(First of two parts)
SIXTY-TWO-YEAR-OLD farmer Victoriano Cordero remembers the day in 2008 when Arnie Teves of the powerful Teves clan in Negros Oriental drove him away from the house he had lived in for the past 40 years.
“He came with his security guards who roamed around,” Cordero recalls. Teves reportedly warned him, “If you come back here, I will kill you.”
Last Oct. 25, Teves was elected barangay captain of Malabugas in Bayawan City, the latest member of the political dynasty to be installed in public office.
Teves is said to be eyeing the presidency of the Association of Barangay Captains of Negros Oriental, a position that will give him a seat in the provincial board. Cordero and 29 other agrarian reform beneficiaries fear he would use his clout to further block them from taking over the Teves-controlled land already titled in their names.
Teves’ victory as barangay captain is the latest twist in the 20-year saga that has pitted the farmer-beneficiaries against the Teveses, three generations of politicians. Teves’ brother, Pryde Henry, now even chairs the Committee on Agrarian Reform in the House of Representatives.
Thirteen years ago, 19 farmers received Certificates of Land Ownership Award (CLOA) from the Department of Agrarian Reform for a 33-hectare land in Barangay Caranoche, Sta. Catalina. Eleven more farmers got CLOAs for 28 hectares in Barangay Villareal, Bayawan City in 1999.
But the Teveses have refused to relinquish the landholdings, even though the DAR and the courts have ruled they no longer have the legal right to them.
Former congressman Herminio Teves, grandfather of Arnie and Pryde Henry, has blocked the farmers’ claim on the land. He insists he is the rightful owner and that he has not been justly compensated by the Land Bank of the Philippines when the lands came under the coverage of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program.
The Teveses acquired the landholdings in 1976 when Herminio’s brother, former Sen. Lorenzo Teves, bought the Villareal property from Socorro Basa and the Caranoche property from Antonio and Lourdes Calumpang.
The transfer of ownership was never registered with the Registry of Deeds, and the parcels of lands were never titled to Lorenzo. But since the transfer of property took place long before Republic Act No. 6657, the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law, was enacted, DAR recognized Lorenzo’s right to the property.
On May 18, 1988, however, three weeks before RA 6657 took effect, the former senator offered the property to DAR for distribution under CARP through the voluntary-offer-to-sell (VOS) scheme.
Land Bank valued the property at about P5,600 per hectare and paid Lorenzo more than P186,000. The old titles in the names of Basa and Calumpang were cancelled, and a new title in the name of the Republic of the Philippines was registered. DAR issued the CLOAs to the Caranoche farmers in 1997 and the Villareal farmers in 1999.
But Herminio questioned the CARP coverage. Asserting his right over the property, he presented as proof a memorandum of agreement cum deed of sale dated Oct. 3, 1988 which he said was executed between him and Lorenzo.
The agreement purported to “cede, sell and convey” the property to Herminio for P1.85 million. But the sale was never recorded in the Registry of Deeds. Neither was the property ever titled to the former congressman.
In June 1998, farmer-beneficiaries led by Francisco Cacas filed a petition before the Regional Agrarian Reform Adjudicator (RARAD) seeking to enforce their rights. Their petition was sustained.
On March 1 the following year, the RARAD, in a decision written by regional adjudicator Jose C. Llames, dismissed Herminio’s protest, declaring the memorandum of agreement between him and Lorenzo invalid because, it said, the document was initiated and executed four months after RA 6657 took effect. RA 6657 allowed the transfer of property ownership only within three months after it became effective, or until Sept. 15, 1988.
The RARAD then ordered Herminio “and all other persons acting for and in (his) behalf” to vacate the property and turn it over to the 30 farmer-beneficiaries. It also enjoined him and his party “from intruding and/or disturbing in any manner the peaceful possession and cultivation by the (farmer-beneficiaries) of the land in question.”
Herminio lost his appeal before the DAR Adjudication Board (DARAB). He brought the case to the Court of Appeals, but the court upheld both the RARAD and DARAB.
The former congressman then filed a motion for review with the Supreme Court. But the High Court, in a resolution on April 26, 2004, denied his request because of, among other things, his failure to appeal within the required 15-day period.
The Supreme Court also denied a motion of reconsideration that Herminio subsequently filed. On Sept. 21, 2004, the court’s decision became final and executory.
Dialogues, hunger strike
In November 2008, after a series of dialogues with DAR and a two-week hunger strike, the farmer-beneficiaries won recognition for their right to occupy the land.
The Villareal farmers said Pryde Henry signed an agreement with them promising to remove his piggery from the awarded land. He asked for 90 days to build a new piggery in a new site.
Pryde Henry confirmed he signed the agreement. “I said, ‘Okay, if you want my piggery out, I’ll get it out in three months’ time,’” he said.
He said, however, that two days after the signing, trouble broke out. “The farmer-beneficiaries tried to drive away the other farmers staying in the area. There were fistfights and stone throwing,” he said.
“To make matters worse, I learned that Villareal was not yet subject for installation. The order to install was for Caranoche, not Villareal, because the inclusion-exclusion (petition) for Villareal is still ongoing up to this very day. What I’m trying to say is: They deceived me. They told me the land was theirs, but there was still this inclusion-exclusion petition,” Pride Henry said.
The petition was filed in December 2006 by farmers led by Rodrigo Padilla, a farmer working for Teves. It was meant to identify which farmers were qualified to become beneficiaries.
Rodolfo Inson, DAR Region VII director, dismissed the petition on Nov. 25, 2008, two weeks after the installation.
Cordero, a farmer-beneficiary in Barangay Villareal, said that in the 11 years that the 28-hectare land was being processed for coverage in CARP—from 1988 to 1999—Padilla and his co-petitioners never signified any intention to become beneficiaries. Neither did they raise questions about how DAR identified and selected the 11 farmer-beneficiaries, he said.
“The filing of the inclusion-exclusion petition…was instigated by Herminio Teves (because) Teves had no intention to really distribute the land to them,” Cordero said. “The petition was in fact a move to evade CARP, to prevent land distribution.”
Cordero also said Pryde Henry was wrong to accuse them of deceit. “We own the land by virtue of our title, our CLOA, issued in 1999,” he said.
He added that DAR’s decision to install the Villareal and Caranoche farmers in their CARP-awarded land on Nov. 12, 2008 was based on its March 12, 2008 legal opinion that the inclusion-exclusion petition did not constitute a legal impediment to their installation.
The counteroffer
Pryde Henry has offered the Villareal and Caranoche farmer-beneficiaries another piece of land in Barangay Minaba, Bayawan City, but the farmers have rejected his offer.
“My grandfather offered the land to them for free because the land (in Villareal-Caranoche) is for our farm workers, not for them. If they really want to become farmers like our farmers, we’ll offer them for free the land in Minaba,” the congressman told VERA Files.
But the farmers say the issue is non-negotiable.
“What the Teveses do not understand, or refuse to understand, is that the Villareal-Caranoche property is our land, it is titled in our name. It was never titled to Herminio Teves; he never owned it,” said Cordero.
He added, “The land in Minaba is not his land; it is public land and there are settlers there. Why should we exchange the land already titled to us for a piece of land that is potentially a problem? Why should we agree to their offer when in the first place they have no right to make that offer?”
Pryde Henry said, however, the farmer-beneficiaries refused the Minaba area because the place was very far.
“We are willing to give them three hectares each. So, if they are 30 in all, that would be 90 hectares for free! But they do not want the offer because they say Minaba is far. But it’s only eight kilometers from the city, and the road is paved. So now you wonder, Are they farmers or are they speculating realtors?” he said.
Cordero said, however, that it is the Teveses who are speculating.
“When the property was awarded to us in 1997 and 1999, the surrounding area was not yet as developed as it is now. Over the past decade, there has been development. The land value may have increased, but we know nothing about that. If there is anyone who is speculating, it is the Teveses. They hold on to the land even if it is not theirs because they are speculating,” he said. (To be concluded)
This article is part of a VERA Files project on human rights reporting supported by the British Embassy and The Coca-Cola Export Corp.
