ptperalta.net Just about anything I could think think of…

1. 

   B P Nillos
   February 11th, 2010 - 08:32

   Villar is a businessman. Business is formed to earn profit and increase wealth. It works by providing viable trade between both the business owner and the consumer. The government takes one-third of my hard earned money even before I receive it in exchange of what? I can hardly feel it. But I guess it’s gonna be a relief when I begin to drive over a nice paved toll less road. Whether or not he earned so much from this project, in my point of view, I don’t care how rich he gets, just give me enough of my end. Business makes us rich. I’d love to learn the things he do. But to be in a public service is a whole new different playing field. Now having them mixed up is quite too hazy. Gone are the days of true statesmen dominating the land. Neil Gaiman predicted that there’ll be no more governments, but corporations. The whole world is no longer composed of countries, but prospective markets. I guess the political players has changed, and imminently so is the game. OK, so sino sunod sa presidentiables?

   ( REPLY )
2. 

   Body Massage
   March 4th, 2010 - 05:55

   We are convinced NoyNoy is by far the most logical preference for the presidency in the Philippines, definitely not mainly because he’s the son of heroes Cory and also Benigno Aquino but because he’s the reduced evil within the candidates. Sure we are able to mention about the Hacienda Luisita killings nonetheless in the end of the day his opponents possess much worse records. He remains true to his anti-corruption campaign, also between the other people competing for presidency he doesn’t have corruption troubles. We met him one time on a bash, this individual appears so good and well-defined and allow me to add a ideal gentleman as well.

   ( REPLY )
   • 

     Juan Dela Cruz
     March 21st, 2010 - 23:32

     ——————————————————————————–

     ADDITIONAL INFO…

     OO, siguro nga di siya mangugurakot pero ang panloloko nila sa mga farmers…nakakaawa…nangako ang ina na binawi sa pamamagitan ng pag-amendiya ng constitution para mailihis ang naipangako na…

     AT, ngayon ipinapangako na naman ng anak…gawin na muna niya bago mag-eleksiyon kaya…

     masyadong conflict ang mga sitwasyon nila….

     Hacienda Luisita’s past haunts Noynoy’s future
     March 1, 2010, 6:46 am
     Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: cory aquino, GMA news, Hacienda Luisita Masaker, HLI, Inquirer.ent, Kris Aquino, ninoy aquino, Noynoy Aquino, PDI, Stephanie dychiu
     Source:

     http://www.gmanews.tv/story/181877/hacienda-luisitas-past-haunts-noynoys-future

     Hacienda Luisita’s past haunts Noynoy’s future
     By STEPHANIE DYCHIU
     01/18/2010 | 06:20 PM

     More
     //
     Share1894
     This week the country commemorates the tragic shooting of protesting farmers on January 22, 1987, an incident better known as the Mendiola massacre. Along with the Hacienda Luisita massacre of November 16, 2004, these two incidents represent the darker side of the Aquino legacy.

     The struggle between farmers and landowners of Hacienda Luisita is now being seen as the first real test of character of presidential candidate Noynoy Cojuangco Aquino, whose family has owned the land since 1958. Our research shows that the problem began when government lenders obliged the Cojuangcos to distribute the land to small farmers by1967, a deadline that came and went. Pressure for land reform on Luisita since then reached a bloody head in 2004 when seven protesters were killed near the gate of the sugar mill in what is now known as the Luisita massacre. This is the story of the hacienda and its farmers, an issue that is likely to haunt Aquino as he travels the campaign trail for the May 2010 elections. Below is part one. Part two is here, part three here and part four here.

     First of a series

     Senator Noynoy Cojuangco Aquino has said he only owns 1% of Hacienda Luisita. Why is he being dragged into the hacienda’s issues?

     This is one of the most common questions asked in the 2010 elections.

     To find the answer, GMANews.TV traveled to Tarlac and spoke to Luisita’s farm workers and union leaders. A separate interview and review of court documents was then conducted with the lawyers representing the workers’ union in court. GMANews.TV also examined the Cojuangcos’ court defense and past media and legislative records on the Luisita issue.

     The investigation yielded illuminating insights into Senator Noynoy Aquino’s involvement in Hacienda Luisita that have not been openly discussed since his presidential bid. Details are gradually explored in this series of special reports.

     A background on the troubled history of Hacienda Luisita is essential to understanding why the issue is forever haunting Senator Noynoy Aquino and his family.

     Remnant of colonialism

     Before the Cojuangco family acquired Hacienda Luisita in the 1950s, it belonged to the Spanish-owned Compaña General de Tabacos de Filipinas (Tabacalera). Tabacalera acquired the land in 1882 from the Spanish crown, which had a self-appointed claim on the lands as the Philippines’ colonial master. Luisita was named after Luisa, the wife of the top official of Tabacalera.

     Tobacco used to be the main crop planted in Luisita, but in the 1920s, the Spaniards shifted to sugar. Sugar production had become more profitable because demand was guaranteed by the US quota. In 1927, the Spaniards built the sugar mill Central Azucarera de Tarlac to accompany their sugarcane plantation.

     Around the same year, the wealthy Cojuangco brothers Jose, Juan, Antonio, and Eduardo also put up a small sugar mill in Paniqui, Tarlac. The eldest brother, Jose “Pepe” Cojuangco, Sr., was the father of former President Corazon “Cory” Cojuangco Aquino, and the grandfather of Senator Noynoy Aquino.

     Ninoy brokers purchase of Luisita

     In 1954, Corazon Cojuangco married Benigno “Ninoy” Aquino, Jr. with President Ramon Magsaysay as one of the ninongs (sponsor) at the wedding. In 1957, Magsaysay talked to Ninoy Aquino about the possibility of Ninoy’s father-in-law, Jose Cojuangco, Sr. acquiring Central Azucarera de Tarlac and Hacienda Luisita from the Spaniards. The Spaniards wanted to sell because of the Huk rebellion and chronic labor problems.

     Ninoy Aquino wanted the azucarera and hacienda to stay only within the immediate family of his father-in-law, not to be shared with the other Cojuangcos, wrote American development studies expert James Putzel in his 1992 book A Captive Land: The Politics of Agrarian Reform in the Philippines.

     (Dr. James Putzel did extensive research on agrarian reform in the Philippines between the late 1980s to the early 1990s. He is currently a Professor of Development Studies at the London School of Economics.)

     The exclusion of Jose Cojuangco, Sr.’s brothers and their heirs from Luisita caused the first major rift in the Cojuangco family, Putzel wrote. This played out years later in the political rivalry of Jose’s son Peping and Eduardo’s son Danding. Today, this divide is seen between Noynoy Aquino (grandson of Jose Sr., nephew of Peping) and Gibo Teodoro (grandson of Eduardo Sr., nephew of Danding), who are both running in the 2010 presidential elections.

     (Click here to view the the Cojuangco family tree)
     Government loans given to Cojuangco

     Jose Cojuangco, Sr. received significant preferential treatment and assistance from the government to facilitate his takeover of Hacienda Luisita and Central Azucarera de Tarlac in 1957.

     To acquire a controlling interest in Central Azucarera de Tarlac, Cojuangco had to pay the Spaniards in dollars. He turned to the Manufacturer’s Trust Company in New York for a 10-year, $2.1 million loan. Dollars were tightly regulated in those times. To ease the flow of foreign exchange for Cojuangco’s loan, the Central Bank of the Philippines deposited part of the country’s international reserves with the Manufacturer’s Trust Company in New York.

     LAND REFORM AND SOCIAL JUSTICE

     ——————————————————————————–

     ——————————————————————————–

     When Spain colonized the Philippines by force beginning 1521, its lands were claimed by the conquistadors in the name of Spain. The natives who were already there tilling the land were put under Spanish landlords, who were given royal grants to “own” the land and exact forced labor and taxes from the natives. After the Spaniards left, the Americans took over. When the Philippines became independent in 1946, history had to be set right by giving the lands back to the people whose ancestors have been tilling them for centuries. However, a new feudal system developed among the Filipinos themselves, and once again drove a wedge between the tillers and their land.
     The Central Bank did this on the condition that Cojuangco would simultaneously purchase the 6,443-hectare Hacienda Luisita, “with a view to distributing this hacienda to small farmers in line with the Administration’s social justice program.” (Central Bank Monetary Board Resolution No. 1240, August 27, 1957).

     To finance the purchase of Hacienda Luisita, Cojuangco turned to the GSIS (Government Service Insurance System). His application for a P7 million loan said that 4,000 hectares of the hacienda would be made available to bonafide sugar planters, while the balance 2,453 hectares would be distributed to barrio residents who will pay for them on installment.

     The GSIS approved a P5.9 million loan, on the condition that Hacienda Luisita would be “subdivided among the tenants who shall pay the cost thereof under reasonable terms and conditions”. (GSIS Resolution No. 1085, May 7, 1957; GSIS Resolution No. 3202, November 25, 1957)

     Later, Jose Cojuangco, Sr. requested that the phrase be amended to “. . . shall be sold at cost to tenants, should there be any” (GSIS Resolution No. 356, February 5, 1958). This phrase would be cited later on as justification not to distribute the hacienda’s land.

     On April 8, 1958, Jose Cojuangco, Sr.’s company, the Tarlac Development Corporation (TADECO), became the new owner of Hacienda Luisita and Central Azucarera de Tarlac. Ninoy Aquino was appointed the hacienda’s first administrator.

     In his book, Putzel noted that the Central Bank Monetary Board resolution from 1957 required distribution of Hacienda Luisita’s land to small farmers within 10 years. The controversies that would hound the hacienda for decades can be traced to the Cojuangcos’ efforts to retain control of the land long after the deadline for land distribution passed in 1967.

     Land not distributed to farmers

     “Ang pagkakaintindi ng mga ninuno naming manggagawang-bukid ng Hacienda Luisita noon, within 10 years, babayaran na [ng mga Cojuangco] ang utang nila sa gubyerno. Pagdating ng 1967, ang lupa ay sa magsasaka na (The way our elders, the farm workers of Hacienda Luisita, understood things at that time, within 10 years, the Cojuangcos were going to pay back the money they borrowed from the government. By 1967, the land would belong to the farmers),” says Lito Bais, one of the present-day leaders of the United Luisita Workers Union (ULWU). Bais was born on the hacienda in 1957, the year before the Cojuangco family took over. His mother was also born on the hacienda.

     When 1967 came and went with no land distribution taking place, the farm workers began to organize themselves to uphold their cause. That year, Ninoy Aquino also became the Philippines’ youngest senator. His entry into national politics marked the start of his bitter rivalry with President Ferdinand Marcos.

     After Marcos declared Martial Law in 1972, his most voluble critic Aquino, who was planning to run for President, was one of the first people arrested.

     Government files case vs. Cojuangcos

     The Cojuangcos’ disputed hold over Hacienda Luisita had been tolerated by Marcos even at the height of his dictatorship. However, as Ninoy Aquino and his family were leaving for exile in the US, a case was filed on May 7, 1980 by the Marcos government against the Cojuangco company TADECO for the surrender of Hacienda Luisita to the Ministry of Agrarian Reform, so land could be distributed to the farmers at cost, in accordance with the terms of the government loans given in 1957-1958 to the late Jose Cojuangco, Sr., who died in 1976. (Republic of the Philippines vs. TADECO, Civil Case No. 131654, Manila Regional Trial Court, Branch XLIII)

     The Marcos government filed this case after written follow-ups sent to the Cojuangcos over a period of eleven years did not result in land distribution. (The Cojuangcos always replied that the loan terms were unenforceable because there were no tenants on the hacienda.) The government’s first follow-up letter was written by Conrado Estrella of the Land Authority on March 2, 1967. Another letter was written by Central Bank Governor Gregorio Licaros on May 5, 1977. Another letter was written by Agrarian Reform Deputy Minister Ernesto Valdez on May 23, 1978.

     The government’s lawsuit was portrayed by the anti-Marcos bloc as an act of harassment against Ninoy Aquino’s family. Inside Hacienda Luisita, however, the farmers thought the wheels of justice were finally turning and land distribution was coming.

     Cojuangcos claim hacienda has no tenants

     In their January 10, 1981 response to the government’s complaint, the Cojuangcos again said that the Central Bank and GSIS resolutions were unenforceable because there were no tenants on Hacienda Luisita.

     “Inilaban ni Doña Metring, yung nanay nila Cory, na wala raw silang inabutan na tao [sa hacienda], kaya wala raw benipesyaryo, kaya ang lupang ito ay sa kanila (Doña Metring, the mother of Cory, said there were no tenants in the hacienda when they took over, therefore there were no beneficiaries, therefore the land belonged to them),” recalls Bais. “E, tignan mo naman ang lupang ito. Paano mapapatag ang lupang ito? Paano makapag-tanim kung walang taong inabutan? (But look at this land. How else could this land have been tamed? How could it have been cultivated if there were no people here when they took over?)”

     (The distinction between a tenant farmer and seasonal farmers hired from outside was key to the Cojuangcos’ defense. A tenant farmer is one who is in possession of the land being tilled. In his book A Captive Land, James Putzel noted that the Central Bank resolution mentioned distribution not to tenants but to “small farmers.” Raising the issue of tenancy thus seemed ineffective in the defense.)

     The Cojuangcos also said in their January 10, 1981 response that there was no agrarian unrest in Luisita, and existing Marcos land reform legislation exempted sugar lands. Further, they asserted that the government’s claim on Luisita had already expired since no litigation was undertaken since 1967.

     Court orders Cojuangcos to surrender Luisita

     In the meantime, vague rumors of a planned conversion of the hacienda into a residential subdivision or airport, or both, cropped up among the farm workers, causing anxiety that they would be left with no land to till. (This was likely due to the decline of the sugar industry in the Philippines after the US quota ended in the 1970s. Conversion became a buzzword among big landowners all over the country. The Cojuangcos formed Luisita Realty Corporation in 1977 as a first step to turning the hacienda into a residential and industrial complex.)

     The government pursued its case against the Cojuangcos, and by December 2, 1985, the Manila Regional Trial Court ordered TADECO to surrender Hacienda Luisita to the Ministry of Agrarian Reform. According to Putzel, this decision was rendered with unusual speed and was decried by the Cojuangcos as another act of harassment, because Cory Aquino, now a widow after the assassination of Ninoy Aquino in 1983, was set to run for President against Marcos in the February 7, 1986 snap elections. The Cojuangcos elevated the case to the Court of Appeals (Court of Appeals G.R. 08634).

     Cory promises to give “land to the tiller”

     Cory Aquino officially announced her candidacy on December 3, 1985. Land reform was one of the pillars of her campaign.

     A farmer GMANews.TV spoke to said they were told by Cojuangco family members managing the hacienda during this time that if Cory became president, Hacienda Luisita would once and for all be distributed to the farmers through her land reform program. He said this promise was made to motivate them to vote for Cory and join the jeepney-loads of people being sent to Manila from Tarlac to attend her rallies.

     On January 6, 1986, Aquino delivered the first policy speech of her campaign in Makati and said, “We are determined to implement a genuine land reform program . . . to enable [beneficiaries] to become self-reliant and prosperous farmers.”

     Ten days later, on January 16, 1986, Aquino delivered her second major speech in Davao and said, “Land-to-the-tiller must become a reality, instead of an empty slogan.”

     In the same speech, Aquino also said, “You will probably ask me: Will I also apply it to my family’s Hacienda Luisita? My answer is yes.”

     This campaign promise would haunt her for many years to come. To this day, it haunts her son.

     Marcos flees, Aquino dissolves Constitution

     HOW????

     The snap elections took place on February 7, 1986. Marcos was declared winner, but was ousted by the People Power revolution. Cory Aquino was sworn in as President on February 25, 1986. She named her running mate Salvador “Doy” Laurel Prime Minister through Presidential Proclamation No. 1.

     A month later, Aquino issued Presidential Proclamation No. 3 declaring a revolutionary government and dissolving the 1973 Constitution. This nullified Laurel’s position as Prime Minister, and abolished the Batasang Pambansa (Parliament). Aquino announced that a new Constitution was going to be formed. Legislative powers were to reside with the President until elections were held.

     To critics, Aquino’s abandonment of Laurel and her taking of legislative power were early signs that a web of advisers was influencing her decisions. The sway of these advisers would be felt later in the choices Aquino would make regarding Hacienda Luisita.

     Juan Ponce Enrile’s link to Hacienda Luisita

     On September 16, 1987, Laurel formally broke ties with Aquino. The New York Times reported that Laurel had confronted Aquino about her promise in 1985 to let him run the government as Prime Minister after Marcos was ousted, because she had no experience. This was the reason Laurel agreed to shelve his own plan to run for President and put his party’s resources behind Aquino during the snap elections. “I believed you,” the New York Times quoted Laurel saying he told Mrs. Aquino. Aquino just listened without response, Laurel said.

     Laurel found an ally in Juan Ponce Enrile, another disenchanted EDSA veteran who now opposed Aquino.

     Enrile also happened to be the lawyer of Tabacalera when Hacienda Luisita was taken over by the Cojuangcos in 1957. He was retained by the Cojuangcos after the sale. Enrile’s inside knowledge of the controversial transaction would be a big thorn in the side of the Cojuangco-Aquinos.

     Mendiola, a portent of the Luisita massacre

     On January 22, 1987, eleven months into the Aquino administration, the Mendiola massacre happened. Thousands of frustrated farmers marched to Malacañang demanding fulfillment of the promises made regarding land reform during the Aquino campaign, and distribution of lands at no cost to beneficiaries. At least a dozen protesters were killed in the violent dispersal. More were seriously injured.

     In a protest march for land reform in January 1987, 13 protesters were killed near Malacañang in what has gone down in history as the Mendiola Massacre, a low point in the administration of former President Corazon C. Aquino. Photo by Mon Acasio

     NOW LOOK WHAT FORMER PRESIDENT CORY AQUINO STRATEGIES:

     Under pressure after the bloodshed in Mendiola, Aquino fast-tracked the passage of the land reform law. The new 1987 Constitution took effect on February 11, 1987, and on July 22, 1987, Aquino issued Presidential Proclamation 131 and Executive Order No. 229 outlining her land reform program. She expanded its coverage to include sugar and coconut lands.

     Her outline also included a provision for the Stock Distribution Option (SDO), a mode of complying with the land reform law that did not require actual transfer of land to the tiller.

     (Aquino’s July 22, 1987 “midnight decree”, as Juan Ponce Enrile called it back then, raised eyebrows because it was issued just days before the legislative powers Aquino took in 1986 were going to revert back to Congress on July 28, 1987, the first regular session of the new Congress after the May 1987 elections. The timing insured the passage of the SDO.)

     ***********
     ***********

     ANOTHER FACTOR (S)

     another additional info…this was how EDSA 1 all about!!!!

     TSK…TSK…TSK… ginamit at binulag ang masang pilipino ng mga mayayamang nakapalibot sa mga Aquino at ginamit ang salitang demokrasya upang magkaroon ng “daw” ng kalayaan pero ang katotohanan….DEMOKRASYANG PANSARILING INTERES…..

     Tama ang husga ng ating history mula ng magkaroon ng demokrasya kasi…nagkaroon nga ng demokrasya pero bakit patuloy pa rin sa paghirap ang bansa natin…wag nating idahilang ang global crisis..balikan natin ang after edsa 1 then after 10 years mayroon bang nagbago???….

     Government files case vs. Cojuangcos

     The Cojuangcos’ disputed hold over Hacienda Luisita had been tolerated by Marcos even at the height of his dictatorship. However, as Ninoy Aquino and his family were leaving for exile in the US, a case was filed on May 7, 1980 by the Marcos government against the Cojuangco company TADECO for the surrender of Hacienda Luisita to the Ministry of Agrarian Reform, so land could be distributed to the farmers at cost, in accordance with the terms of the government loans given in 1957-1958 to the late Jose Cojuangco, Sr., who died in 1976. (Republic of the Philippines vs. TADECO, Civil Case No. 131654, Manila Regional Trial Court, Branch XLIII)

     The Marcos government filed this case after written follow-ups sent to the Cojuangcos over a period of eleven years did not result in land distribution. (The Cojuangcos always replied that the loan terms were unenforceable because there were no tenants on the hacienda.) The government’s first follow-up letter was written by Conrado Estrella of the Land Authority on March 2, 1967. Another letter was written by Central Bank Governor Gregorio Licaros on May 5, 1977. Another letter was written by Agrarian Reform Deputy Minister Ernesto Valdez on May 23, 1978.

     The government’s lawsuit was portrayed by the anti-Marcos bloc as an act of harassment against Ninoy Aquino’s family. Inside Hacienda Luisita, however, the farmers thought the wheels of justice were finally turning and land distribution was coming.

     Cojuangcos claim hacienda has no tenants

     In their January 10, 1981 response to the government’s complaint, the Cojuangcos again said that the Central Bank and GSIS resolutions were unenforceable because there were no tenants on Hacienda Luisita.

     “Inilaban ni Doña Metring, yung nanay nila Cory, na wala raw silang inabutan na tao [sa hacienda], kaya wala raw benipesyaryo, kaya ang lupang ito ay sa kanila (Doña Metring, the mother of Cory, said there were no tenants in the hacienda when they took over, therefore there were no beneficiaries, therefore the land belonged to them),” recalls Bais. “E, tignan mo naman ang lupang ito. Paano mapapatag ang lupang ito? Paano makapag-tanim kung walang taong inabutan? (But look at this land. How else could this land have been tamed? How could it have been cultivated if there were no people here when they took over?)”

     (The distinction between a tenant farmer and seasonal farmers hired from outside was key to the Cojuangcos’ defense. A tenant farmer is one who is in possession of the land being tilled. In his book A Captive Land, James Putzel noted that the Central Bank resolution mentioned distribution not to tenants but to “small farmers.” Raising the issue of tenancy thus seemed ineffective in the defense.)

     The Cojuangcos also said in their January 10, 1981 response that there was no agrarian unrest in Luisita, and existing Marcos land reform legislation exempted sugar lands. Further, they asserted that the government’s claim on Luisita had already expired since no litigation was undertaken since 1967.

     Court orders Cojuangcos to surrender Luisita

     In the meantime, vague rumors of a planned conversion of the hacienda into a residential subdivision or airport, or both, cropped up among the farm workers, causing anxiety that they would be left with no land to till. (This was likely due to the decline of the sugar industry in the Philippines after the US quota ended in the 1970s. Conversion became a buzzword among big landowners all over the country. The Cojuangcos formed Luisita Realty Corporation in 1977 as a first step to turning the hacienda into a residential and industrial complex.)

     The government pursued its case against the Cojuangcos, and by December 2, 1985, the Manila Regional Trial Court ordered TADECO to surrender Hacienda Luisita to the Ministry of Agrarian Reform. According to Putzel, this decision was rendered with unusual speed and was decried by the Cojuangcos as another act of harassment, because Cory Aquino, now a widow after the assassination of Ninoy Aquino in 1983, was set to run for President against Marcos in the February 7, 1986 snap elections. The Cojuangcos elevated the case to the Court of Appeals (Court of Appeals G.R. 08634).

     **********
     **********

     Over a Dozen Hacienda Luisita Strikers and Their Children Killed
     Massacre of Sugar Plantation Workers
     in the Philippines

     Protesters at Hacienda Luisita in front of banner of the Ambala peasant organization.
     Photo: Manila Indymedia

     Mobilize the Working Class to Avenge the Martyrs and Win Strike!

     In the afternoon of November 16, Filipino police and army units carried out a brutal massacre of striking sugar plantation workers at Hacienda Luisita, located in Tarlac province in central Luzon, north of Manila. After a stand-off with the strikers the day before, some 1,000 cops and troops were sent to the hacienda headquarters, accompanied by two armored personnel carriers, fire trucks and water cannons. After launching a volley of tear gas grenades, Army riflemen fired point-blank into the picketers’ front lines using live ammunition. A 60-calibre machine gun was also used. Truncheon wielding police chased migrant workers into their barracks and later combed the ten barangays (villages) where hacienda workers live. “Soldiers were allegedly ‘zoning’ Barangay Motrico, dragging men out of their homes and lining them up to be arrested,” the Philippines Daily Inquirer (17 November) reported. Dead bodies were found scattered all around the main gate and the barracks. A total of 14 people were reported killed, including two children suffocated by the tear gas, and some 200 injured, over 30 with gunshot wounds. A total of 133 strikers and their supporters were arrested.

     The Hacienda Luisita massacre is the worst slaughter of Filipino workers in recent years. It underlines the fraud of bourgeois “democracy,” which rains death on the exploited and oppressed fighting for their rights. It is all the more significant because the police and army attack was ordered directly from the central government, by Labor Secretary Patricia Sto. Tomas, and was carried out on behalf of the Cojuangco family, prominent landowners including former president Corazon Cojuangco Aquino. The current president, Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, responded to the mass killing with empty platitudes and “prayers.” Spokesmen for the Hacienda justified the bloodbath as a “legitimate exercise of state power,” saying the work stoppage was “illegal and left-inspired.” Plantation workers had gone on strike November 6 demanding the reinstatement of some 327 unionists, including nine union leaders, fired ten days earlier by the management of the hacienda and the sugar mill (Central Azucarera de Tarlac, CAT). As thousands of strikers and their supporters occupied the facilities, the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) declared it was assuming jurisdiction for the dispute and ordered in three military battalions to take down the picket lines and disperse the strikers.

     Hacienda Luisita tries to sell itself as luxurious modern resort, complete with covered tennis courts, swimming pool with Jacuzzi, a championship golf course, business park and “simple yet elegant” hotel, “your hacienda home.” Yet this “fusion of agriculture and industry” is based on the superexploitation of workers who live a miserable existence enforced by an age-old system of “landlordism and state terrorism,” as the magazine Bulatlat (21 November) put it. The Philippine Army’s Camp Aquino, headquarters of the Northern Luzon Command, is located just across the MacArthur Highway from the plantation. When Corazon Aquino was president in January 1987, 13 members of a left-wing peasant group were killed by Marines at the Mendiola Bridge in Manila as thousands marched on the Malacañang presidential palace demanding land reform. The 1987 march was led by agricultural workers from Hacienda Luisita. Later, 17 farmers including women and children were massacred by Marines in nearby Nueva Ecija province on “suspicion” that they were guerrillas of the Maoist-led New People’s Army. Now Arroyo, whose husband’s family owns plantations in the sugar island of Negros Oriental, has her first crop of martyrs.

     Strikers at Hacienda Luisita flee for safety from police and troops, November 16 (left).
     Workers carry off body of murdered comrade. Video shots courtesy of SIPAT, via Bulatlat.

     But faced with the murderous attack of the bourgeoisie, the response of the reformist left, both Stalinists and social democrats, has been to appeal to the capitalist rulers for “democracy. On November 18, the BMP (Bukluran ng Manggagawang Pilipino – Filipino Workers Solidarity) staged a “sympathy noise barrage” calling on the Congress, that corrupt den of bourgeois politicians, to carry out an “independent and impartial investigation” of the Luisita Massacre. On November 30, the BMP and allied PM (Partido ng Manggagawa – Labor Party) occupied the DOLE calling for resignation of Labor Secretary Sto. Tomas while the House of Representatives held a hearing on the massacre. Representatives of Bayan Muna, Anakpawis and Gabriela party lists also sponsored the call for a Congressional investigation. But no “investigation” by the political instrument of the ruling class will be “impartial” or “independent,” much less win the strikers’ demands and avenge their dead. Reflecting this focus on pressuring the bourgeoisie, ULWU unionists linked to the Bayan Stalinist/popular-frontist coalition turned back representatives of the Trotskyist Rebolusyonaryong Grupo ng mga Komunista (RGK) who traveled to Tarlac to show their solidarity with the Luisita strikers.

     In the face of an anti-Communist campaign labeling the strikers guerrillas, the CPP denied that the National People’s Army was present at Hacienda Luisita. The fact that there were no casualties among the police and army is proof enough of this. But although the strikers had exercised proletarian power by seizing the plantation and sugar mill, the CPP/NPA calls for “land to the tiller,” i.e., for a bourgeois-democratic land reform to turn agricultural workers into smallholding peasants rather than fight for workers revolution. Tarlac was a center of peasant insurgency at the time of the Hukbong Mapagpalaya ng Bayan (HMB) or the People’s Liberation Army, led by the Stalinist Communist Party of the Philippines (PKP) during the late 1940s and 1950s. At one point Huk guerrillas reached the outskirts of Manila. But they were ultimately defeated, not merely by military superiority of the U.S.-backed forces, but because the imperialists (through Colonel Edward Lansdale) and their puppets (notably war minister Ramon Magsaysay) stole the guerrillas’ thunder with a counterinsurgency land reform.

     Appealing to the Arroyo government or to the den of corruption of the Philippine Congress for a fair investigation will be no more successful than earlier campaigns for compensation of the victims of the Mendiola massacre. Destruction of the hacienda system of large landholdings will not be accomplished by begging the capitalist rulers to break up their profitable estates and hand land titles over to the impoverished peasantry. That is a program for more Mendiola and Luisita massacres, and for swindles like the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP), by which landowners like the Cojuangcos managed to hold on to their ill-gotten estates through frauds like the bogus “stock distribution option,” creating the fiction that the employees were part “owners” of Hacienda Luisita. Trotskyists fight not for the bourgeois-democratic demand of agrarian reform but for agrarian revolution, for the peasants to seize the lands while agricultural and refinery workers take over the plantations and mills in conjunction with revolutionary struggle by the urban proletariat.

     The response to this new act of capitalist barbarism must be a mobilization of the entire Filipino working class. Such massacres can galvanize mass discontent, as occurred in Russia following the 9 January 1905 slaughter of workers led by the priest and police agent Father Gapon who sought to petition the tsar with their grievances, leading to the 1905 Revolution. A few years later, the 1912 killing of strikers in the Lena River gold fields in eastern Siberia provoked mass demonstrations of up to half a million workers in Moscow and St. Petersburg, setting the stage for the workers upsurge of early 1914 which was cut short by the outbreak of World War I, but then reappeared in 1917 and brought down the tsarist autocracy through workers revolution. They key, in Russia a century ago and in the Philippines today, is to forge a revolutionary leadership, a Bolshevik workers party, that can unite poor peasants, urban slum dwellers, national minorities and oppressed peoples and all other oppressed sectors behind the power of the proletariat.

     We print below a statement on the Hacienda Luisita Massacre by the Rebolusyonaryong Grupo ng mga Komunista (RGK), which sympathizes with the League for the Fourth International.

     Statement of the
     Rebolusyonaryong Grupo ng mga Komunista
     After the Hacienda Luisita Massacre –
     Filipino Workers: Defend Sugar Strikers!

     The Rebolusyonaryong Grupo ng mga Komunista calls on the workers, peasants, women and youth organizations to unite in actively defending the picket lines of the striking Hacienda Luisita workers! We also urge the Central Azucarera de Tarlac Labor Union (CATLU) and the United Luisita Workers Union (ULWU) to welcome any support – be it morally, financially, and physical support – that other workers, peasant, urban poor, women and youth organizations extend regardless of organizational affiliation or tendency. The brutal and bloody dispersal in the picket lines at Hacienda Luisita, owned by the Cojuangco family of former president Cory Aquino, is an injury to our class brothers and sisters! We Trotskyists say: an injury to one is an injury to all! The working class should mobilize throughout the Philippines to demand immediate withdrawal of the police and army, and to win the just demands of the Hacienda Luisita strikers.

     The abominable act against the strikers committed by elements of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and the Philippine National Police (PNP) on November 16, killing 14 including 2 children (due to suffocation), should be indignantly protested through solidarity strikes by workers not only in the province of Tarlac but also in the whole sugar industry – where workers belonging to the Central Azucarera de Bais (CAB) in Bais City in Negros Oriental are also on strike – and especially against companies owned by the Cojuangcos, like the Philippine Long Distance Telephone company and San Miguel Brewery, here in Metro Manila. Militants should fight for such solidarity strikes of workers and employees to encompass all mass workers organizations, regardless of political tendency, not only from the Kilusang Mayo Uno (KMU – May 1st Movement) affiliated unions (allied with the popular-frontist BAYAN coalition1, the Bukluran ng Manggagawang Pilipino (BMP – Solidarity of Filipino Workers) allied with the SANLAKAS front2, and the National Federation of Labor (NFL) – to which the CAB Employees Union (CABEU) belongs.

     Particularly in the present context, where Filipino workers are under full-scale attack by the government of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, backed by the Bush regime in the U.S., the sugar workers’ strike must not be isolated. The enormous power of the organized working class must be mobilized urgently in support of the striking workers in Luisita and Bais! The fight of the Luisita and Bais workers must be taken up by the working-class movement rather than seeking salvation through the intervention of the bourgeois state – Arroyo, the bourgeois congress and the Department of Labor and Employment.

     Urgently posed is the question of the continued militarization of Hacienda Luisita where at almost every major intersection there are military and security checkpoints. The working-class movement must demand the withdrawal of all military, police and anti-worker armed groups – in and out of uniforms – like the dreaded “Yellow Army,” the anti-communist private militia of Danding Cojuangco3. There should be active defense of the picket lines by the CATLU, ULWU and CABEU unions in the Central Azucarera de Tarlac and Bais by setting up defense guards against scab operations. Unions of all tendencies as well as peasant, urban poor, women and youth organizations can contribute to this effort, which could inspire workers throughout the country. Build militant mass picket lines that nobody dares cross!

     Solidarity with the striking workers of Hacienda Luisita! Extend the picket lines to the heartland of the Cojuangco empire! For solidarity strike action in Metro Manila and throughout the sugar industry!

     In the face of the bloody attack on Luisita and the strike of the workers in Bais, we warn that the workers movement should not rely on state intervention. It was the bourgeois state’s intervention through its Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE), under a union-busting “Assumption of Jurisdiction” provision that resulted in the Luisita Massacre. Calling for the resignation of the secretary of labor, Patricia Santo Tomas, and the intervention of the capitalist and landlord dominated Congress, as the popular-frontist BAYAN and the reformist social-democratic AKBAYAN (Citizens Action Party) are doing, will only go to waste. The superexploitation of urban and rural workers, enforced by army and police guns, is not a matter of some particularly rapacious capitalists but the very essence of Filipino capitalism. BAYAN and AKBAYAN only sows dangerous illusions that the bourgeois state can be reformed through its popular-front program that ties the working class to the bourgeoisie. Look at what happened to EDSA 1 and EDSA 24! The program of popular frontism of such groups as BAYAN, SANLAKAS and AKBAYAN serves as the left cover of the bourgeoisie in the maintenance of its domination, exploitation and oppression on the Filipino working masses!

     Meanwhile, the SANLAKAS-allied Labor Party (PM – Partido ng Manggagawa) list calls to review the strike law and form an “independent” body to investigate the incident is nothing but hot air. It is clear as daylight that the blood-drenched AFP and PNP have been carrying out this kind of atrocities against the working class, women, and youth organizations forever! Among the many crimes of the AFP and the PNP are the war against the Moro peoples, the bombings of innocent civilians in Muslim and Christian areas (as exposed by the anti-communist military rebel group, Magdalo). The AFP and the PNP are the armed fist of the capitalist and landlord class along with its prisons, courts and laws! Launching noise barrage, and condemnation rallies and confrontational/dramatic rallies will not change this capitalist system, its state, and the whole bourgeois class.

     Banner of CATLU union says: “Enough! We Are Hungry.” Photo: Dabet Castañeda/Bulatlat

     Because of its limitation as a simple party list, PM beforehand has already limited itself to fighting only “within the bounds of the law.” Yet the so-called “law of the land” was pieced together by the landlords and capitalists to suit their interest. Look at what happened last November 16. It is “the law” in the form of the “Assumption of Jurisdiction” by the DOLE that led to the army and police firing on the Hacienda Luisita workers! It will take a proletarian revolution which installs the working class as the ruling class, expropriating the capitalist and the landlords, to put an end to such massacres. The establishment of a revolutionary workers state that seeks to extend the socialist revolution into the imperialist centers is necessary in order to finally sweep away the rule and dominance of the bourgeoisie, its state including its oppressive courts and prisons, its leeching bureaucracy, and its armed forces and police soaked in the blood of the working people!

     What is needed is a class-struggle leadership and program that above all teaches the working class and all of the oppressed to break from the control and influence of the bourgeoisie, its state, and its left covers. The working class must fight for its revolutionary political independence from this corroding influence and from the illusionary popular-front programs peddled by various “mainstream” (i.e., reformist) left groups to be able to move forward consciously towards fighting not only for economic demands but also for proletarian revolution. That will take a genuine revolutionary-internationalist workers party that carries out the program of permanent revolution as the Bolsheviks did in 1917 in Russia. This is what the RGK is fighting to build.

     –Rebolusyonaryong Grupo ng mga Komunista, 5 December 2004

     To contact the RGK, write to rgk7@hotmail.com

     ——————————————————————————–

     1Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (BAYAN – New Patriotic Alliance), whose acronym spells “people” in Pilipino, was founded during the Marcos dictatorship. Following the popular-front program of the Stalinists in the 1930s, it seeks to build a nationalist “democratic front” including members of the bourgeois opposition. Bayan is regularly accused by the AFP of being a front for the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) of José Maria Sison, its National People’s Army (NPA) and the underground National Democratic Front (NDF).

     2Sandigan ng Lakas at Demokrasya ng Sambayanan (SANLAKAS – Upholder of People’s Power and Democracy) was led by Filemon (“Popoy”) Lagman, founder of the BMP union federation and former head of the Manila committee of the CPP, who was assassinated in February 2001. Lagman also founded the Filipino Workers Party (PMP — Partido ng Manggagawang Pilipino).

     3Eduardo “Danding” Cojuangco was a crony of ousted President Joseph Ejercito Estrada (and brother of former president Cory Cojuangco Aquino) who was given control of the San Miguel Brewery by Estrada.

     4EDSA 1 and 2 refer to the so-called “people’s power” mobilizations on the Epifania dos Santos ring road around Manila near the AFP’s Camp Aguinaldo. In EDSA 1, this was the focus of the 1986 revolt against dictator Ferdinand Marcos, which installed Cory Cojuangco Aquino as a front for General Fidel Ramos and then defense minister Juan Ponce Enrile. EDSA II refers to the January 2001 ouster of President Estrada, charged with corruption (!), by means of mass demonstrations mass mobilizations which was originally instigated by the left, and then taken over by key sectors of the bourgeoisie, particularly the influential Makati Business Club and the Catholic Church led by Jaime Cardinal Sin, which considered the former movie star weak and erratic, and installed Vice President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo in his place.

     THEREFORE, SUPEREME COURT NA LANG ANG DAPAT MAMUNO NGAYON SA ATING BANSA!!!!

     ( REPLY )
3. 

   nuroHunkelo
   April 27th, 2010 - 07:22

   I like your site! This is my page

   ( REPLY )

Leave a comment