THEY WERE the ancient land’s before it eventually became theirs. Only, they are at a loss as to its actual size – never mind the shape or form. Clark has been vastly transformed into an unprecedented haven for foreign investors because land is scarce and pricey where they come from. There is also the ever-looming existential threat by China in the case of Taiwan. As a result, Taiwenese investors, in particular, are being offered or lured into relocating to the former American base where it is relatively safer.
At least, two seminars were held in recent times to flaunt the viability and vision of Clark to foreign investors as an alternative destination in view of the perceived threats and proffered incentives for choosing Clark where, according to the late and former CDC president Levy P. Laus “ the future is bright you need to wear eyeglasses.
For this reason alone, the Aetas feel it’s the right time, than it has ever been, to know where the metes and bounds of their ancestral domain are supposed to be.
There’s another reason, the Aetas have learned their lesson to watch their back. Sometime in 2007, Laus forged a Joint Management Agreement (JMA) with the Tribong Aeta headed by Oscar Rivera whereby 20 percent of the income from rentals of portions of the ancestral domain would be their share. (The Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997 or the so-called IPRA law provides for no less than 30 per cent).
In its year-end reports in 2018 and 2019, the Commission on Audit (COA), recognizing the legality of the JMA, noted and recommended two things: 1)BATA (Bamban Aeta Tribal Association) was already given an advance payment of around P11.4 million as part of the 20 percent share in the net income 2) that the advance payment and subsequent advances be deducted from the JMA share whether the IPO would be legally recognized or not.
So far, the agreement is yet to be honored, with administrative and criminal cases already filed in the courts, sleeping as it were, like Mona Lisa, against several government officials and private individuals for various violations.
Apropos, there are two conflicting resolutions issued by the same agency, the National Commission on Indigenous People (NCIP), germane at the heart of the legal confusion.
On November 12, 2004, the NCIP issued Resolution No. 24-2004 CADT- 1104-025 stating the size of the ancestral domain: 10,684.2295 hectares. More or less five years later, on April 17,2004, the agency issued another resolution, Resolution No. 032 CADT No. 1204-025 –A, reducing the domain’s hectarage to 10,323.3082 hectares — a difference of 360.9013 hectares. It’s a sizeable real estate, or raw land, that could mean much in terms of income from leaseholds, given the current trend. The vast domain is a veritable gold mine in those terms for the indigenous tribes who have been living in less dignified existence since time immemorial.
On May 27,2009 then President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and other local officials handed the title of the ancestral domain to tribal chieftain Oscar Rivera. The day before,the certificate of title, which was the subject of the JMA , was annotated by the Tarlac register of deeds. Which one was Arroyo made to hand over Rivera, the correct or incorrect one? It’s not certain, but the presumption of regularity is assumed. But the devil is on the details.
BATA headed by Rivera has asked the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) to help them relocate the boundaries of the ancestral domain, based on the original size of 10,684.2295 hectares.
The IPRA law gives an insight on why the Aetas have taken this latest move as if it were a matter of life and survival, even success in the future.
“Ancestral domains/lands and resources found therein form the material bases of the ICCs/IPs cultural integrity,” it stated. In other words, its integral and vital to who they are. “The indigenous concept of ownership, therefore, holds that ancestral domains are the ICCs/IPs private but communal property which belongs to all generations and shall not be sold, disposed and destroyed”, the law stressed.
The ancestral is held inviolable as it is deemed sacred. In this direction ,the law created the NCIP, “ to protect and promote the interest and well- being of the ICCs/IPs with due regard to their beliefs, customs and traditions and institution.
Thus far, so far, complaints and cases coming from, at least the Tribong Aeta or BATA, are that the actions and performances of the NCIP remain to be desired.
The newly -minted DENR Secretary Jim O. Sampulna has already forwarded the Aeta group’s request in a memorandum to the current regional executive director of the agency in Central Luzon, specifying that the subject of the purported survey of the land is located in Bamban, Tarlac and Mabacalat, Pampanga. It isn’t certain if the regional office has already acted on the request, or when, if ever.
The survey that is requested by the Aeta tribes for DENR to conduct will help in resolving another long time problem between Pampanga and Tarlac, or between Bamban and Mabalacat. The boundary dispute. When Mabalacat became a component city in a joint move by then Mayor Boking Morales and Congressman Tarzan Lazatin, apparently the dispute was set aside so the cityhood bill would prosper.
It would simplify the problem, a lawyer for the Aetas said. Or it would complicate , probably politicize it, even more. An old issue will have to be inevitably tackled anew: who owns the quarry resources at Sacobia, Tarlac or Pampanga? It is noted by a reliable source in the know that, during the term of then Gov. Bren Z. Guiao, it was the Pampanga provincial government which issued the quarry permit. It still does, the source confirmed.
Will the re-survey or relocation of boundaries—the planting of the “muhons” where they should be as requested by Aetas of the DENR be the game changer? Meantime, the saga of the Aetas for a much better life continues. Hopefully,it wouldn’t be for long.
