Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
Second Regular Session
5249

HOUSE BILL

Introduced by:

Gakriela Womer’s ifarty Reps. LUZVIMINDA C. JLAGAN and EMMI A. DE JESUS

EXPLANATORY NOTE

Asiicle II, Section 15 of the <987 Philippine Constitution provides that, “The State shall protect and promote the right
\o healih of the people and insi!{ health consciousness among them.”

Furthermore, Section 16 of the same Article provides that, “The Stale shall protect and advance the right of the
people lo 2 balanved and heclinful evology in accora with the shythm and harmony of nature’

On the streagin of the above-quoted provisions of the 1987 Constitution, this bill seeks to prohibit aerial spraying

Aatial spray’: has recently become the preiered method of local commarcial farms and agr-business {NCS in
‘applying pesticides and herbicides on their export craps production. Among the country’s export cp lines, itis most
particularly used in the banana industry. According fo the Philippine Banana Growers and Exporters Association
{PRGEA), local commercial farms and agi-business TNCs preier the use of aerial spraying because it is the
cheapest methos for applying pesticide and herbicide

Be that as it may, such method has become a nuisance and a bane to residents living near banana plantations that 4
is about lime the Stale uses its police powers to put a stop to aerial spraying in order to protect the health and well
being of its people as well as of the environment.


Decades 396, zerial spraying was nat much of 2 social problem because local banana plantations were few, largely
smal scal2 and iar from population concentration. Under 3 Letter of Instruction issued in 1973 by former Pres.
Marcos, banana plantations were also conlained and limited to 26,250 hectares in Mindanao’. Since then, however,
‘as the crop tumned inlo economies of scale and rase to become the couniy's leading agricultural export crop, banana
produetion has expanded tremendously. In Mindanao alone, the expansion has been aboul B00 tmes bigger than the
land size banana production covered in the 1970s. Thal transtales to some 250,000 hectares and sill expanding
‘Such an expansion has easily affected a popuialion of malions.

More than the fact that communities had sprouled around banana pianlations that were once sparsely populated. the
‘expansion, aided in no small measure by weak environmental laws and official venality, has eneroacneo on
poputaled areas and emergent villages and towns, bringing into these populated areas the pemicious practize of
using aerial spraying by local commercial farms and agr-business TNCs

ln expanding into these areas, iocal commercial farms and agr-business TNCs drummed up thie economia
advantages that expansion would supposedly bring such as employment and additional revenues for love!
government units. But in harping on these economic benefits, lite attention was paid to the adverse effects ot
‘expansion on the ecological and health welfare of the peopte.

A suudy rade by the Peasant Education Studies Center in 2007? shows how aerial spraying has become a nuisance
to the affected population. In the victims’ acoount on how arial spraying has affected ther lives, scenes shiades ot
Hitier’s blitzkrieg over London during WWI) would come to mind thal local folks, in whal is an apt description of thew
predicament, have come to more popularly call it “aerial bombardment" {in contrast to insidious outsiders who prefer
10 call it ‘chemical showers’ to blunt wilh euphemism the deadly implication of aerial spraying;

‘Once they haar the sound of a coming airplane, people would run to whatever ‘air raid shelters” they coukd fn, be it
thei homes, chapel, or empty bodegas. Or they would seek cover under some thick canopy of tees which does not
protect them at all, Onoe inside any enclosure, thay would close its door and windows, thereby risking suffocation,
just to shut off the nauseous odor that would engutt their whole immediale environment. Normally, they would remain
in the enclosure hours after the airplane had let because the spraying would feave behind a foul odor tal would last
for days, The moment they ventured out, they would find their washed clothes in the clothesine solled witn black
spots {like the color of “akitran") that they have to wash them again. Those who happened to be away from their
homes during the “atlack* would also find their leftover food already discolored that they had lo throw them away, In
addition, he nausea that aerial spraying inficts would leave the atected people lasing their appetite for two or three
days. On inase counts alone, aerial spraying is truly a perwisyo — a nuisance!

‘Acrial spraying is nol only a nuisance. IL is also delelesous to the health of the people living near banana piantations
‘4 2006 study? made by the Department of Health on a village near a banana plantation in Hagonoy. Davao del Sur

» Letter of Instruction No. §8, as amended by Letler of instruction No. 790 issued in 1979, This was repealed in 2009 via
Executive Order No. 807 issued by Pres. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. EO No. 607 Itted the limits on hectarage, paving the way for
Lurbounded expansion for banana production.

2 Peasant Education and Sues Genter, A Social lnvesigation On CARP implementation in TNC Lands in Mindanao, PESC:
‘Quezon City, 2067 (unpublished).

> Department of Health, A Heatth and Environmental Assessment in Sito Camocaan, Hagonay, Davao del Sir, DoH. Davao City,
2006.


showed the presence of high levels of ethylenetniourea (ETU) in their blood samples, ETU is a breakdown product of
Mancozeb, ¢:3°1 of a group of fungicides called ethylenedisdithiocarbamates (EBDCs), which is widely used by large-
scale banana growers. Mancozeb is a chemical classified as carcinogenic by the Swedish pesticide regulatory
authority. it has been documented to have produced “folicular and palltary’ thyroid cancer in rats and
*hepatooellula’ canst in mice. Such documentation highly suggests thst it can also induce thyroid and Iver cancer
in humans.

“The study also found high levels of ETU and chlorothalond (a broad spectrum fungicide used to contol mols,
mildew, bacteria and algae) in the soit and air in the village and, because of chemical drift, even in nearby areas

Furmermore, the study found that 52 % of the village residents who reported to have been exposed to aerial spraying
showed postexposure symptoms like eye redness, eye pan, eye teating, eye and skin ilchness, neadacne and
spells of vorniting and dizziness, These health conditions were aot found in villages not exposed to aerial spraying

anal spraying also affects the vegetation ang animal life inthe vieinity of banana plantations, Resutents ct wages
‘would repo thal the growth of plant life in their backyard and farms had been seriously stunted. Sinoe being
exposed to zetia spraying, coconut and fruit wees and local varieties of banana have stopped bearing fais The sod
has become infertile that people now find it dificult to grow food crops. Even grass grows scantily among the piace
People also ‘ind il harder lo raise pigs and chickens and other animals as they just die out, They also believe at
ther steams have been contaminated because a lol of animals refuse lo drink from these and the animals that do
eventually de.

Tris should point out to whal could be the worst destuctve impact of aerial spraying: fs defilement of the
environmeni and local ecosystems. Since the pesticides and herbicides are released into the air, ine method has
absolutely no means of controlling the chemical falioul to ensure that the harmful chemicals would nit only ther
tasgaled areas. The air-borne harmful chemicals are usualy swept by the winds, dispersing them over wide areas
that include rivers, lakes, streams, and other waler systems that in many rural parts of the county ae used for
personal hygiene and, most importantly, as sources ‘of aquatic foad and potable water.

Chemicals from pesticides and similar harmful substances aocumulats through the years. In the absence of deep-
going study on the goo ecological effects of chemical accumulation from pesticides released into the environment,
‘ene can only Imagine the long term implications on communities and the environment long exposed to aavial
spraying. Moreover, in some provinces, it must be noted that banana production expansion, having exhausted the
ppnme agricu'tural lands in the plains, has crept into areas that are near walarsheds and aquifers.

What gives added compuision for the state to intervena into this social bane is that local commercial farms and age
business TNCs have turned a deaf eat fo complaints brought to their attention by the affected population Refusing (0
lake responsibilty for the damage they wreaked on communities, they have used their corporate might to resist anc
foil attempis of peopie’s organizations and some local government units to curb aerial spraying in such places as
Davao City, Davao del Sur, and Bukidnon.

Locat commercial farms and agribusiness-TNCs have argued that the use of aeriat spraying is part of thelr property
rights which cannot be curtailed by law. Their defenders in the Department of Agriculture contend that the affected
people should be kind to our banana industry because it is the Number 1 dollar earner among our agricultural export
crops, as f saying thal people must bear with the destructive effects of aerial spraying for the dollars that the industy
bangs.


Such arguments are self-serving and specious. The property nights of local commercial farms and agn-business
[TNCs shoula end where the right of the people fo sound health and enviranment begins. And there should be no
argument that between profits and doliare earned Irom banana exports and the health of our people, the kates should
‘come first. To postulate that the people should bear with asia spraying because this countly owes 2 good amount of
doltars to the banana industy is to grossly misplace our priorities.

Given ail the premises, itis but fiting and proper for the stale to intervene into this social bane in benalf of the
affected people and for this bill to be urgently passed into law.

Gabriela Women’s Party Gabriela Women’s Party


Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
Second Regular Session

HOUSE BILL NO. 5249

sngoduced by

Gabriela Women's Party Reps. LUZVIMINDA C. ILAGAN and EMMI! A DE JESUS

AN ACT
PROHIBITING AERIAL SPRAYING AS A METHOD OF APPLYING CHEMICALS
AND SIMILAR SUBSTANCES ON AGRICULTURAL CROPS

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatves of the Phiippines in Congress assembkeo.

SECTION 1. Titi - This Act shallbe known as the “Aerial Spraying Prohibition Act of 2008."

SECTION 2. Dectaration of Stale Principles and Policies, ~ The Stale recognizes that, as an agricultural metned cf
‘applying chemicals and similar subslances, aerial spraying is vexalious lo the peace of communities. detrmentai 10
the health ana well-baing of the people, and desiructve of the flora and fauna and the environment.

It is hereby declared the policy of the State to promote the welfare of the people, including the succeading
generauons, by protecting their well-being, health and environment from any agricultural adtvity, practice or methoo
that wil lead fo the exposure of any person and the environment to hazardous chemicals, substances, of siniar
materials

SECTION 3. - Definition of Terms. - For purposes of this Act, the following terms shat! ba understood as follows:

«a. Aerial spraying refers to the application of chemicals, substances, or similar materia on crops by releasing them
into the ax rom an aire af


b. Agricultural practices refer to the practices that any person, natural or juridical, may conduct wn reiaton to Ms
agricultural activites.

 Agricuttural activities refer 1o activites involved in ine process of agnoultural proaucton, be it emai
large scale farrrung

eum aid

d. Hazardous chemicals refers to any substance or prouct of mixture intended 10 Contras, preven:
‘oF muigate directly oF mdirectly, any pest The lerm shall be understood tc incude insecbeide, Munya, bie
nemaloede, herbicide, molluscicide, avicide, rodenbeale, plant regulator, deloliant, dessicant ana Te eke sat a3
hazardous substanoss or hazardous material

Hep

@. Buffer Zonerelers to an idenlified S0-meter zone within and around the boundanes of
tasmeplariatons that néed special monitoring to avord or munwnize harm io the enviranment and winabi
avea of land that must lie within the property which does not include public ands, public thoraughlares a ackacent
private propenies. It must be planted with diversified tees thal grow taller than whal are usualy planted ard groan in
the plantation fo protect those within the adjacent fields, neighboring farms, residential area, schoois ana won praces

(se

{ Global Positioning Systam survey refers to a survey plan showing the moles and tounds of each aghnourur a
farrnplaniation that must be submitied lo the Office of the Mayor of the municipaltylity which has jusaicucn 2.er
the concerned agricultural farmssplantations.

SECTION 4, Prohibition of aerial spraying ~ The act of aerial spraying is detrimental lo ihe nealth anc weli-bertig of
the people and desinuctive of the environment. Its hereby declared contrary lo law and prohibited

SECTION 5, Monitoring and enforcing agency. - The Offios of the Provincial Governor of each province shalt 0& the
principal enforcement agency for monitoring and ensuring compliance of this Act and for apprenending and
prosecuting wiolaiors thereo! The Provincial Governor of each province shall form municipalityécty-based monsoring
teams from among farmersiarmmarkers organizations, environment protection advocates, <ivil soaety church
people, and youth organizations. The municipalicity mayor, municipality agriculturist, municinaltaty neatin officer,
‘and the munispaliaity chief of police shall be automatic members of lhe monitoring team.

Upon authorization of the municipalicty mayor, the municipaity/city-based monitoring teams shall nave mspeciorial
powers min respect to complanoe of providing buffer zones as mentioned in Section 8.

The monoring leams ate hereby deputized by this Act to make citizens’ arrest of persons who violate Section 4
hereot.

SECTION 6. Aircraft inventory. - To help the enforcing agency in monitoring and ensuring compliance of thus Act, all
persons, natural or juridical, who have practiced aerial spraying or have been engaged in the business of providing
aerial spraying services before the enaciment of this Act, shall be required to subrrt to the Orfloe of tne Prowncial
Governor an invenlory of the aircrafts they used in aerial spraying. The inventory shall indicate theran a bret
cistnetive descnplion of each aircraft, the company ogo, and location of hangar and olher relevant information for
the facile identification of the aircrarts when arbome.


SECTION ?. Corporate violators - Ht the wolatos of ts Act 1s a corporation, partnership, of any omer jucancal entity
the pena provisions hareot shall be applad to the present of chief executive officer of me comporaber: tne
managing partner in ina case of parinership, of Ue equzvaéent head in the case of any other pur “cat & ary
‘other person acting in ther behalf. In the case of corpcratons, the .naictment shall induce We tatiager 2° 76
eparement aiectly responsible for aerial sprayity ars? Sarar operations.

SECTION 8. Pronsion of Zufler Zone. — All persons, naural O° xaxdical, wha ae engaged
proguction olf fity (50) hectares and above and which maxes use of nazafdous chemicals suustar
10 improve productivity, must provide for a itty (30) meier butter zone within the Bound
tarmesplantations, Thus butfer zone muist be propeny identined througn Global Posttoning System (GPS, sr

if the agth flue crop product an nas an opsravien scae of three hundred (300) hectares and above we
shal be fir; (50, meters.

SECTION 9. Grace period for compliance of bulfer zones. - Afar the effectivity of his Act, there sha be 2 ei03 o!
‘cae (1) year witrin which the persons mentioned n Secuon B hereof shall comply the requirement of rowing utter
zones in thert agricultural farms/plantations as menhoned in the same Section,

SECTION 10. Penal Provisions. ~ Any person found to be violating the provisions of this Act shai be penaized 35
fotiows:

1. On violation of Section 4 heract

a. First Offense: Fine of Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.(0} and imprisonment of not tess than three {3} monins bul
fot more than six (6) months.

‘2. Seoone Offense: Fine of One hundred Thousand Pesos {100,000.00} and imprisonment <f wot ess than sa 16
montng but not “nore than one {) year ana suspension of business permits and licenses for one (1) yeas,

¢ Thitd Offense: Fine of One Hundred Fifty Thousand Pesos (P150,000.00} and imprisonment of nol less man one
(1) year but not more nan one (1) year and six (6) months and perpetual cancellation of permits and ienses

In the case of the pilot of the aircraft, the punishment for third violation shall include the canceltanon of ius pot
icons.

2. On vioiabon of Section 8:

a. A fine of Fifty Thousand Pesos (P$0,000 00).

SECTION 11. implemensng Rules and Regulations. — Within fifteen (150 days after the effecuuty of this Act the
Department of interior and Locat Government. in consultation with the Department af Agriculture, Deparment of

Health, Deparment of Environment ana Nalurat Resouces, and the Bureau of Rural Workers, shall issue the
implementing Rules and Regulations of this Act