Indigenous Peoples' Rights

Act of 1997
Indigenous People's Rights Act of 1997 (IPRA) (RA 8371) is a legislation that recognize and promote all the
rights of Indigenous Cultural Communities/Indigenous Peoples of the Philippines.

Early Beginnings[edit]
Year 1909, in the case of Cariño vs. Insular Government, the court has recognized long occupancy of land by
an indigenous member of the cultural communities as one of private ownership, which, in legal concept, is
termed "native title". This case paved the way for the government to review the so-called "native title" or
"private right." In the year 1919, the Second Public Land Act was enacted, recognizing the right of ownership
of any native of the country who, since July 4, 1907, or prior thereto, has continuously occupied and
cultivated, either by himself or through his predecessors-in-interest, a tract of agricultural public land.[1]

In 1936, Commonwealth Act No.141, amended by R.A. 3872 of 1964, was passed which provides that
members of the national cultural minorities who have resided on agricultural, public land since July 4, 1955 are
entitled to recognition of ownership whether or not the land has been certified as "disposable." They shall be
conclusively presumed to have performed all conditions essential to a government grant and shall be entitled to
a certificate of title.[2]

In the 1970s, the laws protecting indigenous people's lands expanded to territorial and bigger domains. Under
Bureau of Forestry Administrative Order No. 11 of 1970, all forest concessions were made subject to the
private rights of cultural minorities within the area as evidenced by their occupation existing at the time a
license is issued by the government. The Revised Forestry Code of 1975 (Presidential Decree 705 under
President Marcos) defines this "private right" of as "places of abode and worship, burial grounds and old
clearings."[3]

In 1978, the Presidential Arm for National Minorities (PANAMIN) was authorized to design, implement and
maintain settlements among the National Minorities. Prior to this, a Presidential Decree was issued in 1974,
"declaring all agricultural lands occupied and cultivated by members of the national Cultural Communities
since 1964 as alienable and disposable, except the islands of Panay and Negros and the provinces of Abra,
Quezon, Benguet and Camarines which became effective on March 11, 1984."[2]

The most recent laws before the Indigenous People's Rights Act of 1997 was passed which recognize the
existence of ancestral land right are the Organic Act of Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (RA 6734,
1989), and the Organic Act for the Cordillera Autonomous Region (RA 6766, 1989).[2]

Historical Evolution of RA.8371[edit]

The decrees that have been passed fail to encompass all the needs of the indigenous people primarily because
of failure in implementation and sole focus on the land and domains only.
Because of this, a more comprehensive law is needed that "seeks to stop prejudice against indigenous people
through recognition of certain rights over their ancestral lands, and to live in accordance recognize and protect
the rights of the indigenous people not only to their ancestral domain but to social justice and human rights,
self-determination and empowerment, and their cultural integrity,[2]" This then gave birth to movements for a
comprehensive law that will protect not only the lands, but human rights of the Filipino indigenous people.
CIPRAD or the Coalition for Indigenous People's Rights and Ancestral Domains is an alliance of Indigenous
People's Organizations (IPOs) and non-government organizations (NGOs) created to pursue the advocacy for
IP rights and ancestral domains. The Coalition is participated by IPOs in the Cordillera, Region I, Nueva
Vizcaya, Cagayan, Caraballo, Sierra Madre, Quezon, Aurora, Quirino, Nueva Ecija, Zambales, Pampanga,
Bulacan, Mindoro Occidental, Palawan, Panay, Davao, Cagayan, Cotabato and Zamboanga. CIPRAD
partnered with various NGOs organizations such as Episcopal Commission on Indigenous Peoples, National
Peace Conference, Center for Living Heritage and PANLIPI (Legal Assistance Center for Indigenous
Filipinos) in order to lobby for the IPRA or Indigenous People's Rights Act.
IPRA, formerly known as Ancestral Domain Bill, was first filed in the Congress sometime in 1987 under the
Senate Bill No. 909 authored by Senator Santanina Rasul, Senator Joseph Estrada and Senator Alberto
Romulo, during the 8th Congress, but was never enacted in to law. In the 9th Congress, Senator Rasul
introduced Senate Bill No. 1029 and Senator Macapagal-Arroyo introduced Senate Bill No. 1849. However,
the bill was never sponsored and deliberated upon in the floor.
Despite these failed efforts, the IPOs decided to give it another try. Decisions have been made during social
negotiations among NGOs and POs to rename the bill from Ancestral Domain Bill to Indigenous Peoples
Rights Act to emphasize the holistic approach and character of the bill. A consensus was made on December
1995 between IP representatives and NGO representatives. Seven non-negotiable points of the bill that were
promoted are the following:
a) recognition of native ttitle and rights of IPs to ancestral domains, b )respect for the right to cultural integrity,
c) recognition of indigenous peoples’ political structures and governance, d) delivery of basic services to the
indigenous peoples, e) respect for human rights, f) elimination of discrimination, g) and creation of an office
that would cater to the IPs needs.[2]

Year 1996, during the 10th Congress, Senator Juan Flavier sponsored the Bill no. 1728 which meant that he
has to defend the bill in all the Senate deliberations and discussions. In his sponsorship speech, he discussed
the legal bases for the bill which can be found in the 1987 Constitution. He also discussed the basic rights of
the ICCs, the contents of the bill itself, and the immediate need of protection of the Filipino Indigenous
People.[2]

Despite difficult hurdles and amendments enacted in the Congress which nearly brought the movement to its
death, the House of Representatives finally approved the bill late in September 1997. President Fidel V. Ramos
signed it on 22 October 1997 officially making it Republic Act No. 8371 Indigenous People's Rights Act of
1997 which aims to "Recognize, Protect and Promote the Rights of Indigenous cultural
Communities/Indigenous Peoples (ICCs/IPS) and for other Purposes."

Definition of Terms[edit]
Indigenous People of the Philippines[edit]
"The Philippines is a culturally diverse country with an estimated 14- 17 million Indigenous Peoples (IPs)
belonging to 110 ethno-linguistic groups. They are mainly concentrated in Northern Luzon (Cordillera
Administrative Region, 33%) and Mindanao (61%), with some groups in the Visayas area (as of 2013)." term
indigenous people as used to reflect the contemporary international language which was formally adopted in
1993.[4]

As of 1998, this is the list of the identified Indigenous People in the Philippines and their location.[2]

Cordillera and Region I Location of Domains

Bontoc Mountain Province

Balangao Mountain Province

Isneg Kalinga, Apayao

Tingguian Abra, Kalinga & Apayao

Kankanaey Benguet, Mt. Prov., Baguio

Kalanguya Benguet, Ifugao

Karao Benguet

Ibaloi Benguet

Ayangan Ifugao

Ifugao Ifugao

Tuwali Ifugao
Kalinga Kalinga

Apayao Kalinga, Apayao

Bago La Union, Ilocos Sur, Ilocos Norte, Pangasinan

Caraballo Mountains Location of Domains

Agta Cagayan, Quirino, Isabela

Kalanguya Nueva Vizcaya

Bugkalot Nueva Vizcaya, Quirino

Isinai Nueva Vizcaya

Gaddang Nueva Vizcaya, Isabela

Aggay Cagayan

Dumagat Isabela, Cagayan

Ibanag Cagayan

Itawes Cagayan

Ivatan Batanes

Rest of Luzon/ Sierra Madre Mountains

Aeta, Negrito, Baluga, Pugot Zambales, Bataan, Tarlac, Pampanga

Abelling Tarlac

Agta Aurora, Palayan City, Camarines Sur

Dumagat Quezon, Rizal, Aurora, Dumagat

Remontado Rizal, Laguna, Quezon

Bugkalot Aurora

Cimaron Camarines Sur

Kabihug Camarines Norte

Tabangnon Sorsogon

Abiyan (Aeta) Camarines Norte/Sur

Isarog Camarines Norte

Itom Albay

Pullon Masbate

Island Groups Location of Domains

Agutaynon Palawan
Tagbanua Palawan

Dagayanen Palawan

Tao't Bato Palawan

Batac Palawan

Palawanon Palawan

Molbog Palawan

Iraya Mangyan Mindoro Occidental/Oriental

Hanunuo Mangyan Mindoro Occidental/Oriental

Alangan Mangyan Mindoro Oriental

Buhid Mangyan Mindoro Occidental/Oriental

Tadyawan Mangyan Mindoro Occidental/Oriental

Batangan Mangyan Mindoro Occidental

Gubatnon Mangyan Mindoro Occidental

Ratagnon Mindoro Occidental

Ati Romblon
Cuyunon Palawan

Ati Iloilo, Antique, Negros Occidental, Capiz, Aklan

Sulod/ Bukidnon Iloilo, Antique, Capiz, Aklan

Magahat Negros Occidental

Korolanos Negros Oriental

Ata Negros Oriental

Bukidnon Negros Oriental

Escaya Bohol

Badjao Cebu/Bohol

Kongking Leyte, Samar

Southern/ Eastern Mindanao Location of Domains

Manobo Agusan Del Norte/ Del Sur

Mandaya Davao Oriental

Mansaka Davao Del Norte

Dibabawon Davao Del Norte

Banwaon Agusan Del Sur

Bagobo Davao Del Sur/ Davao City

Ubo Manobo Davao Del Sur/ Davao City

Tagakaolo Davao Del Sur

Talaingod, Lanilan Davao Del Norte/ Davao City

Mamanwa Surigao Del Norte

Higaonon Agusan Del Norte/ Agusan Del Sur

B'laan Davao Del Sur, Sarangani, South Cotabato

T'boli South Cotabato

Kalagan Davao Del Sur

Tagabawa Davao City

Manobo B'lit South Cotabato

Matigsalog Davao City, Davao Del Sur, Davao Del Norte

Tigwahanon Agusan Del Norte, Agusan Del Sur

Sangil South Cotabato, Sarangani

Central Mindanao Location of Domains

Aromanon North Cotabato

Teduray Sultan Kudarat, Maguindanao, Cotabato City

Bagobo North Cotabato

Ubo Manobo North Cotabato

Higaonon Lanao Del Sur, Iligan City

Subanen Lanao Del Norte

Maguindanao Maguindanao

Maranao Lanao Del Norte/ Lanao Del Sur

Iranon Maguindanao, Lanao Del Sur

Karintik North Cotabato

B'laan North Cotabato, Sultan Kudarat, Maguindanao

Lambangian Sultan Kudarat

Dulangan Sultan Kudarat

Northern and Western Location of Domains

Mindanao
 Subanen Zamboanga Del Sur, Del Norte, Misamis Occidental/Oriental,
Zamboanga City

Talaandig Bukidnon

Higaonon Bukidnon, Misamis Occidental/Oriental

Matigsalog Bukidnon

Umaymanon Bukidnon

Manobo Bukidnon

Kamigin Camiguin

Yakan Basilan

Sama Tawi-Tawi

Badjao/Sama Laut Tawi-Tawi, Basilan, Sulu archipelago

Kalibugan Zamboanga Del Sur/ Del Norte

Jama Mapon Sulu archipelago

The term indigenous cultural communities (ICCs) was used in the Philippine Constitution to describe a group
of people sharing common bonds of language, customs, traditions and other distinctive cultural traits, and who
have, under claims of ownership since time immemorial, occupied, possessed and utilized a territory. Time
immemorial refers to a period of time when as far back as memory can go, certain ICCs/IPs are known to have
occupied, possessed and utilized a defined territory devolved to them by operation of custom law/traditions or
inherited from their ancestors.
Both the terms IPs and ICCs refer to homogenous societies identified by self-ascription and ascription by
others, who have continuously lived as a community on communally bounded and defined territory, sharing
common bonds of customs, traditions and other cultural traits, through resistance to political, social and
cultural inroads to colonization, non-indigenous religions and culture. Whereas, the Filipino majority learned
very well the ways of the colonial masters by adapting to their laws and practices, the minority (IPs),
consciously asserted the integrity of their ancestral territories, pre-Hispanic native culture and justice systems
which are viewed as diametrically opposed to the majority's world view, but which the IPRA law attempts to
recognize and interface with the national legal system.
Ancestral Domains
The 1997 IPRA Law defines ancestral domains as "areas generally belonging to ICCs/IPs comprising lands,
inland waters, coastal areas, and natural resources 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 even when interrupted by war, force majeure or displacement by force, deceit,
stealth or as a consequence of government projects or any other voluntary dealings entered into by government
and private individuals or corporations, and which are necessary to ensure their economic, social and cultural
welfare. It shall include forests, pastures, residential, agricultural and other lands individually owned whether
alienable and disposable otherwise, hunting grounds, burial rounds, 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 and IPs who are still nomadic and or shifting cultivators."[5]

Ancestral domains include the spiritual and cultural bonds to the areas which the ICCs/IPs possess, occupy and
use and to which they have claims of ownership (inherited from ancestors). This generally refer to areas which
they have possessed at a period of time when as far back as memory can go. Proofs of time immemorial
possession main may include testimony of elders, historical accounts, anthropological or ethnographic studies,
names of places, using dialect or language of indigenous peoples, genealogy, treaties or pacts, between or
among indigenous peoples and or other populations.[2]

Ancestral Lands[edit]
Ancestral lands, as stated in the law, refer to "lands 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
even 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."[5]

Ancestral land owners are given the right to transfer these ancestral lands and the right to redeem ancestral
lands lost through vitiated consent. This is different with ancestral domains in a sense that this specifically
refers to the land while the domain may include land, water, and aerial territories.

Key Provisions[edit]
Right of Empowerment and Self Governance[edit]
SECTION 13. Self-Governance. — The State recognizes the inherent right of ICCs/IPs to self-governance and
self-determination and respects the integrity of their values, practices and institutions. Consequently, the State
shall guarantee the right of ICCs/IPs to freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.
SECTION 14. Support for Autonomous Regions. — The State shall continue to strengthen and support the
autonomous regions created under the Constitution as they may require or need. The State shall likewise
encourage other ICCs/IPs not included or outside Muslim Mindanao and the Cordilleras to use the form and
content of their ways of life as may be compatible with the fundamental rights defined in the Constitution of
the Republic of the Philippines and other internationally recognized human rights.
SECTION 15. Justice System, Conflict Resolution Institutions, and Peace Building Processes. — 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.
SECTION 16. Right to Participate in Decision-Making. — ICCs/IPs have the right to participate fully, if they
so choose, at all levels of decision-making in matters which may affect their rights, lives and destinies through
procedures determined by them as well as to maintain and develop their own indigenous political structures.
Consequently, the State shall ensure that the ICCs/IPs shall be given mandatory representation in policy-
making bodies and other local legislative councils.
SECTION 17. Right to Determine and Decide Priorities for Development. — The ICCs/IPs shall have the right
to determine and decide their own priorities for development affecting their lives, beliefs, institutions, spiritual
well-being, and the lands they own, occupy or use. They shall participate in the formulation, implementation
and evaluation of policies, plans and programs for national, regional and local development which may directly
affect them.
SECTION 18. Tribal Barangays. — The ICCs/IPs living in contiguous areas or communities where they form
the predominant population but which are located in municipalities, provinces or cities where they do not
constitute the majority of the population, may form or constitute a separate barangay in accordance with the
Local Government Code on the creation of tribal barangays.
SECTION 19. Role of Peoples Organizations. — The State shall recognize and respect the role of independent
ICCs/IPs organizations to enable the ICCs/IPs to pursue and protect their legitimate and collective interests
and aspirations through peaceful and lawful means.
SECTION 20. Means for Development/Empowerment of ICCs/IPs. — The Government shall establish the
means for the full development/empowerment of the ICCs/IPs own institutions and initiatives and, where
necessary, provide the resources needed therefore.[6]

Rights to Ancestral Domain[edit]

Chapter III, section 7 of the Republic Act No. 8371 of 1997 covers the 8 Rights to Ancestral Domain. This
chapter focuses on the identification and protection of the entitlement of the Indigenous Cultural Communities
(ICC), and the Indigenous Peoples (IPs) as the proper owners of their ancestral land. The following rights are
listed below:
This was implemented in order to stop the historical injustices experienced by the IPs. Despite the
implementation of the law since the year 1997, the IPs of the Philippines still persistently experience injustices.
The IPs are struggling fighting for their rights because they feel like the government has continued to neglect
them.
The main criticism concerning R.A. 8371 is that it is ambiguous. One of the issues it encountered was that it is
inconsistent and conflicting with the Philippines’ constitution (2).
This has become the case because of the doctrine of jura regalia, which means that "all lands of the public
domain belong to the state" (2). The next problem encountered was that the ancestral domain rights’ legal
characterisation as "private but communal" differentiated from the Philippines’ civil law's idea of co-
ownership of real property. This meant that areas in ancestral domains is shared by the members of the
community, but that does not mean that they are considered as co-owners of the said property according to the
New Civil Code (2).
Section 57 of chapter VIII of the Republic Act No. 8371 of 1997 which states that:

Natural resources within Ancestral Domains - The ICCs/IPs shall have priority rights in the harvesting,
extraction, development or exploitation of any natural resources within the ancestral domain. A non-member
of ICCs/IPs concerned may be allowed to take part in the development and utilization of the natural resources
for a period of not exceeding twenty-five (25) years: provided, that a formal and written agreement is entered
into with the ICCs/IPs concerned or that the community, pursuant to its own decision making process, has
agreed to allow such operation: provided, finally, that the NCIP may exercise visitorial powers and take
appropriate action to safeguard the rights of ICCs/IPs under the same contract (1).

is also viewed as problematic (2) because being given

the right to be prioritised in terms of development, exploitation, extraction, or harvesting of natural resources
belonging in ancestral domains does not necessarily mean that an IP member is given the right of ownership of
the said natural resources (3). Section 57 does not really reject the jura regalia, also known as the Regalian
Doctrine or the Doctrine of Discipline expressed in the 1935, 1973, and 1987 Philippine Constitutions (4).
According to the constitutions mentioned, the Regalian Doctrine expresses that "all lands of the public domain,
as well as all natural resources enumerated therein, whether private or public land, belong to the State." (4).
Most argue that the IPRA is flawed because it violates this (4). Instead of protecting the rights of the IPs,
Section 57 strengthens argument that all natural resources found in ancestral domains belong to the State (3).

Social Justice and Human Rights[edit]

This chapter in the IPRA was written to recognize the indigenous people’ right to the same privileges and
protections also afforded by the State to its citizens. The law reemphasizes that all ICC/IPs are legally entitled
to fundamental universal human rights and that the State should actively create an inclusive environment with
this in mind.
Among these rights include;

Equal Protection and Non-discrimination of ICCs/IPs[edit]

Patterned after international standards set by the Charter of the United Nations, Universal Declaration of
Human Rights as well as the equal protection clause in the Philippine 1987 Constitution, this section places the
State as duly responsible for the execution of the IPs’ human rights. The State is then called to acknowledge
the ICCs/IPs position as a vulnerable group that have been historically excluded from socio-economic
opportunities and to guarantee that the IPs enjoy equal protection by the law.

Rights During Armed Conflict[edit]

As signatory to the Geneva Conventions, the State is expected to respect and to ensure respect for the
Conventions in all circumstances including local and international armed conflict. The State through the NCIP
is empowered to ensure all civliians including IPs'/ICCs' safety in circumstances of emergency and conflict.
This being said, areas under Ancestral Domains and members of indigenous tribes require special regulation
beyond that of the Convention as legally recognized IPs/ICCs are given the freedom to govern their territories
by their own laws. Through the IPRA, the State must not;
a) Recruit children of the ICCs/IPs into the armed forces under any circumstance;
b) Conscript or recruit ICC/IP individuals against their will to the armed forces, and in particular for use
against other indigenous peoples;
c) Relocate ICC/IP communities to special centers for military purposes;
d) Force ICC/IP communities, families or individuals to abandon their lands, territories, or means of
subsistence; and

e) Require indigenous individuals to work for military purposes under discriminatory conditions.[5]

These provisions protects IP autonomy as well as requires the State to work alongside tribes through an
integrated emergency program which includes relief and rehabilitation efforts for IP victims of armed violence.
Special emphasis is placed the impact of armed conflict of indigenous children' mental well being and
development in high risk conflict areas.

Freedom from Discrimination and Right to Equal Opportunity[edit]

Unlawful Acts Pertaining to Employment[edit]

Basic Services[edit]

The law guarantees indigenous peoples’ right to basic social services as provided by the State. As a vulnerable
group, special attention is given for the "immediate, effective and continuing improvement of their economic
and social conditions."[5]

Examples of services that fit this provision include social security through the Republic of the Philippines
Social Services System, housing, vocational training and employment support through various efforts of the
Department of Social Welfare and Development as well as complete health coverage through the PhilHealth
"No Balance Billing" from government hospitals.[7][8]

Women, Children and Youth[edit]

The law also emphasizes that these rights are also to be afforded to indigenous women and children. The
provisions should not result in "the diminution of rights and privileges already recognized and afforded to
these groups under existing laws of general application."[5] The government through NCIP must provide
support to organizations which are geared towards empowering women and the youth to involve themselves in
community/nation building.
In accordance to the customary laws of each tribe, the government must provide mechanisms that facilitate
deeper understanding of indigenous culture for women and youth while their human dignity. The law ensures
the full realization of women's and youth rights but requires all mechanisms and programs to be culturally
sensitive and relevant to the ICCs/IPs needs.
An example of the programs geared towards the execution of this particular provision in the IPRA is the
culturally sensitive day-care program for both IP children and their mothers which NCIP mentions in its first
administrative order.[9]

Cultural Integrity[edit]

Attempts to implement these rights regarding cultural integrity are most recently captured by the celebration of
National Indigenous People's Month on October to November 2014. This was said to be the biggest gathering
of Philippine indigenous peoples by far. Headed by the chairman of the National Commission for Culture and
the Arts (NCCA), Felipe M. De Leon, Jr., showcased were the traditional cuisines, rituals, musical
performances and other elements of culture. This gave way for indigenous peoples to interact and learn from
one another's culture. It was held in three different venues, from Oct. 22 to 23 at the Baguio Convention Center
in Baguio City in Luzon in expected attendees were from groups: Gaddang, Isinay, Tinggian, Itneg, Ibanag,
Yogad, Itawit, Malaweg, Kasiguran, Ivatan, Itbayat, Bugkalot, Isnag, Kalinga, Ifugao, Ibaloy, Kankanaey,
Balangao, Bontok, Applai, Ilocano, Bolinao, Pangasinan, Tagalog, Sambal, Pampangan, Ayta, Agta, Mangyan,
Palawani, Molbog, Jama Mapun, Tagbanua, Pala’wan, Agutaynen, Bicolano, Batak and Cuyunon; from Nov. 6
to 7 in Zamboanga City in Mindanao aimed to highlight the groups: Yakan, Subanen, Manobo, Higaonon,
Bagobo, Mandaya, Mansaka, B’laan, Sangir, Ata Manobo, T’boli, Teduray, Arumanen, Mamanwa, Maranao,
Magindanao, Iranun and Tausug and from Nov. 10 to 11 in Bacolod City, Negros Occidental in Visayas for the
groups: Ati, Panay Bukidnon, Waray, Abaknon, Hiligaynon and Cebuano. It was organized by the
Subcommission of Cultural Communities and Traditional Arts, a subcommission of the NCCA, along with the
local governments, government agencies, nongovernmental organizations and private companies with the
theme of "Katutubong Filipino para sa Kalikasan at Kapayapaan" ["Native Filipinos for Nature and
Peace"].[10]

Related International Legislation on IP Rights[edit]

The United Nations acknowledges worldwide the rights of the indigenous people. The article on the UN
Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples is recognized in the international sphere and was adopted by
the United Nations General Assembly during its 61st session at UN Headquarters in New York City on 13
September 2007.
The Declaration is structured as a United Nations resolution, "with 23 preambular clauses and 46 articles
concerning the collective and individual rights of the indigenous peoples in different parts of the world
including protection of their cultural heritage and manifestations of their cultures including human and genetic
resources."
The Philippines did not immediately support the draft. It abstained when the first votes were called, despite the
existence of the Indigenous People's Rights Act of 1997. The Department of Justice and the Office of the
Solicitor General expressed their opposition to the adoption, as they still had to study whether this was
consistent with the Philippine Constitution. Furthermore, the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples,
which was the representative organization of the Philippine IPs did not endorse it at first. However, after
reviewing the declaration for many times, the Philippines supported and voted a yes.[11]

In the end, the final result of the votes for the passing of the charter resulted to 143 yes votes, 4 no votes
(Australia, Canada, New Zealand and U.S.) and 11 abstentions.

Enforcement of IPRA[edit]
On October 2008, the Lumads (an indigenous group) organized a conference in Naga, Zamboanga Sibugay
involving several indigenous people groups. In this summit, the indigenous people groups questioned the
utility of IPRA in protecting their rights described in the IPRA. In this summit, the indigenous people groups
discussed the instances the Philippine Law hindered their rights promised by IPRA. Primarily, the
inconsistencies lie in how the Philippine Law prohibited them from following their customs and traditions that
is centered around the indigenous people's governance of their land.
For instance, they complained that the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) prohibits
some of the IP farmers to hunt animals, and to cultivate lands ( i.e. the 53,262-hectare part of Mt. Malindang
)covered by National Integrated Protected Areas (NIPA) program; thereby, cutting off their primary source of
income and food for their family. In worst-case scenarios, the state outrightly utilizes its right of state to
dispose public lands for activities such as mining, logging and installation of dams that infringe upon the IP's
ancestral domains. And because of these instances of usurpation of ancestral domain to the IP such as wide
coverage of the NIPA to the IP's ancestral domain and economic activities that require the state to exercise
their right to dispose public lands, the IP's basic sources of income and food for their families are greatly
affected.
The limitations and prohibitions extends not only to their basic needs but also prevents them from performing
important rituals in their lives. This includes wedding ceremonies that are normally held without cost but costs
around 50 to 500 pesos when NCIP officials conduct it that is burdensome to IPs who lack sources of funds.

Organisations related to IPRA[edit]

Here are some of the organisations that support IRPA law and their functions:
● Asian Development Bank (ADB)- gives loan to government to create projects such as Cordillera
Agricultural Resource Management (CHARM) that help the development of IP's. The CHARM
project involves helping the IPs in Cordillera to develop the agricultural resource of IPs land.
They also helped in project Mindanao Basic Education Development project to give poor some
education
● International Labor Organization- made some conventions regarding IPs such as poverty program,
regarding on how IPs can assert more control and development of their own lands, regarding steps
on how can IPs protect and guarantee their right of ownership and possession, regarding the
responsibilities of government to ensure the rights of IPs.
● Philippine Action for Intercultural Development- helped the IPs regarding community mapping,
where they help IPs in legalizing the boundaries of their respective lands
● National Confederation of Indigenous Peoples - aims to unite the different IP rights organization
to fight for their rights. Their past projects includes Ancestral Domain Sustainable Development
 Protection Plan (ADSDPP), demarcation of Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title (CADT) on the
ground in favor of the Ati in Boracay Island etc.[21]
● Tribal Communities Association of the Philippine- provides legal assistance to IPs

Gaps in the Law[edit]

Section 56 of the Indigenous People’s Rights Act of 1997 or the IPRA Law states that “property rights within
the ancestral domains already existing and/or vested upon effectivity of this Act, shall be recognized and
respected.”This section is problematic as it means that any title before 1997 holds more weight than an
ancestral claim. Scholars and pro-indigenous groups have criticized this section as it effectively destroys any
ancestral land claim before 1997. Historians have pointed out that most indigenous groups in the Philippines
have been in the archipelago prior to Spanish occupation in the 15th century. However, according to Section
56, since there is no proper documentation committed by the indigenous people prior to 1997, an indigenous
group cannot claim any land that have been in non-inidgenous possession prior to 1997. This makes multi-
national companies and local government units have the power to resist ancestral claims and use the IPRA Law
itself to counter indigenous land claims, as testified in an ongoing Mangyan case since 2011, which evicted
indigenous Mangyans from a claimed land they have been using for many years. In 2015, it was announced
that the indigenous land shall be made into a sanitary landfill by the Puerto Galero local government unit, and
that the Mangyans shall be relocated into a site near the landfill. All Mangyan-planted coconut trees on the
landfill site shall be chopped down by the government and the local government unit shall compensate only
100 pesos (approximately 2 US dollars) each to the Mangyans.[12]

See also[edit]
● Ethnic groups of the Philippines
● Lumad

References[edit]
● ^ Bautista, Philipp. "Acts - The LawPhil Project". www.lawphil.net. Retrieved 2015-07-03.
● ^
● Jump up to:
abcdefgh
● Damaso, Elena; De Guzman, Ma. Vicenta; Manzano, Florence, eds. (1998). Guide to R.A.
8371. Manila: Coalition for Indigenous Peoples' Rights and Ancestral Domains.
● ^ "Presidential Decree No. 705, s. 1975 | Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines". Retrieved
2015-07-03.
● ^ "Fast Facts: Indigenous Peoples in the Philippines". UNDP in Philippines. Retrieved 2015-06-30.
● ^
● Jump up to:
abcde
● "Republic Act No. 8371 | Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines". Retrieved 2015-
06-30.
● ^ http://www.gov.ph/1997/10/29/republic-act-no-8371/. Missing or empty |title= (help)
● ^ "PhilHealth to cover street children, PWDs, indigenous people – DOH - The Manila Times Online".
Retrieved 2015-07-01.
● ^ "DSWD orients indigenous youths on their rights, privileges | Department of Social Welfare and
Development". www.dswd.gov.ph. Retrieved 2015-07-01.
● ^ "http://www.wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/laws/en/ph/ph083en.pdf" (PDF). www.wipo.int. Retrieved 2015-
07-01. External link in |title= (help)
● ^ Editor, Roel. "A celebration of Philippine indigenous cultures". Retrieved 2015-07-06.
● ^ UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and Programme of the Second International
Decade of the World's Indigenous People. Baguio City: Tebtebba Foundation. 2006.
● ^ http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/news/specialreports/490838/48-mangyan-families-in-puerto-
galera-may-lose-homes-to-landfill/story/