Abusing FPIC

HAPPY WEEKEND
By Gina Dizon

SAGADA, Mountain Province -- Free prior and informed consent (FPIC) is a phrase heard, talked about and read constantly in regional papers.

It is also read in national newspapers and sometimes in international e-news. It is heard over the radio where broadcasters are keen on discussing the subject.

It is talked about in seminars and symposia where indigenous peoples rights are discussed in relation to development projects.

It is a spoken and equally unspoken application in a community that needs to be informed and give their consent or non-consent to any project that enters their community.

It is a phrase, a guiding principle one should never forget, lest one forgets his/her rights to exist as a person and as a constituent living in a collective community.

In legal terms, an FPIC certificate precondition is issued by the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) when the consent of a community is given. And when no consent is given, naturally it follows there is no need for an FPIC certificate and no operation or project is done in the targeted community.

Such acronym is irritating and gets one angry when an interested party rams down their pet projects in a village and finds very convenient to let NCIP do its job to facilitate this much hankered for FPIC at the comfort of the mining firm or any company for that matter.

And so we have gotten through the years Bakun Aywanan protesting over an FPIC that has been taken from some “consenting people” of Gambang, Bakun- the community questionably split in three phases. The FPIC issued by the NCIP is questionable until now.

As early as 2004, the peasant organization TimpuyogtiMannalonitiKalinga questioned the approval of the NCIP on Certificate precondition consent applied by Wolfland Resources Inc. TMK notes that the exploration project of the mining company will not only concern barangays Magnao, Guilayon and Nambucayan but will also affect nearby communities Dugpa and Baay in the municipality in Pinukpuk, Kalinga irrigated by the Mananig waters.

Last year, elders in LicuanBaay, Abra were set to file a class suit with the NCIP for alleged irregularities in FPIC procedures against Canadian mining company Olympus Pacific Mines Inc and local partner Abra Mining and Industrial Co. (AMIC) and Jabel Mining who already conducted drilling operations.

The list goes on with signs obviously making FPIC an instrument to be manipulated or apparently ignored at the convenience of the one needing it in the first place. And obviously with a number of cases opposing from communities affected over the issuance of FPICs and in some cases irregular conduct of FPIC consultations, such a provision in the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act is strongly suggesting guidelines how this shall be secured.

Is it enough that two or three officials or a few members of the community will give the consent? Is it enough that the FPIC refer to the consent that private owners of the lots where the project shall be built on shall give? What should the people know to be informed-the bad side and the good side of the project as to environmental and hazardous effects?

Where the FPIC is clearly provided in the IPRA as a requirement in any project entering the community, customary practices are a basic foundation to how IPs give their consent. And this, naturally needs the umili’s (community) way of how the FPIC shall be secured.

Otherwise, we expect a lot of opposition to an FPIC taken the Company Way. And what this is has been clearly manifested in a number of FPICs that has been opposed by affected communities in a number of instances.

FPIC is a basic precept of the human rights of a community, of indigenous peoples rights taken collectively as a culture and as a people talking. It talks about the very culture being respected and the very being of a community to decide.

It talks about being informed. Information is power. In the olden days until now, getting hold of information get’s one attuned to untoward events. Information is vital to analysis and knowledge. Such is the information the proponent company has to provide taking all the positive and negatives sides of a project and letting the people decide whether they should they approve or not a project proposed to be built in their place.

In this context, a wind farm is being proposed to be built by Phil Carbon in 648 hectares of Mt Pilaw within the boundaries of municipalities of Sagada and Besao and poses the questions of what disadvantages and advantages the windmills may give based on scientific studies and based on experience from other countries.

As a bosom friend, Bernice See from Besao asked if effects of climate change are included in the feasibility study of Phil Carbon. An answer to the question which I would also like to know. What is contained in the feasibility study needs to be explained by Phil Carbon to the people of Sagada and Besao.

What is the project cost, benefits it may give, the institution behind the one doing the project, and an intelligent analysis of how much the community will get as its share if ever it shall give its consent.

This follows negotiation where benefits are concerned. What are the best terms that the affected community should have upon giving its land and resources for exploration- in terms of sharing in profits and other social benefits such as scholarships, education, water facilities or disaster trainings for example at the benefit of the Umili . What is the role of the Umili in the management of the facility?

FPIC talks about being “free.” Will the people be given the right to fully appraise the projects and decide on their merits before these are approved?