Learning Brief LEARNING BRIEF “Pakada and tutya”: Gaining the Indigenous Communities’ Consent for Project Implementation Key Messages It is tradition in the Cordilleras or among Indigenous Peoples’ (IPs) that before entering into any territory, pakada” andone mustto leave: seek Pakada” first the in consent Kankana-ey of the (Besao, community. Sagada It • Introducing a project is called “ which means“pakacha” permission to enter to the ICC needs pakaja” andpakada” Sadanga, Mt. Province), in Bontoc, Mt. understanding, Province, “ in Tubo, Abra. Although the word transparency, respect tradition“ ofis deriveddeliberating from whether the Ilocano to approve dialect, itor was deny and perseverance. The practiced by the IPs of Cordillera combined with their culture, tradition and beliefs of the community Tutyathe request is usually to enter done their in their community dap-ays/ators/atos which they call as must be considered “tutya” in Kankana-ey term used in Sagada and Besao. when introducing a which project. Approval of keyrefer players to an indigenous to administer open the meeting agreements place related made of to the stone slabs where bonfire is usually set at its center. The project by the community pakada” tutya” represented by the different dap-ays (Tubo, Sagada and is in accordance with “ and “ are the Council of Elders (COEs) their customary laws and experiences. Their Besao), ators (Sadanga) and atos (Mainit, Bontoc). experiences include the historical struggles This traditional approach was consciously followed by the project in gaining the consent of the indigenous of the community communities of Abra and Mountain Province for its involving ownership and mountains:SIKAME-IWMP Sisipitan, initiative. Kaman-ingel The proposed and Mengmeng watershed management of natural protection plan was named after the three major resources within their ancestral domain claims. (SIKAME) situated in the boundaries of Abra and Mountain Province. Objectively, the implementation of the watershed protection plan becomes the responsibility of the different tribes within the project site. The Project has identified the provincial boundaries of Mountain Province and Abra as the appropriate areas for the establishment of model learning site because it contains the biggest area of water source that supplies the Project’s largest population/beneficiaries. The SIKAME-IWMP specifically aims to prepare watershed plan to protect, sustain, safeguard and enhance the common natural resources in the watershed areas of Mountain Province and Abra; document the indigenous forest management practices of the IPs in the proposed inter- tribal watershed management plan, identify the common watershed areas and come up with a common plan to protect, sustain and enhance the SIKAME ecosystem. Gueday, Ambagiw and Tamboan of Besao, Aguid, Pide, Fidelisan, The plan/project covers 18 barangays namely, Lacmaan, Agawa, Madongo, Tanulong, and Bangaan of Sagada, Mainit of Bontoc, Belwang of Sadanga for Mountain Province and Kili, Tabacda, Tiempo, Alangtin, and Tubtuba of Tubo for Abra Province. The proposed watershed plan covers a total land area of approximately 44,604.96 hectares within 9 sub-watersheds. In the conduct of the initiative, the Project conducted the Free and Prior Information Consent or FPIC in coordination with the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP). The FPIC principle generally requires that communities must be adequately informed about development projects in a timely manner and should be given the opportunity to approve or reject these projects free from undue pressure as stated in the FPIC legal framework of the RA. 8371 (IPRA Law). The consent and approval of all the tribes involved in the SIKAME watershed is important because the main objective of the proposed plan is for all the tribes to co-manage, protect, and preserve the SIKAME natural resources. The Tribes at the very start had many reasons and fears that blocked a unanimous consent resulting to the non-approval of the SIKAME-IWMP. To understand their views, the Project conducted a series of “tutya”. 2 Experiences and Reflections Seeking approval of the ICCs for the issuance Consent seeking as an iterative process: of Certification Precondition of the proposed The case of Northern Sagada project through pakada and tutya The Tribes at the very start had many reasons and The certification precondition states that free, fears that blocked a unanimous consent resulting prior and informed consent (FPIC) has been to the non-approval of the SIKAME-IWMP. To obtained from the concerned IPs. When the understand their views, the Project conducted pakada was already granted or the consent of the a series of tutya. On those occasions, the team community is obtained, the terms and conditions presented all possibilities, opportunities, and agreed upon shall be stated in a memorandum potentials of the watershed protection plan. It was of agreement to be executed between and among reiterated that once approved and materialized, the ICC/IPs (represented by elders who have been the Project will be implemented by all the ICCs identified during the validation and authorized by within the SIKAME area as co-tribal management. the community to sign). A series of “tutya” were But still, some elders were not yet satisfied conducted in all covered barangays. with the concept of the proposed plan. Thus, In the case of Tubo, Abra and Belwang, Sadanga, they requested to have another tutya and more the pakada and tutya was conducted once per information education communication campaign domain, and thrice for Besao, Mountain Province for them to fully understand the whole concept of for they have immediately understood the main the proposed plan. The request was again granted concept, objectives and goals of the proposed by the Project. However, during the course of project. The three ICCs immediately granted tutya, the elders refused consent again claiming approval and consent, and Memorandum of that it will bring negative effect to the community Agreements were signed. On February 2019, the and that they cannot afford to manage other tribes CP for the three Municipalities (per ancestral entering in their boundaries because it might domain) were issued by the NCIP. Meanwhile, cause tribal conflict in the future. Additionally, it took long for Northern Sagada and Mainit, there were some negative elements affecting their Bontoc, to give their approval and consent consciousness that leads them to misunderstood even after the Project conducted series of tutya the project concept, and experienced on past with them. Thus, requested for more tutya and unsuccessful projects like similar research were information education communication (IEC) conducted in the ili without full disclosure of the campaigns. final result. Northern Sagada elders forwarded a letter of resolution stating their refusal to the proposed Formulation of Technical Working Group to plan and excluding Mount Sisipitan in the help achieve project objectives SIKAME plan. As a response, the Project sought A Technical Working Group (TWG) composed help from the MLGU and Municipal TWG A Technical Working Group (TWG) composed Members. of project staff, provincial and municipal local The Local Chief Executive then convened the government units, partner agencies from NCIP, barangay chairpersons of the six Barangays in DENR, DILG, and NEDA, and COEs from the 18 northern Sagada together with the Project staff Barangays were organized to work as the team to and NCIP in his office to discuss the Resolution of provide technical assistance in the formulation Rejection to the SIKAME Project. The Barangay of the SIKAME-IWMP. On the other hand, the officials were enlightened and agreed to continue identified COEs as tribe representatives will help the SIKAME Project after the meeting. They in the formulation of the policies in support to the claimed that the Resolution was not discussed plan. COEs as representative in the TWG will also to them properly and was not even agreed upon help explain the aim and purpose of the SIKAME- IWMP in their respective community. 3 Experiences and Reflections by majority of the community members. The Barangay Chairpersons then promised to coordinate the conduct of community consultation and to pursue for the approval of the concerned ICCs on the said project. They also suggested for more conducive venue for they believed that it might be the venue or ambiance that resulted to the previous disapprovals. The third “tutya” was then conducted at the Bangaan National High School (BNHS) grounds. After all the explanations, Students of the Bangaan National clarifications and discussions among the SagadaHigh Schoolregarding participated for the ‘pamakada’ in the “tutya” being members of the TWGs and other community conducted by the Project and MLGU- members, the plan was not yet been approved by the attending participants for they claimed sought for the SIKAME-IWMP initiative. that they still do not understand its objectives and they wanted more precise and deeper explanations on its main concepts and goals. They also claimed that it is untimely for the project to enter their community for they claimed that they can manage to conserve their watershed for it was already protected since time immemorial. They requested for another tutya. The Project staff, TWG members and service providers agreed to conduct the last and final “tutya” among community and the proponents in the pursuit of the approval of the SIKAME Project. However, it was also decided that if (above) and after the final “tutya” and the community will not give their approval, the NCIP will take (below)Project Manager Cameron P. Odsey action based on the FPIC procedure. Agroforestry Watershed Management Coordinator The last “pakada” through a tutya was better understanding, together with of MLGU-Sagada, took turns conducted in the Mission ground of Bangaan, in explaining the concept of the SIKAME-IWMP for Sagada and with the full support and the community people. participation of the Vice Mayor, he also called the attention of the high school Students of BNHS to attend and participate stating that the participation will raise awareness about the concern among the youth.