November 5, 1999

DAR OPINION NO. 66-99

MEMORANDUM

FOR             :      Dir. Rodolfo T. Inson, CESO IV
                           DAR Region XI
                           Quimpo Avenue, Ecoland
                           Davao City

SUBJECT    :     Request for Legal Opinion

This has reference to your letter-request for legal opinion dated 13 September 1999 on the following issues, to wit:

1.         Whether or not certain provisions of Administrative Order No. 2, Series of 1993 and Administrative Order No. 6, Series of 1998 which are not inconsistent with Administrative Order No. 9, Series of 1998 can still be applied?; and

2.         Whether or not managerial and/or supervisory employees who rose from ranks and were promoted before June 15, 1988 can be qualified as agrarian reform beneficiaries?

In reply to the first issue, Section 34 of DAR Administrative Order No. 9, Series of 1998 (Repealing Clause) specifically provides: "the provisions of DAR Administrative Order No. 6, Series of 1998 and all other orders, circulars or issuances inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed or modified accordingly". Conversely, it goes without saying, therefore, that provisions of prior issuances which are not inconsistent with Administrative Order No. 9, Series of 1998 are still applicable.

Anent issue No. 2, the pertinent guideline regarding qualifications of agrarian reform beneficiaries for acquired commercial farms is DAR A.O. No. 9, Series of 1998 (Rules and Regulations on the Acquisition, Valuation, Compensation and Distribution of Deferred Commercial Farms), particularly Section 4 thereof, quote:

"SEC. 4.        Qualifications of Beneficiaries. — Agrarian reform beneficiaries for acquired commercial, farms must have the following qualifications:

(a)     They must be at least 18 years old upon, filing of application as agrarian reform beneficiary;

(b)     They must have the willingness, aptitude and ability to cultivate and make the land productive; and

(c)     They must have been employed in the commercial, farm between June 15, 1988 and June I S, 1998 or upon expiration or termination of the deferment: Provided, That farmworkers who have worked longest on the land continuously shall be given priority."

Based on the foregoing, we submit that managerial and supervisory employees who were promoted before June 15, 1988 may still qualify as beneficiaries of commercial farms for as long they remain employees of the commercial farm between June 15, 1988 and June 15, 1998 or upon expiration or termination of the deferment, subject to the pertinent provisions of DAR Administrative Order No. 2, Series of 1993 (Supplemental Guidelines on Administrative Order No. 10, Series of 1990, and Other Issuances on the Rights of Farmworkers) and Joint DAR-CDA-DA Administrative Order No. 2, Series of 1997 (Rules and Regulations Governing Membership Issues and Concerns of Farmworkers and Employee Beneficiaries in Agrarian Reform Plantation-Based Cooperatives), quote:

Item II.E of DAR Administrative Order No. 2, Series of 1993

"All farmworker, regardless of classification, but excluding those holding, managerial or supervisory positions in the agricultural enterprise or corporation, are qualified as CARP beneficiaries.

However, farmworkers who had been previously identified as qualified beneficiaries but were promoted to managerial or supervisory positions prior to land transfer may still qualify as awardees if they give up their managerial or supervisory positions."

Item X.I of Joint DAR-CDA-DA Administrative Order No. 2, Series of 1997

"In both leaseback and non-leaseback arrangements, identified worker-beneficiaries in a cooperative who were promoted to managerial or supervisory positions in the plantation company (for leaseback arrangement) or the cooperative itself (for non-leaseback arrangement) after land transfer shall remain as ARBs even without giving up their position."

Under the above-quoted Administrative Orders, farmworkers who had been previously identified as qualified beneficiaries but were promoted to managerial or supervisory positions  prior to land transfer may still qualify as awardees if they give up their managerial or supervisory positions. On the other hand, farmworkers who had been previously identified as qualified beneficiaries but were promoted to managerial or supervisory positions after land transfer may still qualify as awardees without giving up their position.

The aforementioned rule is consistent with the expanded concept of "tillage" as defined in Item III.E of Joint DAR-CDA-DA Administrative Order No. 2, Series of 1997 which "is the collective effort by various types of workers who are employed to make the land productive. It shall not be limited only to employees engaged in actual cultivation of the land but also those involved in processing, administrative, operation, medical and technical work (technical farmworkers) based on the principle that all individuals who contribute to making the land productive are considered tillers". (emphasis and emphasis supplied)

In connection with the above, worth stressing likewise is the deliberation by Congress on Senate Bill No. 249 (now, R.A. No. 6657), as recorded in the Senate Journal (Session No. 109 dated 17 February 1988, pp. 21-23), on the definition of "farmworkers" and who could be qualified as tillers or beneficiaries, quote:

"On Section 4 of Article XIII of the Constitution which partly states that 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, Senator Laurel noted that the Constitution speaks only of "farmers" and "regular farmworkers". Under the term "beneficiaries" where regular, casual and farmworkers are enumerated, he noted that casual and seasonal workers are not entitled as beneficiaries under the Constitution. He then asked whether Congress could pass a law that would go beyond this mandate because of the wordings of the Constitution itself.

In reply, Senator Alvarez stated that in pursuit of such constitutional provision, the Committee, as much as possible, had adhered to the principle of land distribution to the tillers in relation to the remaining part of the provision cited which states that: "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 Congress may prescribe, taking into account the ecological, developmental or equity considerations". He stated that the Committee felt that the provision is liberal and broad enough to enable land distribution to anybody who tills the land, if there is enough land for such distribution.

On whether a mechanic who drives or fixed a truck in a farm would be considered a beneficiary under the bill, Senator Alvarez stated that he could be entitled to own indirectly a portion of the farm, as a collective is contemplated under the program.

As for a security guard, he opined that he could not be considered to be an agricultural worker considering that his relationship with the agricultural enterprise is too remote. However, if said security guard is part of an agricultural enterprise which is more or less widespread and sophisticated in magnitude, said security guard may avail of the opportunity to be owner under a collective in which he could even share in the fruits.

On whether the definition of "farmworkers" would include people within and without the agri-business enterprise, Senator Alvarez stated that while it is true that the bill is liberal in its application of the rules, he does not want to reduce the scope of the rule to absurdity where anybody who is remotely related to the operation could be considered a beneficiary." (emphasis and emphasis supplied)

In view of all the aforegoing, it is believed that the managerial and/or supervisory employees in issue may qualify as beneficiaries of a commercial farm subject, however, to the aforequoted provisions of DAR Administrative Order No. 2, Series of 1993 and Joint DAR-CDA-DA Administrative Order No. 2, Series of 1997.

Please be guided accordingly.

(SGD.) FEDERICO A. POBLETE

Undersecretary for Legal Affairs, and Policy and Planning