(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "THE MARIKINA CITY RESETTLEMENT PROGRAM: A MODEL FOR COMMUNITY AND GOVERNMENT PARTNERSHIP FOR DEVELOPMENT1"

THE MARIKINA CITY RESETTLEMENT PROGRAM: A MODEL 
FOR COMMUNITY AND GOVERNMENT PARTNERSHIP FOR 

DEVELOPMENT 1 

by 

Valentino G. Baac, Ph. D. 2 and Rosette C. Librea 3 

Abstract 

Local Government Units (LGUs) in the Philippines are faced with a compounding 
problem of resources especially for housing. 

This case study showcases an innovation in public administration and governance 
where the Marikina City government, in a very unique and effective interaction of politics, 
administration and civil society, contributed to social and human development through its 
resettlement program. The manifest balancing of good leadership and participative 
governance resulted in the achievement of the City government's twin goals of 
development and socio-economic progress. 

Typical to any urbanizing City, the economic growth of Marikina City was planned 
holistically taking into consideration the mushrooming of squatter colonies within its 
jurisdiction. The City adopted its own formula for the resettlement of squatters vis-a-vis 
the available resources of the City government for housing. Pursuant to the Urban 
Development and Housing Act of 1992, the City assumed the challenge of being at the 
forefront of providing socialized housing to the underprivileged and homeless 4 - the 
social group living in unfavorable conditions in a developing and urbanizing city. 

The "In-City Resettlement Program of Squatters" in Marikina City can be considered as 
a best practice in community development and economic growth. The program is 
integral to the urban renewal and development of the City. In order to achieve its policy 
of providing land for the landless, the City enforced the containment of squatter dwellers 



1 This study was presented at the 3 r Annual Conference of the Network of Asia Pacific Schools and 
Institutes in Public Administration and Governance (NAPSIPAG) held at the University of Sydney, Sydney 
Australia, 4-7 December 2006. 

2 Graduated Ph.D. in Public Administration (Magna Cum Laude) and Masters in Public Administration 
(Summa Cum Laude) from the Graduate School, The Royal and Pontifical University of Santo Tomas, 
Manila, Philippines. He is also a graduate of Bachelor of Laws (LIB) from the University of the East, Manila, 
Philippines; and, AB Philosophy (Cum Laude) from the Sacred Heart Seminary of Palo, Leyte. Currently, he 
is a Consultant of the Development Academy of the Philippines; and the La Salle Institute of Governance. 
He is a Professorial Lecturer at the Graduate Schools, Polytechnic University of the Philippines, Sta. Mesa, 
Manila, Philippines; and, University of the East, Recto, Manila, Philippines. He can be reached at 
valbaac@lycos.com. 

3 The co-author is currently the Manager, Program Management Office of the Government of the 
Philippines-United Nations Development Program (GO-UNDP) Fostering Democratic Governance; and a 
former Director of the Commission on Human Rights. She has a Masters degree in Public Management 
(with honors) from the Development Academy of the Philippines; and, is currently writing her dissertation for 
her Doctoral degree in Public Administration at the University of the Philippines National College for Public 
Administration and Governance (UP-NCPAG). She can be reached at rosettelibrea@yahoo.com. 

4 CESR General Comment 4 (1991), stated that the right to housing includes the right to human dignity, the 
principle of non-discrimination, the right to an adequate standard of living, the right to freedom to choose 
one's residence, the right to freedom of association and expression and the right not to be subjected to 
arbitrary interference with one's privacy, family, home or correspondence, pp 22-26. 



within the city and the provision of 24 square meter lot to each squatter structural owner. 
It was able to achieve the desired result of relocating 30,015 families of informal settlers 5 
and liberating approximately 500 hectares of land, which the urban poor used to occupy. 
The City government successfully linked up the use of all available resources human, 
technical and financial both at the local and national level in order to provide decent 
shelter to the underprivileged and homeless in a span of thirteen years from 1993-2006. 
The number of relocated families represents about 40% of the 120,000 (1/3 of the 
population) residing in about 114 depressed areas. 6 

On account of the long-term benefits of the resettlement program, the leadership of the 
City and the community development interventions of the Marikina Settlement Office 
(MSO) proved to be effective. The mechanisms of consultation and dialogue for people 
empowerment effectively worked except for a number of incidents resulting to the filing 
of alleged human rights violation cases with the Commission on Human Rights (CHR). 
The City Government recognized communities' right of empowerment through the 
organization of Community Housing Associations (CHAs). The development of 
relocation sites reflects good faith of the local government to provide housing to the 
maximum of its available resources. Development of more innovative approaches for 
achieving improved level of people empowerment and sustainability of the program are 
major areas for future consideration. 



Part I. Overview of the Case Study 

A. Purpose of the Study 

The study seeks to analyze the underpinnings of the Marikina City's Resettlement 
Program to include the context under which it was implemented; the mix approaches 
that were utilized; the results of the reform initiatives to the communities and to the city 
as a whole; and, the successes and gains achieved by the program. 

B. Outline of the reform initiatives 

The proliferation of squatters and marginalized communities in the early 1990s and its 
concomitant hazardous effects in the environment of the urbanizing city prompted the 
local government of Marikina to undertake initiative on resettlement. The initiative was 
attached to the urban renewal and resettlement program options under Republic Act No. 
7279, otherwise known, as the Urban Development and Housing Act (UDHA 1992). An 
in-city resettlement program was planned through the conversion of idle lands in the city 
located at Sto. Nino, Malanday, Tumana, Balubad and Nangka. The LGU created the 
Marikina Settlement Office (MSO) in February 1992 to administer the relocation 
program. The MSO took charge of all aspects of program delivery and management. 
The National Home Mortgage Financing Corporation (NHMFC) provided funding for land 
acquisition. LGU allotted 10% of its budget for the implementation of the CMP in the city 
to cover expenses of the MSO operations. Community Housing Associations (CHAs) 
were organized and assigned tasks for the development and maintenance of 
communities. Initially, a prototype community was put up by the MSO and latter rolled 
out to the rest of the converted idle lands. In order to effect swift implementation of the 



5 Marikina's Informal Settlers. Revised and Printed: 03 January 2006. 

6 The Marikina Settlements Program Brochure. January 2006. 



initiative, surveys of marginalized communities were undertaken and feedback 
mechanism was installed. Project Officers of the MSO were hired from the resettled 
communities to establish closer links for monitoring and feedback of community 
concerns. Community resistance was encountered in the beginning but this was 
managed gradually with the organization and involvement of the Community Housing 
Associations. 

C. Outline of gains 

The program relocated 30,015 household beneficiaries representing about 40% of the 
total 120,000 people residing in 114 depressed areas of the city. Six (6) big relocation 
sites and other government and private lands were developed through the CMP 
Originatorship in adequate space of 24 sq. meter single housing structure and adequate 
in-city relocation accessible to work and basic facilities. About 249 Community Housing 
Associations were organized and given purposive participation. Progressive realization 7 
of the right to housing yielded to the increasing number of communities responding to 
the program and apparent improvement in infrastructural and basic services at 
reasonable cost. A resettlement community provides legal security of tenure 8 for settlers 
and other allied services such as livelihood programs and trainings, potable tap water 
and electrical connections, solid waste disposal, health and sanitation, garbage 
collection, telephone lines and other social services. Concreting or cementing of 
pavements and alleys of resettlement areas is one infrastructural service which was also 
progressively implemented in the various resettlement areas. Infrastructural services 
such as water, electric and telephone lines were expedited with the participation of the 
private sector. A local ordinance was issued by the city government exempting utility 
companies of clearance requirements from the private landowners of resettlement sites 
in consonance with the city's social goal on rehabilitating urban lands. 9 

D. Outline of Lessons Learnt 

The principal challenge of balancing good leadership and participative governance is a 
major area of learning. The MSO is the institutional arrangement that sustained the 
housing services. The city government demonstrated every effort to use all resources at 
its disposal. 10 However, if the resettlement program is to be implemented again or 
replicated in other areas, the formation of an inter-agency advisory group on urban 
renewal and resettlement should be done first. In addition, the formation of core group 
in targeted communities for resettlement should be considered at the very beginning to 
ensure people's participation in decision-making. These two groups should have helped 
manage to a greater extent, the community resistance that was encountered significantly 
at the beginning of the resettlement program in Marikina City. The resettlement should 
have been identified more as a city government program rather than the pure initiative of 



7 See UNDP (2002) Rights-Based Development where the State is under obligation to take steps, to the 

maximum of its available resources with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of the rights, p 

61. 

8 CESCR Comment 4, Art. 11 (1) Sixth Session (1991), where legal security of tenure is described to be 

tenure taking a variety of forms including rental (public and private) accommodation, cooperative housing, 

lease, owner-occupation, emergency housing and informal settlements, including occupation of land or 

property, p. 21 . 

9 See MSO. Background on the Marikina Resettlement Program. 2006 

10 Ibid, stating that available resources include national financial resources, loans and assistance 
programmes, pp. 23-25. 



the City Mayor, who unfortunately had to face a lot of criticisms about his perceived 
"assertive style" of managing the resettlement. Moreover, the creation of the MSO 
should have been legislated earlier through a city ordinance making it a city government- 
housing arm rather than the City Mayor's implementing arm. The City Mayor and the 
MSO, though highly commendable with their performance and strong determination in 
implementing swiftly the resettlement program, could have avoided unnecessary 
criticisms from their detractors, if there were mechanisms in place initially to ensure 
more participative and broader representation in decision-making. 



Part II. Profile of the institution/organization 

A. Mission and key functions/services 

Inspired with the vision to make "Marikina City squatter free," the city established the 
Marikina Settlements Office (MSO) in February 1992. The Office was elevated into a 
Department in 2001 through a city ordinance. Section 4, Chapter IV of the Marikina 
Settlement Code of 2001 provides that the MSO is a policy-making and implementing 
body of the socialized housing program of the City Government of Marikina. Over time, 
the MSO has systematized its activities and processes particularly in gathering 
information for purposes of planning and programming. It is engaged in physical survey, 
mapping and household listing, conduct of census and occupancy checking, census 
data evaluation, processing masterlist preparation, structural mapping, survey and 
identification of mini-resettlement sites, model housing design and development, 
government land disposition process, preparation of site development, community 
relations operations, geographical information system for all resettlement sites, 
demolition and relocation operations, re-blocking operations, clearing and cleaning of 
sites, basic services coordination, regularized identification cards of community 
residents, pre-qualification processing of community residence and assistance in 
availing housing loan under the Community Mortgage Program. 

The principal functions and services of the MSO include, among other things, the 
provision of decent housing at affordable cost, clean and healthy environment, basic 
services and employment opportunities, rehabilitation and development of blighted slum 
areas and resettlement of program beneficiaries, provision of rational use and 
development of urban land, provision of equitable land tenure system that shall 
guarantee security of tenure and respect the rights of small property owners, 
encouragement of more effective people participation, adoption of workable policies for 
sustaining the program and institutionalization of the MSO services among the 
underprivileged and homeless . 



B. Mandate, Structure and Processes 

As a Central Local Government Agency, the MSO is mandated to develop, regulate and 
maintain the "Squatter Free" vision of the city. To discharge this mandate, it is endowed 
with the power to formulate policy guidelines and implement an overall urban poor 
development program, to identify and develop lands for conversion into housing projects, 
to develop a comprehensive housing program grounded on sustainable and equitable 
land distribution, effect efficient housing delivery and basic services. The MSO performs 
its mandates through its three divisions namely: Administrative, Resettlement 



management and Operations and Housing and Home site Management (Refer to 
Appendix A). 

A systematic operations of the MSO involves processes of dismantling and prevention of 
illegal structures, land survey assistance, community development services and other 
specific assistance to include the clearing and cleaning of community sites; community 
organizing and accreditation; complaints management and disputes settlement; disaster 
preparedness assistance and response and prevention of illegal vendors. In addition to 
the system of operation of MSO as described in earlier section, the MSO's structure 
provides for the formulation and implementation of services that enhance the quality of 
life of the urban poor in the different settlements. The MSO set up helps in engaging 
resettlement communities in team building, values orientation, leadership development, 
conflict management, formation of livelihood programs and leaders' congress and other 
community services. Also, the set up allows effective resettlement operations to 
facilitate land acquisition and development of new settlement sites, to implement land 
improvement to include road and alley concreting, drainage construction/improvements 
and other infrastructure development, building and structure such as the installation of 
community billboards, street signages, angular frames, construction of multi-purpose 
hall, day care centers, development of parks and playgrounds and other recreational 
facilities in the resettlement areas. 



Part III. Institutional/Organizational Issues and Constraints 

A. Description of performance 

Generally, the MSO has provided options for housing delivery from which urban poor 11 
can choose from. 12 Following the upgrading of the MSO into a Department, program 
delivery was enhanced. As of January 3, 2006, LGU Originatorship Project of the CMP 
in Marikina City improved showing the following performance in terms of the status of 
loans under LGU Originatorship and other cooperation programs with other agencies of 
government and non-government organizations. Specifically, the MSO has facilitated 
organization of 249 Community Housing Associations, which are now availing of the 
CMP. 111 LGU Originated CMP projects with the following statuses: loans taken out 
(49); for take out (5); for Loan LOG preparation and approval (2); for PCL Approval (2); 
for PCL preparation/documentation (6); for MOA (12); and Potential CMP (35). Other 
housing delivery projects were also implemented in government lands (12), public land 
(1), NHA projects (12), direct purchase (13), NGO originated projects (14), donated land 
(3), APD (65) and urban renewal and resettlement colony (17). But the lack of adequate 
resources to fully implement the plans and programs of the MSO is a big constraint. 
Infrastructural projects could not be implemented in all resettlement sites. Not all sites 
have the concreting of alleys and pavements completed. Eleven (11) resettlement 
communities are equipped with infrastructural services to include power and water 
services and concreting of alleys. The rest of the other resettlement communities are in 
different stages of infrastructure services delivery. Livelihood projects are inadequate to 
support generation of sufficient savings among settlers. Internally, the MSO needs 



U CESR General Comment (1991), where it is stated that State parties must give priority to those social 
groups living in unfavorable conditions giving them particular considerations, p. 25. 

2 See The Convention on Economic Social and Cultural Rights where the right to freedom to choose one's 
residence is primordial. 



resources for building capacities among its personnel. 13 Based on reports of the MSO, 
the indicators it uses to gauge its performance include the number of marginalized 
residents resettled, number of residents given jobs and alternative livelihood, number of 
physical infrastructural services available in the community, number of community 
housing associations and their community plans, number of housing loans taken out 
through the Community Mortgage program and the improvements effected by the 
associations through self help. 

To date, the Marikina Resettlement Program has already received the following major 
awards: Galing Pook Award, by the Asian Institute of Management in 1997; Gawad 
Galing Pook Award for Innovation and Excellence in Local Governance in 1998 for 
Squatter-Free Marikina Program jointly sponsored by the Department of Interior and 
Local Government, Ford Foundation, Canadian International Development Agency and 
Asian Institute of Management 14 

B. User satisfaction ratings 

There are no official reports showing satisfaction ratings of the communities. However, 
the growth in the number of families and communities availing of the CMP and other 
resettlement cooperation program with other government and private entities is 
indicative of their favorable response. Indicators of dissatisfaction are the eleven (11) 
cases, which were filed with the Commission on Human Rights. 15 (Appendix B). In 
addition, interviews and testimonials were obtained from about 31 residents of six 
resettlement sites such as Nangka, Tumana, Sto. Nino, and San Miguel Realty in 
Fortune, Parang. Of the 31 respondents, 25 residents expressed satisfaction over their 
transfer in the resettlement area who felt sense of security of tenure and contentment 
with the services they avail in their respective communities such as water, light, 
livelihood, clean and peaceful place. They also cited their lost of fear from being 
demolished and evicted from their residence. Moreover, 15 residents cited various 
suggestions to improve their resettlement areas to include more livelihood training and 
job opportunities, facilitation of improvement of roads and alleys, educational assistance 
and medical missions. They were asked also the question as to how they could help 
improve their communities. Nineteen (19) of the interviewed residents gave different 
suggestions on how they could help improve their communities. These include: 
cooperation in waste segregation and maintenance of the cleanliness of their 
communities to avoid flood and pollution. The same significant number of 19 residents 
expressed that they need to comply with local ordinance and rules and regulations to 
enhance the condition of their communities (Appendix C ). 



Part IV. Description of specific reform initiatives 

A. Unique and exceptional features of programs/initiatives 

Following the city's vision of transforming Marikina "through discipline, good taste and 
excellence," the relocation program was implemented consistent with the standard 



13 See Charito Chiuco Tordicilla (1998). The Gatekeepers of Marikina: A Case of In-City Relocation and 
Management of A Squatter Free Community. Ateneo School of Government. 



15 



Marikina Settlements Office. MSO Brochure. January 2006. 

CESR (1991). General Comment 10 where item 3g stipulates that national human rights institutions are 



tasked with the role of examining complaints alleging infringement of applicable rights, p. 66 



features and processes under the CMP (Refer to Appendix D). Consistent with the 
requirements of the CMP, the MSO conducts an initial assessment on the organizational 
capacity of the community association, as well as, conduct seminars on community- 
organizing among target beneficiaries, who are encouraged to organize themselves into 
a community housing association (CHA) for purposes of acquiring land and owning their 
own houses. The CHA followed the set of criteria (minimum monthly income, minimum 
length of stay, and age limit) set by the local government based on UDHA provisions or 
its own set of criteria. After the community is organized, the City of Marikina then initiates 
the process for land acquisition. 

In contrast with the program implementation in other cities like Bacolod, Mandaluyong, 
Naga and Muntinlupa, the City of Marikina did not allocate budget for land acquisition . It 
banked on the NHMFC to pay for the acquisition of private lands. It allocated 10% of the 
city's budget to fund CMP operations in terms of mobilization and technical 
requirements. One very unique feature of the housing program of Marikina City is the 
hiring of some beneficiaries of the relocation program as project officers. Community 
needs and demands are brought to the attention of the city government through these 
project officers. They also help manage Community Housing Associations by 
coordinating and working with the local barangay officials and association leaders in the 
organization and monitoring of all activities in their designated areas. This mechanism 
directly links community with the city government making the latter more prompt in 
responding to community problems and concerns. The mechanism is non-traditional in 
the sense that communities need not go through bureaucratic processes of bringing to 
government's attention their concerns. The mechanism was conceived to ensure that 
issues and problems are brought to the attention of the MSO and corresponding actions 
are taken with dispatch. This practice has managed resistance and conflict in the 
resettlement areas. The project officers were deployed in the areas the whole day and 
reports back to the MSO to report issues and concerns. Best effort is exerted by the 
project officers to resolve conflicts and problems in the community otherwise; they raised 
them to the MSO for action the following day. 

B. Specific policies and practices that were put in place 16 

The program started with the enforcement of a controversial ordinance that no structures 
could be built without securing permit from the City Hall. Illegal structures were closely 
monitored through the help of the barangay officials. This action needs strong political 
will, which the former City Mayor was able to display, which probably other LGUs could 
emulate. All illegal structures especially in risky and dangerous areas are prohibited. 
The former City Mayor did not compromise the implementation of this ordinance even if 
this should mean lost of support from a number of electorate. A few months before 
election time, he ordered the demolition of the Agus squatter shanties. This was 
perceived to be a big surprise to many because election time was usually not the best 
time for a Chief Executive to be involved in such a highly political act. 17 

At all times, however, outright demolition without notice was enforced as a policy. A 
demolition team was set up to enforce the ordinance. The strong enforcement of the 
ordinance yielded to a fast clearing of squatter communities along the riverbanks, 



16 See, Charito Chiuco Tordicilla (1998). The Gatekeepers of Marikina: A Case of In-City Relocation and 
Management of A Squatter Free Community. Ateneo School of Government. 

17 Ibid. p.5. 



esteros and creeks, in private lands and areas identified for infrastructure development. 
A re-zoning of land was likewise undertaken, which did not only allocate portions of 
Marikina in resettling its squatters but also adopted a policy on the standard size of land 
that can be owned in Marikina to 100 square meters. This is one control measure of the 
city government to maintain the density of population in the city, as well as, stringent 
parameter for selling of lots by future land developers. With the rapid population growth 
of the city attributed to migration, the government needed to enforce stricter measure to 
maximize efficient land use for residential areas, which make up 46% of the city's total 
land area. Moreover, the standard size of lot for distribution to qualified beneficiaries is 
limited to 24 square meters. The city government decided on this size, which is ideal 
only for a single family, to discourage the resettled families' relatives from provinces to 
migrate and live with them. 18 The relocation program also was tied up with the "clean 
and green" policy, which included the reviving of the Marikina River and transforming it 
into a Recreational Park. 

C. How did the change management process unfold 

The exercise of a strong but humane political will of the Mayor, which the city 
government supported, marked the beginning of the program. A census of squatters 
was done from 1992-1994. A listing of both renters and absentee homeowners was also 
done, which sorted out informal settlers from professional squatters. As a result of the 
survey, studies were made on two options: on-site development or off-site project 
depending on the areas occupied by the squatters. Those who live along the river 
banks, esteros, creeks and areas identified for the city's infrastructure development were 
automatically considered for relocation. Others who occupied privately owned properties 
were considered for on-site development after negotiations with owners. Negotiating with 
private landowners was one big challenge. Holding of dialogue with squatter 
communities was a prerequisite and they were made to choose among the six (6) 
relocation sites. Those who decided to go back to their respective provinces were 
handled by the (DSWD) workers who made arrangements for their evacuation and 
transportation fare. Those who have long been suffering from the inconveniences of 
floodwaters especially those living in the riverbanks were brought to a safer ground 
where they were provided temporary shelter under the care of the city government while 
their relocation houses were being constructed. 19 

D. How was support mobilized 

Generally, the Mayor used his authority to mobilize support. He presents his relocation 
program and its benefits but he never consulted everything to the people. He 
demonstrated such discipline to relocated communities by bringing a hammer whenever 
he visited them and pulling out protruding nails he noticed in the houses. 20 

The Mayor solicited the support of the city government for the enforcement of the 
Ordinance that gave full force to the encroachment of new squatters in the city and in the 
implementation of its provision requiring a permit from city hall before structures could be 
built in the city. Private landowners were also enticed into agreeing to sell their lands 



18 Ibid. p. 8. 

19 CESR (1991) General Comment 4 explains the right not to be forcefully evicted without adequate 
protection, p. 51 . 

20 Ibid. p. 8. 



through the representations done by the MSO and the Mayor. Hence, the organization 
of community associations provided support to the program. 



Part V. Results and Outcomes 

A. Successes and Shortcomings 

The city government sustained the management of a "squatter-free city". It has 
effectively controlled the mushrooming of squatter colonies. The revival of the Marikina 
River was transformed as a source of economic opportunities for the city government. 
The city government demonstrated its improved capacity in responding to obligation on 
housing rights under the UDHA. Realization of the right to housing shows progression. 
The city sustained giving lands to landless urban poor of the city notwithstanding the 
limited financial resources and inadequacy of lands of the city. 

B. Evidence-based description of the gains 

Nothing could surpass the security of tenure attained for the settlers, which guarantees 
protection against forced eviction, harassment and other threats. 21 The program 
experienced gains from relocation of 13,771 families as of 1998 and expanded coverage 
of 30,015 families 22 as of January 3, 2006, involving the systematic transfer of squatters 
from the original hazardous, flooded and risky places they used to occupy, to habitable 
and healthy places where they have human security having legally acquired housing 
structure under the CMP, 23 and allied services such as safe drinking water, energy for 
cooking and lighting, refuse disposal, site drainage and livelihood opportunities. The 
families now enjoy human security without threat of being demolished. 

C. Observations and findings of independent groups 

The impression of independent groups like the Philippines-CIDA Local Government 
Support Program is successful except for some reported limitations and constraints. The 
in-city resettlement feature of the program and the ability of the city government to link 
marginalized communities with the government's Community Mortgage Program were 
cited as viable indicators of success of the Marikina City Government. 24 On the part of 
CHR, it is still in the process of examining reported incidents of demolition that may run 
contrary to the provisions of UDHA and other international human rights conventions. 25 



21 CESR (1991) General Comment 4 where item 8a specifies that security of tenure guarantees legal 
protection against forced eviction, harassment and other threats, p. 23. 

22 UNDP (2002) Rights-Based Development, p. 25 - 30. 

23 CESR General Comment 4. 

24 Local Government Support Program. Enhancing Shelter Provision at the Local Level . Service Delivery 
with Impact: A Resource Book for Local Government pp.1 -1 05. 

25 CESR (1991). General Comment 4 where forced eviction as defined does not apply to evictions carried 
out by force in accordance with the law and in conformity with the provisions of the International Covenant 
on Human Rights, p. 51 . 



D. Extent to which program was institutionalized 

The Marikina Settlement Code of 2001 institutionalized and sustained the resettlement 
program from 1993 to date. The code institutionalized MSO as a policy and 
implementing body, qualifications of beneficiaries and limitation of ownership of lands, 
building constructions, prohibited business activities, provision of sanitary toilet, land 
reclassification and conversion to include tax exemptions and requirements, areas 
declared as danger zone, accreditation of community association and penal provisions. 



Part VI. Lessons Learned 

A. Common issues, challenges, constraints, and risks faced by executives / change 
managers 

The most common issue encountered in the course of the implementation of the 
relocation program was that of managing resistance to the said program. While the 
exercise of authority by the Mayor proved to be very effective, there were perceived 
excesses on the part of those executing the program. Also, there is a perception that 
mending of differences along with the implementation of the relocation program could 
have been facilitated were it not for the political differences between the Congressman 
and the Mayor. Perennial constraints involving financial resources were experienced to 
constitute most of the bottlenecks of the program. However, the support of the city 
government and the MSO eased up the problems. As experienced by the Mayor and 
the MSO, there is always that risk of being charged with human rights violation in 
sensitive program such as resettlement and the only way to counteract that risk is to 
uphold the rule of law. 

One other challenge shaped up after the communities have been resettled and 
organized. As inputted by the MSO Administrative Head, the city government had to 
reinforce social reorientation of the communities, as the communities became more 
demanding of services that are offered to them rather than undertaking their 
responsibilities. As a result the city government runs the risk of prioritizing communities 
for infrastructure services. Communities which have demonstrated cooperation of 
improving their resettlement areas are prioritized for infrastructure services such as light, 
water and concreting of alleys. 

B. Methods and techniques to prevent or manage problems 

The issues and problems encountered in the implementation of the program could have 
been managed better if provisions and guidelines under the UDHA and CMP and the 
role of LGUs were clearly understood by the communities. There were communities 
which did not comprehend very well the link of the CMP with the city government. Some 
of these communities thought that once their loans are taken out, the MSO did not have 
anything to do with the communities anymore. At present, the city government is in the 
stage of mobilizing "Presidents' Circle" of Resettled communities, to serve as avenue 
where information could be better communicated. After sometime, the system of project 
officers hired from the communities did not work well anymore. Some 
miscommunications arose from the dual representations of the project officers, which 
affected much some aspects of the operations of the MSO. 



10 



C. Policies, institutional arrangements, and practices that are likely to bring about the 
desired results and outcomes 

Policies on relocation program should be brought to a higher level. The human right to 
adequate housing, which is derived from the right to an adequate standard of living, is of 
central importance for the enjoyment of all economic, social and cultural rights. 26 This 
basic policy should guide all change managers or reform managers in observing 
maximum tolerance in the implementation of relocation as housing has a lot of 
implications to the daily lives of the people. 

The existence of a well-entrenched shelter financing system like that of the CMP is a 
plus factor, but still housing should not be treated as a commodity, that of merely having 
a roof over one's head. More often than not, the resistance of people to relocation stems 
from a number of considerations. These are legal security of tenure, availability of 
services, facilities and infrastructure, affordability, habitability, accessibility location and 
cultural adequacy. On the basis of these considerations extensive genuine consultation 
with, participation by all those affected, including the homeless, the inadequately housed 
and their representatives, must be observed. Furthermore, steps should be complied 
with to ensure coordination among government agencies at the national, regional and 
local levels to include in seeing to it that partnership forged among them would redound 
to the interest of the affected people. 

The UDHA provisions on evictions should be seriously considered by LGUs, Marikina 
City in this case. These are consistent with international guarantees where the 
Philippines as a state party, should undertake substantive and procedural protection and 
process in relation to forced evictions. These procedural protections include: a) an 
opportunity for genuine consultation with those affected; b) adequate and reasonable 
notice for all affected persons prior to the scheduled eviction; c) information on the 
proposed evictions and where applicable, on the alternative purpose for which the land 
or housing is to be used to be made available to those affected in reasonable time; d) 
especially where groups of people are involved, government officials or their 
representatives to be present during eviction; e) all persons carrying out the eviction to 
be properly identified; f) eviction not to take place during bad weather or at night; g) 
provision of legal remedies to those affected; and, h) provision of legal aid to persons 
who are in need to seek redress from the courts. 27 In the case of Marikina City, it would 
seem these guarantees where not observed despite the very clear provisions of UDHA. 

In the area of sources of livelihood for relocated communities, there is a need to 
strengthen the linkage of the city government with the business sector especially in 
relocation sites. It was reported that the CMP implementation was delayed due to poor 
turnout of savings on the part of the beneficiaries. As is usually the case in other 
housing program, there is a need to perfect intervention of local government in this 
respect. The latest program of the city government of Marikina in its survey of 
unemployed labor force in Marikina and its training program is a big boost to the 
inadequacy of source of livelihood for the urban poor. 



26 See, UNHCHR. Compilation of General Comments Adopted by the Committee on Economic, Social and 
Cultural Rights. UNCHR Treaty Body Database. June 2004. pp. 22 -24. 

27 Ibid. pp. 50-53 



11 



D. How can resources be better mobilized and organized 

The funds allocated by city government equivalent to 10% of its budget should be 
revisited. The resettlement program has been there over a decade and should show 
gradual progression considering the infrastructural facilities and services, which need 
completion to cover all resettlement areas. 

Lack of funds to adequately service resettlement communities will always be a problem. 
The city government could pass an ordinance providing tax incentives to industrial 
establishments in the city, which will provide resettlement improvement subsidies. 

On the part of the NHMFC, the funds allocated for the countrywide implementation of the 
CMP should have parallel augmentation to adequately provide for the facilitation of 
speedy take out of loans of CMP beneficiaries. 

E. How to sustain initiatives 

The passage of the Marikina Settlement Code is more than enough measure to 
institutionalize and sustain the program. A template program for each of the 
resettlement area to be managed jointly by the MSO and the Community Association 
should be adopted and institutionalized with funding support from the city government. 
The template should primarily cover the education and training of the resettlement 
community association on community problem solving and community planning and 
management. The program should cover training of the project officers hired from the 
communities on participative-leadership, management, conflict resolution and mediation. 
Further the organization mechanics of the community associations should be 
strengthened to ensure sustainability of community empowerment. 

In addition, programmatic application of the standards on the right to housing as 
exemplified in the UDHA and International Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural 
Rights should be observed in the annual planning of the city government on housing 
program delivery. 

F. Appropriate role/relationship of leaders and citizens 

The mix of leadership of the city government, the support given by the City Council, the 
duly constituted MSO and the organized Community Housing Associations all 
contributed to an improved relationship in the city. But this did not happen overnight. It 
took strong determination and guts for the Mayor to establish this cordial and productive 
relationship to set in over time. As observed in and outside Marikina City, the Mayor 
talks less and demonstrates by example his vision of the city. Performance and 
credibility of the leadership were the dominant factors that made the roles of leaders and 
citizens more understood in context. For a little over a decade, community resettlements 
proved compatible with the development and growth of the city. The hiring of project 
officers from the resettlement communities contributed to the bridging of gap between 
the people and the leaders in Marikina City. Communication of the people and the city 
government is direct and speedy as these project officers reported to MSO in the 
morning, deployed in the communities during the day and reported back to MSO at the 
end of the day to relay feedback on issues and concerns of resettlement communities. 
But the effectiveness of this feedback system waned after sometime. The juridical 
personality of the community associations having been enshrined not only under the 



12 



UDHA and CMP but also in the Marikina Settlement Code is a strong proof of power 
relations between the city leadership and the people. Human Rights involve power 
relations between those instrumentalities of government, which have the duty and 
obligation to provide service and the people who, individually and collectively have the 
entitlements and obligations to exercise their rights responsibly. 

Such power relations between leaders and the people should provide a genuine 
definition of the role of leaders as the enablers of development and the people as 
contributors and subjects-objects of such development. As in the case of Marikina City, 
such power relations is institutionalized and sustained through the rule of law and social 
reorientation on the people's role in achieving the development vision of the city. 



VII. Future directions 



A. Plans and programs 

The future plans and programs for resettlement are focused on physical development 
cum social reorientation. In order to improve housing delivery in Marikina City especially 
for the urban poor, the city government has adopted the following plans for 2006: 
acquisition of new settlement site to accommodate more or less 810 unsettled 
households affected by the road right of way and creek legal easement in line with its 
minimal effect in on-site development approach; routine inspection and tight coordination 
with local residents and leaders to thwart any new illegal construction of dwelling; 
introduction and promotion of colored housing design scheme as part of the Home 
Improvement Program; promotion of model low cost housing design from typical three 
storey housing design with parking concept and distribution of blueprints to every 
community association to give reference on the plan details and specifications; 
continuing physical development with P 54 M cost of infrastructure projects to various 
community sites; and completion of individual land title to more or less 14,000 
households and recipients of the city housing program. Social reorientation underscores 
empowerment of communities to participate and make available their respective 
community action plans to match the housing services of the city government. 

Based on the Justification Statement issued by the MSO, it would require the following 
budgetary support from the city government: 



Plans and Programs 


Amount 






1 . Land Acquisition & Development 


P 62.0 M 


2. Land Improvement; road 
concreting, drainage and other 
infrastructure projects 


47.2 M 


3. Building & Structures Outlay; 
community billboards, signages, 
children center, parklanes, 
facelifting of houses, etc. 


34.2 M 



13 



B. Institutional Strengthening 

The MSO is now in the stage of revisiting its functions and services. After the term of 
Mayor Bayani Fernando, there was realignment of functions and services among the city 
government departments. Infrastructural services were transferred to the engineering 
department, demolition to a separate Anti-Squatting Unit, livelihood to a Women's Circle. 
MSO is consolidating its plans and services especially in the area of infrastructural 
services and livelihood, which are the basic assistance of the MSO to the resettlement 
communities. It has almost scrapped the "Project Officers Arrangements" and 
considered the "Presidents' Circle" as a better alternative for dialogue and feedback. 

C) Building Capacities 

The capacity-building program of communities should be sought by the associations. 
Social reorientation is of highest consideration. Empowerment and not dole out is the 
order of the day. 



Part VIM. Replicability of Practices 

Resettlement Areas 

The "in-city" location of the resettlement program is one approach worth replicating. It is 
a manifestation of the care and attention that socially disadvantaged group like squatters 
should deserve as part of the family of the City of Marikina. They were not displaced. 
Instead, they were given the opportunity to exercise their right to property while 
regulating the right of the socially advantaged group to own more property. They 
participated in decisions and policy-making that affected their lives and the lives of those 
for whom they're responsible for. 

Institutionalization through Marikina Settlement Code 

The codification of the resettlement program into the Marikina Settlement Code is also a 
replicable practice. The code institutionalized the program and the institutional 
arrangement, which any administration could continue or sustain. The MSO as an 
institutional arrangement fully supported administratively and financially by the city 
government delivered the resettlement program alongside the vision and thrust of an 
equally successful economy of the city characterized by urban renewal and a booming 
business environment in the city. 

Community Monitoring and Feedback System 

The "project officer's system", which was scrapped in the latter stage, is a replicable 
practice at the initial stage of a resettlement program. The city government was able to 
penetrate the communities and was able to work on the information and feedback 
learned from the project officers who were residents of the communities. The system 
bridged the gap between the community and the city government. 



14 



Risk Management of Originatorship Scheme 

The City Government assumed full responsibility and commitment under the 
originatorship scheme of the CMP. The city matched the CMP funds with 10% of its city 
budget to cover the cost of infrastructural services for the resettlement communities. 

Social Reorientation 

The city government enforced social reorientation in empowering and building the 
capacities of resettlement communities. This is one replicable practice that made 
communities more self-reliant in managing their affairs. During the latter stage of the 
resettlement program, the city government changed its approach. Only those 
community associations with proven commitment and capability to enhance the 
improvement of the community are given priority by the city government's infrastructure 
and livelihood projects. The shift was made due to the shaping up of the "dole-out" 
mentality among resettled communities. Meaning, communities were encouraged to 
exert its best effort at facilitating the take out of their loans under the CMP before such 
other services could be availed. These services also come in the form of trainings and 
other activities. 

Urban Poor network 

The Presidents' Circle among resettlement communities is a replicable practice for 
empowerment and responsible management of power relations with the city 
government. This practice is still in the infant stage but with great potentials of evolving 
as a good community level network that will help shape more purposive participation 
mechanism in the city. 

Leadership 

The strong political will and the vision orientation of the leader made the resettlement of 
Marikina a great success. While the style of leadership of the former Mayor was 
attacked at all fronts in and outside the Marikina City, the outcome of the program 
vindicated him. As residents of Marikina City, we are witnesses to his "calibrated 
consultation and strong leadership," which facilitated to a large extent, the effective 
management of the development goals of the city vis-a-vis responding to the critical 
situation of housing of the urban poor. This is replicable in areas governed by leaders 
with high emotional quotient who could withstand pressures. 

Assertion of Independence 

The city government's competence in responsibly exercising its independence while 
pursuing cooperation from national agencies was a remarkable practice. Such 
independent thinking and disposition helped shun away the interventionist attitude of 
most observers, especially at the time when the city leadership was at the helm of 
managing the risks and limitations of the resettlement program, as well as, the conflicting 
perceptions of supporters and critiques of the city government's leadership. 



15 



Compliance with Global Strategy on Shelter and Human Rights 

This is one best practice in keeping with some parameters of housing rights advocated 
under the Global strategy for shelter in year 2000 such as adequate privacy, adequate 
space, adequate security, adequate lighting and ventilation, adequate basic 
infrastructure, adequate location close to work and basic facilities, appropriate means - 
all at a reasonable cost. 28 One good thing about the resettlement program in Marikina 
City was its close link with urban renewal. In other traditional practices in the past, 
government assigns resettlement sites in far away places causing undue dislocation of 
families and households from their sources of livelihood and education for their children. 
Relocating families within the city is one way of operationalizing one basic human rights 
principle of "giving attention to vulnerable sectors of society". Hence, the progressive 
planning and implementation of resettling communities in Marikina City is in keeping with 
the state obligation to provide housing to the maximum of its available resources. Its 
replication to be more successful should consider the enhancement of appropriate 
procedural protection and due process which are essential aspects of human rights 
pertinent to forced evictions. This procedural protection should be further enhanced in 
Marikina City and other LGUs, through their incorporation in their Settlement Code. 
These are: a) an opportunity for genuine consultation with those affected, b) adequate 
and reasonable notice for all affected persons prior to the scheduled date of eviction, c) 
information on the proposed eviction and where applicable on the alternative purpose for 
which the land or housing is to be used, d) especially where groups of people are 
involved, government officials or their representatives to be present during the eviction, 
e) all persons carrying the eviction to be properly identified, f) evictions not to take place 
in particularly bad weather or at night unless the affected persons consent otherwise, g) 
provision of legal remedies, and h) provision, where possible, of legal aid to persons who 
are in need of it to seek redress from the courts. 

Acquiescence with Public Administration Concept 

The twin goals of development and socio-economic progress guided well the practice of 
public administration in the resettlement program of Marikina City. The city leadership 
played effectively the interaction of politics, administration and civil society 29 in the 
matter of responding to the housing problem in the city. The city leadership truly 
demonstrated political representation and accountability over the concerns and interest 
of the vulnerable and marginalized segments of the city. Hand-in-hand, the leadership 
also practiced genuine administration with its consistent implementation of settlement 
policies and code and the exercise of political power and observance of the rule of law in 
the resettlement program. In consonance with empowering civil society, the leadership 
also provided opportunities for the organization of communities for better representation 
of their development demands and contributions. The interplay of politics, administration 
and civil society surfaces when the need to bring about reforms and changes in society 
becomes pronounced, as demonstrated in the case of the resettlement program of 
Marikina City. 



28 CESR General Comment 4. 1991 p. 23. 

29 B. Guy Peters and John Piere. Introduction: The Role of Public Administration in Governing . Handbook 
of Public Administration. SAGE Publications. 2003. p 3. 

16 



Appendix A 



MSO STRUCTURE 



30 











OFFICE OF THE MAYOR 












CITY SETTLEMENTS DEPARTMENT 






• Develop, regulate and maintain squatter free 






vision of the city 






• Formulate policy guidelines and implement 






housing services 






• Develop and implement a comprehensive urban 








poor housing progra 


n 






ADMINIST 


RATIVE 




RESETT 


LEMENT 




HOUSING & HOMESITE 


DIVISION 




MANAGEMENT & 
OPERATION DIVISION 




MANAGEMENT DIVISION 


• Maintain office records 








• Plan & design practical & 


and documents 




• Develop & implement 




equitable infrastructure 


• Maintain office 




community organizing 




program for the poor 


equipment, furniture, 




network and approaches 




• Provide mechanism for 


fixture, machines and 




for housing delivery 




estate management, 


vehicles 




• Develop & enforce 




acquisition & land 


• Formulate personnel 




approved scheme for 




disposition 


development program 




equitable land 




• Facilitate conversion of 


• Effect comprehensive 




distribution, relocation 




appropriate lands as 


records management 




• Control proliferation of 




settlement areas 


• Effect sound 




squatters, act as mediator 




• Plan & implement compre- 


administrative controls 




and enforce laws 
pertinent to urban and 




hensive livelihood & skills 
training program to comple- 








housing development 




ment housing services 



Marikina Settlements Office Brochure. November 2005. 



17 



Appendix B 



Demolition Cases Filed with the Commission on Human Rights 3 



Case No. 


Complainants 


Place of Incident 


Date Filed 


26328 


Community Resident 


Victory Hills Suddv. Parang 


4-23-02 


22473 


Community Resident 


Victory Mill, Parang 


3-06-99 


22434 


Community Resident 


Marikina City 


8-08-98 


19866 


Community Resident 


Lower Paraiso, Marikina City 


1-30-98 


13962 


Community Resident 


Tandang Sora St., Parang 


6-01-94 


22445 


Community Resident 


Concepcion 


12-14-90 


6235 


Community Resident 


Bialba, Nangka 


5-13-88 


23684 


Community Resident 


Sitio Olanda 


4-13-00 


19704 


Community Resident 


Marikina City 


no data 


17557 


Community Resident 


Marikina City 


no data 


16044 


Community Resident 


Marikina City 


No data 



Taken from the Data Base of the Commission on Human Rights (CHR). 



18 



Appendix C 

SAMPLE RESPONSES OF RESIDENTS INTERVIEWED 32 
Community Satisfaction Rating Slip 



Questions 


Responses 


Frequency 


1 . Kayo po ba ay 


Yes 


25 


nagkaroon ng katiyakan o 


No Answer 


6 


security of tenure sa lupa 






at pabahay dito sa inyong 






komunidad 






(Did you experience 






security of tenure in the 






resettlement site of your 






community) 






2. Ano po ang mga 


• Tubig (Water) 


5 


serbisyong nakukuha 


• Haw (Electricity) 


7 


ninyo sa pagtira dito sa 


• Livelihood 


10 


komunidad 


• Malinis at tahimik (Clean & Peaceful) 


12 


(Which services are you 


• Seguridad sa lupa at bahay (Security 


19 


getting while staying in the 


to housing and land) 




resettlement site) 


• Medical 


6 




• Kolekta ng basura (Collection of 


19 




garbage) 


3. Kayo po ba ay 


Yes 


25 


nasisiyahan sa pagtira 






dito sa inyong komunidad 


No. 


1 


(Are you satisfied living in 






this community) 


No Answer 


5 


3. Ano po ang inyong 


• Livelihood 


15 


mungkahi upang 


• Medical 


10 


mapabuti ang inyong 


• Trabaho (Work/Livelihood) 


14 


komunidad 


• Educational assistance 


5 


(What are your 


• Kongkretong daan (Concrete road) 


12 


suggestions for the 






betterment of your 






community) 






4. Ano po ang maaari 


• Paghiwalay ng basura (Separation of 


10 


ninyong maitulong upang 


the garbage) 




umunlad ang inyong 


• Kalinisan (Cleanliness) 


12 


komunidad 


• Pagsunod sa mga ordinansa at mga 




(What are the things that 


batas (To obey the local ordinances 


19 


you can help to improve 


and laws) 




your community) 







Data gathered during the interview conducted on 02-03 February 2006, with the beneficiaries of the 
program from Nangka, Tumana, Sto. Nino, and San Miguel Realty in Fortune, Parang, Marikina City. 



19 



Appendix D 

HOW CMP OPERATES 



The CMP is a mortgage financing program. The program caters to organized 
marginalized communities to purchase and develop a piece of land under the concept of 
community ownership. Its funding has been institutionalized in the government system 
through the comprehensive and Integrated Shelter and Finance Act (CISFA). The 
program conceives an incremental approach in developing the sites and facilities of the 
community and their respective homes depending on their affordability levels. 33 
Mortgage payments are temporarily treated as rentals, and the title stays with the 
community, until the beneficiaries have paid the full amount of the loan. Individual titles 
are then given to them. In this program, residents of depressed areas are given the 
opportunity to own a lot they occupy, or legally own an area they choose to resettle in. 
They can also gradually improve this lot, the facilities available on it, and their own 
homes based on their capacity to pay. There are steps in the CMP process. It starts with 
a group of squatters applying for assistance from the local government or a Non - 
Government Organization to acquire a piece of land, which could be the area they 
currently occupy or intend to occupy as a relocation site. A key feature of this housing 
program is the Originator. This may either be a local government or a non -government 
organization that will assist the community association in setting up its organizational 
systems for the housing project as well as provide technical assistance in the 
preparation and submission of required documents. 



i3 See, CESR Comment 4 (1991) where provision on affordability requires that the state parties should 
establish housing subsidies for those unable to obtain affordable housing as well as form of housing finance, 
p. 24. 



20 



REFERENCES 

Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. (1 991 ). General Comment 4. 

Demolition Cases in Marikina. (2005). CHR Data Base. 

Koffi Annan. UN Secretary General. (2004). Human Rights Dimension of Poverty. Office of the 
United nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. 

Local Government Support Program. (2005). Enhancing Shelter Provision at the Local Level . 
Service Delivery with Impact: A Resource Book for Local Government pp.1 -1 05. 

Marikina City Government. Socio-Economic Profile, 1990-1998. 

http://www. marikina. gov. ph/pages\facts-and-figures\social-services\ff-social-housing.jsp 

Marikina's Informal Settlers. (January 2006). 

Marikina City "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marikina City. 

Peters B. Guy and Piere John. (2003). Introduction: The Role of Public Administration in 
Governing . Handbook of Public Administration. SAGE Publications, p 3. 

Rebullida Ma. Lourdes G. D.P.A. (1998). Case Feature in the Local Government Originated 
Community Mortgage Program - Processes and Cases in the Implementation of a 
Socialized Housing Program. A Publication of the Philippine Business for Social 
Progress. October 1998. 

Squatter-Free Marikina: Marikina Settlements Office. (January 2006). 

Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights. Fact Sheet No.21, The Human Right 
to Adequate Housing. 

Seminar Report on Urban Poor Community Upgrading LGU-lnitiated Approaches for Housing the 
Urban Poor. 

Social Economic Planning Office (SEPO). An Economic and Social Development Framework: 
Five Pillars of Growth. September 2004. 

The Rights-Based Development: A Training Manual. July 2002. 

The Settlement Program. Marikina Settlements Office. January 2006. 

Tordecilla, Charito Chiuco. (1998) The Gatekeepers of Marikina: A Case of In-City Relocation 
and Management of a Squatter Free Community. Ateneo School of Government. 

Turner Mark and David Hulme. (1997). Governance, Administration and Development: Making 
the State Work. USA: Kumarian Press, Inc. 



21