Chr_ Resolution-oceanagold Hrvs

8/7/2019 Chr_ Resolution-oceanagold Hrvs

1/19

, u'Y'/Repu liha ng i'i li1.'nt sKoatr!*yr3(, i'?g fi.arorprxtai.ftS tra*lta@ rirg Filipiraas(Cantmissioit n Hutran Righx aftha Phihpf inas)

IN RE: DISPII\CEMENTCOMPII\INT OF R-ESIDEI|ITSOFDIDIPIO, KASIBU, NI,'EVAVIZCAYA- [CHR-H-zoo8-ooSs(sPL. REPORT)x----------:----_________-_xRESOLUTIONCHR(IV) No.Aaofl-oo4

The ultimate goal of economicdevelopment s to raise the quality oflife of cll people.To this end, he Statepromotes he firll and efficientuseofits humanandnatural resources y encouragingprivateentities to invest nkey industries and business enterprises. However, when private entitiesviolate the fundamental rights and entitlements of the people n tle nameof economicdevelopment,hey not only lose leir moral legitimacy* theyalso defeat he verypurpose or which they weregivenauthority to conductbusiness. The present case s a classic aad lamentable example of howeconomicaggresslon enigrates he most basicof humaa rights.

This case s about the alarming human rights situation in BarangayDidipio, IGsibu, Nueva Vizcaya.At the center of the controversy are the6iping operations of OceanaGold Philippines, Inc. (OGPI), a foreign-owned corporation, with which the national governmentof the Philippineshas entered nto a FinancialandTechnicalAssistanceAgleement (FTAA).Several esidentsof Didipio object o the large-scalemining in their area onaccountofperceivedadverseeconomicand environmental mpact that suchactivity would causeto their community. Majority of the residents inDidipio are indigenous peoplesalthough they are originally from otherplaces and tlus cannot directly clairn ancestral domain over Didipio.Reports and complaints reached the Commission on Human Rights(Commission or brevity) aflegingwidespreadand systernaticviolationsofhuman rights committed by OGPI and the security sector againstresidentsopposed to large-scalemining. The tense situatjon in tle area has notabatedandseemso be only gettingworse.In furtherance of its commitment to protect and promote humanrights, andpursuart to its mandate o investigateviolations thereofas well

I*!rapatang Pr!otao: ikas SaAtln, ?ungkulinNatin

r'\,rt

' . : . ]

Cantur lt"althArenue l.P Ca jplex,Dilnnau ll0l


2/19

as mouitor compliancelerewith, the Commissionookcognizance f thiscase, After a thorough review of all the information and documentsgathered,he Commissioninds that, ndeed,human ightsviolationswerecommittedagainst he ndigenouseoplesnhabitingDidipio., TITE REI'VANTFACTS

On 24June 1994,PresidentFidelV. Ramosentered nto a FTAAwithArimco Mining Corporation(AMC) for the exploration, developmentandutilization of minerals ocated n about g7,ooohectaresof land situated nthe provinces of Nueva \rizcaya and Quirino. Included in this area isBarangayDidipio in Kasibu,NuevaVizcaya.On 03 March 1995,PresidentRamossigned nto law RepublicAct No.7942 otherwiseknown as the Philippine Mining Act of 1995.Some of theprovisionsof said aw whichare most relevant o this casearethe following:

Sec.75 EasementRights. When mining areasare so situatedthatfor purposesof more convenientminiug operations t is necessatyto buil4 constructor install on the mining areasor lands owned,occupiedor leasedby other persons,such nftastmcture as roads,railroads, mills, waste dump sites, tailings ponds, warehouses,staging or storage areas and port facilities, tramways, mnwats,airports, electric transmission, eiephoneor ielegraph ines, oalrsand &eir normal flood and catchmentareas,sites for water wells,ditches, canals, uew river beds, pipelines, flumes, cuts, shaffs,tunhels, or mills, the contractor, upon pa]'ment of lrstcompensation,shall be entitled to enter and occupysaid miningareasor lands.Sec.76 Eritry into Private Iands and Concession reas.Subiect oprior notification, holders of mining rights shall not be prwentedfrom entry into private lands and concessionareas by surfaceowDers,occupants, or concessionaireswben conducting miningoperations therein: Provided That any damage done to th6properly of the surfaceowrcr, occupan! or concessionairc s aconsequence f such operationsshall be properly compensated smay be provided for in the implementing rules and regulations:Provided f,uther, That to guamnteesuchcompensation,he penouauthorized o conduct mining operationshall, pdor thereto,post abond with the regionaldirector basedon the type of properties, heprer,ailing prices in and around the area-wbeG tie mininsoperationsare to be conducte4with suety or suretiessatisfactoryto the rgionaldirector.

On $ August1995, he Departmentof Environmentand NaturalResourcesDENR) ssuedhe ImplementingRulesand RegulationsIRR)of R..dNo.7942 hroughDepartment dministrativeOrder(DAO)No. zg,seriesof r99S. This wassupersededy DAO No. 96-4o,seriesof 1996.Pertinento this case re le followingprovisions f said RR:

Section106.VoluntaryAgrement

{ ,

,F-^ \ ,L'5AJ.jt&T(I\q

f,


3/19

A voluntary agrcementbetween a surface owner, occupant orconcessionairehereofpermitting holdeN of mining dghts to enterinto and use ts land for mining purposesshall be registeredwith' the concernedRegionalOffrce.Thesaid agreement hall bebindingupon tfreparties, heir heirs,successors-in-interestlld assigDs.Section1o7.Compensation fthe SurfaceOwnerand OccupantAny damagedone o the propertyofthe surfaceownr, occupantorconcessionarrehereoi as a consequence t the mrmng operauonsor as result of t]le construction or installation of the inftastructurementioned in Section 1o4 above shal be property ald justlycompensated. uch compensation hall be basedon the agreemententered nto between he holder of mining rights and the surfaceowner,occupantor concessionairehereof or, whereappropriate, naccordanee ith P.D.sp. In caseof disagreement r in the absenceof an agrement ttre matter shall be brought before the Panel ofArbitxatom or properdisposition.

In late 1995,AMC consolidatedwith Climax Mining.Limited to form asinge company named Climax-Arimeo Mining Corporation (CAMC). InDecember1996,CAMC ransferredall its rights to theFTAA o AustralasianPhilippine Mining, Incorporateal APMI), which transfer wasapprovetl bythe DENR nineyearsafter in December2oo4.On rr Octoberzoo5, t}te DENR ssuedan Order approving le PartialDeclaration of Mining Project Feasibility for tle Didipio Gold/CopperProject. Saidproject is coveredby the FTAA heldby APML In Decemberofthe same year, APMI launched a "Surface Rights Acquisition" (SRA)

Program o enter the lands within the Projectarea.On 3o March 2006, the SupremeCourt issueda decisionon the caseof Didipio Earth Savers'Multi-PurposeAssociation(DESAMA),et cl vs.Go rn et cl. upholding the constitutionality of the "taking" provisions ofRd No. 7942and its corresponding ules and regulations.Thedispositiveportion of the decision eads:

"WHEREFORX, the instant petition for prohibition andrncndcmus s hereby DISMISSED.Section76 of RepublicAct No.7942and Section oi of DAO96-40; nepubiic ect N6. 7942and tsImplementing Rulesand Regulationscontained n DAO 96-40 -insofar as they relate to financial and technical assisranceagreements etbrred o in paragraph4 of S&tion z ofArticie xrt otthe Constitution are NOTUNCONSTTTUTIONAL.

SOORDERED."

O 1June2oo7APMIchangedts nameo OGPI;In June 2oo8, reports and complaintswere filed with the CHRalleging that OGPI had illegally ard violently demolishedsomer87 houses

i-r\.t"Il),'L ' ;j;iiilit"{t


4/19

ordersof demolition rom thecourt,unaccompaniedy tle Sheriff,withoutpaymentof just compensation, nd witlout providingalternativeoptionsfor relocationand resettlement. heseclemolitionswere reported o havebeen attendedby unnecessary iolenceand destruction: esidentswhoresistedand triecl to save treir homeshad beenbeaten, ncludingtheirneighbourswhohelped hem; houses adbeenbulldozedoff eliffs and seton fire. It wasfurther alleged hat OGPI encedoff largesectionsof theroadsandpathwayswhichcommunity esidentshave eliedupon for thepast30 years o transportpmducerom their farms o the market, t wasalso reported that OGPI has set up checkpoints round the Barangay,causing lem difficulty n movingabou! resulting n the unjust restrictionof t}reir socialand economicactivities.Moreover,t wasalleged hat thePNP-Regional obileGroupservesasa "privatesecurity orce"of OGPI,with their officersbeingstationednside he facilitiesof tle latter.While the CHRwassilently nvestigating ndmonitoring he matter,reportsabout allegedharassmentsnd ncidentsof violenceagainst hose

who stronglyoppose he miningoperations eptpersisting,The situationreacheda criticalpoint on 02 Octoberzoog when,during an attempt odemolishseveralhouses,more than one hundred membersof the PNPallegedlyused tiuncheons,shieldsand tear gasto disperseprotestingresidentsromdemolishinghe houses f their neighbors.Reports aid, heMayorof Kasibuand heBarangay hairpersonf Didipiowere ncludednthose who were violently dispersed.This incident prompted theCommissiono give priority to the settlementof human rights issues nDidipio.On o5 November 2oo9, tle Commission,ed by no less thanChairperson eila M. de Lima, ogetherwith CommissioneroseManuelS.Mamauag,AttorneysRobertAlcantaraand GemmaParojinog,and otherofficers from CHR Region z Offrce,conductedan ocular inspectionofDidipio o seeor themselveshe coudition n thearea.Accompaniedy theMayor of Kasibu,Nueva Vizcaya,and other local offtcials of BarangayDidipio, the Commissionook a three-hourdrive from Solano.NuelaVizcayao the mpactarea.Uponarrival o Didipio, heCommission asatfirst refusedentryby securityofficerswho looked ike soldiers.After thesecurityofficers inallygotago-signalromttreir radio, he securityofhcers

allowed he team o pass.Members f the teamheard he securityofficerssay, mgatoga-munisipryoangyan " When he team dentified hemselvesas officersof the Commissionon Human Rights,the securityofEcersbecamemoreaccommodatingowardsheteamandwen escortedhem othe affectedareas.Theteam then wentto inspect ]le entire mpactarea,includingthe proposed ite of dams or miningpurposeseared o causeshortage f cleanandsafewater or domestic nd rrigationpurposes.Thenext day, he teamconvened PubicDialoguewith the objectiveof understanding he controversy rom all perspectives.Said publicDialoguewasattendedby officersof OGPI, PNPofficials, LGUofficials.representativesf heNationalCommissionn ndigenouseoplesNCIp),

i:'i:L i-'$$"*

'r9r


5/19

and NGO and community eadersand members.During the Dialogue,OGPIwasgivenall opportunity o addressaneryallegationcast at them.Likewise,the police was allowed to explain its participation in thecontroversy, including the October oz dispersal. The Commissionrequestedrom tle participantsall pertinentdocuments ndremrcls hatwould havea bearing n the determinationof the human rights issues nDidipio. Thestakeholders omplied everal aysafter he PublicDialogue,submittingvoluminousecordsanddocumentso support heir positions.Muchof the documents ame romOGPIand he NGOs.IIIE HUMAN IIIGITTS ssUEs

Various ssueshave muddled he controversy n Didipio. In fac!numerous riminal, civil and administrative ases avebeen iled left andright, all of whichhave or their root the miningoperationsn the area. naccordancewith international norms, standards and principles, theCommissionas esolvedo addresshe followinghuman ights ssues:I. WIIETHER R NoT OGPI VIoIAIEDTHERIG}ITToADEQUATEousINGANDPRopERTy IGltrs oFSEVERALESIDENTSN DIDrpro;il. WHETHERoR NoT OGPI 1'IoI,ATED TTE RIGHT To FREEDoMoFMoVEMEM AND THERIG}TTNoT To BEst'B.IEcTED o ARBITRARYINIERFERENCEWITH THI HOME OF THE PEOPLEN DIDIPIO:

III. WHETHERRNoTOGPI I'IoL{IED THE uGIIT ToSECURTTYFPERsoNOFTIIE PEOPLEN DIDIPIO;ry. WHETIIER OR NOT OGPI VIOLATEDTHE INDIGENOUSCOMMUNfft'SRIGHTTo MANIFF,STIEIR CULTURE ND DENTTaTV. WHETHER oR Nor OGPI vrorarED Tr{E fuGHT To WATER oF firEreoeLnw Dutto; andVI, WHETHER oR NoT THE PNP 1'IoIATED ITs owN oPERAfioNALPRocEDuFss DURING HEOcroBER 2 INCTDENT.

Thesessues hallbe addressedn sen'otr'm.TI{E FIIYDtrYGS

I. OGPI \IoLATED fllr RIGII] TO RESIDEIYCE, TIIE RIGHT ToADT4UAIE IIOUSING AND PROPERTY RIGITAS OF SFYERALRESIDENIS TNDIDIPIO.TheRight o Residence, ight o MequateHousingandprotectionofPropertyRights are well recognizedn botl internationaland domestic

;'i,{{qc${


6/19

laws. Article $ (1)of the Universal Declarationof Human Rights (UDHR)states hat "everyonehas the right to fteedom of movementand residencewithin the borders ofeach State."This declarationofthe Right to ResidenceandFreedomof Movement s reiterated n Article rz (r) of the InternationalCovenanton Civil and Political Rights(ICCPR)which provides:"Everyonelawfully within the territory of a State shall, within that territory, have theright to liberty of movementandfreeclomo choosehis residence."While many international documentsl recognize the Right toAdequate Housing, Article rr (r) of the International Covenant onEconomic,Social and Cultural Rights (ESCR)s considered o be the mostrelevant anil most comprehensive rovision.rSaidprovisionreatlsl

'The States Parties to present Covenant recognize he right ofeveryone o an adequatestanilard of living for himself and hisfamily, including adequate ood, clothing ard housin& ard to thecontinuous imprcvement of living conditions.The States Partieswill take appropriatesteps o ensure he international co-operationbasedon freeconsent emphasisadileil.) "The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR)issued General Comment No. 4 on Mequate Housing and GeneralCommentNo.7on ForcedEvictions,elaboratingon tbe normativecontentsof the Right to Adequate Housrng.According to the CESCR,he Right toAdequate Housing should not be interpreted nilrrowly to mean having aroof on one'shead, Rather, t should be seenas the right to live somewherein security,peaceand dignity, in conformity with the inherent dignity of.thehuman person.3It can be gleaned from the aforementioned General

Comments hat the Right to Adequate Housingcontains several reedomsand entitlements. These freedoms include: protection against forcedevictions and the arbitrary destructionand demolition of one's home; t]teright to be free from arbitrary interference with one's home,privacy andfamily. On the other hand, tle entitlements include: security of tenure;housing, land antl property restitution, equal and nondiscriminatoryaccess o adequatehousing; and participation in housing-relateddecision-makingat the nationaland community evels.aThe right to property, on ttre other ha:rd, is well entrenched n our

Constitution. Article III, Section r of the 1987Constitutionunequivocallystates that " n]o personshall be deprived of his life, litr:rerty r propertgwithout due processof law xxx" (emphasiscdded). Likewise,tht CivilI A-sndicatedn CESCRenemlConmntNo. 4, See rticle25(l) ofrhe UnivenalDeclaralionn HurnsnRiehts.anicle5 (e) (iii) ofthe lntemalional onventionn heElimination fAll Fontrs fRacialDiscrimilarionarticie14(2) of the Codventiod n the Elimination f All Formsof DiscriminajiongainstWome&artiole22 (3) of thConvenliotrn drc Rights flhe Chil4 aticle l0 ofthe Deolahtion n Sooial rcgressandDevelopmen!ctionII(8) offte Vadcouver eclamtion tr HumanSettlehe!, 1976ReLortofHabit* Unit6dNationsConferncenHumanSettlementsJnitedNdtions ublication, ales o. E.76.IV.? ndconigendurn),hap.D,article8 (t) oftheDeclaration n theRight o Dvlopmentnd he LO RecommendatiotrolcemhgWo*ers,Housing, 96l CNo._l5).l CESCRGeneral offmentNo.4,Pdragraph.' CESCR eDeral onmeotNo.4.Paragraph' Seegenenly CESCR enaal Comment o. 4 andceneralCotnment o. 7; OHCH& TheRight o AdequateHousing, actSht o.2l&ev.l (2009).

|,,ttd"{ . ' i - :, . j

I*rt !;l.-


7/19

Codeof the Philippinesaad Rulesof Courtprovide or other importantlegal rameworkhatguaranteesndprotectsheRight o Property.OGPIviolated hese ightspertainingo several f Didipio's esitlentswhen t forcefirllywicted them n contravention f existing aws, ulesandregulations.Evidence btained y theCommissionndicate hat OGPIhascausedthe demolitionof at eastonehundrerlandeighty-sevenr87)houses f theindigenous esidentsn Didipio. Said demolitionsweredone uithout acourt order and ruifhoutprovision or adequateelocation,asrequiredbylaw. This wasreadilyand categoricallydmittedby Mr. RamoncitoGozar,OGPI'sVicePresidentor CommunicationsndExternalAffairs.In defense,OGPIclaimslat its conducts lawful. t interposests (1)right of immediateentry aad (z) right to exercisehe powerof eminentdomaingrantedunto t as anFTAAholder,underSection75on EasementRightsand Section76on Entry nto PrivateLandsAreasof the PhilippineMining Actof 1995,n relation o Section o4,Section o5,Section o7andSection o8 of its IRR. This right, OGPIclaims,wasrecognized y theSupremeCourt n DESAMAus.Gozun.Precisely, n DESAMAef ol vs. Gonrnet al, the SupremeCourtclassifiedSection 5andSection 6of the PhilippineMiningActas"taking"provisions,ustifiedbyState's owerof eminentdomain.Whilesuchpowermay be invokedandeffectivelyexercisedy privateparties(i.e,holder ofmining contracts uchas OGPI), n cooperation ith the State,heremedy

is sfill to file expropriationproceedings nd secure he necessaryourtorder.OGPImaynot demolish nd"take" le residents' roperties,withoutfirst complyingwitl therequirements f law anddueprocess,t cannotbegainsaidhat underour aws,demolitionsmustbe donepursuanto a courtorder. Therebeing none, OGPI'sconduct s patentlyunlawfirl and inviolationof the residents' ight toproperlyanddueprocess.A closer examinationof the DESAMADecisionwill reveal thatindeed,expropriation roceedingsre heproper emedyn case residentrefuses o enter nto a voluntaryagreement ith a miningcontractor.The

SunremeCourtsaid:

' i';j"

{t;,:L ' "ij..1.1?},"-d)

"An examinationof ttre foregoing provisions gives no indicationthat ttre courts are excluded from taking cognizance ofexpropdation cases under the mining law. The


8/19

Thispronouncementf t]le SupremeCourt meanslat Section o7 of theIRR, in relation to SectionT6of the PhilippineMiningAct of 1995,onlyapplieswhen he surfaceownershavealreadyentered nto an agreementwith tle permitholder, le only controversyeing le amounto bepaidasjust compensation.t doesnot apply n caseswherehe surface wnersdonot agree o allowpermit holdersentry to their lands. n suchcases,heproper remedy would be for the permit holder, by itself or with theassistance f the State, o institute an expropriationproceedingn theappropriatecourt, asprovidedunder Rule67 of the Rulesof Court andrelevanturisprudence.Further, the Commissionakesparticularnote of OGPI'sapparentscheme f "demolishnow, negotiateater." Thisscbemes problematig osay }re east,as t pushesesidents p againstle wall. Thosewhose ousesweredemolishedwithouttheir consent someevenagainstheir expresswill - are now forced o take the pettysum OGPIoffers n exchangeor

their homes and their lives in Didipio. The residentswere reduced oacceptingOGPI'soffer and succumbingo the atter'sunlarfrrl ploy.Worse,a numberof residentswerenevercompensatedt all.While t maybe truethat aboutseventy-frveZS%) f the resitlentsnDidipio havealreadyenterednto a voluntaryagreement ith OGPI, hereis still a considerable umberof residentslat hasnot entered nto suchagreements. GPIposits hat muchof thesepeoplearenot reallyownersofthe and theyoccupy.Assumingwithoutconceding,hat thesepeoplewerein fact illegal settlers, his doesnot give icense o anyone,much ess a

foreign-owned orporation,o mistreatottrers, n violationof &e dignitytlat inheres n everyhuman.Even n those nstanceswhereevictionand demolitionare ustified,internationalhuman ight norms equire hat theybe"carriedout in strictcompliancewith the relevantprovisionsof internationalhuman ights awand in accordancewith general principles of reasonableness ndproportionality."e"Evictions should not result in individuals beingrendered omelessr vulnerableo the violationofother human ights."z-As tlis Commission as advisedpreviously demolitionsmust beconducted n a just and humanemanner.Certainly, n some nstances,dgmol$ons may.be,legallyustified. However,n no instance,egallyoiotherwise, an the deprivationof one'sshelterbe done n a manier thatrobsaperson f hisdigniry.a

- FIAAsgrart unto its holder he State's lessing o undertakeminingand other exfiactivevenhues,and all its necessaryncidents.within its' CESCR e4eral ormeff No.7, Paragraph4.I -ad,Paxagraph6'Commissiono[ Human ughts,Advisoryon theCodduct f ForcedEvictioN andHouseDemolitions06May2008).

{r/ Uiifi'. 'lv:ijw$\3


9/19

patrimony. t is not carfe blanche or the wholesale enigrationof humanrights ofpeoplewho stand o beaffected y saidundertakings.II.OGPI vror-arED TrrE RrGHT To FhEEDoM oF MoVEMENT AND firERIGHT Nory To BE SUBJECTED o AnBITRARY NTERFERDNCETuTIIIE HOME OFTHB PEOPLEN DIDIPIO.

Closely related to the abovementiouedights are the Right toFreedomof Movementand the Fjght Not to be Subjectedo ArbitraryInterferencewith One'sHome.TheUDHRexpressly eclareshese ights n tle followingmanner:

Article 12No one shallbe subjected o arbitmry interferencewith his privacy,family, home or correspondence, or to attacksupon his honor andreputation. Everyone has the right to ttre protection of the lawagainstsuch nterferenceor attacks.Afiicle 13(r) Bveryonehas tfie right to fteedomof movementand resi


10/19

internal displacement. t also preeludespreventing tle enUy or stay ofpersonsn a definedpart of the territory."On the otJrerhand, the HRC elaborated on the Nght Not to besubjected to fubitrary Interference with One's Home through GeneralComment No. 16. According to the HRC, this right is required to beguaranteedagainst all unlawful and arbitrary interferenceswhether theyemanate from State authorities or from natural or legal persons.oFurthermore, le HRCstated lat tle prohibition on arbitrary interferenceis intended to guarantee lat even nterferenceprovided for by law shouldbe in accordancewitl the provisions,aims and objectivesof the Covenantand should be, n any event,reasonablen the particular circumstances,uThe bundle of property rights guaranteedby domestic aw alsofindsrelevanceon this instance.Article 428 of tle NewCivil Cod states lat "tleowner has the right to enjoy and dispose of a thing, without otherlimitations than those established by law." The right of ownershipnecessarilyncludes,among others, 7'us tendi (ight to usethe property),jus ft-uendi (right to enjoy the property) and. us disponmdi (right todisposeof the property in whicheverwaythe ownersees it). Homeownershavedominion overtleir houseswhich they have a right to enjoyand to doas heyplease,even o spoil or destroy t as ar as he law permits.r4OGPI violated these rights of the people in Didipio when theyintroduced perimeter fences around the Project Area and set upcheckpointsat their chosenentry and exit points. Theseperimeter fenceiblocked off the roads which havebeen customarilyusedby the residentsas

pathways or their easy ngressandegress o the community.Furthermorgth9 chgckpoilts causearbitrary interference o the firll use and enjoymentof tle housesby tle residents.In defense,OGPI claims to have introduced tle perimeter fencesmerely to p_rotect ts Project fuea flep rrntnryful elements and illegalsettlers. It further asserts that it has been autlorized by the BarangayCouncil of Didipio aswell as by tle DENRto estabtsh the checkpoints oguardagainstcontrabands.

- Ihe authorizationgivento OGPIby the BarangayCouncilof Didipioonly relates o the liquor ban. Onthe otherhand,the authority coming rimthe DENR is only in respectof arresting illegal loggingand illegal mining.Certalnly, OGPI cannot use tlese authorizitions tol*tify G arbitra;,interference o the enjoymentof the rights of the residentsofnidipio. OCfishould havedeviseda mechanism hat avoidsunnecessaryncoivenienceto the residenceat the same ime that it serves he purpoie of prohibitingillegalactivities." 1d, Paragraph.': HRCCeoeral omment o. 16,Paragraph." Id., Par?'graph.'' Flenming s.Sherwoo4 39N.W. 101, otrsoD s.Crookshankr,29ac.ZB.

-.;.i\irl ,I \!,, J;Ia.9.1..\IJtlxx

L/t ^-/r ol v


11/19

The Commission also observes that the Derimeter fences wereintroduced in consciousdisregard of the rights of the residentsof Didipio.No genuine consultation of the residents was ever had as to theconstruction of said fences,much lessas to its location.At the very least,OGPI should have observed the basic principles of participatiou audtransparency f it really intended to respect he rights of the residents nDidipio.III. OGPI vrollrrED TrrE Rrcr{r To SEcnRrry oF PERsoNoF firEPEOPLE IN DIDIPIO.The securitycheckpoints ituatedalong Didipio's main road andaround he perimeterof the ProjectAreaare m.anneil y OGPI'sprivatesecuritypersonnelopenlycarryingarms, hereby hreateningmembers f&e community.Membersof the Philippine National Police-Regional obileGroup(PNP-RMG) f Nuera Vizcala andQuirinowerealso detailed n Didipio.Local residentsof Didipio, however, eport that insteadof frrlfilling itsmandate o maintainpeaceanclorder n the community, aid members fthe PNP-RMGact as if they were the private security for OGPI, inabrogation f their swornduty o servehepiople in trust. -Likeruise,he unlawfrrldemolitionsat ttre nstance f OGPIwerealsomireclwith violence.Forexample, uring he demolitionconducted n zzMarch 2oo8, ocal residentEmilioPumihicwasshotwhenhetried to stoDthe demolitioncrew from dismantling he houseof his neighborManueiBidaug.Bidangwasthen takinga nap insidesaid house.Accountsromneighborswho witnessedhe shootingncidentstate hat Emilio pumihicwas estainedby two(z) of OGPI's ecuritypersonnel, hilea third - lateridentified as Whitney Dongiahon shot Pumihicat close range whilePumihicwas rying to free himself.Thebulletpiercedhis upperright armandexited hrough le upperright part of hisback. he shootingncidentoccurred n plain view of membersof the PhilippineNational police.Despite his, said WhibreyDongiahonwasnot apprehended.hese actswereattestedo by Mr. Pumihichimself,and several therswhowitnessedthe ncident.Other membersof tle communitywho stronglyopposearge-scalemining operationsare constantly threatenedby violent demolition.Me-anwhile,eadersof the oppositionistswere criminally chargedwithviolations f theForesbyCode.Thisstateof affairs n Didipioconstitutes continuinghreat to thesecurityof personsof the peoplen Didipio. It e4roseslem to constant

uncertainty to an incessantearthat something ntowardmight happento them, their.familyor their properties.Rightlyso,the localgovernmem

i '' ir;"1f i . '| 'i.,-

i;i:15t."{3

l l


12/19

units in t}te areaeqnessed raveconcernshat tle situationwould ead obreakdown fpeace ndorder n theprovince.OGPI s largely responsibleor the continuing hreats o securityofpersons,giventhat it controlsand supewises he actionsof its securityforces,and hat tle unlawfuldemolitionswereconductedt tsbehest.

IV. OGPI VIoI"ATED THE INDIGENoUS CoMMUNnY's RIGHT mMANIFESTTITERCI',I'UREAND IDENTUY.SinceDecember oo7,OGPIhascausedhe demolitionof at eastonehundred and eighty-sevenr87) housesn Didipio. Over and above heilegality of subh conduct, this demolition resulted in the forceddisplacement f at least one hundredeighty-sevenr87) families whoconsider hesehouses heir home.Majorityof whomwere orced o leaveDidipio for good,and abandon heir indigenouS ommunity,customs,

traditionsandwayof ife.Certainly, he impact of OGPI's demolitions s irreducibleto thephysicaldismantlingof ttreresidents' ouses.Demolitionand heattendantdisplacementf indigenous eoples ffectively enysaidpeopleshe rightto enjoy and manifest their Ifugao culture in community with othermembersof their incligenousgroup, It means the dislocation anddisplacementfwomen,menand children. t meanshe destruction f lifeanda uay o/ft/e intimatelyconnected ith the landthey nurhued,wi& aview o leavinga egacyor theirchildrenand heii kin that will comeafter.Thus, he Commissionindsthat OGPI'sdemolitioncontravenesherights of indigenous eoples nderArticlez7of theCovenant n Civil andPoliticalRiglts, whichguaranteesndigenous eopleshe right to manifestand enjoy their cnlture, both individually and i commuiitg with othermembers f theirgroup.Article r of tle UnitedNationsDeclaration n theRightsof IndigenousPeoples"UNDRIP') further guaranteesndigenouspeoplesheright to ttre irll enjdyment f all human ightsand undamentalfreedoms, s ndividualsand cs o coLlectiue.hecorollaryobligation husconsists n ensuringthe survival and continueddevelopm6ntof thecultural, eligiousandsocial dentityof minority groups,hui enrichinghefabricof society sa whole.u

_ In.demolishing he houlesof indigenouspeoplesn Diclipio,OGpIeffectivelyprecluded hem of the right lo enjoy,manifestand ceiebratetheir.culture in c3r-nmulity_with heir indigenous$oup. It irreparablyimpairedtheconditionsby whichthe Ifugaosof Didipio, n trarmoirywitirtleir land aad eachotler, previouslypricticed Ifugio culture, raditionsandwayoflife.

, /!t H.k Coo,JJ-., en*al Conmen No. 23 u N.Doc CCpR/c/Rev.lAdd.s (1994),palggr[ph9.'r 6@:-

iliilf,r'r'{. ''i:t$d\-{-.h


13/19

V. OGPI MUST EXDRCISEGREAT O\uIIoN IN EXPI,oITING TIIE WAIERREsottRcEoF DIDIpro, posslBr.yENDANGERTNGHE Comuurrry'sFTNDATT'ENTAIIGHTTOAccESSToCI.EANWATER.The Right to Water entitles everyone o sufficient, safe, acceptable,physicallyaccessible ndaffordablewaterfor personalanddomesticuses.'oThe CESCRGeneral Comment No. rS is the first document thatdefined the rigbt to water. In this documentthe Committeeemphasizedthat while there s no explicit mention of a'right to water'in the ICESR, heright to water is indispensably inked to the right to adequatestandardofIiving (Article rr) antl the right to the highestattainablestandardof health(Article rz). Furthermore,the Committeeexplained hat the right to wateris essential n the fulfiIlment of the right to life and human dignity. Andwhile there is no explicit mention of the Right to Water in the UDHR,ICCPRand ICESC& the samehas alreadybeen recognized n many othertreaties, declarationsand international documents.For instance, Articlez4(z) of the Conventionon the Rightsof the ChildrequiresStatesparties ocombat disease anil malnutrition "through the provision of adequatenutritious foodsand clean drinking-water." On the otler hand, Articie r4(z) of the Conventionon the Elimination of All Forms of DiscriminationagainstWomen states lat womenshall havethe right to "enjoy adequateliving conditions; particularly in relation to... water supply."-The GenevaConverrtionson .International Humanitarian l,aiv require combatants toprovide drinking water to POWs and civilians stranded in the armedconflict(GC II Articles20,26, 29,46;Ap II ArticleS(r)), and evenmakethe destructionof drinking water nstallationsancl rrigations punishableas

war crimes(API erticle 54(:), AP II Article r4).'z- AIIdoubts asto the legalexistenceof the Right to Water werefinallysettledwhen tle UN GeneralAssemblyadopted Resolution64/L.6g on zBJuly eoto declaring "the right to safe and clean drinking watir andsaaitation as a human right that is essential or the full eniottrent of lifeand all human rights." Ttrus, the Right to Water is now idlntified as adistinct humanright.

- -Paragraqh, r o{ CESCRGeneralCommentNo. $ emphasizes hebroad scopeof the-Rjght_toWaterandputs in placea general'standardbywhich to measurehe fulfillment of sucharight:"The.elem-nts of-the right to water must be adequatefor hnnfindignity, life and health, in accordancewith Articles ll(r) and rz.

*1,/astx\'[. 'l',;.,tJ\p+t\s' CESCR ederal onlaentNo. 15.".other docr*Jrts that cfer o tlrc rightto waterncMe the ollowing:heconvention tr he Rightsof po^onswtthDisabilitiesihe Aficatr charteroD$e Rights ndwelfareoflhe cfild; tie pmtocolto theAriica! charteronturtrafl aoo eopres Rigr,ts tr be ughtsof womenn Aftica;united NationsEconomic ormissiou or Europe(JNECE)Protocol n wateraM Halth;Agadda 1,adoptedt heudted Nations onferencod EnviroDdentndDevelopmentJNcED); ha MardelplataActionplan;theprog.'EmeofActior ofthe hteaationalconfercncg.Pqp{aqo! a4 Development;he UN-Habitat taaof A9tion; anddle variousRsolutionsdoptcd y theUnitedNationsCeneral ssomblyndheConmissiontrHuman ights, swell asotheroxDertlocumonts.

I /-' .------.--tt 13


14/19

The adequacy f water shouldnot be nterpreted narrowly,by merereference o volumetric quantitiesand technologies.Water shouldbe treated as a social arid cultural goo4 and riot primarily as aneconomicsood, he manner of tJre ealization of the rieht to water' must also-besustainableensuring lat the right can b;realized forpresentard future generations."'8

Paragraphz further dentifieshe threecommonelements r factorstlat aresaid o applyuniversallyn all circumstances: uailabilitA,qualitAand accesshilw,re he absenceor diminution of any of tlese threeelementsranslatesnto a violationofthe right to nater.

Auailability meanshat therehas o beasourcewherepeople angetsufficientquantity of water for their personaland domesticuse. Thisincludes water for drinking, personalhygiene, footl preparationandcooking,washingof clothes,and household anitation.Not only shouldtherebe enoughwater o meetbasicdaily needs, ut thesupplyshouldalsobe continuous r regular.Quclirgmeans hat water mustbe safe- it mustnot threaten lehealthof thosewho use t, Thus,water mustbeftee rom microorganisms,chemical ubstances ndradiological azardshat cause umandiseases.Moreover,hewater'scolor,odor and astehaveo be acceptable.Accessibilifumeans that water and water facilities and servicesshouldbe alailableor accessibleo anyone,withoutdiscriminationof anykind. It has four aspects: 1) Physical Accessibility; z) Economic

Accessibility; )Non-discrimination;nd4) InformationAccessibility.As for domestic aw, PD to67 alsoknowna$ he WaterCodeof thePhilippines ivespriority to ensuringwatersecurityor domestic urposes.Article zz of said aw niovides:Art 22. Betweenwo or moreappropriatorsofwater from the samesourcesof supplg priority in time of appropriation sball give thebetter right, except bat in timesof emergencghe nseof witer fordomesticand.municipal purpses shallhauea better nght ouei allotfter uses;Provided, hat wherc watershortage s recurint and theappropriator for municipal use has a lowei priority in time ofappropdation, hen it shall be his dutv to find an alternativesourceo-fsupply in acco_rdanceith conditions prescribedby the Council(enphasisaddeil).

The collectivityof tlese norms establisheswo key points: (r) arecognitionof the right to water as a distinct human righ! and (2) anacknowledgment f the State'sobligationto ensure the security-anclavailabilityof safeandcleanwatersupply or domestic urposes.

:1'"i.ftlf !\i"r$Jri:g\:s

t: CESCRGeieralConnentNo. 15,paragtaphI l." CESCRGneral omeentNo. 15,Paragmph2.t4


15/19

Althoug!there s asyetno breachof a right-dutycorrelative,t is withgreatcaution lat OGPI shouldproceedwith its plan of diverting waterflowing through. he Tubo Creekand the DinauyanRiver - the Diilipiocommunity's rimarysources f water to facilitate ts miningoperations,as the sameposesa serious lreat to the quantity and quality of thecommunity'sryateresources.In termsof guanfitg, given he mmense olumeof water equiredoprocessmineralores, here is no certainty hat an amount sufficienttosustain he communitiesn their day-to-day omestic nd agriculturalusesshall be left. The local communitiescould ill-afford a warer resouroe-intensive ndusby such as mining competingwitl tleir domesticandagriculturaluses,especially o n light of the swereandprotracteddrought(ElNrno) theprovincehas ecendy uffered rom and s predictedo suffermore requenflyn thefuture because f climatechange. he Commissionalsonotes hat theprovinceof NueraVizcayawasspecificallydentifiedbythe Departmentof Agricultureas beingparticularly"vulnerable"2oo.theeffectsof El lVino.2r ssuch,cleanwater- scarce s t is - is bound o getmuchscarcer.oIn terms of qualitg, contaminateddischarges rom the mineprocessing lantsand tailingspondscould seep nto the river systemsnthe areavihich couldcause uman,aaimalandenvironrnental azardshatwould eventually render the water unfit for any and all usesit hastraditionallybeenusedor.,sOGPI is thus advised to exerciseprudenceand extraordinarydiligence should it utilize ttre Didipio's water resources,est it violateDidipio's ndigenousommunity's uman ightto *ater.

VI. TTx PNP !'IoIATED ITs owN OPERAnoNAL PRoCEDI,RESDTJRING fiIE OCTOBER 2 INCTDENT BY CARRYING HTGF.FOWEREDFIREARIUS AND BY APPLYING UNNECASSARY AND TJNRX,ASONABLEFORCE.The PNP Manual on Police Operational Proceduresprovides forstandard operational conduct for tle police in general and specialprocedures.Rule r9 thereof treats the standardprocedure n Demotition

,t_i"";rn.t_rl! ,.r."i\_.1)SJ3.-(i)

'o To be"lulnqtabl6" dpliess sceptibilityo, but mbility to copewitfr,c6.tainadvolsempactsi.e. tat ofElNiDo)FounbQuar.erly eport fthe tnteBovernmentalmeJ n Climare hange]." D-4lrcs! Offic.DA SeLtAsideP569-Mot El Nino MitigationMeatnes tu paldySector afiicloonlino],a\ajlable t http/w\a,w.da.eov.ph/nowirdex2.php?pass=News_vefis/2oo/febfebo2_ 0loa.hrnl.- Accordingo \F 4' Suane ! Reportof rhe nter-gol,enmernaldnelon Ctirnat Aange (I?CC),ClillLediecharge s xpectedo exaterbateurent stsses n water csourcs iom population rotth and economic ndled-use change x x Dmught-afected reas le projoctcdo increasen,oxtent,with thepotentialor advNeimpacts tr multiplesectolq ncludingagricutturo, at6r6upply, nr$/production ndheal$. Regionally,argoitrcrcas$ n irrigationwator ematrdsa result folinate changesreprojected.x x- Euviromental and Sooial Impacts of Mi ng lafiicle odine], available 6t h$p://pdf.rri.org/rdlinlback$ound litemture_rcview.pdf.--

t f ,


16/19

Orders, I4junctions, and other Similarthereof are directly quotedhereunder: Orders. The relevant pmvisions

Sec. r. Role ofthe PNP in the Enforcement ofa DemolitionOrder -a. Police assistance n the enforcement or implementation of ademolition or injunction ordershall begrantedonly upon a writtenrequest of ttre Sherriff or authorized representative andaccompanied y a valid order issuedby a competentcourt and / orwith wdtten permission from ttre Presidential Commission forUrban Poor. Moreover,saidpolice assistance hall be coordinatedand clearedwith tle concernedmayorbefore ts enforcement.b. The duties of PNPpersonnel n anydemolition activity shallbelimited to the maintenanceof peaceand order, protection of lifeand property, enforcement of laws and legal orders of dulyconstituted authorities, and to perform specific functionsprescribedby law.c. PNPpersonnel asked to provide police assistanee hall be inproper uniform andwill be led by an officer during t]re actualandlegal relocationphase.Thegshall be imited onlV to o@lrpAinghefirst line of law mforcement and ciDil alisturbancecontrol; shallnotpqrticipste in thephgsical lismantling af ang structure subjectof evictbn tr ilanolition; qnd shall refrain lrom the use ofrmnecessary nd unreasonableorce (emphasisadded),

Rule zr of the OperationalProceduresealswith Civil DisturbanceManagementCDM)Operations. rovisions pplicableo this caseare hefollowing:

Sec. z. $peciffc Guidelines -xxxz. The membersof the PNP CDM contingentsftall not cang angkind of frearms but may be equippedwith baton or riot sticks,crashhelmetswith visor,gasmasks,boots or anlde-highshoeswitlshinguartls emphosrs ddedJ.3. Teargas,smokegrenades,water cannons,or any similar anti-riot deviceshall not be usedunless he public assernblvs attendedby acnral violence or serious threats of violence, or deliberatedestructionof property.xxxSec. 6. CDM Operational Arproaches -xxxz. In selecting an operational approach to a civit disturbancsituation,tle Commander ld his staffmustadherescmDulouslvothe 'minimum necessaryforce" pinciple,fot (\p

1 1 , ;, . i , ,t .ri'i

n'"'#

6


17/19

example, rowd control formations or riot control agentsshouldnotbe used if saturation of area with manDower would sufEce(emphasisailded).xxx

On October , 2oo9, at east165policemenweredeployedo Didipioto assistOGPI n the implementation f thewrit of executionssuedby thePanelofArbitrators against he Heirs of lawagan.Earlier hat dar at about3:oo to 4:oo in tle morning, he houseof Elmer Lawaganwasburnedbyunidentifiedmel, someof whomweresuspecterlo be members f OGPI'ssecurityguards,awagan wasalso hit on his headby a hard wood rombehind.When the residentssaw ater in tle morning of that day thatOGPI'sdemolitionwas readying o tear down Lawagan's ther houses,completewith a multitude of policemencarryinghigh-poweredirearmsescorting hem, the people mmediately ormed a human barricade oprevent hem from doing so.Thepolice ried to break the barricaileanilthat is when he situationbecame haotic.Thepolicehenusedeargasand'watercanon o dispersehebarricading eople,Thesituationcalmeddownwhen the RegionalTrial Court issueda TemporaryRestrainingOrderenjoining he demolitionof Lawagan'sroperties few hours ater,

Regardless f who started he violencebetween he policemenandtheprotestingpeopleonOctober 2, 2oog, t appears uiteclearly hat thepoliceviolated ts own operational roceduresn approaching emolitionand CDM operations. t is expressly tated n the PoliceManual hat thepoliceshould nol carry any firearm during a CDM operation,which ispracticallyhe role the PNPshould akeduring anexecution f a demolitionorder. Ukewise,hepoliceshouldhaveexercisedmaximum olerance ndusedminimum and reasonableorce n dealingwith the protesters.t isquite obvious hat the deplol'rnentof 165policemen - most of whomcarried high-poweredirearms to support the Sherriff in executinganappar"lt demolition rom the POA is butwaybeyondwhat s reasonablycalled or under he circumstances.implypu! it wasan overkill.Thepoliceargueshat only45policeofficersweredirectlyengasedn :CDMoperationshat day and hat the rzo policeofficerswhocarriEdhieh- npowered irearms were there to respondto intelligencereporb t[at nl"communists/terrorists" CTs) might sow violenceon tle iame dav. 'i 'However,hepolicedid not furnishthe Commission copyof anvofficial / '','intelligenceeport ndicating hreatsof a CT attack n Didipioon October02, 2oo9. Butevenassuminghat thereweresuch ntelligenceeports,why r.:"1was t tha! accorrlingo PNP ProvincialDirectorSupt.pedroDanguilan, ,i".only 60 police officers were deployed o areas d Didipio repo.tedty Ifrequented y CTs?Wherewere he6o otler policeofficers-who ire atsi, - iicarrying high-powered irearms? In the absenceof any reasonable\

explanationwhy 165policeoffrcersweredeployedn Didipioon that day,the inescapableonclusions that theyweredeployedo assist heSherriffandOGPI n carryingout the demolitionof Lawagan's roperties, ntt-- ,t l\{/ / t


18/19

-. TheCommissio!alsoexpressestsdeepconcern ver eports hatthepolicedeployedn Didipioare aking hesideof OGpI nsteadbfprotecting$e ggneralpeaceand order.For example,t wasreportedhat duringthEdemolitionconductedon zz Marchzoo8, local residentEmilio puriihicwasshot when_he-trieclo stopthe demolitioncrew rom dismantlingheholse of his neighborManuelBidang.Bidangwas hen akinga nap isidesaidhouse.Acgountsrom neighborswhowitnessedheshooting ncidentstatethat Emilio Pumihicwas restrainedby two (2) of OGpI,i securitypersonnel,while a third - later identifiedas Whitrey Dongiahon shotPumihicat close angewhile Pumihicwas ryingto freehimself.Thebulletpiercedhis upper right arm andexited lmugh theupperright part of hisback.Theshoo',ng ncidentoccurredn plainviewof members f thepNp.Despite his,tle policedid not apprehenalWhitneyDongiahon.n anotherincident,a memberof PNP-RMG ubliclydisrespectedbarangay fEcial,Councilor-EduarioAnanayo.n the eveningof z3 March2oo8, the dayafterthe demolition,SeuiorPoliceOfficer4 ("SPO+")NoelValdezslappedCouncilorAnanayo, ccusingle latter of instigatinghe local residentsofire their gunsat nightto intimidateOGPI's taff.On topof all these,hereareallegationshat tlrePNP-RMG eployedn Didipio l keeping tahonatOGPI's remises.

TheCommissioneminds he securitysector,particularly he pNp-RMG n Didipio,ttrat ttrey are heprotectorof all people,not solelyof tlerichand hepowerfirl.CoNcLUsroN

In light of the foregoing, the Commission RESOLVESUNANIMOUSLYTo:r. Recommend o the government under ttre new aclministration tolook into the issues presentedherein and consider the probablewithclrawalof the FIAA granted o the foreip company n view of thegrossviolations of human rights it has committed;2. Require all concerned agencies,particularly the NCIP, the DENR-

MGB, t}le PNPand the AFP, to submit reportsto the CommissiononHuman Rights regardingconcreteactions hey have aken t o respect,protect and firlfill the rights of the affectedcommunity in Didipio,witlin 3o days rom receiptof tlis resolutionl3. Requesthe sameagencies o contiuue monitoring tle human rightssituation in Didipio with the view in mind that all reportsof violationsbe verified and actedupon;4. Advisethe OGPI to consider he findings aboveand conduct a policyre-orientation on the conduct of mining operation taking into

tI'otl * -

,1.--)r.!""1'tYn"\i:i

18


19/19

(ONLEAVE)CECILIA RACIIEL V. QUISI'MBINGCommissioner MA. VICTORIA V,CARDONA

consciousccounthe observancef human ightsof the communityinvolved;5, Direct the CHRRegion I offlce o activelyatlvocateor the humanrights of the affectedcommunityand to take everysteppossibleoavoid heoccurrencef furtherviolence ncloppression'

SORESOLVED.Donehis roe dayof January orr, QuezonCity,Philippines.

- c . \ r \/s'&r-&*f 6*k!-LORETTA ANN P. ROSALESIChaimerson )#r'u- q.A 4/.+

O-MARAVILLAATTESTEDY:

AST'NCION I.Comniissionecretary

Chr_ Resolution-oceanagold Hrvs

Documents

Transcript of Chr_ Resolution-oceanagold Hrvs