ppines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
First Regular Session

3104

HOUSE BILL NO.

INTRODUCED BY ANAKPAWIS PARTY-LIST REPRESENTATIVE
RAFAEL V. MARIANO

EXPLANATORY NOTE

In the last two decades, our government has redesigned the disposition of our
agricultural lands as part of our economic reconstruction along the thrust of economic
liberalization. ‘The liberalization process imposed by the International Monetary Fund
(MF) and later, the World Trade Organization (WTO) and other similar “free wade
agreements” (FTAs) has been intended to open new areas for local and foreign investments
supposedly in order to wean our economy from agriculture dependence and place it on
tack toward private sector-led and export-oriented “industrialization.”!

In pursuance of such thrust, the government rolled out different development
blueprints that built on and exponentially expanded the World Bank-inspired “integrated
area development” (IAD) model of land use plan that was first applied in Ue country when
the Marcos regime erected the foundation of "export processing zones" and implemented
the Green Revolution, These development blueprints went by different names: "industrial
corridor” during the Aquino administration, “growth areas" during Ramos, "straicgic
agriculture and fisheries development zones" with their cores of "regional industrial
centers” during Estrada, and “super regions” under the present Arroyo administration.
But they have one essential feature: they disposed our land resources toward providing
the spatial requirements for attracting local and foreign investments.

In the main, those requirements include allotting lands for building inves
nd infrastructure development that served to connect the investment basins to
the export market. ‘The di s that the lands allocated have been getting bigger and
wider with each name and development blueprint. With the First Calabarzon Project as
prototype, each development model went from integrating provinces to integrating
requiring the massive allocation of lands in a scale that the country had never seen
fore, with the land allocation running in hundreds of thousands of hectares (such as
Estrada’s "SAFDZs" and Arroyo's “super regions’). To illustrate the land scope, the First
Calabarzon Project covers over 900,000 hectares.

ment
basins a

The development trajectory pursued in the post-Marcos period was actually the second stage uf

plementation of the “export-oriented ° platform that was started during the carly years of
ne Marcos dictatorship but fost popular support. For instance,
¢ Calabarzon Project was acitally it was implemented by the Aquine

segimte retaining about 90% of ies eompon


reclassification of our

This triggered an unprecedented cruption of whole:
agricultural lands from the national level down to local government units to force open
our land resources lo local and foreign investments. The policies and rules on land use
were also relaxed to release our lands from their actual agricultural use and tenure,
enhance their commodification and (o facilitate the penetration of investments. In
addition, laws were passed to batter down the structural restrictions to the entry of
foreign investments into our agriculture? This led the local land market and real estate
industry, together with speculators, land hoarders and “buccaneers” to set out a new
of land accumulation that preys on the possession of small farmers and even
n reform beneficiaries.

All these measures were done with the government failing to enact a national land
use plan to guide the content and course of investments on the ground. In the highly
liberalized economy that unfolded, the only government's role in these development
programs was to designate the arcas for investment and infrastructure to build up, As to
the investment content of these areas, it is left to the private sector initiative.

With the release of our land resources to private sector-led investment forays, local
and foreign investors have had their “season in the sun” encroaching on land reform
areas, speculating on the burgeoning land market and converting agricultural lands to
other uses. This, in tum, spiked land prices that animated many landlords and real estate
speculators to “strike while the iron is hot’, And they struck with such frenzy that it
assumed the dimension of a mindless real estate invasion on our peasant communities
and agricultural lands.

In a naked display of private sector abuse, prime rice lands that once lined both
sides of the highways going to Central Luzon and Southern Tagalog were wiped out by
land use conversion in just a matter of four years (1990-1994). Even the highly irrigated
rice lands were not spared. The rice lands that used to serve the basic needs of the
majority were replaced by real estate projects that mainly serve the luxuries of the elite.
So it is not only that these projects took our agricultural lands away from real productive
use, they also had narrow and short term benefits.

As a national phenomenon, land use conversion first conquered the plain:
such topography give the real estate projects their supposed "competitive edge” (proximity
and accessibility to urban-based facilities). Even before the plains were exhausted, it
started going into the interior of the country. When the expanded version of the
prototypical Calabarzon Project was replicated to other regions of the country, more lands
fell to the mindless land use conversion. In some parts of the country, after exhausting
our prime agricultural lands, tershed areas, laying siege on our
environment in the name of “eco-tourism”. While the government of the day and real
estate investors hailed the dawning in the country of a “real estate boom", our farmers
Hecred the rapid shrinking of our prime agricultural lands and the loss of their farms and
ivelihood.

Because of private sector abuse of their right to profit and with land use conversion
going uncontrolled, the country lost a lot of intangibles that proved disastrous to our
economy in the long term. Foremost of these intangibles are the productive forces in our
agriculture that were destroyed by land use conversion. According to the National

; of these laws is the Foreign Investors Land Lease Act which gives foreign investors the right to
Jease public agricultural lands for « period of 5O years and renewable for another 25 years, The lav, authares
oy then Sen. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, was passed in 1994



atistics Office (NSO), over 800,000 hectares of lands had been converted to other uses
since 1972. It can be fairly ed that about three-fourth of this figure were converted
during the post-Marcos implementation of the “export-oriented industrialization” program.
On the equation that a hectare can employ 4-5 farm workers, that means the loss of 2 to
3 million jobs and livelihood in agriculture. On the average 3-hectare landholding, the
figure also means that some 200,000 displaced farmers were added to the landless rural
population, exacerbating thereby the problem of landlessness in the countryside

If these lands were planted to palay, that also means the country’s loss of no less
than 1.8 million metric tons (MT) of rice. Thus, in addition to lost employment and
increasing landlessness, land use conversion had also banished our food security to
oblivion. In 1996, our rice imports volume started climbing to the heights of 1 million MT
a year, It reached the 2 million MT mark in 1998 when the country experienced "El Nino”
it went down to the vicinity of 700,000 MT a year during 1999 -2002 but in 2002 -2008, it
hovered at 1.1 million MT a year. For 2010 requirements, the past government ordered
2.45 million MT of rice.

‘The employment and livelihood that land use conversion destroyed and the
landlessness it left on its wake bears upon the growing inequality in our society and
reversed previous attempts to attain social justice for the poor. While landlords and real
estate companies raked in the profit windfall from the "real estate boom" and scaled the
ladder of the "top 100 corporations” of the country, the dispossessed farmers became
poorer and more vulnerable to the violence of poverty. Land distribution was shunted

side as land use conversion over ran areas covered by agrarian reform or otherwise
claimed by farmers through quasi-legal means. This is not to mention that land use
conversion disrupts the decades of peace of our peasant communities.

Moreover, the loss of our prime agricultural lands to land use conversion is a factor
to the further weakening and deterioration of our agriculture. It wasted away our most
productive lands, driving our dispossessed farmers to marginal areas of our hinterlands.
This adds more pressure to our depleted land resources. It is also driving our farmers out
of agriculture. Since land use conversion is a threat to the security of tenure of our
farmers over their farms, it exacerbates the insecurities and risks that they are
experiencing duc to the government's all-out liberalization of our agriculture.

For all the intangibles our country had given up, the frenzied land use conversion
in the last nineteen years had not really brought our country any closer to
“industrialization" since many of the projects that were put up were speculative and,
therefore, non-essentials. Most of these projects were golf courses, so-called "self-
contained communities" with hotels and supcrmalls as their core, recreation and vacation
get-away complexes and high-end residential enclaves that cater to the elite, Given such
wasteful disposition of our land resources, its trade-offs have been costly, While the “real
estate boom" displaced thousands of farmers, it employed little from among our large
echnical labor for id absorbed almost nothing from the displaced laboring foree in
agriculture,

Its greatest impact, however, has been on the fundamentals and health of our
economy, The “estate bubble” channeled investments away from real production. It is
interesting to note that during the peak of the “real estate bubble” (1992-1997] industrial
output declined, indicating that whatever growth the count ry attained from the "boom"
was as hollow as it was unproductive. The projects of the "real estate bubble” being driven
by speculation and fund leveraging, their stocks and added value were blown out of their
real worth so much so that the “bubble” proved to be the tinderbox for the implosion in
the country of the financial crisis that engulfed Asia in 1997.



Finally, the shrinking of our rice and prime agricultural lands came home to roost.
For the past 5 years, our annual rice imports have been well over one million MT.
Unfortunately, our government and its economic managers seemed not to have leaned
anything from these crises,

is ground alone, its use must be regulated. But
control over the disposition of our land resource:
d frontier as early as the 1960s,
pand nor the luxury to fritter

Land is a finite resource. On thi
what adds urgency to pu bern;
is the fact that our country had reached the end of its |
‘That means that our country no longer has the capacity Lo ex
our lands away to inefficient and unwise use.

‘The purpose of this bill is to seek regulation on land use conversion so as to
prevent the unbridled abuse of our land resources by landlords and speculators to the
detriment of our agriculture and our small farmers, Pending the enactment of a national
land use plan that should guide investments, regulation is here sought to be attained by
prohibiting the conversion into other uses of our prime agricultural lands while strictly
delineating the conditions under which the land use conversion of non-prime agricultural
lands may be allowed. The prohibition part of the bill aims to put a stop to the decimation
of our prime agricultural lands as a way of protecting our agriculture and our farmers as
well as the environment. By so doing, it is hoped that we can reverse the slide toward total
loss of our food security,

The regulation part, on the other hand, aims to ensure that the land use
conversion of non-prime agricultural lands will not affect the economic viability and
ainability of prime agricultural lands. It also aims to ensure that land use conversion
not disturb the peace of our peasant communities and will not violate the tenure of
our farmers over their farms. It is hoped that through such regulation, our country can
have its desired development without displacing large sections of our population,

nds

Itis, therefore, carnestly requested that this bill be urgently approved

FAEL V. MARIAI
Anakpawis Party-list


Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

lar Session

_si04

HOUSE BILL NO.

INTRODUCED BY ANAKPAWIS PARTY-LIST REPRESENTATIVE
RAFAEL V. MARIANO

AN ACT
PROHIBITING THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY
‘THE CONVERSION OF PRIME AGRICULTURAL LANDS INTO OTHER USES AND
REGULATING THE CONVERSION OF NON-PRIME AGRICULTURAL LANDS AND
PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS THEREFOR
AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in. Congr
assembled:

Section 1. Title. - This Act shall be known as the ind Use Conversion Prohibition

Act of 2010",

Section 2, State Principles and Policies. The State realizes that land use conv ion is a
serious threat to the sustainability of a primarily agricultural economy as well as the food
security of our country. It has displaced farmers and destroyed their livelihood which
immensely contributed to the inc of landlessness and uncmployment in the
countryside. It has disrupted, if not defiled, the ecological balance of our environment
which has an impact on local climate change and imminent water cr

‘The State also realizes that agricultural lands are the primary means of livelihood of
seventy percent (70 %) of our population. Land is a finite resource whose use must be
regulated to prevent the depletion of our agricultural lands, attain efficient and wise use of
our land resources and achieve balanced growth in agriculture and industry.

It is the policy of the State to preserve and conserve our agricultural lands. Toward this
end, the State shall regulate land use conversion to resuscitate the sustainability of our
agriculture, prevent the total loss of our food security, protect our ecology and
environment and promote industrial development without displacing our farmers and
destroying their livelihood.

Section 3. Definition of terms. For the purpose of this Act, the following terms were
defined as:

a. Agricultural land refers to lands. regardless of classification, suitable for
agricultural production, both crops and livestock, or such other activity
connected with agricultural production;


stem of

b, Biodiversity refers to the variation of life forms within a given ecosy
an area;

Crop conversion refers to the change in the devotion of an agricultural land
from one crop to another (as for example, from rice to cauliflower or banana);

d. Ecological habitat refers to an ecological or environmental arca that is
inhabited by a particular species of animal, plant or another type of
organism;

¢. Irrigation refers to the system and infrastructure of supplying water to
cultivated agricultural lands. It includes natural irrigation systems that can
be had from lakes, rivers, rivulets, streams, waterfalls, springs, and rainfall;

f, Land use conversion refers to the act of changing the current use of a piece
of agricultural land into some other use;

g. Non-prime agricultural land refers to lands whose suitability to agricultural
production or use is below the averaged 3.0 grade of the combined factors of
soil fertility, climate, biodiversity, terrain, irrigation and other infrastructure
development;

h. Prime agricultural land refers to lands whose suitability for agricultural
production or use has an averaged .3.0 grade or above of the combined factors
of soil fertility, climate, biodiversity, terrain, irrigation and other
infrastructure development

i. Reclassification refers to the act of spe
utilized for non-agricultural uses,
to the requirements and procedui

cifying how agricultural lands shall be
as embodied in the land use plan, subject
for land use conversion

Section 4, National survey to delineate prime agricultural lands from non-prime
agricultural lands. To implement the mandate of this Act, the Department of Agriculture
(henceforth, the Department) shail conduct a national survey to delineate prime
agricultural lands from non-prime agricultural lands in accordance with the definitions of
this Act. The National Mapping and Rescarch Information Authority (NAMRIA) will also be
involved in the national survey. The survey shall be completed within six (6) months after
the effectivity of this Act.

Section 5. Formula for determining prime agricultural lands and non-prime
agricultural lands. The survey to be conducted by the Department shall determine
agricultural lands whether they are prime or non-prime by grading such lands on a scale
of 1 to 10 according to the factors of soil fertility, climate, biodiversity, terrain, irrigation
and other infrastructure development. The grade for each factor shall then be
cumulatively averaged. Agricultural lands with a median grade of 3.0 and above shall be
categorized as prime agricultural lands while agricultural lands with a median grade of
below 3.0 shall be considered non-prime.

Section 6. Segregation of prime agricultural lands. In the conduct of the survey
mentioned in Section 4, prime agricultural lands situated within zones or arcas declared
by any law or executive issuance as reserved for specific purposes, such as, but not
limited to, special economic zones, tourism zones, human settlements, military
reservations, campus sites, and the likes or otherwise covered by reclassification
ordinance, zoning ordinance or land used plans of local government units, where such



lands have remained agricultural in actual use or undeveloped in the last three (3} years
regardless of any reason, shall be segregated from the portion of the reservations actually
developed or used for the specific purpose for which they have been reserved by law,
executive issuance or reclassification ordinance /zoning ordinance/land use plan.

Section 7. Strict prohibition of land use conversion of prime agricultural lands. The
conversion of prime agricultural lands to other uses shall be strictly prohibited until
Congress has enacted a national land use plan.

Section 8. Strict prohibition of other non-prime agricultural lands. Until Congress
has enacted a national land use plan, the conversion of non-prime agricultural lands to
other uses shall also be strictly prohibited in the following instances:

a, where the non-prime
of rice, corn and other

icultural lands have been devoted to the production
ple food of the community

b. where the non-prime agricultural lands have been occupied and made
productive for at least three (3) years by settlers, tiller-occupants or farmers;
and

a. where the non-prime agricultural lands are the host of watershed areas,

Section 9. Prohibition of destruction of the ecological habitat of agricultural lands.
It is likewise strictly prohibited of any person to perform such acts that cause the
diminution of the economic viability or productivity of prime agricultural lands, or such
acts that destroy or undermine the sustainability of production in prime agricultural
lands, including the destruction of their ecological habitat. Such acts include the
following:

a. destroying water systems, whether natural or man-made, or diverting or
impeding their Now that causes prime agricultural lands to lose their sources
of irrigation, making it appear that the affected lands are no longer
economically viable;

b, large-scale cutting of trees that destroys the biodiversity of prime agricultural
lands;

quarrying that will have the same of destroying the biodiversity of prime
agricultural lands;

d. contaminating the water systems that irrigate prime agricultural lands with
mercury and similar harmful elements or chemicals; and

©, failure to prevent the spill of mine wastes to prime agricultural lands.

Section 10. Regulating the conversion of non-prime agricultural lands, If the
agricultural land is non-prime and not suffering from any of the instances mentioned in

Section 8, the land maybe converted to other uses subject to the following requisites and
conditions:

The conversion is for the construction of public schools, housing projects of
the National Housing Authority, or public works that primarily serve
agricultural production such as farm-to-market roads, bridges, irrigation,



public markets, public warehouses for agricultural products, and similar
public purposes;

ito the natural rhythm and cycle
5 and

b. The conversion shall not affect or interfere
of the biodiversity of the entire environment of the ar

¢. The conversion shall not diminish the productivity and the suitability for
agricultural use of prime agricultural lands within the vicinity of the project.

Section 11. Disapproval by law of all pending applications for land use conversion.
All applications for land use conversion authority over prime agricultural lands already
filed with the proper office of the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) but not yet acted
upon as of December 31, 2008 are hereby declared disapproved by this Act. The lands
covered by the disapproval shall automatically revert to agricultural classification.

As to applications for land use conversion authority over non-prime agricultural lands
already filed with the proper office of the DAR as of December 31, 2008, such applications
shail be acted upon in accordance with Sections 8 and 10 of this Act

Section 12. Revocation of approved land use conversion authority for undeveloped
projects. All approved land use conversion authorities over agricultural lands covered by
Sections 8 to 10 but whose development projects have not started or with portions that
have remained undeveloped as of December 31, 2008 are hereby declared revoked by this
Act, Such lands or their undeveloped portion shall automatically revert to agricultural
classification

Section 13. Lands under disapproved or revoked land use conversion authority to be
distributed to farmers. All agricultural lands whose conversion authority has been
disapproved or revoked shall be turned over to the DAR for distribution to qualified
farmer-beneficiaries.

Section 14, Development requirement before another reclassification by local
government units, Local government units shall not cnact a new land use plan, zoning
ordinance or another reclassification of agricultural lands unless four-fifth (4/5) of the
lands previously reclassified has been developed.

Section 15. Land reclassification review mechanism. When a local government unit
reclassifies non-prime agricultural lands, it shall create a Task Force for the purpose of
reviewing the proposed reclassification, The Task Force shall be composed of the
following:

a, representative from the farmers’ sector;

b. representative from the Barangay Agrarian Reform Council;
¢. representative from the irrigators’ association:
d. representative from the local government unit
¢
f

representative from the National Irrigation Authority (NIA}
representative from the National Food Authority (NFA); and
&- Tepresentative from the civil society and other civic organizations.

‘The Task Force shall ensure consultation and public hearings. No reclassification of rice

lands shall be made by local government units without the recommendation of the Task
Force:


Section 17. Penalties. Any person found to have violated the provisions of this Act shall
be punished with an imprisonment of not less than six (6) years and a fine of not less
than One Hundred Fifty Thousand Pesos (P150,000.00) but not more than Three Hundred
Thousand Pesos (P300,000.00}.

if the conversion has been completed or irreversible, the building or infrastructure shall
be confiscated by the State. The confiscated property shall be turned over to the local
government with jurisdiction for public usc or for public auction.

If the violator of this Act is a corporation, partnership, or any other juridical entity, the
penal provisions hereof shall be applied to the president or chief executive officer of the
corporation, the managing partner in the case of partnership, or the equivalent head in
the case of any other juridical entity or any other person acting in their behalf, In the case
of corporations, the indictment shall include the manager of the department directly
responsible for the construction or conversion.

If the violator is a government official, he/she shall suffer the additional penalty of
permanent disqualification from employment in the government or any of its subdivisions,
instrumentality, or government-owned or controlled corporations.

Any person who evicts a farmer tilling an agricultural land to make it appear that the land
has no present tiller or occupant or who changes the crop of the land to make it appear
that the land is not devoted to rice, corn and other staple food shall be punished with an
imprisonment of not less than one (1) year but not more than three (3) year

Section 18. Implementing Rules and Regulations. Within thirty (30) days aftcr the
tivity of this Act, the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR), in consultation with the
Department of Agriculture (DA) and the Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (DENR), shall issue the Implementing Rules and Regulations of this Act

Section 19. Suppletory Application. All previous or existing laws, decrees, executive
orders, rules and regulations, and other issuances consistent with this Act shall have
suppletory effect.

Section 20. Repealing Clause. All previous or existing laws, decrees, executive orders,
rules and regulations or parts thercof inconsistent with this Act are hereby repealed or
amended accordingly.

Section 21. Separability Clause. If, for any reason, any section or provision of this Act is
declared null and void, no other section, provision, or part thereof shall be affected and
the same shall remain in full force and effect.

Section 22. Effectivity Clause. This Act shall take effect immediately after publication in
at least two (2) national newspapers of general circulation.

Approved.