‘No to APSA 103’/Lawful grab proposals

 LETTERS FROM THE AGNO

March L. Fianza

Below is the English translation of a statement by Ampucao resident Alan Sabiano which he wrote in Kankanaey and posted on his Facebook page. Pardon me if the better translation was missed. Alan’s article simply presents their sincere concerns for their community as against what could probably occur once ISRI operates underneath their houses.
    “August 18 2023 was scheduled for signing MOA for APSA 103 but we told them we were not aware of the contents, still they insisted on rushing the signing even while we were pleading for negotiations to defer the signing so that we can study and insert our concerns.
    The community does not have enough time to oppose the application because we were unable to insert our concerns. While the MOA was under study we found out that part of Dalicno where residential houses stood at Upper Dontog, Mangganese, Tipong, Tukok and Tangke were within the Applied Mining Zone of ISRI. The water source of Mangganese and Dontog Tipong below Simpa are also within the Applied Mining Zone.   
    On September 7, 2023; we raised these matters at the dialogue between ISRI, NCIP and IIPO and agreed to conduct an ocular inspection of the water sources while we would decide to exclude or separate the Dalicno area or give our consent to the application.
    In one of the days after, an ocular inspection was conducted but there was no report as to whether the area of the water source was inside the Applied Mining Zone. The company could be silent because they found out that the water source is inside the Applied Mining Zone. Those concerned left the community to decide whether to exclude or give our consent which could be presented to them in another dialog to address livelihood concerns.
    On September 13, 2023 we requested a time for Atty as resource speaker in a meeting because there were more residents who were saying NO TO APSA but our own officials who could be on the side of the ISRI disrupted the meeting. But even while that happened, he should have allowed a time for the people against the APSA 103 to express their concerns so that they would know if these would be included.
    We were hopeful that the meetings and community dialogues were opportunities for all of us to respect the decision of each side since we are all affected by the project.   
    We have been hearing that there were some persons who had been negotiating for compromises or concessions but we respect their decision and we could not stop them since all of us are free to choose how to seek our own means of existence. 

But we who have water sources and residential houses that could be affected by the proposed mining operations underneath, especially at Upper Dontog Mangganese Tipong Tukok Tangke and our neighbors whose livelihoods are deemed to be affected, we ask that our decisions be respected, not disturbed or disrupted.   

We understand that you would go for YES (to APSA) with conditions but hopefully you should also understand why we are for NO TO APSA. It should not be us in this community who do not understand each other.

We vow to seek help from anyone who is able to assist us who are on the side of NO (TO APSA). You who are on the YES side may now fix your concessions with ISRI, but we ask that we should RESPECT each other.” (End of statement)

By the way, on August 18, 2023; mining residents of at least three sitios namely; Dalicno, Simpa and Lolita of Barangay Ampucao in the Municipality of Itogon averted the signing of a memorandum of agreement (MOA) that could have resulted to the approval of a pending Application for Production Sharing Agreement (APSA 103) by the Itogon-Suyoc Resources Inc. (ISRI).

In a petition letter dated August 16, 2023 and addressed to the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) and the Itogon Indigenous Peoples Organization (IIPO), the petitioners claimed that their sitios were part of the areas inside the ancestral domain of Itogon that are affected by the APSA 103 of ISRI.

The three Ampucao sitios consisting of more than 2,000 residents feared that their water sources, small-scale mining activities, livelihood, properties and their safety would greatly be at risk without proper negotiations.

They claimed that a majority of the Ampucao residents, particularly those whose households and properties were within the three sitios were insufficiently informed as the negotiations through general assemblies and meetings were inadequate. To their knowledge, they were still in the process of consultation between ISRI and those concerned.

The petitioners did not give their consensus approval of the project (APSA) on the grounds that the MOA was already drafted when they had yet to be properly informed of its provisions and contents. Signing of the MOA by representatives of the IPs of the ancestral domain of Itogon, the IIPO, ISRI and NCIP could have pushed through if it was not stopped.

The proposed APSA 103 project covers 581 hectares that overlaps the ancestral domain of Itogon, particularly barangays Ampucao, Virac and Poblacion. If approved in a community consensus, an agreement would be signed that would allow ISRI to explore and develop the areas under a Mineral Production Sharing Agreement with certain conditions.

The Ampucao residents through their elders at Dalicno requested in their petition-letter to the IIPO and NCIP to uphold their rights as IPs of Itogon and ensure that their voices be heard prior to the signing of an agreement. Their plea was not heard.

The conduct of an FPIC (Free and Prior Informed Consent) with the physical presence of the IPs of the community affected by the ISRI project is required prior to the issuance of a certification precondition by the NCIP, certifying that a certain project does not overlap a part of an ancestral domain area.

Last Wednesday (September 20, 2023) at around 4pm, the MOA was signed despite the absence of final negotiations and despite a petition that was received and read by the signatories which included the NCIP.

It is quite understandable why the signatories were eager to finish the signing of the MOA. Prior to all events, aside from other concessions, I was shown a picture of a dummy check for a P10M fund allegedly to be managed by a group for barangay projects. Certainly, as they say, "money is the root of all evil!" 

LETTERS FROM THE AGNO

March L. Fianza

Lawful land grab proposals

In many conflict cases involving lands, there are circumstances where one is obviously more powerful than the other in terms of application of laws, financial resources and outside support. The weaker party wins only a small part of the bargain or stands to lose considerably. Although in some instances, it is able to hold on until a new negotiation opens.
    The 2016 arbitral ruling by the UN Permanent Court of Arbitration over the South China Sea was overwhelmingly in favor of the Philippines as it said that major elements of China’s claim, including its nine-dash line, land reclamations and other activities in Philippine waters were illegal.
    Since then, the UN ruling was always raised by the Philippines and its neighbors in response to China’s maritime aggression. Although, recently China produced a new map which changed its nine-dash line to “ten-dash line”. This latest development virtually made the whole South China Sea their claim.
    Just like the nine-dash line that the UN tribunal declared as unlawful, the new 10-dash line has no legal basis except that China is still living up to its age-old vision of expansionism, or for selfish and greedy reasons.
***
Last week, the BCDA (Bases Conversion and Development Authority) at Camp John Hay opposed a proposed Baguio City ordinance to declare the Ibaloy Ancestral Domain of Happy Hallow as a heritage site for preservation purposes.
    It also petitioned the Supreme Court through the Solicitor General to cancel the Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title (CADT) issued in 2006 to Ibaloys who had occupied the area since time immemorial.
    Assuming that BCDA’s actions were supported legally, the conditions of the communities prior to the crafting of the law were diverse, and therefore its implementation would have to be applied on a case to case basis.
    The argument is based on government facts and figures that the Happy Hallow community of indigenous peoples existed even before the Americans came to occupy the land that they converted into a rest and recreation center for military employees and called it Camp John Hay.
    Under the BCDA law, former military reservations, including Camp John Hay, Clark and Subic, etc. would be converted into alternative productive uses and to raise funds by selling these properties. The money would be spent for the development and conversion of these lands to productive civilian use.
    The law further allows the BCDA to reclaim or undertake reclamation projects in areas adjacent or contiguous to the converted land. For John Hay and Happy Hallow, the scenario would be a “late comer visitor grabbing the land of its host IP community” that has been there for the longest time.
    Certainly, this is awkward but it is the law. But again, it does not follow that just because it is lawful, it can be applicable anywhere. That was why I thought that the application of the BCDA law should be on a case to case basis.
***
Another case to consider is the issue involving properties inside the three sitios of Dalicno, Simpa and Lolita of Barangay Ampucao in the ancestral domain and municipality of Itogon.
    The residents claimed that their water sources, small-scale mining activities, livelihood, safety of the people and properties would greatly be at risk with the approval of a pending Application for Production Sharing Agreement (APSA 103) by the Itogon-Suyoc Resources Inc. (ISRI).
    What surprised many was that a signing of an agreement (MOA) was scheduled sometime on August 18, 2023 while the affected residents have yet to know what was written in the documents to be signed.
    In other words, the MOA has been drafted already without the collective agreement of the Ampucao residents who claimed to be insufficiently informed as the negotiations through general assemblies were inadequate. To their knowledge, they were still in the process of consultation with ISRI and those concerned.
    The MOA signing which could have led to an approval of the APSA and displacement of a community did not push through due to heated discussions by the opposing parties. The Ampucao petitioners did not give their consensus approval of the project, otherwise they could have given away their properties for free.
    The derailing and delaying of rightful consultations by the agencies concerned through enterprising minions are plenty.     Lately, in an assembly last Thursday, there were attempts to silence news publicity by passing around unwritten “house rules” that would limit the movement of media personalities who would attend to cover the event.
    I was informed that an ocular inspection on the ground would soon be scheduled to determine the areas to be affected by the APSA. At least that would avert an attempt to “lawfully” operate mines, just like the way mining companies did in other countries a century ago.
    By the way, I am reminded of 2008 about the landowners affected by the operations of the Asin Hydro-electric plants and the government officials of Tuba, Benguet who expressed opposition to the claim of Baguio officials that the city owned the hydro-electric plants.
    Although the Asin Hydro in Nangalisan, Tuba was built by mayor Halsema for the benefit of the city and the mining companies, it does not follow that it should now be owned by the city. No single document certified such actions. 
    In their opposition, then Tuba official Blas Dalus opposed the request made by Baguio City to transfer water permits from the Baguio Water District to the City Government of Baguio and to change the permit from domestic to power generation, arguing that the move needs a Free and Prior Informed Consent (FPIC).
    The former IP representative in the Benguet provincial board also questioned the claim of ownership by the city of the hydro-electric plants in Tuba saying no document shows that the Americans turned over the facility to the city.
    The Asin Hydropower Plants 1, 2 and 3 were built, operated and administered in the 1920’s when the Philippines was colonized by the Americans. The plants ceased operations in 2012 but still remained within the territorial jurisdiction of the Tuba town.
    A check with the offices of the Tuba and Benguet assessors also revealed that Baguio does not own any property in the municipality, meaning, no taxes are paid by the city to Tuba or the province.
    Even while there is no basis and the claim by the city is not clear, city officials still insist on operating a property they do not own. It is a picture of an LGU squatting on the property inside another LGU.