AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

THE DYNAMICS OF MANGYAN ALANGAN CUSTOMARY LAW AND STATE LAW: THE INTEGRATION OF THE APLAKI SYSTEM THROUGH THE SANAMA The dynamics of Mangyan Alangan customary law and state law is analyzed through the integration of the aplaki system through the Mangyan organization, SANAMA (Samahan ng mga Nagkakaisang Mangyan Alangan). The main objectives of this descriptive study are: (1) to describe the political (decision-making) structure of the Mangyan Alangan in Paitan, Naujan, Oriental Mindoro; and (2) to situate the indigenous political structure of the Mangyan Alangan in the IPRA through the SANAMA. This study‟s main unit of analysis is the Samahan ng mga Nagkakaisang Mangyan Alangan (SANAMA), a Mangyan organization, categorically an indigenous people‟s organization founded by the Mangyan Alangan, based in Barangay Paitan, Naujan, Oriental Mindoro.

The Mangyan Alangan of Mindoro Indigenous peoples of the island of Mindoro are collectively called Mangyan. Mindoro being an island with mountainous terrain had the Mangyans as its first settlers, driven from the lowland to the mountains when “acculturation” or a process by which submission to a single colonial ruler, previously dissimilar peoples of different language groups became a majority, while the group which resisted colonial domination became a minority (Casambre, 2006: 106)” began during the period of Spanish colonization. At present, the population of indigenous people in Oriental Mindoro includes eight Mangyan groups or “tribes” namely: 1) the Iraya; 2) Alangan; 3) Tadyawan; 4) Taubud; 5) Bangon; 6) Buhid; 7) Hanunuo-Bulalacao and; 8) Hanunuo-Mansalay (Mangyan Heritage Center, 2007). (Refer to Appendix A for the ethnographic map of Mindoro.) According to the Mangyan Heritage Center (2007), given that the population of the Mangyans in Mindoro is estimated at 100,000, the Mangyans make up ten per cent of the total population of the province. The Mangyan Alangan in particular are found within the municipalities of Naujan, Baco, San Teodoro and Victoria in Oriental Mindoro and in the municipality of Sablayan in Occidental Mindoro. In Naujan, the Alangan Mangyans reside in the upland barangays of Balite, Banuton, Caburo, Magtibay and Paitan (Gariguez, et al, 2005: 85).

1

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

The Mangyan Alangan is the only Mangyan “tribe” (tribe denoting a different sub-ethnic group in the case of the Mangyan) who acknowledges and calls themselves “mangyan” meaning “human being” or “tao” in the Mangyan dialect (Helbling and Schult, 2004: 168). The Mangyan Alangan are traditionally “slash and burn” cultivators (Javier, 1987: 2) or “swidden agriculturists (Kikuchi, 1989: 98).” The Mangyan Alangan is a generally peaceful tribe but is vulnerable to the use and abuse of non-indigenous peoples or non-IPs, mainly lowlanders. The Mangyan Alangan esteems “gentle behavior and strongly disapprove of aggressive and boastful conduct (Helbling and Schult, 2004:10).” The life of a Mangyan Alangan is rooted in nature or kalikasan especially to land or lupa which pertains to their ancestral domain or lupaing ninuno. Review of Related Literature Anthropological studies on the Alangan Mangyans are minimal compared to the studies made on other indigenous peoples in the Philippines especially those from the north (the Cordilleras) and the south (Lumads). The scarcity of literature shows the lack of interest of scholars to study the Mindoro “highlanders (Kikuchi, 1989).” The literature however varies in terms of subject matter. Thus, the available literature on the Alangan Mangyans focus on a number of themes: their culture (Banta, 1985; Quiaoit, 1997; Mariquina, 2001), their history (Helbling and Schult, 2004; Javier, 1987), society (Banta, 1985; Quiaoit, 1997), economy (Banta, 1985; Caraan, 2001; Lopez-Gonzaga, 1983) and politics (Kikuchi, 1984; Kikuchi in Kikuchi, 1989; Banta, 1985; Helbling in Kikuchi, 1989). Socio-cultural and economic studies of the Mangyan Alangan include those of Banta (1985), Quiaoit (1997) and most recently that of Mariquina (2001). Banta (1985) focused on the “effects of changes on the socio-cultural and economic life of the Mangyan Alangan as brought about by changes introduced by the government and the religious missions.” Banta (1985) compared the “traditional” Alangan and the “marginal” Alangan in terms of: (1) “the community- (a) settlement patterns and physical environment; (b) political life (structure, leadership, laws and external relations); (c) social life, interfamily relationships, socialization and communication; (d) economic life and; (e) other cultural aspects-religious life and amusements; and (2) the family- (a) physical setting; (b) intra-family

2

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

relationships; (c) kinship; (d) family beliefs and customs; (e) property and ownership; (f) decision making and; (g) leisure.” Banta (1985) concluded that the impact of changes on socio-cultural life led to: (1) “change of indigenous settlement of the community (balay-lakoy to individual household units); (2) change of location of residence (from interior mountain site to lowland); (3) introduction of a foreign organized religion into the new settlement; and (4) transformation of indigenous political structure to the government introduced concept of a barangay.” Banta (1985) further concluded that the impact of changes in indigenous political leadership led to: (1) “change in who qualifies as the top leaders of the community; (2) change in who selects and the manner of election; and (3) change in the leaders‟ function and responsibilities which indicate the level of involvement the leaders has with the people and how intense the people interact and support him.” Another comparative study of the traditional Alangan and the “acculturated” (or marginal in terms of Banta‟s definition) Alangan was that of Quiaoit (1997)‟s socio-economic study of the Mangyan Alangan. Quiaoit (1997) made a descriptive and ethnographic study on the “changes in the patterns in the man-land relationship” of the Mangyan Alangan, that of the traditional community and an “acculturated” community. Quiaoit (1997) differentiated the “traditional” community practicing “swidden cultivation” from an acculturated one oriented towards “sedentary farming.” Quiaoit (1997) compared: the “ideoreligious” (land rituals, taboos, sacred grounds); the sociopolitical (land ownership and regulation); and economic (subsistence activities and plant and animal life utilized) aspects. Quiaoit (1997) concluded that in the traditional community, “belief in the spirits and preservation of the natural environment are closely interrelated and effectively filter out possible outside social influences” while in the acculturated community, the “presence of adjacent lowlander communities, government land regulations, the cash economy and the presence of religious missionaries have, over the years, brought about the alteration of the natural environment and adaptive modifications in land concepts and practices.” An important implication of the changed man-land relationship of two communities of the Alangan is on the management plan needed for the common ancestral domain claim of the Mangyan Alangan.

3

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

A more culture-centered study is that of Mariquina‟s (2001) cultural documentation of the Alangan in Paitan. Mariquina (2001) provided a description of the culture and the arts of the Mangyan Alangan including their indigenous architecture, indigenous costumes, indigenous accessories, the balanan, traditional celebrations, music and dance, myths and stories. The study also described the swidden agriculture practiced by the Mangyan Alangan which served as the guide in studying the culture of the Mangyan Alangan (Mariquina, 2001). The most recent historical study on the Mangyan Alangan is that of Helbling and Schult (2004). Helbling and Schult (2004) described the Mangyan Alangan‟s “survival strategies” through tracing the history of the Mangyan Alangan since pre-colonial times until the post-EDSA period. Helbling and Schult (2004) provided a brief history of Mangyan relations between lowlanders and missionaries in their conclusion. Helbling and Schult (2004: 154) argued that the peacefulness of the Mangyans was “the result of a relation to the neighboring population being politically and militarily far superior in the lowland…which evolved in pre-colonial times (and)… became more accentuated in the early Spanish times.” During colonial times, the Mangyans stayed outside Spanish control and were called “Manguianes infieles (Helbling and Schult, 2004: 154).” Even when the Spanish colonizers forced the Mangyan to settle in the plains or lowlands, the Mangyans “reacted with withdrawal and retreat, the same pattern of reaction as to attacks and other threats from the lowlands (Helbling and Schult, 2004: 154).” According to Helbling and Schult (2004:154), this was the recurring reaction pattern of the Mangyans throughout Philippine history even during the Moro attacks, the Philippine war of independence against Spain and later to the United States of America and during the Japanese invasion in the Second World War. Through time, the relationship between the Mangyans and lowland settlers were relatively peaceful even when the lowland settlers tried to secure Mangyan labor through: “…coercion (forced labor)…establishing debt bindgaes, patron client and (asymmetrical) blood-brother relations (sanduguan) with Mangyan families. The Mangyan(s) were never able to force settlers or traders to abstain from exploitative practices but they nevertheless could leave the lowland settlements and return to the hinterland anytime (Helbling and Schult, 2004:155).”

4

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

During the Commonwealth period up to the present time, land became scarce and the ancestral domain of the Mangyan Alangan was threatened with further settlements and the Mangyan Alangan were “pushed back from the plain” and retreated to the mountains due to pressure of an “expanding lowland population being far superior in regard to the use of force and violence and supported by the provincial government (Helbling and Schult, 2004: 155).” Thus, for Helbling and Schult (2004:156), the Mangyan‟s “retreat and withdrawal were the only viable survival strategies in the past” even with economic dependence and constant contact with the lowland population. They, however, argued that: “..the increasing scarcity of land, the permanent encroachment of settlers (on their ancestral domain), and the intensifying armed conflict between the National Peoples’ Army (communist insurgents) and the Armed Forces of the Philippines (Philippine army) are threatening these so far effective survival strategies (Helbling and Schult, 2004: 156).” Javier‟s (1987) history of the Mangyan tribes traced the Mangyan tribes‟ first encounter with the missionary Church up to the present times. Javier first discussed the ethnographic characteristics of the Mangyans (i.e. Mangyan identity, social setting, economy, social structure and organization, marriage and family, and folk beliefs and practices) and provided a brief history of the Mangyans. Javier stressed that the “manifold pressures” on the Mangyan tribes which include “pressure on their ancestral lands, properties, and even life have increased tremendously (Javier, 1987: 50).” Javier also highlighted that the “isolation of the Mangyans in the periphery…has contributed to their underdevelopment…(and) exploitation by the lowlanders (Javier, 1987: 51).” Furthermore, Javier described the missionary work (i.e. evangelization and community building) among the Mangyans since the early times up to the EDSA revolution. In the final analysis, taking into account the abovementioned lessons, Javier (1987: 10) proposed a “program of building Christian communities” among the Mangyan tribes and through this discussed the basic concepts and perspectives in building Christian communities that aimed to “help the missionaries engaged in the evangelization and development of the ethnic minorities (Javier, 1987: 2).” In a socio-economic development study, Caraan (2001) compared the indigenous (Mangyan Alangan) and state-sponsored systems of community based rattan utilization and management (i.e. actors

5

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

and the social organization of activities in each system) (Caraan, 2001). Rattan is a source of livelihood for the Mangyan Alangan in Oriental Mindoro. The study concluded with the arguments that: “the infringement of state policy caused changes in rattan utilization and management behavior and the dissolution of the indigenous knowledge, practices and systems on rattan;” and that “rattan depletion is a political economic issue since it involves the market, the state and the Alangan Mangyan as direct land use decision makers (Javier, 2001).” Finally, studies on the indigenous political structure and organization and kinship of the Mangyan Alangan politics were carried out by Kikuchi (1984/1989) and Helbling (in Kikuchi, 1989). Kikuchi‟s theses on ethnic relations among the Mangyan Alangan and the emergence of the formal political leaders and local kin group in the societies which have no unilineal descent group are established in separate articles in different publications. One focused on the Paitan and Bugayan group of the Mangyan Alangan and the examination of the “emergence of the pan-Alangan association (Kikuchi, 1984: 46)” while the other focused on the emergence of formal political leadership in bilateral or non-unilineal societies in both the Alangan and Batangan (or Taubud) tribes (Kikuchi in Kikuchi, 1989:100). Helbling‟s study, on the other hand, investigated the “relation between kinship (as the basis of political culture) and politics (authority and factionalization) and the reproduction of the local group as a political unit (Helbling in Kikuchi, 1989: 124).” The study concluded that there is “a close and definite connection between kin segments and political factions as well as the relevance of the political ideology for the political relations (both the symmetrical and the asymmetrical ones (Helbling in Kikuchi, 1989: 140).” With the available although limited literature on the socio-econo-political and histo-cultural characteristics of the Mangyan Alangan tribe, the researcher aims: (1) to describe the political (decisionmaking) structure of the Mangyan Alangan in Paitan, Naujan, Oriental Mindoro, specifically the integration of the indigenous political structure into an indigenous peoples‟ organization; and (2) to situate this indigenous political structure in the process of granting free prior and informed consent specifically to describe the implications of the changes brought about by the implementation of the IPRA to the Paitan settlement of the Mangyan Alangan.

6

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

Definition of Terms Before the analysis of data and use of relevant literature, it is imperative to clarify the definition of the following terms throughout the paper: (a) Mangyan Alangan or Alangan - a sub-ethnic group or “tribe” of the Mangyan in the northeast of Mindoro (Oriental) (b) IPRA- Indigenous Peoples Rights Act that was passed as legislation to promote and protect the rights of indigenous peoples in the Philippines in 1997 (c) batas-katutubo o batas-kultura- customary laws that are passed through oral tradition among the Mangyan Alangan (d) barangay- basic political unit in the Philippines in accordance to the Local Government Code of 1991 (e) SANAMA- Samahan ng mga Nagkakaisang Mangyan Alangan (f) NCIP- National Commission on Indigenous Peoples, implementing agency of the IPRA (g) FPIC- free, prior and informed consent (h) PMR- Paitan Mangyan Reservation (i) aplaki- term for a male elder among the Alangan (j) agbayi- term for a female elder among the Alangan (k) kalikasan- nature or the environment (l) kaingin- swidden agriculture or slash-and-burn cultivation, a yearly activity of the Alangan (m) kuyay- “caretaker” in the Alangan dialect (n) lupaing ninuno o lupa- “ancestral domain” (o) usapan o pulong- a Tagalog term denoting a meeting or assembly among the Alangan (p) tanongan- term for adjudicator or mediator in the Alangan dialect

Research Methodology and Design The researcher utilized a number of qualitative methods for the study including key informant interviews and archival research. Since the unit of analysis of the study is the SANAMA which is based in Brgy. Paitan in the municipality of Naujan in Oriental Mindoro, key informant interviewing were

7

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

conducted to provide as source of information about the ways of living of the Alangan Mangyan “that have ceased to exist or have been sharply modified (Pelto and Pelto, 1970:71)” by the time the research is conducted but will be relevant in looking into Mangyan customary law. Key informants for this research included two officials of the SANAMA who gave their prior and informed consent to be interviewed. Informal interviews were also conducted with members of the Mangyan Alangan tribe residing in Paitan. Archival research included analysis of a number of available resolutions of SANAMA that involved decision-making internally, i.e. elections and granting consent to outsiders. Those resolutions made in cooperation with other Mangyan organizations were excluded. The researcher argues that the different decision making structures of the Mangyan Alangan political structure, the Indigenous Peoples‟ Rights Act of 1997 overlap and such that the integration of both structures result into the structure, organization and principles of the Mangyan Alangan organization, SANAMA. It is through this conceptual framework that the analysis of the available data is conducted.

SANAMA
Figure 1 Conceptual Framework: The Integration of the Mangyan Alangan Political Structure and the IPRA of 1997 in the SANAMA

MANGYAN ALANGAN POLITICAL STRUCTURE

INDIGENOUS PEOPLES’ RIGHTS ACT OF 1997

The Decision-Making Structure: The Integration of the Aplaki System in the SANAMA Although a peaceful tribe, conflicts are still inherent among the Mangyan Alangan. According to Helbling and Schult (2004:10), “adultery, theft, damage of someone‟s reputation, suspicion of sorcery,

8

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

etc., cause conflicts both within and between groups” or communities. Resolution of conflicts within a community are “settled either bilaterally” between the conflicting parties or “within the family with the mediation of older family members or male relatives (Helbling and Schult, 2004: 10).” When conflicts escalate and endanger the peacefulness of a whole settlement like the one in Paitan, “…the members of a local (community) are summoned to a meeting (or usapan) led by older men. All married men actively participate in the discussions whereas women only speak when they have to give some information about the case, as witnesses or when being accused…During a meeting, the details or the severity of the crime are discussed and the compensation for the victim or the punishment and fine for the wrongdoer are negotiated. These negotiations may last for several days, until finally, the emotions have calmed down and an agreement has been achieved (Helbling and Schult, 2004: 10).” Furthermore, according to Helbling and Schult (2004:11), the infringement of group boundaries or rights on rattan also cause conflicts. Meetings or pagpupulong are “summoned where the older men of the settlements involved discuss the case (2004:11).” To Kalignayan (2008, translation by the researcher) and Lipanyuan (2008, translation by the researcher), the president and secretary of SANAMA, respectively, these elders are the aplaki , who are “responsible for the solution of problems between local groups because of their high status within their respective communities and because of their wide network of friends in other settlements (Helbling and Schult, 2004: 11).” When conflicts cannot be resolved and any negotiation or attempt at reconciliation do not succeed, “the enmity between the two settlements (in case of infringement of group boundaries or rights on rattan) continues in form of…a magic of separation (pamanes) will be placed on the border between both settlements and is believed to cause the immediate death of anybody who attempts to cross it. In this way, both local groups are separated and the conflict is solved by avoidance (Helbling and Schult, 2004:11).” According to Kalignayan (2008, translation by the researcher) and Lipanyuan (2008, translation by the researcher), the Alangan Mangyan‟s traditional leader is the aplaki. The aplaki is a male elder whose roles usually include being the political leader, a healer, and a judge. On the other hand, Tupas (2008, translation by the researcher) acknowledged that although there is also an agbayi, a female elder, whose roles include being a healer, a midwife and an advisor, the agbayi do not make decisions for the community as the aplaki does. Thus, the aplaki remains the authority regarding their customary laws or

9

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

batas-katutubo especially in cases that need verdicts in disciplining a member or members of the community or tribe (Kalignayan, 2008; Lipanyuan, 2008, translation by the researcher). Thus, the aplaki is the executive and adjudicator of the customary laws in their respective communities. (For the complete transcript of the interview, please refer to Appendix B and C.) Helbling‟s thesis on the “internal political order” among the Mangyan Alangan further elaborated on the role of the elders in the Mangyan Alangan tribe. Helbling describes the male elders who are “mentally or physically strong”, who “participate actively in political life and have married children and grown-up children”, who “neither have fathers or fathers-in-law anymore”, whose age range from “45 to 60 years old” as the “dominant” force in a local group (Helbling in Kikuchi, 1989: 130). The male elders are the “custodians and experts of the tradition.” For example, the male elders “preside over the public discussions of marriage…and settle disputes in cases of theft, elopement, adultery and black magic…the official shaman (balaonan) of the group, whp is able to cure sickness and also to protects his group against a multitude of evil spirits (tampalasen) (Helbling in Kikuchi, 1989: 130-131).” After the above discussion on the dominance and authority of the male elders or the aplaki in the Mangyan Alangan tribe, it is imperative to discuss its adaptation and integration into the structure of the SANAMA. First, it is important to locate the organization physically. The Mangyan Alangan settlement in Paitan is considered the largest in Oriental Mindoro and in accordance to the Local Government Code of 1995 is a barangay unit that includes Mangyan settlements found in the mountains, hill villages and the Alangan valley (Helbling and Schult, 2004: 9-10). Paitan serves as the central area for political activities such that the residence of barangay officials, courts, meeting places, election sites are situated there. It is also central for economic activities such as “the sale of rattan and coffee, trade of seeds and consumer goods, wage labor, etc.(Helbling and Schult, 2004:10).” Paitan also served as the center for missionary activities to the Mangyan Alangan communities for almost thirty-five years until the missionaries moved to another Mangyan settlement a few years ago. The missionaries brought medical care and supply, clothes and credit for the Mangyan Alangan in Paitan (Helbling and Schult, 2004: 10; Javier, 1987). It can

10

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

be assumed that because of the centrality of Paitan to the life of the Mangyan Alangan that the SANAMA based its operations in Paitan. The SANAMA was founded in 1987 by the aplaki of the Mangyan Alangan tribe, as a non-profit, voluntary indigenous peoples‟ organization that aims to unite the Mangyan Alangan of Oriental Mindoro. It has a comprehensive seven-point program that aims to the address the following issues: (1) land or lupa (ancestral domain or lupaing ninuno); (2) livelihood or kabuhayan; (3) education; (4) health or kalusugan; (5) spiritual culture o kulturang ispiritwal; (6) women or kababaihan and; (7) youth or kabataan (Kalignayan, 2008, translation by the researcher). It is important to note that the aplaki system is adapted within the organizational structure of the SANAMA. Within the Mangyan Alangan tribe, there are at present (estimated) fifty-seven (57) aplaki who represent each Mangyan Alangan community within the recognized ancestral domain of the Alangan tribe in Oriental Mindoro, covering four municipalities: Naujan, Baco, Victoria and San Teodoro. All the aplaki in these Alangan Mangyan communities are members of SANAMA. It is in the custom of the Mangyan Alangan that the male members especially the aplaki of the tribe are the authority in the community hence they comprise the bulk of the leadership of SANAMA (Kalignayan, 2008; Lipanyuan, 2008, translation by the researcher). The researcher argues that the integration of the aplaki system into the SANAMA can be traced back to the “pan-Alangan” association that was studied by Kikuchi in the 1980s. Thus, it is relevant to discuss Kikuchi‟s theses on the emergence of a local corporate group among the Mangyan Alangan in the late 1950s which is called a banada (literally, “to be together”) (Kikuchi, 1984:62). The banada according to Kikuchi is a “pan-association” with the objective of “establishing a social and economic reciprocity and security system (Kikuchi, 1984:62).” The banada is composed of the 33 kuyay or caretaker from each gado or local group. The kuyay or the caretakers, in turn, elect a president designated as poon (Kikuchi, 1984: 62). The banada was an attempt at “political recognition and solidarity of cohabitants in the same areas” that will “protect the Alangan from social, political and economic menaces from the Christian lowlanders (Kikuchi, 1984: 62-63).” The banada „s external function was to deal with

11

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

“land problems” while its internal function was to “investigate…law breakers (Kikuchi, 1984: 63).” Thus, it can also be argued that the SANAMA is the contemporary version of the banada. Since its founding, the SANAMA has been a central organization for the recognition and protection of the rights of the Mangyan-Alangan. It is a part of the decision making structure in the Mangyan-Alangan tribe since most of the members of the Board of Trustees of the SANAMA are aplaki from different communities of the Alangan. The aplaki in the SANAMA are elected by the members of the tribe either through show of hands (Lipanyuan, 2008, translation by researcher) or through a: “…sistematikong pagpili ng pinuno na isinasagawa sa pamamagitan ng dahon o bato. Ang isang kandidato ay magdadala ng isang uri ng dahon (o bato), gayundin ang kanyang kalaban. Ang mga miyembro ng pamayanan ay pipila at isa-isang pipili ng dahon (o bato). Ang dahong napili na may pinakamaraming bilang ang siyang magiging pinuno. Ang mga matanda at opisyal ng barangay ang magpoproklama kung sino ang nanalo (Kalignayan, 2008).” As an organization, SANAMA provides a picture of the mixture of the traditional socio-political structure of the Mangyan Alangan and the socio-political structure of a peoples‟ organization as recognized by law. The SANAMA can be considered symbol of the recognition and fulfillment of the Mangyan Alangan‟s right to self-governance. The SANAMA has recently renewed recognition from the Securities and Exchange Commission to enable them to continue their program of activities and enable them to continue representing the Mangyan Alangan of Oriental Mindoro. SANAMA is also member of the Kapulungan Para sa Lupaing Ninuno or KPLN, a recognized indigenous peoples‟ network organization by the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP). In the next section, the researcher aims to situate the Mangyan-Alangan in the context of the implementation of the IPRA thus: describing the situation of the Mangyan-Alangan before the implementation of the IPRA and after the implementation of the IPRA (present time).

The Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (1997) The Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (1997) or IPRA is considered a landmark legislation by the Tenth Congress of the Philippines (1995-1998) and is seen as a “progressive law that was passed by a

12

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

legislature dominated by landed interests (Lusterio-Rico, 2007:59).” The IPRA recognizes four set of rights of the indigenous peoples: (1) rights to ancestral domains; (2) right to self-governance and empowerment; (3) social justice and human rights; and (4) cultural integrity. The second set of rights on the right to self-governance and empowerment specifies that: “The ICCs/IPs shall have the right to use their own commonly accepted justice systems, conflict resolution institutions, peace building processes or mechanisms and other customary laws and practices within their respective communities and as may be compatible with the national legal system and with internationally recognized human rights (IPRA,1997, Sec.15).” Among the stated policies in the IPRA that is related to the practice of the customary laws of the indigenous peoples such that: “The State shall protect the rights of ICCs/IPs to their ancestral domains to ensure their economic, social and cultural well being and shall recognize the applicability of customary laws governing property rights or relations in determining the ownership and extent of ancestral domain (IPRA, Sec.2.b).” According to the Indigenous People‟s Rights Act (1997), customary laws refer to “a body of written and/or unwritten rules, usages, customs and practices traditionally and continually recognized, accepted and observed by respective ICCS/IPs(Sec.3.f).” The IPRA in turn, defined what an indigenous political structure is- the “organizational and cultural leadership systems, institutions, relationships, patterns and processed for decision-making and participation, identified by ICCs/IPs such as, but not limited to, Council of Elders, Council of Timuays, Bodong Holder, or any other tribunal or body of similar nature(Sec.3.i).” Free and prior informed consent on the other hand refers to the “consensus of all members of the ICCS/IPs to; be 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 activity, in a language an process understandable to the community (Sec.3.g).” In the following sections are separate but brief discussions on the situation of the MangyanAlangan before the implementation of the IPRA and after the implementation of IPRA.

13

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

The Mangyan Alangan Prior to the IPRA: A Struggle for Survival According to Kalignayan (2008, translation by the researcher), the largest area where the Mangyan Alangan settlements can be found is in Paitan which was declared in 1935 (during the period of the Commonwealth government) as the Paitan Mangyan Reservation or PMR. Ilocano (native of the Ilocos region in northern Luzon) settlements however were established within the PMR when the government forced the resettlement of lowlanders during the Commonwealth period. This caused a number of problems for the Mangyan Alangan in Paitan since the Ilocanos claimed parts of the Mangyan reservation as private land armed with land titles. The Mangyan Alangan equipped with only oral history in claiming the reservation as part of their ancestral domain were disadvantaged and were not able to contest the Ilocano‟s claims over parts and parcels of land within their ancestral domain (Kalignayan, 2008, translation by the researcher). Over the four decades before the implementation of the IPRA, the government was not able to give priority to the protection to the rights of the indigenous peoples especially to their ancestral domain. According to Kalignayan (2008, translation by the researcher), there were a number of problems that were detrimental to the Mangyan Alangan before the implementation of the IPRA particularly including: (1) the exploitation or pagsasamantala by the non-IPs or lowlanders of the Mangyans; (2) land grabbing o pag-angkin ng lupa by non-IPs within their ancestral domain thru the issuance and ownership of land titles; (3) settlement or paninirahan of non-IPs within their ancestral domain without consulting the Mangyans; (4) issuance of the Department of Agrarian Reform of Certificate of Land Use Authority to non-IPs in the guise of the agrarian reform program within the ancestral domain of the Mangyan Alangan; (5) the entry of non-IPs in the ancestral domain or in their communities without consent from or consultation with the Mangyan Alangan. It was only in the recent decade that the government became of assistance and of utility to the Mangyan Alangan was fulfilled. Pursuant to the Department of Environment and Natural Resources Administrative Order No. 2, series of 1993, CADC No. R4-CADC-024 (Certificate of Ancestral Domain Claim) was awarded to the Mangyan Alangan in Oriental Mindoro in 26 February 1996 as represented by

14

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

the SANAMA (Gariguez, 2005: 35). However, according to Kalignayan (2008, translation by the researcher) even with the issuance of such certificate, it did not prove difficult for government-sponsored and commercial projects to be implemented within the ancestral domain of the Mangyan Alangan without their consent, i.e. mining projects.

The Mangyan Alangan after the Implementation of the IPRA: The Prerogative of FPIC in a Continuing Struggle In relation to FPIC, the researcher looks into how the right to self-governance stated in the IPRA is reflected in the indigenous political structure of the Alangan Mangyans which can be reflected in the indigenous peoples‟ organization of the Alangan, the SANAMA. Since the SANAMA was founded in 1987, ten years before the IPRA was implemented, the organization found itself in a position where it can actually empower itself through the law as the sole representative of the Mangyan Alangan in Oriental Mindoro. The IPRA in fact recognizes the existence of a people‟s organization or a “private, nonprofit voluntary organization of members of an ICC/IP which is accepted as representative of such ICCs/IPs (IPRA, 1997, Sec.3.n).” The CADC mentioned above was awarded before the passage of the Indigenous Peoples‟ Rights Act (1997) such that when the law was passed, the Mangyan Alangan needed to apply for the conversion of their CADC to a CADT or Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title that is the recognized certification for the ancestral domain of the indigenous peoples as stated in the IPRA. The ancestral domain, which is the central factor in the life of indigenous peoples particularly the Mangyan Alangan is defined in the IPRA (Sec.3.a) as: “…all areas generally belonging to ICCs/IPs comprising lands, inland waters, coastal areas, and natural resources therein, held under a claim of ownership, occupied or possessed by ICCs/IPs, themselves or through their ancestors, communally or individually since time immemorial, continuously to the present except when interrupted by war, force majeure or displacement by force, deceit, stealth or as a consequence of government projects or any other voluntary dealings entered into by government and private individuals, corporations, and which are necessary to ensure their economic, social and cultural welfare. It shall include ancestral land, forests, pasture, residential, agricultural, and other lands individually owned whether alienable and disposable or otherwise, hunting grounds, burial grounds, worship areas, bodies of water, mineral and

15

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

other natural resources, and lands which may no longer be exclusively occupied by ICCs/IPs but from which their traditionally had access to for their subsistence and traditional activities, particularly the home ranges of ICCs/IPs who are still nomadic and/or shifting cultivators. ” When the IPRA was implemented, the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) was given the mandate to “protect and promote the interest and well-being of the ICCs/IPs with due regard to their beliefs, customs, traditions and institutions (Sec.39).” The Ancestral Domain Office of the NCIP became responsible for the “identification, delineation and recognition of ancestral land/domains…and “issue, upon the free and prior informed consent of the ICCs/IPs concerned, certification prior to the grant of any license, lease or permit for the exploitation of natural resources affecting the interests of ICCs/IPs in protecting the territorial integrity of all ancestral domains (Sec.46.a).” According to Lipanyuan (2008, translation by the researcher), the process of applying for the CADT had been the first problem of the Mangyan Alangan since the IPRA was implemented. The second problem was the lack of knowledge of non-IPs, specially lowlanders, a number of government agencies, local government officials, and foreigners, about the IPRA which made it difficult for the Mangyan Alangan to demand the right to be consulted through the FPIC process. On one hand, according to Kalignayan (2008, translation by the researcher), the IPRA‟s objectives are well-intentioned however there are certain provisions that need to be revised because for the leaders of the tribe, the IPRA is being misused by non-IPs. Kalignayan (2008, translation by the researcher) was also wary of their persistent problems with the Department of Agrarian Reform. Although the NCIP had been helpful to them, according to Kalignayan (2008), the NCIP had also been problematic for them as can be seen in the following account: “Ang NCIP naman minsan ay pumapabor sa hindi katutubo at hindi patas sa pagdedesisyon. May mga dati nang nakatira dito na Mangyan na pwersahang pinagbibigyan ng pabor ang hindi katutubo. May ilan ding problema pa sa NCIP na mga naunang batas na nagsasabing hindi sa katutubo ang lupa. At ang hindi katutubo na may sinasabing karapatan sa lupa ang siyang kinikilala.” On another note, both Kalignayan (2008) and Lipanyuan (2008) refer to an improvement in the decision making process since the IPRA was implemented, because of the involvement of all members of

16

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

the community and the implied right to decide which reflects the indigenous people‟s right to govern themselves. Kalignayan (2008, translation by the researcher) reference to self-governance is shown through the consultation process with the members of the community who can later freely decide on a problem. The consultation process is further explained by Lipanyuan (2008): “Dito sa Mangyan Alangan, ang mga nagpupulong yung mga matatanda, mga lider kagaya sa samahan, sa organisasyon, yung presidente at yung mga miyembro ng board (of trustees), pagkatapos kapag makakabuo sila ng desisyon roon sa pagpupulong na iyon, yun ay ipepresenta uli sa mga tao, dun sa assembly kung tawagin, pag naaprobahan o pumayag yung marami sa napagdesisyunan, dadalhin na din sa ibang pamayanan hanggang mapagdesisyunan din sa pagpupulong, ibig sabihin, lahat ay may partisipasyon sa pag-sangayon sa kasunduan o sa mga pinagpulungan… nakakapagmungkahi rin sila, kahit yung pangkaraniwang miyembro sa pamayanan, nagmumungkahi rin sila kung ano ang pinakamaganda o anong tama doon sa pagpupulong. Ibig sabihin, hindi naman komo lider lang, sila lang ang magdedesisyon para sa buong katutubo o buong Mangyan pati yung mga Mangyan din na walang puwesto o hindi lider ay nakapagdedesisyon sa pamamagitan ng mungkahi (Lipanyuan, 2008) “ Today, the aplaki „s qualifications had also changed somewhat according to Lipanyuan (2008). Being one of the male elders is no longer the main qualification for someone to be an aplaki: “Kailangan ang isang aplaki ng Mangyan Alangan ay laging nasa punto ng katotohanan, walang pinapanigan at hindi mayabang…Yung mga aplaki ngayon, sila yung nagpapatupad ng batas ng kultura ng katutubong Alangan. Lahat ng batas ng Alangan sila ang nagpapatupad. Kapag may pagpupulong, sila rin yung tumitingin at nagtitimbang kung talagang taliwas sa batas ng Alangan ang pinaguusapan (Lipanyuan, 2008).” To show the activities of the SANAMA regarding issues confronting the Mangyan Alangan tribe, the researcher looked into two official documents of the SANAMA (Resolution 2005-June 4 and an undated letter to Mayor dela Chica of Baco, Oriental Mindoro) that were made available by the SANAMA through the Mangyan Mission. It can be seen in Resolution 2005-June 4 addressed to NCIP Commissioner Lagtum Pasag that was made to oppose the reopening and operation of the Mindex-Crew Aglubang Mining Corporation, the integrity of the cultural identity of the Mangyan-Alangan and their connection to their ancestral domain were considered as the main reasons for the opposition. The following were the reasons given for the opposition:

17

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

1. “Ang lugar na miminahin ay mahigpit na ipinagbilin ng aming ninuno na pangalagaan at wag sisirain 2. Biglaang dumating ang Mindex na walang pasabi sa mga Mangyan 3. Pumapasok sa mgasagradong lugar ang mga nagmimina at wala ng paggalang 4. Nagdudulot ng sakit sa mga tao dahil sa aming karanasan 5. Lalong magugutom ang mga tao kung ipagpapatuloy ang minahan 6. Ang mga hayop ay mawawalan ng tirahan 7. Lumalambot ang mga lupa dahil sa ginagawang paghuhukay ng minahan 8. Mawawalan ng tubig inuman ang mga Mangyan dahil lalabo ang tubig Aglubang 9. Takot na sumabog ang mga bulkan, limang bulkan ang napapaloob sa lugar ng minahan…kaya mahigpit naming tinutulan ang pagbubukas muli ng minahan dahil (missing text in researcher’s copy)…sa aming karanasan sa dalawang taong pagoperate ng minahan dito sa amin (SANAMA, Resolution 2005-June 4)” In relation to this, Kaliganayan (2008, translation by the researcher) also referred to the awareness of conflict within the communities regarding mining as one of the problems that arose. According to Kaliganayan (2008, translation by the researcher), there exist both pro-mining and anti-mining Mangyan organizations, that there are times, when there are Mangyans who are involved in mining themselves. Kalignayan(2008, translated by the researcher) attributed this to the influence of money as contributing to the problem of being short-sighted of some Mangyans (“hindi nila nakikita ang kinabukasan”). On the other hand, the undated letter to Mayor de la Chica of Baco, Oriental Mindoro referred to the opposition of SANAMA to an “agpansula” (a sacred ritual to determine if the path to Mt. Halcon can be opened) to be done on March 23, 2008. In the letter, the organization requested that the “agpansula” be postponed in respect and recognition of their culture and rights as Mangyan since the SANAMA and residents of Brgy.Lantuyan issued a 5-year moratorium against entry of the public especially of mountaineers to Mt. Halcon. Mt. Halcon, according to the letter, is covered by the 32,000 hectare ancestral domain of the Mangyan-Alangan declared by the DENR as CADC 124. They also suggested that the elders be consulted about the sacredness and importance of the ritual. The SANAMA also requested that those concerned must obtain Free, Prior and Informed Consent from the Mangyan-Alangan in compliance to the IPRA as well as involving the NCIP in the negotiations regarding the “agpansula (Kalignayan, undated, translation by the researcher).”

18

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

It is important to recognize that there is a perceived conflict between state laws (IPRA, Mining Act of 1995, Forestry Law, Agrarian Reform) and customary laws. To Kalignayan (2008): “May malaking conflict ang mga batas na ito. Ang buhay kasi ng katutubo ay makakalikasan at mapagmahal sa kapaligiran. Ang nasasagasaan ng batas ay ukol sa batas sa kapaligiran at sa pagpapaunlad ng mga ganitong batas. Naaapektuhan ang mga katutubo dahil nga wala silang pinanghahawakan na mga titulo. Kung walang ibang batas, sana ay buhay ang kulturang paniniwala para sa batas katutubo. Iilan lamang ang hindi katutubo na kumikilala sa batas ng katutubo. Dulot nito, ang mga katutubo ay nanantiling mga pinakamahihirap sa bansa. Wala ang mga kailangang ayuda mula sa pamahalaan lalo na sa kasiguraduhan sa karapatan, pagkain at pamumuhay.” From the above discussion, it can be seen that although changes and improvements had been made for the Mangyan-Alangan since the implementation of IPRA especially regarding to their participation in the decision-making process and the prerogative of FPIC in dealing with outsiders, there are still challenges in seeking the recognition, respect and protection of their rights with the utter lack of awareness of other actors about the IPRA.

Conclusions and Recommendations The previous discussion on the indigenous decision making structure and decision-making process of the Mangyan-Alangan, its adaptation and integration into the SANAMA and the impact of the FPIC in their decision-making process and way of life points to a number of conclusions. First, the dominance of the male elders (aplaki) among the Mangyan-Alangan in the decisionmaking process for the community and for the tribe is a crucial factor in studying the decision-making process of the Mangyan-Alangan as part of their customary laws. Second, the importance of consultation with the male elders and leaders should not be seen as a hierarchical system in the Mangyan-Alangan society but as part of their culture. This is balanced out by the participation of the members of the community in the decision-making process that had been adapted since the implementation of the IPRA. This can be seen as an impetus for integration for the MangyanAlangan.

19

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

Third, the IPRA and the FPIC can be seen as a viable strategy for the survival of the Mangyan Alangan, their culture, their land and identity. The FPIC, as a prerogative of the indigenous peoples can be used as a defense of the Mangyan-Alangan against non-Mangyans or non-IPs who want to encroach on their ancestral domain. Finally, the recognition of the indigenous political structure in the organization and decisionmaking process in the SANAMA can be argued as an adaptive and integrative strategy of the Mangyan Alangan to serve as a mechanism that both preserves their customary laws and integrates it to the IPRA. As the study had been conducted only in a limited timeframe, the researcher recommends for future researchers that an intensive fieldwork be conducted to deepen the understanding on the present Mangyan-Alangan‟s political culture and political structure and political organization both in the traditional Alangan communities in the mountains and the “acculturated” Alangan communities (one of which is the Paitan Mangyan Alangan settlements) in the lowlands. The most important lesson to be learned from this study is that for the indigenous peoples, like the Mangyans, recognition and respect for their rights is of essence for peaceful co-existence. This also means that the IPRA, as a law for the indigenous peoples, should be recognized and respected as well. Thus, the key is in information. Both the indigenous and non-indigenous peoples should be educated, not only informed, about the existence of such a law that seeks to recognize, respect and protect the rights of indigenous peoples on their ancestral domain, on self-governance, to social justice and human rights and for cultural integrity.

20

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

References: Banta, L. F. 1985. Changes on the Sociocultural Life of the Alangan Mangyans: A Comparsion of the Traditional Alangan and the Marginal Alangan in Mindoro Oriental. Unpublished Master‟s Thesis (Philippine Studies) Quezon City: University of the Philippines-Diliman. Barbian, K.J. 1977. “The Tribal Distribution of the Mangyans.” Philippine Quarterly of Culture and Society (5) 1-2: 5-11 Caraan, R.A. 2001. Community-Based Rattan Utilization and Management: A Case Study of the Alangan Mangyan and the Depletion of Rattan in their Concession. Unpublished Master‟s Thesis (Social Development) Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Casambre, A.L. 2006. “Indigenous Peoples in Politics and Governance” in T.S. Encarnacion-Tadem and N.M. Morada, Philippine Politics and Governance: Challenges to Democratization and Development. Quezon City: Department of Political Science, University of the Philippines-Diliman Gariguez, E.A., J. Sarmiento and A.L. Aguilar. 2005. Rapid Field Appraisal: Mindoro Nickel Project, Crew Minerals (Phil)-Crew Gold A/S Aglubang Mining Corporation- Victoria, Oriental Mindoro. Calapan: Peasant Empowerment and Advocacy Network (PEASANT-NET) Helbling, J. and V. Schult. 2004. Mangyan Survival Strategies. Quezon City: New Day Publishers Javier, E.G. 1987. The Mangyans: Progress through Christian Community Building. Manila: Divine Word Publications Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997. Republic Act No. 8371. AN ACT TO RECOGNIZE, PROTECT
AND PROMOTE THE RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS CULTURAL COMMUNITIES/INDIGENOUS PEOPLE, CREATING A NATIONAL COMMISSION OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLE, ESTABLISHING IMPLEMENTING MECHANISMS, APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

Kalignayan, S. 2008. Interview with Researcher. (President, SANAMA) 5 May. Brgy. Paitan, Naujan, Oriental Mindoro Kalignayan, S. (undated) Letter to Mayor de la Chica, Punong Bayan, Baco, Silangang Mindoro. SANAMA. Paitan, Naujan, Silangang Mindoro Kikuchi, Y. 1984. Mindoro Highlanders: The Life of the Swidden Agriculturists. Quezon City: New Day Publishers Kikuchi, Y. (ed.) 1989. Philippine Kinship and Society. Quezon City: New Day Publishers Lipanyuan, M. 2008. Interview with Researcher. (Secretary, SANAMA) 5 May. Brgy. Paitan, Naujan, Oriental Mindoro Lopez-Gonzaga, V. 1983. Peasants in the Hills. Quezon City: University of the Philippines Press Lusterio-Rico, R.2007. “Civil Society Groups and the Legislative Process: The Enactment of the Indigenous Peoples‟ Rights Act.” Philippine Political Science Journal 28 (51): 55-84

21

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

Mangyan Heritage Center. 2007. Introduction: The Mangyans of Mindoro. Online. < www.mangyan.org> accessed 10 June 2007 Mariquina, E.M.C. 2001. Paitan Alangan Mangyan: Isang Kultural na Dokumentasyon” Unpublished Thesis (Philippine Arts) Manila: University of the Philippines-Manila Quiaoit, J.S. 1997. The Changing Patterns in the Man-Land Relationship of the Alangan Mangyan of Oriental Mindoro. Unpublished Master‟s Thesis (Sociology) Xavier University Pelto, P.J. and G.H. Pelto. 1977. Anthropological Research: The Structure of Inquiry(2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press SANAMA. Resolution 2005-June 4. Resolusyon ng Pagtutol sa Pagbubukas/PagOperate Muli ng Mindex-Crew Aglubang Mining Corporation. Sitio Luntab Puting Bato, Villa Cerveza, Victoria, Oriental Mindoro. Tupas, V. 2008. Interview (informal) with Researcher (resident of the Mangyan-Alangan settlement in Paitan). 5 May. Brgy. Paitan, Naujan, Oriental Mindoro

22

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

Appendix A Indigenous Population Map of Oriental Mindoro Source: Gariguez, et al., 2005 Legend: ancestral domain of the Alangan Mangyan tribe

-

mining applications within the ancestral domain of the Alangan Mangyan

ETHNOGRAPHIC MAP OF MINDORO

23

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

Appendix B Interview Notes with Segundo Kalignayan, 5 May 2008, Brgy. Paitan, Naujan, Oriental Mindoro 1. Paano po ninyo mailalarawan ang paraan ng mga Mangyan Alangan sa pagdedesisyon ukol sa mga usaping pampolitika noong hindi pa naipapatupad ang IPRA o ang Batas para sa Mga Katutubo?

Segundo Kalignayan (SK): Ang mga nagdedesisyon ay mga lider na kinikilala ng pamayanan at mga opisyal ng barangay (barangay system) at ang SANAMA sa pamamagitan ng Aplaki. a. May pinagkaiba po ba ito nang maipatupad na ang IPRA? Sa ano pong paraan?

SK: Nagkakaron ng pagkonsulta sa pamayanan. Sila ang malayang nakapagdedesisyon ukol sa mga problema. Sila ay may karapatan na magdesisyon. b. Sa ngayon po, paano po ninyo mailalarawan ang paraan ng mga Mangyan Alangan sa pagdedesisyon ukol sa mga usaping pampolitika?

SK: Ang pagdedesisyon ay gawa ng organisasyon sa bawat barangay, mga matatanda at Aplaki lalo na sa mga problemang makakaapekto sa buong tribo. i. ii. iii. iv. Sino ang kinikilalang pinuno sa komunidad ng mga Mangyan Alangan? Paano siya napipili bilang pinuno? Hanggang kailan siya maaaring maging pinuno? Paano siya gumagawa ng desisyon para sa komunidad?

SK: Mayroong sistematikong pagpili ng pinuno na isinasagawa sa pamamagitan ng dahon o bato. Ang isang kandidato ay magdadala ng isang uri ng dahon (o bato), gayundin ang kanyang kalaban. Ang mga miyembro ng pamayanan ay pipila at isa-isang pipili ng dahon (o bato). Ang dahong napili na may pinakamaraming bilang ang siyang magiging pinuno. Ang mga matanda at opisyal ng barangay ang magpoproklama kung sino ang nanalo. 2. Tungkol naman po sa lupaing ninuno ng mga Mangyan Alangan, nagkaroon po ba kayo ng problema (may mga nais gamitin o angkinin ang inyong lupaing ninuno) bago maipatupad ang IPRA?

SK: Maraming naging problema bago ang IPRA. Una dito ay ang pananamantala ng mga hindi katutubo. Inuupahan nila ang mga mangyan na gumawa (halimbawa ay maggapas) at pagkatapos ay hindi man lang sila bibigyan ng pagkain. Ngunit may ilan naman na mababait na bukod sa nagpapakain ay nagbabayad pa. May ilan pang nagaangkin ng lupa nang hindi naiikonsulta sa mga katutubo. Dahil walang titulo ang mga Mangyan, hindi nila maipaglaban na kanila ang lupa na inaangkin ng hindi katutubo. Pananamantala sa mga katutubo sa paninirahan sa kanilang mga lupain ng mga hindi katutubo. Ang Paitan Mangyan Reservation ay napatitulohan ng isang hindi katutubo noong 1935 kahit ang lupaing ito ay malinaw na para sa mga katutubo. Maging ang DAR ay nagiging problema dahil sa pag-isyu nila ng CLUA sa hindi katutubo na sakop ng agrarian reform. a. Paano naman po noong maipatupad ang IPRA?Ano pong uri ng mga problema?

SK: Maganda naman ang layunin ng IPRA ngunit mayroon lamang mga probisyon na kailangang baguhin dahil sa pagsusuri ng mga lider ng katutubo ay nagagamit ang IPRA para sa impluwensya ng hindi katutubo na napakasakit sa kanila. Nagpatuloy pa din ang problema sa DAR sa kanilang pag-iisyu ng CLUA sa mga hindi katutubo. Ang NCIP naman minsan ay pumapabor sa hindi katutubo at hindi patas sa pagdedesisyon. May mga dati nang nakatira dito na Mangyan na pwersahang pinagbbigyan ang pabor ng hindi katutubo. May ilan ding problema pa sa NCIP na mga naunang batas na nagsasabing hindi sa katutubo ang lupa. At ang hindi katutubo na may sinasabing karapatan sa lupa ang siyang kinikilala. May mga nag-aaway din sa loob ng komunidad. Ito ay ukol sa mining, may mga organisasyon na pro- at antimining na kinabibilngan ng mga katutubo. May mga katutubo na kasama pa sa pagmimina. Kapag kasi nakita nila ang impluwnesya ng pera, dun na nagkakaproblema, hindi nila nakikita ang kinabukasan.

24

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

b.

Paano niyo po ito nasosolusyunan?

SK: Nakikipagusap ang mga katutubo sa tulong ng NCIP. Ang PMR naman ay may solicitor–general na nagmula sa national government na siya ding nakikipag-usap sa mga Mangyan. Sa DENR at sa DAR naman ay nakikipagkonsulta ukol sa mga usapin sa kagubatan at kapatagan. c. Paano niyo po maiilarawan ang inyong pakikitungo o relasyon sa mga taga-NCIP na siyang nagpapatupad ng batas IPRA?

SK: Sa ngayon ay maayos naman ang kanilang provincial officer. Pero may mga staff na hindi concerned sa mga katutubo lalo na sa usapin ng mina. Sa kabuuan, sa gobyerno ang nagiging problema. Ang pinakaproblema sa lahat ay ang pondo. Isa ding problema ang mining application ng mga kumpanyang nais magmina sa dulong bahagi ng kanilang CADC sa Mangyan Alangan sa Victoria. Ang lugar na ito ay sa may Aglubang River. SK: Sa panig ng DENR at NCIP, pinapamulat nila na mayroong batas para sa katutubo na kalakasan sana. Kinokonsulta talaga ang matatanda ngunit kapag hindi pumapayag ang mga katutubo, minsan brasuhan na, may mga lider na nahaharass na lalo na sa usaping mina, CLUA at kagubatan. SK: Ang pagpapatupad ang nagiging problema. Nava-violate din ang karapatan ng katutubo kasi kapag hindi pumabor ang konsultasyon nila sa kanilang interes ay may mga harassment na nangyayari. Halimbawa sa hilaga ng tribo, ukol sa turismo, kinonsulta lamang ang local government, provincial committee ng tourism council pero sa parte ng katutubo ay hindi mabigyan ng kasiguraduhan, hindi makatarungan. Ganyan ang pagtingin ng hindi katutubo, maliit ang mga katutubo. d. Sa inyo pong palagay, napoprotektahan po ang inyong mga karapatan ng batas IPRA? Sa ano-ano pong paraan?

SK: Kung ang IPRA mismo, masasabing napoprotektahan nito ang aming mga karapatan. Ang nagiging problema ay ang mga naunang batas sa IPRA na sumasalungat sa ilang mga probisyon dito. 3. Tungkol naman po sa Free Prior and Informed Consent o FPIC na ipinapatupad po sa ilalim ng batas IPRA at ilan pang mga batas na may kaugnayan sa katutubo o lupaing ninuno katulad po ng Batas sa Pagmimina, Batas ukol sa Kagubatan, Batas ukol sa Repormang Agraryo, at iba pa, paano po kayo nagdedesisyon ukol dito?

SK: Sa SANAMA, kinukonsulta muna sa pamayanan para maiwasan ang problema at masigurado ang suporta ng pamayanan sa proyektong papasok sa lupaing ninuno. Kinokonsulta ang bawat lider, bawat opisyal ng barangay, mga matatanda at ang pamayanan bago makapagdesisyon sa isang usapin. a. b. Nag-iba po ba ang paraan ng inyong pagdedesisyon noong kailangan nang humingi ng pahintulot ng mga hindi katutubo para pumasok sa inyong komunidad? Sa ano pong paraan? Naging mas mabilis po ba o mas tumagal po ba? Naging mas komplikado po ba o mas naging simple?

SK: May mga pagkakataon na hindi nakokonsulta, halimbawa sa panig ng local government. Ngunit ang tungkol sa mina ay sadyang laban talaga ng Oriental Mindoro. Kahit hindi tungkol sa mina, may pagkakataon na ang interes ng local government ay nauuna, na kadalasan ay isang problema. Noong magkaroon ng batas IPRA, may mga ahensiya na hindi pa rin kumikilala sa batas para sa katutubo o sa FPIC. May mga nagmamay-ari ng hacienda na gustong ipawalang-bisa ang IPRA law dahil wala silang alam tungkol dito. Mahirap din dahil mga pulitko ang hindi sumusunod sa sistema, basta kung anong gusto nilang gawin sa area ng katutubo ay ginagawa nila. c. Paano po naapektuhan ng probisyon ukol sa Free Prior and Informed Consent ang pamumuhay at pamumuno sa komunidad o lupaing ninuno ng Mangyan Alangan?

25

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

SK: Ang kultura namin ang naaapektuhan, pati ang simpleng pamumuhay. Dahil sa impluwensya ng hindi katutubo, ng pera at ng pulitiko. SK: Sa panahon ngayon, malaking bagay talaga para sa mga katutubo ang magkaroon ng FPIC sa anumang ipapatupad na proyekto dahil lahat talaga ay ikinokonsulta ng nagpapatupad ng proyeko. Responsibilidad din ng lider s akanya-kanyang pamayanan na magkaroon ng konsultasyon sa mga tao. Hindi katulad noong wala pang organisasyon o hindi pa buo ang Mangyan Alangan ay talagang garapalan kung magpatupad ng proyekto ang national government dahil wala nga kaming mga titulo, walang karapatan sa lupa, walang pinanghahawakan na katibayan, sa ganitong parte talaga sila napagsasamantalahan, sa panig nila na nakatira sa lupaing ninuno. d. Maari po ba kayo magbigay ng halimbawa ng napagdesisyunan na alinsunod po sa pagbibigay ng Free Prior and Informed Consent na nakaapekto po sa pamumuhay ng komunidad o sa lupaing ninuno ng Mangyan Alangan?

SK: Ang CLUA ay hindi ikinokonsulta sa lider ng pamayanan ang ipinapatupad. Ang NAPOCOR ay hindi nagkaroon ng FPIC. Hindi mapanghawakan ang seguridad ng katutubo. SK: Walang partisipasyon ang katutubo kahit sa planning kung hindi nariyan ang amg kasiguraduhan para sa katutubo sa Lantuyang, ngunit sa organisasyon ay hindi nagkaroon ng FPIC dahil hindi nakonsulta sa katutubo. Noong 1990s, yung tourist spot sa Brgy Lantuyang at Brgy San Ignacio ay gusto nilang buksan uli dahil iba na ang mga barangay opisyales at SANAMA leader ngunit gumawa ng aksyon ang organisasyon n asana ay kilalanin din sa parte ng provincial at municipal ang kultura ng mga katutubo na dapat bago mag-implementa ng bagong malaking proyekto ay ikonsulta muna sa pamayanan at sa malaking organisasyon (ng mga katutubo). SK: Sa mga nais magpatupad ng proyekto ay sumusunod talaga. Yung mga gustong pumasok ay binibigyan naman ng sapat na panahon. SK: Minsan ay hindi pinadadalhan ng pasabi ang samahan at nakikipagkonsulta na lamang sa ilang lider. Minsan ay hindi pa lider at yung kakilala lamang doon. Ang sistema sa paghingi ng pahintulot ay ang pagpapadala ng sulat o mensahe sa mga lider o organisasyon. Sa pagsusuri ng mga katutubo at may nakitang hindi akma sa mga katutubo, may karapatan silang magpasya ukol sa pag-implementa o hindi ng proyekto para sa kapakanan ng katutubo. Kahit matagal ang proseso, sinisigurado na hindi makakaapekto sa komunidad, pamumuhay at pamumuno sa Mangyan Alangan ang proyektong nais ipatupad. 4. Sa tingin po ba ninyo, magkasalungat po ba ang mga batas kattutbo o batas kultura sa mga batas na ipinapapatupad ng ating gobyerno? SK: May malaking conflict ang mga batas na ito. Ang buhay kasi ng katutubo ay makakalikasan at mapagmahal sa kapaligiran. Ang nasasagasaan ng batas ay ukol sa batas sa kapaligiran at sa pagpapaunlad ng mga ganitong batas. Naaapektuhan ang mga katutubo dahil nga wala silang pinanghahawakan na mga titulo. Kung walang ibang batas, sana ay buhay ang kulturang paniniwala para sa batas katutubo. Iilan lamang ang hindi katutubo na kumikilala sa batas ng katutubo. Dulot nito, ang mga katutubo ay nanantiling mga pinakamahihirap sa bansa. Wala ang mga kailangang ayuda mula sa pamahalaan lalo na sa kasiguraduhan sa karapatan, pagkain at pamumuhay.

Note: All references to an organisasyon or samahan denote the SANAMA.

26

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

Appendix C Interview Notes with Marcelo Lipanyuan, 5 May 2008, Brgy. Paitan, Naujan, Oriental Mindoro 1. Paano po ninyo mailalarawan ang paraan ng mga Mangyan Alangan sa pagdedesisyon ukol sa mga usaping pampolitika noong hindi pa naipapatupad ang IPRA o ang Batas para sa Mga Katutubo?

Marcelino Lipanyuan (ML): Noong panahon ng mga matatanda sa amin, kapag nagdesisiyon sa mga pagpupulong yung mga matatanda ang nag-uusap parang mga datu baga. Sila ang nagtitimbang kung ano ang usapin na pinagpupulungan tapos ay kung ano ang napagdesisyunan doon ay sasabihin naman nila sa karamihan…kapag nasabi na sa karamihan at sang-ayon na ang lahat sa napagdesisyunang pulong o kasunduan. a. May pinagkaiba po ba ito nang maipatupad na ang IPRA? Sa ano pong paraan?

ML: Bali halos yung IPRA, yun din ang sa katutubo eh…parang sinunod lang ng IPRA yung paraan ng pagdedesisyon (ng mga katutubo. ) b. Sa ngayon po, paano po ninyo mailalarawan ang paraan ng mga Mangyan Alangan sa pagdedesisyon ukol sa mga usaping pampolitika?

ML: Dito sa Mangyan Alangan, ang mga nagpupulong yung mga matatanda, mga lider kagaya sa samahan, sa organisasyon, yung presidente at yung mga miyembro ng board (of trustees), pagkatapos kapag makakabuo sila ng desisyon roon sa pagpupulong na iyon, yun ay ipepresenta uli sa mga tao, dun sa assembly kung tawagin, pag naaprobahan o pumayag yung marami sa napagdesisyunan, dadalhin na din sa ibang pamayanan hanggang mapagdesisyunan din sa pagpupulong, ibig sabihin, lahat ay may partisipasyon sa pag-sangayon sa kasunduan o sa mga pinagpulungan…nakakapagmungkahi rin sila, kahit yung pangkaraniwang miyembro sa pamayanan, nagmumungkahi rin sila kung ano ang pinakamaganda o anong tama doon sa pagpupulong. Ibig sabihin, hindi naman komo lider lang, sila lang ang magdedesisyon para sa buing katutubo o buong Mangyan pati yung mga Mangyan din na walang puwesto o hindi lider ay nakapagdedesisyon sa pamamagitan ng mungkahi. i. ii. iii. iv. Sino ang kinikilalang pinuno sa komunidad ng mga Mangyan Alangan? Paano siya napipili bilang pinuno? Hanggang kailan siya maaaring maging pinuno? Paano siya gumagawa ng desisyon para sa komunidad?

ML: Sa kasaysayan ng mga Mangyan Alangan, ang aplaki ay hindi pinipili noong araw…minamana o namamana ang pagiging aplaki, sila yung maimpluwensiya sa pamayanan o isang grupo ng Mangyan, tsaka kung manggagamot sila puwede sila tawaging aplaki. ML: Ngayon ang pagiging aplaki ay pinipili ng mga tao sa pamayanan, halos buong tribong Alangan ay nagpupulong para sa pagpili ng aplaki. May botohan sa pamamagitan ng pagtaas ng kamay. Mayroon na ding pamantayan sa pgpili ng aplaki. Kailangan ang isang aplaki ng Mangyan Alangan ay laging nasa punto ng katotohanan, walang pinapanigan at hindi mayabang. Lahat ng pamayanan ay nakikisangkot sa pagpili kungdi nadaan sa malaking pagpupulong. ML: Yung mga aplaki ngayon, sila yung nagpapatupad ng batas ng kultura ng katutubong Alangan. Lahat ng batas ng Alangan sila ang nagpapatupad. Kapag may pagpupulong, sila rin yung tumitingin at nagtitimbang kung talagang taliwas sa bats ng Alangan ang pinaguusapan. ML: Yun yung mga aplaki na may edad na rin, talagang aplaki, na alam yung batas ng mga Mangyan at kung paano namumuhay ang mga Mangyan. Sila‟y mga Aplaki na talagang laging may papel o ginagampanan para sa mga Mangyan Alangan. Mayroon ding mga “secondary” Aplaki yung sunod sa Aplaki ngayon. Kapag namatay yung mga Aplaki na may edad na, sila yung papalit na Aplaki pero na-“train” na, naturuan na sila nung mga naunang Aplaki.

27

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

ML: Noon at ngayon, taon-taon, nagkakaroon ng assembly. Lahat ng mga problema, lahat ng kahit anong uri ng kaso ng mga Mangyan laban sa kulturang Mangyan, lahat ng hindi magandang gawain ng mga miyembro ng Mangyan Alangan. Lahat ay iipunin ng mga lider ng pamayanan, kahit sa isip lang at hindi isulat, pagdating sa general assembly ng mga Aplaki, pinagpupulungan na lahat iyan, tapos maraming tao, daang tao ang kaharap – mga galing sa pamayanan, mga magtitimbang. Mga Aplaki ang magtitimbang kung ano ang mali doon, kung alin ang hindi talaga pwede, hanggang sa ipresenta nila kung ano ang tingin nila. Halimbawa sa isang problema, yung pagtingin nila doon tapos magkakaroon na din sila ng paghatol kung ano ang karapat-dapat na disiplina, sasang-ayon ang mga Mangyan kung tingin nila ay tama din. Hindi rin basta magdedesisyon nang hindi rin kinokonsulta ang mga tao. 2. Tungkol naman po sa lupaing ninuno ng mga Mangyan Alangan, nagkaroon po ba kayo ng problema(may mga nais gamitin o angkinin ang inyong lupaing ninuno) bago maipatupad ang IPRA?

ML: Halimbawa, yung mga gustong pumasok na nag-iinteres na magkaroon ng hacienda o lupa sa loob ng lupaing ninuno, mismo ang mga Mangyan Alangan … Isa pa, mayroon din yung mining. Tapos yung yamang gubat gustong mapakinabangan ng mga taong labas, yung mga non-Mangyans baga. Problema din yun dahil gusto sana namin ay katutubo ang makinabang doon. a. Paano naman po noong maipatupad ang IPRA?Ano pong uri ng mga problema?

ML: Halos ganoon din. Sabagay ang isang kagandahan ngayon, ginagamit namin yung isang probisyon ng IPRA, yung FPIC. Nakakapagsangga ito sa mga pumapasok sa aming mga lupaing ninuno. Pero ang medyo kahirapan namin nayon, dahil may CADC kami, icoconvert sana namin sa CADT. Kaya lang mahirao yung mga requirements ng pagpapa-CADT kaya nahihirapan kami. Ewan ko kung papaano yung IPRA na pwede, kung papaano iyon. b. Paano niyo po ito nasosolusyunan?

ML: Halimbawa, yung mga pagpasok sa mga lupaing ninuno ay mga katutubo, unang-una ay pinagpupulungan ng mga lider namin tapos gagawa kami ng pamamaraan kung paano ito reresolbahin. Unang-una, gumagawa kami ng sulat o resolusyon tapos dadalhin namin sa mga ahensiya na may kaugnayan dun sa ganoong klase ng problema. Pero partner pa din namin dito yung NGO, yung Mangyan Mission at ang NCIP, yun lagi ang partner namin sa pagresolba ng problema namin. c. Paano niyo po maiilarawan ang inyong pakikitungo o relasyon sa mga taga-NCIP na siyang nagpapatupad ng batas IPRA?

ML: Ang NCIP ay talagang tumutulong sa amin basta oras na nagsabi kami. Nagkonsulta kami ng mga problema, tumulong agad sila. d. Sa inyo pong palagay, napoprotektahan po ang inyong mga karapatan ng batas IPRA? Sa ano-ano pong paraan?

ML: Bale sa mga napraktis na namin, napoprotektahan naman. Yung mga kahit military na napsok sa amin, sinasabi namin na kailangan nila na magkaroon muna nung tinatawag namin free prior. Kapag hindi kami sumang-ayon ay wala rin. Ibig sabihin ay sa puntong ito ay napoprotektahan na rin ng batas IPRA yung mga kultura namin, kung anong buhay namin na ayaw naming mapasukan nila ay napoprotektahan ng batas sa pamamagitan ng FPIC. Pero mayroon pa rin siguro na madagdagan na kuwan… Ang sa akin ay ang batas IPRA ay hindi gaanong kilala sa lahat ng opisina ng gobyerno. Noong nagkaroon kami ng dayalogo dito sa provincial at municipal office ay hindi nila gaanong kilala ito. Kaya sana, tutal ito ay naging batas na, kailangang malaman nung mga nasa gobyerno na opisina at iba pang ahensya at para lalong maging makabuluhan at talagang makilala ang mga karapatan ng mga katutubong Mangyan. 3. Tungkol naman po sa Free Prior and Informed Consent o FPIC na ipinapatupad po sa ilalim ng batas IPRA at ilan pang mga batas na may kaugnayan sa katutubo o lupaing ninuno katulad po ng Batas sa Pagmimina, Batas ukol sa Kagubatan, Batas ukol sa Repormang Agraryo, at iba pa, paano po kayo nagdedesisyon ukol dito?

28

AMUL, GIANNA GAYLE H.

2003-46431

MA Political Science

ANTHRO 245 X2

ML: Nagbago naman. Halimbawa, dumating sa amin yung mga gustong pumunta dito, pumasok man o galing mang gobyerno, ang ginagawa namin ay ikinokonsulta namin sa mga lider muna, dun sa maliitang grupo ng lider, tapos ay kahit dun sa mga tao sa pamayanan ay iniimbitahan na magkaroon ng pagpupulong kung papayagan baga ng mga Mangyan na pumasok dito o manirahan ng ilang araw dito si ganoon. Tapos ay kapag pumayag yung mga Mangyan ay magbubuo na kami ng mga kondisyon na ipepresenta namin kapag dumating yung mga humihingi ng pagsangayon namin. a. b. Nagiba po ba ang paraan ng inyong pagdedesisyon noong kailangan nang humingi ng pahintulot ng mga hindi katutubo para pumasok sa inyong komunidad? Sa ano pong paraan? Naging mas mabilis po ba o mas tumagal po ba? Naging mas komplikado po ba o mas naging simple?

ML: Ang kagandahan nga ng FPIC ay mayroon itong sistema, may proseso at alam ng lahat. Dahil noon ay wala pang IPRA, kung sinu-sino lang ang magdesisyon ay diretso pasok na. Halimbawa may gustong pumarito sa amin, gustong manirahan dito ng ilang buwan hindi namin alam. Kung anong pakay ay diretso lamang ang pasok, dun na maninirahan yun… Ngayon hindi, yung mga nag-aakyat ng FPIC, tinatanong din namin sila kung anong pakay nila, kung anong sadya, anong layunin. Tapos ipepresenta na nila ang kanilang layunin sa pagpunta dito, pagpupulungan naming mga Mangyan. Kapag pumayag na ang lahat halos, pag napagpulungan na, gagawa na kami ng mga kondisyones o yung kasunduan kung ano ang mga bawal o kung ano ang ayaw ng mga Mangyan. c. Paano po naapektuhan ng probisyon ukol sa Free Prior and Informed Consent ang pamumuhay at pamumuno sa komunidad o lupaing ninuno ng Mangyan Alangan?

ML: Sa isang punto, sa akin lang ha, ang FPIC ay malaking tulong din yan sa lider e, pwedeng gamitin nila yan sa pagtanggi e. Halimbawa nakonsulta na sa lahat tapos ay pagdating ng kuwan, sasabihin ay wala, pwede namang tumanggi na diyan e. Sabihin ay ayaw ngmga Mangyan, hindi pupwede total nasa batas na naman yan e. Bago pa lang naman pumasok, kukuha siya ng FPIC ng pagsang-ayon namin. Sa tanong pa lang ay alam na ng katutubo kung maganda ang sadya o maganda ang layunin. Nahahalata naman yun e, kahit sa pag-uusap kunyari papabalikin na lang namin kung ayaw ng katutubo, kunyari sa isang araw, babalik naman… Halimbawa may nagapply na magpulis dito sa provincial office, nitong nakaraang buwan lang ay nahingi siya ng endorsement galing sa organisasyon. Siya naman daw ay Mangyan, may dugong Mangyan. Tinanong ko kung pwedeng makita yung genealogy, e di pinakita sa akin. Pero sa tingin ko, pagbasa ko pa lang, kaduda-duda na, kaya sabi ko sa kanya ay sige, ito ay idadaan ko muna sa pagpupulongsa mga kasamahan kong lider, tapos balik ka na lang ulit sa lingo at pagbalik mo ay ipepresenta ko sa iyo ang naging resulta. Tapos pagbalik niya, kinonsulta ko yung iba, sabi ko ay ayaw ng mga Mangyan dahil hindi kapni-paniwala na ikaw ay isang katutubo, parang nagagamit din namin ang FPIC sa di tamang pagpasok dito sa amin. d. Maari po ba kayo magbigay ng halimbawa ng napagdesisyunan na alinsunod po sa pagbibigay ng Free Prior and Informed Consent na nakaapekto po sa pamumuhay ng komunidad o sa lupaing ninuno ng Mangyan Alangan?

ML: Yung sa provincial government ng Oriental Mindoro, mayroon silang mga project na gusto nilang iimplement dito sa Aglubang River. Yung Aglubang River ay talagang malapit sa site ng mining, gusto nilang pag-aralan ang daloy ng tubig, yung flow baga, kung ano ang pwede. Pagakatapos mapag-aralan, kung papaanong gagawin para di laging magkaroon ng mapaminsalang baha dito sa kapatagan ng Oriental Mindoro. Sa punton giyon ay napakaganda ng kanilang ginagawa dahil hindi sila agad nag-iimplement ng proyekto kundi humihingi talaga sila ng FPIC, gumagawa sila ng FPIC at bale may 3 buwan nila nilalakad ito. Iisa pa lamang ang may FPIC, yung sa Tadyawan pa lang sa Oriental Mindoro. Sa Alangan, wala pa, wala pa kaming binibigyan ng pahintulot pero pabor kami sa gusto nilang gawin. Ang kagandahan talaga, nagkaroon na din ng paggalang kahit sa bahagi ng gobyerno, ginagalang na rin ang mga katutubo, katulad nito dumadaan muna sila sa FPIC, hindi nila magalaw yung lugar dahil hindi pa napayag ang mga katutubo dito sa Alangan. Kaya kung magagawa pa din sa gobyerno, mas higit pa sanang makilala itong batas IPRA lalo na itong kahit yung FPIC na lang ang igalang ay masaya na rin ako bilang isa sa mga katutubo.

Note: All references to an organisasyon or samahan denote the SANAMA.

29

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful