Bu-lat-lat (boo-lat-lat) verb: to search, probe, investigate, inquire; to unearth facts Volume 3, Number 39 November 2 - 8, 2003 Quezon City, Philippines |
Indigenous
Peoples Watch Subanen
Chiefs Want IPRA Scrapped In
a summit held last week of October, Lumad groups declared they have had enough
of the Indigenous Peoples' Rights Act (IPRA). In a resolution passed during
their summit in Naga, Zamboanga Sibugay, 500 Subanen leaders, elders and
sympathizers called for the scrapping of IPRA for being inutile and even
insidious in protecting indigenous tribes' rights and welfare. By
ELMER D. SAGBIGSAL OZAMIS
CITY - Lumad groups held a summit last week of October and declared they have
had enough of the Indigenous Peoples' Rights Act (IPRA). In a resolution passed
during their summit in Naga, Zamboanga Sibugay, 500 Subanen leaders, elders and
sympathizers called for the scrapping of IPRA after finding it inutile and even
insidious in protecting indigenous tribes' rights and welfare. Onrico Simbulan,
regional chair of Salabukan No'k G'taw Subanen (SGS), summed up the Lumad
leaders' radical stand: "Six-years is more than enough experience and
lesson that IPRA deserves to be scrapped, as it did nothing to help the sorry
plight of the Subanen." Simbulan
said that IPRA was used not to protect the Subanen rights and welfare but to
facilitate the entry and implementation of destructive projects detrimental to
their ancestral land and rights. IPRA can be considered a landmark legislation
with a negative twist: it promotes deception rather than rights protection, he
said. Enacted
in October 1997, Republic Act 8371 (or IPRA) is the first and only comprehensive
law that is supposed to recognize the rights of indigenous peoples in the
Philippines. The Act is also considered by some NGOs as a landmark legislation
that would finally answer the decades-long clamor of indigenous peoples for
recognition of their rights over their ancestral lands. But
Efren Soon, Coordinator of Indigenous Cultural Communities Center for
Development (ICCCD), said during the summit that IPRA "pays lip service to
the principles of respecting, upholding and protecting the rights and interest
of indigenous peoples." Based on the tribal communities' experience, he
said, the Act in fact strengthens other oppressive laws that brought forth the
historical injustice committed against the indigenous communities. Instead
of recognizing ancestral land rights, IPRA tied tribes to the legal framework of
land ownership contrary to their customary laws, culture and tradition, Soon
added. Toothless
Act In
an IPRA conference last year, lawyer Marvic Leonen of Legal Rights Center-
Kasama sa Kalikasan (LRC-KSK) advised the Lumad (non-Muslim tribes) not to be
too dependent on IPRA. "Huwag pakahon sa IPRA na may maraming
kontradiksyon at di malinaw na interpretasyon" (Don't be trapped by
IPRA which is riddled with contradictions and vague interpretations), he said. Timuay
Elino Dumagsa, chair of Mt. Malindang Timuay Council, on the other hand, said
that while indigenous peoples are claiming their ancestral land rights based on
IPRA law, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) prohibits
them from any human activity within the so-called protected and watershed areas
covered by the National Integrated Protected Areas (NIPA) program. For
instance, Dumagsa said, Subanen farmers were barred from cultivating the land,
gathering firewood and rattan and hunting wild pigs in the 53,262-hectare part
of Mt. Malindang which DENR had declared a NIPAS area or a “strictly protected
zone.” "IPRA
never protects the Subanen people" said Alfredo Atad, Subanen leader in the
town of Jose Dalman. He laments that the National Commission on Indigenous
Peoples (NCIP), the agency tasked to implement the law, has lifted no finger to
help Lumads in their struggle against an unpopular government pasture project. "Instead
of helping us prevent the entry of the pasture project, the NCIP is trying to
dampen the struggle of the tribe by forcing us to claim first the land through
application of Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claim (CADC)," said Atad. Timuay
Alano Osi complained however that their CADC-applied ancestral land was also a
site of Integrated Social Forestry (ISF) program. Osi suspects that their
application would be rejected as the DENR provides the beneficiaries with 25
years Certificate of Stewardship Contract (CSC). Sowing
disunity Anastacio
Langgap, a local leader in Mt. Paraya, said that the NCIP's appointment of new
leaders has only created conflicts and divisions among the people in the
community. He said that the new appointed leaders were authorized by NCIP to
officiate in weddings and other rituals which are not part of the
responsibilities and powers of genuine Subanen leaders. By
performing these non-traditional roles, the NCIP-appointed leader collect fees
ranging from P50 to P 500, contrary to a policy where they are supposed to
perform their functions without charge, Langgap also said. Martino
Ayas said that the presence of the NCIP-appointed leaders has only spawned
division in the community as they claim legal authority over the leaders and
elders chosen by the people under their custom. Self-
governance "Even
without IPRA we can assert our rights and defend our land," said Timuay
Bernito Sanghilan. He recounts that their tribe successfully stopped the
construction of a dam in Dumpoc in 1990 when the whole community acted as one. The
people were also able to block the entry of DENR personnel and the controversial
Integrated Social Forestry Program in the land which they had declared as
ancestral domain. Simbulan concluded: "Kung ang tribo na ang mag-delineate sa ilang ancestral lands, kini expression sa self-governance ug di na kinahanglan ang balaod" (If the tribal peoples can delineate their ancestral lands, that is an expression of self-governance and there's no need for law anymore). Bulatlat.com We want to know what you think of this article.
|
|