Chapter 8: CERD Chapter

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination

1

Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD)

Introduction

History of Filipino Indigenous Peoples

Several years prior to the coming of the European colonial rulers, Filipinos have lived as homogenous societies and nations of their own. They continuously lived as organized communities in communally bounded and defined territories. They have occupied, possessed, and utilized these territories under claims of ownership, sharing common bonds of language, customs, traditions, and other distinctive cultural traits. They already had their own culture, developed governance, and justice systems, traditional beliefs, value systems which became their way of life.

The Spanish conquest of the Philippines in 1521 that used Christianity on one hand and the sword on the other hand, left a legacy to the Philippines, that is the concept of jura regalia or regalian doctrine that considers all lands colonized by Spain to belong to the Spanish Crown or government. Subsequently, Filipinos who were mostly located in the coastal and low lying areas embraced colonial rule. This was entirely different in the case of Filipinos in the hinterlands or the Indigenous Peoples (IPs) who generally and valiantly resisted colonial occupation and retained their own customary ways, held on to their traditional beliefs, leadership structures, governance and justice systems, customary laws, and stood ground in protecting their territories and ancestral domains.

While Christianized Filipinos waged a war of independence against their colonial masters, this has failed. In 1898, the United States of America arrived in the Philippines and became another Philippine colonial master and to whom Spain ceded its colonial rule over the Philippines. The Japanese came thereafter and the rest was history.

During these colonial dominations and in the history of the Philippine Government’s engagement with IPs, the Indigenous Peoples were known by different names. In the beginning, they were called non-Christian tribes and subsequently as national cultural minorities, later as national minorities, non-Muslims and then as Indigenous Cultural Communities (ICCs) and as IPs.

During the American occupation, the Indigenous Peoples concept

of ancestral lands/domains ownership1 through a ‘native title’ 2 was

1 Indigenous Peoples (IPs) concept of ownership- sustains the view that ancestral domains and all resource found therein shall serve as the material bases of IPs cultural integrity. It generally holds that ancestral domains are the IPs private but community property which belongs to all generations and therefore cannot be sold, disposed or destroyed. It likewise covers sustainable traditional resource rights.


2

recognized. Through a landmark decision by the United States’ Supreme Court, in a case filed in 1901 by Mateo Carino, an Ibaloi from Baguio City, against the American insular government, ruled that territories of IPs have never been subjugated by Spain and thereby were never part of the public domains under the Spanish rule, henceforth does not presuppose ‘to treat as public land that IPs, by native custom and by long association… regarded as their own’ (Dait-Cawed: 20113).

Over the years, development projects were continuously

introduced within IP areas which were perceived to be contrary to their traditional beliefs and customary ways. As a result, conflicts arise relative to issues involving entitlements of IPs to their “native titles” of their ancestral domains/lands, including indigenous knowledge systems & practices (IKSPs) and their self-governance systems.

Due to the foregoing, the ICCs/IPs have become historically differentiated from the majority of Filipinos on account of their customary ways in traditionally defined territories. Currently, there are 110 IP groups in the Philippines. They number about 14,184,645, or 16 percent of the total population of the Philippines. UN Protection Instrument: The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD)

The CERD was a pioneering instrument adopted by the United Nations to monitor and review actions by States to fulfill their obligations under specific human rights agreement.

CERD was adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1965. However, it only came into force in 1969 after 27 States, including the Philippines, had it ratified. It is the oldest and most widely ratified UN human rights convention.

The Center for Human Rights of the United Nations Office in Geneva (hereafter referred to as “Center”) highlights the following principal points of CERD:

Any doctrine of racial differentiation or superiority is scientifically false, morally condemnable, socially unjust and dangerous and has no justification in theory or in practice;

Racial discrimination – and more so, government policies based on racial superiority or hatred – violate fundamental human rights, endanger friendly relations among peoples, cooperation among nations, and international peace and

2 Native Title – refers to pre-conquest rights to lands and domains which, as far back as memory reaches, have been held under a claim of private ownership by ICCs/IPs, have never been public lands and are thus indisputably presumed to have been held that way since before the Spanish conquest. (Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA) of 1997 or Republic Act 8371, Section 3(l), Chapter II). 3 Dait-Cawed, Dahlialyn D., 2011,’The Clash of Philippine Land Laws: An Indigenous Perspective’, National Defense College of the Philippines, Camp Aguinaldo, Quezon City


3

security;

Racial discrimination harms not only those who are its objects

but also those who practice it; and,

A world society free of racial segregation and discrimination, factors which create hatred and division, is a fundamental aim of the United Nations.

The Center further emphasizes that State-Parties to CERD agree

to undertake the following measures: To engage in no act or practice of racial discrimination against individuals, groups of persons or institutions, and to ensure that public authorities and institutions do likewise; Not to sponsor, defend or support racial discrimination by persons or organizations; To review government, national and local policies and to amend or repeal laws and regulations which create or perpetuate racial discrimination; To prohibit and put a stop to racial discrimination by persons, groups, and organizations; and, To encourage integrationist or multiracial organizations and movements and other means of eliminating barriers between races, as well as to discourage anything which tends to strengthen racial division. While CERD does not specifically focus on IP concerns, this

Chapter provides emphasis on IPs on the basis of the overwhelming issues that were elicited from the different consultation activities, both at the national and local levels.

State Treaty Compliance and Emerging IP Human Rights

Issues and Concerns The Philippines adopted and ratified CERD on December 21,

1965 and September 15, 1967, respectively. It submitted its latest report on June 30, 2008, containing the 15th to 20th Consolidated Philippine Reports, covering January 4, 1998 to 2008 which were considered by the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) on August 18-19, 2009. It registered positive responses on compliance with the CERD Concluding Observations of 1997 while at the same time eliciting recommendations from the CERD for future State compliance.

The CERD Concluding Observations of 2009 and the Philippine


4

Universal Periodic Review (UPR) Report of April 2007 are the basis for coming out with State actions as committed in this Chapter. Moreover, other issues and concerns raised during the six regional cluster consultation activities on the PHRP II in 2009 were likewise considered.

A consolidation of the various human rights issues and

concerns on the IPs has been first classified into several human rights agenda as follows: development aggression, armed conflict, non-representation in governance, non-delivery of basic services, non-recognition and non-appreciation of traditional structures and mechanisms, overlapping of policies, and negative or discriminatory outlook on ICCs/IPs. To attain positive outlook on the various human rights issues and concerns, the classifications were later on changed with focus on: (a) economic rights; (b) civil and political rights; and, (c) social and cultural rights.

The following thematic objectives of the Chapter have been

crafted out of the above cited human rights agenda: Thematic Objective 1: To uphold and protect the rights of IPs to their ancestral domains, lands, and resources, recognizing customary laws on property ownership and relations; Thematic Objective 2: To enhance access of IPs to the various pillars of the justice system, and State recognition in the exercise of customary laws and practices or the various traditional justice systems; and protect their rights to social justice and human rights; Thematic Objective 3: To respect, protect and fulfill the civil and political rights of IPs, provide responsive and culturally appropriate mechanism in addressing violations thereto and affording maximum protection to defenders of IPs rights; Thematic Objective 4: To respect, protect, promote and

fulfill the right to self-determination and self-determined

development of Indigenous Peoples, recognizing

indigenous knowledge and socio-political systems and

upholding the right to free and prior informed consent; Thematic Objective 5: To provide culturally appropriate

basic social services and employment to IPs and employing

special measures to fulfill this; Thematic Objective 6: To recognize, protect and promote

the cultural rights of IPs, combating prejudice and

discrimination against them, and fostering solidarity


5

among them and all other sectors of society; and

Thematic Objective 7: To review and amend policies and

programs on IP rights, enact laws that have direct

bearing on IPs, formulate/reformulate existence of

conflicting development policies, programs and areas in

conflict with IP rights and interests with the mandatory and

effective participation of IPs; develop a comprehensive

anti-discrimination legislation; and push for the

ratification of treaties which have direct bearing on racial

discrimination.


6

SECTION 1 Strategic Treaty Indicators

The strategic treaty indicators relate to the thematic objectives. Correspondingly, accountable government institutions and the nature of their duties and responsibilities have been identified. Thematic Objective 1: To uphold and protect the rights of Indigenous Peoples (IPs) to their ancestral domains, lands and resources through the genuine implementation of Free Prior Informed Consent (FPIC) and recognizing customary laws on property ownership and relations.

The full enjoyment of Indigenous Peoples (IPs) rights to their ancestral domains/lands and resources needs to be fast tracked. This is also necessary for the full realization of IP rights to self-governance and determination. However, issues are being raised as the burden of proof lies with the IPs in proving their time immemorial claim for ancestral lands/domains. Coupled with this are the voluminous requirements in recognizing these rights through the delineation and titling of these domains/lands and the delays in the processes and the lack of cooperation by concerned government agencies.

As such, IPs opted to exercise their traditional ownership of

these lands/domains through the ‘native title’ concept, which the IPRA allows for. However, Ancestral Domains without issued titles are more vulnerable to encroachment by both private and government sectors and have become a national concern.

This objective provides indicators such as: 1) the number and proportion of native titles and CADTs/CALTs awarded to IPs broken down by province and region, by population and by area; 2) increased awareness of and application by the government and the general public on national and international human rights standards in the realization of IP rights; 3) formulation and enhancement of a culturally relevant Ancestral Domain Sustainable Development Protection Plan (ADSDPPs) and Free & Prior Informed Consent (FPIC) by the IPs.

The NCIP, DENR, DAR, LRA-DOJ and Department of Energy (DOE) shall have to streamline the processes and requirements for development activities while upholding the primacy of customary laws and not sacrificing the integrity of traditional ownership to ancestral domains/lands and resources of ICCs/IPs. NCIP shall initiate closer collaboration with the aforecited agencies.


7

The Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997 requires FPIC on all resource-access/development activities within ancestral domains, whether large scale extractives or small scale projects. This is implemented by the NCIP, using its 2012 Guidelines on the Exercise of FPIC and Related Processes. Thematic Objective 2: To enhance access of IPs to the various pillars of the justice system, and State recognition and institutionalization in the exercise of customary laws and practices or the various traditional justice systems towards social justice and the protection of their human rights.

Based on NCIP Reports, hardly do IPs/ICCs with Ancestral Domains in remote communities access justice from government courts. More often, they become victims of injustice, technicalities and misrepresentation. They become suspects for sympathizing with rebels or communist insurgents. Worst, they become victims of human rights violations as they seek to defend their Ancestral Domains against government, powerful corporations or private entities without being able to seek justice.

The indicators for this objective cover: 1) clear-cut policies recognizing the interface of IP justice systems and the government justice system with the former as part of the national justice system; 2) pool of IP lawyers and IP human rights defenders/advocates trained including designed and conducted trainings for judges, prosecutors and other IP rights defenders; 3) number and proportion of legal cases on IP rights resolved over the total number received, by province and by region, investigated and adjudicated; 4) researched and documented functional community based IP traditional justice system; 5) number of disputes resolved through customary laws and practices.

For these to be realized, the IPs themselves together with government agencies are central to this objective. The Supreme Court shall play the critical role of providing access to formal justice by the IPs as well as in recognizing their traditional justice systems not merely as alternative dispute resolution mechanisms but as frontline mechanisms in the resolution of cases.

In line with this, the NCIP has undertaken a strengthening

of its quasi-judicial functions, which are granted under the IPRA. It’s Regional Hearing Offices have been reorganized as cluster courts with parallel efforts to retool the agency’s lawyers and legal personnel.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) specifically the Office of

Adjudication and Dispute Resolution (OADR) and all quasi-judicial bodies to include the Regional Hearing Office of NCIP and others including the Barangay Lupong Tagapamayapa shall ensure respect


8

of cultural sensitivity issues in the interpretation and application of laws and policies.

Thematic Objective 3: To respect, protect and fulfill the civil and political rights of IPs including their social, economic and cultural rights, provide responsive and cultural appropriate mechanism in addressing violations thereto and affording maximum protection to defenders of IP rights.

The provision of culturally appropriate institutional

arrangements and mechanisms to protect the IPs is envisioned as a major consideration. Relative to this, the Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines (CHRP) alone does not have adequate mandate. As part of the Philippine obligation to the CERD, the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (UNCERD) appreciates the work of the CHRP but observed that its mandate does not explicitly include economic, social and cultural rights. Thus, the UNCERD recommended the Philippines to include the protection and promotion of economic, social and cultural rights in the mandate of the CHRP.

The indicators aligned to this objective include: 1) the

number and proportion of resolved human rights cases involving IPs and, 2) number of documented human rights violations of social, cultural, economic rights of IPs.

Under this specific objective, the agencies accountable are

the CHRP, NCIP, DND, AFP, DILG, NAPOLCOM, PNP, LGUs, DOJ, Ombudsman, PAO, OPAPP, DENR, CHED, DepEd, SUCs, Congress, Supreme Court, COMELEC, NCCA, among others.

Thematic Objective 4: To recognize and fulfill Indigenous Peoples rights to self-determination, self-determined development and recognizing indigenous knowledge and socio economic, political and cultural systems.

Among the mechanisms to promote self-governance and

self-determination among IPs is the provision in the IPRA directing that IP mandatory representatives be installed in local legislative councils. To implement this, and to promote IPs right to participate in decision making, the DILG has issued Memorandum Circular No. 2010-119 (dated 20 October 2010) directing all Local Government Units on the Mandatory Representation of ICCs/IPs in Policy Making Bodies and Other Local Legislative Councils.

Recognition of traditional justice and peace building

mechanisms and institutions of IPs is necessary towards the realization of this objective. Towards this end, the identification and institutionalization of these IP mechanisms and institutions towards an interface with government mechanisms should be made. A


9

government database through research and documentation of these IP traditional institutions and mechanisms should be facilitated. Utilizing these institutions can build a good partnership between the State and IPs towards lasting peace and development. Self-governance will be effectively exercised by addressing culture sensitivity issues; accessibility of concerned parties in dispute; preservation of the dynamics of indigenous knowledge systems and practices, speedy resolution of IP cases; encouraging the observance of tradition, respect for elders & their precedent practices; and the restitution of community relations.

Indicators for this objective include: 1) best practices

demonstrating self-determined development based on culturally founded principles in sustainable utilization of resources; 2) number of ADSDPPs formulated; 3) number of ADSDPP integrated at the Barangay, Provincial and Regional Development Plans and IPs trained on their traditional crafts, 4) number of IP Mandatory Representatives installed in local legislative councils and policy making bodies at the barangay, municipal and provincial levels.

With the support of the Philippine Government, the NCIP

shall spearhead the identification and institutionalization of data banking mechanisms of Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Practices (IKSPs) towards policy reviews and enhancement/reformulation. The LGUs, DENR, DOE, DOST, DAR, DA, NEDA, CHED, DepEd, DOLE-TESDA, NCCA and Congress shall assist in policy formulation and enhancement. Specifically, towards the preservation of indigenous crafts, TESDA has been working with other agencies in the development of localized competency standards inherent to specific location and cultural affiliation. This can be utilized in the training of new workers who can continue performing the craft.

Thematic Objective 5: To provide culturally-appropriate basic social services and to recognize, protect and promote the cultural rights of IPs, combating prejudice and discrimination against them, and fostering solidarity among them and all other sectors of society.

The indicators relevant to this objective include 1)

appropriate culture based and rights-based IP education, health and social services structures and programs, agricultural processes and livelihood activities; 2) IP rights and culture showcased in all educational and general information materials; 3) the promotion of IP rights and cultural heritage enhanced through appropriate documentation and reproduction of IP culture, educational curricula, schools, cultural centers, museums, non-formal education, bilingual provisions, culturally sensitive festivals and celebrations and, 4) researches on IKSPs.


10

The NCIP reports that ICCs/ IPs have problems such as lack of access to government basic social services like education, health, clean water & air. Armed conflicts have also been pointed out as a serious and urgent concern. Together with the NCIP, DepEd, CHED, SUCs, PIA, Supreme Court, PRC, Training Institutes, AFP, PNP, DAP, NCCA, National Museum, LGUs, DOT, DPWH, Intellectual Property Rights Office, the State should pursue this objective.

Thematic Objective 6: To enhance affirmative actions of the State in terms of legislative and administrative measures and mechanisms that will promote and protect the interest and welfare of the Indigenous Peoples

The lack of proper & accurate information and the absence

of disaggregated data on IPs/ICCs have apparently made them more prone to discrimination. Such need for a database will support the recommendation of the UNCERD for the Philippines to adopt a comprehensive law on the elimination of discrimination on the grounds of race, color, descent or national ethnic origin, covering all rights and freedoms protected under international treaties and conventions which include the CERD.

The indicator for this objective is the passage of a law on

anti-discrimination. To lead in the legislative advocacy are the DFA, NCIP and CHRP. Other accountable agencies include the National Commission on Muslim Filipinos, Philippine Commission on Women, Department of Social Welfare and Development with the Council for the Welfare of Children, National Council for Disability Affairs, DENR, Civil Service Commission, DENR-MGB, DAR, DOE, DA, DOLE, HLURB, DILG, LGUs, Bureau of Immigration, and NEDA among others.

Thematic Objective 7: To review and amend policies and programs on IP rights, ratify international conventions and enact laws that have direct bearing on IPs, formulate/reformulate existence of conflicting development policies, programs and areas in conflict with IP rights and interests with the mandatory and effective participation of IPs; develop a comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation; and push for the ratification of treaties which have direct bearing on racial discrimination

Enactment, amendment, harmonization and complementation of existing laws on IP rights should be pursued. This should take into highest consideration the cultural principles, entitlements, self-governance, Indigenous Political Structures (IPS)4 in the following areas: (a) environment and natural resources; (b) local governance; (c) military practices; (d) administration of State Universities and Colleges (SUCs). Interpretation of laws and policies

4 IPS-


11

must consider IP customary laws, practices, and their aspirations expressed and represented by the IPs themselves.

While the Philippines already has IPRA which is a

landmark legislation and cited as a model for replication by other countries, it has to pursue to the adoption/ratification of other related international human rights treaties/conventions/covenants that promote, protect and fulfill the rights of the IPs.

The NCIP and the National Anti-Poverty Commission

(NAPC) should lead other concerned agencies to include the OMA, PCW, DSWD-CWC, CRPD, DENR, MGB, DAR, DOE, DA, DOLE, HLURB, DILG, LGUs, BOI, CSC, and NEDA.


12

SECTION 2 Thematic Baseline and Situationer

Thematic Objective 1 Aside from the CERD which has been well described in

the first portion of this Chapter, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) is another international policy standard in dealing with the various IP human rights issues.

The Philippine Government through its Mission at the

UN Headquarters in New York headed the Committee that was created to fast track negotiations with other States on the adoption by the UN General Assembly of the UNDRIP. The Philippine Government adopted the Declaration together with other 142 States on September 13, 2007. Four States voted against the Declaration while 11 States abstained.

The national normative framework for IP rights

protection and promotion consists of the Constitution, legislation, administrative policies, court decisions or jurisprudence, and customs and traditional practices.

The Constitution, also dubbed as “The Freedom

Constitution,” provides for the establishment and separation of the Executive, Judiciary, and a bicameral Legislature. It specifies the mandates and powers of the major institutions responsible for human rights protection and promotion. The Constitution provides that:

“The Congress shall give highest priority to the enactment of measures that protect and enhance the right of all the people to human dignity, reduce social, economic and political inequalities, and remove cultural inequities by equitably diffusing wealth and political power for the common good. (Article XIII, Section 1)”. Also, the Constitution declared as a policy that the “State

values the dignity of every human person and guarantees full respect for human rights” (Art. II, Section 11). It is also the national policy to protect the right to health of the people (Art. II, Section 15), as well as their right to a balanced and healthful ecology (Art. II, Section 16). Further, the State is mandated to protect the rights of workers and promote their welfare (Art. II, Section 18) and to guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service (Art. II, Section 26). Everyone’s right to equality before the law in the enjoyment of civil, political and social rights is enshrined in the all embracing Bill of Rights of the 1987 Constitution (Art. III). To strengthen


13

the government’s concern for the protection and promotion of human rights and fundamental freedoms, the Constitution also mandates the Congress of the Philippines to give the “highest priority to the enactment of measures that protect and enhance the right of all the people to human dignity, reduce social, economic and political inequalities and remove cultural inequities by equitably diffusing wealth and political power for the common good” (Art. XIII, Section 1). The “promotion of social justice shall include the commitment to create economic opportunities based on freedom of initiative and self-reliance.” (Art. XIII, Section 2). The State declared as a national policy that it “recognizes and promotes the rights of indigenous cultural communities within the framework of national unity and development” (Art. II, Section 22).

Further, the State is mandated under the Constitution to

“protect the rights of indigenous cultural communities to their ancestral lands to ensure their economic, social and cultural well-being” (Art. 12, Section 5). The same provision states that “Congress may provide for the applicability of customary laws governing property rights or relations in determining the ownership and extent of ancestral domain”. The State shall also “recognize, respect, and protect the rights of indigenous cultural communities to preserve and develop their cultures, traditions, and institutions” and shall consider these rights in the formulation of national plans and policies” (Art. XIV, Section 17).

Henceforth, the Constitution mandated the creation of

“Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) and in the Cordilleras (Cordillera Administrative Region) consisting of provinces, cities, municipalities and geographical areas sharing common and distinctive historical and cultural heritage, economic and social structures and other relevant characteristics within the framework of this Constitution and the national sovereignty as well as territorial integrity of the Republic of the Philippines” (Art. X, Section 15-21).

Specifically, the IP related provisions of the 1987

Philippine Constitution became the bases for the government to legislate and approve RA 8371 or the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA) of 1997, a landmark legislation which primarily seeks to address the rights of ICCs/IPs, enforce constitutional mandates and comply with international human rights standards.

The IPRA likewise drew from the then-draft United Nations

Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).

The IPRA recognizes, protects and promotes both the collective and individual rights of IPs, particularly these four bundles of rights: (a) The Rights to Ancestral Domains; (b) Rights to Self-Governance and Empowerment; (c) Rights to Social


14

Justice and Human Rights; and, (d) Rights to Cultural Integrity. It created the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples

(NCIP). Further, it establishes implementing mechanisms, appropriates funds and other purposes serving the greater interests of Indigenous Peoples.

The right to Ancestral Domain provides the IPs with security of tenure and sustainable use of their ancestral domains/lands. It likewise protects the territorial integrity of the ancestral domains and the general welfare of its owners.

Ancestral domain refers to all areas generally belonging to

ICCs/IPs, subject to property rights within ancestral domains already existing and/or vested upon the effectivity of the Act, comprising lands, inland waters, coastal areas, and natural resources therein, held under a claim of ownership, occupied or possessed by ICCs/IPs by themselves or through their ancestors, communally or individually since time immemorial, continuously to the present, except when interrupted by war, force majeure or displacement by force, deceit, stealth, or as a consequence of government projects or any voluntary dealings entered into by the government and private individuals/ corporations, and which are necessary to ensure their economic, social and cultural welfare. It shall include ancestral lands, forests, pasture, residential, agricultural, and other lands individually owned whether alienable and disposable or otherwise; hunting grounds: burial grounds; worship areas; bodies of water; mineral and other natural resources; and lands which may no longer be exclusively occupied by ICCs/IPs, but from which they traditionally had access to, for their subsistence and traditional activities, particularly the home ranges of ICCs/IPs who are still nomadic and/or shifting cultivators.

Ancestral lands refer to land, subject to property rights

within the ancestral domains already existing and/or vested upon effectivity of the IPRA, occupied, possessed and utilized by individuals, families and clans who are members of the ICCs/ IPs since time immemorial, by themselves or through their predecessors-in-interest, under claims of individual or traditional group ownership, continuously, to the present except when interrupted by war, force majeure or displacement by force, deceit, stealth, or as a consequence of government projects and other voluntary dealings entered into by government and private individuals/corporations, including, but not limited to, residential lots, rice terraces or paddies, private forests, swidden farms and tree lots.

Native title refers to pre-conquest rights to lands and

domains which, as far back as memory reaches, have been held under a claim of private ownership by ICCs /IPs, have never been


15

public lands and are thus indisputably presumed to have been held that way since before the Spanish Conquest.

Indigenous Cultural Communities (ICCs)/Indigenous

Peoples (IPs), refer to a group of people or homogenous societies identified by self-ascription and ascription by others, who have continuously lived as organized community on communally bounded and defined territory, and who have, under claims of ownership since time immemorial, occupied, possessed and utilized such territories, sharing common bonds of language, customs, traditions and other distinctive cultural traits, or who have, through resistance to political, social and cultural inroads of colonization, non-indigenous religions and cultures, became historically differentiated from the majority of Filipinos. ICCs/IPs shall, likewise include peoples who are regarded as indigenous on account of their descent from the populations which inhabited the country, at the time of conquest or colonization or at the time of inroads of non-indigenous religions and cultures or the establishment of present state boundaries who retain some or all of their own social, economic, cultural and political institutions, but who may have been displaced from their traditional domains or who may have resettled outside their ancestral domains.

In pursuance of the right to self-governance and self-

determination, the ICCs/IPs, in coordination with the Department of the Interior and Local Government, through the NCIP, shall formulate measures to ensure that:

(1) The socio-political structures, systems and

institutions of ICCs/IPs are strengthened; (2) The indigenous structures, systems, and institutions

are not supplanted by other forms of non-indigenous governance; and/ or

(3) Mechanisms that allow the interfacing of indigenous

systems of governance with the national systems are established. ensure that indigenous socio-political, cultural and economic rights are respected and recognized. These ensure that capacity building mechanisms are instituted and IPs are afforded every opportunity to participate in decision-making processes.

On the other hand, the Rights to Social Justice and

Human Rights ensure the enjoyment of the following:

(1) Equal protection before the law; (2) Rights During Armed Conflict;


16

(3) Freedom from Discrimination;

(4) Right to Employment;

(5) Right to Basic Services;

(6) Rights of Women;

(7) Rights of Children and Youth, and;

(8) Right to Education.

And lastly, the Rights to Cultural Integrity include:

(1) Protection of indigenous culture, traditions and institutions;

(2) Right to establish and control educational and

learning systems;

(3) Recognition of cultural diversity;

(4) Right to name, identity and history;

(5) Community intellectual property rights;

(6) Protection of Religious, Cultural Sites and Ceremonies;

(7) Right to indigenous spiritual beliefs and traditions;

(8) Protection of Indigenous Sacred Places;

(9) Right to protection of indigenous knowledge systems

and practices, and;

(10) Right to science and technology. Other pertinent legislations on IP rights are the

following:

(1) RA 7160, or “The Local Government Code of 1991” which provides for the creation of Tribal Barangays and the Mandatory Representation of IPs in Local Legislative Councils and Other Policymaking Bodies;

(2) RA 9054, otherwise known as “An Act to

Strengthen and Expand the Organic Act for the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao,


17

Amending for the Purpose RA 6734, Entitled ‘An Act Providing for the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao’ as Amended;”

(3) RA 8425, otherwise known as “An Act

Institutionalizing the Social Reform and Poverty Alleviation Program, Creating for the Purpose the National Anti-Poverty Commission, Defining its Powers and Functions, and for Other Purposes” to provide assurance against discrimination or exclusion from development;”

(4) Presidential Decree 1083, provides for the

codification of Muslim Personal Laws and the recognition of the Shari’a justice system based on Islamic religious law;

(5) Executive Order (EO) 270, which provides for

economic, environmental and social principles of responsible mining;

(6) Executive Order (EO) 270-A, which amended EO 270,

states that, “The ecological integrity of areas affected by mining operation, including biodiversity resources and small-island ecosystems, shall be safeguarded in order to protect public welfare, safety and environmental quality. The rights of affected communities, including the rights of Indigenous Cultural Communities, especially the Free and Prior Informed Consent requirement shall be protected;”

(7) Administrative Order (AO) No. 3, series of 2004, which upholds the rights of every IP individual to a name and history. It registers their civil status and upholds their national identity. It recognizes the customary ways of IPs in the registration of birth, marriage, death, dissolution of marriage, and revocation of the dissolution of marriage.

(8) NCIP Administrative Order (AO) No. 3, Series of 2012,

or the Revised Guidelines on the Exercise of Free, Prior and Informed Consent and Related Processes;

(9) NCIP Administrative Order No. 1 series of 2012, or

the Indigenous Knowledge, Systems and Practices and Customary Laws Research and Documentation Guidelines;



18

the General Guidelines on the Confirmation of Indigenous Political Structures and the Registration of Indigenous Peoples Organizations;


the Revised Omnibus Rules on the Delineation and Recognition of Ancestral Domains and Ancestral Lands


the Guidelines on the Formulation of Ancestral Domain Sustainable Development and Protection Plans (ADSDPPs)

Thematic Objective 2

The criminal justice system has five pillars namely—law enforcement, prosecution, judiciary, correction, and community. Among the mechanisms of the criminal justice system in place are:

(1) The Katarungang Pambarangay System (Village

Justice System), which was created under the Local Government Code of 1991 (LGC) to assist in the settlement of disputes between those residing in the same barangay (village). It institutionalizes the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) systems and remains to be the most important mechanism for reaching amicable settlement.

(2) Section 15 of IPRA provides that the ICCs/IPs shall

have the right to use their own commonly accepted justice systems, conflict resolution institutions, peace building processes or mechanisms and other customary laws and practices within their respective communities and as may be compatible with the national legal system and with internationally recognized human rights. Traditional legal system is effective because it is: a) culture sensitive; b) accessible to community members; c) preserves the dynamics of indigenous knowledge systems and practices; d) promotes self-governance; e)expedites resolution of cases; f) encourages community involvement/participation; g) based on tradition and precedent and respect of elders; and h) emphasizes restitution not retribution.

(3) NCIP Administrative Circular No. 1, Series of 2003,

or the Rules on Pleadings, Practice and Procedure


19

before the NCIP which uphold, among others, the primacy of customary laws and practices. Currently, the NCIP maintains 12 Regional Hearing Offices (RHOs) nationwide. The RHOs are equal in stature with the Regional Trial Courts. Cases handled by the Regional Hearing Offices include issues arising from disputes on Ancestral Domain/Land claims; violations of the right to Free and Prior Informed Consent; violations of employment rights to just compensation and conditions of employment; defacing, removing or destroying cultural sites and artifacts; and, cases involving property rights. Decisions of the RHO can only be appealed to the Commission En Banc. Commission En Banc decisions are appealable to the Court of Appeals under the Rules of Court.

Thematic Objectives 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 The Constitution provided for the creation of the

Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines (CHRP) (Art. 13, Section 17). The CHRP is an independent body which is mandated by the Constitution to investigate on its own or on complaint by any party, all forms of human rights violations, including those involving civil and political rights. The CHRP is also responsible for the provision of appropriate legal measures for the protection of the human rights of all persons within the Philippines, as well as Filipinos living abroad, and for the provision of preventive measures and legal aid services to the underprivileged whose human rights have been violated or need protection.

The NCIP, for its part, was purposely created to

implement the provisions of the IPRA. It is mandated to protect and promote the interest and well-being of IPs with due regard to their beliefs, customs, traditions and institutions. It is the primary government agency that formulates and implements policies, plans and programs for the recognition, promotion and protection of the rights and well-being of IPs with due regard to their ancestral domain and lands, self-governance and empowerment, social justice and human rights, and cultural integrity.

As enabling partner and lead advocate, the NCIP envisions genuinely empowered IPs whose rights and multi-dimensional well-being are fully recognized, respected and promoted towards the attainment of national unity and development. The NCIP has three (3) major functions: a) quasi-judicial; b) quasi-legislative; and, c) executive/administrative.

On the other hand, the Office on Muslim Affairs (OMA) was


20

created by EO 122-A to cater for the needs and aspirations of Muslim Filipinos. And, by virtue of RA 6734 as amended by RA 9054, the Autonomous Regional Government in Muslim Mindanao was established to ensure the exercise of self-governance by Muslim Filipinos. However, despite the availability of laws and institutions, complete realization and fulfilment of IP rights remains elusive.

In the different consultations conducted both at the local and

national levels human rights violations against IPs is still so rampant. The degree of violations may differ from region to region but the trend is basically national in scope.

The following table will illustrate the human rights

issues besieging the IPs nationwide. The various issues were classified into basic human rights. (Please see table 8.1).


21


22

Table 8.1: Situation Matrix

Human Rights Issues

Duty

Bearers

Claimholders

Economic Rights

a. Difficulties in the registration of CADTs/CALTs

b. Protection of ancestral domains/lands under the principle of “native title” (ADs/ALs not subjected by owners for registration/issuance of CADTs/CALTs)

c. Non-integration of ADSDPPs with the Local

Development Plans

d. Displacement of ICCs/IPs from their ancestral domains (Ejectment due to mining, logging, plantations, dams, displacement due to armed conflict)

e. Non-compliance with FPIC

f. Proliferation of illegal logging

g. Overlapping claims on ancestral domains and reservation areas (military, school campuses, ENR, etc.)

h. Overlapping provisions of national and local policies with the IPRA (as to ancestral domains/lands and resources)

i. Non-delivery of basic services: Health, education, social services, road and electricity infrastructure, etc.

NCIP, DAR, DENR,

LRA, Register of

Deeds, LGUs,

NCIP

-do-

NCIP, LGUs, NEDA

NCIP, LGUs, DENR-

MGB, DOE, DTI,

DOE, PNP, AFP,

OPAPP

-do-

DTI, AFP, PNP,

OPAPP

DENR, LGUs, AFP,

PNP, NCIP, CHED,

BCDA

DND-AFP, DILG-

PNP, SUCs, CHED,

DepEd, DENR

NCIP, DENR, DAR,

LGUs

IPs/ICCs


23

Human Rights Issues Duty Bearers Claimholders

Civil and Political Rights

a. Non-representation in Formal

Governance System

b. Low performance of NCIP quasi-

judicial function thru its RHOs due to lack

of manpower and logistics

c. Non-culturally sensitive courts of

justice and quasi-judicial bodies/lawyers

and judges

d. Need for authentic IP representation

in Peace Talks/Processes (MILF and

CPP-NPA)

e. Intrusion of Armed Groups in IP

territories f. Vulnerability to torture, harassment,

and killings due to armed conflict

common within IP areas, endangering IPs as collateral damage

g. Constrained movement due to armed

conflict h. Unsolved murders of IP

leaders/community members and

advocates

i. Illegal detention of IPs

j. Congestion of detention facilities (cross-cutting with non-IPs)

k. Ineffective barangay justice system

l. Forced marriage; early marriage

NCIP, DILG, LGUs

NCIP, CSC, DBM,

Congress

DOJ, Supreme Court,

DENR, DAR

OP, OPAPP

DND-AFP, DILG,

LGUs PNP, Congress DND-AFP, PNP,

LGUs, DOJ

DND-AFP, PNP,

LGUs, DSWD, RDCC

DOJ, DILG, PNP,

CIDG, AFP, NBI

DOJ, BJMP, PNP

DILG, BJMP, PNP,

LGUs

DILG, LGUs, Lupon

members

NCIP, DOJ, NSO-

OCRG, LGUs

DOJ, OMA, Supreme

Court

CHED, DOLE,

TESDA, OWWA,

IPs/ICCs


24

(bethrotal)

m. Difficulties in the Implementation of

the Shari’ah Courts

n. Attribution to Muslims (Crimes not

attributed to the person but to Muslims

in general)

o. Poor accessibility to civil registration

centers

p. Forced marriage

q. Aggressive religious and Non-State

Actor indoctrinations

r. Lack of accessible venues for free

expression

POEA, DFA

NSO-OCRG, LGU-

Local Civil Registrars, NCIP

OCRG, Local Civil

Registrars

DND-AFP, DILG-

PNP, LGUs, OMA, NCIP

DepEd, CHED,

SUCs, Office on

Religious Affairs

DOTC, PIA


25

SECTION 3 Thematic Performance Targets

Thematic Objective 1: To uphold and protect the rights of Indigenous Peoples to their ancestral domains, lands and resources through the genuine implementation of Free Prior Informed Consent (FPIC), recognizing customary laws on property ownership and relations.

By 2016, the CERD-PHRP II targets the development and

implementation of affirmative policies for the recognition and protection of Indigenous Peoples/Indigenous Cultural Communities (IPs/ICCs) concepts of native title, FPIC, customary laws or property ownership after the conduct of FPIC processes. These protection measures address issues on the option of IPs to exercise their traditional ownership of their ancestral domains (ADs) under the concept of ‘native title’ rather than following the delineation and titling process of government.

The annual term target includes policy researches or

documentation on concepts of native title and customary law of six selected IPs/ICCs. The breakdown is as follows:

2012 – 2 groups of IPs/ICCs documented; 2013 - 2 groups of IPs/ICCs documented; 2014 - 2 groups of IPs/ICCs documented.

Thematic Objective 2: To enhance access of IPs to the various pillars of the justice system, and State recognition and institutionalization in the exercise of customary laws and practices or the various traditional justice systems towards social justice and the protection of their rights human rights.

By the end of 2016, the CERD-PHRP II targets to (a) develop

a national policy guideline on the interfacing of IPs justice system and national justice system; and (b) policy review on access of IPs to formal justice.

Annual targets for 2014-2016 include (1) The documentation of traditional justice systems of

seven selected pilot IPs/ICCs’ per ethnographic region:

2014 – 3 pilot ethnographic regions; 2015 – 2 pilot ethnographic regions; 2016 – 2 ethnographic regions.


26

(2) Assessment or study on the extent by which IPs

access the formal justice systems or regular courts in seven selected pilot regional or provincial courts representative of Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao where there are IPs/ICCs.

2014 - 3 pilot regional/provincial courts at one each for

Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao; 2015 - 3 pilot regional/provincial courts at one each for

Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao 2016 - 1 additional pilot regional or provincial court


By 2016 the following should have been achieved: (a)

effective legal safeguards and measures for the protection of rights of IPs and defenders of IP rights; and (b) increased level of awareness and application of national and international IP and human rights protection standards by the government, IPs and the general public at the national and local levels.

The CERD’s annual targets are: 2012 - Development and implementation of joint circular

between NCIP, AFP, PNP and other law enforcement agencies for protection of IPs and IP rights defenders during the period 2010-2012;

2013- Development of special judicial measures in

coordination with DOJ, Supreme Court; and 2012-2015 Information Education and capacity building

on IPRA, CERD and other national and international human rights treaties for 250 participants composed of lawyers/ judges or law enforcers, police/military, IP leaders, IP children, IP youth and IP women and the general public with 50 participants for each session from the period 2012-2015.


27


For the medium term (2014), the CERD-PHRP aims to

develop and enforce an enhanced policy guideline on the Ancestral Domains Sustainable Development and Protection Plan (ADSDPP), Free and Prior Informed Consent (FPIC), based on more critically relevant Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Practices (IKSPs) and other provisions of the IPRA.

The annual term targets for the period 2012-2016 include: (1) 2012 - 2013 - Baselines surveys or studies on

selected IP groups; (2) 2013-2014 - Policy recommendations on culturally

appropriate ADSDPP and FPIC guideline covering seven (7) selected IPs/ICCs with CADTs and ADSDPPs to be conducted;

(3) 2014-2015 - Documentation of IKSP covering seven

selected pilot IPs/ICCs with CADTs and ADSDPPs; and

(4) 2014-2016 - Recognition and implementation of

policy on indigenous political structures (IPS) and IPs Organizations (IPOs) in five selected pilot IPs/ICCs with CADTs (2010-2012).


The CERD chapter of the PHRP II in the medium term aims

to: (a) adopt culturally appropriate socio-cultural policies by NGAs and LGUs to reach out to IPs/ICCs in far flung areas; and (b) Assessment of initiatives of 5 pilot government agencies and 5 LGUs in employing IPs

Under this strategic indicator, the annual term targets are: (1) 2012- Integration of ADSDPPs into Local

Development Plans; (2) 2012-2013 - Development and issuance of


28

guidelines on IP community planning for culturally appropriate delivery of services;

(3) 2012-2015 - Dissemination of IP guideline to all

stakeholders at the national and field levels; one national and with IPs/ICCs in 13 regional cluster groups;

(4) 2014 onwards - Implementation of guidelines in

selected seven IPs/ICCs; and

(5) 2013-2014 - Assessment, Evaluation and review of Certificates of Confirmation (COC) covering years 2008-2009 with PNP, NAPOLCOM, AFP, BJMP, DOH, DOLE and five selected pilot LGUs

Thematic Objective 6: To enhance affirmative actions of the State in terms of legislative and administrative measures and mechanisms that will promote and protect the interest and welfare of the Indigenous Peoples.

The CERD-PHRP’s targets in the medium term or by 2014

are: (a) the institutionalization of an Advocacy Program for IP Rights; (b) the Integration of Indigenous literature, IP rights and CERD in the following: educational curriculum, board and bar examinations, and PNP and AFP trainings; and (c) strengthening the NCIP in light of the status of IPs and international commitments of the Philippines as State party.

In the annual term, the following targets are: (1) 2012-2015 - Advocacy program for IPs Rights; (2) 2012-2015 - Development and implementation of

framework on IP education by 5 IP groups;

(3) 2012–2015 - Development and implementation of an IPs Human Rights Education Program;

(4) 2012-2016 - Advocacy for the integration of CERD and

IPs rights in relevant education and trainings and programs of the AFP, PNP, and other departments and NCLE;

(5) 2012-2016 - Institutional review; and

(6) 2012-2016 - Annual monitoring of CERD implementation

and reporting.


29

Thematic Objective 7: To review and amend policies and programs on IP rights, ratify international conventions and enact laws that have direct bearing on IPs, formulate/reformulate existence of conflicting development policies, programs and areas in conflict with IP rights and interests with the mandatory and effective participation of IPs; develop a comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation; and push for the ratification of treaties which have direct bearing on racial discrimination.

The CERD-PHRP for the medium term targets the

following: (a) enhancement of existing laws and policies on IP rights, harmonization or complementation with other policies developed; (b) bill on anti-discrimination supported and filed in Congress and Senate; and (c) Ratification of ILO 169.

(1) 2013-2015 - Assessment, Evaluation and review of

Certificates of Confirmation (COC) covering years 2008-2009 with PNP, NAPOLCOM, AFP, BJMP, DOH, DOLE and five selected pilot LGUs;

(2) 2012-2015 - Advocacy at the national and local levels for

the passage of an anti-discrimination bill;

(3) 2013-2015 - Issuance and implementation of ordinances in 4 selected pilot areas in each IP area in Luzon, Mindanao, Visayas and ARMM;

(4) 2013-2015 - Advocacy and mobilization for the

ratification of ILO 169;

(5) 2015 onwards - Implementation of guidelines in selected seven IPs/ICCs.


30


31

Table 8.2. Performance Targets


Strategic Indicators Medium Targets Annual Targets

Policy researches or documentation on IP traditional ownership or concept of native title FPIC and customary law of six selected IPs/ICCs

Affirmative policies on concept of native title FPIC and customary laws on property ownership developed and operationalized

By 2014, the CERD-PHRP targets the development and implementation of affirmative policies for the recognition and protection of Indigenous Peoples/Indigenous Cultural Communities (IPs/ICCs) concepts of native title, FPIC, customary laws or property ownership after the conduct of FPIC processes.

Thematic Objective 2: To enhance access of IPs to the various pillars of the justice system, and State recognition and institutionalization in the exercise of customary laws and practices or the various traditional justice systems towards social justice and the protection of their rights human rights. Strategic Indicators Medium Targets Annual Targets

Documentation of traditional justice systems of seven selected pilot IPs/ICC’s per ethnographic region

Assessment or study on the extent

by which IPs access the formal justice system or regular courts or provincial courts where there are IPs/ICC

National policy guidelines on the interfacing of IPs justice system and national justice system developed for implementation

Policy review on access to formal justice by IPs

By 2014, the CERD-PHRP targets to (a) develop a national policy guideline on the interfacing of IPs justice system and national justice system; and (b) policy review on access of IPs to formal justice.

Thematic Objective 3: To respect, protect and fulfill the civil and political rights of IPs including their social, economic and cultural rights, provide responsive and cultural appropriate mechanism in addressing violations thereto and affording maximum protection to defenders of IP rights. Strategic Indicators Medium Targets Annual Targets

Close coordination between NCIP, AFP, PNP, BJMP, CHRP and other concerned agencies for protection of IPs and IPs rights defenders

Information and Education

Effective legal safeguards and measures that address violations of IPs rights and protect the rights of IP defenders

Advocacy campaign awareness to the

By 2014 aims to: (a) establish effective legal safeguards and measures that address violations of IP rights and protect the rights of defenders of IP rights; and (b)increase level of awareness and


32

campaign for IPRA/CERD and other HR treaties to the govt. offices and the public in general

IP rights application of national and international IP and human rights protection standards by the government, IPs and the general public at the national and local levels.

Thematic Objective 4: To recognize and fulfill Indigenous Peoples rights to self-determination, self determined development and recognizing indigenous knowledge and socio economic, political and cultural systems. Strategic Indicators Medium Targets Annual Targets

Culturally appropriate policy guidelines on ADSDPP, FPIC, based on more critically relevant Indigenous Knowledge System and Practices (IKSPs) and other provisions of the IPRA developed and enforced

Medium term (2014), the CERD-PHRP aims to develop and enforce an enhanced policy guideline on the Ancestral Domains Sustainable Development and Protection Plan (ADSDPP), FPIC, based on more critically relevant Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Practices (IKSPs) and other provisions of the IPRA.

Annual term targets for the period 2012-2015 include: (a) baselines surveys or studies on selected IP groups; (b) Policy recommendations on culturally appropriate ADSDPP and FPIC guideline covering seven (7) selected IPs/ICCs with CADTs and ADSDPPs to be conducted; (c) Documentation of IKSP covering seven selected pilot IPs/ICCs with CADTs and ADSDPPs; and (d) Recognition and implementation of policy on indigenous political structures (IPS) and IPs Organizations (IPOs) in five selected pilot IPs/ICCs with CADTs (2010-2012).

Thematic Objective 5: To provide culturally-appropriate basic social services and to recognize, protect and promote the cultural rights of IPs, combating prejudice

and discrimination against them, and fostering solidarity among them and all other sectors of society.

Strategic Indicators Medium Targets Annual Targets

Adoption of culturally appropriate socio-cultural polices by NGAs and LGUs to reach out to IPs/ICC in far flung areas Assessment of initiatives of five pilot government agencies and five LGUs in employing IPs

The CERD-PHRP in the medium term aims to: (a) adopt culturally appropriate socio-cultural policies by NGAs and LGUs to reach out to IPs/ICCs in far flung areas; and (b) Assessment of initiatives of 5 pilot government agencies and 5 LGUs in employing IPs

Integration of ADSDPPs into Local

Development Plans;

2012-2013 - development and

issuance of guidelines on IP

community Planning for culturally

appropriate delivery of services;

2012-2015 - dissemination of IP


33

guideline to all stakeholders at the national and field levels; one national and with IPs/ICCs in 13 regional cluster groups;

2014 onwards - Implementation of

guidelines in selected seven IPs/ICCs;

and 2013-2014 - Assessment, Evaluation and review of Certificates of Confirmation (COC) covering years 2008-2009 with PNP, NAPOLCOM, AFP, BJMP, DOH, DOLE and five selected pilot LGUs.

Thematic Objective 6: To enhance affirmative actions of the State in terms of legislative and administrative measures and mechanisms that will promote and protect the interest and welfare of the Indigenous Peoples Strategic Indicators Medium Targets Annual Targets

Institutionalization of advocacy Programs for IPs Rights Integration of Indigenous literature and IPs rights in the following

educational curriculum

board and bar examinations

PNP and AFP trainings

Strengthening the NCIP in light of the status of IPs and international communities

Medium term target by 2014 are: (a) the institutionalization of an Advocacy Program for IP Rights; (b) the Integration of Indigenous literature, IP rights and CERD in the following: educational curriculum, board and bar examinations, and PNP and AFP trainings; and (c) strengthening the NCIP in light of the status of IPs and international commitments of the Philippines as State party.

In the annual term, the following targets are:

a) 2012-2015 - advocacy Program for

IPs Rights;

b) 2012-2015 - development of

framework on IP education by 5 IP

groups;

c) 2012–2015 - development of an

IPs Human Rights Education

Program;

d) 2012-2015 - advocacy for the

integration of CERD and IPs

rights in relevant education and

trainings and programs of the AFP,

PNP, and other departments and

NCLE;

e) 2012-2015 - institutional review;

and


34

f) 2012-2015 - annual monitoring of

g) CERD implementation and

reporting.

Thematic Objective 7: To review and amend policies and programs on IP rights, ratify international conventions and enact laws that have direct bearing on IPs, formulate/reformulate existence of conflicting development policies, programs and areas in conflict with IP rights and interests with the mandatory and effective participation of IPs; develop a comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation; and push for the ratification of treaties which have direct bearing on racial discrimination. Strategic Indicators Medium Targets Annual Targets

Enhancement of existing laws and policies on IP rights, harmonization or complementation with other policies developed Bill on anti- discrimination supported and filed in Congress and Senate Ratification of ILO 169

Medium term targets the following: (a) enhancement of existing laws and policies on IP rights, harmonization or complementation with other policies developed; (b) bill on anti-discrimination supported and filed in Congress and Senate; and (c) Ratification of ILO 169.

a) 2015 onwards - Implementation of guidelines in selected seven IPs/ICCs; and

b) 2013-2015 - Assessment,

Evaluation and review of Certificates of Confirmation (COC) covering years 2008-2009 with PNP, NAPOLCOM, AFP, BJMP, DOH, DOLE and five selected pilot LGUs

c) 2012-2015 - advocacy at the

national and local levels for the passage of an Anti-Discrimination Bill;

d) 2013-2015 - issuance and

implementation of ordinances in 4 selected pilot areas in each IP area in Luzon, Mindanao, Visayas and ARMM; and

e) 2013-2015 - advocacy and

mobilization for the ratification of ILO 169


35


36

SECTION 4 Program of Action

The basic principle in the drafting and implementation of the

CERD-PHRP II is the participation of Indigenous Peoples/Indigenous Cultural Communities (IPs/ICCs). It is fundamental that the formulation, planning and implementation of CERD and other human rights treaties should include participation of indigenous children, indigenous women, indigenous youth and all other sectors at all levels in the processes of the PHRP II.

Following this principle, IPs are able to consider the PHRP II as part

of their expressions and manifestations for their self-determined development. Their participation is a gesture of the real essence of what the State considers as meaningful participation towards fulfilling the rights of IPs to self-determination through the PHRP II.

Table 3 presents the breakdown of programs and projects

categorized by thematic objective, with specifications on coverage, responsible stakeholders and outputs matched accordingly with the medium and annual targets.


37


38

Table 8.3: Programs/ Activities/ Projects


Performance Targets Programs/ Activities/ Projects

Coverage Responsible Stakeholders Target Date/s

Expected Outputs Medium Targets

Annual Targets Duty-Bearers

Claimholders

Affirmative policies on concept of native title FPIC and customary laws on property ownership developed and operationalized

By 2014, the CERD-PHRP targets the development and implementation of affirmative policies for the recognition and protection of Indigenous Peoples/Indigenous Cultural Communities (IPs/ICCs) concepts of native title, FPIC, customary laws or property ownership after the conduct of FPIC processes.

1. Institutionalization of inter-agency affirmative collaboration for delineation titling and registration of CADTs/CADCs 2. Set-up inter-agency and consultation groups with IP/ICC through traditional leaders 3. FPIC processes and consultations with IPs/ICC conducted in ancestral domains 4. Conduct of research 5. Formulation and approval of policy on traditional ownership 6. Establishment of a national database on IP customary law

National DAR, DENR, LRA, LGU, NCIP, SC, DOJ

IPs/ICC , CSO, IPOs

Q1-2014 Q1- Q4 2014 Continuing Q2-Q4 2014 Q3-Q4 2014 continuing 2014-Q2 2015 Q1-Q2 2014 Q1 2015

Inter-agency group established

Regular group discussions conducted

IP leadership structures in ancestral domains identified

Agency positions papers disseminated

Procedures/policy recommendations established


39





Claimholders

7. Mobilization for inter-agency on approved policy 8. Policy dissemination implementation & monitoring

Q1-Q2 2015

Thematic Objective 2: To enhance access of IPs to the various pillars of the justice system, and State recognition and institutionalization in the exercise of customary laws and practices or the various traditional justice systems towards social justice and the protection of their rights human rights.




Annual Targets Duty-Bearers Claimholders

National policy guidelines on the interfacing of IPs justice system and national justice system developed for implementation Policy review on access to formal justice by IPs

By 2014, the CERD-PHRP targets to (a) develop a national policy guideline on the interfacing of IPs justice system and national justice system; and (b) policy review on access of IPs to formal justice.

1. Establish Inter-agency committee for coordination and consultation

2. Conduct consultation workshop with IPs/ICC and partners

3. Conduct documentation

4. Formulate guidelines 5. Conduct monitoring

and updating of status of cases of IPs

National SC, PAO,DOJ,CHR, DAR,NCIP,DENR,DILG,PHRC, CHRP

IPs/ICC , CSO, IPOs

2014 Committee/group discussions as regular activity of concerned agencies

Participation/consensus of IPs/ICCs

Documentation Guideline validated by

IPs/ICC List and status of cases of IPs Validated assessment/study

and policy recommendation


40





Annual Targets Duty-Bearers Claimholders

Effective legal safeguards and measures that address violations of IPs rights and protect the rights of IP defenders Advocacy campaign awareness to the IP rights

by 2014 aims to: (a) establish effective legal safeguards and measures that address violations of IP rights and protect the rights of defenders of IP rights; and (b)increase level of awareness and application of national and international IP and human rights protection standards by the government, IPs and the general public at the national and local levels.

1. Inter-agency consultation with AFP, PNP and other concerned agencies/CSO for circular

2. Set-up special measures/mechanisms for the protection of IP and IP rights defenders in critical or difficult circumstances

3. Development and reproduction of IP rights education and training materials and modules

4. Conduct of info education and training workshop for lawyers and other law enforcement agencies

National NCIP, CHR,PHRC,AFP, DILG, BJMP,NAPOLCOM, PNP, LGU, DOJ, Ombudsman, PAO,OPAPP, DENR,CHED, DepEd, Congress, SC

IPs/ICC , CSO, IPOs

2014 National Inter-agency coordination body for IP concerns

Joint circular approved and implemented

Training/IEC materials Pool of IP human rights

advocate Special mechanism

established for IPs and IP rights


41


Performance Targets Programs/

Activities/ Projects Coverage Responsible

Stakeholders Target Date/s

Expected Outputs

Medium Targets


Claimholders

Medium term (2014), the CERD-PHRP aims to develop and enforce an enhanced policy guideline on the Ancestral Domains Sustainable Development and Protection Plan (ADSDPP), FPIC, based on more critically relevant Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Practices (IKSPs) and other provisions of the IPRA.

Annual term targets for the period 2012 -2015 include: (a) baselines surveys or studies on selected IP groups; (b) Policy recommendations on culturally appropriate ADSDPP and FPIC guideline covering seven (7) selected IPs/ICCs with CADTs and ADSDPPs to be conducted; (c) Documentation of IKSP covering seven selected pilot IPs/ICCs with CADTs and ADSDPPs; and (d) Recognition and implementation of policy on indigenous political structures (IPS) and IPs Organizations (IPOs) in five selected pilot IPs/ICCs with CADTs (2010-2012).

1. Baseline studies/surveys conducted for 5 ADs with ADSDPPs

2. Assessment/inventory and review of ADSDPP and FPIC conducted

3. Community-based dialogue including all stakeholders in selected IP

4. Development and dissemination of enhanced ADSDPP and FPIC guidelines

5. Information dissemination of guideline on the recognition of IPs and registration of IPOs

6. Issuance of Certificates of recognition to IPs and registration of IPOs

7. Midterm review, monitoring and evaluation of polices

National DOE DOST DAR, DA NEDA CHED DepEd DOLE TESDA Congress DFA NCDA

IPs/ICC , CSO, IPOs

2012-2015

List and status of application for FPIC

Workshops conducted with focal NCIP staff

Enhanced guidelines/policy recommendation on culturally appropriate ADSDPP,FPIC guideline (2013)

Manual or guide checklist of compliance to FPIC and ADSDPP processes

Tools and instruments for M and E system, and monitoring Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)

Implementation of enhanced ADSDPP and FPIC guidelines IN 7 Ads

Feedback on disseminated guidelines

Recognized IPs and registered IPOs


42



Coverage Responsible Stakeholders

Target Date/s

Expected Outputs

Medium Targets


Claimholders

The CERD-PHRP in the medium term aims to: (a) adopt culturally appropriate socio-cultural policies by NGAs and LGUs to reach out to IPs/ICCs in far flung areas; and (b) Assessment of initiatives of 5 pilot government agencies and 5 LGUs in employing IPs

Integration of ADSDPPs into

Local Development Plans;

2012-2013 - development

and issuance of guidelines

on IP community Planning

for culturally appropriate

delivery of services;

2012-2015 - dissemination of IP guideline to all stakeholders at the national and field levels; one national and with IPs/ICCs in 13 regional cluster groups;

2014 onwards -

Implementation of guidelines

in selected seven IPs/ICCs;

and

2013-2014 - Assessment, Evaluation and review of Certificates of Confirmation (COC) covering years 2008-2009 with PNP, NAPOLCOM, AFP, BJMP, DOH, DOLE and

1. Conduct of consultation workshop and establish committee with partner agencies and IP leaders on community Planning and census

2. National workshop for the formulation of guidelines for integration and Planning

3. Validation with IPs/ICC 4. Conduct of information

dissemination and implementation activities of guidelines

5. Inter-agency capacity building on culturally appropriate delivery of services

6. Development of database on IP employment in govt. and LGU

National CHR,PHRC NCIP NCDA,NSO OCRG NSCB DSWD DepEd DOH DOLE TESDA CDA,DA PNP/AFP NAPOLCOM BJMP CSC

IPs/ICC , CSO, IPOs

2012- 2015

1. ADSDPP Integrated in Local development Plan

2. Institutionalized IP concerns in core agencies

3. Pool of IP leaders as resource persons in IP community Planning

4. Memorandum of Agreement with NCIP and all agencies

5. Database of IPs employed in PNP,AFP, NAPOLCOM, BJMP.etc.

6. IP desks and roles provided in each major departments and agencies


43



Target Date/s

Expected Outputs

Medium Targets


Claimholders

five selected pilot LGUs.

Thematic Objective 6: To enhance affirmative actions of the State in terms of legislative and administrative measures and mechanisms that will promote and protect the interest and welfare of the Indigenous Peoples.



Target Date/s

Expected Outputs

Medium Targets


Claimholders

Medium term target by 2014 are: (a) the institutionalization of an Advocacy Program for IP Rights; (b) the Integration of Indigenous literature, IP rights and CERD in the following: educational curriculum, board and bar examinations, and PNP and AFP trainings; and (c) strengthening the NCIP in light of the status of IPs and international commitments of the Philippines as State party.

In the annual term, the Following targets are:

a) 2012-2015 - advocacy

Program for IPs Rights;

b) 2012-2015 - development

of framework on IP

education by 5 IP groups;

c) 2012–2015 - development

of an IPs Human Rights

Education Program;

d) 2012-2015 - advocacy for

the integration of CERD

and IPs rights in relevant

education and trainings

and programs of the AFP,

PNP, and other

1. Inter-agency coordination and collaboration 2. Consultations with IPs/ICCs 3. Training workshop for IPs as resource persons for IP education and with partner agencies (CHED, DepEd, AFP,PNP) 4. Development of an IP human rights education program 5. Layout and reproduction of CERD and IPRA

National SUC PIA,SC PRC AFP PNP DAP LGU CHR,PHRC NCIP DepEd CHED

IPs/ICC , CSO, IPOs

2012- 2015

1. Instituted advocacy program for IP rights

2. Functional inter-agency coordinating body for IPs

3. CERD and IP rights modules for AFP,PNP

4. IEC materials laid out and reproduced

5. Pool of NGA advocates for IP rights set-up

6. IP human rights education program

7. Pool of NGA IP rights advocates


44



Target Date/s

Expected Outputs

Medium Targets


Claimholders

departments and NCLE;

e) 2012-2015 - institutional

review; and

h) 2012-2015 - annual

monitoring of CERD

implementation and

reporting.

6. Media write-up/ guests to the major dept. as advocates of IP rights

Thematic Objective 7: To review and amend policies and programs on IP rights, ratify international conventions and enact laws that have direct bearing on IPs, formulate/reformulate existence of conflicting development policies, programs and areas in conflict with IP rights and interests with the mandatory and effective participation of IPs; develop a comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation; and push for the ratification of treaties which have direct bearing on racial discrimination.



Target Date/s

Expected Outputs

Medium Targets


Claimholders

Medium term targets the following: (a) enhancement of existing laws and policies on IP rights, harmonization or complementation with other policies developed; (b) bill on anti-discrimination supported and filed in Congress and Senate; and (c) Ratification

a) 2015 onwards -

Implementation of

guidelines in selected

seven IPs/ICCs; and

b) 2013-2015 - Assessment,

Evaluation and review of Certificates of Confirmation (COC) covering years 2008-2009 with PNP,

Institutionalization of a system of policy dialogue

Creation of an inter-agency TWG to draft policy on dialogue

Review and monitor joint resolutions/agreements for culturally appropriate implementation of laws affecting IP rights

Devt. of an IP rights

National DOE DOST DAR, DA NEDA CHED DepEd DOLE TESDA Congress DFA NCDA

IPs/ICC , CSO, IPOs

2013-2015 Culturally appropriate policies

Guidelines/policy recommendations on strengthening NCIP

Updates and reports IP right impact assessment

tool Monitoring and evaluation of

implementation or ordinance, EIC Plan and materials on bill


45



Target Date/s

Expected Outputs

Medium Targets


Claimholders

of ILO 169.

NAPOLCOM, AFP, BJMP, DOH, DOLE and five selected pilot LGUs

c) 2012-2015 - advocacy at

the national and local

levels for the passage of

an anti-discrimination bill;

d) 2013-2015 - issuance and

implementation of ordinances in 4 selected pilot areas in each IP area in Luzon, Mindanao, Visayas and ARMM; and

e) 2013-2015 - advocacy and mobilization for the ratification of ILO 169

impact assessment tool or instrument

Lobby for enactment of bill

Campaign for approval of anti-discrimination local ordinances in 4 IP areas

EIC on ILO 169 in national levels

Campaign of ILO 169 Lobby support of

Congress and Senate

NAPC OMA BOI CSC Senate PLLO PHRC

Support groups of IPs/ICC/CSOs, IPOs

Resolution/endorsement to support ratification 169

Support of Congress and Senate


46

Section 5 Linkages with Other Development Initiatives

and Plans

The CERD-PHRP II is anchored on various initiatives and plans. Some of these are the Medium-Term Development Plan for IPs (MTPDP-IP) that is aligned with the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The CERD-PHRP II can also be related to recent emerging issues needing initiatives like those in the CERD Concluding Observations of 2009.

The PHRP II has been encouraging consultations, initiatives of

indigenous communities through their ADSDPPs and processes like the FPIC so that future linkages with these ADSDPPs could be well advocated towards the larger context of eliminating discrimination. Being formulated and crafted by IPs/ICCs themselves, the ADSDPPs should be integrated into local development plans such as barangay, provincial, regional development plans that will also be linked with the CERD-PHRP.

The NCIP is the lead agency for CERD, and is a member of the other

Thematic Clusters to ensure that concerns on discrimination and other IP-related issues in different levels and since concerns of IPs are cross-cutting along themes like CRC, CEDAW, ICCPR, ICESCR among others.

On the theme on armed conflict, for example, the CERD-PHRP will

also be linked with the Comprehensive Framework on Children Involved in Armed Conflict (CIAC) and other peace initiatives like the National IP Peace Agenda sponsored by the OPAPP that can serve as way forward parallel to or complementing the CERD-PHRP II.


47

SECTION 6 Human Rights Capacity Building Plan

Human Rights Capacity Building Plan is important both to duty-bearers and claimholders. A look at the PHRP II shows a focused direction on educating the national and field staff of NCIP on international human rights treaties and other conventions and the IPRA as the national framework for IPs.

This initiative will address the concern that duty bearers have to

be well versed with the subjects at hand. Duty bearers, especially national and field staff of the NCIP, have to be capacitated on these instruments to be able to address and implement the PHRP II effectively. Discrimination is prevalent at all levels; especially for concerns of IPs, these cross-cut across the themes of the PHRP II (i.e. CRC, CEDAW and others) and among sectors such as indigenous women, indigenous children, and youth.

The first years of the PHRP II (2012-2013) will delve more on capacity

building, re-orientation, education and training of the NCIP national and field staff and IPs/ICCs (leaders, youth, women and children) on these instruments. In the meantime, CERD-PHRP II cluster members will incorporate their respective interventions/activities in every first quarter of each year of the PHRP. By the end of each year, a workshop will be conducted with CERD-PHRP Cluster members to assess their own targets and accomplishments vis-à-vis the PHRP II.


48

Table 8.4: Human Rights Capacity Building Plan

Thematic

Participants Objective/s

Education and Training

Activity/ies

Coverage Target Thematic Participants Responsible Parties

Expected Outputs Duty-bearers Claimholders

Thematic Objectives 1 to 7

Awareness raising and familiarization of CERD, ICCPR, ICESCR, CRC, CEDAW, CAT, CMW, CPD, ILO 169, UNDRIP and IPRA among others

National and regional and field

NCIP (national)and field); IAC-CIAC; CERD Thematic Cluster Members

IPs/ICCs Indigenous Political Structures in Ancestral Domains and other IP areas

Philippine Commission on Human Rights, Lead Agencies

All duty bearers and claimholders are made familiar with human rights treaties and human rights national agenda relevant to indigenous peoples


49


50

SECTION 7 Coordination and Management Plan

Through the coordination and management of the PHRP II, the

CERD-PHRP II cluster members will meet regularly. These meetings will be a venue for updates, discussions and review of the status of what each member has done and yet to do.

At the national level, the flow of the reports will be from CERD-PHRP

II Thematic Cluster members who may be solicited from field-based reports and offices to be submitted to the PHRC through the CERD-PHRP II Secretariat through the lead agency, the NCIP through its focal bureau, the Office of Empowerment and Human Rights (OEHR). (See table 8.5)


51


52

Table.8.5: Coordination and Management Arrangements

Thematic Objective Committees/Task Force/Project Implementing Team

Head Members 1. To uphold and protect the rights of Indigenous Peoples to their ancestral domains, lands and resources through the genuine implementation of Free Prior Informed Consent (FPIC), recognizing customary laws on property ownership and relations;

NCIP DAR,LRA,DENR,LGUs, Register of Deeds, Indigenous (IP) Leaders

2. Enhancing access of IPs to the various pillars of the justice system, and State recognition and institutionalization in the exercise of customary laws and practices or the various traditional justice systems towards social justice and the protection of their rights human rights

NCIP Supreme Court, DOJ, DAR, DENR,NCDA, Indigenous Leaders

3. Respecting, protecting and fulfilling the civil and political rights of IPs including their social, economic and cultural

NCIP CHR,PHRC,AFP, DILG, NAPOLCOM, PNP, LGU, DOJ, Ombudsman, PAO,OPAPP, DENR,CHED, DepEd, Congress, Supreme Court DepEd, DENR,SUC, DND,


53

Thematic Objective Committees/Task Force/Project Implementing Team Head Members

rights, provide responsive and cultural appropriate mechanism in addressing violations thereto and affording maximum protection to defenders of IP rights

NCCA

4. Recognizing and fulfilling Indigenous Peoples rights to self-determination, self-determined development and recognizing indigenous knowledge and socio economic, political and cultural systems.

NCIP DOE,DOST.DAR, DA,NEDA,CHED, DepEd, DOLE,TESDA, Congress, DFA, NCDA, NAPC,OMA, DILG,DOT, BOI, CSC, Senate , PLLO,PHRC

5. Providing culturally-appropriate basic social services and to recognize, protect and promote the cultural rights of IPs, combating prejudice and discrimination against them, and fostering solidarity among them and all other sectors of society.

NCIP

NSO, OCRG, NSCB,DSWD, DepEd, DOH, DOLE, TESDA, DA, CDA NCDA


54


6: Enhancing affirmative actions of the State in terms of legislative and administrative measures and mechanisms that will promote and protect the interest and welfare of the Indigenous Peoples

NCIP

DepEd, CHED, SUCs, PIA Supreme Court ,PRC, AFP PNP, DAP

7: To review and amend policies and programs on IP rights, ratify international conventions and enact laws that have direct bearing on IPs, formulate/reformulate existence of conflicting development policies, programs and areas in conflict with IP rights and interests with the mandatory and effective participation of IPs; develop a comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation; and push for the ratification of

NCIP PCW,,DSWD,CWC, NCDA, DENR, DAR, DOE, DA, DOLE, HLURB, NEDA, DILG,NAPC, LGU, OMA, BOI, CSC, Congress, Senate, PLLO, PHRC


55


treaties which have direct bearing on racial discrimination


56

SECTION 8 Resource Generation and Mobilization Plan

The annual CERD-PHRP II Resource Mobilization Plan will be formulated by the end of the quarter prior to the implementation year and finalized by the beginning of the next year before the budget call by the DBM that falls on the 1st quarter of the year of implementation.

As such, for Year 1 (2012), resources for CERD-PHRP II PAPs shall be

anchored on agencies’ mandate, General Appropriations Act (GAA) and Major Final Outputs (MFO). It is reiterated that most of the lead agencies and identified accountable and implementing agencies are operating on their respective agency’s MFO indicators and the GAA in the implementation of their respective mandates. It is encouraged that pooling of resources by these agencies and sourcing fund allocations from partner development institutions (foreign or local) can be possible for concerted efforts and resources. This strategy will stand while concerned agencies are able to incorporate CERD-PHRP into their respective agency plans and into the Philippine Development Plan (PDP) until 2016.


57

Table 8.6. Resource Mobilization Plan

Program/Activity/Project Resource Requirements by Source

Regular Government

Budget

Development Partners

(*The funds are still to be

negotiated

with ODA or other

development partners)

Other Sources Total Budget

Preparatory Consultations and proper meetings

20,000.00

20,000.00

10,000.00

50,000.00

Conduct of National and Local consultations with duty bearers and claim holders Conduct of trainors training on CERD and HRBA for both duty bearers and claim holders

30,000.00 30,000.00 10,000.00 70,000.00

Conduct of studies to support proposed legislations

Conduct of Treaty Monitoring and report preparation Conduct of information dissemination Conduct workshop, symposia, conferences, public hearings

300,000.00

200,000.00

100,000.00

600,000.00


58

Program/Activity/Project Resource Requirements by Source

Regular

Government Budget

Development

Partners (*The funds

are still to be negotiated

with ODA or other

development

partners)

Other Sources Total Budget

Conduct of sectoral and local trainings Knowledge sharing and management Drafting of legislation Conduct of Mid and Post review of PHRP- CERD II chapter

100,000.00

50,000.00

50,000.00

200,000.00


59

SECTION 9 Monitoring and Evaluation Plan

All members of the CERD-Thematic Clusters will submit annual plans

and semestral accomplishment reports to the CERD-PHRP Secretariat, PHRC within the 2nd week of July and January of the reference year.

Based on the consolidated accomplishment reports of each cluster

agency, the CERD-PHRP Secretariat will monitor progress of the implementation of the CERD thematic chapter plans in coordination with the lead agency on CERD thematic chapter. Results of progress of monitoring CERD-PHRP implementation including consolidated accomplishments.

Reports of each agency-cluster member shall be submitted for

policy review and decisions to the Chairman of the NCIP through its Office of Empowerment and Human Rights (OEHR), NCIP, the focal bureau for CERD and other human rights treaty reporting and lead agencies for CERD Philippine compliance reporting.

In coordination with the lead agency, the CERD-PHRP Secretariat will

present consolidated and status reports to all cluster members during regular meetings every quarter for verification of indicators and outputs.


60


61

Table 8.7 Monitoring and Evaluation Calendar

M & E

Activities

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Periodic

Monitoring

Annual and

Bi-annual progress report

Annual

and Bi-annual progress report

Annual


Annual


Annual


Reviews

Annual Cluster Group Assessment Report



CERD-PHRP mid

evaluation report



CERD-PHRP final evaluation report

Surveys/studies IP/ICC Research studies

IP/ICC research studies

Perception surveys



Perception surveys


Performance Scoreboard

Annual Report on Agency Performance

Ratings

Annual Report on Agency Performance Ratings




Chapter 8: CERD Chapter

Government & Nonprofit