PHILIPPINES: ARMM SOCIAL FUND PROJECT ADDITIONAL FINANCING INDIGENOUS PEOPLES PLANNING FRAMEWORK 1

Transcription

1 Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized PHILIPPINES: ARMM SOCIAL FUND PROJECT ADDITIONAL FINANCING INDIGENOUS PEOPLES PLANNING FRAMEWORK 1 The Project The development goals of the proposed Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao Social Fund Project Additional Financing, herein after known as the ARMM Social Fund Project Additional Financing (ASFP AF), are to improve the welfare of people and support mechanisms for the promotion of a peaceful environment in the conflict-affected areas in the ARMM Region. Specific project objectives relating to targeted communities are to: (a) improve access to social and economic infrastructure and livelihood opportunities; (b) strengthen social cohesion and partnerships between and within targeted communities; and (c) improve local governance and institutional capacities for implementation in the ARMM Region, with a focus on improved transparency and accountability in the allocation and management of public resources by the participating communities, local government units (LGU) and ARMM Regional Government. The ASFP AF will fund two out of the original three components. Community Development Assistance (CDA): This component provides opportunities to community groups for increased participation in implementing and managing subprojects addressing their priority socio-economic needs. The subprojects are selected from an open menu derived from a community and social assessment by the community itself, and formulated within the framework of a prioritized community plan. The CDA involves community management of funds accompanied by various accountability mechanisms to ensure efficient and transparent use of funds, empowerment and provision of benefits to vulnerable target groups including men, women and out-of school youth. Institutional Strengthening and Governance (ISG): This component supports a strong information, education and information component including regular workshops and media sessions on the good governance aspect of a community-driven development approach. Another aspect of ISG is institutional strengthening that promotes improved governance in ARMM, LGUs and other partner institutions; technical assistance provided to municipalities that make up ARMM and includes training on multi-year planning, financial management, procurement, and safeguards. ISG also supports project management of ASF with a small core of technical staff. Benefits to Communities and Indigenous Peoples The Project, as in the original one, will be implemented using a community-driven development (CDD) approach with a highly participatory character where communities are fully involved in management and implementation of their own subprojects. The typical sub-projects based on the community-driven development approach are rehabilitation and/or construction of small-scale community infrastructure, e.g., grain driers, classrooms, daycare centers, health posts, community multipurpose centers, footpaths, concrete tire paths, hanging bridges, small piers, and simple water supply systems, all of which have minimal environmental impact and a significant amount of social and economic benefits. The additional financing phase will continue to ensure that Indigenous Peoples (IP) groups are part of the beneficiaries in the overall project and that they are active participants in the social assessment, community planning and sub-project identification and management processes. The baseline survey of the project community collects ethnic affiliation information which helps the community design its sub- 1 The IP framework is based on the Philippines Indigenous Peoples Rights Act and on the World Bank s Operational Policy 4.10 on Indigenous Peoples. February 15, A consultation with IP groups and leaders was successfully conducted in ARMM on February 9, It was cleared by the EAP Safeguards Secretariat on Feb 26,

2 projects accordingly. The Municipal Multi-sectoral Committee, that appraises community proposals, includes an IP representative in its nine member committee. While the Project does not anticipate negative impacts on IPs, an IP Planning Framework will be prepared as a safeguard for IPs and to provide further guidance to project staff when working on developmental aspects with IPs. Being demand-driven in character, the exact location and nature of the community sub-projects are still undetermined. The Project will, therefore, prepare IPP in subprojects, when appropriate. 2 See Attachment on IPP subproject format and elements of the plan. Framework Objectives The IP Planning Framework seek to ensure that Indigenous Peoples are informed, meaningfully consulted and mobilized to participate in the identification, planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of sub-projects to be supported by ASFP AF. Their participation can provide them benefits with more certainty and/or protect them from any potential adverse impacts of sub-projects to be financed by the Project. Definitions For purposes of this policy, the term Indigenous Peoples is used in a generic sense to refer to a distinct, vulnerable, social and cultural group possessing the following characteristics in varying degrees: a) self-identification as members of a distinct indigenous cultural group and recognition of this identity by others; b) collective attachment to geographically distinct habitats or ancestral territories in the project area and to the natural resources in these habitats and territories; c) customary cultural, economic, social, or political institutions that are separate from those of the dominant society and culture; and d) an indigenous language, often different from the official language of the country or region. Legal Framework The IP Planning Framework supports the priority given to Indigenous Peoples by the Government of the Philippines, embodied foremost in the 1987 Constitution, which recognizes the rights of the IPs to their ancestral domains and their power of dominion over their lands and resources. Among its pertinent provisions are: Section 17, Art. XIV: customary laws governing property rights or relations shall be applied in determining the ownership and extent of ancestral domains; and Section 22, Art. II, Section 5, Art. XII: the rights of indigenous peoples to natural resources pertaining to their lands shall be specially safeguarded These rights include the right of the IPs to participate in the use, management and conservation of natural resources. The right to stay in their territory and not be removed therefrom except when relocation is necessary as an exceptional measure, as in the case of an ecological disaster or armed conflict. IPs have a right to return to their territories once the ground for relocation ceases. Another nationally legislated instrument protecting the rights of IP is the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA or RA 8371), which state certain requirements in activities and programs affecting Indigenous Peoples. Some relevant provisions include: 2 See OP 4.10, para 13 and 14, and footnotes 13 and 14 for procedures on community-driven development projects. 2

3 1) Chapter III, Section 7b: IPs have the right to an informed and intelligent participation in the formation and implementation of any project, government or private, that will impact on their ancestral domain ; 2) Chapter IV, Section 16: IPs have the right to participate in decision-making, in all matters which may affect their rights, lives and destinies, through procedures determined by them as well as to maintain and develop their own indigenous political structures Specific to the Proposed Project area, the new ARMM Law, RA 9054, provides through Sec. 5, Article III (Guiding Principles and Policies) that the regional government shall ensure the development, protection and well-being of all indigenous tribal communities This new law, as well as pertinent provisions in the 1987 Constitution and in the IPRA, attempt to correct centuries of oppression and marginalization of the indigenous populations in Mindanao. Additionally, the Philippines supported various international agreements and conventions to protect the rights and culture of IPs, among them: Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities; United Nations Draft Universal Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Screening: The People of ARMM As the name suggests, ARMM or Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao is made up of a majority of Muslim groups who are mostly the members of three major ethnic groups and several minor ethnic groups who have embraced Islam as their religion. These are the Maguindanaon (people of the flooded plains) of Maguindanao, the Maranaw (people of the lake) of the Lanao provinces, and the Tausugs of the Sulu archipelago. The Muslim groups do not consider themselves IPs because they say they are fighting not for ancestral domain but for a broader political domain and self-governance agenda. Based on self identification, they are not included in the definition of IPs in line with the definition of indigenous peoples provided in the WB s policy as well as the Philippines Indigenous Peoples Rights Act. Under the Project, the indigenous peoples are the Tedurays who reside mainly in Maguindanao province. They number under 200,000 in ARMM. Traditionally, the Teduray used to work for the more dominant and politically influential Maguindanaon sultanates. They prefer to live together in their own communities which are clustered in the southern part of the province. Social Assessment The following represents feedback and some key findings from the Social Assessment, resulting from focus group discussions with IPs. These form part of the basis for the Project s original Policy Framework that are still relevant today: o Common needs and aspirations include: livelihood opportunities/assistance (e.g., farm/fishery tools and inputs, skills development, appropriate production and food processing technologies and marketing); road links from farms to barangay centers which are in turn linked to municipal towns; access to potable water supply, health and sanitation services; services for education up to the secondary levels; and resolution of the long-drawn land tenure conflicts. o Distrust of development intermediaries who exploited the IPs by using them during project proposal preparation but keeping the project funds for themselves when money was released. IPs need assurance that such situations will not happen in future development assistance, and that they will no longer be the missed targets of subsequent projects. o Provincial and municipal presence is not felt in IP communities. Most Mayors are absentees officials as they often reside outside the municipality. o Development funds must go directly to the IP Organization, or the Barangay Council, so that the full amount is disbursed. 3

4 o Government should focus its development assistance equally to all poor barangays, and not concentrate only in areas where there are peace and order problems. Framework Guiding Principles The ASFP AF shall ensure that poor communities of Indigenous Peoples are given priority in the consultation and decision-making processes, especially when sub-projects pose potential adverse impacts to them as a community. The Project must, with absolute certainty, assure that IPs do not suffer adverse effects during and after project implementation as well as receive culturally compatible social and economic benefits. Implementing structures for ASFP AF delivery and local government units (LGUs) must ensure at all times that development processes implemented by the Project foster full respect for the Indigenous Peoples dignity, human rights and cultural uniqueness. Consensus of all IP members affected must be determined in accordance with their respective laws and practices, free from any external manipulation, interference and coercion, and obtained after fully disclosing the intent and scope of the sub-project activity, in a language and process understandable to the community. The process of obtaining the Free and Prior Informed Consent (FPIC) shall take into consideration the primary and customary practices of consensus-building, and shall conform to Section 14 (Mandatory Activities for Free and Prior Informed Consent) of NCIP Administrative Order No.3, series of The ASFP AF must ensure that none of its community infrastructure or related subprojects will damage non-replicable cultural property. In cases where the community infrastructure subprojects (e.g., classrooms, water supply systems, health posts, grain dryers, multi-purpose community centers, etc.) are proposed to be located on sites considered as ancestral domain and/or cultural/sacred properties of the IPs, the ASFP AF will request, through its negative list, that the subproject be relocated or redesigned, so that these sites can be preserved and remain intact in situ. However, if the IP community wishes to have an eligible community infrastructure located on its ancestral domain and a FPIC is obtained from the group, then the subproject will be considered for funding. For IP communities in the process of securing an ancestral domain title for an area where a potential new infrastructure can be located, the community will be advised to begin with a non-infrastructure subproject and sequence the infrastructure proposal to a later cycle when the title is secured. For rehabilitation of community infrastructure, an approved subproject can be implemented at any time. Subproject designs must at all times be consistent with the traditional and cultural practices of the IP group in the area. Framework Operational Strategies Technical Assistance for IP Communities. The IPs/Cultural Communities in ARMM shall participate in the identification and planning for sub-projects located within their barangay or ancestral domains. In barangays where IPs are not dominant, or where the communities fall within the ancestral domains of IPs, the Project shall ensure that technical assistance is provided to enable the IPs to participate meaningfully in the planning process. This may mean deployment of competent and committed Project partners who can work with IP communities and ensure that IP prioritized plans and projects are integrated and supported by LGUs, as reflected in the LGU Project, barangay and municipal investment plans. IP Participation in Peace-Building Efforts. Not only shall the IPs be empowered to assert their own development priorities and preserve their cultural identity, they shall be capacitated as active agents of peace, reconciliation and tri-people development. Confidence-building is indirectly achieved as legitimate IP leaders acquire the necessary negotiation and conflict management skills as they engage in peace-building efforts. 4

5 Use of Appropriate Communication Media, Strategies and Tactics for Mobilization. Presentation meetings must be conducted in the local or native language. In addition, facilitators must use simple and uncomplicated process flows during these sessions. Proper Documentation of Interactions with IP Communities and Compliance to Agreements Made. Project implementers must adhere to the requirements for documentation of meetings and consultations conducted with IP communities. The PMO, together with the ARMM, provincial, municipal and barangay LGUs shall not proceed with sub-project endorsements or appraisal processes, unless the corresponding documentation of meetings and consultations with the IP communities as well as signed endorsements by the IP tribal leaders or representatives are attached to the sub-project proposals submitted for review/approval. IP Participation in Development, Monitoring and Evaluation of Mitigation Measures. Where sub-projects pose potential adverse impacts on the environment and the socio-economic-cultural-political lives of these IP communities, IPs must be informed of such impacts and of their right to change design of the subproject proposal. Should IPs grant their approval for such sub-projects, affected IP communities must be part and parcel of the development of mitigation measures. The PMO must ensure that action plans are drawn to be able to monitor and evaluate the implementation of such mitigation measures, with the active involvement of affected communities of IPs. The PMO, through the Municipal and Community Facilitators, should not allow work to commence on any subproject until the agreed compensation and/or the required rituals have been completed as agreed. Coordination, Supervision and Monitoring To ensure compliance by concerned Project stakeholders to the guidelines set forth in this Policy Framework, the following mechanisms and processes will be followed during Project implementation: o The PMO will facilitate the deliberate inclusion of IP representatives in the Municipal Multisectoral Committee and the relevant staff from the National Commission of Indigenous Peoples to the various planning, monitoring and evaluation activities, especially in IP communities. o Sub-project proposal format will include screening for safeguard issues, including for the IP groups, and for special needs with regards to appropriate consultation, participation, implementation procedures and monitoring. o Supportive Monitoring will be done regularly, involving affected IP communities and NCIP representatives, with emphasis on the following concerns: - Verification as to whether the guiding principles for implementing subprojects with IP groups or communities are followed; - Implementation review of subprojects in IP communities to determine whether these are being implemented as designed and approved; - Verify if funds for the IP subprojects are provided in a timely manner and that the amounts released are sufficient for their purposes and that such funds are used judiciously (in accordance with the subproject plans and provisions and in the Project s Operations Manual); - Assess whether recommended solutions discussed during previous supportive monitoring visits have been implemented as committed. Complaints and Grievances In the course of subproject implementation, complaints or grievances from stakeholders are inevitable. All such complaints must be discussed in the specific IP community or locality where the subproject is implemented using the still practiced traditional conflict resolution procedures. The formal local 5

6 leadership at the barangay, together with the tribal leaders of the affected areas, will be tasked to facilitate public hearings and negotiations to resolve or provide redress to these complaints. Where necessary when a second level appeal process is needed, an outside arbiter, preferably from the NCIP/OSCC or OMA will be asked to participate in these discussions and/or negotiations. 3 The concerned Municipal Facilitator or Community Facilitator will observe and document all the proceedings of the discussions or negotiations. If negotiations are stalled, or if the IP communities disagree with the resolutions and all the possible options presented to them, they should be allowed to elevate such complaints to the third level appeal process to the Provincial Representative of either the NCIP/OSCC or the OMA, with copies furnished to the PMO and the Office of the ARMM Governor. Afinal appeal process will be to the NCIP at the national level. Consultation and Disclosure Consultations on the draft Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework was successfully conducted with IP leaders and the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples in ARMM on February 9, For consultations with IPs for community subprojects, please refer to the Attachment on IPP. The documents will be disclosed in the various Knowledge and Development Centers in the country (including Davao, Cotabato City and Zamboanga City in Mindanao) and in the Bank s Infoshop once it is finalized and approved. 3 NCIP = National Commission of Indigenous Peoples OSCC = Organization of Southern Cultural Communities OMA = Office of Muslim Affairs 6

7 Attachment Indigenous Peoples Plan for Subprojects Approach 1. If IPs are majority in the community selected for project: a. They will use their community plan for the sub-project (instead of preparing a separate IP Plan) b. No special social assessment will be needed. 2. If IPs are a minority in the community: a. The normal community assessment conducted for the sub-project will have a section on the social assessment of IPs included b. The community plan will have a section on the IPs and their participation in the subproject. Format for Indigenous Peoples Plan for Subprojects The IPP will be mainstreamed into the existing implementation procedures, as reflected in the forms, for the Community Development Assistance Component as follows: Op Manual Activity Description Annex 3 Screening Screening checklist at the beginning of entry into a community will include, among others (e.g., environment, and resettlement), the following items on IPs: Annex 4 Community/ Social assessment D) Indigenous Peoples 1. Are there Indigenous Peoples living in the sub-project community? What is the percent of IP to the total community population? 2. Will the sub-project affect the rights, traditional land and cultural property of the IPs? 3. How will IPs participate in the subproject activities? 4. What mitigation measures will be put in place to ensure that IPs do not lose access to resource and land rights? Note: Yes (No./location) No Implem Measures If yes to the above questions #1 and #2, refer to the Indigenous Peoples Policy Framework for instructions on how to proceed. The Community Assessment undertaken for every project community will include an additional section on IPs if they are present in the community. The IP section will include the following: Basic data Socio-political profile Development needs and interventions Culturally appropriate approaches for consultation and implementation of sub-project Annex 6, 6.2 Required documentation for approval of sub- The Project has the following requirements for approval and downloading of the first tranche for each subproject grant: 1. Certificate of PO s Registration 7

8 Op Manual Activity project and download of funds Description 2. PO s Bank Account with Certification from the Bank & photo copy of the bank book 3. Procurement Plan 4. Work and Financial Plan 5. Subproject Implementation Agreement 6. Organizational Structure/Committees 7. Subproject Proposal In addition to the above, if there are IPs in the community, the following will be required: 8. Signed endorsement for the subproject from the IP tribal leader or IP representative 4 9. Clearance from the World Bank (see below) Clearance World Bank clearance will be required before final approval and downloading of the 1 st tranche for the subproject in communities where IPs live. 5 Training of Staff Before the additional financing phase begins, safeguards training will be provided to the PMO and ARMM line agency staff involved in the Project. During implementation, the PMO Safeguards Specialist will provide training to all provincial and municipal staff involved in the project. 4 The signed endorsement will represent a FPIC (which will be stronger than the free, prior and informed consultation required under WB OP 4.10). The consultation will be conducted at a Barangay Wide Assembly required for all communities (the details of how to conduct a BWA are in the Operations). This will be sufficient for a community where IPs are the majority. For communities where the IPs are a minority, another special consultation will be conducted just for the IPs. 5 The World Bank will provide clearance for the first year of the Project in cases of communities where IPs live. After one year, if the Project Management Office (PMO) is found capable of undertaking the task, the WB can pass on the clearance function to the PMO; WB will include the review of this clearance work during supervision. 8