Maramag, Bukidnon—Will the farmers claiming 881 hectares of land inside the state-owned Central Mindanao University suffer the same fate as the not-so-lucky Mapalad farmers of Sumilao, Bukidnon?

Before the Malapad farmers gave the beleaguered agrarian reform program a face, there were Buffalo, Tamaraw and Limus—group of farmers who being ordered out of the land they have occupied since 1986.

The Buffalo (Bukidnon Free Farmers and Agri-Labourers Organization), Tamaraw (Tried Agricultural Movers Association of Rural Active Workers) and Limus (Landtiller Inhabitants of Musuan) have been staying in the area, emboldened by the Aquino administration’s promise of social justice.

In 1988, the Department of Agrarian Reform awarded 400 hectares to Buffalo. Tamaraw and Limus were not as lucky, but they chose to remain nonetheless.

However, like the Malapad farmers of Sumilao, Buffalo suffered a reversal of fortune in October 1992 when the Supreme Court nullified the DAR'’ decision and ordered the farmers to leave.

The farmer defied the order despite repeated the attempts by the school administration to drive them out. They claimed that the CMU had been harassing them through its security guards.

The farmers’ brush with the university started since the administration of CMU president Dr. Leonardo Chua. They recalled that after the court handed down the decision, they had been denied water supply from the National Irrigation Administration.

Chua’s successor, Dr. Jaime Gellor, was relatively lenient toward the farmers. He allowed them to go on with their farming activities.

The issue was rekindled sometime in February when the new president, Dr. Madronio Lao, sought the enforcement of a demolition order from the DAR Adjudication Board-region 10, dated June 8, 1999. He also fenced off portions of the area tilled by the farmers. The farmer asked Congress to intervene.

Does size matter?

The CMU was established in 1958 through proclamation No. 476 issued by then President Carlos P. Garcia. It has an area of 3,081 hectares which, the farmers said, were too big for the school.

In a public hearing conducted here on March 26 by the House Committee on agrarian reform chaired by Rep. Gorgonio Unde, both the farmers and Lao argued over the extent of area needed by the university to fulfill its mandate.

Lao emphasized that he would base his action on legal parameters. He said if all claims, including those involving ancestral domain by indigenous peoples, were granted, the CMU will lose all its land.

He said the university has a title to the 3,081 hectares and the lumads’ claims were considered before it was issued. "I have documents to prove that the lumads were given parcels of land," he said.

Lao also said the Board of Regents had offered employment to the lumads and scholarships to their children. "The problem is education, not land," he opined.

Lao claimed that only 1,100 hectares of the CMU property is productive and 881 hectares of these were in the hands of farmers. "How can we develop the area if there are people inside?" he asked.

He added that the school has only 10 hectares for its 300 heads of cattle when the original area of its pasture land was 40 hectares.

For this year, Loa said, the CMU’s budget was slashed by P2 million. To fill the deficit, the school must generate revenues, like utilizing the area occupied by the farmers, he said.

Alvin Obrique, a Buffalo leader who used to teach at the CMU, refuted Lao’s claims that the school lacked sufficient area.

He cited that University of the Philippines unit in Los Banos, Laguna, which has less than a thousand hectares but has been able to impart quality education.

Obrique said the CMU used to be an agriculture-focused institution with 80 percent of its students enrolled in agriculture and related courses. At present, he said, only 20 percent of the students are enrolled in these courses, while the majority are taking up other disciplines.

Thus, he said, the school no longer needed a big area for agricultural research and instructional purposes.

"If Dr. Lao cannot improve the CMU with 1,000 hectares, he has no right to become president," Obrique said.

"It’s not true that only a few are enrolled in agricultural-related courses. Forestry and agricultural engineering are also agricultural-related," Lao retorted, without giving figures.

Gene Nisperos of the Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas-Bukidnon, disagreed with Loa’s statement that the area could not be developed if there are people inside.

"The most productive area in the CMU are those have people in them," he said.

The congressional hearing was prompted by the filing of House Resolution 1148, which urged Congress to assess, in aid of legislation, the situation in land areas owned by state schools and reservations which are occupied by farmers.

The resolution was authored by partylist Rep. Leonardo Montemayor, a member of the House agrarian reform committee.

Montemayor said it was not the first time that the government made such action. He recalled that in 1982, the late President Ferdinand Marcos issued Letter of Instruction 1258 which ordered the Department of Environment and Natural Resources to investigate the status of reservation which no longer served their original purposes in order to accommodate settlers and occupants.

He cited then President Corazon Aquino’s Executive Order 407, as amended by EO 408, which placed under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program areas and reservations not actually needed by schools.

"The policy is to give justice to the farmers," he stressed even as he noted that squatting was no longer a crime because Presidential Decree 772, which penalized the offence, has been repealed.

Montemayor conceded, through, that "the schools have legitimate concerns and rights to fulfill their mandate, to carry out its responsibilities by utilizing the assets (of the schools)."

"How do we achieve a balance? In case of conflict of opinion, do we follow the DAR or the school?" he asked.

"The reality is there are people inside the CMU. Can schools carry out their concerns without driving the people out?" he asked.

Rep. Nereus Acosta, a committee member, said the parties involved should consider not only the legal issues but also the social justice. "We must find a win-win solution," he suggested.

But Lao appeared determined to pursue legal action against the farmers. "I only implement orders from the Board of Regents, and their decision is to implement legal action," he said.

"You are squatters according to the language of the court," he told the farmers.

Nisperos countered that the CMU should not act like a private landlord who wants absolute right to (his) land because it is a government estate.

The farmers appealed to the committee to work out the suspension of the demolition order pending the result of the congressional inquiry.

On top of this, they proposed a lease agreement between them and the CMU, effective for 25 years and renewable for another 25 years.

Lao spurned the proposal, saying it was a leasehold in perpetuity. He said that the Board of Regents was amenable to only a three-year lease.

Obrique retorted that the farmers proposal was lenient compared to the policy of allowing foreigners to lease Philippines land for at least 50 years.

Rep. Juan Miguel Zubiri suggested to both parties to arrive at a compromise agreement if 25 years is to long for the CMU.

He added that the committee might recommend the reduction of the CMU’s land area to one that would just enough for its academic needs.

"Allow these people (farmers) a chance to survive," he said.

Zubiri, however, was pessimists that the university would concede an inch of its area.

After the hearing, he told a group of reporters that he could sense that the school would stick to its hardline policy.

In such case, Mapalad will not be alone in its misfortune.

Note: Special thanks to Mae for sending this article.

Copyright © 1999 PAN Asia & the Pacific