The Plain Truth About Hacienda Luisita
Farm workers in mad scramble for Luisita land
By: Tonette Orejas – Philippine Daily Inquirer
In this 6,500-hectare sugar estate, the agrarian conflict is no longer between relatives of the Liberal Party standard-bearer, Sen. Benigno Aquino III, and the 8,000 farm workers who opted to acquire land than shares of stock.
The dispute is now deeper and sharper among the workers than it is with the landowner, the Cojuangco clan, farmers told the Philippine Daily Inquirer.
It seems out of place. Through the shares of stock distributed to them in 1989, the farmers altogether own 33 percent of Hacienda Luisita Inc. (HLI). The rest, 67 percent, is owned by the clan of the late President Corazon Aquino, the senator’s mother, through Tarlac Development Corp. (TDC).
Technically, the farm workers are still stockholders of HLI, according to Agrarian Reform Undersecretary Narciso Nieto.
The stock distribution option (SDO) scheme is still in place because the Supreme Court temporarily stopped the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) from distributing 4,415 hectares in 2006.
But division has seeped through the ranks of the farm workers because of the same thing they aspired for: A piece of land in Hacienda Luisita.
For instance, in Barangay Texas (also known as Lourdes), 146 SDO holders petitioned HLI and the newly formed Luisita Estate Management (LEM) on Nov. 10 to stop at least two of their fellow holders from renting out 400 hectares of land to growers from Nueva Ecija and Taiwan.
“Pantay-pantay sana ang pagbubungkal namin sa lupa (We had expected equal use of the land),” Elena Reyes, 53, said.
It escapes her why other farmers do this. Their audacity makes her suspect that powerful people were behind them, she said.
In their appeal, the 146 SDO holders want to “use, not own” a hectare or even half a hectare of land in Texas, where 470 holders share almost 500 hectares.
Reyes said the wiser among them made life harder for others.
“Sugar planting stopped after the (2004 strike). We had no jobs, no cash rations, hospital services, transportation coupons or loans to get. The land we want went to a few farm workers like us,” she said.
Noynoy should intervene
Senator Aquino should intervene by asking his relatives to bring back some sense of order and justice in the sugar estate, Reyes said.
“When he was a [Tarlac] congressman, he dealt with us like we were his constituents. He did not act like a landowner,” he said.
Aquino owns only a 1.1-percent share in TDC, said HLI spokesperson Antonio Ligon.
Some of those who led the agrarian protests held alongside the labor strike at Central Azucarera de Tarlac (CAT), the sugar mill inside the hacienda, in November 2004 are the “ones who rent out big tracts of lands [in Concepcion town] to outsiders,” said Renato Luna Jr., head of Barangay Balite.
The strike ended violently on Nov. 16 that year. Seven strikers were dead after a clash with policemen and soldiers that enforced the labor secretary’s order assuming jurisdiction of the strike.
Mill workers and the CAT management had settled a year after the strike, but the agrarian side of the conflict is now on its fifth year, with militants throwing the issue at Aquino.
Lito Bais, chair of the United Luisita Workers Union (ULWU), said his group was working with the group of Concepcion Mayor Noel Villanueva, a sugar planter.
“We did not have the means of production so we partnered with the group of Mayor Villanueva. We also learned new technologies by working with his group,” Bais said.
This arrangement had no consent from HLI or LEM, said Herman Gregorio, LEM manager.
Villanueva said he paid the farm workers P6,000 per hectare as rental for 200 hectares in Barangay Pando. Bais said the ULWU was not getting anything from the deal.
For unknown reasons, the village council is paid P1,000. CAT asked to be paid P30 per ton of sugarcane harvested.
Food crops
In nine other villages in La Paz and Concepcion towns and in Tarlac City that are within the estate, ULWU promoted the “bungkalan” or tilling system, Bais said.
“Some use the land to plant food crops or cash crops,” he said.
The tillers do not pay land rent to HLI or to the ULWU, he said.
Information gathered by the Inquirer showed sugar growers in Tarlac had used the farm workers to gain access to large tracts of land in Luisita, paying the likes of Ely Mercado and 27 more residents of Barangay Asturias P75 for every 1,000 canes planted.
“The land is there for you to take, but if you have no money to buy seeds and tools, how can you plant on your own?” said Mercado.
Others said it was HLI that had been renting out the land to sugar growers, a situation denied by Buena Timbol, LEM administrative services manager.
“We confined our planting in 50 hectares around the mill,” she said.
By the DAR’s monitoring, some 3,000 of the 4,415 hectares of land have been planted to sugar cane, rice and vegetables.
The tilling of lands while the case is still pending with the Supreme Court “does not prejudice [the land distribution],” said Teofilo Inocencio, agrarian reform regional director.
He described the planting activities to be in “uncontrolled proportions.”
“We’re told that most of the users are potential beneficiaries. We can’t say who rented how many hectares to whom because the transactions are undocumented,” Inocencio said.
Agrarian reform
But while the DAR has been preparing a list of potential beneficiaries of Hacienda Luisita until the Supreme Court’s order comes, Inocencio said the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program Extension with Reforms law (Republic Act No. 9700), would “apply in the identification of beneficiaries.”
“There’s an order of priority there for [agrarian] corporations and cooperatives,” he said.
That means nothing is certain yet on who will really get land, he said.
Gregorio said the current fight over the estate would not augur well for the use of Hacienda Luisita, either as an agrarian reform community or whatever productive setups might be devised.
“As the landowner, surely HLI has to put some order in its house. The illegal settlers and tillers can threaten the claims of SDO holders to the land,” he said.
HLI has not taken legal actions against illegal tillers or issued eviction notices to them, he said.
Should the Supreme Court resolve the case in favor of the farm workers, the beneficiaries stand to get small parcels of land.
In Balite, for example, 800 SDO holders will have to share among themselves only 300 hectares—something that would not be fruitful in terms of agricultural production, Luna said.
Used to having the Cojuangcos provide everything they needed, Mercado said: “Ibalik na nila ang tubo. Kahit trabahador kami, may nakukuha pa kaming tulong at arawan (The Cojuangcos should grow sugarcane again. As workers we can still get help and daily wages).”
That is a hope that ULWU opposes.
Owning the land, Bais said, would free the farm workers.
"I am determined to continue the fight started by my father and my mother to see
that democracy takes root and is strengthened in our country. This cannot happen
in a government that serves the interest of the powerful few. We must strengthen
the institutions of government so that they truly serve the interests of our people."





Engr. Jojo
19 Nov, 2009
Those who are accusing Noynoy as the cause of HLI Farm Workers’ woes, read this article so that you will know what is the truth about it. Hindi inuulit ninyo na para b agang kasalanan pa ng Pamilya ni Noynoy ang nangyaring massacre.
lenlen
19 Nov, 2009
The truth will always prevails.To those who spread lies against Nonoy to discourage his supporters,no way that you will succeed.To Noynoy adversaries,please play a fair game.We had enough from dirty politics.
Aurora
21 Nov, 2009
The Hacienda Luisita issue is no dirty politics, it is an issue of social justice, where the Cojuangco-Aquino family benefited from the sweat and blood of the agri-workers since 1957. The Cojuangcos have enjoyed enjoyed lavish lives while agri-workers have been in poverty like taking home a pay of P9.50 for a day.
Jose “Don Pepe” Cojuangco, Sr., father of former president Cory Cojuangco-Aquino and Jose “Peping” Cojuangco, bought majority of the Central Azucarera de Tarlac (CAT), including the 6,453-hectare Hacienda Luisita from the Spanish company Compania General de Tabacos de Filipinas (Tabacalera) using a loan from the GSIS and a dollar load from Manufacturers’ Trust Company of New York and Chase Manhattan Bank, where the Central Bank served as guarantor. Moreover, the GSIS required that the lands would be distributed in 10 years or 1967 to the tenant-farmers as part of the social justice program of the government.
On December 2, 1985, a Manila Regional Trial Court ruled that Hacienda Luisita be distributed to the tenants but the Cojuangcos’ heavily opposed and elevated it to the Court of Appeals. By February 25, 1986, Cory Cojuangco-Aquino rose to power and eventually, the government through the Office of the Solicitor General conveyed that the government is no longer interested in possessing Hacienda Luisita.
As Noynoy is planning to be president of this country, it is obvious that he is expected to uphold the interests of the people NOT OF HIS FAMILY. IF HE COULD NOT PUSH FOR LAND REFORM IN HIS OWN BACKYARD, HOW COULD HE IN THE WHOLE COUNTRY. THIS IS A CHALLENGE TO HIM, NOT TO PULL HIM DOWN OF THE ELECTION. HE SHOULD ANSWER THIS LEGITIMATE AND LONG OVERDUE ISSUE, OTHERWISE, WHAT KIND OF PRESIDENT COULD HE BE.
Engr. Jojo
21 Nov, 2009
@Aurora can’t you understand, the Stock Distribution Option,(SDO), a legal provision of the law (RA 6657 or CARL of 1988) which was mutually agreed upon by both parties. What Social Injustice are you saying? We are in a Democratic Country, you can not just CONFISCATE the land of anybody and give them to anybody without JUST COMPENSATION.
It is very clear that the problem in Hacienda Luisita is the infighting among the beneficiaries. Nagkanya kanya silang sunggab ng lupain na supposedly ay equally owned by all of them. Ang nangyayari dito, sila-sila mismo naglalamangan. Iyong mga matatapang at malalakas ay nag-occupy ng malaking bahagi ng lupain na pinauupahan sa mga local capitalist.
Kung tutoong may malasakit ang mga katulad ninyong makakaliwa sa kinahinatnan ng mga magsasaka sa HLI dapat ayusin ninyo ang kanilang organization kung meron man. Ang kailangan dito ay VALUES ORIENTATION. Kahit sinong presidente ang uupo sa Malacañang ay walang magawa kung ganyan-ganyan ang mga tao sa HLI. Ang kailangan ay isang program ng Social transformation.
Bakit di mo masabi na DIRTY POLITICS iyan, eh, hindi Agrarian Dispute ang problema diyan kundi Labor Dispute na kahit ang Dept. of Labor ni GMA ay kayang solusyonan iyan. Pero pinupukol ninyo kay Noynoy dahil sa kanyang 0.83% SHARE sa Hacienda Luisita. Community Organizing can play a very vital role in the problem of HLI benficiaries.
Regina
21 Nov, 2009
Kwento sa akin ng mga activists na nakausap ko na nagsasagawa ng immersion with the Luisita farmers, 9 pesos lang ang nakukuha nila mula sa nila shares sa HLI. Pero nalaman ko na lang na suntendado ang mga farmers – libre tubig, bahay, electricity, etc. What more do they want? Hindi sinabi sa akin ng mga activists na libre pala sa lahat ng expenses ang mga farmers.
lenlen
21 Nov, 2009
@Engr.Jojo,I dont know how many times you explained here about Hacienda Luisita,but some dont care to accept the truth.
@Aurora,please read the article The Plain Truth About Hacienda Luisita by:Tonette Orejas.After reading I understand more and more about the case.
lenlen
21 Nov, 2009
@Regina yon ang sinasabi na half truth (halbe Warheit).
Regina
21 Nov, 2009
@lenlen yeah. I knew there was something fishy.
Awie
21 Nov, 2009
Hi Regina, the loudest voice you can hear are not from the genuine farmers of Hacienda Luisita, it’s more of the people who were just influenced badly by the leftist and politically interest. That’s how I can see the scenario now.
Aurora
5 Jan, 2010
@Engr. Jojo, how can be SDO be agreed mutually when the military is harassing the agri-workers and those who represented the farmworkers at the board of directors of Hacienda Luisita, Inc. are lackeys of the Cojuangco-Aquino family?
@Regina, they are also not subsidized as they loan it from hli which are automatically deducted from their salaries, thus, plunging to only P9.50 take-home pay. the point is, their man-hours are also shrinking as the Cojuangco-Aquino’s have made money in selling and converting agricultural lands to commercial, residential and industrial use without the consent of supposedly co-owners of HLI, the agri-workers. As the lands widely converted, correspondingly the man-hours or work on the lands also declined, thus, leaving the farmworkers jobless and no source of income. While they perish in poverty, the Cojuangco-Aquino enjoy their lavish ways of life and now one of them fantasizing to be president.
Aurora
5 Jan, 2010
@Engr. Jojo, And again, the cojuangcos acquired hacienda luisita using public funds from the central bank and gsis, meaning it is people’s money. They don’t even shelled out their own money then made more money from it, so why should they be justly compensated? Where’s the democracy your talking about?
Regina
5 Jan, 2010
@Aurora Now I am confused. Isn’t that 9.50 their share as stockholders, not salary?
Engr. Jojo
6 Jan, 2010
@Aurora, I don’t know what is your motive in trying to concoct things which is very far from the truth. How can you say that the Military was harassing the Agri-workers of HLI, when the workers freely participated in the two referenda that conducted separately by the DAR and the PARC which were also ratified by 92.6% and 96.27% of the participating beneficiaries respectively. They were represented in the Board of Director by FOUR people from theirs ranks. They are not lackeys of the Cojuancos. They are also entitled to 3% Production Share from the GROSS SALES of HLI on top of their Salaries, Wages and Fringe Benefits.
Each of them is given no less than 240 sq. meters of Home Lot.
The P9.50/day take home pay is a product of your imagination because I believe that the Minimum Wage that the law prescribed for agricultural corporation is even more that P180.00/day.
And again, you said that the acquisition of that property is through a loan from GSIS and Chase Manhattan Bank, what wrong with that? GSIS and other Financial Institution usually extend loans to any client who has the capability to pay and has enough equity and properties for collateral.
Hacienda Luisita is already subjected to Agrarian Reform Program through the Stock Distribution Option, a provision in RA 6657 otherwise known as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988. A provision
designed by the lawmakers who crafted and enacted the
law as a social justice program and at the same time maintained the economies-of-scale of the vast estate.
Unless otherwise declared by the Supreme Court the SDO in Hacienda Luisita as Null and Void Ab Initio, Noynoy, even if he becomes president can not implement another Land Distribution Scheme in Hacienda Luisita. HULI NA ITO AURORA, KUNG HINDI KA PA NANINIWALA, BAHALA KA SA BUHAY, WALANG KINALAMAN SI NOYNOY DITO.
noel
29 Jan, 2010
Until the legal provision on the SDO is revoked by legislative fiat or stricken down by SC ruling, it remains a valid and available option, regardless of who exercises it.
Having said that, perhaps it would be a valid question to ask: doesn’t the CARP[er] law prohibit the beneficiaries from selling, transfering or otherwise encumbering their land grants within a prescribed period? If so, it seems to me that, while the SDO may be unacceptable to some sectors, even as it remains in the law, redress properly belongs either in the legislature or in the SC.
Meantime, I’m of the view that equal, if not heavier, weight has to be assigned to prohibited sales precisely because they are expressly prohibited.
The point being: SDO remains legal; sales within the prohibited period remains illegal. If we admit that that the SDO option is still in the law and, therefore, it’s exercise prima facie legal until revoked in either of the two ways stated above, then the sale of CARP land grants within the proscribed period is prima facie illegal and must, thus, be prosecuted. So, who did, when and how, and why is no one being prosecuted for it?
This is not to diminish or denigrate the legitimate concerns of all farmers, particularly those of the HLI’s. But I think a fairer view dictates that we look deep into the violations perpetrated at will by some of those who, by being legislators with exceptional means and real interests [pun intended], had the gall and gumption to violate the very same laws they crafted.
Talk about vile designs and vile motives.
Basilio Jamisola
26 Feb, 2010
Unfortunately, Aurora is like the others who are so dumb and their IQ is so low that they can never comprehend even if they read the Plain Truth article 1 million times. Pabayaan mo na lang na mag yak yak ang mga yan.Anyway there are still many who understand..
luis
1 Mar, 2010
I would like to presume that aurora is not so dumb, but simply taking the hardline of activist and the left or maybe shes both. No one can convince nor get to the bottom this kind of people,Ive been there before.So the best thing to treat this is to ignore than to argue non-sense things.