10/12/2019
E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly
case. It is sufficient to state that Section 66 of the Indigenous Peoples' Rights Act is not
basis to hold that the NCIP has jurisdiction over a conflict between a member of an
indigenous cultural communities/indigenous peoples and a non-member of the same
indigenous cultural communities/indigenous peoples.
ACCORDINGLY, I vote to deny the Motion for Reconsideration.
[1] Rep. Act No. 8371 sec. 66 provides:
Section 66. Jurisdiction of the NCIP. - The NCIP, through its regional offices, shall have
jurisdiction over all claims and disputes involving rights of ICCs/IPs: Provided, however,
That no such dispute shall be brought to the NCIP unless the parties have exhausted all
remedies provided under their customary laws. For this purpose, a certification shall be
issued by the Council of Elders/Leaders who participated in the attempt to settle the
dispute that the same has not been resolved, which certification shall be a condition
precedent to the filing of a petition with the NCIP.
[2] Ponencia, p. 9.
[3] Rep. Act No. 8371, sec. 66.
[4] Rep. Act No. 8369, sec. 3 provides:
Section 3. Establishment of Family Courts. - There shall be established a Family Court
in every province and city in the country. In case where the city is the capital of the
province, the Family Court shall be established in the municipality which has the
highest population.
[5] Supreme Court Adm. O. No. 23-08 (2008), Designation of Special Courts to Hear,
Try and Decide Environmental Cases.
[6] Adm. Matter No. 03-03-03-SC, Designating Certain Branches of the Regional Trial
Courts to Try and Decide Cybercrime Cases Under Republic Act No. 10175.
Source: Supreme Court E-Library
This page was dynamically generated
by the E-Library Content Management System (E-LibCMS)
elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/63044
32/32
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents