City of Slum: How RA 7279 and RA 8368 were used to cuddle squatters

Squatting has been a normal way of life in the Philippines after the world war II, records showed that victims of war built temporary houses around Manila and when the Philippine government rehabilitated Manila and it became the economic hub of the country, many people from the provinces migrated and took their chances.[1] However, because opportunities were limited those immigrants from the provinces found themselves trapped in Metro Manila without any money to pay for return fare hence they created make shift houses and found themselves struggling in the city each day.

Over the years many who lived in provinces migrate and took chances living in the city. Some have places to stay while other resort to squatting. According to official estimates, Manila and suburbs had around 46,000 squatters in 1946; it rose to 98,000 in 1956 and to 283,000 in 1963. After the Marcos Regime, groups of people occupied estates and areas along Roxas Boulevard and in river Banks which were all formerly owned by Marcos cronies. The emerging housing problems of the underpriviliged paved the way for the enactment of The Urban Development and Housing Act (UDHA) or RA 7279 was passed under this government. It provides for a comprehensive and integrated urban development and housing programme, and therefore increases the number of modes of land acquisition offered under PD 1517. Years later after the enactment of UDHA, the PD 772 which penalizes squatting and other similar acts was repealed by RA 8386. These Government efforts to minimize squatting problems however were weak causing the doubled number of squatters in Metro Manila amounting to 2.8 Million for 2010. [2] 

The enactment of Republic Act 8368 strengthened the guts of many Filipino to occupy idle lands and create shanties for their permanent homes. The decriminalization of squatting and shifting the punishment on the so-called professional squatters does not solve the squatting problems in the Philippines. In fact, the laws were useless as the government could not really identify beyond the text of RA 7279 the difference between squatter and professional squatters. RA 7279 were also used by squatters to defend their so-called right over the land because the law requires consultation between property owners and illegal occupants, with a 30-day notice of eviction plus a provision for adequate relocation for settlers.[3] As long the government could not give a proper relocation area for the squatters then their eviction will be delayed. To summarize, the squatters find idle lands and create shanties for living or let someone rent the place then invoke Section 28 of RA 7279 for them to keep the place for an indefinite time while the owner waits for the government to give squatters an area for their relocation.

The honest intention of the law to alleviate the squatting problem and elevate the lives of the urban poor were plausible however the loophole, and the creative circumvention in the context of the law which impliedly supported by many politician gave RA 7279 and RA 8368 the impression that it is useless and a burden to the government to solve the squatting problems in the Philippines. 

[1]https://cuervopropertyadvisory.wordpress.com/2013/08/30/squatters-a-bane-to-the-philippine-social-infrastructure-part-1/

[2] http://philrights.org/from-squatters-into-informal-settlers/

[3]http://hlurb.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/laws-issuances/mandates/ra_7279.pdf