Home | To bottom

IPs attend national CBD

BAGUIO CITY (May 4) — Tribes from the various indigenous communities across the country gathered here for a capacity building and strategy workshop on the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act (IPRA) and its new guidelines on the Free Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) at the Igorot Lodge from May 4 to 6. The activity geared towards effective implementation of the Philippine National CBD.

Thirty-six delegates from indigenous peoples (IPs), non-government organizations, and representatives from the academe and government agencies joined the seminar.

The group presented the prevailing situation of the IPs in the country alongside contradicting government laws with regard to their rights and culture.

Joji Cariño, Project Leader on Tebtebba Capacity building for CBD said that they are bringing together indigenous peoples, members of government and academe to discuss the implementation of the CBD, IPRA, and the FPIC.

Prof. Arturo Bocquiren of the University of the Philippines Baguio (UPB) mentioned that the Philippines ranks 17th in the world’s richest natural resource base. At the same time, it ranks 25th in the world’s most ecologically endangered places.

Bocquiren said that IPs should lead in the conservation of biodiversity since the areas concerned are their land. He added that biodiversity advocacy is an obligation that everyone should take on.

The seminar emphasized the participation of the IPs in the country on biodiversity conservation. According to Datu Victor Saway of Apu Agbilin Community Organization, an IP group in Bukidnon, the participation of the IPs should be acknowledged since their customs and traditions significantly contribute to the biological conservation compared to the practices by the government and the private sector. Janeth Escobar, one of the delegates from Mindanao said that IPs have minimal involvement in local governance and decision making.

The delegates discussed key issues in their own communities and their actions toward these. The discussion focused on conservation of biological diversity, sustainable use of biological diversity and benefit sharing arising from the use of genetic resources.

Some of the common problems mentioned include destruction of biological diversity such as in Davao where in local frog and shell species are now lesser in number; land grabbing, government projects that contradict with the IP lifestyle and the increasing number of migrants, which can endanger IP culture. Government neglect was also reported.

Land tenure security and land conversion issues were reported as well by the delegates.

Problems in legislation such as the passage at the Mining Act of 1995, the National Integrated Areas System (NIPAS) and the IPRA were also mentioned.

According to Florence M. Daguitan of Montañosa Research and Development Center (MRDC), one of the problems in Cordillera is the Regalian Doctrine which contradicts with the IPs beliefs and worldview. The doctrine provides for “State control and ownership over all natural resources in the public domain.” Other delegates share the same view.

However, IPs firmly practice communal sharing which was emphasized by Dr. Lourdes J. Cruz of the UP Marine Science Institute. IPs do not support the idea of privatization and commercialization because these can ruin natural resources, Cruz said.

Daguitan added that NIPAS also prohibits the IPs in their own land by not allowing them in certain “protected areas”. She explained that the land has always been a part of the Cordillera peoples’ existence.

According to Cariño, if the implementation of the CBD is the priority, communities practicing biodiversity conservation should be noted. She added that the implementation of the CBD should respect the rights of indigenous peoples.

With regard to the FPIC, obtaining such nowadays is easy for private companies and the government, a common complaint among IPs, especially with the impending passing of the new guidelines on FPIC, Cariño said. (See related article.)

However, Marites Agayaten of Protected Area and Wildlife Bureau (PAWB) said that it the government finds it hard identifying whom to talk with when government projects are concerned. Hence, she said, the new guidelines requiring that leaders and elders can give a consent to a project may shorten the process.

As a government representative, Agayaten stressed the need to protect the IPRA as opposed to IPs opinion. According to some delegates, the IPRA recognizes the indigenous cultures, however, some of its application is not appropriate to the IPs.

Proposals to ensure community stability were raised. These include review of the contradicting laws, assertion of rights to self-determination, policy advocacy and micro-watershed projects. Applications, however, differ from one ICC to another due to the differences in the communities’ biological diversity problems.

The academe also presented different programs to achieve conservation. These are the Biodiversity Advocacy of the Cordillera Studies Center discussed by Bocquiren and the Rural LINC Program explained by Cruz.

The seminar was sponsored by Tebtebba and the Third World Network. # Sharon L. Ayes, UP Baguio Intern for NORDIS

Home | Back to top