Meeting Concerns of Indigenous Folk

MANILA, Philippines — About a half a century ago, on June 18, 1964, two major landmark legislation were passed by Congress – RA 3872 amending the Public Land Act and RA 3985 amending the Pasture Land Act – providing that lands actually occupied by members of the Cultural Minorities (IPs) since July 4, 1945, by themselves or through their predecessors in interest, belong to them.

This was, in effect, the precursor of what is commonly referred to today as the “Ancestral Domain” of the Indigenous People (IP). These two laws, however, were simply discarded by the powers-that-be, as the IPs who were generally impoverished were discriminated against and were often victims of theft, plunder, and exploitation of their landholdings, ancestral domain, and traditional habitats.

Mining operations in the country today are invariably located in ancestral lands of the IPs. It is in these areas where the IPs’ rights should be upheld, by a more ecologically sound, gender-fair, and equitable system of resource management. The individual and collective rights of the IPs as well as their rights to culture, identity, language, employment, health, and education must be adequately addressed.

According to long-established legal precedents, IPs are considered a quasi-sovereign nation-state, that never surrendered to colonial rule and consistently asserted their tribal sovereignty.

The 2007 national census reports that the Philippines has a total population of 88.57 million. The National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) Statistics Office disclose that the estimated population of IPs in the Philippines would be about 13.5 million or about 16% of the total of population. There are 111 ethno-linguistic groups of IPs spread all over the country, particularly in Regions I, II, III, IV, V, VI, and VII.

House Bill No. 1460 filed by Rep. Teodoro Casiño of Bayan-Muna Partylist, seeks to include data on the IPs such as ethnicity by descent bloodline and language in all national censuses to generate accurate demographic data on IP and ethno-linguistic groups. Casiño said these data are indispensable in knowing the real state of the country’s indigenous peoples as basis for national planning and decision making.

“National statistics fail to reflect IP situation because data are hidden in national averages. Perhaps, the measure could have also required that the Cash Transfer Program of the present disposition should embrace the most destitute IPs under its aegis,” Casiño said.

Article XII and XIV of the Philippine Constitution and the pertinent sections therein generally provide for the recognition and protection of the rights of indigenous cultural communities and Indigenous Peoples (IPs) to their ancestral lands and the applicability of customary laws governing propriety rights or relations in determining the ownership and extent of ancestral domain.

In Sec. 2 of Article XII of the Constitution, the State clings to the royal overtones of imperium or shades of the Regalian doctrine, that “all lands of the public domain are owned by the State.” The IP’s occupation, possession, and proprietal rights over their ancestral domain are their exclusive birthright and heritage. For even before the establishment of earthly kingdoms, empires, colonial regimes, or territories, IPs were already in full occupation, ownership, and possession of their landholdings.

President Ferdinand Marcos whose broad social justice program envisioned the democratization of the mineral wealth of the country, issued PD 1899 “Establishing Small-Scale Mining Development known as “Minahan ng Bayan.” It granted provincial governors authority to approve small-scale mining permits, to enable LGUs to share in the local mineral resources of their respective local communities. RA 7076, the People’s Small-Scale Mining Act of 1992, was passed pursuant to the fundamental precept of social justice in recognition that the IPs were really the first to discover the gold deposits in the area.

Recently though, the DENR made known its plan to handle exclusively the issuance of permits for small-scale mining operations. Hopefully, this will not presage the phasing out of the “Minahan ng Bayan” social program intended for small entrepreneurial operators.

There are 121 big mining companies in the country today, according to the DENR. Sometime ago, these big companies made a sweeping statement, that small-scale mining is the culprit in the destruction of forest covers and the degradation of the environment.

As more giant companies invest in the mining industry which was forecast to reach $12.48 billion by 2012, it will not be surprising if the IPs and the small-scale mining operators, will be blamed for the continuing destruction of the forest covers and natural resources, including damage to biodiversities of the area.

Small scale mining operations are both handled and regulated by the DENR and the Local Government Units. Proceeds from these mining operations are allotted to the miner, the local government, and the DENR, as it was originally intended that small-scale operations, properly regulated and supervised, will benefit the miner and the local community. There are reports, however, about the predatory practices of some regulators that resulted in the disappointing performance of mining activity and even compromised the protection of the forest covers in those areas.

Under RA 7492 (Mining Law), the state can enter into any of three modes of mineral agreements for the exploration, development, and utilization of mineral resources. They are the Financial and Technical Assistance Agreement (FTAA), the Mineral Processing and Sharing Agreement (MPSA), and the Joint Venture Agreement (JVA).

By and large, though, the areas assigned to big mining companies are located in ancestral domains where some IPs are engaged in their traditional subsistence farming and mining. In Eastern, Central, and Western Mindanao and also in the Visayas are found small-scale miners. The Cordillera is one region where patches of small-scale miners are found within areas assigned to big mining companies.

Recently, the gold-rich Compostela Valley, an 8,100-hectare mining reservation was awarded to three mining operators. The Compostela and Diwalwal area in Davao abound with indigenous peoples. Initially, the mining companies reportedly agreed to allow the small-scale miners to conduct their trade within their mining patents but they have now proposed that the small-scale miners be phased-out. Such proposal would derogate the IP’s ownership, possession, and occupation of their lands that are their birthright, acknowledged and respected by law.

The recurring problem of IPs and the big mining companies can perhaps be mitigated if all the IPs (small miners) located within big companies’ operational area, organize themselves into cooperatives and enter into resource availment/extraction management/processing and revenue sharing agreements with the big companies. The latter, would handle the technical know-how, operational supervision, and integrate the Ips’ mines in a total operational set-up with theirs. All proceeds from the integrated operational arrangement would be allotted in accordance with the extent and material support contributed by the parties.

Such arrangement can be patterned after that of the Republic of Mongolia. Then Mongolian President Eldegdorj Tsakhia, ever conscious of his people’s welfare, required that the people be given 538 shares of stock of Erdenes-Tavan Tolgoi, Ltd., which was awarded the exclusive exploration and extraction of coal in Mongolia. The Mongolian government also recently enacted a scheme which gave each Mongolian citizen a $55 cash payments that would spur consumers spending in a nation where the capita annual income is about $2,000.

The Philippine Executive and Legislative should work in tandem to address the concerns of indigenous peoples. For a start, an Executive Order should be considered mandating the DENR and the NCIP to conduct a thorough demographic census and survey of all area of the country where IP’s are located to determine the exact metes and bounds of their ancestral domain, landholdings, and other related possessions.

There are some IPs that have already been acculturated. Their areas need not be included in the survey. The DENR and other related government agencies should undertake a thorough geodetic survey of the content and lifespan of mineral ores underneath their ancestral domains.

The Cooperative Development Authority (CDA) should help organize the IPs into formal cooperatives to enhance their productivity and strengthen the base of their ownership. To truly go forward and pull IPs onto mainstream for the “itutuwid na daan,” the government can do no less for the Indigenous Peoples of the land.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog