Agrarian Reform and CARP — Reading the Philippines' Land Problem from the Original Legal Texts

As of 2026-09-08 · Updated 2026-09-08 · Section: Society, Human Rights & Public Safety · 日本語版

注Verified 2026-08-26. The revision history for this article (confirming RA 3844's approval date, correcting the amended section of RA 8532, correcting the mix-up between RA 6657 Sections 21 and 26, clarifying the indicator used for the DAR budget, and more) is recorded in full table form at the end of the representative file "1987年憲法," under "Verification Record (2026-08-26)." The provisions and figures in this article for RA 6657, 9700, 11953, 7881, 7905, 8532, 3844, and Act 1120 have all been re-cross-checked against the original texts collected on LawPhil.

0. The gist of this article

The Philippines' land problem can be understood along a single throughline: "the Republic, after independence, has tried by statute to dismantle the great landed estates (haciendas) created under colonial rule, and nearly 40 years on, still hasn't finished the job." In his State of the Nation Address (SONA) on 27 July 2026, President Marcos stated that "over 400,000 land titles covering more than 500,000 hectares" had been distributed in four years, and declared his intent "to complete it in 2027" (Manila Times, 2026-07-29, 2026-08-17). In other words, CARP, which began in 1988, still had not been declared complete as of 2026.

1. The Spanish era — haciendas and "fraylocracia"

Under Spanish rule, the granting of crown lands (from encomienda to hacienda) and land consolidation by religious orders (Augustinian, Dominican, Recollect, Jesuit) progressed, and "friar lands" formed, centered on Central Luzon. As the export economy in sugar, tobacco, and abaca expanded in the 19th century, a structure took hold of absentee landlords collecting rent alongside share tenants (kasama) who split the harvest.

The system in which religious orders held influence even over secular administration became known as "fraylocracia" (friar rule), and was one of the central grievances of the 1896 revolution. 注 No primary source could be reached in this research that fixes the term's first use or precise usage (primary source not reached). This article confirms the anti-friar movement of the revolutionary period only through its administrative consequence — the U.S. government's purchase of the friar lands, discussed below.

2. The American period — the "Friendly Estates" purchase (1903–1904)

The American colonial government adopted a policy of buying up the friar lands that had fueled the revolution and reselling them to tenant farmers. The legal basis was Act No. 1120 (the Friar Lands Act, enacted 26 April 1904).

注 The commonly circulated figure of "about 166,000 ha / $7.2 million" is an approximation; the statute itself gives "164,127 ha / $7,239,784.66." The statutory figures should be used when citing this.

This purchase resulted in preferential acquisition by those with money — in practice, existing powerful families and emerging commercial capital — and did not resolve tenancy. During the American period, if anything, the disposal of public land (under the Public Land Act system) enabled new large-scale sugar plantations to form in areas such as Negros.

3. The postwar period — tenant unrest and the Huk movement

Tenant disputes in Central Luzon intensified from the 1930s, becoming an armed anti-Japanese resistance (the Hukbalahap) during the Japanese occupation, and transforming after the war into the armed anti-government insurgency of the People's Liberation Army (HMB). 注 This article could not reach a primary source for the scale of the Huk movement or its death toll (primary source not reached). No figures are given.

Instead, the government's response can be traced through legislation.

(Corrected in the 2026-08-26 verification pass) RA 3844's approval date is 8 August 1963. The earlier version stated that "the approval date is not recorded in the LawPhil text and could not be confirmed," but the end of LawPhil's original text (immediately after Section 173, "Effective Date") explicitly reads "Approved: August 8, 1963." Source: LawPhil's original text at statutes/repacts/ra1963/ra_3844_1963.html.

注Note the risk of confusing section numbers: the "25% cap" is RA 3844, Section 34. This has no connection to Section 34 of the Mining Act, RA 7942 — citations conflating the two occur repeatedly.

RA 1400 and RA 3844 set their thresholds too high (300 ha / 75 ha) and lacked both funding and an implementing apparatus, limiting their real-world effect.

4. The Marcos era — PD 27 (1972)

Immediately after the declaration of martial law (Proclamation No. 1081), on 21 October 1972, Presidential Decree No. 27 (PD 27) was issued.

Under PD 27, a Certificate of Land Transfer (CLT) was first issued, with an Emancipation Patent (EP) issued upon full payment. Support prices were fixed as of 1972 at ₱35 per cavan of rice and ₱31 per cavan of corn (PIDS DP 2017-34, footnote 9).

PD 27's decisive limitation was that it covered "rice and corn only." Large plantations in sugar, coconut, banana, and similar crops — including Hacienda Luisita — were excluded.

注 Taiwan's 1950s compensation factor was likewise 2.5 times, and PD 27 is said to have followed that model. Japan's land reform used a compensation factor of 7 times the annual harvest, and Korea's was 1.25 times (Iyer and Maurer 2008, via PIDS DP 2017-34).

5. CARP — the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (RA 6657, 1988)

5-1. The framework of the law

Full title: AN ACT INSTITUTING A COMPREHENSIVE AGRARIAN REFORM PROGRAM TO PROMOTE SOCIAL JUSTICE AND INDUSTRIALIZATION, PROVIDING THE MECHANISM FOR ITS IMPLEMENTATION, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES Approved: 10 June 1988 (under President Corazon Aquino)

5-2. Initial scope

The 1991 initial LAD scope was 3,820,900 ha / 1,553,500 beneficiaries (Adriano 1991, PIDS DP 2017-34, Table 1). Breakdown:

注 This scope expanded substantially in later years. Under the end-2016 DAR PIMD baseline, it stood at 5,425,343 ha. When citing "CARP's target area," always specify the date the figure refers to.

6. CARPER (RA 9700, 2009) and 30 June 2014

Full title translates roughly to "an Act strengthening the CARP, extending the acquisition and distribution of all agricultural lands... amending certain provisions of RA 6657, and appropriating funds." Approved: 7 August 2009.

6-1. Table mapping "the amending law's section" to "the amended section" (注 watch for confusion)

注RA 9700 is an amendatory law rewriting the text of RA 6657. Consequently, "RA 9700, Section X" and "RA 6657, Section X" refer to different numbered sections. The version of RA 6657 posted on LawPhil is the 1988 text as originally enacted, and the following sections are not the current text (per the 2026-08-26 amendment-verification pass; source: the section text within LawPhil's ra_9700_2009.html).

6-1-2. 注 Three amending laws predate RA 9700 (added per the 2026-08-26 amendment-verification pass)

This article cluster had previously described only a three-stage lineage — RA 6657 → RA 9700 → RA 11953 — but the DAR's legal information system (lis.dar.gov.ph) displays RA 6657 as "as amended by RA 7881, 7905, 8532 and 9700." Omitting the three 1990s laws would leave the exclusion of fishponds and the establishment of the Support Services Office absent from "the text of the law."

注Here too, "the amending law's section" and "the amended section" carry different numbers. A correct example: RA 8532's Section 1 amends RA 6657's Section 63 (funding), while the same law's Section 2 is merely the effectivity clause (corrected in the 2026-08-26 verification pass; the earlier version stated that "RA 8532's Section 2 amends RA 6657's Section 63," which is incorrect. The original text reads: "Section 1. Sec. 63 of Republic Act No. 6657 … is hereby amended to read as follows" / "Section 2. This Act shall take effect within fifteen (15) days following the completion of its publication..."). Likewise, RA 7881 amends RA 6657's Section 3(b), Section 10, and Section 11, paragraph 1 in its own Sections 1–3, and inserts Section 32-A in its Section 4 and Sections 65-A onward in its Section 5. Source: LawPhil's original texts at ra_7881_1995.html / ra_7905_1995.html / ra_8532_1998.html.

(Confirmed in the 2026-08-26 verification pass) The approval dates for all three laws are confirmed at the end of their original texts: RA 7881 = 20 February 1995 / RA 7905 = 23 February 1995 / RA 8532 = 23 February 1998.

注As of August 2026, RA 6657 has not been amended beyond the five laws listed above (RA 7881/7905/8532/9700/11953). No new amending law from 2025–2026 could be found (searches of Google News RSS and Senate/House bill databases for enacted laws "amending Republic Act No. 6657" turned up nothing).

An important consequence: as of 30 June 2014, DAR's "issuance of new Notices of Coverage — the gateway to new compulsory acquisition" closed. Since then, the DAR's work has effectively shifted to (1) processing cases begun before the deadline, (2) parcelizing collective CLOAs (SPLIT, discussed below), and (3) support services. 注Saying "CARP ended in 2014" is inaccurate — only the acquisition authority lapsed; distribution, titling, and litigation continue today.

7. RA 11953 (2023) — the New Agrarian Emancipation Act

Full title: New Agrarian Emancipation Act (an act freeing agrarian reform beneficiaries from financial burdens by condoning the principal, unpaid amortizations, and interest on agricultural land awarded under CARP, and exempting it from estate tax) Approved: 7 July 2023 (under President Marcos)

The condonation covers "principal, unpaid amortizations, interest, penalties, and surcharges." It provides that "this condonation shall extinguish all mortgage liens on the acquired land constituted in favor of the national government, as represented by LBP." The Register of Deeds must register the title and annotate the condonation within 60 days (Section 8). Beneficiaries are enrolled in the Registry System for Basic Sectors in Agriculture (RSBSA) and given priority for credit access and support services. The awarded land is excluded from the gross estate for estate tax purposes.

RA 11953 makes exactly one amendment to RA 6657. Its Section 16 (Repealing Clause) states explicitly that "Section 21 of Republic Act No. 6657, as amended, is hereby modified."

注Corrected in the 2026-08-26 verification pass — the earlier version misread the content of RA 6657's Section 21. - The heading of RA 6657's Section 21 is "Payment of Compensation by Beneficiaries Under Voluntary Land Transfer" — this covers direct payments from a farmer-beneficiary to the landowner under a voluntary land transfer (VLT) (original text: "Direct payments in cash or in kind may be by the farmer-beneficiary to the landowner under terms to be mutually agreed upon by both parties..."). RA 11953's termination of direct payments under the VLT/DPS scheme (P206,247,776.41 / 10,201 people / 11,531.24 ha) connects precisely to this Section 21. - By contrast, the provision governing amortization payments from beneficiaries to the LBP — a "30-year installment plan at 6% annual interest" — is RA 6657's Section 26 ("Payment by Beneficiaries"), not Section 21. The earlier version of this article incorrectly described Section 21 as "the section governing payment of amortizations." - (Sources: LawPhil's ra_6657_1988.html, Sections 21 and 26 original text; ra_11953_2023.html, Section 16.)

注Do not confuse "RA 11953, Section 16" with "RA 6657, Section 21." Note also that RA 11953's Section 4 defines covered beneficiaries as "those awarded land under PD 27 / RA 6657 (as amended) / RA 9700," and excludes anyone convicted with finality of violating RA 6657's Sections 73 and 74.

注 This law only extinguishes debt — it does not increase the amount of land available. Nor does the removal of the mortgage lien abolish the "10-year transfer restriction (RA 6657, Section 27, as amended by RA 9700 Section 12; the 10-year period itself is unchanged even after the amendment)." In practice, a misunderstanding has spread that "the mortgage is gone, so the land can now be sold" — indeed, the DAR was reported in January 2026 to have "cancelled CLOAs on the grounds of premature leasing or sale" (GMA Network headline, 2026-01-08).

Progress of implementation

(Source: BusinessMirror, 2025-07-30, "DAR chief: 2024 a 'banner year' for agrarian reform") In the July 2026 SONA, President Marcos reaffirmed the full implementation of RA 11953, and DAR Secretary Conrado Estrella III stated the intent to "finish off all remaining condonations within 2026" (Manila Times, 2026-08-17).

8. Developments in 2025–2026

8-1. The DAR's budget

注 The sum of the program-level figures (5.1 + 9.5 + 1.4 + 1.87 = 17.87B) exceeds the ₱17.4B total. It seems consistent to treat SPLIT as a subset of the Land Tenure Security program, but reporting presents them side by side, so these line items should not simply be added together.

注(Added in the 2026-08-26 verification pass) This "₱17.4 billion" is the proposed figure in the 2026 National Expenditure Program (NEP) (P17,395,384,000), not the enacted figure in the 2026 General Appropriations Act (GAA). Under the 2026 GAA, the entire agriculture and agrarian reform sector was increased to ₱297.5 billion (up substantially from the 2026 NEP's ₱256.0 billion and the 2025 GAA's ₱248.0 billion), and the DAR's own final enacted figure may differ from its proposed figure. The DBM-published 2026 GAA Volume I-A, DAR section (dbm.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/GAA/GAA2026/VolumeIA/DAR/DAR.pdf), is an image-based PDF from which text could not be extracted, so this research could not confirm the final figure (primary source not reached). When citing "the DAR's 2026 budget," always distinguish between the proposed figure (NEP) and the enacted figure (GAA).

The Senate approved P17.4B (Daily Tribune, 2025-10-25), and Senator Zubiri requested a further increase (Manila Bulletin, 2025-10-26). On 18 June 2026, the Presidential Agrarian Reform Council (PARC) reportedly approved a ₱5.9 billion support-services budget (PNA headline, 2026-06-18; 注 details could not be traced to the original article and remain unconfirmed).

8-2. SPLIT — parcelizing collective CLOAs

CARP's biggest hidden challenge is the "collective CLOA." Because a single title was issued to multiple beneficiaries, individual farmers could not identify their own parcel, making the land unusable as collateral or for inheritance purposes.

(Source: De los Reyes 2016 / DAR Field Operations Office, PIDS DP 2017-34, Table 9)

The World Bank-supported SPLIT (Support to Parcelization of Lands for Individual Titling) project is converting this remaining balance into electronic titles (e-Titles). Its 2026 target is "to verify 248,000 titles, covering 300,000 ha and 247,000 people" (BusinessMirror, 2025-09-11). 注 The World Bank's project page (P172346) is script-dependent and could not be retrieved in full during this research, so the loan amount and approval date remain unreached primary sources.

8-3. Land title distribution results (Marcos administration)

注The 2024 figures differ between releases: 102,338 (BusinessMirror 2025-07-30, from the DAR chief's remarks) versus 211,751 (BusinessMirror 2025-02-05). The former appears to be LAD-focused (ordinary land acquisition and distribution), while the latter appears to be a total including SPLIT e-Titles, though the DAR has not made this distinction explicit. When citing "how many titles were distributed," always note the source and definition (LAD only, or including SPLIT).

On 4 March 2026, the DAR announced a "91% performance rating" (PNA). On 17 August 2026, Secretary Estrella declared his intent to "complete what remains in 2027" (Manila Times). Meanwhile, on 28 July 2026, a priest in Quezon province publicly challenged the SONA's claims about agrarian reform achievements (Inquirer headline).

9. Achievements and limitations

9-1. Distributed versus undistributed

As of end-2016 (DAR PIMD, PIDS DP 2017-34)

The regions where the remaining balance is concentrated are the core of the problem. The Negros Island Region (NIR) at 29.3%, ARMM (now BARMM) at 33.4%, and Bicol (Region 5) at 20.9% remained undistributed (end-2016). The pattern of sugar haciendas and the Muslim autonomous region being the last to be resolved has not changed as of 2024 reporting on Negros (Rappler, 2024-04-11, "Land distribution gap in Negros sparks doubts over CARP deadline").

Breakdown of undistributed land by crop (end-2014, total 694,784 ha): coconut 30%, rice 23%, sugarcane 19%, corn 13%.

There is also a problem with the quality of the distribution achieved. Of the private agricultural land distributed (2,625,547 ha), only 14% came through compulsory acquisition (CA), 32% through voluntary land transfer (VLT/direct payment), 25% through voluntary offer to sell (VOS), and 22% originated from PD 27 (OLT). In other words, land the landowner had accepted willingly accounted for the majority, while genuinely contested inroads into large estates remained limited.

Furthermore — looking at the distribution of acquisition prices, 57% of CARP-acquired land (excluding land acquired under the PD 27/EO 228 method) sold for under ₱40,000 per hectare (PIDS DP 2017-34). Compensation for rice land acquired between 2010 and 2014 "fell below even the estimated capitalized net income of rainfed paddy," and the same paper suggests that the land DAR came to acquire in later years was likely low-productivity and remote.

9-2. Beneficiaries selling land, and reverse flows

RA 6657's Section 27 bans transfer for 10 years, and Section 73(f) bans transferring beneficial interest for circumvention purposes. In practice, however, leakage occurs through leasing arrangements, mortgaging, and the sale of "cultivation rights."

Confirmed specific cases (2024–2026):

The very fact that a government undersecretary must publicly say "don't sell" is itself evidence that reverse flow is real.

9-3. Did productivity and income actually rise? (competing views)

The short answer is "it's unclear." PIDS DP 2017-34 (Ballesteros, Ancheta and Ramos, December 2017) summarizes the major impact evaluations as follows.

PIDS's overall conclusion: "landholding raises welfare, but there is no difference whether that land came via CARP or via inheritance/purchase," and "there is no clear evidence that CARP has improved agricultural investment, access to formal finance, or equity." 注 Conversely, claims by the DAR or farmer groups that "CARP raised productivity" are, more often than not, based not on causal estimation using original government statistics but on simple (non-experimental) comparisons between beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries. Estimated figures should be distinguished from confirmed ones, and government releases from industry/advocacy-group claims.

9-4. Land conversion — a substantive setback

If distributed land ceases to be agricultural, agrarian reform becomes hollow. RA 6657's Section 65 attaches conditions — "5 years after award" and "no longer economically feasible as agricultural land" — but in practice, a pattern has long persisted in which municipal "reclassification" comes first, with the DAR's "conversion" approval simply ratifying it afterward.

注This 620,000 ha figure is "conversion of irrigated area under the CPES," which is a different definition from "land use conversion" approved by the DAR. The cumulative area converted under DAR approvals could not be traced to a primary source in this research (primary source not reached). Equating the two and writing that "the DAR's conversion approvals took 620,000 ha out of agriculture" would be incorrect.

The 2026 policy shift — a temporary freeze on conversion

Entering 2026, the Department of Agriculture (DA) put the brakes on conversion itself.

(Sources: BusinessMirror, 2026-03-06 / 2026-07-23; Manila Times, 2026-07-24) The basis is a 1995 joint memorandum circular requiring DA certification before an LGU reclassifies agricultural land as non-agricultural. A comprehensive National Land Use Act had still not been enacted as of August 2026.

10. Hacienda Luisita — the litmus test of CARP

10-1. Timeline (based on the Supreme Court's factual findings)

10-2. The Hacienda Luisita massacre of 16 November 2004

During the forcible dispersal of a strike by the sugar mill and plantation workers' union, 7 farmers and workers died and over 100 were injured (BusinessMirror, 2016-11-16).

(Source: BusinessMirror, 2016-11-16, "Group: Justice remains elusive for Luisita massacre victims") 注 The Supreme Court's G.R. No. 171101 (decided 5 July 2011) addresses only the legality of the agrarian reform and stock-distribution scheme; the decision itself makes no mention of the massacre. It would be incorrect to write that "the Supreme Court made a finding on the massacre." 注 Details including victims' names could not be reached in primary sources (Ombudsman resolutions, autopsy records).

10-3. The Supreme Court's rulings

10-4. 2025 — an order for the government to pay ₱28.4 billion

In 2025, matters took an ironic turn for the farmers.

In other words, in order to hand land to the farmers, the state may need to pay the Cojuangco-Aquino side roughly ₱28.49 billion — about 28 times the principal amount. The ruling has not yet become final (GMA Network, 2025-06-19). 注 Both "P1 billion" and "P28.48 billion" have appeared in headlines: the former is the principal, and the latter is the total including 35 years of interest. Do not conflate the two.

11. 注 Common errors (a checklist)

12. Key sources

Primary sources (original legal texts) - Republic Act No. 6657 (approved 10 June 1988) — LawPhil: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1988/ra_6657_1988.html - Presidential Decree No. 27 (21 October 1972) — LawPhil: https://lawphil.net/statutes/presdecs/pd1972/pd_27_1972.html - Republic Act No. 9700 (approved 7 August 2009) — LawPhil: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2009/ra_9700_2009.html - Republic Act No. 11953 (approved 7 July 2023) — LawPhil: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2023/ra_11953_2023.html - Republic Act No. 3844 (the Agricultural Land Reform Code) — LawPhil: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1963/ra_3844_1963.html - Republic Act No. 1400 (approved 9 September 1955) — LawPhil: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1955/ra_1400_1955.html - Republic Act No. 1199 (approved 30 August 1954) — LawPhil: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1954/ra_1199_1954.html - Act No. 1120 (the Friar Lands Act, 26 April 1904) — LawPhil: https://lawphil.net/statutes/acts/act1904/act_1120_1904.html

Primary sources (court decisions) - Hacienda Luisita, Inc. v. PARC, G.R. No. 171101, decided 5 July 2011 — https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2011/jul2011/gr_171101_2011.html - Same, resolution of 22 November 2011 — https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2011/nov2011/gr_171101_2011.html - Same, resolution of 24 April 2012 — https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/apr2012/gr_171101_2012.html

Primary sources (government research institutions) - Ballesteros, M. M., Ancheta, J., and Ramos, T., "The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program after 30 Years: Accomplishments and Forward Options," PIDS Discussion Paper Series No. 2017-34 (December 2017) — https://pidswebs.pids.gov.ph/CDN/PUBLICATIONS/pidsdps1734.pdf

Secondary sources (major reporting) - BusinessMirror, 2025-06-17, "Hacienda Luisita should get ₱28.48 billion from government, says CA" - BusinessMirror, 2025-07-30, "DAR chief: 2024 a 'banner year' for agrarian reform" - BusinessMirror, 2025-09-11, "DAR seeking ₱17.39-billion budget for 2026" / 2025-11-21, "DAR's '26 ₱17.4-billion budget…" - BusinessMirror, 2025-02-05, "DAR distributes 211K e-titles, Cloas in 2024" - BusinessMirror, 2016-11-16, "Group: Justice remains elusive for Luisita massacre victims" - BusinessMirror, 2023-12-11, "'PHL converts 600K hectares of irrigated lands'" (citing PSA/CPES) - BusinessMirror, 2026-03-06, "Lands for RE exempt from DA ban" / 2026-07-23, "DA seeks to protect 3M hectares of rice land from reclassification" / 2026-02-05, "Estrella orders investigation of 'land grabbing' in Tarlac" / 2026-06-29, "DAR writes off ₱9.9M CAR ARBs' agrarian debt…" - The Manila Times, 2026-07-29, "DA, DAR laud SONA pronouncements" / 2026-08-17, "DAR Chief vows to complete the work by 2027" / 2025-06-19, "Court tells govt to pay Hacienda Luisita P1B" / 2026-07-24, "New guidelines on farmland conversions out by August"

注 This article does not use Wikipedia as a source anywhere. Primary sources that could not be reached (the World Bank's SPLIT project loan terms, the DAR-approval-based cumulative conversion area, the original Ombudsman resolutions, and statistics related to the Huk movement) are explicitly marked in the text as "primary source not reached."

日本語の詳細版: 分野「農地改革とCARP」「農地改革とCARP ── フィリピンの土地問題を法令原文から読む」（本サイト日本語版）。