MARBAI farmers back DAR officials in

graft case filed by Lapanday

By
ANTONIO L. COLINA IV
-
MAY 23, 2017

Want create site? With Free visual composer you can do it easy.
DAVAO CITY (MindaNews/23 May) Farmers belonging to Madaum Agrarian Reform
Beneficiaries Association Inc. in Barangay Madaum, Tagum City have thrown their support
behind two embattled officials of the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR).

DAR Secretary Rafael Mariano and Undersecretary Luis Pangulayan are facing complaints for
violation of Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act filed by the Lorenzo-owned Lapanday Foods
Corp. (LFC).

In an interview Tuesday, MARBAI president Mely Yu maintained Department of Agrarian

Reform (DAR) officials were just doing their job in light of the May 18 issuance of the writ of
execution that installed 159 MARBAI farmers as owners of a 145-hectare disputed
property managed by LFC.

She called LFCs agricultural venture agreement (AVA) with Hijo Employees Agrarian Reform
Beneficiaries Cooperative-1 (HEARBCO-1) an onerous contract and insisted ownership of the
property.

She said MARBAI and HEARBCO-1 members have not come into conflict after the
installation and even claimed the latter wanted to turn over the land because of their growing
debt to LFC.

In a release posted on the DAR website, Mariano said the actions taken by LFC illustrate how
landlord-oligarchs use courts to thwart the implementation of genuine agrarian reform and
harass DAR officials implementing the agrarian reform law.
LFC filed complaints before the Ombudsman last week against Mariano and Pangulayan for
violation of Section 3(e) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act and asked the Ombudsman
for their preventive suspension.

LFCs lawyer Noel Oliver Punzalan, in his complaint received by the Ombudsman on May 18,
said that the respondents clearly used their office and abused their authority to deliberately
favor the No Group/Madaum Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Association Inc. (MARBAI)
members.

He maintained that Mariano and Pagulayan did not even consider that the No Group/MARBAI
members are not the only agrarian reform beneficiaries in the land awarded to the Hijo
Employees Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Cooperative-1 (HEARBCO-1) whose majority
members honor and respect the court-approved compromise agreement with Lapanday Foods
Corporation (LFC).

Last May 17, Mariano served the writ of execution, his third attempt, to install 159 MARBAI
members as owners of the 145-hectare disputed property in Barangay Madaum.

But Mariano countered by saying Lapandays contract is not binding to MARBAI as it was
executed with HEARBCO-1 (Hijo Employees Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Cooperative 1)
who already ceded the disputed portion of the banana plantation to MARBAI farmers.

In a May 18 statement, LFC maintained that it owns the fruits coming from the San Isidro
(Sanid) despite the reentry of former members of the cooperative it is in contract with.

The 145-hectare contested property is situated in the San Isidro farm.

The firm added it is denouncing Mariano for forcing the installation by coercing the police to
carry out his highly anomalous action and blamed him for directly instigating the mob who
became violent and unruly as the installation of the breakaway agrarian reform beneficiaries
(ARBs) was proceeding in Madaum, Tagum City on May 18.
It said the contract with HEARBCO-1 will continue, insisting that the reentry of former members
does not modify the existing agreement where HEARBCO- 1 is obligated to deliver and sell the
fruits from the whole plantation to Lapanday. (Antonio L. Colina IV/MindaNews)

The advantages of pursuing the easiest successes first consist of building administrative experience and
morale, and of stimulating peasant enthusiasm; the disadvantage is that such a strategy looks
opportunistic. The advantage of starting land reform everywhere simultaneously is the tremendous
positive political effect of such a strategy; the disadvantages are the dangers of shocking into existence
an overwhelming political opposition, and of administrative overextension that will create a vicious
circle in which failure induces more failure. The advantage of proceeding through land reform according
to crop and to degree of modernization is protection of productivity; modernized sectors can be
protected, and political opposition can be minimized. The disadvantages include incentives to change
crops, administrative ambiguities wherever multiple cropping occurs, and apparent lack of concern for
equity. The Filipinos have combined the first and fifth strategies; the reform has at least initially been
confined to rice and corn lands, and there the big fish have been reformed first. A second strategic
choice concerns the terms of the alliance between the central administration and the peasantry. An
administration can use existing peasant capabilities if they are adequate, or the central bureaucracy can
create and control a local infrastructure, or it can devolve responsibilities to local groups on the
assumption that responsibility will induce sufficiently rapid learning. It can employ these strategies in
various combinations and sequences. The key principle is that local organizations must be responsive
largely to local peasants rather than to local elites or to the national government. But the local
organizations must be able to rely on central power to disperse opposition. The Philippines face peculiar
difficulties in creating an appropriate alliance between central authority and the peasantry, because of
high social inequality and landlord power, because of the absence of an indigenous village organizational
base, and because of overcentralized national administration. These problems are further compounded
by the commitmento a politics of integration whose practical implication is that landlords join peasant
organizations and thereby gain leverage over those organizations.

Thousands of banana workers are set to reclaim areas controlled by the

Lapanday Foods Corporation at the Hijo plantation area in Madaum, Tagum
City today, after years of fierce struggle.

National agriworkers center Unyon ng mga Manggagawa sa Agrikultura

(UMA) said that the Madaum Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Association, Inc
(MARBAI) was able to secure a writ of installation from the Department of
Agrarian Reform (DAR), for a 145-hectare portion of the contested banana
plantation.

The re-installation of agrarian reform beneficiaries set today in Madaum

would not be possible if not for the militant collective action of MARBAI
members, who were not deterred by Lapandays violent maneuvers, said
UMA Secretary General Danilo Ramos, referring to the series of shooting
incidents perpetrated by private security guards of Lapanday December last
year which resulted in the wounding of at least 10 farm workers.

UMA lauded the efforts of its local affiliate, the Unyon sa mga Mag-uuma
Alang sa Tinood Nga Repormang Agraryo (UGMAD-TRA or Farmers Union
for Genuine Agrarian Reform), in leading daring actions such as the
unprecedented land occupation of the contested Lapanday farms since
October last year, and the series of protests at the local and national offices of
the DAR and Lapanday.

A genuine agriworkers union as the UGMAD-TRA served to unite banana

workers affiliated with splinter groups of agrarian reform beneficiaries (ARB)
under Lapandays control. Today, MARBAIs installation will be joined by two
other ARB cooperatives which they previously considered as rivals. Members
of HEARBCO1 and GMARBAI have now decided to assert their rights through
self-installation. These cooperatives are now united in fighting the
landgrabbing of the Lorenzos, said Ramos.

Ramos added that the case of Lapanday banana workers in Madaum reminds
one of the violence in Hacienda Luisita, especially now that the Lorenzo family
are involved in the management of both agricultural firms.

The banana workers of the Lapanday Foods Corporation in Tagum City and
the sugar workers of Hacienda Luisita in Tarlac are both called agrarian
reform beneficiaries by the state. Both are also victims of bloody shooting
incidents perpetrated by landlords who insist on their immoral claims over
these land reform areas, said Ramos who added that Hacienda Luisita
farmers are still fighting for their rights years after the massacre and spate of
extra-judicial killings in the controversial sugar estate.

Martin Lorenzo, a scion of the Lorenzo landlord family who controls Lapanday,
is now a co-owner of the Central Azucarera de Tarlac in Hacienda Luisita with
the Cojuangco-Aquinos.

UMA said that the onerous agribusiness venture agreement (AVA) between
ARB cooperatives and Lapanday practically legitimized land grabbing and
unfair labor practices in the banana plantation.
The AVA in Lapanday is similar in essence to the failed Stock Distribution
Option scheme in Hacienda Luisita, which was also implemented through the
bogus Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP). In both schemes,
farmworkers are told that they are now landowners or stockholders in control
of business, but they practically remain landless farmworkers who earn
measly wages and token dividends, if any, said Ramos.

In Hacienda Luisita, farm workers earned a measly Php 9.50 a day as

stockholders when workers decided to strike in 2004. This practice is
replicated by the Cojuangco-Aquino-Lorenzos today in hiring sacadas or
migratory sugar workers. Sacadas in Luisita are still paid Php 9.50 a day or
even less.

The practice of contractualization among agricultural workers is actually

made worse by the CARPs SDO scheme and AVAs. Agriworkers fighting for
jobs, decent wages and benefits this coming Labor Day will also be marching
for genuine land reform and free land distribution, ended Ramos.

TAGUM CITY (MindaNews/18 May) After seven years of struggle to reclaim the 145-
hectare banana plantation from the management of Lapanday Foods Corp. (LFC), a Lorenzo-
owned company, members of the Madaum Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Association, Inc.
(MARBAI) were installed Thursday as owners of the disputed property.

In an interview, Agrarian Reform Secretary Rafael Mariano, who served the writ of installation
for the third time Thursday, described the serving of the order as peaceful and successful.
Farmers of Madaum Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Inc. gather after they were installed at the
plantation in Madaum, Tagum City managed by Lapanday Foods Corporation on Thursday, 18
May 2017. MindaNews photo by Manman Dejeto
Syempre naging mapayapa at matagumpay at makikita na matiwasay at masasabi natin naging
lubos ang pagsasakatuparan dun sa pagtugon sa naunang hinaing na sila ay mainstall. (The
serving of the order was peaceful and successful and we were able to address the concern of our
farmers they would be installed), he said.

He attributed the successful installation to the directive issued by President Rodrigo Duterte
during his meeting with some 200 MARBAI farmers last May 9 near Malacanang that the order
must be served.
He said the dialogue with the president was fruitful, ending their 13-day picket in Manila, from
April 29 until May 12. The farmers returned home to Davao del Norte on May 13.

Mariano encouraged the farmers to continue defending their rights through strong collaboration
and determination.

Before the installation, the DAR chief said a series of inter-agency meetings were held to ensure
a peaceful installation.

On April 17, Mariano was supposed to serve the order but it did not happen when police
authorities refused to give assistance due to some questions of technicalities in DARs order,
including the lack of operation plan. It was then rescheduled to April 2 but it was not executed
when nobody would receive the order.

In December 2016, farmers forcibly occupied the 145-hectare banana plantation after the firm
refused to give the land. But they were ejected on December 31 and had since been camping
outside the gate of the plantation.

MARBAI chairperson Mely Yu said she was thankful to Duterte and Mariano that they were
finally recognized as owners of the land.

She said they would continue to assert their claims on the disputed property.

We really have to assert our claims on the land because the debt of the cooperative will only go
up if the management continues to be under Lapanday, she said, referring to the Hijo
Employees Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Cooperative-1 (HEARBCO-1).

HEARBCO-1 owns 1,323 hectares awarded to them as agrarian reform beneficiaries by Hijo
Plantation Inc. in 1996.
In 2010, MARBAI members broke away from HEARBCO-1 and claimed 145 hectares of the
property owned by the cooperative.

In a statement, LFC opposed DARs writ of installation over portions of land that were already
awarded to the members of HEARBCO-1.

It said it cannot be dispossessed of the land and its existing management contract over the area
because the Davao City Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 14 approved the Compromise
Agreement between LFC and HEARBCO-1.

Citing the courts writ of execution issued on December 9, 2015 and alias writ of execution on
November 21, 2016, LFC said the court recognized and upheld the companys right to manage
and possess the contested land.

This DAR action defies the final and executory orders of the Court. Ironically, the members of
this breakaway group participated in the resolution of the legal dispute. Thus, they are bound by
the subsequent legal orders that have now become final and executor, it added.

But Mariano maintained the lower court has no jurisdiction over the matter because it is DAR
who has quasi-judicial powers over agrarian reform cases.

Citing Section 50 of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law or Republic Act 6657, Mariano
said DAR clearly has quasi-judicial power and exclusive jurisdiction in all issues involving the
implementation of the agrarian reform program. Only the Supreme Court may issue a temporary
restraining order to stop the implementation of DARs decision.

In January 2011, Yu and her group were banned from entering the premises by the security
guards of HEARBCO 1 and formed MARBAI, which consisted of 157 members, and filed a
petition for reinstatement and accounting of harvest against the cooperative.
In a case brief released by DAR, the property in question was part of the 1,323.9272 hectares
previously owned by Hijo Plantation Inc. that voluntarily offered it for CARP coverage.

On October 18, 1999, HEARBCO 1 entered into a 10-year Banana Sales and Marketing
Agreement (BSMA) with Hijo Plantation at a price of $2.10 per box at 13 kilograms per box.

Afterwards, Hijo Plantation, Inc. and Global Fruits Corporation entered into a Deed of
Assignment of Banana Sales and Marketing Agreement.

But the following day, October 19, LFC and HEARBCO 1 entered into a supplemental
agreement that amended the BSMA executed between the cooperative, Hijo Plantation and
Global Fruits Corp.

The Provincial Agrarian Reform Adjudicator of Davao Del Norte on December 15, 2015,
ordered the reinstatement of the ousted HEARBCO 1 officials and on March 17, 2016, a writ of
execution directed the full implementation of the decision.

But on April 12, 2016, the Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board informed the
PARAD that the bigger portion of the of the area where the petitioners had to be reinstated
was already under the occupation and management of LFC by virtue of of the existing
compromise agreement dated April 9, 2011 between LFC and HEARBCO 1 entered into before
RTC of Davao City Branch 14 as a result of the case filed by LFC against HEARBCO
1. (Antonio L. Colina IV/MindaNews)