2.

1 A Brief Background on Indigenous Peoples

From the time of their colonization, conquest or occupation, the indigenous peoples have
histories of resistance, interface or cooperation with states, which prove their conviction and
determination for survival in face of distinct sovereign identities. As a result, they got recognized
as sovereign peoples by states like the US, Cananda, New Zealand and others. Despite this
recognition, indigenous populations continue to dwindle while the settler populations grew
bigger and more dominant, which later on manifested that states have become less inclined in
recognizing their sovereignty as indigenous communities.

Cayuga Chief Deskaheh, the representative of the Six Nations of the Iroquois, travelled to
Geneva, to the League of Nations during 1923 to plead for his people’s cause, the recognition of
their rights. Yet, he failed. Then he travelled to Europe where he got a lot of audience in his
successful PR campaign (United Nations, 2009).

W.T. Ratan also protested the breakdown of the Treaty of Waitangi which was concluded
in 1840 between the representatives of the British Crown and Maori chiefs in New Zealand,
through which the Maori obtained legitimate ownership of their lands. Ratana first travelled to
London with a large delegation to petition King George V, but he was denied access. He later on
sent his delegation to Geneva to the League of Nations and also arrived there later himself in
1925, but they were also denied access.

Despite little attention given by the international community to indigenous issues, the
1950s was a different matter. Concerns of forced labor among “native populations” prompted
the International Labour Organization (ILO) to work on what became, in 1957, Convention No.
107 entitled “Convention Concerning the Protection and Integration of Indigenous and Other
Tribal and Semi-Tribal Populations in Independent Countries.” However, the same treaty was
widely criticized as assimilationist by the indigenous movement, which was more visible to be
such at the international level in the 1970s. Such convention led to the adaptation of ILO
Convention No. 168 in 1989 This would eventually lead to the adoption of ILO Convention No.
169 in 1989 being a sequel and further development of the former convention (United Nations,
2009).

During 1972, the United Nations Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and

Protection of Minorities initiated a study on the problem of discrimination against indigenous
populations which came to be known as “the Martinez Cobo study,” the name given after the
Special Rapporteur who was appointed to draft the report. This study was an offshoot of the
rapidly growing international indigenous movement in human rights terms from different
countries like the Americas, the Caribbean, Australia, New Zealand, Bangladesh, and the
Philippines.

The above study led to the establishment of the first United Nations mechanism on
indigenous peoples’ issues, in 1982, called the Working Group on Indigenous Populations of the
Sub-Commission. Later, in 1983, the Working Group allowed the participation of representatives
of indigenous communities.
 Several improvements were witnessed between 1984 and 1993 like the establishment of
the UN Voluntary Fund for Indigenous Populations (1985), the adoption of ILO Convention No.
169 on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries (1989), the proclamation of the
International Year of the World’s Indigenous People (1993), and the proclamation of two
separate International Decades of World’s Indigenous People (1995-2004 and 2005-2014).

The First Decade, launched in 1994 and completed in 2004, adopted the special theme of
“partnership in action” and its programme of action was meant to raise awareness about, and
integrate, indigenous issues into the intergovernmental and, by extension, the governmental
agendas (United Nations Organization, 2004). The First Decade helped to promote awareness
and solidified indigenous issues on the agenda of the United Nations and some of its agencies.
Indigenous peoples themselves also took advantage of the Decade, documenting and providing
information about human rights violations and carving themselves a niche within various
international fora. During the course of the First Decade a number of other achievements were
made:

Referring to the First Decade above, which was completed during 2004, adopted the
special theme “partnership in action” was aimed at raising awareness about, and integrate,
indigenous issues into the intergovernmental and, by extension, the governmental agendas.
While UN was doing its part of promoting and solidifying indigenous issues unto its own agenda,
the indigenous communities were documenting and providing information about human rights
violations and creating a niche in the international media (United Nations, 2009). A good number
of other achievements of the First Decade include:
a. August 9 was declared as the annual International Day of the World’s Indigenous People
b. The Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of
indigenous people was appointed by the Commission on Human Rights
c. A fellowship programme for indigenous people was established within the Office of the High
Commissioner on Human Rights (OHCHR).

Another major goal of the first Decade was the formation of the United Nations
Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues by the Economic and Social Council in 2000. Despite
these developments, several challenges confronted them like the lack of implementation by
states of the programmes intended to promote the development and rights of indigenous
peoples and the UN’s role in assisting them. Also, there was an unfinished task such as the Draft
Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples that remained unadopted during the first Decade
even if there were great efforts from all sectors (United Nations, 2009). Later, in 1993, the Draft
Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples was completed by the Working Group. The said
document was held in high esteem by the indigenous peoples as it was created with their
participation.

The Draft Declaration was approved by the Sub-Commission in 1994 and the Commission
on Human Rights, in 1995, established a Working Group tasked to examine and fine-tune the
Draft Declaration. In June of 2006, the historic decision by the Human Rights Council, the body
that succeeded the Commission on Human Right, adopted the Declaration after a series of
difficult negotiations with the indigenous peoples. By September 13, 2007, a great milestone in
the work of the UN and the Indigenous peoples’ struggle for the protection and promotion of
their rights was reached as the General Assembly adopted the United Nations Declaration on the
Rights of Indigenous Peoples (United Nations General Assembly Resolution, 2007).

The Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples replaced the Working Group
on indigenous populations in 2007. This Expert Mechanism is a subsidiary body of the Human
Rights Council which was composed of five experts and its function includes the provision of
thematic expertise on the rights of indigenous peoples to the Council through the use of research-
based advice. The Expert Mechanism can also suggest proposals to the Council for consideration
and approval, but it has no power to adopt resolutions nor decisions.

Following the Vienna Conference of 1993, the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues
(UNPFII) was established in the year 2000. Its mandate was to discuss economic, social,
environmental developments (United Nations, 2009). Likewise, it was tasked to consider matters
about education, health and human rights and to advise the Economic and Social Council and the
United Nations system so as to integrate and coordinate issues with the indigenous communities
and to raise awareness about indigenous issues. The UNPFII is a well-attended annual gathering
by a great number of indigenous representatives and the representatives of many world leaders.

2.2. The National Policy and Developments

The Philippines has a rich cultural heritage which cannot be compromised by an

exaggerated desire to go global-minded while leaving behind the indigenous communities
helplessly struggling to survive daily. Several environmental advocates admit the great
contributions that these indigenous communities bring to the present society like the
preservation of the nation’s cultural heritage and protection of forested ancestral lands which
greatly aid in conserving depletable natural resources of the country.

Yet, there has been recorded countless struggles that these indigenous communities have
been going through, even up to this present age. They have outlasted the unbearable abuses
from the time of colonization to this day resulting in the decline of their population. However,
before the end of the 20th century, the Philippine Government laid the National Policy which can
safeguard their interests. This policy is embodied in the so-called “Indigenous Peoples Rights Act
1997”. From the Philippine Office of the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples, the
Republic Act 8371 (Indigenous Peoples Rights Act) is herein explained.

ANCESTRAL DOMAIN/LAND RECOGNITION

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Through the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA), Certificate of Ancestral Domain
Titles(CADTs) are issued to formally recognize the rights of possession and ownership of
Indigenous Cultural Communities/Indigenous Peoples (ICCs/IPs) over their ancestral
domains as identified and delineated in accordance with this law, while Certificate of
Ancestral Land Titles (CALTs) formally recognize the rights of ICCs/IPs over their ancestral
lands.

ASSISTANCE TO ANCESTRAL DOMAIN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND PROTECTION

PLAN (ADSDPP) FORMULATION
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Provision of technical and/or financial assistance to the Indigenous Cultural

Communities/Indigenous Peoples (ICCs/IPs) in the formulation of their Ancestral Domain
Sustainable Development and Protection Plan (ADSDPP). This holistic, comprehensive and
integrated plans shall promote a culture and rights-based approach to development. It
reflects the present and future desired conditions of the ICCs/IPs and contains the types of
programs/projects that they will adopt for the sustainable management and development of
their domain and community. The management plan shall include, but not be limited to, the
following basic information:

The manner by which the concerned ICCs/IPs shall protect their ancestral domain;
The development programs related to livelihood, education, infrastructure, self-governance,
environment, natural resources, culture and other practical development aspects, that are
decided and adopted by the ICCs/IPs;

Community policies covering the implementation of all forms of development

activities in the are; and Management System, including the sharing of benefits and
responsibilities among members of the concerned ICCs/IPs.

Program aims to promote all the rights of ICCs/IPs within the framework of national
unity and development and all shall protect the rights of Indigenous Peoples to their
ancestral domains to ensure their economic, social and cultural well-being; and To recognize
the inherent rights of ICCs/IPs to self-governance and self-determination, and respect the
integrity of their values, practices and institutions as well as guarantee their right to freely
pursue their development and equally enjoy the full measure of human rights and freedom
without distinction or discrimination.

CULTURALLY APPROPRIATE RESPONSIVE AND GENDER SENSITIVE SOCIO-ECONOMIC

AND ECOLOGY DEVELOPMENT PROTECTION SERVICES

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The program provides for policy support and extension of assistance to ICCs/IPs
through funding under the MOOE of the Commission apart from coordination with pertinent
government agencies especially charged with implementation of various socio-economic
services, policies and programs affecting the ICCs/IPs to ensure that the ICCs/IPs are directly
benefited.

IP EDUCATION AND ADVOCACY SERVICES

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Educational Assistance Program. It is the program that aims to provide limited
financial assistance to qualified ICCs/IPs students/pupils based on the criteria set forth in
NCIP Administrative Order No. 5, series of 2012, otherwise known as NCIP Guidelines of
2012 on the Merit-Based Scholarship (NCIP-MBS) and Educational Assistance (NCIP-EA) and
its amendments by virtue of Commission En Banc Resolution No. 06-099-2014, series of
2014.

The Merit-Based Scholarship Program. It is a program that aimed of providing

meaningful scholarship to qualified/deserving IP students based on screening criteria and
benefits or privileges set forth in the Guidelines.

The Support and Advocacy Program. This collective term refers to education-related
projects and activities that complement the EAP and MBSP and Advocate holistic
development to include initiatives other than educational assistance and scholarship, such
as but not limited to Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET) and other Review programs;
Bridging Programs, School and Community-related Health Programs; Appropriate Social
Infrastructures; and Trainings and Research Programs for Culturally Appropriate IP
Education.

IP CULTURE SERVICES

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Considered as a mechanism of assisting the cultural communities preserve their

cultural and historical heritage and at the same time evoking public awareness and respect
for the IPs and their rights, is the extension of support to them in the practice of their rituals
and ceremonies whenever these are necessary held. The performance of cultural
manifestations as in rites, songs dances chants, and games, and the presentation of their
native life ways, literature and arts, fabric and architectural designs, artifacts and
instruments, in their original versions or in a manner in which they have been held through
the years, without romanticism or simply aesthetic motivation, is essential to the Ips
authentic flow of life and inherent world views at work. Stereotyping, false representation
and commercialization of indigenous cultures are current fads that must be reckoned with
and corrected. In here, time is of the essence

IP HEALTH SERVICES

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

Republic Act No. 8371 known as The Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997 declares
that the State shall recognize and promote all the rights of Indigenous Cultural
Communities/Indigenous Peoples (ICCs/IPs) to government’s basic services health
included. The Universal Health Care (UHC)/Kalusugan Pangkalahatan (KP) (AO 2010-0036)
addresses inequities in health outcomes ensuring that all Filipinos have equitable access to
health care. The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples 2007 (UNDRIP) states
that Indigenous Peoples have the right to improvement of their economic and social
conditions without discrimination; develop priorities and strategies for exercising their right
to development; right to traditional medicines maintain their health practices; conserve
their vital medicinal resources and access health and social services without discrimination;
enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health; maintain,
control, protect and develop their cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and cultural
expressions and intellectual property over them.

GENDER AND RIGHTS-BASED SERVICES

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

This sub-program covers strategic efforts to protect the rights of the Indigenous
Peoples to self-governance and self-determination ensuring that, but not limited to the
following

The socio-political structures, systems and institutions of ICCs/IPs are strengthened;

The Indigenous structures, systems and institutions are not supplanted by other
forms of non-indigenous governance; and/or
The established mechanisms that allow the interfacing of Indigenous systems of
governance with the national systems are established; and
The ICC/IP representation in policy and decision-making bodies are institutionalized.

IP RIGHTS ADVOCACY AND MONITORING OF TREATY OBLIGATIONS

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

In context, Indigenous Peoples human rights and violations of these rights in hinged
on the ICCs/IPs existence or societies of their own even before foreign colonization of the
Philippines. Having their own people, government and territories have been the foundation
of their cultural identity, rights to self-determination and ancestral domains. To ICCs/IPs
therefore, human rights is the respect of their collectiveness as groups of peoples and at the
same time, recognizing their rights as citizens of a bigger society of the Philippine Republic.
Their rights are human rights too.

The IP Human Rights Program, with full participation and consultation with ICCs/IPs,
aims to contribute to the organizational outcome of the Commission. It seeks to promote the
IPRA as an ICCs/IPs national framework of their human rights, to advocate ancestral
domains as territories of peace and IPs self-determined development, human security and
well- being.

The program strategy shall focus on the IPRA, international rights and other
instruments from legal frameworks into a well-defined call for action involving various
sectors such as international and national government, non-government organizations
(NGOs), civil society groups (CSOs), ICCs/IPs leadership structures and IP organizations and
the private sector towards the full enjoyment of ICCs/IPs human rights. A close networks
built from ancestral domains, municipality, provincial, regional and national levels should be
strengthened. Moreover, coordination and monitoring systems and mechanisms or the
promotion and protection of IP rights at all levels shall also be enhanced through the
program.

The overall objectives of the program are the following:

General: To ensure that the basic human rights of indigenous peoples/indigenous

cultural communities (IPs/ICCs) basic social, political, cultural and economic rights are
respected, recognized, protected and promoted, to promote ancestral domains as territories
of peace and advocate the principle that Indigenous Peoples (IPs) rights are human rights
and the respect of which will realize both the self-determined development and security of
IPs as human being and ancestral domains/communities as a whole.

LEGAL SERVICES

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

COMPONENTS
There are three components of the Legal Services. These are:

Indigenous Peoples Legal Assistance (IPLA)

The IPRA mandates the NCIP to protect and promote the interest and well-being of
the ICCs/IPs with due regard to their beliefs, customs, traditions and institutions. The same
law likewise considers the NCIP as the primary government agency through which ICCs/IPs
can seek government assistance and as the medium through which such assistance may be
extended.
With the aforementioned mandates, the NCIP, through its Central, Regional, and Provincial
lawyers and legal officers, provides legal assistance and services to the ICCs/IPs by
representing them before the regular courts and quasi-judicial bodies, conducting
investigations on the basis of complaints filed by the ICCs/IPs, preparing pleadings and other
legal documents for said clients or simply rendering legal opinion or advisory.

Paralegal Training
 The National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP), through its lawyers and
legal officers, renders legal assistance to IP clients as part of the general mandate of the Office
to recognize, protect and promote the rights of our ICCs/Ips.

The paralegal training program seeks to educate and inform ICCs/IPs of their rights,
the various applicable remedies they have in case these rights are violated and abused, and
the different jurisdiction (courts, prosecution offices, quasi-judicial and administrative
bodies, and other government agencies) where they may lodge their complaints for such
violations.

IPs from communities need to be trained in order that they may assist other members
of their communities in reporting violations of their rights and gathering pieces of evidence,
as well as assist NCIP or their private lawyers on legal concerns brought to them for proper
action. Adequate and appropriate training is a must for paralegals in order that they may be
able to assist other members of the community in accessing justice. Paralegals must not only
be aware of the basic provisions of laws relating to IPs but must also be aware of their roles
and limitations in assisting people. They must also be trained on keeping records and be
provided exposure to various government agencies so that they are able to help others
approach these agencies.

Documentation of Customary Laws

The Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997 or Republic Act No. 8371 provides for the
primacy of customary laws and practices in resolving disputes. Section 65 of IPRA provides
that ,when disputes involve ICCs/IPs, customary laws and practices shall be used to resolve
the dispute.
Furthermore, Section 63 of the same law states that customary laws, traditions and practices
of the ICCs/IPs of the land where the conflict arises shall be applied first with respect to
property rights, claims and ownership, hereditary succession and settlement of land dispute.
Several administrative orders and guidelines of the NCIP also emphasize the importance and
primacy of customary laws in resolving disputes involving ICCs/IPs.
It essential to undertake the documentation of customary laws not only for the sake of
documentation and preservation, but in order to have a full understanding of these laws and
practices, and to have ready and available resources in resolving disputes brought before the
NCIP. Thus, considering the importance of customary laws, the NCIP is tasked to undertake
the documentation of customary laws.

ADJUDICATION SERVICES

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The IPRA mandates the NCIP, acting through its Regional Hearing Offices (RHOs) and
the Commission En Banc (CEB) and in the exercise of its quasi-judicial powers, to resolve all
claims and disputes involving rights of ICCs/IPs, subject to the provisions of the IPRA and its
implementing Rules, and other regulations, as well as, pertinent jurisprudence. With the
aforementioned mandate, the NCIP, through its RHOs and CEB reviews cases submitted
before it for adjudication, as a quasi-judicial tribunal, and after due proceedings and
hearings, resolves the issues raised for adjudication.

2.3. Biodiversity Conservation

All over the world, there are 5,000 different indigenous cultures which account for most
of the world’s cultural diversity, although they constitute only the minority. They inhabit areas of
very high biological diversity which establishes a strong correlation with areas of very high
cultural diversity. Thus, the degree of cultural diversity is correlated with biological diversity.

These indigenous peoples identified themselves with their lands and distinct cultures.
Their spiritual, cultural, social and economic relationships with their lands, laws, customs and
practices reflect their responsibility to preserve their traditional lands for use by their future
generations. History has shown that they are the best guardians of the environment. Thus,
anything that can hamper their access to their traditional lands would be considered as a critical
issue on matters of possession of their lands and protection of the natural habitat.

In 1972, the protection and improvement of human environment was the major issue of
the Un Conference on the Human Environment. However, it made no mention of indigenous
peoples and their critical situation until the Brundtland report on sustainable development
(1987) which gave so much credit on their critical roles in protecting the environment.

With the UNCED of 1992 of the United Nations Conference on Environment and
Development, the indigenous peoples were included as a “major group” because their specific
relationship with the environment was recognized and some of their concerns were already
considered. The said recognition was made possible by the efforts of the indigenous peoples
themselves after their movement was created through the Working Group on the Indigenous
Populations (1982) and the adoption of ILO Convention No. 169.

The UNCED was later viewed as an opportunity to inform the international community
about the environmental issues indigenous peoples were facing and how their traditional
knowledge of ecology and practices could contribute to resolving the global environmental
problems.

Part of the documents which came out of the UNCED was the “Convention on Biological
Diversity” which take into account the indigenous concerns, knowledge and expertise which
spread through the international levels through the ensuing written documents and policies.
Thus, the said Convention on Biological Diversity has made a clear-cut documentation and
stipulated policies, through the efforts of indigenous groups, on matters of environment.
Through this, several INGO’s and NGOs like WWF and IUCN.

Major Issues

There are still numerous challenges to the critical roles of indigenous peoples in
preserving the environment. Herein below are such critical issues:

2.3.1. Land Dispossession

Dispossession of traditional lands and territories is one of the major problems faced
by indigenous peoples all over the world (United Nations, 2009). For several centuries, this
has been an ongoing process, first as a result of the intrusion of colonial systems and the
ever- growing search for rich agricultural areas and natural wealth, while today, it’s a result
of development policies and globalization. In other words, the present-day issues related to
land dispossession are related to newly existing development policies and globalization
initiatives.
 Due to lack of appropriate legal frameworks, indigenous peoples have experienced
disruptions in their traditional land tenure and use patterns, fragmentation and loss of
traditional land, changes in settlement patterns, privatization of communal lands,
degradation of land and/or resources, lack of recognition of territorial rights, insufficient and
inequitable land allocation, lack of effective mechanisms for conflict resolution, inefficient
official land registers, and difficult procedures for land demarcation and titling (United
Nations, 2009).

Several countries have witnessed the development trends as the cause for the decline
of different modes of production of indigenous peoples like hunting and gathering,
pastoralism and shifting agriculture, which are all perceived as primitive, non-productive and
not in accord with the aspirations of modernization of present-day states. Thus, indigenous
peoples feel that most development policies are, either directly or indirectly, intended to
weaken or eradicate their traditional modes of production. Likewise, they view new
technologies like use of improved seeds, fertilizers, pesticides, the introduction of cash-crop
cultivation and large plantation schemes which can cause environmental degradation and
ultimately adversely affect many indigenous communities to resettle elsewhere.

2.3.2. Large-scale Development Projects

Indigenous lands and territories have become the targets of large-scale development
projects which are part of certain economic policies promoting free-trade agreements and
globalization. These development projects cover a great number of activities like the large-
scale exploitation of natural resources, including subsoil resources; the establishment of
plantations and industrial plants; tourist developments; and the construction of ports,
transportation networks, multipurpose dams, military bases or toxic waste dumps (United
Nations, 2009).

On the other hand, it is obvious that the indigenous peoples bear the costs of these
projects and the side effects on their human rights include loss of traditional territories and
land, eviction, migration and resettlement, depletion of resources needed for physical and
cultural survival, degradation and pollution of the traditional environment, social and
community disorganization, long-term adverse health and nutritional effects, harassment
and violence (United Nations, 2009).

2.3.3. The Forest Issue

The forest plays an essential part in securing the physical, cultural, spiritual and
economic well-being of indigenous forest-dwellers which gives them access to secure means
of subsistence, medicinal plants and ability to practice their customs. However, they can be
in jeopardy due to certain unreasonable human activities directed to the forest.

These wrongful activities directed towards the forests include deforestation, wherein
logging of whatever sort is the most prominent cause. Likewise, some development projects
are inimical to the conservation of forest resources like large-scale infrastructure projects
such as: hydroelectric dams and gas and oil pipelines, oil exploration and mining operations.

The indigenous communities who are likewise the forest-dwellers pay the price of
such destructive activities, although economically lucrative in most instances. As plants and
wildlife disappear, their subsistence base, likewise, disappears and forces them to abandon
their traditional way of living based on hunting and gathering. After abandoning their
traditional lands, they are forced into living as squatters in a different society. They did not
receive any compensation or other reparation for their losses forcing them to beg or end up
in bonded labor.
 The sad experiences of many indigenous peoples are results of unfair forest policies
and legislations which have generally been designed without, or with very little, involvement
from them. In fact, only few countries have included considerations regarding forest-related
traditional knowledge in their forest policies. As a proof to this claim, several logging
concessions overlap with traditional indigenous lands which are not supposed to happen.
Also, illegal logging activities still prevail, particularly, in traditional ancestral domains of
indigenous peoples without being dealt with by the law. On the other hand, several cases of
indigenous people being jailed for carrying out customary activities on lands which were
declared conservation forest (United Nations, 2009).

2.3.4. Protected Areas

Most protected areas of land are those taken over by the state without the consent
and consideration of indigenous peoples’ rights and use patterns under the guise of
imminent domain. Aside from imminent domain, the so-called “Yellowstone model” which
consisted of establishing and managing national parks for the benefit of future generations,
but to the exclusion of indigenous residents. As a result, national parks in many parts of the
world have denied indigenous peoples their rights, evicted them from their homelands, and
provoked long-term social conflict. This model of “colonial conservation” caused the
widespread human suffering and resentment among indigenous peoples.

Today, there is a new different meaning attached to the term “Protected Area.” The
new notion of Protected Area is that it is a new model of conservation based on respect for
the rights of indigenous peoples and their traditional knowledge. Its meaning ranges from
scientific research to tourism and recreation. In other words, conservation can be possible
through collaboration with indigenous peoples and based on respect for their internationally
recognized rights (United Nations, 2009).

Recent overall statistics regarding how many indigenous peoples have been evicted
and displaced in order to realize large-scale projects (whether agricultural schemes,
infrastructural development, natural resource extraction or protected areas), the results of
these developments have been documented to cause common negative experiences of
indigenous peoples; such as:
1. Landlessness (expropriation of land assets and loss of access to land)
2. Joblessness (even when the resettlement creates some temporary jobs)
3. Homelessness (loss of physical houses, family homes and cultural space)
4. Marginalization (social, psychological and economic downward mobility)
5. Food insecurity (malnourishment, etc.)
6. Increased morbidity and mortality
7. Loss of access to common property (forests, water, wasteland, cultural sites)
8. Social disarticulation (disempowerment, disruption to social institutions)

Likewise, forced evictions and land dispossessions have caused severe conditions of
indigenous women who, as a result, have assumed an increased workload as they are forced
to walk long distances to find alternative sources of pure water or wooden fuel, or driven out
of income-earning productive activities.

2.4. Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC)

FPIC is a mechanism through which indigenous peoples and their communities can
conduct their own collective decision making process in relation to the plans, projects and
activities regarding their lands, territories and resources, health and well-being, territorial
integrity, collective identity, culture, livelihood, social cohesion and future well-being.

This mechanism requires that indigenous peoples are:

 a. are provided with accurate and complete information regarding the proposed
policy, program or project that may affect them, in a language and manner they
understand;
b. are consulted in accordance with their customary decision-making processes;
c. are given the freedom, time and space to conduct their internal and collective
decision-making process without interference; and
d. indigenous peoples’ collective decision to give or withhold consent including setting
conditions for consent is recognized and respected with proper and accurate
documentation of the decision.

Indigenous Peoples are Entitled to FPIC

Like any ordinary human beings, indigenous peoples are equally entitled to all human
rights which they are entitled to. All of these rights are well-articulated in the so-called FPIC
(AIPP, 2014). Thus, there must be some reasons why indigenous peoples are entitled to FPIC.
The following are such reasons; to wit:
a. FPIC is a collective right of indigenous peoples that has been violated
throughout history. In order to rectify the mistakes of the past due to colonization,
subjugation, and forced assimilation, this set of principles can initiate the respect of
rights of indigenous peoples who have been unjustly violated in the past.

b. Indigenous peoples have the right to decide on the development of their own land,
territories and resources. Indigenous peoples have the right to decide on the
utilization, management, conservation and development of their lands, territories
and resources based on their collective ownership and perspectives, interest and
welfare as distinct peoples - and not merely as individuals.

c. Indigenous peoples have their own traditional practices of decision-making and

consensus- building as an exercise of self-determination and self-governance. The
traditional practice of collective decision-making process requires the consensus of
the majority, if not everyone would practically consent. In other words, it does not
mean that there is no possibility of dissenting opinions to surface among members of
the indigenous communities. However, the majority decision reached is the one
validly adopted. This majority basis of collective decision is necessary to the exercise
of the right to self-determination and self-governance of indigenous peoples.

d. Indigenous peoples need to protect and promote their collective interest. It important
to note that indigenous peoples do not exist individually, but, collectively because
they rely on each other in order to survive and develop. Thus, it is fitting that FPIC
seeks to protect and promote the collective interests of all indigenous peoples.

The Key Elements of FPIC

a. Free.

Free implies the absence of any manipulation, coercion or intimidation from any
other groups, bodies and entities in the decision-making process of indigenous
 peoples. In the process of decision making and the outcome of such decision, there is
no evidence of its violation.

b. Prior.

As a precondition before implementing any activity or project, an informed consent

must first be sought from the indigenous peoples who will be affected by such
implementation. Thus, with prior consent, a sufficient time must be given to
indigenous peoples to understand, analyze, and discuss the information they received
collectively. Thus, outsiders must respect the duration required by indigenous
peoples in their collective decision-making process.

c. Informed.

This is considered the core element of FPIC decision making process because it is not
just important for indigenous peoples to gain access to information, but also to
achieve clarity of understanding over such accessed information. To secure this core
element, it is necessary that even the language used in communications must be the
local language of the indigenous peoples.

d. Consent.

Consent is a collective decision-making process of indigenous peoples which requires

several steps. Overall, this includes a series of consultations of indigenous peoples in
order to allow them enough time to undertake their own internal deliberations prior
to rendering their collective decisions. Thus, it is also said that giving consent is an
iterative process.