Republic of the Philippines

PARTIDO STATE UNIVERSITY

Camarines Sur

Caramoan Campus
MODULE III

INDIGENOUS PEOPLE: THE POSTCOLONIAL PERIOD

Name of student: ________________________________ Week Number: 6-7

Course Code: GEE2 Name of Faculty: Diana Rose R. Pismo
Course Title: Indigenous People’s Study
**************************************************************************************************************************
I. Objectives
At the end of this module, students are expected to:
• Determine the effect of every period to the existence development and preservation of
the IP’s
• Summarize the initial response of the IP’s in relation to modernity s
• Demonstrate the ability to formulate an argument in favor or against a particular issue.

II. Lesson
The effect of the U.S. land laws continued after the Philippines
became an independent state in 1946. While many of these laws
were subsequently amended by the Philippine legislature, they
retained their basic objectives and features. It was in the 1987
Constitution that, while keeping the Regalian Doctrine, “the rights of
indigenous cultural communities within the framework of national
unity and development ”5 were recognized, and the autonomous
regions of Muslim Mindanao and in the Cordilleras were created.6 To
implement these constitutional provisions, Republic Act 8371, also
known as Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA), was enacted in
1997.

DEVELOPMENT AND PRESERVATION OF THE INDIGENOUS

Figure 1. Overview of the Regalian Doctrine (Source:
https://www.studocu.com/ph/document/arellano-
PEOPLES university/college-of-law/regalian-doctrine-environment-
kaw/10242955)
Post-Colonial Land Legislation
The Philippines gained political independence from the United States in 1946; however, the
postwar regime essentially upheld the policies of the American colonial government.

Cordillera
In the Cordillera region, the land problem was aggravated by the passage of legislation and Republic
Acts and Proclamations declaring Igorot ancestral lands open for leaseholders, military reservations,
watersheds, and resettlement areas. The Cordillera region could also be used by the government as a
“resource base” for its development endeavors. This meant that the government would take a development
philosophy that fully exploited the rich natural resources through extractive development projects like
hydropower dams, mining and logging, with the “minorities” sacrificing for the “majority.”

Among the more significant post-colonial pieces of

legislation that would deprive and deny the indigenous
peoples their ancestral lands and cultural heritage was the
infamous Revised Forestry Code of 1975. The Code provides
that all lands having a slope of eighteen degrees or more are
inalienable and non-disposable for agricultural and settlement
purposes. Paradoxically, the indigenous peoples have
traditionally settled on the slopes in their territories and have
long enjoyed sustainable agriculture there as evidenced by the
antiquity of their terraces that, to this day, are thriving. The Figure 2. Cordillera People Alliance (Source:
code also declared, “all lands above 18 degrees slope https://cpaphils.org/elders%20work%20main.htm)

Page 1 of 8
 Republic of the Philippines
PARTIDO STATE UNIVERSITY
Camarines Sur

automatically belong to the state classified as public forest land.” The Regional Forestry Master Plan36 recorded that
57% of the pine forest area in the Cordillera has a slope greater than 50 degrees – making the people squatters in their
own lands. Prior to the Forestry Code, however, some legislation was passed that seem to have favored the lot of the
indigenous peoples. Apparently, this legislation was aimed at integrating indigenous peoples into the majority society
by giving indigenous peoples a chance to quiet title to their lands.

In the Cordillera region (Northern Philippines), the state legislated policies that favored some of the indigenous
populations. The indigenous population engaged in vegetable farming in Benguet province is a case in point. Local
history shows that in the 1950s, there was a rush for land along the Halsema stretch because of the promising vegetable
enterprise. Chinese businessmen farmers would scramble for the lands in the area and soon would monopolize the
vegetable farms in the area. In response, Igorot farmers organized themselves and rallied against Chinese dominance
in the vegetable industry. This discontent reached Malacañang, compelling then Presidents Magsaysay and Macapagal
to implement policies favoring the Igorot farmers and to provide indigenous peoples an opportunity to secure their
lands.

Lumad
Large-scale migration of Christian settlers from Luzon and Visayas was further assisted by the Philippine
government with the establishment of the Philippine Commonwealth in 1935. The Commonwealth administration was
interested in economically developing Mindanao, and for providing an outlet for the impoverished farmers in the north.
In 1935 the Quirino-Recto Colonization Act brought more Christian settlers to Mindanao. Other acts were promulgated
by the Government of the Philippines which opened Mindanao to more settlers. Before 1934 government agencies like
the Rice and Corn Production Administration, Land Settlement Development Corporation, and the National
Resettlement Development Corporation pursued land resettlement projects that brought in 9,800 families to Mindanao.

The influx of settlers from Visayas and Luzon to Mindanao deprived many of the Lumads and the rural Muslims
in Mindanao rights to their land. The land policies set the stage for the subsequent eruption of major conflicts related
to land in the South as most rural Muslims and Lumads were further marginalized. The Bureau of Lands awarded land
rights based on priority of claims filed, not priority of occupation. It was not unusual for individuals to obtain legal titles
to land already occupied by Muslim and Lumad groups. If the occupants refused to move and the title owner was
sufficiently wealthy or influential, he or she would gain forceful possession of the land, sometimes by armed conflict
often supplied by local units of the Philippine Constabulary. (McKenna 1998). Lumads like the Tiruray lost their forests
to homesteaders and Muslim farmers. "Teduray people in deforested places were issued titles to their land, but their
unsophisticated grasp of the unfamiliar concept eventually resulted in the loss of almost every Teduray-owned farm to
homesteaders." (Schlegel 1998: 8) As a result of resettlement, Lumads receded into the forested areas where logging
operations further deprived them of their land.

The indigenous peoples of the Philippines have been classified (by Maceda in 197540) according to a typology
based on concepts of land ownership and tenure among various indigenous peoples, with the indigenous peoples of
the Cordillera considered the upland wet rice cultivators. These include the Bontoks, Ifugaos, Kankanaey, Kalingas,
and the other tribes of the Cordillera. Acquisition of land, to these people, remains primarily a matter of occupying and
then cultivating an area cleared of forest growth. These farmers then proceed to terrace the hillside and plant it with
the preferred crop, rice, whenever water is available. The first occupant to build a terrace on a site is considered its
owner.
The acquisition of water rights is a necessary complement of land ownership because without water the
terraces would be of little value. Hillside clearings of land used for planting root crops and vegetables followed the
same system in which the land belongs to the first cultivator. In this case, however, ownership is valid only until the
land is reclaimed by forest growth. Once it reverts to this condition it becomes once more the property of the whole
community and, as such, is free for the taking by the first person who clears it. If a piece of land is allowed to lie fallow,
however, anybody intending to cultivate it will need the permission of the owner or the first cultivator. A forest area may
also be claimed by families as their own. This gives them the exclusive right to whatever firewood, lumber, and other
forest products are derived from it.

Land property may be alienated in any of the generally known ways: through sale, barter, mortgage, or
inheritance. Reports indicate that outsiders find it difficult to make land purchases. When land is disposed of through
inheritance, the best and most productive fields are reserved for the eldest son of the family. Among the upland
cultivators, land is considered the most important item among their possessions, and the position of a person in his
society will largely depend on the amount of productive land he can call his own.

Page 2 of 8
 Republic of the Philippines
PARTIDO STATE UNIVERSITY
Camarines Sur

Conflict on Land Claims: Early Beginnings

The conflict between land laws imposed by the State and the customary land laws of indigenous peoples will
be traced from pre-contact times until the present time. National land laws and indigenous laws exist simultaneously
but independent of each other. And as a result of developing from very different historical origins and evolving from
different modes of production, the two systems of land law often contradict each other.

The conflict started with Spain. During its colonization of the Philippines in the 16th century, the concepts of
land ownership, the idea of private property, the volume of agricultural production, and the way the different groups of
people interacted changed drastically. The Spanish conquerors brought with them, among other things, their own world
view of land and its system of ownership and use. They armed themselves with a feudal theory known as Jura Regalia
– which later became the infamous Regalian Doctrine – and introduced this into the country through the Laws of the
Indies and the Royal Cedulas. The Jura Regalia did not automatically mean absolute ownership of the Philippine
islands. But the colonists justified their appropriation of the islands to themselves and the Crown through this legal
fiction, which stated that, “henceforth, by virtue of conquest, all lands in the archipelago belonged to the sovereign.”

This piece of fiction then became and has since remained the theoretical bedrock upon which Philippine land
laws were based and which dealt a fatal blow to Philippine indigenous concepts of land rights and land tenure.41 During
the American colonial period from 1898-1945, the American government used the same policy, requiring settlers on
public lands to obtain deeds from the government. This reveals that the Americans understood the value of the Regalian
doctrine as a legal basis for the state to hold property. The colonial government introduced laws that reinforced the
state’s control over the public domain, justifying it by saying that there was no effective system of land registration
during the Spanish period. The laws passed during that period include the following:

The Land Registration Act No. 496 of 1902, which declared all
lands subject to the Torrens system of formal registration of land
title and empowered the State to issue to any legitimate claimant
secure proof of title over a parcel of land. This system turned land
into a commodity that could be traded by the exchange of a piece
of paper

The Philippine Commission Act No. 178 of 1903,

which ordered that all unregistered lands become part of the
public domain, and that only the State had the authority to
classify or exploit the same.

The Mining Law of 1905, which gave the Americans

the right to acquire public land for mining purposes.
The Public Land Acts of 1913, 1919 and 1925, which
opened Mindanao and all other fertile lands that the State
considered unoccupied, unreserved, or otherwise
unappropriated public lands to homesteaders and corporations,
despite the fact that indigenous peoples were living in these
lands.

Aside from these laws, the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Carino v. Insular Government in
1909 protected the vested rights of indigenous cultural communities of the Philippines over ancestral domains that they
have occupied since time immemorial. However, even if that holding is valid under present jurisprudence, the authority
of the case is now questionable in light of recent legislation. Article XII of the Philippine Constitution of 1987 contains
the provision that “all lands of the public domain . . . belong to the State.” State laws have been enacted that have
effectively extinguished the right of indigenous peoples to their lands such as Presidential Decree No. 705 (1975), also
known as the Revised Forestry Code of 1975, which declares all lands 18% in slope or over are automatically
considered as forestland and therefore not alienable and disposable unless released from the forest zone. Most of the
indigenous peoples claiming rights to their lands are found within these areas. Also added to the 1987 Constitution
were some provisions recognizing and promoting “the rights of indigenous cultural communities within the framework
of national unity and development” (Article II, Sec. 22) and creating autonomous regions in Muslim Mindanao and in
the Cordilleras (Article X, Secs. 15-19).

Page 3 of 8
 Republic of the Philippines
PARTIDO STATE UNIVERSITY
Camarines Sur

With all these laws on land and resources, “the indigenous peoples realized soon enough that, with respect
to land at least, there were now the national written law – rooted in and carried over from the country’s colonial
experience – and the customary unwritten tribal law.”42 To their eternal consternation, they realized that while it was
they who defied colonialism and retained their unwritten indigenous law systems, they would end up as disenfranchised
cultural minorities. A conflict-ridden situation arose out of this historical accident. At the heart of the problem is the lack
of congruence between the customary law and the national law on the ownership and use of land. The table in Appendix
B contrasts differences between the two legal systems.

The newest law to protect the rights of the indigenous peoples in the Philippines is the Indigenous Peoples
Rights Act of 1997 (IPRA). It was enacted in November 1997 and is considered a landmark in legislation for indigenous
peoples. The IPRA is the first comprehensive law to recognize the rights of the indigenous peoples of the Philippines.
It recognizes the indigenous peoples’ rights to their ancestral lands and domain, and specifically sets forth the
indigenous concept of ownership. The law recognizes that indigenous peoples’ ancestral domain is community property
that belongs to all generations. IPRA likewise recognizes the customs of indigenous peoples and their right to self-
governance and empowerment. However, there have been many criticisms of IPRA, especially in terms of its conflict
with other existing laws like the Philippine Mining Act of 1995.

Effect of Modernization to the Culture of Indigenous People in the Philippines

IPs STRUGGLES FROM MARCOS TO ARROYO ADMINISTRATION

Ferdinand Marcos

Though dispossessing the IPs of their ancestral domains have been pervasive for more than four
centuries, it gained a new intensity in the 1970s under the martial law rule of President Ferdinand Marcos. He
utilized martial law to advance his economic agenda which was supported by the US to the disadvantage of
the IPs’ remaining resources. However, this proved to be a tactical mistake on the part of Marcos. It catalyzed
the IPs to support the rebel groups.

The Presidential Assistant for National Minorities (PANAMIN)2 brought the full force of martial law in
the tribal communities. Initially, PANAMIN is a handout style charity program of the government to help the
IPs resolve their problems regarding poverty and landlessness. However, upon the declaration of martial law,
it became the political and military arm of the government to guard the indigenous communities against rebel
groups (IPRAP-TABAK 1992, p. 9).

Though most of the ICs were relocated to distant places, some still welcomed the establishment of
PANAMIN, believing that such relocation would mean having a piece of land to till. Unfortunately, such
movement was used to allow big businesses to take over such abandoned tribal lands.

Corazon Aquino Administration

Upon Corazon Aquino’s assumption as the Philippine President, IP organizations and advocates actively
lobbied for the protection of their rights. As a result, provisions purporting to protect IP rights were included in the 1987
Constitution.3 However, these are subsumed subject to conditions of the “national development policies and programs”
rendering the provision inutile and government pronouncements mere rhetoric (IPRAPTABAK 1992, p. 12).

In 1988, after the collapse of the peace talks between the government and the National Democratic Front
(NDF), the military adopted the “gradual constriction” strategy (IPRAP-TABAK 1992, p. 13). This includes the process
of separating the civilians from the insurgents, of food supply lines and removing of suspected supporters – known as
population control.

IP advocacy groups joined the IPs in actively asserting their rights not only over their ancestral domains but
also “to social justice and human rights, self-governance and empowerment and cultural integrity” (PANLIPI 1999, p.
59). With their combined efforts, Republic Act 8371 or the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act was signed into law on
October 29, 1997.

Fidel Ramos Administration

Page 4 of 8
 Republic of the Philippines
PARTIDO STATE UNIVERSITY
Camarines Sur

In his enactment speech, President Fidel Ramos declared: “Through the RA 8371, we accelerate the
emancipation of our Indigenous People from the bondage of inequity. This social injustice bred poverty, ignorance and
deprivation among our indigenous cultural communities and further alienated them from people from the mainstream”
(PANLIPI 1999, p. 59).

Unfortunately, the enactment of the IPRA culminated with the end of Ramos administration. The supposed
implementation of the programs and projects designed to realize the provisions of the Act must endure the biases of
the Estrada administration against the IPs. Such predispositions are apparent in several measures made to prevent
the effective implementation of the law.
Joseph Estrada Administration

The Estrada administration appropriated low budgets to the National Commission on Indigenous People
(NCIP). In 1999 and in 2000, the allocations for NCIP amounted to only 363 million and 360 million, respectively
(Women and Men 2000, pp. 4-6). Moreover, program funds for the agency were withheld. On September 21, 1998,
Executive Secretary Ronaldo Zamora issued Memorandum Order NO. 21 which froze all NCIP project funds except
salaries of rank-and-file employees. Another is Administrative Order No. 108 issued by the Malacañang, which created
the Presidential Task Force on Indigenous People (PTFIP) to assist the NCIP in rendering its functions (Malanes 2000,
p. 8). Lastly, no Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title (CADT) or Certificate of Ancestral Land Title (CALT) has been
issued (Hamada 2001, p. 3).

Gloria Macapagal Arroyo Administration

After the ouster of Joseph Estrada, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo was cast into the presidency with the push of
civil society, the business community, and military concession. Her political debt allowed civil society some form of
leverage with the government in the form of a few key government positions. For issues concerning IPs, Secretary
Ging Deles of the National Anti-Poverty Commission and Ambassador Howard Dee of the Office of the Presidential
Adviser for Indigenous Peoples’ Affairs provided these links to the executives (Hamada 2001, p. 3). However, Arroyo,
as a Senator and Vice-President, was staunch supporter of globalization and the WTO Agreements. As an economist,
she has clearly enunciated that her governance will be guided by the principles of the market. In her inaugural speech,
policy directions for basic and marginalized sectors were not clearly articulated (Hamada 2001, p. 5).

III. ACTIVITY

Answer the following questions.

1. What were the struggles/problems encountered by the Ethnic group in Cordillera and the Lumads?

2. Compare and contrast the different administration (Marcos to Arroyo) on their approach to the
Indigenous Peoples.

Page 5 of 8
 Republic of the Philippines
PARTIDO STATE UNIVERSITY
Camarines Sur

3. How did the government solve the problems of IPs regarding land claims?

Page 6 of 8
 Republic of the Philippines
PARTIDO STATE UNIVERSITY
Camarines Sur

IV. ASSESSMENT

Direction: Find a case/event/article that entails violation of rights of the Indigenous People and give a
summary in essay form. Also, answer the question stated below:

1. In your own opinion, what can you recommend to resolve the issue/struggles?

Page 7 of 8
 Republic of the Philippines
PARTIDO STATE UNIVERSITY
Camarines Sur

V. REFERENCES
Caballero, E. (2022, June). USAID. Retrieved from https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/pnadb804.pdf
Carling, J. (2001, October). The Cordillera Experience. Retrieved from Asia Society: https://asiasociety.org/cordillera-
experience
Minority Rights Group International. (2008). World Directory of Minorities and Indigenous Peoples - Philippines :
Indigenous peoples. Retrieved February 24, 2022, from https://www.refworld.org/docid/49749ccac.html
Molintas, J. M. (2004). THE PHILIPPINE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES’ STRUGGLE FOR LAND AND LIFE:
CHALLENGING LEGAL TEXTS. Arizona Journal of International & Comparative Law, 21(1), 270-305.
Ting, M. G., Bagsic, A., Eguilos, M., Jaen, R., Respicio, M., & Tan, C. (2008). Modernity vs. Culture:Protecting the
Indigenous Peoples of the Philippines. European Journal of Economic and Political Studies, 77-98.
Ty, Rey. (2010, December). Indigenous Peoples in the Philippines: Continuing Struggle. Retrieved from Hurights
Osaka: https://www.hurights.or.jp/archives/focus/section2/2010/12/indigenous-peoples-in-the-philippines-
continuing-struggle.html

Table of Figures

Figure 1. Overview of the Regalian Doctrine (Source: https://www.studocu.com/ph/document/arellano-

university/college-of-law/regalian-doctrine-environment-kaw/10242955) .................................................................... 1
Figure 2. Cordillera People Alliance (Source: https://cpaphils.org/elders%20work%20main.htm) ............................... 1

Page 8 of 8