1 - Universal Periodic Review

More documents

Recommendations

Info

(or “aggressive”) in its approach. These other groups indicated that they sometimesencounter problems with the way TFM enters landholdings already organised by themand woos (potential) agrarian reform beneficiaries by offering resources, loans, etc.Specific Conclusions:• A complicating factor in the organizing work among farmworkers and tenants inthe region is the presence of about six different organizations with varyingapproaches towards the land question. To date, most organizations (with theexception of the CPP-NPA) seem to have found a way to work peacefully in thesame area most of the time, and in several instances have even collaborated witheach other to share complimentary experiences and skills.• The DAR’s half-hearted approach in implementing CARP in the region hashelped to set the stage for conflicts to emerge. This approach has been one ofthe main contributing factors in the tension that arose between TFM and DALO. Ifthe DAR had done its job properly, it is likely that this tension would not havereached such an extreme level. Particularly problematic is the tendency toexpedite the issuing of collective CLOAs without a swift follow-up in terms oftaking the necessary further steps (i) to determine specific areas for differentgroups of beneficiaries and/or (ii) to award individual titles should that be thedesire of the beneficiaries.Specific Recommendations:• In the specific case of Hacienda Dorotea, the DAR should immediately undertakean area/boundary identification process that is speedy and just, so as to lessenthe tensions and deter any further strife.• Regarding the murder of Rico Adeva, we urge a speedy and just resolution of thecase so that the perpetrator(s) will be brought to justice.• We urge the RPA-ABB to come up with an official written policy statement on itsalleged involvement in cases against farmer-beneficiaries; to investigate into theirranks possible human rights violations committed by its members; and to effectthe necessary measures to resolve these allegations.• We urge the TFM and all other organisations working in the area to hold aconstructive dialogue on the terms of their coexistence; all groups working in thearea should fully commit themselves to striving for a peaceful and constructiveform of coexistence built on the principle of complementation, rather thancompetition.4.4.3. Chemical Victims:Davao Banana Plantation Workers Association of Tiburcia Inc. (DBPWATI)In the 1970’s and 1980’s, a chemical banned in the US was applied by fruit companiesin the US and used here in the Philippines, unbeknownst to farmworkers and residentsin these areas, who found out about this only in 1995. The said chemical wasDIBROMOCHLOROPROPANE (DBCP), a known carcinogen used against the banananematode parasite. Stanfilco, Chiquita (TADECO), and Del Monte were the main usersof DBCP, which was manufactured by Shell Chemical Corporation, Dow ChemicalCompany and the Occidental Chemical Corporation. DBCP was banned when 7,536IFFM 2006 Final Report 32
claimants in Texas filed a class-action case against the manufacturers, in light of itshazardous effects, including sterility and skin diseases, especially on plantationworkers assigned to wrap and harvest bananas without any protective gear.Workers in Davao del Norte who were exposed to the chemical suffered seriousinjuries to their health, including sterility and severe damage to their reproductiveorgans. At least one was said to have died from exposure to DBCP fumes, while anestimated 60% of the male workers were rendered sterile and 20% of the womenworkers have suffered damage to the uterus. These claims have been validated bymedical examinations conducted by the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA).“I wanted to have more children, but can not, since I am sterile. Moreover, on a dailybasis we have to deal with the stigma that people make fun of you that you are sterile”,says a victim of chemicals who worked and got exposed to DBCP at the bananaplantation in the 1970s and 1980s.Refusing to use the chemicals was not an option for a lot of plantation workers. ”Weneeded the job. If we would have refused orders from the management, we would havebeen terminated”, says another plantation worker, who suffers from a skin disease. Heregrets the fact he was never properly educated and trained by the management to usechemicals. “We did not wear any protective clothes and were not aware of the danger.”In 1997, banana plantation workers filed the same case as in Texas against thecompanies and the manufacturers. 761 out of 7,961 members of DBPWATI (firstclaimants) were simultaneously paid US$20,000 by the Dow Chemical Corporation andUS$22,000 by the Shell Chemical Company. Hence, the total amount paid by the twomanufacturers was US$42,000, made through a settlement agreement (SA) as part ofan out-of-court settlement.In October 1998 a second set of 420 claimants of DBPWATI filed the same case in theRegional Trial Court Branch 14, Davao City against the users and manufacturers ofDBCP. The case reached the Supreme Court (Third Division), but is still pendingbecause only two of the companies have given their comments on a motion ofmediation that was filed by DBPWATI members. The other four companies mustsubmit their comments regarding the motion for mediation in order for the case to moveforward.Specific Recommendations• We urge the immediate provision of full and appropriate medical attention to thevictims of the chemical poisoning and the immediate launching of aninvestigation into the case in order to establish culpability.• The government should take immediate actions to prevent the entering of thebanned chemicals to avoid more damages within the country, especially to theworkers of the banana plantations as well as to the nearby residents.• Compensation should be given to all the victims of chemical effects.IFFM 2006 Final Report 33
Page 1 and 2: RUNNING AMOK:LANDLORD LAWLESSNESS a
Page 3 and 4: petitioners and agrarian reform ben
Page 5 and 6: List of AcronymsADB Asian Developme
Page 7 and 8: SWS Social Weather StationTADECO Ta
Page 9 and 10: 1. IntroductionThe Government of th
Page 11 and 12: During the Visayas leg of the prese
Page 13 and 14: the right to food in General Commen
Page 15 and 16: into the CARP. Voluntary Offer to S
Page 17 and 18: This remote region on Southern Luzo
Page 19 and 20: families should receive adequate we
Page 21 and 22: 4.2.5. Dispossession of cropsTwo (2
Page 23 and 24: is therefore the least desirable op
Page 25 and 26: (v) To properly investigate those i
Page 27 and 28: was the person they saw shoot Ka Er
Page 29 and 30: assailants at the time of her husba
Page 31: collective CLOA, that is why they c
Page 35 and 36: 5.3. State Obligation to Protect Pe
Page 37 and 38: (iii) Ensure Petitioners’ and Ben
Page 39: IFFM 2006 Final Report

1 - Universal Periodic Review

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?