It’s the Hacienda after all

 

The handwriting on the wall is more apparent now than before, when 188 members of Congress signed the articles of impeachment about a month ago. Soon, the Philippine Senate will convene to determine the fate of Renato Corona, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

With the constant barrage of press releases and new revelations about Corona’s unexplained wealth by anti-Corona crusaders, including the prosecution panel and the government’s propaganda machine, there is now widespread public perception that Corona is guilty as charged. Corona, who’s been so negative to the public eye, could be burned at stake anytime. The impeachment trial is largely a political process and public opinion therefore plays a vital part in the minds of those senators who will make the final judgment.

President Noynoy Aquino ponders about the future of the family-owned
 Hacienda Luisita. Click link to view "Video documentary:Noyynoy's Luisita
http://bulatlat.com/main/2010/04/27/video-documentary-noynoys-luisita/

But the real plot behind the impeachment of Corona is fully more evident now than when it was conceived in haste. The trial of former president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, which everyone thought could be the trial of the century, turns out to be a sideshow, a dud muted by exchanges in the media by angry pronouncements from both pro and anti-Corona camps. Who would expect that Mrs. Arroyo would be happily convalescing from a mysteriously conjured-up illness while under house arrest at the Veterans Memorial Hospital?

As it turns out or as the impeachment denouement is expected very soon, all this “moro-moro” about Renato Corona is not about bias in deciding in favour of his former boss. The impeachment was not even about dismantling Noynoy Aquino’s final stumbling block in prosecuting Arroyo for corruption and election sabotage. It is all about recovering the Hacienda, a last attempt by the Cojuangcos to preserve the family’s sentimental vestige of feudal ownership.

The Senate has five months more to remove Corona from the highest court of the land. Failing that, the Hacienda must be redistributed to its lawful and rightful owners. Redistribution of the Hacienda to the farmers must be made in six months from the day the Supreme Court rendered its judgment on November 22, 2011.

Can the Senate be up to this task?

Judging by the numbers, the Senate needs only 16 senators to convict Corona. Although, a lesser number of magnificent seven of these senators is needed to acquit. But who among the senators are willing to turn back the momentum of history, and be remembered as the dark angels of the antichrist?

The die has been cast. If the decision to convict Corona is not unanimous as expected, the numbers predict more than 2/3 is hardly a difficult outcome.

Hacienda Luisita has been in the hands of the Cojuangco family, which includes the late former President Corazon Aquino and her son, incumbent President Benigno Aquino III, since the family acquired the property in 1958 through a loan from the Government Service Insurance System and a dollar loan from the Manufacturer’s Trust Company of New York, which was guaranteed by the Central Bank of the Philippines. A condition for the sale of the Hacienda to the Cojuangcos was the transfer of the lands to the tenants or farmers ten years after the loan has matured. Meaning, the lands have to be transferred to the farmers by 1967. Of course, this never happened because the Cojuangcos were a powerful political clan and they were able to thwart any attempts to transfer ownership to the farmers.

When Corazon Aquino became president of the Philippines, the Hacienda was exempted from land reform, the centrepiece of her administration. The property was placed under a stock distribution agreement between the landowners and farm workers in compliance with the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP). The stock distribution option (SDO) was a scheme under the CARP that was first implemented during the administration of President Cory Aquino.

Following a year of turbulent protests where several striking workers of the Hacienda were killed and dozens of others wounded, the Department of Agrarian Reform cancelled the stock distribution agreement on the ground that it had failed to improve the lives of more than 5,000 farmer beneficiaries. In May 2006, the Presidential Agrarian Reform Council junked the motion of the Hacienda management to reconsider the revocation of the SDO. The Cojuangcos, however, were successful in obtaining a temporary restraining order from the Supreme Court which effectively blocked the revocation of the SDO. On November 22, 2011, the Supreme Court finally ordered the redistribution of the Hacienda to the farmers holding that the farmers will not benefit from the distribution of shares of stock.

What can happen after the Senate renders its judgment against Corona?

Chief Justice Corona would be replaced by someone more hospitable to the Aquino government. If that person is one of the incumbent justices, a vacancy occurs which Noynoy Aquino will fill up with another justice of his own choice. The other justices appointed by former President Arroyo would have been successfully chastened by the impeachment process, emboldening Noynoy to do anything he wishes without opposition. Now, wouldn’t that be the most opportune time to reverse the Supreme Court decision on the redistribution of the Hacienda to the farmers?

Hacienda Luisita, which is as large as the total land area of the cities of Pasig and Makati combined, is simply too big and of too sentimental value for the Cojuangco family to lose. The family held on to the Hacienda lands through eight presidential turnovers. Losing the Hacienda on the watch of one of their very own would be most hard to swallow.

The Hacienda the Cojuangcos dearly love is one of the last remnants of colonialism in the Philippines despite efforts by the government to implement land reform. One could picture Noynoy Aquino after retiring from the presidency galloping on a horse through the sunset while he surveys the vast landscape of his family estate. Or imagine Noynoy driving his Porsche over the long stretch of the national highway built on a large swath of Hacienda land by government money, as he is fond of doing in order to unwind. Or on a lazy Saturday afternoon, Noynoy could just drive to the range for practice shooting.

The lifestyle of the very rich and famous scion of the Cojuangco family—why would Noynoy be a fool to give the Hacienda up?

Philippine Independence 101

On June 12, 1898, Emilio Aguinaldo proclaimed the independence of the Philippines from the window of his home in Kawit, Cavite. A month before, Aguinaldo also formally established the Dictatorial Government which he believed would be more efficient than a republican one in time of crisis. It was only later upon the advice of Apolinario Mabini that Aguinaldo changed the form of government from Dictatorial to Revolutionary.

Aguinaldo’s proclamation of Philippine independence came at the cusp of the Spanish army’s defeat in the hands of the Filipino rebels. It was never recognized by Spain or the United States which at the time had also been at war with Spain. In December 1898, American and Spanish peace commissioners met in Paris to settle questions relating to Cuba, the Philippines, and other matters. Felipe Agoncillo, Aguinaldo’s diplomatic envoy, pleaded with the commissioners to recognize the Philippines as an independent nation. The commissioners refused to listen to Agoncillo and went ahead to sign the Treaty of Paris on December 10, 1898, in which Spain gave up the Philippines to the United States for a sum of 20 million dollars.

Battle of Manila Bay, May 1, 1898. Courtesy of wikipedia.

On February 4, 1899, the Filipino-American War broke out which would last until 1902. Aguinaldo’s revolutionary government was crushed and his proclamation of independence short-lived. The Philippines was annexed as a Commonwealth of the United States until the end of the Japanese war in 1946 when independence was granted to the Philippines on July 4 by the United States’ Congress.

The June 12, 1898 independence proclamation was essentially an aspirational one. It was never achieved, and the colonization of the Philippines was handed over from its former colonial master Spain to the emerging power, the United States of America. Whereas the July 4, 1946 independence was merely a nominal one, it came at the expense of officially adopting the vestiges of American colonialism such as parity rights for American citizens in the Philippine Constitution and one-sided bilateral agreements in favour of the United States such as the Bell Trade Act, Laurel-Langley Agreement and the RP-US Military Bases Agreement.

In other words, the celebration of Philippine independence, as it was held before every July 4 commencing from the third Republic under President Manuel Roxas and then every June 12 beginning the fifth Republic under President Diosdado Macapagal, is a ritual bereft of historical correctness. Macapagal changed the celebration of independence to June 12 as a symbolic act of nationalism which was praised by other Filipino nationalists at the time since the July 4th independence was declared not by a Filipino but by an American, President Harry Truman. Both dates, however, do not represent the historical truth if the celebration of independence should really reflect the first act made by the Filipino people to establish a free and sovereign nation.

Philippine Independence Day Parade. Photo courtesy of Noel Y.C.

Aguinaldo’s June 12th declaration of Philippine independence was in itself questionable since he had earlier made overtures to Admiral George Dewey to recognize the independence of the Philippines under the protection of the United States Navy. One can argue that no sensible and patriotic leader of his country would claim independence, yet beg for protection from a foreign army. A U.S. Library of Congress Country Study on the Philippines completed in 1991 contained reports that the United States Department of the Navy during that time had ordered Dewey to distance himself from Aguinaldo so he would not make untoward commitments to the Philippine forces. Besides, Aguinaldo was never in a firm position to declare independence from Spain when the Philippine revolution was not over yet. The most Aguinaldo could accomplish was to proclaim the Filipino aspiration for a government that was independent and free from Spanish control, except this aspiration or desire to be an independent state was already expressed two years earlier after members of the Katipunan, led by Andres Bonifacio, declared a nationwide armed revolution to win freedom from Spain.

If we have to critically study the origin of an independent and sovereign Philippines, albeit aspirational, we can trace the embryonic idea to the formation of the Katipunan in 1892 when a small group of patriotic Filipinos decided to found a society dedicated to the objective of securing separation and independence from Spain. The Katipunan was founded right after Jose Rizal was arrested on July 7, 1892 by Spanish authorities and ordered to be banished to Dapitan. But it was four years later on August 24, 1896, under the threat of discovery by the Spanish civil authorities that the Katipunan would finally declare its decision to wage a national armed revolution against Spain.

Katipunan Flag as shown at Pugadlawin. Courtesy of wikipedia.

The Katipunan did not just declare its intention to fight Spain but it also established a national government with elected officials who would lead the nation and the army. There was no holding back the revolution. The Spanish secret police already knew of the dangerous clandestine Katipunan and the Spanish civil authorities had been warned by the clergy of the grave danger the society posed to the Spanish community. Governor-General Ramon Blanco made up his mind to order the “juez de cuchillo” or total annihilation of the Filipino population in identified areas of the uprising. Some, like Rizal, balked at the idea of the timing of the revolution, but to many, the time had come.

It was clear to Bonifacio and the members of the Katipunan that they were waging a national struggle. The Spanish historian Manuel Sastron described the revolution as a “rebellion of the Tagalogs against Spanish domination,” although it was clear that the 1896 revolution was a national endeavour. The term “Tagalog” referred to all persons born in the archipelago, whether Bisayan, Ilocano, Pampango, etc. Thus, the Tagalog nation or Katagalugan, consisted not only of Tagalog speakers but also included those who grew up in the Philippines, regardless of their ethnolingusitic classification and ancestry. At the time, the term “Filipino” applied solely to Spaniards born in the archipelago while “Tagalog” applied to all indios or natives.

From the declaration of war of independence on August 24, 1896, the Katipunan became an open de facto government. It had its own laws, bureaucratic structure and an elective leadership. As a matter of historical fact, it was the first Filipino national government. That was the conclusion made by John R.M. Taylor, the American military historian and custodian of the Philippine Insurgent Records. Most Filipino historians also agreed that the Katipunan was more than a secret revolutionary society and that Bonifacio intended to have the Katipunan govern the whole Philippines after the overthrow of Spanish rule.

How is the Katipunan’s open declaration of war against Spain any different from Aguinaldo’s proclamation of independence almost two years later on June 12, 1898? Both may be considered aspirational and did not accomplish the objective of a free and sovereign nation, but Bonifacio’s Katipunan was the first act declaring a national struggle and it paved the road to liberation from Spain, although independence was never achieved because the hopes of the Filipino people were quashed by the new colonial masters from America.

After the hostilities during the Filipino-American war ended in 1902 and the United States established its colonial foothold in the archipelago, Muslims in the south never wavered in their struggle for independence from the central government which continues until today. Despite grant of limited self-autonomy to Muslim-dominated provinces in Mindanao, the struggle for liberation goes on for the Muslim inhabitants of the south. Arguably, the same can be said about the Communist Party of the Philippines and the New People’s Army which have persevered in their struggle for national democracy despite the powerful presence of the United States’ military through the Visiting Forces Agreement.

Filipino casualties on the first day of the Philippine-American War.
Photo courtesy of miaojsilva.

The question therefore is not whether we have achieved independence as a nation through the revolution of 1896, or whether the struggle for real independence continues because hostilities between government’s soldiers and the local insurgents and Muslim rebels have not ceased.

If we accept that all we have accomplished is merely an aspiration to become an independent and sovereign state, isn’t it right that we observe our celebration of independence by making it historically correct? We may not have to call it “Independence Day” if this shocks or bothers our conscience. We can always call it our “National Day” instead. But we must abide by events in our history and the struggles of the Katipunan if the 1896 Philippine Revolution has to have any worth at all. We can begin by recognizing Andres Bonifacio not only as the founder of the Katipunan and leader of the revolution of 1896, but as the first Filipino president, the father of our nation and founder of our democracy.

 Andres Bonifacio, leader of the Philippine Revolution of 1896.
 Photo  courtesy of shaiipot.

But then Bonifacio was regarded by those who would proclaim heroes—members of the educated and landed elite in Philippine society—as a mere lowly worker, uneducated and probably illiterate by the standards of our education system today, whereas Aguinaldo was a member of the ilustrado, educated, and also from the landed class. It’s up to us to honour our historical roots correctly, and it is not necessary that we wage another revolution or a civil war to settle this issue.