10/12/2019 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly On petitioners' assertion that Section 72[59] of the IPRA negates the ruling that the NCIP has jurisdiction only over claims and disputes under Sections 52, 54, and 62 thereof, even if the parties involved do not belong to the same ICC/IP, the Court finds the same as misplaced. Note that under Section 72 of the IPRA, any person who commits violation of any of the provisions of the IPRA may be punished either (1) in accordance. with the customary laws of the ICCs/IPs concerned, provided that the penalty shall not be a cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment, and that neither death penalty nor excessive fines shall be imposed; or (2) upon conviction, by imprisonment of not less than 9 months but not more than 12 years, or a fine of not less than P100,000.00 nor more than P500,000.00, or both such fine and imprisonment upon the discretion of the court. Again, it would be contrary to the principles of fair play and due process for those parties who do not belong to the same ICC/IP group to be subjected to its separate and distinct customary laws, and to be punished in accordance therewith. The Court thus rules that the NCIP shall have primary jurisdiction over violations of IPRA provisions only when they arise between or among parties belonging to the same ICC/IP group. When the parties belong to different ICC/IP group or where one of the parties is a nonICC/IP, jurisdiction over such violations shall fall under the proper Regional Trial Court. Justice Brion has aptly discussed that even if Section 72 of the IPRA is a special penal law that applies to all persons, including non-ICCs/IPs, the NCIP jurisdiction over violations of ICC/IP rights is limited to those committed by and against members of the same ICC/IP group, thus: Section 72 of the IPRA provides that any person who violates the rights.ofiCCs/IPs shall be punished "in accordance with the customary laws of the ICCs/IPs concerned.... without prejudice to the right of the ICC/IP concerned to avail of the protection of "existing laws. . .[i]n which case," the penalty shall be imprisonment and/or fine, and damages, "upon the discretion of the court." "Existing laws" refer to national laws as opposed to customary laws; while "the court" refers to the regular courts as opposed to administrative bodies like the NCIP. Under Section 72, ICCs/IPs can avail of the protection under national laws and file an action before the regular courts, in which case, the penalty shall be imprisonment and/or fine, and damages. From this perspective, Section 72 is a special penal law that applies to ALL persons, including non-ICCs/IPs. The phrase "without prejudice," however, means without limiting the course of action that one can take. Thus, a recourse under customary laws does not take away the right of ICCs/IPs to secure punishment under existing national laws. An express caveat under the customary law option is that the penalty must not be cruel, degrading, or inhuman, nor shall it consist of the death penalty or excessive fines. elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/63044 18/32