Separate Concurring Opinion 5 G.R. No. 224469 identity," 12 which is, inter alia, characterized by the integral connection between their culture and the environment. In this relation, it is apt to mention that Article 27 of the United Nations Convention on International Civil and Political Rights (Article 27) - to which the Philippines is a signatory - tasks the State party to protect the rights of ethnic minorities "to enjoy their own culture." Interpreting this provision, the United Nations Human Rights Committee (UNHRC) issued General Comment No. 23, 13 declaring that. "culture manifests itself in many forms, including a particular way of life associated with the use of land resources, especially in the case of[JPs]." Thus, the UNHRC stated that the State party's obligation under Article 27 includes protecting the IPs' particular "way of life which is closely associated with territory and [the] use of its resources." 14 It concludes that such protection is "directed towards ensuring the survival and continued development of [the IPs'] cultural, religious[,] and social identity." Hence, based on these legal sources, protecting IPs' rights necessitates due regard for the centrality of the IPs' use of natural resources to their cultural identity. The IPRA, which was enacted under the auspices of the 1987 Constitution, concretized the State's recognition and promotion of all IPs' rights. The protection g,ranted to them is based on the recognition of their way of life, 15 characterized by their holistic relationship with the natural environment. Accordingly, the IPRA acknowledges the IPs' right to ancestral domains, which is an all-embracing concept that pertains not only to "lands, inland waters, [and] coastal area" but also to the "natural resources therein." 16 Ancestral domains also include land which may no longer be exclusively occupied by them, but to which they "traditionally had access for their subsistence." 17 Section 5 of the IPRA states that "all resources found therein shall serve as the material bases of their cultural integrity." The same provision explains that the indigenous concept of ownership "covers sustainable traditional resource rights," which refers to their right to "sustainably use, manage, protect, and conserve" certain resources. 18 Section 7 (b) of the IPRA also provides for their right to "manage and conserve natural resources" and to "share the profits from allocation and utilization of the natural resources found therein." 19 Section 57 of the IPRA further grants IPs the priority rights in the harvesting, extraction, development or exploitation of any natural resources within their ancestral domains. Taken > 12 13 14 15 16 11 18 19 See Ha Datu Tawahigv. Lapinid, G.R. No. 221139, March 20, 2019. UNHCR, CCPR General Comment No. 23: Article 27 (Rights of Minorities), 8 April 1994, CCPR/C/21 /Rev .1/Add.5, available at: https ://www .refworld.org/docid/45 3 883 fc0 .html (last accessed on August 26, 2020). Id. See also JG.A. Diergaardt (late Captain of the Rehoboth Baster Community) et al. v. Namibia, Communication No. 760/1997, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/69/D/760/1997 (2000). See Ha Datu Tahciwig v. Lapinid, supra note 12. See also Section 4, Chapter III of RA 8371. See Section 3(a) of the IPRA. Id. Section 3(o) of the IPRA. Section 7 of the IPRA recognizes and protects IPs' rights to the ancestral domains including the right to develop lands and natural resources.