For more than three decades, the Aroma temporary housing in Tondo has been home to many urban poor families. Only this time, residents face the threat of demolition and eviction stemming from legal battles on land ownership.
R-II Builders, a construction company owned by business tycoon Reghis Romero, now asserts its claim of the land and pressure residents to accept compensation of at least P60,000 in exchange for their displacement.

Samahan ng Maralita sa Temporary Housing (SMTH), a community organization of urban poor residents living in Aroma, raised this issue to Manila City Mayor Honey Lacuna during the Talakayang Bayan held last January 27 at the San Andres Sports Complex.
More than 300 participated in the said multisectoral forum.
No relocation, no demolition

During the forum, Mayor Lacuna emphasized that no demolition takes place without adequate and proper relocation.
Her statement drew mixed reactions from the audience; some cheered, while others found it questionable. SMTH was among those who expounded on their situation in the community.
SMTH president Maria Fe Hulipaz shared that several individuals were roaming around their community, they surmised that these were agents either from R-II Builders, National Housing Authority (NHA), and Smokey Mountain Asset Pool (SMAP). However, none of them showed identification when asked.
What was clear from their actions, according to Hulipaz, was that they were conducting so-called validation assessments and tagging among houses of residents and later attempting to convince them to accept the P60,000 compensation.
“Ang inaalok nilang 60,000 ay para sa mga na-census ng 2017. Kapag tinanggap nila ang pera, gigibain ang bahay at paalisin na,” Hulipaz explained.
[The P60,000 they are offering is for those who were included in the 2017 census. If they accept the money, their house will be demolished and they will be forced to leave]
In response, Mayor Lacuna raised a rhetorical question: “Kaya anong sagot doon?” [So what should people do?] to which the audience quickly responded: “Wag magpabayad.” [Don’t accept]
Such dispute stemmed from the issue between the NHA and R-II Builders, with the Aroma community being the alleged ‘collateral’.
Supreme Court ruling: a win for R-II or a loss for residents?
In 2018, the Supreme Court upheld the R-II Builders’ right to recover over P4 billion assets from NHA and the Home Guaranty Corporation (HGC) under the 1993 Joint Venture Agreement (JVA) to implement the Smokey Mountain Development and Reclamation Project (SMDRP). The Court further denied the appeals of NHA and HGC, emphasizing that R-II’s lawsuit sought the liquidation of the asset pool and the recovery of residual value.
SMDRP aimed to convert the former dumpsite of Smokey Mountain into a housing and commercial development.
Under JVA, R-II is entitled to own 40 hectares of reclamation of no more than 40 hectares of Manila Bay area across Radial Road 10; 1.3 hectares of commercial area at the Smokey Mountain area, and all the constructed units of medium-rise low-cost permanent housing units beyond the 3,500 units share of the NHA. While for the NHA, the agency is entitled to retain ownership of temporary and permanent housing units, open spaces, roads, and industrial sites.
The JVA, meanwhile, was amended twice the following year. NHA and R-II, alongside HGC and the Philippine National Bank (PNB), entered into an Asset Pool Formation Trust Agreement in September 1994. This agreement established a pool of assets to finance the project, which include the 21.2-hectare Smokey Mountain site, 79 hectares of Manila Bay foreshore property, and various financial instruments.
Notably, Aroma and its temporary housing units were not explicitly listed among the assets.
To reiterate, under JVA, it only involved the Smokey Mountain dumpsite, its reclamation, and surrounding areas. The reclamation asset that R-II claims in the Manila Bay foreshore property directly across R-10 refers to the reclaimed land where the Romero-owned Manila Harbour Centre is located along the coastline adjacent to the Smokey Mountain area.
Manila Urban Poor Network Benedict Macabenta argued that even if R-II Builders is entitled to recover such assets, public housing land like Aroma should not have been used as collateral.
Hulipaz seconded, adding that the land had already been inhabited by their community for decades.
Land for the Landless, a possible solution?
With the looming threat of eviction, Hulipaz raised what the Manila city government could do, especially when Mayor Lacuna opened up about the long-standing housing program initiative in Manila called the Land for the Landless Program.

“Pwede po bang bilhin nalang ang lupa sa temporary housing para ibigay sa amin o babayaran namin para sa pangmasang pabahay?” Hulipaz asked, invoking what their community had prepared as part of their “People’s Plan”.
[Is it possible to just buy the land in the temporary housing and give it to us, or will we pay for it to be used for mass housing?]
The Land for the Landless program is based on the City Charter of Manila and the City Tenants and Security Committee Resolution No. 16-A where the city government bought private properties to be distributed to qualified applicants.
Manila Urban Settlement Office (MUSO) official Atty. Danilo De Guzman answered on behalf of Mayor Lacuna.
“Kung ayaw ninyo pong tanggapin ang inooffer. Ganito po iyan, ang inooffer lang naman ng R-II Builders at NHA ay yung mga willing na umalis, boluntaryong umalis. Ngayon, walang pilitan. Kapag may nalaman kami na pinipilit na tanggapin para makaalis, ireport ninyo agad sa amin. Wala tayong forced eviction, wala tayong demolition hangga’t walang relocation,” said Atty. De Guzman.
De Guzman then claimed that the Manila city government could process the purchasing of land, reassuring residents like Hulipaz.
“Kung sa proseso ng pagbili, kaya naman natin iyan. Pero ito ay isang mahabang proseso. Kasi marami rin tayong binibili na Land for the Landless. Siguro, isang possibility rin, yung side ninyo, kausapin natin ang NHA, R-II Builders, na kung pwede ay bilhin ng Maynila. Actually noong nag-meeting kami with NHA, laging sinasabi ni Mayor sa NHA, yung mga properties ninyo na may nakalagay na housing ay baka pwedeng iassign nalang sa Maynila para madistribute sa actual occupants,” Atty. De Guzman explained.
[If you don’t want to accept what’s being offered, this is how it is: what R-II Builders and NHA are offering is only for those willing to leave, voluntarily. Now, there’s no coercion. If we find out that anyone is being forced to accept to leave, report it to us immediately. We have no forced eviction, and no demolition as long as there is no relocation]
Macabenta, meanwhile, emphasized that the government has a responsibility to protect long-term residents and their constituents from displacement caused by private profit-driven projects like SMDRP.

“Kailangang tugunan ng Manila LGU ang hinaing ng mga residente ng Aroma. Kaya naman palang gawin na bilhin, mainam kung ma-integrate sa programa na ng lungsod na Land for the Landless,” Macabenta asserted.
[The Manila LGU needs to address the concerns of the residents of Aroma. If it is possible to buy the land, it would be better if it could be integrated into the city’s existing program, Land for the Landless]
According to MUPN, the case in Aroma underscores a broader and systemic failure on how public lands meant for social housing face undue compromise in private financial disputes while leaving marginalized communities to pay the ultimate price.