MANILA, Philippines — (UPDATE 2 – 12:26 p.m.) A lawyer has filed a criminal and administrative graft complaint before the Office of the Ombudsman against Agrarian Reform Secretary Rafael Mariano and Undersecretary for Legal Affairs Luis Pañgulayan over Thursday’s installation of farmers in a disputed banana plantation in Tagum City, Davao del Norte.
A media statement released by Lapanday Foods Corp. said the complaint for violating Section 3 of Republic Act No. 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, and for grave misconduct, conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service, and oppression/grave abuse of authority, filed by lawyer Noel Olive Punzalan was received by the Office of the Ombudsman the same day Mariano led the installation of more than 150 members of the Madanum Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Association Inc. in the 145-hectare property.
READ LAPANDAY’S MEDIA STATEMENT:
[pdf-embedder url=”http://media.interaksyon.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Media-Statement-LFC-may182017_dar-execs.pdf” title=”Media Statement LFC may182017_dar execs”]
The complaint, said Lapanday, sought the preventive suspension of Mariano and Pañgulayan “due to the seriousness and depravity of the acts they committed.”
Lapanday did not say if Punzalan filed the complaint on its behalf although, in a separate statement, the firm maintained that “it owns the fruits coming from the San Isidro (Sanid plantation) despite the reentry of former members of the cooperative it is in contract with,” referring to Hijo Employees Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Cooperative-1, from which MARBAI broke away and with which the company has an existing contract.
Reacting to the complaint against the DAR executives, Renato Reyes Jr., secretary general of the Bagong Alyansang Makabayan, dismissed it as a “bogus graft case … instigated by Lapanday” as “pure harassment.”
“The agribusiness corporation wants to preserve the very oppressive and exploitative contracts it imposed on agrarian reform beneficiaries,” Reyes said. “It has profited immensely from these contracts while the farmers remain dirt poor.”
“We stand with Ka Paeng (Mariano) and we are confident in the legal and moral basis of his actions as DAR secretary,” he added.
Lawyer Jobert Pahilga, a legal consultant to Mariano, also called the complaint “clearly and purely a harassment suit.”
“DAR acted within its authority and within the bounds of the agrarian reform law” and was this “duty-bound to install the farmers who are owners of the land.”
He also noted that Lapanday’s application for a temporary restraining order and injunction had been denied by the Court of Appeals.
“So legally, there is no reason not to install MARBAI farmers. And under the law, only SC can enjoin the implementation of DAR’s order implementing agrarian reform law,” he said.
In the second statement, Lapanday also denounced the DAR and Mariano “for forcing the installation by coercing the Philippine National Police to assist him carry out his highly anomalous action” and “directly instigating the mob who became violent and unruly as the installation of the breakaway agrarian reform beneficiaries was proceeding.”
Video of the installation posted online did show the wall to the plantation being broken down but, aside from this, nothing untoward, much less violence, was evident.
The installation of the MARBAI farmers came after President Rodrigo Duterte paid them a visit at a protest camp they had set up at Mendiola earlier this month. Late last year, MARBAI set up a barricade in Madaum in a bid to occupy the land but violence broke out when plantation guards opened fire on them in two incidents, leaving nine farmers wounded.
Lapanday said Punzalan’s complaint alleged that Mariano and Pañgulayan “clearly used their office and abused their authority to deliberately favor the No Group/Madaum Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Association Inc. (MARBAI) members” and “did not even consider that the No Group/MARBAI members are not the only agrarian reform beneficiaries in the land awarded to the Hijo Employees Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Cooperative-1 (HEARBCO-1) whose majority members honor and respect the court-approved compromise agreement with Lapanday Foods Corporation (LFC).”
WATCH VIDEO POSTED ON SEC MARIANO’S FACEBOOK PAGE:
It also accused them of “undue interference” that “fueled the acts of violence and destruction by the No Group/MARBAI,” thus supposedly ensuring that “there can be no lasting peace and progress among the stakeholders in the area.”
In the second statement, Lapanday said MARBAI’s installation “does not modify the existing agreement where HEARBCO-1 is obligated to deliver and sell the fruits from the whole plantation to Lapanday.”
It vowed to “take all necessary steps for its contract with HEARBCO-1 to be strictly enforced and complied with” and warned of “criminal and civil cases against any person or entity who shall interfere with the agreement.”
But Pahilga said Lapanday’s management contract is “binding only insofar as HEARCO-1 members are concerned, not against MARBAI who already opted out of the contract. HEARBCO-1 also already ceded the portion occupied by MARBAI to the latter in an agreement submitted to PARAD (Provincial Agrarian Reform Adjudicator) Davao Del Norte.”
