Warped FPIC version

 LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL

Roger Sinot

ASIN HOT SPRING, Tuba, Benguet - Last March 10, 2015; the OIC- Regional Director, NCIP-CAR replied to my letter in reference to the Free Prior Informed Consent process on how it is conducted when consent was already given by the landowners to the proposed hydroelectric plant project here.

"We deemed it proper to refer your letter to the company, Goldlink Global Energy Corporation for comment in the interest of due process”, the Director stated. Part of the letter comment of the Legal counsel for Goldlink dated December 15,2014 said and I quote: "Mr. Sinot's family is among those who were invited to the meeting because, based on the preliminary surveys, their property was a probable site/route for the proposed project. Hence, there was a need to redesign and re-route the project so that those NOT amenable to the use of their properties would not be affected." 

He further said, "Please note that consent obtained through FPIC does not operate as a license for the project proponent to enter private properties over and above the objection of those who actually owned them." He even stressed that the consent of the Local Government Units (LGUs) to hydroelectric projects implemented within their territorial jurisdiction is dictated  by law and government regulations. It does not come within the ambit of the IPRA. 

Hence, securing the endorsement of the host LGUs is not a condition precedent to the issuance of a Certification Precondition (CP) much less the conduct of the FPIC process. In the same manner, a CP or the conduct of FPIC is not a requirement for the endorsement by host LGUs.

May I state the definition of FPIC derived from the IP Rights Act. The FPIC is a consensus of all members of the ICCs/IPs which is determined according to their customary laws and practices. The consensus should be free from any External Manipulations, Interference, and Coercion and obtained after fully disclosing the intent and scope of the program, objective and activity of the proponent.

The FPIC is given by the concerned ICCs/IPs upon signing the Memorandum of Agreement(MOA) containing the conditions/requirements and benefits, as well as penalties of the agreeing parties as basis for the consent. On the host LGUs consent, as required by law, no permit for the exploration, utilization and development of natural resources on any portion of the Ancestral Domain shall be granted or renewed by the concerned government regulating agency WITHOUT FPIC of affected ICCs/IPs.

Therefore, may I again say, this is "putting the cart before the horse." A classic example of a Chinese Proverb, "LutongMakaw"(Done deal) or was it just for compliance sake?

My family’s property located at Nursery, Sipitan, Tadiangan is where the water intake of the old American made AsinHydros #2 and #3 of barangay Nangalisan are located. It is the source of water supply for basic livelihood, farm irrigation and households downstream. It also supplies three resorts in the barangay. Should the Goldlink redesign and reroute the water from the Irisan river that pass through our property, all of the stakeholders below will be affected. 

If and when Goldlink would do so, it will be an unlawful act. The diversion/rerouting involves a great deal and causes eminent danger of dissipation and drying up of farms and even constitutes environmental damage that prejudices the lives, health and properties of inhabitants below. The railroading of the approval of the proponent’s project disenfranchises the whole of Nangalisan barangay.

Under section 59 of the IPRA, it provides that all departments and other government agencies shall henceforth be strictly enjoined from issuing, renewing, or granting any concession, license or lease, or entering into any production-sharing agreement without certification from the NCIP and Ancestral Domain holders. 

Such certification shall only be issued after a Field-based Investigation (FBI) conducted by the Ancestral Domain Office (ADO) of the area concerned. It provides that NO certification shall be issued by the NCIP without the free, prior, informed and written consent of the ICCs/IPs concerned. 

We yearn for an FPIC that is simply followed. Free- is first, Prior- is second, Informed- is third, and a written consent/lease contract- to be the last activity. It should be accessible, consistent and pro-ICCs/IPs. Their rights in particular should be given concrete and expedient process that only allows the proponent Goldlink to play second fiddle. It is clear, the message of IPRA is that the ICCs/IPs of the locality (Tuba) will determine their DESTINY, and not the proponent Goldlink, neither the NCIP who determine it for them.

As an elder of the community and a leader to the Tadiangan Nangalisan Hydro Ancestral Land Association (TNHALA), I say, "In triumph or in defeat, we will keep on knocking and pounding until we slay the dragons of penury and injustice” so PEACE and JOY will truly REIGN in Benguet and the Cordillera as well.