Pitfalls and Pipelines - Philippine Indigenous Peoples Links

Chapter 2.8: Importance of Free, Prior and Informed Consent
319
requirements has been widely documented as resulting in
severe and persistent negative consequences for indigenous
peoples around the world. Lack of consultation and the failure
to seek and obtain consent deny the most basic human right to
self-determination and has lead, inter alia, to loss of communal
lands, livelihoods and food production, disease and ill-health,
pollution of waterways and soils, destruction of forests and
other biodiversity, desecration of sacred sites, social conflict
and loss of life. The session at the 2009 Manila Conference
was keen to emphasize the fundamental importance of the realization
of indigenous peoples’ land and resource ownership
rights for FPIC to be realized in a meaningful way. 15
Conference participants also emphasized the importance
of FPIC as a collective right to land and traditional land
ownership systems, given that livelihoods such as pastoralism
or hunter-gathering were not compatible with private land
ownership.
Meaghen Simms of the The North-South Institute presented
on the Institute’s work with partners, and the Canadian
experience, at the 2009 Manila Conference. 16 She concluded
that, in their organization’s experience, FPIC can only be realized
when starting from the premise that “indigenous peoples
are not just another stakeholder to be consulted, but rights
holders whose identity, autonomy and cultural survival is inextricably
linked with their relationship to the land.”
In her experience, the realization of FPIC in practice
required the strengthening of indigenous peoples’ organizations,
and governmental capacity to oversee negotiations,
as well as convincing mining companies to respect FPIC
and indigenous rights. Ms Simms gave Canadian examples,
noting how the narrow application of the law (for instance,
the application of FPIC only for those with land titles, and
even then not requiring it in all cases) was effectively watering
down the requirement and leading to increased situations
of conflict. Instead of consent the standard was increasingly
becoming “consultation” and “accommodation.” This was a
concern that was echoed throughout the session and, indeed,
the conference.