May 20, 1997
DAR OPINION NO. 55-97
MEMORANDUM
TO : Dir. Jose T . Domingo
PARC Secretariat
SUBJECT : Proposal on Private Initiated Model on Agrarian Reform by the PARCCOM of Camarines Sur
This has reference to your request for comment regarding the proposal of the PARCCOM to adopt a Private Initiated Model as an Alternative Approach to Pursue Agrarian Reform.
This stemmed from the two cases cited, particularly: 1) Casiano Villareal, et al.; petitioners vs. Related Investments and Development Corporation, Inc. (RIDC); and 2) CARP Coverage of the Contiguous Parcels of Land Covered by TCT Nos. RT-514 (18822), RT-515 (18823); TCT-4168, TCT-4169, RT-516 (18824) , RT-512 (18820) , TCT No. RT-513 (18821), TCT-7483 and TCT-7484. The first case involves the reinstatement of forty four (44) PD 27 farmer beneficiaries which however did not materialize since the writ and the alias writ of execution were not implemented due to the resistance of the landowner and the PROSAMAPI Cooperative. The Management of RIDC and the members of PROSAMAPI "believe they have a way of possibly implementing agrarian reform". In the second case, the PROSAMAPI Cooperative, the herein FBs in this issue, did not cooperate with the documentation of the compensation under the Direct Payment Scheme. They entered into an Agreement with RIDC that a Deed of Sale in their favor will be executed in the event that they (PROSAMAPI) already have the financial capability to buy the land. Moreover, they agreed to the Direct Payment Scheme provided the following conditions are present, to wit:
1) The name of PROSAMAPI members shall not be annotated at the back of the CLOA;
2) Conversion at a total of 50 hectares portion to be approved by DAR (including the portion to be awarded to 44 beneficiaries in the first case)
3) Transfer of ownership shall be until such time that the cooperative is finally capable to buy the property;
4) Payment shall not be made through the Land Bank but direct to the landowner not in cash but in the form of commercial trees planted inside the subject property, and taken cared of by the beneficiaries.
It was observed by the PARCCOM that the subject properties are currently mortgaged with the Philippine National Bank (PNB). The PARCCOM of Camarines Sur is now proposing for a private initiated model on how the subject properties should be distributed in order to peacefully resolve the matter. Hence, your request for comment.
We believe that the aforesaid proposal of the PARCCOM is not in line with DAR's established and long standing policy on CARP implementation. The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) through the DAR as the lead agency provides clear-cut procedures and mechanisms for the proper implementation of the Program. We observed that in both the abovementioned cases, the CARL (R.A. No. 6657) and its implementing rules and regulations as well as related agrarian laws were openly violated by the owner of the subject properties, the RIDC, and the PROSAMAPI Cooperative.
With respect to the first case, the RIDC disregarded or did not obey the alias writ of execution for the reinstatement of the 44 PD 27 beneficiaries and instead offered that the beneficiaries should be relocated on condition that they must first join the PROSAMAPI Cooperative. The PARCCOM's proposal to adopt a private initiated model on how the land should be distributed as an alternative approach is therefore an unwarranted departure from the legally mandated policy and established procedures of CARP implementation, a reproach to the DAR Adjudication Board's issued Order for Reinstatement of the farmer beneficiaries, and an unjustified acquiescence to the blatant defiance thereof.
With regard to the second case, we note that all the conditions provided therein, with the possible exception of that of No. 4, set by the Chairman of PROSAMAPI Cooperative who is also the President of RIDC and the owner of the subject properties, are unacceptable and in direct contravention to the mandate of R.A. No. 6657 regarding the award of properties to agrarian beneficiaries under the Direct Payment Scheme.
Section 21 of R.A. No. 6657 provides that: "direct payment in cash or in kind may be made by the farmer-beneficiary to the landowner under terms to be mutually agreed upon by both parties, which shall be binding upon them, upon registration with and approval by the DAR". Furthermore, DAR Administrative Order No. 6, Series of 1995, otherwise known as the Supplemental Guidelines to Administrative Order No. 7, Series of 1994, Re: New Implementing Guidelines Strengthening the Formation, Organization and Operation of the PARCCOM Pursuant to R.A. No. 7905 provides for the adoption of the Direct Payment Scheme between the landowner and the farmer and/or farm worker-beneficiary provided that the following provisions shall be followed:
a) amount and terms of payment are not more burdensome to the agrarian reform beneficiary than under the compulsory acquisition coverage provision of the CARP;
b) the ARBs agree to the amount and the terms of payment;
c) the DAR shall act as mediator in cases of disagreement between the landowner and the farmer; and
d ) the farmer and/or farm worker-beneficiary shall be eligible to borrow from the Land Bank of the Philippines an amount equal to eighty-five percent (85%) of the selling price of the land they have acquired pursuant to the said bank's credit loan assistance program.
Under existing agrarian laws, rules and regulations, the terms and conditions of the Direct Payment Scheme should include the immediate transfer of possession and ownership of the land in favor of the identified beneficiaries. Moreover, Certificates of Land Ownership Award (CLOAs) shall be issued to the ARBs with the proper annotation of their names on the back of the CLOAs to protect the farmer-members from possible summary and unjust separation by the cooperative or association (DAR Administrative Order No. 3, Series of 1993 and Joint DAR-CDA Administrative Order No. 2, Series of 1995). Furthermore, DAR Administrative Order No. 2, Series of 1995, otherwise known as the Revised Rules and Procedures Governing the Acquisition of Private Agricultural Lands Subject of Voluntary Land Transfer or a Direct Payment Scheme Pursuant to R.A. No. 6657 provides that: "land titles with existing liens and encumbrances shall not be covered under the Voluntary Land Transfer/Direct Payment Scheme". We believe that said guidelines squarely apply in this case since it was observed by no less than the PARCCOM itself that the subject properties are currently mortgaged with the PNB.
In sum, to allow the aforementioned private initiated model and leave the parties on their own to do as they wish, notwithstanding their purportedly noble and commendable objective, would be to unduly favor them apart from all the rest-practically putting them above and beyond the pale of the law, would set an extremely bad precedent, and will open the floodgates toward widespread circumvention of the Program. This should not be countenanced.
(SGD.) ARTEMIO A. ADASA, JR.
Undersecretary for Legal Affairs, and Policy and Planning