(BAGUIO CITY, PHILIPPINES) The recent Supreme Court (SC) ruling reaffirming the city’s exemption from ancestral domain claims under the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act (IPRA) underscores the urgent need for both local and national action to address these challenges. While the ruling clarifies the legal landscape, it also highlights the complexities Indigenous communities face in securing their land rights.

Section 78 of the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act (IPRA) of 1997 grants Congress exclusive authority to reclassify lands within the city’s Townsite Reservation, effectively preventing the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) from issuing new Certificates of Ancestral Land Titles (CALTs) and Certificates of Ancestral Domain Titles (CADTs) for properties within the reservation predating IPRA. Despite Supreme Court rulings upholding this provision, local officials and indigenous communities are pushing for its repeal, citing its discriminatory impact.

Councilor Jose Molintas, condemned Section 78 as a tool of injustice against indigenous peoples. Molintas, a human rights lawyer and former member of the UN Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, highlighted how the provision has led to the invalidation or restriction of CALTs and CADTs within the city. He argued that it violates principles of justice, non-discrimination, and equality, citing international standards like the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. He has previously raised concerns about the city’s “historical discrimination” against indigenous peoples, particularly the practice of selling ancestral lands, which has fueled illegal settlements and land disputes.

Joanna Cariño, a descendant of Ibaloi leader Mateo Cariño, whose fight for native title recognition led to the landmark “Cariño Doctrine,” has criticized Republic Act 11689 as “ahistorical” for failing to address the concerns of the original Ibaloi inhabitants. She pointed out that the American colonial government expropriated and sold native Ibaloi lands after the city’s chartering in 1909, displacing them and leaving historical injustices unaddressed.

The debate has spurred discussions on potential solutions, primarily the repeal of Section 78 or amendments to the City Charter. Councilor Peter Fianza warned against delays, emphasizing the risk of ancestral lands being repurposed, further marginalizing indigenous communities.

While past discussions have focused on amendments to the city’s Revised Charter (RA 11689), authored by Representative Mark Go, this charter itself has drawn criticism for provisions like Section 54, which reinforces restrictions on ancestral land claims.

In a significant development, the NCIP has expressed support for amending Section 78 and agreed to draft a resolution with the city urging Congress to act. The NCIP has also proposed treating ancestral lands within the townsite reservation as private property, granting owners the same rights as holders of other land titles.

City and NCIP officials have agreed to collaborate on recognizing previously issued CALTs and CADTs without legal disputes, streamline processes for registering derivative titles, and facilitate the issuance of building and business permits to Indigenous peoples. A technical working group, including representatives from the city government, NCIP, DENR, and other agencies, will be established to implement these resolutions.

For his part, Baguio City Councilor, Isabelo Cosalan Jr. explains that the SC’s decision emphasizes the importance of “open, continuous, and actual possession” for land claims outside the IPRA framework.

“That raises critical questions about how such possession is proven, especially given Baguio’s history and the displacement of indigenous communities.” Cosalan quips.

He emphasized two fronts for action: City Government and Congress.

“The City government must take a proactive approach, going beyond simply acknowledging the ruling.” Says Cosalan, adding in vernacular “ket pagtitinnulungan ah” (we need to emphasize collaboration) ” let’s use one government approach.”

[A “one-government approach” is a strategy that aims to integrate and coordinate the efforts of various government agencies and departments to achieve a common goal or address a complex issue. It emphasizes breaking down silos, fostering collaboration, and aligning policies and programs across different parts of the government to provide more seamless and effective services to citizens.]

Cosalan mentioned specific actions the City can do:

1. Document and Preserve Evidence: The city should actively assist indigenous communities in documenting their ancestral land claims, including oral histories, genealogical records, and any other evidence of continuous possession. This could involve establishing a dedicated office or task force to support this process.
2. Local Land Records Transparency: While the SC ruling focuses on IPRA, the city can improve the transparency and accessibility of its own land records. This can help reduce local disputes and provide additional supporting evidence for ancestral claims. Explore blockchain technology for local records to enhance security and accessibility. This will benefit not just the IPs but all concerned residents of Baguio, irrespective of ethnicity, who still have to perfect their land rights and be issued titles with absolute ownership and corresponding building permits. Through the enhanced efficiencies, the City reduces the voluminous cases. Urban planning woes can be eliminated leading to more effective comprehensive land use plans.
3. Sustainable Development Plan with Indigenous Input: Develop a comprehensive and participatory sustainable development plan that incorporates the perspectives and needs of Indigenous communities. This plan should address issues like responsible land use, environmental protection, and cultural preservation. Ensure indigenous representation in the planning and implementation process.
4. Advocate for IPRA Reform: While respecting the SC ruling, the city should continue to advocate for reforms to the IPRA at the national level. This includes pushing for amendments to Section 78 that address its discriminatory impact and ensure a more equitable process for recognizing ancestral domain claims. Work with legal experts to propose specific, actionable amendments.
5. Mediation and Conflict Resolution: Establish accessible and culturally sensitive mediation and conflict resolution mechanisms to address land disputes within indigenous communities and between indigenous communities and other stakeholders.

Cosalan also mentioned some actions that can be done by congress since the SC ruling underscored the need for Congress to revisit the IPRA and related land laws.

“ Our representative can move in the appropriate House committees to:

• Clarify “Continuous Possession”: Congress needs to define more clearly what constitutes “open, continuous, and actual possession” in the context of ancestral land claims, particularly in areas with complex historical land ownership patterns like Baguio City. The definition should consider the unique challenges faced by indigenous communities.
• Amend IPRA Section 78: Revisit Section 78 of the IPRA to address its discriminatory impact on Baguio’s indigenous peoples. Consider alternative solutions that balance the city’s unique history with the rights of indigenous communities to their ancestral lands.
• Fund NCIP and Streamline Processes: Provide adequate funding to the NCIP to effectively carry out its mandate. Streamline the processes for ancestral domain claims and land titling to reduce bureaucratic delays and make the process more accessible to Indigenous communities.
• Review and Update Land Laws: Conduct a comprehensive review of existing land laws to ensure they are consistent with the IPRA and promote equitable and sustainable land management practices. Address loopholes and inconsistencies that contribute to land disputes and insecurity.
• Oversight and Accountability: Congress should exercise greater oversight of land administration agencies to ensure accountability and prevent corruption or mismanagement of ancestral lands.

“Saan met nga nalpas dita SC ruling ti tungtungan. Adda met ti trabaho to City tayo ken dita Congress. Saan met nga agkakalaban ta maymaysa tayo a gobyerno. Agkolab tayo amin para kadatay nga IP” (The Supreme Court ruling is not the end of the discussion on land rights in Baguio. It’s a call to action for both the city government and Congress to work together to create a more just and sustainable land system that respects the rights of Indigenous communities and protects the city’s unique heritage.)

Only through collaborative and concrete actions can Baguio hope to address these deeply rooted challenges.

The success or realization of the intended actions would result to benefit not only the IPs but all concerned residents of Baguio, irrespective of their ethnicity, who still have to perfect their land rights and be issued titles with absolute ownership and corresponding building permits and do business legally.

Moreover, the city government shall benefit from the realized reforms and relieved from voluminous land cases and conflicts. Urban planning woes shall be greatly eliminated leading to a doable Comprehensive Land Use Plan.