CARP (Successful??)

The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform program was initiated 2 decades ago. It was seen as the formula that will free the ordinary farmers from the bondage of poverty. Since 1988 up to the present year the program was never put into full swing due to the loop holes that provides land owners to get away with the law. Ten years ago, many observers of the political battle over land reform in the Philippines predicted that the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) would go the way of most past government reforms -- nowhere. Nothing substantial could possibly be achieved, it was widely believed, by such a flawed program as CARP. It was simply too loophole-ridden to effectively cover even a fraction of the land ripe for reform. The government of Aquino and Ramos presidency tended to focus on the less contentious components of CARP, though it was under the latter that the more contentious private estates were increasingly confronted with compulsory acquisition (CA), the more social justice-oriented of CARP's different modes of acquisition and distribution. But as a result of this implementation "delay," only about 127,000 hectares of the reported 4.619 million hectare accomplishment as of the end of 1997 actually involved CA. The bulk involved the more landowner-friendly modes of voluntary-offer-to-sell (VOS) and voluntary land transfer (VLT). The Aquino administration consciously avoided private estates. By June 1992, only 475 thousand hectares of private lands, but 1.217 million hectares of public lands had been distributed. Of these private lands distributed, 75 percent (or 355 thousand hectares) merely involved the continuation of Marcos' land reform in rice and corn lands, while the rest comprised voluntarily offered lands and government-sequestered estates. P17 billion was spent on CARP implementation, of which only P3.129 billion (or 18.37 percent) went to land acquisition and distribution, while P8.6 billion (or 50.53 percent) went to support services. Marked by successive scandals involving anomalous deals between landlords and DAR officials, the Aquino period left a bitter taste around CARP implementation, further undermining already weak public support for the program.

The people are now tasked to evaluate if the program really succeed or not. What is noticeable is that the CARP as a program on paper is very good. IT is on the implementation stage that the past administration failed. Is it because we lack the logistics and the financial support to carry the program or someone’s vested interest are being protected? …