PART OF the problem is that while IPRA is laudable, it exists alongside government programs and policies that indigenous communities say are against their interests.

“IPRA is Johnny-come-lately,” admits NCIP chairperson Janette Cansing Serrano. She says that by the time IPRA was enforced, contentious laws were already put in place, particularly the Mining Act of 1995, and environment and natural resource laws on protected areas, and the land reform law. This is why, she says, much of the job of the NCIP is talking with more established agencies to harmonize laws.

To date, NCIP has inked harmonization guidelines with the environment and agrarian reform departments as well as the Land Registration Authority on delineation, titling and management of resources within ancestral domains. NCIP has also talked to the interior department to secure cooperation of local government units to recognize ancestral domain rights of indigenous peoples.

Most local governments were apprehensive to the delineation process, which cuts across political boundaries, says Serrano. They thought these would reduce their internal revenue allotment, she explains. But she says the greater challenge to NCIP lies in securing sufficient money from the national coffers to do its job. She quips, “Our mandate is bigger than our pockets.”

In fact, in its first three years, under the term of ousted president Joseph Estrada, the Commission was not given any budget because its first head was allegedly involved in graft. It was only in 2000 that the NCIP began receiving a budget through the General Appropriations Act. It gets an average of only P460 million a year, or roughly P39 — less than a dollar — per indigenous person annually. Of this average budget, about 70 percent goes to personnel salaries while the rest go to projects and other operation expenditures.

Serrano says that with such measly budget, “our agency also feels we are marginalized.” She also says increasing the budget to finish titling and delineating ancestral domains is a matter of political will. But she insists that the NCIP has advanced well in protecting the rights of indigenous peoples to their ancestral domain despite budgetary constraints.

LRC-KSK’s VILLANUEVA, though, is less upbeat. While she concedes that IPRA is a landmark legislation, she argues that it has become a mere “accommodation in the present political system” because it has failed to resolve conflicts in relation to land and natural resources, especially those in state-owned projects.

	HANUNUO Mangyan recite poetry during an ambahan session. [photo courtesy of Mangyan Heritage Center]

For instance, the Subanen peoples in Siocon, Zamboanga del Norte did secure their ancestral domain claim in 1997, which was converted into a CADT in 2003. Yet two years later, the Canadian mining firm TVI Pacific Inc. opened its mine operations in Mount Canatuan, which Subanen believe to be a sacred place that should be untouched.

TVI has been operating in the province since the 1990s despite charges of displacement, intimidation, and loss of livelihood, and environmental destruction from Subanen and small-scale miners.

“I can’t return to my own home now,” says Timuay (indigenous leader) Jose Boy Anoy, who has led more than 500 Subanen families to protest against TVI’s presence in the mountain. Anoy, 64, says he has received threats from paramilitary groups that TVI hired to fence off and guard the mountain from protesting Subanen like him.

In 2005, the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) ruled that the Canadian subsidiary failed to get genuine free and prior informed consent from the indigenous peoples there. The TVI chose to deal with the Siocon Subanon Association, which both the CHR and the NCIP said was a product of midnight deals and did not represent the true Subanen in the area.

TVI over the years has refuted these allegations, stating that it has the consent of the area’s indigenous peoples. In a recent letter to the Philippine Daily Inquirer, it said that it enjoys the support of the Subanen who "have joined in the common effort to judiciously use resources as a means of attaining economic and social progress." It also said Anoy was not a tribal leader and that Mount Canatuan “is not sacred.”

The NCIP says the TVI continues to give the Siocon Subanon Association a hefty royalty of at least P1 million monthly. In the meantime, Villanueva says it is time for a progressive interpretation of IPRA. “Advocacy should not stop just because there is already a law,” she says. “It should further be used to let non-indigenous peoples understand and respect the rights of indigenous groups.”

She also says the NCIP should work to be truly biased for the indigenous peoples, instead of virtually facilitating the entry of mining projects in ancestral lands.

But Serrano says her commission is not pro-mining, even if it is under the Office of the President, which aggressively promotes the mining to increase investment. Still, she argues, “We have to balance liberty with prosperity. We have to get better deals for the indigenous peoples.”

Cultural anthropologist Castro, for his part, says institutions like schools and media should begin doing their part in helping indigenous peoples into the mainstream. He says that at the very least, there should be an end in stereotyping or putting token representation of indigenous peoples in media stories, books, and films.

Castro says that the contribution of the indigenous people in shaping our history is even usually overlooked. He points out, “Did you know that heroine Gabriela Silang was an indigenous woman, a Tingguian? But it was never mentioned in our history books.”