Domestic Violence is Very Real And Common in The UK - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 10 Words: 2972 Downloads: 1 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Law Essay Type Analytical essay Level High school Tags: Domestic Violence Essay Did you like this example? Domestic violence is very real and common in the UK, and indeed internationally In the UK domestic violence accounts for a quarter of all crime, despite these figures it is recorded that only 5 per cent of recorded cases of domestic violence end in conviction, less than 20 per cent of rapes and sexual assaults are reported to the police, and less than 6 per cent of rapes result in conviction. Wells points out as a comparison, the number of women that are in prison, and the seemingly trivial reasons for there incarceration. There are now over 4,500 women in prison, an increase of 194 per cent in the last ten years. Most women are convicted of non-violent offences, such as shoplifting. One woman out of 12 judges in the House of Lords, 5 women out of 43 police Chief Constables, 18 women out of 42 Chief Officers of Probation, 7 women out of 42 Chief Crown Prosecutors, 31 women out of 138 Prison Governors. There was evidence of sexual harassment and discrimination experienced by women working in the system. Domestic violence is not discriminatory and occ urs between people of all social classes, amongst all racial and religious groupings and in all age groups. Crime and other statistics can only provide us with a taster of the real picture. The nature and extent of the suffering which is endured by families behind closed doors is very much something that is kept private. Victims of domestic assaults often do not complain of violence, either through fear of being further assaulted, or because they are too embarrassed and ashamed to reveal their plight to professionals who might be able to assist them. Although the traditional perspective is that victims of domestic violence are predominately women, this is not always the case, men, children and the elderly are vulnerable to domestic violence too. This said there is an abundance of evidence to show that it is women and children who are the main victims. Children who themselves suffer violence at the hands of a parent are in the main protected by the state though child protection procedures. The remedies provided by the civil law are therefore generally used to obtain protection for an adult victim. As Subedi points out There are several causes of violence against women. These range from historical unequal power relations between men and women to cultural perceptions, womens sexuality, inaction on the part of the agents of the State to the traditional perception in law and practice that matters within the family and between a husband and wife are basically private matters in which outside or State involvement should be kept to a minimum. Unlike other forms of crime, the problem with domestic violence has been that even the law itself is not well- developed and the law that is there on this issue has not been enforced as vigorously as possible. It is from this premise that efforts have been made in the recent past both at national and international level to strengthen the law on traditional patterns of violence and to expand the scope of the law to cover new forms of violence. While the problem often encountered in this process at national level is the doctrine of privacy and the concept of the sanctity of the family, the dichotomy of the public/private sphere is the problem at international level. In the UK, domestic assaults are criminal offences and a man who attacks his wife can be prosecuted for his actions. He may be charged with one or more of various offences against the person included the offence of rape. The Protection From Harassment Act 1997 introduced strong measures to assist those who are victims of a course of conduct, which amounts to harassment and made such conduct a crime. However, victims of domestic violence and harassment may be reluctant to become involved in the prosecution process for a number of reasons. These include the realisation by the victim that the matter is no longer under her control once she has reported an attack to the police. It will be up to the police to decide whether and h ow they wish to investigate her complaint, and it will be the decision of the Crown Prosecution Service whether or not to go ahead and press charges. This loss of control acts as a disincentive to women to report incidents of violence, as they may well fear the consequences of their action if the police and Crown Prosecution Service fail, as they see it, to respond in an appropriate fashion. In the past the police have been unwilling to intervene in cases of domestic violence, and to prosecute offenders. This perception of the police as unwilling to come to the assistance of victims of domestic assaults is still evident today, even though domestic violence is taken much more seriously by the police than in the past, and even though police practices in many areas have changed radically in favour of the victim. Figures from British Crime Surveys suggest that domestic violence forms the largest single category of violent crime. In a survey carried out by Davis and Gretny re vealed that of a total of 448 assaults, all of which were referred to the CPS, there were 243 (54 per cent) non-domestics and 205 (46 per cent) domestics. If the British Crime Survey finding that domestic violence comprises 20 per cent of all assaults can be believed, and if the Bristol police files that they surveyed can be taken to be representative of the current position, it would appear that domestic assault is significantly more likely to be prosecuted than is assault in other contexts. This is remarkable given the widely accepted picture of domestic violence as a crime both under-reported and under-recorded. In such situations a victim of domestic violence, may apply for an injunction under the Davis G Cretney A, (1996) Prosecuting Domestic Assault, Criminal Law Review Mar 162 174 or a non- molestation order under s42 of the Family Law Act 1996. The statutes have somewhat differing aims although both statutes do aim to prevent harassment and can be compared and thi s will be discussed. Only associated persons can apply under the FLA 1996; anybody can apply under the PHA 1997. There are wider remedies available under the FLA 1996, including the power to make occupation orders. Damages can be awarded only under the PHA 1997. This is an important point. Domestic violence/harassment knows no social boundaries and therefore an award of damages can be a salutory lesson. It can also be an important remedy for those who are scared to report, for fear of financial hardship. Such damages can, of course, if not promptly paid, be enforced in all the usual ways including execution, attachment of earnings or a charging order on land if necessary followed by an order for sale. Presently, a power of arrest can be attached to FLA 1996 orders but not to PHA 1997 orders. However, although the power of arrest is retained for occupation orders it is to be abolished for non-molestation orders. A warrant of arrest can be issued under either statute. Breach of an injunction under s 3 of the PHA 1997 is an offence breach of a non-molestation order is made an offence by s 42A of the FLA 1996.(7) District judges have full jurisdiction under both statutes to make orders, issue warrants and deal with contempt of court proceedings for breach of orders. Applications under the FLA 1996 are family proceedings governed by the Family Proceedings Rules 1991 and must be issued in a family proceedings court, a divorce county court, family hearing centre, care centre or in the Principal Registry or Lambeth Shoreditch or Woolwich County Courts.Applications under the PHA 1997 are civil proceedings governed by CPR 1998 Part 65 and can be issued in the High Court (Queens Bench Division) or in the county court for the district in which either the claimant or the defendant resides or carries on business. Exceptionally, concurrent proceedings under both statutes are appropriate. They should be consolidated and tried together. A person arrested and brought before the court pursuant to the FLA 1996 can be remanded in custody or on bail. There is no power to remand a person arrested and brought before the court pursuant to the PHA 1997. Punishment for contempt of court under either statute is subject to the maximum of 2 years imprisonment provided by the Contempt of Court Act 1981. The sentence must be proportionate to the seriousness of the contempt. Conviction for breach of an injunction under s 3 of the PHA 1997 or for breach of a non-molestation order under s 42A of the FLA 1996 both carry a maximum sentence of 6 months and/or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum on summary conviction, and a maximum sentence of 5 years and/or fine on conviction on indictment. Both statutes provide that a person cannot be both punished for contempt of court and prosecuted in respect of the same incident. The PHA 1997 also creates offences (ss 2 and 4) not dependant on a civil injunction; the FLA 1996 does not. By s 1 of the PH A 1997, a person must not pursue a course of conduct which amounts to harassment of another and which he knows or ought to know amounts to harassment of another. By s 7(3) a course of conduct must involve conduct on at least two occasions and by s 7(4) conduct includes speech. Section 7(3A) was inserted by the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 and provides: A persons conduct on any occasion shall be taken, if aided, abetted, counselled or procured by another: (a) to be conduct on that occasion of the other (as well as conduct of the person whose conduct it is); and (b) to be conduct in relation to which the others knowledge and purpose, and what he ought to have known, are the same as they were in relation to what was contemplated or reasonably foreseeable at the time of the aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring. The phrase course of conduct has caused difficulty. In R v Hills held that assaults in April and October 1999 were not a course of conduct, particularly si nce the parties had been reconciled in the interim. In Lau v Director of Public Prosecutions quashed a conviction on the grounds that two incidents 4 months apart were not a course of conduct. The fewer the number of incidents and the wider the time lapse between them, the less likely that they give rise to a course of conduct. On appropriate facts, a charge of assault should be preferred. Indeed, many cases justify both a charge of assault and of harassment. The definition of harassment (and assault) is the same in civil and criminal proceedings, and thus arguments on whether or not there was a course of conduct can arise in both civil and criminal courts. In civil cases, where they may be doubt on whether there is a course of conduct then, as in crime, where appropriate, assault can also be alleged. In June 2003 the Home Office published a consultation paper setting out proposals to tackle domestic violence. The paper indicated the Governments strategy was based on thr ee elements: to prevent domestic violence occurring or recurring; to increase support for victims; and to ensure improved legal protection and justice for domestic violence victims. This led to the enactment of the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004 which came into force in March 2005. DVCVA 2004 closely links the civil and criminal processes through new police powers, and through a new criminal offence of breach of a non-molestation order. It also creates a new offence of causing or permitting the death of a child or vulnerable person. It also requires the adoption of a code of practice and a victims fund, to be financed by surcharges on fines and some fixed penalties. It creates the power for the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority to recover money from offenders, and makes a variety of other changes to criminal procedure, powers and sentencing. Non-molestation or occupation orders are key tools in providing protection for those who fall within the categ ory of associated persons. Prior to the enactment of the DVCVA 2004 eligibility extended to those living together as man and wife (cohabitants), or former cohabitants, and those who live or have lived in the same household (except if they are employees, tenants or boarders, or a lodger). DVCVA 2004 extends the category of associated person to include cohabitants in a same-sex relationship living in an equivalent relationship to that of husband and wife. The power to attach a power of arrest to a non-molestation order is removed by this act. Instead, common assault becomes an arrestable offence under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and breach of a non-molestation order becomes a criminal (arrestable) offence. If, for whatever reason, no prosecution is mounted, perhaps because of the wishes of the victim, that does not prevent an application to the civil court to commit for breach of the order. Nothing prevents the commencement of civil proceedings while criminal proceedings are pending, following arrest, though arguably a family court should await the determination of the criminal process. A new criminal offence is created under s42A will be punishable on conviction on indictment by a term of imprisonment not exceeding five years, or a fine, or both, and on summary conviction by a term of imprisonment not exceeding 12 months, or a fine not exceeding the statutory minimum, or both. The prosecution will need to prove the existence and terms of the order; the fact that the defendant was aware of the order; conduct that amounts to breach of that order, provided the breach is relevant only to sentence and not to guilt or innocence; and the lack of reasonable excuse. Minor changes are made to occupation orders under the DVCVA 2004 these require a court, in proceedings for an occupation order, to consider whether or not to make a non-molestation order. Other changes include changes to reflect cohabitation as opposed to marriage. Nothing in the new Act removes the right of the court to attach a power of arrest to an occupation order. This may cause some difficulties where a court makes both a non-molestation order and an occupation order, particularly if a court has attached a radius clause, for example not to come within a specified distance of the applicants home. Restraining orders under PHA 1997 form an integral part of the machinery for the protection of victims of domestic violence. DVCVA 2004, s 12, will extend the courts power to make a restraining order under s 5 of PHA 1997.Under s 5, when a court is sentencing or otherwise dealing with a person who is convicted of an offence under s 2 or s 4 of that Act, then as well as sentencing him or dealing with him in any other way, it may make a restraining order. The restraining order is particularly useful, as it provides for the continued safety of the victim but can only be made in cases where a conviction had been obtained for a s 2 or s 4 offence. As Wells points out: A vignette of current concerns suggests that much has changed in the last few decades. There is a ministerial group on domestic violence headed by Home Office minister, Baroness Scotland. The Solicitor General, a woman, has made tackling domestic violence a policy priority. She has talked to the President of Family Division, a woman. The Law Commission has recommended the abolition of the partial defence of provocation for reasons largely to do with its differential impact on male and female partner killers. The psychological trauma associated with rape and other forms of sexual harassment has been acknowledged, much attention has been given to improving police practices, and the offences themselves have been reconfigured around the concept of trust. It is difficult to believe that these changes would have come about without the influence of feminism in general and feminist legal commentators in particular. These changes also fit into a much wider pat tern in which victims have moved very much centre stage along with the associated restorative justice movement. Internationally moves are being made to improve the situation for women. There have been international efforts to strengthen womens rights. This perception has contributed to the reluctance on the part of many countries to adopt either a protocol to CEDAW providing for individual petition or a protocol on violence against women with similar remedies for women. Moreover, the perception of States towards certain types of violence seems to be different in developed Western countries from that of certain developing countries. While widespread dissemination of pornographic material and use of women as sex objects by the media has been viewed as violence against women by women in certain developing countries, the same does not necessarily hold true in certain Western countries such as the Netherlands and the United States, which opposed the inclusion of this type of vio lence in the definition of violence in the draft UN declaration on violence against women. This type of activity cannot be violence for those women who voluntarily allow themselves to be used as sex objects by the media. But it may be seen as a psychological violence against women in general by those who disapprove of such treatment of women by the media. The protest campaigns organised recently by grass-root womens groups in India against the world beauty competition in Bangalore is an example of such differences of opinion. So is British law sufficient? Does it protect women adequately? There is generally are much greater awareness of domestic violence, and the criminality and culpability has increased some what over the last decade. Awareness has been heightened, although it can be argued that the piece meal legislation is unacceptable and there needs to be some joined up thinking insofar as this area of law is concerned. Whilst the new legislation is a move in that dir ection, it is a wasted opportunity as it is certainly desirable that the law on domestic violence should be consolidated. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Domestic Violence is Very Real And Common in The UK" essay for you Create order

The Character Horatio in Shakespeares Hamlet Essay

The Character Horatio in Shakespeares Hamlet In the play Hamlet, by William Shakespeare, the confidant Horatio is created to serve a number of different purposes. Horatio is a flat character. He is a loyal, obedient, and trustworthy companion to Hamlet. His character does not undergo any significant transformation throughout the play, except that he serves as a witness of the death of Hamlet, Claudius, and Gertrude. Horatios role in the play seems to be as a utilitarian character that Shakespeare created in order to heighten the suspense of the play. Also for Horatio to be Hamlets ear so as to appease the audiences ear, and to communicate the moral of the play. Horatio serves often as the voice of reason, for instance; he is†¦show more content†¦Horatio is seen as a peacemaker, a man of reason, when he calms Hamlet at the Ophelia funeral. Hamlet, in 3.2, asks Horatio to be a second witness to Claudius guilt upon seeing the Gonsago scene. Hamlet needs verification from Horatio as to the reality of what they both see. At the end of the scene, Horatio supports Hamlets interpretation of Claudius actions as proof of guilt. Horatio, as opposed to Hamlets dramatic flair, is the character that prompts Hamlet to speak (usually asking Hamlet for exposition or disclosure of Hamlets thoughts). He merely prompts Hamlet to expound. Shakespeare used the character Horatio to prompt Hamlet to speak so that the audience would hear Hamlet expound while Hamlet was in scene (Hamlet often vocalizes his thoughts, without being helped by Horatio, in soliloquies). For example, at the beginning of 1.4, Horatio asks Hamlet to interpret the sound of horns and cannons, What does this mean, my lord? (1.4.7.). Hamlet then tells him about the evil revelry of Claudius. Horatio then prompts Hamlet for more information, Is it custom? (1.4.13), after which Hamlet expounds on his attitude toward Claudius. Horatio also prompts, and reacts predictably, to Hamlets philosophizing in the graveyard scene, saying, It might, my lord (5.1.81), and Ay, my lord (5.1.87), and Not a more, my lord (5.1.113), and (again) Ay, my lord (5.1.115). Hora tio prompts Hamlet to speak as well asShow MoreRelatedCharacter Analysis Of Horatio In Shakespeares Hamlet938 Words   |  4 PagesIn Shakespeare’s play, Hamlet, Horatio is Hamlet’s confidant as he plots revenge against King Claudius, the murderer of King Hamlet. He listens to Hamlet’s secrets without revealing them to the other characters. He is essentially the keeper of all truth. Unlike the other characters, Horatio seems to be the only character that Hamlet could trust without fearing that he would betray him. He is known for his logic and sanity, which is the complete opposite of Hamlet’s impulsive behavior. Although subtleRead MoreThe Foils of Hamlet Essay646 Words   |  3 PagesA foil is a minor character in a literary work that compliments the main character through similarities and differences in personality and plot. In William Shakespeares play Hamlet, the main character, Hamlet, has three major foils. These foils are his close friend Hora tio, Fortinbras, Prince of Norway, and the brother of his love, Laertes. These three characters contradict and enhance Hamlets major characteristics. Hamlets friend Horatio is a foil for him because he brings out the revengeRead MoreFriendship Between Horatio And Hamlet1000 Words   |  4 Pagesloyalty in Shakespeare’s masterpieces, especially in his tragedies. Various characters seem to be close friends with the main character in the beginning of plays but usually reveal their true opinions on them or disappear because of their lack of loyalty. The third type of friendship, according to Aristotle, is based on goodness, in which the individuals admire their friend’s goodness and in which they help one another in their pursuit for happiness. The friendship between Horatio and Hamlet lasts longerRead MoreA Compare/Contrast of Hamlet through his foils - Laertes, Fortinbras and Horatio.1702 Words   |  7 PagesIt is without doubt that William Shakespeare has created many unique, thought - provoking characters. Hamlet is by far Shakespeares most compelling character. In Shakespeares play Hamlet, various character trai ts, exhibited by Hamlet, can be seen through his foils. Similarities with Hamlet and Horatios education, as well as their levels, can be drawn. However, Hamlets character is in constant change and even philosophical. Fortinbras, without question encompasses many of Hamlets qualities. TheyRead MoreDifferent Types Of Friendship By Aristotle1178 Words   |  5 Pagesloyalty in Shakespeare’s masterpieces, especially in his tragedies. Various characters seem to be close friends with the main character in the beginning of plays but usually reveal their true opinions on them or disappear because of their lack of loyalty. In Shakespeare’s Hamlet, the characters spend a lot of time betraying one another for their own gain. Characters such as Rosencrantz, Guildenstern, Claudius, and Gertrude, are not loyal to Hamlet. The only exception would be Horatio, who is Hamlet s trustedRead MoreFriendship Between Hamlet And Horatio1330 Words   |  6 PagesOne will be hard-pressed to fi nd true friendship and loyalty in Shakespeare’s masterpieces, especially in his tragedies. Various characters seem to be close friends with the main character in the beginning of plays but usually reveal their true opinions on them or disappear because of their lack of loyalty. The friendship between Horatio and Hamlet lasts longer because the two of them love each other in accordance with their merit. There are three types of friendship, according to Aristotle. TheRead MoreHamlet Tragic Flaw Analysis1522 Words   |  7 PagesWilliam Shakespeare’s Hamlet is considered one of the greatest tragedies ever written, and it has sparked a few controversial discussions amongst critics, the most intriguing topic being Hamlet’s ‘tragic flaw’. It was A.C. Bradley who popularised this concept of a ‘tragic flaw’ which was translated and based around Aristotle’s model of tragedy. He suggests that the reason Hamlet delayed the act of avenging his father’s murder was due to possessing a tragic flaw; the inability to act. Whereas, criticRead MoreTwo Kinds Of Friendship By Aristotle1219 Words   |  5 Pagesloyalty in Shakespeare’s masterpieces, especially in his tragedies. Various characters seem to be close friends with the main character in the beginning of plays but usually reveal their true opinions on them or disappear because of t heir lack of loyalty. In Shakespeare’s Hamlet, the characters spend a lot of time betraying one another for their own gain. Characters such as Rosencrantz, Guildenstern, Claudius, and Gertrude, are not loyal to Hamlet. The only exception would be Horatio, who is Hamlet s trustedRead MoreEssay about Scenes in Shakespeares Hamlet653 Words   |  3 Pagesconstantly finds oneself baffled trying to think of a movie in which they can truly say is their favorite. Once one comes up with an answer to this question, the preceding question is â€Å"why?† What is it that truly makes a movie great? One can argue the characters, or the story line that makes the movie great. But ultimately it is the memorable scenes in which make the movie ones favorite. It is the scenes that truly stand out above the other components of a movie or play. For this reason, numerous writersRead MoreAnti-Idealism In Shakespeares Hamlet1563 Words   |  7 Pagesanalyzes Shakespeare’s works and h ow they function as a shift between these two worlds. Specifically, he examines Shakespeare’s rejection of the â€Å"religious ideal [and] the ideal of contempt,† as well as his use of skepticism and â€Å"uncertainties, mysteries, and doubts without driving forward to conclusions.† Furthermore, Edmundson discusses how Shakespeare dismissal of these ideals worked as a reflection of modern societies shift away from the ideals of the ancient world, however Shakespeare’s works also

The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform free essay sample

Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program of 1988, also known as CARP, is a Philippine state policy that ensures and promotes welfare of landless farmers and farm workers, as well as elevation of social justice and equity among rural areas. CARP was established by the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988 (CARL) which aimed for a nation with equitable land ownership and empowered agrarian reform beneficiaries while, at least, improving social lives. The law was outlined by former President Corazon C. Aquino through Presidential Proclamation 131 and Executive Order 229 on June 22, 1987. The law was finally enacted by the 8th Congress of the Philippines and signed by Aquino on June 10, 1988. [edit] Spanish and American regimes During the Spanish regime, Philippines land ownership was ruled by private sectors, generally by the encomenderos, large landlords and friar feudal haciendas. Small farmers were struggling at that time for agrarian rights, especially that titular system was not infamous and ancestral domainship is their only legal basis for ownership. It was during the American occupation that agrarian reform finally stabilized. Even though there are some agrarian rights established by the American colonial government, few were only given initiatives and the rich agrarian families in countryside continue to rule their own lands. [edit] Presidential Decree 27 In 1972, President Ferdinand Marcos, issued second presidential order after the Martial Law, stating that the Philippines is a land reform nation. A month later, he issued Presidential Decree no. 27 which detailed the first comprehensive agrarian reform order that was attempted in the country. According to the law, an individual cannot own more than seven hectares of land. If this may happen, the remaining area will be parceled out and will be divided into individual tenants. Such tenant may enjoy a maximum of three hectares of irrigated land, or five hectares of unused land, where the new owners will pay royalty taxes and the computable amount of land to the original landholders for a maximum of fifteen years. If, however, there are sharecroppers sharing lands with less than seven hectares of land area, the land will be converted to leaseholders with fixed rents. Only rice and corn fields were included to the PD 27.. Komprehensibong Repormang agraryo Program From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Mula sa Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation , search Jump to: navigation , search Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program of 1988 , also known as CARP, is a Philippine state policy that ensures and promotes welfare of landless farmers and farm workers, as well as elevation of social justice and equity among rural areas . Komprehensibong Repormang agraryo ng Programa ng 1988, na kilala rin bilang Carp, ay isang Philippine patakaran ng estado na ang nagsisiguro at nagtataguyod sa kapakanan ng walang lupain magsasaka at sakahan manggagawa, pati na rin ang pagtataas ng panlipunang hustisya at katarungan sa mga rural na lugar . CARP was established by the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988 (CARL) which aimed for a nation with equitable land ownership and empowered agrarian reform beneficiaries while, at least, improving social lives. Carp ay itinatag sa pamamagitan ng Comprehensive Repormang agraryo Batas ng 1988 (Carl) na naglalayong para sa isang bansa na may pantay na lupa ang pagmamay-ari at kapangyarihan reporma agraryo benepisyaryo habang, hindi bababa sa, ang pagpapabuti ng panlipunang buhay. The law was outlined by former President Corazon C. Aquino through Presidential Proclamation 131 and Executive Order 229 on June 22, 1987. Ang mga batas ay naka-outline sa pamamagitan ng dating Presidente Corazon C. Aquino sa pamamagitan ng Presidential Proclamation 131 at Executive Order 229 sa Hunyo 22, 1987. The law was finally enacted by the 8th Congress of the Philippines and signed by Aquino on June 10, 1988. Ang batas ay enacted sa wakas ng 8th Kongreso ng Pilipinas at naka-sign sa pamamagitan ng Aquino sa 10 Hunyo 1988. [ edit ] Spanish and American regimes [ edit ] Espanyol at Amerikano regimes During the Spanish regime , Philippines land ownership was ruled by private sectors, generally by the encomenderos , large landlords and friar feudal haciendas . Sa panahon ng rehimeng Espanyol , Pilipinas lupang pagmamay-ari ay pinasiyahan sa pamamagitan ng mga pribadong sektor, sa pangkalahatan ng encomenderos , malaki-upa at prayle pyudal haciendas . Small farmers were struggling at that time for agrarian rights, especially that titular system was not infamous and ancestral domainship is their only legal basis for ownership. Maliit na magsasaka ay struggling sa oras na iyon para sa agraryo mga karapatan, lalo na ang may titulo na sistema ay hindi kalait-lait at minamana domainship ay ang kanilang lamang legal na batayan para sa pagmamay-ari. It was during the American occupation that agrarian reform finally stabilized. Ito ay sa panahon ng American trabaho na reporma agraryo sa wakas nagpapatatag. Even though there are some agrarian rights established by the American colonial government, few were only given initiatives and the rich agrarian families in countryside continue to rule their own lands. Kahit na may ilang mga karapatan agraryo itinatag ng Amerikanong kolonyal na pamahalaan, ay ilang lamang ibinigay pagkukusa at ang mayaman agraryo mga pamilya sa kabukiran patuloy na tuntunin ng kanilang sariling lupain. edit ] Presidential Decree 27 [ edit ] Presidential decree 27 In 1972, President Ferdinand Marcos , issued second presidential order after the Martial Law, stating that the Philippines is a land reform nation. Sa 1972, President Ferdinand Marcos , ipinalabas pangalawang pangulo order pagkatapos ng Martial Law, na nagpapahiwatig na ang Pilipinas ay isang lupain bansa reporma. A month later, he issued President ial Decree no. Isang buwan mamaya, siya inisyu Presidential decree no. 27 which detailed the first comprehensive agrarian reform order that was attempted in the country. 7 na mga detalyadong sa unang komprehensibong reporma agraryo order na tinangka sa bansa. According to the law, an individual cannot own more than seven hectares of land. Ayon sa batas, ang isang indibidwal ay hindi maaaring sariling higit sa pitong hectares ng lupa. If this may happen, the remaining area will be parceled out and will be divided into individual tenants. Kung ito ay maaaring mangyari, ang natitirang lugar ay parceled out at ay nahahati sa mga indibidwal na mga nangungupahan. Such tenant may enjoy a maximum of three hectares of irrigated land, or five hectares of unused land, where the new owners will pay royalty taxes and the computable amount of land to the original landholders for a maximum of fifteen years. Ang ganitong mga nangungupahan ay maaaring-enjoy ng isang maximum ng tatlong hectares ng irigasyon, o limang hectares ng lupang hindi ginagamit, kung saan ang bagong may-ari ay magbabayad ng buwis sa pagkahari at ang nakukuwenta halaga ng lupa sa orihinal na landholders para sa isang maximum ng 15 taon. If, however, there are sharecroppers sharing lands with less than seven hectares of land area, the land will be converted to leaseholders with fixed rents. Kung, gayunpaman, may mga sharecroppers pagbabahagi ng lupain na may mas mababa sa pitong hectares ng lupa lugar, ang lupa ay convert sa leaseholders sa takdang rents. Only rice and corn fields were included to the PD 27.. Tanging ang bigas at mais patlang ay kasama sa PD 27 .. Noynoy hinikayat na ituloy ang implementasyon ng CARP MANILA – Nanawagan kay President-elect Benigno â€Å"Noynoy Aquino III nitong Biyernes ang dating pangulo ng Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) na ituloy ang implementasyon ng Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP). Ayon kay Jaro Archbishop Angel Lagdameo, dating pangulo ng CBCP, nararapat na ipagpatuloy ang naturang batas dahil nakatutulong ito sa mga maliliit na magsasaka. â€Å"Let us hope that there will be a good spirit in the implementation of the CARP law, these law is for the farmers, ayon kay Lagdameo sa panayam ng Radio Veritas. Ang CARP ay unang ipinatupad sa ilalim ng liderato ng pumanaw na si dating pangulong Corazon Aquino, ina ni Noynoy. Nabahiran ng kontrobersiya ang naturang programa dahil mismong ang ilang bahagi ng lupain ng mga Aquino sa Tarlac – na mas kilala bilang Hacienda Luisita – na nasakop ng CARP ay nakaipit ngayon sa usaping legal sa Korte Suprema. Nauna rito, ipinangako ni Noynoy nitong panahon ng kampanya na ipapamahagi sa mga benepisaryong magsasaka ang bahagi ng Luisita sa 2013 kapag nanalo sa halalan. Samantala, inirekomenda ng National Secretariat for Social Action Justice and Peace ng CBCP si Christian Monsod, na italaga ni Aquino bilang kalihim ng Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR). Ayon kay Manila Auxiliary Bishop Broderick Pabillo, tagapangulo ng CBCP-NASSA, malawak ang kaalaman ni Monsod sa batas para sa repormang pang-agraryo. Si Monsod ay dating pinuno ng Commission on Elections (Comelec), at asawa ni dating economic planning secretary Winnie Monsod. Ang panawagan natin ay sana mag-appoint siya (Aquino) ng maayos na DAR secretary. Ang aking suggestion nga ay si Atty. Monsod dahil may malawak na siyang alam sa CARP law at may puso siya sa mga magsasaka, ayon kay Pabillo. Idinagdag ng Obispo na dapat suriing mabuti ni Aquino ang karakter at integridad ng mga taong itatalaga nito sa Gabinete para makatulong sa kanyang pangako na wawakasan ang katiwalian sa gobyerno at pag-alis ng kahirapan sa bansa. Luisita land, 1-M hectare others, up for distribution More than one million hectares of agricultural land, including the Hacienda Luisita plantation estate owned by the President and his relatives, have to be distributed to farmer-beneficiaries before 2014. Hacienda Luisita in Tarlac is a 6,453-hectare land owned by President Benigno Simeon â€Å"Noynoy Aquino III and the Cojuangco clan. Three Cabinet members— Department of Agrarian Reform Secretary Virgilio de los Reyes, Agriculture Secretary Proceso Alcala, and Environment Secretary Ramon Paje— already discussed on Tuesday how to speed up the process of distributing the land and providing support services to farmers. Meron ho tayong hanggang 2014 upang itoy gawin, kaya ating ginagawa, pinagsasanib-sanib natin ang pwersa ng DA, DAR at DENR upang itoy matupad, De los Reyes said in an interview over GMA News Unang Hirit on Thursday. The original Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) was extended last year for another five years. CARP, a land reform law mandated by R epublic Act 6657, was signed in 1988 by the late President Corazon Aquino, the incumbent President’s mother. Hacienda Luisita was placed under the CARP stock distribution option (SDO) scheme in 1988.