22 February 2017, Manila, Philippines - Civil society and grassroots organizations from across Asia gathered in Manila for a two-day strategy meeting, February 21 and 22, to discuss a global campaign against inequality. Calling themselves the Fight Inequality Alliance, the group believes that a global movement is what it’s going to take to address and fight inequality, which has reached extreme proportions in this century, and has created devastating impacts on communities and countries, and on the climate.

‘We cannot hope to end poverty and injustice without confronting the over concentration of wealth and power among the few. Inequality is part of the root cause of the many issues we face as people of Asia,’ said Lidy Nacpil, Coordinator, Asian Peoples’ Movement on Debt and Development (APMDD).

“Inequality is undermining the work against poverty, and given the scale of the challenge in tackling extreme inequality, it is only by bringing activists and organizations to work together can greater impact be achieved. There is an urgent need to address the structural causes of inequality through building a people-powered movement around the world,” added Lilian Mercado, Asia Regional Director of Oxfam International.

In its vision and mission statement, Fight Inequality Alliance (FIA) expounded on inequality’s various facets and expressions in societies and the different regions of the world, emphasizing how the “elite few” has access to and control of huge wealth, incomes, products and resources around the globe while the 99 percent tries to survive in precarious working and living conditions.

“Inequality has reached a crisis point around the world. That’s why this alliance is growing and building the power of the people to be stronger than the people with power. Together we must turn the tide against rising inequality,” said Jenny Ricks, Convenor of the Fight Inequality Alliance.

In 2016, an Oxfam study calculated that worldwide, 62 individuals had the same wealth as 3.6 billion people. The wealth of these 62 richest people rose by 45% since 2010 while the wealth of the 3.6 billion people, those comprising the bottom half of the population, dropped by just over a trillion dollars in the same period, a decline of 38%. The average annual income of the poorest 10% of people in the world has risen by less than $3 each year in almost a quarter of a century. Their daily income has risen by less than a single cent every year. Since the turn of the century, the poorest half of the world’s population has received just 1% of the total increase in global wealth, while half of that increase has gone to the top 1%.

“There are wide gaps between macroeconomic indicators of economic growth, incomes, GDP and employment on the one hand, and actual conditions of wellbeing and poverty on the other hand. Even if macro figures show an increase in GDP growth and incomes, at the micro level, we still see increasing unemployment, worsening work conditions, the impoverishment of small farmers and producers, distress migration, and growing feminization of poverty,” explained Shalmali Guttal, Executive Director of Focus on the Global South, a regional organization based in Bangkok but with national advocacies in India, the Philippines, and the Mekong region.

Environmental catastrophes are also a manifestation of the massive inequality being faced globally. Climate science puts the accountability for climate change squarely on the excessive use of fossil fuels by the North starting from over a century ago. In the last few years, climate change impacts ranging from extreme heat and prolonged dry seasons to more devastating storms and unprecedented volumes of rainfall bore down on the Philippines, Myanmar, Nepal, Bangladesh, Pakistan, India, Vietnam, Cambodia, Lao PDR and other developing countries, aggravating hunger, job insecurity, and negatively impacting migration and peace and order in the region.

“It is our stark realization that winning our fight to save the environmental is something we cannot do without tackling root causes, without confronting the malaise of inequality,” said Yeb Saño, Executive Director of Greenpeace Southeast Asia.

Organizations at the forefront of the formation of this movement have been involved in various initiatives addressing poverty and other social-economic development issues but they see the urgency of coming together to face an enormous challenge, the biggest threat to “human development” and humanity itself. At the international level, the lead groups in the alliance are ACT Alliance, ActionAid International; Civicus, Asian Peoples Movement on Debt and Development (APMDD); FEMNET; Focus on the Global South; Global Alliance for Tax Justice; Greenpeace; International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC); and Oxfam International. But it is the main strategy of FIA to build upon the plans and actions crafted by national organizations in recognition of specific conditions and issues within countries and societies.

“Our organization has been doing various campaigns from when it was established in 1958, especially to achieve women empowerment and gender equality. But we can do better if we join others who have the same voice as us. In this way we can be stronger,” said Unique Lohani of the All Nepal Women’s Association.

Indonesia-based group Prakarsa has been working as well “to make our society better through improving access to and participation in the economic and political processes of our country, as well as social relations. According to Ah Maftuchan, Prakarsa recognizes that “poverty in many countries have been reduced, but the poor are very slow in getting income increase because of rising inequality. We are keen about putting inequality as part of our advocacy. Our government is setting up programs to fight inequality but we need to advocate more to push it to address inequalities in education, health, income, social insurance, labor protection, among others.”

“A movement of national alliances is seen as the key driver of change and will be supported by regional and international solidarity and action to amplify it. The alliance will be a radical voice for transformational social and economic alternatives,” the FIA statement said. #

Media contact: 

Joseph Purugganan, Philippines Coordinator, Focus on the Global South

Tel: +63 922 829 9450 | Email: josephp@focusweb.org

Angelica Carballo Pago, Media Campaigner, Greenpeace Southeast Asia - Philippines

Tel: +63 949 889 1332 | Email: apago@greenpeace.org

Dinah Fuentesfina, International Campaigns Mobilisation Manager, ActionAid

Tel: +66 (0) 933539926 | dinah.fuentesfina@actionaid.org

Photo caption: Trade activists protesting the 17th round of negotiations for the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (RCEP) in Kobe, Japan. 27 February 2017. Photo by Shoko Uchida.

1 March 2017

Trade Justice Pilipinas a broad platform campaigning for just trade and investment policies expresses its opposition to and calls on the public to resist international economic agreements like Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (RCEP) and other new generation FTAs that advance corporate agenda over peoples rights and welfare.

The demand was made as governments from 16 countries in the Asia-Pacific region converged in Kobe, Japan for the 17th round of negotiations for the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (RCEP).

There is a stronger push for RCEP in the wake of the US withdrawal from the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP).  RCEP is now presented as tan alternative arena for advancing trade and investment agenda in the Asia Pacific Region.  

What is being glossed over in the rush to conclude RCEP is that the deal that is being forged is cut in the same mold as TPP.  Like TPP, RCEP is a new generation FTA that could further inequality and wealth concentration, environmental destruction and the climate crisis, and lead to more human rights violations and erosion of peoples’ rights in the region.  

RCEP like TPP is advancing a corporate agenda that would threaten public health and peoples access to medicines. The strong push from Japan and Korea for TPP-provisions on intellectual property rights in the RCEP negotiations will make it harder for poor people in the region to access affordable medicines particularly life-saving drugs, and for governments to advance public health policies for the benefit of the poor.

RCEP like TPP is advancing the corporate agenda by pushing for an investment regime that will give corporations the right to sue the government over policies and regulations. Under the infamous Investor State Dispute Settlement Mechanism or ISDS, corporations are given the power to take legal action against the State in private and exclusive investment arbitration courts.  ISDS, which has been highly criticized in the context of TPP negotiations, should be strongly rejected as well by governments across Asia as an instrument for weakening the right of State to regulate investments in the name of the greater public interest.

RCEP like TPP will further curtail the power of governments to use public policies to advance development agenda by putting in place prohibitions on performance requirement such as policies on domestic content and export restrictions, policies that favor employment of locals over foreign workers or even those that push for technology transfer.

Amidst the continuing backlash against globalization policies that have disenfranchised and marginalized the working class, the imperative is really to push back on RCEP and new generation trade and investment agreements that advance the corporate agenda over peoples’ interests.#

Joseph Purugganan (josephp@focusweb.org. Tel: +639228299450)

Photo caption: Trade activists protesting the 17th round of negotiations for the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (RCEP) in Kobe, Japan. 27 February 2017. Photo by Shoko Uchida.

This morning, around 80 community members came together to participate in an event in Cambodia to commemorate International Women’s Day.

Of the participants, around 30 were local schoolchildren, with members of social movements and civil society organisations also participating, including two from Messenger Band, one from Social Action for Change and one from Focus on the Global South.

Community members from Lor Peang shared their thoughts and experiences on women’s and land rights, especially in the context of their long-running land dispute against KDC International, which has greatly exacerbated their daily struggles:

“I struggle for my land but authorities were coming to suppress us; they were not coming to help us. We have to know weapons to fight back. What we can do is go to ask government to help to solve the land conflict for my community. What I expect and hope is to have justice for our community. I want to receive a gift from government to release Ms. Tep Vanny and the other five human rights defenders. Please Prime Minister come to visit our community to hear about the real land conflict with KDC company.” Ms. Keo Vannak, land activist at Lor Peang.

1.jpg

“I have a land conflict with KDC and my livelihood is very poor. No government institutions are helping to solve our land conflict.” Ms. Sim, female activist and widow at Lor Peang community.

“I lost my land in Lor Peang. When I lost my land I lost my livelihood; my husband passed away and I am living as a widowed mother. I have children who need me to support them so I go to work in the factory but it does not mean I no longer join the struggle of land. I still continue to join other activists when I am free. I would like the government to solve our land conflict urgently. I don't understand- today is Women's Rights day but why does the factory owner still work as normal?” Ms. But Touch, a factory worker in Lor Peang community.

6_1.jpg

“I have lost land in this community. Rights are stated in the declaration on human rights and other conventions; also it is included in Cambodia constitution. In Cambodia from my observation there is a lack of human rights respect and protection, including implementation.” Mr. Peng Rum from CNRP.

"Women play an important role in family and politics." Mr. Sgnoun Ngoun, a land activist at Lor Peang community. 

“I was a former school teacher. I lost my position and career because of the land conflict with KDC company. My son joined school when he was 11 years old. The tactic of the company is for our community to lose the case and so we cannot continue our struggle. We have lost rights to live, land and livelihoods. What we fight for is justice and land for our community and generation.” Ms. Oum Sophy, Lor Peang community representative.

4_1.jpg

Manila -- For Philippine women’s organizations, the 2017 commemoration of International Women’s Day was a critical action by and on behalf of Filipino women. As the March 8 statement signed by more than 30 organizations, including Focus on the Global South, said, “Filipino women from across all sectors have fought long and tough struggles—and have won many. In the past decades, we asserted for better working conditions for workers, pushed for lands for farmers and decent housing for the urban poor, fought and brought down a dictatorship, claimed our reproductive rights, and resisted sexual and other forms of violence against women.”

But it also underscored that, “…conditions around the world, and in particular, in Philippine society, are far from achieving gender equality and ending misogyny. Especially in these times when forces promoting patriarchal and anti-poor policies return to power.”

Indeed, women workers and from the urban poor communities (mainly in Tondo, one of the oldest districts in Manila populated mostly by informal settlers), which have been the main target of the Duterte government’s Tokhang or war on drugs, came out of their homes, had a noise barrage and marched towards the historic Plaza Miranda, where protesters have often converged for political actions. At Plaza Miranda they were met by other sectoral women’s organizations as expression of solidarity; the main message was to show that women were casting away fear that harassment, extrajudicial killings, and other forms of violence have instilled in them.

“Rice and roses, not violence. Land, livelihood, reproductive health service, gender-fair education, job security, not violence,” the women declared via speeches and banners.

March 8 has come and gone, but this is the promise the women made: “The Filipino women have persisted amidst all these challenges in the past. The Filipino women will not be cowed, not now, not ever. We shall always rise to the occasion to struggle and defend our victories; to further fight for and realize our rights. We shall not allow the forces of misogyny, of death, of all kinds of violence against women to overcome us.” (For the full statement, please go to https://www.facebook.com/focusontheglobalsouth/posts/10155107762434438 …)

On 14 March 2017, the International Day of Action for Rivers, we, the Save the Mekong Coalition along with civil society and community partners from Thailand, Cambodia and Vietnam, make this statement to express our gratitude to the Mekong River and the way of life she supports. The Mekong is our mother river, home to unique biodiversity and a lifeline for millions of people throughout the river basin. We recognize the efforts of Mekong communities who are working to protect and preserve the unique ecosystems and resources of the river for future generations. 

We are extremely concerned by large-scale development plans, which ignore knowledge, cultures, and voices of the women and men in the Mekong Basin whose lives and beliefs are inherently intertwined with the Mekong River. Planning and decision-making over hydropower and other developments on the Mekong River have lacked public participation, transparency and accountability.

Rivers are essential in sustaining human existence globally, and yet, everywhere, freshwater systems are being destroyed and degraded. With climate change and increasing water scarcity, it is more important than ever to protect these vital resources and the biodiversity, natural systems and way of life they support.

On this day around the world hundreds of communities are joining together to take action for their rivers. We stand in solidarity with communities along the Mekong River. We re-affirm our commitment to work together across the basin, prioritizing the voices of Mekong communities in decision-making over the future of the Mekong River for current and future generations. 

This declaration is available to download in Khmer language below. 

FTAs aren’t just about ‘trade’. They’re comprehensive agreements to lock in free market capitalism, strengthen the power of global corporations, finance, and powerful governments, and advance their geopolitical objectives. 

There are direct links between FTAs, climate change, ecological devastation, and violations of Indigenous Peoples’, workers’ and farmers’ rights. 

We must struggle for real systemic change, saying “no to FTAs and global free market capitalism”, combatting racist politics and defending mother earth.

Click here to download the English edition 

Haga clic aquí para descargar la edición en español 

Cliquez ici pour télécharge l'édition française 

For further information, please contact info@nyeleni.org or visit www.nyeleni.org

On 21 March, the International Day of Forests, 200 organisations are reminding the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) that its misleading forest definition dating back to 1948 must be changed. The definition has allowed the plantations industry to hide the devastating ecological and social impacts of large-scale monoculture tree plantations behind a positive forest image.

FAO’s forest definition has allowed the plantations industry to call their monoculture plantations of fast-growing species such as eucalyptus, pine, rubber or acacia "forests" because it defines a forest only by the number, height and canopy cover of trees on an area. The FAO forest definition has been used as blueprint for over 200 national and international forest definitions since 1948.

Under the guise of this FAO forest definition, the industry has been able to expand fast, especially in the global South, where monoculture tree plantations now cover some several tens of millions of hectares of land. This expansion has brought misery to countless rural and peasant communities, and indigenous peoples. Families have lost land and livelihood where monoculture tree plantations have taken their land, destroyed their way of life, dried up their water springs and streams and poisoned their food with agro-toxins. (1)

"For almost 70 years, the misleading FAO forest definition has served the tree plantations industry well. They have hidden the destruction caused when diverse forests, grasslands and peatlands overflowing with life are converted into 'green deserts' made up of monoclonal trees in straight rows behind the positive forest image provided by the FAO," says Winfridus Overbeek, international coordinator of the World Rainforest Movement.

Forest restoration as climate protection debate adds urgency to get forest definition right

"With the adoption of the UN Paris Agreement on climate change, revision of this FAO forest definition takes on additional urgency", says Guadalupe Rodríguez from Salva la Selva/Rettet den Regenwald, "it would be a tragedy if the misleading FAO definition makes expansion of these damaging tree monocultures eligible for climate funds earmarked for "reforestation" and "forest restoration." This would not only harm even more communities where tree plantations take over land used by villagers but also undermine climate protection: Carbon-rich forests could be destroyed and be replaced by monoculture tree plantations with countries claiming that according to the FAO forest definition, no forest area has been lost - despite the massive loss of carbon, biodiversity, water sources and local livelihoods when forests are replaced by monoculture plantations.

An example where the deliberate mis-labelling of plantations as forests allows the plantations industry to tap into climate funds is the 'African Forests Restoration initiative' (AFR100). Launched at the 2015 UN climate meeting, it aims to cover 100 million hectares that participating African governments consider “degraded” lands. The World Bank will make USD 1 billion available for this plan – and relies on the FAO forest definition to define eligibility for funding. Unsurprisingly, one of the most controversial tree plantations companies operating in Africa, the Norwegian-based Green Resources (2), was among the keynote speakers at a 2016 conference in Ghana, where the implementation of the AFR 100 initiative was prominent on the agenda.

2017 FAO International Forests Day theme 'Forests & Energy' shows urgent need to change forest definition 

"Industrialized countries' unsustainable energy demand combined with their new quest for 'renewable' energy is already converting forests in the global South into industrial 'biomass' plantations. Yet, the word 'plantation' does not appear once on the FAO's "Key messages" webpage for the International Forests Day 2017", says Wally Menne of the Timberwatch Coalition, South Africa. For example, to fuel all of the UK's energy requirements through eucalyptus­-based biomass would require some 55 million hectares of plantation in Brazil – an area larger than twice the size of the UK.

200 groups today join the more than 130 thousand groups and individuals who called on the FAO in 2015 to rise to the challenge and urgently change the FAO forest definition because tree plantations are not forests.

Contacts:

World Rainforest Movement:

Winfridus Overbeek winnie(at)wrm.org.uy Tel: +55 27 988 219007

Timberwatch Coalition:

Wally Menne plantnet(at)iafrica.com Tel: +27 (0) 82 4442083

Rettet den Regenwald:

Guadalupe Rodriguez guadalupe(at)regenwald.org Tel: + 49 40 410 38 04 3

Notes:

(1) The letter sent to FAO today can be found here and below. It is also available in Spanish, French and Portuguese.

(2) In response to the 2015 petition signed by over 130,000people calling on FAO to change its forest definition, the FAO claims that its role is merely to harmonize the different national and international forest definitions of forests elaborated since 1948. However, the letter sent today shows how this view ignores that in fact, the FAO forest definition is THE reference for many of the national definitions, in the UN climate talks, in initiatives such as AFR100, etc.

Image: Rubber plantation in Southern Lao PDR

Forest destruction and encroachment on public land are issues that have figured highly on the agenda of the current military government. Since 2014, the introduction and implementation of controversial legislations, cabinet resolutions and policies, including NCPO Orders no. 64/2014 and 66/2014, have restricted access and use of land and forestry land by marginalized and landless peasants, indigenous peoples, and villagers, despite previous recognitions by the Constitution of their rights and a long period of settlement on the land. Various cases of land rights violations including of ethnic communities have been documented. Many of the victims and affected communities who have been forcibly evicted, or had their lands expropriated by State agencies, have not received any compensation or alternative land. Many of them are also facing criminal cases and civil suits especially around allegations of causing climate change, and their access to legal aid and justice remains difficult.

After three years of implementation, the impacts of these legal instruments and policies on the poor, landless and marginalized populations are visible and clear. Cross Cultural Foundation, Isan Land Reform Network, Center for Protection and Revival of Local Community Rights, Karen Network for Cultural and Environmental Tanowsri Area, and Focus on the Global South, will hold a public forum to present and review the situation of land rights in the past years under current military government, and the access to justice for people defending their land rights. 

We would like to extend an invitation to you to attend and participate in the forum, which will be held onMarch 28, 2017 from 8.30 am to 4.30 pm, at room no. 803, Chaloem Rajakumari 60 Building, Chulalongkorn University. Thai and English translation will be provided.

We very much look forward to seeing you at the forum. 

Program

“Situation of forest and land rights, and access to justice in Thailand”

09.00 – 09.30 am         Welcome remark by Associate Professor Dr. Prapart Pintobtang,  Director of Chulalongkorn University Social Research Institute.

Commemoration of the missing of land rights defenders from Mr. Pholachi Rakchongcharoen, Billy to Mr. Den Kamlae

09.30-12.00 pm           Presentation of situations of land and forest, and lead the discussion by

• A representative from Isan Land reform network
• A representative from Bantan land reform network
• A representative from Four regions slum network
• A representative from Southern Peasant Federation
• A representative from Northern Peasant Federation
• A representative from Indigenous Peoples community

Moderator: Dr. Chainarong Sretthachau, Mahasarakham University

12.00 pm – 01.00 pm  Lunch

01.00 pm - 04.30 pm    Discussion and Suggested solutions for access to justice on land and forest issues. 

Review on land rights cases based on the court’s decision, and voice of the villagers, the defendants in the land rights cases, and the movement of the restoration of right to self-cultivation for livelihood in the forestland

• Mr. Sumitchai Hatthasan,  Director of CPCR
• Mr. Somnuek Tumsupap, Director of Human Rights Lawyer Development Learning Center
• A representative from people who effected from justice process

A presentation on legal reform and interpretation of community rights by Mr. Somchai Homlaor

Moderator: Pornpen Khongkachonkiet, Cross Cultural Foundation

The European Commission proposal for a multilateral mechanism to settle investor-state disputes (ISDS) – publicly branded as a Multilateral Investment Court – would take us down that second path. It threatens to forever lock-in the highly controversial ISDS system that only benefits corporations.

This proposal is part of the negotiations that the EU is holding with Indonesia, Philippines and Myanmar. Furthermore, the EU has presented it to as many as 40 non-EU governments during the World Economic Forum at Davos and also in a meeting last December in Geneva.

This webinar will introduce the current European Commission proposal as well as several critical perspectives on the issue.

Programme

• Overview: What’s in the Commission’s proposal?
• Presentation of the critique based on S2B’s position paper
• Presentation of views from Asia
• Discussion

Organisers

S2B Network, EU-ASEAN FTA Network, Trade Justice Pilipinas, Indonesia for Climate Justice, Focus on the Global South, Transnational Institute (TNI), PowerShift, 11.11.11 and Friends of the Earth International. 

Civil society organizations from Indonesia, Philippines, and Europe criticized the European Union’s Multilateral Investment Court proposal as an attempt to multilateralise the investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism and establish a global corporate court system[1].

EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom made a strong pitch for a global investment court at the  meeting between the EU and ASEAN Economic Ministers held in Manila last week.

Indonesia for Global Justice (IGJ) together with Focus on the Global South, Trade Justice-Pilipinas, Transnational Institute, Friends of the Earth International, and Seattle to Brussels Network, organized a Webinar discussion on “A multilateral ISDS? The European Commission proposal for a Multilateral Investment Court", Wednesday (22/2). The webinar discussion explored the strategic debate and critical perspectives on the EU proposal, particularly in relation with the ongoing trade talks between the EU and the Philippines and Indonesia.

The European Commission's proposal would allow foreign investors to bring claims against States on the basis of previously agreed investment protection treaties. It would still allow investors to bypass national court systems. The cases will be adjudicated by a permanent group of lawyers, but the independence and impartiality of this body is being questioned.

This proposal maintains the very same flaws of the ISDS system: only one-side, the investors can initiate claims; foreign investor will not face any obligations; investors do now have to exhaust local remedies and respect for domestic court;, the neutrality of judges is doubtful.

Cecilia Olivet, a researcher at the Amsterdam-based research institute Transnational Institute, said “It is highly regrettable that the European Commission has chosen to disregard the voice of millions of EU citizens who clearly rejected the creation of corporate courts and is attempting to re-legitimise a highly criticised ISDS system. If ever a Multilateral Investment Court is created, it will entrench the already existing broad investor privileges.

Rachmi Hertanti of Indonesia for Global Justice asserted that “the multilateral investment court would certainly contradict the review process of investment treaties carried out by the Government of Indonesia. She also explained that the Indonesia-EU CEPA will be used as a tool for the EU to bind Indonesia automatically on the Multilateral Investment Court”. She finally added “the Multilateral Investment Court will not touch the substance of investment protection treaty that gives so many rights for investor, especially the rights to sue the State. Certainly, this scheme is very far away from the principles formulated under the new Indonesian investment treaty model, which limits the rights of investors, particularly related to the ISDS Mechanism”. 

Joseph Purugganan, a researcher of Focus on the Global South and Convenor of the broad campaign platform Trade Justice Pilipinas, explained that civil society campaigning across the globe has made ISDS a truly toxic element of new generation FTAs. What the EC is trying to do with its earlier proposal for the investment court system and now the multilateral investment court is to project these ideas as alternatives to ISDS, and it is hoping government will buy that idea.

“Unfortunately, the MIC is not an alternative.  It will continue to pose risks to developing countries and lock-in countries to a system that favors corporate rights over peoples rights and welfare. We will campaign in the Philippines and work in solidarity with groups across Asia and the world to expose this toxic new proposal", he added.

The webinar finished with a call to governments to not fall in the EU trap and reject the Multilateral Investment Court proposal. In parallel, governments should conduct a review process of their investment protection treaties.**

Contact:

Rachmi Hertanti: rachmihertanti@gmail.com

Cecilia Olivet: ceciliaolivet@tni.org

Fabian Flues: fabian.flues@foeeurope.org

Joseph Puruganan: josephp@focusweb.org

[1] For a more detailed analysis see Seattle to Brussels network position paper: http://www.s2bnetwork.org/isds-dangerous-crossroads/

New Delhi, 27 March - On Monday, Bharatiya Kisan Union led by Rakesh Tikait joined the Tamil Nadu farmers who have been protesting in Jantar Mantar for two weeks now, offering support to their demands for a complete loan waiver, fair and profitable price for their produce, and drought relief and mitigation measures, including inter-linkage of rivers. 

Nearly 170 drought-affected farmers have been on an indefinite protest in Delhi for over two weeks. 

The farmers from Tamil Nadu, led by P Ayyakanu of South Indian River Interlinking Farmers’ Association, had grabbed widespread attention after they brought along with them what they alleged were skulls of farmers who had committed suicide due to farming distress. 

While speaking to the media P Ayyakanu broke down, “We have been sitting here for two weeks demanding a direct meeting with the Prime Minister, so that we can convey to him our depressing realities. Over four hundred farmers have committed suicide in the last six months in my region. We are being harassed for repaying loans. How will we pay back when there is massive drought and when we don’t get a profitable price for our produce? This year we haven’t cultivated at all”

Tamil Nadu is facing the worst drought in nearly 140 years. The protesting farmers are largely from the delta area of Cauvery river. 

Several of the assembled farmers from Tamil Nadu were seen holding dead rats in their mouths. “It is a symbolic act to show the extreme hunger that exists in rural Tamil Nadu now owing to the farm crisis,” said one of them. 

Rakesh Tikait from Bharatiya Kisan Union said “These are farmers who have traversed 3000 kilometres to reach the capital city to convey their problems to the government. All their demands resonate with the demands of small farmers of North India too. That is why Bharatiya Kisan Union is pledging their support to our sisters and brothers from South India. It is not just in Tamil Nadu, but in every state including Uttar Pradesh farmers are reeling under heavy debt. They have been long demanding a fair support price for their produce, which is atleast 50% more that the cost of production. That demand has not been met by successive governments and we want it to be immediately implemented. To reduce rural distress, it is important that the loans of farmers are waived. Bhartiya Kisan Union has also long been demanding for inter-linking of rivers.”

Rakesh Tikait also mentioned about the need for a National Agricultural Policy. He demanded that a committee be formed to look into all issues of the farmers – including price, issues of debt and loans. "Unless a policy at a national level is not framed, we are just moving in circles", he said. 

The union leader also warned that if demands are not met, they will scale up the agitation and bring all farmers across the various states of India together. Among other leaders of BKU, its general secretary Yudhvir Singh also joined the protests today. 

[Watch video] 

Bharatiya Kisan Union is also a member of the Indian Coordination Committee of Farmers Movements which has prominent farmers’ organisations of the south such as Karnataka Rajya Raitha Sangha and others as its members. 

Several Tamil students were also present at Jantar Mantar offering their support and solidarity to the protesting farmers. 

Political leaders including Sitaram Yechury and D Raja also visited the protesting farmers at Jantar Mantar, New Delhi. 

Reacting to the drought relief of Rs. 2000 crore issued by the Tamil Nadu government, P Ayyakannu said that it is barely enough. 
“For dry land we are given Rs 3000 per acre and for wet land just above Rs. 5000. How is that any relief?” he questioned. 

Incidentally, the Supreme Court was also hearing a petition on farmers’ suicides today and it has asked the Central government to file an affidavit with a road map and a detailed plan of action to deal with the issues of suicide, within four weeks. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

More photos available here. 

AN INVITATION TO A TALK & FORUM 

Focus on the Global South, the Philippines-Cuba Friendship Association, and the University of the Philippines-College of Mass Communications (UP-CMC) are co-organizing an event dubbed “The Struggle Against Forgetting: A Writer’s (Journalist & Novelist) Perspective,” 4th April 2017, 1 - 4 P.M. at the UP-CMC Auditorium.

Our guest of honor and main speaker at the event is Ms Marta Rojas Rodriguez, Cuban journalist and novelist. Ms Rodriguez covered historic events of the Revolution, including the attacks on the Moncada Barracks in 1953, and wrote reportage on Fidel Castro's travels inside and outside of Cuba. She also has several testimonial books and journalistic chronicles to her name as a war correspondent in Viet Nam and was one of the founders of the Cuban Committee of Solidarity with South Viet Nam. In recent years, she has transitioned to fiction writing, winning the Alejo Carpienter Prize for Novel in 2006.

Please come and join us in a timely, enriching discussion with Ms Rodriguez and our other guest speakers. 

UP President Francisco Nemenzo Jr - Opening Remarks

Mr. Patrick Campos (UP-CMC) - Welcome Remarks on behalf of the Organizers

Ms. Marta Rojas Rodriguez - Main talk

Responses from:

Dr. Diosa Labiste - Department of Journalism, UP-CMC

Dr. Luna Sicat-Cleto - UP-Institute of Creative Writing

Mr. Joseph Purugganan (Focus on the Global South) - Closing Remarks

Moderator: Ms Clarissa V. Militante, Focus on the Global South

See you there!

Across the Mekong region, ‘development’ has become synonymous with rapid economic growth, to be achieved through predominantly large-scale, private investments. The development model promoted by the region’s governments prioritizes trade and investment liberalization, and privatization. Private investment is sought in virtually every sector of the economy from energy, oil, minerals, agriculture and food processing to education, health, tourism, manufacturing, pharmaceuticals, transportation and urban infrastructure. 

This paper presents an overview of these investment trends in the Mekong region, the regulatory and policy changes designed to facilitate large-scale foreign and domestic investment, and the impacts of such investment on the living and working conditions of workers in Special Economic Zones (SEZs). It offers a critical perspective on the scale and range of large-scale investments in the region, and how these investments privilege large investors over local populations and public interest. 

The English language paper can be downloaded above.  The paper will soon be available in Khmer language.

By Analie Gepulani Neiteler*

We arrived late that afternoon on 14^th March 2017, in Sumalo, a small village of 400 households and a thousand or so residents, in Bataan province, north of Metro Manila. It was only a three-hour bus ride from the city and the sun had not set when we got there. The sky was a reddish purple. Was it not for a serious cause,it would feel like a typical visit to the family in the province – a get-away from Manila. But you would have to follow the people into their backyard to get a glimpse of their real situation—of their ongoing struggle.

At first glance, Sumalo appeared to be just like any ordinary barangay. The  main social-economic activity happened through a sari-sari store where households sell sweets, snacks, and even some rice produce to earn a little by the side while people are served without paying for an extra ride to get to the nearest palengke (market). Halu-halo—a local summer delicacy of fruits and sweets in mixture of crushed ice and milk—is also sold on the streets, and people walking and working everywhere, gathered around the vendor to greet anyone and everyone, and stop for little chitchat. At sunset, one begins to hear out-of-tune videoke singing, which would last throughout the night.

In the early morning, everyone was already up and busy with all sorts of stuff. Guests, like me, were not allowed to help, thus with nothing to do, I was able to practice some Tagalog and tried to explain what I was doing here. The people from Sumalo were all very curious and happy that I showed interest in speaking Tagalog. It was a very welcoming feeling for me, especially since in the city, I am mostly just seen as white and foreign; this perception usually makes it more difficult to be in tune with people.

With the provincial life, I had associated carabaos (water buffalo) but I found out that Sumalo was not known for its rice fields and there was no such animal in sight. Instead, horses were used for farm work to conquer the hilly lands. On our way further into the countryside, we met one farmer riding the horse; upon seeing me and my colleagues from Focus, he swung down and had me seated in his place. We passed a shed in the middle of fields which was occupied by the indigenous peoples of the area. They were not around at that time and the place was empty. So we rested and cut some fresh buko for an early merienda.

For many generations, the farmer families took responsibility for the land. They cultivated and harvested it. Then the landlords decided to put up fences and “make use” of their right. In the meantime, the land would just turn into grassland of no further agricultural use. Now, the private guards of the landlords would harvest. So when I asked one of the farmers on who was the owner of the land we were passing through, he simply replied: “They own nothing. Only rights.” And his answer expressed a deep pain of loss looking at the willful waste of land.

Before we called it a day, I had to take part in the most typical tradition one can experience in the Philippines. I sang with a videoke and became one with all the other chants and sounds in the dark. Most of the videoke machines contained more than 2000 songs. And the unimportance of being in or out of tune was wonderful. What mattered was that we sang together.

 *Ms Gepulani Neiteler is an intern in Focus-Philippines Office. She’s a student from Humboldt University in Berlin and worked with Focus from February to April 2017.

by Raphael Baladad

Almost  three decades after the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) had been enacted and two years after the provisions on land acquisition and distribution of CARP with Extension and Reforms (CARPER) expired, the government still has to meet its targets for land redistribution and support services delivery. Although it had its successes, the program has left behind a significant number of farmers longing for land security and sustainable livelihoods.

Alas, the struggle for land continues, even as countless protests, court battles, and dialogues have made even the staunchest peasant leaders grow tired, weary—and literally, old. Some would say that the greatest casualty of the protracted implementation of Agrarian Reform are not those who have fought bravely and died, but the morale of those left to continue with the struggle. The fire within that once brought and kept people together to push for much needed reforms has waned over time.

But there is yet something to look forward to.

The Save Agrarian Reform Alliance (SARA) and Focus on the Global South with several student’s organizations including Ateneans for Agrarian Reform Movement (AFARM), Union of Students for the Advancement of Democracy (USAD), Student Party for Equality and Advancement of Knowledge (PUP-Speak), Alyansa ng mga Mag-aaral para sa Panlipunang Katwiran at Kaunlaran (UP-ALYANSA), and the Bukluran ng mga Progresibong Iskolar (UP Bukluran System) held their second Agrarian Reform Youth Congresses in February 2017 (the first was in 2015). It aimed to empower the youth by helping determine more tangible roles for them in the agrarian social movements. More than just creating a student network that would help promote agrarian reform as a critical issue for the youth, the Congress became a venue for developing mutual relationships among them and with various farmers’ organizations under SARA.  The congress outputs were a shot of hope that could revitalize the farmers’ struggle. The young participants identified several activities to support the national advocacies on agrarian reform, namely: (a) community immersions and the documentation of farmers’ struggles; (b) communications and media to heighten public awareness on agrarian reform issues; and (c) research and education on key socio-political and economic issues affecting the development of small-holder agriculture. The ARYC has yet to grow as an independent youth organization, but it is a step towards recognizing and integrating youth roles into larger social movements on land.

 Increasing Youth Participation and Involvement

In this age of millennials or today’s youth who find empowerment in social media, there is untapped force. History has shown that successful movements have often had the youth at the vanguard, and this generation, despite stereotypes attributed to them, should not be considered any different. The challenge thus lies in harnessing their energies, not only to support or contribute to, but in the near future lead and sustain, social movements.

Youth involvement is primarily experiential, and largely depends on how they are affected by a given issue. On agrarian reform and rural development, one might expect the sons and daughters of farmers to join protests or mobilizations in support of agrarian reform, but we might not say the same for those who are living far from the sights of struggles. Another factor that can contribute to the lack of ‘affection’ for this issue is the declining appreciation of agriculture and its role in our society and economy. Since farming or farmwork is seen as something synonymous to poverty, youngsters from rural communities would often opt to leave and find jobs in the city.

Convincing the youth to join and commit to such causes has always been a challenge. But to address the age gaps in both the agricultural sector and in the social movements, ARYC was witness to a renewed effort in youth involvement, through the sharing of experiences in the struggle by the peasant leaders, resulting in more awareness of history and present conditions, and by having a space where on their own they were able to make deeper connections, not only form opinions but to strategize as well. It is the connection which social movements foster with the youth that would determine how invested they are in affecting change.

In several occassions, the mere presence of the youth in protests, mobilizations, and in communities have boosted the morale of the farmers. Simply through listening to the stories of farmers, or by just peeking into the living conditions of these farmers, the youth already impart hope. More than just cogs in the social movement’s machinery, the youth create fire that sustains the fervor in a struggle. They are not just second liners but on their own have the ability to inspire, innovate and transcend. More than the need for us to empower the youth, they empower us to carry on.

Lahore, India—Twenty-three (23) male tenants from the village of Dera Sehghal, Muridkey city in Sheikupura district a tenant, have been in prison for a year now. Police have charged them with theft, robbery, and other heinous crimes, but these were false accusations made just to force them to vacate the land they had been cultivating as tenants since 1970. This was the testimony of Jamila Bibi from the same village during a recent gathering of peasant leaders that aimed to re-launch the struggle for land rights despite arrests and state repression. Scores of peasant leaders from various parts of Punjab gathered, April 10, in Lahore, in a meeting organized by Pakistan Kissan Rabita Committee, chaired by Mian Mohammed Asharaf, a peasant leader from Lahore.

Jamila Bibi said that the night before the meeting, an 80-year old tenant, Sardar Mohammed, was dragged on the floor while we women resisted his arrest.

“There is no more male tenant left in the farm. Only women and children are left in the village that has been without electricity for over one year now,” said Jamila. Her husband, son, sister’s husband, and three cousins have been in jail for over a year, too.

“They are not thieves or robbers. They are ordinary peasants trying to safe their only livelihood that is few acres of land they are cultivating for long.” Jamila told the peasants’ gathering.

Sugra Bibi, another peasant women leader shared that her daughter was murdered last year just because she was breadwinner for the family who was supporting peasants to resist. No one has been arrested for the crime, while most of her relatives are in jail including her son.

Noor Nabi, general secretary Anjman Mozareen Punjab and local union council chairman, gave testimony on Mehr Abdul Sattar, Nadeem Ashraf, Malik Salim Jakhar, all tenants at the Military Farms in Okara, and Hafiz Husnain Raza and district correspondent Nawai Waqat Okara who are all facing several false charges because they had consistently demanded land rights at the farm. Mehr Abdul Sattar is currently in the Sahiwal High Security Prison for the last one month and no one has been allowed to visit him.

“We fear he’s being tortured every day. The High Security Prison is meant for religious convicted terrorists and Mehr Abdul Sattar is under trial. He has been accused falsely as RAW agent and links with religious terrorists,” said Noor Nabi.

Farooq Tariq, general secretary Pakistan Kissan Rabita Committee and spokesperson for the Awami Workers Party, have demanded an end to the repression of tenants from different parts of Punjab. He said that all tenants should be granted land rights and Military Farms administration should leave this agriculture business to peasants by “honorably withdrawing from the land that tenants have been cultivating for over 100 years.”

Farooq Tariq said that worst sort of feudal culture has been imposed on the tenants at Dera Sehghal. Police have been used to register absolute false police cases against the ordinary tenants. He thus asked the chief minister to visit the village and see for himself “the worst sort of feudal practicesjust 20 kilometer away from Lahore.”

The meeting was also addressed by Mehr Ghulam Abbas, Liaqat Ali, Nasir Iqbal and others. The meeting was organized to commemorate the International Day of Peasants on 17^th April.

From a Press Release issued by Nasir Iqbal (Gharhi Shahu Lahore)

I have deep connection with the land. My maternal grandfather was a farmer of coffee and fruit who proudly cultivated his family farm. He woke up before the crack of dawn, ate his breakfast, and ventured out into the small coffee farm with his old but trusty sickle in hand. Later, he would come back with the day’s bounty. He would be tired by that time but a certain happiness engulfed him. This was his routine for the rest of his productive years. At a young age, I understood what hard work meant, that working with your hands created wealth, that perseverance and resilience counted for something. But my grandfather died almost a poor man, with nothing to pass on to his children except farmland and debt. In our rural town in Cavite as in many other places like ours, people look down on farmers. They are oftentimes considered ‘backward’, ‘ignorant’ and ‘underdeveloped’. Growing up, I would hear comments that “farmers are poor because they are lazy.” Yet, I could never reconcile such comments with what my grandfather did day in and day out. As I grew older and mature, I found out there is something more about a farmer’s life and suffering. Indeed, when I became involved in the peasants’ struggle I saw the reasons for farmers’ poverty—that they lay deep in policies, society’s structures, and political economy. At the core of this would be the (lack) of recognition of farmers’ contributions to the economy and society.

Feeding the world under multiple threats 

Reports from the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization (UN-FAO) show that small farmers like my grandfather, family farmers, pastoralists, and peasants feed the world (as much as 80 percent of the world’s food needs). Yet, they do so with less than a quarter of the global farmlands (GRAIN, 2014). For example, small farmers such as Zenaida Javier, who was awarded 2.5 hectares of land under the Philippine state-led agrarian reform program says that “umunlad and agrikultura sa amin. Noong una ang tanim ay niyog, ngayon marami na, saging, mangga, dalanghita, lanzones, at kung anu-ano pa” (Agriculture progressed in our area.  Before, only coconut were planted to the land, but now we have banana, mango, local orange, lanzones, and other fruits). Javier is from Sariaya, Quezon, south of Manila, and area dedicated to vegetable growing and trading in Southern Luzon and Bicol.  In the Philippines, the average farmland owned or cultivated by small farmers and peasants are less than three hectares.

Land is the primary resource of farmers’ livelihood. Rural cultural values and identities have evolved from the land. But farmers’ land rights, the right to own, control, and cultivate lands, are often contested and hardly recognized in national laws and policies. The threat of land grabbing and land use conversions for non-agricultural uses such as for purposes of real estate, industrial complex, etc., are everyday realities that small farmers and peasants have had to confront. Even in countries which recognize the rights of farmers to land (land-to-the-tiller) under the Constitution and where there is a long-standing and on-going agrarian reform and land redistribution programs, farmers’ land rights are always under threat. Their rights are being violated in various legal and extra-legal ways. The community lands of Zenaida and her neighbors, for example, might soon be converted into property for middle class or upscale housing. Her story is just one of many in the Philippine, or even in Asia. Cambodian farmers have been displaced from their lands to give way to eucalyptus plantations owned by Vietnamese corporations. Similarly, peasants’ houses in Mekar Jaya village, in North Sumatra, Indonesia have been razed to the ground by a Malaysian palm oil company, ironically, after President Joko Widodo had ordered the implementation of agrarian reform. Land remains an arena of violent contestations and dispossession.

Then there is also the increasing concentration of the global food system in fewer hands—or corporations. The planned merger of six giant agricultural corporations (Dow Chemical with Dupont, Monsanto with Bayer AG, Syngenta with ChemChina) in March is the latest example. Over 200 organizations of farmers, religious people, international development and environmental worker have raised the alarm that such a mega-merger will only concentrate market power, worsen the problems caused by industrial agriculture such as environmental degradation, and negatively impact small farmers and landless households. Small farms would further be marginalized and economically hurt with this expansion of industrial agriculture. This will consequently increase in and out-migration and inequality in the countryside.  Eliminating poverty and ensuring that vulnerable people such as farmers do not fall back into it will become more difficult under such capital intensive and highly vertically-integrated global food system.

Locally, small farmers and peasants, have had to negotiate and deal with traders and middle persons in getting fair prices for their produce. Their battle cry has been for middle persons to be gone or for them to be provided with multiple options where they can sell their produce, for example through government-created trading posts and other pro-poor farmer policy instruments. For instance, Alan Alob and Dionisio Umali, small farmers from Sariaya, Quezon, claim that the existence of a central trading post, established by the Philippine Department of Agriculture and operates like a cooperative and foundation, has offered them multiple options for selling their produce and cut down the cost of transportation to their benefit. However, not many rural communities have such facilities and those with none have suffered at the behest of local traders.

Global recognition

Small farmers and peasants continue to struggle for recognition under national and global policies/laws and human rights instruments. In particular, the rights of peasant to land are not codified in international human rights law despite being central to numerous economic, social and cultural rights, and for achieving for many civil and political rights. Many national laws and policies that uphold the right to land and role of small farmers and peasants have been borne out of their decades-long struggles. Global institutions such as the UN-FAO have acknowledged the massive contribution and investment that small and family farmers and peasants have made to global and national economies. There is currently a global campaign to enact a global Convention on the Rights of Peasants and this points toward the right direction. But much still needs to be done, as shown in many struggles to defend life, local food systems, and land and territories by small farmers and peasants.

What can we do? Farmers, like my grandfather, died eking out a living from the land as well as feeding their families and communities. The reality is that small farmers and peasants, globally, are ageing and in dire need of a next generation of tillers. Let us not allow them to die or age in vain. Let us support our local food systems—our small farmers and peasants’ produce; let us thank a farmer today and every day. Let us honor them by recognizing and demanding that public policies and our everyday consumption support their land rights as well as sustainable peasant and small farmer agriculture. There is a life and future in farming, and this is something that all of us have something can contribute to.

Since the implementation of the Forestry Master Plan (FMP) by the military government in 2014, the struggles of landless villagers, indigenous peoples, urban and rural poor, and frontline communities have often been met with violence in the form of physical attacks, killings, enforced disappearance, burning and destruction of houses and property, “mandatory attitude adjustment,” and the use of SLAPP[1] against activists and community members.

The FMP along with other so-called legal instruments to put an end to forest destruction, trespassing on public land, and to improve sustainable management of natural resources have in fact only allowed an army-led operation against alleged encroachers, who in reality were communities long residing and depending on these lands.

According to the report from a unit of the military itself, the Internal Security Operation Command (ISOC), from June 2014 to February 2015, more than 1,000 people were arrested and prosecuted for illegal logging and encroachment. Although there has been no clear figure as to how many of those arrested were large scale landlords or big corporations, testimonies have shown that the majority of those arrested were poor farmers, marginalized and landless people. Human rights violations have been committed in the name of this plan and the perpetrators have rarely been brought to justice.

Meanwhile, investors in dispute with villagers over these lands have seized the opportunity to use force against local people to evict them from the contested areas. In the case of a sea gypsy community in Phuket, they were attacked and ambushed several times, at night and daytime, by private security forces that were known to be connected to a resort.  These attacks have led to a number of local people being seriously injured and personal properties being destroyed. The sea gypsies have filed a case before responsible authorities, but the process of investigation has to this date not made much progress.

Policies on land have often come with the promise to provide land access and ownership to landless and the poor communities. However, these promises have rarely been fulfilled, and instead, these poor families are placed at even greater risk of losing the land. The process of expropriation and forced eviction is justified by so called “development” for national interests and have been fully captured by the corporate and elite.

In Chaiyaphum province, northeast Thailand, local authorities had notified at least eight communities to move out from the disputed lands since the introduction of the plan. The communities resisted and asserted their rights to remain in the land until the dispute would be resolved. Villagers coming together to unite in the collective struggle have been seen as a threat by the state officials. According to villagers, local government officials have been trying to break community cohesion through manipulation and the creation of distrust among the villagers by spreading false information. The leaders of the community have been threatened and followed, and local authorities have monitored collective activities. 

Despite the challenges and threats to them, the shared perspectives and frustrations of injustice that prevail in society have brought land rights defenders, student movements, urban and rural poor movements, academics and other progressive groups together. While individual struggle is still being pursued, synergies for collective actions are also constantly being built.

The Struggle of Land Rights Defenders

On April 16, 2016, a known land rights defender, Den Kamlae, was forcibly disappeared. The family and villagers believed that local officials had been involved in Mr. Den’s disappearance because of his activism and involvement in the community’s dispute with the national park department on land issues. Mr. Den’s disappearance reflects the current situation of land and environmental right defenders who continue to face threats, even as the culture of impunity prevails in Thailand.

From their testimonies, frontline communities, social movements, and land rights defenders have expressed that they no longer see land rights as separate from the issue of investment and development policies which are designed to benefit corporations and economic-political elite, at the cost of people’s lives and the destruction of the ecosystem, especially under the current military government. For them, the struggle for land rights is a struggle for democracy, and a struggle for development that respects local peoples’ rights and dignity as well as nature.

In response to the struggle for land rights, the military government has adopted different strategies to curb the rights and freedom of people, including their freedom of expression and assembly, and the right to participate in decision-making processes. The shrinking of public space and criminalization of dissent are challenges not only faced by land rights defenders, but also by student movements, progressive academics, labor groups, and journalists.

They have been arrested and subjected to mandatory attitude adjustment. Many of them have been prosecuted in the military court, instead of the civilian court, which has raised concerns about people’s basic rights and the transparency of the judicial process.  Many from the media have been threatened and journalists were banned from traveling abroad. In many cases, the military government has attempted to silence criticism of scholars by asserting pressure on their institutions to stop and ban academic forums and meetings.    

The structure of power that exists—based on a form of inegalitarianism that breeds injustices—is the target of the collective struggle.  To shift to a structure that respects rights and dignity, and allows the voices of the poor and marginalized people to be heard, requires not only collective aspiration and concerted effort, but efficient strategies that are able to address root causes while protecting human rights defenders. For this to materialize, domestic and international solidarities are crucial and need to be mobilized to strengthen and enhance continuous struggle amidst challenge.

The Southern Peasants Federation have also been at the forefront of support to the struggles of these communities. Last year, it issued a statement on the occasion of World Habitat Day in October, to demand for the following:

1. Government must recognize and protect the rights of peasant and community to collective land ownership and management for sustainable and stability, and for their new settlement.
2. Government must recognize and protect the right of landless peasants, labors and the poor to assemble and establish new community and to construct secured housing in state owned land that appropriate for agriculture that encroached and illegally occupied by capitalists, companies and etc. Community rights and community land titling must be respected.
3. Government must thoroughly and justly provide habitat for every citizen in the country.

Government must provide appropriate compensation to the populations affected by government’s development projects and policies.

To mark the International Day of Peasants’ Struggles, Focus on the Global South releases this special edition that puts together articles on issues that small farmers and peasants continue to face.  These pieces also highlight the different forms of resistance that farmers and peasants put up amidst these challenges. 

Mary Ann Manahan of Focus-Philippines remembers the hard work of her grandfather, a small farmer who eked out a living from his small farm of coffee and fruit, and died with hardly anything to pass on to his family but his small plot and his pride for being a farmer. Ms Manahan would realize the bigger context of her grandfather’s hardships as she grows up, studies, and becomes involved in the agrarian reform struggle in the Philippines.

Niabdulghafar Tohming from Focus-Thailand tells the story of communities in forest lands who have been harassed, criminalized, and dispossessed because of the military government’s Forestry Plan. Similarly, in India, tenanted farmers are under attack via state-led repression, with many of those affected getting imprisoned under false charges, but they pledge to forge ahead with their resistance.

Raphael Baladad’s (Focus-Philippines) reflections on youth power gives us something to be hopeful about, in the midst of the decades-long struggle of Filipino peasants. Peasant leaders have grown “tired and weary, and literally old,” but the involvement of students and youth in their struggle are seen as means to not only re-energize the peasant movement but the youth’s as well. 

Afsar Jafri covers the peasant mobilization in New Delhi to commemorate this day. (See photos below)

Annalie Gepulani, Focus intern, writes her impressions of the farming community in Bataan, Philippines, she visited.

Forest Communities Criminalized under the Military Rule in Thailand by Niabdulghafar Tohming

Honoring my Grandfather & Small Farmers of the World  by Mary Ann Manahan

Struggle for Land Rights Continues Despite Arrests and State Repression

Reflections: Harnessing Youth Energies for Agrarian Reform by Raphael Baladad

Blog: In tune with Sumalo Analie Gepulani Neiteler*

Manila--Around 500 activists from the Philippines and around Asia held a protest action, 21 April 2017, at the Asian Development Bank in Manila calling for an end to ADB immunity.

The protestors marched on Metro Manila's main highway, EDSA, to the ADB headquarters where a short program ensued in the presence of a phalanx of riot policemen.

"50 years is enough, ADB out of Asia Now" resonated throughout the action as chant of the protestors and in the speeches of campaigners. 

Shaktiman Ghosh, representing the National Hawkers Federation, one of the largest people’s movements in India, assailed the ADB for pushing policies and projects that have destroyed the environment and increased the vulnerabilities of poor people. Chinara Aitbev from the youth movement 'Nash Vek" of the Kyrgyz Republic talked about the displacement of communities and problems related to resettlement programs with ADB projects like the Central Asia Regional Economic Corridor transport project.

Joseph Purugganan of Focus on the Global South expressed solidarity with the campaign to bring down the wall of ADB immunity that has allowed the bank to deny its culpability in atrocities and other human rights abuses linked to its policies and projects.

Aaron Pedrosa of SANLAKAS lambasted the ADB as an anti-development bank that has created more poverty and inequality, and environmental destruction across Asia and the globe in the course of its five-decade long history. Khevin Yu of the Philippine Movement for Climate Justice (PMCJ) for his part called out the ADB for its support to coal and dirty energy projects.

​The protest ended with the handing over to ADB officials of a copy of the statement on challenging ADB's immunity by NGO Forum on the ADB.