THE proposed amendments to the Investors’ Lease Act, which would lengthen the lease periods available to foreign investors, inadequately protects the lessors who own the land, an Ateneo de Manila political scientist said.

Hansley A. Juliano, a lecturer at the Ateneo de Manila, called the prominence of the Investors’ Lease Act in the legislative agenda a stark contrast to the measures on healthcare, virology, and digital connectivity, which actually align with voter concerns.

“I find it a bit of a red flag to put the foreign lease bill on top,” he said via Facebook Messenger. “It suggests a desire to give up property rights to foreign investors in a very neoliberal fashion, without even actual guarantees of protection to local owners.”

He added that the 99-year maximum allowable lease period is the most problematic feature of the proposed law.

The Palace unveiled last week its seven priority bills for the remaining six session days of the 19^th Congress.

The members of the Legislative-Executive Development Advisory Council said the other bills scheduled for deliberation at Bicameral Conference Committee level include the proposed Rationalization of the Mining Fiscal Regime; the proposed Amendments to the Universal Health Care Act; the proposed E-Government Act/E-Governance Act; the proposed Konektadong Pinoy Act; the proposed Virology Institute of the Philippines act; and the proposed Blue Economy Act.

The 19^th Congress will resume session today before adjourning sine die on June 13. The 20^th Congress is scheduled to convene its first regular session on July 28.

Mr. Juliano noted that the 99-year lease period “is definitely the biggest (concern)… Functionally, it means guaranteeing foreign control for three generations, and considering how many lease arrangements tend to pan out, there is no genuine and fruitful way to contest it, more so if the entire leasing process involves the deprivation of residents, as has been documented many times now.”

According to Mr. Juliano, the seven-item list reflects continuity rather than change in the country’s economic policy stance.

“What it says to me is that Mr. Marcos and his cabinet are still latching onto the same economic policies that are criticized and rejected by the electorate during the recent midterm cycle,” he said, noting the recently concluded polls, which delivered weaker-than-expected results for the administration.

He said the implied policy agenda “can hardly be seen as being accountable to the voters who already told you to change course.”

He warned that the policy direction favoring foreign ownership, mining liberalization, and the Blue Economy framework could deepen divisions with civil society groups and segments of society advocating for stronger environmental and property protections.

The House of Representatives in December approved on third and final reading House Bill 10755, which sought to amend Republic Act 7652, or the Investors’ Lease Act.

The 1987 Constitution prohibits foreigners from owning land, but the 31-year-old Investors’ Lease Act allowed foreign investors to lease private land for an initial period of 50 years, renewable once for a maximum of 25 years.

The bill seeks to allow foreign investors to sublet properties unless prohibited under the lease contract. Sublease contracts longer than 25 years or more are required to be registered with the Register of Deeds, while contracts of less than 25 years are exempt.

The measure listed the approved purposes of land leases by foreigners to include industry, agro-industrial, commercial, tourism, agriculture, agroforestry and ecological conservation. — Chloe Mari A. Hufana