Business & Human Rights website publishes letter to President Arroyo

PIPLinks … presented a letter to President Arroyo…raising issues around the recent concluding observations of the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) ... [that urge] the Government to acknowledge that racial discrimination exists in the Philippines, to ensure that Indigenous Peoples are protected in situations of armed conflict and that independent and impartial investigations are conducted into all allegations of human rights violations …[ I]t recommended that the Government fully implement the IPRA … [and] made specific recommendations on the activities of TVI Pacific, who are operating in the ancestral domain of the Subanon at Mount Canatuan …

See:- http://www.business-humanrights.org/Links/Repository/165752

Statement by Peter Duyapat of DESAMA

Statement to the Second session of the UN Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

Speaker : Peter Duyapat from the Didipio Earthsavers Multipurpose Association (DESAMA)

Thank you Madam Chair for this opportunity to share with the participants of this session our experience in the Philippines and to give our recommendations for the consideration of the UN Human Rights Council through the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

I am Peter Duyapat, belonging to the Ifugao indigenous community living in Didipio, Municipality Kasibu, province of Nueva Vizcaya. I am the leader of our local organization, the Didipio Earthsavers Multipurpose Association. In the early 1960s, because of limited livelihood options and poverty, the then Commission on National Integration (CNI) encouraged my family and other Ifugao families to relocate to Didipio, Municpality of Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya from Hungduan, Ifugao Province so that we can establish our community there. Here, we were able to set up our agricultural farms to feed our families. Together with other settlers, we were able to live satisfactorily and our children were able to go to school.

Madam Chair, the problem came when the Philippine government awarded a Financial or Technical Assistance Agreement to Arimco Mining Corporation, an Australian mining company, in 1994. Our free, prior, and informed consent was not given to them, and yet, despite this, the Philippine government allowed the entry of the international mining corporation even with our adamant opposition. In the following decades, we have suffered numerous human rights violations. This would include demolition of our houses, blocking our ingress and egress from the area, physical abuses against other indigenous members of our community, filing strategic lawsuits against public participation, and many more. The most recent of which, when I, myself, last April 2009, was physically attacked by company guards led by the security head and was brought to the Philippine National Police who did not do anything to protect me. I was only released when people came to demand for my release.

We sought the assistance of the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP), especially with regard to the absence of FPIC for the mining operations. However, we were told that because we were migrant IPs, we did not have the right to FPIC. Added to this, we were charged with criminal cases by government agencies, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, for illegal occupation of forest lands, despite the fact that it was also the government that encouraged us to settle in our area in the early 1960s. Ironically, Madam Chair, they allow mining operations on forest lands which should be prohibited, but do not respect our rights as migrants and long-term settlers.

Madam Chair, there have been a number of times that the mining company, now OceanGold Philippines, Inc., demolished and/or attempted to demolish our homes for the mining operations. Most of the times, the company was accompanied by members of the Philippine National Police. Currently, allegedly because of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's order, military forces are now deployed in our area. During the past years, President Arroyo has implemented her policy on foreign investments through the establishment of the Investment Defence Forces, wherein military resources of the country are used for the benefit of the corporations, but on the other hand, undermines our rights to voice out opposition.

In light of this, we would therefore like to make the following recommendations:

1. That migrant indigenous peoples should be afforded the same rights as with other indigenous peoples, especially on the right to self-determination and the right to Free, Prior and Informed Consent;
2. That military forces should not be used by governments to assist or protect extractive corporations to the detriment of the indigenous peoples; and,
3. To encourage state governments to pass legislation on natural resource management which fully recognizes the rights of indigenous peoples like the Alternative Mining Bill of the Philippines.

There is a You-tube link to this presentation (although sound is poor quality)

Statement by PIPLinks on extractive industries and indigenous peoples

Statement to the Second session of the UN Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

Presentation under Agenda Item 4b - UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: Adjudication, remedies, repatriation, redress and compensation

Comments on paper A/HRC/EMRIP/2009/5 - Report of OHCHR organized International Workshop on the Natural Resource Companies, Indigenous Peoples and Human Rights

Presented by: Andrew Whitmore, on behalf of PIPLinks and Cathal Doyle of the University of Middlesex, Department of Law

With reference to this agenda item, the extractive industries are a cause of considerable conflict for Indigenous Peoples. The recent shooting and killing of Indigenous Peoples in Peru while protecting their lands from extractive companies is a particularly brutal example.

We therefore thank the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights for submitting to this Experts Mechanism meeting their report on the 'International Workshop on Natural Resource Companies, Indigenous Peoples and Human Rights: Setting a Framework for Consultation, Benefit-Sharing and Dispute Resolution', which took place in Moscow in December 2008, as a follow up to the 2001 Workshop on the same issues.

The Moscow Workshop was an attempt to bring Indigenous Peoples and extractive industry representatives together, and therefore consisted of frank discussions on issues of major concern to Indigenous Peoples. These included the need to recognize them as rights holders (as opposed to just stakeholders), the requirement to obtain their Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) in relation to all extractive projects in their territories and the need for models of corporate engagement which are based on the recognition of Indigenous Peoples' land rights, regardless of the national legislative framework.

The Office of the High Commissioner report captures much of what was discussed. However, it remains relatively silent on one of the most salient issues raised during the conference from the perspective of Indigenous Peoples - namely that extractive companies recognize the requirement to obtain FPIC, and that FPIC act as the framework and context for all consultations with Indigenous Peoples, including related negotiations pertaining to benefit sharing and mitigation measures.

We feel that it is particularly important for the report of the Workshop to emphasize the requirement to obtain FPIC given the following:
a) The 2001 workshop (which was the precursor to the Moscow workshop) recommended that 'consultation between indigenous peoples and the private sector should be guided by the principle of free, prior, informed consent of all parties concerned'. Indigenous representatives at that meeting were clear that the special value of the Office of the High Commissioner as a convener of such discussion was to prioritise a human rights framework for discussions;
b) In the intervening period the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People has been adopted in the General Assembly with Article 32 requiring that "States shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the indigenous peoples concerned through their own representative institutions in order to obtain their free and informed consent prior to the approval of any project affecting their lands or territories and other resources, particularly in connection with the development, utilization or exploitation of mineral, water or other resources.";
c) This issue of consent was raised by a number of attendees at the Moscow workshop, including the government representatives from Greece and Brazil, who emphasized that FPIC was now the minimum standard to be respected.
e) The Experts Mechanism recommended in its first session that the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action 'should acknowledge that both the right to self determination and the principle of FPIC are now universally recognized through the adoption of the Declaration'.

We tabled a submission to the Moscow meeting entitled 'Free Prior Informed Consent - a universal norm and framework for consultation and benefit sharing in relation to indigenous peoples and the extractive sector', outlining the status of FPIC in international human rights law. We would like to submit that paper to the Expert Mechanism with regard to any future research upon this agenda item.

Given the above we wish to make the following recommendations:-

1. That any follow up studies conducted by the Office of the High Commissioner or the Experts Mechanism explicitly acknowledge FPIC as the recognized minimum standard that must be respected by all actors in the extractive sector, including the private sector, that wish to engage with Indigenous Peoples.
2. That any future studies on the topic of the relationship of the extractive sector with Indigenous Peoples initiated by the Experts Mechanism or the Office of the High Commissioner should be informed by the report of the 2009 UN Permanent Forum's International Expert Workshop on Indigenous Peoples Rights, Corporate Accountability and Extractive Industries. A copy of this report and the 'Manila Declaration' are provided as an attachment to this statement to inform the debate, and we are aware that an Indigenous network is being created as a result of this meeting that can be consulted upon this, or related, issues;
3. While understanding the obvious financial constraints of organizing such workshops, it is regrettable that Indigenous Peoples' representation at the workshop was very limited. Independent, direct participation of Indigenous Peoples with expertise of extractive industry operations and human rights is essential. In the interest of ensuring both the relevance and legitimacy of any follow up activities we urge that the United Nations provide a more adequate and flexible funding framework for funding Indigenous Peoples to attend meetings, including such expert workshops.