(the following digest was presented by Jill Carino, EED-TFIP Convenor to the National Consultation with Prof. Rodolfo Stavenhagen, United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of Indigenous Peoples held on 02 to 03 February 2007 in Quezon City, Philippines.

Introduction

In the Philippines, the distinctiveness of the 12 to 15 million indigenous peoples and their respective communities to other sectors is their deep attachment to their ancestral land, territory and their collective identity. Indigenous peoples communities are generally situated in areas that are rich repositories of high biodiversity and both physically- and socially-distant from the centers of past and present government institutions. Such conditions promoted a relative autonomy which nurtured the persistence of distinct knowledge systems and socio-political institutions, although these too have underwent cultural accommodation and adaptations. Within a context of a rich local biodiversity, indigenous knowledge systems and socio-political institutions are the guiding structures that ensure the livelihood, food security and, more substantively, the survival of indigenous peoples. In other words, food security of indigenous peoples is ultimately linked to their continued access to and control over their ancestral domain and their right to self-determination.

Harvest in Peril

Although varying in levels and situations, their access and control over their land and resources are in peril, resulting to a situation of coping over a deteriorating quantity and quality of food reserves. Results conducted revealed that there is a high incidence of food shortages among the Tumandok of Panay and Aeta of Luzon. In some communities like the Ifugao and Kankanaey (in the north), Erumanen and Escaya (in the south), communities have suffered varied but steady downward rates of financial indebtedness and economic dependency to dominant private agribusinesses. Among the Ibaloi of Benguet and Talaandig of Bukidnon-Misamis region, there had been a systematic appropriation of their ancestral land in favor of extractive industries such as large-scale mining and logging. In addition, day-to-day activities are being disrupted among the Tumandok and some Kankanaey communities due to constant militarization. In general, these external situations have seriously altered the ways of life of indigenous peoples, rendering them food insecure.

Exclusion to Elimination

This trend is a result of a mainstream development discourse of the state that generally treats their lands/territories as a resource base for national development but as a pretext, regards the livelihood and indigenous knowledge systems of indigenous communities as backward, passive and primitive.

The agenda of the state is to integrate the indigenous communities into a homogenous market system. However such agenda is now challenged by indigenous peoples themselves mainly because main they have yet to enjoy the fruits of so-called “growth” and “development”. Fact of the matter is that such system have resulted to their exclusion, when adopted on the wholesale by indigenous peoples communities. Some forms of exclusion is the disenfranchisement of their own land, livelihood insecurity, erosion and extinction of indigenous knowledge systems and socio-political institutions, and even mendicancy. It is likewise alarming that several indigenous peoples have fall victim of systematic elimination through extrajudicial killings, in which the Philippine government appears to continuously ignore.

Resurgence

Nonetheless, a resurgence is happening in our indigenous communities. It can be ascertained that exemplary and effective indigenous knowledge and socio-political institutions are re-vitalized and indeed go together with so-called modern techniques. With the guidance of non-government organizations, there are promising cases, such as but not limited to: farm-based seed selection and innovation practices, community-based seed conservation projects, land titling using state instruments, to mass education, organizing and mobilization. Concrete examples include: 1) land titling among the Aeta availing of the governments agrarian reform instruments; 2) several indigenous peoples communities formalizing land ownership using provisions of the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA); 3)the Lampisa land stewardship and Holok pest management systems among the Kankanaey and Ifugao, respectively, and the Lapat sociopolitical system that addresses land use among the Banao in Abra. These various strategies show the diversity of options they have chosen in exercising their self-determination in their everyday lives. It exemplifies that indigenous peoples, when informed of the range of strategic options, including threats and opportunities, have the capacity to decide on their own development path. The trajectory is to let them to identify their own development situation and prescribe and realize their own development objective. Within an atmosphere of dialogue and information exchange, composite civil society organizations, academic organizations and peoples’ organizations serve as bridges in advocating these rights, thus, enabling the capacities of indigenous peoples in translating their issues into real solutions.

Way Forward

With the strategic goal of indigenous communities securing access to and control over ancestral lands and domains, as well as the recognition and respect to their right to self-determination, the EED-TFIP assert the following advocacies :

1. Indigenous peoples have the right to determine their own development. The right of indigenous peoples to free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) that also takes into account a community’s socio-economic and historical context is recognized and exercised,

2. Ancestral domains are the nexus of indigenous peoples’ survival and development. By studying national and local policies on land use and tenure toward eventually proposing the policies that genuinely protect the indigenous peoples’ rights to guarantee and promote the sustainable use and management of the domains’ resources.

3. Indigenous knowledge systems are the basis of development, hence, they must be studied, protected and promoted. These are towards recognizaing and developing sui generis systems of protecting traditional knowledge, especially with respect to:

• Customary law,
• Community systems of fines and penalties,
• Community registers, and
• Community intellectual property rights

4. Genetic resources form the essential core of the livelihood system and, thus, the food security of indigenous peoples. Hence, there is a need to undertake a grassroots advocacy toward a strong public policy (e.g., local and national legislations) that would protect and promote the rights of indigenous peoples to their genetic resources, especially along the following :

• Enactment of the mandatory labeling bill, banning of GMOs, ratification of the Cartagena Protocol, and the signing of the National Biosafety Framework,
• Development and formulation of a policy framework specific to biosafety and GMOs, including the effective liability and redress regime, and
• Declaration of genetically modified -free zones at the local level, and the assertion of the rights of indigenous peoples’ to their cultural integrity and FPIC in relation to GMOs.

5. Indigenous sociopolitical systems are essential to food security. It is imperative to respect, promote, and strengthen the role of indigenous socio- political systems to attain food security through the following efforts:

• Conduct the study of, and document the exemplary indigenous sociopolitical systems operating in local communities,
• Recognize their role in order to enhance the engagement of indigenous sociopolitical systems in local governance,

6. Food sufficiency and food security are essential conditions for the survival of indigenous peoples. Hence, there is a need to promote and enhance food sufficiency and food security of indigenous peoples’ communities through the following efforts:

• Promoting sustainable agriculture practices while intensifying food production in order to achieve staple crop sufficiency and insure food security,

• Developing the capacity of indigenous peoples to strengthen their food production systems,

• Diversifying the livelihood activities of indigenous communities in order to ensure food security,

• Locating and protecting the respective market niches for selected produce from indigenous communities,

• Recognizing and advancing the role of indigenous women as co-stewards in ensuring food and livelihood security, and

• Intensifying the campaign and advocacy of the EED-TFIP regarding issues that affect food and livelihood security of indigenous peoples, especially in connection with, but not limited to:

· · Agricultural modernization and trade liberalization,

· · Extractive industries, such as large-scale mining, log and lumber extraction. and hydroelectric power generation via large dams,

· · Piracy of biogenetic resources,

· · Development aggression, and

· · Militarization