Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Valenzuela
College of Education, Arts and Sciences
Department of Social Sciences
GE 2
Readings in
Philippine
History
AGRARIAN
REFORM POLICIES
Agrarian Reform is very
significant for the economy of
any country because more than
half of the population is
employed in the agricultural
sector. Agriculture is the main
source of livelihood especially for
the developing countries.
Reforms are important because
they protect the rights of the
farmers .
History of Agrarian Reform in the Philippines
Agrarian reform can refer either, narrowly, to government-initiated or government-
backed redistribution of agricultural land (see land reform) or, broadly, to an
overall redirection of the agrarian system of the country, which often includes
land reform measures.
Pre-Colonial Times (Before 16th Century)
What was the type of land ownership during the pre-Spanish
time?
Land was commonly owned by the community known as
barangay. This is a small unit of government consisting of 30-
100 families administered by the chiefs. Everyone in the
barangay regardless of status had access on the land and
mutually shares resources and the fruits of their labor. They
believed in and practiced the concept of “stewardship” where
relationship between man and nature is important.
SPANISH ERA (1521-1896)
What was the system of land cultivation
at this period?
• The colonial government at this period
introduced a pueblo agriculture, a
system wherein native rural
communities were organized into
pueblo and each Christianized native
family is given a four to five hectares of
land to cultivate.
• The pueblo agriculture practiced no
share cropper class or landless class.
• The native families were merely
landholders and not landowners.
AMERICAN ERA (1898-1935)
What initiated the Americans to focus on land
reform?
Realizing that being landless was the main cause of
social unrest and revolt at that time, the Americans
sought to put an end to the miserable conditions of
the tenant tillers and small farmers by passing
several land policies to widen the base of small
landholdings and distribute land ownership among
the greater number of Filipino tenants and farmers.
Philippine Bill of 1902
This law provided regulations on the disposal of
public lands wherein a private individual can own 16
hectares of land while the corporate land holdings
can avail of 1, 024 hectares.
This also gave the rights to the Americans to own
agricultural lands.
Why was the Torrens system of land registration introduced?
Some 400,000 native farmers were without titles at the start of the
American era, this situation was also aggravated by the absence of
records of issued titles and accurate land surveys. To remedy the
situation, the Torrens system was then introduced to replace the
registration system implemented by the Spaniards.
Under Torrens system
The Land Registration Act of 1902 or Act. No. 496
placed all private and public lands under Torrens system. Torrens
title is the certificate of ownership issued by the land Register of
Deeds, naming and declaring the owner of the real property described
therein, free from all liens and encumbrances except such as may be
expressly noted thereon or otherwise reserved by law
The Cadastral Act or Act. No. 2259
speeds up the issuance of Torrens titles. This was done by surveying
a municipality and presented the result to the land registration court.
Homestead program of 1903
This program allowed an enterprising tenant to acquire a farm of at least 16 hectares to
cultivate. However, the program was not implemented nationwide and was introduced only
in some parts of Mindanao and Northern Luzon, where there were available public alienable
and disposable lands.
Other agrarian laws introduced by the Americans
• Land Act or Act No. 926
provided rules and regulations for selling and leasing portions of the public domain,
completing defective Spanish land titles, and canceling and confirming Spanish
concessions.
• Public Land Act of 1919 or Act 2874
limits the use of agricultural lands to Filipinos, Americans and citizens of other countries.
A temporary provision of equality on the rights of American and Filipino citizens and
corporations.
• Friar Land Act or Act. No. 1120
provided the administrative and temporary leasing and selling of friar lands to its tillers.
• Rice Share Tenancy Act of 1933 or Act. No. 4054
first legislation regulating the relationships of landlord and tenants and the first law to
legalize a 50-50 crop sharing arrangement.
• Sugarcane Tenancy Contracts Act of 1933 or Act No. 4113
regulated the relationship of landlord and tenants in the sugarcane fields and required
tenancy contracts on land planted to sugarcane.
• JAPANESE ERA
Peasants and workers organized
the HUKBALAHAP (Hukbong
Bayan Laban sa mga Hapon) on
March 29, 1942 as an anti-
Japanese group. They took over
vast tracts of land and gave the
land and harvest to the people.
For them, the war was a golden
opportunity for people’s initiative
to push pro-poor programs.
Landlords were overpowered by
the peasants but unfortunately at
the end of the war, through the
help of the military police and
civilian guards landlords were
able to retrieve their lands from
the HUKBALAHAP.
Government Initiatives on Agrarian Reform
Manuel L. Quezon (1935-1944)
RA 4054 or the Rice Tenancy Law
was the first law on crop sharing which legalized
the 50-50 share between landlord and tenant with
corresponding support to tenants protecting them
against abuses of landlords. However, this law
was hardly implemented because most of the
municipal councils were composed of powerful
hacienderos and big landlords. In fact, only one
municipality passed a resolution for its
enforcement and majorities have petitioned its
application to the Governor General.
The 1935 Constitution
provided specific provisions on social justice and
expropriation of landed estates for distribution to
tenants as a solution to the land ownership and
tenancy problems.
Manuel Roxas (1946-1948)
Republic Act No. 34
70-30 sharing arrangement between tenant and landlord. The 70% of the
harvest will go to the person who shouldered the expenses for planting,
harvesting and for the work animals. It also reduced the interest of
landowners’ loans to tenants at not more than 6%.
• The purchase of 8,000 hectares of lands in Batangas owned by the
Ayala-Zobel family. These were sold to landless farmers. However, due to
lack of support facilities, these farmers were forced to resell their lands to
the landowning class.
Elpidio Quirino (1948-1953)
Executive Order No. 355, the Land Settlement Development
Corporation (LASEDECO)
was established to accelerate and expand the peasant resettlement
program of the government. However, due to limited post-war resources,
the program was not successful.
Ramon Magsaysay (1953-1957)
• R.A. No. 1199 (1954): Agricultural Tenancy Act basically governed
the relationship between landholders and tenant-farmers. This law
helped protect the tenurial rights of tenant tillers and enforced fair
tenancy practices.
• R.A. No. 1160 (1954): Free distribution of Resettlement and
Rehabilitation and Agricultural land and an Act establishing the
National Resettlement and Rehabilitation Administration (NARRA).
• R.A. No. 1400 (1955) : Land Reform Act or known as “Land to the
Landless” Program which sought improvement in land tenure and
guaranteed the expropriation of all tenanted landed estates.
• Agricultural Tenancy Commission
to administer problems arising from tenancy.
• 28,000 hectares were issued to settlers.
• Agricultural Credit and Cooperative Financing Administration
(ACCFA)
This is a government agency formed to provide warehouse facilities
and assist farmers market their products and established the
organization of the Farmers Cooperatives and Marketing
Associations (FACOMAs).
• Carlos P. Garcia (1957-1961)
Was there was no legislation passed in his term but he continued
to implement the land reform programs of President Magsaysay.
• Diosdasdo Macapagal (1961-1965)
• “Father of Agrarian Reform”
• Land Reform Code or RA No. 3844
• RA No. 3844
Act abolished share tenancy in the Philippines. It prescribed a
program converting the tenant farmers to lessees and eventually
into owner-cultivators; It aimed to free tenants from the bondage
of tenancy and gave hope to poor Filipino farmers to own the
land they are tilling. It emphasized owner-cultivatorship and
farmer independence, equity, productivity improvement and the
public distribution of land.
Ferdinand E. Marcos (1965-1986)
• Presidential Decree No. 27
It provided for tenanted lands devoted to rice and corn to pass ownership to the tenants,
and lowered the ceilings for landholdings to 7 hectares. The law stipulated that share
tenants who worked from a landholding of over 7 hectares could purchase the land they
tilled, while share tenants on land less than 7 hectares would become leaseholders.
Corazon C. Aquino (1986-1992)
• Proclamation 131, instituted the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP)
as a major program of the government. It provided for a special fund known as the
Agrarian Reform Fund (ARF) in the amount of 50 Billion pesos to cover the estimated
cost of the program for the period 1987-1997.
• EO 228
declared full ownership of the land to qualified farmer-beneficiaries covered by PD 27. It
also regulated (fixed) the value of remaining rice and corn lands for coverage provided for
the manner of payment by the farmerbeneficiaries and the mode of compensation (form of
payment) to the landowners.
• RA 6657 or Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law
an act instituting a comprehensive agrarian reform program to promote social justice and
Industrialization, providing the mechanism for its implementation and for other purposes.
The Lumad of the Philippines
LUMAD is a Bisayan term meaning “native” or “indigenous”. It is adopted
by a group of 15 from a more than 18 Mindanao ethnic groups in their
Cotabato Congress in June 1986 to distinguish them from the other
Mindanaons, Moro or Christian. Its usage was accepted during the Cory
Administration when R.A. 6734, the word Lumad was used in Art. XIII sec.
8(2) to distinguish these ethnic communities from the Bangsa Moro.
Called ” infieles” during the Spanish regime, the subjugation of the
Lumads was equally important as that of the Muslims. Thus, Jesuit
missions were established near infieles territories. They were found
among the Tiruray in Cotabato; among the Subanons in Dapitan;
among the Manuvus and Caragans in Misamis and Surigao; and
among the Bilaans in Davao.
Lumads practiced swidden agriculture depending on the land’s
productivity. Communal sharing of resources based on the belief of the
sacredness of land and nature as divine endowments define their
relationship with their environment.
SEEDS OF RESISTANCE: A PERSONAL ACCOUNT OF THE LUMAD
STRUGGLE FOR LAND SOVEREIGNTY
by Christiaan Delgado-Pfeifer
Most schools have their own farms for communal crop production,
medicinal herbs, and demonstration areas to apply organic agricultural
techniques. In the classroom, we study the actual history of Lumad struggles
against colonialism, their collective rights as indigenous people, and global
current events. Here, the students and their teachers come together to
create deep knowledge and lasting action to defend the earth and struggle
for justice in our homeland.
Youth sing songs as they cook on the blazing fire-- embedded in the lyrics is
our vision of a new culture of unity in defense of their ancestral lands. This
school is a haven for young people to learn, who are often the first in their
lineage of farmers to receive a formal education. And while this space
meant to be a safe haven, the children also sing stories of death, stolen
land, and forced evacuation from ancestral domains under the rule of
Martial
In 2017,Law.
the Duterte administration claimed, “I will use the armed forces, the
Philippine air force. I’ll really have those [schools] bombed … because you
are operating illegally and you are teaching the children to rebel against
government.” In the eyes of the Duterte administration it has become illegal
rebellion to teach children how to farm organically, how to defend the
collective rights of indigenous people, and to speak out courageously
against military terror. In this situation, who are the real criminals? Is it the
Lumad who are sustaining and preserving the soil for future generations? Or
is it the Duterte administration who has invested over 8 trillion pesos
(roughly 418 million USD) from the World Bank and United States
