18/07/2025
*A Call to Reassess NCIP and National Agencies’ Strategic Actions Toward Fulfilling IPRA (RA 8371 of 1997)*
*Based on Field Realities and Implementation Gaps Observed*
*A. Overview:*
*The Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA) of 1997 was envisioned to be a landmark law upholding the rights of Indigenous Cultural Communities/Indigenous Peoples (ICCs/IPs) in the Philippines. However, after 26 years of implementation, it has become clear that the pace, prioritization, and sequencing of programs by NCIP and other national agencies need urgent reassessment to ensure meaningful fulfillment of the law’s intent.*
*B. Key Observations and Points for Urgent Review:*
*1. Overly Prescriptive Guidelines Assume ICCs/IPs Are Already Fully Capacitated*
Each time NCIP releases new or revised guidelines whether on Delineation and Titling, IPS Documentation and Confirmation, IPO Accreditation, FPIC/EPR, CRMDP Approval, ADMO Establishment, or ADSDPP Formulation—the agency seems to assume that the ICCs/IPs are already organizationally prepared and culturally cohesive to comply. However, this assumption often disregards the historical marginalization, fragmentation, and the varying stages of readiness across communities.
*2. Entry of Investments Prior to Governance Foundations Causes Confusion and Conflict*
Frequently, investments and development projects enter ancestral domains even before foundational processes like IPS confirmation or IPO recognition are completed. FPIC/EPR applications, IPMR selection, and CRMDP formulation are prematurely implemented, often leading to confusion, disunity, and intra-community conflict.
*3. Pre-IPRA Organizing Frameworks Require Harmonization*
Prior to IPRA, other agencies had already engaged in the organizing, recognizing, and interfacing with Indigenous communities under different frameworks. These legacy structures need to be harmonized with IPRA to avoid contradictions, duplication, or rejection by the communities themselves.
*4. Foundational Structures Must Come First*
It is imperative to prioritize foundational building blocks such as:
a.,IPS Documentation and Confirmation
b. IPO Accreditation and Recognition
c. ADMO Establishment
These core governance structures enable ICCs/IPs to function in accordance with their customs, traditions, and collective decision-making processes. Without these, all other interventions—including those involving investments—lack legitimacy, sustainability, and cultural grounding.
*5. Prioritize Institutionalization Before Projectization*
Even in the absence of investors or development projects, the ICCs/IPs must first be allowed—and supported—to organize themselves properly, through culturally appropriate and state-recognized means. Delineation, ADSDPP, and similar processes should come after governance foundations are in place, not before.
*6. Data Highlights the Urgent Need for Systemic Shift*
As reported in the July 2023 Terminal Report:
a. NCIP’s average implementation level of the 11 Building Blocks is only 29.6%
b. IPS Documentation and Confirmation is only 40% complete, despite 26 years of implementation
c. Total national budget allocation for NCIP over this 26 years period was around Php 20 billion only, or less than Php 1 billion per year.
This slow pace raises a hard question: Do we need another 26 years—or more—to fully capacitate our ICCs/IPs? This is neither fair nor acceptable.
*7. A Call for Policy Realignment and Political Commitment*
Unless we re-prioritize the foundational actions and mobilize support from lawmakers and the executive branch, NCIP’s role will remain reactive, and the agency will continue to be scapegoated during Congressional budget hearings and inquiries. Meanwhile, ICCs/IPs will continue to suffer from fragmentation, vulnerability to exploitation, and loss of cultural cohesion.
*C. Conclusion and Recommendation:*
*There is an urgent need for a policy shift that focuses on empowering the ICCs/IPs from within, through culturally grounded, legally recognized governance mechanisms. NCIP, in partnership with national government agencies and legislators, must re-sequence its implementation strategy to reflect this reality, ensuring that empowerment precedes engagement, and organization precedes investment.*
