What Went Before: The Hacienda Luisita dispute | Inquirer News

What Went Before: The Hacienda Luisita dispute

/ 05:09 AM November 23, 2011

On July 5, the Supreme Court upheld the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) revocation of the stock distribution option (SDO) at Hacienda Luisita, but called for a referendum to allow farmers to vote again on either land ownership or shares of stock in Hacienda Luisita Inc. (HLI).

The court ordered the DAR to “immediately schedule meetings with the farm workers and explain to them the effects, consequences and legal or practical implications of their choices.”

The Supreme Court spokesperson, Jose Midas Marquez, later explained that no new vote was called, but that the workers would be asked to validate their decision on whether to own stocks or land.

ADVERTISEMENT

The DAR and Alyansa ng Manggagawang Bukid sa Asyenda Luisita (Ambala) later filed motions for reconsideration and various clarificatory questions.

FEATURED STORIES

Ambala asked the tribunal to declare as unconstitutional Section 31 of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law allowing landowners to offer shares of stocks to farmers instead of land redistribution.

The DAR, on the other hand, filed a motion urging the Supreme Court to proceed with the land distribution, citing a decision of the Presidential Agrarian Reform Council (PARC) in 2005.

In opposing the SDO, the DAR and PARC said the entire 6,435-hectare sugar plantation should be apportioned to hacienda farmers “to achieve the agrarian reform policy mandated by the Constitution.”

Hands-off policy

During his election campaign, President Benigno Aquino III pledged to redistribute the family-owned hacienda but had “adopted a hands-off policy” on the dispute only months into his administration saying he had divested himself of his interests in the sugar plantation.

ADVERTISEMENT

In August 2010, a compromise deal to end the dispute was signed by HLI and various hacienda unions. Under the deal, beneficiaries could choose either stocks or land.

It also promised a P150-million financial assistance to the workers. HLI initially distributed P20 million with the balance to be handed out once the Supreme Court approved the agreement.

HLI said the P20 million covered 118,725,222 shares, each equivalent to 17 centavos. It said the amount earmarked for each worker depended on hours worked and the task done. Most of the farmers received P300 to P500. The money distributed ranged from P9,000 to less than P1.

Hacienda Luisita covers parts of Tarlac City and the towns of Concepcion and La Paz in the province of Tarlac.

In 1958, the Cojuangcos acquired the estate and the sugar mill from Compania General Tabacos de Filipinas through loans from the Government Service Insurance System and a dollar loan from the Manufacturer’s Trust of New York granted on condition that the estate would be distributed to small farmers under former President Ramon Magsaysay administration’s social justice program.

Reform program

On June 10, 1988, then President Corazon Aquino promulgated the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program, which called for the redistribution of all agricultural lands, including Hacienda Luisita, to landless tenant farmers.

On Aug. 23, 1988, HLI was incorporated, allowing the distribution of shares of stocks among farmers-beneficiaries in lieu of land. It was the first corporation to do so.

Almost 5,000 of the 6,000 hectares of the land were placed under a stock distribution agreement between HLI and the farm workers, with more than 90 percent of the plantation’s 6,000 workers opting for shares of stock in a 1989 referendum.

In 2003, hacienda farmers claimed the SDO did not improve their lives and demanded its scrapping. A strike led to a violent dispersal of protesters by police and military forces on Nov. 16, 2004, leaving at least seven workers dead.

In 2005, the DAR revoked the SDO arrangement. PARC upheld the move the following year. HLI went to the Supreme Court, which then issued a temporary restraining order in 2006. Ana Roa, Inquirer Research

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

Source: Inquirer Archives

TAGS: DAR, Government, Judiciary, Politics, Supreme Court

© Copyright 1997-2024 INQUIRER.net | All Rights Reserved

We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. By continuing, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. To find out more, please click this link.