Thematic Objective No. 1 To uphold and protect the rights of the IPs to their ancestral domains, lands, and

resources, recognizing customary laws on property ownership and relations

Under this thematic Objective the NCIP aims to develop and implement affirmative policies for the recognition

and protection of the indigenous cultural communities/indigenous peoples (ICCs/IPs) concept of Native title,

FPIC, customary laws or property ownership after the conduct of FPIC processes within 2014-2015, to include

documentation of 6 IP Communities (2 each year from 2012-2014).

In this regard the NCIP, to address previous experiences and gaps in FPIC policy implementation, strengthened

and streamlined the FPIC 2006 policy under the NCIP Administrative Order No. 3, series of 2012. This Revised

Guidelines on FPIC established the following:

a. Enhanced protective mechanisms provided for excluded areas or no-go zones from any activity, meaning

such areas shall only be used for exclusive purposes for which they were identified, viz sacred grounds and

burial sites of indigenous communities; identified international and local cultural and heritage sites; critical

areas identified or reserved by the ICCs/IPs for special purposes; and other areas specifically identified by

ICCs/IPs in their ADSDPP Further, posting of bond is now required from proponents to answer for

damages, violation of terms and conditions which the ICCs/IPs may suffer and claim from on account of

the said activity as may be agreed by the parties in the MOA and under other applicable laws.

b. Enumerated mandatory or minimum provisions of the MOA such as on the detailed use of funds and in

accordance with guidelines on the use of Royalty Share and other benefits and the necessity for another

FPIC after the exploration stage in mining.

c. Emphasized exercise of priority right by the ICC/IPs.

d. The management of royalty has been provided where the royalties must be used for programs and projects

that will redound to the well-being and benefit of the ICCs/IPs entitled to it. Not less than 30% of each

release must be allocated for livelihood and social development. The royalty as provided must never be

used as payment for damages caused by the proponent/company’s activities to the person and properties of

an individual member, as this is a distinct obligation of the company and not part of royalties.

In addition to this policy strategy to recognize and respect the ICCs/IPs rights to FPIC the NCIP, as a permanent

member of the Mining Industry Coordinating Committee (MICC) and its created Technical Working Group

(TWG), championed for the express recognition of the ICCs/IPs right to FPIC on large scale mining operations

under Executive Order No. 79. This EO provided for the administration’s policy direction on mining industry.

The NCIP institutionalized inter-agency affirmative collaboration for delineation titling and registration by

signing Joint DAR-DENR-LRA-NCIP Administrative Order No. 01-12 which was issued in January 25, 2012

to Clarify, Restate and Interface the Respective Jurisdictions, Policies, Programs and Projects of the Department

of Agrarian Reform (DAR), Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Land Registration

Authority (LRA) and NCIP in order to address jurisdictional and operational issues between and among these

agencies. The order focuses on identifying contentious areas tackling both tenurial and resource use instruments

where a mechanism of conflict resolution is provided for in the establishment of a Joint National Committee

which shall issue a Rules of Procedure for this purpose.

To simplify submission of proofs required for Delineation and Recognition of Ancestral Domains and Lands

enumerated under the IPRA, the NCIP promulgated Administrative Order No.4 Series of 2012 or the Revised

Omnibus Rules on Delineation and Recognition of Ancestral Domains and Lands of 2012. Whereby, as of

September 2015, the NCIP approved 187 CADTs of which there are 43 CADTs registered to the Register of

Deeds, 3 CADTs are transmitted for registration and 141 CADTs are on process. With this data, from 2012-

2015 there were 31 CADTs approved for a total of 473,697.90 hectares awarded to 117,056 IP Rights Holders..

The NCIP conducted research to establish National database on IP customary laws and formulated a policy on

traditional ownership, with these activities the NCIP issued the Administrative Order No. 1, S. 2012 or the

Indigenous Knowledge, Systems and Practices (IKSPs) and Customary Laws (CLs) Research and

Documentation Guidelines of 2012 as well as the NCIP Administrative Order No. 2 Series of 2012 – guidelines

on the confirmation of indigenous political structures and the registration of indigenous peoples organizations with these guidelines the NCIP had recognized two IPS the YAKAN of region 9 and the GADDANG of region

2. While it recognized a total of ______ IPOs.

By setting-up inter-agency and consultation groups with ICCs/IPs through traditional leaders and pursuant to

Administrative Order No. 001, S. 2009 - National Guidelines for the Mandatory Representation of Indigenous

Peoples in Local Legislative Councils, the NCIP had issued Certificate of Affirmation to a number of 2,157

seated Indigenous Peoples Mandatory Representations nationwide, as follows: 1) Provincial – 15; 2) City - 23;

3) Municipal - 222; and 4) Barangay – 1,897 and a number of 1,685 not seated IPMRs as follows: 1)

Provincial – 10; 2) City - 20; 3) Municipal - 180; 4) Barangay - 1475

Finally, the Dissemination of agency position were achieved through participation during deliberations on

specific bills pending before the Senate and House of Representatives concerning ICCs/IPs, their ADs and

resources within.

Thematic objective no. 2. To enhance access of IPs to the various pillars of the justice system, and state

recognition in the exercise of customary laws and practices or various traditional justice system; and protect

their rights to social justice and human rights

Under this thematic objective the NCIP aims to (a) develop a national policy guideline on interfacing of IPs

justice system and national justice system; and (b) policy review on access of IPs to formal justice, to include

the following: for paragraph (a) – 5 pilot ethnographic regions from 2014 to 2015; and for paragraph (b) 6 pilot

regional/provincial courts 2 each for Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao from 2014 to 2015.

By establishing Inter-agency committee for coordination and consultation workshop with ICCs/IPs and

partners, the NCIP in order to enforce its quasi-judicial functions spelled out in the IPRA, established and

consolidated its Regional Hearing Officers (RHOs) to set up four (4) clustered courts through Commission-en-

banc resolution 047-20-12 and Memorandum Circular No. 007, Series of 2012. These ethnographic regions

include 1) Cordillera Administrative Region (CAR) and Region I 2) Central Mindanao 3) Southern and Eastern

Mindanao 4) Northern and Western Mindanao 5) Region II 6) Region III and the rest of Luzon and 7) The

Island Groups. In 2012, the clustered courts handled a total of 99 cases wherein 17 cases were decided upon,

currently handling sixty two (62) pending cases and twenty (20) cases for resolution.

For its contribution, the NCIP, in 2010 to 2012 has extended adjudication and legal services to indigenous

peoples from the central to field offices. These services range from 1) advising and assisting 16,255 walk-in IP

applicants 2) acceptance, handling and defense of 1,541 cases 3) submission of 657 position papers. In 2010,

there were 407 investigations conducted, 32 congressional hearings participated and 586 legal opinions and

advisories rendered.

To strengthen this strategy the NCIP formulated guidelines to this effect whereby on October 2014 the CEB

issued the 2014 Revised Rules of Procedure (Administrative Circular No. 1 s. 2014) which sets the procedures

to be followed in the hearing and disposition of cases filed before the NCIP in the exercise of the quasi-judicial

functions. The orientation of all NCIP lawyers on the 2014 Revised Rules of Procedures was held on December

2014.

In connection with the policy review on access of IPs to formal justice the NCIP, in cooperation with EU thru

the EPJUST II Program, conducted a round table discussion with the Supreme Court in its attempt to engage the

High Court in reviving the program on delineating the jurisdiction of the regular courts vis-a’-viz the NCIP,

however, both agencies have not come to an agreement, as of yet, on the guidelines to make such engagement

possible/successful.

To provide readily documented data and assist the agency on Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Practices

(IKSPs) and Customary Laws (CLs) of the 110 IP communities nationwide upon which the delineation of the

jurisdictional courts vis-aviz the NCIP shall base upon, Legal Affairs Office (LAO) in partnership with the Office of Education Culture and Health (OECH), conceptualized and crafted the Policy on IKSP and CLs

Research and Documentation within the framework of IP empowerment, self-determination and is

contextualized for the IPs benefit. It ensures the recognition, preservation, protection of the IKSPs that includes

CLs that will eventually also serve to guide IPs rights advocates. With all these initiatives, the NCIP through the

CEB issued the NCIP Administrative Order No. 1 s. 2015 or the Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Practices

(IKSPs) and Customary Laws (CLs) research and Documentation Guidelines of 2012.

To realize such objectives, in partnership with the UNDP, the LAO undertook documentation of Customary

Laws in four (4) project sites, namely, Palawan, bukidnon, Benguet and Compostela Valley; and an expansion

of one (1) of the areas is being undertaken this year using government budget by Region IV. And in

coordination with the DILG the NCIP participated as focal agency on the training of trainers on creating a

gender-responsive, child friendly and IP-relevant Katarungang pambarangay as well as on National

Trainers’Training on Barangay Tanod Skills Enhancement Project.

Thematic Objective No. 3. To respect, protect and fulfil the civil and political rights of the IPs, provide

responsive and culturally appropriate mechanism in addressing violations thereto and affording maximum

protection to defenders of IPs rights

Under this thematic objective the NCIP aims to (a) establish effective legal safeguards and measures that

address violations of IP rights and protect the rights of defenders of IP rights; and (b) increase level of

awareness and application of national and international IP and human rights protection standards by the

government, IPs and the general public at the national and local levels. To include the following: a) 2012 –

Development and implementation of joint circular between NCIP, AFP, PNP and other law enforcement

agencies for protection of IPs and IP rights defenders during the period 2010-2012; b) 2013 – Development of

special judicial measures in coordination with DOJ, Supreme Court; and c) 2012-2015 – Information Education

and capacity building on IPRA, CERD and other national and international human rights treaties for 250

participants composed of lawyers/judges or law enforcers, police/military, IP women and the general public

with 50 participants for each session from the period 2012-2015.

Through an inter-agency consultation with AFP, PNP and other concerned agencies/CSO for circular and by

setting-up special measures/mechanisms for the protection of IP and IP rights defenders in critical or difficult

circumstances. The NCIP institutionalized the Quick Response Mechanism (QRM) in 2013 to address the

IPRVs in the context of armed conflict, development aggression and insurgency.

The QRM aims to establish quick response units and teams (QRUs/QRTs) at the national, regional, provincial,

community service centres and mobilize IPs in ancestral domains as partners for the QRU including field

government agencies such as the CHR, PNP, AFP, PAO, OPAPP, DSWD and DILG to name a few.

The QR teams are composed of the NCIP QR units, government agencies and selected indigenous leaders and

women from ancestral domains areas of armed conflict – who shall also compose the Pool of IP human rights

advocate.

This mechanism was initiated to look into IP issues during conflict in terms of accessing services, interventions

in evacuation centers, recruitment of IPs in armed groups among others depending on an in depth analysis of

communities prior, during and after conflict.

Since the initial activities towards the institutionalization of the QRM in 2013, 5 QR seminar workshops were

conducted wherein 1 national workshop, 1 Mindanao cluster re-echo and 3 seminar/workshops on Gender,

Peace and Security for IP women peace builders back to back with QRM were conducted. At least more or less

300 participants benefitted where at least half are IP women. Aligned with this, the NCIP has also forged a

memorandum of agreement (MOA) with the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) towards the

operationalization of indigenous peoples desks at all levels of the AFP.

To elaborate on the preceding paragraph, such were achieved through the conduct of information education and

training workshop for lawyers and other law enforcement agencies. Initially orientations on the rights of IPs

(IPRA 101) and the Internal Peace and Security Plan (IPSP 101) were conducted in two clusters, one at the

national level and the other was the re-echo at Mindanao. During these activities, there were at least two

hundred (200) participants who attended. The former involved at least 70 indigenous peoples/leaders, national

government agencies and CSOs/NGOs. The latter involved participants from the five (5) regions in Mindandao,

namely Regions 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 that included representatives from field offices of government agencies

such as the local government, indigenous leaders and women from armed conflict areas, NCIP personnel,

assigned indigenous peoples desks from the AFP and representatives from other government agencies like the

Philippine National Police (PNP); Office of the Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process (OPAPP);

Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) and Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines

(CHRP). The operationalization and regular interaction between and among QRUs and QRTs are continuing.

Aside from the institutionalization of the QRM a Policy guidelines relevant to Extra-Judicial Killings (EJKs)

through an inter-agency committee (IAC) was created under the Administrative Order 35 in November,

2013.This IAC will look into the investigation of human rights abuses both by state and non-state forces and to

ensure a focused probe and speedy resolution of all unsolved cases. It assigned the Department of Justice (DOJ)

as the chair. It includes the representation of government agencies including the NCIP to the body and aims to

investigate cases of EJKs submitted to it.

Thematic Objective No. 4. To respect, protect, promote and fulfil the right to self-determination and self-

determined development of indigenous peoples, recognizing indigenous knowledge and socio-political systems

upholding the right to free and prior informed consent

Under this thematic objective the NCIP aims to (a) Document baselines group; (b) Policy recommendations on

culturally appropriate ADSDPP and FPIC guideline covering seven (7) selected IPs/ICCs with CADTs and

ADSDPPs to be conducted; (c) Documentation of IKSP covering seven selected pilot IPs/ICCs with CADTs

and ADSDPPs; and (d) Recognition and implementation of policy on indigenous political structures (IPS) and

IPs Organizations (IPOs) in five selected pilot IPs/ICCs with CADTs (2012-2014)

The identified community working groups for the ADSDPP formulation with the assistance of the NCIP will

conduct a participatory baseline survey, focusing on the existing population, natural resources, development

projects, land use, sources of livelihood, income and employment, education and other concerns within 2016.

The survey includes the documentation of the ICCs/IPs culture or IKSPs and historical accounts or inventory of

documents relative to the sustainable development and protection of the ancestral domain. The baseline includes

the appraisal of the quality and quantity of existing natural resources in the ancestral domain. The working

group shall also assess the data/information, identify and prioritize problems/issues and concerns, determine

needs and gaps, and try to understand the underlying causes and how particular problems affect particular

sectors of the community. The output shall be presented to the community for validation of its accuracy and

reliability before proceeding to the succeeding steps of the ADSDPP formulation process. Timelines as to the

processing of the domain/land titles are likewise provided21 however, the processing of titles shall be at the

pace of the ICC/IP community.

After assessment/inventory and review of FPIC conducted and as reported under Thematic Objective number 1,

the FPIC 2006 guidelines was strengthened/enhanced under NCIP Administrative Order No. 3, series of 2012

and had its Section 12 revisited under NCIP Administrative Order No. 1 s. 2015. To date the number of FPIC

approved application nationwide is _____________ .

The NCIP is bent to enhance, amend, or revise the Administrative Order No. 1 s. 2004 - Guidelines on the

Formulation of the Ancestral Domain Sustainable Development and Protection Plan (ADSDPP) as indicated

under the remarks of thematic objective no. 7. With the Existing guidelines for ADSDPP formulation, the NCIP

assisted ___________ ADSDPP formulation. While the number of revised ADSDPPs is __________ and the

number of newly formulated ADSDPP is ____________.

Under the recognition and implementation of policy on indigenous political structures (IPS) and IPs

Organizations (IPOs) in five selected pilot IPs/ICCs with CADTs, as reported under thematic Objective Number

1, with the NCIP Administrative Order No. 2 Series of 2012 – guidelines on the confirmation of indigenous

political structures and the registration of indigenous peoples organizations, the NCIP had confirmed 2 IPS –

the YAKAN of region 9 and the GADDANG of region 2, while it recognized a total of ______ IPOs as of

December 2014.

Thematic Objective No. 5. To provide culturally appropriate basic social services and employment to IPs and

employing special measures to fulfil this

Under this thematic objective the NCIP aims to Integrate ADSDPP into local Development Plans. 2012-2013 –

development and issuance of guidelines on IP community planning for culturally appropriate delivery of

services; 2012-2015 – dissemination of IP guideline to all stakeholders at the national and field levels; one

national and with IPs/ICCs in 13 regional cluster groups; 2014 onwards – Implementation, evaluation and

review of certificates of confirmation (COC) covering years 2008-2009 with PNP, NAPOLCOM, AFP, BJMP,

DOH, DOLE, and five selected pilot LGUs.

Through the conduct of consultation workshop and establishment of committees with partner agencies and IP

leaders on community planning and census, the NCIP enhanced its coordination for IPs/ICCs to have better

access to basic government services by entering into at least 13 Memorandum of Agreements with government

agencies. Among them are the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), the Department of Education (DepEd),

Department of Health (DOH) and Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG). Among these are the

following:

1. The Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) has made conscious efforts to include

IPs/ICCs in their programs such as the National Community Driven Development Plan (NCDDP). It has

conducted an orientation on the NCDDP to NCIP core personnel for better understanding and towards a

culture or IP sensitive government poverty reduction program. NCIP-DSWD MOA in connection with the

implementation of the NCDDP.

2. Joint Memorandum Circular No. 04 s. 2013, where the NCIP is one of the signatories. This Joint

Memorandum is to amend the Joint Memorandum Circular No. 3 s. 2011 on the institutional arrangement

for the implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps)

3. SAMA-BADJAOs, Women and Children, Elderly to be forwarded from OSESSC.

4. The Indigenous Peoples Mandatory Representation (IPMR) Guidelines was issued by the Commission. The

IPMR shall be the IP resource persons to bring the IP community plans to Local Legislative Councils as

well as to all the local special bodies. In recognition, the DILG Memorandum Circular No. 2010-119 the

“Mandatory Representation of ICC or IP in Policy-Making Bodies and other legislative councils” was

implemented by the DILG. This Memorandum Circular was reiterated under DILG Memorandum by the

Secretary dated 07 September 2015. As of December 2014 there are a number of 2,157 seated IPMRs

nationwide, as follows: 1) Provincial – 15; 2) City - 23; 3) Municipal - 222; and 4) Barangay – 1,897.

While there are 1,685 not seated IPMRs as follows: 1) Provincial – 10; 2) City - 20; 3) Municipal -

180; 4) Barangay - 1475

5. An IP Health Technical Team composed of representatives from the DOH, NCIP and the Department of

Interior and Local Government (DILG) has worked out for the development and operationalization of

DOH-NCIP-DILG Joint Memorandum Circular (JMC) 2013-01 and its corresponding Strategic Plan.

Specifically, the JMC intends to provide directions for: a) making basic health services available and

culture-sensitive, b) providing equitable distribution of needed health resources, c) ensuring non-

discrimination of ICCs/IPs in the delivery of health services, d) managing geographical, financial and

socio–cultural barriers so that IPs can access basic health services, and e) strengthening recognition,

promotion, and respect of safe and beneficial traditional health practices. To coordinate the performance of

the individual partner agency’s functions and efficient implementation of activities, an inter-agency

committee shall be organized at different levels i.e. national, regional and provincial.

Currently, a move to review the Memorandum of Agreement with the Philippine Health Insurance

Corporation (PhilHealth) was initiated. During the top-level discussions with key officials of the

PhilHealth, the following agreements were made:

a) Indigenous Peoples may already have coverage under Indigent Program or under other membership

category (ex. Employed/Sponsored);

b) Those without coverage who are considered to be poor shall be referred to the Department of Social

Welfare and Development (DSWD) for possible inclusion in the National Household Targeting System

(NHTS) so that the stringent requirements can be waived; and

c) Request for the inclusion in the General Appropriations Act (GAA) as a Special Program of the

Government like the PAMANA and Bangsamoro.

Basic health services in far-flung Indigenous Cultural Communities (ICCs) are seldom or never availed of.

This is due to the fact that most IPs are not aware of the services being offered by the government.

Likewise, the distance of their homes to the nearest health facility entails a number of hours or days,

travelled either by foot or by traditional means of transportation. Considering the meager funds of NCIP,

especially that which is devoted to social services, it has to step up coordination and networking. The

agency’s intervention and coordinative mandate on health services revolve on the implementation of the

conduct of cultural sensitivity orientation/training on health services, medical and dental missions (mobile

clinic), support to IP hospitalization, documentation of indigenous health knowledge and practices,

establishment of medicinal plant garden and medicinal forests used among IPs, support to the formulation

of ancestral domains investment plan for health, training of IP Community Health Workers, and others.

To ensure that IP concerns are highlighted in priorities for health interventions, NCIP has maintained its

membership with the Board of the Philippine Country Coordinating Mechanism (PCCM). Under the Global

Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (GFATM), the agency has remained an active partner in the

control of malaria and tuberculosis, especially in IP areas where the incidence of Key Affected Population

(KAP) is high. GFATM aims to make a sustainable contribution to the country’s development by

mitigating the impact caused by the 3 diseases although there has been no official report on IPs afflicted

with AIDS. Believing that this is in support to the attainment of MDG 6, NCIP committed to be engaged on

a primary basis. Likewise, NCIP also sits in the Board of the Coalition in the Elimination of Lymphatic

Filariasis (CELF).

6. The NCIP has forged a memorandum of agreement (MOA) with the Armed Forces of the Philippines

(AFP) towards the operationalization of indigenous peoples desks at all levels of the AFP, discussed under

thematic objective no. 6

Thematic Objective No. 6. To recognize, protect and promote the cultural rights of IPs, combating prejudice

and discrimination against them, and fostering solidarity among them and all other sectors of society.

Under this thematic objective the NCIP aims to achieve the following: a) 2012-2015 – advocacy Program for IP

rights; b) 2012-2015 – development of framework on IP education by 5 IP groups; c) 2012-2015 – development

of an IPs Human Rights Education Program; d) 2012-2015 – advocacy for the integration of CERD and IPs

rights in relevant education and trainings and programs of the AFP, PNP, and other departments and NCLE; e)

2012-2015 – institutional review; and f) 2012-2015 – annual monitoring of CERD implementation and

reporting.

I. The NCIP implements the IP rights advocacy and Monitoring Treaty Obligations Programme through the

Office of Empowerment and Human Rights (OEHR) with the following accomplishments:

1. IP rights advocacy and Institutionalization of Quick Response Mechanism (QRM) for IP rights

violations. Under this activity, for 2014, the NCIP has conducted at least 20 facilitating-field and

central activities composed of six (6) seminar workshops/training on Quick Response Mechanism

(QRM) provided also with technical and fund support with five (5) at the field levels and one (1) QR

re-orientation planning and budgeting workshop at the national level; 3 technical assistance to regions

extended; IP relief and financial assistance facilitated; 3 consultations on Bangsamoro Basic Law

(BBL) facilitated and conducted; 7 field missions/ validation and consultations on IP rights issues (i.e

FPIC, peace and security) conducted; monitoring human rights and treaty obligations; support to

human rights, peace, women and IP rights celebrations and inventory tracking and database of IPRVs.

2. On the strategy on IP consultations and seminar workshops/trainings, firstly, were five (5) seminar

workshops facilitated with more or less 200 participant -beneficiaries and five (5) NCIP regions

benefitted these were mostly funded through the Central Office-QR PAMANA Programme. These

activities include four (4) seminar workshops on quick response for IP rights violations (IPRVs)

conducted wherein 4 were in the field (Regions 3, 12, CAR) and one (1) at the central. There were at

least 150 indigenous peoples and NCIP personnel combined as beneficiaries of the field workshops

while at least 50 NCIP personnel benefitted from the re-orientation and planning budgeting workshop.

The latter was purposely to re-orient participants new on the issue or who may be are newly assigned

as quick response focal persons and follow through administrative requirements from field participants

for facilitation of fund sub-allotment and release. The former activities were conducted at the Regions

III, Cordillera Administrative Region (CAR) and Region 12 to identify field QR point persons,

establish inter-agency QR networks and together with IP participants, to plan the field plan for QR

next steps.

3. To further have these activities implemented and support the successful implementation of the

consultations and training/seminars, the NCIP facilitated formulation of three (3) project proposals for

Regions 9, 11 and 12 approved and released for implementation. As of this writing, Regions 1, 3,

CAR, 9 and 12 has conducted and implemented their respective regional-based phase of the QRM

programme while Region 11 after activity report has yet to be verified.

4. Bangsamoro Basic Law (BBL) IP consultations were also conducted. The concern on the draft BBL is

urgent. The Tedurays, Lambangians and Dulangan Manobos are indigenous communities within the

core area of the Bangsamoro are affected. The NCIP facilitated the support to three (3) IP community

consultations in coordination with the Committee on Indigenous Peoples of the House of

Representatives conducted in Upi, Maguindanao, North Cotabato and Davao City. An average total of

about 1,500 IPs participated during these 3 consultations where 500 IPs participated in each of the

consultations. The NCIP, through the Legal Affairs Office, has forwarded its position paper on the

draft BBL to the House of Representatives, to other NGAs and CSOs/NGOs.

5. Field validation missions and verification of human rights related issues. The NCIP has been involved

in field validation of human rights and man-made and natural disaster-caused-conflict reports and

issues. So far, ten (10) field validation activities, to include those on BBL and the case of Datu

Tagulambong as discussed above, were conducted on issues related to 1) SMI operations concerning

FPIC that concerns various agencies, involvement of various TRICOM groups, reports of human rights

violations from CHR and recent clash of armed groups 2) killing of IP leaders 3) Badjao of Leyte who

are victims of Typhoon Haiyan and 4) peace and security/insurgency/armed conflict issues

a) On SMI issues. Several IP issues surround the operation of SMI. There were four (4) validation

activities conducted revolved around a) alleged human rights violations as reported by the CHR b)

the concern of the Swiss Embassy on following protocols by the SMI c) the visit/operation of the

Church-based organization at Tampakan without clearance from communities which caused the

ambush of armed groups in the said area - the security issue involves the ICC in the area. 4) the

various reports of violations by farmer, women and IP organizations on SMI mining operation.

While several factors have to be considered in the case of SMI which operates within 3 provinces

of two regions which are areas of responsibility of the NCIP, it is a known fact that IPs affected by

SMI operations are B’laans who have their common histories, related by blood (kins; relatives) but

possess different degrees of being ‘mainstreamed’ in society and who know each other.

b) Tribal Coalition in Mindanao (TRICOM). The issues surrounding the operation of TRICOM have

affected the representation, benefit sharing and royalties of IPs/ICCs. Other issues involve the

registration of TRICOM in the SEC which stands as an IPO but with other IPs/ICCs not

benefitting from this. Thus validation activities were expected that to date, field reports have yet to

be submitted to the OEHR, Central Office.

c) Badjaos at Leyte. On the issue on housing the 77 households of Badjaos at Leyte affected by

typhoon Haiyan, the OEHR conducted its field investigation as reported that the Badjaos are

allegedly barred to live/reside at that part of Leyte. In coordination with the NCIP regional

authorized personnel, concerned local government officials, it has been agreed that in the

development of the Municipality of Isabel, Leyte Local Government Plan, the concerns of the

Badjaos will be considered.

d) Insurgency in Camandag, Asipulo. Through the invite of the LGU of Asipulo, Ifugao an ancestral

domains of Tuwali, Kankanaey and Ayangan indigenous communities with CADT CAR-ASI-

0308-063, the OEHR shared about the rights of IPs in armed conflict and the IPRA. The activity

was in light of the armed conflict/insurgency problem that took place on 14 October 2014 at

Barangay Camandag, Asipulo in a clash between state and non-state armed groups. During that

incident, the LGU reported that about 750 IPs of which 350 IPs ages 0-18 years and 400 IPs above

18 years old were affected during the conflict. Initially however, no reports on civilians affected

have been received prior to the field visit. Even police reports only mentioned of the number of

killed from both clashing armed groups. The OEHR has recommended supporting initiatives

raised by the communities during the IEC and an after activity report on this was submitted to the

Commission and the Office of the OEHR Director (OOD). To date, administrative requirements

have been initially drafted and submitted (November 2014) to the OOD and still awaiting its

action.

6. Addressing IP issues for 2014 had the OEHR participate in inter-agency activities that enhanced NCIP

networks with at least ten (10) government and non-government organizations towards addressing IP

issues. These organizations/agencies include the DILG, COMELEC, NAPOLCOM, CHR, PNP,

Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) and the House of Representatives. Listed below are some of the

inter-agency activites, ad follows:

a. The National Monitoring Mechanism with CHR as lead agency

b. Omnibus Rules on the Visiting Forces Agreement with the Philippine Commission on the

Visiting Forces as lead agency

c. OPAPP pamana budget grant for the Institutionalization of the QR Mechanism

d. NCIP as one of the champions in the STEP coalition for registration of IPs in hard to reach

areas and enrolling them for biometrics with the DILG and the COMELEC. Legal Network

for Truthful Elections (LENTE) as the secretariat

7. In the course of its coordination with these agencies, the NCIP was able to provide and develop

position paper, proposed house bills, coordinate human rights violation issues, participate in

discussions to promote IP rights to suffrage and discuss programs for conflict affected areas or the

PAMANA through the DILG.

8. Support of the NCIP to the IPs/ICCs has also been manifested. The NCIP was able to issue

Commission-en-banc resolutions to condemn killings of IP leaders whose advocacy against large

mining projects had their lives threatened. The ambush of Datu Tagulambong and the creation of Task

Force Orasan through CEB Resolution No. 06-082-2014 dated 24 September 2014 for the killing of

Datu Orasan were just a few of these.

9. Support to Human Rights Week & IPRA Hour Celebration. The OEHR supported these celebrations as

part of the agency’s IP rights advocacy program that IP rights are human rights. On the one hand, the

IPRA enactment is celebrated on the month it was enacted March. Last year, the OEHR spearheaded

the activities. Simultaneous activities from the central to the field offices with the theme, ‘IPRA: A

glimmer of hope’. On the other hand, the OEHR lead the celebration of the human rights week at the

Quezon City Circle. Around 20 personnel participant beneficiaries joined in the activity. It has been

held with the participation of the AFP, PNP, CHR, NCIP and other agencies. The CHR sponsored the

occasion.

10. Inventory tracking and database on IPRVs. At the Central Office, the inventory tracking and database

of IPRVs is important. While the OEHR maintains its 2012 data list of complaints on IPRVs totalling

231 cases of complaints, it had prepared its initial list of 2014 IPRV complaints totalling 287 of which

16 are building up from the 2012 and 2013 list while 40 are new complaints recorded. Of these new

complaints 28 Civil and Political Rights violations from regions IV (3), X (4), XI (1), XII (12) and

XIII (8); 16 violations of IP rights on Ancestral Domains from regions II (1), IV (2), IX (2), X (2), XI

(5) and XII (4); 1 violation of IP rights due to Militarization and Private Armed Groups; 3 violations of

IP Rights on Benefit Sharing from CAR (1) and region XIII (2); 3 violations of IP rights on FPIC from

regions II (1), Region X (1) and CAR (1); 2 violations of IP rights on IPRM from regions IX (1) and

XII (1); and 5 complaints against NCIP staff and other government agencies from regions IV (2), X (1)

and XII (2) with region12 having the highest number of IPRV complaints and region 2 and CAR

having the lowest. Continuous inventory and database is being conducted every year.

11. Monitoring human rights and treaty Obligations. On international issues affecting IPs, the OEHR was

involved in at least six (6) activities with 80 individual-beneficiaries and 10 non-government and

government beneficiaries. These activities included consultations, developing and submitting agency

inputs on treaties and conventions and participation in conferences/workshops on international issues.

Among these, it facilitated two (2) government agency and CSO consultations to present draft

responses to the concluding observations of the United Nations Committee on the CERD (UNCERD)

of which 80 participant-beneficiaries attended. As a result, three (3) agency input reports were

submitted that includes the draft Philippine 22nd Session ICERD Report in compliance to its

obligation as state party to the ICERD with the NCIP as lead agency to its compliance reporting,

provided also agency inputs to Convention 111 or the Convention concerning Discrimination in

Respect of Employment and Occupation furnished the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE)

and to the United States Embassy on updates for its 2014 human rights report. Further, the OEHR

participated in three (3) conference workshops on the UN Food and Agriculture Organization

(UNFAO), the US Joint POW/MIA Agency Committee (JPAC) and on UN Special Rapporteur on

IDPs.

II. The NCIP through the Office of Education Culture and Health accomplished the following through the

Education Assistance Program for IPs:

1. The NCIP asserts that culturally appropriate and responsive education enables the Indigenous Peoples

to stand up, be counted and protect their rights as well as improve their multi-dimensional well-being

in terms of social, cultural, economic and political situation. As such, education is indispensably

considered by NCIP as an essential tool for “enabling” through recognition and empowerment, for

“ensuring” by way of protection, and for “enhancing” as in promotion and development, of Indigenous

Peoples’ rights and welfare, their ancestral domains, the assertion for self-governance and their cultural

integrity. Relative to this, an Educational Assistance Program (EAP) is implemented as one of the big

and most sought-after programs of the agency. Currently serving 7,802 grantees from 124 IP-inhabited

Congressional Districts nationwide, the NCIP-EAP is a human capital investment that basically aims to

improve the over-all quality of life, efficiency and enlightened empowerment of ICCs/IPs thru

increased access to educational opportunities. In school year 2014-2015, there were 5,802 (74%)

College grantees, 1,216 (16%) High School grantees and 784 (10%) Elementary grantees who

qualified and availed of the program as per NCIP Administrative Order No. 5, series of 2012 Under the

relatively new approved implementing guidelines, stipends of IP grantees were increased by about 100

percent. As of the end of school year 2013-2014, there are 26,948 graduates assisted since the program

was implemented under NCIP in 1999, and thus, a total of 34,750 beneficiaries from school year 1999-

2000 to school year 2014-2015.

2. An innovation under the afore-stated implementing guidelines is the inclusion of a full-packaged

scholarship program called Merit-Based Scholarship (MBS) with more rigid selection process and

stringent policies but much higher financial support. Implementation started in SY 2012-2013 with 92

well-selected freshmen scholars who have been maintained until the present. Both the EAP and MBS

cater to the overall development objective of investing in human capital through the grant of

scholarships to deserving Indigenous Cultural Communities/Indigenous Peoples (ICCs/IPs) who seek

the opportunity and qualify for educational advancement and/or skills development, thereby

empowering them to become self-reliant and capacitated to meaningfully contribute to the promotion

of their well-being and to nation- building.

3. In collaboration with the Department of Education (DepEd), a National Indigenous Peoples Education

Policy Framework and a National IP Core Curriculum for the Alternative Learning System (ALS) were

developed. As policies, these trailblazing outputs were issued by DepEd as DepEd Order No. 62, series

of 2011, and DepEd Order No. 101, series of 2010, respectively. The IP Education Policy Framework

was a concerted effort based on various IP education initiatives and experiences nationwide that were

shared by partner-stakeholders and translated into vision and goals, principles, components, and

priority activities. These will serve as springboards for the formulation of an Indigenous Peoples’

Education Roadmap subject to series of continuing validation activities with the ICCs/IPs. The

formulation of the said roadmap will be a quantum leap for the over-arching concern for all

community-based efforts to be mainstreamed in policies, plans and programs for formal basic and

higher education as well as non-formal and informal education of IPs. The policy also brought forth

the first-time creation of an IP Education Office (IPsEO) in DepEd, by virtue of DepEd Order No. 103,

series of 2011, to take charge of IP concerns.

4. A major achievement with the Bureau of Alternative Learning System (BALS) of the Department of

Education (DepEd) is the Development and Pilot-testing of the IP Core Curriculum and Instructional

Materials for Alternative Learning System (ALS). Making use of the culture-sensitive and generic

Core Curriculum for IPs on Alternative Learning System, learning materials and facilitators’ guides

were prepared by IPs themselves for the pilot areas of Dumalneg, Ilocos Norte involving Isnegs, and

Botolan, Zambales particularly, the Pinatubo Aetas. Similarly, a pilot area for the Agtas in Infanta,

Quezon was assisted through the Episcopal Commission on Indigenous Peoples (ECIP) with the same

purpose of validating and improving the afore-stated curriculum as well as the learning materials.

Modules and the corresponding instructional materials, reference guides and facilitators’ manuals were

translated, also by the IPs, and these have gone through a series of focused group discussions, rigid

scrutiny and refinements both in the field and in the policy levels. Since the entire IP community is

considered as the entire school, the philosophy adhered to in the process was that clientele system must

be in synergistic partnership with the delivery system. The same principles applied to the pilot area of

Mariki, Zamboanga City where the Floating Schools concept for the Badjaos will be assisted in tandem

with the Western Mindanao State University (WMSU). Another Mindanao-based pilot area where the

IP Core Curriculum for ALS was uniquely piloted through integration in the existing IP curriculum

was that of the School of Indigenous Knowledge and Traditions (SIKAT) of the T’bolis in Lake Sebu,

South Cotabato.

5. On the other hand, Higher Education for Indigenous Peoples is still a wide area to be explored by

continuous dialogue and sharing of experiences that could provide impetus for a core framework and

common roadmap. Through a Core Group composed of School Presidents and authorized

representatives of State and Private Universities and Colleges who attended the 1st and 2nd National

Conferences on Indigenous Peoples’ Higher Education in Davao City and co-sponsored by the

University of Southeastern Philippines (USEP), Minority Care International and the NCIP, a National

Steering Committee on Indigenous Peoples’ Higher Education (NSC-IPHEd) was initially formed to

advocate for IP Higher Education in the Philippines. The proposed Network was jointly facilitated by

the Assisi Development Foundation, USEP and the NCIP. This initiative aims to establish partnership

with CHED, DepEd and TESDA in advancing quality, relevant and culture-based higher education for

IPs; to advocate and promote IP rights to education; to organize seminar-workshops in developing

mechanisms for the integration of indigenous knowledge systems and practices (IKSPs) to instruction,

research, extension and production; to plan out future gatherings and conferences on IP Education; and

to establish linkage and support among Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) and various stakeholders.

Efforts to revive and strengthen the Network are underway.

6. So far, the visible initiatives on indigenized tertiary education in the Philippines, in which NCIP is a

major partner, especially to the Assisi Development Foundation, are those of the Pamulaan Center for

IP Education offering four IP-related degree courses on education, peace, anthropology and

agricultural technology based at the University of Southeastern Philippines (USEP) in Mintal, Davao

City, and the ladderized Bachelor of Elementary Education degree with focus on IP Development

Studies offered by the College of Education at the University of Southern Mindanao in Kabacan, North

Cotabato. Some HEIs that have engaged the NCIP in their worthy projects, like the Saint Mary’s

University in Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya, and the University of the Philippines Visayas in Iloilo City,

have establish institutes or centers focused on IPs that operate for research, education and community

outreach activities. Likewise, small initiatives on indigenizing learning or instructional materials and

teaching strategies were noted in tertiary institutions that are located in predominantly IP areas as in

the case of HEIs in the Cordillera Administrative Region.

7. In response to the distinct needs of IP communities in having an education in their own culture and

provided in their own language, the DepEd, in working coordination with the NCIP, has earlier issued

DepEd Order No. 42, series of 2004 (“Permit to Operate Primary Schools for Indigenous Peoples and

Cultural Communities”), DepEd Order No. 74, series of 2009 (“Institutionalizing Mother Tongue-

Based Multilingual Education”), DepEd Order No. 101, series of 2010 (“The Alternative Learning

System (ALS) Curriculum for Indigenous Peoples Education”), DepEd Order No. 62, series of 2011

(“National Policy Framework for Indigenous Peoples Education”), and DepEd Order No. 51, series of

2014 (“Guidelines in the Conduct of Activities and Use of Materials Involving Aspects of Indigenous

Peoples Culture”). IP Education stakeholders build on these existing policies and further strengthen the

policy environment that enable agencies and organizations, their offices and units, especially those in

the frontline of service-delivery, to effectively address realities on the ground. The guidelines

embodied in the foregoing policies seek to promote among learners, teachers, facilitators, program

planners, administrators and policy-makers cultural sensitivity, respect for cultural diversity, and a

deeper consciousness and understanding of the indigenous knowledge and cultural expressions of

ICCs/IPs. These policies serve as instruments for promoting shared accountability, continuous

dialogue, engagement and partnership among government, IP communities, civil society, and other

education stakeholders. Recognizing that a culturally appropriate and responsive education is

necessary to the realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms, the policies provide impetus to

IP Education programs that are rights-based and subscribes to the principles of participation, inclusion

and empowerment.

Thematic Objective No. 7 To review and amend policies and programs on IP rights, enact laws that have direct

bearing on IPs, formulate/reformulate existence of conflicting development policies, programs and areas in

conflict with IP rights and interests with the mandatory and effective participation of IPs; develop a

comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation; and for the ratification of treaties which have direct bearing on

racial discrimination

Under this thematic objective the NCIP aims to achieve the following (a) 2015 onwards – implementation of

guidelines in selected seven IPs/ICCs; (b) 2013-2015 – assessment evaluation and review of certificates of

confirmation covering years 2008-2009 with PNP, NAPOLCOM, AFP, BJMP, DOH, DOLE, and five selected

pilot LGUs; (c) 2012-2015 – advocacy at national and local levels for the passage of an anti-discrimination bill;

(d) 2012-2015 – issuance and implementation of ordinances in 4 selected pilot areas in each IP area in Luzon,

Visayas and Mindanao and ARMM; and (e) 2013-2015 – advocacy and mobilization for the ratification of ILO

169;

NCIP is mandated by the IPRA to formulate an Indigenous Peoples Masterplan every after five years. The

ADSDPPs formulated by ICCs/IPs and the result of NACs in areas where there are still no ADSDPPs form as

the basis of this masterplan. The 1st IP masterplan that was drafted covers the period of six (6) years instead of

five (5) years to to jibe with the term of office of the President of the Republic. Thus, the current IP Masterplan

covers the period FYs 2010 to 2015. It is only right time that this has to be updated by 2015 to cater for IP

policy and development direction setting for 2016 to 2021, in line also with the updating of the Philippine

Development Plan (PDP) by the next presidency.

Moreover, in consultation with the ICCs/IPs, NCIP exercised its quasi-legislative power and function by

coming out with the following Administrative Orders/Circulars, or implementing guidelines for more effective

and efficient implementation of its quasi-judicial and executive/administrative powers and functions:

1. AO No. 1 s. 2015 - The guidelines for the implementation of Section 12 of RA 8371 otherwise known as

the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997;

2. AO No. 1, S. 2014 - The 2014 Revised Rules of Procedure Before the National Commission on Indigenous

Peoples;

3. AO No. 5, S. 2012 - NCIP Guidelines of 2012 on the Merit-Based scholarship (NCIP-MBS) and

Educational Assistance (NCIP-EA);

4. AO No. 4, S. 2012 - Revised Omnibus Rules on Delineation and Recognition of Ancestral Domains and

Lands of 2012;

5. AO No. 3, S. 2012 - The Revised Guidelines on Free and Prior Informed Consent (FPIC) and Related

Processes of 2012;

6. AO No. 2, S. 2012 - The General Guidelines on the Confirmation of Indigenous Political Structures and

the Registration of Indigenous Peoples’ Organization;

7. AO No. 1, S. 2012 - The Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Practices (IKSPs) and Customary Laws

(CLs) Research and Documentation Guidelines of 2012.

The Commission is also bent to enhance, amend, or revise the following implementing guidelines in the months

to come, as appropriate, to ensure that the rights of ICCs/IPs and their responsibilities to their respective

ancestral domains are properly addressed.

1. AO No. 001, S. 2009 - National Guidelines for the Mandatory Representation of Indigenous Peoples in

Local Legislative Councils;

2. AO No. 1 S, 2004 - Guidelines on the Formulation of the Ancestral Domain Sustainable Development and

Protection Plan (ADSDPP);

The National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) has established its Legislative Liaison Office at the

Central Office which is tasked to coordinate with the House of Representatives and the Senate on bills that

concerns the interests and well-being of the Indigenous Cultural Communities/Indigenous Peoples (ICCs/IPs).

The Office on Policy, Planning & Research (OPPR), as the focal office, coordinates with the other offices of

NCIP at the national, regional and field office levels to ensure that the Agency and ICC/IP concerns are

properly represented in the various committee hearings. As of to date, there are seventeen (17) legislative

measures filed at the House of Representatives and four (4) legislative measures filed at the Senate which are

undergoing series of consultations at various levels, to wit:

A. House Bills

1. House Bill No. 97 - An Act Providing for the Indigenous Peoples Scholarship Program and

Appropriating Funds Therefor;

2. House Bill No. 98 - An Act to Include Ethnic Origin in the National Survey Conducted by the National

Statistics Office;

3. House Bill No. 985 - An Act Creating a Joint Congressional Oversight Committee for the Indigenous

Peoples Rights Act;

4. House Bill No. 659 - An Act Prohibiting Discrimination Against Persons on Account of Ethnic Origin

and/or Religious Belief;

5. House Bill No. 1071 - An Act Providing for the Establishment of an Indigenous Training Center in the

City of Kidapawan, North Cotabato and Appropriating Funds Therefor and for Other Purposes;

6. House Bill No. 1072 – An Act Creating the Department of Indigenous Peoples, Defining its Powers and

Functions, Appropriating Funds Therefor and Other Purposes;

7. House Bill No. 1078 - An Act to Maximize the Contribution of Indigenous Peoples to National Building,

Grant Benefits and Special Privileges, and for Other Purposes;

8. House Bill No. 1220 – Extending the Period for Indigenous Cultural Communities/Indigenous Peoples to

Exercise the Option to Secure Land Title to Their Ancestral Lands Under Land Registration Act 496 and

Granting a New Five (5) Year Period to the National Commission On Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) to take

Appropriate Legal Action for the Cancellation of Officially Documented Titles which were Illegally

Acquired, Amending for the Purpose Section 12 And 64 Of Republic Act 8371, Otherwise Known as

“The Indigenous Peoples Rights Act Of 1997”;

9. House Bill No. 1274 - An Act Providing for a Free And Culture-Sensitive System of Registration

Concerning the Civil Status of Indigenous Peoples and for Other Purposes;

10. House Bill No. 2369 - An Act Providing for the Establishment of an Indigenous Training Center in the

Municipality Of Sen. Ninoy Aquino, 2nd District of Sultan Kudarat and Appropriating Funds therefor;

11. House Bill 4219 - An Act Protecting and Strengthening the Indigenous Community Conserved Areas,

Recognizing their Contribution to Biodiversity Conservation, Establishing for the Purpose The National

ICCA Registry, Appropriating Funds Therefor and for Other Purposes;

12. House Bill No. 4220 - An Act Recognizing And Institutionalizing Indigenous Peoples' Educational

Systems Within the Philippine Educational Systems, Establishing the Guidelines for the Accreditation,

Management And Evaluation of IP Schools, Appropriating the Necessary Government Funds, Financial

Assistance, Incentives, and Support Therefor and for Other Purposes;

13. House Bill No. 4634 - An Act Establishing the Kalanguya Center for the Provinces of Ifugao, Benguet,

Nueva Vizcaya, 6th District Of Pangasinan and 1st District of Nueva Ecija and Appropriating Funds

Therefor;

14. House Bill No. 1274 - An Act Providing for a Free And Culture-Sensitive System of Registration

Concerning the Civil Status of Indigenous Peoples and for Other Purposes;

15. House Bill 1969 - An Act Providing for a Free and Culture-Sensitive System of Registration Concerning

the Civil Status of Indigenous Peoples and for Other Purposes;

16. House Bill No. 4420 - An Act Declaring August 9 as National Indigenous Peoples Day and Mandating

the Meaningful Observance thereof;

17. House Bill No. 5351 – An Act Establishing Resource Centers for Indigenous Cultural

Communities/Indigenous Peoples to Enhance and Ensure Delivery of Essential Services, Appropriating

Funds Therefor and for Other Purposes;

B. Senate Bills

1. Senate Bill No. 534 – An Act to Include Ethnic Origin in the National Survey Conducted by the National

Statistics Office;

2. Senate Bill No. 669 - An Act Safeguarding the Traditional Property Rights of Indigenous Peoples;

3. Senate Bill No, 857 - An Act Creating and Establishing the Center for Studies On Indigenous Cultural

Communities, Appropriating Funds Therefor and for Other Purposes;

4. Senate Bill No. 1506 - An Act Ensuring Equal Employment Opportunities to Members of Indigenous

Cultural Communities and Preference in Certain Cases and for Other Purposes;

5. Senate Bill No. 2013 - An Act Granting The National Commission On Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) a New

Ten (10) Year Period Within Which to take Appropriate Legal Action for the Cancellation of Officially

Documented Titles which were Illegally Acquired as Provided Under Section 64 Of Republic Act 8371,

Otherwise Known as “An Act To Recognize, Protect and Promote the Rights of Indigenous Cultural

Communities/Indigenous Peoples, Creating The National Commission On Indigenous Peoples,

Establishing Implementing Mechanisms, Appropriating Funds Therefor, and for Other Purposes”;

6. Senate Bill NO. 2209 – An Act Establishing Resource Centers for Indigenous Cultural

Communities/Indigenous Peoples to Enhance and Ensure Delivery of Essential Services, Appropriating

Funds Therefor and for Other Purposes;

7. Senate Bill No. 2580 An Act Protecting and Strengthening the Indigenous Community Conserved Areas,

Recognizing their Contribution to Biodiversity Conservation, Establishing for the Purpose the National

ICCA Registry, Appropriating Funds Therefor and for other. Purposes..

While several laws have been enacted that may deter discrimination, the State has still to pass a bill on anti-

discrimination. Worth noting however, are the efforts of the legislative branch in having a law specific to anti-

discrimination passed into law. In 2007, an Anti-religious and Racial Profiling bill was proposed in the House

of Representatives. The proposed bill criminalizes the discriminatory acts against a person on account of his/her

religion, ethnic origin and race. It has undergone the long and tedious process of enacting laws. In the process,

comments and positions of different concerned agencies were solicited. The bill passed the scrutiny and final

readings of both House and Senate but due to the impending elections then in 2010, it has again to be filed and

undergo the same process. Nevertheless, taking cognizant of its importance, several bills related to anti-

discrimination were proposed during the Fifteenth Congress. In 2011, at the House of Representatives and

Senate, proposed House Bill No. 4807 entitled „An Act Prohibiting Racial, Ethnic and Religious Discrimination

‟complemented at the Senate by Senate Bill No. 2814 entitled „An Act Prohibiting Profiling as well as

Discrimination against persons on account of Ethnic or racial origin and/or religious affiliation or belief‟ were

filed. The former has been introduced by at least ten (10) members of the House of Representatives while the

latter was also a consolidation of at least four (4) proposed Senate bills. These were Senate bill (SB) no. 19

entitled „An Act prohibiting discrimination against person on account of ethnic origin and/or religious belief‟,

SB No. 1213 entitled „An Act prohibiting discrimination against persons on account of ethnic origin and/or

religious belief‟ and SB No. 1342 entitled „An Act prohibiting religious and racial profiling‟. While laws

passed during the reporting period were prioritized towards the reorganization of the judiciary for instance,

these laws will facilitate efforts in addressing discrimination as well. The non-passage of a specific anti-

discrimination bill will not impede the continuing initiatives of government agencies and non-government

organizations concerned in addressing discrimination since the State recognizes its obligation and duty as a

party to the ICERD.

On February 7-8, 2013, the government through a Second Round Table Discussion (RTD), consulted the key

stakeholders on the propriety of the Philippines‟ ratification of the ILO International Convention on Indigenous

and Tribal Peoples (No. 169). The consultation process involved determining the necessity of enacting

legislation, ascertaining gaps in existing laws, rules and regulations, and identifying ways to address such gaps.

In that RTD, the call to ratify ILO 169 was resounding. However, the challenge still remains on how various

NGOs, CSOs, Government agencies including the Department of Foreign Affairs, Indigenous Peoples and the

general public be part of the broader support on the lobbying for ratification and being informed and

knowledgeable about ILO 169 and the IPRA in general.

References:

1. CONSOLIDATED REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON THE

ELIMINATION OF ALL FORMS OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION (ICERD). Submitted to PHRC and forwarded to DFA for

official submission of the Philippine Compliance Report on the ICERD to GENEVA on 2014;

2. 2014 Agency Accomplishment Report

3. 2014 Agency report on the Implementation of Outcome Document: Resolution No. 69/2

4. Agency Inter-Bureau Consultation on 08 October 2015