One of the most damaging effects of Article XII is the way owners of “fee simple land” or “privately own land” only has limited tenure of ownership. I urge everyone in the CNMI to take the time and read section-by-section of Article XII and learn what it means to you and your family. It is a serious land issue that we must correct before it is too late.
Our political status negotiators in the early seventies feared that once we became U.S. Commonwealth the private land owners would be exploited by “outsiders” to sell their lands. If you are not a “Northern Marianas Descent,” you do not have the right to own land in the CNMI. This is what Article XII of our Constitution states. Many NMD’s wanted to sell their land for number of personal reasons. But instead they had to execute a long term lease agreement and the land owner would receive 100 percent of the rental payment at the inception of the lease agreement. The danger of such transaction is that the title to such land might be transferred to a new owner who might demand additional rental payment from the “lessee/buyer.”
Section 6 of the Constitution states in part “any transaction made in violation of Section 1 shall be void ad initio.” In other words, any land transaction not in keeping with provision of Article XII is automatically NULL AND VOID AS IF THE TRANSACTION NEVER TOOK PLACE. Don’t take my word for it; consult and get the advice of your attorney. Be sure that you are fully protected from any possible deficient land transactions.
The Political Status negotiators on the U.S. side in joint effort with our negotiators agreed to let the future generations tackle the issue of privately owned land by revisiting Article XII 25 years after the termination of the Trusteeship Agreement. The Trusteeship Agreement between the Administering Authority and United Nations ended in November 3, 1986, the same date when the residents of the Northern Mariana Islands became U.S. citizens. Twenty five thereafter is now, Year-2011.
In their 8-page presentation on the BRIEF SUMMARY OF ITS HISTORY AND PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE XII, Howard Willens and Deanne Siemer quite eloquently described the concerns reflected in Article XII arose in part because of the confused land situation confronting the local inhabitants at the conclusion of World War II. During the decades of exploitation in these islands, the Japanese took much of the land from the local population to use for their commercial, governmental and military purposes. We are talking about the 20s and the 30s.
During this period the Japanese had approximately 45,000 civilians inhabiting the NMI. As WWII approached, they stationed an additional 30,000 military personnel on these islands. The impact of the invasion was devastating, not only to the people of these islands, but on the property owned by the local people and by the Japanese.
Political status negotiations between the U.S., and NMI began in December of 1972. Chairman Edward Pangelinan of the Commission raised the question about the future purchase and use of land because of the Commission’s concern that affiliation with the U.S. would attract large number of U.S. and Japanese and other investors to the NMI seeking land for personal or commercial purposes.
The Marianas negotiators were aware that outside investors had taken over a large percentage of the land in Hawaii and Guam. They wanted, if possible, to prevent such an outcome in the NMI. They were also aware that in 1950 the U.S. Congress had rejected, on constitutional ground, an effort to protect Guam from unrestricted exploitation by outside investors.
It was understood from the beginning that the U.S. Constitution presented a substantial roadblock to any effort to limit the sale of land in the future NMI commonwealth. (Section 2 of Article 4 of the U.S. Constitution provides that the citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and amenities of citizens of the several states).
Everyone knew that one of the major objectives of these status negotiations was to provide United States citizenship to the Northern Marianas people. If they achieved this citizenship and then imposed restrictions on land ownership, it would mean that some United States citizens could buy land in the Northern Marianas and that other United States citizens could not, an apparent violation of Section 2.
Amendment 14 of the U.S. Constitution was another substantial obstacle to any restrictions on land transactions. It guarantees that the government will not deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of law, nor deny any person within its jurisdiction of equal protection of the laws. First part of the amendment means that the Northern Marianas could not take away property already owned by outsiders.
The second part of the amendment means that the Northern Marianas could not base property right on classification by race.
The 25 years was an arbitrary one wherein the negotiators felt that the NMI people would have acquired the necessary sophistication to deal with outside investors. It was also felt that the 25 years was short enough so that the people could re-examine in a timely manner the need for such restrictions in light of their overall impact on local family. This compromise was embodied in Section 805 of the Covenant.
The children who were born 25 years ago have no doubt reached adulthood and a high degree of sophistication to think for themselves and are able to make their own determination on what is good and what is bad. Great many of our people have families and we must accord them the respect they truly deserve.
We do not need the government interfere on personal matters. Sections of Article XII mandate the government to dictate to owners of private lands on what they can or cannot do to their lands. Article XII in my personal opinion is one-sided, paternalistic and might even be communistic for it gives the government the prerogative to tell land owners what to do with our own private lands. Article XII takes away our inalienable right of self-determination.
The people of the CNMI may be viewed as “land-rich and money-poor.” To those that are “land-rich and money-poor,” if Article XII is not repealed will the government take on the responsibility to provide families the support they need to subsist and exist? If I fail to handle my personal affairs, I have nobody to blame by me.
No Chamorro or Carolinian in his right mind would “self-destruct” by selling his or her last piece of land. We are all smart enough to take care of ourselves and our families.
DAVID M. SABLAN
Papago, Saipan
