Chapter 8: CERD Chapter

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
1
Convention on the Elimination of all
Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD)
Introduction
History of Filipino Indigenous Peoples
Several years prior to the coming of the European colonial rulers,
Filipinos have lived as homogenous societies and nations of their own.
They continuously lived as organized communities in communally
bounded and defined territories. They have occupied, possessed, and
utilized these territories under claims of ownership, sharing common
bonds of language, customs, traditions, and other distinctive cultural
traits. They already had their own culture, developed governance, and
justice systems, traditional beliefs, value systems which became their
way of life.
The Spanish conquest of the Philippines in 1521 that used
Christianity on one hand and the sword on the other hand, left a legacy
to the Philippines, that is the concept of jura regalia or regalian
doctrine that considers all lands colonized by Spain to belong to the
Spanish Crown or government. Subsequently, Filipinos who were
mostly located in the coastal and low lying areas embraced colonial rule.
This was entirely different in the case of Filipinos in the hinterlands or
the Indigenous Peoples (IPs) who generally and valiantly resisted
colonial occupation and retained their own customary ways, held on to
their traditional beliefs, leadership structures, governance and justice
systems, customary laws, and stood ground in protecting their
territories and ancestral domains.
While Christianized Filipinos waged a war of independence
against their colonial masters, this has failed. In 1898, the United States
of America arrived in the Philippines and became another Philippine
colonial master and to whom Spain ceded its colonial rule over the
Philippines. The Japanese came thereafter and the rest was history.
During these colonial dominations and in the history of the
Philippine Government’s engagement with IPs, the Indigenous Peoples
were known by different names. In the beginning, they were called non-
Christian tribes and subsequently as national cultural minorities, later as
national minorities, non-Muslims and then as Indigenous Cultural
Communities (ICCs) and as IPs.
During the American occupation, the Indigenous Peoples concept
of ancestral lands/domains ownership1 through a ‘native title’ 2 was
1 Indigenous Peoples (IPs) concept of ownership- sustains the view that ancestral domains and all resource found therein shall serve as the material
bases of IPs cultural integrity. It generally holds that ancestral domains are the IPs private but community property which belongs to all
generations and therefore cannot be sold, disposed or destroyed. It likewise covers sustainable traditional resource rights.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
2
recognized. Through a landmark decision by the United States’ Supreme
Court, in a case filed in 1901 by Mateo Carino, an Ibaloi from Baguio City,
against the American insular government, ruled that territories of IPs
have never been subjugated by Spain and thereby were never part of the
public domains under the Spanish rule, henceforth does not presuppose
‘to treat as public land that IPs, by native custom and by long
association… regarded as their own’ (Dait-Cawed: 20113).
Over the years, development projects were continuously
introduced within IP areas which were perceived to be contrary to their
traditional beliefs and customary ways. As a result, conflicts arise
relative to issues involving entitlements of IPs to their “native titles” of
their ancestral domains/lands, including indigenous knowledge systems
& practices (IKSPs) and their self-governance systems.
Due to the foregoing, the ICCs/IPs have become historically
differentiated from the majority of Filipinos on account of their
customary ways in traditionally defined territories. Currently, there
are 110 IP groups in the Philippines. They number about 14,184,645, or
16 percent of the total population of the Philippines.
UN Protection Instrument: The International Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD)
The CERD was a pioneering instrument adopted by the
United Nations to monitor and review actions by States to fulfill
their obligations under specific human rights agreement.
CERD was adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1965.
However, it only came into force in 1969 after 27 States, including the
Philippines, had it ratified. It is the oldest and most widely ratified
UN human rights convention.
The Center for Human Rights of the United Nations Office in
Geneva (hereafter referred to as “Center”) highlights the following
principal points of CERD:
 Any doctrine of racial differentiation or superiority is
scientifically false, morally condemnable, socially unjust and
dangerous and has no justification in theory or in practice;
 Racial discrimination – and more so, government policies
based on racial superiority or hatred – violate fundamental
human rights, endanger friendly relations among peoples,
cooperation among nations, and international peace and
2 Native Title – refers to pre-conquest rights to lands and domains which, as far back as memory reaches, have been held under a claim of private
ownership by ICCs/IPs, have never been public lands and are thus indisputably presumed to have been held that way since before the Spanish
conquest. (Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA) of 1997 or Republic Act 8371, Section 3(l), Chapter II).
3 Dait-Cawed, Dahlialyn D., 2011,’The Clash of Philippine Land Laws: An Indigenous Perspective’, National Defense College of the Philippines, Camp
Aguinaldo, Quezon City

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
3
security;
 Racial discrimination harms not only those who are its objects
but also those who practice it; and,
 A world society free of racial segregation and
discrimination, factors which create hatred and division, is a
fundamental aim of the United Nations.
The Center further emphasizes that State-Parties to CERD agree
to undertake the following measures:
 To engage in no act or practice of racial discrimination
against individuals, groups of persons or institutions, and to
ensure that public authorities and institutions do likewise;
 Not to sponsor, defend or support racial discrimination by
persons or organizations;
 To review government, national and local policies
and to amend or repeal laws and regulations which
create or perpetuate racial discrimination;
 To prohibit and put a stop to racial discrimination by
persons, groups, and organizations; and,
 To encourage integrationist or multiracial organizations and
movements and other means of eliminating barriers between
races, as well as to discourage anything which tends to
strengthen racial division.
While CERD does not specifically focus on IP concerns, this
Chapter provides emphasis on IPs on the basis of the overwhelming
issues that were elicited from the different consultation activities,
both at the national and local levels.
State Treaty Compliance and Emerging IP Human Rights
Issues and Concerns
The Philippines adopted and ratified CERD on December 21,
1965 and September 15, 1967, respectively. It submitted its latest report
on June 30, 2008, containing the 15th to 20th Consolidated Philippine
Reports, covering January 4, 1998 to 2008 which were considered by the
Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) on
August 18-19, 2009. It registered positive responses on compliance
with the CERD Concluding Observations of 1997 while at the same
time eliciting recommendations from the CERD for future State
compliance.
The CERD Concluding Observations of 2009 and the Philippine

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
4
Universal Periodic Review (UPR) Report of April 2007 are the basis
for coming out with State actions as committed in this Chapter.
Moreover, other issues and concerns raised during the six regional
cluster consultation activities on the PHRP II in 2009 were likewise
considered.
A consolidation of the various human rights issues and
concerns on the IPs has been first classified into several human rights
agenda as follows: development aggression, armed conflict, non-
representation in governance, non-delivery of basic services, non-
recognition and non-appreciation of traditional structures and
mechanisms, overlapping of policies, and negative or discriminatory
outlook on ICCs/IPs. To attain positive outlook on the various human
rights issues and concerns, the classifications were later on changed
with focus on: (a) economic rights; (b) civil and political rights; and, (c)
social and cultural rights.
The following thematic objectives of the Chapter have been
crafted out of the above cited human rights agenda:
Thematic Objective 1: To uphold and protect the rights of
IPs to their ancestral domains, lands, and resources,
recognizing customary laws on property ownership and
relations;
Thematic Objective 2: To enhance access of IPs to the
various pillars of the justice system, and State recognition
in the exercise of customary laws and practices or the
various traditional justice systems; and protect their
rights to social justice and human rights;
Thematic Objective 3: To respect, protect and fulfill the
civil and political rights of IPs, provide responsive and
culturally appropriate mechanism in addressing
violations thereto and affording maximum protection to
defenders of IPs rights;
Thematic Objective 4: To respect, protect, promote and
fulfill the right to self-determination and self-determined
development of Indigenous Peoples, recognizing
indigenous knowledge and socio-political systems and
upholding the right to free and prior informed consent;
Thematic Objective 5: To provide culturally appropriate
basic social services and employment to IPs and employing
special measures to fulfill this;
Thematic Objective 6: To recognize, protect and promote
the cultural rights of IPs, combating prejudice and
discrimination against them, and fostering solidarity

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
5
among them and all other sectors of society; and
Thematic Objective 7: To review and amend policies and
programs on IP rights, enact laws that have direct
bearing on IPs, formulate/reformulate existence of
conflicting development policies, programs and areas in
conflict with IP rights and interests with the mandatory and
effective participation of IPs; develop a comprehensive
anti-discrimination legislation; and push for the
ratification of treaties which have direct bearing on racial
discrimination.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
6
SECTION 1
Strategic Treaty Indicators
The strategic treaty indicators relate to the thematic
objectives. Correspondingly, accountable government institutions
and the nature of their duties and responsibilities have been
identified.
Indigenous Peoples (IPs) to their ancestral domains, lands and
resources through the genuine implementation of Free Prior
Informed Consent (FPIC) and recognizing customary laws on
property ownership and relations.
The full enjoyment of Indigenous Peoples (IPs) rights to their
ancestral domains/lands and resources needs to be fast tracked. This
is also necessary for the full realization of IP rights to self-
governance and determination. However, issues are being raised as
the burden of proof lies with the IPs in proving their time
immemorial claim for ancestral lands/domains. Coupled with this
are the voluminous requirements in recognizing these rights through
the delineation and titling of these domains/lands and the delays in
the processes and the lack of cooperation by concerned government
agencies.
As such, IPs opted to exercise their traditional ownership of
these lands/domains through the ‘native title’ concept, which the
IPRA allows for. However, Ancestral Domains without issued titles
are more vulnerable to encroachment by both private and
government sectors and have become a national concern.
This objective provides indicators such as: 1) the number
and proportion of native titles and CADTs/CALTs awarded to IPs
broken down by province and region, by population and by area; 2)
increased awareness of and application by the government and the
general public on national and international human rights standards
in the realization of IP rights; 3) formulation and enhancement of a
culturally relevant Ancestral Domain Sustainable Development
Protection Plan (ADSDPPs) and Free & Prior Informed Consent
(FPIC) by the IPs.
The NCIP, DENR, DAR, LRA-DOJ and Department of Energy
(DOE) shall have to streamline the processes and requirements for
development activities while upholding the primacy of customary
laws and not sacrificing the integrity of traditional ownership to
ancestral domains/lands and resources of ICCs/IPs. NCIP shall
initiate closer collaboration with the aforecited agencies.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
7
The Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997 requires FPIC on
all resource-access/development activities within ancestral
domains, whether large scale extractives or small scale projects. This
is implemented by the NCIP, using its 2012 Guidelines on the
Exercise of FPIC and Related Processes.
Thematic Objective 2: To enhance access of IPs to the various
pillars of the justice system, and State recognition and
institutionalization in the exercise of customary laws and
practices or the various traditional justice systems towards
social justice and the protection of their human rights.
Based on NCIP Reports, hardly do IPs/ICCs with Ancestral
Domains in remote communities access justice from government
courts. More often, they become victims of injustice, technicalities
and misrepresentation. They become suspects for sympathizing with
rebels or communist insurgents. Worst, they become victims of
human rights violations as they seek to defend their Ancestral
Domains against government, powerful corporations or private
entities without being able to seek justice.
The indicators for this objective cover: 1) clear-cut policies
recognizing the interface of IP justice systems and the government
justice system with the former as part of the national justice system;
2) pool of IP lawyers and IP human rights defenders/advocates
trained including designed and conducted trainings for judges,
prosecutors and other IP rights defenders; 3) number and
proportion of legal cases on IP rights resolved over the total number
received, by province and by region, investigated and adjudicated; 4)
researched and documented functional community based IP
traditional justice system; 5) number of disputes resolved through
customary laws and practices.
For these to be realized, the IPs themselves together with
government agencies are central to this objective. The Supreme
Court shall play the critical role of providing access to formal justice
by the IPs as well as in recognizing their traditional justice systems
not merely as alternative dispute resolution mechanisms but as
frontline mechanisms in the resolution of cases.
In line with this, the NCIP has undertaken a strengthening
of its quasi-judicial functions, which are granted under the IPRA. It’s
Regional Hearing Offices have been reorganized as cluster courts
with parallel efforts to retool the agency’s lawyers and legal
personnel.
The Department of Justice (DOJ) specifically the Office of
Adjudication and Dispute Resolution (OADR) and all quasi-judicial
bodies to include the Regional Hearing Office of NCIP and others
including the Barangay Lupong Tagapamayapa shall ensure respect

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
8
of cultural sensitivity issues in the interpretation and application of
laws and policies.
Thematic Objective 3: To respect, protect and fulfill the civil and
political rights of IPs including their social, economic and
cultural rights, provide responsive and cultural appropriate
mechanism in addressing violations thereto and affording
maximum protection to defenders of IP rights.
The provision of culturally appropriate institutional
arrangements and mechanisms to protect the IPs is envisioned as a
major consideration. Relative to this, the Commission on Human
Rights of the Philippines (CHRP) alone does not have adequate
mandate. As part of the Philippine obligation to the CERD, the
United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial
Discrimination (UNCERD) appreciates the work of the CHRP but
observed that its mandate does not explicitly include economic,
social and cultural rights. Thus, the UNCERD recommended the
Philippines to include the protection and promotion of economic,
social and cultural rights in the mandate of the CHRP.
The indicators aligned to this objective include: 1) the
number and proportion of resolved human rights cases involving IPs
and, 2) number of documented human rights violations of social,
cultural, economic rights of IPs.
Under this specific objective, the agencies accountable are
the CHRP, NCIP, DND, AFP, DILG, NAPOLCOM, PNP, LGUs, DOJ,
Ombudsman, PAO, OPAPP, DENR, CHED, DepEd, SUCs, Congress,
Supreme Court, COMELEC, NCCA, among others.
Thematic Objective 4: To recognize and fulfill Indigenous
Peoples rights to self-determination, self-determined
development and recognizing indigenous knowledge and socio
economic, political and cultural systems.
Among the mechanisms to promote self-governance and
self-determination among IPs is the provision in the IPRA directing
that IP mandatory representatives be installed in local legislative
councils. To implement this, and to promote IPs right to participate
in decision making, the DILG has issued Memorandum Circular No.
2010-119 (dated 20 October 2010) directing all Local Government
Units on the Mandatory Representation of ICCs/IPs in Policy Making
Bodies and Other Local Legislative Councils.
Recognition of traditional justice and peace building
mechanisms and institutions of IPs is necessary towards the
realization of this objective. Towards this end, the identification and
institutionalization of these IP mechanisms and institutions towards
an interface with government mechanisms should be made. A

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
9
government database through research and documentation of these
IP traditional institutions and mechanisms should be facilitated.
Utilizing these institutions can build a good partnership between the
State and IPs towards lasting peace and development. Self-
governance will be effectively exercised by addressing culture
sensitivity issues; accessibility of concerned parties in dispute;
preservation of the dynamics of indigenous knowledge systems and
practices, speedy resolution of IP cases; encouraging the observance
of tradition, respect for elders & their precedent practices; and the
restitution of community relations.
Indicators for this objective include: 1) best practices
demonstrating self-determined development based on culturally
founded principles in sustainable utilization of resources; 2) number
of ADSDPPs formulated; 3) number of ADSDPP integrated at the
Barangay, Provincial and Regional Development Plans and IPs
trained on their traditional crafts, 4) number of IP Mandatory
Representatives installed in local legislative councils and policy
making bodies at the barangay, municipal and provincial levels.
With the support of the Philippine Government, the NCIP
shall spearhead the identification and institutionalization of data
banking mechanisms of Indigenous Knowledge Systems and
Practices (IKSPs) towards policy reviews and
enhancement/reformulation. The LGUs, DENR, DOE, DOST, DAR, DA,
NEDA, CHED, DepEd, DOLE-TESDA, NCCA and Congress shall assist
in policy formulation and enhancement. Specifically, towards the
preservation of indigenous crafts, TESDA has been working with
other agencies in the development of localized competency
standards inherent to specific location and cultural affiliation. This
can be utilized in the training of new workers who can continue
performing the craft.
Thematic Objective 5: To provide culturally-appropriate basic
social services and to recognize, protect and promote the
cultural rights of IPs, combating prejudice and discrimination
against them, and fostering solidarity among them and all other
sectors of society.
The indicators relevant to this objective include 1)
appropriate culture based and rights-based IP education, health and
social services structures and programs, agricultural processes and
livelihood activities; 2) IP rights and culture showcased in all
educational and general information materials; 3) the promotion of
IP rights and cultural heritage enhanced through appropriate
documentation and reproduction of IP culture, educational curricula,
schools, cultural centers, museums, non-formal education, bilingual
provisions, culturally sensitive festivals and celebrations and, 4)
researches on IKSPs.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
10
The NCIP reports that ICCs/ IPs have problems such as lack
of access to government basic social services like education, health,
clean water & air. Armed conflicts have also been pointed out as a
serious and urgent concern. Together with the NCIP, DepEd, CHED,
SUCs, PIA, Supreme Court, PRC, Training Institutes, AFP, PNP, DAP,
NCCA, National Museum, LGUs, DOT, DPWH, Intellectual Property
Rights Office, the State should pursue this objective.
Thematic Objective 6: To enhance affirmative actions of the
State in terms of legislative and administrative measures and
mechanisms that will promote and protect the interest and
welfare of the Indigenous Peoples
The lack of proper & accurate information and the absence
of disaggregated data on IPs/ICCs have apparently made them more
prone to discrimination. Such need for a database will support the
recommendation of the UNCERD for the Philippines to adopt a
comprehensive law on the elimination of discrimination on the
grounds of race, color, descent or national ethnic origin, covering all
rights and freedoms protected under international treaties and
conventions which include the CERD.
The indicator for this objective is the passage of a law on
anti-discrimination. To lead in the legislative advocacy are the DFA,
NCIP and CHRP. Other accountable agencies include the National
Commission on Muslim Filipinos, Philippine Commission on Women,
Department of Social Welfare and Development with the Council for
the Welfare of Children, National Council for Disability Affairs, DENR,
Civil Service Commission, DENR-MGB, DAR, DOE, DA, DOLE, HLURB,
DILG, LGUs, Bureau of Immigration, and NEDA among others.
programs on IP rights, ratify international conventions and
enact laws that have direct bearing on IPs,
formulate/reformulate existence of conflicting development
policies, programs and areas in conflict with IP rights and
interests with the mandatory and effective participation of
IPs; develop a comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation;
and push for the ratification of treaties which have direct
bearing on racial discrimination
Enactment, amendment, harmonization and
complementation of existing laws on IP rights should be pursued.
This should take into highest consideration the cultural principles,
entitlements, self-governance, Indigenous Political Structures (IPS)4
in the following areas: (a) environment and natural resources; (b)
local governance; (c) military practices; (d) administration of State
Universities and Colleges (SUCs). Interpretation of laws and policies
4
IPS-

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
11
must consider IP customary laws, practices, and their aspirations
expressed and represented by the IPs themselves.
While the Philippines already has IPRA which is a
landmark legislation and cited as a model for replication by other
countries, it has to pursue to the adoption/ratification of other
related international human rights treaties/conventions/covenants
that promote, protect and fulfill the rights of the IPs.
The NCIP and the National Anti-Poverty Commission
(NAPC) should lead other concerned agencies to include the OMA,
PCW, DSWD-CWC, CRPD, DENR, MGB, DAR, DOE, DA, DOLE, HLURB,
DILG, LGUs, BOI, CSC, and NEDA.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
12
SECTION 2
Thematic Baseline and Situationer
Thematic Objective 1
Aside from the CERD which has been well described in
the first portion of this Chapter, the United Nations Declaration
on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) is another
international policy standard in dealing with the various IP human
rights issues.
The Philippine Government through its Mission at the
UN Headquarters in New York headed the Committee that was
created to fast track negotiations with other States on the
adoption by the UN General Assembly of the UNDRIP. The
Philippine Government adopted the Declaration together with
other 142 States on September 13, 2007. Four States voted
against the Declaration while 11 States abstained.
The national normative framework for IP rights
protection and promotion consists of the Constitution, legislation,
administrative policies, court decisions or jurisprudence, and
customs and traditional practices.
The Constitution, also dubbed as “The Freedom
Constitution,” provides for the establishment and separation of the
Executive, Judiciary, and a bicameral Legislature. It specifies the
mandates and powers of the major institutions responsible for
human rights protection and promotion. The Constitution provides
that:
“The Congress shall give highest priority to the enactment
of measures that protect and enhance the right of all the
people to human dignity, reduce social, economic and
political inequalities, and remove cultural inequities by
equitably diffusing wealth and political power for the
common good. (Article XIII, Section 1)”.
Also, the Constitution declared as a policy that the “State
values the dignity of every human person and guarantees full respect
for human rights” (Art. II, Section 11). It is also the national policy to
protect the right to health of the people (Art. II, Section 15), as well
as their right to a balanced and healthful ecology (Art. II, Section 16).
Further, the State is mandated to protect the rights of workers and
promote their welfare (Art. II, Section 18) and to guarantee equal
access to opportunities for public service (Art. II, Section 26).
Everyone’s right to equality before the law in the enjoyment of
civil, political and social rights is enshrined in the all embracing
Bill of Rights of the 1987 Constitution (Art. III). To strengthen

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
13
the government’s concern for the protection and promotion of
human rights and fundamental freedoms, the Constitution also
mandates the Congress of the Philippines to give the “highest
priority to the enactment of measures that protect and enhance the
right of all the people to human dignity, reduce social, economic and
political inequalities and remove cultural inequities by equitably
diffusing wealth and political power for the common good” (Art. XIII,
Section 1). The “promotion of social justice shall include the
commitment to create economic opportunities based on freedom of
initiative and self-reliance.” (Art. XIII, Section 2). The State declared
as a national policy that it “recognizes and promotes the rights of
indigenous cultural communities within the framework of national
unity and development” (Art. II, Section 22).
Further, the State is mandated under the Constitution to
“protect the rights of indigenous cultural communities to their
ancestral lands to ensure their economic, social and cultural well-
being” (Art. 12, Section 5). The same provision states that
“Congress may provide for the applicability of customary laws
governing property rights or relations in determining the ownership
and extent of ancestral domain”. The State shall also “recognize,
respect, and protect the rights of indigenous cultural communities
to preserve and develop their cultures, traditions, and institutions”
and shall consider these rights in the formulation of national
plans and policies” (Art. XIV, Section 17).
Henceforth, the Constitution mandated the creation of
“Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) and in the
Cordilleras (Cordillera Administrative Region) consisting of
provinces, cities, municipalities and geographical areas sharing
common and distinctive historical and cultural heritage, economic
and social structures and other relevant characteristics
within the framework of this Constitution and the national
sovereignty as well as territorial integrity of the Republic of the
Philippines” (Art. X, Section 15-21).
Specifically, the IP related provisions of the 1987
Philippine Constitution became the bases for the government to
legislate and approve RA 8371 or the Indigenous Peoples Rights
Act (IPRA) of 1997, a landmark legislation which primarily seeks to
address the rights of ICCs/IPs, enforce constitutional mandates and
comply with international human rights standards.
The IPRA likewise drew from the then-draft United Nations
Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).
The IPRA recognizes, protects and promotes both the
collective and individual rights of IPs, particularly these four
bundles of rights: (a) The Rights to Ancestral Domains; (b) Rights
to Self-Governance and Empowerment; (c) Rights to Social

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
14
Justice and Human Rights; and, (d) Rights to Cultural Integrity.
It created the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples
(NCIP). Further, it establishes implementing mechanisms,
appropriates funds and other purposes serving the greater interests
of Indigenous Peoples.
The right to Ancestral Domain provides the IPs with
security of tenure and sustainable use of their ancestral
domains/lands. It likewise protects the territorial integrity of the
ancestral domains and the general welfare of its owners.
Ancestral domain refers to all areas generally belonging to
ICCs/IPs, subject to property rights within ancestral domains
already existing and/or vested upon the effectivity of the Act,
comprising lands, inland waters, coastal areas, and natural resources
therein, held under a claim of ownership, occupied or possessed by
ICCs/IPs by 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 voluntary dealings entered into by the government and private
individuals/ corporations, and which are necessary to ensure their
economic, social and cultural welfare. It shall include ancestral lands,
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 other natural resources; and lands which may no longer
be exclusively occupied by ICCs/IPs, but from which they
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.
Ancestral lands refer to land, subject to property rights
within the ancestral domains already existing and/or vested upon
effectivity of the IPRA, occupied, possessed and utilized by
individuals, families and clans who are members of the ICCs/ IPs
since time immemorial, by themselves or through their
predecessors-in-interest, under claims of individual or traditional
group ownership, continuously, to the present except when
interrupted by war, force majeure or displacement by force, deceit,
stealth, or as a consequence of government projects and other
voluntary dealings entered into by government and private
individuals/corporations, including, but not limited to, residential
lots, rice terraces or paddies, private forests, swidden farms and tree
lots.
Native title refers to pre-conquest rights to lands and
domains which, as far back as memory reaches, have been held
under a claim of private ownership by ICCs /IPs, have never been

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
15
public lands and are thus indisputably presumed to have been held
that way since before the Spanish Conquest.
Indigenous Cultural Communities (ICCs)/Indigenous
Peoples (IPs), refer to a group of people or homogenous societies
identified by self-ascription and ascription by others, who have
continuously lived as organized community on communally bounded
and defined territory, and who have, under claims of ownership
since time immemorial, occupied, possessed and utilized such
territories, sharing common bonds of language, customs, traditions
and other distinctive cultural traits, or who have, through resistance
to political, social and cultural inroads of colonization, non-
indigenous religions and cultures, became historically differentiated
from the majority of Filipinos. ICCs/IPs shall, likewise include
peoples who are regarded as indigenous on account of their descent
from the populations which inhabited the country, at the time of
conquest or colonization or at the time of inroads of non-indigenous
religions and cultures or the establishment of present state
boundaries who retain some or all of their own social, economic,
cultural and political institutions, but who may have been displaced
from their traditional domains or who may have resettled outside
their ancestral domains.
In pursuance of the right to self-governance and self-
determination, the ICCs/IPs, in coordination with the Department of
the Interior and Local Government, through the NCIP, shall
formulate measures to ensure that:
(1) The socio-political structures, systems and
institutions of ICCs/IPs are strengthened;
(2) The indigenous structures, systems, and institutions
are not supplanted by other forms of non-indigenous
governance; and/ or
(3) Mechanisms that allow the interfacing of indigenous
systems of governance with the national systems are
established. ensure that indigenous socio-political,
cultural and economic rights are respected and
recognized. These ensure that capacity building
mechanisms are instituted and IPs are afforded
every opportunity to participate in decision-
making processes.
On the other hand, the Rights to Social Justice and
Human Rights ensure the enjoyment of the following:
(1) Equal protection before the law;
(2) Rights During Armed Conflict;

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
16
(3) Freedom from Discrimination;
(4) Right to Employment;
(5) Right to Basic Services;
(6) Rights of Women;
(7) Rights of Children and Youth, and;
(8) Right to Education.
And lastly, the Rights to Cultural Integrity include:
(1) Protection of indigenous culture, traditions and
institutions;
(2) Right to establish and control educational and
learning systems;
(3) Recognition of cultural diversity;
(4) Right to name, identity and history;
(5) Community intellectual property rights;
(6) Protection of Religious, Cultural Sites and
Ceremonies;
(7) Right to indigenous spiritual beliefs and traditions;
(8) Protection of Indigenous Sacred Places;
(9) Right to protection of indigenous knowledge systems
and practices, and;
(10) Right to science and technology.
Other pertinent legislations on IP rights are the
following:
(1) RA 7160, or “The Local Government Code of 1991”
which provides for the creation of Tribal Barangays
and the Mandatory Representation of IPs in Local
Legislative Councils and Other Policymaking Bodies;
(2) RA 9054, otherwise known as “An Act to
Strengthen and Expand the Organic Act for the
Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao,

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
17
Amending for the Purpose RA 6734, Entitled ‘An
Act Providing for the Autonomous Region in
Muslim Mindanao’ as Amended;”
(3) RA 8425, otherwise known as “An Act
Institutionalizing the Social Reform and Poverty
Alleviation Program, Creating for the Purpose the
National Anti-Poverty Commission, Defining its
Powers and Functions, and for Other Purposes” to
provide assurance against discrimination or
exclusion from development;”
(4) Presidential Decree 1083, provides for the
codification of Muslim Personal Laws and the
recognition of the Shari’a justice system based on
Islamic religious law;
(5) Executive Order (EO) 270, which provides for
economic, environmental and social principles of
responsible mining;
(6) Executive Order (EO) 270-A, which amended EO 270,
states that, “The ecological integrity of areas
affected by mining operation, including
biodiversity resources and small-island ecosystems,
shall be safeguarded in order to protect public
welfare, safety and environmental quality. The rights
of affected communities, including the rights of
Indigenous Cultural Communities, especially the Free
and Prior Informed Consent requirement shall be
protected;”
(7) Administrative Order (AO) No. 3, series of 2004,
which upholds the rights of every IP individual to a
name and history. It registers their civil status and
upholds their national identity. It recognizes the
customary ways of IPs in the registration of birth,
marriage, death, dissolution of marriage, and
revocation of the dissolution of marriage.
(8) NCIP Administrative Order (AO) No. 3, Series of 2012,
or the Revised Guidelines on the Exercise of Free,
Prior and Informed Consent and Related Processes;
(9) NCIP Administrative Order No. 1 series of 2012, or
the Indigenous Knowledge, Systems and Practices
and Customary Laws Research and Documentation
Guidelines;

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
18
the General Guidelines on the Confirmation of
Indigenous Political Structures and the Registration
of Indigenous Peoples Organizations;
the Revised Omnibus Rules on the Delineation and
Recognition of Ancestral Domains and Ancestral
Lands
the Guidelines on the Formulation of Ancestral
Domain Sustainable Development and Protection
Plans (ADSDPPs)
Thematic Objective 2
The criminal justice system has five pillars namely—law
enforcement, prosecution, judiciary, correction, and community.
Among the mechanisms of the criminal justice system in place are:
(1) The Katarungang Pambarangay System (Village
Justice System), which was created under the Local
Government Code of 1991 (LGC) to assist in the
settlement of disputes between those residing in the
same barangay (village). It institutionalizes the use
of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) systems
and remains to be the most important mechanism
for reaching amicable settlement.
(2) Section 15 of IPRA provides 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. Traditional
legal system is effective because it is: a) culture
sensitive; b) accessible to community members; c)
preserves the dynamics of indigenous knowledge
systems and practices; d) promotes self-
governance; e)expedites resolution of cases; f)
encourages community involvement/participation;
g) based on tradition and precedent and respect
of elders; and h) emphasizes restitution not
retribution.
(3) NCIP Administrative Circular No. 1, Series of 2003,
or the Rules on Pleadings, Practice and Procedure

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
19
before the NCIP which uphold, among others, the
primacy of customary laws and practices.
Currently, the NCIP maintains 12 Regional Hearing
Offices (RHOs) nationwide. The RHOs are equal in
stature with the Regional Trial Courts. Cases
handled by the Regional Hearing Offices include
issues arising from disputes on Ancestral
Domain/Land claims; violations of the right to
Free and Prior Informed Consent; violations of
employment rights to just compensation and
conditions of employment; defacing, removing or
destroying cultural sites and artifacts; and, cases
involving property rights. Decisions of the RHO can
only be appealed to the Commission En Banc.
Commission En Banc decisions are appealable to the
Court of Appeals under the Rules of Court.
Thematic Objectives 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7
The Constitution provided for the creation of the
Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines (CHRP) (Art. 13,
Section 17). The CHRP is an independent body which is mandated
by the Constitution to investigate on its own or on complaint by
any party, all forms of human rights violations, including those
involving civil and political rights. The CHRP is also responsible
for the provision of appropriate legal measures for the protection of
the human rights of all persons within the Philippines, as well as
Filipinos living abroad, and for the provision of preventive
measures and legal aid services to the underprivileged whose
human rights have been violated or need protection.
The NCIP, for its part, was purposely created to
implement the provisions of the IPRA. It is mandated to protect
and promote the interest and well-being of IPs with due regard
to their beliefs, customs, traditions and institutions. It is the
primary government agency that formulates and implements
policies, plans and programs for the recognition, promotion and
protection of the rights and well-being of IPs with due regard to
their ancestral domain and lands, self-governance and
empowerment, social justice and human rights, and cultural
integrity.
As enabling partner and lead advocate, the NCIP envisions
genuinely empowered IPs whose rights and multi-dimensional
well-being are fully recognized, respected and promoted towards
the attainment of national unity and development. The NCIP has
three (3) major functions: a) quasi-judicial; b) quasi-legislative; and,
c) executive/administrative.
On the other hand, the Office on Muslim Affairs (OMA) was

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
20
created by EO 122-A to cater for the needs and aspirations of Muslim
Filipinos. And, by virtue of RA 6734 as amended by RA 9054, the
Autonomous Regional Government in Muslim Mindanao was
established to ensure the exercise of self-governance by Muslim
Filipinos. However, despite the availability of laws and
institutions, complete realization and fulfilment of IP rights remains
elusive.
In the different consultations conducted both at the local and
national levels human rights violations against IPs is still so rampant.
The degree of violations may differ from region to region but the
trend is basically national in scope.
The following table will illustrate the human rights
issues besieging the IPs nationwide. The various issues were
classified into basic human rights. (Please see table 8.1).

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
21

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
22
Table 8.1: Situation Matrix
Human Rights Issues Duty
Bearers
Claimholders
Economic Rights
a. Difficulties in the registration of CADTs/CALTs
b. Protection of ancestral domains/lands under the
principle of “native title” (ADs/ALs not subjected by
owners for registration/issuance of CADTs/CALTs)
c. Non-integration of ADSDPPs with the Local
Development Plans
d. Displacement of ICCs/IPs from their ancestral
domains (Ejectment due to mining, logging,
plantations, dams, displacement due to armed
conflict)
e. Non-compliance with FPIC
f. Proliferation of illegal logging
g. Overlapping claims on ancestral domains and
reservation areas (military, school campuses, ENR,
etc.)
h. Overlapping provisions of national and local
policies with the IPRA (as to ancestral
domains/lands and resources)
i. Non-delivery of basic services: Health, education,
social services, road and electricity infrastructure, etc.
NCIP, DAR, DENR,
LRA, Register of
Deeds, LGUs,
NCIP
-do-
NCIP, LGUs, NEDA
NCIP, LGUs, DENR-
MGB, DOE, DTI,
DOE, PNP, AFP,
OPAPP
-do-
DTI, AFP, PNP,
OPAPP
DENR, LGUs, AFP,
PNP, NCIP, CHED,
BCDA
DND-AFP, DILG-
PNP, SUCs, CHED,
DepEd, DENR
NCIP, DENR, DAR,
LGUs
IPs/ICCs

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
23
Human Rights Issues
Duty Bearers Claimholders
Civil and Political Rights
a. Non-representation in Formal
Governance System
b. Low performance of NCIP quasi-
judicial function thru its RHOs due to lack
of manpower and logistics
c. Non-culturally sensitive courts of
justice and quasi-judicial bodies/lawyers
and judges
d. Need for authentic IP representation
in Peace Talks/Processes (MILF and
CPP-NPA)
e. Intrusion of Armed Groups in IP
territories
f. Vulnerability to torture, harassment,
and killings due to armed conflict
common within IP areas, endangering
IPs as collateral damage
g. Constrained movement due to armed
conflict
h. Unsolved murders of IP
leaders/community members and
advocates
i. Illegal detention of IPs
j. Congestion of detention facilities
(cross-cutting with non-IPs)
k. Ineffective barangay justice system
l. Forced marriage; early marriage
NCIP, DILG, LGUs
NCIP, CSC, DBM,
Congress
DOJ, Supreme Court,
DENR, DAR
OP, OPAPP
DND-AFP, DILG,
LGUs PNP, Congress
DND-AFP, PNP,
LGUs, DOJ
DND-AFP, PNP,
LGUs, DSWD, RDCC
DOJ, DILG, PNP,
CIDG, AFP, NBI
DOJ, BJMP, PNP
DILG, BJMP, PNP,
LGUs
DILG, LGUs, Lupon
members
NCIP, DOJ, NSO-
OCRG, LGUs
DOJ, OMA, Supreme
Court
CHED, DOLE,
TESDA, OWWA,
IPs/ICCs

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
24
(bethrotal)
m. Difficulties in the Implementation of
the Shari’ah Courts
n. Attribution to Muslims (Crimes not
attributed to the person but to Muslims
in general)
o. Poor accessibility to civil registration
centers
p. Forced marriage
q. Aggressive religious and Non-State
Actor indoctrinations
r. Lack of accessible venues for free
expression
POEA, DFA
NSO-OCRG, LGU-
Local Civil Registrars,
NCIP
OCRG, Local Civil
Registrars
DND-AFP, DILG-
PNP,
LGUs, OMA, NCIP
DepEd, CHED,
SUCs, Office on
Religious Affairs
DOTC, PIA

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
25
SECTION 3
Thematic Performance Targets
Indigenous Peoples to their ancestral domains, lands and
resources through the genuine implementation of Free Prior
Informed Consent (FPIC), recognizing customary laws on
property ownership and relations.
By 2016, the CERD-PHRP II targets the development and
implementation of affirmative policies for the recognition and
protection of Indigenous Peoples/Indigenous Cultural
Communities (IPs/ICCs) concepts of native title, FPIC, customary
laws or property ownership after the conduct of FPIC processes.
These protection measures address issues on the option of IPs to
exercise their traditional ownership of their ancestral domains (ADs)
under the concept of ‘native title’ rather than following the
delineation and titling process of government.
The annual term target includes policy researches or
documentation on concepts of native title and customary law of
six selected IPs/ICCs. The breakdown is as follows:
2012 – 2 groups of IPs/ICCs documented;
2013 - 2 groups of IPs/ICCs documented;
2014 - 2 groups of IPs/ICCs documented.
Thematic Objective 2: To enhance access of IPs to the various
pillars of the justice system, and State recognition and
institutionalization in the exercise of customary laws and
practices or the various traditional justice systems towards
social justice and the protection of their rights human rights.
By the end of 2016, the CERD-PHRP II targets to (a) develop
a national policy guideline on the interfacing of IPs justice system
and national justice system; and (b) policy review on access of IPs to
formal justice.
Annual targets for 2014-2016 include
(1) The documentation of traditional justice systems of
seven selected pilot IPs/ICCs’ per ethnographic
region:
2014 – 3 pilot ethnographic regions;
2015 – 2 pilot ethnographic regions;
2016 – 2 ethnographic regions.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
26
(2) Assessment or study on the extent by which IPs
access the formal justice systems or regular
courts in seven selected pilot regional or
provincial courts representative of Luzon, Visayas
and Mindanao where there are IPs/ICCs.
2014 - 3 pilot regional/provincial courts at one each for
Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao;
2015 - 3 pilot regional/provincial courts at one each for
Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao
2016 - 1 additional pilot regional or provincial court
Thematic Objective 3: To respect, protect and fulfill the civil and
political rights of IPs including their social, economic and
cultural rights, provide responsive and cultural appropriate
mechanism in addressing violations thereto and affording
maximum protection to defenders of IP rights.
By 2016 the following should have been achieved: (a)
effective legal safeguards and measures for the protection of rights
of IPs and defenders of IP rights; and (b) increased level of
awareness and application of national and international IP and
human rights protection standards by the government, IPs and the
general public at the national and local levels.
The CERD’s annual targets are:
2012 - Development and implementation of joint circular
between NCIP, AFP, PNP and other law
enforcement agencies for protection of IPs and
IP rights defenders during the period 2010-2012;
2013- Development of special judicial measures in
coordination with DOJ, Supreme Court; and
2012-2015 Information Education and capacity building
on IPRA, CERD and other national and
international human rights treaties for 250
participants composed of lawyers/ judges or law
enforcers, police/military, IP leaders, IP children, IP
youth and IP women and the general public with 50
participants for each session from the period 2012-
2015.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
27
Thematic Objective 4: To recognize and fulfill Indigenous
Peoples rights to self-determination, self-determined
development and recognizing indigenous knowledge and socio
economic, political and cultural systems.
For the medium term (2014), the CERD-PHRP aims to
develop and enforce an enhanced policy guideline on the Ancestral
Domains Sustainable Development and Protection Plan (ADSDPP),
Free and Prior Informed Consent (FPIC), based on more critically
relevant Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Practices (IKSPs)
and other provisions of the IPRA.
The annual term targets for the period 2012-2016 include:
(1) 2012 - 2013 - Baselines surveys or studies on
selected IP groups;
(2) 2013-2014 - Policy recommendations on culturally
appropriate ADSDPP and FPIC guideline covering
seven (7) selected IPs/ICCs with CADTs and
ADSDPPs to be conducted;
(3) 2014-2015 - Documentation of IKSP covering seven
selected pilot IPs/ICCs with CADTs and ADSDPPs;
and
(4) 2014-2016 - Recognition and implementation of
policy on indigenous political structures (IPS) and
IPs Organizations (IPOs) in five selected pilot
IPs/ICCs with CADTs (2010-2012).
Thematic Objective 5: To provide culturally-appropriate basic
social services and to recognize, protect and promote the
cultural rights of IPs, combating prejudice and discrimination
against them, and fostering solidarity among them and all other
sectors of society.
The CERD chapter of the PHRP II in the medium term aims
to: (a) adopt culturally appropriate socio-cultural policies by
NGAs and LGUs to reach out to IPs/ICCs in far flung areas; and
(b) Assessment of initiatives of 5 pilot government agencies and 5
LGUs in employing IPs
Under this strategic indicator, the annual term targets are:
(1) 2012- Integration of ADSDPPs into Local
Development Plans;
(2) 2012-2013 - Development and issuance of

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
28
guidelines on IP community planning for culturally
appropriate delivery of services;
(3) 2012-2015 - Dissemination of IP guideline to all
stakeholders at the national and field levels; one
national and with IPs/ICCs in 13 regional cluster
groups;
(4) 2014 onwards - Implementation of guidelines in
selected seven IPs/ICCs; and
(5) 2013-2014 - Assessment, Evaluation and review of
Certificates of Confirmation (COC) covering years
2008-2009 with PNP, NAPOLCOM, AFP, BJMP,
DOH, DOLE and five selected pilot LGUs
Thematic Objective 6: To enhance affirmative actions of the
State in terms of legislative and administrative measures and
mechanisms that will promote and protect the interest and
welfare of the Indigenous Peoples.
The CERD-PHRP’s targets in the medium term or by 2014
are: (a) the institutionalization of an Advocacy Program for IP
Rights; (b) the Integration of Indigenous literature, IP rights and
CERD in the following: educational curriculum, board and bar
examinations, and PNP and AFP trainings; and (c) strengthening
the NCIP in light of the status of IPs and international
commitments of the Philippines as State party.
In the annual term, the following targets are:
(1) 2012-2015 - Advocacy program for IPs Rights;
(2) 2012-2015 - Development and implementation of
framework on IP education by 5 IP groups;
(3) 2012–2015 - Development and implementation of an IPs
Human Rights Education Program;
(4) 2012-2016 - Advocacy for the integration of CERD and
IPs rights in relevant education and trainings and
programs of the AFP, PNP, and other departments and
NCLE;
(5) 2012-2016 - Institutional review; and
(6) 2012-2016 - Annual monitoring of CERD implementation
and reporting.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
29
programs on IP rights, ratify international conventions and
enact laws that have direct bearing on IPs,
formulate/reformulate existence of conflicting development
policies, programs and areas in conflict with IP rights and
interests with the mandatory and effective participation of
IPs; develop a comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation;
and push for the ratification of treaties which have direct
bearing on racial discrimination.
The CERD-PHRP for the medium term targets the
following: (a) enhancement of existing laws and policies on IP
rights, harmonization or complementation with other policies
developed; (b) bill on anti-discrimination supported and filed in
Congress and Senate; and (c) Ratification of ILO 169.
(1) 2013-2015 - Assessment, Evaluation and review of
Certificates of Confirmation (COC) covering years
2008-2009 with PNP, NAPOLCOM, AFP, BJMP, DOH,
DOLE and five selected pilot LGUs;
(2) 2012-2015 - Advocacy at the national and local levels for
the passage of an anti-discrimination bill;
(3) 2013-2015 - Issuance and implementation of
ordinances in 4 selected pilot areas in each IP area in
Luzon, Mindanao, Visayas and ARMM;
(4) 2013-2015 - Advocacy and mobilization for the
ratification of ILO 169;
(5) 2015 onwards - Implementation of guidelines in selected
seven IPs/ICCs.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
30

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
31
Table 8.2. Performance Targets
Thematic Objective 1: To uphold and protect the rights of Indigenous Peoples to their ancestral domains, lands and resources through the genuine
implementation of Free Prior Informed Consent (FPIC), recognizing customary laws on property ownership and relations.
Strategic Indicators Medium Targets Annual Targets
Policy researches or
documentation on IP traditional
ownership or concept of native title
FPIC and customary law of six
selected IPs/ICCs
Affirmative policies on concept of
native title FPIC and customary laws
on property ownership developed
and operationalized
By 2014, the CERD-PHRP targets
the development and
implementation of affirmative
policies for the recognition and
protection of Indigenous
Peoples/Indigenous Cultural
Communities (IPs/ICCs) concepts
of native title, FPIC, customary laws
or property ownership after the
conduct of FPIC processes.
Thematic Objective 2: To enhance access of IPs to the various pillars of the justice system, and State recognition and institutionalization in the exercise of
customary laws and practices or the various traditional justice systems towards social justice and the protection of their rights human rights.
Documentation of traditional
justice systems of seven selected
pilot IPs/ICC’s per ethnographic
region
Assessment or study on the extent
by which IPs access the formal
justice system or regular courts or
provincial courts where there are
IPs/ICC
National policy guidelines on the
interfacing of IPs justice system and
national justice system developed for
implementation
Policy review on access to formal
justice by IPs
By 2014, the CERD-PHRP targets to
(a) develop a national policy
guideline on the interfacing of IPs
justice system and national justice
system; and (b) policy review on
access of IPs to formal justice.
Thematic Objective 3: To respect, protect and fulfill the civil and political rights of IPs including their social, economic and cultural rights, provide responsive
and cultural appropriate mechanism in addressing violations thereto and affording maximum protection to defenders of IP rights.
Close coordination between NCIP,
AFP, PNP, BJMP, CHRP and other
concerned agencies for protection
of IPs and IPs rights defenders
Information and Education
Effective legal safeguards and
measures that address violations of
IPs rights and protect the rights of IP
defenders
Advocacy campaign awareness to the
By 2014 aims to: (a) establish
effective legal safeguards and
measures that address violations of
IP rights and protect the rights of
defenders of IP rights; and
(b)increase level of awareness and

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
32
campaign for IPRA/CERD and other
HR treaties to the govt. offices and
the public in general
IP rights application of national and
international IP and human
rights protection standards by the
government, IPs and the general
public at the national and local
levels.
Thematic Objective 4: To recognize and fulfill Indigenous Peoples rights to self-determination, self determined development and recognizing indigenous
knowledge and socio economic, political and cultural systems.
Culturally appropriate policy
guidelines on ADSDPP, FPIC, based
on more critically relevant
Indigenous Knowledge System and
Practices (IKSPs) and other
provisions of the IPRA developed
and enforced
Medium term (2014), the CERD-
PHRP aims to develop and enforce
an enhanced policy guideline on the
Ancestral Domains Sustainable
Development and Protection Plan
(ADSDPP), FPIC, based on more
critically relevant Indigenous
Knowledge Systems and Practices
(IKSPs) and other provisions of the
IPRA.
Annual term targets for the period
2012-2015 include: (a) baselines
surveys or studies on selected IP
groups; (b) Policy recommendations
on culturally appropriate ADSDPP
and FPIC guideline covering seven
(7) selected IPs/ICCs with CADTs
and ADSDPPs to be conducted; (c)
Documentation of IKSP covering
seven selected pilot IPs/ICCs with
CADTs and ADSDPPs; and (d)
Recognition and implementation of
policy on indigenous political
structures (IPS) and IPs
Organizations (IPOs) in five
selected pilot IPs/ICCs with CADTs
(2010-2012).
Thematic Objective 5: To provide culturally-appropriate basic social services and to recognize, protect and promote the cultural rights of IPs, combating prejudice
and discrimination against them, and fostering solidarity among them and all other sectors of society.
Adoption of culturally appropriate
socio-cultural polices by NGAs and
LGUs to reach out to IPs/ICC in far
flung areas
Assessment of initiatives of five pilot
government agencies and five LGUs
in employing IPs
The CERD-PHRP in the medium
term aims to: (a) adopt culturally
appropriate socio-cultural policies
by NGAs and LGUs to reach out to
IPs/ICCs in far flung areas; and (b)
Assessment of initiatives of 5 pilot
government agencies and 5 LGUs in
employing IPs
Integration of ADSDPPs into Local
Development Plans;
2012-2013 - development and
issuance of guidelines on IP
community Planning for culturally
appropriate delivery of services;
2012-2015 - dissemination of IP

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
33
guideline to all stakeholders at the
national and field levels; one national
and with IPs/ICCs in 13 regional
cluster groups;
2014 onwards - Implementation of
guidelines in selected seven IPs/ICCs;
and
2013-2014 - Assessment, Evaluation
and review of Certificates of
Confirmation (COC) covering years
2008-2009 with PNP, NAPOLCOM,
AFP, BJMP, DOH, DOLE and five
selected pilot LGUs.
Thematic Objective 6: To enhance affirmative actions of the State in terms of legislative and administrative measures and mechanisms that will promote and
protect the interest and welfare of the Indigenous Peoples
Institutionalization of advocacy
Programs for IPs Rights
Integration of Indigenous literature
and IPs rights in the following
 educational
curriculum
 board and bar
examinations
 PNP and AFP
trainings
Strengthening the NCIP in light of
the status of IPs and international
communities
Medium term target by 2014 are: (a)
the institutionalization of an
Advocacy Program for IP Rights; (b)
the Integration of Indigenous
literature, IP rights and CERD in the
following: educational curriculum,
board and bar examinations, and
PNP and AFP trainings; and (c)
strengthening the NCIP in light of
the status of IPs and international
commitments of the Philippines as
State party.
In the annual term, the following
targets are:
a) 2012-2015 - advocacy Program for
IPs Rights;
b) 2012-2015 - development of
framework on IP education by 5 IP
groups;
c) 2012–2015 - development of an
IPs Human Rights Education
Program;
d) 2012-2015 - advocacy for the
integration of CERD and IPs
rights in relevant education and
trainings and programs of the AFP,
PNP, and other departments and
NCLE;
e) 2012-2015 - institutional review;
and

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
34
f) 2012-2015 - annual monitoring of
g) CERD implementation and
reporting.
Thematic Objective 7: To review and amend policies and programs on IP rights, ratify international conventions and enact laws that have direct bearing on
IPs, formulate/reformulate existence of conflicting development policies, programs and areas in conflict with IP rights and interests with the mandatory and
effective participation of IPs; develop a comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation; and push for the ratification of treaties which have direct bearing on
racial discrimination.
Enhancement of existing laws and
policies on IP rights, harmonization
or complementation with other
policies developed
Bill on anti- discrimination
supported and filed in Congress and
Senate
Ratification of ILO 169
Medium term targets the following:
(a) enhancement of existing laws
and policies on IP rights,
harmonization or complementation
with other policies developed; (b)
bill on anti-discrimination supported
and filed in Congress and Senate;
and (c) Ratification of ILO 169.
a) 2015 onwards - Implementation
of guidelines in selected seven
IPs/ICCs; and
b) 2013-2015 - Assessment,
Evaluation and review of
Certificates of Confirmation
(COC) covering years 2008-
2009 with PNP, NAPOLCOM,
AFP, BJMP, DOH, DOLE and five
selected pilot LGUs
c) 2012-2015 - advocacy at the
national and local levels for the
passage of an Anti-Discrimination
Bill;
d) 2013-2015 - issuance and
implementation of ordinances in
4 selected pilot areas in each IP
area in Luzon, Mindanao,
Visayas and ARMM; and
e) 2013-2015 - advocacy and
mobilization for the ratification
of ILO 169

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
35

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
36
SECTION 4
Program of Action
The basic principle in the drafting and implementation of the
CERD-PHRP II is the participation of Indigenous Peoples/Indigenous
Cultural Communities (IPs/ICCs). It is fundamental that the formulation,
planning and implementation of CERD and other human rights treaties
should include participation of indigenous children, indigenous women,
indigenous youth and all other sectors at all levels in the processes of the
PHRP II.
Following this principle, IPs are able to consider the PHRP II as part
of their expressions and manifestations for their self-determined
development. Their participation is a gesture of the real essence of
what the State considers as meaningful participation towards fulfilling
the rights of IPs to self-determination through the PHRP II.
Table 3 presents the breakdown of programs and projects
categorized by thematic objective, with specifications on coverage,
responsible stakeholders and outputs matched accordingly with the medium
and annual targets.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
37

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
38
Table 8.3: Programs/ Activities/ Projects
Thematic Objective 1: To uphold and protect the rights of Indigenous Peoples to their ancestral domains, lands and resources through
the genuine implementation of Free Prior Informed Consent (FPIC), recognizing customary laws on property ownership and relations.
Performance Targets Programs/
Activities/ Projects
Coverage Responsible Stakeholders Target
Date/s
Expected Outputs
Medium
Targets
Annual Targets Duty-
Bearers
Claimholders
Affirmative
policies on
concept of native
title FPIC and
customary laws
on property
ownership
developed and
operationalized
By 2014, the
CERD-PHRP
targets the
development and
implementation
of affirmative
policies for the
recognition and
protection of
Indigenous
Peoples/Indigeno
us Cultural
Communities
(IPs/ICCs)
concepts of native
title, FPIC,
customary laws or
property
ownership after
the conduct of
FPIC processes.
1. Institutionalization of
inter-agency affirmative
collaboration for
delineation titling and
registration of
CADTs/CADCs
2. Set-up inter-agency
and consultation groups
with IP/ICC through
traditional leaders
3. FPIC processes and
consultations with
IPs/ICC conducted in
ancestral domains
4. Conduct of research
5. Formulation and
approval of policy on
traditional ownership
6. Establishment of a
national database on IP
customary law
National DAR, DENR,
LRA, LGU,
NCIP, SC,
DOJ
IPs/ICC , CSO,
IPOs
Q1-2014
Q1- Q4 2014
Continuing
Q2-Q4 2014
Q3-Q4 2014
continuing
2014-Q2 2015
Q1-Q2 2014
Q1 2015
 Inter-agency group
established
 Regular group
discussions conducted
 IP leadership structures
in ancestral domains
identified
 Agency positions papers
disseminated
 Procedures/policy
recommendations
established

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
39
Date/s
Expected Outputs
Medium
Targets
Bearers
Claimholders
7. Mobilization for inter-
agency on approved
policy
8. Policy dissemination
implementation &
monitoring
Q1-Q2 2015
Thematic Objective 2: To enhance access of IPs to the various pillars of the justice system, and State recognition and institutionalization
in the exercise of customary laws and practices or the various traditional justice systems towards social justice and the protection of
their rights human rights.
Date/s
Expected Outputs
Medium
Targets
Annual Targets Duty-Bearers Claimhold
ers
National policy guidelines
on the interfacing of IPs
justice system and national
justice system developed
for implementation
Policy review on access to
formal justice by IPs
By 2014, the CERD-
PHRP targets to (a)
develop a national
policy guideline on
the interfacing of IPs
justice system and
national justice
system; and (b)
policy review on
access of IPs to
formal justice.
1. Establish Inter-
agency committee for
coordination and
consultation
2. Conduct consultation
workshop with
IPs/ICC and partners
3. Conduct
documentation
4. Formulate guidelines
5. Conduct monitoring
and updating of
status of cases of IPs
National SC, PAO,DOJ,CHR,
DAR,NCIP,DENR,
DILG,PHRC, CHRP
IPs/ICC ,
CSO, IPOs
2014  Committee/group
discussions as regular
activity of concerned
agencies
 Participation/consensus of
IPs/ICCs
 Documentation
 Guideline validated by
IPs/ICC
 List and status of cases of IPs
 Validated assessment/study
and policy recommendation

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
40
Thematic Objective 3: To respect, protect and fulfill the civil and political rights of IPs including their social, economic and cultural
rights, provide responsive and cultural appropriate mechanism in addressing violations thereto and affording maximum protection to
defenders of IP rights.
Date/s
Expected Outputs
Medium
Targets
Annual Targets Duty-Bearers Claimhold
ers
Effective legal safeguards
and measures that address
violations of IPs rights and
protect the rights of IP
defenders
Advocacy campaign
awareness to the IP rights
by 2014 aims to: (a)
establish effective
legal safeguards and
measures that address
violations of IP rights
and protect the rights
of defenders of IP
rights; and
(b)increase level of
awareness and
application of
national and
international IP and
human rights
protection standards
by the government,
IPs and the general
public at the national
and local levels.
1. Inter-agency
consultation with AFP,
PNP and other
concerned
agencies/CSO for
circular
2. Set-up special
measures/mechanisms
for the protection of IP
and IP rights defenders
in critical or difficult
circumstances
3. Development and
reproduction of IP
rights education and
training materials and
modules
4. Conduct of info
education and training
workshop for lawyers
and other law
enforcement agencies
National NCIP,
CHR,PHRC,AFP,
DILG,
BJMP,NAPOLCO
M, PNP, LGU,
DOJ,
Ombudsman,
PAO,OPAPP,
DENR,CHED,
DepEd,
Congress, SC
IPs/ICC ,
CSO, IPOs
2014  National Inter-agency
coordination body for IP
concerns
 Joint circular approved and
implemented
 Training/IEC materials
 Pool of IP human rights
advocate
 Special mechanism
established for IPs and IP
rights

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
41
Thematic Objective 4: To recognize and fulfill Indigenous Peoples rights to self-determination, self-determined development and
recognizing indigenous knowledge and socio economic, political and cultural systems.
Coverage Responsible
Stakeholders
Target
Date/s
Expected Outputs
Medium
Targets
Bearers
Claimhold
ers
Medium term (2014), the
CERD-PHRP aims to
develop and enforce an
enhanced policy guideline
on the Ancestral Domains
Sustainable Development
and Protection Plan
(ADSDPP), FPIC, based on
more critically relevant
Indigenous Knowledge
Systems and Practices
(IKSPs) and other
provisions of the IPRA.
Annual term targets for
the period 2012 -2015
include: (a) baselines
surveys or studies on
selected IP groups; (b)
Policy recommendations on
culturally appropriate
ADSDPP and FPIC
guideline covering seven
(7) selected IPs/ICCs with
CADTs and ADSDPPs to be
conducted; (c)
Documentation of IKSP
covering seven selected pilot
IPs/ICCs with CADTs and
ADSDPPs; and (d)
Recognition and
implementation of policy on
indigenous political
structures (IPS) and IPs
Organizations (IPOs) in
five selected pilot IPs/ICCs
with CADTs (2010-2012).
1. Baseline
studies/surveys
conducted for 5 ADs
with ADSDPPs
2. Assessment/inventor
y and review of
ADSDPP and FPIC
conducted
3. Community-based
dialogue including all
stakeholders in
selected IP
4. Development and
dissemination of
enhanced ADSDPP
and FPIC guidelines
5. Information
dissemination of
guideline on the
recognition of IPs and
registration of IPOs
6. Issuance of
Certificates of
recognition to IPs and
registration of IPOs
7. Midterm review,
monitoring and
evaluation of polices
National DOE
DOST
DAR, DA
NEDA
CHED
DepEd
DOLE
TESDA
Congress
DFA
NCDA
IPs/ICC ,
CSO, IPOs
2012-
2015
 List and status of application
for FPIC
 Workshops conducted with
focal NCIP staff
 Enhanced guidelines/policy
recommendation on
culturally appropriate
ADSDPP,FPIC guideline
(2013)
 Manual or guide checklist of
compliance to FPIC and
ADSDPP processes
 Tools and instruments for M
and E system, and
monitoring Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA)
 Implementation of enhanced
ADSDPP and FPIC guidelines
IN 7 Ads
 Feedback on disseminated
guidelines
 Recognized IPs and
registered IPOs

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
42
Thematic Objective 5: To provide culturally-appropriate basic social services and to recognize, protect and promote the cultural rights
of IPs, combating prejudice and discrimination against them, and fostering solidarity among them and all other sectors of society.
Stakeholders
Target
Date/s
Expected Outputs
Medium
Targets
Bearers
Claimhold
ers
The CERD-PHRP in the
medium term aims to: (a)
adopt culturally appropriate
socio-cultural policies by
NGAs and LGUs to reach out
to IPs/ICCs in far flung areas;
and (b) Assessment of
initiatives of 5 pilot
government agencies and 5
LGUs in employing IPs
Integration of ADSDPPs into
Local Development Plans;
2012-2013 - development
and issuance of guidelines
on IP community Planning
for culturally appropriate
delivery of services;
2012-2015 - dissemination of
IP guideline to all
stakeholders at the national
and field levels; one national
and with IPs/ICCs in 13
regional cluster groups;
2014 onwards -
Implementation of guidelines
in selected seven IPs/ICCs;
and
2013-2014 - Assessment,
Certificates of Confirmation
(COC) covering years 2008-
2009 with PNP, NAPOLCOM,
AFP, BJMP, DOH, DOLE and
1. Conduct of consultation
workshop and establish
committee with partner
agencies and IP leaders
on community Planning
and census
2. National workshop for
the formulation of
guidelines for
integration and
Planning
3. Validation with IPs/ICC
4. Conduct of information
dissemination and
implementation
activities of guidelines
5. Inter-agency capacity
building on culturally
appropriate delivery of
services
6. Development of
database on IP
employment in govt.
and LGU
National CHR,PHRC
NCIP
NCDA,NSO
OCRG
NSCB
DSWD
DepEd
DOH
DOLE
TESDA
CDA,DA
PNP/AFP
NAPOLCO
M
BJMP
CSC
IPs/ICC ,
CSO, IPOs
2012-
2015
1. ADSDPP Integrated in
Local development Plan
2. Institutionalized IP
concerns in core agencies
3. Pool of IP leaders as
resource persons in IP
community Planning
4. Memorandum of
Agreement with NCIP and
all agencies
5. Database of IPs employed
in PNP,AFP, NAPOLCOM,
BJMP.etc.
6. IP desks and roles
provided in each major
departments and agencies

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
43
Stakeholders
Target
Date/s
Expected Outputs
Medium
Targets
Bearers
Claimhold
ers
five selected pilot LGUs.
Thematic Objective 6: To enhance affirmative actions of the State in terms of legislative and administrative measures and mechanisms that
will promote and protect the interest and welfare of the Indigenous Peoples.
Stakeholders
Target
Date/s
Expected Outputs
Medium
Targets
Bearers
Claimhold
ers
Medium term target by
2014 are: (a) the
institutionalization of an
Advocacy Program for IP
Rights; (b) the Integration
of Indigenous literature,
IP rights and CERD in the
following: educational
curriculum, board and bar
examinations, and PNP
and AFP trainings; and (c)
strengthening the NCIP in
light of the status of IPs
and international
commitments of the
Philippines as State party.
In the annual term, the
Following targets are:
a) 2012-2015 - advocacy
Program for IPs Rights;
b) 2012-2015 - development
of framework on IP
education by 5 IP groups;
c) 2012–2015 - development
of an IPs Human Rights
Education Program;
d) 2012-2015 - advocacy for
the integration of CERD
and IPs rights in relevant
education and trainings
and programs of the AFP,
PNP, and other
1. Inter-agency
coordination and
collaboration
2. Consultations with
IPs/ICCs
3. Training workshop
for IPs as resource
persons for IP
education and with
partner agencies
(CHED, DepEd,
AFP,PNP)
4. Development of an IP
human rights education
program
5. Layout and
reproduction of CERD
and IPRA
National SUC
PIA,SC
PRC
AFP
PNP
DAP
LGU
CHR,PHRC
NCIP
DepEd
CHED
IPs/ICC ,
CSO, IPOs
2012-
2015
1. Instituted advocacy
program for IP rights
2. Functional inter-agency
coordinating body for IPs
3. CERD and IP rights modules
for AFP,PNP
4. IEC materials laid out and
reproduced
5. Pool of NGA advocates for IP
rights set-up
6. IP human rights education
program
7. Pool of NGA IP rights
advocates

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
44
Stakeholders
Target
Date/s
Expected Outputs
Medium
Targets
Bearers
Claimhold
ers
departments and NCLE;
e) 2012-2015 - institutional
review; and
h) 2012-2015 - annual
monitoring of CERD
implementation and
reporting.
6. Media write-up/
guests to the major
dept. as advocates of IP
rights
Thematic Objective 7: To review and amend policies and programs on IP rights, ratify international conventions and enact laws that have
direct bearing on IPs, formulate/reformulate existence of conflicting development policies, programs and areas in conflict with IP rights
and interests with the mandatory and effective participation of IPs; develop a comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation; and push
for the ratification of treaties which have direct bearing on racial discrimination.
Stakeholders
Target
Date/s
Expected Outputs
Medium
Targets
Bearers
Claimho
lders
Medium term targets the
following: (a) enhancement
of existing laws and
policies on IP rights,
harmonization or
complementation with
other policies developed;
(b) bill on anti-
discrimination supported
and filed in Congress and
Senate; and (c) Ratification
a) 2015 onwards -
Implementation of
guidelines in selected
seven IPs/ICCs; and
b) 2013-2015 - Assessment,
Certificates of
Confirmation (COC)
covering years 2008-
2009 with PNP,
Institutionalization of a
system of policy dialogue
 Creation of an inter-
agency TWG to draft
policy on dialogue
 Review and monitor joint
resolutions/agreements
for culturally appropriate
implementation of laws
affecting IP rights
 Devt. of an IP rights
National DOE
DOST
DAR, DA
NEDA
CHED
DepEd
DOLE
TESDA
Congress
DFA
NCDA
IPs/ICC
, CSO,
IPOs
2013-2015  Culturally appropriate
policies
 Guidelines/policy
recommendations on
strengthening NCIP
 Updates and reports
 IP right impact assessment
tool
 Monitoring and evaluation of
implementation or
ordinance, EIC Plan and
materials on bill

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
45
Stakeholders
Target
Date/s
Expected Outputs
Medium
Targets
Bearers
Claimho
lders
of ILO 169. NAPOLCOM, AFP, BJMP,
DOH, DOLE and five
selected pilot LGUs
c) 2012-2015 - advocacy at
the national and local
levels for the passage of
an anti-discrimination bill;
d) 2013-2015 - issuance and
implementation of
ordinances in 4 selected
pilot areas in each IP
area in Luzon,
Mindanao, Visayas and
ARMM; and
e) 2013-2015 - advocacy
and mobilization for the
ratification of ILO 169
impact assessment tool or
instrument
 Lobby for enactment of
bill
 Campaign for approval of
anti-discrimination local
ordinances in 4 IP areas
 EIC on ILO 169 in national
levels
 Campaign of ILO 169
 Lobby support of
Congress and Senate

NAPC
OMA
BOI
CSC
Senate
PLLO
PHRC
 Support groups of
IPs/ICC/CSOs, IPOs
 Resolution/endorsement to
support ratification 169
 Support of Congress and
Senate

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
46
Section 5
Linkages with Other Development Initiatives
and Plans
The CERD-PHRP II is anchored on various initiatives and plans. Some
of these are the Medium-Term Development Plan for IPs (MTPDP-IP) that is
aligned with the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The CERD-PHRP II
can also be related to recent emerging issues needing initiatives like those in
the CERD Concluding Observations of 2009.
The PHRP II has been encouraging consultations, initiatives of
indigenous communities through their ADSDPPs and processes like the FPIC
so that future linkages with these ADSDPPs could be well advocated towards
the larger context of eliminating discrimination. Being formulated and
crafted by IPs/ICCs themselves, the ADSDPPs should be integrated into local
development plans such as barangay, provincial, regional development plans
that will also be linked with the CERD-PHRP.
The NCIP is the lead agency for CERD, and is a member of the other
Thematic Clusters to ensure that concerns on discrimination and other
IP-related issues in different levels and since concerns of IPs are cross-
cutting along themes like CRC, CEDAW, ICCPR, ICESCR among others.
On the theme on armed conflict, for example, the CERD-PHRP will
also be linked with the Comprehensive Framework on Children Involved
in Armed Conflict (CIAC) and other peace initiatives like the National IP
Peace Agenda sponsored by the OPAPP that can serve as way forward parallel
to or complementing the CERD-PHRP II.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
47
SECTION 6
Human Rights Capacity Building Plan
Human Rights Capacity Building Plan is important both to duty-
bearers and claimholders. A look at the PHRP II shows a focused
direction on educating the national and field staff of NCIP on international
human rights treaties and other conventions and the IPRA as the
national framework for IPs.
This initiative will address the concern that duty bearers have to
be well versed with the subjects at hand. Duty bearers, especially national and
field staff of the NCIP, have to be capacitated on these instruments to be able to
address and implement the PHRP II effectively. Discrimination is prevalent at
all levels; especially for concerns of IPs, these cross-cut across the themes of
the PHRP II (i.e. CRC, CEDAW and others) and among sectors such as indigenous
women, indigenous children, and youth.
The first years of the PHRP II (2012-2013) will delve more on capacity
building, re-orientation, education and training of the NCIP national and
field staff and IPs/ICCs (leaders, youth, women and children) on these
instruments. In the meantime, CERD-PHRP II cluster members will incorporate
their respective interventions/activities in every first quarter of each year
of the PHRP. By the end of each year, a workshop will be conducted with
CERD-PHRP Cluster members to assess their own targets and
accomplishments vis-à-vis the PHRP II.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
48
Table 8.4: Human Rights Capacity Building Plan
Thematic
Participants
Objective/s
Education and
Training
Activity/ies
Coverage Target Thematic Participants Responsible
Parties
Expected
OutputsDuty-bearers Claimholders
Thematic
Objectives
1 to 7
Awareness
raising and
familiarization
of CERD,
ICCPR,
ICESCR, CRC,
CEDAW, CAT,
CMW, CPD,
ILO 169,
UNDRIP and
IPRA among
others
National
and
regional
and
field
NCIP (national)and
field); IAC-CIAC;
CERD Thematic
Cluster Members
IPs/ICCs
Indigenous
Political
Structures in
Ancestral
Domains and
other IP areas
Philippine
Commission
on Human
Rights, Lead
Agencies
All duty
bearers and
claimholders
are made
familiar with
human rights
treaties and
human rights
national
agenda
relevant to
indigenous
peoples

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
49

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
50
SECTION 7
Coordination and Management Plan
Through the coordination and management of the PHRP II, the
CERD-PHRP II cluster members will meet regularly. These meetings will be a
venue for updates, discussions and review of the status of what each
member has done and yet to do.
At the national level, the flow of the reports will be from CERD-PHRP
II Thematic Cluster members who may be solicited from field-based
reports and offices to be submitted to the PHRC through the CERD-
PHRP II Secretariat through the lead agency, the NCIP through its focal
bureau, the Office of Empowerment and Human Rights (OEHR). (See table
8.5)

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
51

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
52
Table.8.5: Coordination and Management Arrangements
Thematic Objective Committees/Task Force/Project Implementing Team
Head Members
1. To uphold and protect
the rights of Indigenous
Peoples to their ancestral
domains, lands and resources
through the genuine
implementation of Free Prior
Informed Consent (FPIC),
recognizing customary laws on
property ownership and
relations;
NCIP DAR,LRA,DENR,LGUs, Register
of Deeds, Indigenous (IP)
Leaders
2. Enhancing access of IPs to
the various pillars of the
justice system, and State
recognition and
institutionalization in the
exercise of customary laws
and practices or the various
traditional justice systems
towards social justice and the
protection of their rights
human rights
NCIP Supreme Court, DOJ, DAR,
DENR,NCDA, Indigenous
Leaders
3. Respecting, protecting
and fulfilling the civil
and political rights of IPs
including their social,
economic and cultural
NCIP CHR,PHRC,AFP, DILG, NAPOLCOM,
PNP, LGU, DOJ, Ombudsman,
PAO,OPAPP, DENR,CHED,
DepEd, Congress, Supreme
Court DepEd, DENR,SUC, DND,

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
53
Head Members
rights, provide
responsive and cultural
appropriate mechanism
in addressing violations
thereto and affording
maximum protection to
defenders of IP rights
NCCA
4. Recognizing and
fulfilling Indigenous
Peoples rights to self-
determination, self-
determined development
and recognizing
indigenous knowledge
and socio economic,
political and cultural
systems.
NCIP DOE,DOST.DAR, DA,NEDA,CHED,
DepEd, DOLE,TESDA, Congress, DFA,
NCDA, NAPC,OMA, DILG,DOT, BOI,
CSC, Senate , PLLO,PHRC
5. Providing culturally-
appropriate basic social
services and to
recognize, protect and
promote the cultural
rights of IPs, combating
prejudice and
discrimination against
them, and fostering
solidarity among them
and all other sectors of
society.
NCIP
NSO, OCRG, NSCB,DSWD, DepEd,
DOH, DOLE, TESDA,
DA, CDA NCDA

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
54
Head Members
6: Enhancing affirmative
actions of the State in terms of
legislative and administrative
measures and mechanisms that
will promote and protect the
interest and welfare of the
Indigenous Peoples
NCIP
DepEd, CHED, SUCs, PIA
Supreme Court ,PRC, AFP
PNP, DAP
7: To review and amend
policies and programs on
IP rights, ratify
international
conventions and enact
laws that have direct
bearing on IPs,
formulate/reformulate
existence of conflicting
development policies,
programs and areas in
conflict with IP rights
and interests with the
mandatory and effective
participation of IPs;
develop a
comprehensive anti-
discrimination
legislation; and push
for the ratification of
NCIP PCW,,DSWD,CWC, NCDA,
DENR, DAR, DOE, DA, DOLE,
HLURB,
NEDA, DILG,NAPC, LGU, OMA,
BOI, CSC, Congress, Senate, PLLO,
PHRC

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
55
Head Members
treaties which have
direct bearing on racial
discrimination

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
56
SECTION 8
Resource Generation and Mobilization Plan
The annual CERD-PHRP II Resource Mobilization Plan will be
formulated by the end of the quarter prior to the implementation year and
finalized by the beginning of the next year before the budget call by the DBM that
falls on the 1st quarter of the year of implementation.
As such, for Year 1 (2012), resources for CERD-PHRP II PAPs shall be
anchored on agencies’ mandate, General Appropriations Act (GAA) and Major
Final Outputs (MFO). It is reiterated that most of the lead agencies and
identified accountable and implementing agencies are operating on their
respective agency’s MFO indicators and the GAA in the implementation of
their respective mandates. It is encouraged that pooling of resources by
these agencies and sourcing fund allocations from partner development
institutions (foreign or local) can be possible for concerted efforts and
resources. This strategy will stand while concerned agencies are able to
incorporate CERD-PHRP into their respective agency plans and into the
Philippine Development Plan (PDP) until 2016.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
57
Table 8.6. Resource Mobilization Plan
Program/Activity/Project Resource Requirements by Source
Regular
Government
Budget
Development
Partners
(*The funds
are still to be
negotiated
with ODA or
other
development
partners)
Other Sources Total Budget
Preparatory
Consultations and proper
meetings
20,000.00 20,000.00 10,000.00 50,000.00
Conduct of National and Local
consultations with duty bearers
and claim holders
Conduct of trainors training on
CERD and HRBA for both duty
bearers and claim holders
30,000.00 30,000.00 10,000.00 70,000.00
Conduct of studies to support
proposed
legislations
Conduct of Treaty
Monitoring and report preparation
Conduct of information dissemination
Conduct workshop, symposia,
conferences, public hearings
300,000.00 200,000.00 100,000.00 600,000.00

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
58
Program/Activity/Project Resource Requirements by Source
Regular
Government
Budget
Development
Partners
(*The funds
are still to be
negotiated
with ODA or
other
development
partners)
Other Sources Total Budget
Conduct of sectoral and local
trainings
Knowledge sharing and management
Drafting of legislation
Conduct of Mid and Post review of
PHRP- CERD II chapter
100,000.00 50,000.00 50,000.00 200,000.00

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
59
SECTION 9
Monitoring and Evaluation Plan
All members of the CERD-Thematic Clusters will submit annual plans
and semestral accomplishment reports to the CERD-PHRP Secretariat, PHRC
within the 2nd week of July and January of the reference year.
Based on the consolidated accomplishment reports of each cluster
agency, the CERD-PHRP Secretariat will monitor progress of the
implementation of the CERD thematic chapter plans in coordination with the
lead agency on CERD thematic chapter. Results of progress of monitoring
CERD-PHRP implementation including consolidated accomplishments.
Reports of each agency-cluster member shall be submitted for
policy review and decisions to the Chairman of the NCIP through its Office
of Empowerment and Human Rights (OEHR), NCIP, the focal bureau for CERD
and other human rights treaty reporting and lead agencies for CERD
Philippine compliance reporting.
In coordination with the lead agency, the CERD-PHRP Secretariat will
present consolidated and status reports to all cluster members during
regular meetings every quarter for verification of indicators and outputs.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
60

Chapter 8: CERD Chapter

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (15)

Similar to Chapter 8: CERD Chapter

Similar to Chapter 8: CERD Chapter (20)

More from Presidential Human Rights Committee - Secretariat

More from Presidential Human Rights Committee - Secretariat (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Chapter 8: CERD Chapter