP. Many farmers are not under CARP and many

beneficiaries of CARP are also stopped because of the retention limit in which they are made to

be tenants and leaseholders. (ANAKPAWIS,2009)

In GARB, All landless farmers are beneficiaries of GARB. All previous Beneficiaries of CARP

will also be beneficiaries of the new bill as well as workers of small landowners in agriculture.

Even fisherman who were occupying shorelands as well as tillers and settlers in disposable lands.

And all other lands where someone wants to become farmers in nearby barrios and

municipalities. (ANAKPAWIS,2009)

Protection of lands of beneficiaries

In CARP, exemptions and retention is a huge disadvantage especially for the protection of the

land. Since if they cant adhere to the requirements set by CARP, then their land will be

confiscated. It can also be classified as an LCU or a Land use conversion which means that the

land is not secure from conversion. Even the documents for security purposes such as the CLOA,

CLTs or EPs are not uphold at all times, and is usually questioned and cancelled depending on

the payment of the Farmer. (ANAKPAWIS,2009)

In GARB, the bill prohibits selling,mortgage,transfering or any conveyance and disposition of

lands as well as land reclassification and land use conversion. Taxes from the lands are

prohibited, with lands distributed are immuned as well as land reform areas are highly protected.

(ANAKPAWIS,2009)

Support Services

CARPs way of supporting is using a collateral as a means of support system for farmers. But in

reality, there were no support services given to beneficiaries. The budget was also corrupted or at

least delayed when the original Law states that there should be a 50 billion budget for agriculture

as funds for landlords. It became 100 billion and the remaining 50 billion was only given on

1998. (ANAKPAWIS,2009)

GARB has a proper service system, wherein they are giving 50 billion funds for agriculture and

calling it as the land reform support services fund. And will ensure the continous service for 5

years. The support system consists of credit facilities, production support, post-harvest, market

access and market, price guarantees and such other services necessary to making their production

viable and increase their income. (ANAKPAWIS,2009)

In Conclusion, GARB is not just a social justice system to protect the rights of all our farmers,

but also a development tool to push the agriculture of the Philippines to new heights. Senatorial

Candidate Neri Colmenares stated in a forum in De Lasalle University, [For me], genuine

agrarian reform is not merely a social justice tool; it is also a development tool. In my opinion,

no country can develop without genuine agrarian reform, (Colmenares, N, 2016 cited by

Cepeda, M , 2016). The Researchers believe that GARB would be able to perform both of those

functions, but with many landlords and agricultural elites opposed to the idea of GARB being
implemented, the next administration has their work cut out for them in the field of agrarian

reform.

References

ANAKPAWIS partylist. (2009). Comparison Between the Genuine Agrarian Reform Bill
(GARB) and the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP). Retrieved July 14, 2016,
from http://bulatlat.com/main/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/8-49-ap-garb-vs-carp-ok.pdf

ANAKPAWIS Party-List (2016, July 3).Explanatory note for the genuine agrarian reform Bill
(GARB) This 17thECongress of the House of Representatives to be Filed by the Anakpawis
Party-list Representative Ariel Ka Ayik Casilao and Makabayan Lawmakers. Retrieved from
http://www.anakpawis.net/2016/06/explanatory-note-for-the-genuine-agrarian-reform-bill-garb-
this-17th-congress-of-the-house-of-representatives-to-be-filed-by-anakpawis-party-list-
representative-ariel-ka-ayik-casilao-and-makabay/
Cepeda, M. (2016, January 23). Neri Colmenares: Genuine agrarian reform a 'development tool'
Retrieved July 4, 2016, from http://www.rappler.com/nation/politics/elections/2016/119982-neri-
colmenares-genuine-agarian-reform-development

Corrales, C. B. (2015, June). CARP, CARPER: Failing, falling, dead? Retrieved July 17, 2016,
from http://pcij.org/blog/2015/06/11/carp-carper-failing-falling-dead

DAR. (n.d.). FAQ's on Agrarian Reform: CARP. Retrieved July 09, 2016, from
www.dar.gov.ph/downloads/category/82-FAQs?download...FAQs on CARP
Enchanis, R. (2015, April 18). Genuine agrarian reform, not CARP, key to national devt.
Retrieved July 30, 2016, from http://opinion.inquirer.net/84198/genuine-agrarian-reform-not-
carp-key-to-national-devt

House Bill 252. House Bill 252 Genuine Agrarian Reform Bill. Retrieved from
https://www.scribd.com/doc/311771770/House-Bill-252-Genuine-Agrarian-Reform-Bill
House of Representatives (2016, July 2). Bill to implement genuine land reform. Retrieved from
http://www.congress.gov.ph/press/details.php?pressid=9660

KMP (2015, May). Praymer hinggil sa GARB (Genuine Agrarian Reform Bill). Retrieved from
http://kilusangmagbubukidngpilipinas.com/primer-on-the-genuine-agrarian-reform-bill-garb/

Maria Blesila, D., Reyes, C., Tabuga, A., & Asis, R. (2012, April). Poverty and Agriculture in the
Philippines: Trends in Income Poverty and Distribution. Retrieved July 12, 2016, from
http://dirp4.pids.gov.ph/ris/dps/pidsdps1209.pdf

Ramos-Syson, P. (n.d.). CARP Exemptions and Exclusions -- From Agrarian Reform Law and
Jurisprudence DAR-UNDP SARDIC Publication. Retrieved July 12, 2016, from
https://www.scribd.com/doc/137477724/CARP-Exemptions-and-Exclusions-From-Agrarian-
Reform-Law-and-Jurisprudence-DAR-UNDP-SARDIC-Publication

http://www.dar.gov.ph/ra-6657-what-is-carp-comprehensive-agrarian-reform-program

http://www.dar.gov.ph/about-us/about-the-department

http://www.dar.gov.ph/q-and-a-on-carp/english

http://www.gov.ph/2014/06/30/q-and-a-the-comprehensive-agrarian-reform-program/