Agrarian Reform and Social Legislation

1. What do you understand by Agrarian Reform and why there is a need for such program?

Agrarian Reform is the redistribution of lands, regardless of crops or fruits produced to

farmers and regular farmworkers who are landless, irrespective of tenurial arrangement,
to include the totality of factors and support services designed to lift the economic status
of the beneficiaries and all other arrangements alternative to the physical redistribution of
lands, such as production or profit-sharing, labor administration, and the distribution of
shares of stocks, which will allow beneficiaries to receive a just share of the fruits of the
lands they work

The program is essential for the country as it does not only uplift social economic status
of the farmers but it also serves to protect their rights against potential abuses that may be
employed to the community in the field of agriculture who may not be fully aware of
their rights and how it must be protected. Moreover, developing countries like the
Philippines capitalize on Agriculture where significant number of population considers
farming as they primary source of livelihood. Thus, it is vital to employ concrete
guidelines and extensive assistance in order to acquire the benefits not only to the farmers
and farmworkers but also to the growth of the country as it derive its profit therefrom.
Consequently, the program is beneficial to the economy of the country as a whole.

2. What are the provisions of the constitution on agrarian reform? Cite 4 provisions.

Article XIII, Section 4-6 & 8, 1987 constitution

Section 4.

The State shall, by law, undertake an agrarian reform program 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 farmworkers, 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 such priorities and reasonable retention limits as the
Congress may prescribe, taking into account ecological, developmental, or equity
considerations, and subject to the payment of just compensation. In determining retention
limits, the State shall respect the right of small landowners. The State shall further
provide incentives for voluntary land-sharing.

Section 5.

The State shall recognize the right of farmers, farmworkers, and landowners, as well as
cooperatives, and other independent farmers' organizations to participate in the planning,
organization, and management of the program, and shall provide support to agriculture
through appropriate technology and research, and adequate financial, production,
marketing, and other support services.
 Section 6.

The State shall apply the principles of agrarian reform or stewardship, whenever
applicable in accordance with law, in the disposition or utilization of other natural
resources, including lands of the public domain under lease or concession suitable to
agriculture, subject to prior rights, homestead rights of small settlers, and the rights of
indigenous communities to their ancestral lands. The State may resettle landless farmers
and farmworkers in its own agricultural estates which shall be distributed to them in the
manner provided by law.

Section 8.

The State shall provide incentives to landowners to invest the proceeds of the agrarian
reform program to promote industrialization, employment creation, and privatization of
public sector enterprises. Financial instruments used as payment for their lands shall be
honored as equity in enterprises of their choice.

3. What lands are covered by the CARL? What is the retention limit of the land owners?

Lands Covered by the CARL

a) All alienable and disposable lands of the public domain devoted to or suitable for
agriculture.
b) All lands of the public domain in excess of the specific limits as determined by
Congress
c) All other lands owned by the Government devoted to or suitable for agriculture
d) All private lands devoted to or suitable for agriculture regardless of the agricultural
products raised or that can be raised thereon

Retention Limit of Land Owners

The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law provides retention limits to landowners as

well. To take on its declared aim of establishing owner cultivatorship of economic-sized
farms as the basis of Philippine agriculture, CARL prohibits landowners to retain more
than five hectares of land and an additional three hectares for each child of the landowner
over 15 years of age, provided that he/she is personally cultivating the land.

4. Do you think the effective implementation of the CARL will lead to industrialization and
create more jobs for Filipinos? Why?

Yes but only to some extent. The primary objective of the law is to provide assistance
and uplift the social economic status of the farmers and farmworkers who are landless
through land redistribution and other alternative modes mentioned in the program such as
profit sharing, labor administration, and Stock distribution. However, the aforementioned
modes is inadequate to fully effectuate industrialization. From the provisions of the law,
 there were no express specifications on the advancement of the industry through the use
of technology and extensive guidelines on mass production and other characteristics of
industrialization. The law is even silent on the production of goods but rather have
revolved around redistribution of lands to farmers and farmworkers and how they would
be able to share in the fruits of their labor even when they do not own the land.

5. It is said that what led to the impeachment of CJ Corona was his decision to distribute of
land of Hacienda Luisita owned by PNoy’s family. Do you agree or disagree?

The trial of the late CJ Corona have shaken not only the government particularly the
judiciary but also in the digital landscape. Thus, it has been a public knowledge that the
impeachment of the former chief justice is connected to the political alliances in the
government. Thus, during the administration of Aquino, those who share political
affiliation with President Arroyo is also being a target of indictment from the
administration of PNoy. It is even apparent how chief justice Renato Corona bluntly
declared that it was the Hacienda Luisita issue that was the principal reason for his
impeachment and for the unusual maneuvers (fair and foul) taken by the President to
secure his conviction by the Senate. This may be inferred if history is taken into
consideration taking into account the timeline of events regarding the Hacienda Luisita
and the revocation of the SDO. The history is fairly suggestive of how the Aquino
Administration exact vengeance to the former president Arroyo and her alliances.
However, it would be impartial and such allegations are rendered unmeritorious without
being supported by the legal system of the Philippines. In dealing with the case of
Corana, official documents must be used to establish credibility. Hence, the conclusions
must be based on the facts stated in the cases decided by the courts of jurisdiction. In the
said case, Corona was impeached for betrayal of public trusts founded on arguments
where the issues on Hacienda Luisita is irrelevant and unrelated. Therefore, in accordance
with the case law provided in the impeachment case of CJ Corona, I disagree that the
distribution of the lands of Hacienda Luisita led to his impeachment. However, the
possibility that motives founded upon the history of such land reform case may have
induced the Aquino administration in filing for his impeachment.