Chequered History

Of Micronesian

Land Ownership

• In July, PIM published the views of a Micronesian, F. T. Uludong, on the ownership of land in Micronesia. Uludong said that some Micronesians were suspicious of America's motives in searching early records in an effort to identify land ownership; they suspected some of these searches were designed to support the government's claim to title. Before publication of the article PIM invited the Micronesian Trust Territory government to reply. A long letter in reply, from the Trust Territory High Commissioner, Mr, Edward E. Johnston, was published in PIM October (p. iv). Mr. Johnston also had his officers especially prepare for PIM an article which for the first time outlines the land situation in Micronesia as the government sees it. This valuable record is here published in full.

Today’s complex land tenure systems and land use pattern in Micronesia, which have evolved over the last 100 years as a result of drastic external influences and internal elements, now seriously hamper the political development and especially the economic pro gress of this territory. However, the implementation of the Micro nesian Land Cadaster Program in 1970 will, when completed, re solve most of the major outstanding land problems.

The US Military Administration in 1944 inherited the myriad land problems caused by three foreign administrations (two European and one Asian) in a time span of only 60 -ars. The Pacific War, with its devastation and destruction of land records and survey monuments, has greatly added to the complexity. The Spanish settled in Guam in 1656 but not until 1668 did they attempt to administer and missiomse all the Mariana Islands from this central location. Their interest in the northern Mariana Islands was primarily in christianising the Chamorro, and to facilitate this, beginning in 1698 they forcibly depopulated all the islands and settled the native population on Guam. The vacant northern Mariana Islands then became Spanish crown land and the resettled Chamorro underwent great cultural changes on Guam and most succumbed to disease The Spanish Government resettled Carolinians on Saipan around 1815, and later in 1845 encouraged a few Chamorro families from Guam to resettle on Saipan by offering substantial land grants. To obtain land, an individual merely took possession of an area and filed with the Spanish Administration on Guam an application for a “Possessory Title”, describing as best as he could the land he occupied. Under Spanish

law it took 20 years before a person could then request a crown grant on the basis of his possession and use. The crown land grants form the basis of today’s titles and are not the subject of title dispute (inheritance disputes do occur), Before the beginning of this cen tury on iy sma n amounts of land had been acquired by the Spanish and German interests in the Carolines and M ars halls respectively for ad ministrative and mission purposes, trading stations and plantations, These land acquisitions were docu mente(j an< i there are a number of land trans f ers that occurred before the tum of the last centur y where (i ocum ents were recorded by the Spanish in their Manila Land p eg ;ctrv *, . .

Today these documents are mainly in the possessmn of mission groups and are recognised by the successors descendants of the parties in voivea.

The period of Spanish rule, which ended in 1899 with the Span ish American War and the sub sequent Treaty of Paris, was a period of tremendous population de crease in the Marianas and else where, and there was virtual com plete depopulation of all the north ern Mariana Islands. This practically eliminated the traditional land-hold-

German impact

ing system in the entire Mariana Islands.

The German Administration adopted a general policy that all land was to be used for economic development and that land not put to active use would be acquired by the government for development by others. Their program of develop ment was carried out on all the major islands of the three island groups. They thoroughly documented their land program.

Certain Micronesians claim today that the Germans alienated certain lands unjustly, and without adequate compensation, or no payment at all.

On the other hand a significant num ber of Micronesians today hold title to what is now private land as a result of the German land program.

In their desire for maximum enter prise, the Germans drastically modi fied and altered the traditional land holding systems, especially on Ponape and Saipan, by redistribution of land holdings and the grant of title to individuals who previously held a lesser interest (such as a use right) or had no previous interest at all.

The German Land Reform Pro gram in Ponape, which began in 1912, made a significant and lasting impact on the land holding system on Ponape Island, and today there is a growing number of Micronesians who consider that steps should be taken now to modify the effect of the 1912 Land Reform progress. This in itself, if it was implemented even in part, could cause a major up heaval in Ponape land tenure pat terns of today.

The Island Sphere, as German Micronesia was then called, was ad ministered from the capital at Rabaul, in German New Guinea. The Aus tralian military occupied Rabaul in 1914 and shipped the bulk of the German records of Micronesia to Canberra, where they are today.

Records of the German period in Micronesia exist also in the archives at Potsdam, East Germany.

The Japanese military seized Mic ronesia in 1914. They recognized most of the German land acquisi tions and followed the same policies, but with certain modifications which in themselves had far reaching effects, especially on Ponape.

When Japan was granted a Man date in 1922 it began an extensive development program which centered around the Mariana Islands. Saipan and Tinian were admirably suited for sugarcane. The Japanese took over the German government lands

Japanese impact

and also purchased or leased other areas so that most of the agricultural development of Saipan and Tinian were controlled by Japanese interests, and used in agricultural production for the home islands.

The Palau area was also developed.

Large areas were taken over as hav ing been public lands under the Ger mans, or were purchased from natives. On Angaur the Japanese took over the German-established phosphate mines and continued to operate them without compensation to the people.

In the rest of the Caroline Islands emphasis was mainly on copra pro duction, although Truk Atoll was later also developed as a Japanese military bastion. Copra was primarily produced by natives on their own land, and Japanese commercial in terests did not buy extensive land areas. An exception was in Ponape, where some lands were either pur chased from the natives or developed under German claims of title.

In the Marshall Islands, the Japan ese took over land only as required for administrative purpose. As the Japanese began to expand militarily toward the end of the 1930’5, in creasing areas were taken over in all island groups for the use of military, air and naval forces.

During the first phase, private lands were taken under eminent domain proceedings, and compensa tion was paid to the owners. Our investigations have shown that in most instances this compensation was adequate.

After the Pacific War began the need for land became so pressing that the Japanese military apparently began taking over certain parcels of private land without compensating, or completing compensation payments to the owners. On some lands elabo rate concrete installations, which permanently destroyed their use for agriculture were placed.

As the war progressed, the Man dated Islands were subject to allied bombardment, and in some cases, invasion and almost complete des truction. As Kwajalein, Eniwetok, Saipan, Tinian, Ulithi, Peleliu and Angaur were conquered in turn, the US built up extensive military bases in each place, using almost the entire land area of each island. The erection of such things as airfields and military roads, completely des troyed some of the land for agri cultural use.

During combat, it was impractic able for the armed forces to take the time to compensate the owners for

Postwar impact

the use of their land, but with the establishment of US Military Govern ment, Land and Claims Commissions were set up to determine ownership and values, and establish the pro cedure for payment of land rentals and land damage claims.

However, with the widespread demobilisation in the latter part of 1945 and 1946, personnel were re moved from the field so quickly that land and claims programs were never completed.

With the closing down of military bases and installations, many of the Japanese records and new land records were transferred to storage, or disappeared entirely. At the time of the establishment of the present US Trusteeship, in July 1947, the active work of the land and claims program had been virtually aban doned, due to the pressure of more immediate economic and social problems.

After the Trusteeship was set up, the personnel situation of the US Naval Administration of the Trust Territory improved somewhat but it was still critical, and the land and claims program was again forced into the background until an organis ation with sufficient experienced and qualified personnel could be set up and firm working policies established.

Towards the close of 1949, funds and personnel were finally obtained for the establishment of a Land and Claims Section in the office of the Attorney General on the staff of the Deputy High Commissioner.

The section originally consisted of one man, who was appointed as Land and Claims Administrator. His first job was to analyse the outstanding problems and to establish a priority system for handling them.

It was determined that first prior ity should be given to processing the land requirements of the military and the return of formerly occupied lands to private owners; second priority to the collection of inform ation on land rentals and ‘post secure’ land damage claims against the United States; and third priority to the collection of data regarding the Japanese use or occupation of private land.

Since the most seriously affected area was Saipan, where the entire island w r as used by the military, the Land and Claims Administrator was assigned to Saipan. It was meanwhile found that countless land problems existed in every district, but only in Saipan was serious dis-

US impact

location being caused by the lack of land for subsistence farming, and uncertainty of tenure of the land already allocated by revocable use permit.

The American policy toward pre war land ownership was established by the Naval Administration when it issued Trust Territory Land Policy Letter P-1, dated December 29, 1947, and the policies it sets forth are followed to this day.

Briefly, on land ownership, de cisions reached by former govern ments prior to Japan’s resignation from the League of Nations are con sidered binding. All rights to lands acquired by the former German or Japanese Governments now belong to the Trust Territory Government.

Lands transferred from the public domain to Japanese corporations or Japanese nationals after Japan’s resignation are considered invalid.

For the same period, private land transfers to the Japanese Govern ment, corporations, or nationals are subject to review; if the owner can establish that the sale was not made of his own free will or that he did not in fact receive just compen sation, title will be vested in him upon the condition that he repays to the Trust Territory Government the amount of the sale received by him.

On September 27, 1951, the Attor ney General of the Trust Territory issued a vesting order, by which the Area Property Custodian acquired custody and title to all former Japan ese interests in all real and personal property located within the Trust Territory.

The US Administration started to make specific determinations of ownership of properties suspected of being Alien Property. However, the work was barely started about 1950 when it was abandoned, as the prob lem was immense and the Adminis tration wanted to get on with other programs. The suspected parcels were considered to be vested in the Alien Property Custodian without a formal hearing and action. Further more, the land has been used in the various land programs without being divested from the Alien Property Custodian.

The Administration (Government) of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands was created by Presidential Executive Order, The record of the US administration authority since World War II has been in accord with the Trusteeship Agreement.

The Administering authority has been most conscious of its respon-

Military impact

sibility “ to protect the inhabitants against the loss of their lands and resources ” (article 6).

However, the Trusteeship Agreement also provides that “in discharging its obUga tions under Article 76(a) and Article 84, of the charter, the Administering Authority shall ensure that the Trust Territory shall play its part, in ac cordance with the charter of the United Nations, in the maintenance of inter national peace and security. To this end the administering authority shall be entitled: "1. to establish naval, military and air bases and to erect fortifications in the Trust Territory; 3. to station and employ armed forces in the Territory; and 3. to make use of volunteer forces, facilities and assistance from the Trust Territory in carrying out the obligations towards the Security Council undertaken in this regard by the Administering Authority, as well as for the local defense and the maintenance of law and order within the Trust Territory (article 5).”

Those sections of the Trusteeship Agreement quoted are not necessarily incompatible, and while areas of private land are presently being leased to the United States for military purposes, the Administration has been most active in confining and maintaining military reservations to a minimum acreage conducive to their present and forseeable future requirements.

The High Commissioner partici pates in a five yearly joint review of the need for continued use by the United States for each parcel of land leased to the United States if the term of the lease agreement is for a period in excess of five years.

The Bill of Rights for the Trust Territory states in part “ No person shall be deprived of property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation ”

Under Public Law 1-6, enacted by the First Session of the Congress of Micronesia in July 1965, the Terri torial Government has primary res ponsibility for problems of a terri tory-wide nature including, the ac quisition of land for public use and public facilities, uniform land title registration, public land adminis tration (such as homesteading and leasing of the public domain), etc.

The Code of the Trust Territory also provides that all six district governments shall be primarily res ponsible for, land law and inheritance law. The Code also provides that all municipalities (local governments)

have a primary responsibility and power to impose and collect real property taxes.

It should be clearly understood at this point that all public lands in Micronesia are vested in the Govern ment of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands and not in the United States nor a federal agency. The US does not hold title to any land in Micronesia.

If a US federal agency wishes to acquire an interest in private or pub lic land, it can only lease this land through or from the Trust Territory Government. Land leased, purchased or otherwise acquired from a private land owner by the Trust Territory Government is then leased to the US federal agency. In the case of a tract —public land required by a US federal agency is allocated by way of a direct lease. In all instances the US federal agency has either made a substantial lump sum payment for the use of the land for the entire term, or pays an annual rental for the use of the land to either the Trust Territory Government or to the private owner through the Trust Territory Government.

For the fiscal year commencing July 1, 1969 and for succeeding fiscal years, the Secretary of Interior has ruled that sale and rentals received from public land (both improved and unimproved) and lease rentals re ceived from public facilities are to be made available to the Congress of Micronesia.