dossiermanila

DE LIMA EYES WATCHLIST FOR MIKE ARROYO

2011-08-03T16:45:00.001+08:00

EMBATTLED former First Gentleman Jose Miguel Arroyo has been placed on the
government's watchlist, justice secrertary Leila De Lima announced yesterday.

Arroyo is n the watchlist of the Bureau of Immigration (BI) in
connection to anomalies over Philippine National Police’s
purchase of helicopters in 2009.

“I am inclined to issue a watchlist order (against Mr. Arroyo),” Sec.
Leila de Lima told reporters in an chance interview.

De Lima said she has directed her legal staff to already draft the
watchlist order, which was reportedly sought by the Senate President
Pro-Tempore Jose "Jinggoy" Estrada.

She said the order would be issued upon official receipt of the request.

Sen. Joseph Estrada asked Malacañang and the DOJ to place him in the BI
watchlist after Lion Air president Archibald Legaspi Po confirmed
during Senate blue ribbon committee hearing last Tuesday that Mr.
Arroyo was the previous owner of the two R44 Raven I choppers that
were sold as brand new to the PNP in 2009.

While on watchlist, Mr. Arroyo needs to ask for clearance from the DOJ
before he could leave the country.

The former first gentleman allegedly owned the controversial used
multi-million peso helicopters that were sold as brand new to the PNP
in 2009.###

SC STANDS BY RULING V. TRUTH COMMISSION

2011-07-26T15:46:00.002+08:00

High Court Affirms December Ruling that EO 1 will be used to persecute GMA

A RULING by the Supreme Court (SC) has turned down Malacanang's last ditch appeal to revive the Truth Commission to investigate dealings of the Arroyo administration, a key program of the present government.

Speaking to newsmen, Court Administrator Midas Marquez announced the court decision to uphold its earlier ruling declaring unconstitutional President Aquino’s Executive Order No. 1 creating a truth commission which was tasked to investigate anomalies during the Arroyo administration.

“A second motion for reconsideration would no longer be entertained because such pleading would be prohibited under the rules of court,” he told reporters in a news briefing.

Last December in a vote of 10 to 5, the court voted to declare EO 1 unconstitutional for violating the equal protection clause of the Constitution inasmuch as it singles out investigation of graft and corrupt practices in the previous administration.

This time the official voting was 10-3 following the retirement of two dissenters in the original opinion namely Associate Justices Eduardo Nachura and Conchita Carpio-Morales who was recently appointed Ombudsman.

The Aquino administration through Solicitor General Jose Anselmo Cadiz earlier had claimed that extending the scope of investigations indefinitely beyond the Arroyo administration is unrealistic and, as such, a matter of practice an incumbent administration only looks into the dealings of the one which preceded it.

Chief Justice Renato Corona, Associate Justices Teresita Leonardo-de Castro, Arturo Brion, Presbitero Velasco, Diosdado Peralta, Lucas Bersamin, Mariano del Castillo, Martin Villarama, Jose Perez and Jose Mendoza voted to declare the EO creating Philippine Truth Commission (PTC) unconstitutional.

The PTC headed by former Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr. would have investigated the countless corruption scandals during the Arroyo administration.Senior Associate Justices Antonio Carpio, Conchita Carpio-Morales, Eduardo Nachura,

Roberto Abad, and Ma. Lourdes Sereno dissented from the majority ruling.

The original SC decision written by Associate Justice Jose Mendoza said Malacanang should have included previous administrations under the coverage of the PTC which had originally been given a 29 month deadline to complete its fact finding mission exclusively on the Arroyo administration.

"Not to include past administrations similarly situated constitutes arbitrariness which the equal protection clause cannot sanction. Such discriminating differentiation clearly reverberates to label the commission as a vehicle for vindictiveness and selective retribution,"the majority opinion said.

"The Court, in exercising its power of judicial review, is not imposing its own will upon a co-equal body but rather simply making sure that any act of government is done in consonance with the authorities and rights allocated to it by the Constitution," the tribunal reasoned in its ruling.

The decision said that while "most government actions are inspired with noble intentions, all geared towards the betterment of the nation and its people...it is important to remember the end does not justify the means.”

In ordering the palace to cease and desist from implementing EO1 the court said "no matter how noble and worthy of admiration the purpose of an act, but if the means to be employed in accomplishing it is simply irreconcilable with constitutional parameters, then it cannot still be allowed. The Court cannot just turn a blind eye and simply let it pass. It will continue to uphold the Constitution and its enshrined principles."

“The Constitution must ever remain supreme. All must bow to the mandate of this law. Expediency must not be allowed to sap its strength nor greed for power debase its rectitude.”

The tribunal however suggested that "perhaps a revision of the executive issuance so as to include the earlier past administrations would allow it to pass the test of reasonableness and not be an affront to the Constitution,"

"Of all the branches of the government, it is the judiciary which is the most interested in knowing the truth and so it will not allow itself to be a hindrance or obstacle to its attainment. It must, however, be emphasized that the search for the truth must be within constitutional bounds for “ours is still a government of laws and not of men.”

In his separate opinion Chief Justice Renato Corona siding with the majority opinion conceded that although the President may supplant and directly exercise the investigatory functions of departments and agencies within the executive department, his power of control under the Constitution and the Administrative Code is confined only to the executive department.

Corona said that "without any law authorizing him, the President cannot legally create a committee to extend his investigatory reach across the boundaries of the executive department to public officers and employees, their co-principals, accomplices and accessories from the private sector during the previous administration without setting apart those who are still in the executive department from those who are not,"
The head magistrate added that only the Ombudsman has the investigatory jurisdiction over them under the Constitution. "There is no law granting to the President the authority to create a committee with concurrent investigatory jurisdiction of this nature." he said.

In his dissenting opinion on the other hand, Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio said under the ruling the 9 year Arroyo administration will enjoy the distinction of being the only presidency which will not undergo a formal investigation by its successor.

"Ominously, the majority opinion provides from hereon every administration a cloak of immunity against any investigation by its successor administration. This will institutionalize impunity in transgressing anti-corruption and other penal laws. Sadly, the majority opinion makes it impossible to bring good governance to our government," Carpio warned.

He added that "this Court has no power to prevent the President from knowing the facts to understand certain government transactions in the Executive branch, transactions that may need to be reviewed, revived, corrected, terminated or completed,"

In a separate dissenting opinion, Associate Justice Roberto Abad said the " Court is not better placed than the President to make the decision he made,"
" Unlike the President, the Court does not have the full resources of the government available to it. It does not have all the information and data it would need for deciding what objective is fair and viable for a five-member body like the Truth Commission. Only when the President’s actions are plainly irrational and arbitrary even to the man on the street can the Court step in from Mount Olympus and stop such actions. "Abad said.###

BELO LOSES APPEALS COURT CASE OF PROPERTY FIGHT WITH EX-LOVER

2011-07-17T13:29:00.006+08:00

Above: File photo of Belo's present lover Hayden Kho during a hearing at the DoJ. Jose Santos, another of Belo's former lover is suing her for his supposed share in properties they acquired while they were living together.

BEAUTY surgeon to the stars Vicky Belo has lost a case before the Court of Appeals seeking to stop a Pasig court from proceeding with a case over the co-ownership of her properties.

The case for co-ownership was filed by Jose Santos her former live-in partner before Hayden Kho.

In a nine-page decision by Associate Justice Mario Guariña III, the CA’s Special Eight Division held that Belo’s motion for bill of particulars that Belo filed before the lower court was unnecessary.

Belo’s motion for bill of particulars, a kind of motion of to dismiss, sought three detals from respondent and former live-in partner Jose Santos -- the exact period when they cohabited as “husband and wife,” a list of properties acquired by her in which he claims a one-half interest and an estimate of their values, and a list properties which the respondent acquired during the period of the cohabitation.

Santos,a cosmetic surgeon himself, in his petition for declaration of co-ownership, asked the Pasig RTC to be declared the co-owner of all the properties and moneys that he and Belo acquired during their cohabitation from 1996 to 2007.

The CA, held that it would be unnecessary for Santos to be more precise about the dates since he already indicated that the period of their cohabitation was from 1996 to January 2007.
Concurring with the ruling were Associate Justices Apolinario Bruselas, Jr., and Agnes Reyes-Carpio.

“The petitioner cannot be caught by surprise by this basic allegation. She knows in her mind whether she cohabited with the respondent during a particular period, and if she did, all that she needs to know are already there. She should be able to prepare affirmative defense, whether it is in the nature of denying the allegation or qualifying it with more specific dates of her own,” the CA ruled.

The appellate court noted that Santos’ complaint file with the lower court also enumerated several properties that should belong to the co-ownership such as their shareholdings in the business corporations, the six residential houses, a condominium unit, house and lot at Greenhills, savings in certain banks and properties acquired by Belo including a condominium unit in the RCBC Tower and another at San Francisco, USA.

“Again, the office of the pleading as a concise summary of the essential ultimate facts make it impractical to ask for more, for more here already means evidentiary information which is not required from a pleading,” the CA declared.

Likewise, the CA ruled that Belo cannot compel Santos to state in his complaint the properties that the latter acquired during the period of their alleged cohabitation.

“When the petitioner does not state that he had also acquired properties, for the purpose of the complaint, that is it. The ball is in the petitioner’s court to contest the assumption, by alleging in the answer that there are also co-owned assets in the possession of the respondent,” the appellate court said.

In his complaint filed with the lower court, Santos recounted that he and Belo started having an affair in 1990 when they were already separated from their respective spouses.
Santos, who is also a cosmetic surgeon, claimed that he allowed Belo to use one-half of his office space at Tektike Towers at Ortigas, and all the income generated by this clinic went to her.

He said he was very supportive to Belo and even gave her the needed media exposure to herpractice.

In 1997, Santos said they decided to live together at his house in Dasmarinas Village, Makati.

He said their future looks rosy together considering that the businesses they organized prospered and that they accumulated substantial asserts and large deposits in banks.
However, Santos said in early 2007, after a trip to South Africa, Belo asked him to sign a waiver of the properties they acquired during the years they were living-in together, and when he refused, she broke up with him.

Santos said this prompted him to file a petition for declaration of co-ownership of the properties and businesses they acquired and for the inventory and accounting of all their assets.###

CA JUSTICES INHIBIT SELVES IN AMPATUAN PETITION

2011-07-06T16:18:00.001+08:00

TWO magistrates of the Court of Appeals (CA) want no part in deciding the petition filed by former Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) Gov. Zaldy Ampatuan in connection with his involvement in the 2009 Maguindanao massacre case.
Justices Danton Bueser and Marlene Gonzales-Sison recused themselves from hearing the case in the 11th division of the appellate court just as they did earlier in a similar case involving Zaldy's father, Datu Andal Ampatuan Sr.
The two magistrates granted the motion for inhibition filed by families of some victims represented by lawyer Harry Roque Jr. last Feb.
"The voluntary recusal of Associate Justices Bueser and Gonzales-Sison from the first case and their active participation in the present case is, at the very least, highly unusual, considering that both cases deal with the same incident, the same facts, and the same legal controversy," Roque had argued.
Two other justices were picked during raffle yesterday to take their place in the CA division of five – Senior
Associate Justice Josefina Salonga and Romeo Barza.
Salonga and Barza join Associate Justices Noej Tijam, Jose Reyes Jr. and Mario Guarina III in resolving the petition of Ampatuan seeking to nullify the resolution of Department of Justice approving his indictment for the carnage.
The Supreme Court (SC) earlier ordered CA Presiding Justice Andres Reyes Jr. to investigate allegations of
bribery and irregularity against Justices Bueser and Sison by widows of media men killed in the massacre who had also sought their inhibition.###

RETIRED STATE AUDITOR SAYS DOJ SHOULD INDICT RABUSA

2011-07-06T15:28:00.000+08:00

RETIRED STATE AUDITOR SAYS DOJ SHOULD INDICT RABUSA

A RETIRED government auditor wants the the justice department (DoJ) to reconsider its decision placing whistleblower Col. George Rabusa under the state witness protection program and said the former military budget officer should himself be indicted.

In an open memorandum, retired former state auditor Arturo V. Besana said the government should consider "that the cloak of witness protection over Rabusa be removed and that he (Rabusa) himself be placed under the bar of justice just like the rest whom he unjustly accused,"

"Why (was) Rabusa placed under the witness protection program? Rabusa was involved in schemes aimed at looting the military's coffers.He admitted having P 200 million deposit in a private bank,pocketed P 500,000 as private allowance,amassed illegally an additional P 17 million and was charged by the Ombudsman for lying, for dishonesty,for grave misconduct,for conduct unbecoming of a public officer and for violation of the anti-graft and corrupt practices act," Besana asked.

The auditor claimed that by placing Rabusa under the cloak of government witness protection, "his handlers have unwittingly crafted him into a monster, the like of a Frankenstein,destroying the hierarchical structure of the defense institutions and shaking the very foundation of a nation,"

The auditor also claimed that "Rabusa is now engaged in blackmail and extortion" adding that Rabusa's revelations resulted in "traditions ravaged and dishonored. Important names have been smeared"

During yesterday's hearings, Prosecutor General Claro Arellano gave the parties in the case ten days to file their counteraffidavits in the case and three days to file a manifestation on whether they want an extension to file the

One of the defense lawyers Edgar Avila who represents Col. Roberto Arevalo claimed Rabusa's complaint is defective and said the latter should have filed a P21 million filing fee.

The DOJ earlier summoned three former Armed Forces chiefs-of-staff and 19 others implicated in the plunder complaint
filed by retired Lt. Col. George Rabusa, the former military budget officer who blew the whistle on alleged corruption in the military.

The DOJ panel chaired by Arellano has ordered former AFP chiefs Diomedio Villanueva, Roy Cimatu and Efren Abu and the others to submit their answer to Rabusa's allegations in a hearing set on July 6. Also summoned were former military comptrollers Lt. Gen. Jacinto Ligot and Maj. Gen. Carlos Garcia.

The others are: North Luzon Command head Lt. Gen. Gaudencio Pangilinan, retired Maj. Gen. Ernesto Boac, Col. Cirilo Tomas Donato, Col. Roy Devesa, Maj. Emerson Angulo, retired Maj. Gen. Hilario Atendido, B/Gen. Benito de Leon, retired Lt. Col. Ernesto Paranis, Capt. Kenneth Paglinawan, Col. Gilbert Gapay, Col. Robert Arevalo, and Maj. Gen. Epineto Logico; former Intelligence Service of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (ISAFP) resident auditor Divina Cabrera, state auditors Arturo Besana, Crisanto Gabriel and Manuel Warren and accountant Generoso del Castillo.

In his complaint filed last April, Rabusa submitted to the DOJ details and supporting documents on corruption in the military through misappropriation and conversion of millions of public funds, which he had exposed in congressional inquiries some three months ago.

"Respondents took advantage of their official positions, authority, and influence to unjustly enrich themselves at the expense and to the damage and prejudice of the Filipino people and the Republic of the Philippines," he alleged. ###

Supreme Court decision on Hacienda Luisita

2011-07-05T17:31:00.002+08:00

Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila

EN BANC

HACIENDA LUISITA, INCORPORATED,
Petitioner,

LUISITA INDUSTRIAL PARK CORPORATION and RIZAL COMMERCIAL BANKING CORPORATION,
Petitioners-in-Intervention,

- versus -

PRESIDENTIAL AGRARIAN REFORM COUNCIL; SECRETARY NASSER PANGANDAMAN OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM; ALYANSA NG MGA MANGGAGAWANG BUKID NG HACIENDA LUISITA, RENE GALANG, NOEL MALLARI, and JULIO SUNIGA and his SUPERVISORY GROUP OF THE HACIENDA LUISITA, INC. and WINDSOR ANDAYA,
Respondents. G.R. No. 171101

Present:

CORONA, C.J.,
CARPIO,
VELASCO, JR.,
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO,
BRION,
PERALTA,
BERSAMIN,
DEL CASTILLO,
ABAD,
VILLARAMA, JR.,
PEREZ,
MENDOZA, and
SERENO, JJ.

Promulgated:

_________________________ x-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x

D E C I S I O N

VELASCO, JR., J.:

“Land for the landless,” a shibboleth the landed gentry doubtless has received with much misgiving, if not resistance, even if only the number of agrarian suits filed serves to be the norm. Through the years, this battle cry and root of discord continues to reflect the seemingly ceaseless discourse on, and great disparity in, the distribution of land among the people, “dramatizing the increasingly urgent demand of the dispossessed x x x for a plot of earth as their place in the sun.” As administrations and political alignments change, policies advanced, and agrarian reform laws enacted, the latest being what is considered a comprehensive piece, the face of land reform varies and is masked in myriads of ways. The stated goal, however, remains the same: clear the way for the true freedom of the farmer.
Land reform, or the broader term “agrarian reform,” has been a government policy even before the Commonwealth era. In fact, at the onset of the American regime, initial steps toward land reform were already taken to address social unrest. Then, under the 1935 Constitution, specific provisions on social justice and expropriation of landed estates for distribution to tenants as a solution to land ownership and tenancy issues were incorporated.
In 1955, the Land Reform Act (Republic Act No. [RA] 1400) was passed, setting in motion the expropriation of all tenanted estates.
On August 8, 1963, the Agricultural Land Reform Code (RA 3844) was enacted, abolishing share tenancy and converting all instances of share tenancy into leasehold tenancy. RA 3844 created the Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) to provide support in all phases of agrarian reform.
As its major thrust, RA 3844 aimed to create a system of owner-cultivatorship in rice and corn, supposedly to be accomplished by expropriating lands in excess of 75 hectares for their eventual resale to tenants. The law, however, had this restricting feature: its operations were confined mainly to areas in Central Luzon, and its implementation at any level of intensity limited to the pilot project in Nueva Ecija.
Subsequently, Congress passed the Code of Agrarian Reform (RA 6389) declaring the entire country a land reform area, and providing for the automatic conversion of tenancy to leasehold tenancy in all areas. From 75 hectares, the retention limit was cut down to seven hectares.
Barely a month after declaring martial law in September 1972, then President Ferdinand Marcos issued Presidential Decree No. 27 (PD 27) for the “emancipation of the tiller from the bondage of the soil.” Based on this issuance, tenant-farmers, depending on the size of the landholding worked on, can either purchase the land they tilled or shift from share to fixed-rent leasehold tenancy. While touted as “revolutionary,” the scope of the agrarian reform program PD 27 enunciated covered only tenanted, privately-owned rice and corn lands.
Then came the revolutionary government of then President Corazon C. Aquino and the drafting and eventual ratification of the 1987 Constitution. Its provisions foreshadowed the establishment of a legal framework for the formulation of an expansive approach to land reform, affecting all agricultural lands and covering both tenant-farmers and regular farmworkers.
So it was that Proclamation No. 131, Series of 1987, was issued instituting a comprehensive agrarian reform program (CARP) to cover all agricultural lands, regardless of tenurial arrangement and commodity produced, as provided in the Constitution.
On July 22, 1987, Executive Order No. 229 (EO 229) was issued providing, as its title indicates, the mechanisms for CARP implementation. It created the Presidential Agrarian Reform Council (PARC) as the highest policy-making body that formulates all policies, rules, and regulations necessary for the implementation of CARP.
On June 15, 1988, RA 6657 or the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988, also known as CARL or the CARP Law, took effect, ushering in a new process of land classification, acquisition, and distribution. As to be expected, RA 6657 met stiff opposition, its validity or some of its provisions challenged at every possible turn. Association of Small Landowners in the Philippines, Inc. v. Secretary of Agrarian Reform stated the observation that the assault was inevitable, the CARP being an untried and untested project, “an experiment [even], as all life is an experiment,” the Court said, borrowing from Justice Holmes.
The Case
In this Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition under Rule 65 with prayer for preliminary injunctive relief, petitioner Hacienda Luisita, Inc. (HLI) assails and seeks to set aside PARC Resolution No. 2005-32-01 and Resolution No. 2006-34-01 issued on December 22, 2005 and May 3, 2006, respectively, as well as the implementing Notice of Coverage dated January 2, 2006 (Notice of Coverage).
The Facts
At the core of the case is Hacienda Luisita de Tarlac (Hacienda Luisita), once a 6,443-hectare mixed agricultural-industrial-residential expanse straddling several municipalities of Tarlac and owned by Compañia General de Tabacos de Filipinas (Tabacalera). In 1957, the Spanish owners of Tabacalera offered to sell Hacienda Luisita as well as their controlling interest in the sugar mill within the hacienda, the Central Azucarera de Tarlac (CAT), as an indivisible transaction. The Tarlac Development Corporation (Tadeco), then owned and/or controlled by the Jose Cojuangco, Sr. Group, was willing to buy. As agreed upon, Tadeco undertook to pay the purchase price for Hacienda Luisita in pesos, while that for the controlling interest in CAT, in US dollars.
To facilitate the adverted sale-and-purchase package, the Philippine government, through the then Central Bank of the Philippines, assisted the buyer to obtain a dollar loan from a US bank. Also, the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) Board of Trustees extended on November 27, 1957 a PhP 5.911 million loan in favor of Tadeco to pay the peso price component of the sale. One of the conditions contained in the approving GSIS Resolution No. 3203, as later amended by Resolution No. 356, Series of 1958, reads as follows:
That the lots comprising the Hacienda Luisita shall be subdivided by the applicant-corporation and sold at cost to the tenants, should there be any, and whenever conditions should exist warranting such action under the provisions of the Land Tenure Act;
As of March 31, 1958, Tadeco had fully paid the purchase price for the acquisition of Hacienda Luisita and Tabacalera’s interest in CAT.
The details of the events that happened next involving the hacienda and the political color some of the parties embossed are of minimal significance to this narration and need no belaboring. Suffice it to state that on May 7, 1980, the martial law administration filed a suit before the Manila Regional Trial Court (RTC) against Tadeco, et al., for them to surrender Hacienda Luisita to the then Ministry of Agrarian Reform (MAR, now the Department of Agrarian Reform [DAR]) so that the land can be distributed to farmers at cost. Responding, Tadeco or its owners alleged that Hacienda Luisita does not have tenants, besides which sugar lands––of which the hacienda consisted––are not covered by existing agrarian reform legislations. As perceived then, the government commenced the case against Tadeco as a political message to the family of the late Benigno Aquino, Jr.
Eventually, the Manila RTC rendered judgment ordering Tadeco to surrender Hacienda Luisita to the MAR. Therefrom, Tadeco appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA).
On March 17, 1988, the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) moved to withdraw the government’s case against Tadeco, et al. By Resolution of May 18, 1988, the CA dismissed the case the Marcos government initially instituted and won against Tadeco, et al. The dismissal action was, however, made subject to the obtention by Tadeco of the PARC’s approval of a stock distribution plan (SDP) that must initially be implemented after such approval shall have been secured. The appellate court wrote:

The defendants-appellants x x x filed a motion on April 13, 1988 joining the x x x governmental agencies concerned in moving for the dismissal of the case subject, however, to the following conditions embodied in the letter dated April 8, 1988 (Annex 2) of the Secretary of the [DAR] quoted, as follows:

Should TADECO fail to obtain approval of the stock distribution plan for failure to comply with all the requirements for corporate landowners set forth in the guidelines issued by the [PARC]: or

If such stock distribution plan is approved by PARC, but TADECO fails to initially implement it.

x x x x

WHEREFORE, the present case on appeal is hereby dismissed without prejudice, and should be revived if any of the conditions as above set forth is not duly complied with by the TADECO.
Markedly, Section 10 of EO 229 allows corporate landowners, as an alternative to the actual land transfer scheme of CARP, to give qualified beneficiaries the right to purchase shares of stocks of the corporation under a stock ownership arrangement and/or land-to-share ratio.
Like EO 229, RA 6657, under the latter’s Sec. 31, also provides two (2) alternative modalities, i.e., land or stock transfer, pursuant to either of which the corporate landowner can comply with CARP, but subject to well-defined conditions and timeline requirements. Sec. 31 of RA 6657 provides:
SEC. 31. Corporate Landowners.(Corporate landowners may voluntarily transfer ownership over their agricultural landholdings to the Republic of the Philippines pursuant to Section 20 hereof or to qualified beneficiaries x x x.

Upon certification by the DAR, corporations owning agricultural lands may give their qualified beneficiaries the right to purchase such proportion of the capital stock of the corporation that the agricultural land, actually devoted to agricultural activities, bears in relation to the company’s total assets, under such terms and conditions as may be agreed upon by them. In no case shall the compensation received by the workers at the time the shares of stocks are distributed be reduced. x x x

Corporations or associations which voluntarily divest a proportion of their capital stock, equity or participation in favor of their workers or other qualified beneficiaries under this section shall be deemed to have complied with the provisions of this Act: Provided, That the following conditions are complied with:

(a) In order to safeguard the right of beneficiaries who own shares of stocks to dividends and other financial benefits, the books of the corporation or association shall be subject to periodic audit by certified public accountants chosen by the beneficiaries;

(b) Irrespective of the value of their equity in the corporation or association, the beneficiaries shall be assured of at least one (1) representative in the board of directors, or in a management or executive committee, if one exists, of the corporation or association;

(c) Any shares acquired by such workers and beneficiaries shall have the same rights and features as all other shares; and

(d) Any transfer of shares of stocks by the original beneficiaries shall be void ab initio unless said transaction is in favor of a qualified and registered beneficiary within the same corporation.

If within two (2) years from the approval of this Act, the [voluntary] land or stock transfer envisioned above is not made or realized or the plan for such stock distribution approved by the PARC within the same period, the agricultural land of the corporate owners or corporation shall be subject to the compulsory coverage of this Act. (Emphasis added.)

Vis-à-vis the stock distribution aspect of the aforequoted Sec. 31, DAR issued Administrative Order No. 10, Series of 1988 (DAO 10), entitled Guidelines and Procedures for Corporate Landowners Desiring to Avail Themselves of the Stock Distribution Plan under Section 31 of RA 6657.
From the start, the stock distribution scheme appeared to be Tadeco’s preferred option, for, on August 23, 1988, it organized a spin-off corporation, HLI, as vehicle to facilitate stock acquisition by the farmworkers. For this purpose, Tadeco assigned and conveyed to HLI the agricultural land portion (4,915.75 hectares) and other farm-related properties of Hacienda Luisita in exchange for HLI shares of stock.
Pedro Cojuangco, Josephine C. Reyes, Teresita C. Lopa, Jose Cojuangco, Jr., and Paz C. Teopaco were the incorporators of HLI.
To accommodate the assets transfer from Tadeco to HLI, the latter, with the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC’s) approval, increased its capital stock on May 10, 1989 from PhP 1,500,000 divided into 1,500,000 shares with a par value of PhP 1/share to PhP 400,000,000 divided into 400,000,000 shares also with par value of PhP 1/share, 150,000,000 of which were to be issued only to qualified and registered beneficiaries of the CARP, and the remaining 250,000,000 to any stockholder of the corporation.
As appearing in its proposed SDP, the properties and assets of Tadeco contributed to the capital stock of HLI, as appraised and approved by the SEC, have an aggregate value of PhP 590,554,220, or after deducting the total liabilities of the farm amounting to PhP 235,422,758, a net value of PhP 355,531,462. This translated to 355,531,462 shares with a par value of PhP 1/share.
On May 9, 1989, some 93% of the then farmworker-beneficiaries (FWBs) complement of Hacienda Luisita signified in a referendum their acceptance of the proposed HLI’s Stock Distribution Option Plan. On May 11, 1989, the Stock Distribution Option Agreement (SDOA), styled as a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), was entered into by Tadeco, HLI, and the 5,848 qualified FWBs and attested to by then DAR Secretary Philip Juico. The SDOA embodied the basis and mechanics of the SDP, which would eventually be submitted to the PARC for approval. In the SDOA, the parties agreed to the following:
1. The percentage of the value of the agricultural land of Hacienda Luisita (P196,630,000.00) in relation to the total assets (P590,554,220.00) transferred and conveyed to the SECOND PARTY [HLI] is 33.296% that, under the law, is the proportion of the outstanding capital stock of the SECOND PARTY, which is P355,531,462.00 or 355,531,462 shares with a par value of P1.00 per share, that has to be distributed to the THIRD PARTY [FWBs] under the stock distribution plan, the said 33.296% thereof being P118,391,976.85 or 118,391,976.85 shares.

2. The qualified beneficiaries of the stock distribution plan shall be the farmworkers who appear in the annual payroll, inclusive of the permanent and seasonal employees, who are regularly or periodically employed by the SECOND PARTY.

3. At the end of each fiscal year, for a period of 30 years, the SECOND PARTY shall arrange with the FIRST PARTY [Tadeco] the acquisition and distribution to the THIRD PARTY on the basis of number of days worked and at no cost to them of one-thirtieth (1/30) of 118,391,976.85 shares of the capital stock of the SECOND PARTY that are presently owned and held by the FIRST PARTY, until such time as the entire block of 118,391,976.85 shares shall have been completely acquired and distributed to the THIRD PARTY.

4.The SECOND PARTY shall guarantee to the qualified beneficiaries of the [SDP] that every year they will receive on top of their regular compensation, an amount that approximates the equivalent of three (3%) of the total gross sales from the production of the agricultural land, whether it be in the form of cash dividends or incentive bonuses or both.

5. Even if only a part or fraction of the shares earmarked for distribution will have been acquired from the FIRST PARTY and distributed to the THIRD PARTY, FIRST PARTY shall execute at the beginning of each fiscal year an irrevocable proxy, valid and effective for one (1) year, in favor of the farmworkers appearing as shareholders of the SECOND PARTY at the start of said year which will empower the THIRD PARTY or their representative to vote in stockholders’ and board of directors’ meetings of the SECOND PARTY convened during the year the entire 33.296% of the outstanding capital stock of the SECOND PARTY earmarked for distribution and thus be able to gain such number of seats in the board of directors of the SECOND PARTY that the whole 33.296% of the shares subject to distribution will be entitled to.

6. In addition, the SECOND PARTY shall within a reasonable time subdivide and allocate for free and without charge among the qualified family-beneficiaries residing in the place where the agricultural land is situated, residential or homelots of not more than 240 sq.m. each, with each family-beneficiary being assured of receiving and owning a homelot in the barangay where it actually resides on the date of the execution of this Agreement.

7. This Agreement is entered into by the parties in the spirit of the (C.A.R.P.) of the government and with the supervision of the [DAR], with the end in view of improving the lot of the qualified beneficiaries of the [SDP] and obtaining for them greater benefits. (Emphasis added.)

As may be gleaned from the SDOA, included as part of the distribution plan are: (a) production-sharing equivalent to three percent (3%) of gross sales from the production of the agricultural land payable to the FWBs in cash dividends or incentive bonus; and (b) distribution of free homelots of not more than 240 square meters each to family-beneficiaries. The production-sharing, as the SDP indicated, is payable “irrespective of whether [HLI] makes money or not,” implying that the benefits do not partake the nature of dividends, as the term is ordinarily understood under corporation law.
While a little bit hard to follow, given that, during the period material, the assigned value of the agricultural land in the hacienda was PhP 196.63 million, while the total assets of HLI was PhP 590.55 million with net assets of PhP 355.53 million, Tadeco/HLI would admit that the ratio of the land-to-shares of stock corresponds to 33.3% of the outstanding capital stock of the HLI equivalent to 118,391,976.85 shares of stock with a par value of PhP 1/share.
Subsequently, HLI submitted to DAR its SDP, designated as “Proposal for Stock Distribution under C.A.R.P.,” which was substantially based on the SDOA.
Notably, in a follow-up referendum the DAR conducted on October 14, 1989, 5,117 FWBs, out of 5,315 who participated, opted to receive shares in HLI. One hundred thirty-two (132) chose actual land distribution.
After a review of the SDP, then DAR Secretary Miriam Defensor-Santiago (Sec. Defensor-Santiago) addressed a letter dated November 6, 1989 to Pedro S. Cojuangco (Cojuangco), then Tadeco president, proposing that the SDP be revised, along the following lines:
That over the implementation period of the [SDP], [Tadeco]/HLI shall ensure that there will be no dilution in the shares of stocks of individual [FWBs];
That a safeguard shall be provided by [Tadeco]/HLI against the dilution of the percentage shareholdings of the [FWBs], i.e., that the 33% shareholdings of the [FWBs] will be maintained at any given time;
That the mechanics for distributing the stocks be explicitly stated in the [MOA] signed between the [Tadeco], HLI and its [FWBs] prior to the implementation of the stock plan;
That the stock distribution plan provide for clear and definite terms for determining the actual number of seats to be allocated for the [FWBs] in the HLI Board;
That HLI provide guidelines and a timetable for the distribution of homelots to qualified [FWBs]; and
That the 3% cash dividends mentioned in the [SDP] be expressly provided for [in] the MOA.
In a letter-reply of November 14, 1989 to Sec. Defensor-Santiago, Tadeco/HLI explained that the proposed revisions of the SDP are already embodied in both the SDP and MOA. Following that exchange, the PARC, under then Sec. Defensor-Santiago, by Resolution No. 89-12-2 dated November 21, 1989, approved the SDP of Tadeco/HLI.
At the time of the SDP approval, HLI had a pool of farmworkers, numbering 6,296, more or less, composed of permanent, seasonal and casual master list/payroll and non-master list members.
From 1989 to 2005, HLI claimed to have extended the following benefits to the FWBs:
3 billion pesos (P3,000,000,000) worth of salaries, wages and fringe benefits

59 million shares of stock distributed for free to the FWBs;

150 million pesos (P150,000,000) representing 3% of the gross produce;

37.5 million pesos (P37,500,000) representing 3% from the sale of 500 hectares of converted agricultural land of Hacienda Luisita;

240-square meter homelots distributed for free;

2.4 million pesos (P2,400,000) representing 3% from the sale of 80 hectares at 80 million pesos (P80,000,000) for the SCTEX;

Social service benefits, such as but not limited to free hospitalization/medical/maternity services, old age/death benefits and no interest bearing salary/educational loans and rice sugar accounts.
Two separate groups subsequently contested this claim of HLI.

On August 15, 1995, HLI applied for the conversion of 500 hectares of land of the hacienda from agricultural to industrial use, pursuant to Sec. 65 of RA 6657, providing:

SEC. 65. Conversion of Lands.(After the lapse of five (5) years from its award, when the land ceases to be economically feasible and sound for agricultural purposes, or the locality has become urbanized and the land will have a greater economic value for residential, commercial or industrial purposes, the DAR, upon application of the beneficiary or the landowner, with due notice to the affected parties, and subject to existing laws, may authorize the reclassification, or conversion of the land and its disposition: Provided, That the beneficiary shall have fully paid its obligation.

The application, according to HLI, had the backing of 5,000 or so FWBs, including respondent Rene Galang, and Jose Julio Suniga, as evidenced by the Manifesto of Support they signed and which was submitted to the DAR. After the usual processing, the DAR, thru then Sec. Ernesto Garilao, approved the application on August 14, 1996, per DAR Conversion Order No. 030601074-764-(95), Series of 1996, subject to payment of three percent (3%) of the gross selling price to the FWBs and to HLI’s continued compliance with its undertakings under the SDP, among other conditions.
On December 13, 1996, HLI, in exchange for subscription of 12,000,000 shares of stocks of Centennary Holdings, Inc. (Centennary), ceded 300 hectares of the converted area to the latter. Consequently, HLI’s Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. 287910 was canceled and TCT No. 292091 was issued in the name of Centennary. HLI transferred the remaining 200 hectares covered by TCT No. 287909 to Luisita Realty Corporation (LRC) in two separate transactions in 1997 and 1998, both uniformly involving 100 hectares for PhP 250 million each.
Centennary, a corporation with an authorized capital stock of PhP 12,100,000 divided into 12,100,000 shares and wholly-owned by HLI, had the following incorporators: Pedro Cojuangco, Josephine C. Reyes, Teresita C. Lopa, Ernesto G. Teopaco, and Bernardo R. Lahoz.
Subsequently, Centennary sold the entire 300 hectares to Luisita Industrial Park Corporation (LIPCO) for PhP 750 million. The latter acquired it for the purpose of developing an industrial complex. As a result, Centennary’s TCT No. 292091 was canceled to be replaced by TCT No. 310986 in the name of LIPCO.
From the area covered by TCT No. 310986 was carved out two (2) parcels, for which two (2) separate titles were issued in the name of LIPCO, specifically: (a) TCT No. 365800 and (b) TCT No. 365801, covering 180 and four hectares, respectively. TCT No. 310986 was, accordingly, partially canceled.
Later on, in a Deed of Absolute Assignment dated November 25, 2004, LIPCO transferred the parcels covered by its TCT Nos. 365800 and 365801 to the Rizal Commercial Banking Corporation (RCBC) by way of dacion en pago in payment of LIPCO’s PhP 431,695,732.10 loan obligations. LIPCO’s titles were canceled and new ones, TCT Nos. 391051 and 391052, were issued to RCBC.
Apart from the 500 hectares alluded to, another 80.51 hectares were later detached from the area coverage of Hacienda Luisita which had been acquired by the government as part of the Subic-Clark-Tarlac Expressway (SCTEX) complex. In absolute terms, 4,335.75 hectares remained of the original 4,915 hectares Tadeco ceded to HLI.
Such, in short, was the state of things when two separate petitions, both undated, reached the DAR in the latter part of 2003. In the first, denominated as Petition/Protest, respondents Jose Julio Suniga and Windsor Andaya, identifying themselves as head of the Supervisory Group of HLI (Supervisory Group), and 60 other supervisors sought to revoke the SDOA, alleging that HLI had failed to give them their dividends and the one percent (1%) share in gross sales, as well as the thirty-three percent (33%) share in the proceeds of the sale of the converted 500 hectares of land. They further claimed that their lives have not improved contrary to the promise and rationale for the adoption of the SDOA. They also cited violations by HLI of the SDOA’s terms. They prayed for a renegotiation of the SDOA, or, in the alternative, its revocation.
Revocation and nullification of the SDOA and the distribution of the lands in the hacienda were the call in the second petition, styled as Petisyon (Petition). The Petisyon was ostensibly filed on December 4, 2003 by Alyansa ng mga Manggagawang Bukid ng Hacienda Luisita (AMBALA), where the handwritten name of respondents Rene Galang as “Pangulo AMBALA” and Noel Mallari as “Sec-Gen. AMBALA” appeared. As alleged, the petition was filed on behalf of AMBALA’s members purportedly composing about 80% of the 5,339 FWBs of Hacienda Luisita.
HLI would eventually answer the petition/protest of the Supervisory Group. On the other hand, HLI’s answer to the AMBALA petition was contained in its letter dated January 21, 2005 also filed with DAR.
Meanwhile, the DAR constituted a Special Task Force to attend to issues relating to the SDP of HLI. Among other duties, the Special Task Force was mandated to review the terms and conditions of the SDOA and PARC Resolution No. 89-12-2 relative to HLI’s SDP; evaluate HLI’s compliance reports; evaluate the merits of the petitions for the revocation of the SDP; conduct ocular inspections or field investigations; and recommend appropriate remedial measures for approval of the Secretary.
After investigation and evaluation, the Special Task Force submitted its “Terminal Report: Hacienda Luisita, Incorporated (HLI) Stock Distribution Plan (SDP) Conflict” dated September 22, 2005 (Terminal Report), finding that HLI has not complied with its obligations under RA 6657 despite the implementation of the SDP. The Terminal Report and the Special Task Force’s recommendations were adopted by then DAR Sec. Nasser Pangandaman (Sec. Pangandaman).
Subsequently, Sec. Pangandaman recommended to the PARC Executive Committee (Excom) (a) the recall/revocation of PARC Resolution No. 89-12-2 dated November 21, 1989 approving HLI’s SDP; and (b) the acquisition of Hacienda Luisita through the compulsory acquisition scheme. Following review, the PARC Validation Committee favorably endorsed the DAR Secretary’s recommendation afore-stated.
On December 22, 2005, the PARC issued the assailed Resolution No. 2005-32-01, disposing as follows:
NOW, THEREFORE, on motion duly seconded, RESOLVED, as it is HEREBY RESOLVED, to approve and confirm the recommendation of the PARC Executive Committee adopting in toto the report of the PARC ExCom Validation Committee affirming the recommendation of the DAR to recall/revoke the SDO plan of Tarlac Development Corporation/Hacienda Luisita Incorporated.
RESOLVED, further, that the lands subject of the recalled/revoked TDC/HLI SDO plan be forthwith placed under the compulsory coverage or mandated land acquisition scheme of the [CARP].
APPROVED.

A copy of Resolution No. 2005-32-01 was served on HLI the following day, December 23, without any copy of the documents adverted to in the resolution attached. A letter-request dated December 28, 2005 for certified copies of said documents was sent to, but was not acted upon by, the PARC secretariat.
Therefrom, HLI, on January 2, 2006, sought reconsideration. On the same day, the DAR Tarlac provincial office issued the Notice of Coverage which HLI received on January 4, 2006.
Its motion notwithstanding, HLI has filed the instant recourse in light of what it considers as the DAR’s hasty placing of Hacienda Luisita under CARP even before PARC could rule or even read the motion for reconsideration. As HLI later rued, it “can not know from the above-quoted resolution the facts and the law upon which it is based.”
PARC would eventually deny HLI’s motion for reconsideration via Resolution No. 2006-34-01 dated May 3, 2006.
By Resolution of June 14, 2006, the Court, acting on HLI’s motion, issued a temporary restraining order, enjoining the implementation of Resolution No. 2005-32-01 and the notice of coverage.
On July 13, 2006, the OSG, for public respondents PARC and the DAR, filed its Comment on the petition.
On December 2, 2006, Noel Mallari, impleaded by HLI as respondent in his capacity as “Sec-Gen. AMBALA,” filed his Manifestation and Motion with Comment Attached dated December 4, 2006 (Manifestation and Motion). In it, Mallari stated that he has broken away from AMBALA with other AMBALA ex-members and formed Farmworkers Agrarian Reform Movement, Inc. (FARM). Should this shift in alliance deny him standing, Mallari also prayed that FARM be allowed to intervene.
As events would later develop, Mallari had a parting of ways with other FARM members, particularly would-be intervenors Renato Lalic, et al. As things stand, Mallari returned to the AMBALA fold, creating the AMBALA-Noel Mallari faction and leaving Renato Lalic, et al. as the remaining members of FARM who sought to intervene.
On January 10, 2007, the Supervisory Group and the AMBALA-Rene Galang faction submitted their Comment/Opposition dated December 17, 2006.
On October 30, 2007, RCBC filed a Motion for Leave to Intervene and to File and Admit Attached Petition-In-Intervention dated October 18, 2007. LIPCO later followed with a similar motion. In both motions, RCBC and LIPCO contended that the assailed resolution effectively nullified the TCTs under their respective names as the properties covered in the TCTs were veritably included in the January 2, 2006 notice of coverage. In the main, they claimed that the revocation of the SDP cannot legally affect their rights as innocent purchasers for value. Both motions for leave to intervene were granted and the corresponding petitions-in-intervention admitted.
On August 18, 2010, the Court heard the main and intervening petitioners on oral arguments. On the other hand, the Court, on August 24, 2010, heard public respondents as well as the respective counsels of the AMBALA-Mallari-Supervisory Group, the AMBALA-Galang faction, and the FARM and its 27 members argue their case.
Prior to the oral arguments, however, HLI; AMBALA, represented by Mallari; the Supervisory Group, represented by Suniga and Andaya; and the United Luisita Workers Union, represented by Eldifonso Pingol, filed with the Court a joint submission and motion for approval of a Compromise Agreement (English and Tagalog versions) dated August 6, 2010.
On August 31, 2010, the Court, in a bid to resolve the dispute through an amicable settlement, issued a Resolution creating a Mediation Panel composed of then Associate Justice Ma. Alicia Austria-Martinez, as chairperson, and former CA Justices Hector Hofileña and Teresita Dy-Liacco Flores, as members. Meetings on five (5) separate dates, i.e., September 8, 9, 14, 20, and 27, 2010, were conducted. Despite persevering and painstaking efforts on the part of the panel, mediation had to be discontinued when no acceptable agreement could be reached.
The Issues
HLI raises the following issues for our consideration:
I.

WHETHER OR NOT PUBLIC RESPONDENTS PARC AND SECRETARY PANGANDAMAN HAVE JURISDICTION, POWER AND/OR AUTHORITY TO NULLIFY, RECALL, REVOKE OR RESCIND THE SDOA.

II.

[IF SO], x x x CAN THEY STILL EXERCISE SUCH JURISDICTION, POWER AND/OR AUTHORITY AT THIS TIME, I.E., AFTER SIXTEEN (16) YEARS FROM THE EXECUTION OF THE SDOA AND ITS IMPLEMENTATION WITHOUT VIOLATING SECTIONS 1 AND 10 OF ARTICLE III (BILL OF RIGHTS) OF THE CONSTITUTION AGAINST DEPRIVATION OF PROPERTY WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OF LAW AND THE IMPAIRMENT OF CONTRACTUAL RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS? MOREOVER, ARE THERE LEGAL GROUNDS UNDER THE CIVIL CODE, viz, ARTICLE 1191 x x x, ARTICLES 1380, 1381 AND 1382 x x x ARTICLE 1390 x x x AND ARTICLE 1409 x x x THAT CAN BE INVOKED TO NULLIFY, RECALL, REVOKE, OR RESCIND THE SDOA?

III.

WHETHER THE PETITIONS TO NULLIFY, RECALL, REVOKE OR RESCIND THE SDOA HAVE ANY LEGAL BASIS OR GROUNDS AND WHETHER THE PETITIONERS THEREIN ARE THE REAL PARTIES-IN-INTEREST TO FILE SAID PETITIONS.

IV.

WHETHER THE RIGHTS, OBLIGATIONS AND REMEDIES OF THE PARTIES TO THE SDOA ARE NOW GOVERNED BY THE CORPORATION CODE (BATAS PAMBANSA BLG. 68) AND NOT BY THE x x x [CARL] x x x.

On the other hand, RCBC submits the following issues:

I.

RESPONDENT PARC COMMITTED GRAVE ABUSE OF DISCRETION AMOUNTING TO LACK OR EXCESS OF JURISDICTION WHEN IT DID NOT EXCLUDE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM THE COVERAGE OF THE CARP DESPITE THE FACT THAT PETITIONER-INTERVENOR RCBC HAS ACQUIRED VESTED RIGHTS AND INDEFEASIBLE TITLE OVER THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS AN INNOCENT PURCHASER FOR VALUE.

THE ASSAILED RESOLUTION NO. 2005-32-01 AND THE NOTICE OF COVERAGE DATED 02 JANUARY 2006 HAVE THE EFFECT OF NULLIFYING TCT NOS. 391051 AND 391052 IN THE NAME OF PETITIONER-INTERVENOR RCBC.

AS AN INNOCENT PURCHASER FOR VALUE, PETITIONER-INTERVENOR RCBC CANNOT BE PREJUDICED BY A SUBSEQUENT REVOCATION OR RESCISSION OF THE SDOA.

II.

THE ASSAILED RESOLUTION NO. 2005-32-01 AND THE NOTICE OF COVERAGE DATED 02 JANUARY 2006 WERE ISSUED WITHOUT AFFORDING PETITIONER-INTERVENOR RCBC ITS RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS AS AN INNOCENT PURCHASER FOR VALUE.

LIPCO, like RCBC, asserts having acquired vested and indefeasible rights over certain portions of the converted property, and, hence, would ascribe on PARC the commission of grave abuse of discretion when it included those portions in the notice of coverage. And apart from raising issues identical with those of HLI, such as but not limited to the absence of valid grounds to warrant the rescission and/or revocation of the SDP, LIPCO would allege that the assailed resolution and the notice of coverage were issued without affording it the right to due process as an innocent purchaser for value. The government, LIPCO also argues, is estopped from recovering properties which have since passed to innocent parties.
Simply formulated, the principal determinative issues tendered in the main petition and to which all other related questions must yield boil down to the following: (1) matters of standing; (2) the constitutionality of Sec. 31 of RA 6657; (3) the jurisdiction of PARC to recall or revoke HLI’s SDP; (4) the validity or propriety of such recall or revocatory action; and (5) corollary to (4), the validity of the terms and conditions of the SDP, as embodied in the SDOA.

Our Ruling

I.

We first proceed to the examination of the preliminary issues before delving on the more serious challenges bearing on the validity of PARC’s assailed issuance and the grounds for it.

Supervisory Group, AMBALA and their
respective leaders are real parties-in-interest

HLI would deny real party-in-interest status to the purported leaders of the Supervisory Group and AMBALA, i.e., Julio Suniga, Windsor Andaya, and Rene Galang, who filed the revocatory petitions before the DAR. As HLI would have it, Galang, the self-styled head of AMBALA, gained HLI employment in June 1990 and, thus, could not have been a party to the SDOA executed a year earlier. As regards the Supervisory Group, HLI alleges that supervisors are not regular farmworkers, but the company nonetheless considered them FWBs under the SDOA as a mere concession to enable them to enjoy the same benefits given qualified regular farmworkers. However, if the SDOA would be canceled and land distribution effected, so HLI claims, citing Fortich v. Corona, the supervisors would be excluded from receiving lands as farmworkers other than the regular farmworkers who are merely entitled to the “fruits of the land.”

The SDOA no less identifies “the SDP qualified beneficiaries” as “the farmworkers who appear in the annual payroll, inclusive of the permanent and seasonal employees, who are regularly or periodically employed by [HLI].” Galang, per HLI’s own admission, is employed by HLI, and is, thus, a qualified beneficiary of the SDP; he comes within the definition of a real party-in-interest under Sec. 2, Rule 3 of the Rules of Court, meaning, one who stands to be benefited or injured by the judgment in the suit or is the party entitled to the avails of the suit.
The same holds true with respect to the Supervisory Group whose members were admittedly employed by HLI and whose names and signatures even appeared in the annex of the SDOA. Being qualified beneficiaries of the SDP, Suniga and the other 61 supervisors are certainly parties who would benefit or be prejudiced by the judgment recalling the SDP or replacing it with some other modality to comply with RA 6657.
Even assuming that members of the Supervisory Group are not regular farmworkers, but are in the category of “other farmworkers” mentioned in Sec. 4, Article XIII of the Constitution, thus only entitled to a share of the fruits of the land, as indeed Fortich teaches, this does not detract from the fact that they are still identified as being among the “SDP qualified beneficiaries.” As such, they are, thus, entitled to bring an action upon the SDP. At any rate, the following admission made by Atty. Gener Asuncion, counsel of HLI, during the oral arguments should put to rest any lingering doubt as to the status of protesters Galang, Suniga, and Andaya:
Justice Bersamin: x x x I heard you a while ago that you were conceding the qualified farmer beneficiaries of Hacienda Luisita were real parties in interest?

Atty. Asuncion: Yes, Your Honor please, real party in interest which that question refers to the complaints of protest initiated before the DAR and the real party in interest there be considered as possessed by the farmer beneficiaries who initiated the protest.

Further, under Sec. 50, paragraph 4 of RA 6657, farmer-leaders are expressly allowed to represent themselves, their fellow farmers or their organizations in any proceedings before the DAR. Specifically:
SEC. 50. Quasi-Judicial Powers of the DAR.(x x x

x x x x

Responsible farmer leaders shall be allowed to represent themselves, their fellow farmers or their organizations in any proceedings before the DAR: Provided, however, that when there are two or more representatives for any individual or group, the representatives should choose only one among themselves to represent such party or group before any DAR proceedings. (Emphasis supplied.)

Clearly, the respective leaders of the Supervisory Group and AMBALA are contextually real parties-in-interest allowed by law to file a petition before the DAR or PARC.
This is not necessarily to say, however, that Galang represents AMBALA, for as records show and as HLI aptly noted, his “petisyon” filed with DAR did not carry the usual authorization of the individuals in whose behalf it was supposed to have been instituted. To date, such authorization document, which would logically include a list of the names of the authorizing FWBs, has yet to be submitted to be part of the records.

PARC’s Authority to Revoke a Stock Distribution Plan

On the postulate that the subject jurisdiction is conferred by law, HLI maintains that PARC is without authority to revoke an SDP, for neither RA 6657 nor EO 229 expressly vests PARC with such authority. While, as HLI argued, EO 229 empowers PARC to approve the plan for stock distribution in appropriate cases, the empowerment only includes the power to disapprove, but not to recall its previous approval of the SDP after it has been implemented by the parties. To HLI, it is the court which has jurisdiction and authority to order the revocation or rescission of the PARC-approved SDP.

We disagree.
Under Sec. 31 of RA 6657, as implemented by DAO 10, the authority to approve the plan for stock distribution of the corporate landowner belongs to PARC. However, contrary to petitioner HLI’s posture, PARC also has the power to revoke the SDP which it previously approved. It may be, as urged, that RA 6657 or other executive issuances on agrarian reform do not explicitly vest the PARC with the power to revoke/recall an approved SDP. Such power or authority, however, is deemed possessed by PARC under the principle of necessary implication, a basic postulate that what is implied in a statute is as much a part of it as that which is expressed.
We have explained that “every statute is understood, by implication, to contain all such provisions as may be necessary to effectuate its object and purpose, or to make effective rights, powers, privileges or jurisdiction which it grants, including all such collateral and subsidiary consequences as may be fairly and logically inferred from its terms.” Further, “every statutory grant of power, right or privilege is deemed to include all incidental power, right or privilege.
Gordon v. Veridiano II is instructive:
The power to approve a license includes by implication, even if not expressly granted, the power to revoke it. By extension, the power to revoke is limited by the authority to grant the license, from which it is derived in the first place. Thus, if the FDA grants a license upon its finding that the applicant drug store has complied with the requirements of the general laws and the implementing administrative rules and regulations, it is only for their violation that the FDA may revoke the said license. By the same token, having granted the permit upon his ascertainment that the conditions thereof as applied x x x have been complied with, it is only for the violation of such conditions that the mayor may revoke the said permit. (Emphasis supplied.)

Following the doctrine of necessary implication, it may be stated that the conferment of express power to approve a plan for stock distribution of the agricultural land of corporate owners necessarily includes the power to revoke or recall the approval of the plan.

As public respondents aptly observe, to deny PARC such revocatory power would reduce it into a toothless agency of CARP, because the very same agency tasked to ensure compliance by the corporate landowner with the approved SDP would be without authority to impose sanctions for non-compliance with it. With the view We take of the case, only PARC can effect such revocation. The DAR Secretary, by his own authority as such, cannot plausibly do so, as the acceptance and/or approval of the SDP sought to be taken back or undone is the act of PARC whose official composition includes, no less, the President as chair, the DAR Secretary as vice-chair, and at least eleven (11) other department heads.

On another but related issue, the HLI foists on the Court the argument that subjecting its landholdings to compulsory distribution after its approved SDP has been implemented would impair the contractual obligations created under the SDOA.
The broad sweep of HLI’s argument ignores certain established legal precepts and must, therefore, be rejected.
A law authorizing interference, when appropriate, in the contractual relations between or among parties is deemed read into the contract and its implementation cannot successfully be resisted by force of the non-impairment guarantee. There is, in that instance, no impingement of the impairment clause, the non-impairment protection being applicable only to laws that derogate prior acts or contracts by enlarging, abridging or in any manner changing the intention of the parties. Impairment, in fine, obtains if a subsequent law changes the terms of a contract between the parties, imposes new conditions, dispenses with those agreed upon or withdraws existing remedies for the enforcement of the rights of the parties. Necessarily, the constitutional proscription would not apply to laws already in effect at the time of contract execution, as in the case of RA 6657, in relation to DAO 10, vis-à-vis HLI’s SDOA. As held in Serrano v. Gallant Maritime Services, Inc.:
The prohibition [against impairment of the obligation of contracts] is aligned with the general principle that laws newly enacted have only a prospective operation, and cannot affect acts or contracts already perfected; however, as to laws already in existence, their provisions are read into contracts and deemed a part thereof. Thus, the non-impairment clause under Section 10, Article II [of the Constitution] is limited in application to laws about to be enacted that would in any way derogate from existing acts or contracts by enlarging, abridging or in any manner changing the intention of the parties thereto. (Emphasis supplied.)

Needless to stress, the assailed Resolution No. 2005-32-01 is not the kind of issuance within the ambit of Sec. 10, Art. III of the Constitution providing that “[n]o law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be passed.”
Parenthetically, HLI tags the SDOA as an ordinary civil law contract and, as such, a breach of its terms and conditions is not a PARC administrative matter, but one that gives rise to a cause of action cognizable by regular courts. This contention has little to commend itself. The SDOA is a special contract imbued with public interest, entered into and crafted pursuant to the provisions of RA 6657. It embodies the SDP, which requires for its validity, or at least its enforceability, PARC’s approval. And the fact that the certificate of compliance ––to be issued by agrarian authorities upon completion of the distribution of stocks––is revocable by the same issuing authority supports the idea that everything about the implementation of the SDP is, at the first instance, subject to administrative adjudication.
HLI also parlays the notion that the parties to the SDOA should now look to the Corporation Code, instead of to RA 6657, in determining their rights, obligations and remedies. The Code, it adds, should be the applicable law on the disposition of the agricultural land of HLI.
Contrary to the view of HLI, the rights, obligations and remedies of the parties to the SDOA embodying the SDP are primarily governed by RA 6657. It should abundantly be made clear that HLI was precisely created in order to comply with RA 6657, which the OSG aptly described as the “mother law” of the SDOA and the SDP. It is, thus, paradoxical for HLI to shield itself from the coverage of CARP by invoking exclusive applicability of the Corporation Code under the guise of being a corporate entity.
Without in any way minimizing the relevance of the Corporation Code since the FWBs of HLI are also stockholders, its applicability is limited as the rights of the parties arising from the SDP should not be made to supplant or circumvent the agrarian reform program.
Without doubt, the Corporation Code is the general law providing for the formation, organization and regulation of private corporations. On the other hand, RA 6657 is the special law on agrarian reform. As between a general and special law, the latter shall prevail—generalia specialibus non derogant. Besides, the present impasse between HLI and the private respondents is not an intra-corporate dispute which necessitates the application of the Corporation Code. What private respondents questioned before the DAR is the proper implementation of the SDP and HLI’s compliance with RA 6657. Evidently, RA 6657 should be the applicable law to the instant case.
HLI further contends that the inclusion of the agricultural land of Hacienda Luisita under the coverage of CARP and the eventual distribution of the land to the FWBs would amount to a disposition of all or practically all of the corporate assets of HLI. HLI would add that this contingency, if ever it comes to pass, requires the applicability of the Corporation Code provisions on corporate dissolution.
We are not persuaded.
Indeed, the provisions of the Corporation Code on corporate dissolution would apply insofar as the winding up of HLI’s affairs or liquidation of the assets is concerned. However, the mere inclusion of the agricultural land of Hacienda Luisita under the coverage of CARP and the land’s eventual distribution to the FWBs will not, without more, automatically trigger the dissolution of HLI. As stated in the SDOA itself, the percentage of the value of the agricultural land of Hacienda Luisita in relation to the total assets transferred and conveyed by Tadeco to HLI comprises only 33.296%, following this equation: value of the agricultural lands divided by total corporate assets. By no stretch of imagination would said percentage amount to a disposition of all or practically all of HLI’s corporate assets should compulsory land acquisition and distribution ensue.
This brings us to the validity of the revocation of the approval of the SDP sixteen (16) years after its execution pursuant to Sec. 31 of RA 6657 for the reasons set forth in the Terminal Report of the Special Task Force, as endorsed by PARC Excom. But first, the matter of the constitutionality of said section.
Constitutional Issue
FARM asks for the invalidation of Sec. 31 of RA 6657, insofar as it affords the corporation, as a mode of CARP compliance, to resort to stock distribution, an arrangement which, to FARM, impairs the fundamental right of farmers and farmworkers under Sec. 4, Art. XIII of the Constitution.
To a more specific, but direct point, FARM argues that Sec. 31 of RA 6657 permits stock transfer in lieu of outright agricultural land transfer; in fine, there is stock certificate ownership of the farmers or farmworkers instead of them owning the land, as envisaged in the Constitution. For FARM, this modality of distribution is an anomaly to be annulled for being inconsistent with the basic concept of agrarian reform ingrained in Sec. 4, Art. XIII of the Constitution.
Reacting, HLI insists that agrarian reform is not only about transfer of land ownership to farmers and other qualified beneficiaries. It draws attention in this regard to Sec. 3(a) of RA 6657 on the concept and scope of the term “agrarian reform.” The constitutionality of a law, HLI added, cannot, as here, be attacked collaterally.
The instant challenge on the constitutionality of Sec. 31 of RA 6657 and necessarily its counterpart provision in EO 229 must fail as explained below.
When the Court is called upon to exercise its power of judicial review over, and pass upon the constitutionality of, acts of the executive or legislative departments, it does so only when the following essential requirements are first met, to wit:
(1) there is an actual case or controversy;

(2) that the constitutional question is raised at the earliest possible opportunity by a proper party or one with locus standi; and

(3) the issue of constitutionality must be the very lis mota of the case.

Not all the foregoing requirements are satisfied in the case at bar.
While there is indeed an actual case or controversy, intervenor FARM, composed of a small minority of 27 farmers, has yet to explain its failure to challenge the constitutionality of Sec. 3l of RA 6657, since as early as November 21, l989 when PARC approved the SDP of Hacienda Luisita or at least within a reasonable time thereafter and why its members received benefits from the SDP without so much of a protest. It was only on December 4, 2003 or 14 years after approval of the SDP via PARC Resolution No. 89-12-2 dated November 21, 1989 that said plan and approving resolution were sought to be revoked, but not, to stress, by FARM or any of its members, but by petitioner AMBALA. Furthermore, the AMBALA petition did NOT question the constitutionality of Sec. 31 of RA 6657, but concentrated on the purported flaws and gaps in the subsequent implementation of the SDP. Even the public respondents, as represented by the Solicitor General, did not question the constitutionality of the provision. On the other hand, FARM, whose 27 members formerly belonged to AMBALA, raised the constitutionality of Sec. 31 only on May 3, 2007 when it filed its Supplemental Comment with the Court. Thus, it took FARM some eighteen (18) years from November 21, 1989 before it challenged the constitutionality of Sec. 31 of RA 6657 which is quite too late in the day. The FARM members slept on their rights and even accepted benefits from the SDP with nary a complaint on the alleged unconstitutionality of Sec. 31 upon which the benefits were derived. The Court cannot now be goaded into resolving a constitutional issue that FARM failed to assail after the lapse of a long period of time and the occurrence of numerous events and activities which resulted from the application of an alleged unconstitutional legal provision.
It has been emphasized in a number of cases that the question of constitutionality will not be passed upon by the Court unless it is properly raised and presented in an appropriate case at the first opportunity. FARM is, therefore, remiss in belatedly questioning the constitutionality of Sec. 31 of RA 6657. The second requirement that the constitutional question should be raised at the earliest possible opportunity is clearly wanting.
The last but the most important requisite that the constitutional issue must be the very lis mota of the case does not likewise obtain. The lis mota aspect is not present, the constitutional issue tendered not being critical to the resolution of the case. The unyielding rule has been to avoid, whenever plausible, an issue assailing the constitutionality of a statute or governmental act. If some other grounds exist by which judgment can be made without touching the constitutionality of a law, such recourse is favored. Garcia v. Executive Secretary explains why:
Lis Mota — the fourth requirement to satisfy before this Court will undertake judicial review — means that the Court will not pass upon a question of unconstitutionality, although properly presented, if the case can be disposed of on some other ground, such as the application of the statute or the general law. The petitioner must be able to show that the case cannot be legally resolved unless the constitutional question raised is determined. This requirement is based on the rule that every law has in its favor the presumption of constitutionality; to justify its nullification, there must be a clear and unequivocal breach of the Constitution, and not one that is doubtful, speculative, or argumentative. (Italics in the original.)
The lis mota in this case, proceeding from the basic positions originally taken by AMBALA (to which the FARM members previously belonged) and the Supervisory Group, is the alleged non-compliance by HLI with the conditions of the SDP to support a plea for its revocation. And before the Court, the lis mota is whether or not PARC acted in grave abuse of discretion when it ordered the recall of the SDP for such non-compliance and the fact that the SDP, as couched and implemented, offends certain constitutional and statutory provisions. To be sure, any of these key issues may be resolved without plunging into the constitutionality of Sec. 31 of RA 6657. Moreover, looking deeply into the underlying petitions of AMBALA, et al., it is not the said section per se that is invalid, but rather it is the alleged application of the said provision in the SDP that is flawed.
It may be well to note at this juncture that Sec. 5 of RA 9700, amending Sec. 7 of RA 6657, has all but superseded Sec. 31 of RA 6657 vis-à-vis the stock distribution component of said Sec. 31. In its pertinent part, Sec. 5 of RA 9700 provides: “[T]hat after June 30, 2009, the modes of acquisition shall be limited to voluntary offer to sell and compulsory acquisition.” Thus, for all intents and purposes, the stock distribution scheme under Sec. 31 of RA 6657 is no longer an available option under existing law. The question of whether or not it is unconstitutional should be a moot issue.
It is true that the Court, in some cases, has proceeded to resolve constitutional issues otherwise already moot and academic provided the following requisites are present:
x x x first, there is a grave violation of the Constitution; second, the exceptional character of the situation and the paramount public interest is involved; third, when the constitutional issue raised requires formulation of controlling principles to guide the bench, the bar, and the public; fourth, the case is capable of repetition yet evading review.
These requisites do not obtain in the case at bar.
For one, there appears to be no breach of the fundamental law. Sec. 4, Article XIII of the Constitution reads:
The State shall, by law, undertake an agrarian reform program founded on the right of the farmers and regular farmworkers, who are landless, to OWN directly or COLLECTIVELY THE LANDS THEY TILL or, in the case of other farmworkers, to receive a just share of the fruits thereof. To this end, the State shall encourage and undertake the just distribution of all agricultural lands, subject to such priorities and reasonable retention limits as the Congress may prescribe, taking into account ecological, developmental, or equity considerations, and subject to the payment of just compensation. In determining retention limits, the State shall respect the right of small landowners. The State shall further provide incentives for voluntary land-sharing. (Emphasis supplied.)
The wording of the provision is unequivocal––the farmers and regular farmworkers have a right TO OWN DIRECTLY OR COLLECTIVELY THE LANDS THEY TILL. The basic law allows two (2) modes of land distribution—direct and indirect ownership. Direct transfer to individual farmers is the most commonly used method by DAR and widely accepted. Indirect transfer through collective ownership of the agricultural land is the alternative to direct ownership of agricultural land by individual farmers. The aforequoted Sec. 4 EXPRESSLY authorizes collective ownership by farmers. No language can be found in the 1987 Constitution that disqualifies or prohibits corporations or cooperatives of farmers from being the legal entity through which collective ownership can be exercised. The word “collective” is defined as “indicating a number of persons or things considered as constituting one group or aggregate,” while “collectively” is defined as “in a collective sense or manner; in a mass or body.” By using the word “collectively,” the Constitution allows for indirect ownership of land and not just outright agricultural land transfer. This is in recognition of the fact that land reform may become successful even if it is done through the medium of juridical entities composed of farmers.
Collective ownership is permitted in two (2) provisions of RA 6657. Its Sec. 29 allows workers’ cooperatives or associations to collectively own the land, while the second paragraph of Sec. 31 allows corporations or associations to own agricultural land with the farmers becoming stockholders or members. Said provisions read:
SEC. 29. Farms owned or operated by corporations or other business associations.—In the case of farms owned or operated by corporations or other business associations, the following rules shall be observed by the PARC.
In general, lands shall be distributed directly to the individual worker-beneficiaries.
In case it is not economically feasible and sound to divide the land, then it shall be owned collectively by the worker beneficiaries who shall form a workers’ cooperative or association which will deal with the corporation or business association. x x x (Emphasis supplied.)
SEC. 31. Corporate Landowners.— x x x
x x x x
Upon certification by the DAR, corporations owning agricultural lands may give their qualified beneficiaries the right to purchase such proportion of the capital stock of the corporation that the agricultural land, actually devoted to agricultural activities, bears in relation to the company’s total assets, under such terms and conditions as may be agreed upon by them. In no case shall the compensation received by the workers at the time the shares of stocks are distributed be reduced. The same principle shall be applied to associations, with respect to their equity or participation. x x x (Emphasis supplied.)
Clearly, workers’ cooperatives or associations under Sec. 29 of RA 6657 and corporations or associations under the succeeding Sec. 31, as differentiated from individual farmers, are authorized vehicles for the collective ownership of agricultural land. Cooperatives can be registered with the Cooperative Development Authority and acquire legal personality of their own, while corporations are juridical persons under the Corporation Code. Thus, Sec. 31 is constitutional as it simply implements Sec. 4 of Art. XIII of the Constitution that land can be owned COLLECTIVELY by farmers. Even the framers of the l987 Constitution are in unison with respect to the two (2) modes of ownership of agricultural lands tilled by farmers––DIRECT and COLLECTIVE, thus:
MR. NOLLEDO. And when we talk of the phrase “to own directly,” we mean the principle of direct ownership by the tiller?
MR. MONSOD. Yes.
MR. NOLLEDO. And when we talk of “collectively,” we mean communal ownership, stewardship or State ownership?
MS. NIEVA. In this section, we conceive of cooperatives; that is farmers’ cooperatives owning the land, not the State.
MR. NOLLEDO. And when we talk of “collectively,” referring to farmers’ cooperatives, do the farmers own specific areas of land where they only unite in their efforts?
MS. NIEVA. That is one way.
MR. NOLLEDO. Because I understand that there are two basic systems involved: the “moshave” type of agriculture and the “kibbutz.” So are both contemplated in the report?
MR. TADEO. Ang dalawa kasing pamamaraan ng pagpapatupad ng tunay na reporma sa lupa ay ang pagmamay-ari ng lupa na hahatiin sa individual na pagmamay-ari – directly – at ang tinatawag na sama-samang gagawin ng mga magbubukid. Tulad sa Negros, ang gusto ng mga magbubukid ay gawin nila itong “cooperative or collective farm.” Ang ibig sabihin ay sama-sama nilang sasakahin.
x x x x
MR. TINGSON. x x x When we speak here of “to own directly or collectively the lands they till,” is this land for the tillers rather than land for the landless? Before, we used to hear “land for the landless,” but now the slogan is “land for the tillers.” Is that right?
MR. TADEO. Ang prinsipyong umiiral dito ay iyong land for the tillers. Ang ibig sabihin ng “directly” ay tulad sa implementasyon sa rice and corn lands kung saan inaari na ng mga magsasaka ang lupang binubungkal nila. Ang ibig sabihin naman ng “collectively” ay sama-samang paggawa sa isang lupain o isang bukid, katulad ng sitwasyon sa Negros. (Emphasis supplied.)
As Commissioner Tadeo explained, the farmers will work on the agricultural land “sama-sama” or collectively. Thus, the main requisite for collective ownership of land is collective or group work by farmers of the agricultural land. Irrespective of whether the landowner is a cooperative, association or corporation composed of farmers, as long as concerted group work by the farmers on the land is present, then it falls within the ambit of collective ownership scheme.
Likewise, Sec. 4, Art. XIII of the Constitution makes mention of a commitment on the part of the State to pursue, by law, an agrarian reform program founded on the policy of land for the landless, but subject to such priorities as Congress may prescribe, taking into account such abstract variable as “equity considerations.” The textual reference to a law and Congress necessarily implies that the above constitutional provision is not self-executory and that legislation is needed to implement the urgently needed program of agrarian reform. And RA 6657 has been enacted precisely pursuant to and as a mechanism to carry out the constitutional directives. This piece of legislation, in fact, restates the agrarian reform policy established in the aforementioned provision of the Constitution of promoting the welfare of landless farmers and farmworkers. RA 6657 thus defines “agrarian reform” as “the redistribution of lands … to farmers and regular farmworkers who are landless … to lift the economic status of the beneficiaries and all other arrangements alternative to the physical redistribution of lands, such as production or profit sharing, labor administration and the distribution of shares of stock which will allow beneficiaries to receive a just share of the fruits of the lands they work.”
With the view We take of this case, the stock distribution option devised under Sec. 31 of RA 6657 hews with the agrarian reform policy, as instrument of social justice under Sec. 4 of Article XIII of the Constitution. Albeit land ownership for the landless appears to be the dominant theme of that policy, We emphasize that Sec. 4, Article XIII of the Constitution, as couched, does not constrict Congress to passing an agrarian reform law planted on direct land transfer to and ownership by farmers and no other, or else the enactment suffers from the vice of unconstitutionality. If the intention were otherwise, the framers of the Constitution would have worded said section in a manner mandatory in character.
For this Court, Sec. 31 of RA 6657, with its direct and indirect transfer features, is not inconsistent with the State’s commitment to farmers and farmworkers to advance their interests under the policy of social justice. The legislature, thru Sec. 31 of RA 6657, has chosen a modality for collective ownership by which the imperatives of social justice may, in its estimation, be approximated, if not achieved. The Court should be bound by such policy choice.
FARM contends that the farmers in the stock distribution scheme under Sec. 31 do not own the agricultural land but are merely given stock certificates. Thus, the farmers lose control over the land to the board of directors and executive officials of the corporation who actually manage the land. They conclude that such arrangement runs counter to the mandate of the Constitution that any agrarian reform must preserve the control over the land in the hands of the tiller.
This contention has no merit.
While it is true that the farmer is issued stock certificates and does not directly own the land, still, the Corporation Code is clear that the FWB becomes a stockholder who acquires an equitable interest in the assets of the corporation, which include the agricultural lands. It was explained that the “equitable interest of the shareholder in the property of the corporation is represented by the term stock, and the extent of his interest is described by the term shares. The expression shares of stock when qualified by words indicating number and ownership expresses the extent of the owner’s interest in the corporate property.” A share of stock typifies an aliquot part of the corporation’s property, or the right to share in its proceeds to that extent when distributed according to law and equity and that its holder is not the owner of any part of the capital of the corporation. However, the FWBs will ultimately own the agricultural lands owned by the corporation when the corporation is eventually dissolved and liquidated.
Liquidation, which is a necessary consequence of the dissolution of a corporation, entails the winding up of the affairs of the corporation. This involves the “collection of all assets, the payment of all its creditors, and the distribution of the remaining assets, if any, among the stockholders thereof in accordance with their contracts, or if there be no special contract, on the basis of their respective interests.” Thus, upon liquidation, the FWBs will ultimately own the corporate assets which include the agricultural lands.
Anent the alleged loss of control of the farmers over the agricultural land operated and managed by the corporation, a reading of the second paragraph of Sec. 31 shows otherwise. Said provision provides that qualified beneficiaries have “the right to purchase such proportion of the capital stock of the corporation that the agricultural land, actually devoted to agricultural activities, bears in relation to the company’s total assets.” The wording of the formula in the computation of the number of shares that can be bought by the farmers does not mean loss of control on the part of the farmers. It must be remembered that the determination of the percentage of the capital stock that can be bought by the farmers depends on the value of the agricultural land and the value of the total assets of the corporation.
There is, thus, nothing unconstitutional in the formula prescribed by RA 6657. The policy on agrarian reform is that control over the agricultural land must always be in the hands of the farmers. Then it falls on the shoulders of DAR and PARC to see to it the farmers should always own majority of the common shares entitled to elect the members of the board of directors to ensure that the farmers will have a clear majority in the board. Before the SDP is approved, strict scrutiny of the proposed SDP must always be undertaken by the DAR and PARC, such that the value of the agricultural land contributed to the corporation must always be more than 50% of the total assets of the corporation to ensure that the majority of the members of the board of directors are composed of the farmers. The PARC composed of the President of the Philippines and cabinet secretaries must see to it that control over the board of directors rests with the farmers by rejecting the inclusion of non-agricultural assets which will yield the majority in the board of directors to non-farmers. Any deviation, however, by PARC or DAR from the correct application of the formula prescribed by the second paragraph of Sec. 31 of RA 6675 does not make said provision constitutionally infirm. Rather, it is the application of said provision that can be challenged. Ergo, Sec. 31 of RA 6657 does not trench on the constitutional policy of ensuring control by the farmers.
A view has been advanced that there can be no agrarian reform unless there is land distribution and that actual land distribution is the essential characteristic of a constitutional agrarian reform program. On the contrary, there have been so many instances where, despite actual land distribution, the implementation of agrarian reform was still unsuccessful. As a matter of fact, this Court may take judicial notice of cases where FWBs sold the awarded land even to non-qualified persons and in violation of the prohibition period provided under the law. This only proves to show that the mere fact that there is land distribution does not guarantee a successful implementation of agrarian reform.
As it were, the principle of “land to the tiller” and the old pastoral model of land ownership where non-human juridical persons, such as corporations, were prohibited from owning agricultural lands are no longer realistic under existing conditions. Practically, an individual farmer will often face greater disadvantages and difficulties than those who exercise ownership in a collective manner through a cooperative or corporation. The former is too often left to his own devices when faced with failing crops and bad weather, or compelled to obtain usurious loans in order to purchase costly fertilizers or farming equipment. The experiences learned from failed land reform activities in various parts of the country are lack of financing, lack of farm equipment, lack of fertilizers, lack of guaranteed buyers of produce, lack of farm-to-market roads, among others. Thus, at the end of the day, there is still no successful implementation of agrarian reform to speak of in such a case.
Although success is not guaranteed, a cooperative or a corporation stands in a better position to secure funding and competently maintain the agri-business than the individual farmer. While direct singular ownership over farmland does offer advantages, such as the ability to make quick decisions unhampered by interference from others, yet at best, these advantages only but offset the disadvantages that are often associated with such ownership arrangement. Thus, government must be flexible and creative in its mode of implementation to better its chances of success. One such option is collective ownership through juridical persons composed of farmers.
Aside from the fact that there appears to be no violation of the Constitution, the requirement that the instant case be capable of repetition yet evading review is also wanting. It would be speculative for this Court to assume that the legislature will enact another law providing for a similar stock option.
As a matter of sound practice, the Court will not interfere inordinately with the exercise by Congress of its official functions, the heavy presumption being that a law is the product of earnest studies by Congress to ensure that no constitutional prescription or concept is infringed. Corollarily, courts will not pass upon questions of wisdom, expediency and justice of legislation or its provisions. Towards this end, all reasonable doubts should be resolved in favor of the constitutionality of a law and the validity of the acts and processes taken pursuant thereof.
Consequently, before a statute or its provisions duly challenged are voided, an unequivocal breach of, or a clear conflict with the Constitution, not merely a doubtful or argumentative one, must be demonstrated in such a manner as to leave no doubt in the mind of the Court. In other words, the grounds for nullity must be beyond reasonable doubt. FARM has not presented compelling arguments to overcome the presumption of constitutionality of Sec. 31 of RA 6657.
The wisdom of Congress in allowing an SDP through a corporation as an alternative mode of implementing agrarian reform is not for judicial determination. Established jurisprudence tells us that it is not within the province of the Court to inquire into the wisdom of the law, for, indeed, We are bound by words of the statute.
II.
The stage is now set for the determination of the propriety under the premises of the revocation or recall of HLI’s SDP. Or to be more precise, the inquiry should be: whether or not PARC gravely abused its discretion in revoking or recalling the subject SDP and placing the hacienda under CARP’s compulsory acquisition and distribution scheme.
The findings, analysis and recommendation of the DAR’s Special Task Force contained and summarized in its Terminal Report provided the bases for the assailed PARC revocatory/recalling Resolution. The findings may be grouped into two: (1) the SDP is contrary to either the policy on agrarian reform, Sec. 31 of RA 6657, or DAO 10; and (2) the alleged violation by HLI of the conditions/terms of the SDP. In more particular terms, the following are essentially the reasons underpinning PARC’s revocatory or recall action:

(1) Despite the lapse of 16 years from the approval of HLI’s SDP, the lives of the FWBs have hardly improved and the promised increased income has not materialized;

(2) HLI has failed to keep Hacienda Luisita intact and unfragmented;

(3) The issuance of HLI shares of stock on the basis of number of hours worked––or the so-called “man days”––is grossly onerous to the FWBs, as HLI, in the guise of rotation, can unilaterally deny work to anyone. In elaboration of this ground, PARC’s Resolution No. 2006-34-01, denying HLI’s motion for reconsideration of Resolution No. 2005-32-01, stated that the man days criterion worked to dilute the entitlement of the original share beneficiaries;

(4) The distribution/transfer of shares was not in accordance with the timelines fixed by law;

(5) HLI has failed to comply with its obligations to grant 3% of the gross sales every year as production-sharing benefit on top of the workers’ salary; and

(6) Several homelot awardees have yet to receive their individual titles.

Petitioner HLI claims having complied with, at least substantially, all its obligations under the SDP, as approved by PARC itself, and tags the reasons given for the revocation of the SDP as unfounded.
Public respondents, on the other hand, aver that the assailed resolution rests on solid grounds set forth in the Terminal Report, a position shared by AMBALA, which, in some pleadings, is represented by the same counsel as that appearing for the Supervisory Group.

FARM, for its part, posits the view that legal bases obtain for the revocation of the SDP, because it does not conform to Sec. 31 of RA 6657 and DAO 10. And training its sight on the resulting dilution of the equity of the FWBs appearing in HLI’s masterlist, FARM would state that the SDP, as couched and implemented, spawned disparity when there should be none; parity when there should have been differentiation.

The petition is not impressed with merit.

In the Terminal Report adopted by PARC, it is stated that the SDP violates the agrarian reform policy under Sec. 2 of RA 6657, as the said plan failed to enhance the dignity and improve the quality of lives of the FWBs through greater productivity of agricultural lands. We disagree.

Sec. 2 of RA 6657 states:
SECTION 2. Declaration of Principles and Policies.(It is the policy of the State to pursue a Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP). The welfare of the landless farmers and farm workers will receive the highest consideration to promote social justice and to move the nation towards sound rural development and industrialization, and the establishment of owner cultivatorship of economic-sized farms as the basis of Philippine agriculture.
To this end, a more equitable distribution and ownership of land, with due regard to the rights of landowners to just compensation and to the ecological needs of the nation, shall be undertaken to provide farmers and farm workers with the opportunity to enhance their dignity and improve the quality of their lives through greater productivity of agricultural lands.
The agrarian reform program is founded on the right of farmers and regular farm workers, who are landless, to own directly or collectively the lands they till or, in the case of other farm workers, to receive a share of the fruits thereof. To this end, the State shall encourage the just distribution of all agricultural lands, subject to the priorities and retention limits set forth in this Act, having taken into account ecological, developmental, and equity considerations, and subject to the payment of just compensation. The State shall respect the right of small landowners and shall provide incentives for voluntary land-sharing. (Emphasis supplied.)

Paragraph 2 of the above-quoted provision specifically mentions that “a more equitable distribution and ownership of land x x x shall be undertaken to provide farmers and farm workers with the opportunity to enhance their dignity and improve the quality of their lives through greater productivity of agricultural lands.” Of note is the term “opportunity” which is defined as a favorable chance or opening offered by circumstances. Considering this, by no stretch of imagination can said provision be construed as a guarantee in improving the lives of the FWBs. At best, it merely provides for a possibility or favorable chance of uplifting the economic status of the FWBs, which may or may not be attained.

Pertinently, improving the economic status of the FWBs is neither among the legal obligations of HLI under the SDP nor an imperative imposition by RA 6657 and DAO 10, a violation of which would justify discarding the stock distribution option. Nothing in that option agreement, law or department order indicates otherwise.
Significantly, HLI draws particular attention to its having paid its FWBs, during the regime of the SDP (1989-2005), some PhP 3 billion by way of salaries/wages and higher benefits exclusive of free hospital and medical benefits to their immediate family. And attached as Annex “G” to HLI’s Memorandum is the certified true report of the finance manager of Jose Cojuangco & Sons Organizations-Tarlac Operations, captioned as “HACIENDA LUISITA, INC. Salaries, Benefits and Credit Privileges (in Thousand Pesos) Since the Stock Option was Approved by PARC/CARP,” detailing what HLI gave their workers from 1989 to 2005. The sum total, as added up by the Court, yields the following numbers: Total Direct Cash Out (Salaries/Wages & Cash Benefits) = PhP 2,927,848; Total Non-Direct Cash Out (Hospital/Medical Benefits) = PhP 303,040. The cash out figures, as stated in the report, include the cost of homelots; the PhP 150 million or so representing 3% of the gross produce of the hacienda; and the PhP 37.5 million representing 3% from the proceeds of the sale of the 500-hectare converted lands. While not included in the report, HLI manifests having given the FWBs 3% of the PhP 80 million paid for the 80 hectares of land traversed by the SCTEX. On top of these, it is worth remembering that the shares of stocks were given by HLI to the FWBs for free. Verily, the FWBs have benefited from the SDP.
To address urgings that the FWBs be allowed to disengage from the SDP as HLI has not anyway earned profits through the years, it cannot be over-emphasized that, as a matter of common business sense, no corporation could guarantee a profitable run all the time. As has been suggested, one of the key features of an SDP of a corporate landowner is the likelihood of the corporate vehicle not earning, or, worse still, losing money.
The Court is fully aware that one of the criteria under DAO 10 for the PARC to consider the advisability of approving a stock distribution plan is the likelihood that the plan “would result in increased income and greater benefits to [qualified beneficiaries] than if the lands were divided and distributed to them individually.” But as aptly noted during the oral arguments, DAO 10 ought to have not, as it cannot, actually exact assurance of success on something that is subject to the will of man, the forces of nature or the inherent risky nature of business. Just like in actual land distribution, an SDP cannot guarantee, as indeed the SDOA does not guarantee, a comfortable life for the FWBs. The Court can take judicial notice of the fact that there were many instances wherein after a farmworker beneficiary has been awarded with an agricultural land, he just subsequently sells it and is eventually left with nothing in the end.
In all then, the onerous condition of the FWBs’ economic status, their life of hardship, if that really be the case, can hardly be attributed to HLI and its SDP and provide a valid ground for the plan’s revocation.
Neither does HLI’s SDP, whence the DAR-attested SDOA/MOA is based, infringe Sec. 31 of RA 6657, albeit public respondents erroneously submit otherwise.
The provisions of the first paragraph of the adverted Sec. 31 are without relevance to the issue on the propriety of the assailed order revoking HLI’s SDP, for the paragraph deals with the transfer of agricultural lands to the government, as a mode of CARP compliance, thus:
SEC. 31. Corporate Landowners.(Corporate landowners may voluntarily transfer ownership over their agricultural landholdings to the Republic of the Philippines pursuant to Section 20 hereof or to qualified beneficiaries under such terms and conditions, consistent with this Act, as they may agree, subject to confirmation by the DAR.
The second and third paragraphs, with their sub-paragraphs, of Sec. 31 provide as follows:
Upon certification by the DAR, corporations owning agricultural lands may give their qualified beneficiaries the right to purchase such proportion of the capital stock of the corporation that the agricultural land, actually devoted to agricultural activities, bears in relation to the company’s total assets, under such terms and conditions as may be agreed upon by them. In no case shall the compensation received by the workers at the time the shares of stocks are distributed be reduced. x x x

Corporations or associations which voluntarily divest a proportion of their capital stock, equity or participation in favor of their workers or other qualified beneficiaries under this section shall be deemed to have complied with the provisions of this Act: Provided, That the following conditions are complied with:

(a) In order to safeguard the right of beneficiaries who own shares of stocks to dividends and other financial benefits, the books of the corporation or association shall be subject to periodic audit by certified public accountants chosen by the beneficiaries;

(b) Irrespective of the value of their equity in the corporation or association, the beneficiaries shall be assured of at least one (1) representative in the board of directors, or in a management or executive committee, if one exists, of the corporation or association;

(c) Any shares acquired by such workers and beneficiaries shall have the same rights and features as all other shares; and

(d) Any transfer of shares of stocks by the original beneficiaries shall be void ab initio unless said transaction is in favor of a qualified and registered beneficiary within the same corporation.

The mandatory minimum ratio of land-to-shares of stock supposed to be distributed or allocated to qualified beneficiaries, adverting to what Sec. 31 of RA 6657 refers to as that “proportion of the capital stock of the corporation that the agricultural land, actually devoted to agricultural activities, bears in relation to the company’s total assets” had been observed.
Paragraph one (1) of the SDOA, which was based on the SDP, conforms to Sec. 31 of RA 6657. The stipulation reads:
1. The percentage of the value of the agricultural land of Hacienda Luisita (P196,630,000.00) in relation to the total assets (P590,554,220.00) transferred and conveyed to the SECOND PARTY is 33.296% that, under the law, is the proportion of the outstanding capital stock of the SECOND PARTY, which is P355,531,462.00 or 355,531,462 shares with a par value of P1.00 per share, that has to be distributed to the THIRD PARTY under the stock distribution plan, the said 33.296% thereof being P118,391,976.85 or 118,391,976.85 shares.
The appraised value of the agricultural land is PhP 196,630,000 and of HLI’s other assets is PhP 393,924,220. The total value of HLI’s assets is, therefore, PhP 590,554,220. The percentage of the value of the agricultural lands (PhP 196,630,000) in relation to the total assets (PhP 590,554,220) is 33.296%, which represents the stockholdings of the 6,296 original qualified farmworker-beneficiaries (FWBs) in HLI. The total number of shares to be distributed to said qualified FWBs is 118,391,976.85 HLI shares. This was arrived at by getting 33.296% of the 355,531,462 shares which is the outstanding capital stock of HLI with a value of PhP 355,531,462. Thus, if we divide the 118,391,976.85 HLI shares by 6,296 FWBs, then each FWB is entitled to 18,804.32 HLI shares. These shares under the SDP are to be given to FWBs for free.
The Court finds that the determination of the shares to be distributed to the 6,296 FWBs strictly adheres to the formula prescribed by Sec. 31(b) of RA 6657.
Anent the requirement under Sec. 31(b) of the third paragraph, that the FWBs shall be assured of at least one (1) representative in the board of directors or in a management or executive committee irrespective of the value of the equity of the FWBs in HLI, the Court finds that the SDOA contained provisions making certain the FWBs’ representation in HLI’s governing board, thus:
5. Even if only a part or fraction of the shares earmarked for distribution will have been acquired from the FIRST PARTY and distributed to the THIRD PARTY, FIRST PARTY shall execute at the beginning of each fiscal year an irrevocable proxy, valid and effective for one (1) year, in favor of the farmworkers appearing as shareholders of the SECOND PARTY at the start of said year which will empower the THIRD PARTY or their representative to vote in stockholders’ and board of directors’ meetings of the SECOND PARTY convened during the year the entire 33.296% of the outstanding capital stock of the SECOND PARTY earmarked for distribution and thus be able to gain such number of seats in the board of directors of the SECOND PARTY that the whole 33.296% of the shares subject to distribution will be entitled to.
Also, no allegations have been made against HLI restricting the inspection of its books by accountants chosen by the FWBs; hence, the assumption may be made that there has been no violation of the statutory prescription under sub-paragraph (a) on the auditing of HLI’s accounts.
Public respondents, however, submit that the distribution of the mandatory minimum ratio of land-to-shares of stock, referring to the 118,391,976.85 shares with par value of PhP 1 each, should have been made in full within two (2) years from the approval of RA 6657, in line with the last paragraph of Sec. 31 of said law.
Public respondents’ submission is palpably erroneous. We have closely examined the last paragraph alluded to, with particular focus on the two-year period mentioned, and nothing in it remotely supports the public respondents’ posture. In its pertinent part, said Sec. 31 provides:
SEC. 31. Corporate Landowners x x x

If within two (2) years from the approval of this Act, the [voluntary] land or stock transfer envisioned above is not made or realized or the plan for such stock distribution approved by the PARC within the same period, the agricultural land of the corporate owners or corporation shall be subject to the compulsory coverage of this Act. (Word in bracket and emphasis added.)

Properly viewed, the words “two (2) years” clearly refer to the period within which the corporate landowner, to avoid land transfer as a mode of CARP coverage under RA 6657, is to avail of the stock distribution option or to have the SDP approved. The HLI secured approval of its SDP in November 1989, well within the two-year period reckoned from June 1988 when RA 6657 took effect.
Having hurdled the alleged breach of the agrarian reform policy under Sec. 2 of RA 6657 as well as the statutory issues, We shall now delve into what PARC and respondents deem to be other instances of violation of DAO 10 and the SDP.
On the Conversion of Lands
Contrary to the almost parallel stance of the respondents, keeping Hacienda Luisita unfragmented is also not among the imperative impositions by the SDP, RA 6657, and DAO 10.
The Terminal Report states that the proposed distribution plan submitted in 1989 to the PARC effectively assured the intended stock beneficiaries that the physical integrity of the farm shall remain inviolate. Accordingly, the Terminal Report and the PARC-assailed resolution would take HLI to task for securing approval of the conversion to non-agricultural uses of 500 hectares of the hacienda. In not too many words, the Report and the resolution view the conversion as an infringement of Sec. 5(a) of DAO 10 which reads: “a. that the continued operation of the corporation with its agricultural land intact and unfragmented is viable with potential for growth and increased profitability.”
The PARC is wrong.
In the first place, Sec. 5(a)––just like the succeeding Sec. 5(b) of DAO 10 on increased income and greater benefits to qualified beneficiaries––is but one of the stated criteria to guide PARC in deciding on whether or not to accept an SDP. Said Sec. 5(a) does not exact from the corporate landowner-applicant the undertaking to keep the farm intact and unfragmented ad infinitum. And there is logic to HLI’s stated observation that the key phrase in the provision of Sec. 5(a) is “viability of corporate operations”: “[w]hat is thus required is not the agricultural land remaining intact x x x but the viability of the corporate operations with its agricultural land being intact and unfragmented. Corporate operation may be viable even if the corporate agricultural land does not remain intact or [un]fragmented.”
It is, of course, anti-climactic to mention that DAR viewed the conversion as not violative of any issuance, let alone undermining the viability of Hacienda Luisita’s operation, as the DAR Secretary approved the land conversion applied for and its disposition via his Conversion Order dated August 14, 1996 pursuant to Sec. 65 of RA 6657 which reads:
Sec. 65. Conversion of Lands.(After the lapse of five years from its award when the land ceases to be economically feasible and sound for agricultural purposes, or the locality has become urbanized and the land will have a greater economic value for residential, commercial or industrial purposes, the DAR upon application of the beneficiary or landowner with due notice to the affected parties, and subject to existing laws, may authorize the x x x conversion of the land and its dispositions. x x x
On the 3% Production Share
On the matter of the alleged failure of HLI to comply with sharing the 3% of the gross production sales of the hacienda and pay dividends from profit, the entries in its financial books tend to indicate compliance by HLI of the profit-sharing equivalent to 3% of the gross sales from the production of the agricultural land on top of (a) the salaries and wages due FWBs as employees of the company and (b) the 3% of the gross selling price of the converted land and that portion used for the SCTEX. A plausible evidence of compliance or non-compliance, as the case may be, could be the books of account of HLI. Evidently, the cry of some groups of not having received their share from the gross production sales has not adequately been validated on the ground by the Special Task Force.
Indeed, factual findings of administrative agencies are conclusive when supported by substantial evidence and are accorded due respect and weight, especially when they are affirmed by the CA. However, such rule is not absolute. One such exception is when the findings of an administrative agency are conclusions without citation of specific evidence on which they are based, such as in this particular instance. As culled from its Terminal Report, it would appear that the Special Task Force rejected HLI’s claim of compliance on the basis of this ratiocination:
The Task Force position: Though, allegedly, the Supervisory Group receives the 3% gross production share and that others alleged that they received 30 million pesos still others maintain that they have not received anything yet. Item No. 4 of the MOA is clear and must be followed. There is a distinction between the total gross sales from the production of the land and the proceeds from the sale of the land. The former refers to the fruits/yield of the agricultural land while the latter is the land itself. The phrase “the beneficiaries are entitled every year to an amount approximately equivalent to 3% would only be feasible if the subject is the produce since there is at least one harvest per year, while such is not the case in the sale of the agricultural land. This negates then the claim of HLI that, all that the FWBs can be entitled to, if any, is only 3% of the purchase price of the converted land.

Besides, the Conversion Order dated 14 August 1996 provides that “the benefits, wages and the like, presently received by the FWBs shall not in any way be reduced or adversely affected. Three percent of the gross selling price of the sale of the converted land shall be awarded to the beneficiaries of the SDO.” The 3% gross production share then is different from the 3% proceeds of the sale of the converted land and, with more reason, the 33% share being claimed by the FWBs as part owners of the Hacienda, should have been given the FWBs, as stockholders, and to which they could have been entitled if only the land were acquired and redistributed to them under the CARP.

x x x x

The FWBs do not receive any other benefits under the MOA except the aforementioned [(viz: shares of stocks (partial), 3% gross production sale (not all) and homelots (not all)].

Judging from the above statements, the Special Task Force is at best silent on whether HLI has failed to comply with the 3% production-sharing obligation or the 3% of the gross selling price of the converted land and the SCTEX lot. In fact, it admits that the FWBs, though not all, have received their share of the gross production sales and in the sale of the lot to SCTEX. At most, then, HLI had complied substantially with this SDP undertaking and the conversion order. To be sure, this slight breach would not justify the setting to naught by PARC of the approval action of the earlier PARC. Even in contract law, rescission, predicated on violation of reciprocity, will not be permitted for a slight or casual breach of contract; rescission may be had only for such breaches that are substantial and fundamental as to defeat the object of the parties in making the agreement.
Despite the foregoing findings, the revocation of the approval of the SDP is not without basis as shown below.
On Titles to Homelots
Under RA 6657, the distribution of homelots is required only for corporations or business associations owning or operating farms which opted for land distribution. Sec. 30 of RA 6657 states:
SEC. 30. Homelots and Farmlots for Members of Cooperatives.(The individual members of the cooperatives or corporations mentioned in the preceding section shall be provided with homelots and small farmlots for their family use, to be taken from the land owned by the cooperative or corporation.
The “preceding section” referred to in the above-quoted provision is as follows:
SEC. 29. Farms Owned or Operated by Corporations or Other Business Associations.(In the case of farms owned or operated by corporations or other business associations, the following rules shall be observed by the PARC.

In general, lands shall be distributed directly to the individual worker-beneficiaries.

In case it is not economically feasible and sound to divide the land, then it shall be owned collectively by the worker-beneficiaries who shall form a workers’ cooperative or association which will deal with the corporation or business association. Until a new agreement is entered into by and between the workers’ cooperative or association and the corporation or business association, any agreement existing at the time this Act takes effect between the former and the previous landowner shall be respected by both the workers’ cooperative or association and the corporation or business association.

Noticeably, the foregoing provisions do not make reference to corporations which opted for stock distribution under Sec. 31 of RA 6657. Concomitantly, said corporations are not obliged to provide for it except by stipulation, as in this case.
Under the SDP, HLI undertook to “subdivide and allocate for free and without charge among the qualified family-beneficiaries x x x residential or homelots of not more than 240 sq. m. each, with each family beneficiary being assured of receiving and owning a homelot in the barrio or barangay where it actually resides,” “within a reasonable time.”
More than sixteen (16) years have elapsed from the time the SDP was approved by PARC, and yet, it is still the contention of the FWBs that not all was given the 240-square meter homelots and, of those who were already given, some still do not have the corresponding titles.
During the oral arguments, HLI was afforded the chance to refute the foregoing allegation by submitting proof that the FWBs were already given the said homelots:
Justice Velasco: x x x There is also an allegation that the farmer beneficiaries, the qualified family beneficiaries were not given the 240 square meters each. So, can you also [prove] that the qualified family beneficiaries were already provided the 240 square meter homelots.

Atty. Asuncion: We will, your Honor please.

Other than the financial report, however, no other substantial proof showing that all the qualified beneficiaries have received homelots was submitted by HLI. Hence, this Court is constrained to rule that HLI has not yet fully complied with its undertaking to distribute homelots to the FWBs under the SDP.

On “Man Days” and the Mechanics of Stock Distribution
In our review and analysis of par. 3 of the SDOA on the mechanics and timelines of stock distribution, We find that it violates two (2) provisions of DAO 10. Par. 3 of the SDOA states:
3. At the end of each fiscal year, for a period of 30 years, the SECOND PARTY [HLI] shall arrange with the FIRST PARTY [TDC] the acquisition and distribution to the THIRD PARTY [FWBs] on the basis of number of days worked and at no cost to them of one-thirtieth (1/30) of 118,391,976.85 shares of the capital stock of the SECOND PARTY that are presently owned and held by the FIRST PARTY, until such time as the entire block of 118,391,976.85 shares shall have been completely acquired and distributed to the THIRD PARTY.
Based on the above-quoted provision, the distribution of the shares of stock to the FWBs, albeit not entailing a cash out from them, is contingent on the number of “man days,” that is, the number of days that the FWBs have worked during the year. This formula deviates from Sec. 1 of DAO 10, which decrees the distribution of equal number of shares to the FWBs as the minimum ratio of shares of stock for purposes of compliance with Sec. 31 of RA 6657. As stated in Sec. 4 of DAO 10:
Section 4. Stock Distribution Plan.(The [SDP] submitted by the corporate landowner-applicant shall provide for the distribution of an equal number of shares of the same class and value, with the same rights and features as all other shares, to each of the qualified beneficiaries. This distribution plan in all cases, shall be at least the minimum ratio for purposes of compliance with Section 31 of R.A. No. 6657.
On top of the minimum ratio provided under Section 3 of this Implementing Guideline, the corporate landowner-applicant may adopt additional stock distribution schemes taking into account factors such as rank, seniority, salary, position and other circumstances which may be deemed desirable as a matter of sound company policy. (Emphasis supplied.)

The above proviso gives two (2) sets or categories of shares of stock which a qualified beneficiary can acquire from the corporation under the SDP. The first pertains, as earlier explained, to the mandatory minimum ratio of shares of stock to be distributed to the FWBs in compliance with Sec. 31 of RA 6657. This minimum ratio contemplates of that “proportion of the capital stock of the corporation that the agricultural land, actually devoted to agricultural activities, bears in relation to the company’s total assets.” It is this set of shares of stock which, in line with Sec. 4 of DAO 10, is supposed to be allocated “for the distribution of an equal number of shares of stock of the same class and value, with the same rights and features as all other shares, to each of the qualified beneficiaries.”
On the other hand, the second set or category of shares partakes of a gratuitous extra grant, meaning that this set or category constitutes an augmentation share/s that the corporate landowner may give under an additional stock distribution scheme, taking into account such variables as rank, seniority, salary, position and like factors which the management, in the exercise of its sound discretion, may deem desirable.
Before anything else, it should be stressed that, at the time PARC approved HLI’s SDP, HLI recognized 6,296 individuals as qualified FWBs. And under the 30-year stock distribution program envisaged under the plan, FWBs who came in after 1989, new FWBs in fine, may be accommodated, as they appear to have in fact been accommodated as evidenced by their receipt of HLI shares.
Now then, by providing that the number of shares of the original 1989 FWBs shall depend on the number of “man days,” HLI violated the afore-quoted rule on stock distribution and effectively deprived the FWBs of equal shares of stock in the corporation, for, in net effect, these 6,296 qualified FWBs, who theoretically had given up their rights to the land that could have been distributed to them, suffered a dilution of their due share entitlement. As has been observed during the oral arguments, HLI has chosen to use the shares earmarked for farmworkers as reward system chips to water down the shares of the original 6,296 FWBs. Particularly:
Justice Abad: If the SDOA did not take place, the other thing that would have happened is that there would be CARP?

Atty. Dela Merced: Yes, Your Honor.

Justice Abad: That’s the only point I want to know x x x. Now, but they chose to enter SDOA instead of placing the land under CARP. And for that reason those who would have gotten their shares of the land actually gave up their rights to this land in place of the shares of the stock, is that correct?

Atty. Dela Merced: It would be that way, Your Honor.

Justice Abad: Right now, also the government, in a way, gave up its right to own the land because that way the government takes own [sic] the land and distribute it to the farmers and pay for the land, is that correct?

Atty. Dela Merced: Yes, Your Honor.

Justice Abad: And then you gave thirty-three percent (33%) of the shares of HLI to the farmers at that time that numbered x x x those who signed five thousand four hundred ninety eight (5,498) beneficiaries, is that correct?

Atty. Dela Merced: Yes, Your Honor.

Justice Abad: But later on, after assigning them their shares, some workers came in from 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992 and the rest of the years that you gave additional shares who were not in the original list of owners?

Atty. Dela Merced: Yes, Your Honor.

Justice Abad: Did those new workers give up any right that would have belong to them in 1989 when the land was supposed to have been placed under CARP?

Atty. Dela Merced: If you are talking or referring… (interrupted)

Justice Abad: None! You tell me. None. They gave up no rights to land?

Atty. Dela Merced: They did not do the same thing as we did in 1989, Your Honor.

Justice Abad: No, if they were not workers in 1989 what land did they give up? None, if they become workers later on.

Atty. Dela Merced: None, Your Honor, I was referring, Your Honor, to the original… (interrupted)

Justice Abad: So why is it that the rights of those who gave up their lands would be diluted, because the company has chosen to use the shares as reward system for new workers who come in? It is not that the new workers, in effect, become just workers of the corporation whose stockholders were already fixed. The TADECO who has shares there about sixty six percent (66%) and the five thousand four hundred ninety eight (5,498) farmers at the time of the SDOA? Explain to me. Why, why will you x x x what right or where did you get that right to use this shares, to water down the shares of those who should have been benefited, and to use it as a reward system decided by the company?

From the above discourse, it is clear as day that the original 6,296 FWBs, who were qualified beneficiaries at the time of the approval of the SDP, suffered from watering down of shares. As determined earlier, each original FWB is entitled to 18,804.32 HLI shares. The original FWBs got less than the guaranteed 18,804.32 HLI shares per beneficiary, because the acquisition and distribution of the HLI shares were based on “man days” or “number of days worked” by the FWB in a year’s time. As explained by HLI, a beneficiary needs to work for at least 37 days in a fiscal year before he or she becomes entitled to HLI shares. If it falls below 37 days, the FWB, unfortunately, does not get any share at year end. The number of HLI shares distributed varies depending on the number of days the FWBs were allowed to work in one year. Worse, HLI hired farmworkers in addition to the original 6,296 FWBs, such that, as indicated in the Compliance dated August 2, 2010 submitted by HLI to the Court, the total number of farmworkers of HLI as of said date stood at 10,502. All these farmworkers, which include the original 6,296 FWBs, were given shares out of the 118,931,976.85 HLI shares representing the 33.296% of the total outstanding capital stock of HLI. Clearly, the minimum individual allocation of each original FWB of 18,804.32 shares was diluted as a result of the use of “man days” and the hiring of additional farmworkers.
Going into another but related matter, par. 3 of the SDOA expressly providing for a 30-year timeframe for HLI-to-FWBs stock transfer is an arrangement contrary to what Sec. 11 of DAO 10 prescribes. Said Sec. 11 provides for the implementation of the approved stock distribution plan within three (3) months from receipt by the corporate landowner of the approval of the plan by PARC. In fact, based on the said provision, the transfer of the shares of stock in the names of the qualified FWBs should be recorded in the stock and transfer books and must be submitted to the SEC within sixty (60) days from implementation. As stated:
Section 11. Implementation/Monitoring of Plan.(The approved stock distribution plan shall be implemented within three (3) months from receipt by the corporate landowner-applicant of the approval thereof by the PARC, and the transfer of the shares of stocks in the names of the qualified beneficiaries shall be recorded in stock and transfer books and submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) within sixty (60) days from the said implementation of the stock distribution plan. (Emphasis supplied.)

It is evident from the foregoing provision that the implementation, that is, the distribution of the shares of stock to the FWBs, must be made within three (3) months from receipt by HLI of the approval of the stock distribution plan by PARC. While neither of the clashing parties has made a compelling case of the thrust of this provision, the Court is of the view and so holds that the intent is to compel the corporate landowner to complete, not merely initiate, the transfer process of shares within that three-month timeframe. Reinforcing this conclusion is the 60-day stock transfer recording (with the SEC) requirement reckoned from the implementation of the SDP.

To the Court, there is a purpose, which is at once discernible as it is practical, for the three-month threshold. Remove this timeline and the corporate landowner can veritably evade compliance with agrarian reform by simply deferring to absurd limits the implementation of the stock distribution scheme.
The argument is urged that the thirty (30)-year distribution program is justified by the fact that, under Sec. 26 of RA 6657, payment by beneficiaries of land distribution under CARP shall be made in thirty (30) annual amortizations. To HLI, said section provides a justifying dimension to its 30-year stock distribution program.
HLI’s reliance on Sec. 26 of RA 6657, quoted in part below, is obviously misplaced as the said provision clearly deals with land distribution.
SEC. 26. Payment by Beneficiaries.(Lands awarded pursuant to this Act shall be paid for by the beneficiaries to the LBP in thirty (30) annual amortizations x x x.
Then, too, the ones obliged to pay the LBP under the said provision are the beneficiaries. On the other hand, in the instant case, aside from the fact that what is involved is stock distribution, it is the corporate landowner who has the obligation to distribute the shares of stock among the FWBs.
Evidently, the land transfer beneficiaries are given thirty (30) years within which to pay the cost of the land thus awarded them to make it less cumbersome for them to pay the government. To be sure, the reason underpinning the 30-year accommodation does not apply to corporate landowners in distributing shares of stock to the qualified beneficiaries, as the shares may be issued in a much shorter period of time.
Taking into account the above discussion, the revocation of the SDP by PARC should be upheld for violating DAO 10. It bears stressing that under Sec. 49 of RA 6657, the PARC and the DAR have the power to issue rules and regulations, substantive or procedural. Being a product of such rule-making power, DAO 10 has the force and effect of law and must be duly complied with. The PARC is, therefore, correct in revoking the SDP. Consequently, the PARC Resolution No. 89-12-2 dated November 21, l989 approving the HLI’s SDP is nullified and voided.
III.
We now resolve the petitions-in-intervention which, at bottom, uniformly pray for the exclusion from the coverage of the assailed PARC resolution those portions of the converted land within Hacienda Luisita which RCBC and LIPCO acquired by purchase.
Both contend that they are innocent purchasers for value of portions of the converted farm land. Thus, their plea for the exclusion of that portion from PARC Resolution 2005-32-01, as implemented by a DAR-issued Notice of Coverage dated January 2, 2006, which called for mandatory CARP acquisition coverage of lands subject of the SDP.
To restate the antecedents, after the conversion of the 500 hectares of land in Hacienda Luisita, HLI transferred the 300 hectares to Centennary, while ceding the remaining 200-hectare portion to LRC. Subsequently, LIPCO purchased the entire three hundred (300) hectares of land from Centennary for the purpose of developing the land into an industrial complex. Accordingly, the TCT in Centennary’s name was canceled and a new one issued in LIPCO’s name. Thereafter, said land was subdivided into two (2) more parcels of land. Later on, LIPCO transferred about 184 hectares to RCBC by way of dacion en pago, by virtue of which TCTs in the name of RCBC were subsequently issued.
Under Sec. 44 of PD 1529 or the Property Registration Decree, “every registered owner receiving a certificate of title in pursuance of a decree of registration and every subsequent purchaser of registered land taking a certificate of title for value and in good faith shall hold the same free from all encumbrances except those noted on the certificate and enumerated therein.”
It is settled doctrine that one who deals with property registered under the Torrens system need not go beyond the four corners of, but can rely on what appears on, the title. He is charged with notice only of such burdens and claims as are annotated on the title. This principle admits of certain exceptions, such as when the party has actual knowledge of facts and circumstances that would impel a reasonably cautious man to make such inquiry, or when the purchaser has knowledge of a defect or the lack of title in his vendor or of sufficient facts to induce a reasonably prudent man to inquire into the status of the title of the property in litigation. A higher level of care and diligence is of course expected from banks, their business being impressed with public interest.
Millena v. Court of Appeals describes a purchaser in good faith in this wise:
x x x A purchaser in good faith is one who buys property of another, without notice that some other person has a right to, or interest in, such property at the time of such purchase, or before he has notice of the claim or interest of some other persons in the property. Good faith, or the lack of it, is in the final analysis a question of intention; but in ascertaining the intention by which one is actuated on a given occasion, we are necessarily controlled by the evidence as to the conduct and outward acts by which alone the inward motive may, with safety, be determined. Truly, good faith is not a visible, tangible fact that can be seen or touched, but rather a state or condition of mind which can only be judged by actual or fancied tokens or signs. Otherwise stated, good faith x x x refers to the state of mind which is manifested by the acts of the individual concerned. (Emphasis supplied.)
In fine, there are two (2) requirements before one may be considered a purchaser in good faith, namely: (1) that the purchaser buys the property of another without notice that some other person has a right to or interest in such property; and (2) that the purchaser pays a full and fair price for the property at the time of such purchase or before he or she has notice of the claim of another.
It can rightfully be said that both LIPCO and RCBC are––based on the above requirements and with respect to the adverted transactions of the converted land in question––purchasers in good faith for value entitled to the benefits arising from such status.
First, at the time LIPCO purchased the entire three hundred (300) hectares of industrial land, there was no notice of any supposed defect in the title of its transferor, Centennary, or that any other person has a right to or interest in such property. In fact, at the time LIPCO acquired said parcels of land, only the following annotations appeared on the TCT in the name of Centennary: the Secretary’s Certificate in favor of Teresita Lopa, the Secretary’s Certificate in favor of Shintaro Murai, and the conversion of the property from agricultural to industrial and residential use.
The same is true with respect to RCBC. At the time it acquired portions of Hacienda Luisita, only the following general annotations appeared on the TCTs of LIPCO: the Deed of Restrictions, limiting its use solely as an industrial estate; the Secretary’s Certificate in favor of Koji Komai and Kyosuke Hori; and the Real Estate Mortgage in favor of RCBC to guarantee the payment of PhP 300 million.
It cannot be claimed that RCBC and LIPCO acted in bad faith in acquiring the lots that were previously covered by the SDP. Good faith “consists in the possessor’s belief that the person from whom he received it was the owner of the same and could convey his title. Good faith requires a well-founded belief that the person from whom title was received was himself the owner of the land, with the right to convey it. There is good faith where there is an honest intention to abstain from taking any unconscientious advantage from another.” It is the opposite of fraud.

To be sure, intervenor RCBC and LIPCO knew that the lots they bought were subjected to CARP coverage by means of a stock distribution plan, as the DAR conversion order was annotated at the back of the titles of the lots they acquired. However, they are of the honest belief that the subject lots were validly converted to commercial or industrial purposes and for which said lots were taken out of the CARP coverage subject of PARC Resolution No. 89-12-2 and, hence, can be legally and validly acquired by them. After all, Sec. 65 of RA 6657 explicitly allows conversion and disposition of agricultural lands previously covered by CARP land acquisition “after the lapse of five (5) years from its award when the land ceases to be economically feasible and sound for agricultural purposes or the locality has become urbanized and the land will have a greater economic value for residential, commercial or industrial purposes.” Moreover, DAR notified all the affected parties, more particularly the FWBs, and gave them the opportunity to comment or oppose the proposed conversion. DAR, after going through the necessary processes, granted the conversion of 500 hectares of Hacienda Luisita pursuant to its primary jurisdiction under Sec. 50 of RA 6657 to determine and adjudicate agrarian reform matters and its original exclusive jurisdiction over all matters involving the implementation of agrarian reform. The DAR conversion order became final and executory after none of the FWBs interposed an appeal to the CA. In this factual setting, RCBC and LIPCO purchased the lots in question on their honest and well-founded belief that the previous registered owners could legally sell and convey the lots though these were previously subject of CARP coverage. Ergo, RCBC and LIPCO acted in good faith in acquiring the subject lots.
And second, both LIPCO and RCBC purchased portions of Hacienda Luisita for value. Undeniably, LIPCO acquired 300 hectares of land from Centennary for the amount of PhP 750 million pursuant to a Deed of Sale dated July 30, 1998. On the other hand, in a Deed of Absolute Assignment dated November 25, 2004, LIPCO conveyed portions of Hacienda Luisita in favor of RCBC by way of dacion en pago to pay for a loan of PhP 431,695,732.10.
As bona fide purchasers for value, both LIPCO and RCBC have acquired rights which cannot just be disregarded by DAR, PARC or even by this Court. As held in Spouses Chua v. Soriano:
With the property in question having already passed to the hands of purchasers in good faith, it is now of no moment that some irregularity attended the issuance of the SPA, consistent with our pronouncement in Heirs of Spouses Benito Gavino and Juana Euste v. Court of Appeals, to wit:

x x x the general rule that the direct result of a previous void contract cannot be valid, is inapplicable in this case as it will directly contravene the Torrens system of registration. Where innocent third persons, relying on the correctness of the certificate of title thus issued, acquire rights over the property, the court cannot disregard such rights and order the cancellation of the certificate. The effect of such outright cancellation will be to impair public confidence in the certificate of title. The sanctity of the Torrens system must be preserved; otherwise, everyone dealing with the property registered under the system will have to inquire in every instance as to whether the title had been regularly or irregularly issued, contrary to the evident purpose of the law.

Being purchasers in good faith, the Chuas already acquired valid title to the property. A purchaser in good faith holds an indefeasible title to the property and he is entitled to the protection of the law. x x x (Emphasis supplied.)

To be sure, the practicalities of the situation have to a point influenced Our disposition on the fate of RCBC and LIPCO. After all, the Court, to borrow from Association of Small Landowners in the Philippines, Inc., is not a “cloistered institution removed” from the realities on the ground. To note, the approval and issuances of both the national and local governments showing that certain portions of Hacienda Luisita have effectively ceased, legally and physically, to be agricultural and, therefore, no longer CARPable are a matter of fact which cannot just be ignored by the Court and the DAR. Among the approving/endorsing issuances:
Resolution No. 392 dated 11 December 1996 of the Sangguniang Bayan of Tarlac favorably endorsing the 300-hectare industrial estate project of LIPCO;

BOI Certificate of Registration No. 96-020 dated 20 December 1996 issued in accordance with the Omnibus Investments Code of 1987;

PEZA Certificate of Board Resolution No. 97-202 dated 27 June 1997, approving LIPCO’s application for a mixed ecozone and proclaiming the three hundred (300) hectares of the industrial land as a Special Economic Zone;

Resolution No. 234 dated 08 August 1997 of the Sangguniang Bayan of Tarlac, approving the Final Development Permit for the Luisita Industrial Park II Project;

Development Permit dated 13 August 1997 for the proposed Luisita Industrial Park II Project issued by the Office of the Sangguniang Bayan of Tarlac;

DENR Environmental Compliance Certificate dated 01 October 1997 issued for the proposed project of building an industrial complex on three hundred (300) hectares of industrial land;

Certificate of Registration No. 00794 dated 26 December 1997 issued by the HLURB on the project of Luisita Industrial Park II with an area of three million (3,000,000) square meters;

License to Sell No. 0076 dated 26 December 1997 issued by the HLURB authorizing the sale of lots in the Luisita Industrial Park II;

Proclamation No. 1207 dated 22 April 1998 entitled “Declaring Certain Parcels of Private Land in Barangay San Miguel, Municipality of Tarlac, Province of Tarlac, as a Special Economic Zone pursuant to Republic Act No. 7916,” designating the Luisita Industrial Park II consisting of three hundred hectares (300 has.) of industrial land as a Special Economic Zone; and

Certificate of Registration No. EZ-98-05 dated 07 May 1998 issued by the PEZA, stating that pursuant to Presidential Proclamation No. 1207 dated 22 April 1998 and Republic Act No. 7916, LIPCO has been registered as an Ecozone Developer/Operator of Luisita Industrial Park II located in San Miguel, Tarlac, Tarlac.

While a mere reclassification of a covered agricultural land or its inclusion in an economic zone does not automatically allow the corporate or individual landowner to change its use, the reclassification process is a prima facie indicium that the land has ceased to be economically feasible and sound for agricultural uses. And if only to stress, DAR Conversion Order No. 030601074-764-(95) issued in 1996 by then DAR Secretary Garilao had effectively converted 500 hectares of hacienda land from agricultural to industrial/commercial use and authorized their disposition.
In relying upon the above-mentioned approvals, proclamation and conversion order, both RCBC and LIPCO cannot be considered at fault for believing that certain portions of Hacienda Luisita are industrial/commercial lands and are, thus, outside the ambit of CARP. The PARC, and consequently DAR, gravely abused its discretion when it placed LIPCO’s and RCBC’s property which once formed part of Hacienda Luisita under the CARP compulsory acquisition scheme via the assailed Notice of Coverage.
As regards the 80.51-hectare land transferred to the government for use as part of the SCTEX, this should also be excluded from the compulsory agrarian reform coverage considering that the transfer was consistent with the government’s exercise of the power of eminent domain and none of the parties actually questioned the transfer.
While We affirm the revocation of the SDP on Hacienda Luisita subject of PARC Resolution Nos. 2005-32-01 and 2006-34-01, the Court cannot close its eyes to certain “operative facts” that had occurred in the interim. Pertinently, the “operative fact” doctrine realizes that, in declaring a law or executive action null and void, or, by extension, no longer without force and effect, undue harshness and resulting unfairness must be avoided. This is as it should realistically be, since rights might have accrued in favor of natural or juridical persons and obligations justly incurred in the meantime. The actual existence of a statute or executive act is, prior to such a determination, an operative fact and may have consequences which cannot justly be ignored; the past cannot always be erased by a new judicial declaration.
The oft-cited De Agbayani v. Philippine National Bank discussed the effect to be given to a legislative or executive act subsequently declared invalid:
x x x It does not admit of doubt that prior to the declaration of nullity such challenged legislative or executive act must have been in force and had to be complied with. This is so as until after the judiciary, in an appropriate case, declares its invalidity, it is entitled to obedience and respect. Parties may have acted under it and may have changed their positions. What could be more fitting than that in a subsequent litigation regard be had to what has been done while such legislative or executive act was in operation and presumed to be valid in all respects. It is now accepted as a doctrine that prior to its being nullified, its existence as a fact must be reckoned with. This is merely to reflect awareness that precisely because the judiciary is the government organ which has the final say on whether or not a legislative or executive measure is valid, a period of time may have elapsed before it can exercise the power of judicial review that may lead to a declaration of nullity. It would be to deprive the law of its quality of fairness and justice then, if there be no recognition of what had transpired prior to such adjudication.
In the language of an American Supreme Court decision: “The actual existence of a statute, prior to such a determination of [unconstitutionality], is an operative fact and may have consequences which cannot justly be ignored. The past cannot always be erased by a new judicial declaration. The effect of the subsequent ruling as to invalidity may have to be considered in various aspects,––with respect to particular relations, individual and corporate, and particular conduct, private and official.” x x x

Given the above perspective and considering that more than two decades had passed since the PARC’s approval of the HLI’s SDP, in conjunction with numerous activities performed in good faith by HLI, and the reliance by the FWBs on the legality and validity of the PARC-approved SDP, perforce, certain rights of the parties, more particularly the FWBs, have to be respected pursuant to the application in a general way of the operative fact doctrine.
A view, however, has been advanced that the operative fact doctrine is of minimal or altogether without relevance to the instant case as it applies only in considering the effects of a declaration of unconstitutionality of a statute, and not of a declaration of nullity of a contract. This is incorrect, for this view failed to consider is that it is NOT the SDOA dated May 11, 1989 which was revoked in the instant case. Rather, it is PARC’s approval of the HLI’s Proposal for Stock Distribution under CARP which embodied the SDP that was nullified.
A recall of the antecedent events would show that on May 11, 1989, Tadeco, HLI, and the qualified FWBs executed the SDOA. This agreement provided the basis and mechanics of the SDP that was subsequently proposed and submitted to DAR for approval. It was only after its review that the PARC, through then Sec. Defensor-Santiago, issued the assailed Resolution No. 89-12-2 approving the SDP. Considerably, it is not the SDOA which gave legal force and effect to the stock distribution scheme but instead, it is the approval of the SDP under the PARC Resolution No. 89-12-2 that gave it its validity.
The above conclusion is bolstered by the fact that in Sec. Pangandaman’s recommendation to the PARC Excom, what he proposed is the recall/revocation of PARC Resolution No. 89-12-2 approving HLI’s SDP, and not the revocation of the SDOA. Sec. Pangandaman’s recommendation was favorably endorsed by the PARC Validation Committee to the PARC Excom, and these recommendations were referred to in the assailed Resolution No. 2005-32-01. Clearly, it is not the SDOA which was made the basis for the implementation of the stock distribution scheme.
That the operative fact doctrine squarely applies to executive acts––in this case, the approval by PARC of the HLI proposal for stock distribution––is well-settled in our jurisprudence. In Chavez v. National Housing Authority, We held:
Petitioner postulates that the “operative fact” doctrine is inapplicable to the present case because it is an equitable doctrine which could not be used to countenance an inequitable result that is contrary to its proper office.

On the other hand, the petitioner Solicitor General argues that the existence of the various agreements implementing the SMDRP is an operative fact that can no longer be disturbed or simply ignored, citing Rieta v. People of the Philippines.

The argument of the Solicitor General is meritorious.

The “operative fact” doctrine is embodied in De Agbayani v. Court of Appeals, wherein it is stated that a legislative or executive act, prior to its being declared as unconstitutional by the courts, is valid and must be complied with, thus:

xxx xxx xxx

This doctrine was reiterated in the more recent case of City of Makati v. Civil Service Commission, wherein we ruled that:

Moreover, we certainly cannot nullify the City Government's order of suspension, as we have no reason to do so, much less retroactively apply such nullification to deprive private respondent of a compelling and valid reason for not filing the leave application. For as we have held, a void act though in law a mere scrap of paper nonetheless confers legitimacy upon past acts or omissions done in reliance thereof. Consequently, the existence of a statute or executive order prior to its being adjudged void is an operative fact to which legal consequences are attached. It would indeed be ghastly unfair to prevent private respondent from relying upon the order of suspension in lieu of a formal leave application. (Citations omitted; Emphasis supplied.)
The applicability of the operative fact doctrine to executive acts was further explicated by this Court in Rieta v. People, thus:
Petitioner contends that his arrest by virtue of Arrest Search and Seizure Order (ASSO) No. 4754 was invalid, as the law upon which it was predicated — General Order No. 60, issued by then President Ferdinand E. Marcos — was subsequently declared by the Court, in Tañada v. Tuvera, 33 to have no force and effect. Thus, he asserts, any evidence obtained pursuant thereto is inadmissible in evidence.

We do not agree. In Tañada, the Court addressed the possible effects of its declaration of the invalidity of various presidential issuances. Discussing therein how such a declaration might affect acts done on a presumption of their validity, the Court said:

“. . .. In similar situations in the past this Court had taken the pragmatic and realistic course set forth in Chicot County Drainage District vs. Baxter Bank to wit:

‘The courts below have proceeded on the theory that the Act of Congress, having been found to be unconstitutional, was not a law; that it was inoperative, conferring no rights and imposing no duties, and hence affording no basis for the challenged decree. . . . It is quite clear, however, that such broad statements as to the effect of a determination of unconstitutionality must be taken with qualifications. The actual existence of a statute, prior to [the determination of its invalidity], is an operative fact and may have consequences which cannot justly be ignored. The past cannot always be erased by a new judicial declaration. The effect of the subsequent ruling as to invalidity may have to be considered in various aspects — with respect to particular conduct, private and official. Questions of rights claimed to have become vested, of status, of prior determinations deemed to have finality and acted upon accordingly, of public policy in the light of the nature both of the statute and of its previous application, demand examination. These questions are among the most difficult of those which have engaged the attention of courts, state and federal, and it is manifest from numerous decisions that an all-inclusive statement of a principle of absolute retroactive invalidity cannot be justified.’

xxx xxx xxx

“Similarly, the implementation/enforcement of presidential decrees prior to their publication in the Official Gazette is ‘an operative fact which may have consequences which cannot be justly ignored. The past cannot always be erased by a new judicial declaration . . . that an all-inclusive statement of a principle of absolute retroactive invalidity cannot be justified.’”

The Chicot doctrine cited in Tañada advocates that, prior to the nullification of a statute, there is an imperative necessity of taking into account its actual existence as an operative fact negating the acceptance of “a principle of absolute retroactive invalidity.” Whatever was done while the legislative or the executive act was in operation should be duly recognized and presumed to be valid in all respects. The ASSO that was issued in 1979 under General Order No. 60 — long before our Decision in Tañada and the arrest of petitioner — is an operative fact that can no longer be disturbed or simply ignored. (Citations omitted; Emphasis supplied.)
To reiterate, although the assailed Resolution No. 2005-32-01 states that it revokes or recalls the SDP, what it actually revoked or recalled was the PARC’s approval of the SDP embodied in Resolution No. 89-12-2. Consequently, what was actually declared null and void was an executive act, PARC Resolution No. 89-12-2, and not a contract (SDOA). It is, therefore, wrong to say that it was the SDOA which was annulled in the instant case. Evidently, the operative fact doctrine is applicable.

IV.

While the assailed PARC resolutions effectively nullifying the Hacienda Luisita SDP are upheld, the revocation must, by application of the operative fact principle, give way to the right of the original 6,296 qualified FWBs to choose whether they want to remain as HLI stockholders or not. The Court cannot turn a blind eye to the fact that in 1989, 93% of the FWBs agreed to the SDOA (or the MOA), which became the basis of the SDP approved by PARC per its Resolution No. 89-12-2 dated November 21, 1989. From 1989 to 2005, the FWBs were said to have received from HLI salaries and cash benefits, hospital and medical benefits, 240-square meter homelots, 3% of the gross produce from agricultural lands, and 3% of the proceeds of the sale of the 500-hectare converted land and the 80.51-hectare lot sold to SCTEX. HLI shares totaling 118,391,976.85 were distributed as of April 22, 2005. On August 6, 20l0, HLI and private respondents submitted a Compromise Agreement, in which HLI gave the FWBs the option of acquiring a piece of agricultural land or remain as HLI stockholders, and as a matter of fact, most FWBs indicated their choice of remaining as stockholders. These facts and circumstances tend to indicate that some, if not all, of the FWBs may actually desire to continue as HLI shareholders. A matter best left to their own discretion.

With respect to the other FWBs who were not listed as qualified beneficiaries as of November 21, 1989 when the SDP was approved, they are not accorded the right to acquire land but shall, however, continue as HLI stockholders. All the benefits and homelots received by the 10,502 FWBs (6,296 original FWBs and 4,206 non-qualified FWBs) listed as HLI stockholders as of August 2, 2010 shall be respected with no obligation to refund or return them since the benefits (except the homelots) were received by the FWBs as farmhands in the agricultural enterprise of HLI and other fringe benefits were granted to them pursuant to the existing collective bargaining agreement with Tadeco. If the number of HLI shares in the names of the original FWBs who opt to remain as HLI stockholders falls below the guaranteed allocation of 18,804.32 HLI shares per FWB, the HLI shall assign additional shares to said FWBs to complete said minimum number of shares at no cost to said FWBs.

With regard to the homelots already awarded or earmarked, the FWBs are not obliged to return the same to HLI or pay for its value since this is a benefit granted under the SDP. The homelots do not form part of the 4,915.75 hectares covered by the SDP but were taken from the 120.9234 hectare residential lot owned by Tadeco. Those who did not receive the homelots as of the revocation of the SDP on December 22, 2005 when PARC Resolution No. 2005-32-01 was issued, will no longer be entitled to homelots. Thus, in the determination of the ultimate agricultural land that will be subjected to land distribution, the aggregate area of the homelots will no longer be deducted.
There is a claim that, since the sale and transfer of the 500 hectares of land subject of the August 14, 1996 Conversion Order and the 80.51-hectare SCTEX lot came after compulsory coverage has taken place, the FWBs should have their corresponding share of the land’s value. There is merit in the claim. Since the SDP approved by PARC Resolution No. 89-12-2 has been nullified, then all the lands subject of the SDP will automatically be subject of compulsory coverage under Sec. 31 of RA 6657. Since the Court excluded the 500-hectare lot subject of the August 14, 1996 Conversion Order and the 80.51-hectare SCTEX lot acquired by the government from the area covered by SDP, then HLI and its subsidiary, Centennary, shall be liable to the FWBs for the price received for said lots. HLI shall be liable for the value received for the sale of the 200-hectare land to LRC in the amount of PhP 500,000,000 and the equivalent value of the 12,000,000 shares of its subsidiary, Centennary, for the 300-hectare lot sold to LIPCO for the consideration of PhP 750,000,000. Likewise, HLI shall be liable for PhP 80,511,500 as consideration for the sale of the 80.51-hectare SCTEX lot.
We, however, note that HLI has allegedly paid 3% of the proceeds of the sale of the 500-hectare land and 80.51-hectare SCTEX lot to the FWBs. We also take into account the payment of taxes and expenses relating to the transfer of the land and HLI’s statement that most, if not all, of the proceeds were used for legitimate corporate purposes. In order to determine once and for all whether or not all the proceeds were properly utilized by HLI and its subsidiary, Centennary, DAR will engage the services of a reputable accounting firm to be approved by the parties to audit the books of HLI to determine if the proceeds of the sale of the 500-hectare land and the 80.51-hectare SCTEX lot were actually used for legitimate corporate purposes, titling expenses and in compliance with the August 14, 1996 Conversion Order. The cost of the audit will be shouldered by HLI. If after such audit, it is determined that there remains a balance from the proceeds of the sale, then the balance shall be distributed to the qualified FWBs.
A view has been advanced that HLI must pay the FWBs yearly rent for use of the land from 1989. We disagree. It should not be forgotten that the FWBs are also stockholders of HLI, and the benefits acquired by the corporation from its possession and use of the land ultimately redounded to the FWBs’ benefit based on its business operations in the form of salaries, and other fringe benefits under the CBA. To still require HLI to pay rent to the FWBs will result in double compensation.
For sure, HLI will still exist as a corporation even after the revocation of the SDP although it will no longer be operating under the SDP, but pursuant to the Corporation Code as a private stock corporation. The non-agricultural assets amounting to PhP 393,924,220 shall remain with HLI, while the agricultural lands valued at PhP 196,630,000 with an original area of 4,915.75 hectares shall be turned over to DAR for distribution to the FWBs. To be deducted from said area are the 500-hectare lot subject of the August 14, 1996 Conversion Order, the 80.51-hectare SCTEX lot, and the total area of 6,886.5 square meters of individual lots that should have been distributed to FWBs by DAR had they not opted to stay in HLI.

HLI shall be paid just compensation for the remaining agricultural land that will be transferred to DAR for land distribution to the FWBs. We find that the date of the “taking” is November 21, 1989, when PARC approved HLI’s SDP per PARC Resolution No. 89-12-2. DAR shall coordinate with LBP for the determination of just compensation. We cannot use May 11, 1989 when the SDOA was executed, since it was the SDP, not the SDOA, that was approved by PARC.

The instant petition is treated pro hac vice in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.

WHEREFORE, the instant petition is DENIED. PARC Resolution No. 2005-32-01 dated December 22, 2005 and Resolution No. 2006-34-01 dated May 3, 2006 are hereby AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that the original 6,296 qualified FWBs shall have the option to remain as stockholders of HLI. DAR shall immediately schedule meetings with the said 6,296 FWBs and explain to them the effects, consequences and legal or practical implications of their choice, after which the FWBs will be asked to manifest, in secret voting, their choices in the ballot, signing their signatures or placing their thumbmarks, as the case may be, over their printed names.

Of the 6,296 FWBs, he or she who wishes to continue as an HLI stockholder is entitled to 18,804.32 HLI shares, and, in case the HLI shares already given to him or her is less than 18,804.32 shares, the HLI is ordered to issue or distribute additional shares to complete said prescribed number of shares at no cost to the FWB within thirty (30) days from finality of this Decision. Other FWBs who do not belong to the original 6,296 qualified beneficiaries are not entitled to land distribution and shall remain as HLI shareholders. All salaries, benefits, 3% production share and 3% share in the proceeds of the sale of the 500-hectare converted land and the 80.51-hectare SCTEX lot and homelots already received by the 10,502 FWBs, composed of 6,296 original FWBs and 4,206 non-qualified FWBs, shall be respected with no obligation to refund or return them.

Within thirty (30) days after determining who from among the original FWBs will stay as stockholders, DAR shall segregate from the HLI agricultural land with an area of 4,915.75 hectares subject of PARC’s SDP-approving Resolution No. 89-12-2 the following: (a) the 500-hectare lot subject of the August 14, l996 Conversion Order; (b) the 80.51-hectare lot sold to, or acquired by, the government as part of the SCTEX complex; and (c) the aggregate area of 6,886.5 square meters of individual lots that each FWB is entitled to under the CARP had he or she not opted to stay in HLI as a stockholder. After the segregation process, as indicated, is done, the remaining area shall be turned over to DAR for immediate land distribution to the original qualified FWBs who opted not to remain as HLI stockholders.

The aforementioned area composed of 6,886.5-square meter lots allotted to the FWBs who stayed with the corporation shall form part of the HLI assets.

HLI is directed to pay the 6,296 FWBs the consideration of PhP 500,000,000 received by it from Luisita Realty, Inc. for the sale to the latter of 200 hectares out of the 500 hectares covered by the August 14, 1996 Conversion Order, the consideration of PhP 750,000,000 received by its owned subsidiary, Centennary Holdings, Inc. for the sale of the remaining 300 hectares of the aforementioned 500-hectare lot to Luisita Industrial Park Corporation, and the price of PhP 80,511,500 paid by the government through the Bases Conversion Development Authority for the sale of the 80.51-hectare lot used for the construction of the SCTEX road network. From the total amount of PhP 1,330,000,000 (PhP 500,000,000 + PhP 750,000,000 + PhP 80,511,500 = PhP 1,330,511,500) shall be deducted the 3% of the total gross sales from the production of the agricultural land and the 3% of the proceeds of said transfers that were paid to the FWBs, the taxes and expenses relating to the transfer of titles to the transferees, and the expenditures incurred by HLI and Centennary Holdings, Inc. for legitimate corporate purposes. For this purpose, DAR is ordered to engage the services of a reputable accounting firm approved by the parties to audit the books of HLI and Centennary Holdings, Inc. to determine if the PhP 1,330,000,000 proceeds of the sale of the three (3) aforementioned lots were used or spent for legitimate corporate purposes. Any unspent or unused balance as determined by the audit shall be distributed to the 6,296 original FWBs.

HLI is entitled to just compensation for the agricultural land that will be transferred to DAR to be reckoned from November 21, 1989 per PARC Resolution No. 89-12-2. DAR and LBP are ordered to determine the compensation due to HLI.

DAR shall submit a compliance report after six (6) months from finality of this judgment. It shall also submit, after submission of the compliance report, quarterly reports on the execution of this judgment to be submitted within the first 15 days at the end of each quarter, until fully implemented.

The temporary restraining order is lifted.

SO ORDERED.

PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR.
Associate Justice

WE CONCUR:

RENATO C. CORONA
Chief Justice

ANTONIO T. CARPIO TERESITA J. LEONARDO-DE CASTRO Associate Justice Associate Justice

ARTURO D. BRION DIOSDADO M. PERALTA
Associate Justice Associate Justice

LUCAS P. BERSAMIN MARIANO C. DEL CASTILLO
Associate Justice Associate Justice

ROBERTO A. ABAD MARTIN S. VILLARAMA, JR.
Associate Justice Associate Justice

JOSE PORTUGAL PEREZ JOSE CATRAL MENDOZA
Associate Justice Associate Justice

MARIA LOURDES P. A. SERENO
Associate Justice

C E R T I F I C A T I O N

Pursuant to Section 13, Article VIII of the Constitution, it is hereby certified that the conclusions in the above Decision had been reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Court.

RENATO C. CORONA
Chief Justice

“Jose Julio Zuniga” in some parts of the records.
Association of Small Landowners in the Philippines, Inc. v. Secretary of Agrarian Reform, G.R. No 78742, July 14, 1989, 175 SCRA 343, 352.
Id. at 392.
Yujiro Hayami, et al., Toward an Alternative Land Reform Paradigm: A Philippine Perspective 53 (1990).
Id.
Bureau of Agrarian Reform Information and Education (BARIE) & Communications Development Division (CDD), Agrarian Reform History 19 (2006).
Salmorin v. Zaldivar, G.R. No. 169691, July 23, 2008, 559 SCRA 564, 572.
Yujiro Hayami, et al., supra note 4, at 57.
Id.
Id.
Id. at 60; BARIE & CDD, supra note 6, at 21.
BARIE & CDD, supra note 6, at 22.
Yujiro Hayami, et al., supra note 4, at 71.
Providing the Mechanism for the Implementation of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program.
Supra note 2.
Rollo, pp. 100-101.
Id. at 782-800.
Id. at 103-106.
Id. at 3644, Memorandum of HLI.
Id. at 3809, Memorandum of Farmworkers Agrarian Reform Movement, Inc. (FARM).
Id. at 3645-3646, Memorandum of HLI.
Id. at 3645.
Id. at 3810, Memorandum of FARM.
Id. at 3811.
Id. at 3651, Memorandum of HLI.
SECTION 10. Corporate Landowners. Corporate landowners may give their workers and other qualified beneficiaries the right to purchase such proportion of the capital stock of the corporation that the land assets bear in relation to the corporation’s total assets, and grant additional compensation which may be used for this purposes. The approval by the PARC of a plan for such stock distribution, and its initial implementation, shall be deemed compliance with the land distribution requirements of the CARP.
Section 1.
1a.) Qualified Corporate Landowner-Applicant(All bona fide stock corporations owning agricultural land utilized for agricultural production and existing as such as of June 15, 1988, the date of effectivity of R.A. No. 6657, may apply for and avail of the voluntary stock distribution plan [SDP] provided in Section 31 thereof. New corporations incorporated after the effectivity of R.A. No. 6657 may also apply, provided that they are subsidiaries of or spin-offs from their mother corporation x x x.
1b.) Qualified Beneficiaries(The qualified beneficiaries in the [SDP] are all those identified beneficiaries of land transfer enumerated under Section 22 of RA 6657.
The [SDP] shall be agreed upon by both the corporate landowner-applicant and the qualified beneficiaries and subject to approval by PARC. x x x
Section 2. Applicant and Time of Filing(The corporate landowner-applicant shall file the [SDP] in a form to be prescribed by DAR and obtain approval within two (2) years from the effectivity of RA 6657 but prior to DAR’s notice of compulsory acquisition of said property under the same law.
Section 3. Proportion of Distribution(The [SDP] of corporate landowner-applicant must give the qualified beneficiaries the right to purchase at least such proportion of the capital stock of the corporation that the agricultural land, actually devoted to agricultural activities, bears in relation to the corporation’s total assets under such terms and conditions as may be agreed upon by them.
Section 4. Stock Distribution Plan(The [SDP] submitted by the corporate landowner-applicant shall provide for the distribution of an equal number of shares of stock of the same class and value, with the same rights and features as all other shares, to each of the qualified beneficiaries. This distribution plan in all cases, shall be at least the minimum ratio for purposes of compliance with Section 31 of RA 6657.
On top of the minimum ratio provided under Section 3 of this Implementing Guideline, corporate landowner-applicant may adopt additional stock distribution schemes taking into account factors such as rank, seniority, salary, position and other circumstances which may be deemed desirable as a matter of sound company policy.
Section 5. Criteria for Evaluation of Proposal(The [SDP] submitted by the corporate landowner-applicant shall meet the following minimum criteria:
a. that the continued operation of the corporation with its agricultural land intact and unfragmented is viable with potential for growth and increased profitability;
b. that the plan for stock distribution to qualified beneficiaries would result in increased income and greater benefits to them, than if the lands were divided and distributed to them individually;
c. that the stock distribution plan is acceptable to a majority, defined as 50% plus 1, of all the qualified beneficiaries;
d. that the plan shall include a provision that the books of the corporation shall be subject to periodic audit by certified public accountants chosen by the beneficiaries;
e. that irrespective of the value of the beneficiaries equity in the corporation, they shall be assured of at least one (1) representative in the Board of Directors or in a management or executive committee, if one exists x x x;
f. that a beneficiary who avails of a stock option must first execute the necessary waiver from being a beneficiary in another stock distribution plan x x x;
other criteria that the DAR may prescribe x x x.
Section 6. Valuation and Compensation(The valuation of corporate assets submitted by the corporate landowner-applicant in this proposal shall be subject to verification and audit examination by DAR. The determination of the value of the agricultural land shall be based on the land valuation guidelines promulgated by DAR.
Section 7. Modes of Stock Distribution(The [SDP] x x x may be effected through divestment of the existing equity holdings by stockholders or other modes of stock distribution acceptable to both parties and duly approved by DAR.
Section 8. Limited Transferability of Beneficiaries Stocks x x x.
Section 9. Payment of Shares – The payment of the purchase price of the shares shall be under such terms and conditions agreed upon by the corporate landowner-applicant and the beneficiaries, provided that in no case shall the compensation received by the workers, at the time the shares of stock are distributed, be reduced.
Section 10. Disposition of Proposal(After the evaluation of the [SDP] submitted by the corporate landowner-applicant to the [DAR] Secretary, he shall forward the same with all the supporting documents to the Presidential Agrarian Reform Council (PARC), through its Executive Committee, with his recommendation for final action.
Section 11. Implementation / Monitoring of Plan(The approved [SDP] shall be implemented within three (3) months from receipt by the corporate landowner-applicant of the approval thereof by the PARC and the transfer of the shares of stocks in the names of the qualified beneficiaries shall be recorded in the stock and transfer books and submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) within sixty (60) days from the said implementation of the [SDP].
Upon completion, the corporate landowner-applicant shall be issued a Certificate of Compliance. The [DAR] Secretary x x x shall strictly monitor the implementation to determine whether or not there has been compliance with the approved [SDP] as well as the requirements of the CARP. For this purpose, the corporate landowner-applicant shall make available its premises for ocular inspection, its personnel for interview, and its records for examination at normal business hours.
Section 12. Non-compliance with any of the requirements of Section 31 of RA 6675, as implemented by this Implementing Guidelines shall be grounds for the revocation of the Certificate of Compliance issued to the corporate landowner-applicant.
Section 13. Nothing herein shall be construed as precluding the PARC from making its own independent evaluation and assessment of the stock distribution plan x x x and in prescribing other requirements.
Rollo, p. 386.
Id. at 148.
Id. at 3767.
Id. at 1318-1319.
Id. at 3736-3740.
Id. at 147-150.
Id. at 3746. The figure is lifted from “A Proposal for Stock Distribution under CARP”; Memorandum of HLI, Annex “A.”
Id. at 3730-3748.

A PROPOSAL FOR STOCK DISTRIBUTION UNDER C.A.R.P.

Tarlac Development Corporation, [Tadeco] engaged principally in agricultural pursuits, proposes to comply with the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (C.A.R.P.) x x x with [regard] to its farm x x x “Hacienda Luisita” by availing of Section 31 of [RA] 6657 which allows a corporate landowner to choose between physically dividing its agricultural land subject to agrarian reform among its farmworkers and adopting a plan of distribution to the same beneficiaries of the shares of the capital stock of the corporation owning the agricultural land.
In view of the fact that the portions of Hacienda Luisita devoted to agriculture, consisting of approximately 4,915.75 hectares, if divided and distributed among more or less 7,000 farmworkers as potential beneficiaries, would not be adequate to give the said farmhands a decent means of livelihood, [Tadeco] has decided to resort to the distribution of shares to the qualified beneficiaries as the better and more equitable mode of compliance with the C.A.R.P.
One of the important businesses of [Tadeco] was to operate Hacienda Luisita which is a sugarcane farm, the agricultural parts of which x x x have an aggregate area of about 4,915.75 hectares.
Prior to 1981, [Tadeco] operated the said farm x x x manually. The only mechanized portion of the operation then was the preparation of the land. Under this system of cultivation, production was so exiguous that the yield per hectare was even below the break-even point. To survive the crippling economic crisis begotten by the depressed price of sugar [Tadeco] began introducing in Hacienda Luisita in 1981 new technology in sugarcane farming by way of mechanization. The size and contiguous nature of the land made the mechanized approach ideal. Its intention was not to cut cost thru labor displacement but to take advantage of the better productivity level accruing to this type of operation.
In no time at all, x x x the yield per hectare almost doubled and went up to 80 tons. And what was before a marginal operation became a viable one.

FARMWORKER-BENEFICIARIES

Hacienda Luisita, as an agricultural enterprise, employs at the moment 6,296 farmworkers, excluding those whose names have been dropped from the list for not having worked in the farm for the past two years. Its labor complement consists of 337 permanent farmworkers, 275 seasonal, 3,807 casuals who are master list members and 1,877 casuals who are non-master list members, although it actually needs only 4,047 of them to run the farm.
Since its acquisition of Hacienda Luisita in 1958, [Tadeco] has never resorted to retrenchment in personnel even during extremely difficult times x x x, which saw the sugar industry on the brink of collapse. It has promptly complied with increases in the minimum wage law. There has been no collective bargaining negotiation that did not produce an across-the-board increase in wages for labor, so that a Hacienda Luisita worker received compensation much higher than the floor wage prescribed for the sugar industry.
For Crop Year 1987-88, [Tadeco] paid a total of P48,040,000.00 in terms of salaries and wages and fringe benefits of its employees and farmworkers in Hacienda Luisita. Among the fringe benefits presently enjoyed by its personnel, under their existing collective bargaining agreement [CBA] with management, are the following:
1.) 100% free hospitalization and medical plan for all employees and workers, and their spouses, children and parents;
2.) Service and amelioration bonuses;
3.) Interest-free loans on education, rice and sugar, and salary and special loans;
4.) Bus fare subsidy for students who are children of employees and workers in the farm, and
5.) Retirement plan that is fully funded and non-contributory.
To be entitled to the above-mentioned benefits, a qualified worker has only to work for 37 days in one crop year.

SPIN-OFF CORPORATION

To expedite compliance with the requirements of the [CARP] on stock distribution and at the same time assure the farmworker-beneficiaries of the farm of receiving greater benefits than if the agricultural land were to be divided among them instead, [Tadeco] conceived of separating the agricultural portions of Hacienda Luisita from the rest of its business and transferring and conveying the said agricultural land and such properties, assets, equipment, rights, interests and accounts related to its operation, including liabilities, obligations and encumbrances incurred thereby, to another corporation separate and distinct, and for that purpose caused, thru its controlling stockholders, the registration and incorporation of [HLI] on August 23, 1988, as the entity to serve as the spin-off vehicle in whose favor the said properties and assets were later on to be transferred and conveyed.
Capital Structure. – To accommodate such transfer of assets, [HLI], with the approval of the [SEC], increased its authorized capital stock on May 10, 1989, from P1,500,000.00, divided into 1,500,000 shares with a par value of P1.00 per share, to P400,000,000.00, divided into 400,000,000 shares also with a par value of P1.00 per share, 150,000,000 of which issuable only to qualified and registered beneficiaries of the (C.A.R.P.) and 250,000,000, to any stockholder or stockholders of the corporation.
Valuation of Assets Transferred. – By virtue of a Deed of Assignment and Conveyance executed on March 22, 1989, [Tadeco] subscribed to P355,131,462.00 worth of shares in the increase in authorized capital stock of the spin-off corporation, [HLI], and in payment of its subscription transferred and conveyed to the latter the agricultural portions of Hacienda Luisita x x x having a total area of 4,915.7466 hectares, which are covered x x x together with such other properties, assets, equipment, rights, interests and accounts as are necessary in the operation of the agricultural land.
Such properties and assets contributed by [Tadeco] to the capital stock of [HLI], as appraised and approved by the [SEC], have an aggregate value of P590,554,220.00, but inasmuch as the conveyance of assets also involved the transfer of liabilities to the spin-off corporation, the net value left, after deducting the total liabilities of the farm amounting to P235,422,758.99, is P355,131,462.00 which is precisely the amount of [Tadeco’s] subscription to the increase in capital stock of [HLI].
The total value of the properties and assets transferred and conveyed by [Tadeco] to [HLI] amounting to P590,554,220.00 may be broken down as follows:

Agricultural land, x x x totaling 4,915.7466
hectares at their fair market value
of P40,000.00 per hectare ……………………… P196,630,000.00

2.) Machinery and Equipment, x x x consisting
of heavy equipment, [etc.] ……………………... 43,932,600.00

3.) Current Assets x x x …………………………… 162,638,993.00

4.) Land Improvements, in the nature of
roads, culverts, bridges, [etc.] ………………….. 31,886,300.00

5.) Unappraised Assets, such as railroad
system and equipment, x x x and construction
in progress……………………………………… 8,805,910.00

6.) Long Term Note Receivable …………………... 28,063,417.00

7.) Residential Land, with a total
area of 120.9234 hectares at their
appraisal value of P50.00 per sq. m. …………… 60,462,000.00

8.) Land, consisting of 187 lots used for
roads, railway, canals, lagoons, x x x
having an aggregate area
of 265.7495 hectares …………………………… 58,135,000.00
The break down of the liabilities and obligations contracted in operating the farm land of Hacienda Luisita [totaling P235,422,758.00] and that have to be deducted from the total value of the properties and assets transferred to arrive at their net value, is hereinbelow indicated:
x x x x
The above valuations of both assets and liabilities have been given the imprimatur of the [SEC] by reason of its approval of the increase in the authorized capital stock of [HLI], the subscription to such increase of [Tadeco], and the payment by [Tadeco] of its subscription thru transfer of assets and liabilities. Consequently, the net value of the assets and properties transferred to [HLI] of P355,131,462.00, if added to the subscription of the incorporators [HLI] to the original authorized capital stock of the said corporation amounting to P400,000.00, would give us the total capital stock subscribed and outstanding of [HLI] of P355,531,462.00 which, as will be seen later on, plays an important role in determining what amount of shares of the capital stock of [HLI] may be distributed among its farmworker-beneficiaries pursuant to Section 31 of Republic Act No. 6657.

MECHANICS OF STOCK DISTRIBUTION PLAN

Under Section 31 of [RA] 6657, a corporation owning agricultural land may distribute among the qualified beneficiaries such proportion or percentage of its capital stock that the value of the agricultural land actually devoted to agricultural activities, bears in relation to the corporation’s total assets. Conformably with this legal provision, [Tadeco] hereby submits for approval a stock distribution plan that envisions the following:
1.) The percentage of the value of the agricultural portions of Hacienda Luisita (P196,630,000.00) in relation to the total assets (P590,554,220.00) transferred and conveyed to the spin-off corporation, x x x is 33.3%, or to be exact, 33.296%, that in accordance with law, is the proportion of the outstanding capital stock of the corporation owning the agricultural land, which is P355,531,462.00 or 355,531,462 shares with a par value of P1.00 per share, that is proposed to be distributed to the qualified beneficiaries of the plan.
2.) The said 33.3% of the outstanding capital stock of [HLI] is P118,391,976.85 or 118,391,976.85 shares with a par value of P1.00 per share.
3.) The qualified beneficiaries of the [SDP] shall be the farmworkers who appear in the annual payroll, inclusive of the permanent and seasonal employees, who are regularly or periodically employed by [HLI] x x x.
4.) [HLI] shall arrange with [Tadeco] at the end of each fiscal year, for a period of 30 years, the acquisition and distribution to the farmworker-beneficiaries, on the basis of number of days worked during the year and at no cost to them, of one-thirtieth (1/30) of 118,391,976.85 shares of the capital stock of [HLI], equivalent to P118,391,976.85, that are presently owned and held by [Tadeco], until such time as the entire block of P118,391,976.85 shares shall have been completely acquired and distributed among the farmworker-beneficiaries.
5.) [HLI] guarantees to the qualified beneficiaries of the stock distribution plan that every year they will receive, on top of their regular compensation, an amount that approximates three (3%) percent of the total gross sales from the production of the agricultural land, whether it be in the form of cash dividends or incentive bonuses or both.
6.) Even if only a part or fraction of the shares earmarked for distribution will have been acquired from [Tadeco] and distributed among the farmworker-beneficiaries, [Tadeco] shall execute at the beginning of each fiscal year an irrevocable proxy, valid and effective for one (1) year, in favor of the farmworkers appearing as shareholders of [HLI] at the start of the said year which will empower the said farmworkers or their representative to vote in stockholders’ meetings of [HLI] convened during the year the entire 33.3% of the outstanding capital stock of [HLI] earmarked for distribution and thus be able from the very beginning to gain such number of seats in the board of directors of [HLI] that the whole 33.3% of the shares subject to distribution will be entitled to.
7.) In addition, [HLI] shall within a reasonable time subdivide and allocate for free and without charge among the qualified family-beneficiaries residing in the place where the agricultural land is situated, residential or homelots of not more than 240 sq. m. each, with each family-beneficiary being assured of receiving and owning a homelot in the barrio or barangay where it actually resides.

STOCK RIGHTS AND RESTRICTIONS

As previously explained, the amendment of the articles of incorporation of [HLI] increasing its capital stock provided for the classification of its shares of stock into two types: Class “A” and Class “B” shares. Shares of stock representing the proportion of the outstanding capital stock of the said corporation to be distributed among its farmworker-beneficiaries shall constitute the Class “A” shares, while the rest of the capital stock shall become Class “B” shares or shares sans any restrictions and can be issued to any stockholder.
Class “A” shares have the same rights as the x x x Class “B” shares. But their issuance being limited to farmworker-beneficiaries only, Class “A” shares are subject to the restriction that for a period of 10 years from and after their distribution, no sale, transfer or conveyance of such shares x x x shall be valid unless it be by hereditary succession or in favor of qualified and registered beneficiaries within the same corporation. This limitation on the transferability appears x x x in the amended articles of incorporation of [HLI] and in due time will be printed on the corresponding certificates of stock of that type of shares.
Limiting the effectivity of the restriction to 10 years finds support in Section 27 of the Republic Act No. 6657 which makes land distributed among beneficiaries under the [CARP] non-transferable for only 10 years, and since stock distribution is a lawful alternative to the fragmentation of land, the said legal provision should equally apply to a case where stock option is the choice.

ADVANTAGES OF STOCK PLAN
OVER LAND DISTRIBUTION

There are puissant reasons behind [Tadeco’s] preference for stock distribution to land apportionment, and they are the following:
1.) The physical fragmentation and distribution of the agricultural segments of Hacienda Luisita, among potential farmworker-beneficiaries who number approximately 7,000 would result in each individual farmhand receiving less than a hectare of land that in no way could produce enough to enable him to lead a comfortable life;
2.) As the recipient of a parcel of agricultural land, the farmworker has to take care of injecting the necessary inputs needed by the land and shoulder the cost of production, and
3.) The farmworker incurs the obligation of paying to the government for his share of the agricultural land, although the law allows him 30 years within which to do it.
On the other hand, the stock distribution plan envisaged by [Tadeco] contemplates of:
Distributing the shares of stock over a number of years among the qualified beneficiaries at no cost to them;
Allowing the farmworker to continue to work on the land as such and receive the wages and other benefits provided for by his [CBA] with the corporate landowner;
Entitling him to receive dividends, whether in cash or in stock, on the shares already distributed to him and benefit from whatever appreciation in value that the said shares may gain as the corporation becomes profitable;
Qualifying him to become the recipient of whatever income-augmenting and benefit-improving schemes that the spin-off corporation may establish, such as the payment of the guaranteed three (3%) percent of gross sales every year and the free residential or homelots to be allotted to family beneficiaries of the plan, and
Keeping the agricultural land intact and unfragmented, to maintain the viability of the sugar operation involving the farm as a single unit and thus warrant to the acknowledged farmworker-beneficiaries, hand-in-hand with their acquisition of the shares of the capital stock of the corporation owning the land, a continuing and stable source of income.
Indeed, the stock distribution plan of [Tadeco] x x x has many strong points and adherence to the law is one of them.
For instance, in arranging for the acquisition by the farmworker-beneficiaries of shares of the capital stock of the corporation owning the land gratis, the corporate landowner upholds Section 9 of the Guidelines and Procedures promulgated to implement Section 31 of [RA] 6657, which prohibits the use of government funds in paying for the shares. Moreover, the plan for the free dispersal of shares will not in any way diminish the regular compensation being received by the farmworker-beneficiaries at the time of share distribution, which is proscribed by Section 31 of [RA] 6657.

IMPORTANCE TO
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Hacienda Luisita at present is the principal source of sugarcane needed by a sugar mill owned and operated by [CAT] in the area. It supplies 50% of the sugarcane requirement of the mill that has 1,850 employees and workers in its employ. Any disruption in the present operation of Hacienda Luisita which would affect its present productivity level would therefore automatically influence the operational viability of the sugar factory x x x and which, in turn, would have repercussions on the livelihood of the present employees and workers of the mill as well as the livelihood of the thousands of sugarcane planters and their families within the Tarlac sugar district being serviced by the sugar mill.
On the other hand, the well-being of the sugar mill has to be the prime concern also of the corporate owner of Hacienda Luisita, simply because it is the entity that mills and converts the sugarcane produce of the latter to a finished product. Not only that. By milling with [CAT] which has the most efficient sugar mill in the region, the corporate owner of Hacienda Luisita in effect guarantees to itself maximum recovery from its farm’s sugarcane – something that is essential to its financial capability. In other words, the relationship between farm and mill is one of absolute reciprocity and interdependence. One cannot exist without the other.
The importance of the agricultural land of Hacienda Luisita staying undivided cannot be gainsaid. For it to remain lucrative, it has to be operated as a unit x x x. And on its successful operation rests the well-being of so many businesses and undertakings in the province, or in a wider perspective, in the region, that are largely dependent upon it for existence.

CONFORMITY OF
FARMWORKER-BENEFICIARIES

On May 11, 1989, a historic event took place in Hacienda Luisita when the representatives of [Tadeco] and [HLI] and 5,848 farmworker-beneficiaries inked their accord, in the presence of officials of the [DAR], to a [MOA] that embodies the stock distribution plan subject of this proposal. The said 5,848 farmworker-beneficiaries who gave their conformity to the agreement represent 92.9% of their entire complement which is much more than the majority (50% plus one) that the law requires.

CONCLUSION

Here is a stock distribution plan that calls for the acquisition and distribution every year, for the next 30 years, of 3,946,399.23 shares, worth P3,946,399.23, of the capital stock of the corporation owning the agricultural land among its qualified farmworker-beneficiaries at no cost to them. It also guarantees to pay to them each year the equivalent of three (3%) percent of the gross sales of the production of the land, which is about P7,320,000.00 yearly, irrespective of whether the said corporation makes money or not. It contemplates of allowing the farmworker-beneficiaries from the very start to occupy such number of seats in the board of directors of the corporate landowner as the whole number of shares of stock set aside for distribution may entitle them, so that they could have a say in forging their own destiny. And last but not least, it intends to help give the same farmworker-beneficiaries, who are qualified, adequate shelter by providing residential or homelots not exceeding 240 sq.m. each for free which they can call their own.
The above stock distribution plan is hereby submitted on the basis of all these benefits that the farmworker-beneficiaries of Hacienda Luisita will receive under its provisions in addition to their regular compensation as farmhands in the agricultural enterprise and the fringe benefits granted to them by their [CBA] with management. x x x
Under DAO 10, Sec. 1b.), par. 2, “the acceptance of the [SDP] by the majority of all the qualified beneficiaries shall be binding upon all the said qualified beneficiaries within the applicant corporation.”
Rollo, p. 14.
Id. at 1308-1309.
Id. at 1310-1313.
Entitled “Resolution Approving the Stock Distribution Plan of [Tadeco]/HLI.”
Rollo, p. 151.
Id. at 3667-3668.
Id. at 647-650.
Id. at 80, Petition of HLI; id. at 944, Consolidated Reply of HLI; id. at 1327-1328.
Id. at 651-664.
Id. at 1485-1487.
Id. at 1483-1484.
Id. at 1492-1493.
Id. at 1362.
Id. at 3669.
Id. at 1499-1509, via a Deed of Sale dated July 30, 1998.
Id. at 1362.
Id. at 1514-1518.
Id. at 1519-1520.
Id. at 1521-1522.
TSN, August 18, 2010, pp. 153-155.
Rollo, pp. 153-158, signed by 62 individuals.
Id. at 546.
Id. at 175-183.
Id. at 442, Mallari’s Comment to Petition. Mallari would, per his account, breakaway from AMBALA to form, with ex-AMBALA members, Farmers Agrarian Reform Movement, Inc. or FARM.
Id. at 159-174.
Id. at 184-192.
Id. at 679-680.
Id. at 386-405. The following are the pertinent findings of the Special Task Force as stated in its Terminal Report:

IV. IDENTIFICATION OF THE PROBLEMS/ISSUES/CONCERNS:

Matrix on the Comparative Views of the Farmer Groups vis-à-vis those of HLI Management, Along With the Corresponding FGD/OCI. Results was prepared and the compliance reports submitted, the petitions of the FWBs, particularly the AMBALA and the Supervisory Group, together with the respective responses to said petitions by HLI management and the FGD/OCI results were utilized to make a comparative summary, exemplified hereunder.

1. INDIVIDUAL ISSUES RAISED BY THE SUPERVISORY GROUP OF HACIENDA LUISITA INCORPORATED VIS-Á-VIS REJOINDER OF HLI AND OBSERVATION OF TF.

1.1. Issue: Non-enjoyment of the rights and privileges that were supposed to be given to the FWBs as stated in the [MOA] prompted the supervisory group to claim for the “one percent (1%)” share from the HLI representing their share as supervisors during the transition period.

HLI management: Such claim is a total misapprehension of Section 32 of R.A. No. 6657, the last paragraph of which requires the payment of 1% of the gross sale to managerial, supervisory and technical workers at the time of the effectivity of R.A. No. 6657. There were no such managerial employees and supervisors engaged in temporarily managing and supervising the operation of the land until its final turnover to the farmworkers since there was no land to transfer in the first place.

The Task Force position: That Section 32 of R.A. No. 6657 may not directly apply to the instant case but the non-realization of the said 1% share of expectation in the gross sale is a cause of disenchantment. The claim for the 1% share is not included in the MOA. x x x

1.2. Issue: Non-receipt of the 10% dividend

HLI contends that the distribution of said dividend does not apply to corporate farms like HLI which opted for the SD Plan.

Task force finding: The FWBs do not receive such financial return despite the stipulation on the matter.

1.3. Issue: On the three percent (3%) out of the thirty three percent (33%) representing the equity shares given from the proceeds of the sale of the 500 hectares (converted to non-agricultural use).

The HLI management argues that the corporation, banking on the legal fiction of separate corporate existence, is not obliged to give 33% of the gross selling price of the land since the legal owner is the corporation itself and not the stockholders. And the 3% was given by the HLI merely as a bonus for the FWBs.

The Task Force position: Though, allegedly, the supervisory group receives the 3% gross production share and that others alleged that they received 30 million pesos still others maintain that they have not received anything yet. Item No. 4 of the MOA is clear and must be followed. There is a distinction between the total gross sales from the production of the land and the proceeds from the sale of the land. The former refers to the fruits/yield of the agricultural land while the latter is the land itself. The phrase “the beneficiaries are entitled every year to an amount approximately equivalent to 3% would only be feasible if the subject is the produce since there is at least one harvest per year, while such is not the case in the sale of the agricultural land. This negates then the claim of HLI that, all that the FWBs can be entitled to, if any, is only 3% of the purchase price of the converted land.

Besides, the Conversion Order dated 14 August 1996 provides that “the benefits, wages and the like, presently received by the FWBs shall not in any way be reduced or adversely affected. Three percent of the gross selling price of the sale of the converted land shall be awarded to the beneficiaries of the SDO.” The 3% gross production share then is different from the 3% proceeds of the sale of the converted land and, with more reason, the 33% share being claimed by the FWBs as part owners of the Hacienda, should have been given the FWBs, as stockholders, and to which they could have been entitled if only the land were acquired and redistributed to them under the CARP.

1.4. Issue: Illegal conversion and financial incapability of HLI to proceed with the proposed development, thereby leaving the areas unproductive.

The HLI management contends that the Petition for Conversion was duly approved by the DAR on 14 August 1996 and it had the conformity of more than 5,000 FWBs who signed a manifesto of support.

In the Petitions and/during the OCI/FGD [Ocular Inspection/Focused Group Discussion] the 500 hectares subject of conversion appear to still remain undeveloped. A clear example is the Central Techno Park which has a landscaped entrance and concrete roads but the only things which can be seen inside the premises are cogon grasslands. The FWBs further maintained that they were either not given any monetary benefit from the conversion of the 500 hectares or that they were only partially given.

2. CONCERNS MANIFESTED IN THE PETITION FILED BY THE ALYANSA NG MGA MANGGAGAWANG BUKID NG HACIENDA LUISITA (AMBALA) LED BY MR. RENE GALANG

2.1. Issue: That DAR Administrative Order No. 10, series of 1988, guidelines in the corporate availment of SDO, should observe Section 31 of R.A. No. 6657 qualified beneficiaries and provide that they (FWBs) be allowed to buy the land from the company.

The HLI management posits the proposition that Section 31 is very clear and unambiguous. It grants to the FWBs the right to purchase shares of stocks in the corporation that owns the agricultural land itself and not the land. HLI is correct in this unless the SDP is disregarded.

2.2. Issue: Cancellation of the SDO and immediate coverage of the area are requested as the agreements in the implementation of the SDO were allegedly not followed/complied with.

The HLI management warranted that subject SD Plan is the most feasible scheme/alternative vis-à-vis physical distribution of the landholding under compulsory acquisition.

During the FGD/OCI, it was represented that the terms, conditions and benefits provided for in the MOA/commitment appear not to have been substantially followed. Hereunder, is a more detailed discussion of the issues:

2.2.1. On the issue of non compliance with the MOA

* FWBs are supposed to receive P700-800 dividends annually.

* P800-1000 production sharing per year. The Hacienda is operating continuously which only proves that the Hacienda is earning.

HLI, however, claims that it is not incurring profits, thus, there are no dividends to be distributed. But the shares of stocks and 3% production share have been given.

FGD/OCI finding shows that the number of shares of stocks to be received by the FWBs, depends on their designation (i.e., permanent, casual or seasonal) and on the number of man days. Retired and retrenched workers are not given shares of stocks and cease as share holders. Undisputedly, the setup under the MOA is one-sided in favor the HLI. The work schedule, upon which the extent of entitlement to be granted shares of stock is wholly within the prerogative and discretion of HLI management that a FWB can still be denied thereof by the simple expediency of not giving him any working hours/days. And this is made possible by the fact that [there] are more farmers/farmworkers in its employ than what is, according to HLI, necessary to make it operational.

On the issue of representation

It was verified that the Board of Directors election is annually conducted. However, majority of the FWBs are no longer interested and, in fact, have boycotted the elections because of the minority representation of the FWBs (4 as against 7). They claim that they are always outnumbered and some claim that the representatives elected are pro management. x x x [N]o fruitful and harmonious corporate activities can be expected as any resistance will be counter-productive, that to continue the operation under the SDP that is challenged herein will only be an empty exercise. The farmers and farmworkers will not, under the circumstances, be able to realize the contemplated receipt of benefits under the Program.

On the issue of the 240-square meter homelot

As to the 240 square meter homelots, not all of the FWBs were given homelots. Of those given, they complain that they still do not have the corresponding titles. And, those already given titles maintain that said documents are useless as such, for they cannot even be used as bank collaterals, despite even the lapse of the 5-year prescriptive period, because banks and other financial institutions refuse to honor the same without clearance from the HLI management. x x x

On the issue of coverage of the Hacienda

The HLI contends that dividing the 4,915.75 hectares among 6,296 beneficiaries would result to a farm lot of 0.78 hectare per individual FWB, which is not an economic size farm. Differences in the physical conditions of the landholding must be considered such as soil fertility and accessibility. The question of who would get the fertile or accessible part of the land and who would receive less would result/culminate in a “battle royale” among the FWBs.

DAR has established guidelines on the matter of such allocations and no problem has been encountered in its implementation of the CARP. By and large for a whole scale cultivation and production, formation of cooperatives has proven to be an effective mechanism to address the problem. The law even encourages the use of such combination [cf. Section 29, (3rd par.), Rep. Act No. 6657].

On the agreement that other benefits will be given other than those provided for in the MOA

It was stipulated that the SDO would provide the FWBs other benefits x x x a less than a hectare-farm would not be able to provide, like the 3% of the gross production sales, to be shared with the FWBs, on top of their regular compensation.

The FWBs do not receive any other benefits under the MOA except the aforementioned [(viz: shares of stocks (partial), 3% gross production sale (not all) and homelots (not all)].

V. PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS

1. The common issues raised by the petitioners are focused on the revocation of the existing SDO that was proposed by HLI and approved by the PARC on ground, among others that the provisions of Section 31 of R.A. No. 6657, upon which the SDO/SDP was based is contrary to the basic policy of the agrarian reform program on Land Acquisition and Redistribution, as may be gleaned from the second paragraph of Section 2 of R.A. No. 6657, which reads:

“To this end, a more equitable distribution and ownership of land, with due regard to the rights of landowners to just compensation and to the ecological needs of the nation, shall be undertaken to provide farmers and farmworkers with the opportunity to enhance their dignity and to improve the quality of their lives through greater productivity of agricultural lands.” (underscoring supplied).

Envisioned in the foregoing provision is the physical land transfer to prospective beneficiaries as reiterated in Section 5 thereof, as follows:

“Schedule of Implementation. The distribution of all lands covered by this Act shall be implemented immediately and completed within ten (10) years from the effectivity thereof”.

2. While SDO/SDP is an alternative arrangement to the physical distribution of lands pursuant to Section 31 of R.A. No. 6657, logic and reason dictate that such agreement must materialize within a specific period during the lifetime of CARP, stating clearly therein when such arrangement must end. The aforementioned provision may be considered as the provision of the law on “suspended coverage”, parallel to the provisions of Section 11 on Commercial Farming where coverage of CARP is deferred for ten (10) years after the effectivity of Republic Act No. 6657. Stated simply, owners of commercial farms are given a chance to recoup their investment for ten (10) years before same is finally subjected to coverage under the CARP.

VI. FINDINGS, ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION:

1. Providing for the quintessence and spirit of the agrarian reform program, Republic Act No. 6657 explicitly provides:

“SECTION 2. Declaration of Principles and Policies.(It is the policy of the State to pursue a Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP). The welfare of the landless farmers and farmworkers will receive the highest consideration to promote social justice and to move the nation toward sound rural development and industrialization, and the establishment of owner cultivatorship of economic-size farms as the basis of Philippine agriculture.

To this end, a more equitable distribution and ownership of land, with due regard to the rights of landowners to just compensation and to the ecological needs of the nation, shall be undertaken to provide farmers and farmworkers with the opportunity to enhance their dignity and improve the quality of their lives through greater productivity of agricultural lands” (underscoring added).

Within the context of the foregoing policy/objective, the farmer/farmworker beneficiaries (FWBs) in agricultural land owned and operated by corporations may be granted option by the latter, with the intervention and prior certification of DAR, “x x x the right to purchase such proportion of the capital stock of the corporation that the agricultural land, actually devoted to agricultural activities, bears in relation to the company’s total asset x x x” (Section 31, Rep. Act NO. 6657). Toward this end, DAR issued Administrative Order No. 10, series of 1988, copy of which is attached as Annex “K” and made an integral part hereof, which requires that the stock distribution option (SDO) shall meet the following criteria, reading, inter alia:

“a. that the continued operation of the corporation with its agricultural land intact and unfragmented is viable, with potential for growth and increased profitability;

“b. that the plan for stock distribution to qualified beneficiaries would result in increased income and greater benefits to them, than if the lands were divided and distributed to them individually;

x x x x

And to ensure, effective and fair implementation of the contemplated Stock Distribution Plan (SDP), the said AO also provides:

“SECTION 12. Revocation of Certificate of Compliance(Non-compliance with any of the requirements of Section 31 of RA 6657, as implemented by these Implementing Guidelines shall be grounds for the revocation of the Certificate of Compliance issued to the corporate landowner-applicant.

SECTION 13. Reservation Clause(Nothing herein shall be construed as precluding the PARC from making its own independent evaluation and assessment of the stock distribution plan of the corporate landowner-applicant and from prescribing other requirements.”

Herein, however, there is yet no Certificate of Compliance issued.

The reason is simple. Despite the lapse of sixteen (16) years, from the time the SDP was approved in November 1989, by resolution of the x x x (PARC), the objective and policy of CARP, i.e., acquisition and distribution (herein under the [SDP], only shares of stocks) is yet to be fully completed; the FWBs, instead of the promised/envisioned better life under the CARP (therein, as corporate owner), do still live in want, in abject poverty, highlighted by the resulting loss of lives in their vain/futile attempt to be financially restored at least to where they were before the CARP (SDP) was implemented. While they were then able to make both ends meet, with the SDP, their lives became miserable.

2. For the foregoing considerations, as further dramatized by the following violations/noncompliance with the guidelines prescribed, which are legally presumed as integrated in the agreements/accords/stipulations arrived at thereunder like the HLI SDP, namely:

2.1. Noncompliance with Section 11 of Administrative Order No. 10, Series of 1988, which provides:
“The approved stock distribution plan shall be implemented within three (3) months from receipt by the corporate landowner-applicant of the approval thereof by the PARC and the transfer of the shares of stocks in the names of the qualified beneficiaries shall be recorded in the stock and transfer books and submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) within sixty (60) days from the said implementation plan.”

The [SDP], however, submitted a 30-year implementation period in terms of the transfer of shares of stocks to the farmworkers beneficiaries (FWBs). The MOA provides:

“At the end of each fiscal year: for a period of 30 years, SECOND PARTY shall arrange with the FIRST PARTY the acquisition and distribution to the THIRD PARTY on the basis of the number of days worked and at no cost to them of one-thirtieth (1/30) of …”

Plainly, pending the issuance of the corresponding shares of stocks, the FWBs remain ordinary farmers and/or farmworker and the land remain under the full ownership and control of the original owner, the HLI/TADECO.

To date the issuance and transfer of the shares of stocks, together with the recording of the transfer, are yet to be complied with.

2.2. Noncompliance with the representations/warranties made under Section 5 (a) and (b) of said Administrative Order No. 10.

As claimed by HLI itself, the corporate activity has already stopped that the contemplated profitability, increased income and greater benefits enumerated in the SDP have remained mere illusions.

2.3. The agricultural land involved was not maintained “unfragmented”. At least, 500 hectares hereof have been carved out after its land use has been converted to non-agricultural uses.

The recall of said SDP/SDO of HLI is recommended. More so, since:

1. It is contrary to Public Policy

Section 2 of [RA] 6657 provides that the welfare of landless farmworkers will receive the highest consideration to promote social justice. As such, the State undertake a more equitable distribution and ownership of land that shall provide farmworkers with the opportunity to enhance their dignity and improve the quality of their lives through greater productivity of agricultural lands.

In the case of Hacienda Luisita, the farmworkers alleged that the quality of their lives has not improved. In fact it even deteriorated especially with the HLI Management declaration that the company has not gained profits, in the last 15 years, that there could be no declaration and distribution of dividends.

2. The matter of issuance/distribution shares of stocks in lieu of actual distribution of the agricultural land involved, was made totally dependent on the discretion/caprice of HLI. Under the setup, the agreement is grossly onerous to the FWBs as their man days of work cannot depart from whatever management of HLI unilaterally directs.

They can be denied the opportunity to be granted a share of stock by just not allowing them to work altogether under the guise of rotation. Meanwhile, within the 30-year period of bondage, they may already reach retirement or, worse, get retrenched for any reason, then, they forever lose whatever benefit he could have received as regular agrarian beneficiary under the CARP if only the SDP of HLI were not authorized and approved.

Incidentally, the FWBs did not have participation in the valuation of the agricultural land for the purpose of determining its proportionate equity in relation to the total assets of the corporation. Apparently, the sugarlands were undervalued.

3. The FWBs were misled into believing by the HLI, through its carefully worded Proposal that “x x x the stock distribution plan envisaged by [Tadeco], in effect, assured of:

“A. Distributing the shares of stock over a numbers of years among the qualified beneficiaries at no cost to them;

B. Allowing the farmworker to continue to work on the land as such and receive the wages and other benefits provided for by his collective bargaining agreement with the corporate landowner;

C. Entitling him to receive dividends, whether in cash or in stock, on the shares already distributed to him and benefit from whatever appreciation in value that the said shares may gain as the corporation becomes profitable;

D. Qualifying him to become the recipient of whatever income-augmenting and benefit-improving schemes that the spin-off corporation may establish, such as the payment of the guaranteed three (3%) percent of gross sales every year and the free residential or homelots to be allotted to family beneficiaries of the plan; and

E. Keeping the agricultural land intact and unfragmented, to maintain the viability of the sugar operation involving the farm as a single unit and thus warrant to the acknowledged farmworker-beneficiaries, hand-in-[hand] with their acquisition of the shares of the capital stock of the corporation owing the land, a continuing and stable source of income.” (Annex “A”, supra).

At the expense of being repetitive, the be sugar-coated assurances were, more than enough to made them fall for the SDO as they made them feel rich as “stock holder” of a rich and famous corporation despite the dirt in their hands and the tatters, they use; given the feeling of security of tenure in their work when there is none; expectation to receive dividends when the corporation has already suspended operations allegedly due to loses; and a stable sugar production by maintaining the agricultural lands when a substantial portion thereof of, almost 1/8 of the total area, has already been converted to non-agricultural uses.
Id. at 694-699.
Id. at 339-342.
Id. at 100.
Id. at 101.
Id. at 146.
Id. at 107-140.
Id. at 103-106.
Id. at 19.
Id. at 52
Id. at 255-256.
Id. at 257-259.
Id. at 334-367.
Id. at 436-459.
Attys. Edgar Bernal and Florisa Almodiel signed the motion/manifestation as counsel of Mallari and/or FARM.
The Supervisory Group later teamed up with the AMBALA-Mallari faction. For brevity, they are referred to herein as the “AMBALA-Mallari-Supervisory Group.”
Rollo, pp. 530-641.
Id. at 1350-1359.
Id. at 1535-1544.
TSN, August 24, 2010, p. 229.
Rollo, pp. 3060-3062.
Id. at 81.
G.R. No. 131457, August 19, 1999, 312 SCRA 751.
Rollo, p. 82.
Id. at 149.
Sec. 4. The State shall, by law, undertake an agrarian reform program founded on the right of farmers and regular farm workers, who are landless, to own directly or collectively the lands they till or, in the case of other farm workers, to receive a just share of the fruits thereof. To this end, the State shall encourage and undertake the just distribution of all agricultural lands, subject to such priorities and reasonable retention limits as the Congress may prescribe, taking into account ecological, developmental, or equity considerations, and subject to the payment of just compensation. In determining retention limits the State shall respect the right of small landowners. The State shall further provide incentives for voluntary land-sharing.
Consumido v. Ros, G.R. No. 166875, July 31, 2007, 528 SCRA 696, 702.
TSN, August 18, 2010, p. 141.
Rollo, p. 871.
Id. at 38.
Atienza v. Villarosa, G.R. No. 161081, May 10, 2005, 458 SCRA 385, 403; citing Chua v. Civil Service Commission, G.R. No. 88979, February 7, 1992, 206 SCRA 65.
Id.
Id.
No. L-55230, November 8, 1988, 167 SCRA 51, 59-60.
Public respondents’ Memorandum, p. 24
EO 229, Sec. 18.
BANAT Party-list v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 177508, August 7, 2009, 595 SCRA 477, 498.
G.R. No. 167614, March 24, 2009, 582 SCRA 254, 275-276.
Rollo, p. 40; TSN August 18, 2010, p. 74.
DAO 10, Section 11. Implementation / Monitoring of Plan(The approved [SDP] shall be implemented within three (3) months x x x.
Upon completion [of the stock distribution], the corporate landowner-applicant shall be issued a Certificate of Compliance. x x x
Section 12. Non-compliance with any of the requirements of Section 31 of RA 6675, as implemented by this Implementing Guidelines shall be grounds for the revocation of the Certificate of Compliance issued to the corporate landowner-applicant. x x x
TSN, August 24, 2010, p. 13.
Koruga v. Arcenas, G.R. Nos. 168332 and 169053, June 19, 2009, 590 SCRA 49, 68; citing In Re: Petition for Assistance in the Liquidation of the Rural Bank of Bokod (Benguet), Inc., PDIC v. Bureau of Internal Revenue, G.R. No. 158261, December 18, 2006, 511 SCRA 123, 141.
TSN, August 24, 2010, p. 205.
Id.
Garcia v. Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 157584, April 2, 2009, 583 SCRA 119, 129; citing Franciso, Jr. v. House of Representatives, G.R. No. 160261, November 10, 2003, 415 SCRA 44.
ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corporation v. Philippine Multi-Media System, Inc., G.R. Nos. 175769-70, January 19, 2009, 576 SCRA 262, 289 citing Philippine Veterans Bank v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 132561, June 30, 2005, 462 SCRA 336; Apex Mining Co., Inc. v. Southeast Mindanao Gold Mining Corp., G.R. Nos. 152613, 152628, 162619-20 and 152870-71.
Franciso, Jr. v. House of Representatives, supra note 108.
Alvarez v. PICOP Resources, Inc., G.R. Nos. 162243, etc., November 29, 2006, 508 SCRA 498, 552.
Supra note 108, at 138-139.
An Act Strengthening the CARP, Extending the Acquisition and Distribution of all Agricultural Lands, Instituting Necessary Reforms, Amending for the Purpose Certain Provisions of RA 6657, as Amended and Appropriating Funds therefor.
Quizon v. Comelec, 545 SCRA 635; Mattel, Inc. v. Francisco, 560 SCRA 506.
Webster’s Third New International Dictionary Unabridged 444-445 (1993).
Id. at 445.
Records of the Constitutional Commission, Vol. II, p. 678.
Sec. 2, 3rd paragraph , of RA 6657 states: The agrarian reform program is founded on the right of farmers and regular farmers who are landless, to own land directly or collectively the lands they till or, in the case of other farmworkers to receive a share of the fruits thereof. To this end, the State shall encourage and undertake the just distribution of all agricultural lands, subject to priorities and retention limits set forth in this Act x x x.
11 Fletcher, Cyc. Corps. (1971 Rev. Vol.) Sec. 5083.
Mobilia Products, Inc. v. Umezawa, G.R. Nos. 149357 and 149403, March 4, 2005.
Yu v. Yukayguan, G.R. No. 177549, June 18, 2009.
Id.
Cawaling v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 146319, October 26, 2001, 368 SCRA 453.
Basco v. PAGCOR, G.R. No. 138298, November 29, 2000, 346 SCRA 485
Angara v. Electoral Commission, 63 Phil. 139 (1936); Cawaling v. COMELEC, supra, citing Alvarez v. Guingona, 252 SCRA 695 (1996).
National Food Authority v. Masda Security Agency, Inc., G.R. No. 163448, March 8, 2005.
Rollo, p. 794. The PARC resolution also states:
HLI’s implementation of the distribution of the mandatory minimum ratio of land-to-shares of stock to the ARBs [Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries] was based on man days, within its policy of no-work no-shares of stock, and not to equal number of shares depending upon their rightful share, as required in the rules, and therefore practically divested the ARBs, as to their qualification/entitlement, as ARBs at HLI’s whims, to their disadvantage and prejudice in the form of diminution in the minimum ration of shares. Having increased x x x the number of workers (contractual), the equity share of each permanent employee, as of 1989, naturally had to be, as in fact, reduced.
Further x x x, HLI took it upon itself, or usurped, the duty or mandate of DAR to qualify the recipient ARBs and imposed its own criteria and discretion in the allocation of the mandatory minimum ratio of land-to share by basing the distribution on the number of days worked. Still worse, HLI made allocation to recipients who are not in the ARBs original masterlist as admittedly, it distributed to about 11,955 stockholders of record 59,362,611 shares representing the second half of the total number of shares earmarked for distribution when in fact there were only 6,296 farm workers or less, at the time when the land was placed under CARP under the SDP/SDO scheme. (Emphasis added.)
Memorandum of Renato Lalic, et al., p. 14.
Little Oxford Dictionary 442 (7th ed.).
Rollo, p. 3676.
The SGV & Co.’s Independent Auditors Report on HLI for years ended 2009, 2008 and 2007 contains the following entries: “[T]he Company has suffered recurring losses from operations and has substantial negative working capital deficiency. The Company has continued to have no operations and experienced financial difficulties as a result of a strike staged by the labor union on November 6, 2004.” Rollo, p. 3779, Annex “I” of HLI’s Memorandum.
Sec. 5(2).
TSN, August 24, 2010, p. 125.
MOA, 4th Whereas clause.
Memorandum of public respondents, p. 41.
HLI Consolidated Reply and Opposition, p. 65.
Herida v. F&C Pawnshop and Jewelry Store, G.R. No. 172601, April 16, 2009, 585 SCRA 395, 401.
Bascos, Jr. v. Taganahan, G.R. No. 180666, February 18, 2009, 579 SCRA 653, 674-675.
Cannu v. Galang, G.R. No. 139523, May 26, 2005, 459 SCRA 80, 93-94; Ang v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.80058, February 13, 1989, 170 SCRA 286.
TSN, August 18, 2010, p. 58.
RA 6657, Sec. 31.
DAO 10, s. 1988, Sec. 1.
TSN, August 18, 2010, p. 106.
Id. at 103-106.
See Abakada Guro Party List v. Purisima, G.R. No. 166715, August 14, 2008, 562 SCRA 251, 288-289.
Rollo, p. 1362.
Lu v. Manipon, G.R. No. 147072, May 7, 2002, 381 SCRA 788, 796.
Sandoval v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 106657, August 1, 1996, 260 SCRA 283, 295.
Cavite Development Bank v. Lim, G.R. No. 131679, February 1, 2000, 324 SCRA 346, 359..
G.R. No. 127797, January 31, 2000, 324 SCRA 126, 136-137.
Rollo, p. 1568.
Duran v. Intermediate Appellate Court, No. L-64159, September 10, 1985, 138 SCRA 489, 494.

Rollo, pp. 1499-1509.
G.R. No. 150066, April 13, 2007, 521 SCRA 68, 82-83.
Supra note 2.
Memorandum of RCBC, p. 52.
Id.
Id. at 52-53.
Id at 53.
Roxas & Company, Inc. v. DAMBA-NFSW, G.R. Nos. 149548, etc., December 4, 2009, 607 SCRA 33, 56.
RA, 8974, Sec. 6.
See < HYPERLINK "http://www.congress.gov.ph/committees/commnews/commnews_det.php?newsid=1231" http://www.congress.gov.ph/committees/commnews/commnews_det.php?newsid=1231 > (last visited June 23, 2011).
Manila Motor Co., Inc. v. Flores, 99 Phil. 738, 739 (1956).
Fernandez v. P. Cuerva & Co., No. L-21114, November 28, 1967, 21 SCRA 1095, 1104; citing Chicot County Drainage Dist. V. Baxter States Bank (1940) 308 US 371.
No. L-23127, April 29, 1971, 38 SCRA 429, 434-435.
G.R. No. 164527, August 15, 2007.
G.R. No. 147817, August 12, 2004.
See Province of North Cotabato v. GRP Peace Panel on Ancestral Domain, G.R. Nos. 183591, 183752, 183893, 183951 and 183962, October 14, 2008.
Rollo, p. 193.
Rollo, p. 3738. These homelots do not form part of the 4,915.75 hectares of agricultural land in Hacienda Luisita. These are part of the residential land with a total area of 120.9234 hectares, as indicated in the SDP.

2009-12-18T16:40:00.000+08:00

AMPATUAN JUNIOR REFUSES TO ANSWER MULTIPLE MURDER CHARGES;FORTUN SAYS DOJ CHIEF BIASED
A DEFIANT but apparently "bored" Datu Unsay Mayor Andal Ampatuan Jr. was brought before prosecutors yesterday.
The government's primary suspect in the November 23 massacre in Maguindanao which resulted in the death of 57 individuals including at least 27 jounalists was brought to the justice department (DoJ) yesterday.Clad in a white shirt and a camouflage flak jacket, operatives from the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) flanked him as he sat through the hour-and-a half proceedings.
Most newsmen covering the event wore black shirts and some belonging to the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP) held a demonstration inside the DoJ compound. Ampatuan himself was nearly mauled as he walked inside the DoJ building which was secured by more than 300 heavily armed policemen .
Defense lawyer Sigfrid Fortun was heckled with shouts of "Mukhang Pera (Greedy for money)" by a group of demontrators led by former Pagsanjan mayor Abner Afuang.
During the proceedings itself, Ampatuan remained in handcuffs linked by a chain to another set of leg restraints and seemed bored by the hearing. At numerous times , he openly yawned while the prosecution panel led by State Prosecutor Roseanne Balauag discussed procedure with lawyers attending the case.
Fortun invoked the right to a speedy disposition of the case against his clients, the Ampatuans, and said the latter have decided to waive the filing of a counter-affidavit to answer the complaint filed by the NBI and the national police's Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG).
"On the basis of what the (prosecution) panel has said and what Sec. Devanadera has said we are submitting the matter for resolution by the (prosecution) panel." Fortun said referring to what he later claimed was "a bias" on the part of the DoJ secretary in making statements on the incident. He said they will be filing an appeal to the Court of Appeals (CA) to stop the proceedings before the DoJ.
Fortun was ordered by the prosecution panel to "make his manifestation (not to file a counteraffidavit) in writing and identify which Ampatuans he is representing."
Most of the lawyers of Ampatuan's co-respondents who were mostly policemen also claimed they have not received a copy of the formal complaint against in the client but nevertheless was ordered to file a counter affidavit within ten days, or on the next hearing of the case on December 28.
Later in the day, 26 policemen from the national police's 1507th Regional Mobile Group (RMG) based in Maguindanao arrived.
Nena Santos, a lawyer for Buluan vice mayor Ismael Mangandadatu who is the primary complainant in the case urged the panel to bring all the accused to Manila.
Mangandadatu , in a chance interview with newsmen later said he "hoped all the Ampatuans would be jailed".
The other day, the Supreme Court (SC) said a judge has been named to try the initial batch of murder cases against Datu Andal Ampatuan,Jr. and his men.
The said cases which arose from the inquest conducted four days after the November 23 incident were originally filed before the Cotabato City court but were subsequently moved to the Quezon City regional trial court due to security concerns.
In a statement the high court said the murder cases have been reraffled to Judge Jocelyn Solis Reyes, of the Quezon City Regional Trial Court Br. 221. Reyes is a five year verteran of the courts.
Two other judges, the SC announced that QC RTC Executive Judge Fernando T. Sagun ,Jr. 1st vice-executive judge Bernelito R. Fernandez and 2nd vice-executive judge Vivencio S. Baclig will go to Camp Crame to examine three possible sites for hearing the murder cases. The hearing before prosecutors in the DoJ number around 50 counts of murder.###

Witnesses positively identified Ampatuan in massacre, says DOJ chief

2009-12-01T16:56:00.003+08:00

Ampatuan lawyer asks SC to stop crackdown

AN initial indictment for twenty five counts of murder have been filed by government lawyers against Datu Unsay town Mayor Datu Andal Ampatuan Jr. aka Unsay before the Cotabato city regional trial court (RTC) for the massacre of at least 64 individuals last November 23 at Sitio Masalay,Brgy. Malating,Ampatuan, Maguindanao.
The information filed before Branch 15 of the Cotabato RTC covered an initial batch of 25 victims including Genalyn Mangundadatu, wife of the suspect's political rival, Buluan Vice Mayor Esmael Mangundadatu.
Justice secretary Agnes Devanadera said they have secured testimony of at least 25 witnesses including the victims' next-of-kin,forensics experts as well as bystanders and other persons.
"We also have witnesses who positively identified the suspect." Devanadera said.
Devanadera commenting on the autopsy reports submitted to her said Genalyn seemed to have suffered the most injuries from gun shot wounds ,17 in all,more than the other victims.
"She had seventeen gunshot wounds, I'm looking at the others (autopsy report) some have nine (gunshot wounds) some have three." Devanadera said.
General Santos City Prosecutor Edilberto Jamora, filed the charges against Ampatuan, son of Maguidanao Governor Ampatuan Sr., with Judge Melanio Guerrero of the regional trial court Branch 15 in Cotabato City.
Meanwhile Sigfrid Fortun, the lawyer for the Amapatuans are asking the Supreme Court to issue a temporary restraining order against government agents from making arrests.
SC Spokesperson Midas Marquez told reporters that the petition will be heard with dispatch based on the urgency of the matter.
The justice department earlier filed another petition to have the hearing of the Maguindanao cases ne tranferred from Shariff Aguak to either a Manila court or Quezon city.
Marquez denied that all the judges in Cotabato city have taken a leave of absence because of fear.
"What happened was that the court which has jurisdiction in Shariff Aguak is in Cotabato City. RTC branches 13 and 14 has jurisdiction over Cotabato city while Shariff Aguak is covered by RTC branch 15.,"
He further clarified that at the time of the murders, the court had no sitting judge. The pairing judge of the said court, according to Marquez was the former father-in-law of Governor Andal Ampatuan Sr.
"That is why the Chief Justice decided to designate Judge Melanio Guererro of Sultan Kudarat. He arrived at Cotabato City at around 10:00 which allowed them to act accordingly," Marquez added.
At least six aggravating circumstances have been mentioned in the information filed by City Prosecutor AL P. Calica, Edilberto Jamora, Felipe Vicente A. Velasco, Senior State Prosecutor Leo B. Dacera and Assistant City Prosecutor Elmer D. Lastimosa.
These were evident premeditation, taking advantage of superior strength, treachery, with cruelty, in an unihabited place and by a band, armed with firearms.
No initial findings of rape however have been indicated she said."Autopsy reports confirmed that the women were not raped but all of them shot at their genitals. The twenty two women were negative for spermatozoa specimen."
"This isn't the end of our investigation, the title of our information is several john does. We have many witnesses. There are also other affluent families in maguindanao, most are local officials being pinpointed to as involved in the massacre," Devanadera added.
"On the basis of the statements submitted to us, there are more suspects apart from the suspects included in the watchlist," Devanadera said.
She also explained why there were only seven count of murder heard during the inquest last Friday."The reason that we only have seven because there were only 7 forensic reports submitted to us.
"Di magkakaroon nang hearing dahil our witnesses are reluctant to go to court and they fear for their safety and their families safety. Priority namin ang mga safety nang witnesses and future witnesses,"
"I have inforamtion that there is a tape recorder but I haven't heard of the contents. I have reasons to beleive na merong tape recorder.
Devanadera also said that there is a newly designated judge in Cotabato since the other judges and other prosecutors were all on leave.
The justice secretary confirmed that she was being told to go slow on the Ampatuans."Meron silang narereceive na pasabi the prosecutors received text messages saying that mag-ingat...I myself received such message to go slow on the ampatuans.," She said that such was only work for her."This is just work for me.I'm not taking it personally."
Devanadera added that the Ampatuans were not the only ones being considered as suspects."There are other ones, those who belong in prominent families and local officials," Devanadera added.###

Noynoy asks SC to stop gerrymandering in Dato's congressional district

2009-10-27T17:17:00.001+08:00

PRESIDENTIAL hopeful senator Benigno "Noynoy" C. Aquino III is asking the Supreme Court (SC) to declare unconstitutional a law carving up a new district in the province of Camarines Sur which he said is meant to potentially accommodate administration lawmakers.
In a 33-page petition, Aquino along with Naga City Mayor Jesse Robredo said the law ,Rep. Act No. 9716, which creates a third district from the present First District and Second District of the province would potentially favor palace allies particularly presidential son Dato Arroyo.
Before Arroyo, now budget and management secretary Rolando Andaya was the First District representative. "Now this law would favor for them (Arroyo and Andaya)" Aquino explained to reporters adding that the extra congressional district would mean the two would not need to run against each other should they both run.
RA 9716 entitled "An Act Reapportioning the Composition of the First and Second Legislative District in the Province of Camarines Sur and thereby Creating A New Legislative District from such Reapportionment" Aquino insists in his suit "constitutes grave abuse of discretion" and "violates the principle of proportional representation."
In asking the high court to declare the said law void in its entirety for being unconstitutional Aquino reapportionment of the coverage of congressional districts should not be based on how the new areas would benefit incumbent and would-be lawmakers.
"It is not a question of whether or not the congressman would agree to the creation of a new legislative district. It is a question if whether or not it would translate to better representation for the people living in the said locality, given that the population of a a particular locality has grown so much as to entitle it a new legislative district." Aquino said.
The son of former senator Benigno Aquino Jr underscored that "congressional reapportionment is an issue of the people represented not the representative"
He cited that the population of the first district in the newly reapportioned province of Camarines Sur as provided in RA 9716 is only 176,383 or way below the 250,000 population requirement as provided for in the constitution, the law should be struck down for being unconstitutional.
Aquino also said that since the law entails the disbursement of government funds and "given that RA 9716 is patently unconstitutional. the expenditure of government funds to implement its terms is in violation of law and is an ultra vires act."
RA 9716 originated as House Bill 4264 filed by Rep. Luis Villafuerte and was approved by the House of Representatives on June 11,2008.It was submitted to the Senate on June 17, 2008.
During public hearings, Senator Joker Arroyo and Rep. Villafuerte argued that the Constitution did not provide any minimum population requirement for the creation of congressional districts within a province.
They added that while the Constitution requires that cities must have at least 250,000 inhabitants to be entitled to a legislative district there is no such requirement for provinces.
The provinces of Batanes,Camiguiin,Siquijor among others have less than 250,000 inhabitants yet have their own legislaitve districts.
Before Rep. Act 9716 the First District is composed of the towns of Del Gallego, Ragay,Lupi,Sipocot,Cabusao,Libmanan,Minabalac ,Pamplona,Pasacao and San Fernando with a population of 417,300 two years ago.
The second district is composed of the towns of Gainza,Milaor,Pili,Ocampo,Camaligan,Canaman,Magarao,Bombon,Calabanga and Naga with a combined population of 474,899 in 2007.
With the reapportionmen of the two districts , the first district will have a population of 176,383 while the second district will have a population of 276,777 according to Aquino.###

Hayden charged, Belo cleared by DoJ

2009-10-22T16:41:00.003+08:00

Manila--CRIMINAL charges for 'violence against women' have been recommended by the justice department (DoJ) against embattled physician Hayden Kho in connection with the complaint of starlet Katrina Halili, Ma. Katrina Iren Halili in real life.The case was filed yesterday morning at the Pasig regional trial court (RTC).

In a 24-page resolution, the DoJ panel headed by Senior State Prosecutor Emelie Fe M. De Los Santos recommended charging Kho for violation of Rep. Act No. 9262 otherwise known as the Anti-Violence Against Women and Children Act of 2004.The complaint filed against Dr. Maria Victoria 'Vicky' Belo-Henares, Erick Johnston Chua,Mark Herbert A. Rosario and Princess Marie S. Velasco were dismissed.

"We have not yet received a copy of the resolution but it only confirms what we have been saying from the start that Dr. Belo is innocent and there is not a scintilla of proof against her." Belo's lawyer Adel Tamano told reporters in connection with the development.

However the prosecutors recommended that the NBI be directed to conduct an investigation about the possible culpability of Kho, Belo and the other respondents who may be responsible for the uploading of the sex video and recommend their prosecution.

"What respondent Kho did to complainant is a clear betrayal of the trust and love she gave him that has caused her emotional or psychological distress and is as abhorrent as violence of any kind." the prosecutors said.

The panel cited a portion of the law which identifies violence against women as "engaging in purposeful, knowing or reckless conduct,personally or through another, that alarms or causes substantial emotional or psychological distress to the woman or her child." and "causing mental or emotional anguish , public ridicule or humiliation to the woman or her child."

The DoJ panel added that the act of videotaping intimate moments with the complaiannt clearly shows his lack of respect for women. "He cannot simply justify said act with a disclaimer that the videotaping was not meant to be shown to anyone. He should own up and be responsible for his actions particularly when it affects another person's right and dignity."

The panel reiterated that Kho's "supposition and conclusion that he never intended anyone to see the video is untenably strained and far from truth."

Kho claims that he met Halili on August 22,2007 when he performed liposuction on her. A week after the liposuction was made Kho claims he received a call from Halili asking him to meet her in a hotel. He accepted the invitation and while there sensed that he was being seduced by her.

He also said that Halili and her friends were under the influence of drugs and she even offered him some. They used drugs and while under the influence became physically affectionate and had sex.

During their encounters he insists that the sex video was taken while the camera was on top of a television and was not hidden.

On December 9,2008 he learned that his then girlfriend Belo, asked his fraternity brother "Bistek" Rosario and friend Chua to go to his condominium to take his laptops and external drive. He realized that he was about to lose the love of his life and more importantly , the possibility that his deepest secret will be discovered. He then committed suicide for fear of the imminent consequences of his indiscretions but was saved by timely medical attention.

Kho maintains that ever since his computers and external drive was taken from him, he did not have personal knowledge what became of them and their contents. In May 2009, Kho said someone threatened him with the public release of the videos and blackmailed him for money. He claims to be a victim of circumstances.

Two security guards at the residence of Belo, Ervin Serviano and Rolly Canonoy confirmed that Chua arrived at Belo's residence on December 12,200.

Another witness, Jacquiline Thng,confirmed that she had dinner with Belo,Rosario and one Francis Labora at Silk Restaurant and that Chua later arrived and handed a disk to Belo.Chua for his part denies the charges and said that in the evening of December 09,2008, another respondent Velasco, an employee in the Belo Medical Group visited Belo in her residence and confessed that she had an affair with Kho.

In the same evening Chua said Belo asked him to retrieve the computers and hardware from Kho's apartment.Later while they were preparing to open the laptop they learned Kho attemted to commit suicide prompting them to bring Kho to the Makati Medical Center. A certain Martin Villaroman managed to open the laptop and found several recordings of Kho's sexual encounters. A copy was made and the file in the computer was then deleted.

Other members of the DoJ panel are Roseanne G. Elepano - Balauag, Ma. Lourdes C. Uy, Hjalmar M. Quintana , Jr. and Xerxes U. Garcia. The recommendation was approved by Chief State Prosecutor Jovencito Zuno.###

SALONGA ASKS SC TO RULE ON VFA'S VALIDITY DESPITE SMITH ACQUITTAL

2009-05-29T14:40:00.000+08:00

FORMER Senate President Jovito Salonga is asking the Supreme Court (SC) to rule on the constitutionality of contentious provisions of the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) claiming the suits pending before the high court on the matter had not been rendered moot by the decision last April 19 by the Court of Appeals (CA) reversing the conviction of United States Marine L/Cpl. Daniel Smith who had been found guilty of rape by a Makati court.

In an 8-page opposition Salonga through his lawyer Allan Jones Lardizabal pointed out that the supposedly vague provisions of the military training pacts being questioned before the SC may again become an issue in future cases.

" Clearly , there is a need for the Honorable Court to rule on the issues that are currently pending adjudication. Foras long as the VFA remains in place, and for as long as US soldiers come and go to participate in military activities, the issues will keep repeating themselves; unless the COurt makes a definitive ruling that settles them with finality, " Salonga said.

Last April,three female magistrates of the Court of Appeals (CA) Eleventh Division acquitted Smith. A few day later, Evalyn Ursua the lawyer of Smith's alleged victim, presented to the public another Filipina, "Vanessa" supposedly raped by an American serviceman inside a hotel in Makati City.
Last May 11, government lawyers asked the SC to dismiss the three cases involving the VFA pending before the SC citing the CA decision to clear Smith.
In his latest pleading , Salonga underscored that the case should not be dismissed because it fell into the category of exceptional instances when the high court may still rule on a case which would otherwise be moot and academic.
"The petition before the Supreme Court (SC) involves issues centering not only on the invalidity of the provisions of the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) on custody of prisoners; it also involves the invalidity of the entire VFA itself. Hence, the questions raised and the arguments forwarded by the parties revolve not only around the issue of custody of convicted rapist Daniel Smith , but also on the status of the VFA under the different legal regimes, i.e. internaTional law,United States law, and Philippine law," Salonga said.
Citing court precedents, the SC said "the Court will decide cases, otherwise moot and academic, if there is a grave violation of the Constitution; the situation is exceptional in character and paramount public interest is involved; the constitutional issues raised requires formulation of controlling principles to guide the bench,the case is capable of repetition yet evading review,"
In citing that the case fell into the exception, Salonga said it is their contention " that there was a grave violation of the constitution when the VFA was entered into by officials of the government of the Philippines without complying with the strict requirements in the Constitution,"

Salonga claims the provisions of the VFA are violative of the constitution adding that it "transgress several rules of criminal jurisdiction, equal protection,and the procedure,validity and effects of treaties and laws. The instant case is exceptional in character, and paramount public interest is involved,"

Citing compliance with the public interest requirement , Salonga said " there is no question that the entire Filipino nation should take interest when foreign armies are allowed to enter our territory. Paramount public interest is involved in regulating the manner in which such armies are supervised, restrained to their assigned quarters, and , in case they commit any crime while they are in Philippine territory, arrested, prosecuted , and detained,"###

CA ACQUITS SMITH, THREE FEMALE MAGISTRATES RULE IT WAS A 'ROMANTIC EPISODE'

2009-04-23T17:27:00.000+08:00

CA ACQUITS US MARINE DANIEL SMITH IN RAPE CASE, THREE FEMALE MAGISTRATES RULE IT WAS A 'ROMANTIC EPISODE'
By Benjamin B. Pulta

THREE female magistrates of the Court of Appeals (CA) yesterday ruled in favor of acquitting United States Marine L/Cpl. Daniel Smith who was convicted by a Makati regional trial court of raping a Filipina while he was on furlough.
In a 71-page decision, the CA's Special Eleventh Division through Monina Arevalo-Zenarosa ruled that "on reasonable ground,the accused Lance Corporal Daniel Smith is hereby acquitted of the crime of rape as alleged in the information,"
"He is ordered released immediately unless held for other lawful cause," the CA division ruled after two other magistrates, Remedios S. Fernando and Myrna Dimaranan-Vidal concurred with the ruling.
"What we see was the unfolding of a spontaneous, unplanned romantic episode with both parties carried away by their passions and stirred up the urgency of the moment caused probably by alcoholic drinks they took, only to be rudely interrupted when the van suddenly stopped to pick up some passengers,"the CA said.
The appellate court took pains to claim that it had not been influenced by a supposed sworn statement executed by the victim which was reportedly prepared by Smith's counsel. The matter is presently being investigated by the Supreme Court.
"Ultimately, it must be pointed out that in resolving the case, we disregard the alleged recantation of Nicole submitted on March 8,2009.Nor did we open the sealed draft decision penned by retired Justice Agustin S. Dizon which was attached to the records," the CA said.
The court insisted that its "careful and judicious perusal of the evidence on record does not convince the prudent mind about the moral certainty of the guilt of the accused,"
"(T)he moment of parting came and the marines had to rush to the ship. In that situation,reality dawned on Nicole--what her audacity and reckless abandon,flirting with Smith and leading him on,brought upon her," the court said adding that "her claim that she was unconscious rings hollow,delusive and untrue."
Earlier this week, Smith's lawyers were ordered by the Supreme Court (SC) to answer a petition alleging that they played a part in preparing the supposed "recantation" made by Smith's accuser, 'Nicole'.
In a four-page resolution the high court required " the concerned lawyers of Sycip Salazar Hernandez and Gatmaitan to comment within ten days from notice on the alleged violation ". Smith is being represented by the legal team from the said firm led by Jose Justiniano.
The said ruling also ordered Court of Appeals (CA) President Justice Conrado Vasquez Jr. " to conduct an investigation on the alleged release of a draft ruling acquitting Smith.
A petiiton has been filed last month before the SC by individuals and groups asking the high court to investigate Daniel Smith's defense lawyers involvement in the Court of Appeals draft ruling acquitting the US Marine.
The suit also urges the high court to stop the appellate court from proceeding with the case and for the SC to conduct an investigation of what it said was "the questionable circumstances of the execution of the supposed sworn statement of Nicole dated 12 March 2009 and "to discipline, if warranted, the lawyers, including Sycip Salazar Hernandez & Gatmaitan" The latter they said may have violated ethical rules in its execution and notarization.
Petitioners said that while the investigation is being conducted,the SC should stop the CA from resolving Smith’s appeal until all the issues.
Individual petitioners in the suit are former Leticia Ramos Shahani is a former senator and one of the principal authors of Republic Act No. 8353, also known as the Anti-Rape Law of 1997, Mary John Mananzan, Teresita Ang See, Nemenzo and Cristina as well as lawyers Evalyn G. Ursua and Harry Roque.
Likewise parties in the suit are the Gabriela (General Assembly Binding Women For Reforms, Integrity, Equality, Leadership and Action),its party-list group Gabriela Women's Party (“GWP”) , the Bagong Alyansang Makabayan ( Bayan), the Ecumenical Women's Forum and Task Force Subic Rape.
The parties are questioning what it claims are improper steps taken by government lawyers as well as the defense panel in the suit. "The Office of the Solicitor General has not taken any step to ensure that the interests of the people are protected. For example, it has not made any move to ascertain whether the People’s principal witness, Nicole, indeed freely, voluntarily and intelligently executed her alleged sworn statement of March 12, 2009. " the petitioner said.
"It has not made any move either to ascertain whether unethical or illegal methods were employed by Daniel Smith’s lawyers in the execution of Nicole’s supposed sworn statement in their office. In the light of the Office of the Solicitor General’s insistence that Smith should be detained in the U.S. Embassy until the final resolution of his appeal, despite the Supreme Court ruling of February 11, 2009, the office evidently suffers from a serious conflict of interest."
The petitioner said while the supposed sworn statement of Nicole has been called a “recant” by the media, "in truth, the same is not a recant."
The parties also said there is no inconsistency between the new statement and the testimonies of Nicole and other witnesses and that the narrative in the sworn statement affirms "Nicole’s severe intoxication before and during the rape, which deprived her of the capacity to give free, voluntary and intelligent consent to any sexual contact, as corroborated by toxicology experts and other prosecution witnesses during the trial".\ The sworn statement is not inconsistent with the testimonies of witnesses who saw the U.S. marines dump Nicole on the side of the road " like a pig, with her pants down and its zipper at the back, and with a condom sticking out of her panties. " Those witnesses testified that Nicole was incoherent and unable to even remember her name.
" From the sequence and timing of events, it is not difficult to conclude that everything has been orchestrated so that in the end Smith will get acquitted and the public will accept the acquittal. With the acquittal, the issue of Smith’s custody by the U.S. Embassy, which has become legally untenable and a foreign relations nightmare to both the Philippine and U.S. governments, will disappear, as ably predicted by Secretary Remonde. "the parties said.###

2009-04-22T13:19:00.001+08:00

Today is April 22, 2009,Wednesday
Today's headlines and top stories in today’s newspapers
SC sits 32 more party list solons, Malaya banner story -- In a 35-page decision penned by Associate Justice Antonio Carpio, the Court en banc struck down for being unconstitutional the 2 percent threshold in the distribution of additional seats in relation to the distribution of additional party list seats under R.A. 7941 (Party List System Law).The decision is immediately executory.

The 2 percent threshold presents an unwarranted obstacle to the full implementation of party list representation and prevents the attainment of "the broadest possible representation of party, sectoral or group interests in the House of Representatives," the SC said.

SC party-list ruling kills Cha-cha, Tribune banner story -- Charter change (Cha-cha) through the one-chamber Constituent Assembly (Con-ass) is dead in the water, with the Supreme Court (SC) ruling having set the guidelines for parties running for the remaining party-list slots in Congress to represent marginalized and underrepresented sectors in society.

The decision raised the party-list seats to 55 from the current 23 and effectively increased the required three-fourths vote needed for Congress to amend or revise the Constitution.

Opposition decries new way for Charter change, Times front page -- A sponsorship speech of Rep. Victor Ortega of La Union, the chairman of the House Committee on Constitutional Amendments, kicked off deliberations on the recommended changes as pushed by House Resolution 737 filed by House Speaker Prospero Nograles.

Ruling seen as blow to Cha-Cha efforts, Malaya front page -- The resolution of Speaker Prospero Nograles which seeks to lift the limitation on foreign ownership of land now requires 207 signatures out of the new total House membership of 270 to comply with the three-fourths vote requirement. The previous requirement was 179 out of 243 members.

The bar is even higher for the Constituent Assembly resolution of Rep. Luis Villafuerte. It now needs 222 signatures out of 293 members, including 23 senators. The previous requirement was 197 out of 266 legislators.

House officially flags off Charter Change express, Malaya news page -- Nograles also sought to allay fears that the passage of his House Resolution 737, which seeks to allow foreign ownership of alienable public and private lands, would open the floodgates to revision of the Constitution.

HR 737 was finally sponsored in the plenary Tuesday night by the chair of the committee on constitutional amendments Kampi Rep. Victor Ortega (La Union), officially opening the debates on Charter Change.

Erap tells bishops: Let the people, not church, decide, Tribune front page -- Estrada has repeatedly said he would run for president again if the opposition forces fail to unite behind a single candidate. He was elected as president in 1998 but was deposed in 2001 amid charges of corruption and mismanagement. He was convicted of plunder after a six-year trial and then granted an absolute pardon by his successor, President Arroyo.

Don’t vote for bets with ads–Namfrel, Times front page -- Henrietta de Villa, chairman of the Parish Pastoral Council for Responsible Voting and of Namfrel, said people should show their outrage over the violations, not just in words but also in deeds. Namfrel is an officially accredited election watchdog in the Philippines.

She was referring to likely presidential candidates who have been airing radio and television commercials. Other likely bets are also hosting radio segments and endorsing commercial products also in commercials and in outdoor advertising—allegedly to gain media exposure and get a headstart on the next year’s campaign.

Next year’s polls shaping up to be star-studded production, Times news page -- Already, a number of celebrities from the movie and television business are sending signals—some not subtle—suggesting an interest to seek public office next year.

Senators Jinggoy Estrada and Ramon Bong Revilla Jr. are most likely to seek reelection, even as fellow television personality Edu Manzano is reportedly preparing to join them in the Senate. Manzano is the country’s anti piracy chief.

Sen. Escudero ‘dreaming’ of Palace bid, Times news page -- Sen. Francis “Chiz” Escudero on Tuesday admitted he has dreams of joining the presidential race in 2010, even as Joseph Estrada lashed out at a bishop who said the former president should not run next year.

But Escudero said he has yet to decide on making a bid for the Palace next year, and he would only decide on running once he meets the legal qualifications for presidential aspirants.

Senate ethics issue seen disintegrating into fight among ‘presidentiables’, Times news page -- Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano, spokesman of the minority, said they also asked the majority at the all-Senate caucus to act on the “post-dated” order for Villar to reply to Madrigal’s charges even before the ethics committee had met to determine whether the charges were sufficient in form and substance.

Jinggoy urges Ping to recuse on ethics investigation of Manny, Malaya news page -- SENATE President Pro-tempore Jose "Jinggoy" Estrada yesterday urged ethics committee chair Sen. Panfilo Lacson to inhibit from hearing the complaint against former Senate President Manuel Villar on the alleged P200 million double insertion in the 2008 C-5 road extension project.

Estrada said panel members perceived to be biased against the former Senate President should also inhibit.

Estrada said the call for Lacson to inhibit was first raised by Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago, also a member of the new majority bloc.

Self-Rated Poverty Declining–Survey, Times news page -- “Self-rated poverty has been on a generally downward trend since mid-2008, declining from 59 percent in June 2008, 52 percent in September, 52 percent in December, to 47 percent in February 2009,” the social research institution added.

In its latest survey on self-rated poverty, SWS said 27 percent of the respondents put themselves on the borderline, while 26 percent consider themselves as not poor.

Losing bidder says DepEd’s noodles now cost more, Malaya news page -- This was disclosed by Dennis Quido, sales manager of losing bidder Kolonwel Marketing Inc., which had submitted a sample of the noodles distributed by DepEd in its 2007 feeding program to laboratory testing to find out if the claims of winning supplier Jeverps Manufacturing on the noodles’ nutritional value are true.

Quido said DepEd spent P284 million in 2007 for more than 15 million packets of the noodles. In 2008, he said Jeverps, which was also the winning supplier in 2007, was paid P427 million for supplying more than 19 million packets of noodles. He said this means a packet costs P22 each, up from the previous price of P18 per packet which is still more expensive than noodles available in supermarkets for only P6 to P8 per packet.

Web-only newspapers? Don't junk the presses yet, Times news page -- A study by two researchers at City University in London dissects in excruciating detail the ill-fated move by an economic daily in Finland,Taloussanomat.fi, which shed its printing presses in December 2007.

The aim was to cut operating costs by eliminating paper, distribution and associated staff. It worked: the paper slashed its capital outlays by more than 50 percent.

The problem is that its revenue plummeted even further, by 75 percent.

Prepare for ‘Gloria Forever’ edtorde.htm by Ellen Tordesillas, Malaya Opinion -- Actually, at this point in time, Gloria Arroyo can do anything she wants.
If the real purpose in the char-ter change resolutions pend-ing in the Malacañang -controlled House of Representatives is not to prolong the hold on power of Gloria Arroyo, why are her minions desperately pushing for charter change less than a year away from the 2010 elections when they know very well that two out of three Filipinos do not want charter change now?

No amount of public assurance by Speaker Prospero Nograles and Camarines Sur Luis Villafuerte, authors of separate resolutions calling for amendments to the Constitution, will make the people believe that all these frantic moves have nothing to do with making sure that Arroyo continues to be in power, in whatever form or position, so that they also can continue enjoying the protection and privileges of being aligned with her.

Mr. Expose Insensitive by Amb. Ernesto Maceda, Tribune Opinion -- Deeper. The hot exchange of words between Sen. Ping Lacson and Sen. Manny Villar supported by Sen. Aquilino Pimentel Jr. and Sen. Allan Peter Cayetano is another unfortunate episode in the history of this Senate. Villar finally took the floor to defend himself. He also asked the Senate to investigate Lacson for murder and other crimes.

As a neutral observer, I believe public sympathy is on Villar�s side. Senator Lacson can limit the damage by immediately giving up the chairmanship of the ethics committee. Only then will any ethics committee report be credible.

After all, Villar has been �punished� enough with his removal as Senate President.

2009-04-20T12:48:00.001+08:00

Today is April 20, 2009,Monday
This morning's headlines and top stories in today’s newspapers

Erap joins resettled San Juan folks on 72nd birthday, Malaya news page -- Estrada was accompanied by his son San Juan JV Ejercito at the Erap City, a resettlement in Taytay, Rizal, for homeless residents of San Juan.

Estrada’s spokesperson Margaux Salcedo said "The former president has decided to forego throwing a party this year due to the current economic crisis. Instead, decided to spend it with the less fortunate as has been his way for several years now."

Erap’s birthday wish: Fraud-free elections in 2010, Bulletin front page -- Former President Joseph Estrada, crisscrossing Metro Manila and nearby Rizal areas as the finale of his 72nd birthday celebration Sunday, told thousands of cheering admirers and supporters that their trust and confidence remain to be the strongest force that made him survive the darkest hours of his life in the almost seven years that he was in jail.

He said their “support will remain in my heart forever.” “Hindi ko makakalimutan habang buhay ang inyong hindi pag-iwan sa akin sa pinaka-madilim na bahagi ng buhay ko,” Estrada spoke in Filipino to throngs of supporters in Metro Manila’s marginalized areas.

Chiz seeks R & D funds for AFP defense buildup, Tribune front page -- Sen Francis �Chiz� Escudero yesterday sought an end to the Philippines� reliance on military handouts from the Philippines and called for allocation of funds needed for a research and development program that would enable the country to build up its own defense capability.

Escudero made this call after noting that Balikatan exercises in Bicol region exposed the �decrepit state of the country�s armed forces�

RP seeks Syria�s support for OIC status, Tribune front page -- A high-ranking Philippine official is following up on the country�s bid for an observer status to the influential Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) that would pave the way for the continuation of peace talks with Muslim groups in the country�s restive southern region.

Vice President Noli de Castro personally sought the support of the Syrian government for the Philippines� bid to the Muslim bloc.

Makeover for 2010 contenders: Dressing their way to Malacañang, Manila Times front page -- It’s only a few months away from the 2010 presidential elections and the country already has a few probable candidates for the highest post in the land—Senators Manuel Villar Jr., Loren Legarda, Manuel “Mar” Roxas 2nd, Panfilo Lacson and Francis “Chiz” Escudero, plus Chairman Bayani Fernando of the Metro Manila Development Authority, Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro and Makati City Mayor Jejomar Binay, to name a few.

Loren bats for reliability of poll automationTHE full automation of the 2010 elections should proceed despite claims that it could be tampered with, Sen. Loren Legarda said Sunday.

Heavy-handed arrest of Ted’s in-laws, house help dismays Puno, Malaya front page -- Puno, during his visit at the wake of Trinidad Etong at the Arlington Memorial Chapels in Quezon City Saturday night, said the policemen should have been more lenient in arresting Failon’s in-laws Pamela and his brother Maximo because Trinidad needed them by her side at the hospital.

DOJ bucks Trina cremation, Let authorities finish probe first, says Gonzalez, Manila Times front page -- Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez on Sunday said that the body of Trinidad “Trina” Arteche Etong, wife of ABS-CBN news anchor and former congressman Ted Failon, should not be cremated until the authorities completed their investigation of her death.

Gonzalez explained that there were still nagging questions on the death of Trinidad that needed to be addressed.

Thousands of soldiers, tillers, cops victims of Legacy scam, Tribune front page -- More than 12,000 uniformed personnel were among the victims of the dubious pre-need plans under the Legacy Group, Sen. Manuel Roxas II said yesterday along with announcing the resumption this morning of the Senate inquiry into the status of the pre-need industry.

Pinoy seamen banned from crewing ships passing through Gulf of Aden, Malaya front page – PRESIDENT Arroyo has banned Filipino seafarers from crewing ships passing through the Gulf of Aden following stepped up hijackings and kidnappings by Somali pirates.

"Over the week President Arroyo issued a series of directives banning the deployment of our seafarers on the pirate-threatened sea lanes and the stepping up our efforts to recover our kababayans who are still held hostage by these pirates," Press Secretary Cerge Remonde told Radyo ng Bayan.

Ted Failon’s multiple tragedy by Ellen Tordesillas edtorde.htm , Malaya Opinion -- These things can only happen in an environment of lawlessness and impunity.’ I pray that nobody, especially lesser mortals like me, will go through the multiple tragedy that happened to Ted Failon, one of the country’s top broadcasters.

It was tragic enough that a suicide happened in the Failon family. It was double tragedy that a number of them became suspects and worse, they became victims of police arrogance and cruelty.

Many who witnessed the policemen’s rough treatment of Max Arteche and Pamela Arteche-Trincheta, siblings of Trina, Ted’s wife, who passed away Thursday, as well as that of their driver and household help lament that if that can happen in a case involving a broadcast celebrity under the glaring lights of live TV, how much more to ordinary citizens?

Ted Failon and the police‘,edducky.htm by Ducky Paqredes, Malaya Opinion -- (W)e are all witnesses to how our police handle Juan de la Cruz, the average Pinoy. This is the way that the police do their job when dealing with the hoi polloi.”

In a sense, I am glad that the PNP in dealing with the household of Broadcaster Ted Failon did so with heavy, heavy hands. By their doing so, we are all witnesses to how our police handle Juan de la Cruz, the average Pinoy. This is the way that the police do their job when dealing with the hoi polloi. What you saw and are seeing is the culture that has permeated our police forces.

They will cajole and threaten and do illegal stuff such as roughing them up, arresting and placing them in detention without even applying for a search warrant and they will forcibly take citizens for no other purpose than showing police power to the max.
Security and risk managers by Dahli Espillera eddahli.htm, Malaya Opinion -- ‘Other countries have professionals effectively trained and fully experienced to deal with hostage-takers.” – Former Cavite Congressman Gilbert Remulla.’

Tens of millions of dollars in ransom is reported to have been paid to hostage-takers for the release of hijacked sea-going vessels captured in recent months.

As with international ocean piracy, local kidnappings are on the rise because they have become extremely lucrative and virtually risk-free for the outlaws, according to the Nacionalista Party (NP), led by Senator Manuel Villar Jr.

Man at the Market Selective zeal, Tribune Opinion -- If only the police would show the same zeal and passion they have shown in solving the mystery surrounding the shooting and eventual death of the wife of popular radio and television anchor Ted Failon Etong, the ratio between the country�s crime index and those that were actually solved by the police would have been greatly reduced to an acceptable level.

Unfortunately, the police in this country are clearly very selective in their crime solution effort. Only those high profile cases such as the Etong death where the media�s klieg lights are focused capture such kind of attention from the police. Those crimes that involve lesser mortals, more often than not, don�t get such resoluteness on the part of the police to solve.

BIG DEAL By Dan Mariano Finally, RP takes action on Somali piracy – Manila Times Opinion -- Malacañang’s critics are likely to call it another case of “too little too late”—and with good reason. After all, Somali pirates have seized hundreds of Filipino seamen in dozens of hi-jackings over the past couple of years while Philippine authorities basically just looked on and hoped for the best.

Nevertheless, the Palace’s announcement banning the deployment of Filipino seamen on ships sailing the extremely dangerous waters off Somalia is a step in the right direction. For one thing, it indicates that the government has finally taken official notice of the problem—and seems to be doing something to address it.

2009-04-16T11:57:00.001+08:00

Good Morning,

Today is April 16, 2009, Thursday
The headlines and top stories in today’s newspapers

Ted Failon arrested, PDI banner story -- Police arrested ABS-CBN news anchor and former Congressman Ted Failon at 12 midnight allegedly for tampering with evidence and obstruction of justice for failure to immediately report the shooting of his wife.

Failon was brought to Camp Karingal in Quezon City by the arresting team led by Supt. Gerardo Ratuita, deputy chief of the Quezon City Criminal Investigation and Detection Unit. The popular news anchor was accompanied by his eldest daughter, Kaye, and his lawyers.

(All newspapers, front page)

Failon's wife shot at home, Philstar banner story -- The wife of broadcast journalist Ted Failon was in critical condition yesterday from a gunshot wound to the head inflicted at their home in Quezon City.

Failon on Estrada’s Senate list, PDI news page -- TED FAILON, who was recently included by deposed President Joseph Estrada in the opposition’s list of possible senatorial candidates in 2010, is a broadcaster of television giant ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corp. and its sister radio station dzMM.

Opposition: Palace out to neutralize Estrada, PDI front page -- The United Opposition said Wednesday the moves to implicate Joseph Estrada in the revival of the criminal case against Best World Resources chair Dante Tan showed that the administration “will leave no stone unturned” to scuttle his chances of becoming president again.

San Juan Mayor Joseph Victor “JV” Ejercito, a son of Estrada, said the revival of the BW case and another one was clearly intended to “neutralize” Estrada, who remains the leading figure of the opposition.

RaulGon scored over demolish-Erap ‘ranting’, Malaya news page -- JUSTICE Secretary Raul Gonzalez was asked yesterday to stop what was described as a vilification campaign against President Joseph Estrada and focus instead on scoundrels in and out of government.

Sen. Francis Escudero said Gonzalez "should end this virtual striptease" as he has become a "master at feeding bits and pieces of innuendo to media."

Escudero issued the statement a day after Gonzalez talked of a link between the Best World Resources Corp. (BWRC) stock manipulation case in 1999 and the murders of publicist Salvador "Bubby" Dacer and his driver Emmanuel Corbito in 2000.

DOJ clueless on Erap-Tan link, Manila Times banner story -- UNO decries ‘hatchet job’ on Estrada -- Because he did not know whether Tan and Estrada were supposedly dear friends, according to the Justice secretary, only former Chairman Perfecto Yasay of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), “maybe even [former Finance Secretary] Edgardo Espiritu,” could elaborate on the issue of Estrada and the three other supposed recipients of the shares having made off with the millions from sale of the shares.

Palace, DoJ slammed for demolition job on Erap, Tribune front page -- Senate President Pro Tempore Jinggoy Estrada yesterday assailed what he called continuing attempts by the Department of Justice (DoJ) and the Executive to link his father, former President Joseph Estrada, to the Dacer-Corbito case, this time, on the issue of the Best World Resources Corp. (BWRC) scandal years ago, intertwined with the double-murder case of publicist Salvador �Bubby� Dacer and his driver Emmanuel Corbito.

Dumlao loses petition; due to fly home, Manila Times front page -- US FEDERAL authorities are expected to implement the extradition order against former police Senior Supt. Glenn Dumlao, one of the principal suspects in the Dacer-Corbito double murder case, after a New York court junked his petition for habeas corpus.

Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez explained Wednesday that in the absence of any new legal impediment, the US authorities have no other recourse but to send Dumlao back to the Philippines, as they are bound to comply with the US-Philippines Extradition Treaty.

BW's Tan gave Lacson 300,000 shares, documents show, Philstar front page -- The chairman of Best World (BW) Resources had instructed a stock brokerage firm to transfer 300,000 company shares to former police chief and now Sen. Panfilo Lacson.

The STAR has obtained a copy of the letter detailing the instruction of BW chairman Dante Tan to AT De Castro Securities Corp. sometime in July 1999.

At the time the instruction was given, BW shares cost P30 to P35 each. The share’s value rose dramatically in the next few weeks, reaching a staggering P130 by November.

It was the sharp spike in BW share prices that sparked suspicion that the stock was being manipulated.

Tan, in his letter, had also ordered the transfer of 300,000 shares each to Faustino Salud, Benito Salazar, and to the account of Teodorico Enriques/Buenaventura Peralta.

Teodoro won't slide to vice presidential post, Philstar news page -- Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro said yesterday that his plan right now is to seek the presidency and he won’t slide down to vice president in the 2010 elections.

Teodoro told ABS-CBN News Channel last Tuesday night that he has joined the administration’s selection process to choose the presidential standard-bearer. He clarified reports that he might run for vice president if the administration chooses Vice President Noli de Castro as presidential candidate.

Teodoro supporters turn to the Internet, PDI news page -- Can a promotional website make up for this presidential aspirant’s cautious “silence”?

Supporters of Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro Jr., who last month announced his intention to run for president in 2010, have turned to the Internet to advertise his credentials to the electorate, especially to young voters.

The site—www.gilbertteodoro.com—makes a pitch for the Harvard-trained lawyer who, in a TV interview on Tuesday, said his sensitive Cabinet job has been limiting his “options” when it comes to playing to the crowd.

Teodoro taps Internet for 2010 Palace race, Manila Times news page -- But Teodoro—whose site, “GT 2010,” was developed in February—does not enjoy first-mover advantage, as many of the likely, and popular, presidential candidates already have websites.

Like the secretary, Sen. Manuel Villar Jr., has an official site dedicated to his 2010 aspirations. The headline on the site is his campaign battle cry: “Sipag at Tiyaga [Industry and Patience]”

Other likely presidential aspirants, too, have generic official websites, including Vice President Noli de Castro, former President Joseph Estrada, Sen. Francis “Chiz” Escudero and Sen. Manuel “Mar” Roxas 2nd.

Villar’s colleagues cry ‘political rubout’, PDI news page -- Daggers are out and charges of a “political rubout” are being aired in connection with the ethics complaint against Sen. Manuel Villar.

Amid accusations of double standard, the Senate committee on ethics and privileges Wednesday ordered Villar to answer charges that his real estate empire had benefited from the alleged P200-million double-funding for the C-5 road extension project.

Ethics panel finds basis to probe Villar, Malaya news page -- THE Senate ethics committee yesterday found the complaint by Sen. Jamby Madrigal against Sen. Manuel Villar sufficient in form and substance, a finding which the minority bloc led by Villar described as a "political rub-out."

The decision was leaked to Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano, Villar’s ally, Tuesday night.

Johnmuel Mendoza, the committee’s legal counsel, said the sworn complaint by Madrigal was merely sufficient in form and substance.

Villar camp contests ethics panel's ruling on C5 controversy, Philstar news page -- The camp of Sen. Manuel Villar Jr. contested yesterday the order of the Senate ethics committee finding the complaint against the former Senate president sufficient in form and substance.

Senators allied with Villar also questioned why the order came out ahead of its scheduled committee meeting yesterday.

Senate Minority Leader Aquilino Pimentel Jr. raised the issue before the floor, describing the ethics committee’s move as an affront to the Senate as an institution.

Pimentel said it was wrong for the ethics committee led by Sen. Panfilo Lacson to issue an order ahead of any committee meeting.

Hatchet job on Villar case in Ping panel, Tribune front page -- A �leakage� of an antedated �order� by the Senate ethics committee investigating Sen. Manuel Villar Jr. on his alleged involvement in the questionable double funding of the C-5 Road extension project, stirred a new round of tension yesterday, with senators perceived to be his supporters and critics lashing at one another within the halls of the upper chamber.

The leakage of the order on Villar to �comment� on the charges against him, which also carries a declaration by the powerful committee headed by Sen. Panfilo Lacson, on sufficiency of form and substance of the complaint, had taken a new twist on the matter that is said to have triggered Villar�s ouster as Senate chief in November last year.

Senate ready for showdown with House on Charter change, Philstar news page -- Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago yesterday said the Senate is ready for a showdown with the House of Representatives before the Supreme Court if the lower chamber passes a resolution for Charter change (Cha-cha) without the senators voting separately on the proposed amendments.

Speaker blasts JdV over Cha-cha tirades, Tribune news page -- Speaker Prospero Nograles yesterday lashed back at his predecessor, former Speaker Jose de Venecia Jr. for urging his House colleagues to undo everything he has done thus far during his stint as leader of the chamber.

Kabalikat ng Malayang Pilipino (Kampi) president and Camarines Sur Rep. Luis Villafuerte accused the former Speaker of being �the biggest source of political strife� in the House.

Con-Ass takes new tack , Malaya banner story -- THE draft House resolution convening Congress into a Constituent Assembly (Con-Ass) to amend the 1987 Constitution will undergo revisions to dispel speculations that it is meant to prolong the term of President Arroyo.

Rep. Luis Villafuerte (Kampi, Camarines Sur) said he has deferred the filing of the measure because he wants to make it clear that its only objective is to force the Supreme Court to rule on whether the House and the Senate should vote jointly or separately in proposing Charter amendments.

House assures Ombudsman of fairness in impeachment proceedings, Philstar news page -- Quezon City Rep. Matias Defensor, chairman of the House justice committee, yesterday assured Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez of impartial proceedings in the impeachment complaint filed against her.

“This I can assure the Ombudsman, we will give equal treatment to both the prosecution and defense,” Defensor said. “I think an impeachment complaint against the President or any other impeachable official should be treated equally.”

Gutierrez: ‘I’m ready to face charges’, PDI news page -- But Gutierrez may not necessarily be assured of the support of administration allies in the House of Representatives, which endorsed the impeachment complaint against her to the justice committee Wednesday.

De Venecia won’t testify at Senate on ZTE, PDI news page -- However, De Venecia officially corroborated his son’s testimony before a Senate panel that the First Family was involved in the NBN-ZTE deal, a claim vehemently denied by the spokespersons of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and her husband Jose Miguel Arroyo.

Senators condemn DA executive's slay, Philstar news page -- Sen. Richard Gordon vowed yesterday to initiate a Senate investigation to ascertain whether the murder of Agriculture Undersecretary Gumersindo Lasam had something to do with his knowledge of the alleged P728-million fertilizer fund anomaly.

Gordon, chairman of the Senate Blue Ribbon committee, made the bow as he condemned Lasam’s killing.

Senators raise suspicions on killing of Lasam, Manila Times news page -- Sen. Gordon says DA official was the 4th in the department with knowledge of anomalies who got killed. Senators suspected Wednesday that the killing of Agriculture Undersecretary Gumersindo Lasam on Tuesday was connected to the P728-million fertilizer fund scam.

Senate not likely to pass simplified tax measure, Philstar news page - The Senate is not likely to pass the bill adopting a simplified net income taxation scheme (SNITS) that would limit the expenses professionals and the self-employed could deduct from their gross incomes to reduce their tax liabilities, Sen. Panfilo Lacson said yesterday.

Lacson said House Bill 5521 could be “headed to the Senate archives” or “to the grave” because the Department of Finance failed to provide enough data to justify the measure.

Lacson, chairman of the Senate ways and means committee, said Finance Secretary Margarito Teves admitted they should do their homework and that they lacked the necessary inputs for the panel.-

Senate probe sought on power law violations, Malaya news page -- SENATE majority leader Juan Miguel Zubiri has filed a resolution seeking an investigation by the Senate committee on energy and other appropriate committees on the possible violations of the Electric Power Industry Reform Act (EPIRA) by the National Power Corp. and the Power Sector Assets and Liabilities Management Corp.

Zubiri, in his Senate Resolution 957, said the Senate should look into the P3.7255 per kilowatt hour or P0.8376/kwh increase in generation cost implemented by the Napocor and PSALM in the Visayas grid last March.

Teachers want P9,000 pay hike, Philstar news page -- The Alliance of Concerned Teachers (ACT), Teachers’ Dignity Coalition (TDC), Philippine Public School Teachers Association (PPSTA), and other allied groups said yesterday the P6,000 pay hike proposed under House Joint Resolution No. 24 is not enough to provide teachers the pay they deserve, considering their level of work and credentials.

‘Feeding program noodles not overpriced’, Malaya news page -- The noodles were bought by DepEd for P18 per pack. Other commercial noodles are sold at P4 to P5 per pack.

The claimed superior nutritional value of the noodles based on the inclusion of fresh egg was also allegedly untrue.

Winning bidder for the 2008 DepEd school feeding program, Jebervs Manufacturing Corp., reportedly also won the contract for 2009.

A losing bidder, Conwell Marketing Inc., reportedly submitted Jebervs’ noodles to a laboratory test and found them to be all-flour and with no nutritional content, including the claimed inclusion of fresh egg.

2009-04-06T13:30:00.001+08:00

NEWS MONITORING AND ANALYSIS
Today is April 06, 2009, Monday
Headlines and top stories in today’s newspapers

Gordon told: Stop talking to Abus , PDI banner story -- Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro Jr. Sunday told Sen. Richard “Dick” Gordon to stop negotiating with the Abu Sayyaf kidnappers and bring their demands to the multi-agency committee handling the hostage crisis.

Teodoro described as “unfortunate and uncalled for” Gordon’s statement that President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo should be held accountable if the kidnappers carry out their threat to behead the two foreign Red Cross workers still under their custody.

Teodoro twits Gordon, Manila Times banner story -- Defense chief: Senator strengthening hand of Abu Sayyaf kidnappers Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro on Sunday accused Sen. Richard Gordon of aiding kidnappers for saying that the fate of the two remaining International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) hostages is now up to President Gloria Arroyo.

Teodoro rejected a renewed demand by the kidnappers from the Abu Sayyaf terrorist group to withdraw military troops from five towns of Sulu province in southern Mindanao. The group reiterated its threat to behead one of the two ICRC hostages—Swiss Andreas Notter, 38, and Italian Eugenio Vagni, 62—whose Filipino colleague was released last week 77 days after all three were abducted on January 15.

DND chief blasts Gordon�s meddling in hostage crisis, Tribune banner story -- Teodoro blasted Gordon after the senator said the lives of two workers belonging to the International Committee of the Red Cross �now lies in the hands of President Arroyo,� a remark that could be interpreted as an attempt to �absolve� the Abu Sayyaf of all responsibility for the hostage crisis.

�Sen. Gordon�s statements only serve to strengthen the hand of the kidnappers,� a visibly irked Teodoro said and made it clear that �the fate of the hostages is not in the hands of the president but of the kidnappers.�

Government rejects Sayyaf kidnappers' demands, Philstar banner story -- Defense Secretary Gilberto Teodoro rejected the Abu Sayyaf demand for a withdrawal of military forces even after Sen. Richard Gordon warned that the two hostages, Italian Eugenio Vagni and Swiss Andreas Notter, could be beheaded by the bandit group.

Pullout from 2 towns is latest Abu demand, Malaya banner story -- TWO days after releasing one of three delegates of the International Committee of the Red Cross, Abu Sayyaf bandits demanded that all security forces pull out from the towns of Indanan and Parang in Sulu, Gov. Abdusakur Tan said yesterday.

CHR scores Davao ‘selective vigilantism’, PDI front page -- To the Philippines’ chief human rights watchdog, it is nothing less than “selective vigilantism”—a brand of street justice where assassins mainly target suspected criminal offenders belonging to poor families.

That was how Commission on Human Rights (CHR) Chair Leila de Lima described the activities of the “Davao Death Squad,” which the agency investigated during an unprecedented public inquiry last week in Davao City, where the group operates.

Resolve media killings, GMA gov�t urged, Tribune front page -- Sen. Manuel Villar Jr. has urged the Arroyo administration to take appropriate measures needed for the early resolution of and to improve conviction rate of unsolved murder cases involving media people.

�It is very troubling that despite the constitutional guarantee on freedom of expression, a spate of killings on members of media has numbered at a record high of 100 since 1999, according to the National Union of Journalists of the Phi-lippines,� Villar said as he filed Senate Resolution 954.

Publishers tackle killing of journalists, Malaya news page -- Dubbed as "Reporting the 2010 Elections Now," the forum will have session topics on impunity and media killings, the impact of the global economic crisis on the 2010 elections, the challenges for automated elections, governance, the right of reply, and the future of print advertising.

Malacañang's clemency grants scored, Philstar news page -- Makati City Mayor Jejomar Binay yesterday lashed at Malacañang’s “mad rush” to grant clemency to convicts involved in sensational cases.

The opposition leader said President Arroyo committed grave abuse of discretion when she extended clemency to businessman Rodolfo Manalili.

Gloria’s ‘mad rush’ of clemencies scored, Malaya news page -- United Opposition president Jejomar C. Binay yesterday criticized President Arroyo’s "mad rush of clemencies" to convicts in sensational cases, calling it an abuse of the presidential power to grant clemency that is certain to weaken faith in the justice system.

Binay, also Makati mayor, said he was particularly outraged by Arroyo’s grant of clemency to Rodolfo Manalili, who had been sentenced to double life imprisonment for masterminding the abduction and killing of UP students Ernesto "Cochise" Bernabe and Ana Louis "Beebom" Castanos.

‘Sexy’ Bicol tourists given malicious spin: Palace, Malaya front page -- PRESS Secretary Cerge Remonde yesterday branded as "malicious" reports that prostitutes are being "delivered" every night to American soldiers taking part in the Balikatan exercises in the Bicol region, stressing the women may have been tourists attending the month-long Magayon Festival.

"Itong Magayon Festival ay dinadayo ng mga turista – foreigners at local – at dahil nakita na madaming turista doon, nakikita doon ang mga seksing turista binibigyan kaagad ng malisya," he said.

Erap to meet with possible opposition standard bearers before June, Philstar news page -- Former President Joseph Estrada disclosed yesterday that he would meet with all the presidential aspirants before June to convince them to support a common candidate for the 2010 elections.

Estrada told The STAR that he would meet with the opposition to determine whether they will unite behind a single presidential candidate in 2010.

“I will meet all of the opposition presidentiables after May. If they will not unite, then I will declare my presidential bid for the 2010 presidential elections,” Estrada said.

Guardians faction taps Lim, Trillanes, Malaya news page -- A MILITARY-BASED group formerly associated with Sen. Gregorio Honasan has tapped two detained officers as national advisers but it said this has nothing to do with any plan to overthrow the government.

The Guardians Nationalist of the Philippines said Sen. Antonio Trillanes and Brig. Gen. Danilo Lim posses "impeccable character to lead with moral authority."

House pushes for live debates among presidential aspirants, Malaya news page -- CONGRESSMEN from both sides of the political fence are calling for a live public debate among presidential candidates in the run-up to the May 2010 national elections, saying it is a necessary part of a "winnowing" process in choosing the country’s next leader.

Anak Mindanao party list Rep. Mujiv Hataman of the House minority bloc said the debate should be held during the campaign period and broadcast live on national television and radio. "Let’s see what they’ve got and let the people decide who is the best to lead the country in the next six years," he said.

President leaves for Thailand this week, Manila Times news page -- PRESIDENT Gloria Arroyo leaves for Thailand on Good Friday to attend the 14th Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) Summit on April 10 to 12 in Pattaya City.

The 10-member Asean will tackle the regional bloc’s response to the global financial crisis.

After the summit, the President will then proceed to Dubai for an overnight stay to meet with Filipino workers and discuss with Arab companies the employment opportunities for Filipinos in the Middle East.

Arroyo’s birthday wish: a united Philippines, PDI news page -- Unity is a “noble mission that everyone must pursue,” said Ms Arroyo to an audience of Cabinet secretaries, local officials and town mates.

Philippine Deposit Insurance Corp. sets payout of Legacy claims, Philstar front page -- “We will start mailing check payments for valid deposit insurance claims, or letters regarding the status of claims by the end of April,” PDIC president Jose Nograles said.

Nograles said the PDIC had sent checks to depositors of other closed banks in the past through registered mail.

Due to delayed funds for North Rail China slaps penalties on RP, Manila Times business news page -- CHINA has penalized the Philippines for the delayed use of funds ear marked for a project that would revive the train system running from Metro Manila to the north of the country.

A document from the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) showed that the Export-Import Bank of China penalized Manila to the tune of $2.52 million as of October last year for the NorthRail Project Phase 1 Section 2.

No probe on state prosecutor--AMLC, PDI breakaing news -- The Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) denied it was investigating a state prosecutor for plunder in connection with allegations of bribery by scions of prominent families arrested in a drug bust.

In a resolution, the Court of Appeals granted the motion of AMLC to correct its records mentioning State Prosecutor John Resado in an investigation over the alleged bribes offered by Richard Brodett, Jorge Joseph and Joseph Tecson, also known as the “Alabang Boys,” to have the drug case against them dismissed.

Perez’s motion to dismiss case junked anew, PDI breaking news -- For the second time in two months, the Sandiganbayan’s Fourth Division has junked former Justice Secretary Hernando “Nani” Perez’s bid to have a case for alleged unethical practices against him dismissed.

The case is in connection with his alleged extortion of $2 million from former Manila Rep. Mark Jimenez in 1998.

$1-B ODA projects ‘safe’: BUT O.E.C.D. ’BLACKLIST’ PUTS FUTURE PROJECTS AT RISK, Mirror news page -- About $1 billion worth of projects funded out of proceeds from official development assistance (ODA) loans this year are safe from the clutches of developed countries angered by the continued inability of the Philippines and three other sovereigns to comply with more transparent tax laws, Finance Secretary Margarito Teves said over the weekend.

But prospects on billions more in the pipeline seen as key to continued macroeconomic stability over a longer stretch are now in doubt, according to Finance Undersecretary Gil Beltran.

ODA financing at risk after OECD blacklist, Tribune news page -- Cheap official development assistance (ODA) financing of local projects may likely be placed at risk with the recent listing of the Philippines in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) shame list of four tax haven countries, later on cut to three, finance officials said yesterday.

While the OECD blacklisting of the country will not affect ongoing ODA-financed projects those that the government will submit for financing may suffer, Finance Secretary Margarito Teves said.

Supreme Court grants Manotok, Araneta claims on Maysilo estate, Philstar news page -- The Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) denied it was investigating a state prosecutor for plunder in connection with allegations of bribery by scions of prominent families arrested in a drug bust.

In a resolution, the Court of Appeals granted the motion of AMLC to correct its records mentioning State Prosecutor John Resado in an investigation over the alleged bribes offered by Richard Brodett, Jorge Joseph and Joseph Tecson, also known as the “Alabang Boys,” to have the drug case against them dismissed.

As I See It : Why Arroyo is freeing criminals / Neal Cruz, PDI Opinion -- Trying to look for an answer to that question has kept me awake nights. So far, I have come to only one clue: All the high-profile criminals freed recently have one thing in common—they are all rich. All with the exception of Ninoy’s killers, but somebody may be spending for them (the mastermind buying their silence?). That is why Leo Echegaray did not get executive clemency but was executed. He wasn’t rich.

Coming full circle in one year edtorde.htm By Ellen Tordesillas, Malaya Opinion -- ‘Although some of us have moved on to teaching as well as other journalism-related work, we all started as beat reporters.’ On March 25 last year VERA Files came out with a two-part special report on the government’s scrambling to meet the deadline set by the United Nations for the submission of the Philippine claim of its extended continental shelf, the underwater extension of the land.
The deadline set by the Convention of the Law of the Sea, which the Philippines ratified 24 years ago, for coastal states to declare their extended continental shelf is May 13, 2009.

Man at the Market Playing footsies with bandits by Jesse E.L. Bacon II, Tribune Opinion --

he ideology-less Abu Sayyaf finally released to the nation�s relief Filipino Red Cross volunteer Mary Jane Lacaba 77 days after holding her and two other foreigner volunteers who are still under their custody, hostage in the mountains of Sulu.

Officially, the authorities claimed the release was without any consideration, monetary or otherwise. But the bandits who held the volunteers were reported to have initially demanded ransom in exchange for the safe release of the captives. Whether ransom was demanded, much more paid, could not be verified thus making this talk just that, a talk.

But what eclipsed the Lacaba release was the startling revelation made by Interior Secretary Ronaldo Puno that the Abu Sayyaf seems succeeding with impunity in their illegal activities because of the support accorded them by several individuals including policemen. As far as this columnist could recall, this is the first time that a ranking government official publicly admitted the support enjoyed by this bandit group from policemen. This is the thing that made Puno�s admission startling.

Men of God in the Palace? by Boiled Green Bananas / Liling Magtolis Briones, Mirror Opinion -- Bro. Eddie Villanueva, Fr. Ed Panlilio and Bro. Mike Velarde in the palace of iniquity known as Malacañang? Why? This is the question asked by those who stick to the dictum of separation of the Church and State. The same question is also asked by religious Filipinos who insist that men and women of God should not combine matters of state with matters of faith.

And why not? This is the answer of those who argue that it will take no less than religious leaders to lead in the task of cleansing Philippine society. They say the institutions of the country have been thoroughly corrupted. Moral values have been destroyed. Men and women of God will be more effective in the task of leading the country, not only to national development but also to moral renewal.

Backhoe scam: NIA justifies 25-year rule GOTCHA By Jarius Bondoc, Philstar Opinion -- Carlos S. Salazar, National Irrigation Administrator, reacts to my two pieces on irregularities in his agency’s P1.4-billion bidding for backhoes (Gotcha, 27 and 30 Mar. 2009). Verbosity and bombast pared down to fit:

“At the outset we categorically deny that the bidding was anomalous; it was conducted in strict conformity with the Government Procurement Reform Act and its Implementing Rules and Regulations-A.

“There is no irregularity in the timeline, although some procurement activities fell within the long holidays last Dec. 2008. The period from advertisement to bid opening complied with Government Procurement Policy Board prescriptions. Procurement was synchronized with scheduled fund release of the National Development Company. Timeline considered the 2009 dry season, best to repair and rehabilitation of irrigation systems.

Self-interest SKETCHES By Ana Marie Pamintuan, Philstar Opinion -- In addition to being ranked as one of the most corrupt countries in the world, the Philippines has a new dubious distinction: one of the world’s four worst tax havens.

This was broadcast to the world at the recently concluded G20 summit, no less – the debut on the international stage of US President Barack Obama.

According to reports from London, it was Obama, together with UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who pressed for a crackdown on uncooperative tax havens that have worsened the current financial crisis and provided shelters for the corrupt.

'Banking on governance' COMMONSENSE By Marichu A. Villanueva, Philstar Opinion -- But alas, the biggest casualty of the Legacy financial mess is our entire country anew. The Philippines was among four nations blacklisted as uncooperative tax havens upon the instance of the so-called “Group of 20” at the end of their summit meeting in London last week. While the Legacy scam may not be the immediate reason for this, it, however, only brought out the Philippine banking system under attack anew by the international community.

Hongkong magazine which called RP a nation of slaves apologizes

2009-03-30T17:33:00.003+08:00

(This image was lifted from the DFA website)

2009-03-30T09:33:00.002+08:00

NEWS MONITORING AND ANALYSIS
Today is March 30, 2009 Monday
Headlines and top stories in today’s newspapers

No stopping Cha-cha as Speaker gives go-signal for debates, Philstar front page -- Speaker Prospero Nograles gave the go signal for the House of Representatives to start the debates on the proposed amendments to the 1987 Constitution when Congress resumes session on April 13.

Nograles though assuaged fears that the proposed amendments stated under Resolution 737 would include term extension of incumbent officials and changing the form of government.

House seat is Arroyo option after 2010–JDV, PDI front page -- President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo could run for a congressional seat in her home province of Pampanga if efforts to amend the Constitution through a House-instigated constituent assembly (Con-ass) fail.

“Congress is her fallback position in the event that Con-ass does not succeed. A congressional seat will buy her immunity from all suits,” said Pangasinan Rep. Jose de Venecia Jr. in a phone interview.

Nograles Cha-cha resolution on agenda, Malaya front page -- The resolution has 163 signatures, just 34 signatures short of the constitutional requirement of 197 signatures or three-fourths House vote to propose the amendment and bring it to the Senate.

Nograles said the House will also start tackling the resolution of Rep. Luis Villafuerte (Kampi, Camarines Sur) for convening Congress into a Constituent Assembly (Con-Ass) as a mode to amend the Constitution. The House committee on constitutional amendments has yet to tackle the Con-Ass resolution.

NPO warns of possible increase in number of fake government papers, receipts, Philstar front page -- The National Printing Office (NPO) has warned that the number of fake government papers, receipts, and documents would rise if the agency loses control of the printing of official accountable and standard forms of national government agencies and local government units.

Dionisia Valbuena, erstwhile NPO officer-in-charge, said as the printer of government forms, the NPO plays a vital role of ensuring the integrity of important government papers and documents.

Malacañang dares Panlilio to file corruption charges vs GMA, Philstar front page -- Malacañang officials hit back yesterday at Pampanga Gov. Ed Panlilio for his threat to file criminal charges against President Arroyo if he wins the presidential elections in 2010.

Press Secretary Cerge Remonde dared Panlilio to file corruption charges against Mrs. Arroyo now if he has enough evidence against the President, and not wait until he becomes president of the country.

“If Gov. Panlilio is serious, why would he wait until he wins? Why won’t he do it (file charges) now if he has evidence? If he is saying that he would do that if he wins, he is making it a political promise,” Remonde told dzRB.

Panlilio bid new Church intervention, PDI news page -- The clergy is one of the most underrepresented sectors in the formal power structure in the Philippines, although the Catholic Church has wielded considerable unofficial political power and influence in the country since Spanish rule up to the present indigenous Republic.

From this perspective, the movement to draft Pampanga Gov. Eddie Panlilio, the Catholic priest “on leave” from his priestly duties, for the presidency in the 2010 national elections represents a precedent-shattering breakthrough in the selection process for the highest office of the land.

Lacson resigned to joining party for 2010 bid, PDI front page -- Once a staunch independent political player when he ran and lost for president in 2004, Senator Panfilo Lacson on Saturday said he was resigned to the fact that he might have to join a political party to win the 2010 presidential derby.

Lacson, who spoke before the first congress of the anti-corruption group Kapatiran sa Baguio Isip, Serbisyo Inc. (Kabagis, Brotherhood in Baguio, Mind, Service Inc.), said he has been negotiating with a political party since February in preparation for the 2010 elections.

A member of the Liberal Party told the Philippine Daily Inquirer that the senator was negotiating with their organization, but Lacson refused to identify the party when asked by reporters in a press conference.

But Lacson said the negotiations now involve who would be the party's standard bearer.

Palace: Lacson politicizing a criminal issue, Philstar news page -- Remonde said it is Lacson, not the administration, who is going “berserk” in his efforts to extricate himself from criminal charges that he had masterminded the abduction and murder of publicist Salvador “Bubby” Dacer and his driver Emmanuel Corbito in 2000.

Remonde turned the tables on Lacson after the senator earlier accused the administration of having gone berserk in its efforts to implicate him in the double murder case.

Mancao, Dumlao return may be delayed—report, PDI news page -- The United States District Court in New Jersey has granted former Senior Supt. Michael Ray Aquino’s petition asking US authorities to produce fellow former police officers Cezar Mancao and Glenn Dumlao in the Newark court within 60 days, according to a report.

All three, who are in the US, are accused of involvement in the killing of publicist Salvador “Bubby” Dacer and his driver Emmanuel Corbito in November 2000.

Villar alarmed over recessionary racism, Philstar news page -- The senator described the phenomenon as “recessionary racism.”

“Protectionism has become a buzz word amidst the ongoing global financial crisis. Although many are against the protectionist policies that some nations want to implement, it is a reality that many now have a tendency towards protecting their own economies and people,” Villar said.

He noted that the scarcity of job opportunities has caused “desperation and anxiety” among people. It has also led to growing resentment that foreigners are getting jobs in other nationalities’ home countries.

2 senator's bodyguards draw gun at NAIA-3, PDI news page -- The PNP-ASG identified the two men as retired Navy man Arthur Llewelyn Benaguit and private security officer Jusepit Factor.

According to a report by Inspector Charlie Salum of the Airport Police Department (APD), the two suspects were riding a Suzuki Raider motorcycle when they were flagged down by PO3 Louie Sanggalang along Andrews Avenue.

The APD noted that the back rider was not wearing a helmet. Benaguit, instead of talking to the police, allegedly drew his gun. Sanggalang’s men held on to Benaguit’s arm to prevent him from firing.

After a minor scuffle, the two men immediately brought to a nearby hospital where doctors said the two tested positive for alcohol.

Benaguit reportedly showed police that he has in his possession documents to show that he is legally allowed to carry a gun. However, the police said that it was not sufficient reason to draw his gun while being flagged down by the police officers.

“Benaguit is lucky that those who flagged him did not shoot him right away when he drew his gun,” one of the arresting officers said.

Police said Benaguit and Factor claimed they are the bodyguards of a young opposition senator who is eyeing the presidency. When asked to name names, the PNP-ASG refused. The two suspects vehemently denied the police’s allegation.

Police have filed inquest proceedings against the two suspects before the Pasay City prosecutor’s office. The two men remain detained at the PNP-ASG detention cell near NAIA Terminal 1.

Higher traffic fines won't make drivers law-abiding - Escudero, PDI newsw page --Opposition Sen. Francis “Chiz” Escudero said increasing fines for traffic violations will not improve road discipline in the country.

“I believe the best deterrent to preventing vehicular accidents is ensuring the certainty of punishment to ill-disciplined drivers rather than imposing higher penalties,” he added.

For instance, instead of waiting for drivers to commit violations and fining them for it, he said authorities should institute steps to prevent them from even contemplating violating traffic laws in the first place.

Immediate passage of proposed amendments to Central Bank Act sought, Philstar news page -- MB member Ignacio Bunye said the multi-billion-peso collapse of the Legacy Group caused “a stronger sense of urgency to prevent Legacy-type operations from victimizing more innocent depositors and investors in the future.”

He said even before the Legacy scam, the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP), as regulator of all banks in the country, had repeatedly stressed the importance of amending its charter to enable it to effectively perform its duty.

“If there is one good thing that came out of the Legacy mess, it is the heightened awareness among Filipinos that they should be more prudent in dealing with unscrupulous syndicates posing as respectable institutions,” Bunye said.

CHR probes 800 kills by Davao death squad, PDI front page -- The killings have gone on for too long and it’s time to hold those responsible to account.

With this message, Commission on Human Rights (CHR) Chair Leila de Lima is set to open on Monday a public inquiry into a wave of unexplained killings of more than 800 people in Davao City since 1998.

Many of the victims were people purportedly with criminal records, giving rise to suspicions that the killings were the work of the so-called Davao Death Squad (DDS), a shadowy vigilante group.

Talks turn ugly, Bulletin banner story -- Sulu Gov. Abdulsakur Tan, chairman of the multi-agency crisis team, said the Abu Sayyaf rebels have renewed their threat to behead the hostages after revising their demand to a complete military pullout in Sulu in exchange for the freedom of one ICRC member.

“They told us that they want a total pullout… They reiterated that they will do what they want, they will do what they want to the hostages if we don’t give them what they want,” Tan said in a phone interview Sunday afternoon.

“It has turned ugly. And I’m being put in bad light here because many are not happy with what I’m doing here. It’s as if we’re giving the rebels everything, opening Sulu to the kidnappers, they are not happy about it,” he added.

Tamano on eminent group: Counterproductive, PDI news page -- Forming an eminent persons group composed of internationally renowned personalities to serve as advisers in the peace talks with Islamic secessionist rebels may not be such a good idea, an opposition leader, who is a Muslim, said.

Adel Tamano, spokesperson of the United Opposition (UNO), said bringing prominent people such as former British Prime Minister Tony Blair into the peace talks with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) would be counterproductive.

NIA told to re-bid P1.4-B backhoes GOTCHA By Jarius Bondoc, Philstar Opinion -- The NIA bidding of Jan. 19 for excavators came under scrutiny by the powerful Procurement Transparency Group (PTG). Two wrongs stuck out: NIA imposed that bidders be at least 25 years in business, and altered the bidding venue without due notice. Since the playing field was unleveled, the PTG told NIA to declare failure of bidding. Aside from re-bidding, PTG advised NIA to:

• stick to the Government Procurement Reform Act’s pass-fail rule;

• scrap the extraneous “25-year rule”; and

• ensure the presence of observer-NGOs in the re-bidding.

Leadership change SKETCHES By Ana Marie Pamintuan, Philstar Opinion -- Why should the 1987 Constitution be completely rewritten and the system of government changed? We returned to the pre-martial law system of government after the 1987 Charter was ratified. The presidential system worked before martial law; it’s still working now. What isn’t working is the national leadership. So what – or who – needs changing?

Sounding Board : Population size of congressional districts / Fr. Joaquin G. Bernas, S.J., PDI Opinion -- WHAT SHOULD be the minimum population of a representative district? The Constitution is clear that a city can become a representative district if it has a population of at least 250,000. The Constitution is also clear that each province, no matter how small its population, is entitled to one representative district. The question now is being asked whether the Constitution sets a minimum size for representative districts whenCongress creates them independently of the creation of cities or provinces. Is the 250,000 minimum for cities also the norm for other districts?

Mikey, truly the son of Gloria and Mike by Ellen Tordesillas -- ‘‘Mikey Arroyo wants us to believe that there is honor in the pledge of the congressmen they have bought to sign the resolution.’ edtorde.htm -- In all his interviews about his having approached former Speaker Jose de Venecia, together with Leyte Rep. Martin Romualdez, for help in getting more signatures for the Villafuerte resolution, Arroyo keeps on saying that nowhere in the resolution does it state that his mother’s term will be extended. He says that if they succeed in having the resolution passed and upheld by the Supreme Court, charter change will be after 2010.

2009-03-28T16:04:00.001+08:00

LAW GROUP CRIES FOUL OVER NICOLE "RECANTATION"

MANILA -- A local lawyers' group yesterday denounced what it said were glaring irregularities in the retraction made by rape victim "Nicole" supposedly clearing convicted rapist Daniel Smith before her decision to flee to the United States.

In a statement the Alternative Law Groups (ALG) through Atty. Marlon Manuel said "the recently sworn statement by Nicole fails to make a credible retraction of her testimony during the trial of the Subic rape case. It should not bear any legal significance on the appeal of the conviction now pending before the Court of Appeals or on the issue of the custody of convicted American soldier Daniel Smith."

ALG chairperson Lorena Navaliasca for her part said that the development "clearly exemplifies how women victims of violence ,as well as members of marginalized and vulnerable groups have been at a disadvantaged position in the country's justice system.

"What is particularly disturbing are the circumstances surrounding the affidavit's execution. The preparation of the affidavit without the assistance --and without the knowledge -- of Nicole's counsel clearly established a lopsided situation with Nicole at the losing eng. The affidavit glaringly presented the defense version."Manuel added.

A petition has been filed before the Supreme Court by individuals and groups asking the high court to investigate Daniel Smith's defense lawyers involvement in the Court of Appeals draft ruling acquitting the US Marine.
The suit also urges the high court to stop the appellate court from proceeding with the case and for the SC to conduct an investigation of what it said was "the questionable circumstances of the execution of the supposed sworn statement of Nicole dated 12 March 2009 and "to discipline, if warranted, the lawyers, including Sycip Salazar Hernandez & Gatmaitan"
The latter they said may have violated ethical rules in its execution and notarization.
Petitioners said that while the investigation is being conducted,the SC should stop the CA from resolving Smith’s appeal until all the issues.
Individual petitioners in the suit are former Leticia Ramos Shahani is a former senator and one of the principal authors of Republic Act No. 8353, also known as the Anti-Rape Law of 1997, Mary John Mananzan, Teresita Ang See, Nemenzo and Cristina as well as lawyers Evalyn G. Ursua and Harry Roque.
Likewise parties in the suit are the Gabriela (General Assembly Binding Women For Reforms, Integrity, Equality, Leadership and Action),its party-list group Gabriela Women's Party (“GWP”) , the Bagong Alyansang Makabayan ( Bayan), the Ecumenical Women's Forum and Task Force Subic Rape.
The parties are questioning what it claims are improper steps taken by government lawyers as well as the defense panel in the suit. "The Office of the Solicitor General has not taken any step to ensure that the interests of the people are protected. For example, it has not made any move to ascertain whether the People’s principal witness, Nicole, indeed freely, voluntarily and intelligently executed her alleged sworn statement of March 12, 2009. " the petitioner said.
"It has not made any move either to ascertain whether unethical or illegal methods were employed by Daniel Smith’s lawyers in the execution of Nicole’s supposed sworn statement in their office. In the light of the Office of the Solicitor General’s insistence that Smith should be detained in the U.S. Embassy until the final resolution of his appeal, despite the Supreme Court ruling of February 11, 2009, the office evidently suffers from a serious conflict of interest."
The petitioner said while the supposed sworn statement of Nicole has been called a “recant” by the media, "in truth, the same is not a recant."
The parties also said there is no inconsistency between the new statement and the testimonies of Nicole and other witnesses and that the narrative in the sworn statement affirms "Nicole’s severe intoxication before and during the rape, which deprived her of the capacity to give free, voluntary and intelligent consent to any sexual contact, as corroborated by toxicology experts and other prosecution witnesses during the trial".\ The sworn statement is not inconsistent with the testimonies of witnesses who saw the U.S. marines dump Nicole on the side of the road " like a pig, with her pants down and its zipper at the back, and with a condom sticking out of her panties. " Those witnesses testified that Nicole was incoherent and unable to even remember her name.
" From the sequence and timing of events, it is not difficult to conclude that everything has been orchestrated so that in the end Smith will get acquitted and the public will accept the acquittal. With the acquittal, the issue of Smith’s custody by the U.S. Embassy, which has become legally untenable and a foreign relations nightmare to both the Philippine and U.S. governments, will disappear, as ably predicted by Secretary Remonde. "the parties said.###

2009-03-12T15:41:00.003+08:00

NEWS MONITORING AND ANALYSIS
March 12, 2009
Thursday
Headlines and top stories in today’s newspapers

Road Board books open for scrutiny, Philstar front page -- Malacañang yesterday said it had nothing to hide in the controversy over the alleged misuse of some P50 billion in road users’ tax that would be investigated by both chambers of Congress.

Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita said the books of the Road Board, which handles the Motor Vehicle User’s Charge (MVUC), are open to scrutiny by lawmakers.

He reiterated that the Palace welcomed the looming congressional inquiries and expressed confidence the issue would be clarified.

DPWH usec, 2 others hurt in ambush, Malaya banner story -- PUBLIC Works Undersecretary Ramon Aquino was wounded yesterday in an ambush staged by two motorcycle-riding men in front of the DPWH main office in Port Area, Manila.

Aquino, chief of staff of Secretary Hermogenes Ebdane, was hit in the chest and abdomen but is in stable condition at the Manila Doctors Hospital, said Undersecretary Rafael Yabut.

GMA signs baselines bill Beijing protests Spratlys ‘claim’, Manila aTimes banner story -- China on Wednesday immediately protested President Gloria Arroyo signing into law a controversial bill defining the Philippines’ maritime boundaries.

GMA signs Baselines Bill into law, triggers China protest, Philstar front page -- “We are sending the message to the whole world that we are affirming our national sovereignty… our national interest as an independent country,” Ermita said.

China, which also claims sovereignty over Scarborough Shoal, “strongly opposed” the signing of Republic Act 9522 known as the Philippine Baseline Act, which defines Philippine territorial waters and maintains the country’s claim over the disputed Spratly Islands (Kalayaan Island Group or KIG) in the South China Sea and Scarborough Shoal.

Vietnam, which also has long-running claims in the Spratlys, also opposed the move.

Arroyo signs controversial baselines bill, PDI front page -- Ms Arroyo signed Republic Act No. 9522 (or the Philippine Archipelagic Baselines Law) on Tuesday in Malacañang minus the formal ceremony that often marks the signing of key legislation, perhaps hoping to avoid controversy with other nations.

The law defines the “general configuration” of the archipelago, including the extended continental shelf (ECS) and exclusive economic zone (EEZ), to make it more compliant with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

100 more congressmen proposed, Bulletin banner story -- "Being a democratic and republican state, our very own people expect no less than proper representation in the government so that their voices will be heard, their concerns will be addressed, and their rights will be protected," Enrile said.

Enrile seeks 100 new House seats, Philstar front page -- Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile has filed a bill seeking to increase the seats in the House of Representatives from 250 to 350 to ensure proper representation in the legislature because of the growing population in some congressional districts.

Enrile said the Constitution provides that the House shall be composed of not more than 250 members “unless otherwise fixed by law.” It also provides that 20 percent of the House members should be elected through a party-list system of registered national, regional and sectoral parties or organizations.

De Venecia seeks dismissal of expulsion case, Philstar news page -- In his answer to Amante’s complaint, the former speaker said the committee “should have dismissed the case outright for failure to state a cause of action.”

De Venecia pointed out the Constitution authorizes Congress to punish its members for “disorderly behavior.”

“Nowhere in the privilege speech (of Amante) and in the interpellations thereon can you find an allegation constituting ‘disorderly behavior’ committed by the respondent,” he said.

Palace cheers Teodoro’s plan to run in 2010, PDI news page -- Everything but the endorsement.

Malacañang officials Wednesday cheered Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro’s announcement to run for President in the 2010 elections, trumpeting his credentials and even comparing him to US President Barack Obama.

Malacañang officials have been floating the name of Teodoro as a possible candidate for President since November last year.

Palace upbeat on Teodoro for 2010, Philstar news page -- With just a little over a year before the 2010 national elections, Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro Jr. appears to have the inside track to secure the nomination as presidential bet of the administration party.

Teodoro recently admitted that he wants to run for president in 2010. His name has been floated on several occasions as the administration’s possible choice to run for the country’s top post.

Both Lakas-Christian Muslim Democrats (Lakas-CMD) senior deputy secretary-general Gabriel Claudio and provincial chairman for Batangas, Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita, welcomed Teodoro’s intention to seek the presidency, considering that he is one of the most capable and qualified officials allied with the administration.

Charter change on top of Teodoro agenda, PDI news page -- Count on Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro Jr. to amend the Constitution if he becomes the next president.

“First and foremost, we should really have political reforms... there must be a review of the Constitution, that’s the number one priority in my platform,” Teodoro said a day after he took the initial step in a presidential bid by making his intentions public.

Next on his list, he said, was to carry on with the fiscal measures being implemented by the Arroyo administration to sustain the basic services provided to every Filipino and improve infrastructure programs.

Why is Monsod singing different tune?, PDI news page -- Sen. Richard Gordon, the author of the election automation law, asked this after Monsod warned on Tuesday that the haste in automating the 2010 elections could lead to computerized cheating.

The senator said Monsod was a “Johnny-come-lately” because Congress has already passed the budget to fund automation. He said the election automation law has sufficient safeguards to avoid cheating.

Jesus is Lord disowns Securities and Exchange Commission executive, Philstar front page -- The religious group Jesus is Lord denied yesterday reports that Commissioner Jesus Enrique Martinez of the Securities and Exchange Commission is a member, but admitted that JIL founder Eddie Villanueva endorsed Martinez for the SEC position based on his credentials and qualifications.

“To imply that beleaguered SEC Commissioner Jesus Enrique Martinez is a member of the Jesus is Lord is absurd,” JIL executive secretary Edith Mendoza said. “Based on our records, Commissioner Jesus Martinez has never been a member of JIL.”

Martinez goes on leave, Philstar banner story -- Embattled Commissioner Jesus Martinez filed a leave of absence from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) yesterday on the eve of his retirement and as the depth of his alleged role in the Legacy mess was revealed.

Martinez, who is slated for retirement today, stands to lose all his benefits and may even serve time in prison if he is found to have covered up Legacy’s financial troubles in exchange for lavish presents including a house and lot.

DOJ record in going after fraudsters does not inspire confidence: Mar, Malaya front page-- SEN. Manuel "Mar" Roxas II yesterday said the failure of the Department of Justice to prosecute suspects in previous cases of securities fraud puts to doubt its ability go after Celso delos Angeles of the Legacy Group and government officials who were his alleged protectors.

"Ano pong maaasahan natin dito sa panibagong task force ng DOJ na ito?" Roxas said in a radio interview.

Roxas said the DOJ created a similar task force in 2005 to investigate a wave of banking anomalies but has not filed a single case after four years.

BSP must account for Legacy collapse—solon, Tribune banner story -- But Sen. Richard Gordon yesterday said BSP officials should also be investigated for failing to prevent the alleged illegal banking scheme employed by Legacy owner Celso de

los Angeles through a number of rural banks.

'Ombudsman has only 7 months left in office', Philstar news page -- Sen. Francis Escudero believes Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez must step down on Oct. 31 this year after serving the unexpired term of her predecessor based on a 1955 Supreme Court decision.

Ombudsman’s days numbered, PDI news page -- Sen. Francis “Chiz” Escudero has found a novel argument to yank Gutierrez out in case impeachment proceedings against the Ombudsman fail in the administration-controlled House of Representatives.

In a statement issued from Canberra, Australia on Wednesday, Escudero contended that Gutierrez is only serving out the unexpired term of her predecessor, Simeon Marcelo, and according to his calculations, her term ends in October.

'Chiz wrong on when Ombudsman Gutierrez should go', abs-cbnNEWS.com/Newsbreak | -- Senator Francis Escudero erred in his analysis that the term of Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez will expire in October 2009, an assistant Ombudsman said Wednesday.

Republic Act (RA) 6770 or the “Act providing for the functional and structural organization of the Office of the Ombudsman" states that in case of vacancy, the Ombudsman's replacement will have a full term.

Article 3, Section 8 of RA 6770 says: “In case of vacancy in the Office of the Ombudsman due to death, resignation, removal or permanent disability of the incumbent Ombudsman, the Overall Deputy shall serve as Acting Ombudsman in a concurrent capacity until a new Ombudsman shall have been appointed for a full term."

The Ombudsman and the Deputy Ombudsmen are mandated to serve for seven years without reappointments.

PCGG ready to field questions on San Miguel diversification, Philstar news page -- By virtue of its 27 percent stake in SMC, the PCGG has nominated to the SMC board of directors broadcast executive Menardo Jimenez; industrialist Egmidio Jose; former Presidential Security Group (PSG) head Leo Alvez; former Nueva Ecija congressman Pacifico Fajardo, father of the deputy presidential spokesperson Lorelei Fajardo; and former justice secretary Silvestre Bello III.

European Chamber of Commerce warns RP vs sliding back to protectionism, Philstar Business news page -- The Philippines is not insulated from the effects of the global crisis, and moving towards protectionism will just make the situation worse, the European Chamber of Commerce in the Philippines (ECCP) said yesterday.

PLDT, Lopez Group in talks to cement alliance in Meralco, Philstar business news page -- Telecommunications giant Philippine Long Distance Telephone Co. (PLDT) and the Lopez Group are holding top-level talks to consolidate their stake in power retailer Manila Electric Co., a ranking PLDT official said yesterday.

PLDT Beneficial Trust Fund (BTF) vice-chairman and ePLDT president Ray Espinosa told The STAR that “many things are being discussed” by the two groups and that a disclosure will be made soon on the results of the talks.

Army major tagged in Pitao slay; 2 confined to barracks, Philstar front page -- Speaking over a local ABS-CBN radio station, NPA commander Leoncio Pitao said seven other soldiers – a major, three sergeants and three corporals – were also involved in the murder of his daughter Rebelyn.

Pitao said he has “solid evidence” to back up his allegations, including the fact that the white van used in snatching Rebelyn last March 5 was seen parked in a military safehouse in Carmen, Davao del Norte.

Pitao said the 11 soldiers were widely known to have been behind the killing of militant leaders in the Davao

region.

“Last year, they killed my brother Danilo and now, Rebelyn is their latest victim,” he said.

Pay Abu Sayyaf P50M or attack, PDI front page -- The government has two options to free the three kidnapped aid workers of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC): Pay the Abu Sayyaf bandits P50 million, or attempt a “very dangerous” rescue operation.

President sets up bounty system to hasten arrest of media killers, Bulletin front page -- The President also contributed P2 million to the “freedom fund” for the families of slain journalists during a meeting with representatives from National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP), the Kapisanan ng mga Brodkaster ng Pilipinas (KBP), and the Philippine Press Institute (PPI) as well as police officials in Malacañang.

Political killings on the rise again, groups say, abs-cbnNEWS.com/Newsbreak -- The National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) disinterred the cadavers of Ronel Raguing, 25, and Julito Quirante, 48, in Sitio Junob, Brgy. Sta. Catalina, Negros Oriental. They were allegedly seized by members of the 79th Infantry Battalion last February 2.

The bodies were found hog-tied and bore possible injury marks.

Prior to this, the body of Pitao, daughter of New People’s Army (NPA) commander Leoncio Pitao, was discovered in an irrigation ditch in Carmen, Davao del Norte on March 5. She was reportedly abducted by four armed men in Bago Gallera de Oro Subdivision, Bago Gallera, Tolomo, Davao City.

Human rights groups Karapatan-Central Visayas (KARAPATAN-CV) and the Promotion of Church People's Response condemned the sudden upsurge of alleged extra-judicial killings.

Gloria advised to jettison heavy baggage FG — think tank, Tribune news page -- First Gentleman Jose Miguel “Mike” Arroyo has become an untenable political baggage to his similarly unpopular spouse that people close to President Arroyo have “advised her to file for legal separation,” multinational think tank Pacific Strategies and Assessments (PSA) said in its Feb. 16 report on the country.

It noted, however, that the “First Couple together with their three children Congressmen Mikey and Dato; and daughter Luli have all miraculously maintained a united front in the face of the many family controversies and persistent speculation about various marital infidelities.”

EDITORIAL - Another road mess, Philstar editorial -- From street lamps in Cebu for the ASEAN summit to bidding for a World Bank-funded road project and now to funds for road repairs, corruption scandals hound the Department of Public Works and Highways.

The bet is Legacy boss will escape conviction POSTSCRIPT By Federico D. Pascual Jr., Philstar Opinion -- De los Angeles and his co-accused, like many other operators before him, will just put up the “Prove it!” legal defense that has been honed to perfection by Arroyo officials under fire. This stops in their tracks all pursuers, who often lack airtight evidence.

Viewpoint : Strange virus / Juan Mercado, PDI Opinion -- A spineless ombudsman and whitewashing congressmen saw to it that World Bank bidding crooks were not nailed. As in Jose Pidal’s bank accounts, the First Gentleman was insulated from answering tough questions. Presidential immunity in this country has a reach beyond the letter of the law.

Lito Banay Readers know more edbanayo.htm, Malaya Opinion -- Doming C sent in his comments about our "Essay on Age" Thursday last, where we dissected the curious case of "pa-pogi" of Chiz Escudero on the Nene Pimentel right to reply bill he himself co-authored. Said Doming, "I agree with your commentary about Chiz. Simple pa-pogi or claiming to be the Obama of the Philippines without the track record to show should give him no room (reason?) to aspire for the presidency. This nation has suffered so much, let’s give the country a break. We need a man who has the vision, competence, integrity and reliability, to become our next president, not a candidate of some rich businessmen."

FROM THE SIDELINES By Alfredo G. Rosario : GSIS’ bitter pill, Manila Times Opinion -- My son, Virgilio, had served for over 32 years in the government and died in office. But he was not given even the basic burial benefit. The check I received last week was for the initial survivorship benefit of his widow, Roselyn, and two minor daughters.

It was a bitter pill to swallow. My son’s family had opted for expediency without justice because it had no other choice. It should have deserved justice with expediency.

Tony Lopez: Battle of the Titans, Manila Times Opinion -- At the starting gate are three major groups—San Miguel Corp. under Chairman and CEO Eduardo Cojuangco Jr. and President and Chief Operating Officer Ramon Ang, Ayala Corp. under the brothers, Chairman and CEO Jaime Augusto Zobel de Ayala and President and COO Fernando Zobel de Ayala, and Manuel Pangilinan of the First Pacific Group of Hong Kong of the Salim Group of Indonesia. First Pacific, in turn, has controlling interest in two large Philippine companies—the Philippine Long Distance Telephone Co. (PLDT) and Metro Pacific Investments Corp.

Senate Press Releases:

Poll automation law has enough safeguards vs cheating - Gordon --Gordon, author of Republic Act (RA) 9369 or the amended Automated Elections System Law, made the assurance to dispel skepticisms by some quarters that no machine could be fool-proof to cheating and manipulation.

"Some unscrupulous individuals may try to hack into the computer system that will be employed in the poll automation. However, the law has sufficient safeguards to ensure that they will not succeed," he said.

"We are trying to put a stop to the wholesale cheating that has marred our elections in the past," he added.

Killing of NPA leader's daughter may be a war crime, underscores need for Int'l Humanitarian Law - Gordon -- Independent Senator Richard J. Gordon today underscored the urgency for Congress to pass a measure penalizing crimes against International Humanitarian Law (IHL) under domestic courts with the killing of a daughter of a communist leader.

If the killing of Rebelyn Pitao was connected to her being a daughter of New People's Army commander Leoncio Pitao, Gordon said it is more urgent to pass the IHL bill that would punish such acts under domestic courts.

"Whether or not the killing of Rebelyn Pitao is related to her father's involvement with the NPA, we should not tolerate such an atrocious act. However, this incident highlights the need to enjoin the country to International Humanitarian Law," he said.

Chiz bats for entry of more Filipino health professionals, non-skilled workers in... -- "We talked about the possibility of a government-to-government arrangement on labor migration at various levels," he said in a statement before returning to Manila on Wednesday. The senator was in Australia from March 8 to 11 on the invitation of the Australian government.

Escudero's visit was highlighted by his first meeting with Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd whom he said agreed that Australia and the Philippines should play "more active roles in the region.

Jail godfathers in illegal drug trade - Loren --
Sen. Loren Legarda yesterday challenged the government to prosecute some big-time traders, manufacturers and syndicate godfathers engaged in illegal drug trafficking to prove it was serious in eliminating the "worsening" illicit drug trade.

"I am alarmed by the disclosure of an asset of the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency that illegal drugs, like shabu, is openly being sold in sari-sari or neighborhood stores in Taguig City," Loren said.

2009-03-04T14:02:00.001+08:00

DESPITE RICE CRISIS,DOJ RULES TO ALLOW FOREIGN FIRMS TO EXPORT,ENGAGE IN RETAIL TRADE OF STAPLE

REMEMBER last year's months long crisis which saw mammoth crowds lining to purchase low quality rice?

Well, don't look know but a ruling by the justice department (DoJ) has authorized the government to allow the exportation of rice out of the country by foreigners.

In a four page opinion (DoJ Opinion No. 9,S. 2009) dated February 17 of this year,justice secretary Raul Gonzalez said it is within the authority of the National Food Authority (NFA) to allow the exportation of "special" or "fancy" rice varities by foreign and local entities.

These rice varities ,according to the opinion rendered upon the request of NFA Administrator Jessup P. Navarro includes glutinous,aromatic rice and those with "excellent and nutritive quality."

Navarro sought the legal opinion , the DoJ chief said, "in view of foreign investors' interests to participate in the development and production of rice in the country and to export the same to target markets abroad."

Gonzalez cited that under a Marcos presidential decree, PD No. 194 which the late strongman issued on May 17,1973, "allows an alien,association,partnership or corporation owned whole or in part by foreigners to engage in the rice industry" including activities such as the "production,warehousing,processing,milling,handling the distribution either wholesale or retail of rice."

The only limitation on the possible stranglehold by foreigners on the supply of local rice , the DoJ cited was a the provision of the said law requiring the transfer of at least 60% percent of such foreign firms to Filipino citizens over a period to be established by the now defunct National Grains Authority.

The NFA which succeeded the functions of the National Grains Authority in a resolution passed in 1998 allowed a 30-wait transition period before such foreign firms are required to turn over 60 percent to Filipinos.

"The conclusion is inevitable, therefore, that foreign investors may be authorized to cause the exportation of fancy or special rice provided that ,after 30 years from start of operation,their ownership shall not exceed a maximum of forty percent of the equity capital."###

2009-03-04T13:45:00.000+08:00

NEWS MONITORING AND ANALYSIS
March 04, 2009
Wednesday
Headlines and top stories in today’s newspapers

Erap reiterates ‘last option’ in 2010 presidential race, ABS-CBN News Central Visayas | 03/04/2009 12:23 AM -- Despite the scorching heat, residents of Consolacion town in Cebu province flocked to their public market to meet and greet former president Joseph “Erap” Estrada in his “Lakbay Pasasalamat” to the province.
Together with some politicians identified with the opposition, Estrada visited some municipalities of Cebu to extend his gratitude to people who, he said, have remained supportive and dedicated to him, especially during his imprisonment.
Loud cheers from the crowd welcomed Estrada before his speech. Most of the people applauded and were heard encouraging the former president to be back in Malacañang Palace.
Estrada, in his speech at a program held during the activity, he emotionally recounted his experience on leaving the presidency in 2001. He said that his primary reason of stepping down from office was to prevent more bloodshed to his avid supporters.

‘Manay Gina’ joins Erap in Cebu leg of Lakbay, Tribune news page -- This time around, Gina de Venecia, wife of former Speaker, Pangasinan Rep. Jose de Venecia Jr., went along on Estrada’s visit to Cebu.

The deposed President was also joined in his trip to the Central Visayan province by Sen. Loren Legarda, Makati City Mayor and United Opposition (UNO) president Jejomar Binay, UNO spokesman lawyer Adel Tamano and the late Fernando Poe Jr.’s daughter, Grace Poe-Llamanzares.

Justice in Erap trial top bet to fill SC slot, Tribune news page -- SC spokesman Jose Midas Marquez said the SC justices holding a voting in their regular en banc meeting saw Sandiganbayan Associate Justice Francisco Villaruz Jr. and CA Associate Justices Martin Villarama and Lucas Bersamin emerging as their top choices with nine votes each.

The three, along with eight other candidates, are vying for the slot vacated by Associate Justice Adolf Azcuna, who retired last Feb. 16.

Villaruz Jr. is one of three Sandiganbayan justices who convicted former President Joseph Estrada of plunder. His fellow justices in the Sandiganbayan special division - Justices Teresita de Castro and Diosdado Peralta - are now serving as SC justices.

SC names 3 candidates to replace Azcuna, PDI breaking news -- The Supreme Court Tuesday recommended two Court of Appeals justices and a Sandiganbayan magistrate for inclusion on the Judicial and Bar Council’s short list of nominees to the tribunal seat vacated by recently retired Justice Adolfo Azcuna.

Appellate court Justices Martin Villarama and Lucas Bersamin, and Sandiganbayan Justice Francisco Villaruz all received nine votes each from the Supreme Court justices who sat in an en banc session Tuesday.

Senators slam Villar’s ‘P1B’ boast, PDI breaking news -- Senators believed to be running in next year’spresidential race slammed declared presidential candidate Sen. Manuel Villar Jr. for telling, in effect, that the presidential race would be decided by those who can raise more campaign money.

Senators Panfilo Lacson, Manuel “Mar” Roxas II, Francis Escudero and Richard Gordon disagreed that money would determine the winner of the presidentialpolls in 2010.

Gordon-Cayetano feud spills to the floor , PDI breaking news -- The word war between senators Richard Gordon and Alan Peter Cayetano over the just-concluded Senate blue ribbon committee report on the P728-million fertilizer fund scam spilled over the Senate floor Tuesday night.

This came after Gordon, chair of the Senate blue ribbon committee, sponsored on the floor the committee report recommending the filing of plunder and other criminal charges against former Agriculture Undersecretary Jocelyn “Joc-joc” Bolante and nine other persons for their involvement in the scam.

Marcelo: Ombudsman ignoring big fish, Malaya front page -- Marcelo told a gathering of students at the University of the Philippines College of Law Tuesday that he indeed filed fewer cases when he was Ombudsman, but said these were the more difficult ones such as those of presidential friend and former justice secretary Hernando Perez, former AFP comptroller Carlos Garcia, and officials of the Department of Public Works and Highways who built the Diosdado Macapagal Avenue.

Mike Arroyo hits LP, backs Gutierrez, PDI front page -- Mike Arroyo, who belonged to the same batch at the Ateneo Law School as Gutierrez, said those seeking the Ombudsman’s removal from office should lay off her. He denied having close ties with Gutierrez, who was Ms Arroyo’s chief presidential legal counsel and acting justice secretary before the President appointed her Ombudsman.

FG tells Gutierrez critics to back off, Tribune banner story --

In a television report yesterday, Mr. Arroyo was quoted as telling the proponents of the impeach complaint against her that Gutierrez should be left alone, another way of repeating his famous “back off” line, because she is “performing her duties well.”

Mr. Arroyo, who was identified in a World Bank report as a key personality in the bid-rigging cartel on major road projects, also clarified that Gutierrez was not a classmate but only a batchmate at the Ateneo Law School.

“She’s just doing her job, just let her alone, leave her alone,” Mr. Arroyo was quoted as saying.

2009-03-03T13:54:00.001+08:00

NEWS MONITORING AND ANALYSIS
March 03, 2009
Tuesday

Headlines and top stories in today’s newspapers

(Updated) Impeachment complaint filed vs Ombudsman, abs-cbnNEWS.com/Newsbreak -- An impeachment complaint was filed Monday morning at the House of Representatives against Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez.

Gutierrez was accused of betrayal of public trust and culpable violation of the Constitution for her alleged "inaction and mishandling" of various cases pending before her office.

ANC tried to get the side of Gutierrez but her office said she will hold a news conference at 2 p.m..

The complainants were were led by former Senator Jovito Salonga and civic group Kilosbayan. It was endorsed by Akbayan party-list Rep. Risa Hontiveros Baraquel.
“Unfortunately, with Ombudsman Ma. Merceditas N. Gutierrez at the helm since 1 December 2005, the public trust has completely collapsed,” the complaint said. “Protector of the People has transformed into the coddler of the powerful and corrupt."

Impeachment raps filed vs Ombudsman, PDI banner story, In the 33-page complaint, Salonga and 30 other petitioners stated that public trust in the Office of the Ombudsman as the public protector had “completely collapsed” after it became a “coddler of the powerful and corrupt” since Gutierrez took over in December 2005.

Impeach rap filed vs Ombudsman Gutierrez, PDI breaking story 030209 -- "Ombudsman has become synonymous to inaction, mishandling, or downright dismissal of clear cases of graft and corruption, some leading to the President herself or that of her closest associates," according to the 33-page complaint.

Ombudsman faces impeachment raps, Philstar banner story -- Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez is facing impeachment before the House of Representatives.

In filing their complaint yesterday, former Senate president Jovito Salonga and 30 other prominent citizens said the Office of the Ombudsman has become “the coddler of the powerful and corrupt” under Gutierrez’s watch.

Gutierrez hits back at Salonga, other critics, Philstar front page -- Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez turned the tables on her detractors yesterday as she accused those behind the impeachment complaint against her of using politics to get back at her.

She said she is prepared to face the allegations being hurled against her by former Senate president Jovito Salonga, former Bukidnon Rep. Nereus Acosta, former social welfare secretary Ma. Corazon “Dinky” Soliman and Professor Randy David, among others.

Bolante bares plan to run for office, PDI news page -- Former Department of Agriculture undersecretary Jocelyn “Joc-joc” Bolante has announced plans to run for an elective position in the 2010 elections.

House okays automation budget, Philstar front page -- The House of Representatives approved on third and final reading last night the proposed P11.3-billion supplemental budget for the automation of the combined presidential, congressional and local elections in May next year.

Palace supports Cha-cha economic reforms, Philstar news page -- Malacañang disowned yesterday the latest move at the House of Representatives to amend the Constitution but maintained support for changes that are geared toward economic reforms and attracting investments.

Deputy Presidential Spokesperson Lorelei Fajardo made the pronouncement as the House prepared to conduct plenary debates on Speaker Prospero Nograles’ Resolution 737 that seeks to amend the Constitution’s economic provisions to relax restrictions on foreign ownership.

Gloria allies seen making move on Cha-Cha in 2 months, Malaya front page -- THE next two months will be crucial in the fight to thwart moves by allies of President Arroyo in the House of Representatives to amend the Constitution and allow her to stay in power beyond 2010, Jejomar Binay, president of the United Opposition (UNO), said.

Binay, also Makati mayor, called on UNO local leaders, civil society and people’s organizations to prepare to mobilize their forces in the event the House approves any of several measures calling for Charter Change.

Recto stands by P330-B plan, Mirror news page -- THE present P330-billion stimulus package would go a long way if spent with greater transparency and accountability, so that no more additional stimulus spending would be needed even if the economic crisis deepened and lasts longer than expected.

This is the thinking of the National Economic and Development Authority (Neda), but as Director General Ralph Recto said on Monday, “Efficiency in spending will be crucial considering that while a slight recovery is expected in 2009, this will not be enough to boost the economy. We can’t max out the Philippine credit card. There is no need for more stimulus funds, just better spending.”

Dissatisfaction with GMA at 46% - Pulse Asia, Philstar news page -- Pulse Asia’s February 2009 Ulat ng Bayan Survey found that 46 percent of Filipino adults are dissatisfied with Mrs. Arroyo’s performance, the same rating the President garnered in the last survey conducted in October 2008.

Public distrust of Arroyo still predominant: survey abs-cbnNEWS.com/Newsbreak | -- Amidst allegations of bribery in drug related cases involving officials of the justice department, charges of bid rigging in road projects that prompted the World Bank to blacklist certain local contractors, a fresh attempt to change the constitution and lukewarm efforts to stem effects of the global financial crisis, a new survey conducted by poll agency Pulse Asia Inc. showed that public sentiment concerning the President Arroyo remains predominantly one of distrust and disapproval.
This sentiment is predominant not only at the national level but in all geographic areas and socio-economic classes as well.
Disapproval and distrust of the President is most marked in Metro Manila where the 62 percent say they disapprove of her performance and 67 percent say they distrust her.
The lowest disapproval and distrust figures (38% and 35%, respectively) are recorded in the Visayas. But even the Visayas, there are more people who disapprove and distrust the President compared to those who approve and trust her (27 percent and 22 percent, respectively).
President Arroyo’s highest trust rating (31%) is granted by those in Mindanao while the lowest figure (11%) is likewise posted in Metro Manila.

Malacañang downplays Pulse Asia trust survey, Manila Times news page -- “I think the survey was not based on actual performance. It was only based on perception and it is very difficult to measure perception,” deputy spokesman Lorelei Fajardo said.

“I don’t think this [survey] should distract the President. She’s working not based on popularity, but rather, on results,” Fajardo added.

Palace withdraws Mercado's nomination, Philstar news page -- Mercado’s nomination was initially blocked by opposition Senate President Pro Tempore Jinggoy Estrada, son of deposed President Joseph Estrada.

Mercado served as defense secretary during the administration of Estrada from June 1998 until the former president was ousted from office in January 2001.

Senator Estrada said the CA notified him yesterday about the Palace’s withdrawal of Mercado’s nomination when he manifested his desire to quiz Mercado again during his scheduled confirmation hearing tomorrow.

Erap's operators are destroying Gen. Danny Lim AS I WRECK THIS CHAIR By William M. Esposo, Philstar Opinion -- The political operators of convicted former president Joseph “Erap” Estrada have been hyperactive lately in trying to promote a power triumvirate featuring Estrada, General Danilo “Danny” Lim and Supreme Court Chief Justice Reynato Puno.

This idea was first broached by Alejandro “Ding” Lichauco in his January 22 column in the Tribune(“Puno-Lim-Erap triumvirate: The political future”).

Then my Ateneo batch mate, Jose Luis “Linggoy” Alcuaz, went to town sending text messages that an important announcement will be posted on Gen. Danny Lim’s website. The much ballyhooed ‘important’ announcement turned out to be the posting of Ding Lichauco’s triumvirate proposal.

2009-02-27T13:25:00.002+08:00

NEWS MONITORING AND ANALYSIS
February 27, 2009
Friday
Headlines and top stories in today’s newspapers

'Binay sounding like a broken record', Philstar news page -- Allies of President Arroyo advised Makati Mayor Jejomar Binay to stop sounding like a “broken record” by insinuating that the chief executive will extend her term beyond June 2010.

Speaker Prospero Nograles, president of the ruling Lakas-CMD party of Mrs. Arroyo, said it is “already a given” and there is no need for anybody to force her to say that she will step down in 2010, as it is already “enshrined in the 1987 Constitution.”

“Stepping down after the term limit is in the Constitution. There is no need to say it again and again,” he reiterated.

Tamano denounces Abu Sayyaf kidnappings He appeals to kidnappers not to prolong the agony of Red Cross hostages and release them immediately -- COTABATO CITY: A known stalwart of the political opposition and a Muslim leader on Wednesday broke his silence to denounce even his fellow Muslims engaged in criminal acts like what the Abu Sayyaf is doing in kidnapping even innocent people engaged in humanitarian work like the three workers of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) who remains in captivity since January 15.

Senators press full automation of polls, Malaya news page -- SENATORS yesterday batted for full automation of the 2010 elections as they rejected the proposed "hybrid elections" or mix of manual and automated counting of votes.

"I support the position of Comelec chair Jose Melo in resisting the so-called ‘hybrid’ elections. The proposal will complicate and further confuse the vote counting process, which will only serve the purposes of poll cheats. It will only open opportunities for cheat operators to use their ‘Garci’ templates again extensively, holding candidates as hostages," Sen. Pia Cayetano said.

House wants hybrid polls, Philstar banner story -- Speaker Prospero Nograles indicated yesterday that the House of Representatives would insist on a hybrid or partial automation of next year’s general elections.

“Hybrid may be a compromise at least for this election. Partial automation is better than none at all,” Nograles toldThe STAR.

Senate-House clash on poll automation looms, Manila Times news page -- A clash between the House and the Senate on poll automation appears imminent, which could further endanger the modernization of the elections that was supposed to have started in 1998.

Fully automated 2010 elections in peril, PDI news page -- Melo said the Comelec is considering the idea of partially computerizing the 2010 polls as the delay in the release of the budget has considerably reduced the time to prepare for the country’s first-ever national computerized elections.

Blacklisted firms confirm corruption in road projects, abs-cbn news.com/Newsbreak -- The smoking gun came straight from the horses’ mouth.

Firms previously engaged in and eventually banned from World Bank-funded projects had confirmed that politicians and rebel groups get a share in road projects, causing costs to skyrocket.

At least one admitted that a cartel involving national politicians operates at the Department of Public Works and Highways.

These were based on the WB’s Notice Sanction Proceedings, which Senator Panfilo Lacson provided to the Senate. The document recorded interviews of the WB’s Integrity Vice Presidency, also referred to as the INT, with various individuals involved in the controversial road project.

The WB has blacklisted seven firms, two of them Filipino contractors, after it established that they take part in collusive schemes. The controversy has dragged the name of First Gentleman Miguel Arroyo.

One high-ranking executive of a foreign construction firm confirmed with investigators of the INT that money was paid to a former lawmaker to help the company corner projects. The company was one of those that WB debarred.

Corruption in gov’t, judiciary widespread — US State Dep’t, Tribune banner story -- REPORT ALSO CITES ALLEGATIONS OF GOV’T TORTURE The US State Department cited widespread corruption in the Philippine government, including the judiciary, as a major obstacle to human rights and criticized President Arroyo’s administration for its lack of political will to resolve the problem.

In its 2008 Human Rights Report, the State Department said that amid the existence of anti-corruption bodies, corrupt practices among government officials remain pervasive.

US report: RP judiciary corrupt, inefficient, Philstar front page -- A US State Department report said corruption and inefficiency in the judicial system have undermined human rights in the Philippines and caused “widespread skepticism” of due process.

“The law provides for an independent judiciary; however, the judicial system suffered from corruption and inefficiency,” the State Department’s 2008 Country Report on Human Rights Practices in the Philippines released yesterday said.

Guarding press freedom, Malaya news page – The Philippine Press Institute will definitely go to the Supreme Court if this bill becomes a law. The bill is definitely an attempt to interfere with editorial judgment and in effect curb our freedom. It is a dictation on the press by the state.

Right of Reply faces GMA veto, Philstar front page -- President Arroyo will veto the Right of Reply Bill if she finds its provisions would trample on the freedoms of the press and of expression, Malacañang said yesterday.

Deputy presidential spokesman Anthony Golez said Mrs. Arroyo will not tolerate any infringement on these constitutionally guaranteed freedoms.

Special session sought for poll budget, PDI news page -- Senate Majority Leader Juan Miguel Zubiri on Thursday said he was willing to sponsor a Senate resolution to ask President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo to call for a special session of Congress, possibly a two-day session from April 6 to 7.

‘Priority No. 556’ dies before interview, PDI news page -- He finally got an appointment—“Priority No. 556”—for an interview.

But then again, the line had always moved way too slow for the likes of Benito Dumaguit, 84.

Dumaguit died of a lingering heart ailment at his home in Gorordo Avenue, Cebu City, on Wednesday, a day before he was to be interviewed concerning his share in the recently approved benefits from the US government for Filipino World War II veterans.

Dumaguit and comrades had waited 63 years for such payment from Washington. An estimated 18,000 surviving veterans are expected to file claims, most of them now in their 80s and 90s, and are said to be dying at a rate of 10 a day.

Documents in hand, Dumaguit’s son Gil on Thursday went to Camp Lapu-lapu, venue of the interviews, to ask the Philippine Veterans Affairs Office (PVAO) if his now grieving family would still receive the $9,000 lump sum package.

The answer he got was not encouraging.

'Nicole' asks Supreme Court: Reverse Visiting Forces Agreement ruling, Philstar banner story -- Rape victim “Nicole,” two former senators and five cause-oriented groups asked the Supreme Court (SC) yesterday to order the immediate transfer of convicted rapist US Marine Lance Corporal Daniel Smith to Philippine custody.

The petitioners also called on the SC to reverse its decision affirming the constitutionality of the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA).

BSP files criminal case vs Legacy owner, PDI front page -- The central bank, Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) Thursday charged Celso de los Angeles Jr. and other officials of a Legacy bank with a P1-billion syndicated estafa (fraud) in the Department of Justice. Syndicated estafa is a nonbailable offense.

P1B syndicated estafa raps vs Legacy owner , Malaya banner story -- THE Bangko Sentral yesterday filed charges of syndicated estafa involving P1 billion against Celso delos Angeles and other officers of the Legacy Group and affiliated companies.

The latest charges stemmed from the siphoning of the deposits of the Rural Bank of DARBCI, one of the 13 failed banks under the Legacy Group with branches in Cebu and General Santos cities.

CBCP rejects nuclear power plant revival, PDI banner story -- The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) has thrown its weight behind the opposition to rehabilitating the mothballed Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP).

In a pastoral statement, the CBCP urged Congress to “completely and irrevocably reject the opening of the nuclear plant as the most dangerous and expensive way to generate electricity.”

Local government units to receive P40-billion increase in internal revenue allotments, Philstar news page -- Local government units (LGUs) will receive a P40-billion increase in their internal revenue allotments (IRA) from tax collections of the National Government, President Arroyo announced yesterday.

Citing the role of LGUs in helping build a stable economy, Mrs. Arroyo, in her speech at the convention of the Vice Mayors’ League of the Philippines in Cagayan de Oro City, Misamis Oriental, said local governments would get 40 centavos for every P1 of tax collected by the National Government.

Church group joins call for Gutierrez to resign, Malaya news page -- Group convener Fr. Joe Dizon said the bid-rigging scandal is not the only corruption case where Gutierrez has been remiss in her duties and responsibilities.

End killings, CHR chief dares cops, PDI news page -- De Lima also reminded the police to uphold human rights despite the confusion and adrenaline rush they may feel during armed encounters.

“There is no such thing as pro- or anti-government when it comes to human rights. There is only for human rights and against it. And for those of us on the side of human rights, there can be no fence-sitting,” she said in a speech at Camp Crame on Thursday.

Fidel’s lament ‘She does not deserve to commemorate an EDSA spirit she has never, never at all, cherished.’, Malaya Opinion -- Fidel Valdez Ramos, who together with Juan Ponce Enrile and the Reform the Armed Forces Movement, led the breakaway from the government of Ferdinand Marcos that culminated in what history now calls the "EDSA people power revolt," has reason to be miffed.

The woman he helped install into office, first by endorsing her along with Jose de Venecia as his party’s standard bearers in 1998, then once more in 2001, when his political nemesis and successor Joseph Estrada was on trial after his impeachment by the House, deigned it beneath her to attend the commemoration of the event that brought the forms of democracy back to life. She preferred to be across the street, visiting briefly one of those umpteenth job fairs organized by DOLE and its POEA to make the jobless scramble for the little mercies of available opportunities beyond these benighted shores.

GMA wasn't only one missing at EDSA rites GOTCHA By Jarius Bondoc , Philstar Opinion -- Gloria Macapagal Arroyo wasn’t the only one missing at the EDSA Revolt’s 23rd anniversary rite Wednesday. Absent too, though for other reasons, were leaders who had ousted tyrant Ferdinand Marcos in 1986. Cory Aquino was elsewhere recounting how fellow-anti-Marcos movers had tried to derail her Presidency. Her old comrades then, if not deceased, preferred to stay home. Nowhere were the two million or so professionals and intellectuals who had made up the four-day peaceful uprising. The computer experts who had exposed the Comelec’s rigging of snap-election results for Marcos against Aquino are now mostly working abroad.

Gone most tellingly was the spirit of People Power. Exercising the right to change a despotic, corrupt leader has become irrelevant. Filipinos have become alienated from their government. More so after an EDSA-Dos in Jan. 2001 brought back, in Arroyo’s person, Marcos’s regime.

Elected instead of appointed Ombudsman A LAW EACH DAY (Keeps Trouble Away) By Jose C. Sison Aside from being unnecessary, the call for the resignation of the Ombudsman is really futile if she is bent on clinging to her office. Resignation is an exercise of the will, done without outside compulsion. The only “compulsion” consistent with the exercise of free will is the inner voice telling her that she should already resign. This voice becomes audible only if the Ombudsman is sensitive enough to realize that her performance is below par based on the standards set by the Constitution and the law; and is perceptive enough to discern that she has not measured up to the qualifications of the position as the guardian and champion of the people against any illegal, unjust, improper or inefficient acts or omissions of public officials or government employees.

The right to edit, PDI editorial -- On Wednesday, Senate Minority Leader Aquilino Pimentel Jr. challenged his “friends in the media” to offer him a “reasoned argument” against his right of reply bill, which has passed third reading in the Senate.

Analysis : Insidious censorship / Amando Doronila, PDI Opinion -- No democratic country in the world has ever passed legislation that requires the media to provide equal space and time to the replies of citizens offended by news stories.

The members of Congress have taken the lead of reinventing Philippine democracy by initiating legislation that claims to expand freedom of the press while pretending to ensure fairness to citizens who are victims of some news reports or commentaries. Their initiative takes the form of Senate Bill 2150, and House Bill 3306. Both would require the media to publish or broadcast the reply of a party offended by a news story on the same space and with the same prominence as the offending report.

Glimpses : One more EDSA / Jose Ma. Montelibano, PDI Opinion -- It surprised me little that Gloria Arroyo would say the world would not accept another EDSA, meaning another people-powered revolution. After all, in the one year she has left in her administration, only death through illness or people power can unseat her. In either scenario, her family, led by husband Mike Arroyo, will suddenly find a vulnerability that can cause actual panic behind closed doors.

Passion For Reason : Protectionism isn’t for professionals / Raul Pangalangan, PDI Opinion -- I am a total outsider to the high-profile feud within SGV & Co., the country’s leading accounting firm, and have followed the story only in the newspapers. Some accounts say that one camp has on its side the protectionist clause of the Constitution that excludes all foreigners from the practice of all professions. The argument goes: If the Manila-based SGV is “integrated” into the international firm Ernst & Young, the Filipino accountants will merely front for their foreign principals thus circumventing the Constitution, much to the chagrin of the politically correct nationalists hereabouts. I’m sure the row involves other complex issues, but my focus here is solely the entrenched protectionism of the professions, why it is disturbing and how we can solve it without Charter change. (Why give our impostor President yet another excuse for Charter change?)

As I See It : Curious case of Agnes Raguinan, teacher / Neal Cruz, PDI Opinion -- What’s going on in the Supreme Court ? It supposed to be the highest court in the land that corrects errors of lower courts and dispenses justice without fear or favor. Of late, however, this image of an incorruptible court has been tarnished. The case of retired Associate Justice Ruben Reyes is just one case in point.

Reyes was found guilty of grave misconduct by the en banc and fined P500,000, to be deducted from his retirement benefits, for leaking an unpromulgated and confidential decision on the citizenship of Negros Oriental province’s Rep. Jocelyn Limkaichong.

The American way Man at the Market by Jesse E. L. Bacon II, Tribune Business Opinion -- Surprising attitude

Not until I recently involved myself in numerous church activities did I realize the depth of anger harbored by those whom I mingled with in these activities against the unabated corruption in the Arroyo administration. We erroneously thought that our church mates simply didn’t care about the evils happening in the Arroyo administration. We were greatly surprised with the way church people denounced the corrupt ways of the Arroyo administration. God indeed works in very mysterious ways.

2009-02-26T08:37:00.000+08:00

A streetpost in Multinational Village in Paranaque stands as silent witness. On the nearby vacant lot along this street twenty years ago, two Filipino-Chinese businessmen were summarily executed by four policemen. This week the Supreme Court convicted the third of the four lawmen.

SC UPHOLDS RECLUSION PERPETUA FOR TWO PARANAQUE COPS IN MURDER OF BUSINESSMEN

MANILA --Two Paranaque policemen who shot to death two Chinese businessmen in Paranaque City twenty years ago will be spending the rest of their lives behind bars after they lost their appeal before the Supreme Court.

In a 31-page decision by Associate Justice Adolfo S. Azcuna,the SC First Division upheld the decision of the Sandiganbayan Anti-Graft Court finding Paranaque City Police Patrolmen Edgardo Herrera and Redentor Mariano guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder.

The two along with two others, Patrolmen Roberto Barrera and Rodolfo Alcalde killed two businessmen, George Go and Shi Shu Yang on Decemberr 28,1989.

Go and Yang who owned the now defunct Chow Chow Restaurant apparently drew the ire of the policemen after the victims gave the lawmen twenty pesos and two shirts when the policemen solicited money from them for Christmas.

The four confronted Go and Yang in the latter's business, beat them up and confiscated a licensed .45 caliber pistol belonging to the victims. The gun was later discovered in the office of another policeman with its etched serial number tampered.

The suspects' crime was uncovered after the lawmen were positively identified by a female foreigner living in a house near the vacant lot in Timothy St. in Multinational Village also in Paranaque where Go and Yang were killed in cold blood.

While the cases against them was pending Barrera and Alcalde jumped bail but Barrera was subsequently arrested and convicted for the killings.

In the latest SC decision against their conspirators Mariano and Herrera , the high court ruled their claim of self-defense is untenable. The policemen had argued that while being transported, the two Chinese businessmen tried to grab their service assault rifle and resulted in the accidental firing and the deaths.

"Considering that both victims were handcuffed and unarmed, and therefore, had restricted movements, it could only mean that the perceived threats to petitioners' lives were not sufficiently serious, in which case they were not justified in shooting the hapless victims who were unarmed."the SC ruled otherwise.

"Petitioners (policemen) could have simply subdued the two victims in a manner as to engage them in a fight without necessarily killing them." the high court ruled.

Concurring were Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno and Associate Justices Antoniot T. Carpio,Renato C. Corona an Teresita Leonardo-De Castro.

Aside from sentencing them to reclusion perpetua, the SC also ordered the lawmen to pay P 1.6 million in damages,indemnity and unrealized earning and income.

2009-02-18T08:30:00.000+08:00

This story broke in local newspapers this morning and was credited to Agence France Presse .

A rare bird known as Worcester’s buttonquail (Turnix worcesteri), found in the Philippines was photographed alive for the first time the Wild Bird Club of the Philippines (WBCP) reported.

The bird, the Philippine Star also reported was recorded on both video and still photography by a GMA 7 Network documentary team at Dalton Pass in Nueva Vizcaya last January before it was cooked and eaten. The bird was sold for P10.

The WBCP hailed the discovery of the Worcester’s buttonquail first described based on specimens bought in Quinta Market in Manila in 1902. The bird was named after Dean Conant Worcester, an American zoologist and public official specializing in the Philippines around that time.

2009-02-17T16:01:00.000+08:00

NEWS MONITORING AND ANALYSIS
February 17, 2009
Tuesday
Headlines and top stories in today’s newspapers

It's Joey who's applying for 2010 Senate slate - Erap, Philstar news page -- Estrada was reacting to reports quoting Joey, the whistleblower in the alleged anomalous national broadband deal between the government and China’s ZTE Corp., that he is being wooed by Estrada to run under the ticket of the opposition in next year’s elections.

On the contrary, Estrada said it was Joey de Venecia who presented himself to them.

WB offers to brief government officials, senators, Philstar banner story -- The World Bank offer came after a dressing down – in absentia – from some senators last week who accused the lending institution at a public hearing of not backing up its claims with solid evidence. The WB report implicated First Gentleman Jose Miguel Arroyo and some officials as well as three Filipino contractors in bidding irregularities.

Bert Hofman, World Bank country director for the Philippines and East Asia and Pacific Region, relayed the institution’s willingness to share more information with officials in a letter to Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago.

WB blinks, agrees to brief senators, PDI banner story -- World Bank officials said they were willing to brief senators — but not at a Senate hearing — on their claim that Philippine construction contractors had rigged the bidding of World Bank-funded road projects.

World Bank country director Bert Hofman told Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago on Monday that bank officials were willing to hold an “informal technical briefing” on the matter.

Ping: Let’s erase fears Senate has turned into a Palace lackey, Malaya front page -- "If we injudiciously exonerate or pin the blame on anybody without exhausting all legal means to get to the bottom of this controversy, then we only have ourselves to blame if we are branded as accomplices or subservient to the corrupt powers-that-be," Lacson said.

RP veterans get $198M, PDI banner story -- The US Congress approved on Friday the stimulus bill, a $787-billion package of tax cuts and fresh spending to salvage the broken American economy, handing US President Barack Obama his biggest political victory yet.

The bill contains a provision recognizing the military service of Filipino veterans of World War II and granting a tax-free lump sum of $15,000 to those who are based in the United States and $9,000 to those living in the Philippines.

‘Palace plan is to wait it out’—lawyer, PDI front page -- The Philippine government’s strategy is apparently to stall any action on a Supreme Court ruling to move rape convict Lance Cpl. Daniel Smith back to a Philippine jail and just wait for the Court of Appeals to rule on his case, the lawyer of Smith’s Filipino victim “Nicole” said.

“That’s what we get from their moves … The strategy is to wait,” Evalyn Ursua said when reached by phone on Saturday.

Sen. Francis Pangilinan filed yesterday a resolution calling for the termination of the VFA for violating the 1987 Philippine Constitution.

Gov’t has inferiority complex—senator, PDI front page -- Sen. Joker Arroyo on Saturday characterized executive branch officials as having an “inferiority complex,” resulting in the Philippines’ continued failure to take custody of convicted rapist US Marine Daniel Smith.

SEC files raps vs Legacy owner, Philstar front page -- Sources said the SEC recommended the filing of criminal charges against the respondents for selling unregistered securities and engaging in misrepresentation by assuring investors that the principal amount of their investments is guaranteed.

Congress prodded on poll automation budget, Philstar front page -- Presidential Adviser for Political Affairs Gabriel Claudio said Speaker Prospero Nograles and House appropriations committee chairman Junie Cua of Qurino province earlier gave assurances that “whatever kinks there were have all been ironed out.”

Mar hits P200-million equipment overprice; NIA chief denies claim, Philstar news page -- Roxas told reporters at the Manila Hotel that the Senate Blue Ribbon committee would conduct an investigation into the alleged rigging of the public bidding for the procurement of heavy equipment worth P1.4 billion by the NIA.

P1.4-B NIA project must be probed: Mar, Mirror news page –

NIA P1.4B rigging bared, Malaya banner story -- In Resolution No. 880, Roxas sought an inquiry by the Blue Ribbon committee into the alleged manipulation of the bidding process, which he said was made "precisely to limit the number of participants in the bid project."

Oil deregulation review sought, Bulletin banner story -- After being ignored by oil companies, House Speaker Prospero Nograles yesterday renewed his threat to push for a congressional review of the oil deregulation law in the wake of government’s vow to examine the finances of the country’s major petroleum player

Palace serious on oil-deregulation law review, Mirror news page -- Responding to questions on Congress’s stand on this, Speaker Prospero Nograles said “revisiting the law is not far-fetched,” given recent developments, but stressed that any action by lawmakers will be anchored on what, at bottom, is the national interest.

February 25 not a holiday, Philstar news page -- Deputy Presidential Spokesperson Lorelei Fajardo said Feb. 25 was not included in the list of holidays under Proclamation 1699 issued by President Arroyo setting the holidays for 2009.

“This was not included in the calendar of holidays,” Fajardo said at a news briefing. “I think there are many long weekends and long holidays, that’s why Feb. 25 was not considered. But we have many activities commemorating Edsa I.”

‘Corruption is GMA’s bribe to stay in power’, Malaya front page -- "Kailangan talagang bantayan itong isinusulong na Charter change. I think the next three weeks is critical for the administration to push its effort to amend the Constitution and we should do everything to prevent them from tinkering with the Charter," Teresita "Ging" Deles, former peace adviser and member of Former Senior Government Officials (FSGO), said in a forum.

What Mikey wants, Mikey gets?, Malaya news page -- Panlilio, who was at Camp Crame, said it has been a year and nine months since he requested that Singian be replaced by a "morally upright and qualified police chief" for failing to stop illegal gambling.

BUSINESS San Miguel eyes BayanTel, PDI Business news page -- Conglomerate San Miguel Corp. is in talks with a major creditor of Bayan Telecommunications Inc. (BayanTel) to acquire about $150 million worth of debt paper that could give it the controlling stake in the telecom firm of the Lopez group, Philippine Daily Inquirer sources said.

The mystery buyers of Meralco shares, Written by Mirror on the wall / Raul Valino Mirror Opinion -- With the Meralco annual stockholders’ meeting and election of officers just three months away, our sources say more sales will be forthcoming to make the inevitable happen, that is the changing of the guards on Ortigas Avenue.

Who will eventually become the new majority owners or managers of Meralco? Some say it could be San Miguel Corp. (SMC), the food and beer giant that may also have tied up with the finest names in Philippine business, namely, the Zobel-Ongpin clans.

The perfect bank scam? Omerta / Butch del Castillo Mirror Opinion -- TWELVE rural banks with a recorded deposit base of P14.4 billion (amassed through a total of 50 branches in Luzon and Visayas) suddenly go belly up, one after another, within a three-week time frame. It was as if these banks’ almost simultaneous closure was carefully orchestrated by some unseen baton-wielding hand.

All the 12 banks happen to be owned by the Legacy Group founded by the controversial ex-banker Celso de los Angeles, the incumbent mayor of Santo Domingo, Albay. (Under the corporate umbrella of Legacy are also four failed preneed companies with billions of pesos in liabilities to thousands of customers.)

BIG DEAL By Dan Mariano Nuclear folly marches on , Manila Times Opinion 02/16/09 -- Rep. Juan Miguel Arroyo of Pampanga recently said that a bill seeking to commission the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP) in Morong, Bataan, is as good as passed. The chairman of the House energy committee reported that the bill already has the support of 190 out of 238 congressmen.

Human Remains Dug at DoJ Compound Last February 4,2009. Photos By Arlene Lim-Farol

2009-02-16T15:27:00.000+08:00

February 16,2009 newsman's transcript of the Independent Fact Finding Committee on the Alabang Boys

2009-02-16T14:09:00.000+08:00

Testimony of BDO assistant vp Liza bugay of Resado account

Testified that there was a deposit on nov 30 credited to resado’s account on December 2. Dec1 holiday, so dec2 pumasok ng pera sa account. Did not say the amount. Lawyer ruben purisima repeatedly told the court that the bank rep may not answer with regards to movement of transactions on that particular accounbts, only on terminologies, hypothetical questions but not on specific accounts. Only panel was able to see the bank statement. Fr. Aquino said the one who is going to file charges is the depositor but here you have the depositor also asking questions from you, sabi ni purisima, they want a written statement of the waiver, even if handwritten. But resado did not do so, he said he also wants to hear the explanations bec there are many entries in his account that he doesn’t understand himself.

Media Ambush interview with Verano

(Philip brodette testifies)... he feels that this is getting to be a family feud and has nothing to do with the case. What he was saying is lets just go on with the case proper. This fight between the brodetts, it doesn’t overwhelm the case itself so he wanted the committee to proceed with case.

(significance) he was invited to appear, he didn’t want to ignore the invite bec that might give the wrong signal. So he came over willingly to appear. Relevant portion is whether or not he called usec blancaflor, he said he just called, he apologized for unnecessarily dragging him in the case, usec decent man (my butt) only to find out why the alabang boys were not being released.

(why he chose blancaflor to call) he was the logical person to call, they were previous acquaintances. I don’t know how much of a friend, he is undersecretary, so normal human tendencies is to contact him.

(did he contribute to bribery) if there was such, but he denied it.

(who tipped him abt release) i think the brother told him, when they found the release order, but there was a glitch... The moment we received it, dec 19, evening.

(resado presentation of bank account) the bank branch manager testified, she just explained what was those codes that were printed on the statement of the banks.

(significant what panel said that deposit made on nov 30 but credited only on dec 2) thats also surprising bec then even the date is irrelevant already, credit lang pala on dec 2. They were making a big issue that it was deposited on the day he supposedly issued the reso.

PDEA chief Dionisio Santiago chance interview

(on the credibility of witnesses ) its up to court to appreciate.
(why significant, why present dave brodett family) activities na kunwari walang alam yung bata, gawa-gawa lang. Here comes Amanda, testifying otherwise. Who can better talk about a relative kundi yung kababata.... friendster account nabura na...
(resado account) nalinawan tayo, nagkaroon lang tayo ng konting problema kung ayaw nila they are invoking bank secrecy law. Andun na yung bank account owner na nagsasabi na willing siyang buksan. Kaya mejo nagquestion na kami.

(lost opportunity to clear his name) its up to the court to decide how they will look at the testimony, nanood lang kami.

2009-02-16T13:45:00.000+08:00