NCIP Ifugao for whom?

FROM A DISTANCE

Abe Pawid

(The article below posted by Jude Baggao became hot discussion in ifugao cyberspace watchdog (ICW) for more than two weeks but no word from NCIP ifugao.)

In June 28, 2013, I had a chance to share with a resident from Binablayan, Tinoc, Ifugao on the role of the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) on two key issues; Free Prior Informed Consent (FPIC) and the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the community of Binablayan and the Quad River Corporation.

At first, I was thinking of an ordinary sharing of story. But then as his story progresses, I need to get a recorder, a piece of pen and notebook, and prepare a cup coffee which turned out to be a thermos of coffee. His sharing on the conduct and role of the NCIP Ifugao on issues of FPIC and MOA signing is compelling.

According to my source, he can vouch the veracity of his statements when necessary. His statements can also be supported by a petition made by concern citizens of Tinoc on the issue of the hydroelectric power plant. As a background, my source is a resident of Binablayan, Tinoc and also a direct affected party when the hydroelectric power plant will push through.

This article will deal on the alleged disturbing conduct and role of the NCIP Ifugao in using its power and influence to railroad and ignore democratic processes for the interest of Sta. Clara and Quad River. If these allegations are true, then the NCIP Ifugao is robbing and violating people’s right for a genuine people’s participation in decision-making on important matters affecting them.

Coupled with these allegations is the high level of participation of some municipal employees and officials with their counterparts at the barangay level. This is worrisome because these employees and officials are involved in securing signatures for the FPIC and the MOA. With their full involvement, community meetings are manipulated and controlled for the interest of the companies.

In Binablayan for example, Barangay Captain Ramon Cadap challenged one of his constituent for a fight in front of the community meeting with the NCIP on April 5, 2013. The only fault of the person was asking a question for the NCIP. KapitanCadap went on to lambast the person as anti-government and supporter of the NPA.

Joining the barangay captain in his display of arrogance is the first council member who went to identify several people among the audience and insulted and called them names. With their presence, the NCIP Ifugao just watched the unfolding of events.

Another highlight issue here is that instead of a community meeting, the gathering of signatures is done through house-to-house either by the barangay officials or their emissaries. Deceit is also employed to secure signatures of their own constituents.

In one incident, a community resident was forced to sign the MOA when the barangay captain Cadap approached him while resting along the way to bring his produce to the collecting area. He was told by the KapitanCadap that he should sign the MOA because he is only the one left not signing the document.

Furthermore, NCIP Ifugao in a series of events did not sincerely listen to the requests and suggestions from the people. For example in Binablayan, the people requested a copy of the drafted Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) prior to their meeting in April 5, 2013 but NCIP did not provide any copy for the requesting party until the actual day. Instead of apologizing to the people, the NCIP went to question the people’s capacity to review the proposed MOA.

NCIP went also to explain that the people should trust them because they are educated and lawyers. NCIP went to tell the people that they included their comments and suggestions from their previous meeting. My source said that their major requested components for the MOA were not included.

NCIP Ifugao should also clear their personal bias and act as officers and representatives of the government especially inside their office and in their other functions regardless of people and their beliefs. They should remember that their office is to cater to all indigenous peoples and not on beliefs and orientation.

For example, in June 05, 2013, my source went to the NCIP provincial office in Lagawe to avail some important documents pertaining to the project. According to him, instead of providing him copies regarding the project, he was met by indifference by no less than the NCIP Ifugao provincial officer, Esther Licnachan.

Still, my source stood his ground and asked for the papers he was requesting but to no avail. Director Licnachan also informed him that Atty. Karen Salvador-Kalaw was not around and that the papers he was requesting was with her office.

Dismayed, my source left the NCIP office. After one day, June 07, he went back again to the NCIP office hoping that Atty. Kalaw will be there. When he arrived at the office, provincial officer Licnachan this time informed him that Atty. Kalaw is allegedly on-leave for two weeks.