Three Supreme Court rulings have curtailed the authority of the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples-Cordillera Administrative Region (NCIP-CAR) in issuing Certificates of Ancestral Land Titles (CALTs) and Certificates of Ancestral Domain Titles (CADTs) within the Baguio Townsite Reservation. As a result, the NCIP can only issue CALTs and CADTs for areas outside the reservation.
This was revealed by NCIP-CAR Regional Director Roland Calde during the Baguio City Council’s regular session on September 23, 2024.
Calde said these three critical Supreme Court rulings (Abanag Case, Pineda Case, and Lauro Carantes Case) establish Baguio City as excluded from the application of the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA) or Republic Act No. 8371.
He explained that these court decisions dictate that the NCIP cannot issue CALTs and CADTs for properties within Baguio Townsite Reservation unless reclassified by Congress.
Currently, the NCIP is coordinating with the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) and the city government regarding the specifics of the Baguio Townsite Reservation. Calde said, according to their initial understanding, Baguio City is primarily a townsite reservation with only a few areas designated as reservations.
In light of these Supreme Court rulings, the NCIP En Banc has issued a resolution suspending the processing of CALTs and CADTs in the city. Calde said that areas recognized through judicial or administrative proceedings are excluded from this suspension.
Calde added that they will continue to process claims for areas outside the Baguio Townsite Reservation and those covered by proclamations and reservations.
Currently, there are 757 pending CALT applications. The NCIP has yet to determine which of these applications are outside the Baguio Townsite Reservation.
Calde explained that the NCIP had previously recognized the Certificates of Ancestral Domain Claims (CADCs) issued by the DENR, but the SC ruling on the Pineda Case nullified these issuances, stating that a CADC is not a prior land right. This has invalidated many land claims in the city that rely on CALCs.
Councilor Jose Molintas emphasized the need to clarify this legal distinction, especially since many CALCs were issued by the DENR prior to the enactment of IPRA, and these CALCs have since been transferred from the DENR to the NCIP.
Councilor Arthur Allad-iw asserted that the nullification of these ancestral land claims is a historical injustice.
With regard to legal options available to indigenous communities regarding their land claims, Calde said they can seek judicial recognition of their properties. This means they can go to court to formally assert their claims to land and seek legal validation of their rights instead of relying on administrative processes.
“As long as they possess the property, unless mandated by a court to vacate or remove themselves, they must secure and strengthen their positions and occupation of those areas,” Calde stated.
Many CALTs in the city have already been canceled, and there are pending cases in the Regional Trial Court for further cancellations. Calde said the NCIP must carefully navigate the process of pending applications to avoid further disappointment for IPs.
“It would be unnecessary to place an additional burden and false hope on our IP members by processing their applications, only to have them canceled again,” he said.
Councilor Peter Fianza stressed that the Mateo Carino Doctrine, a legal principle which originated in Baguio City and states that long-term occupation of land can serve as a basis for land claims, could still be a viable legal basis for IPs to assert their land rights, albeit outside the framework of IPRA.
Calde also mentioned that IPs may explore other legal modes for claiming land such as under the Public Land Act or Commonwealth Act 141, particularly for areas outside the townsite reservation.
Meanwhile, Vice Mayor Faustino Olowan appealed to the NCIP not to surrender jurisdiction over IP issues in the city as doing so would leave the IP community with limited recourse.
Councilor Leandro Yangot argued said the NCIP should remain a steadfast supporter of IP rights. He argued that the NCIP En Banc resolution suspending the issuance of CALTs and CADTs in the city gives the wrong impression to the public as it seems to indicate a retreat from the NCIP’s responsibilities.
‘𝘚𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 78 𝘪𝘴 𝘷𝘢𝘨𝘶𝘦; 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘙𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘊𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘊𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘪𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘤’
Section 78 is a special provision of IPRA that ensures that any land rights and titles that were legally recognized before this law took effect will still be valid.
However, Molintas pointed out that this provision is a point of confusion as it lacks clarity on ‘prior land rights.’ He expressed concern about possible repercussions if these CALCs are not recognized. He said this provision of IPRA lacks a clear explanation of the rights it aims to protect.
Molintas suggested that the issues arising from Section 78, which he claimed have been further complicated by the Revised Baguio City Charter, need to be addressed through additional legislative measures.
Baguio IPMR Maximo Edwin Jr. further hit the Revised City Charter, asserting that it does not properly recognize the historical and cultural significance of IP land ownership in the area.
Since the NCIP’s authority in Baguio City has been limited by the Supreme Court rulings, Calde agreed with the call from some city officials to amend certain provisions of the Revised Baguio City Charter and Section 78 of IPRA in order to clarify the legal status of ancestral land claims and enhance the protection of these rights
The city council decided to further discuss these issues in October and extended the invitation to the DENR. The dialogue aims to clarify any misunderstandings about land definitions, particularly regarding the Baguio Townsite Reservation. -Jordan G. Habbiling
