Reading 4: In Defense of ancestral land. Carino, J., Regpala, M.E. & de Chavez, R. (Eds.). (2010).

Asserting
land rights. Baguio City: Tebteba Foundation

The Cordilleras in northern Philippines is one region in the country which has a strong
indigenous peoples' movement. One key organization that has helped advance indigenous
peoples' rights in the region is the Cordillera People's Alliance, which now federates more than
100 grassroots people's organizations. The alliance was born out of the upland indigenous
peoples' defense of their ancestral lands from intrusive and destructive development projects of
the Marcos regime in the late 1970s and early 1980s.
In the late 1970s, people of the Cordilleras - particularly in Bontoc, Mountain Province and
Kalinga - rose up in arms against a planned series of big dam projects along the Chico River, the
cradle of agriculture in both provinces. The World Bank-funded projects would have inundated
centuries-old rice fields, some residences, rotational farms and burial and sacred grounds. Some
Cordillera leaders who were in the frontlines of defense against these threats to their homeland
lost their lives. One of them was Kalinga chieftain Macliing Dulag, who was assassinated by
Marcos' soldiers on April 24,1980.
Alongside the River Chico conflict, the Tinggians of neighboring Abra province also had
to keep vigil over their forest lands and rivers being threatened by another Marcos project. A
Marcos crony had embarked on a paper mill project, requiring volumes of timber from Tinggian
forests. Chemicals used in milling paper also contaminated river and other water systems. The
Tinggians tried all legal means to stop Cellophil Resources Corporation but to no avail.
The Chico River and the Cellophil debacle prompted indigenous peoples from these
affected areas and neighboring provinces to organize themselves. It was only in organizing
themselves that they could face a military regime.
The protest actions in various parts of the Cordillera interior soon spread to the town
centers and Baguio City. The indigenous peoples of the Cordillera learned the value of concerted
and unified action. The 1980's ferment led to increased coordination among the growing number
of organizations and their experiences contributed in defining the substance and features of a
program for self-determination.
So, in 1984 the Cordillera People's Alliance was established. Indigenous socio-political
systems such as the bodong (peace pact) and pagta (agreement) and the role of elders helped
unify and strengthen the Alliance in devising concerted action. The Alliance's main goal was to
advance a people's movement for the defense of ancestral lands and for self-determination. It still
maintains this goal up to now.
Upon its inception, the Alliance launched some major campaigns. The Chico and Cellophil
issue inspired public educational forums on ancestral land, self-determination and collective rights
of indigenous peoples. Through these forums, the Alliance was able to build broader unities with
other Igorot (the collective term for the various indigenous groups of the Cordilleras) advocates
and other members of society from the academe, church, non-government organizations,
solidarity groups and the media.
Leaders of the Alliance have since articulated that the problems in the Cordillera are not
isolated from wider Philippine and global realities. They also have sought to shatter the"
indigenist" and romanticized view of tribal society as a static society that should be preserved in
its pure form.
After the Marcoses were ousted in 1986, the Cordillera People's Alliance was among
indigenous peoples' organizations that helped lobby for the inclusion of respect and recognition
of indigenous peoples' rights in the 1987 Philippine Constitution. That Constitutional provision
needed an enabling law and that led to the enactment of the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act in
1997.
With Marcos gone and a new Philippine Constitution in place, the Cordillera peoples'
struggle to defend their ancestral land continued. Since the mid-1980s, in the mining town of
Itogon, Benguet, upland folk sought the help of the Cordillera People's Alliance in resisting open-
pit mining operation of Benguet Corporation, a big mining company. The Alliance helped them in
employing various means and forms of defending their lands. It helped them file petitions to
concerned authorities, arrange dialogues and community meetings, and mobilize them for
marches and human barricades.
In the 1990s, particularly during the term of former President Fidel Ramos, the Ibaloi
people of Dalupirip and other adjoining villages in Itogon town in Benguet province also sought
the help of the Alliance. At that time the Ibaloi were protesting against the planned construction
of the giant San Roque Dam along the River Agno in the Itogon-Pangasinan border.
Despite the Ibaloi's resistance, the Ramos government pursued the dam project. But the
Alliance could still count some gains. These included the organization of the people, and, as
Abigail Anongos of the Alliance articulated, "raising their political awareness on the nature of the
State and the need for a wider struggle for national democracy and self-determination."
Today, there are various efforts, including those in government, to pursue autonomy for
the Cordillera, which still remains an administrative region. But the Alliance maintains that "there
can be no genuine regional autonomy when indigenous peoples' rights are violated, and ancestral
lands are treated as a resource base for plunder, exploitation and profit."
With its rich experience in ancestral land defense, the Alliance has been sought by other
indigenous communities to help them devise ways by which to defend and protect their lands and
resources. Just recently, the Tinggians of Baay-Licuan in Abra province sought the help of the
Alliance after a mining company wanted to explore there. To appease and convince the people
to allow its activity, the company had said that it was "just exploring" the area if it had minerals or
not. So the field staff of the Alliance had to alert the Tinggians, warning them that exploration was
actually the first phase of mining operations.

4.1 Macliing Dulag

To the Marcos dictatorship, the indigenous communities of the Cordillera mountain range
in the north of Luzon could easily be dealt with as it proceeded with its plan to build a huge dam
on the Chico River.
But the Kalinga and Bontok peoples knew that the project would flood their ricefields and
their homes, communal forests and sacred burial grounds. It would destroy their lives by changing
their environment forever.
Macliing Dulag was a respected elder of the Butbut tribe in the tiny mountain village of
Bugnay in the 1960s. He was a pangat, one of those listened to by the community because of
their wisdom and courage. He was also the elected barrio captain of Bugnay, serving out three
terms since 1966.
Ordinarily, he tended his ricefields and worked as a laborer on road maintenance projects
(earning P405 a month).
In 1974, the regime tried to implement a 1,000-megawatt hydroelectric power project, to
be funded by the World Bank, along the Chico River. The plan called for the construction of four
dams that would have put many villages under water, covering an area of around 1,400 square
kilometers of rice terraces (payew), orchards, and graveyards. As many as 100,000 people living
along the river, including Macliing’s Bugnay village, would have lost their homes.
Macliing became a strong and articulate figure in this struggle which pitted small nearly
powerless communities in the Cordilleras against the full powers of the martial law regime. Kalinga
and Bontok leaders were offered bribes, harassed by soldiers and government mercenaries, even
imprisoned. But the anti-dam leaders, including Macliing, stayed firm in their opposition to the
project. They argued that development should not be achieved at such extreme sacrifice.
“If you destroy life in your search for what you say is the good life, we question it,” Macliing
said. ”Those who need electric lights are not thinking of us who are bound to be destroyed. Should
the need for electric power be a reason for our death?”
 Macliing expressed the people’s reverence for the land, affirming their right to stay: “Such
arrogance to say that you own the land, when you are owned by it! How can you own that which
outlives you? Only the people own the land because only the people live forever. To claim a place
is the birthright of everyone. Even the lowly animals have their own place…how much more when
we talk of human beings?”
Resistance to the dam project unified the Cordillera region. Macliing and other Cordillera
leaders initiated a series of tribal pacts (bodong or vochong), which helped cement this unity and
create a very broad alliance of the communities and their supporters. They recognized the leader
of the Butbut as their spokesperson, for although Macliing had had no formal education, he always
found the right words for what they needed to say.
Macliing was murdered by government soldiers on April 24, 1980. They surrounded his
house one night and sprayed it with bullets. His assassination merely solidified opposition to the
dam and won it sympathizers from all over the country and even abroad. Even the World Bank,
which would have funded the dam construction, withdrew from the project, finally forcing the
martial law government to cancel its plans.
Four of Macliing’s killers were charged and in 1983 tried before a military tribunal. An army
lieutenant and a sergeant were subsequently found guilty of murder and frustrated murder. The
lieutenant was later reinstated in the army, rose to become a major, and then himself was killed
in 2000 by the New People’s Army.
(Raluto, R.D. (2015). Poverty and ecology at the crossroads. Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University. F 201.77599 R1399 ). 4.2
THE CONTEMPORARY OPPRESSIONS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES IN MINDANAO. The
postcolonial government of the Philippines that uncritically adopts many of the agrarian policies
of the colonizers systematically perpetuates the agrarian oppression of the poor peasants. The
most affected among them are the indigenous peoples (IPs) who are mostly found in Mindanao.
Technically, the IPs include not only the native occupants of the place but
also those who had settled there long before the arrival of the Spanish colonizers in the second
decade of the 17th century. In this sense, the Muslim Filipinos who had been in Mindanao since
pre- Hispanic colonization may also be considered IPs. As a whole, IPs comprise around 14
million of the Philippines' population, of whom 61 percent reside in Mindanao. Since the
colonial period, they and their forebears have suffered various forms of oppression. Let us turn
our narrative to their agrarian and religious struggles.
Land-Grabbing. In the Mindanao context, the non-Islamized and non-Christianized IPs
are commonly called Lumads - a generic term derived from the Cebuano language, which literally
means "native" of the place or one who is "born of the earth." The term suggests an identity that
is intimately connected to the native land. Many tribal communities name themselves after the
river where they reside. They consist of at least 18 local ethnolinguistic groups that are rightly
recognized as original inhabitants of the mainland of Mindanao outside the Moro provinces.
According to Mindanao historian Rudy Rodil, the Lumad "could claim, circa 1900, legitimate
control over a vast area of territory now encompassed in 17 out of a total 20 provinces, Sulu and
Tawi-Tawi excluded. Today, however, many Lumad communities are marginalized by the
government resettlement policy, which promotes internal colonization of their ancestral lands and
territories.
The dream to reclaim their ancestral domain is at the heart of the Lumad struggle for self-
deterrnination. They struggle to regain the ancestral land where their forefathers grew up, raised
their families, and were buried. Ancestral land, for them, is very sacred because" it is where the
spirits of their ancestors roam." Thus they spontaneously nurture a certain spiritual relationship
with their ancestral land as part of relating with their ancestors. For them, the ancestral domain
does not only refer to the piece of land but also includes the "spirit guides" that dwell in the trees,
rivers, and lands. They consider as sacred all the resources on, above, and beneath the ancestral
lands. As Bukidnon Datu Saway puts it, "the earth is our flesh, the water is our blood, the trees
are our bones, the vines are our veins, the sun is our torch and sight, the air is our breath and
strength, the sound is our language, the cosmic energy and the spirits are our soul."?" Since their
lives are deeply interwoven in the very fabric of their ancestral domain, the Lumad consider its
ecological destruction as outright self-destruction.
On the other hand, the indigenous Muslim Filipinos were also displaced with the coming
of the Christian settlers in Mindanao. Their main agrarian problem started with "the forcible/illegal
annexation of Moroland to the Philippines under the Treaty of Paris in 1898," which led to the
"imposition of confiscatory land laws."68 They felt that the central Philippine government,
dominated by Christian politicians, was blind and deaf to their grievances for national recognition,
justice, and equality." They perceived that the central government was unjustly treating them as
"socially lower" than Christian Filipinos. “Consequently, many Muslim provinces are among the
poorest in the country" and remain socially neglected, especially in terms of government
development programs.
For some Muslim Filipinos, it is not enough to reclaim a piece of their ancestral domain.
They want the Mindanao-Sulu islands to be separated politically from the Philippine Republic."
This was the case of Datu Udtog Matalam's Mindanao Independence Movement (MIM) in 1968.
For the proponents of this separatist movement, the Muslim struggle for self-determination would
not be possible in a government that systematically promotes integration and assimilation of the
Muslim culture into the national mainstream culture. For them, such an approach would simply
eradicate their Islamic identity and religion. They keenly perceive this as a strategy to perpetuate
the colonial approach to Christianization." As we know, the secessionist movement did not
succeed, largely due to lack of international support among Muslim countries and to the Philippine
government's explicit rejection. Nevertheless, the petition for the Autonomous Region in Muslim
Mindanao (ARMM) was strategically granted, allegedly, to soften the worsening decades of
Mindanao conflicts.
The struggles of the indigenous peoples in Mindanao continue. Until now, many Lumad
and Muslim Filipino communities are still victims of many government-sponsored development
projects that have become instruments of "cultural invasion" and systematic eradication of their
indigenous identity. They feel excluded from government development plans, as they are still the
most affected victims of other people's development projects, such as logging operations,
establishment of ranches, mining concessions, agribusiness plantations, industrial tree
plantations, government reservation areas, and power-generating projects. The IPs unjustly bear
the costs of mass displacement-the price of someone else's "development." They
continue to desperately cry out for justice, as they hold on to a dream that someday their human
rights will be duly recognized and that they will be given the right to fully govern their communities
according to their own customary laws.
Religious Prejudices. As in the past, religious oppression continues to exist today in the
frontiers of the country, especially in Mindanao, where the believers of tribal, Islamic, and
Christian religions coexist. Historically, the present tripeople composition (i.e., Lumad, Muslim,
and Christian) in Mindanao was made possible by the phenomenon of migration owing to the
government resettlement program in the early 20 th century. Numerically, the Lumad and Muslim
Filipinos are the minority communities as they comprise only about 20 percent of the total
Mindanao-Sulu population. Accordingly, the IPs are not only the least in terms of demographic
quantity but also the last in matters of development priorities.
The existing conflict in Mindanao has been commonly framed from the perspective of
religious differences between Muslim and Christian communities. Oftentimes, the religious conflict
between Christians and Muslims has been exaggerated at the expense of neglecting and
marginalizing the religious interests of the Lumad. Nevertheless, the perception of religious
conflict between armed Muslim groups and Christian settlers in Mindanao is not without basis. It
can be confirmed by the existence of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), which allegedly
forged a tactical alliance with the NPA-NDF against the government. As Eliseo Mercado has
argued, "The Moro struggle that is, rightly or wrongly, associated with the MILF has a religious
face. The conflict in Southern Mindanao has something to do with religion.” For Mercado, the
religious nature of the Mindanao conflict is evident in the killings and kidnappings of many
Christian personnel, including bishops, nuns, priests, pastors, and foreign missionaries by the
alleged Muslim fundamentalist groups. In fact, the reality of threats and violence against church
workers still continues today. All these would seem to indicate that there is a religious factor in
the Filipino Muslim's struggle in Mindanao.
There is no need to insist that the Muslim struggle for peace is inseparable from the dream
for liberation and a sustainable future. Too much attention has already been given to insurgency
problems to the neglect of the equally important environmental issues that today are
indiscriminately plaguing the people-both rich and poor. It is high time to include the urgent
ecological issues among the top priority agenda for Mindanao!
2. Salient Features of the UNDRIP

Reading 2: UN declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples. Tauli-Corpuz, V., Enkiwe-

Abayao, L., & de Chavez, R. (Eds.). (2010). Towards an alternative development paradigm: Indigenous people’s self-determined
development. Baguio City: Tebteba Foundation

The UN Working Group on Indigenous Populations started drafting the Declaration on the
Rights of Indigenous Peoples in 1985. The drafting finished in 1993 and the following year the
Sub-Commission adopted the Draft and submitted it to the Commission on Human Rights. Our
participation in the drafting of the Declaration text allowed for substantial dialogues between us.
the experts and the States. This became the global forum where we discussed extensively our
worldviews, our concepts of rights and development which includes the controversial right
of self-determination.
The CHR set up the "Working Group established in accordance with Commission on
Human Rights resolution 1995/32 of 3 March 1995" to further elaborate and negotiate the Draft."
This Open-ended Intersessional Working Group held its first session from 20 November to 1
December 1995 and completed its work at its 12th Session on February 3, 2006. The adoption
of the Chairman's Text of the Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples became
one of the agenda items of the 1st Session of the newly established Human Rights Council
(successor of the defunct Commission on Human Rights), which on 29 June 2006 adopted it
through a vote (30 in favor, two against-Canada and Russia-and 12 abstentions).
It was then sent to the 61st Session of the General Assembly, which at its session in
November 2006 decided to defer its adoption on the basis of an African States resolution to
further study the Declaration. The African States presented a paper on their proposed
amendments to the Declaration, which indigenous peoples flatly rejected as these reinforced
discriminations. A legal response subsequently developed by the African Commission on
Human and Peoples' Rights Working Group on Indigenous Populations and Communities to the
Aide-Memoire made by the African States was vital in leading to the change in the position of
the States.
Indigenous peoples both from Africa and other regions waged a sustained campaign to
make the African Group of States understand that this Declaration would not be a problem but a
solution to some of the issues they face. Their lobbying and arguments also made the issues of
African indigenous peoples more visible. They extensively used the 2003 Report on Indigenous
Populations and Communities in Africa prepared by a Working Group specifically set up for this
purpose to convince the African States and multilateral bodies that there are indigenous peoples
in Africa who are different from the dominant populations. The Report countered the common
argument the African States use not to deal with this issue - that all Africans are indigenous. We
impressed upon them that it was not to their advantage to be seen as blocking the adoption of a
major human rights instrument, and as the days went, they noticeably distanced themselves
from Canada and other opposing States. Eventually the African States led by Namibia and
Botswana came together with delegations from Mexico, Peru and Guatemala to discuss and
agree on amendments to the Declaration, which the latter brought to the indigenous peoples'
caucus steering committee to see if the amended text was acceptable. All the regional
indigenous caucuses agreed to support the amended text.
After more than two decades of work, the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous
Peoples" was finally adopted by the 61st session of the General Assembly through a vote of 143
in favor, four against and 11 abstentions. For more than two decades we were able to sharpen
our arguments on why we insist that specific articles are formulated the way they are. At some
point we knew that we would not win the battle by perfecting our arguments alone, but by being
flexible enough to accept there could be amendments which would not alter the substance and
basic principles we had fought for but would allay some fears of States who are the main duty
bearers for the implementation of these rights.

UNDRIP and permanent forum on indigenous issues.

As Chair of the Permanent Forum. this writer was given the privilege to address the
General Assembly's 61st Session.
This Declaration has the distinction of being the only Declaration in the UN which was
drafted with the rights-holders, themselves, the Indigenous Peoples. We see this as a
strong Declaration which embodies the most important rights we and our ancestors have
long fought for: our right of self-determination, our right to own and control our lands,
territories and resources, our right to free, prior and informed consent, among others.
Each and every article of this Declaration is a response to the cries and complaints
 brought by indigenous peoples before the UN-WGIP. This is a Declaration which makes
the opening phrase of the UN Charter, "We the Peoples ... " meaningful for 370 million
indigenous persons all over the world.
xxx
In terms of what the Declaration will mean for the Permanent Forum, we pointed out
that:
It will serve as the major framework for the Forum in providing advice to the members-
states of ECOSOC and the UN agencies, programmes and funds.
It is a key instrument and tool for raising awareness on indigenous peoples and
for monitoring progress on how their rights are protected, respected and fulfilled, and
how self-determined development is being achieved.
It fleshes out and facilitates the operationalization of the human rights-based
approach to development as it applies to indigenous peoples.
It will serve as a guide for States, the UN System, indigenous peoples and civil
society in making the theme of the Second Decade of the World's Indigenous People
"Partnership for Action and Dignity" a reality.
As it sets the minimum international standards for the protection and promotion
of the rights of indigenous peoples, it will be the framework for redesigning existing and
future laws, policies, and programs on indigenous peoples.
xxx

Self-determined development and UNDRIP

xxx The main principles which underpin UNDRIP are non-discrimination and equality.
and the foundational right is the right of self-determination. There is a need to highlight the
preamble, which further elaborates self-determined development. The preamble:
• recognizes that the historic injustices we suffered, through colonization and
dispossession of our lands, territories and resources, have prevented us from
exercising our right to development.
• acknowledges the urgent need to respect and promote our inherent rights. which
derive from our cultures, economic, social and political structures, our histories and
worldviews and our rights to our lands, territories and resources.
• affirms that our control over our lands, territories and resources and over
developments which affect us, will enable us to maintain and strengthen our
institutions, cultures and traditions as well as pursue our development according to
our needs and aspirations.
• stresses that the imperative to respect our indigenous knowledge, cultures and
traditional practices is crucial as these can contribute to the goals of sustainable and
equitable development.
• states unequivocally that we possess collective rights which are indispensable for
our existence, wellbeing and integral development as peoples.
Harmonious and cooperative relations between States and indigenous peoples would be
strengthened if the rights contained in this Declaration are recognized. Justice, democracy,
respect for human rights, non-discrimination and good faith are the key principles which define
this relationship.
The UNDRIP is an acknowledgement that indigenous peoples have not and still do not
enjoy the rights afforded to them by International Human Rights Law on an equal and non-
discriminatory basis. It does not establish special rights for us but is an instrument that interprets
how International Human Rights Law applies to us, as distinct collectivities and as individuals.
The arguments we used to convince States are that the articles of the Declaration come from
natural law, our histories, our customary laws, existing International Human Rights Law and
jurisprudence of the various Treaty Bodies. Some States who voted against it, however, still do
not accept respect for customary law established by the Declaration.
The main basis of our claim to our right to development is our right of self-
determination (Article 3). From this follows our right:
a) to maintain and strengthen our distinct political, legal, economic, social and cultural
institutions (Art. 5).
 b) to be secure in our enjoyment of our own means of subsistence and development,
and to engage freely in our traditional and other economic activities (Article 20.1).
c) Should we be deprived of our means of subsistence and development, we are
entitled to just and fair redress (Art. 20.2).
d) to determine and develop priorities and strategies for exercising our right to
development. This includes our right to develop and determine health, housing and
other economic and social programmes affecting us, to be involved in shaping these
and, as far as possible, to administer such programmes through our own institutions
(Art. 23).
e) The Declaration states that we cannot be subjected to forced assimilation. Any past,
present or future action, which deprives us of our integrity as distinct peoples,
dispossesses us of our lands, territories and resources, forcibly assimilates or
integrates us, or denigrates our cultural values and integrity should be provided
redress by the State (Art. 8).
f) Integral to the right to development is the right of participation. This is why we fought
hard to ensure that our right to free, prior and informed consent is recognized in the
Declaration which is affirmed in several articles. We cannot be forcibly removed from
our lands and territories and relocated without our free, prior and informed consent
(Art. 10).
g) We have the right to practice and revitalize our traditions and customs, which
includes our right to maintain and protect past, present and future manifestations and
expressions of our culture. These include our archaeological and historical sites,
artefacts, designs, ceremonies, technologies, literature and visual and performing
arts. These are considered our cultural, religious, intellectual and spiritual property. If
these are taken without our free, prior and informed consent and in violation of our
laws, traditions and customs, States should provide redress, which includes
restitution jointly developed with us (Art. 11).
h) The Declaration affirms that we have the right to maintain, control, protect and
develop our cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural
expressions, as well as the manifestations of our sciences, technologies and
cultures, including human and genetic resources, seeds, medicines, knowledge of
the properties of fauna and flora, oral traditions, literatures, designs, sports and
traditional games and visual and performing arts. We also have the right to maintain,
control, protect and develop our intellectual property over such cultural heritage,
traditional knowledge, and traditional cultural expressions (Art. 31).

The term "traditional cultural expressions" in this article was not in the original draft, but
as UNESCO and WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization) were already using it, the Saami Council
and Tebtebba proposed its inclusion. Tebtebba was also against the use of the term "intellectual
property," which was similarly not in the original draft but later agreed to it, being the consensus
reached by the indigenous peoples' caucus.
Articles 10, 11 and 31 resemble some provisions of the UNESCO Universal Declaration
on Cultural Diversity and related Conventions, but UNESCO does not go far enough in terms of
recognizing our right to free, prior, and informed consent and in providing for redress. The
Permanent Forum and UNESCO need to conduct a dialogue on these articles so that
convergence and mutual strengthening can happen as many indigenous peoples all over the
world are victims of acts of misappropriation of their cultural, intellectual, religious and spiritual
property.
The Declaration recognizes that the dignity and diversity of our cultures, traditions,
histories and aspirations should be appropriately reflected in education and public information.
Effective measures should be taken by States to combat discrimination and prejudice against
indigenous peoples and promote tolerance, understanding and good relations between us and
the broader society (Art. 15). Since UNESCO is the main body that deals with the development of
education and media, it plays a significant role in monitoring how this particular article is
implemented.
xxx We have the right to determine and develop priorities and strategies for the
development or use of our lands, territories and resources. Our free, prior and informed consent
should be obtained by States before approving any project, especially as it relates to the
development. use and exploitation of mineral, water and other resources. Just and fair redress
for activities undertaken without our participation and consent should be provided by States, and
effective measures should be taken to mitigate adverse environmental, economic, social,
cultural and spiritual impacts (Art. 32). States should respect our right to conserve and protect our
environment and the productive capacity of our lands, territories and resources and provide
assistance programs for these without discrimination (Art. 29). xxx

Culture as development and development as culture

The UNDRIP contains the basic principles and rights to be implemented if self-
determined development is to be achieved. xxx. The violation of the rights to lands, territories
and resources is also a violation of the rights to development and to culture. The culture of
indigenous peoples cannot be understood outside of their physical environment, resources and
traditional livelihoods.
We may not produce a lot of surplus from our agricultural production BUT our wellbeing
as distinct peoples is not compromised. From the perspective of the dominant development
model, there is no development in our communities because our contribution to the gross
national product (GNP) is insignificant.
The imperative to ensure that our cultures and traditions remain alive, our community
unity and solidarity is strengthened, our subsistence is guaranteed, and our indigenous
governance systems are in place, requires us then to fight for our basic human rights which
include civil, political, social, economic and cultural rights. We can easily grasp the concepts of
inalienability, indivisibility and interrelatedness of human rights because of this.
xxx As the issues of cultural diversity and development with culture became more
visible, other UN programmes and multilateral bodies developed their own contributions to the
discourse. The UNDP's "Policy of Engagement with Indigenous Peoples" (2001) recognized
the value of indigenous peoples’ cultures and knowledge for sustainable development.
… indigenous cultures comprise a heritage of diverse knowledge and ideas that is a
resource for the whole world. As UNDP pursues sustainable human development,
attention has been placed on indigenous peoples largely owing to their sustainable
development practices. This has led to an interest in indigenous peoples' ways of life,
their cultures, sciences, land and resource management, governance, political and
justice systems, knowledge and healing practices. Recognition of indigenous peoples'
assets and traditional knowledge (such as terrestrial and marine ecosystems, naturally
occurring medicines from plants and insects, cultivated plant varieties, and animal
husbandry) can be helpful to national and international development. Furthermore,
indigenous peoples' continued existence is a testimony to the sustainability and viability
of indigenous economic production systems, and social and governance practices that
should be supported and enhanced, and most importantly, incorporated into mainstream
development practices.
The UNDP theme for its 2004 Human Development Report in 2004, "Cultural Liberty in
Today's Diverse World," aimed to counter the Huntington view that the problems of the world
today are rooted in the clash of civilizations or cultures. Because this was done post-September
9/11, the HDR team found it timely to deal with this issue. The UNDP report elucidated on why it
is crucial that the issue of culture be integrated in mainstream development thinking and
practice. It shows that democracy and economic growth have proven to be inadequate to bring
about a more peaceful and prosperous world. Developing and implementing multicultural
policies which recognize and respect differences in ethnicity, religion and cultures and promote
diversity and cultural freedoms are instead the paths to take for a more peaceful and secure
world.
The World Bank Operational Policy 4.10 on Indigenous Peoples (2005), the Inter-
American Development Bank Operational Policy on Indigenous Peoples and Strategy for
Indigenous Development (2006) and Asian Development Bank Policy on Indigenous Peoples
(1998) all contain provisions which acknowledge that indigenous peoples' identities and cultures
are linked to their ancestral lands and territories and the natural resources they depend on. The
risks and vulnerabilities they suffer when so-called development projects are brought to their
communities, even without their consent, compelled these different bodies to develop safeguard
policies on indigenous peoples. The IADB Strategy Paper went to the extent of defining
development with identity:
... refers to a process that includes strengthening of indigenous peoples, harmony and
sustained interaction with their environment, sound management of natural resources
and territories, the creation and exercise of authority, and respect for the rights and
values of indigenous peoples, including cultural, economic, social and institutional rights,
in accordance with their worldview and governance. This is a concept based on the
 principles of equity, interconnectedness, reciprocity and solidarity. It seeks to consolidate
the conditions in which indigenous peoples can thrive and grow in harmony with their
surroundings by capitalizing on the potential of their cultural. natural. and social assets.
according to their priorities.
Indigenous peoples have to be made aware of the existence of these policies and be
equipped to use them, as these banks fund development projects in indigenous territories.

UN permanent forum on indigenous issues and role in self-determined development

xxx The most significant achievement of the Decade (1994-2004) was the establishment of
the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues. Again, indigenous peoples lobbied hard for it
until ECOSOC Resolution 2000/22, which provided for its setting up, was adopted in 2000. In its
six years of existence, the Forum has raised the visibility of indigenous peoples and their issues
within the UN system in an unprecedented manner. Its mandate is to provide expert advice and
recommendations to the ECOSOC and UN programmes, agencies and funds on indigenous
issues in the areas of culture and economic and social development, environment, education,
health and human rights. Aside from providing advice it promotes coordination and integration of
activities relating to indigenous peoples' issues within the UN system as well as raise
awareness and disseminate information on these.
The first Session in 2002 strongly recommended the establishment of a Secretariat unit
for the Forum. which the 54 member-states of ECOSOC heeded. Funded by the UN regular
budget, the Secretariat is under the Department of Social and Economic Affairs (DESA) of the
Division for Social Policy and Development.
As a subsidiary body of ECOSOC, the Forum is well placed to address indigenous
peoples' self-determined development, given its mandate. Its regular sessions and expert
workshops serve as spaces where concrete proposals on how to strengthen indigenous
peoples' self-determined development are debated and agreed upon. As early as its first
session, indigenous peoples asserted that the human rights based-approach to development
should be considered as the framework in addressing their issues. They also strongly
recommended for governments and the UN system to initiate disaggregated data collection to
better know the real picture of the situation of indigenous peoples. Another was for the same
actors to ensure that the right of indigenous peoples to have their free. prior and informed
consent be respected.
The 4th and 5th Sessions of the Forum had the Millennium Development Goals as the
special theme. The Inter-Agency Support Group on Indigenous Issues prepared reports on
MDGs and Indigenous Peoples. The report on Indigenous Peoples and MDGs 1 and 2, which
this writer authored as the special rapporteur, noted that achievement of the MDGs can lead to
further poverty or marginalization of indigenous peoples. This is especially so when the State
undertakes poverty alleviation programs that are geared towards expanding lands meant for
mono crop agricultural plantations. This happened among pastoralists of Kenya and Tanzania
when their pasture lands were fenced off by the governments and given to farmers to plant
agricultural crops for the market. The same occurred in Vietnam where highland indigenous
peoples were displaced by lowlanders subsidized by the government to set up coffee
plantations in the highlands. While Vietnam reported that it achieved its goal of poverty
alleviation, the impoverishment of the indigenous peoples as a consequence was not cited at
all.
In 2006 an International Expert Group Meeting on MDGs, Indigenous Participation and
Good Governance was held that specifically stressed " ... the need to ensure effective
participation of indigenous peoples in all stages of the development cycle, such as obtaining
free, prior and informed consent; equitable benefit-sharing schemes; and dispute resolution
mechanisms. Strong indigenous governance structures provide the basis for indigenous
communities to deal with the changes imposed by modernization and globalization without
further disempowerment and marginalization.”
Another important workshop relevant to the subject of this paper is the International
Technical Workshop on Indigenous Traditional Knowledge (2006). The experts defined
indigenous traditional knowledge as the complex bodies and systems of knowledge, know-
how, practices and cultural expressions that have been and are maintained, used and
developed by peoples, which do not only sustain the daily life but is also a key element in
maintaining their identities and building their self-determination. They recognized that "this issue
raises a range of policy, procedural, conceptual, political and practical challenges in a wide
variety of areas, such as conservation of biological diversity, intellectual property, trade
negotiations, agricultural policies, education, environment, science, climate change, sustainable
development, private sector activities, health, cultural policies, gender and human rights." These
challenges are before governments, the UN system, other intergovernmental bodies and
indigenous peoples, themselves.
Reading 4: Ikalahans: Owners & protectors of the Land. Magata, H. (2012). In Sustaining &
Enhancing Indigenous Peoples’ Self-Determined Development: 20 Years After Rio. Volume 2. Baguio City: Tebteba Foundation

We, the Kalanguya-Ikalahan tribe, invariably equate land and the resources within it with life itself. We
nurtured our indigenous systems for our land and resources management that have endured the test of
time. For this reason, the recognition of our indigenous ability to sustainably manage our ancestral
domain was made a matter of policy (ADSSDPP 2005).
I am an Ikalahan, I am a Forest Guard
The strong cool breeze of the Malico forest caused Nonoy, the forest guard, to tighten
his jacket around his chest. But even the approaching rain does not stop him from trekking
down the pathway to the forest—his forest.
Nonoy is one of the forest guards of the Kalahan Forest Reserve in Nueva Vizcaya
province, northern Philippines. He makes sure that the forest is used according to community
land use plans. He also reports to the local forestry office if there are indiscriminate harvesting
of timber products and forest fires. It is a part of his job to identify sick trees that might need
assistance or cutting and checks portions of the forest that need clearing or replanting. He loves
his job.
He has learned how to measure how the trees grow just by looking at them and by
making use of his tape measure. Centimeter, circumference, breast height—these are only
some of the terms he learned to use when he sees how the trees are growing. He used to think
that when trees are left alone in the forest, then they would grow faster. Why not? No people
and animals would disturb the growth. But experience taught him otherwise.
It was not bad at all when people assist the growing of trees. He has been instrumental
in assisting the growth of trees and other species in the forest by the Forest Improvement
Technology (FIT) that he and the other foresters of Ikalahan have innovated. He is happy to see
that their innovation is yielding much trees than they ever thought. Oh, how he loves
his job.
The Forest Improvement Technology
FIT follows the natural rejuvenation process of the forest. Trees die or are felled by
storms, while new seedlings will sprout and develop. Mature trees that have stopped
growing are removed to create favorable conditions for forest rejuvenation. If this is done
every year, the forest will continue to develop and improve. The removal of individual trees
does not hurt the forest or its environment and provides first class lumber.
Each year the forest farmer makes a selection of trees to be cut. The farmer
checks for crooked, damaged or crowded trees that need to be removed to improve the
forest. Simple equipment is used, and the sawdust, tops and branches are left to rot
because they restore fertility to the forest soil and help maintain biodiversity. The farmer
does not separate the potential crop trees from the other trees because he knows that all
trees have a role to play in the forest.
If there are large open spaces, a forest pioneer species will be planted first.
Agricultural crops are not planted between the trees because they would bother the other
plants that need to grow to make a good forest. Enrichment planting can increase the
population of one or two species of large or small plants. This can be highly favorable as
long as the forest is not turned into a plantation. The forest farmer will cut only a small
amount of growth, allowing the forest to improve each year.
When the forest finally has its proper amount of wood, which is approximately 270
m3 per ha, the farmer can begin to remove an amount equal to the total growth rate of 15
to 20 m3 per ha per year. The farmer will have to do that to allow the seedlings to grow.
The growth rate presently expected in Philippine forests is about 4.5 m3 per ha per year.
Under proper management, using FIT, the forest can produce as much as 15 to 20 m3
per ha per year. Such a forest still retains the characteristics of a natural forest.
It still has high biodiversity and is an effective watershed with a high
 percolation rate. It will also provide a sanctuary for many kinds of wild orchids, animals,
birds and insects. If each forest farmer cares for five ha of good forest, he may harvest up
to 80 m3 of first class lumber every year without damaging the forest. That would provide
him with higher cash income than many professionals and he would still have plenty of
time to produce his own food on the farm. Once the forest has developed, it can be
sustained indefinitely.
The forest guard doesn’t make much money from his job. But according to him, he does
what he does for the future generation. He says he is not a university graduate but has
learned forest protection from his parents and grandparents. The community has become his
teacher, and the forest his school grounds. He has been doing this for years and he wants
to continue doing it for his children. He loves his job.

The Fight for Land is the Fight for Life

Nonoy stops to appraise the pine forest down the mountainside. He sighs from pure
bliss. Some of the smaller pine trees are now catching up with older ones. These pine trees
were planted during the earthquake, he recalls. Ah, yes the earthquake. It was in 1990 when a
major earthquake hit the community. Right after the quake, there was a torrential rain for 40
days. Some feared it was the end of the world. A huge part of the forest eroded with large trees
uprooted. This devastated the forest—but not the people. The community started collecting
indigenous seedlings and put up more nurseries for the rehabilitation of the forest. No family sat
down until the destroyed parts of the forest were replanted. Nonoy sniffs.
Now, he sees the fruit of their toil. He recalls that the planting was done after community
consultations and agreements. It has been wont in the community to call for a tongtong
or a community meeting when there are community matters to be discussed. The lallakay
(elders) would preside the meeting and the youth and children are welcome to listen. It was
through these community gatherings that Nonoy learned how the Ikalahans have fought
valiantly for their right to access, control and manage their ancestral forests.
The reserve is a part of the 48,000 hectares of the whole ancestral domain of the
Ikalahans. The ancestral domain has been recognized and handed to the Ikalahans in 1974
through a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA No. 1) with the government. The agreement gave
the Ikalahans the right to access, manage and utilize the forest for 25 years, renewable
for another 25 years, according to their traditional forest management.
The community story of the Ikalahans was not an easy road to success. Being the first
group of indigenous peoples to challenge the government to relinquish forest management
to the community, the Ikalahans had to play the rule of the game. They had to have a legal
name.
The Kalahan Educational Foundation (KEF) became the answer. With the help of Pastor
Delbert Rice, an American missionary who was residing in the community at that time, the
community registered the KEF in the early 1970s to serve as their legal entity in their battle. A
year after, the community realized that they needed a community school for their youth who
were then leaving to neighboring towns for secondary education. The Kalahan Academy was
set up through meager local funds and much community contributions.
Forest fires, rampant illegal logging and threats of land grabbing from outsiders
prompted the community to set up community rules and actions that would later be recognized
and serve as a model to other forest-based communities, not only nationwide but in many other
countries in the world.
MOA No. 1 spurred inspiration from and determination of the Ikalahan to save their then-
endangered forest. xxx They started reforestation with donated labor and used their meager
funds in acquiring needed seedlings and manpower for their reforestation project. The KEF
hired local people and worked on the development of their skills rather than hire technical
experts from the outside. They also wrote project proposals and received meager
support from various funding agencies (Rice, 2003).
The documentation of forest resources, which started in the 70s has proven to be very
helpful not just in forest resource inventory but also in protecting the reserve. In the 1990s the
government proposed a road construction that would save hours of navigating through difficult
roads to neighboring provinces. The community was ecstatic! This would mean less hours of
travel time to the city! But the proposal says that the road would have to pass through the
wildlife sanctuary of the Kalahan Forest Reserve. Everyone disagreed. The Ikalahans through
the KEF organized bird watching activities with other civil and environmental organizations.
They invited government officials, agencies and civil organizations to join the activity. At the end
of the day, the Ikalahans were able to make a very long list of indigenous birds, migratory birds,
endangered birds and animals, and even threatened species of trees that would have to be cut
were the road proposal takes place. The government did not dare try to irk the people. They
backed off from the project.

Community Resilience and Forest Management

Nonoy could not stop smiling while thinking how proud he felt to be in charge of his own
ancestral forest. He realized that the MOA No. 1 has been very instrumental in making the
Ikalahan manage their forest, but it was really the comm“unity” (oneness) that made everything
possible. The rain droplets are starting to fall. He walks faster. He recalls how, as a child, he
would trot down their uma (swidden farm) while his mother is busy harvesting obi (sweet
potatoes). He would then help carry the obi back home where they will cook it in boiling water
for dinner. How long ago it seems now!
Now, they are observing the two-month-no hunting policy. He knows this has to be done
to give way to the hatching of the birds. It has also been years since there were recorded
violators of night bird hunting. The community forestry law prohibits hunting of night birds in
order to prevent catching of migratory birds. Since childhood, they were taught that the Kalahan
Forest Reserve is a migratory path for birds from other countries. He heard that some birds
even come from China.
He passed by the uma of his friend Tom and saw that Tom’s fire grass are almost ready
for harvest. He prays the rainy season do not come before it is harvest time for fire grass. His
friend Tom and other farmers sell the fire grass and other crops from their production forest.
He sees that his friend is still practicing the traditional composting he used to know as a child.
This is common in the community as they strongly oppose the entrance of commercial
pesticides and herbicide. His mother would gather all the vines and weeds from the uma, put
them under the soil in a plot and let the weeds rot in time for the next planting season.
Other weeds and branches from trees his mother would pile in the steeper parts of the uma to
prevent erosion. They call this procedure the gen-gen. He also uses this method to maintain
fertility of the soil in his dappat (individual land holding). His father acquired the dappat in the
early 70s where all community members were given 5-10 ha of the production forest to till. Then
his father divided the land to his children. The remaining part of the forest were set aside for the
wildlife sanctuary and watersheds that are still observed up to the present.
How time has changed! Before, they would only talk about how to sustain the forest for
their needs such as food, water, and shelter. Now, they are talking about climate change and
how it might affect their children in the future. Since the 90s the community have observed slight
changes in the weather, specifically the weather patterns. Before, the elders and even the
younger people in the community were able to predict and prepare when the strongest typhoons
came and when to weed the uma in time for summer season. Now, time has changed. Nonoy’s
father is an old man who loves to work in his uma from sunrise to high noon. He would then go
home at lunchtime and get some rest before going back to the fields.
 But some years back, he consistently complains of the sun becoming hotter which
makes him unable to finish his tasks at noon time. He claims the sun must have gotten older,
too; that is why it is much hotter and “burns the skin.” Nonoy believes his father. Recently, he
heard his friend from Malico, which is way up high the forest, who was able to plant rice in his
paddy. People in Malico have not been planting rice in their paddies since he could remember
because of the cold weather. They only get rice from the farmers from the lower part of the
domain, where it is hotter.
There have been visitors in the community who have been talking about possibilities of
selling carbon. “Carbon?” Nonoy thought. He does not have any idea about selling carbon.
From what he heard, carbon is something stored in the forest when you take care of the trees.
When there are more trees, there are more carbon and there is less climate change. As a
forest guard, he has been involved in measuring the biomass and carbon content of the forest.
They have started doing this in 1994 and then had to change the formula twice in order
to get a more accurate result. He could not remember how much exactly the forest carbon
content is, but it ranges from 8,000-9,000 tons/year and it continues to improve every year.
He shrugs. If someone would buy carbon or air, then he does not see anything bad about it, as
long as he and the community continue what they do in the forest. Who knows, if they were able
to sell carbon while still managing their forest, they might be able to have their own hospital. He
sighs. Sometimes, this talk on climate change and forest being a solution to it gets very
complex. Why don’t people just stop making things that result to climate change?
Now, he is nearing home. He can smell the sweet scent of Manang Persia’s jam. He
should try to tell his wife to cook dagwey (wildberry) jam when he gets home. The community
livelihood on selling jams and jellies has been a huge success. Accounts from older men and
women have it that the quest for an alternative livelihood started in the early 80s. Many tried
venturing in milk processing, commercial vegetable production, and composting; but so far, the
production of jams from wild fruits has been the most successful and sustainable one. He heard
from their marketing division that they are now selling their products to as far as Manila, the
country’s capital.
The community livelihood started out as an experiment. One day, they realized that
much of the wild fruits were being left alone in the wild for the birds to eat. But not everything is
being consumed by the animals. So they started picking some wild and edible fruits and the
community women learned how to cook and preserve them. Now, they gather wild fruits from
their production forests but makes sure they leave more than enough for the wild animals to eat.
Now, it is really raining. Nonoy didn’t have any umbrella so he was partly jogging. He
was a few meters from their door and Nonoy’s heart swelled with pride. His home, a simple hut
made from sturdy pine tree from his own forest, stands before him. His wife, cooking some rice
from their own ricefield from their dappat must have also been preparing some of the fish
he caught from the river the previous day. And his child, his precious kid, is waiting at the
doorway for him. These are his treasures, nurtured and fostered here in this forest—a forest
that has been fought for and taken cared for so long by his forefathers. A forest he had sworn to
protect and live for the rest of his life.