SC stops Luisita land distribution

Former President Corazon Aquino’s family won a temporary restraining order from the Supreme Court yesterday on a government plan to parcel out its 6,000-hectare sugar plantation in Tarlac to farm workers under the land reform program.

The order bars Agrarian Reform Secretary Nasser Pangandaman and the Presidential Agrarian Reform Council from carrying out a December 2005 order to revoke a stock-sharing scheme of Hacienda Luisita Inc. under which plantation workers obtained shares of stock in the company instead of getting their own farm lots under the government’s Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP).

Hacienda Luisita is the corporate entity that runs the sprawling plantation owned by the Cojuangco clan.

In a resolution, the court’s third division also ordered Hacienda Luisita to post a P5-million bond while awaiting a final ruling on the case.

The government asserts that Hacienda Luisita’s stock distribution option was illegal and accuses the company of illegally selling a 500-hectare portion of the farm to developers.

The dispute arose from a 1988 land reform law, under which the government has acquired some 3.9 million hectares, including the holdings of big landowners which they sold under easy terms to some three million landless farm workers.

Hacienda Luisita had filed a petition before the court questioning the PARC’s jurisdiction over the company’s stock distribution plan.

Asked for comment on the court order, the former president said she has left to her lawyers to decide what moves should be taken by her family.

"My lawyer will take care of that," Mrs. Aquino said in a mobile phone text message to The STAR.

Magdangal Elma, whose law firm Belo, Gozon & Elma is handling the Luisita case for the Cojuangcos, said the restraining order has now opened the legal battle between Hacienda Luisita and the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR).

"We are happy about the order. Now, the SC will decide on the merits of the case. The TRO was just to preserve the status quo," Elma, a former presidential legal counsel during the Aquino and Estrada administrations, told The STAR in an interview.

According to Elma, the DAR would now have to decide if it would file a petition contesting the restraining order, adding that Hacienda Luisita would be ready to oppose such a petition.

"The SC would expectedly ask for the filing of more pleadings by the parties involved for thorough evaluation of the case. The SC might not be able to render a decision on our petition soon or immediately because this case is so complicated," he said. "As of the moment, everybody should respect the order of the SC."

Pangandaman said that they might file a petition asking for a lifting of the restraining order but wants to meet with government lawyers first to plan their next step.

"My only apprehension is when the farm worker-beneficiaries learn about the SC order and would react violently," he said. "We would talk to them and appeal for them to stay calm as we will do what we can to address this. We will do our best so we can push through with the distribution" of lands.

Elma emphasized that Mrs. Aquino is not a party in the Luisita case, explaining that it is a court dispute between the government and a privately owned company.

In a resolution, the SC ordered the PARC not to enforce a notice it issued on Jan. 2, placing the Hacienda Luisita plantation under the government’s agrarian reform program for distribution to farmers.

The notice followed a Dec. 22, 2005 PARC resolution that upheld a recommendation from the DAR revoking Hacienda Luisita’s stock distribution plan.

In March, the PARC rejected an appeal from Hacienda Luisita asking for reconsideration, prompting the company to go to the Supreme Court.

In a 16-page resolution issued on March 24, the PARC’s validation committee, chaired by Justice Undersecretary Ernesto Pineda, upheld the PARC’s authority to resolve Hacienda Luisita’s dispute with its plantation workers, and to revoke its stock distribution plan that the PARC approved in 1987.

On Jan. 2, Hacienda Luisita filed the motion for reconsideration with the validation committee questioning the PARC’s jurisdiction over the issue.

It argued that courts should have jurisdiction because the company’s stock distribution plan was an agreement with its workers, therefore making it a corporate issue and not a land dispute.

But the PARC committee insisted on the council’s authority. It cited a memorandum issued by the Department of Justice on Oct. 27, 2005, which ruled that the PARC "is vested with the jurisdiction to resolve complaints involving the revocation" of the stock plan.

The DAR made the recommendation following findings by a PARC committee that the Hacienda Luisita stock plan, implemented in the late 1980s, had failed to improve the lives of farmers.

Plantation workers had also alleged that the company reneged on its obligations under the stock plan, including non-payment of dividends, which resulted in a series of strikes.

Mrs. Aquino is not involved in the management of the sugar plantation.

A clash broke out in November 2004 between police and strikers during a picket. Three sugar mill workers were killed and at least 16 others, including three police officers, were injured.

The strikers were demanding better wages and the reinstatement of more than 300 laid-off colleagues, including union leaders.

In October 2005, Ricardo Ramos, head of the labor union in Hacienda Luisita, was shot dead by an unidentified gunman while having a drink with friends at his home in Tarlac City.

The attack fueled initial speculation that the murder was connected to the strike. The still unidentified killer remains at large.

Leftists suspect an army general accused of human rights abuses and killings in the past of masterminding Ramos’ murder. They charged that the military is engaged in a campaign targeting left-wing activists.

The PARC resolution placing Hacienda Luisita land under the government’s agrarian reform program fueled speculation that it was in retaliation for Mrs. Aquino’s withdrawal of support from Mrs. Arroyo last year.

The panel is chaired by Mrs. Arroyo and has the last say on whether or not to stop the stock distribution plan.

Mrs. Arroyo is fighting an opposition campaign to remove her from office following accusations that she cheated in the 2004 presidential election.

Last year, she admitted having inappropriate phone conversations with an unidentified election official in what she described as a "lapse in judgment" and a clumsy attempt to protect her slim lead in the balloting.

Mrs. Arroyo, however, denied rigging the outcome.

After that admission, Mrs. Aquino and several other key allies withdrew support from Mrs. Arroyo. Aquino urged her to make the "supreme sacrifice" of resigning to avoid a political crisis that could paralyze the country.

Mrs. Arroyo successfully fought an impeachment bid in the House of Representatives and has been locked in a protracted battle with the opposition since.

Opposition lawmakers in the House are planning to file a new impeachment complaint in July. — With Katherine Adraneda, AFP