1 / 14

FPIC: THE PHILIPPINE EXPERIENCE

FPIC: THE PHILIPPINE EXPERIENCE. By: Robie Halip Researcher, NTFP 2 nd Regional UNREDD Information Exchange Meeting: FPIC Shared Learning April 19-20, 2012 Bogor, Indonesia. REDD+ in the Philippines. Philippines is now in the readiness phase

lacey
Download Presentation

FPIC: THE PHILIPPINE EXPERIENCE

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. FPIC: THE PHILIPPINE EXPERIENCE By: Robie Halip Researcher, NTFP 2nd Regional UNREDD Information Exchange Meeting: FPIC Shared Learning April 19-20, 2012 Bogor, Indonesia

  2. REDD+ in the Philippines • Philippines is now in the readiness phase - focused on capacity building, consultation, communication, integration and reform among others - implement National REDD Plus Strategies (NRPS) Readiness Strategies * NRPS has 7 components and is included in the National Climate Change Action Plan of the Climate Change Commission approved last November 22, 2011

  3. REDD+ in the Philippines • Related initiatives from the NRPS components are currently being conducted ie policy studies of GIZ and CODE REDD/ NTFP • Policy Study on Review of FPIC Implementation • How faithful is FPIC process being followed • Is current FPIC process an effective safeguard for indigenous peoples to assert their right to self determination? • Will FPIC process be an effective safeguard of indigenous rights once REDD PLUS is implemented?

  4. Steps in FPIC Process (2006 Guidelines) I. Project Proponent files application with regulatory agency II. Regulatory agency refers application to NCIP III. NCIP endorses application to NCIP Regional Office NCIP Refers to Master List of Ancestral Domains Can result in Certificate of Non-Overlap (CNO) IV. Pre-FBI (Field Based Investigation) Conference V. FBI Proper – commences after payment by project proponent of FBI Fee (to NCIP Trust Fund) VI. Pre-FPIC Conference VII. FPIC Proper – starts upon payment of FPIC Fee Includes provision for inclusion of NGO Results in Consent/MOA or Non-Consent and issuance of CP

  5. Basic FPIC Process (NCIP AO 1 s. 2006) REGULATORY AGENCY / APPLICANT REGIONAL LEVEL PO/CSC LEVEL Endorses request for CP with required documents RD directs the PO/CSC to hold a pre-FBI Conference & FBI and notifies the applicant Conduct of Pre-FBI conference (w/in 10 days from receipt of application) RD assigns officer to determine overlap based on AD Master List PO notifies RD & ADAR of the commencement of FBI Applicant deposits FBI Fee to the PTA Conduct of FBI, prep & submission of report (w/in 9 days, to commence after 5 days of deposit of FBI fee NO YES Overlap? 3 D A Y S Conduct of Pre-FPIC conference (1 day) Receives copy Of the CNO RD issues CNO Conduct of FPIC Conference In case the application covers 2 or more Regions, the concerned agency shall Endorse the same to ADO Director who Will decide which RO shall take the lead. Regular (55 days) Special (20 days)

  6. Rationale of the Policy Study on the FPIC Implementation • There have been reports of complaints ranging from creation of fictitious tribal associations and tribal leaders, collusion with the proponents, to outright corruption. • Some communities have started questioning the wisdom and legitimacy of the existing FPIC process because of these allegations • The NCIP has deemed it urgent for an assessment and evaluation of FPIC processes in view of several issues • The FPIC safeguard has to be strengthened to be able to respond to existing and emerging pressures from development projects in ancestral domains • REDD PLUS initiatives aimed at utilising/managing forest resources  affects and impacts on indigenous rights over such resources

  7. Policy Study on the assessment of the implementation of FPIC • OBJECTIVES • To assess the faithful implementation of the Free and Prior Informed Consent (FPIC) provisions as effective safeguard for IPs to assert their right to self-determination • Develop a policy agenda and recommendations for enhancing FPIC process in the Philippines, particular in the context of REDD-plus implementation

  8. Common experiences in the implementation of FPIC requirement Communities • Consent were given mainly because of the economic benefits • Phasing of the acquisition of consent • No monitoring mechanisms on violations committed during the conduct of the FPIC and implementation of the MOA • Insufficient IEC to the communities on the FPIC process and available grievance mechanisms • Lack of capacity building on negotiation skills (community and NCIP)

  9. Common experiences in the implementation of FPIC requirement • Signing of MOA were done outside the communities leading to mistrust of community members to their leaders/designated signatories • Insufficient IEC on available grievance mechanisms for affected indigenous communities • Phasing of the acquisition of consent • Information provided to the communities were insufficient for them to come up with an informed decision

  10. Common experiences in the implementation of FPIC requirement NCIP • Different interpretations of FPIC teams ie affected area and impact area • MOA content not scrutinized well by RRT (Regional Review Team) • NCIP role as facilitator is contradictory to their mandate to protect the rights of IPS • Limited to the documents provided by the regulating agency/proponent • Limited technical expertise • Budgetary constraints in the NCIP • Insufficient interagency coordination in the implementation of the FPIC requirement

  11. Emerging Policy Options • Time-bound decision making vs. customary decision making system of the community • Role of NCIP in the implementation of the FPIC process – neutral? • Strengthen the role of the RRT especially in ensuring that the FPIC process was implemented accordingly and the MOA reflects the sentiments of the people • Implementation of one FPIC for one process / phase of the project

  12. Emerging Policy Options • Strengthen feedbacking system with the affected communities and local NCIP offices • Invite independent technical experts especially during FPIC process • Ensure the full participation of indigenous peoples • Encourage IPs to adhere to their cultural system of consent • Fixed FBI and FPIC fees – the higher the impact, the higher the fee (eg. Small scale vs large scale – should be centralized at the NCIP Central Office) • Each AD / community should have own MOA and CP • One CP for one application and process of the project

  13. Joint Initiatives to Assess/Review the 2006 FPIC Guidelines • Filing of House Resolution 887 in the Lower House of the 15th Congress calling for the review of the 2006 FPIC Guidelines that led to the formation of a technical working group on the review of the 2006 FPIC guidelines composed of NCC Committee members, representatives from NCIP and members of various civil society organizations • Creation of a Technical Working Group on the Review of FPIC of NCIP

  14. THANK YOU… HAGGIYO!

More Related