GLEEN R.

BARRIENTOS/ 2023-5349
April 20, 2024
SDS 255-IKM
Prof. Fredo P. Basino

IPRA-UNDRIP ANALYSIS
The Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997 (IPRA) and the United Nations Declaration
on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) represent significant milestones in recognizing
and protecting the rights of indigenous communities worldwide. The IPRA and UNDRIP share
common goals of safeguarding indigenous rights, equality and non-discrimination. On the other
hand, differs in scope, implementation, and authority.
IPRA, enacted in 1997 in the Philippines, is a comprehensive legislation that
acknowledges the historical injustices faced by indigenous peoples. The goal is to empower the
IP’s by recognizing their rights to ancestral domains, self-governance, cultural integrity, and
social justice. It also establishes mechanisms for indigenous communities to participate in
decision-making processes that affect them directly, ensuring their voices are heard in matters of
land, resources, and development projects. In fact, a voted tribal leader has a set in the local
government to ensure that the IP’s are represented and aided by the government.
While, UNDRIP, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 2007, provides a
universal framework for protecting the rights of indigenous peoples globally. It encompasses a
broader range of rights, including those related to culture, language, education, health, and self-
determination. UNDRIP sets out principles for states to respect, protect, and fulfill indigenous
peoples' collective and individual rights, emphasizing the need for meaningful consultation and
consent in all matters affecting them.
Both IPRA and UNDRIP take significant steps to correct historical injustices and
promoting indigenous peoples' rights to self-determination and cultural preservation. The
declaration of the IPRA and UNDRIP deals with the identity of the IPs; concept of land and right
of ownership over it; right to natural resources; right against displacement and unauthorized
intrusion; government responsibility and special measures; human rights; consultation,
participation and free and informed consent; development; cultural integrity and customary laws;
recruitment and conditions of employment; education and means of communication; vocational
training, handicrafts, and rural industries; social security and health; and administration.
Moreover, the IPRA is a national legislation with legally binding provisions within the
Philippines while the UNDRIP lacks binding legal force on its own. On the positive note, both
carries considerable moral and political weight, serving as a guide for countries and its
government to develop laws and policies that align with its principles.
However, challenges remain in the effective implementation of the provisions under the IPRA
law and the UNDRIP. In some cases, indigenous communities continue to face marginalization,
discrimination, and violations of their rights because of conflicting interests with the
government, corporations and non-indigenous populations.