‘Landmark’ Bangsamoro IP code has not benefited non-Moro IPs – group

This is AI generated summarization, which may have errors. For context, always refer to the full article.

'The first thing that needs to be improved is the law itself,' says Francisco Lara Jr., executive director of Climate Conflict Action Asia

MANILA, Philippines – The Bangsamoro Indigenous Peoples’ (IP) code, hailed as a landmark law by both the national and autonomous governments and their international partners, has not benefited the non-Moro IPs in their battle for land rights, the peace advocacy group Climate Conflict Action Asia (CCAA) said.

“The IP Code has not shown any benefit and is silent on fast-tracking the awarding of titles….The first thing that needs to be improved is the law itself,” Francisco “Pancho” Lara Jr., executive director of CCAA, told Rappler in a response to a query about the United Nations (UN) 2024 report for the Philippines.

The UN report cites the passage of the Bangsamoro IP code in yearend 2024 as one of the key achievements of the Philippines, and seen as a good indicator of “commitment to inclusive and sustainable peace in an eventful year.” The Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (BARMM) is set to hold its first-ever parliamentary elections in October 2025, and BARMM remains to be the top two priority for the UN, said Philippines resident coordinator Arnaud Peral.

The first priority is for the Philippines to achieve its long-aspired for upper middle-income country status, and “the second is BARMM… to support everything that we can to show the dividends of peace, to bring and consolidate the peace process and help enhance the presence of the State and the delivery of services for the people,” Peral told reporters on June 5.

But the non-Moro IPs have been decrying the language of the IP code, saying that it has diluted their claim to their land. The Teduray-Lambangian IP groups are claiming 208,158 hectares of ancestral land in Maguindanao and Sultan Kudarat, and at least 83 IP leaders have been killed in the last 10 years, the reason cited is their relentless fight for their land rights.

The Bangsamoro IP code was going to be the answer to their problems, but IP leaders have been telling lawmakers that the language of the law disadvantages them. It is a precarious situation where Muslims and non-Moro IPs both live in the same area where peace is fragile. Lara said the language of the law “frames the Bangsamoro as ‘a shared homeland for all,’ diluting the legal recognition of non-Moro IPs as distinct peoples with collective land claims.”

On the operational level, the awarding of their Certificates of Ancestral Domain (CADT) had been halted by a cease and desist order in 2019 from the BARMM government’s Ministry of Indigenous Peoples Affairs (MIPA), claiming that the process is now within their jurisdiction.

Before the Bangsamoro Organic Law (BOL), the processing of titles had been done by the national government’s  National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP). Since this cease and desist order by MIPA, which the national government’s Commission on Human Rights (CHR) alleged as “lacking legal basis,” it has been a protracted process that has frustrated non-Moro IPs. At a House of Representatives inquiry in February, stakeholders and lawmakers warned there could be more violence if the issue is not resolved.

In the last few months, IP groups have reported escalating threats and harassment.

“There is no mention of a timeline for the awarding of CADT. Instead, Section 102 of the IP Code says that pending ancestral domain applications under NCIP shall be turned over to the MIPA. Turning over the application to the regional agency may cause another set of delays and confusion, especially given that the IP Code does not meet national legal standards,” said Lara.

Peral said “as with every legislation, it has to be put to the test [with] its implementation and its impact.”

“So this is something that we will continue to monitor to see how it works, what works, what doesn’t work and if need be and if we are requested ,we can continue to provide also some advice of how to improve its implementation or improve the legislation,” said Peral.

Lara said that “what is urgently needed is a legislative amendment to address these institutional gaps.” – Rappler.com