OEHR-NCIP cited LGUs violation on IPs right

Posted by Mindanao Pagadian Frontline

PAGADIAN CITY, Zamboanga del Sur (Oct. 18, 2014-MPF News) --- The Office of Empowerment and Human Rights of National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (OEHR-NCIP) had cited Local Government Unit of Pagadian City of violation in the Indigenous Peoples’ (IPs) Rights following the allegedly illegal removal of IPs Mandatory Representatives (IPMR) in the City Council.

Timuay Lingating

The OEHR-NCIP Acting Director Dominador A. Gomez emphasized in his directives dated October 13 to the NCIP Executive Region-9 Director Timuey Woy Lim P. Wong to issue a final decision to re-instate IPMR Timuay Langhap Rio Olimpio A. Lingating based on his recommendation that the recall and withdrawal of support have no sufficient ground.

Wong also mandated that the issue shall be elevated to the Central office for further action if the Pagadian City Council refuses to re-instate the IPMR.

The OEHR after having compiled and reviewed the documents relative to the case of Recall/Removal of lP Mandatory Representative Timuay Lingating from the City Council of Pagadian City can't be given weight and is hereby declared insufficient ground to recall.

It all started on July 1, 2013 with three complaint letters from Safaron Donde, Muslim Sector; Marcelo A. Alviola, Tribal leader and Ernesto M. Mong, Punong Barangay addressed to the City Vice Mayor Divina Grace C. Yu questioning the appointment of Mr. Lingating as IPMR without due process, no consultation and selection done.

The reason provided by the Vice Mayor in her letter March 26, 2014 to the DILG Regional Director has nothing to do with the complaints on “process of selection", however legal remedies is needed on the following issues to support the recommendation for the immediate reinstatement of the IPMR:

The first reason, Is the failure of the 10th and 11th Council to legislate a law creating the office of the IPMR as ex-officio member a basis of the recall of the IPMR? The OEHR said, the failure of the Council is the violation of the provision of IPRA and the removal of the IPMR because of their failure is another violation of the IP Rights.

Second, the reason of the exclusion also mentioned another failure of the City Council to refer the issue to the concerned committee for deliberation and evaluation. Is the IPMR subject to deliberation and evaluation of a committee? NCIP issued a Certificate of Affirmation (COA) which means that the process of selection is followed. The DlLG issued a Certificate of Recognition (COR) recognizing that everything is in order. Are the COA and COR also subject to deliberation and evaluation of the City Council Committee?

Third, the reason for exclusion says that the endorsement of Mr. Lingating as IPMR was not proper due to the absence of supporting documents. The City Council is questioning the issuance of COA.

The OEHR said based on the documents specifically on the Fact-Finding Report and the letter of Regional Director Wong addressed to Marcelino A. Alviola, et. al. (the complainants) dated September 15,2014, the director concluded to quote "…the affidavit of withdrawal of endorsement/recall executed by the lPs of Pagadian City can't be given weight and is hereby declared insufficient ground to recall IPMR Rio Olimpio A. Lingating."

Director Wong continued on the last paragraph of the same letter to quote "lt is highly recommended that whatever action of the lCCs/lPs of Pagadian City pertaining to the issue on IPMR, the same should first be brought to the lCCs/lPs elders/leaders for Consensus Building in accordance with what is the customary laws and practices of the tribe." Based on the above, the undersigned believes that the issue of IPMR recall/removal is resolved.

The NCIP Legal Affairs Office (LAO) shall issue an Opinion on the three items mentioned above to consider DILG Opinions and Advisories on IPMR issues and copies to be furnished to all concerned, the OEHR directives disclosed. (By JONG CADION)