PILLAS 1

PILLAS, Jobert D.

2023-21289

1-AA Malikhaing Pagsulat sa Filipino

Eng 13 WFX-1

Analysis Paper (2271 words including footnotes and references)

JUNE 10, 2024

THE MARCOS JR. ADMINISTRATION'S PUSH FOR ECONOMIC CHARTER

CHANGE PRIORITIZES FOREIGN INTERESTS OVER GENUINE AGRARIAN

REFORM AND FILIPINO FARMERS' RIGHTS

A hot topic in the House of Representatives is the Marcos Jr. administration's push for

charter change to amend the 1987 Constitution. It is noteworthy that this Constitution was

crafted after the ousting of his dictatorial father, Ferdinand Marcos Sr. This raises a key

question: who stands to benefit if these amendments are approved?

Resolution of Both Houses (RBH) No. 7, principally authored by Speaker Ferdinand

Martin G. Romualdez, Senior Deputy Speaker and Pampanga 3rd District Rep. Aurelio

Gonzales Jr., Deputy Speaker and Quezon Rep. David Suarez, Majority Leader Manuel Jose

Dalipe, Senior Deputy Majority Leader and Ilocos Norte Rep. Ferdinand Alexander Marcos,

and other House leaders, has been filed. They argue that amending the Constitution is the final
 PILLAS 2

piece of the puzzle for investment measures. They add that the Marcos administration aims to

maintain a thriving economy, create jobs and income opportunities, and overall improve the

lives of Filipinos.

A total of 289 congressmen agreed to RBH No. 7, which adds the phrase “unless

otherwise provided by law” to Section 11 of Article XII (National Patrimony and Economy)

which prohibits foreign ownership of public utilities unless 60 percent of the total capital is

owned by Filipino citizens1. Why does it matter if these phrases are added?

PUBLIC UTILITIES: LAND, FOOD SECURITY, AND LABOR

Under Article XII, Sec. 11, it is mandated to protect and make sure that any public

utility must be majority-owned, or 60%, by Filipinos. If the ChaCha's aim is realized and the

phrase "unless otherwise provided by law" is added, this protection can easily be nullified. But

how?

If our lawmakers wish to sell our public utilities to foreign entrepreneurs, they can

easily enact a law for it. One law could eliminate Filipino ownership, so what will Filipinos

lose if this happens?

1
19th Congress. RBH No. 7
 PILLAS 3

Firstly, it could affect our farmers. According to the Unyon ng Manggagawa sa

Agrikultura (UMA), seven out of ten farmers still do not own land. Because of this, some are

forced to split their harvest 50-50 or higher just to farm2. Now, if the ChaCha is implemented,

it’s certain that the government will not prioritize protecting farmers because they are opening

up more opportunities for foreigners to own land rather than distributing it to farmers. And

foreigners can own not just a small percentage but 100%, surpassing Filipinos. But what is the

effect if farmers don’t have land?

The Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA)3 revealed that the number of workers in the

agriculture and forestry sectors decreased to 854,000 as of January 2024. One of the reasons

that the study stated about the reduction in numbers could be the lack of land for farmers.

In a personal interview by the Inquirer with Rolando Augustin4, a landless farmer from

Isabela, he shared his farming experience. An Inquirer study linked to the Southeast Asian

Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA) states that a

"small farmer" has an average land area of 1.29 hectares. But the Kilusang Magbubukid ng

Pilipinas (KMU) emphasized that because of the lack of irrigation and other support services,

1.29 hectares of land will only produce around 52 sacks. From these, Augustin would get only

6.5 sacks, or 325 kilos of rice, as "income." If sold at the current price of rice at P12 to P17.20

per kilo, he would only get P3,900 to P5,590. This is why agricultural production is weakening.

2
De Guzman, Sara Soliven. Agriculture is dying in the Philippines. 18 June 2018. PhilStar.
3
PSA. Employment Rate in January 2024 was Estimated at 95.5 Percent.
4
Dela Peña, Kurt. Day of the Landless: The failed promises of land reform in PH. Inquirer.
 PILLAS 4

As a result, there will be a problem with the food supply in the country. Primarily, land

is the main ingredient in providing food for everyone. There is no food to harvest if the farmers

do not have land. Based on the report by the United Nations (UN), nearly 51 million Filipinos

experienced moderate or severe food insecurity from 2020 to 2022. As a result, hypothetically,

the issue of land for farmers is also an issue of food security.

If the government argues that we can import, it is possible, as it is already happening

now. But who suffers from this neoliberal policy? No one else but us. Prices of goods are high

because we do not patronize our farmers' own products.

For instance, the Rice Liberalization Law paved the way for removing import

restrictions on rice. This law was signed under the administration of former President Rodrigo

Duterte in 2019. According to Cathy Estavillo, Bantay Bigas spokesperson, “Despite being the

top rice-importing country in the world with 3.6 million metric tons, the country has reached

record-breaking price inflation at 22.6% the past month, the highest since 2009.”5

The KMP asserts that the National Mapping and Resource Information Authority data

shows that 14.2 million hectares of alienable and disposable public land will be exposed and

weakened by ChaCha, especially if its goal is 100% foreign ownership. Isn't it evident that

foreign interests prevail?

5
Legaspi, Zeus. Farmers to government: Junk Rice Liberalization Law. Inquirer.
 PILLAS 5

Such laws could be enacted if ChaCha passes, prioritizing the removal of protection for

public utilities. According to Republic of the Philippines v. Manila Electric Company 6,

businesses and operations of public utilities must be of quality for the public interest. These

should be anchored in public service, such as providing basic commodities and services

necessary for the general public interest. Hence, we can see the blatant selling of our

government to foreign ownership, such as public utilities.

IF NOT CHACHA, PASS THE GARB!

Given the current state of our farmers, instead of ChaCha focusing on foreign ownership,

why not pass the Genuine Agrarian Reform Bill in our country? This bill is undoubtedly

centered on the interests of our Filipino farmers.

In 2016, Anakpawis Rep. Ariel Casilao filed HB 555, the Genuine Agrarian Reform Bill.

The proposed bill aims for the following7:

1. Break up land monopoly and implement free, fair, just, and equitable

distribution of the lands covered by this Act within a five-year period and

eliminate all forms of oppression and exploitation in the countryside and

thereby usher the advent of genuine social justice;

6
G.R. No. 141369 April 9, 2003
7
17th Congress. HB 555
 PILLAS 6

2. Transform the farmer-beneficiaries into efficient producers through the

institution of an integrated, comprehensive, and holistic program of support

services and other state subsidies that will nurture them toward improving their

productive capabilities;

3. Increase the income of farmer-beneficiaries and raise their living standard

through the promotion of cooperatives and other forms of mutual-aid as the

main vehicle for improving their productivity;

4. Install the social mechanism and effective measures that will secure the lands

of farmer-beneficiaries from loss and prevent the restoration of land monopoly;

and

5. Launch the thoroughgoing development of our agricultural sector and lay the

foundation for national industrialization.

According to Rep. Casilao, the continued monopoly and control of land by a few

landlord families show that the fake Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) was

not intended to break the land monopoly but was implemented only to appease the anger of

farmers in the countryside, a classic counter-insurgency strategy to create the illusion of land

reform.

In Hacienda Luisita Incorporated v. Presidential Agrarian Reform Council 8, Chief

Justice Corona argues in his dissenting opinion that Section 31 of RA 6657 (CARP) is

unconstitutional in substance and spirit because it conflicts with Article XIII, Section 4 of the

Constitution. He focuses attention to how unambiguous and straightforward Section 4's original

8
G.R. No. 171101. November 22, 2011
 PILLAS 7

phrasing is: it ensures either individual or collective ownership of the land that landless farmers

and common farmworkers labor on, laying the foundation for agrarian reform. According to

Corona, the express language of this constitutional provision leaves no room for interpretation

– agrarian reform fundamentally means providing landless farmers and farmworkers with

ownership of the land they cultivate.

Corona contends that without actual land distribution, there can be no true agrarian

reform. Any program that fails to grant farmers and farmworkers ownership of land, offering

them something less, such as stock certificates, does not meet the constitutional mandate. He

underscores that the essential characteristic of a constitutional agrarian reform program is the

actual distribution of land to farmers. Corona believes that a farmer's right to the land they

work on ought to be the cornerstone of land reform. He goes on to add that the original goal of

agrarian reform, as envisioned by the drafters of the Constitution, was to distribute land to

farmers fairly, without any modifications or concessions. Any strategy that disregards this idea,

then, falls short of fulfilling the constitutional requirements for agricultural reform.

However, under the proposed GARB, it promotes the protection of farmers on their

land while also protecting their basic rights. It is remembered that because of the land, human

rights abuses occurred. Through this, all farmers not yet given land under previous agrarian

reform programs, including those renting private agricultural land, are set to benefit.

Today, during the 19th Congress, Reps. Arlene Brosas (Gabriela Women’s Party),

France Castro (ACT Teachers Partylist), and Raoul Manuel (Kabataan Partylist) refiled the
 PILLAS 8

GARB. The proposed bill's9 goals remain the same: to give land to Filipino farmers as well as

the resources for production, rather than dancing to the tune of ChaCha, which is only for

foreign interests.

Additionally, in his dissenting opinion in Hacienda Luisita Incorporated v. Presidential

Agrarian Reform Council10, Chief Justice Corona firmly supports the Constitution's mandate

for land redistribution as a means toward accomplishing agricultural reform. He firmly admits

that ordinary farmworkers and landless farmers have a fundamental right to own the farms they

work on, either by themselves or in cooperation.

This underscores the principle that those who work the land should have ownership

rights. Furthermore, Corona emphasizes the significance of these rights and assures that they

will be upheld, portraying this guarantee as essential to the success of agricultural reform. If

farmers did not have secure land rights, the reform failed. Furthermore, he claims the

Constitution obliges the State to allocate agricultural lands in a way that ensures a fair and

balanced redistribution process—as long as preservation limits and equitable compensation are

maintained. Chief Justice Corona's opinion as a whole emphasizes that the constitutional

commitment to agricultural reform is based on the protection and implementation of farmers'

rights.

If the government wants to boost the economy, why not create laws or programs for

agriculture? The Philippines is an agricultural country. As an agricultural nation, it needs to

9
19th Congress. HB 1161
10
G.R. No. 171101. July 05, 2011
 PILLAS 9

invest in promoting inclusive development and reconstructing a more resilient agricultural and

food system capable of facing calamities and addressing the effects of climate change

(Sanchez, 2015). Because whenever a disaster hits the country, agriculture is always affected.

The damaged crops are wasted. It is time to raise the status of this sector to be more prepared

for upcoming storms.

Further, the contribution of the agricultural sector to the economy is estimated at 40

percent of the total domestic product (GDP), and two-thirds of jobs come from this (Sanchez,

2015). This percentage is significant. And if the Marcos administration truly wants economic

growth, it should focus on the agricultural sector because it is the primary source of income in

the country. However, the agricultural sector faces ongoing challenges such as low farmer

income, low rural employment, lack of food security, and lack of competition (Sanchez, 2015).

The Philippines should promote the goals of the Global Sustainable Development Goals

to end or reduce hunger, achieve food security, improve nutrition, and promote sustainable

agriculture (Sanchez, 2015). Therefore, the call is to oppose the Charter Change that only

pushes for foreign interests. Advocate for laws like GARB that provide farmers with

opportunities to grow the country's economy, create jobs for all, strengthen education, and most

importantly, center policy-making on Filipinos' interests and not on foreign interests.

 PILLAS 10

Bibliography

17th Congress. House Bill 555. 30 June 2016. House of Representatives. https://hrep-

website.s3.ap-southeast-1.amazonaws.com/legisdocs/basic_17/HB00555.pdf. 20 May

2024.

19th Congress. "House Bill 1161. An Act Instituting Genuine Agrarian Reform in the

Country and Creating Mechanism for Its Implementation and for Other Purposes." 3

July 2022. House of Representatives. https://hrep-website.s3.ap-southeast-

1.amazonaws.com/legisdocs/basic_19/HB01161.pdf. 20 May 2024.

Casilao, Ariel. Bill to implement genuine land reform Media Affairs and Public Relations

Service. 12 July 2016. House of Representatives.

https://www.congress.gov.ph/press/details.php?pressid=9660.

De Guzman, Sara Soliven. Agriculture is dying in the Philippines. 18 June 2018. PhilStar.

https://www.philstar.com/opinion/2018/06/18/1825542/agriculture-dying-philippines.

20 May 2024.

Dela Peña, Kurt. Day of the Landless: The failed promises of land reform in PH. 31 March

2022. Inquirer. https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1576211/day-of-the-landless-the-failed-

promises-of-land-reform-in-ph. 20 May 2024.

L.M.J.C.Jocson. Nearly 51M Filipinos face food insecurity — UN report. 14 July 2023.

BusinessWorld. https://www.bworldonline.com/top-

stories/2023/07/14/534036/nearly-51m-filipinos-face-food-insecurity-un-report/. May

2024.

Lalu, Gabriel Pabico. House approves RBH 7 on third reading. 20 March 2024. Inquirer.

https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1921063/fwd-embargo-rbh-7-now-approved-on-third-

reading-at-house. 20 May 2024.

 PILLAS 11

Legaspi, Zeus. Farmers to government: Junk Rice Liberalization Law. 14 February 2024.

Inquirer. https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1904340/fwd-farmers-protest-rice-

liberalization#:~:text=%E2%80%9CThe%20Rice%20Liberalization%20Law%20resu

lted,Cathy%20Estavillo%20said%20in%20a. 20 May 2024.

Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA). "Employment Rate in January 2024 was Estimated at

95.5 Percent." 8 March 2024. Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA).

https://psa.gov.ph/statistics/labor-force-survey/press-release/node/1684062498. 20

May 2024.

Republic of the Philippines v. Manila Electric Company. No. G.R. No. 141314. Supreme

Court Third Division. 9 April 2003. LawPhil.

https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2003/apr2003/gr_141314_2003.html.

Sanchez, Fernando. Challenges faced by philippine agriculture and UPLB’s strategic

response towards sustainable development and internationalization. December 2015.

UPLB University Library. https://www.ukdr.uplb.edu.ph/journal-articles/1763/. 20

May 2024.
 PILLAS 12

As a student of the University of the Philippines, I value intellectual integrity and the

highest standards of academic conduct. I am committed to an ethical learning environment that

promotes a high standard of honor in scholastic work.

Because I believe that dishonesty is not an acceptable avenue to success, I affix my

signature to this work to affirm that it is original and free of cheating and plagiarism, and does

not knowingly furnish false information.

Furthermore, I understand that suspected misconduct on given assignments will be

reported to the appropriate office – and, if established, will result in disciplinary action in

accordance with University rules, policies, and procedures.

JOBERT D. PILLAS