Arcaina, Nicolene POS100 - B

100254 BS Legal Management May 21, 2013

FINAL PAPER
A Study on the Aurora Pacific Economic Zone Issue
A Sui Generis of other Land Issues in the Philippine Nation
***
I. Introduction
Land is definitely a major resource in any nation-state and has many functions indicative of the
peoples identity, their welfare, and the states economic development. Hence, it is an interesting
field to delve into when it comes to measuring and re-evaluating a nations status, especially in
terms of civic participation (especially from the members of the agricultural sector) and
involvement as part of the democratic process and in terms of the actual progress through its
laws and mandates as part of the developmental aspect of a nation.
To further understand the concept of the land as an integral part of the nation, we place it
in a particular context and a specific case at hand, which is that of the Aurora Pacific Economic
Zone Issue of the Philippines, and of other related cases.
II. Overview of the Aurora Pacific Economic Zone Issue
The Aurora Pacific Economic Zone, or more popularly known by its abbreviation,
APECO, has definitely created some room for speculation and re-investigation. Last December
2012, over a hundred farmers from Casiguran, Aurora marched to Manila to express their protest
against the alleged land grabbing and human rights violation of their co-farmers and fisher-folk
in favor of the promised social and economic development of Aurora.
1
According to news, issues
on displacement of the fishermen and farmers belonging to around 3000 families, non-
compliance to basic project standards, and even on failure to consult this development project
with the locals involved. The passing of RA 10083 or the APECO law of 2010 is henceforth put
into question with regard to its governing provisions and supposedly development-oriented
programs for the people of Aurora.
III. Scope and Methodology of Study
The study will discuss other land issues which involve both indigenous (or the minority)
and majority groups. These land issues would include that of the Hacienda Luisita in Tarlac,
Philippines and land rights conflicts originating from the Ibaloi of Baguio and from the
Mangyans of Mindoro to name a few. Recounting these cases key points will serve as the
grounds for comparison. The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program will be revisited to
create a particular foregrounding for the discussion of the APECO and its related cases
implications on the democratic and developmental aspects of the country.
This case study sought textbooks, journals, newspapers, and online media as references to
collect and gather data, feedback, and information on useful and applicable theories and models.
IV. Objectives
This case study aims to identify a recurring problem in a particular system that the state
has through the APECO issue and a comparison with similar matters in the past. It also aims to

1
Casiguran locals march for their land. Last accessed May 18, 2013, http://www.rappler.com/move-
ph/16941-casiguran-locals-march-for-their-land

determine what this identification implies with regard to the democratic and developmental
facets of the country and how it can seek improvement and progress in a nation that is
supposedly of, by, and for the people.
V. Land Distribution Issues in the Philippines: In Retrospect
This section will tackle and unravel similar land issues in the Philippines that made it to
news or have been documented in one way or another. These cases occurred prior to or are
occurring simultaneously with our main case at hand.
The Hacienda Luisita case is indeed a very popular one. Owned by the Cojuangcos of
Tarlac, the 6431-hectare Hacienda Luisita has been acquired in the late 1950s through reported
political connections through the Cojuangcos who owned profitable group of businesses based
on sugar and through Ninoy Aquino. This Hacienda previously belonged to the Tabacalera who
expanded the cultivated land to more than 10,000 hectares and served more than 1,000 farmers.
Later on, the Cojuangcos together with Aquino had to acquire the Central Monetary Boards
approval of their GSIS loan worth P 5,911,000 and foreign loan worth US$2,128,480. 9.6 million
went to the Tarlac Development Corporation to serve as a holding and management company for
Hacienda Luisita. However, to acquire this approval, the CMB mandated that the land must be
distributed to the tenants, specifically small farmers within 10 years of the acquisition. There
have been subsequent changes to provisions regarding this redistribution, creating some form of
sale between the current tenants and owners (and even more complications later on) hence
preventing the supposed distribution. The Cojuangcos have managed to preserve this Hacienda
until recent years through different legal manipulations and offering alternative bonds for the
farmers despite their protests in different periods of history to fight for their lands.
In other several and smaller parts of the country lie cases and experiences from
indigenous groups which share the same sentiment when it comes to their rights to their ancestral
lands and to livelihood opportunities rooted in these respective lands.
The book Asserting Land Rights takes us to several journeys of different indigenous
peoples groups regarding their experiences of acquiring land and fighting for their rights over
their lands. First however, it is interesting to note that the Philippines has a rich bank of
customary laws among different indigenous peoples. The Talaandig of Mindoro had a traditional
treaty of peace through which indigenous territories were established which is called Tampuda
Hu Balagen
2
. To them, native title as a vested right is inherent to their culture and identity as a
people. The state needs not to impose a new title to give the Talaandig the rights to their lands.
The people of Sagada have their own socio-political and cultural institution called the dap-ay
3

and the Subanen of Mindanao are guided by the belief that their laws were already instituted
when they were created by their Creator
4
. And most other indigenous people already have their
own ways to organize particular justice and governance.
Problems arose among the Talaandigs who were asserting their rights opposed CADT or
Certificates of Ancestral Domain Title (from the 1987 Constitution and the IPRA) applications.
They deem this application or the acquisition of such title is redundant since they are already
granted with such right to their lands given their customary law of right to their lands which is
a cultural and not a legal right. On the other hand, introduction of land tenure system of the
government through tax declarations created confusion among the people of Sagada. There has

2
Joji Carino, Ma. Elena Regpala, and Raymond de Chavez. Asserting Land Rights. (Baguio: Tebtebba Foundation,
2010). 29.
3
Ibid., 30
4
Ibid., 34
been an overstatement in the total number of hectares covered by such tax declarations, a case
which is definitely questionable. The Subanen faced problems of land exploitation from a
Canadian Mining Firm which divided and impoverished the Subanen. The government actually
granted the application of the mining firm two months before the signing of the IPRA law in
1997
5
. As mentioned earlier, the indigenous groups can apply for their CADT to secure their
land rights but a reported incidence proves that the securing process is no easy feat. Vicky
Makay, an Ibaloi elder tells us that she still hasnt gotten this land right security after more than a
decade since application. According to her, her lack of resources (in form of money, and square
meters of land to share with those willing to help her) hindered her from consistent follow-
ups with Ancestral Domain Office or Land Registry Authority. The Mansaka of Compostela
Valley were subjected to logging (after 1964) and big-scale mining operations in 1994. The
Napnapan Mineral Resources Inc had applied for operations covering around 4,000 hectares in
the area and it was reported that this application was approved without free, and prior informed
consent of the locals. Plantation developments transformed more portions of their land in later
years and there have been assertions of customary laws while continuously dividing the Mansaka
people because the sponsoring companies helped them out through scholarships and similar
benefits. Similar experiences are accounted for with the Mandaya in Mindanao, Manobo of
Agusan del Sur, the Tagbanwa in Coron, Palawan and the Mangyan Tagabukid of Romblon
whose town mayer permitted logging operations across their thick forests. The Dumagats of
Aurora, Quezon have budget difficulties in transitioning and in processing their ancestral lands
even after being awarded with their CADTs in 2009.
VI. Aurora Pacific Economic Zone Issue Revisited

5
Ibid., 35
Notwithstanding popular news, let us take a look at several objectives and goals provided
for by Republic Act 10083, also known as the Aurora Pacific Economic Zone and Freeport Law
of 2010, an amendment of RA 9490 of 2007.
The Aurora Pacific Economic Zone and Freeport covers two parcels of land (parts of
which are highly agricultural and includes vast waters which are home to marine life and a
source of livelihood) as mandated by RA 10083 covering a total of 496 hectares for the first
parcel and 12, 427 hectares for the second across the barangays of Dibet and Esteves (for first
parcel), and San Ildefonso, Cozo, and Culat (for second parcel), Municipality of Casiguran,
Aurora, Quezon. This upscale in the land coverage as stated in Section 2 is a significant
amendment in RA 10083 from 9490. It displaces the previous Section 2 of RA 9490 which was
a preliminary reiteration of a government policy which is to actively encourage, promote,
induce, and accelerate the sound and balanced industrial, economic, and social development of
the country in order to provide jobs to the people, especially to those in the rural areas... and
improve the level and quality of their living conditions through the establishment among
others...
6
The succeeding sections declare governing principles regarding the operations which
are inclined towards gaining foreign investments, establishments, facilities, tax systems, and
administrative matters under the APECO. It is also interesting to note Section 5 which declares
the powers and functions of the APECO, which includes: (b) to register, regulate, supervise
the enterprises in the Aurora Ecozone in an efficient and decentralized manner, subject to
existing laws. Under the same section is a portion regarding preservation and protection of the
ecological balance within the Ecozone via establishing forest, marine, and wildlife reservations
in coordination with the DENR. Moreover, Section 7 declares the non-profit nature of the

6
Section 2 of Republic Act 9490 (2007)
APECO hence declaring it exempt from tax, duties, fees, imposts, charges, service fees in any
court or administrative proceedings in which it may be a party.
The issue at hand stems from a protest by Casiguran locals whose rights to some of the
12,000 hectares were violated due to lack of clear approval to a supposedly discussed
development program for the people of Aurora and a displacement of around 3,000 families in
pursuit of the said program. Resettlements were, according to some fishermen, still far from
their daily venues and avenues for livelihood, creating difficulty for them and other workers
who depended on the lands that they call home. This development program also endangers food
security as it will be built across agricultural and marine vicinities hence the low believability in
the mentioned promise of APECO regarding preservation of such lifelines for the locals under
Section 5. Protests from people outside these local and indigenous groups argue that APECO
also allows and legalizes land-grabbing and displacement of locals that depend on Aurora land
and waters for their livelihood without appropriate relocation, disregards the free, and prior
informed consent of the Agta Dumagats as defined in the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act
(IPRA)
7
, and violates the CARPer law as well.
Secretary Leila de Lima publishes a DOJ opinion sought by Secretary Virgilio Reyes of
the Department of Agrarian Reform regarding APECO. Secretary Reyes brings up the issue of
the CARP law (RA 6657, will be discussed further in this paper) and EO 448 with regard to a

7
APECO answers critics anew. Last accessed May 19, 2013, http://ph.news.yahoo.com/blogs/tinig-ng-
botante/apeco-answers-critics-anew-014547050.html and President Benigno Aquino III: Protect the land,
waters, and people of Casiguran from APECO, Last accessed May 19, 2013,
http://www.change.org/petitions/president-benigno-s-aquino-iii-protect-the-lands-waters-and-people-of-
casiguran-from-apeco-2.

particular land that belonged to Aurora State College of Technology and was reserved by
Proclamation 723 for a purpose exclusive to the establishments nature. The APECO covers
such land and Sec. Reyes asked whether there must be some conversion to be made to consider
the ASCOT land under the CARP rendering APECOs inclusion of the land illegal. De Lima
advises
8
that EO 448 states that only lands which are suitable for agricultural purposes and
those which are no longer actually, directly, and exclusively used or necessary for the purpose
for which they have been reserved, as determined by the DAR in coordination with the
government agency or instrumentality concerned in whose favor the reservation has been
established. This implies that if ASCOT continues to actually, directly, and exclusively
operate according to purposes its land has been reserved, it should be the one supervising over
this parcel of land, and should not be transferred to APECO or even DAR for conversion.
Moreover, according to news and interviews with then House of Representatives member
Sonny Angara, who sponsored the law with his father Sen. Edgardo Angara, confirms a failure of
disclosure and consultation with the locals regarding this development program. This interview
and confirmation were acquired long after the passing of RA 10083, and even after the protests
and marching of Casiguran farmers last December 2012. It somehow bypassed, possibly not
entirely, the participation and rights of the locals to whom this law is directed to.
VII. Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program
Constant clamor and protests from the people belonging to the aforementioned cases are
certainly part of a larger scheme of things, of a set of particular laws which are ideally present to

8
DOJ Public Opinion, August 26, 2011. Last accessed May 20, 2013,
http://www.lis.dar.gov.ph/home/document_view/8660
protect these allegedly violated rights. The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law is one of the
many attempts of the government to normatively create a sphere of confidence and optimism for
landless farmers, farmworkers, and even fisher folk.
Section 2, Chapter 1 of Republic Act 6657 or the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law
of 1988 exposes the general normative principles of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Program. The first paragraph states priority to landless farmers and farmworkers for the highest
consideration to promote social justice and to move the nation towards sound rural development
and industrialization... Together with this 10-year program which offers land redistribution to
farmers and basic support services in terms of cultivating their lands, is a mandate on owner-
tenant sharing in the production of crops which is also supposedly to pursue the interests of the
farmers themselves and not to further subject them to bonds with more able citizens who can
work around the loopholes of specific clauses of the CARL.
To supplement this section is section 9, on Ancestral Lands which states that, For
purposes of this Act, ancestral lands of each indigenous cultural community shall include, but
not be limited to, lands in the actual, continuous and open possession and occupation of the
community and its members: provided, that the Torrens Systems shall be respected.
The right of these communities to their ancestral lands shall be protected to ensure their
economic, social and cultural well-being in line with the principles of self-determination and
autonomy, the systems of land ownership, land use, and the modes of settling land disputes of all
these communities must be recognized and respected.
This is also governed by the 1987 Constitution as stated in Section 4 and 6 of Article XIII
on Social Justice and Human Rights: The State, shall by law, undertake an agrarian reform
program founded on the right of the farmers and regular farmworkers who are landless, to own
directly or collectively the lands they till, or in the case of other farmworkers, receive a just
share of the fruits, thereof. To this end, the State shall encourage and undertake the just
distribution of all agricultural lands, subject to such priorities and reasonable extension limits as
the Congress may prescribe, taking into account ecological, developmental, or equity
considerations, and subject to the payment of just compensation and The State shall apply the
principles of agrarian reform, whenever applicable in accordance with law.
Last 2003, an assessment of CARPs impact and development has been made by the
Department of Agrarian Reform and from it came alarming and very few significant outcomes as
validated by a complementary study in 2008.
1,854 respondents were surveyed in 2003 in a study on the impact of CARP on rural
community households (micro-level) and CARP had, in general, a significant positive impact.
9

However, CARP didnt have much impact when it comes to the more quantitative indicators
such as in distribution of landholdings, and income. Value added in agriculture at the macro
level had continuously declined.
10
The problems of share tenancy issues reflected decreasing
incidences (from 25%-16% in 10 years, from 1990-2000), but this 16% is still considered
significant. There has been decline in access to productive land, decreasing sizes in landholdings
considering that about 80% of the respondents fell below the three-hectare bracket
11
, and decline
in real total income. Moreover, and in more pertinent aspects to our study, the abovementioned
assessment studies show that only less than 50% of the total number of respondents was part of

9
Prudenciano U. Gordoncillo, Eva F. Escueta, Linda M. Penalba, Filomena A. Javier. An Assessment of the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program and its impact on rural communities: Household (micro) perspective in
vol. 2 of CARP Assessment Studies. (Diliman: Department of Agrarian Reform, 2003). 117.
10
Ibid., 118
11
Ibid., 119
peoples organizations and cooperatives. ARBs or Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries comprise 57%
of these groups and the rest were non-ARBs. An alarming statistic regarding the CARP can also
be noted. There was a very low level of awareness among farmers about the CARP which did not
significantly change in 10 years. About 33% of the respondents were not aware and around 35%
of those who are aware thought that CARP will not succeed.
12

In the validation study in 2008, we are faced with CARPs dilemma of not being able to
meet its target land distribution in 10 years, given that DAR was able to distribute only 60% of
its target and DENR, only less than 50%
13
. In this study comprised of 1,227 respondents, 18% of
these, who were part of DARs master list of beneficiaries responded that they havent received
their titles to lands theyre due, 10% of them still holding a Certificate of Land Transfer which is
an initial contract provided to agrarian reform beneficiaries of PD No. 27, and 14% replied that
they havent received the title which is supposed to be awarded to them, positively 85% of them
physically occupying the lands awarded to them, 82% indicated that they are still occupying and
in possession of the lands awarded to them, 17% said that they are neither occupying nor
possessing their awarded land due to reasons such as sale, pawning, lease or reacquisition of
former owner.
14

VIII. Implications and Questions on Democracy and Development of the Philippines
According to Neher and Marlay, scholars believe that there is a clear and positive
relationship between democracy and development.
15
They assert that a democratic government is

12
Ibid., 123
13
Joji Carino, Ma. Elena Regpala, and Raymond de Chavez. Asserting Land Rights. (Baguio: Tebtebba Foundation,
2010). 17.
14
Ibid., 27-36
15
Clark D. Neher and Ross Marlay. Democracy and Development in Southeast Asia. (Colorado: Westview Press,
1995). 191.
necessary for any economy to function effectively. There is a particular building-up of trust and
relationship between the government and its active constituents so these two parties move
towards a healthier and better economy. However, certain contexts must be taken into
consideration when concluding our prior statement. We must look at different forces at work,
especially in cases like that of the Philippines where supposedly efforts for development create
greater gaps between the rich and the poor, worsening a perception of the state and its policies
which are supposedly instruments for democracy.
With land, as a great resource and ticket to identity for Filipinos at stake in this
undertaking, we can imply a few truths regarding the states current democracy and development
with respect to the APECO case and other cases that build around similar predicaments.
First, since there is difficulty in discerning several laws implementation and application,
there is much room for debate over whose interests these laws serve and for further amendments
which can divert the primary purposes set by the preliminary authors for the laws. The generic
clauses and unclear provisions which are very much open to misinterpretation and can be
considered as loopholes dont entirely protect, if not entirely jeopardize, interests of the supposed
benefactors of these laws.
Rousseau talks about the general will in a developmental model of democracy, one that
is contrary to his private or selfish will and one that seeks not just economic equity but also
economic quality. Grass-roots democracy or the belief that political power should be exercised
at the lowest possible level is at the very heart of the developmental model of democracy
16
.
Given this model, theres much pushing that the Philippine nation needs to do given the evident

16
Andrew Heywood. Democracy in Politics 2
nd
ed. (Hampshire: Palgrave, 2002). 74-75.
and prominent pursuit of private will as seen in our unclear and questionable laws. In pursuit of a
positive correlation between democracy and development in the Philippine context, empowering
and enabling people who value their rights and their simple contributions to society can be a step
towards some form of grassroots democracy.
Another implication, which is very much related to the first one, poses a nature of an
interrogation more than an implication. Albeit civic representation through the Congress and
party-lists, why do people clamor for the lack of consultation when it comes to passing bills
that oversee the rights they think they are due? And if even main legislators who push for laws
focused on masked development and progress programs admit to non-compliance to prior
mandate, how can this be concluded in a supposedly democratic state? There is still a prevalence
of an elite-run system elites that arent necessarily learned and exactly qualified to run the state
efficiently but elites who have been there for decades, products of political dynasties that
sequester power and redirect the needs of the state making the laws they make appear as if they
address real problems in the country.
Gaetano Mosca enlightens us regarding the case of elitism and its seemingly reverse
relationship with democracy. Moscas fundamental principle presents democracy and elitism as
distinct but not opposite and mutually interdependent. It is formulated as follows: In all
societies which have a government, those who control and exercise public power are always a
minority, whereas the majority never really participate in the government but are merely subject
to it.
17
Robert Dahl refines this and tells us that there isnt a single minority who controls but
several minorities do. And according to Daniel Bell as he quotes Confucius The Analects, only

17
Maurice A. Finocchiaro. Beyond Right and Left: Democratic Elitism in Mosca and Gramsci. (New Haven and
London: Yale University Press, 1999). 23.
ethical and intellectual elites have a vocation to lead society, as the bulk of persons are not
thought capable of exercising such initiative.
18
As a matter of fact, we can agree with both Mosca
and Dahl, but Confucius can be a bit too discriminating. However order and proper governance a
nation needs which can be delivered by the learned and well-educated, this work towards order
and governance is a joint one, and most especially not independent of the less privileged who
form the majority.
Third, there might be mistakes in asserting what kind of development the country actually
needs. We arent solving real problems. Some just think that ingenious solutions would solve
problems which arent even there, or conditions perceived with inaccurate lenses. How much is
the State, the legislative, overseers of the developmental sector in touch with the people a
democracy is ideally serving, provided a very significant pivotal point which is the land?
Fourth, a pattern of attempts in development in the so-called system that we have
especially with regard to land-related concerns is a sign of both real and ambiguous progress the
country can be undergoing. There seems to be some form of stagnancy in the programs set by the
government and backlogs which are overlooked hence more attempts of providing solutions.
This stagnancy mirrors a larger context which is a sluggish economic and political development
ever since the efforts of the State towards re-democratization during Corazon Aquinos
administration.
IX. Recommendations
This section proposes several recommendations both specific to the APECO case and
generic to the other land cases at hand.

18
Daniel A. Bell. Beyond Liberal Democracy: Political Thinking for an East Asian Context. (Princeton and Oxford:
Princeton University Press, 2006). 153.
One of the first major steps a developing country like ours can take is re-examination of
its resources. This can be juxtaposed to the idea of SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses,
Opportunities, and Threats) analysis which is utilized as a fact-check tool in the business field. In
our case, the government has to know what Aurora has in terms of its natural resources, human
resources, and how well it can cultivate the relationship of these two in the context of Aurora.
After identifying what a particular region has and is capable of, it is also necessary to
identify its needs and concerns which require immediate addressing. A thorough knowledge of a
particular region enables and produces better legislators who are even better qualified to craft
laws which are evident of proper matching between a regions needs and resources. This
empowers the most important resource of the nation which is the people themselves.
Cases like these also call for fixing information systems necessary for databases and
tracking concrete progress. Investment in technologies which allow this to happen can be
considered by the government.
For an agricultural-friendly type of nation that we have, the government can look into
developing sustainable methods of cultivating and empowering this sector as it definitely has so
much promise and potential.
X. Conclusion
The Aurora Pacific Economic Zone and Freeport Issue of 2012 is definitely a sui generis
of land-related cases in the Philippines. This is evident in their legalistic natures, ambivalent
legal bases and in the parties involved, which are comprised of indigenous people with ancestral
lands, farmers and farm workers seeking rights towards just production in a land they can call
their own, and of course, legislators and personalities who are members of different or similar
elite groups put into power by a supposedly democratic nation-state and ideally creating
opportunities for real development and protection of the peoples general will.
The performance of the CARP and the presence of RA 6657 to govern it seem to worsen
the wounds caused by RA 10083 or the APECO law. Instead of providing a clear-cut and
objective solution to protect the values Casiguran farmers stand for, it only opened for a
possibility of tolerance of continued oligarchy and redirection as to what could really matter to
the people who are in dire need of the governments attention. It also continues to be a concrete
evidence of frustration in the development sector. We are further confronted with more attempts
towards development instead of even just meeting the minimum of a very ambitious program
that has its so-called social justice and equity all over it.
Albeit differences in the efforts of pushing for social justice and probably crops that they
produce, the people who fight for the rights they are due couldnt be blamed for cynicism
towards a real system that they could fully trust and participate in. The Angaras and the rest of
the APECO board could harness and start establishing an active and productive people in
Aurora if they could focus on the current resources that they have through the people who know
very well what they need and what they are capable of doing, of contributing to a better nation.
If theres real value we place in the general will and an appropriate system of checks and
balance which is a requisite for a democracy (Lipset), then conflict of interests among the
government, its arms, and different members of varying constituent groups could be lessened, if
not entirely eradicated, and could be efficiently reformed towards a constructive framework the
Philippines, as a striving and developing nation can use.


Bibliography
Daniel A. Bell. Beyond Liberal Democracy: Political Thinking for an East Asian Context. (Princeton and
Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2006)
Joji Carino, Ma. Elena Regpala, and Raymond de Chavez. Asserting Land Rights. (Baguio: Tebtebba
Foundation, 2010)
Maurice A. Finocchiaro. Beyond Right and Left: Democratic Elitism in Mosca and Gramsci. (New Haven
and London: Yale University Press, 1999). 22-61, 114-143
Carmina B. Flores-Obanil. Validation Survey Results: Private Agricultural Land Distribution under
CARP. (Diliman: Philippine Center for Rural Development Studies, 2008). 1-41
Prudenciano U. Gordoncillo, Eva F. Escueta, Linda M. Penalba, Filomena A. Javier. An Assessment of
the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program and its impact on rural communities: Household (micro)
perspective in vol. 2 of CARP Assessment Studies. (Diliman: Department of Agrarian Reform, 2003). 1-
11, 23-27, 39-51, 117-128
Carolina G.Hernandez. Political Developments in the Philippines in Democracy and Development in
East Asia: Taiwan, South Korea, and the Philippines ed. Thomas Robinson. (Washington DC: The AEI
Press).
Andrew Heywood. Democracy in Politics 2
nd
ed. (Hampshire: Palgrave, 2002)
Andrew Heywood. Governments, Systems, and Regimes in Politics 2
nd
ed. (Hampshire: Palgrave,
2002)
Seymour Martin Lipset. The Social Requisites of Democracy Revisited 1993 Presidential Address in
vol. 59 of American Sociological Review. (1994)
Clark D. Neher and Ross Marlay. Democracy and Development in Southeast Asia. (Colorado: Westview
Press, 1995). 2-10, 14-19, 71-73, 191-200.
Adam Przeworski. A Better Democracy, A Better Economy in Boston Review. (1996)
James Putzel. Can Corporate Stock-Sharing Lead to Social Justice in Saliksik: PPI Research Papers.
(Quezon City: Philippine Peasant Institute, 1992).
***
Agta, Farmers, Fishermen set March vs. APECO Last accessed May 20, 2013,
http://manilatimes.net/index/index.php/news/top-stories/47049-agtas-farmers-fishermen-set-march-vs-
apeco
APECO answers critics anew. Last accessed May 19, 2013, http://ph.news.yahoo.com/blogs/tinig-ng-
botante/apeco-answers-critics-anew-014547050.html

Casiguran locals march for their land. Last accessed May 18, 2013, http://www.rappler.com/move-
ph/16941-casiguran-locals-march-for-their-land
DOJ: School should give 105 hectare land to farmers. Last accessed May 20, 2013.
http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/305722/news/nation/doj-school-should-give-105-hectare-
aurora-land-to-farmers
DOJ Public Opinion, August 26, 2011. Last accessed May 20, 2013,
http://www.lis.dar.gov.ph/home/document_view/8660
Executive Order 448 of February 14, 1991. Last accessed May 20, 2013.
http://www.lawphil.net/executive/execord/eo1991/eo_448_1991.html
Hacienda Luisita and the farce of Philippine land reform. Last accessed May 20, 2013,
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2011/07/phil-j07.html
President Benigno Aquino III: Protect the land, waters, and people of Casiguran from APECO, Last
accessed May 19, 2013, http://www.change.org/petitions/president-benigno-s-aquino-iii-protect-the-
lands-waters-and-people-of-casiguran-from-apeco-2.
Republic Act 6657 of June 10, 1988 Last accessed May 16, 2013.
http://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1988/ra_6657_1988.html
Republic Act 9490 of June 29, 2007 Last accessed May 19, 2013.
http://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2007/ra_9490_2007.html
Republic Act 10083 of July 27, 2009 Last accessed May 19, 2013.
http://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2010/ra_10083_2010.html
1987 Philippine Constitution. Last accessed May 20, 2013.
http://www.lawphil.net/consti/cons1987.html