More critics rise vs Duterte policies

MANILA, Philippines — Aside from rice farmers, hog raisers and fishermen, another marginalized group raised their collective voice against the Duterte administration’s handling of a key issue in their sector: the controversial coconut levy fund.

The Federation of Free Farmers, Kilus Magniniyog, and the Confederation of Coconut Farmers Organizations of the Philippines jointly published a position paper questioning the draft of the implementing rules and regulations (IRR) of Republic Act No. 11524, the Coconut Farmers and Industry Trust Fund Act.

The groups said the draft did not provide a consultative mechanism between the trust fund managers and the coconut farmers and criticized the opacity in the use of the coco levy funds and assets.

Under the proposed IRR published by the Department of Finance (DOF), the Trust Fund Management Committee (TFMC) — composed of the DOF, the Department of Justice, and the Department of Budget and Management — was not obligated to report the trust fund’s interest earnings since 2015 and has the power to privatize or dispose of the assets.

It also did not specify how noncash assets like oil mills may be used while the TFMC decides on how it should be utilized.

Another contention is the DOF’s role as the trust fund manager, which would allow it to solely recommend investment strategies to grow the existing assets, currently estimated to have ballooned to over P100 billion.

Stronger participation

Farmer groups have petitioned for stronger participation in the use of the fund but secured so far only three of the nine seats on the Philippine Coconut Authority board, which is also not part of the TFMC.

As such, industry leaders urged the creation of a consultative group composed of coconut farmer representatives who may inform the TFMC of their needs and allow them to share inputs on fund management.

“Without transparency, the government cannot just demand complete trust by virtue of being the fund holder … Trust, after all, is earned, not commanded. The lack of dialogue merely endangers speculation about dubious intentions surrounding billions worth of levy funds,” the groups said.

They also criticized the DOF’s primary mandate to generate revenue from the funds and assets which may not jibe with the interests of coconut farmers, when the IRR should reflect the Supreme Court’s ruling that the fund “is owned by the government in trust for the coconut farmers.”

Other issues raised were the allocated budget for the Trust Fund Management’s expenses that will be pulled out from the trust fund and the lack of information regarding the interest earned by the fund every year, among others.

While the Coconut Trust Fund Act did not specify who may approve the proposed rules, the groups said members of the TFMC “appear bent on passing their own draft through a joint memorandum circular,” adding that stakeholders were only given one week to comment on the draft IRR.

Despite being “hugely disappointed and angered by the law’s serious deficiencies,” industry leaders said they were still “ready to contribute proposals that will secure the maximum benefits for farmers long struggling to recover their forced levy contributions these past 50 years.”