How mining threatens Indigenous defenders in the Philippines

Last
year, Indigenous Pala’wan obtained a legal order requiring a
nickel company and the government to address the environmental impacts of its
operations. 

The court found that the authorities had
displayed “inaction” and “indifference” to the concerns of Indigenous
communities about mining in a protected area of their land. 

Corruption
allegations had marred the free, prior and informed consent process, which
eventually resulted in the NCIP ordering the company to “cease and
desist” until grievances are resolved.

Pala’wan
communities say they were inspired by the people on Sibuyan – a small island
known as the “Galapagos of Asia” – who mobilised to resist a nickel-mining
company earlier that year.

In other cases, communities are simply fighting to get
a fairer deal, such as larger royalty payments or the ability to renegotiate
contracts with mining companies.

Civil
society groups are calling for a new mining law to
protect communities and the environment during the energy transition. 

They want
meaningful reform of regulatory bodies, including NCIP, and free, prior and
informed consent procedures, the perpetrators of attacks against defenders to
be held to account, and demilitarisation of Indigenous land.

“At
the heart of biodiversity conservation is the recognition that Indigenous
Peoples are the original environmental stewards. Yet, rather than being
supported in our role, we are displaced, criminalised, and stripped of our
sovereignty,” said Beverly Longid.

“If
the global community is truly committed to ecological justice, it must begin by
defending the rights of Indigenous Peoples and restoring our control over our
ancestral lands.”

Recommendations

The Philippine Government 

These were developed in collaboration with 18 civil society and Indigenous organisations from the Philippines.

Strengthen protections for Indigenous Peoples and biodiversity:

• Review the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act (IPRA) to protect the right of “free, prior and informed consent” (FPIC) to ensure meaningful consent from Indigenous communities. This must address other laws that contradict or weaken IPRA
• Formally recognise the role of Indigenous Peoples’ customary governance systems and Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Practices in biodiversity protection
• Amend the country’s Writ of Kalikasan framework to provide stronger preventative legal remedies for environmental harms and violations of ecological rights. Establish a special environmental court to consider claims
• Ratify and implement the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention (1989), also known as International Labour Organization Convention 169, a legally binding agreement protecting the rights of Indigenous Peoples

End the militarisation of mining areas and hold perpetrators of human rights violations to account:

• Withdraw military deployments from mining areas
• Abolish the NTF-ELCAC and criminalise red-tagging
• Repeal the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 and the Terrorism Financing Prevention and Suppression Act of 2012
• Dismantle paramilitary groups and revoke Executive Order 546

Repeal the 1995 Mining Act and create a stronger legal framework that prioritises environmental sustainability, Indigenous rights and long-term community welfare:

• Conduct an independent and transparent audit of mining companies to ensure compliance with national and international business and human rights principles and hold those violating these principles accountable
• Strengthen and implement existing laws to prevent mining in legally protected and key biodiversity areas, including those found in ancestral domains
• Conduct an independent review of the national security policy’s use of state forces, paramilitaries, private armed groups, and corporate security personnel to enable and protect mining operations

Abolish the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) and overhaul mechanisms for protecting Indigenous rights:

• Establish a new elected Council of Elders, chosen by Indigenous Peoples, to ensure genuine representation and accountability, and to facilitate the meaningful participation of Indigenous Communities in the creation and implementation of safeguards to protect their lands, livelihoods, and cultural heritage from exploitation
• Establish an independent truth and justice commission to investigate cases where the NCIP has either facilitated or failed to prevent violations of Indigenous rights, particularly in relation to mining projects and forced land acquisitions. This commission should have the mandate to impose appropriate sanctions, and ensure that reparations are provided to affected communities

Pass specific legislation to protect defenders against violence, harassment and threats, including the Environmental Defenders Bill and a Human Rights Defenders Act:

• Review and repeal all outdated development plans that prioritise extractive industries at the expense of the environment and local communities. Any future projects should recognise the vital role of Indigenous Peoples’ customary governance systems and Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Practices in biodiversity protection.

Mining and energy companies

Do not mine in protected and key biodiversity areas.

Respect Indigenous rights and self-determination, including the right to Free, Prior and Informed Consent:

• Respect Indigenous communities’ right to say no to mining projects. FPIC must be a genuine community-led process, ensuring that Indigenous Peoples have the power to reject projects without fear of coercion or retaliation
• Uphold international standards on business and human rights, and mitigate any harms caused by inadequate national laws or collaborations with government agencies, such as the NCIP
• In cases where Indigenous communities agree to allow mining operations, strictly comply with environmental laws and draw up environmental mitigation measures. Halt mining operations in areas where it has been alleged that FPIC has been coerced or manipulated pending a full and independent investigation
• Regularly engage independent third-party auditors to assess compliance with FPIC principles, environmental protections, and other critical standards, providing transparent reporting to stakeholders

Adhere to the highest international environmental, social and governance standards, including the OECD’s Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas (OECD Guidance), the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on Responsible Business Conduct and the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.

• Support independent and transparent audits of all mining operations, focusing on compliance with human rights and environmental standards.
• Consider becoming a member of International Responsible Mining Assurance.
• In areas already impacted by mining, fund financial reparations, restoration and reforestation initiatives to mitigate biodiversity loss. Create funds specifically aimed at compensating individuals and communities affected by corporate practices through direct financial compensation or investments in community development initiatives, health, and education programs.
• In areas already impacted by mining, acknowledge corporate responsibility for harm. Publicly recognise the negative impacts of operations on local communities and the environment.
• Establish and implement transparent mechanisms to monitor the effectiveness of reparations efforts. Hold regular assessments, soliciting community feedback, to ensure that initiatives are impactful and really hold companies accountable for the harm they caused.

Develop people-centred Social Development and Management Plans that genuinely reflect the needs and perspectives of host communities. Actively incorporate local communities into the planning and decision-making of these plans to foster trust, strengthen community relations, and ensure long-lasting positive impacts.

• Invest in Community-Driven Development and Reparation Initiatives
• Establish funds and collaborative programs to support environmental rehabilitation and social services in communities impacted by mining, especially those involved in supply chains
• Encourage supplier investment in reparation initiatives to mitigate biodiversity loss and support community health, education, and infrastructure development

Support the proposed legislative reforms and human rights protections described above.

Financial and multilateral institutions

• Make public reporting on sourcing a requirement of financial support or investment
• Use leverage, such as the threat of withdrawing financial support, to dissuade companies from continuing to source from companies involved in human rights abuses
• Just Energy Transition Partnerships should be screened against international environmental, social and governance standards and the recommendations of the UN Secretary General’s panel on transition minerals to expressly exclude projects which fall foul of these criteria

The EU

The EU should either suspend talks on a trade deal with the Philippines or make significant improvements to current human rights and environmental abuses a key steppingstone for further discussions.

• The rights of, and threats to, the country’s Indigenous peoples and their vulnerable position in the just transition must be given special attention in EU-Philippines trade talks. The review of the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act to ensure rigorous enforcement of the constitutional guarantee of free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) must be part of a pre-conditionality approach.
• As part of the trade talks, the country’s mining legislation, such as the Mining Act, needs to be improved to create a more robust legal framework that prioritises environmental sustainability, Indigenous rights and long-term community welfare.

New Global Gateway projects with the Philippines must be consistent with the principles of the EU’s development strategy, with a view to reaffirming the primary tasks of the EU’s development objectives, such as poverty reduction, sustainable development, good governance and the protection of human rights. 

• All projects undertaken and companies involved must follow the highest standards, and for those in scope, all Global Gateway projects must comply with the CSDDD standards once implemented in EU Member States.

The EU Commission should support the timely implementation of the CSDDD in its EU Member States in order to meet the 2026 implementation deadline.

• EU Member States should pay particular attention to the establishment of a national supervisory authority that is well resourced and equipped to monitor the compliance of companies in scope of the CSDDD
• This national supervisory authority must ensure that its complaints mechanism is responsive and accessible to affected communities, and that it is equipped and prepared to impose sanctions if companies fail to comply with the provisions of the CSDDD

The US

• The US should ensure that none of its development aid is going towards mining projects that are perpetuating human rights abuses and ecological damage. USAID should specifically screen financing for mineral development to ensure it is not contributing to the abuses outlined in the report
• Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity must focus on supply chains which are sustainable. This means that only projects with express permission and cooperations from communities should be considered

Methodology and acknowledgements

Our investigation was based on obtaining, analysing and visualising different government and civil society datasets. Our full methodology is
outlined in the report.

Special thanks to everyone who helped with this process, especially A Cervantes, D Cotia, T Olarve, J Pagdanganan, J Santos, S Suringa and I Taroma.