In 1997, the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA) was passed, embodying the rights and aspirations of Indigenous Peoples (IPs) and providing the legal framework for the protection and development of Indigenous Cultural Communities (ICCs). Among the rights sought by IPs is the recognition of their ancestral domains (ADs) through the issuance of the certificates of ancestral domain titles (CADTs) and certificate of ancestral land titles (CALTs). CADTs are titles that formally recognize the rights of possession and ownership of ICCs/IPs over their ancestral domains as identified and delineated in accordance with this law, while CALTs refer to titles formally recognizing the rights of indigenous cultural communities (ICCs)/IPs over their ancestral lands.
As of July 2010, 156 out of 286 CADT applications have been approved by the NCIP, while 130 are still in various stages of the titling process. The NCIP also approved 258 CALTs with 8,609 right holders.
The Ancestral Domain Sustainable Development and Protection Plan (ADSDPP) is a long term comprehensive spatial and development plan with identifiesd programs and projects that strengthen self-governance, build lasting peace and genuine development within ancestral domains of particular ICCs or IP groups. It serves as the community development framework that ensures a participatory process of mainstreaming IP issues and concerns. However, the ICCs/IPs still need technical and financial assistance in the formulation of the ADSDPPs and their integration in the CLUPs and local development plans. The NCIP had already assisted 87 ICCs/IPs in the formulation of their ADSDPPs.
The NCIP also formulated and implemented the guidelines on the Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC). FPIC refers to the consensus of all concerned members of the ICCs/ IPs that is determined in accordance with their respective customary laws and practices free from any external manipulation, interference and coercion and obtained after fully disclosing the intent and scope of the project. To date, the NCIP has issued a total of 296 Certificates of Compliance and 1,368 Certificates without Overlap (CEB/ Certificates of Non-Overlap) related to FPIC. Concerns exist, however, over the duration of the FPIC process, as well as the internal conflicts within the ICCs utilization of royalties, and the non-implementation by companies operating within ADs of the terms indicated in the memorandum of agreement with the ICCs.
Further, NCIP is mandated to provide legal assistance to enforce the right of IPs to resolve conflicts in accordance with their customary laws pertaining to property rights, claims, ownership, hereditary succession and settlement of land disputes within ancestral domains/ lands. NCIP handled 8,767 legal assistance to ICCs/IPs before judicial and quasi-judicial bodies since 2004. There are still 265 cases pending before the NCIP regional hearing officers.
Basic services for IPs within their ancestral domains were delivered in accordance with their rights and entitlements. These covered educational assistance; strengthening IP education starting with indigenization of curriculum and learning materials, as well as cultural sensitivity training for teachers; assistance to IP-serving community schools; traditional crafts; livelihood and entrepreneurship; support to cultural festivals/congresses; medical missions and referral system; assistance in emergency situations; and documentation of activities for traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions, customary laws and children in armed conflict (CIAC) .The delivery of these socioeconomic services was anchored on indigenous knowledge systems and practices (IKSPs) and based on the principles of human rights, cultural sensitivity, gender equality, people empowerment, and sustainable development.
Most IPs/ICCs, however, still lack adequate access to social protection and basic services within their localities and among their particular tribal groups. They also need the negotiation skills and technical know-how on risk and impact assessments, to ensure equitable access-benefit sharing agreements, and the necessary funds for the management and preservation of their ancestral domains.
The representation of IPs in various legislative bodies and other special bodies, as provided under the IPRA, as well as the convening and sustainability of their multilevel consultative bodies, are priority concerns that still need to be fully addressed.
There is also a need for a more updated and disaggregated data on IPs that can serve as basis in the formulation of more appropriate, targeted and updated policies and programs for IPs.