Araneta et al. + the Government vs. San Jose Del Monte Bulacan Farmers:
A case study on the MRT 7 construction
Submitted by:
Lucille Ashley Z. Palestroque
(2015-46178)
Submitted to:
Josefina G. Tayag, D.P.A., ret. Thesis Adviser
APPROVAL SHEET
This undergraduate thesis entitled, Araneta et al. + the Government vs. San Jose Del Monte
Bulacan Farmers: A case study on the MRT 7 construction, prepared and submitted by Lucille
Ashley Z. Palestroque in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree program B.A.
Political Science, has been examined and is recommended for approval and acceptance by:
______Josefina G. Tayag, D.P.A., ret. Thesis Adviser
Wherefore, this undergraduate thesis is hereby accepted and approved by:
______Prof. Jerome A. Ong Chairperson Department of Social Sciences
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This research would not be possible without the help of several people. I would like to express my gratitude to my thesis adviser, Dr. Josefina G. Tayag for her patience and encouraging advices for me as I make every step in the research field. She had been very accommodating for all the questions I have for my topic.
I would also like to thank my family, friends and relatives for they are my inspiration. Their existence makes me strive harder each day. They tirelessly remind me of my goal that is why there is no room for giving up.
Lastly, I would like to thank my interviewee for sparing me his time and knowledge which is a big help for this study. Also, to all the farmers, this study is for them. It is their plight this study is trying to understand. I want to thank them for being industrious and hardworking as they provide food products for all the people.
ABSTRACT
The study covered the issues of landownership in the Philippines and how these were resolved in the past. The presence of agrarian reform became a big factor since this mandates the redistribution of public and private agricultural lands to landless farmers and farmworkers. Apart from this, the study also closely looked at the case of the farmers in San Jose Del Monte, Bulacan specifically in the affected barangays- Barangay Tungkong Mangga, San Roque, and San Isidro with the on-going construction of the proposed Metro-Rail Transit (MRT) Line-7. This study also provided concrete recommendations in order for the land disputes, resulting to displacement of marginalized claimants will be avoided.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter I...... 1-12
a. Brief Introduction...... 1
b. Research question...... 1
c. General and specific objectives...... 2
d. Tentative Answer...... 2
e. Review of Related Literature (RRL)...... 3-7
f. Theoretical Framework...... 7-8
g. Conceptual Framework...... 8-9
h. Definition of Terms ……………………………………………….9
i. Methodology...... 9-11
j. Significance of the Study...... 11-12
Chapter II...... 13-15
Chapter III (Findings and Analysis) ...... 18-19
Chapter IV (Conclusion and Recommendation) ...... 20
Bibliography...... 22-24
Appendices...... 25-51
a. Informed consent form (ICF)...... 25-29
b. Transcription of interviews...... 30-48
c. List of questions...... 49-50
d. Data Matrix……...... 51
CHAPTER 1
Brief Introduction
The Metro Rail Transit (MRT) Line-7 of the San Miguel Corporation (SMC) Mass Rail
Transit 7, Inc., a Public-Private Partnership (PPP) project with the Department of Transportation
(DOTr), is a P62.7 billion project which aims to build a 23-kilometer elevated railway which stretches from North Avenue, Quezon City to San Jose Del Monte, Bulacan. This project seeks to reduce the travel time from North Edsa to San Jose Del Monte, Bulacan from the current two-hour travel time to 30 minutes (Philippine Daily Inquirer, 2016). However, in the midst of all the urbanization and development plans in Bulacan- specifically in San Jose Del Monte, farmers face serious threats of displacement and loss of livelihood with the construction of these projects. In the article “San Jose del Monte farmers saga vs. land grabbing” (2015), an international fact-finding mission together with the Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (KMP), the Asian Peasant Coalition (APC), and the Alyansang
Magbubukid sa Bulacan-San Jose Del Monte (AMB-SJDM) reported that this project would cause
300 farming families, 1,000 people, and 10,000 urban poor to be displaced and left with no source of income and livelihood. It will also wipe out almost 600 hectares of agricultural lands, particularly in
Barangay Tungkong Mangga and hundred hectares of land in other neighboring barangays namely
Barangay San Roque and Barangay San Isidro.
Research Question
How do government projects cause displacement when there are land disputes between the common poor people such as the Bulacan farmers of San Jose Del Monte and rich people possibly aligned with the government, with what effects and implications?
1
General Objective
To analyze how government projects could lead to displacement of common people amid land disputes between them and rich landowners.
Specific Objective
1. To discuss the issue of landownership in the Philippines by rich constituents as against the poor
and the marginalized, how these had been resolved in the past with what implications.
2. To discuss a situationer of the case in San Jose Del Monte where a rich family like the Aranetas are pitted against the poor and marginalized people who also claim they have rights
a. Brief history of the case; when and how it occurred
b. Its present situation, who are the protagonists, their claims and how rightful are such
claims
c. What the government has done to resolve the issue and, in whose favor,
3. To give a general assessment in this particular case with whom the government sided with what
implications;
4. To give recommendations so that land disputes do not always result in the displacement of the
poorer claimants.
Tentative Answer
Government will try to get the approval of the more powerful claimant of the land and because of this, the claims of the powerless and marginalized will be disregarded, leading to their displacement.
2
Review of Related Literature
I. Development-Induced Displacements
A. Causes
According to Singer and Neef (2015), development-induced displacement and resettlement
(DIDR) have remained one of the most contentious issues in development today. There had
been a steep increase in the displacement and dispossessions caused by large scale acquisitions
of land by the public and private sectors. It is “by the public and private sectors” because
development projects are going hand-in-hand between governments and their private partners.
McDonnell (2017) agreed with Singer and Neef (2015) by pointing out the case of
unethical political partnership between public and private sector. The overall trend from land
grabbing is the shift in landownership from indigenous people to foreigners.
McDonnel (2017) defined land grabbing as the processes of exclusion of people from
landscapes. Most lands grabbed are the ancestral domains of the indigenous peoples because
of the richness these possess which then attract foreigners.
Wehrmann (2008) supported McDonnel (2017) by claiming that the population will be
excluded from the land the moment the foreigners become attracted to it. Wehrmann (2008)
pointed out his example that “in many countries, indigenous people have been dispossessed
or live at risk of being dispossessed due to either a failure to recognize their rights to land or
invalidation of those rights by the state, or through expropriation or privatization of their lands
by the state”. The failure of the state to establish indigenous people’s rights to land enables
neoliberal policies, and therefore risk the indigenous people into dispossession.
3
B. Effects
Vandergeest (2006), on the other hand, believed that displacement is inevitable as far as development is concerned. Robinson (2003) agreed with Vandergeest (2006), however, he also claims that the development does not benefit everyone equally.
In most countries, indigenous peoples who were historically deprived of their rights to land were prone to more serious conflicts in the next generations to come (Wehrmann, 2008). It is the case in most countries where the long fight for land ownership persists.
Vanclay (2017) stated that large-scale development projects typically require large hectares of land to push through. As a result, people living in communities with large-scale development projects are dislocated through physical displacement. In addition, their livelihood and income-generating resources are affected as well, not to mention other environmental and social impacts that could make living conditions in the community unsustainable (Vanclay, 2017).
Vanclay (2017) described the process of resettlement as, “complex – it is multi- dimensional, multi-factor, multi-actor, multi-scalar and multi-level” due to the fact that people may be vulnerable and affected in many different ways. Given the size and the cost of development-induced displacement, discussions about displacement and resettlement should not be taken lightly.
Thus, discussions about development-induced displacement should not dismiss the negative impacts of these displacements to a mere “collateral damage” or part of the development process. Analyzing the impact of development-induced displacement should give highlight to the practice and issues that come with it as well.
4
II. The State and Displacement
A. Role as Protector
Padovani (2016) stated that states in developing countries face a trade-off dilemma. The
growing necessity to industrialize the economy and alleviate poverty levels means freeing
large number of people in rural communities from dependence on low-productivity
occupations and to separate them from land itself. Through freeing rural communities, he
believes that land can now be put to a ‘higher-value’ through the process of industrialization
and creating spaces for modernisation and building modern transport networks;
reconfiguration of land tillers and farmers skills should also be taken to account to cultivate
their capabilities and attitude toward performing non-rural jobs. For him, this processes
essentially produce higher income and better livelihood. Yet this is easier said than done,
major social transformation requires institutional changes in land ownership and other patterns
in land usage. He also agreed with Vandergeest that displacement and dispossession is
necessary for social transformation.
B. Role as Displacement Instigator
Vandergeest (2006) claimed that “all development has the potential of causing
displacement.” Padovani added that expropriation, forced-displacement, and resettlement are
the harshest part of any development. It exposed people in communities to great risk of
impoverishment (Patel et al., 2015), risk of homelessness, job and food insecurity, and other
environmental and social risks. Padovani (2016) described displacement and resettlement as
“state-centric processes” since the state is both the decision maker and the executor of policies
on land usage and ownership. Adding to it, the genuine workings of difficulties established
5
within the justice sector to land reform are paid with just little attention. Pro-market intellects
adduce difficult legal problems as a reason to move toward market-oriented land policies and
disregard the state-led land reform (Franco, 2008). Also, according to Gironde and and Golay
(2016), “the current wave of land acquisitions was preceded by legislative changes that
established a state monopoly on land management and created insecurity in land tenure for
local populations.”
These acquisition of lands which benefited their new owners and in return negatively
affected and violated the rights of those dispossessed is in fact an event in history. Roudart
and Mazoyer (2015) cited the tombstone inscriptions and papyrus writings which indicates
that there are already existing large vast of lands under the Old Kingdom of Egypt. It was
during the third millennium BC when villages were obliged to do unpaid labor to the state and
so this means the detrimental situation of those who were dispossessed.
Synthesis of the RRL
Most of the sources claimed that land disputes that lead to displacement is problematic.
However, there was a statement from Vandergeest where he was justifying the displacements that take place. For him, displacement is inevitable especially if it is for the development-in expense of the marginalized sectors. Padovani (2016) also believed the same. He even suggested that the farmers should start engaging to non-rural jobs.
Franco (2008) placed an emphasis on the burden and misfortune the farmers are facing.
One problem with the sources that were gathered is that most of them are foreign. Enough local sources are not yet available. Data that the researcher gathered might be a help for future studies.
6
The researcher personally believed that the farmers deserve the land that they have been pleading for. This helps them be more productive because they are no longer required to divide the land’s income with the landlord.
Theoretical Framework
Harvey’s theory of accumulation by dispossession, Neoliberalism, and Role of state
As capital accumulation flourished, David Harvey (n.d.) introduced another theory that could help in understanding the purpose of this study. Capital accumulation by dispossession reveals the creation of neoliberal policies to ensure the continuity of the process of primitive accumulation. As the state furthers the development of a capitalist society, neoliberal policies are created which ensures the centralization of wealth and power to the elites by dispossessing the public of their wealth and land. These policies are guided by four practices: privatization, financialization, management, and manipulation of crisis and state redistribution. According to
David Harvey (n.d.), these four practices come with a wide range of processes which includes,
“commodification and privatization of land and the forceful expulsion of peasant populations; conversion of various forms of property rights- common, collective, state, etc.- into exclusive private property rights; suppression of rights to the commons; commodification of labor power and the suppression of any alternative, indigenous, forms of production and consumption; colonial, neo-colonial and imperial processes of appropriation of assets, including natural resources; monetization of exchange and taxation, particularly of land; slave trade; and usury, the national debt and ultimately the credit system (Harvey, 2004).” Marx believed that the state- having the
7 monopoly of violence and definitions of legality- plays a key role in forwarding and promoting the processes of primitive accumulation. In David Harvey’s ‘Capital Accumulation by
Dispossession’, he stated that Marx suggests which Braudel confirms, that the transition to capitalist development was vitally dependent upon the stand of the state. State policies plays a crucial role in defining the intensity and in creating new forms of capital accumulation.
SJDM, Bulacan farmers and MRT-7 Project
The purpose of this study is to know how government projects drive displacements of dwellers in the land to be converted for commercial use. In the case of the displacement of the farmers in some barangay communities in San Jose Del Monte, Bulacan, accumulation by dispossession as proposed by David Harvey, is evident. The perpetuating factors leading to the displacement of the farmers in the said communities were due to the capitalistic goals of the partnering government and private entities. Dispossessing the farmers would supposedly make them submissive and be an agent of the capital accumulation. By using this theory, the researcher was able to test how these government projects, and for this case the MRT-7 project, actually used urban developments as a tool for exploiting the poor. It is by these capitalists in a semi-feudal and semi-colonial society that enables the never-ending cycle of exploitation.
Conceptual Framework
CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: EFFECT: OUTCOME: Policies and actions of the government that favor the Land Dispute in the Philippines The poor becomes poorer elite and landless. Poor are not organized, hence the inability to fight for their rights.
8
Land disputes in the Philippines are problematic because the poor who, too, have legal claims are disregarded. Policies and actions of the government towards the land dispute favors the elite. Some marginalized individuals are already giving up and are not exercising their rights anymore thinking that the elites always win. In result, they lose the land that they have a fight for and they become poorer.
Definition of Terms
Land Dispute-question on ownership of a certain territory or land between two or more
entities
Displacement-a scenario where a superior person or entities constrained a group of inferior
people to leave a certain place where they live and/or plant their products
Land Ownership-it is not limited to buying or inheriting a certain land or parts of a land.
This can also apply to the agrarian reform that will supposedly benefit the farmers.
Land Grabbing- the act of stealing a land or part of a land from the powerless entities.
Methodology
The research is qualitative in nature. It revealed how public processes made possible the pursuance of government projects sans the certainty of ownership of the land they will use in the construction of such projects, and hence leads to public displacement. In order to answer the research problem, a number of interviews were conducted with the residents of San Jose del Monte
(SJDM), Bulacan as research participants. 2 participants were already enough since they are just
9 living in the same area and the point of saturation was reached easily. Also, some of the residents of the area were completely clueless about the issue. The researcher also aimed to conduct an interview, aside from SJDM farmers, with a representative of the organization composed of peasants named Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (KMP). KMP is an organization of landless peasants, small farmers, farm workers, etc. Aside from this, it is the researcher’s goal to gather information from the government’s perspective. Data from either the Department of Agriculture
(DA) or Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) will be a big help to give balance with the information gathered. Unfortunately, the researcher was not able to conduct an interview with neither of the two (2) because of the unreachable contact information. Instead, data were gathered from Department of Transporation (DOTr) through an interview.
In order for the interviews to proceed, an Informed Consent Form (ICF) was prepared. The
ICF was available in both English and Filipino. This contained the content and purpose of the research, its benefits and risk, and the contact information of the research and her adviser. It was also emphasized that the participants have the right to refuse to answer questions that they do not feel answering. They were also provided an option to bring a friend or anyone with them that they feel comfortable with. The venue of the interview was according to the participant’s preference.
Furthermore, this study respected each participant’s privacy, hence the data are saved in the researcher’s laptop and is locked with a password. Data gathered from the interviews will only be used until May 31, 2019. After this, it will be immediately destroyed.
The researcher analyzed the data that were gathered through focusing on the framework of this study. The researcher familiarized herself to the interviews, and data gathered in order to code them. By coding, it means identifying the important details from the data gathered. The parameters of identifying important details were based on the thematic framework this study is using.
10
To further synthesize the important details, the researcher used broader categories out of the themes and subthemes originally found. Charting the categories helped in filtering what codes are most important. After charting, categories were mapped to show what relationship they have.
When relationships are established, the final step was the interpretation of the results.
Significance of the study
As pointed in the statement of the problem, land grabbing is one of the major concerns in the Philippines. The existence of projects through Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) in forwarding urban development does not equate to the development of the lives of the people.
Because of the worsening crisis, private firms find ways in scheming for profits. They either form partnerships with the government or they themselves run for posts in the government; and in these kinds of situations, those who have lesser power are gravely affected. They will either be displaced, or be bribed through receiving compensation or through being hired as workers for the development project. But what this manifest is that the situation remains the same- they still get deprived of a stable and consistent way to provide for their needs, and worse, they get pushed away from the lands they have cultivated for years.
Through studying these kinds of social issues, we begin to understand how some Filipinos, especially the farmers, still suffer amid the goal of the government in developing communities. It has been proven that despite the objective of developing communities by building infrastructures, highways and railroads, these are done at the expense of others’ lives. The so-called forward development in the urban is in contrast with the backward situation of the affected rurals. This study manifests the power relations between those who are in power and those who are inferior in the society.
11
The plight of the farmers does not just endanger and aggravate the lives of those that are directly affected, it impacts the society as well. Land grabbing threatens the overall food security and food sovereignty in the country. Cochrane (2011), cited that the World Food Summit, held in
1996, declared that the ideal food security encompasses the global population, whereby people have access to “sufficient, safe, and nutritious food, encompassing both the physical availability and the economic access.” The United Nations declared that it is the intrinsic right of all people to have access to food. However, the responsibility of providing people the access to food rests on the actions done by the states. In the study “Food Security or Food Sovereignty: The Case of Land
Grabs” (2011), Cochrane explains that food security does not necessarily mean that the state should be able to produce sufficient food supplies; rather that a country is able to provide sufficient, safe, and nutritious food for its people. Food sovereignty, on the other hand, involves both ownership and the rights of local people to define how one produces its own supply of food.
With the widespread cases of land grabbing such as the case in the farmers of San Jose Del
Monte, Bulacan, food security and food sovereignty in the country are exposed to vulnerable conditions. Large-scale acquisitions of agricultural lands through Public-Private Partnerships
(PPPs) force farmers out of their lands and out of their jobs. In prioritizing commercial and urban developments, the support for domestic agriculture declines, resulting in the country’s dependence on agricultural imports. Widening of agricultural imports may negatively impact the economy.
The increase in price of commercially produced agricultural products become unaffordable for poor consumers thereby passing the burden to the people.
12
CHAPTER 2
Land Grabbing in the Philippines
According to Chavez (2018), the farmers and land reform advocates assert that land grabbing and land use conversion negatively affect the food security of the whole country. The lands where the farmers plant their products are also the source of their living. Once some powerful individuals take it away from them, they will hardly survive living.
The KMP blames land grabbing and land-use conversion as the reasons why control and ownership of lands slipped out of the farmers’ hands. According to the organization, this problem will have a domino effect because if the farmers are landless, food production will be affected causing the country’s economy to decline (Chavez, 2018).
A special edition was made by the Focus Policy Review to explain to the farmers, land rights advocate, and the public, the reason behind the continuance of land grabbing for the past years. Ong (2015) claimed that land grabbing is a political issue with an economic goal. This would be the grabber’s capital in order to accumulate profits.
Contributors that were policy analysts stated that the farmers and peasants have their rights to the land. This is also applicable to the fisher folks to the traditional fishing ground and to the indigenous people to their ancestral lands. They reiterated it through the social justice constituent of the 1987 constitution (Ong, 2015).
Engineer Mangalili, the project head of the MRT 7 construction, on the other hand, believes that the farmers have no right to refuse even if they have the right of ownership on the land because the state has its power of eminent domain.
Land Reform in the Philippines.
13
Land reform is the government’s solution to unequal distribution of ownership of the land in the country (Ballesteros & Dela Cruz, 2006). This unequal distribution is the main reason why farmers are suffering. Their income and well-being strongly depend on their access to land (Llanto
& Ballesteros, 2003). They are not able to maximize the results of their hard work because the enjoyment is for the landowner alone. The mentioned unequal distribution benefited the economic and political advantaged people. Reforms to correct the inequality were already present during commonwealth period.
However, during this period, inequality in land distribution was not the main concern of the government; instead, they shifted their attention on how to gain monopoly ownership and control of land resources. It was concluded that the land redistribution program was flawed causing the original landowners to still own a notable part of the land. This is a manifestation that the landowners are able to manipulate the redistribution through their political power.
The importance of land information system was also mentioned in the study as a vital tool before any enhancement of the agrarian laws to happen. Moreover, the government cannot focus on their seeking for a continuous agrarian land tax without the presence of a systematic land information system (Ballesteros & Dela Cruz, 2006). Opposite to what the earlier people believed, redistribution has good effect on growth (Deininger et. al., 2000).
Agriculture is the most abandoned among the three main sectors in the Philippine economy, in terms of funding and growth. This is the reason why fisherfolks and farmers are the poorest individuals in the country. It takes a lot of money to own a tractor. A farmer of Hacienda Luisita, who has been working there for 9 years, needs to produce 3,000 pesos in order to rent a tractor for a hectares worth of work (Cayabyab, 2013). Providing food products for the whole country is nearly impossible if the farmers themselves are having a hard time providing for their families.
14
Indigenous peoples are vulnerable in these situations especially because they lose access to their ancestral lands. The “land grabbers” are not just rich individuals, they can also be foreigners who demand cheaper products or non-food agricultural crops (McDonnell, 2017). This kind of scenario is very evident in the Philippine setting. Several reports of indigenous peoples are being harassed, intimidated, or killed for the sake of acquiring their ancestral lands. Among these
Indigenous groups are the Lumads living in Mindanao. For years, progressive Lumad leaders, women, and children who fight against the unjust ruling of the Philippine government have been killed.
15
CHAPTER 3
FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS
The study revolved around the issue of agreement between the two parties, namely the group of the elites (Araneta et. al.) and the farmers of San Jose del Monte Bulacan. They are both claiming rights on the land that will be affected by the construction of the MRT 7. This study seeks to answer the question of how government projects cause displacement when there are land disputes between the common poor people such as the Bulacan farmers of San Jose Del Monte and rich people possibly aligned with the government, and with what effects and implications. The researcher hypothesized that government will try to get the approval of the more powerful claimant of the land. Therefore, the claims of the powerless and marginalized will be disregarded and will lead to their displacement. This is further supported by the theoretical framework, David Harvey’s theory of accumulation by dispossession, Neoliberalism, and Role of state, and the reseracher’s conceptual framework. They both claim that the actions of the government, focused on capital accumulation, results to dispossession and displacement of the public. However, it is also stated in the conceptual framework that the lack of order among the poor is a contributing factor.
In order to gather credible information, a series of comprehensive interviews was done with
Paeng, a member of KMP; Trining and Lando, farmers of San Jose Del Monte; Engineer Mangalili, the engineer assigned to the MRT 7 project. An Informed Consent Form (ICF) was sent to the organization and offices through electronic mail (e-mail) address. On the day of the interviews, the ICFs were once again explained. It was also reiterated that the interviewees can refuse to answer any question that they will be uncomfortable to do so.
Background on the MRT 7 construction
16
The MRT 7 is a project of the previous administration under the Public Private Partnership
Program. This project costs 62.7 Billion pesos proposed by the San Miguel Corporation which is chaired by Eduardo “Danding” Cojuanco, Jr. The MRT 7 will be composed of 14 stations starting from the North Avenue to San Jose del Monte, Bulacan. This seeks to lessen the commuters’ 2- hour travel time to just 30 minutes.
Issues
The opinion of the farmers of San Jose del Monte Bulacan were not consulted. There was only an information dissemination telling the farmers that a transportation system would be constructed in their area. These farmers claimed that they have the right over the land. They have been farming there for decades. They also have been paying rents and taxes in cash or in kind.
In defense, Engr. Mangalili claimed that the government is practicing its power of eminent domain. He said that the affected individuals will be given just amount as a compensation. It is also impossible that the government or the construction will be the one adjusting because they are following certain measurements and international standards.
Ideal means of transportation
Paeng wanted to emphasize that they were not against development. They were just against the fulfillment of the elite’s self-interests. Since the project had the private sector’s involvement, they expected it to be profit oriented.
According to him, the transportation system in the Philippines should possess three things: nationalized, affordable, safe, and accessible. He said that they have the data that will validate their claims that the government has the capability to provide a transport system without the private
17 sectors’ aid. When it is wholly government owned, it will be more affordable and accessible. In line with this, the government should be able to assure the commuters’ safety every time they use the transport systems.
Engr. Mangalili opposed Paeng’s claim. He said that this project is still considered as a government owned because despite the intervention of private entities, the government will take over and be in-charge after 25 years.
Effect of the MRT 7 project/construction
The farmers are about to be displaced from their lands. They are already experiencing food insufficiency and it will worsen once they are officially displaced. There is a possibility that the whole country’s production will be affected. However, it will help commuters because their usual travel time will be shorter.
Short reminders
Paeng and the two farmers also wanted to remind everyone that farmers are not terrorists.
They are industrious people who seek to provide food products not only to his/her family but also for other Filipinos. They have been accused by President Duterte as terrorists just because they are claiming the land that they deserve.
Engr. Mangalili calls for the support of everyone. According to him, we should focus on the benefit the project can give the commuters and the whole country.
18
Themes Paeng Lando Engr. Mangalili Effects of MRT 7 "‘Yung ejectment, "..dahil libo-libo kaming "Mapapabilis ng project na displacement ng mamatay sa gutom" 'to ang byahe ng ating magsasaka, pamilya commuters." tsaka maralita tapos ‘yung usapin ng food self- sufficiency, kasiguraduhan sa pagkain"
Actions towards the issue "hangga’t kakayanin, "Dedepensahan namin "We're waiting the result idedepensa’t ipaglalaban itong lupa.." of the case" ang karapatan sa lupa" Example of similar cases/ "...‘yung mag-asawang "Ang Manila Banking ay "Meron diyang lupa ang situation niligpit sa Bulacan, land may 20 thousand hectares DA na napaalis din ang dispute na may CLOA, ito na nasangla sa kanila na informal settlers" ‘yung mag- puro foreclosed na lupa.." asawang Lucila Vargas Leola, 61 atsaka ‘yung asawa niyang si Roger."
Suggested Solution "Tuloy ang Laban!" "Hindi kami aalis dito kahit "compensation" bayaran pa kami"
19
CHAPTER 4
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
The government had been partnering with the private sector for the projects it will be doing.
These partnerships largely affected the Filipino citizens since these private entities are focused on accumulating profit. In relation to the farmers of San Jose del Monte Bulacan, they will be displaced despite their claims on the land. The ownership of the elites is what the government recognizes. However, the claims of the farmers that the land they are tilling is an idle land is not enough.
The elite removed the means of production of the marginalized sectors, farmers in order for these people to be forced to work for them instead. It is their technique for them to use the marginalized in helping them to achieve their goal of capital accumulation. Land disputes together with land grabbing has given many problems to the farmer. Despite the existence of the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP), they are still experiencing injustice. They are pleading for the Genuine Agrarian Reform Bill to be passed. Moreover, it was discussed in the
Review of Related Literature (RRL) that these problems are not exclusive to the Philippines alone.
The indigenous people are also victims of these greedy phenomena.
A scenario from the past was given in the interview with Engr. Mangalili where a building was needed to demolish because a government project will be needing the location. This should not be set as an example to the farmers because it would be easier for the owner of the building to let go and accept the compensation because he or she is way more advantaged financially compared to the farmers.
The government should not totally abandon the agricultural aspect of development.
Industrialization and agricultural development can go hand in hand.
20
The interviews that were conducted validated and supported what the RRL has been providing. Moreover, the frameworks have helped the researcher to come up with the conclusion.
Manuel, strongly argues that the farmer deserves the land they are tilling for decades already. Thus, the displacement will not be able to stop them from justifying their claims. They are still full of hope that the government will eventually see what they have been clamoring about.
In light of the study, recommendations should be presented to address the contemporary issue involved and for the purpose of further studies. Monetary compensation will never be enough because it has been their source of living for years. The government should be able to provide the affected farmers with a new source of income. In addition, the future researchers should be able to consider the legal aspects of the research. It is highly recommended to collect data and get the sides of the involved rich people, such as Aranetas.
21
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ballesteros, M., & Dela Cruz, A. (2006). Land Reform and Changes in Land Ownership
Concentration: Evidence from Rice-Growing Villages in the Philippines. Retrieved
November 28, 2018, from https://dirp4.pids.gov.ph/ris/dps/pidsdps0621.pdf
Cayabyab, M. (2013, May 1). Agriculture: The decline of the poor man's sector. Gma New
Online. Retrieved November 28, 2018, from
https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/money/content/306370/agriculture-the-decline-of-
the-poor-man-s-sector/story/
Chavez, C. (2018, October 11). Farmers' group say land grabbing, conversion to blame for
undeveloped agriculture, food insecurity. Retrieved from
https://news.mb.com.ph/2018/10/11/farmers-group-say-land-grabbing-conversion-to-
blame-for-undeveloped-agriculture-food-insecurity/
Cochrane, L. (2011). Food security or food sovereignty: The case of land grabs. The
Journal of Humanitarian Assistance, 5.
Deininger, K., Olinto, P., & Maertens, M. (2000). Redistribution, investment, and human capital
accumulation: The case of Agrarian Reform in the Philippines. Retrieved December 4,
2018, from
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.201.4178&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Franco, J. C. (2008). Making Land Rights Accessible: Social Movements and Political-Legal
Innovation in the Rural Philippines. The Journal of Development Studies,44(7), 991-
1022. doi:10.1080/00220380802150763
Gironde, C., & Golay, C. (n.d.). 11 Large-Scale Land Acquisitions, Livelihoods and
Human Rights in South-East Asia. Large-Scale Land Acquisitions,273-291.
22
doi:10.1163/9789004304758_012
Inquirer Central Luzon. (2016, August 8). Bulacan city starts probe of demolitions for
MRT 7. Philippine Daily Inquirer. Retrieved from
https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/803870/bulacan-city-starts-probe-of-demolitions-for-mrt-7
Llanto, G. M., & Ballesteros, M. M. (2003). Land Issues in Poverty Reduction Strategies and the
Development Agenda: Philippines. Retrieved December 4, 2018, from
https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/127806/1/pids-dps2003-03.pdf.
Mcdonnell, S. (2017). Urban Land Grabbing by Political Elites: Exploring the Political Economy
of Land and the Challenges of Regulation. Kastom, Property and Ideology,283-304.
doi:10.22459/kpi.03.2017.09
Neef, A., & Singer, J. (2015). Development-induced displacement in Asia: Conflicts,
risks, and resilience. Development in Practice,25(5), 601-611.
doi:10.1080/09614524.2015.1052374
Ong, T. A. (2015, August 30). Understanding land grabbing, land rights in the 21st century.
Retrieved from https://www.rappler.com/move-ph/ispeak/104201-understanding-land-
grabbing-rights
Padovani, F. (2016). Development-induced displacement in India and China: A
comparative look at the burdens of growth. Lanham: Lexington Books.
Roudart, L., & Mazoyer, M. (n.d.). 1 Large-Scale Land Acquisitions: A Historical
Perspective. Large-Scale Land Acquisitions,1-29.
doi:10.1163/9789004304758_002
Robinson, W. C. (2003). Risks and rights: The causes, consequences, and challenges
of development-induced displacement. Washington, DC: The Brookings
23
Institution.
Siddiqui, K. (2014). Modernisation and displacement of rural communities in India.
Journal of social business, 4(2/3), 3-27.
Vanclay, Frank (2017) Project-induced displacement and resettlement: from
impoverishment risks to an opportunity for development? Impact Assessment and Project
Appraisal. 35:1, 3-21, DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2017.1278671
Vanclay, Frank (2017) Project-induced displacement and resettlement: from
impoverishment risks to an opportunity for development? Impact Assessment and Project
Appraisal. 35:1, 3-21, DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2017.1278671
Vandergeest, P. (2006). Developments displacements: Ecologies, economies, and
cultures at risk. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.
Wehrmann, B. (2008). Land conflicts: A practical guide to dealing with land disputes.
Eschborn: GTZ.
24
APPENDICES
Informed Consent Form
Informed Consent form for Kilusan ng Magbubukid ng Pilipinas This informed consent form is for a representative of KMP, who I am inviting to participate in my research, titled “Araneta + Government vs. San Jose Del Monte, Bulacan farmers: A Case study on the MRT 7 construction”
Lucille Ashley Z. Palestroque University of the Philippines Manila Undergraduate Thesis
This Informed Consent Form has two parts: • Information Sheet (to share information about the study with you) • Certificate of Consent (for signatures if you choose to participate)
You will be given a copy of the full Informed Consent Form
25
Part I: Information Sheet Introduction I am Lucille Ashley Z. Palestroque, a Political Science major from the University of the Philippines Manila (UPM). I am doing research on the ongoing MRT 7 construction and how it drove displacement. I am going to give you information and invite you to be part of this research. You do not have to decide today whether or not you will participate in the research. Before you decide, you can talk to anyone you feel comfortable with about the research. This consent form may contain words that you do not understand. Please ask me to stop as we go through the information and I will take time to explain. If you have questions later, you can ask them of me or of my thesis adviser, Prof. Josefina G. Tayag.
Purpose of the Research The MRT 7 construction pushed through amid land dispute. I want to gather sufficient information in order for me to formulate possible ways to prevent this from sustaining. I want to learn from you about the real story behind the displacement and the construction itself. This may include the interaction between the farmers and the government. I would also want to know the organization’s plan regarding the matter. Furthermore, it would be of help to know more about the programs the organization has implemented or will implement in connection with land disputes.
Type of Research Intervention This research will involve your participation in an hour-and-a-half interview.
Participant Selection You are being invited to take part in this research because we feel that your experience as a member of KMP can contribute much to our understanding and knowledge of displacement of farmers because of land disputes.
Voluntary Participation The choice that you make will has no bearing on your job at the KMP or on any work-related evaluations or reports. You may change your mind later and stop participating even if you agreed earlier.
Procedures I am asking for your help in learning more about the history of displacement because of land disputes in the Philippines. As such, I am requesting for your participation in my thesis. If you accept, you will be asked to sit down for an hour-and-a-half interview, preferably at the KMP National Office or anywhere you find convenient. If you feel safer bringing along a friend or a co-worker with you, that can be arranged also. Rest assured that you are not forced to answer
26 questions you deem inappropriate or uncomfortable. The information will be tape-recorded, kept properly at my work computer and will be classified as confidential. No one but myself will be able to access these informations. The recording will be destroyed after 2 weeks.
Duration The research only requires one session of an hour-and-a-half interview.
Risks There are no physical risks involved in this risk, however you may share some personal or confidential information accidentally, or that you may feel uncomfortable answering some of my questions. However, we do not wish for this to happen. You do not have to answer any question or take part in the interview if you feel the question(s) are uncomfortable answering.
Benefits There are no direct benefits to you, but it is very likely that your participation will help us find a solution to the problems attributed to farming, one that will not be against the farmers.
Reimbursements You will not be provided any monetary incentive to take part in the research. However, merienda will be provided should the interview overlap with your break time.
Confidentiality The research being done in the agency may draw attention and if you participate you may be asked questions by other people in the agency. I will not be sharing information about you to anyone. The information that I collect from this research project will be kept private. Any information about you will have a number on it instead of your name. Only the researcher will know what your number is and I will lock that information up with a password and a pin. It will not be shared with or given to anyone except my thesis adviser, Prof. Josefina G. Tayag.
Sharing the Results The knowledge that we get from this research will be shared with you and your agency before it is made widely available to the public. You will receive a summary of the results. There will also be a small meeting in the community and these will be announced. Following the meeting, I will publish the results so that other interested people may learn from the research.
Right to Refuse or Withdraw You do not have to take part in this research if you do not wish to do so, and choosing to participate will not affect your job or job-related evaluations in any way. You may stop participating in the interview at any time that you wish without your job being affected. I will give you an opportunity at the end of the interview to review your remarks, and you can ask to
27 modify or remove portions of those, if you do not agree with my notes or if I did not understand you correctly.
Who to Contact If you have any questions, you can ask them now or later. If you wish to ask questions later, you may contact any of the following me by sending an SMS to 09655616733 or an e-mail to [email protected]. This proposal has been reviewed and approved by Research Ethics Board (REB) which is a committee whose task it is to make sure that research participants are protected from harm. If you wish to find about more about the REB, contact Prof. Josefina G. Tayag.
28
Part II. Certificate of Consent I have read the foregoing information, or it has been read to me. I have had the opportunity to ask questions about it and any questions I have been asked have been answered to my satisfaction. I consent voluntarily to be a participant in this study
Print Name of Participant______Signature of Participant ______Date ______Day/month/year
Statement by the researcher/person taking consent I have accurately read out the information sheet to the potential participant, and to the best of my ability made sure that the participant understands that the following will be done: 1. The interview will be conducted at a convenient time and place for the interviewee. 2. The information will only be accessible by myself. 3. The information will be kept confidential and safe by a password and a pin. 4. The results of the research will be shared with the participant prior to being published.
I confirm that the participant was given an opportunity to ask questions about the study, and all the questions asked by the participant have been answered correctly and to the best of my ability. I confirm that the individual has not been coerced into giving consent, and the consent has been given freely and voluntarily. A copy of this ICF has been provided to the participant.
Print Name of Researcher/person taking the consent______Signature of Researcher /person taking the consent______Date ______Day/month/year
29
Interview Transcription
Engineer Mangalili
Engineer: Nagkaroon ito ng approval ng NEDA in 2008. At ang original proponent (San miguel Corporation). Dun sa submitted proposal nakalagay dun ‘yung alignment, and happens to be the end portion is San Jose Del Monte Bulacan, to provide alternative transportation system and they believe that this is the most potential na magkaroon ditto ng alternative transpo. Aside from MRT 7, meron pang complimentary ditto na magkakaroon ng IMA. The highway from SJDM ililink sya sa NLEX which is about 22 kms. The alignment, the railways is 22 kms, the highway is 22km as well. the highway is from nlex to SJDM and will pass thru the municipalities of bulacan. Initial onset talagang identified ang SJDM as the best location of the depot at tska masilbihan ‘yung mga tao roon. To expand the development outside of metropolis. Ako: As far as I know po ‘yung area na macocover ng construction is sino po ang nag mamayari? Engineer: Where is the alignment first? The alignment is almost within the right of way of DPWH. The government entered into a memorandum of agreement with DPWH to utilize the road particularly to commonwealth ave. towards the area of SJM. Jan mga lot owners are government or private individuals. It doesn’t matter who the owners are because this is the most viable alignment as identified. Hindi dapat tignan kung sino ba ang may ari otherwise you cannot implement any project kasi ang rail, may sinusunod na international standards. Ako: Since wala po kayong care kung sino ang owners, sino po ang nabigyan ng compensation? Engineer: What are the entitlement of the affected land owners? Meron tayong recently republic act 10752. Nakasaad don kung what are the compensation that can be received by the affected lot owners. Ako: Dito po sa sinasabi nating compensation, covered po ba ditto ang SJDM Farmers? Engineer: Yes, Covered. The area of SJDM is private owned. The depot area is owned by (FSAM*). The terrain is deep. Who would be the benefactor? The people, not few individuals. The power of imminent domain. If the government needs property it will exercise it’s power thru the imminent domain. If they refuse, pero nakalagay sa batas sa batas well compensated. Ako: Nainterview ko nadin po ang farmers. Nasabi po nila na long time ago hindi nabuwisan. Na wave ‘yung ownership ng minention nilang owner so sila ang nag occupy pero wala silang title na maproprovide. Paano po sila mabibigyan ng compensation kahit wala silang mapakitang title? Engineer: The lot owner is entitled for compensation. Pero dahil may nag s-squat. Just like an informal settler. For example, dito sa north ave may mga squatter. The property belongs to the department of agriculture. Bakit kapag inalis ‘yung squatter babayaran mo? (kasi po may mawawala sa kanila). Ganun din ‘yung farmer. Ano ‘yung benefit ng farmer na hindi benefit ng tiller? He is entitled for compensation same as thru with the farmers. Ako: Hindi po tayo nag babase sa ownership pero nag be base tayo sa mawawala sa kanila. Engineer: LINA LAW about squatting. Nung araw meron tayong CARP. If you are a tiller for quite some time you will later on be entitled for ownership via payment. Bibigyan ka ng
30 pagkakataon para ma own mo sya pero babayaran mo padin. Kung walang payment, otherwise may s squat na lahat. Sinasabi nila na may mga sagingan sila don, kamotehan. Yun ‘yung ina assess. Kaya nga kami nag hihire ng independent party appraiser to determine the extent of compensation which is subject to validation, assessment and verification. Ako: Dun po sa point to point MRT project. Sa SJDM lang po ba nag kakaroon ng land dispute issue? Engineer: Marami. If you’ve gone thru the alignment makikita mo dun sa quezon, quirino avenue. May mga tinamaang building. ‘yung mga nag invest na tao na nag establish ng building then all of a sudden I ka-cut ‘yung building mo eh sila mga tiller lang na nang aagaw ng lupa, ang ibig ko sabihin ang ineexercise ng government is ‘yung makuha ‘yung property at magamit sa mas kapipakinabang na bagay para ang makinabang nito ay maraming tao. Ako: Sinasabi po nila na hindi po sila against sa development per se pero parang better po sana if government owned entirely. Is it really possible? Engineer: This is really government undertaking. Under the concession agreement entered by the government with SMCorp. The obligation to provide the right of way is the government. So the government is responsible for the acquisition of the land. ODA Project extended by outside countries, the obligation of the government is “RIGHT OF WAY”. Ipo-provide muna ‘yung right of way bago I finance. In this case, government ang bibili ng lupa at mag rerelocate ng affected utilities. So its government owned. Ako: Cinoconnect po sya as private-public partnership. Engineer: Ano ba ‘yung coverage ng PPP? ‘yung proponent is the constructor, financer and operator for the next 25 years. Meaning to say, all properties would go back to the government after 25 years. Ano ang role ng govberment? Bumili ng lupa mag relocate ng affected utilities. Kung mapapansin mo it runs along commonwealth which happens to be government owned. Nag karoon ng sila lang ang financer sila lang ang operator for the next 25 years and the rest will be taken care of the government after 25 years. Ako: Familiar po ba kayo sa agrarian case? Ciniclaim nila na distributed na sya before thru CARP and sinasabi na ‘yung Araneta ay parang hindi sila covered. Engineer: The government via court will establish the rightful ownership. It’s the court who will tell them kung sino ang may ari. Not us. Ako: Wala pang decision ‘yung agrarian case. Bakit nag sisimula na ‘yung project? Engineer: simula kami sa unaffected, wala kaming permit to enter sa iba. Ano ba ang role ng court? Sila ang magbibigay ng writ of possession na nag sisilbi ng permit to enter para makapag start kami. With all those contested areas no development yet has been done. Ako: Will it be possible na hindi sa party nyo sasangayon ‘yung decision na mag-eend ‘yung project. Engineer: For example, this is the affected area. Ang court mag iidentify sino ang may ari, paano babayaran at magkano ang babayaran, yun lang e establish nya Ako: Strong ‘yung stand ng farmers na hindi sila aalis ditto. Engineer: Sa palagay mo may magagawa ba ‘yung informal settlers? It’s the same. Compensation lang ‘yung way. For example ikaw ‘yung may-ari ng lupa, may nag tanim. Nawalan kana ng privilege. If you are the owner babayaran ka sa ownership mo. If you are the tiller babayaran ka sa improvement mo. Ako: Ano po ‘yung pinaka solution sa issue na ito?
31
Engineer: Compensation as a whole ang solution. Everything can be compensated. Sabi ko nga sayo isang good example, ISF, wala silang magagawa lilipat tlga sila. Ako: ‘yung minimention nyo pong informal settlers sa North Ave. , ano nga po ba reason kung bakit sila dinidisplace? Engineer: Kasi mag wa-widen ng kalsada. Ako: Sakop nap o ba un ng DPWH? Engineer: Ang may ari ng lupa ay D.A, kasi kakainin naming ‘yung ilang lane dun so we have to replicate the road otherwise walang dadaanan ‘yung tao. Since mag wi widen ng daan at matatamaan ang informal settlers, we have to relocate them through the assistance of (20:06). Ako: May idea po ba kayo kung san irerelocate ang farmers? Engineer: Walang nakatira dun sa Depot Area. I’ve gone through the place. Walang nakatira dahil sa terrain. Ako: May nakapag sabi sakin na papaalisin daw sila kahit d sila directly affected kasi unpleasant daw ‘yung sight. Engineer: Wala namang ganon. Kung sa area may bahay babayaran yan sila through the assessment by the appraiser. Unless tatayuan nila ngayon. Pero at the time of the original survey walang naka tira. Ako: So in that case walang compensation na mabibigay kung ngayon palang sila mag tatayo? Engineer: Yan na ay subject for court order. Korte na mag didisisyon kasi nag karoon ng inventory. Originally nga agricultural ‘yung area eh so paano ka nagkaroon ng bahay sa loob. If you are telling us na tinitill mo yan, eh wala ka dapat bahay. At tsaka nakita mo ba ‘yung terrain? Kung Makita mo nga napaka lalim. Kung umulan nga jan sapul kana. Tignan mo nalang sa practical side, sino mag babahay jan? pag umulan jan dagusdusan na ‘yung tubig. Not unless, gusto mo lang mag take advantage sa government. Eh opportunista ka kapag ganun. Ako: Covered din po ng research ko ang previous situation na same ang issue. Tanong ko lang po kung covered nyo po ba ang itatayong LRT line 1 Extension sa Cavite? Engineer: Meron don pero hindi ko hawak although hinawakan ko before yan. Ang extension na yan ay up to Zapote. Madadaanan ang Las Pinas area.
Ako: Meron po ba kayong goal na date or inaantay nyo po talaga ‘yung decision ng court para matapos tong project na to? Engineer: When the project was approved meron yang timeline. When the project will start and when will it be completed. But along the way we had troubles, among those is ‘yung ownership. So somehow nadelay kami. Ang target nga nito is matapos sana ng 2020. In fact, right now all the trains are already manufactured and available. Ako: Hangang san na po ‘yung construction ngayon? Engineer: Alam mo ‘yung pangarap village? Dun kami nag stop kasi hindi kami maka access pa puntang depot. Para maka abot kami sa Depot we have to pass through properties of the Marcoses. Meaning to say ‘yung affected areas are station 13, station 14 and the depot. Ako: May naririnig po ako sa against sa project na hindi pa nga daw ayos ang MRT Line 3 tapos sisingitan ng MRT Line 7. Engineer: Ano pinaka malaking problema ng gobyerno ngayon sa metro manila? Traffic hindi ba. Kung ikaw ang gobyerno, ano ang gagawin mo? Somehow you have to make some solutions to lessen the traffic. The reason why ang mga nag crack up ngayon na mga project is
32 more on the rail systems. Tama? Meron tayong mga ginagawang subway, meron tayong MRT 7, may diversion tayo na pa puntang North sub-commuter rail way na kung saan mag sisimula sa Tutuban going to Malolos, Bulacan. So development is trying to come up with several development to expand to the outskirts. Hindi naman ibig sabihin na dahil may problema ang MRT 3 eh the development would stop. Right? So dapat there should be a compliment to MRT 3 and what would that be? MRT 7. Hindi ibig sabihin na may problema ang isa mag s stop ang development. Edi naging stagnant ka. Lalo mong pinapalaki ang problema na sa halip na kino control mo eh pinapalaki mo. Ako: Satingin nyo po magiging just ang fare pag natapos ang project? Engineer: Yes. Meron mga public consulation yan. Ako: Gaano po kaya kalaki ‘yung matitipid na oras pag nag start na ang operation? Engineer: If we will stick with the original alignment, 68 mins look time. About 22 kms the look time is 68mins. So meaning to say 34mins. May tinatawag silang (29:24 = Head way?) Anong oras ang dating kada station? 2 -2.5 mins. This is a solution to the traffic congestion and I hope people will help us to realize because at the end of the tunnel there is the land? (29:45). Ako: Magkano po kaya from Noth Ave. to end point? Engineer: Hindi ko alam eh kasi aalamin pa yan but definitely magiging fair yan. Ako: Hindi ba po namention nyo nag stop po kayo sa may Pangarap, so ‘yung construction tuloy tuloy lang po ba simula doon? Engineer: Kung makikita mo ‘yung mrt 7, It’s a combination of a Train (elevated and depressed) what do we mean by depressed? Eto ‘yung mga underground. Ano ‘yung mga underground areas? ‘yung sa may Quezon Memorial Circle, underground yan. Tapos meron din tayo sa University Ave. sa UP. Kung mapapansin mo unti- unting umaangat yan kagaya doon sa may Tandang Sora. Kaya hindi mo lang sya mapansing elevated dahil sa contour ng highway.
Trining and Lando
A: Ano po ang alam niyong kwento sa likod ng pagtatayo ng MRT 7?
F: Una, EEI company, nagsukat sa right namin. ‘Yung history diyan, no’ng si Ka Rafael Mariano pa ang nakaupo, wala silang land conversion. Nung pangalawa, dialogue namin sa DAR, nakaalis na si Ka Mariano, ang sabi nila hindi na kailangan ng land conversion dahil project ng gobyerno. Ngayon, kami namang mga magsasaka, nakipagdayalogo kami sa barangay, sa Congress, kay Ariel Casilao, doon kami nag dialogue na kung ang balak nila sa right kung nasukat na nila pero bago sila mag offer ng bayaran tapos na dapat nila masukat. Kami naman, ayaw naming mag pabayad dahil madami nang kalokohan ngayon sa bayaran kagaya doon sa sakahan namin sa kabila. Pagkatapos mabayaran ng 2 million, kinuha din ung pera kasi benta daw sa shabu ung pera na yon sabi nila. Isa pang dahilan kung bakit ayaw naming mag pabayad ay kapag pumirma ako ng kasunduan na magpapabayad at hindi nila ipinasok sa bangko, eh paano nalang kaming mga magsasaka. Yaan ang napag usapan naming ni Ariel Casilao. May narinig akong kwento na meron daw retiradong pulis na dapat ay makaka tanggap ng 400k pero hindi nya ito natanggap kasi wala daw laman ang bangko nya. Paano nalang ako, mas lalo na akong walang magawa. Binanggit naman nila ang San Miguel, Sabi ko ang San Miguel si Danding Cojuangco ang mang-ari. Naka kuha siya ng share sa coco levy fund ayon sa pagsuri sa Kilusang Magbubukid ng 22 billion sa 85 billion noong panahon ni Marcos. Naka
33 corrupt na nga siya sa magsasaka ng niyog, tapos papalayasin nya pa kami at isa pa, alam ko na si Danding ang author sa pagpapatay kay Aquino. Doon kami nag tapos sa aming kwento. Ang lupa ditto sa San Jose Del Monte ay dating pastulan, 700 hectares. Ang kategorya ng pastulan ay hindi kaylangang buwisan ang lupa. Halimbawa sabihin ni Araneta na mag pastol kami ng Baka na Brahman, ibig sabihin isang Brahman sa isang hectarya ng lupa. Pag native na baka, dalawang baka sa isang hectarya. Sa kasaysayan, hinarass kami ng security. Kinasuhan kami ng anti-squating, na-forward nila sa Malolos prosecutor. Pinagaralan ng prosecutor ang lupa kung eto ba ay dapat para sa 35 magsasaka.Noong hinarap naming yan doon. Naipalabas na walang batas ang gobyerno laban sa squatting sa lupang sakahan. Doon pumuntos ang magsasaka at napawalang saysay ang kaso. Kaya hangang ngayon daladala naming ang katibayan na hindi kami aalis sa lupa dahil abandonado ang lupa. Noong 1972 pa naming nakuha ang 5 titulo na nasangla sa Manila Banking na umabot sa 311 hectares. Umpisa ng 1972 na nasangla, hindi nabuwisan hangang ngayon etong lupang tinirahan naming ngayon.
A: Sino po dapat ang magbubuwis? F: Syempre Puyat-Araneta dapat ang mag bubuwis. Ibig sabihin matagal nang abandoned ang lupa. Ibig sabihin idle land. Kaya sinabi naming sa DAR Office na hindi kami aalis sa lupa at sabi naming, kayong mga abogado nililito kaming mga magsasaka. Kasi ung abogado namin, sinabi na hindi daw nya pwedeng igiit kasi kukuhanan daw sya ng lisensya. Narinig mismo naming un sa kanya. Kaya kaming mga magsasaka, sabi namin dahil kami ang nag saka ng lupa kami din dapat ang maging abogado nito. (7:00-7:50). Kaya ngayon, kung kanila ang lupa mag hati kami, eh dahil abandunado ang lupa anong paghahatian natin? Si mayor, sabi naming hindi kami aalis sa lupa kasi abandonado ang lupa. Ang mayor ditto sa San Jose Del Monte, kung hindi sana taktakan ng milyon milyon ang bunganga mag sasalita yan. Basta sabi naming sa DAR, mamatay man o mabuhay, hindi kami aalis sa lupa. Hindi ako takot sa libo libong bala pero takot ako sa libo libong mamamatay sa gutom. Yon ang prinsipyo ko. Naka kuha ang kilusang magbubukid ng kwento na ang usapan daw sa lupa ay 1200 pesos per square meter. Ngayon, ang gusto daw ng manila banking ay 2500 per square meter. Ngayon mag bubuldoze pa, which is mahal din ang bayad. Ngayon ang balita ko, may pulis ditto na anak ng nasa engineering office ng San Jose Del Monte. Sabi ko sa kanya na kaya naming cinoveran ang MRT line 7 kasi kaming magsasaka eh mamamatay sa gutom. Hindi naman kami usapin sa bayaran. Kaya sabi nya, doon nalang daw kami sa motorpool wala naman daw kaso para sa magsasaka kasi libong hectarya na pagmamay ari padin ng Puyat. Pero ditto may sabit sya, kagaya ng sabi ni Ariel Casilao, pa gang magsasaka eh masasagasaan, mag dedemanda sila sa congress. Pero sa kalagayan, mataas ang puntos namin sa usapin. Pero sa DAR, para bang napabayaan na kami na parang ang lupa eh para na sa MRT 7 eh dedepensahan namin itong lupa dahil libo libo kaming mamamatay sa gutom. Kaya sabi ko sa kanila, kung mamamatay din kami sa lilipatan eh mas mainam pang dito nalang kami sa lupa namin mamatay.
A: Bago pa po nagkaroon ng plano para sa MRT Line 7. Meron nang problema o kaguluhan sa lupang ito. Linawin ko lang po kung sino talaga ang may ari ng lupang ito? F: Puyat ang may ari. Inaangkin ni Puyat.
A: Balak na po talaga kayo paalisin noon pa man? F: Matagal na. Nung kinasuhan kami ng anti squatting, isa na yon. Kaya lang natalo sila sa kaso at nakuha namin ang 5 titulo nung 1972 na hindi nabuwisan ang lupa. Ibig sabihin abandonado ang lupa o idle land.
A: Noong oras na malaman ninyo na itatayo ang MRT Line 7. Ano po ung una nyong naging update?
34
F: Hinarangan na agad namin sila kaya ang last option nila ay bayaran kami. Pero hindi kami nag pa bayad. Mismong lupa ko ang sinukat kasi meron ang lupa na 20 hectares na naipasa ko na sa mga anak ko. Target din ang lupa ko ng MRT. Depot daw ang ilalagay sa dati kong pwesto. Pero ewan ko, nag ka ligaw ligaw na kasi sila kasi nag ka kontrobersya ang lupa. Ngayon ang balak, doon nalang daw ilalagay ang depot sa motorpool area. Pero “daw” pa lang yan kumbaga pwede pang mabago ang direksyon nila.
A: Ano po ang pinag tapusan ng usapan since hinirangan niyo po sila at ayaw niyo pong mag pabayad? F: Since ang lupa ay idle land at matagalan ng nabawisan at kami ay nakapag tanim na kaya sinabi ko sa kanila, kung pumasok kami sa lupa na totoo pero kung eto ay idle land edi amin ito.
A:Kapag naka tayo na po ang MRT 7, ano pong mangyayari sa inyo? F: Kami nag hihintay lang kasi may dalawang kwento kaming naririnig. Una, hindi daw itutuloy kasi sabi ng NEDA hindi daw kaya ng budget. Ang kaya nalang daw sa budget ay sa kalsada na lang. Ano paba bu-buldozin nilang kalsada, nasa pangarap na ung huli nilang ginawa. Nakikita namin na ang lupa eh pabor para sa amin pero kung pipilitin parin nila, hindi kami aatras jan ang tanong nalang ay kung saan kami ilalagay na may makakain kami. Ang San Jose Del Monte alam naman natin na maraming tao pero walang kabuhayan. Lahat nga ng mga driver doon sa electrical eh halos taga San Jose Del Monte pero nag tratrabaho sa malayo. Kahit i- survey niyo pa ang San Jose Del Monte at malaman ninyo na walang trabaho dito, nasa maynila padin lahat kaya ayaw namin umalis. Sabi saamin dati ng mayor na ilalagay kami sa doon sa Pabahay 2000 na napaka liit. Sabi namin sa kanya na kung doon mamamatay kami at dito mamamatay din, bakit pa kami lilipat at maghihirap kung parehas lang din naman mamamatay.
A: Maliban dito, may nababalitaan ba kayo na kaso na parang kagaya sa inyo na magsasaka sa abandonadong lupa na pinapaalis? F: Binibisita na kami ng Bangko Central. Alam ko na kayo ang kinukuhaan ng pera ng Manila Banking. Sa aming pagkaka alam, ang Manila Banking ay may 20 thousand hectares na nasangla sa kanila na puro foreclosed na lupa. Ang pera sa gobyerno ay nakuha na nila, halimbawa pinayaman na ni araneta. Sabihin natin na araneta center yan ung mga palaruan. Kung pera yan na galing dito eh napakinabangan na nila ang pera ng gobyerno, lupa ng gobyerno pero sinangla pa nila at hindi binuwisan. Kaya kami ang naka diskubre sa mayor. Minamatahan namin ang.. Dapat si DAR, eh hindi binuwisan. Eh paano na kami, lumayas ba kami eh mataas ang puntos namin sa usapin? Walang iskwater sa lupang sakahan kaya doon ang insulto sa kanila, kaya hindi kami aalis. Kung mamatay ang isa,dalawa, o tatlo dito, kung barilin man eh andami padin maiiwan, hindi ba?
A: Nakapag saliksik ako tungkol sa MRT 7. Isang argumento eh ang lupa ay naipamigay na under ng CARP. May katotohanan po ba yon? F: Ang CARP ay mapag linlang. Ako iba ang prinsipyo ko. Kung abandonado ang lupa, sino ang magkakahati? At amin ito kasi kami ang nag tanim eh. Hindi naman ito illegal, ngayon lang kung sabihin ng San Jose kung kaya ba namin magpakain ng isang libong tao kada isang araw? Pwede, kahit mag bigay pa kami ng tatlong saging kada araw eh kaya namin. Milyon milyon ang saging dito. Dito nga nabubuhay ang magnanakaw ng saging dito eh.
A: Kung kayo pa ay tatanungin, ano po tingin ninyo ang dapat na solusyon sa mga ganitong problema?
A: Excemption order, saan po ito?
35
F: Ibig sabihin, walang puwang ito na gawing sakahan. Parang pabor parin sa mga dayuhan. Kung anong gusto nila eh matutupad. Ang mga magsasaka ay walang magagawa sa agriculture. Itong gobyerno natin laging lang pabor sa dayuhang kapitalista. Lagi nalang nilang gusto na ibenta tayo. Sabi ko “walang aalis sa lupa, patay man o buhay!”. Angkan lang namin dito, libo na. Sabi ko nga ako wala akong takot kung mamatay. Hindi ako takot sa libo libong bala pero takot ako sa libo libong mamamatay sa gutom. Kaya ang prinsipyo namin dito ay huwag umalis sa lupa.
A: ano po ang masasabi nyo sa mga magsasaka na tinanggap nalang ung pera kasi hinaharass na sila? F: Ako kasi hindi nila kayang takutin kasi handa na akong mamatay. Paano nila ako tatakutin? Kada isang beses na makikipag usap ako, handa akong mamatay.
A: So nag kakaroon din po ba kayo ng mga kaibigang sundalo? F: Maraming sundalo si Araneta na naturuan ko noon sa Panghihilot. Ito ngang kategorya ko eh lumalaganap na nga ito sa buong unibersidad, UP Manila, UP Diliman. Ang dahilan, eh may alam tayo kung paano ang depensa. Dalawa sa pinaka mataas sa Philippine Army diyan ngayon sinabihan ko na tuturuan ko kayo para matuto din kayo. Ung mga sundalo, kaibigan natin yan eh. Hindi naman yan kalaban. Matagal na akong kontrobersyal sa sundalo, noon pang naging negosyante ako ng hayop, kalabaw, may kargador at bangka akong galing Lucena. Dahil nung pinahakot nila saakin ung sampung kalabaw ninakaw ko lang yun. Eh hindi ko hinakot,dahil iba prinsipyo ko. Kahit saan ko ilagay, kung mamatay man ako o mabuhay eh wala ako sa paraang panloloko. Itataya ko ang buhay ko para sa kinabukasan ng kapwa nating tao. Ung punto na patay man o buhay, nahihirapan sila kasi handa naman akong mamatay. Hindi ako matatakot. Kaya sabi ko sa mga sundalo, itlog pako sa tatay ko mandirigma na ako.
A: May naiisip ba kayong paraan na sana nagawa ninyo noon para maiwasan itong ganitong problema sa pagmamay-ari sa lupa? F: Kung sa usapin, sa punto namin eh mataas ang kategorya namin. Una abandonado ang lupa, Pangalawa walang skwater
A: Wala po bang paraan na parang magkaka pruweba na kayo talaga ang may ari ng lupa? F: Nandito na kami eh, nakatanim na kami. Pwede na kami mag pakain sa libong tao araw araw. Makaka guarantiya kami na libong tao lang ang siguradong mapapakain namin. Milyon milyon pang saging ang makukuha namin para sa libong tao lang ah. Kung magpalabas kami ng saging eh 30 o 40 thousand. Eh hindi naba natin mapakain ang buong kamaynilaan?
A: Paano po kami makakatulong na mga simpleng estudyante? F: Malaki matutulong ninyo kasi kaya nyo magsulat tungkol saamin. Kagaya saamin, kahit pinahirapan kami, kahit may mga tambak na sundalo eh hindi namin yan inaantala. Ang problema lang jan, kung may mamatay jan saamin, eh hindi naman namin inaantala na matakot kami. Lalong mas gaganda ang kasaysayan. Kung sundalo man ang may gawa non, ang tanong, bakit tayo matatakot? Eh maganda ngang mamatay para wala ng problema eh. Pero may mga usapin na ganon. Okay lang.
36
Paeng
Ako: Base po sa pagsasaliksik ko, ang nangyari ay ‘yung lupa po sa San Jose del Monte Bulacan ay parang kine-claim ng mga Araneta po tapos base po sa nabasa ko, may on-going pa pong agrarian case do’n sa lupangn’yon. So ano nga po ba talaga ang kwento sa likod ng pagpapatayo ng MRT 7?
Interviewee: Diretso sa punto. Ang MRT 7 project ay Metro Rail Transit LRT 7, 22.8 kilometers rail system with 14 stations. Ang halaga nito, almost 1.44 Billion dollars, 62.7 Billion pesos na proposed by the universal LRT Corporation Consortium of San Miguel Corporation chaired by,
ECJ-Eduardo Cojuanco, Jr. Pero ito ay part ng project sa nakaraan na administration na PPP. Ito
‘yung public private partnership na ang main magpopondo ang katuwang ay ang JICA. JICA projects and the MRT7. So may mga iba’t ibang hatian ‘yan. Halimbawa ‘yan ‘yung pinautang ng
JICA. So all in all, 1.5 billion ‘yoong MRT 7. Tapos syempre ‘yan ‘yung mga proponents. Eduardo
Cojunaco Jr, at least pampito siya pero sa huling inilabas ng Golbalizing corporate philippines noong nakaraang araw, (December 3) kasama siya sa top corporation parang itong San Miguel, number 6 tapos David Consunji with the networth of 3.9 Billion dollars ito ‘yung may mga plantations sa mindanao atsaka mining napakapeligroso sa magsasaka at agriworkers. Gregorio
“Gregory” Araneta. Ito ‘yung tinatanong mo no? Scion of the araneta clan, one of biggest and most influential landlord families in the country. Lalo pa nung panahon ni Marcos Hindi kaila sa atin na siya ay manugang. Ang city of San Jose Del Monte is composed of 59 barangays. Sa 59 barangays, anim na lang ‘yung mayroong sakahan. Isipin mo ‘yan. 6 out of 59, at mamaya pag-uusapan natin ano implication nung mga proyekto na ‘yan sa mga magsasaka. Food self- sufficiency dahil ang may mga bukirin na lang diyan ‘yung kasing MRT, mula rito, hanggang San Jose Del Monte, barangay tungkong mangga ‘yung barangay tungkong mangga, isa ‘yan sa source ng pagkain at
37 ng agricultural product ng iba’t ibang palengke ‘yan ‘yung magkakatabing barangay ‘yung anim na ‘yan, halos ito ‘yung tungkong mangga, hindi accordingly sa pagkakasunod sunod ha pero
‘yung pulutong na ‘yan, ay tungkong mangga, meron diyang San Isidro, Paradise, Kaybanban atsaka dalawa pa ‘yon ‘yung bugkos noong mga agricultural land partikular sa San isidro during the time of former Governor Nasing Santiago ang nagkaaward ng most outstanding coffee farmer ay taga barangay San Isidro. Galing siya ng Silang, Cavite. Kaya may karanasan siya as coffee farmer, ‘yung kapeng barako. Nalipat sila diyan, kaya lang ‘yung lupa naman nila roon, contested ng nga Robes. Ang gusto kong puntuhin, dapat sana pangalagaan ng gobyerno ‘yung natitirang 6 barangays out of 59 para sa first, pagkain ng mga taga-San Jose Del Monte dahil meron diyang tanim na iba-iba palay, mais, kamote, saging. Ang totoo niyan, nung panahon bago simulan ang proyekto, ay nagkaroon ng series of dialogue and petition ang Alyansa ng magbubukid ng Bulacan kasama ‘yung local chapter, tio ‘yung SASAMAG sa tungkong mangga, san isidro, at ‘yung iba pang mga barangay organization do’n sa nabanggit kong mga baryo kay former city mayor bago pa si mayor robes ngayon, atsaka congressman si San Pedro. Mayor Rey? San Pedro...Reynaldo?
At dala namin ‘yung mga produkto. Kaya itong proyekto na ‘to ay ang makikinabang ay ‘yung mga big comprador. ‘Yung mga oligarch. Pero gusto naming banggitin na ang KMP ay hindi tutol sa pag-unlad. Hindi kami tutol sa development. Kaya lang, una, dapat development for the filipino people, development para sa farmers, at gusto naming linawin na hindi kami anti-development. At katunayan, ang nais namin ay ang means of transportation sa Pilipinas at kasama na ‘yang Quezon
City to San Jose Del Monte, meron na dapat na principle at batayan kaugnay sa pagdevelop ng mga transport. First, ito ay nationalized. Nationalized ‘yung means of transportation sa Pilipinas.
Second, dapat ito ay accesible, affordable at tsaka safety. ‘Yung apat na ‘yan. Nationalized, ibig sabihin dapat government owned. Tapos ‘yung affordable, safety atsaka accesible. Ligtas. ‘Yan
38 dapat ‘yung mahalagang usapin. Ngayon, ‘pag tiningnan natin dito dahil ito ay under ng PPP,
Public Private Partnership, at ngayon sa ilalim ni president Duterte ay BBB, build build build, na ang makikinabang sa malalaking proyekto ay mga big comprador atsaka mga panginoong may lupa. … kongkreto.. Eduardo Cojuanco Jr. is one of the biggest comprador sa buong bansa. Kaya asahan natin na katulad na MRT 3 atsaka ‘yung mga LRT 1 and 2 na sa ngayon ay privatized, tingin namin ay hindi ito dapat gan’on kasi hindi lang LRT, hindi lang MRT, pati na ‘yung mga expressway natin like NLEX, SCTEX, owned by MVP ‘di ba, Manny V Pangilinan. Kaya tingnan mo naman kung ga’no kataas, kung ga’no kamahal. Kaya ‘yon ‘yung gusto naming linawin. Kaya tinutulan ng mga magsasaka, partikular ng KMP, at ng iba’t ibang organisasyon at indibidwal, diyan sa kahabaan ng Commonwealth along Caloocan, atsaka parte ng Bulacan, kasi ‘yan ‘yung tatamaan mula rito sa North, dito close to Trinoma and SM North hanggang doon ‘yan sa San Jose
Del Monte, partikular sa tungkong mangga. ‘Yon ‘yung una. Ngayon, doon sa ilang gabay mo kung nagkaroon ba ng konsultasyon. Nalaman na lang namin, nalaman na lang ng mga residente ang tungkol sa project.
A: Pa’no po? Dinig dinig na lang po gan’on?
I: Nadinig, nalaman, at no’ng nakipagdialogue, kinonfirm. Pero kahit sa panahon ni city mayo San
Pedro, wala siyang maipakita na blue print. Ang sinasabi niya ay ito ay national plan and national project so walang blue print. Kaya walang naganap na public consultation para tanungin. Kung mayroon man, information na may ganitong gagawin na project. Magakiba ‘yon.
A: Pero ‘yung konsultasyon, wala po?
I: Oo. ‘yung dapat ay public consultation para hilingin at alamin ano ba ang sentiment at panawagan ng mga taga baryo, sa pag-alam namin, wala at ilang serye ng dialogue na nakasama
39
‘ko kay mayor atsaka sa sanguniang panglungsod, at inihapag namin. Pag-aaralan, titingnan.
Kaakibat niyan ay matindi ‘yung militarization. ‘Di ko pala nabanggit na ‘yung sa city of San Jose
Del Monte, may mga parsela diyan ng lupa na inari at tingin namin connection, isa ‘yung araneta na pinag-uusapan natin kanina. Gregorio “greggy” araneta na manugang ng former dictator ferdinand marcos. Meron din diyan na bahagi ‘yung sa mga Puyat, ito ‘yung sa Bangko, Manila
Banking Corporation, pagkatanda ko, Meron din diyang bahaging inaangkin ang mga Singson.
Ano ‘yan eh, Puyat, Araneta, Singson, atsaka Villar. Katunayan ay dinala ko rito ‘yung kopya na
‘yung mag-asawang niligpit sa Bulacan, land dispute na may CLOA, ito ‘yung mag-asawang
Lucila Vargas Leola, 61 atsaka ‘yung asawa niyang si Roger. Pinaslang sila noong Spetember
2015. ‘Yung lupa nila inaangkin nila Chavit Singson sa Ilocos. Ang pagkatanda ko around 13 hectares ‘yan at katunayan, may panahon na meron kaming organizing, napakaganda nung lugar nila at ipinaglalaban nila ‘yung lupa. Isang araw, mula sa kanilang Baryo sa San Isidro, Dinadala nila ‘yung produkto nila sa groto, may tungkong mangga, kung saan may araw ng palengke. On their way, nakatricycle sila, do’n sila binaril. Malakas naming kinundena ito dahil ‘yung dalawang mag-asawa na ‘yan, si Ka Roger atsaka si Ka lucila, very dedicated peasant leader, member ng, sa local, ang tawag nila’y nagkaisa. Nagkakaisang Magbubukid ng Barangay San Isidro, City of San
Jose. Kaya may mga iba’t ibang land dispute sa mga lugar na ‘yan. Kaya ‘pag pinag-usapan natin, ano epekto ng MRT 7 project, displacement sa mga magsasaka. Pangalawa, may malaking epekto sa food security, food self sufficiency dahil alam mo sa ngayon ang production sa City of San Jose ay hindi na sumasapat sa kanyang populasyon tapos ‘pag inugnay mo pa ‘yan sa buong Bulacan na sumasaklaw ng, dati dalawampu’t apat na bayan, dahil naging city na ang San Jose Del Monte,
Malolos, Meycauayan at sa ‘pag alam ko meron ding mga bago at least around 4 cities and 20 municipalities sa buong Bulacan ang production ay hindi na sumasapat ‘yung production sa
40 kanyang consumption. Kaya ibig sabihin, sa pangkalahatang bayan at lungsod ng Bulacan, dapat protektahan ‘yung mganalalabing sakahan sa buong lalawigan at sa buong bansa hindi lingid sa’yo, sa atin na sa ngayon, nag-increase nang napakataas ang presyo ng bigas sa pamilihan. Ibang usapin pa dahil do’n sa control ng kartel kaya ang punto, dapat ‘yung mga tinatamnan ng palay, staple food ay i-declare na protected agricultural land para sa pagkain ng mamamayang Pilipino dahil mahirap na iasa natin ang pagkain natin lalo pa ang rice as staple food ng mga Pilipino na almost
93-95% ng mga Pilipino, ang kinakain ay kanin, according na rin sa NEDA kaya may kaugnayan
‘yan. So ngayon, ano ang dapat na gawin ng pamahalaan? Mahalaga na paunlarin ‘yung imfrastrature sa ating bansa pero sa tingin namin ang very basic ay ganito, dahil ang Pilipinas, primarily ay agricultural country, dapat, una paunlarin ‘yung magsasaka, ‘yung agrikultura at
‘yung kanayunan. Ang tawag namin diyan, Tunay na reporma sa lupa at pambansang industriyalisasyon or Genuine Agrarian reform and National industrialisation. Ito ‘yung twin forces that will modernizesa ating bansa. Kumbaga, Genuine rural development na sabi nga ng
AGHAM, dapat ‘yung National Industrialisation for science and technology development, dapat para sa mga kababayan natin. Basic, paunlarin ‘yung ating agrikultura, dahil 70-75% ng mga mamamayan sa ating bansa ay mga magsasaka. Hindi katulad ngayon, na export oriented, import dependent, foreign dominated ang ating bansa. Sabi nga ay National Industrialisation: Key to establishment of modern and diversified industrial economy, masesecure ‘yung livelihood, satisfy basic needs, rapid and sustained economic growth, achieve economic independence. Hindi katulad ngayon na ‘di ba, as of August/September? Average 6.7% ang inflation pero sa Bicol umabot ng
10% at may ibang lugar na mas higit pa. Dahil dito sa patakaran ng gobyerno at walang malasakit sa mga magsasaka. Katunayan, ‘yung impra project, itong BBB, build build build ay concentration ay Metro Manila atsaka syempre sa Luzon ‘yan ay Southern Tagalog and Central Luzon pero ang
41 pinakamahirap na lugar sa buong bansa ang isa ay ARMM atsaka mga probinsya sa Eastern
Visayas katulad ng Samar provinces, Leyte sa CARAGA, Surigao. Peor ang concentrated ng project ay nandito sa NCR, Luzon particular atsaka syempre ‘yung minda na hometown ni
President Duterte. Kaya tingin namin ay lalo lamang titindi ang monopolyo, ang kontrol ng oligarkiya sa buong bansa. Ngayon, ano na ‘yung mga hakbang na ginawa namin? Isa, nagkaroon ng pag-uusap sa mga baryo, inter-baryo at napagkaisahan ng mga barangay sa City of San Jose
Del Monte na malakas na tutulan ang MRT project at binuo ‘yan ng Alyansa ng magbubukid ng
Bulacan at Kilusang magbubukid ng Pilipinas. Second, ‘yung petition/ kahilingan, inihapag sa
LGU, local government unit, sa pamumuno ni City Mayor San Pedro atsaka ng councils.
Pangalawa, nagkaroon din ng iba’t ibang dialogue sa mga department agency katulad ng DOTC na ngayon ay DOTR, Department of Agrarian Reform DAR, Department of Agriculture, kung bakit DAR kasi tungkol sa land dispute kasi mga beneficiary sila ng land reform program ng gobyerno. DA dahil sa usapin ng pagkain dahil sila ‘yung incharge sa food security at dapat food self sufficiency. Meron ding dialogue sa iba pa na pagpapakita nung ejectment militarization siyan sa nabanggit na lugar. Kaya bago pa nagsimula ‘yung project, ito ay napakatagal na struggle. Sa kabilang banda, gusto naming banggitin na dahil sa pagkakaisa ng organisasyon, ng samahan, halimbawa diyan sa tungkong mangga, SASAMAG, hanggang ngayon, nanatili silang nandoon.
‘Yung mga magsasaka sa mga barangay, katunayan, si tatay melecio canete ay ilang beses nang nakulong kaugnay diyan. Siya ‘yung former chairman ng SASAMAG diyan sa tungkong mangga.
Narelease na siya pero tuloy pa rin. Gan’on din, marami nang pumunta diyan na mga estudyante, nagresearch, may mga solidarity night, rural missionaries of the Philippines, NARRA, at iba pa.
Bilang sympathy at pakikiisa do’n sa laban nung magsasaka diyan. Ang status ngayon, syempre
‘yung project ang dami nang nakatayong poste. Hanggang kahabaan ng commonwealth,
42 paglampas mo ng SM fairview, kahit doon sa going to tungkong mangga meron na ring mga ilang nakatayo. Dagdag pala, base sa alam namin, ‘yung main station diyan sa tungkong mangga, magkakaroon pa ng intermodal tapos mula doon, meron din silang plano na express na dudugtong sa NLEX, interconferential road ang tanda kong tawag nila kaya hindi lang ‘yang MRT 7 dahil ikokonekta ‘yang MRT 7 ‘yung dulo tungkong mangga going to NLEX sa Bocaue kaya addtional na naman ‘yung madidisplace. Pero kung sa amin, maraming basehan para tutulan. ‘Yung ejectment, displacement ng magsasaka, pamilya tsaka maralita tapos ‘yung usapin ng food self sufficiency, kasiguraduhan sa pagkain. Kaya ‘yon ‘yung buod ng pinag-uusapan natin. Sana bigyang pansin ng gobyerno ‘yung kahilingan ng mga magsasaka. Ngayon sa nakikta namin, ‘yung mga ginagawnag proyekto, program ng gobyerno, kaugnay sa PPP, BBB ay ‘yung kapakanibangan ng big comparador, burakratang kapitalista sa’tin mga landlord at mga dayuhan sa ating bansa at ito’y bilang pagtalima kung malalim nating susuriin sa iniimpose ng IMF World Bank kaugnay ng neoliberalismo ito ‘yung privatization, derregulation, import liberalization, at later on denationalization kasi ang nagmamay-ari , malaking oligarkiya. Ngayon, nakakabahala under
Duterte administration, nagsama na ‘yung Duterte, Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, atsaka Marcos, kahapon, pinagtibay na sa second reading ng house of representatives ang tungkol sa pagbabago ng saligang batas. Alam natin, do’n sa both joint house resolution number 8 and 9 sa economic provision, is hundred foreign ownership of land. Hundred percent foreign ownership sa natural resources, mga utilities tulad ng tubig, kuryente, transportasyon, komunikasyon, plus eskwelahan, medya atsaka ospital. Kaya kami, malakas naming.. No to CHACHA, No to 100% foreign ownership of land, lupa para sa magsasakang Pilipino hindi sa dayuhang monopolyo. ‘Yon ‘yung kaugnay sa MRT 7 at related issues concerning sa magsasakang Pilipino. Syempre kami, gusto naming banggitin na ang pagsasaka ay isang marangal na gawain. Hindi ito gawaing terorismo.
43
Malakas naming panawagan na stop the killings, stop killing farmers, itigil at labanan ang ginagawang panggigipit, mga trump up charges, na ginagawa ng duterte administration sa pangunguna ng inter-agency legal action commitee or IACLA. Noong panahon ni President
Macapag Arroyo, ito ‘yung IALAG. Kaya mga trump up charges sa mga magsasaka, sa ating mga kababayan kabilang na ‘yung trump up charges recently kay Former BAYAN Muna representative at makabayan officer Satur Ocampo at Congresswoman France Castro ng Alliance of Concerned
Teacher at kahit si ANAKPAWIS representative Ariel Kasilao noong dumalo sa isang solidarity event sa Davao City last October 23, 2018 ngayon ay sinampahan ng gawa gwang kaso ng PNP ng Davao doon sa lungsod ng Davao. Dapat itigil ‘yan pati na ‘yung imposition ng Martial Law
‘di lamang sa Mindanao kung ‘di under memorandum order from Malacanang inexpand na ng
Samar, Negros, atsaka Bicol. Uulitin ko, ang malakas na panawagan ng magsasaka ay libreng pamamahagi ng lupa, ngayon na, isabatas ang Genuine Agrarian Reform Bill at hindi ang MRT 7 project, itigil ang pagpapatupad ng neolibiralismo sa bansa through derregulation, import liberalization, and privatization.
A: Confirm ko lang po, ‘di kayo against sa development so ang mangyayari, sana kung ang MRT
7 ay public owned, mas mura at mas safe, okay po kayo.
I: Opo, dapat affordable kasi, dapat nga palakasin ng gobyerno ‘yung public transport system.
Alam mo pinagmamalaki ko dahil former officer ako ng Asian Peasant Coalition, secretary general ng APC from 2004 to 2013 kaya nagkakaroon ako ng pagkakataon na dumalo sa iba’t ibang conferences/ event sa iba’t ibang bansa sa Asya. Dahil officer ako ng KMP, secretary general sa mahabang panahon, bago naging chairman ng KMP last july 2017 ay nakakadalo ako sa iba’t ibang conferences at pagtitipon sa iba’t ibang panig ng mundo kabilang sa Europe. At sa
Europe, very efficient ‘yung train nila. Pupunta ka ng iba’t ibang bansa, manggagaling ka ng the
44 netherlands, pupunta ka ng luxembourg, pupunta ka ng Italy, France, Germany, by tren tapos ‘yung tren, deretso do’n sa entrance ng airport. Kahit sa iba pang mga bansa very efficient pero state owned. Kaya dapat, ‘yan ‘yung palakasin hindi privatization ng transport kaya uulitin ko hindi privatized, government owned kasi ‘yung mga pribado ‘yung orientation no’n is profit, super profit. ‘Pag gobyerno dapat service. Service to the people.
A: Sa tingin niyo po, kakayanin ng budget ng bansa kung state owned ang MRT 7
I: Ang totoo, sa aming pagsusuri, kung bibigyang priority ng gobyerno ‘yung transport system natin, kasi ito ‘di ba ang laking utang tapos under hybrid PPP actually, gumagastos ang gobyerno at umuutang pa nga eh kaya lang ang ginagarantyahan ng hybrid PPP ‘yung tubo ng mga oligarch atsaka mga foreigner. Kaya sa tanong mo na kaya ba,tingin namin pwedeng program. Halimbawa kahit itong energy natin. Ang pagsusuri ng AGHAM tungkol do’n sa source of energy natin partikular nung isabatas ‘yung EPIRA law’yung tungkol source ng power ang sabi nila, ito ay five- year program tapos ang taya nila, pwedeng, halimbawa pagpalagay natin na gastusan ng 7 billion hanggang 10 billion pataas, kaya. Eh ang totoo niyan, ang confidential budget ng presidente kasama ‘yung intelligents at iba pa, in the past, almost 200 billion. ‘Yung nasa diskresyon ng pangulo kaya kung mga project para sa taong bayan ay tingin namin kaya. Usapin lang ng pagpa- prioritize na dapat para lang sa welfare ng kababayan natin, hindi para sa dayuhan. At katunayan maraming project ang gobyerno uutangin pa rinat ang magbabayad niyan ay taong bayan.
A: Nawalan ‘yung magsasaka ng kabuhayan pa’no po sila..
45
I: Actually, mawawalan sila kasi sa ngayon, ‘di pa naman sila napapaalis pero once na umabot doon, sa ngayon, nagtatayo pa lang ng mga poste bago pa dumating ng tungkong mangga. ‘Pag dumating doon, at tinayo na ‘yung kung ano anong establishment doon..
A: So ano pong plano nilang magiging kapalit once na pinaalis na sila
I: Nako. Ang labas nila eh ‘di tambay. Eh ang ginagawa ng gobyerno sa tambay eh hinuhuli.
Delikado kaya sakanila, ipaglalaban nila. Kaya ang KMP, do’n sa bungkalan, meron kaming
ABCDE. Assert Bungkalan, Consolidate, Defend and Expand.
A: So sa pagkakaintindi ko po, hanggang hindi pa sila pinapaalis, patuloy pong ang laban..
I: Tuloy! Tuloy ang laban, Tuloy ang bungkalan, paggigiit ng karapatan sa lupa dahil para sa magsasaka at katutubo, ang lupa ay, katumbas ng buhay. ‘Pag inalis mo ‘yung magsasaka’t katutubo sa lupa, katulad ng mangingisda kapag inalis mo sa tabing dagat, tabing pangisdaan eh nando’n ang kanilang source ng kabuhayan, mas ibayong kahirapan at kagutuman ang dadanasin
A: Tatanong ko po sana ‘yung tungkol sa agrarian case kaso nabanggit niyo po na iba iba naman pala ‘yung may-ari. Pero lahat po ng mga ‘yon, may laban po ba ‘yung mga magsasaka na pagmamay-ari nila ‘yon?
I: May laban ang magsasaka in terms nung historical, moral atsaka social justice dahil deka dekada na nilang binubungkal. Halimbawasa sa kin, 3rd generation na. ‘Yung aming lolo’t lola, parents ko hanggang ngayon at maraming magsasaka ‘yung gan’on. Second, nagbayad na sila ng upa sa lupa cash or in kind. Produkto atsaka cash. Tapos, may mga saklaw din ng land reform program ng nakaraan ata kasalukuyang gobyerno kaya kapag tiningnan natin dapat napunta na sa magsasaka. Kaya ang panawagan namin, libreng pamamahagi ng lupa sa magsasaka now na.
46
A: Pa’no po kung patuloy nga pong mapaalis sila, may mabibigay po kayang compensation ang gobyerno?
I: Hindi sapat ang compensation, sa tingin namin, doon sa mawawalang lupa at kabuhayan kaya hangga’t kakayanin, idedepensa’t ipaglalaban ang karapatan sa lupa at paninirahan ng mga magsasaka at maralitang kababayan natin do’n sa tatamaan ng MRT 7 at iba pang anti- mamamayang proyekto ng mamamayan.
A: Bilang huling tanong po, ano pong matutulong namin bilang mga estudyante?
I: Mahalaga, isa ‘yung mga nalalaman niyong tunay na kalagayan, panawagan ng mga magsasaka, agriworkers, peasant team and fisherfolks ay mapaabot sa ibang kabataan at estudyante, faculty, bukod diyan, mahalaga na makapunta ‘yung mga kabataan at estudyante katulad mo sa komunidad ng magsasaka para kaita ‘yung tunay na kalagayan at makipamuhay. Katulad ng ginawa ng iba pang eskwelahan, nagkakaroon sila ng pakikipamuhay nang ilang araw at ‘yung ibang...lalo pa sa bahagi ng unibersidad ng pilipinas, sa ilalim ng development established na kurso. Bukod diyan, tingin namin mahalagang magbuo ng formation ang mga kabataan na pwedeng tawaging friends of the farmers, friends of the rural poor, sapagkat ang issue ng magsasaka at pag-unlad ng agrikultura ay issue nating lahat katulad ng ginagawa ng national network of agrarian reform advocate.. Meron silang programa ng mga organizing sa mga school, paglahok sa mga pagkilos, gayun din ang rural missionaries of the philippines, ang mga pari, madre religious, nagpupunta sila sa mga komunidad ng magsasaka. Pwede rin letter to the editor, tapos mai-publish sa mga eskwelaha katulad ng.. ‘Yung ANAKPAWIS, ‘yung issue ng magsasaka inilalabas sa publication halimbawa sa iba’t ibang unibersidad tulad ng Philippine Collegian, at iba pa, last october and june, naging main issue, coverletter ng philippine collegian ‘yung pagkilos
47 ng magsasaka. Tapos bukod diyan, pwedeng maglunsad sa school ng round table, forum, talakayan, photo exhibit, kaya tingin namin ay maraming magagawa ang mga katulad mo bilang mag-aaral, kabataan at estudyante para sa mga magsasaka. Katulad sa ener abente dos, 32 years nang no land no justice ako isa akong survivor sa mendiola massacre tapos sa darating na december
10, iniinvite namin kayo na magjoin kasi ang isang tinatamaan ngayon kaugnay ng extra judicial killings ay magsasaka. Maraming salamat sa pagkakataon sa paginterview mo.Mabuhay ang mga kabataang lumalaban para sa bayan.
48
List of questions (For KMP/ farmers)
1. Ano po ang kwento sa likod ng pagpapatayo ng MRT 7? Nagkaroon ba ng pag-uusap sa
pagitan ng magsasaka at ng gobyerno?
2. Ano po ang mga hakbang na ginawa niyo noong malaman niyong paaalisin na ang mga
magsasaka ng sjdm?
3. Mayroon po bang mga pangyayari na kapareho nito? Ano po ang naging hakbang
ninyo?
4. Ano po ang kasalukuyang status ng kaso?
5. Ano po ang naisip na solusyon ng mga magsasaka ng sjdm kapalit sa kabuhayang
nawala sakanila?
6. Sa tingin po ninyo, paano maiiwasan ang mga ganitong pangyayari?
7. Pa’no kaming mga sinpleng estudyante makakatulong sa inyo?
49
List of questions (Government)
1. Ano po ang kwento sa likod ng pagpapatayo ng MRT 7? Nagkaroon ba ng pag-uusap sa
pagitan ng magsasaka at ng gobyerno?
2. Ano po ang naging hakbangin ng mga gobyernopara sa mga magsasaka kaugnay ng
proyektong ito?
3. Ano pong masasabi niyo para sa mga tutol sa proyektong ito?
4. Ano po ang naisip na solusyon ng Gobyerno para sa kabuhayang mawawala sa mga
magsasaka?
5. Ano po ang masasabi niyo tungkol sa dispute na mayroom kaugnay sa lupang masasagasaan
ng MRT 7?
50
Data Matrix
Data needed Source of data or where to find Analysis of data Ethical aspects it
Discussion of the issue of Journal and news articles online Historical account; content Acknowledge all sources landownership in the analysis, or searching for Philippines by rich constituents themes and subthemes in the as against the poor and the materials marginalized
Situationer of the case in San Barangay records Content analysis or searching Acknowledge all sources Jose Del monte where a rich for themes and subthemes, family like the Aranetas are giving a historical pitted against the poor and backgrounder marginalized people who also claim they have rights -history of the case
- present situation, who are the Interview with the residents Know who, how many, the list informed consent asked protagonists, their claims and of questions for the interview how rightful are such claims
-Actions of the government to News articles Acknowledge all sources that resolve the issue and in whose Content analysis or searching favor for themes and subthemes, will be used giving a historical backgrounder
assessment in this particular Interview with KMP Study thoroughly his/her case with whom the representative answers Informed Consent form government sided with what implications
Secondary materials Review the effects of laws Acknowledge all sources that recommendations so that land implemented and consider the disputes do not always result in welfare of the farmers will be used the displacement of the poorer claimants.
51