Regional autonomy and IPRA

HAPPY WEEKEND

By Gina Dizon

Taking control over natural resources as a major call for Cordillera regional autonomy  is equally a rationale of  the State to control its territorial integrity and put teeth in its politico-economic policies enshrined clearly in the 1986 Constitution providing that only the national government has control over the exploitation and use of the country’s natural resources.

Deeply stamped in the history of the State owning the land and resources is ingrained in the Regalian doctrine passed from the Spanish dominion of 300 years to the American period to the present economic and political system of the country.

For a period of time and composition of the Philippine State, land and the very natural resources- forest products, minerals, including the wind and the solar-hit  resources that hovers around the territorial atmosphere is owned by the State.

These very lands were built industries,mining sites and projects which source the finances of the State-gold, nickel, zinc and waters and other forms of renewable energy for electrical power- in the name of “development for the many” and for the many operations of government.

We talk of  Ambuklao dam along the waters of Benguet, Magat dam with waters from Isabela and Ifugao, Philex and Lepanto Mines for its gold and copper. With millions and billions of money having been generated from these resources found in the Cordillera is the nagging question of  how much share and benefit the host communities  got  and get from the  extraction and utilization of the resources located within their  domains over the century of time.

For a period of time since the creation of a Philippine State, the national wealth of host communities remained under the control of national laws and the very system of sharing the wealth of the very  communities where the resources are found.

Share in benefits for host communities currently stand at one-centavo per kilowatt-hour of the electricity sales which applies to generation facilities located in all barangays, municipalities, cities, provinces and regions based on Dept of Energy Regulation 1-94.

The national government gets a 40% share of  the gross collection derived from taxes, fees and charges in any co-production, joint venture or production sharing agreement in the use of the national wealth as the Local Government Code provides. Of the 40% share, 20% is allocated to the province, 45% to the city/municipality; and 35% to the barangay.

The share of local government units from the utilization and development of national wealth shall be released without need of any further action, directly to the provincial, city, municipal or barangay treasurer on a quarterly basis.

The Renewable Energy law of 2008 also provides for a one percent share of the LGU of the gross income of RE resource developers resulting from the sale of renewable energy.

Yet is the one centavo per kilowatt hour or the one percent share good enough for the host community or the LGU where the resource is found. This also  asks the question if the  40% share with  20% of this allocated to the province, 45% to the city/municipality; and 35% to the barangay is good  enough.

The Electric Power Industry Reform Act  (EPIRA) law for one was passed in 2001 and with inflation having shot through the years, one centavo share needs to be increased even expressed by NEDA  regional director Milagros Rimando in a recent forum in Bontoc.

The context of the question I am reminded of traces its being in a consultation on Cordillera autonomy two years ago in Bontoc about  benefit sharing- how much Mountain Province shall get when it opens its resources for exploitation.

The question remains very relevant in the present where the proposed law,  House Bill 4649 or  Act Establishing the Cordillera Autonomous Region was filed 2nd week of July  by Cordillera representatives Nicasio Aliping Jr (Baguio City), Manuel Agyao (Kalinga), Teddy Baguilat Jr (Ifugao), Eleanor Begtang (Apayao), Maximo Dalog Sr. (Mt. Province), Ma. Jocelyn Bernos (Abra), and Ronald Cosalan (Benguet).

Can the autonomous region if it comes to being, legislate successfully the shares the region wants and go against what is already provided in the Local Government Code?

This goes true to PD 705 where it provides that lands 18% in slope and over is considered public land and the State considering it inalienable and open for eviction of  squatters thereof.

Can  PD 705 and the said provision be amended and the control of the domains where such is applicable to indigenous peoples be left to the control and management of  the proposed Cordillera autonomous region.   

In a related news report, Benguet congressman  Ronald Cosalan  expressed his reservation of the autonomy bill if passed into a law not realizing its potential due to control of the State on  the country’s natural resources. Cosalan said the most that can happen is the regionalization of the Cordillera.

Another  existing  provision of the law needing amendment is the redefinition of what host communities mean in the EPIRA  to include not only where the project site is located but also the area or the LGU where the resource is  traced from as in a watershed.

Shall proposed amendments if there be any be done first in an existing law by Congress before the proposed autonomy bill be successfully signed into law? 

Member of the technical working group on Cordillera autonomy and chief of staff  Atty Forest Tabbang of the office of Congressman Manuel Agyao of  Kalinga said whatever proposed amendments  in existing laws shall be discussed in the  Committee level and the proposed changes  incorporated in the bill.

Ifugao congressman Teddy Baguilat has a cautious position saying we ‘should go slow’ on the proposed autonomy law with this phrased in general terms  while relying on the Constitutional provision for the establishment of  autonomous states for both the Cordillera and Mindanao.         

The coming in of  an autonomy law practically lets the  autonomous region  have control over its natural resources- the waters, rivers, mountains, pasture lands, mineral lands; and the  areas where the air, hot springs and the space under the warm  glare of the sun are located within the very domains of the Cordillera. Meaning, shall this come easy?

With the filing of House Bill 4649 and  a major call on controlling natural resources within Cordillera domains inhabited by indigenous Igorots and its many sub tribes, what  chances shall it be approved by Senate and by President Benigno Aquino 111?

The proposed autonomy law finds solace in the constitutionally debated- IPRA  where it provides that ancestral domains are owned by indigenous peoples making them owners of the lands and the rivers they are in-  the waters  and the sites where the sun sets its rays on and even beyond  the 18% in slope and over where most indigenous peoples live.  

The very  recognition of the  State on native title and the granting of  certificates of  ancestral land titles giving title to an indigenous person and certificates of ancestral domain  titles giving recognition to an IP community  practically makes  IPs  have titled claims over their domains and making the proposed organic law for an autonomous Cordillera state possibly forthcoming.

 The all-out  passing of the bill by the  six congressmen of the Cordillera is a plus  factor from the  hesitant stand of  Abra congresswoman Jocelyn Bernos and Benguet Congressman Ronald Cosalan with their reservations for more public consultations.

Yet while that is the case. the peoples' pulse remains the answer to Cordillera autonomy and begs the question what makes people say yes  and what makes them say no.  A practical guide to gauging peoples’ positions is what an initiative can do for their lives and shall it be something good for their children.

If we have autonomy, shall it mean there shall be more jobs? Shall it mean the cost of the  electricity shall be lowered? Shall it mean we shall have subsidized or even free education for all? Shall it mean comprehensive  health care for everyone?  Shall it mean lowered costs of  basic commodities? Shall it mean the lessening or eradication of graft and corruption in government? Shall it mean free prior and informed consent of IPs strengthened over any project introduced in their respective communities?

The answer to the  question of  whether Cordillerans favor regional autonomy or not remains in the minds of the constituents of the Cordillera. How informed, how relevant is Cordillera autonomy to the everyday lives of the Cordilleran and the most of the many indigenous peoples within the Cordillera provinces, municipalities, cities, barangays and villages.