1 day ago
3
Upgrade to High-Speed Internet for only ₱1499/month!
Enjoy up to 100 Mbps fiber broadband, perfect for browsing, streaming, and gaming.
Visit Suniway.ph to learn
BAGUIO, Philippines – Residents of a village in Benguet have filed a civil case seeking to nullify an agreement and certification linked to a planned mining expansion in their community.
The complaint, filed with a regional court in La Trinidad, Benguet, on Monday, July 21, named the Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB) central office, the environment secretary, the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) central and regional offices, and the Itogon Indigenous Peoples Organization (IIPO) as respondents.
Itogon-Suyoc Resources Incorporated (ISRI), the company behind the planned expansion under Application for Production Sharing Agreement (APSA) 103, was also identified as a respondent in the case filed by residents of Sitio Dalicno in Barangay Ampucao, Itogon town.
The residents – Allan Sabiano, Juanito Arciba, Luciano Manuel, Cristeta Caytap, and Regina Sidor – alleged that the Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) process was flawed and lacked genuine approval from those directly affected.
Along with seeking to void the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) and the Certification Precondition (CP), the petitioners also asked the court for a temporary restraining order and injunction to stop the MGB from processing and endorsing ISRI’s application to the DENR secretary for approval.
As the community directly affected by the project, the residents asserted they were excluded from consultations, despite living in the project area, which includes their homes, churches, schools, roads, and water sources.
ISRI filed APSA 103 in 2012 for a 581-hectare production-sharing agreement within the Itogon ancestral domain. The law requires written consent from indigenous peoples before development or mining can proceed. The NCIP issued the CP on December 23, 2024, confirming the proponent’s FPIC compliance and community consent.
‘Existential threat’
The petitioners described the project as a threat to the community and vital resources, which they warned could be approved without proper consultation and consent.
“The approval of APSA 103 into a mineral production sharing agreement constitutes an existential threat to the safety and livelihood of the ICCs/IPs of Dalicno, Ampucao, who stand to be most affected by large-scale mining activity,” they stated.
In their court filing, they noted that their settlements fall directly within the project site, placing their infrastructure at risk. Most residents, they added, rely on small-scale mining for income and would lose their primary livelihood if the project proceeds.
They also raised concerns over the potential loss of vital water sources, located within a 154-hectare portion of the project area and covered by valid water permits.
Procedural lapses
They argued that the MOA, signed by ISRI and IIPO on September 20, 2023, was “without basis as no genuine FPIC was conducted” according to established guidelines. They described it as “a by-product of a series of procedural lapses,” accusing the NCIP of favoring the mining company.
The plaintiffs said affected communities “expressed a resounding opposition” to APSA 103 during a 2020 FPIC process facilitated by NCIP-Benguet. Petitions from Dalicno, Camp Lolita, Tangke, and Simpa, along with resolutions from Barangay Ampucao and the municipal council, supported this claim.
Despite this, they said they only learned of a scheduled MOA signing between ISRI and IIPO in August 2023. Community protests initially blocked the signing.
They also alleged that ISRI failed to hold the two community assemblies required under Section 22 of the FPIC guidelines and never presented its plans, scope, or mitigation measures to the broader community.
In a resolution issued on January 3, 2024, then-NCIP regional director Atanacio Addog dismissed the residents’ complaints and upheld the FPIC process, citing a lack of evidence of irregularities.
Question of representation
The complainants also challenged IIPO’s authority to represent them in the consultations. They disputed NCIP-CAR’s position that only one IPO should participate in the FPIC process in the absence of a community assembly to validate leaders and the decision-making process.
They noted that IIPO “had not renewed its former 2007 Certificate of Registration” during the proceedings. Under NCIP Administrative Order No. 2-2012, IPOs are required to renew their registration every two years to gain juridical personality to represent the community.
“IIPO, for its failure to renew its registration, is therefore in the same footing as all other existing IPOs in Itogon and cannot be considered as more superior in terms of representing the IPs,” the complaint stated. “It stands to reason that existing IPOs should not be excluded in the FPIC process on the ground that they have not been registered.”
Rappler contacted the IIPO secretary, who declined to comment, saying they need to review the complaint.
In two separate 2023 resolutions, IIPO stated there was no irregularity in the FPIC process and that several consultations addressed the residents’ concerns, one of which noted there were no grounds for elevating the issue to the courts or other forums.
Rappler sought comment from ISRI through its publicly listed cellphone number and email on Facebook. A staff member said the inquiry would be referred to their “boss,” but no response had been received as of posting time. We will update this report once a response has been made. – Rappler.com
