IT COULD be said that our indigenous peoples are our own “First Nations”.
It could also be said that the issuance of Certificates of Ancestral Domain Titles (CADTs) is a more respectable approach towards treating our indigenous peoples, because they are given legal titles to their lands, unlike in the United States where the indigenous peoples are only given the residency rights to live inside the Indian Reservations, but they do not have titles to the lands that they live in.
In fairness however, the US government is giving more supports to their Indian Reservations, compared to the supports that the Philippine government is giving to our ancestral domains. That is one shortcoming that would hopefully be addressed by the national council that we are organizing.
While the legal rights given by the CADT appears to be solid, there is really more than meets the eye, because not all of the ancestral domains have been granted CADTs, and many of these domains are in legal encumbrances that would make it difficult to acquire them under the Indigenous Peoples Republic Act (IPRA). It seems that the only legal way to reacquire these other domains is to buy them back within the legal framework of our existing real estate laws.
In cases where legal acquisition is not possible, there are other ways wherein legal occupancy is possible, or perhaps other forms of commercial use could also be possible, under certain contractual relationships. Whichever way, what is important is that our indigenous peoples could go back to where their ancestral roots are.
Other than the CADT framework, the other legal frameworks that could be explored are:
(1) the Indigenous Communities Conservation Area (ICCA)
(2) the Integrated Forest Management Agreement (IFMA)
(3) the National Greening Program (NGP) and
(4) the Public-Private Partnership Program (PPPP).
ICCA is an international framework that is supported by the United Nations. It recognizes the roles of indigenous communities in the conservation of natural areas, regardless of whether they are tribal or not, and regardless of whether they have legal titles to the lands or not. It pursues the legal fiction that these communities have been doing the conservation work for hundreds if not thousands of years, and they should be recognized and supported for doing so. The IFMA, the NGP and the PPPP are programs of the Philippine government that could be tapped for the benefit of the indigenous peoples.
In the US many tribal associations have already succeeded in raising money so that they could buy back their ancestral domains, specifically those that have not been set aside as Indian Reservations, and those that have already fallen into private hands.
Believe it or not, some of the lands that have been reacquired by the tribal associations have mountains and rivers within, thus giving it an additional conservation dimension. Here in the Philippines, legal occupancy by way of the IFMA, the NGP and the PPPP would be a good start, but the long term goal should really be legal possession.
For that matter, there are many lands that have already been declared as alienable and disposable by the government, and our own tribal associations could start applying for these lands already.
Also here in the Philippines, the so-called tribal councils are not formally organized, and very few of them are registered in the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Although many of them are registered with the NCIP, that other registration does not really give them the legal personality that an SEC registration could give.
I think that the better approach is to organize tribal associations that would be governed by the tribal councils. In turn, the tribal associations could be the building blocks upon which the national council could be built. Although the SEC registration would give the tribal associations the official authority of the national government, it is still important to honor the traditional authority of the tribal councils.
As it is now, the IPRA law gives the indigenous peoples the rights to be represented in the municipal councils and the provincial boards, but the selection of representatives appears to be arbitrary and subject to much political maneuverings. In many municipalities and provinces, these rights are yet to be honored.
Our hope is that the planned national council will be instrumental in making the selection process more transparent, and in making sure that the right to representation will be realized. Aside from that, the national council will also help the tribes that have not yet firmed up their CADTs due to legal and financial problems.
Due to the objections of some members of Congress at the time the IPRA was passed, the ancestral domains of the Islamized tribes of Mindanao were not included in the CADT framework. At present however, many members of these Islamized tribes are asking to be granted their own CADTs.
The solution I think is to separate their cultural heritage from their religious faith, in much the same way that the Hebrew heritage is considered separate from the Jewish faith.
The truth is, all of the indigenous tribes of Mindanao are of the same Sri-Vishayan heritage before they were either Islamized or Christianized in their religious faith, as the case may be. That could be the key to peace in Mindanao, for everyone to embrace their common heritage./PN
