Walk for Sumilao Land, Walk for Justice
20 November 2007
Approaching Quezon Province
Yesterday, 19 November 2007, while the Sumilao Farmers were traversing the whole stretch of Balogo, Sapacao to Tara, Sipocot, they encountered challenges and situations that needed their full attention. One of the marchers, Toto Hapayon, and one from the support groups, Dr. Grace Bag-ao, were rushed in the hospital in Naga City.
The marchers observed that Toto Hapayon is alarmingly losing weight, while Dr. Bag- ao, fondly called by the marchers as Dok G, suffered a broken shin. She was advised to undergo an operation. .
Like the previous day, the typhoon affected the pace of the marchers. They negotiated the muddy roads from barangay Sapacao to Sipocot, and at certain times, they had to pass flooded streets.
When they reached the day's destination, FUERZA and Social Action Center (SAC) organized a short program intended to educate the locals in the municipality. To better appreciate their struggle, they showed to the public some video documentaries featuring the Walk for Sumilao Land, Walk for Justice Campaign/pilgrimage. Ka Rene Peñas, together with some other Sumilao Farmer leaders, narrated the history of their struggle and why they chose to walk from Bukidnon to Manila.
The program was attended by private and other LGU personnel. An inspirational message was solicited from the support groups.
Meanwhile, Sumilao Farmers' support groups in Manila staged a mobilization in front of the National Office of Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) in Quezon City Circle. This was participated by various NGOs and POs supporting the cause of the Sumilao Farmers in reclaiming the 144-hectare land in Sumilao, Bukidnon. They used slippers to symbolize the sufferings of the Sumilao Farmers from Bukidnon to Manila walking on foot. The DAR Secretary, however, did not show up - a clear manifestation of the proof that the top government official who does not care so much about the plight of the Sumilao farmers, and to the rest of the farmers across the country.
Sumilao Update
19 November 2007
Before starting their walk yesterday, the farmers heard a Eucharistic celebration at 5:00 in the morning. It was the first time that they heard a mass before starting their journey. Usually, they hear masses upon their arrival at the place where they shall stay for the night.
It was perhaps a good start for their day's walk because they were able to endure the harsh weather. Thus, despite the outpouring of heavy rain and strong winds, they arrived safely at Balogo, Pasacao, Camarines Sur, their next stop, with high spirits.Aside from the bad weather, the place was not very safe, because of the alleged presence of members of the New Peoples Army. Even the members of the Philippine National Police were hesitant to accompany the farmers at the time they entered Sta. Rosa. But, the local priest personally ensured that the farmers shall safely arrive in Balogo. They arrived at Balogo around lunch time. After eating their lunch, they took a short rest, before starting with their scheduled activity for the afternoon.
First, they had a general assembly where they discussed how they could continue their walk despite the unfriendly weather. For instance, they talked about how many kilometers they should walk if the heavy rains will continue.
It was also discussed in the general assembly who among the marchers shall compose the 'pool of speakers' for the week. This is part of the commitment to enhance their skills in articulating their struggle to the public. And in order to deepen their knowledge on the intricacies involved in their struggle, and to share their individual and collective insights of their journey, they regularly conduct learning sessions.
Later in the afternoon, Mr. Ben Longid, Roland Quilanan, Boyet Ambayec, who introduced themselves as representatives of Senator Gringo Honasan, visited the farmers and gave the senator's donation.
Before retiring to sleep, there was a meeting of the team leaders, where they assessed the disposition and feeling of each and every marcher. It came out that all of them are still very much willing to continue, despite physical stress, and emotional pain for missing their family.
Partial Luzon Leg
Camarines Norte
20 November - Sipocot to Ragay - 31 kilometers
21 November - Ragay to del Gallego - 30 kilometers
22 November - del Gallego to Tabogon - 20 kilometers
Quezon Province
23 November - Tabogon to Lopez - 32 kilometers
24 November - Lopez to Gumaca - 20 kilometers
25 November - Gumaca to Atimonan - 33 kilometers
26 November - Atimonan to Lucena - 30 kilometers
27 November - Lucena to Tiaong - 37 kilometers
Laguna
28 November - Tiaong to San Pablo - 15 kilometers
29 November - San Pablo to Los Baños - 21 kilometers
Revisiting the Sumilao Case:
Petitioners are the community residents and qualified agrarian reform beneficiaries (ARBs) who are directly affected by the conversion. The petitioners in this case are landless farmers, farmworkers, and community residents in San Vicente, Sumilao, Bukidnon. Being such, they undoubtedly have a paramount interest on the instant petition as they are the immediate community residents who are directly affected by the conversion of the land. Being such, they undoubtedly have a paramount interest on the instant petition.
Further, the petitioner-farmers being the landless residents of San Vicente, Sumilao, are the qualified farmer beneficiaries under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law:
SEC. 22. Qualified Beneficiaries. - The lands covered by the CARP shall be distributed as much as possible to landless residents of the same barangay, or in the absence thereof, landless residents of the same municipality in the following order of priority:
agricultural lessess and share tenants;
regular farmworkers;
seasonal farmworkers;
other farmworkers;
actual tillers or occupants of public lands;
collective or cooperatives of the above beneficiaries; and
others directly working on the land.
It is also worth mentioning that petitioners Paterno Tuminhay and Renato Peñas are the incumbent Barangay Kagawads of San Vicente, Sumilao, Bukidnon, hence, they have the moral and political obligation to be vigilant on matters affecting their jurisdiction.
On this note, several DAR policy issuances pertinent to protest to conversion of agricultural lands recognize the legal standing of the community residents and landless farmers on the matter:
DAR Administrative Order No. 1, series of 1990
Article VIII. "Protest or opposition against the application for conversion may be applied by any person who may be displaced with the Provincial Agrarian Reform Adjudicator (PARAD) xxx"
DAR Administrative Order No. 12, series of 1994 Article XIV. "The Regional CLUPPI shall evaluate written protest filed by any person who may be displaced or affected by the proposed land use conversion"
DAR Administrative Order No. 1, series of 1999
Article IV. Section 18. Who May File. - Any person who will be displaced or directly affected by the proposed land use conversion such as occupants, tenants, farmworkers, identified beneficiaries, bona fide residents of adjoining properties or communities may file a written protest against the application for conversion xxx Provided, that in case the protestant or oppositor is an identified beneficiary under the agrarian reform program of the land applied for and who failed to file a written protest within the said period due to fraud, accident, mistake or excusable neglect, he shall have the right to intervene at any time during the pendency of the application.
DAR Administrative Order No. 1, series of 2004
Section 16. Protest. Persons affected by the proposed land use conversion, such as identified beneficiaries, farmers, agricultural lessees, share tenants, actual tillers, occupants or residents of adjoining properties or communities, may file a written protest xxx. An oppositor who is an identified Agrarian Reform Beneficiary (ARB) of the land applied for conversion, and who failed to file a written protest within the period due to FISTS, may intervene at any time during the pendency of the application
Although the above-cited provisions refer to the legal standing of identified beneficiaries, farmers, agricultural lessees, share tenants, actual tillers, occupants or residents of adjoining properties or communities to protest to applications for conversion of agricultural lands, the same principle applies to petitions for cancellation of approved conversion orders.
The present petition for cancellation of the conversion order is synonymous to a protest by the community residents and landless farmers themselves who were directly affected by the failure of NQSRMDC and its successor-in-interest SMFI to comply with the conditions of the conversion order to the great detriment of the community residents and landless farmers who could have benefited from the land which remained idle and uncultivated for 10 years.
The fact the SMFI plans to illegally transform the whole 144-hectare property into a piggery farm right in the midst of the farmers' residents, in violation of the authorized development plan in the conversion order, raises immediate concern to the petitioners. The active participation of the actual residents and the landless farmers in filing the instant petition, as they are the ones who are directly affected thereby, confirms their legal standing to petition its cancellation.
The petitioners also bring the instant petition under the doctrine of intergenerational responsibility as enunciated in the case of Oposa vs. Factoran. Essentially, the principle means that we hold the natural resource treasures of the earth in trust for the benefit, enjoyment and use of the generations of humankind yet to come. Petitioners herein, as the actual residents and qualified farmer-beneficiaries of the 144-hectare land, represent not only themselves but also future generations who are directly affected by NQSRMDC and SMFI's illegal conversion of the land, and who are the future beneficiaries thereof.
Furthermore, the effect of granting the petition for revocation of the conversion order is the reversion of the land to the status of agricultural lands and shall be subject to CARP coverage as circumstances may warrant. The petitioners and their future generations will be the beneficiaries of the subject land's CARP coverage under Section 22 of RA 6657. The cancellation of the Conversion Order will result in the reversion of the land to agricultural use which is coverable under CARP. In other words, the cancellation of the Conversion Order will redound to the benefit of the Sumilao Farmers and their future generations, otherwise, they will suffer the consequences if the Conversion Order will be upheld.
