I DATA ON POPULATION AND LANGUAGE (NATIONAL) 1 II. DATA ON CADTs (NATIONAL) Approved CADTs per region, land area and number of IP holders CORDILLERA ADMINISTRATIVE REGION (CAR) No. of CADTs Awarded: 26 Land Area (hectares): 404,730.6150 REGION 2 No. of IP Holders: 288,231 No. of CADTs Awarded: 12 Land Area (hectares): 1,041,570.5695 No. of IP Holders: 77,997 REGION 1 No. of CADTs Awarded: 8 Land Area (hectares): 50,960.5500 No. of IP Holders: 28,573 NUMBER LAND AREA NO.of IP REGION of CADTS (Hectares) HOLDERS AWARDED Luzon 100 2,680,220.2982 520,700 Visayas 10 56,452.6804 13,759 Mindanao 133 2,999,220.1346 749,960 REGION 3 TOTAL 243 5,735,893.1072 1,314,419 No. of CADTs Awarded: 18 Land Area (hectares): 190,494.2857 No. of IP Holders: 27,981 REGION 4 No. of CADTs Awarded: 26 REGION 10 Land Area (hectares): 946,756.7762 No. of CADTs Awarded: 27 No. of IP Holders: 73,699 Land Area (hectares): 347,999.3399 No. of IP Holders: 86,218 REGION 5 No. of CADTs Awarded: 10 REGION 11 Land Area (hectares): 45,707.5018 No. of CADTs Awarded: 33 No. of IP Holders: 24,219 Land Area (hectares): 1,126,468.5178 No. of IP Holders: 292,539 REGIONS 6 & 7 No. of CADTs Awarded: 10 Land Area (hectares): 56,452.6804 No. of IP Holders: 13,759 REGION 9 No. of CADTs Awarded: 13 Land Area (hectares): 208,825.2774 No. of IP Holders: 54,107 REGION 13 No. of CADTs Awarded: 26 Land Area (hectares): 639,499.4993 REGION 12 No. of IP Holders: 99,792 No. of CADTs Awarded: 34 Land Area (hectares): 676,427.5002 No. of IP Holders: 247,304 In terms of territories, about 7.7 million hectares are occupied by the IPs or 26% of the 30 million hectares total land area of the country. As of April 30, 2019, the NCIP has issued 243 CADTs with a total land area of 5,735,893.1072 hectares and a total of 1,314,419 IPs as rights holders or about 9.39% of the total estimated IP population of 14,000,000. 2 III. RELEVANT LAWS AND POLICIES Legal Policies, laws and framework governing IPs in the Philippines 1987 Philippine RA 8371(1997) - The 1 Constitution, Sec. 5 2 Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act “The State, subject to the • Created the National enabling law that defines the 4 IMPACT+ provisions of this Constitution and IMPACT+ Enabled the enactment of Commission on Indigenous bundles of rights to be enjoyed national development policies and RA 8371 or the Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) as the by indigenous peoples: Rights to programs, shall protect the rights Peoples’ Rights Act (IPRA) primary government agency Ancestral Domains, Right to Self- of indigenous cultural communities in 1997 mandated to “protect and Governance and Empowerment, to their ancestral lands to ensure promote the interest and well- Social Justice and Human Rights, their economic, social, and cultural being of the ICCs/IPs with and Cultural Integrity well-being.” due regard to their beliefs, customs, traditions and institutions.” Joint DAR-DENR-LRA- NCIP Administrative IMPACT The objective of the JAO to address jurisdictional and IMPACT • The proper 3 Order No. 01, Series of operational issues between and among these land titling implementation of the 2012 (JAO 01-12) agencies has resulted in undue delay in the issuance IPRA is impeded by the and registration of CADTs. Data in 2016 showed that of lack of independence, 182 CADTs issued by the NCIP, less than 50 have been capacity, and registered with the Land Registration Authority (LRA). Non- resources of the NCIP Issuances from registration with the LRA means that the CADT owners are to implement their the Department of less able to prevent intrusion into their ancestral domains by mandate. 4 migrants and corporations. • The existence of laws Education in contradiction to provisions of IPRA are prioritized for Department Orders (DO): DO 62, IMPACT+ Enabled the inclusion of IP Ed in the curriculum of public schools and the implementation by the s. 2011 - Adopting the National use of the mother tongue as medium of instruction; allowed the accreditation government such as the: Indigenous Peoples (IP) Education of community learning centers established in IP communities with IP • Philippine Mining Act Policy Framework learners and teachers, with some assistance and support from the LGUs of 1995 liberalizing thru School Boards and the Special Education Fund. DO 103, s. 2011 - Creation of the mining Industry Indigenous Peoples Education with huge incentive to Office (IPsEO) foreign companies and weak environmental DO 32, s. 2015 - Adopting the DOH-DILG-NCIP and social protection Indigenous Peoples Education including IP rights under Curriculum Framework Joint Memorandum 5 IPRA DO 50, s. 2016 - Hiring Guidelines Circular (JMC) • National Integrated for Teacher I Position in Schools Protected Area System Implementing Indigenous Peoples JMC 2013-01 - Guidelines for the Law with prohibitions Education Effective School Year IMPACT+ Enabled concerned Delivery of Basic Health Services for and restrictions to the 2016-2017 agencies to finalize Indigenous Cultural Communities/ use and management process of coming up of IP over their lands DO 3, S. 2017, or the Multiyear Indigenous Peoples with the Indigenous Implementing Guidelines on the and resources, and DILG Memorandum Circular 2018-65 Peoples’ Strategic Plan Allocation and Utilization of the IP the National Greening – Creation of Provincial Inter-Agency for Health for CYs 2018- Education Program Support Fund Program (NGP) Committee (PIAC) on the Implementation 2022 on January 18, 2017 • 1975 Revised of DOH-NCIP-DILG JMC 2013-01 Forestry Code (P.D. 705), and other DENR administrative The proper implementation of the IPRA is impeded by the lack of independence, capacity, orders related to the and resources of the NCIP to implement their mandate. Further, the existence of laws in management and contradiction to provisions of IPRA are prioritized for implementation by the government as the utilization of natural • Philippine Mining Act of 1995 liberalizing the Mining Industry with huge incentive to foreign resources conflicting companies and weak environmental and social protection including IP rights under IPRA with the rights of • National Integrated Protected Area System Law with prohibitions and restrictions to the use indigenous peoples and management of IP over their lands and resources (IPs) specifically recognized and • 1975 Revised Forestry Code (P.D. 705), and other DENR administrative orders related to the protected under the management and utilization of natural resources conflicting with the rights of indigenous Indigenous Peoples’ peoples (IPs) specifically recognized and protected under the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Rights Act (IPRA). Act (IPRA). 3 IV. REALITIES ON THE GROUND The data presented in the succeeding sections are data generated from the following communities Even with the passage and implementation of the Indigenous Peoples where the Indigenous Navigator Initiative (IN) is Rights Act (IPRA) indigenous peoples continue to face serious challenges in being implemented: relation to the respect and recognition of their individual and collective rights. Below are the key thematic concerns of indigenous peoples in the country as identified by the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) which they are also trying to address in their various programs1: Mansalay, Oriental Mindoro Formal recognition of Ancestral Domains Impact of government services are Napsan, Simpokan, and (ADs) 01 08 not felt Bagong Bayan, Puerto Princesa, Palawan Overlapping claims over ancestral Control and management of ADs 02 09 domains Benuan and Bayabas, Upi, Maguindanao Non-recognition of agencies of IP elders/ NCIP’s capacity to deliver its mandate 03 10 leaders Carmen, North Cotabato 14 thematic Bunawan, Agusan del Sur Destruction of the ecosystems within concerns Displacements of IPs from their the ADs 04 of IPs in 11 ancestral domains Calapagan, Davao Oriental the country Non-compliance and violation of Free, Insufficient knowledge of their rights Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) 05 12 Eroding culture of the IPs 06 13 Discrimination of IPs The data was gathered through the conduct Weak IP governance system 07 14 Peace and security. of focused group discussions, key informant interviews, community meetings, and secondary data gathering. Additional input from other Indigenous peoples are losing their lands and resources to extractive indigenous peoples institutions/organizations who industries, mono crop plantations, and calamities among others. Urgent attended the Indigenous Peoples VNR Writeshop action needs to be done to address the issues above including particular last June 2019 are also included in this report. concerns of indigenous women and indigenous persons with disabilities to ensure that indigenous peoples will not be left behind in the achievement of the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda. A. Worsening Poverty and Food Insecurity Among Indigenous Peoples Definition of Poverty for Indigenous Peoples Indigenous peoples define poverty differently from how the government measures poverty rate which is by daily income, or the poverty threshold, to classify those who are poor. The following are some of the responses of indigenous communities on their concept of poverty. “Poverty does not refer to a Other communities also believe that “A house without a smoke coming out of it during status of an individual. In our poverty is a family situation and thus cooking time is a house of the poor. We are tribe, one cannot be well- cannot be disaggregated into a male dependent on our crops and those we get from to-do if a neighbor does not or female situation. Interestingly, nature, thus, our ancestral domain is so important have enough. Because of our among the Manobo women as it is the continuum of our lives, and as long as value of sharing, a community in Dinagat, gender discrimination we have lands to till, we will not experience poverty.