SC to create panel to mediate in Luisita dispute

After hearing oral arguments on the Hacienda Luisita agrarian dispute, the Supreme Court has decided to create a special panel that will mediate between the estate’s corporate owners and its farmers, Chief Justice Renato Corona said on Tuesday. Corona acted on Associate Justice Presbitero Velasco's suggestion that a panel be formed to help the Hacienda Luisita Inc. (HLI) management and its farmers to hammer out a deal that could offer a "win-win" solution for both parties. The parties in the case were also given 30 days to submit their memoranda responding to the issues raised in both oral arguments, one on Tuesday and the first one Wednesday last week. Corona explained that instead of allotting the usual 20-day non-extendable period for the simultaneous filing of memoranda, the court decided to extend the period to 30 days, even as it will “try to resort to mediation" through a special committee. "We would like to decide this case as soon as we can," the chief justice stressed. At the resumption of the oral arguments on Tuesday, Velasco offered Solicitor General Jose Anselmo Cadiz the possibility of the court creating a panel to mediate between the Cojuangco-owned HLI and its farmer beneficiaires. Cadiz's office represents the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) and the Presidential Agrarian Reform Council (PARC), which in December 2005 issued a resolution ordering the revocation of the stock distribution option (SDO) agreement forged in May 1989. Under the SDO scheme, farmer beneficiaries are given shares of stocks instead of land. In 2006, the SC granted the HLI's petition to stop the PARC from revoking the SDO scheme and ordering land distribution. "There is a view that if the court opts for land distribution, this could be a no-win situation. Based on facts presented, it would appear that the situation is very complicated. The submission of a compromise agreement opens a window of opportunity for a win-win solution," said Velasco. "Will the government consider recommending to the PARC the recall of their revocation of the SDOA to pave the way for a mediation among the parties to be handled by a panel of mediators created by the Supreme Court?" Velasco asked. However, Cadiz appeared to flip-flop on his position. "I think we can explore that," Cadiz said at first, responding to Velasco's question on whether the Solicitor General is amenable to the creation of a panel to be organized by the court to talk to the parties in the land dispute. But later, Cadiz said mediation can occur even if the SDO scheme is revoked. "I am not prepared to do that. A mediation can happen even if there is such a revocation made by the PARC. The court can exercise its ascendancy, its moral suasion for the parties to come up with an agreement according to law and public policy even with the revocation by PARC," Cadiz replied. Associate Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro also questioned constitutionalist Christian Monsod whether he is amenable to having a panel mediating between HLI and farmer-beneficiaries. “Are you ready to consider through mediation?" asked De Castro. "Yes, provided it is not within the framework of the SDO," said Monsod, who is representing farmers from the Farm workers Agrarian Reform Movement in Hacienda Luisita (FARM). In an interview with reporters later, Monsod said he welcomes the SC initiative, provided that the compromise deal forged between HLI and the farmers earlier this month is not included in the negotiations. "We are not sitting down if the compromise agreement is on the table. We will not be railroaded into an agreement unfair to the farmers," said Monsod. 'Republic is for land distribution' Throughout Tuesday's oral arguments, Cadiz argued that the PARC can order the revocation of the SDO agreement because it did not fulfill the 1988 Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law's thrust of social justice and improved lives for farmers. Cadiz also insisted that he was speaking for the government and not in behalf of President Benigno Aquino III’s family on the Cojuangco side, which owns Hacienda Luisita and wants SDO maintained. Cadiz is perceived to have close ties with Aquino, having served as a coordinator of "PiNoy Lawyers," a group of over 200 lawyers who volunteered to serve as Aquino's legal watchdogs during his presidential campaign for the May 10 elections. "If I may put it in the proper context, I am an appointee of the incumbent President, but I'm speaking on behalf of the Republic. And the Republic says land must be distributed. Your honors, the President has not swayed me either way to speak in behalf of his family and I would think the late Cory Aquino was also that way," said Cadiz. The solicitor general made the statement when Associate Justice Arturo Brion questioned whether former President Corazon Aquino took part in PARC's deliberations in 1989 in approving the SDO agreement in Hacienda Luisita. "I did not mean to cast any aspersions on the integrity of the President," Brion later clarified. The August 6 compromise deal The oral arguments likewise tackled the August 6, 2010 compromise deal between HLI and the farmer beneficiaries. HLI has already asked the court to approve the compromise settlement even if the SC is yet to decide on the validity of the SDO scheme. (See: HLI asks Supreme Court to approve Luisita agreement) Under the August 6 agreement, farmers are given the option to retain their stocks in the sugar plantation, or to get their share of land from the 6,543-hectare Cojuangco-owned estate in Tarlac province. HLI had reported that about 70 percent of some 10,502 farmer-beneficiaries chose to keep their stocks in the corporation instead of getting land. On Tuesday, Associate Justice Conchita Carpio-Morales asked Cadiz for his stand on the compromise deal. "Do you agree that the PARC should pass upon the validity, or lack of, of the compromise agreement," asked Morales. Cadiz replied that the court can approve the deal if it is lawful and not violative of public policies, even as the DAR and PARC are pushing for land distribution and the revocation of the SDO. "The PARC has to be consulted and its view taken. But since the case is with the court, if I may say, the Supreme Court should approve any compromise agreement," said Cadiz, who later admitted he has not yet read the entire compromise settlement. "I was categorical that I have not gone over it. What I said is that if it is not contrary to law and public policy, then the compromise agreement must be approved," Cadiz later told Associate Justice Roberto Abad. 'Messy' land distribution After Cadiz argued that land must be distributed to the farmers, Justice Velasco said that the possibility of land distribution may be "messy" and "very, very complicated." "You have to consider the fact that HLI assets include roads, bridges, irrigation canals, and even railroad systems. And these land improvements may be situated in the land that we (the Supreme Court) will distribute. So it's a messy situation here," said the associate justice. It was at that point that Velasco raised the possibility of the court creating a special panel to mediate among parties in the land dispute. Associate Justice Roberto Abad also asked Cadiz for assurance that farmers' lives would be better if the court orders land distribution and withdraws its June 2006 temporary restraining order that prevented PARC from revoking the SDO scheme. "Are you sure that the beneficiaries would be better off if the court annuls the SDOA? Can you assure us that this will happen?" asked Abad. Cadiz replied: "I think I can assure that they (farmers) will not be worse off today if they receive the land." He likewise said that while the number of farmer beneficiaries ballooned from 6,900 in 1989 to 10,500 in 2010, some farmer beneficiaries may be relatives and thus could be lumped together — making the number of beneficiaries to more or less 6,000. Incumbent DAR Secretary Virgilio de los Reyes briefly took the floor and said the government has enough money to support the farmers if they receive land. "It will take P20,000 to P39,000 per hectare of sugar land (to support farmers)," he told Abad. Despite being wary of De los Reyes' answer, Abad said the government will be responsible if the court orders land distribution. "You give the comfort that if the court annuls this SDO, the government will answer for the result,' said Abad.—JV, GMANews.TV