Common sense, not hysterics Philippine Daily Inquirer
December 29, 2007
IT is a sad day for the country when a columnist of great stature like Fr. Joaquin G. Bernas fails to see the forest for the trees and pours more gasoline into the Sumilao controversy.
Yes, Bernas has the scholarship to weigh in and talk his head off on whatever issue he wants to—but he should do so within the parameters of sobriety and common sense. I certainly hope that Bernas’ latest views and the hysterical way he aired them do not reflect those of his religious community. If they do, the rule to resolve conflicts in a civilized manner in the Philippines is in real trouble.
Bernas portrays the Sumilao controversy as an uneven fight between big business and the farmers. A David-versus-Goliath situation, he calls it. If this is not a clear case of stirring up class animosity which could lead to more serious confrontation, I don’t know what is. The Sumilao controversy is simply a case of a group of 55 farmers wanting to take possession of a 144-hectare land, and a food firm acting to protect its right of ownership, legitimized by the highest court of the land. Who should really own the land, let the Court decide.
Bernas claims that the new owner of the 144-hectare land, San Miguel Foods Inc. (SMFI) has not complied with the proviso of the conversion order to use the land for agro-industrial purposes. But SMFI has! It is using the land not for farming but as a site for modern, state-of-the-art, vertically integrated food processing facilities. What could be more agro-industrial than that?
Compassion for the farmers is what impels Bernas, maybe, to make a banzai charge at big business, sword swinging; and to proclaim that using the land for a high-tech agro-industrial project is not the right way to bring prosperity to the farmers. Giving the land to the farmers is the right way, is it?
Dividing 144 hectares among the 55 farmers will result in each of them getting exactly 2.6 hectares. Bernas can figure out for himself if such a minuscule piece of property can be coaxed to yield an income sufficient to feed a farmer’s family of six, give him and his family an abode better than a bahay kubo, cover the family’s medical needs, and most important of all, enable him to send his children to school up to college. Yes, college! Because education—not being “a man with the hoe” forever—is what would level the playing field for the farmer.
“Let the little people decide what is best for themselves and for their dignity as human beings,” sermonizes Bernas.
A very romantic sentiment—until one realizes that what the good father means is giving 2.6 hectares to each of the 55 Sumilao farmers at bahala na siya sa buhay niya. The implication of that admonition—politically correct, maybe, but chilling—is the farmer’s consignment in perpetuity to a life of bondage to marginal farming and poverty.
—JESUS L. ARRANZA, president, Federation of Philippine Industries, 701 Atlanta Center Bldg., Annapolis Street, San Juan City
