10/12/2019 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly After a circumspect review of the relevant laws and jurisprudence, the Court maintains that the jurisdiction of the NCIP under Section 66 of the IPRA is limited [to] claims and disputes involving rights of IPs/ICCs where both parties belong to the same ICC/IP group, but if such claims and disputes arise between or among parties who do not belong to the same ICC/IP group, the proper regular courts shall have jurisdiction.[2] In my concurrence to the original decision, I pointed out that this was premised on Section 66 of the Indigenous Peoples' Rights Act, which has required that "no [claims and disputes involving rights of indigenous cultural communities/indigenous peoples] shall be brought to the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) unless the parties have exhausted all remedies provided under their customary laws."[3] The primacy given to customary laws assumes membership in the same ethnolinguistic group that have been and still are practicing the same customary norms not contrary to law. Thus, Section 66 of the Indigenous Peoples' Rights Act will apply to parties belonging to the same Kankanaey group in Besao, Mountain Province. However, it cannot apply to disputes between a Hanunoo Mangyan from Mindoro and a B'laan from Tampakan in Sultan Kudarat. Its application to various tribes in Kalinga depends on whether they share the same customary norms. While the various indigenous communities in Kalinga may belong to the same ethnolinguistic grouping, they may not share the same norms. The same is equally true among the various subtribes of the Subanen in the Zamboanga Peninsula. Definitely, Section 66 of the Indigenous Peoples' Rights Act does not apply in this case, where one of the parties do not belong to the same ethnolinguistic group as the other. I More importantly, the Indigenous Peoples' Rights Act cannot be interpreted as a charter that removes all minoritized Filipinos from the workings and application of the national legal system. Persons and groups belonging to what is still now considered as indigenous cultural communities/indigenous peoples interact with other cultures who consider themselves as Filipinos. To my knowledge, the Indigenous Peoples' Rights Act is an exemplary social legislation that should assist members of indigenous cultural communities to be empowered in all their relationships. The statute was not designed to facilitate their continued social and cultural isolation. The Indigenous Peoples' Rights Act shouid not cause their further marginalization. To insist that the NCIP has the sole and exclusive jurisdiction in any conflict involving indigenous cultural communities/indigenous peoples is to insist on a dangerous and debilitating stereotype. It is to assume that no indigenous cultural communities/indigenous peoples have intellectual or moral resource to deal with outsiders on equal footing in regular courts of justice. It is also to insist that our regular judges should not inform themselves of the concerns of indigenous peoples or that they cannot acquire the cultural sensitivity to be able to resolve conflicts among indigenous peoples fully and fairly. Insisting that the NCIP should exclusively deal with all conflicts elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/63044 29/32