IP rights to be protected in gov’t projects, Ombudsman says after Palawan case ruling
MANILA — Indigenous Peoples’ (IPs) rights will be protected as the government implements its projects in their communities, the Office of the Ombudsman has pledged.
In a statement on Wednesday, the Ombudsman said IP rights will be guarded over “illegal, unjust, improper, or inefficient acts” in government project implementation.
The Ombudsman’s remark came following a decision on the rehabilitation and dredging of the Malinao River in Barangay Simpokan, Puerto Princesa City in Palawan.
The case started from a complaint lodged by the Sambayaang Tagbanua kat Barangay Simpokan Inc. (STBSI) leaders against Puerto Princesa City Environment and Natural Resources Office head Carlo Benitez Gomez, the then barangay captain, seven barangay councilors, and the Sangguniang Kabataan chairman.
The STBSI leaders argued that they were part owners of an ancestral domain that belongs to the Tagbanua IPs/Indigenous Cultural Communities (ICC) in Puerto Princesa City.
The complainants said that in 2022, Barangay Simpokan officials passed a resolution for the rehabilitation of the Malinao River with “lack of proper consultation and permission from their indigenous leaders,” adding that there was a “blatant desecration of their culture and traditions” for permitting the gravel deposit extraction from the river.
The decision stated that as the City Mining Regulatory Board (CMRB) technical secretariat, Gomez released the clearance for the rehabilitation to supposedly respond to the effects of Typhoon Odette.
Among the conditions of the clearance was that the rehabilitation contractor would “receive 6,000 cubic meters of surplus gravel deposits taken from the Malinao River in exchange for the operational costs it would incur.”
Opposing the project, the STBSI noted that it is in violation of Republic Act 8371 or the IP Rights Act (IPRA).
According to the Ombudsman’s decision, Gomez was administratively liable for conduct unbecoming of a public officer.
“Gomez’s act of issuing clearance to proceed without the required certification precondition from the NCIP (National Commission on Indigenous Peoples) and without waiting for the CMRB’s approval is a deliberate transgression of rules or procedures as provided under the IPRA,” the decision read.
“Gomez failed to observe professionalism and justness and sincerity so as to discourage wrong perception of his role as a dispenser or peddler of undue patronage,” it added.
The other respondents were cleared as they only participated in the issuance of the resolution.
The penalty for Gomez is a one-year suspension without pay. Should the suspension cannot be enforced because of separation from service, the penalty will be converted into a fine in the amount equivalent to six months of Gomez’s salary.
Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla cautioned government officials to respect laws that seek the safeguarding of IP rights.