Making a simple matter more complex

Sometime last week there was an article in one of the local paper titled “Random Thoughts” that made a statement saying “First, I would like to ask that Article 12 not be repealed.” The reason given is that what has happened in other places where non-locals were allowed to acquire land, making land unaffordable to the locals.

I strongly suggest that the details under Article 12 be examined closely. For example, there are locals right now that have reached the 25-percent threshold. Their children will not be able to receive the land from their parents or grandparents.

Under Article 12, a couple of 100 percent Northern Marianas decent, or NMD, adopting a person under 18 years of age from anywhere in the world—China, Japan, Korea, Russia, anyplace in the world—becomes 100 percent NMD. However, a child from a couple where one is not 100 percent NMD is only 50 percent at most. Yet, there is a bloodline here compared to the non-NMD adopted child.

Article 12 is now beginning to displace people. This trend will continue and will become more serious as time goes by. Inter-marriages are very common now and it will continue to be more common as the world becomes smaller through technology. We are more free to travel now than before.

There are children now that are only 25 percent NMD. Should they marry non-NMD, their children will be below the threshold and will therefore not be able to own the land from their parents or grant parents. Is this protecting landownership? Is this keeping landownership within families? What happens to the land that can’t be passed down?

Lowering the 25 percent to however low one wants to set it will not solve anything. In fact, the lower the threshold is set, the more complex the issue of who is an NMD. How for example is one going to determine with 100 percent certainty his or her bloodline? Through DNA?

Article 12 also says that you do not own your land; the public through Article 12 is also a part owner of your land. Why is this so? Because under Article 12, fee simple ownership of land can only be by NMD. Therefore, you can’t dispose of your land as you wish. Since you can’t dispose of your land as you wish, it means that you do not have full or absolute ownership of your land. Is this what we want?

Do we want or need for the public to be part owner of what we consider our very private property?

By the way, repealing Article 12 does not mean that you must sell your land. You can lease it out or sell it. It is really up to you. No one will be forced to sell. However, should you decide that it is in the best interest of you and or your family to sell, then you will be selling in an open market where land values are truly accounted for. The current situation with Article 12 in place sets an artificially low price on land. What is important here is a full understanding of what are the details to Article 12.

Suggested readings to gain a good understanding of Article 12 are: Section by Section Analysis of the Covenant to Establish a Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands and Analysis of the Constitution of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.

Interestingly, Article 12 has not stopped long-term leases (50 years). Some politicians are proposing to extend the lease to 99 years. Furthermore, there are talks about changing the 25 percent blood quantum to the smallest possible value. What truly is to be gained with all these? There is still the problem of no one owning their land. How is bloodline to be traced? DNA testing? The courts?