Tuesday, February 05, 2008 ARBs forcibly enter Marsman's plantation By Ben O. Tesiorna
BANANA growers and agrarian reform beneficiaries (ARBs) of a 193-hectare land in Barangay Tibal-og in Sto. Tomas, Davao del Norte forcibly entered the north gate of the vast Marsman plantation after the Provincial Agrarian Reform Office validated their contract with the Davao Fruits Corporation, a rival company of Marsman.
More than a hundred farmers entered the gate of Marsman around 2 p.m. on Monday to enforce their right to pack their products, which the Marsman allegedly prevented them to do.
Two trucks owned by the farmers forcibly moved their way in despite the futile protest of about 10 blue guards of the Marsman.
It was learned that the Marsman Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Cooperative (Marbco) and the Marsman Individual Farmers Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Cooperative (Mifarbco) entered into an alternative venture agreement (AVA) with the Davao Fruits in 2006.
The Marsman, however, protested such move saying that the two farmer cooperatives failed to satisfy the requirements needed for them to pre-terminate their 2003 agreement with Marsman.
The Paro-Davao del Norte headed by Nicasio Lemente stated last January 28 through an order granting the joint petition of the two cooperatives and approving the AVA entered into by Marbco and Mifarbco with Davao Fruits.
The two cooperatives reportedly complied with the 18-month notice for the termination of their exclusive banana marketing agreement (Ebma) with Marsman.
Merbco and Mifarbco also claimed to have fully paid Marsman of the P38 million needed for their agreement to be terminated as payment for the facilities and structures Marsman had constructed within the 193-hectare area owned by the farmers.
The farmers served the Paro order Monday morning and forcibly entered the area in the afternoon. During the standoff, fully armed blue guards of Marbco and Mifarbco were seen outside the Marsman north gate, while fully armed guards of Marsman were on the other side of the fence.
A guard of the Marsman told Sun.Star Davao Monday that while the farmers were able to enter the premises along with their two trucks, they would definitely not be allowed to leave the premises after they packed their products Tuesday.
The farmers warned that they would enter or leave the premises whenever they wish since they are the real owners of the land and not Marsman.
The government awarded the 193-hectare land inside the more than 1,000-hectare banana plantation of the Marsman Company to the 193 farmer beneficiaries in 2003.
That same year, the ARB's entered into a 10-year marketing agreement with Marsman. Part of the stipulation was for any of the two parties to terminate the contract provided an 18-month notice and due payment is given to the other party.
The farmers said they have complied with the 18-month notice and have paid Marsman P38 million.
It was learned that Marsman did not accept the payment, thus farmers were forced to consign the money to the court.
Marbco chair Gumercindo Cañas said they have decided to terminate their contract with Marsman for various reasons. Among the reasons was the shabby treatment of Marsman to the farmers, delayed payments, aerial spraying fee is high, expensive fertilizers, and most importantly the low buying price of Marsman for their products.
Cañas said Marsman originally buy their bananas for only $2.30 per box, whereas DFC offered to pay them $2.75 per box.
Efforts to get the side of any Marsman official proved futile as of this writing.
Marsman's chief operations officer Amado de Borja was inside the plantation, but was not available for an interview since he is said to be in a bad mood, according to his secretary.
A text message to the corporate services director of Marsman Drysdale, Ma. Victoria E. Sembrano, was also unanswered.
In an earlier interview with Sembrano, she said as far as Marsman is concerned, they have an existing contract with the Marbco, consequently Mifarbco -- which was formed within Marbco.
She also added that no less than the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) provincial AR office rejected the proposed AVA Mifarbco submitted.
DAR Administrative Order 9 of 2006 requires that the Paro will review any AVA covering production, contract growing, marketing contract, management contract, service contract, "and other emerging schemes where there are no transfer in the use and possession of the land."
Since the Mifarbco land is not yet fully paid and is still within the 10-year prohibition of transfer of land, the Paro has to affix his signature as nominal party to the AVA.
Since the Paro rejected the AVA, then it means the AVA is not valid, Sembrano said in the interview.
She also said they were willing to give what the farmers were to get from the agreement they had with the other banana exporter, but the Minfarbco refused to deal with them.
The farmers said they would bring out their packed products outside the premises "by hook or by crook."
The Marsman guards also said they are to prevent the trucks from getting out of the premises by hook or by crook per order of the Marsman management.
No police and Paro officials were seen in Monday's incident.
