Separate Concurring Opinion 4 G.R. No. 224469 Based on the foregoing, the subject timber8 or dita 9 tree in this case was owned by the State even if it stood within an ancestral domain. 10 Considering that petitioners admitted that they cut the dita tree found within the ancestral domain, there is proof beyond reasonable doubt that the first element of Section 77 is present in this case. ' ~ On the contrary, however, it is doubtful that the second element of Section 77 obtains in this case. This is considering the undisputed contention that petitioners' act of cutting a singular dita tree was made pursuant to their rights as IPs. To my mind, the intent behind Section 77 is the conservation of our natural resources consistent with the State's general policy to protect the environment. However, a review of the laws passed after the Forestry Code reveals that IPs have been granted a limited authority to utilize natural resources located within their ancestral domains as necessary for their subsistence. It is observed that unlike previous constitutions, the 1987 Constitution explicitly and repeatedly declares that the State "recognizes and promotes the rights of indigenous cultural communities." 11 In this regard, it has been stated that "[t]he 1987 Constitutiqn's 11ttitude towards IPs, with its emphasis on preservation, is a marked departure from regimes under the 1935 and 1973 Constitutions, which were typified by integration" (i.e., attuning IPs to the mainstream) that "inevitably tended to measures that eroded [their] identities." This shift in the constitutional appreciation ofIPs' rights "reorients the State toward enabling [IPs] to maintain their 9 10 11 In Mustang Lumber, Inc. v. CA (327 Phil. 214, 235 [1996]), the Court stated that while the Revised Forestry Code does not define timber, "[i]t is settled that in the absence of legislative intent to the contrary, words and phrases used in a statute should be given their plain, ordinary, and common usage meaning. And insofar as possession of timber without the required legal documents is concerned, Section 68 of P.D. No. 705, as amended, makes no distinction between raw or processed timber. Neither should we. Ubilex non distinguitnecnosdistingueredebemus." Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines "timber" as "growing trees or their wood" and "dita" as "a forest tree (Alstoniascholaris) of eastern Asia and the Philippines the bark of which was formerly used as an antiperiodic." See Justice Kapunan's opinion in Cruz v. Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources, supra note 7, at 1066-1070: "While as previously discussed, native title to land or private ownership by Filipinos of land by virtue of time immemorial possession in the <;oncept of an owner was acknowledged and recognized as far back during the Spanish colonization of the Philippines, there was no similar favorable treatment as regards natural resources. The unique value of natural resources has been acknowledged by the State and is the underlying reason for its consistent assertion of ownership and control over said natural resources from the Spanish regime up to the present." "Having ruled that the natural resources which may be found within the ancestral domains belong to the State, the Court deems it necessary to clarify that the jurisdiction of the NCIP with respect to ancestral domains under Section 52[i] oflPRA extends only to the lands, and not to the natural resources therein." See also Justice Panganiban's statement in IPRA - Social Justice or Reverse Discrimination, The PHILJA Judicial Journal 157-203 (2002) that "in all the Opinions rendered, there seems to be a general understanding that natural resources within ancestral domains were 'not bestowed' by IPRA on the indigenous people." p. 172. See Section 22, Article II (Declaration of Principles and State Policies) of the 1987 Constitution which provides that: "The State recognizes and promotes the rights of indigenous cultural communities within the framework of national unity and development." See also Section 17, Article XIV thereof, to wit: "The State shall recognize, respect, and protect the rights o(indigenous cultural communities to preserve and develop their cultures, traditions, and institutions. It shall consider these rights in the formulation of national plans and policies." ✓