IN THE MATTER OF: HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION CHR-VI-2014-0049AT SEMIRARA ISLAND, CALUYA, ANTIQUE

X --------------------------------------------------------------------- X

SITUATION REPORT

I. INTRODUCTION

The report describes the situation of the communities in Semirara Island in the Municipality ofCaluya, Province of Antique. It seeks to determine the root cause of their complaints, particularly ontheir lack of tenurial security over the parcels of land they occupy in Sitio Sabang, Brgy. Tinogboc. Thereport also documents impacts of the activities of Semirara Mining and Power Corporation (SMPC) onthe human rights of the complainants. Drawing on human rights standards, the report provides guidanceto all stakeholders involved, as anchored on information gathered in the course of the meetings andfield work of the Inter-Agency Working Group (IAWG), which includes government agencies,community and civil society organizations that the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) convened forthe purpose of examining the human rights situation in Semirara Island. Such guidance expounds onaction points that are expected from both rights-holders and duty-bearers on how to effectively protectand promote all human rights, particularly in the context of coal mining in Semirara Island, andgenerally in so far as the situation concerns resource allocation through governance mechanisms.

The Municipality of Caluya and its People

The Municipality of Caluya is located in the northernmost portion of Antique Province in theWestern Visayas region of the Philippines, and is home to about 35,496 people.1 In the human rightsparlance, they are called “rights-holders.” The municipality consists of three major islands, namely,Caluya, Semirara, and Sibay. Semirara Island comprises three (3) barangays, namely: Alegria,Tinogboc, and Semirara where the coal mining pits are found.

Notably, the groups of indigenous peoples (IPs) in Antique are the Ati, Bukidnon, and Cuyun-on or Cuyunin from Palawan. The National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP), through Mr.Rey Jesus Rubite,2 confirmed this fact based on the 1990 validation activity that it conducted in Caluya.Accordingly, there were more or less 200 households of IPs in the area, particularly in Brgy. Imba,Caluya Island, Caluya, Antique. Mr. Rubite further stated that migrant IPs were residing in SemiraraIsland.

On average, the travel time between and among the major islands is four to five hours each way.Despite improvements in sea navigation in the country, Caluya remains spatially remote, and publictransportation to and from the islands continues to pose a challenge to the residents and visitors alike.

1 <2015 Census>2 During the 5th IAWG meeting and field visit on 23-26 May 2016

1

IN THE MATTER OF: HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION CHR-VI-2014-0049AT SEMIRARA ISLAND, CALUYA, ANTIQUE

X --------------------------------------------------------------------- X

SITUATION REPORT

I. INTRODUCTION

The report describes the situation of the communities in Semirara Island in the Municipality ofCaluya, Province of Antique. It seeks to determine the root cause of their complaints, particularly ontheir lack of tenurial security over the parcels of land they occupy in Sitio Sabang, Brgy. Tinogboc. Thereport also documents impacts of the activities of Semirara Mining and Power Corporation (SMPC) onthe human rights of the complainants. Drawing on human rights standards, the report provides guidanceto all stakeholders involved, as anchored on information gathered in the course of the meetings andfield work of the Inter-Agency Working Group (IAWG), which includes government agencies,community and civil society organizations that the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) convened forthe purpose of examining the human rights situation in Semirara Island. Such guidance expounds onaction points that are expected from both rights-holders and duty-bearers on how to effectively protectand promote all human rights, particularly in the context of coal mining in Semirara Island, andgenerally in so far as the situation concerns resource allocation through governance mechanisms.

The Municipality of Caluya and its People

The Municipality of Caluya is located in the northernmost portion of Antique Province in theWestern Visayas region of the Philippines, and is home to about 35,496 people.1 In the human rightsparlance, they are called “rights-holders.” The municipality consists of three major islands, namely,Caluya, Semirara, and Sibay. Semirara Island comprises three (3) barangays, namely: Alegria,Tinogboc, and Semirara where the coal mining pits are found.

Notably, the groups of indigenous peoples (IPs) in Antique are the Ati, Bukidnon, and Cuyun-on or Cuyunin from Palawan. The National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP), through Mr.Rey Jesus Rubite,2 confirmed this fact based on the 1990 validation activity that it conducted in Caluya.Accordingly, there were more or less 200 households of IPs in the area, particularly in Brgy. Imba,Caluya Island, Caluya, Antique. Mr. Rubite further stated that migrant IPs were residing in SemiraraIsland.

On average, the travel time between and among the major islands is four to five hours each way.Despite improvements in sea navigation in the country, Caluya remains spatially remote, and publictransportation to and from the islands continues to pose a challenge to the residents and visitors alike.

1 <2015 Census>2 During the 5th IAWG meeting and field visit on 23-26 May 2016

1

The Municipality of Caluya became well-known because the island of Semirara is home to thelargest open pit coal mines in South East Asia.3 In fact, mining is considered as the major industry ofthe municipality, albeit it also produces a sizeable amount of seaweeds. Most of the people who live incoastal villages (barangay) of the municipality are involved in the seaweed industry, either growingseaweeds full or part time, buying and trading them, or working as laborers for the industry. Aside fromcoal mining in Semirara Island, livelihood in Caluya comprises subsistence farming and fishing; cashcropping of copra, nipa, some vegetables, and seaweed; commercial fishing; fishing boats, andconstruction; work at the municipal hall on Caluya Island; mat weaving; entrepreneurial businessessuch as sari-sari stores; tricycle driving; teaching in schools; and practicing midwifery.4

Significantly, Proclamation No. 649, series of 1940, (PP No. 649) established as coal miningreservations all the coal deposits and coal-bearing lands in the Southeastern portion of the island ofMindoro and the islands of Semirara, Sibay, and Caluya in Antique. Such classification gave rise to theland disputes in Semirara Island, and stoked distress among the residents of the islands of Caluya andSibay, which are neighboring islands of Semirara.

II. CHR MANDATE IN TAKING COGNIZANCE OFTHE SITUATION IN SEMIRARA ISLAND

Under Section 18, Article XIII of the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines, the CHR ismandated, among others, to investigate all forms of human rights violations involving civil andpolitical rights,5 monitor the Philippine Government's compliance with international treaty obligationson human rights, and request the assistance of any department, bureau, office, or agency in theperformance of its functions. It is in accordance with said mandate that this human rights situation andtreaty monitoring report on the communities in Semirara Island is being issued.

On October 26, 2015, the residents of Brgy. Tinogboc, Semirara Island, Caluya, Antique,through Sabang-Poocan Farmers, Fishermen Association, Inc. (SAPOFFA), sent a letter to CHR,alleging that they were displaced from the land that they were occupying in preparation for the dairyfarm project jointly being pursued by the Municipality of Caluya and the SMPC. The residents allegedthat they are occupying parcels of land in Brgy. Tinogboc, where they earn their livelihood.

Before sending the said letter to CHR, SAPOFFA requested a dialogue with then CaluyaMunicipal Mayor Genevive Lim-Reyes in March 2015 to discuss their concerns. However, no dialoguewas arranged for that purpose. Instead, clearing operations in Brgy. Tinogboc by the SMPC continueduntil October 2015. These events prompted the residents to ask for the assistance of the CHR to: (1)conduct an in-depth investigation on the situation of residents in Sitio Sabang and Sitio Poocan inBarangay Tinogboc, Semirara Island; (2) stop the activities of SMPC officials in Sitio Sabang andPoocan through an order from an appropriate government agency; and (3) repeal PresidentialProclamation No. 649, which hinders the titling of lands and the eventual grant of such lands to currentresidents.

3 Municipality of Caluya, “Comprehensive Land Use Plan (2002-2011)4 <Seaweed: The Nature of a Global Cash Crop in the Caluya Islands, Philippines. Shannon Arnold.Ms. Arnold’s study

focused on Caluya Municipality, in which she stayed on four of its islands: Sibato, Sibolo, Panagatan. She conducted ethnographic field work between May and September of 2007. In April 2011, Ms. Arnold’s research became one of the working papers of the Canada Research Chair in Asian Studies (ChatSEA). She is currently a program manager at PAKISAMA (Pambansang Kilusan ng mga Samahang Magsasaka / National Federation of Peasant Organisation) >

5 Civil rights are defined as those that belong to every citizen of the state or country, or, in wider sense, to all its inhabitants, and are not connected with the organization or administration of the government. They include the rights of property, marriage, equal protection of the laws, freedom of contract, etc. Or, as otherwise defined civil rights are rights appertaining to a person by virtue of his citizenship in a state or community. Such term may also refer, in its general sense, to rights capable of being enforced or redressed in a civil action. Political rights on the other hand, are said to refer to the right to participate, directly or indirectly, in the establishment or administration of government, the right of suffrage, the right to hold public office, the right of petition and, in general, the rights appurtenant to citizenship vis-a-vis the management of government. (Simon vs. CHR, G.R. No. 100150, 5 Jan. 1994)

2

The Municipality of Caluya became well-known because the island of Semirara is home to thelargest open pit coal mines in South East Asia.3 In fact, mining is considered as the major industry ofthe municipality, albeit it also produces a sizeable amount of seaweeds. Most of the people who live incoastal villages (barangay) of the municipality are involved in the seaweed industry, either growingseaweeds full or part time, buying and trading them, or working as laborers for the industry. Aside fromcoal mining in Semirara Island, livelihood in Caluya comprises subsistence farming and fishing; cashcropping of copra, nipa, some vegetables, and seaweed; commercial fishing; fishing boats, andconstruction; work at the municipal hall on Caluya Island; mat weaving; entrepreneurial businessessuch as sari-sari stores; tricycle driving; teaching in schools; and practicing midwifery.4

Significantly, Proclamation No. 649, series of 1940, (PP No. 649) established as coal miningreservations all the coal deposits and coal-bearing lands in the Southeastern portion of the island ofMindoro and the islands of Semirara, Sibay, and Caluya in Antique. Such classification gave rise to theland disputes in Semirara Island, and stoked distress among the residents of the islands of Caluya andSibay, which are neighboring islands of Semirara.

II. CHR MANDATE IN TAKING COGNIZANCE OFTHE SITUATION IN SEMIRARA ISLAND

Under Section 18, Article XIII of the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines, the CHR ismandated, among others, to investigate all forms of human rights violations involving civil andpolitical rights,5 monitor the Philippine Government's compliance with international treaty obligationson human rights, and request the assistance of any department, bureau, office, or agency in theperformance of its functions. It is in accordance with said mandate that this human rights situation andtreaty monitoring report on the communities in Semirara Island is being issued.

On October 26, 2015, the residents of Brgy. Tinogboc, Semirara Island, Caluya, Antique,through Sabang-Poocan Farmers, Fishermen Association, Inc. (SAPOFFA), sent a letter to CHR,alleging that they were displaced from the land that they were occupying in preparation for the dairyfarm project jointly being pursued by the Municipality of Caluya and the SMPC. The residents allegedthat they are occupying parcels of land in Brgy. Tinogboc, where they earn their livelihood.

Before sending the said letter to CHR, SAPOFFA requested a dialogue with then CaluyaMunicipal Mayor Genevive Lim-Reyes in March 2015 to discuss their concerns. However, no dialoguewas arranged for that purpose. Instead, clearing operations in Brgy. Tinogboc by the SMPC continueduntil October 2015. These events prompted the residents to ask for the assistance of the CHR to: (1)conduct an in-depth investigation on the situation of residents in Sitio Sabang and Sitio Poocan inBarangay Tinogboc, Semirara Island; (2) stop the activities of SMPC officials in Sitio Sabang andPoocan through an order from an appropriate government agency; and (3) repeal PresidentialProclamation No. 649, which hinders the titling of lands and the eventual grant of such lands to currentresidents.

3 Municipality of Caluya, “Comprehensive Land Use Plan (2002-2011)4 <Seaweed: The Nature of a Global Cash Crop in the Caluya Islands, Philippines. Shannon Arnold.Ms. Arnold’s study

focused on Caluya Municipality, in which she stayed on four of its islands: Sibato, Sibolo, Panagatan. She conducted ethnographic field work between May and September of 2007. In April 2011, Ms. Arnold’s research became one of the working papers of the Canada Research Chair in Asian Studies (ChatSEA). She is currently a program manager at PAKISAMA (Pambansang Kilusan ng mga Samahang Magsasaka / National Federation of Peasant Organisation) >

5 Civil rights are defined as those that belong to every citizen of the state or country, or, in wider sense, to all its inhabitants, and are not connected with the organization or administration of the government. They include the rights of property, marriage, equal protection of the laws, freedom of contract, etc. Or, as otherwise defined civil rights are rights appertaining to a person by virtue of his citizenship in a state or community. Such term may also refer, in its general sense, to rights capable of being enforced or redressed in a civil action. Political rights on the other hand, are said to refer to the right to participate, directly or indirectly, in the establishment or administration of government, the right of suffrage, the right to hold public office, the right of petition and, in general, the rights appurtenant to citizenship vis-a-vis the management of government. (Simon vs. CHR, G.R. No. 100150, 5 Jan. 1994)

2

More so, based on reports from the CHR Regional Office No. 6 and from the complainingresidents themselves, earlier on 25 February 2014, two heavy equipment trucks and one bulldozer fromthe SMPC arrived at Sitio Poocan, Brgy. Tinogboc, Semirara Island. These came with companysecurity and LGU police forces who acted on verbal orders of Caluya Mayor Lim-Reyes to clear fivehectares of land in Sitio Poocan. No court order or permit was presented to the residents, promptingthem to set up a human barricade to stop the clearing and demand answers from the mayor.Subsequently, Mayor Lim-Reyes went to Sitio Poocan on 27 February 2014 for a dialogue with theresidents and presented a “deed of sale/donation” covering the five hectares of land located in SitioPoocan. The said deed was signed by Caluya Mayor on behalf of the Municipality and Milady Muñoz,who purported to represent the heirs of Dr. Antiquio X. Janairo. A day after the dialogue, 28 February2014, Caluya Police arrested Bernardo “Totong” Magdaug, then President of the SAPPOFA and MarkKato, a community organizer of Pambansang Kilusan ng mga Samahang Magsasaka (PAKISAMA).They were arrested on charges of illegal assembly. Eventually, the case was dismissed by the 6th

Municipal Circuit Trial Court – Pandan, Antique.

Caluya Mayor Lim-Reyes said, in her 27 August 2014 letter to former CHR ChairpersonLoretta Ann P. Rosales, that Sitio Poocan was similar to the residential area in Sitio Sabang, it beingnear the sea, which was the primary source of income of the residents of Sitio Sabang. She also saidthat lots measuring 138 square meters each would be formally given to those who were displaced bythe recovery of the portion of Lot 902 at Sitio Sabang. She further stated that houses would be built forthem free of charge. In order to afford the target size of each lot to be given to the people, theMunicipality of Caluya bought another two hectares of Lot 912, increasing the entire relocation area tofive hectares. Both the lots donated and bought were referred to as Lot 912-A. Caluya Mayor Lim-Reyes claimed that the Municipality started to clear the area of Lot 912-A to give way to theconstruction of roads so that the relocation site would be ready for occupancy should the heirs of Dr.Janairo demand the ejectment of the Municipality and of the people in a portion of Lot 902. However,when the clearing operations started in the area of Lot 912-A on 25 February 2014, she contended thatthe residents of Sitio Sabang prevented the entry of heavy machineries, despite the fact that Lot 912 islocated kilometers away from the protesters' residence.

Nevertheless, there were also allegations that Mayor Lim-Reyes was directly pressuring a groupof more than 100 families in Sitio Sabang to voluntarily vacate the land. Despite all these, the clearingof Sitio Poocan continued until June 2014. Employees of the SMPC, meanwhile, proceeded to developthe relocation site intended for those who would come from Sitio Sabang of Brgy. Tinogboc. Duringthis time, the residents believed that Brgy. Tinogboc was intended to be a mine waste facility and formining expansion. Thereafter, Punong Barangay Romeo Malixi met with SAPOFFA and their leaderBenjamin Magan and revealed the plans of the SMPC. The residents also learned that Sitio Sabang willbe developed into a dairy farm.

On the other hand, certain residents in Caluya Island, namely the group of Ephraim Lorenzo etal., were said to occupy lands in Brgy. Imba, allegedly part of titled land under Original Certificate ofTitle (OCT) No. N-2081 in the name of Salvacion Vda. De Javier, who was granted Free Patent No.467791 on March 6, 1970 even while Proclamation No. 649 is presumably in effect. The residents wereevicted pursuant to the judgment of the 6th Municipal Circuit Trial Court of Pandan-Libertad-Caluya,which was rendered on 5 March 2008 for Civil Case No. 189-C (Unlawful Detainer). Reports show thateighty-four (84) households were displaced6 as a result of the implementation of the Writ of Executionand Writ of Demolition issued on 09 July 2009 by the Regional Trial Court, Branch 13, Culasi, Antiquein Civil Case No. C-204, which affirmed the decision of the court a quo.

In view of the foregoing, the CHR proceeded to verify the allegations of the complainants todetermine a systemic violation of civil and political rights in relation to the human right of adequatestandard of living. To gather relevant data and respond to the questions of the residents of Caluya,Antique, an Inter-Agency Working Group (IAWG) was convened by representatives and focal personsfrom the National Anti-Poverty Commission (NAPC), Land Management Bureau (LMB), Department

6 Resolution No. 2009-133 of the Sangguniang Bayan, Caluya, Antique adopted on December 07, 2009 titled “ResolutionAppropriating Fund Amounting to Two Million Nine Hundred Twenty Thousand (P2,920,000.00) Pesos out of 5% Calamity Reserve for the Construction of Temporary Shelter of the Displaced Residents in Imba, Caluya, Antique”

3

More so, based on reports from the CHR Regional Office No. 6 and from the complainingresidents themselves, earlier on 25 February 2014, two heavy equipment trucks and one bulldozer fromthe SMPC arrived at Sitio Poocan, Brgy. Tinogboc, Semirara Island. These came with companysecurity and LGU police forces who acted on verbal orders of Caluya Mayor Lim-Reyes to clear fivehectares of land in Sitio Poocan. No court order or permit was presented to the residents, promptingthem to set up a human barricade to stop the clearing and demand answers from the mayor.Subsequently, Mayor Lim-Reyes went to Sitio Poocan on 27 February 2014 for a dialogue with theresidents and presented a “deed of sale/donation” covering the five hectares of land located in SitioPoocan. The said deed was signed by Caluya Mayor on behalf of the Municipality and Milady Muñoz,who purported to represent the heirs of Dr. Antiquio X. Janairo. A day after the dialogue, 28 February2014, Caluya Police arrested Bernardo “Totong” Magdaug, then President of the SAPPOFA and MarkKato, a community organizer of Pambansang Kilusan ng mga Samahang Magsasaka (PAKISAMA).They were arrested on charges of illegal assembly. Eventually, the case was dismissed by the 6th

Municipal Circuit Trial Court – Pandan, Antique.

Caluya Mayor Lim-Reyes said, in her 27 August 2014 letter to former CHR ChairpersonLoretta Ann P. Rosales, that Sitio Poocan was similar to the residential area in Sitio Sabang, it beingnear the sea, which was the primary source of income of the residents of Sitio Sabang. She also saidthat lots measuring 138 square meters each would be formally given to those who were displaced bythe recovery of the portion of Lot 902 at Sitio Sabang. She further stated that houses would be built forthem free of charge. In order to afford the target size of each lot to be given to the people, theMunicipality of Caluya bought another two hectares of Lot 912, increasing the entire relocation area tofive hectares. Both the lots donated and bought were referred to as Lot 912-A. Caluya Mayor Lim-Reyes claimed that the Municipality started to clear the area of Lot 912-A to give way to theconstruction of roads so that the relocation site would be ready for occupancy should the heirs of Dr.Janairo demand the ejectment of the Municipality and of the people in a portion of Lot 902. However,when the clearing operations started in the area of Lot 912-A on 25 February 2014, she contended thatthe residents of Sitio Sabang prevented the entry of heavy machineries, despite the fact that Lot 912 islocated kilometers away from the protesters' residence.

Nevertheless, there were also allegations that Mayor Lim-Reyes was directly pressuring a groupof more than 100 families in Sitio Sabang to voluntarily vacate the land. Despite all these, the clearingof Sitio Poocan continued until June 2014. Employees of the SMPC, meanwhile, proceeded to developthe relocation site intended for those who would come from Sitio Sabang of Brgy. Tinogboc. Duringthis time, the residents believed that Brgy. Tinogboc was intended to be a mine waste facility and formining expansion. Thereafter, Punong Barangay Romeo Malixi met with SAPOFFA and their leaderBenjamin Magan and revealed the plans of the SMPC. The residents also learned that Sitio Sabang willbe developed into a dairy farm.

On the other hand, certain residents in Caluya Island, namely the group of Ephraim Lorenzo etal., were said to occupy lands in Brgy. Imba, allegedly part of titled land under Original Certificate ofTitle (OCT) No. N-2081 in the name of Salvacion Vda. De Javier, who was granted Free Patent No.467791 on March 6, 1970 even while Proclamation No. 649 is presumably in effect. The residents wereevicted pursuant to the judgment of the 6th Municipal Circuit Trial Court of Pandan-Libertad-Caluya,which was rendered on 5 March 2008 for Civil Case No. 189-C (Unlawful Detainer). Reports show thateighty-four (84) households were displaced6 as a result of the implementation of the Writ of Executionand Writ of Demolition issued on 09 July 2009 by the Regional Trial Court, Branch 13, Culasi, Antiquein Civil Case No. C-204, which affirmed the decision of the court a quo.

In view of the foregoing, the CHR proceeded to verify the allegations of the complainants todetermine a systemic violation of civil and political rights in relation to the human right of adequatestandard of living. To gather relevant data and respond to the questions of the residents of Caluya,Antique, an Inter-Agency Working Group (IAWG) was convened by representatives and focal personsfrom the National Anti-Poverty Commission (NAPC), Land Management Bureau (LMB), Department

6 Resolution No. 2009-133 of the Sangguniang Bayan, Caluya, Antique adopted on December 07, 2009 titled “ResolutionAppropriating Fund Amounting to Two Million Nine Hundred Twenty Thousand (P2,920,000.00) Pesos out of 5% Calamity Reserve for the Construction of Temporary Shelter of the Displaced Residents in Imba, Caluya, Antique”

3

of Energy (DOE), Land Registration Authority (LRA), Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR),Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG), Department of Agriculture (DA)/NationalDairy Authority (NDA), Environmental Management Bureau (EMB), Department of Labor andEmployment (DOLE), Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB), National Commission on IndigenousPeoples (NCIP), National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA), Department of Education(DepEd), Department of Health (DOH), and civil society organizations, namely Pambansang Kilusanng mga Samahang Magsasaka (PAKISAMA), Bantay Kita, and the Philippine Movement for ClimateJustice. The representatives of the Semirara Mining and Power Corporation (SMPC) also participatedduring the meetings of the working group. The IAWG organized itself into thematic clusters. TheGovernance Issues Cluster was composed of CHR, NAPC, DILG, NEDA, DOLE, and DOE. Themembers of the Environment Issues Cluster included CHR, EMB, DOE, MGB, DOH, DepEd. Themembers of the Land Use Cluster comprised of the CHR, DOE, DAR, LMB/DENR, LRA, NCIP, andDA-NDA.

The IAWG held several meetings (1st, 09 February 2016; 2nd, 13 April 2016; 3rd, 27 April 2016;4th, 11 May 2016). During its 5th meeting, the IAWG conducted a field visit and held community-baseddialogues at Caluya, Antique on 23-26 May 2016, followed by a debriefing in Quezon City on 29 June2016 (6th meeting). 7th meeting was held on 2 September 2016.

The 8th (21 June 2018), 9th (14 August 2018) and 10th (04 April 2019) meetings were convenedto present the draft report for further inputs of the resource persons from the government agencies, civilsociety organizations, the company, and the complaining residents.

The instant report corresponds to a framework whereby findings are being evaluated as part ofthe process to develop action-oriented measures in the form of guidelines, protocols, and rules ofprocedures that set standards in governance mechanisms, in order to address gaps in the protection andpromotion of human rights in a particular context. Inevitably, monitoring a human rights situation isnever-ending because the objective is to ensure that rights-holders enjoy fully a life of dignity, which isoften realized progressively. As such, the continuous discussion between the rights-holders and theduty-bearers on the findings in the situation report, as well as the standards being espoused, provides asystematic opportunity to mainstream human rights-based approach, eventually enriching human rightsstandards and serving as patterns for inquiry of ensuing problems and gaps. The framework isgraphically shown as follows:

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework

4

of Energy (DOE), Land Registration Authority (LRA), Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR),Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG), Department of Agriculture (DA)/NationalDairy Authority (NDA), Environmental Management Bureau (EMB), Department of Labor andEmployment (DOLE), Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB), National Commission on IndigenousPeoples (NCIP), National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA), Department of Education(DepEd), Department of Health (DOH), and civil society organizations, namely Pambansang Kilusanng mga Samahang Magsasaka (PAKISAMA), Bantay Kita, and the Philippine Movement for ClimateJustice. The representatives of the Semirara Mining and Power Corporation (SMPC) also participatedduring the meetings of the working group. The IAWG organized itself into thematic clusters. TheGovernance Issues Cluster was composed of CHR, NAPC, DILG, NEDA, DOLE, and DOE. Themembers of the Environment Issues Cluster included CHR, EMB, DOE, MGB, DOH, DepEd. Themembers of the Land Use Cluster comprised of the CHR, DOE, DAR, LMB/DENR, LRA, NCIP, andDA-NDA.

The IAWG held several meetings (1st, 09 February 2016; 2nd, 13 April 2016; 3rd, 27 April 2016;4th, 11 May 2016). During its 5th meeting, the IAWG conducted a field visit and held community-baseddialogues at Caluya, Antique on 23-26 May 2016, followed by a debriefing in Quezon City on 29 June2016 (6th meeting). 7th meeting was held on 2 September 2016.

The 8th (21 June 2018), 9th (14 August 2018) and 10th (04 April 2019) meetings were convenedto present the draft report for further inputs of the resource persons from the government agencies, civilsociety organizations, the company, and the complaining residents.

The instant report corresponds to a framework whereby findings are being evaluated as part ofthe process to develop action-oriented measures in the form of guidelines, protocols, and rules ofprocedures that set standards in governance mechanisms, in order to address gaps in the protection andpromotion of human rights in a particular context. Inevitably, monitoring a human rights situation isnever-ending because the objective is to ensure that rights-holders enjoy fully a life of dignity, which isoften realized progressively. As such, the continuous discussion between the rights-holders and theduty-bearers on the findings in the situation report, as well as the standards being espoused, provides asystematic opportunity to mainstream human rights-based approach, eventually enriching human rightsstandards and serving as patterns for inquiry of ensuing problems and gaps. The framework isgraphically shown as follows:

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework

4

III. KEY FINDINGS

The resultant key findings from the IAWG meetings are being presented as follows:

1. The complainants from Brgy. Tinogboc, Semirara Island, lack tenurial security over the parcels of land they occupy, hence they are vulnerable to be forcibly evicted therefrom. Despite that, they exerted efforts to obtain tenurial security such as through the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program, albeit unsuccessfully, because the government's interest is primarily to pursue coal miningin Semirara Island.

In the course of the inquiry, it was settled that the residents of Sitio Sabang, Brgy. Tinogboc,Semirara Island were involuntarily displaced, without court order, from the land they occupied andwere relocated to Sitio Poocan, while others are still threatened with displacement. The one hundredtwenty-three (123) hectares of land that they occupied, possessed, and utilized were allegedly sold toprivate individuals without any consultation and investigation of their claims.7 In this case,complainants in Semirara Island occupied said lands, which a certain Dr. Antiquio X. Janairo donatedto the Municipality of Caluya on 11 October 1993. The affected residents were relocated to SitioPoocan after the heirs of Janairo revoked the donation.8 It is worth noting, however, that the claim ofJanairo over the land in dispute was based only on a tax declaration. The land was not titled under hisname as registered owner. Still, in the course of the working group's meetings, the Municipality ofCaluya did not show proof that residents who were relocated to Sitio Poocan were granted tenurialsecurity.

Still, the glaring fact remains that there are titled lots in Semirara Island. During the 11May 2016 IAWG meeting, Elsa Ureta, Chief-Lands, Patents & Deeds Section (LPDS), ProvincialEnvironment and Natural Resources Office (PENRO) – Antique, reported that there were two (2) LandClassification (LC) Maps covering the Municipality of Caluya, i.e., LC Map 790 (approved by Bureauof Forestry on December 1, 1928) and LC Map 2130 (approved by Bureau of Forestry on August 6,1957). She also said that there were 672 hectares of alienable and disposable (A&D) lands in SemiraraIsland pursuant to LC Map 2130, and 2,367.9358 hectares of A&D lands in Caluya Island pursuant toPLS 428-D (approved 10-11 December 1956). While there seemed to be A&D lands, Ms. Ureta opinedthat the lands may not be disposed pursuant to PP No. 649 and Sections 839 and 8810 of the Public LandAct (Commonwealth Act No. 141). Nevertheless, she explained that according to the record ofPENRO-Antique, there were 565 lots in Caluya Island that are titled while 141 titled lots inSemirara Island. The Land Registration Authority – Central Office, through Atty. Michael Nebrija,provided a partial list indicating 157 certificates of title for the Caluya Cadastre despite the existence ofPP No. 649. The complainants are not among these title holders.

In order to secure tenurial rights over the lands they occupy, PAKISAMA assisted thecomplainants from Brgy. Tinogboc to seek coverage of lands under the Comprehensive AgrarianReform Program (CARP) in February 2014. This was admitted by DAR Legal Affairs UndersecretaryLuis Meinrado C. Pañgulayan during the 1st IAWG meeting (9 February 2016). He said, as a responseto the request of PAKISAMA, that the concerned regional office and land reform officers in the areaconducted proper ocular inspection or site investigation. Apparently, there were no agriculturalactivities in the area, hence, Brgy. Tinogboc could not be covered under CARP. More so, theproclamation of former President Quezon in 1940, PP No. 649, declaring Semirara as a mineral land,disqualified the subject property from the CARP coverage.

7 Letter of PAKISAMA to Honorable Jose Luis Martin Gascon, October 30, 20158 <Letter sent by Caluya Mayor to CHR Chair Loretta Ann P. Rosales>9 Section 83, CA No. 141: “Upon the recommendation of the Secretary of Agriculture and Commerce, the President may

designate by proclamation any tract or tracts of land of the public domain as reservations for the use of the Commonwealth of the Philippines or of any of its branches, or of the inhabitants thereof, in accordance with regulations prescribed for this purpose, or for quasi-public uses or purposes when the public interest requires it, including reservations for highways, rights of way for railroads, hydraulic power sites, irrigation systems, communal pastures or leguas comunales, public parks, public quarries, public fishponds, workingmen's village and other improvements for the public benefit.”

10 Section 88, CA No. 141: “The tract or tracts of land reserved under the provisions of section eighty-three shall be non-alienable and shall not be subject to occupation, entry, sale, lease, or other disposition until again declared alienable under the provisions of this Act or by proclamation of the President.”

5

III. KEY FINDINGS

The resultant key findings from the IAWG meetings are being presented as follows:

1. The complainants from Brgy. Tinogboc, Semirara Island, lack tenurial security over the parcels of land they occupy, hence they are vulnerable to be forcibly evicted therefrom. Despite that, they exerted efforts to obtain tenurial security such as through the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program, albeit unsuccessfully, because the government's interest is primarily to pursue coal miningin Semirara Island.

In the course of the inquiry, it was settled that the residents of Sitio Sabang, Brgy. Tinogboc,Semirara Island were involuntarily displaced, without court order, from the land they occupied andwere relocated to Sitio Poocan, while others are still threatened with displacement. The one hundredtwenty-three (123) hectares of land that they occupied, possessed, and utilized were allegedly sold toprivate individuals without any consultation and investigation of their claims.7 In this case,complainants in Semirara Island occupied said lands, which a certain Dr. Antiquio X. Janairo donatedto the Municipality of Caluya on 11 October 1993. The affected residents were relocated to SitioPoocan after the heirs of Janairo revoked the donation.8 It is worth noting, however, that the claim ofJanairo over the land in dispute was based only on a tax declaration. The land was not titled under hisname as registered owner. Still, in the course of the working group's meetings, the Municipality ofCaluya did not show proof that residents who were relocated to Sitio Poocan were granted tenurialsecurity.

Still, the glaring fact remains that there are titled lots in Semirara Island. During the 11May 2016 IAWG meeting, Elsa Ureta, Chief-Lands, Patents & Deeds Section (LPDS), ProvincialEnvironment and Natural Resources Office (PENRO) – Antique, reported that there were two (2) LandClassification (LC) Maps covering the Municipality of Caluya, i.e., LC Map 790 (approved by Bureauof Forestry on December 1, 1928) and LC Map 2130 (approved by Bureau of Forestry on August 6,1957). She also said that there were 672 hectares of alienable and disposable (A&D) lands in SemiraraIsland pursuant to LC Map 2130, and 2,367.9358 hectares of A&D lands in Caluya Island pursuant toPLS 428-D (approved 10-11 December 1956). While there seemed to be A&D lands, Ms. Ureta opinedthat the lands may not be disposed pursuant to PP No. 649 and Sections 839 and 8810 of the Public LandAct (Commonwealth Act No. 141). Nevertheless, she explained that according to the record ofPENRO-Antique, there were 565 lots in Caluya Island that are titled while 141 titled lots inSemirara Island. The Land Registration Authority – Central Office, through Atty. Michael Nebrija,provided a partial list indicating 157 certificates of title for the Caluya Cadastre despite the existence ofPP No. 649. The complainants are not among these title holders.

In order to secure tenurial rights over the lands they occupy, PAKISAMA assisted thecomplainants from Brgy. Tinogboc to seek coverage of lands under the Comprehensive AgrarianReform Program (CARP) in February 2014. This was admitted by DAR Legal Affairs UndersecretaryLuis Meinrado C. Pañgulayan during the 1st IAWG meeting (9 February 2016). He said, as a responseto the request of PAKISAMA, that the concerned regional office and land reform officers in the areaconducted proper ocular inspection or site investigation. Apparently, there were no agriculturalactivities in the area, hence, Brgy. Tinogboc could not be covered under CARP. More so, theproclamation of former President Quezon in 1940, PP No. 649, declaring Semirara as a mineral land,disqualified the subject property from the CARP coverage.

7 Letter of PAKISAMA to Honorable Jose Luis Martin Gascon, October 30, 20158 <Letter sent by Caluya Mayor to CHR Chair Loretta Ann P. Rosales>9 Section 83, CA No. 141: “Upon the recommendation of the Secretary of Agriculture and Commerce, the President may

designate by proclamation any tract or tracts of land of the public domain as reservations for the use of the Commonwealth of the Philippines or of any of its branches, or of the inhabitants thereof, in accordance with regulations prescribed for this purpose, or for quasi-public uses or purposes when the public interest requires it, including reservations for highways, rights of way for railroads, hydraulic power sites, irrigation systems, communal pastures or leguas comunales, public parks, public quarries, public fishponds, workingmen's village and other improvements for the public benefit.”

10 Section 88, CA No. 141: “The tract or tracts of land reserved under the provisions of section eighty-three shall be non-alienable and shall not be subject to occupation, entry, sale, lease, or other disposition until again declared alienable under the provisions of this Act or by proclamation of the President.”

5

During the same meeting, Usec. Pañgulayan also opined on the issue of ownership of the landby Antiquio Janairo. He explained that Janairo was not the registered owner as there was no certificateof title issued covering the subject land. He concluded that Janairo was only in possession of a taxdeclaration, and that was not a conclusive proof of ownership.

After the IAWG's field visit on 23-26 May 2016, the DAR manifested that during the first yearsof the CARP, there were farmers in the area who filed a petition placing certain landholdings under thecoverage of CARP, while the DAR Provincial Office received applications for Voluntary Offer to Sell.Few families claimed large tracts of untitled land in the municipality. At first, the DAR deployed acomplete manpower complement for the DAR Municipal Office in Caluya. However, they were pulledout of the island in the mid 1990s upon knowing the existence of PP No. 649.11

Nevertheless, DAR records show that the land under the name of a certain Lito Lucena, agrantee of a free patent on 11 October 1960, was foreclosed by the Philippine National Bank (PNB),San Jose, Occidental Mindoro, which eventually became the registered owner of the same Lot No. 840(21,945 sq.m.), Pls-428-D, located in Barangay Semirara, Municipality of Caluya, Antique. On 7October 1994, the entirety of Lot No. 840 was awarded to a certain Eugenio A. Animas, Jr. as agrarianreform beneficiary (ARB) under TCT No. CLOA-1130. On 28 May 1991, another ARB in the name ofProspero Calinog was awarded Lot No. 21, Pls-428-D, located in Barangay Poblacion-I, Caluya,Antique under TCT No. CLOA-30 with an area of 1.4094 hectares. Both landholdings were coveredunder the Voluntary Offer to Sell (VOS) Scheme.

During the 2nd IAWG meeting, DAR-Region VI Director Gideon Umadhay and PARPO-Antique Ludimer Capague explained that the DAR has completed all the processes in the acquisition ofthe above mentioned landholdings. In the case of the PNB, certificate of land ownership awards(CLOAs) covering the subject properties had been issued and the compensation folder was transmittedto Land Bank of the Philippines-Agrarian Operations Center (LBP-AOC) for the land owner’scompensation. Records show that LBP-AOC, Iloilo City had booked an amount of Php 6,331.57 forLot 840 (TCT-T-1156) and Php 9,350.62 for Lot 21 (TCT-T-1155). However, upon knowing theexistence of PP649, the LBP-AOC returned the subsequent submission of DAR and, in like manner, theDAR had stopped processing compensation folder coming from the Municipality of Caluya.

In efforts to cover lands in Caluya, Antique under CARP, the DAR used as reference theregistered free patents and the tax declarations, in effect showing that the lands were agricultural.DAR's land acquisition and distribution processes were eventually halted when they were informedabout PP No. 649 in 1990. Curiously, the records would show that they still awarded Lot No. 840 inBrgy. Semirara to a certain Animas under TCT No. CLOA-1130 in 1994, and issued TCT No. CLOA-30 earlier on 28 May 1991.

11 Page 6, 31 May 2016 Memorandum from Florentino D. Siladan, OIC Assistant Regional Director; Ludimer A. Capague, OIC PARPO I/CAO; Froebel A. Sardina, MARPO-Cluster 1 Re: Report on the Participation of DAR Officialsto the Fact-Finding Mission Conducted by Commission on Human Rights (CHR) on human rights situation in the Island of Caluya & Semirara, Caluya, Antique on May 23 to 26, 2016

6

During the same meeting, Usec. Pañgulayan also opined on the issue of ownership of the landby Antiquio Janairo. He explained that Janairo was not the registered owner as there was no certificateof title issued covering the subject land. He concluded that Janairo was only in possession of a taxdeclaration, and that was not a conclusive proof of ownership.

After the IAWG's field visit on 23-26 May 2016, the DAR manifested that during the first yearsof the CARP, there were farmers in the area who filed a petition placing certain landholdings under thecoverage of CARP, while the DAR Provincial Office received applications for Voluntary Offer to Sell.Few families claimed large tracts of untitled land in the municipality. At first, the DAR deployed acomplete manpower complement for the DAR Municipal Office in Caluya. However, they were pulledout of the island in the mid 1990s upon knowing the existence of PP No. 649.11

Nevertheless, DAR records show that the land under the name of a certain Lito Lucena, agrantee of a free patent on 11 October 1960, was foreclosed by the Philippine National Bank (PNB),San Jose, Occidental Mindoro, which eventually became the registered owner of the same Lot No. 840(21,945 sq.m.), Pls-428-D, located in Barangay Semirara, Municipality of Caluya, Antique. On 7October 1994, the entirety of Lot No. 840 was awarded to a certain Eugenio A. Animas, Jr. as agrarianreform beneficiary (ARB) under TCT No. CLOA-1130. On 28 May 1991, another ARB in the name ofProspero Calinog was awarded Lot No. 21, Pls-428-D, located in Barangay Poblacion-I, Caluya,Antique under TCT No. CLOA-30 with an area of 1.4094 hectares. Both landholdings were coveredunder the Voluntary Offer to Sell (VOS) Scheme.

During the 2nd IAWG meeting, DAR-Region VI Director Gideon Umadhay and PARPO-Antique Ludimer Capague explained that the DAR has completed all the processes in the acquisition ofthe above mentioned landholdings. In the case of the PNB, certificate of land ownership awards(CLOAs) covering the subject properties had been issued and the compensation folder was transmittedto Land Bank of the Philippines-Agrarian Operations Center (LBP-AOC) for the land owner’scompensation. Records show that LBP-AOC, Iloilo City had booked an amount of Php 6,331.57 forLot 840 (TCT-T-1156) and Php 9,350.62 for Lot 21 (TCT-T-1155). However, upon knowing theexistence of PP649, the LBP-AOC returned the subsequent submission of DAR and, in like manner, theDAR had stopped processing compensation folder coming from the Municipality of Caluya.

In efforts to cover lands in Caluya, Antique under CARP, the DAR used as reference theregistered free patents and the tax declarations, in effect showing that the lands were agricultural.DAR's land acquisition and distribution processes were eventually halted when they were informedabout PP No. 649 in 1990. Curiously, the records would show that they still awarded Lot No. 840 inBrgy. Semirara to a certain Animas under TCT No. CLOA-1130 in 1994, and issued TCT No. CLOA-30 earlier on 28 May 1991.

11 Page 6, 31 May 2016 Memorandum from Florentino D. Siladan, OIC Assistant Regional Director; Ludimer A. Capague, OIC PARPO I/CAO; Froebel A. Sardina, MARPO-Cluster 1 Re: Report on the Participation of DAR Officialsto the Fact-Finding Mission Conducted by Commission on Human Rights (CHR) on human rights situation in the Island of Caluya & Semirara, Caluya, Antique on May 23 to 26, 2016

6

Notably, the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP, 2002-2011) of Caluya, Antique wouldshow that it was an agricultural area because 65.35% of its total land area was agricultural. This is thesame classification that was being observed in 2014, when the complainants and PAKISAMA sought toavail CARP coverage for their tenurial security. The CLUP provided this breakdown of general landuse in the Municipality, as follows:

Land Use Category Area (Has) % to Total AreaBuilt Up Area 213.6037 1.82Agriculture 7,660.07 65.35Forest 2,846.00 24.28Swamps 49.99 0.43Special Use:

Mining/Quarrying 256.85 2.19

Grassland/Pasteur Land 694.1171 5.92

TOTAL 11,720.6275 100

Stated differently, these data would show that, while the Islands of Semirara, Caluya and Sibayare being considered as coal mining reserves pursuant to PP No. 649, there are lands identified foragriculture, grassland growth or pasteur.

In relation, the NDA, the Municipal Government, and the SMPC confirmed the plan and thecorresponding efforts to put up the dairy farm project in Unong, Semirara Island. During thecommunity dialogue in Sitio Sabang on 25 May 2016, it appeared that there was a boundary issuerelating to the proposal to build a dairy farm. Sabang was fenced and napier grasses were also growntherein, thus making the community residents believe that Sabang was the area intended for the saiddairy farm project. Apparently, residents claimed that an area located in Unong, contiguous toSabang, was likewise enclosed to form part of the dairy farm.

During the same meeting, Ms. Shiela Maniego, Corporate Social Responsibility Officer of theSMPC, referred to the DOE in relation to updates on the approval of the dairy farm project. She saidthat, at first, the company was interested in engaging with the said program in Unong becauserehabilitation12 there was already ongoing. The produce, specifically the milk, was intended for some500 to 600 first-graders. She added that schools have high rates of malnutrition. As a consequencethereof, she claimed that the budget of the LGU would be greatly affected if funds would be allocatedfor the feeding program in order to address this due to the chronic state of malnutrition. She similarlyclarified that the relocation area due to the mining contract, as against the location of the dairy project,was different. The place that the SMPC was developing into a farm was different.

NDA’s Mr. Bitolinamisa III claimed in 2012 that the SMPC informed them of the latter’sintention to build a dairy farm. In fact, Mr. Bitolinamisa III said they had the opportunity to conduct anaerial view on 23 August 2012 of the area identified by the SMPC. During that time, the project sitethey identified was Unong, which has a land area 76 hectares, but the NDA considered it is not enougharea and thus proposed 100 hectares. Since the project was for rehabilitation, Mr. Bitolinamisa IIIsuggested to plant napier grass so they can see the viability of the area for the dairy project. He saidthat they visited the area again on 9 June 2014. Around 23 hectares were already covered with napiergrass, but the growth of the grass was not good. Hence, he suggested to look for a nursery to plantnapier grass and other planting materials.

12 Mine rehabilitation is defined as a process used to repair the impacts of mining on the environment. The long-term objectives of rehabilitation can vary from simply converting an area to a safe and stable condition to restoring the pre-mining conditions as closely as possible with all the area's environmental values intact and establishing a land use capability that is functional and proximate to the land use prior to the disturbance of the mine area. (Revised Implementing Rules and Regulations of R.A. 7942, otherwise known as the Philippine Mining Act of 1995, DENR A.O. No. 2010-21) http://www.mgb.gov.ph/images/stories/CDAO-Final.pdf (accessed 9 Oct. 2019)

7

Notably, the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP, 2002-2011) of Caluya, Antique wouldshow that it was an agricultural area because 65.35% of its total land area was agricultural. This is thesame classification that was being observed in 2014, when the complainants and PAKISAMA sought toavail CARP coverage for their tenurial security. The CLUP provided this breakdown of general landuse in the Municipality, as follows:

Land Use Category Area (Has) % to Total AreaBuilt Up Area 213.6037 1.82Agriculture 7,660.07 65.35Forest 2,846.00 24.28Swamps 49.99 0.43Special Use:

Mining/Quarrying 256.85 2.19

Grassland/Pasteur Land 694.1171 5.92

TOTAL 11,720.6275 100

Stated differently, these data would show that, while the Islands of Semirara, Caluya and Sibayare being considered as coal mining reserves pursuant to PP No. 649, there are lands identified foragriculture, grassland growth or pasteur.

In relation, the NDA, the Municipal Government, and the SMPC confirmed the plan and thecorresponding efforts to put up the dairy farm project in Unong, Semirara Island. During thecommunity dialogue in Sitio Sabang on 25 May 2016, it appeared that there was a boundary issuerelating to the proposal to build a dairy farm. Sabang was fenced and napier grasses were also growntherein, thus making the community residents believe that Sabang was the area intended for the saiddairy farm project. Apparently, residents claimed that an area located in Unong, contiguous toSabang, was likewise enclosed to form part of the dairy farm.

During the same meeting, Ms. Shiela Maniego, Corporate Social Responsibility Officer of theSMPC, referred to the DOE in relation to updates on the approval of the dairy farm project. She saidthat, at first, the company was interested in engaging with the said program in Unong becauserehabilitation12 there was already ongoing. The produce, specifically the milk, was intended for some500 to 600 first-graders. She added that schools have high rates of malnutrition. As a consequencethereof, she claimed that the budget of the LGU would be greatly affected if funds would be allocatedfor the feeding program in order to address this due to the chronic state of malnutrition. She similarlyclarified that the relocation area due to the mining contract, as against the location of the dairy project,was different. The place that the SMPC was developing into a farm was different.

NDA’s Mr. Bitolinamisa III claimed in 2012 that the SMPC informed them of the latter’sintention to build a dairy farm. In fact, Mr. Bitolinamisa III said they had the opportunity to conduct anaerial view on 23 August 2012 of the area identified by the SMPC. During that time, the project sitethey identified was Unong, which has a land area 76 hectares, but the NDA considered it is not enougharea and thus proposed 100 hectares. Since the project was for rehabilitation, Mr. Bitolinamisa IIIsuggested to plant napier grass so they can see the viability of the area for the dairy project. He saidthat they visited the area again on 9 June 2014. Around 23 hectares were already covered with napiergrass, but the growth of the grass was not good. Hence, he suggested to look for a nursery to plantnapier grass and other planting materials.

12 Mine rehabilitation is defined as a process used to repair the impacts of mining on the environment. The long-term objectives of rehabilitation can vary from simply converting an area to a safe and stable condition to restoring the pre-mining conditions as closely as possible with all the area's environmental values intact and establishing a land use capability that is functional and proximate to the land use prior to the disturbance of the mine area. (Revised Implementing Rules and Regulations of R.A. 7942, otherwise known as the Philippine Mining Act of 1995, DENR A.O. No. 2010-21) http://www.mgb.gov.ph/images/stories/CDAO-Final.pdf (accessed 9 Oct. 2019)

7

Notably, the plan to build a dairy farm in the former Unong coal mine in Semirara Island, whichwas closed in 2000, is part of rehabilitation efforts thereon. Building a residential area in Unong forthose without tenurial security was not considered. Instead, relocation efforts was made in the moredistant area of Sitio Poocan.

2. The government relies on Proclamation No. 649, s. 1940 (PP No. 649) to ensure that coal mining in Semirara Island would continue. The government prioritizes the conduct of coal mining through the Semirara Mining and Power Corporation (SMPC) as its agent.

According to the DOE, it seemed that PP No. 649,13 classifying Semirara Island, including theislands of Caluya and Sibay as coal mining reservation is still valid and existing. Indubitably, the DOEposits that there are no alienable and disposable parcel of lands within the islands. Nonetheless, theDOE admitted that the DENR should be consulted to confirm if there were indeed alienable anddisposable lands within Semirara Island.

The DOE likewise cited the Supreme Court in the case of Republic vs. Cortez, G.R. No.186639, 5 February 2014, which stated that “the thirty (30)-year period of prescription for purposes ofacquiring ownership and registration of public land under Section 14 (2) of P.D. No. 1529 only beginsfrom the moment the State expressly declares that the public dominion property is no longer intendedfor public service or the development of the national wealth or that the property has been convertedinto patrimonial. x x x [A]lthough lands of the public domain that are considered patrimonial may beacquired by prescription under Section 14(2) of P.D. No. 1529, before acquisitive prescription couldcommence, the property sought to be registered must not only be classified as alienable anddisposable; it must also be declared by the State that it is no longer intended for public use, publicservice or the development of the national wealth. Thus, absent an express declaration by the State, theland remains to be property of public dominion.”

The DOE also called our attention to the 18 October 2007 opinion14 of the Office of theRegional Technical Director-Land Management Services, DENR-Region VI (Western Visayas), whichstated that the Islands of Semirara, Sibay and Caluya were classified as alienable and disposable (now“agricultural land” under the 1987 Constitution) in 1928. Proclamation No. 649, reclassifying theislands into mineral lands was issued on 20 November 1940. Consequently, the required period withinwhich prescription may set in as basis of acquisition of ownership has never been complied with by anyclaimant or applicant occupying or possessing the subject area. However, granting for the sake ofargument that any person has occupied and/or possessed the lot and thus complied with all theconditions of the law vesting upon him imperfect title prior to Proclamation No. 649, still he was notentitled to apply for titling under the 'Torrens System.' Under our existing jurisprudence, classificationmust be categorical, meaning the land must be either completely alienable and disposable (now'agricultural' land under the 1987 Constitution) or completely mineral land. As long as miningoperations were being undertaken thereon or underneath, it did not cease to be so and become alienableand disposable, even if only partly so, because it was enclosed with fence and has been cultivated bythose who are occupying the surface. Once minerals are discovered in the lands, whatever the use towhich it is being devoted at the time, such use may discontinued (sic) by the State to enable it to extractthe mineral therein in the exercise of its sovereign prerogative. The land is, therefore, converted tomineral land. However, in the event that vested right had been conferred to the occupant/possessorwhen the land was converted to mineral land, the occupant/possessor is entitled to just compensationfor the loss sustained by him pursuant to the Mining Law or in appropriate expropriation proceedings.15

During the 1st IAWG meeting, DOE manifested that the SMPC is entitled to conduct miningactivities in the 5,500 hectares of Semirara Island, 3,000 hectares of Caluya Island, and 4,200 hectaresof Sibay Island, or a total of 12,700 hectares. DOE further alleged that the three islands were coveredby Coal Operating Contract (COC) No. 5 entered into by the Philippine Government on 11 July 1977

13 Establishing as coal mining reservations all the coal deposits and coal-bearing lands in the southeastern portion of the province and island of Mindoro, and the islands of Semirara, Sibay and Caluya, Province of Antique, Philippines.

14 18 October 2007 Letter of Office of the Regional Technical Director-Land Management Services, Region VI, Western Visayas, c/o Lormelyn E. Claudio – OIC Regional Executive Director; letter is addressed to a certain Atty. John R. Sadullo

15 Republic v. CA, G.R. No. L-43938, April 15, 1988

8

Notably, the plan to build a dairy farm in the former Unong coal mine in Semirara Island, whichwas closed in 2000, is part of rehabilitation efforts thereon. Building a residential area in Unong forthose without tenurial security was not considered. Instead, relocation efforts was made in the moredistant area of Sitio Poocan.

2. The government relies on Proclamation No. 649, s. 1940 (PP No. 649) to ensure that coal mining in Semirara Island would continue. The government prioritizes the conduct of coal mining through the Semirara Mining and Power Corporation (SMPC) as its agent.

According to the DOE, it seemed that PP No. 649,13 classifying Semirara Island, including theislands of Caluya and Sibay as coal mining reservation is still valid and existing. Indubitably, the DOEposits that there are no alienable and disposable parcel of lands within the islands. Nonetheless, theDOE admitted that the DENR should be consulted to confirm if there were indeed alienable anddisposable lands within Semirara Island.

The DOE likewise cited the Supreme Court in the case of Republic vs. Cortez, G.R. No.186639, 5 February 2014, which stated that “the thirty (30)-year period of prescription for purposes ofacquiring ownership and registration of public land under Section 14 (2) of P.D. No. 1529 only beginsfrom the moment the State expressly declares that the public dominion property is no longer intendedfor public service or the development of the national wealth or that the property has been convertedinto patrimonial. x x x [A]lthough lands of the public domain that are considered patrimonial may beacquired by prescription under Section 14(2) of P.D. No. 1529, before acquisitive prescription couldcommence, the property sought to be registered must not only be classified as alienable anddisposable; it must also be declared by the State that it is no longer intended for public use, publicservice or the development of the national wealth. Thus, absent an express declaration by the State, theland remains to be property of public dominion.”

The DOE also called our attention to the 18 October 2007 opinion14 of the Office of theRegional Technical Director-Land Management Services, DENR-Region VI (Western Visayas), whichstated that the Islands of Semirara, Sibay and Caluya were classified as alienable and disposable (now“agricultural land” under the 1987 Constitution) in 1928. Proclamation No. 649, reclassifying theislands into mineral lands was issued on 20 November 1940. Consequently, the required period withinwhich prescription may set in as basis of acquisition of ownership has never been complied with by anyclaimant or applicant occupying or possessing the subject area. However, granting for the sake ofargument that any person has occupied and/or possessed the lot and thus complied with all theconditions of the law vesting upon him imperfect title prior to Proclamation No. 649, still he was notentitled to apply for titling under the 'Torrens System.' Under our existing jurisprudence, classificationmust be categorical, meaning the land must be either completely alienable and disposable (now'agricultural' land under the 1987 Constitution) or completely mineral land. As long as miningoperations were being undertaken thereon or underneath, it did not cease to be so and become alienableand disposable, even if only partly so, because it was enclosed with fence and has been cultivated bythose who are occupying the surface. Once minerals are discovered in the lands, whatever the use towhich it is being devoted at the time, such use may discontinued (sic) by the State to enable it to extractthe mineral therein in the exercise of its sovereign prerogative. The land is, therefore, converted tomineral land. However, in the event that vested right had been conferred to the occupant/possessorwhen the land was converted to mineral land, the occupant/possessor is entitled to just compensationfor the loss sustained by him pursuant to the Mining Law or in appropriate expropriation proceedings.15

During the 1st IAWG meeting, DOE manifested that the SMPC is entitled to conduct miningactivities in the 5,500 hectares of Semirara Island, 3,000 hectares of Caluya Island, and 4,200 hectaresof Sibay Island, or a total of 12,700 hectares. DOE further alleged that the three islands were coveredby Coal Operating Contract (COC) No. 5 entered into by the Philippine Government on 11 July 1977

13 Establishing as coal mining reservations all the coal deposits and coal-bearing lands in the southeastern portion of the province and island of Mindoro, and the islands of Semirara, Sibay and Caluya, Province of Antique, Philippines.

14 18 October 2007 Letter of Office of the Regional Technical Director-Land Management Services, Region VI, Western Visayas, c/o Lormelyn E. Claudio – OIC Regional Executive Director; letter is addressed to a certain Atty. John R. Sadullo

15 Republic v. CA, G.R. No. L-43938, April 15, 1988

8

initially with Vulcan Industrial & Mineral Exploration Corporation and Sulu Sea Oil DevelopmentCorporation. In 1980, a deed of assignment was made in favor of then Semirara Coal Corporation(SCC). On 13 May 2008 (i.e., 31 years from 1977), the original term of COC No. 5 was extended fromthe original period of 32 years under Section 11 (b) of P.D. No. 972, as amended, to an additionalperiod of 19 years, adding up to a total of 50 years, as provided for in Section 2, Article XII, 1987Constitution.16 COC No. 5 would expire on 14 July 2027. Further details on the history of COC No. 5are stated below:

TIMELINE OF COAL OPERATING CONTRACT NO. 5 (COC NO. 5)DATE EVENT

11 July 1977 COC No. 5 was entered into among the now defunct Energy DevelopmentBoard, Vulcan Industrial & Mineral Exploration Corp., Sulu Oil Development

Corp.January 1978 Seafront Petroleum Corp. farmed-in with the original contracting parties.7 April 1980 Rights and obligations of Vulcan, Sulu Sea and Seafront in COC No. 5 were

transferred to then Semirara Coal Corp. (SCC) by virtue of a Deed ofAssignment.

25 June 1980 Deed of Assignment was approved by the defunct Bureau of EnergyDevelopment.

8 June 1983 COC No. 5 was entered anew into between SCC (SMPC's parent company) andthe then Ministry of Energy for a period of 29 years, or until 13 July 2012.

13 May 2008 The term of COC No. 5 was extended for a period of fifteen (15) years, from 13 July 2012 to 14 July 2027.

12 August 2009 Semirara Mining Corp. (formerly SCC) requested the Department of Energy toamend COC No. 5 contract area to include coal bearing areas in Caluya and

Sibay Islands. 12 November

2009Philippine Government thru DOE entered into a second amendment to COC No.5 with SMC covering the modified areas to include Caluya and Sibay, covering

an additional area of 3,000 hectares and 4,200 hectares, respectively.6 August 2018 COC No. 5 was further amended wherein the Corporation relinquished coal

blocks 294, 375, 377 and 16, and replaced with coal blocks 214, 215, 254 and257 all located in Semirara Island. It also relinquished the areas in Caluya and

Sibay, Antique.

Section 11 (b) Presidential Decree No. 972, or the Coal Development Act of 1976, provides that“the exploration period under every coal operating contract shall be for two (2) years. If the operatorhas complied with its exploration work obligations, the exploration period may be extended foranother two (2) years. The coal operating contract shall lapse unless coal of commercial quantity ismeasured during the exploration period or at the end thereof in any area covered by the coal operatingcontract. If coal of commercial quantity is measured, the coal operating contract shall remain inforce for development and production during the balance of the exploration period and/or for anadditional period ranging from ten (10) to twenty (20) years, thereafter renewable for a series ofthree (3)-year periods not exceeding twelve (12) years under such terms and conditions as may beagreed upon by the parties.” (emphasis ours) As such, P.D. 972 would allow a total of not more than34-year term for a coal operating contract, inclusive of the 4-year maximum period for exploration.

In contrast, Article XIV, Section 8 of the 1973 Constitution, which was in effect until 1986,stated that “all lands of the public domain, waters, minerals, coal, petroleum and other mineral oils,all forces of potential energy, fisheries, wildlife, and other natural resources of the Philippines belongto the State. With the exception of agricultural, industrial or commercial, residential, and resettlementlands of the public domain, natural resources shall not be alienated, and no license, concession, or

16 26 April 2016 Letter of Atty. Rino Abad, DOE to Dr. Renante Basas, HRCMO-CHR

9

initially with Vulcan Industrial & Mineral Exploration Corporation and Sulu Sea Oil DevelopmentCorporation. In 1980, a deed of assignment was made in favor of then Semirara Coal Corporation(SCC). On 13 May 2008 (i.e., 31 years from 1977), the original term of COC No. 5 was extended fromthe original period of 32 years under Section 11 (b) of P.D. No. 972, as amended, to an additionalperiod of 19 years, adding up to a total of 50 years, as provided for in Section 2, Article XII, 1987Constitution.16 COC No. 5 would expire on 14 July 2027. Further details on the history of COC No. 5are stated below:

TIMELINE OF COAL OPERATING CONTRACT NO. 5 (COC NO. 5)DATE EVENT

11 July 1977 COC No. 5 was entered into among the now defunct Energy DevelopmentBoard, Vulcan Industrial & Mineral Exploration Corp., Sulu Oil Development

Corp.January 1978 Seafront Petroleum Corp. farmed-in with the original contracting parties.7 April 1980 Rights and obligations of Vulcan, Sulu Sea and Seafront in COC No. 5 were

transferred to then Semirara Coal Corp. (SCC) by virtue of a Deed ofAssignment.

25 June 1980 Deed of Assignment was approved by the defunct Bureau of EnergyDevelopment.

8 June 1983 COC No. 5 was entered anew into between SCC (SMPC's parent company) andthe then Ministry of Energy for a period of 29 years, or until 13 July 2012.

13 May 2008 The term of COC No. 5 was extended for a period of fifteen (15) years, from 13 July 2012 to 14 July 2027.

12 August 2009 Semirara Mining Corp. (formerly SCC) requested the Department of Energy toamend COC No. 5 contract area to include coal bearing areas in Caluya and

Sibay Islands. 12 November

2009Philippine Government thru DOE entered into a second amendment to COC No.5 with SMC covering the modified areas to include Caluya and Sibay, covering

an additional area of 3,000 hectares and 4,200 hectares, respectively.6 August 2018 COC No. 5 was further amended wherein the Corporation relinquished coal

blocks 294, 375, 377 and 16, and replaced with coal blocks 214, 215, 254 and257 all located in Semirara Island. It also relinquished the areas in Caluya and

Sibay, Antique.

Section 11 (b) Presidential Decree No. 972, or the Coal Development Act of 1976, provides that“the exploration period under every coal operating contract shall be for two (2) years. If the operatorhas complied with its exploration work obligations, the exploration period may be extended foranother two (2) years. The coal operating contract shall lapse unless coal of commercial quantity ismeasured during the exploration period or at the end thereof in any area covered by the coal operatingcontract. If coal of commercial quantity is measured, the coal operating contract shall remain inforce for development and production during the balance of the exploration period and/or for anadditional period ranging from ten (10) to twenty (20) years, thereafter renewable for a series ofthree (3)-year periods not exceeding twelve (12) years under such terms and conditions as may beagreed upon by the parties.” (emphasis ours) As such, P.D. 972 would allow a total of not more than34-year term for a coal operating contract, inclusive of the 4-year maximum period for exploration.

In contrast, Article XIV, Section 8 of the 1973 Constitution, which was in effect until 1986,stated that “all lands of the public domain, waters, minerals, coal, petroleum and other mineral oils,all forces of potential energy, fisheries, wildlife, and other natural resources of the Philippines belongto the State. With the exception of agricultural, industrial or commercial, residential, and resettlementlands of the public domain, natural resources shall not be alienated, and no license, concession, or

16 26 April 2016 Letter of Atty. Rino Abad, DOE to Dr. Renante Basas, HRCMO-CHR

9

lease for the exploration, development, exploitation, or utilization of any of the natural resourcesshall be granted for a period exceeding twenty-five years, renewable for not more than twenty-fiveyears, except as to water rights for irrigation, water supply, fisheries, or industrial uses other than thedevelopment of water power, in which cases, beneficial use may be the measure and the limit of thegrant.” DOE categorically admitted that the initial period of COC No. 5 is for 32 years.

The timeline would show that there were interruptions of the period due to changes of thecontractor in 1980 and 1983. The DOE would not see anything unlawful if the government agreed, in1983, with the renewal of COC No. 5's term for twenty-nine (29) years from 1983 until 2012. The 1973Constitution is clear that a single concession, inclusive of the exploration phase, shall be for twenty-five (25) years at any given time (both for the initial and renewal stage), while in PD No. 972 itself theoriginal term is twenty (20) years subject to a renewal of “a series of three (3)-year periods notexceeding twelve (12) years.”

Still, it was not shown if the SMPC was the only one capable of mining coal in the islands ofSemirara, Caluya and Sibay. It was evident however that the government consistently granted theconcession to said company. Section 6 of PD No. 972 allows the DOE to adopt any of the followingalternative procedures:

By offering an area or areas for bids, specifying the minimum requirements and conditions inaccordance with said decree; or

By negotiating with a qualified party for a coal operating contract under the terms andconditions provided in PD No. 972.

By law, no person shall be entitled to more than fifteen (15) blocks (i.e., each block contains1,000 hectares, more or less) of coal lands in any one coal region. In 2013, the SMPC was also awardedcoal concessions in Bulalacao, Oriental Mindoro (7,000 hectares) and in Maitum and Kaimba, Provinceof Saranggani (5,000 hectares), which are parts of different coal regions.17

3. Governance mechanisms are deficient to ensure the protection and promotion of the complainants' human rights.

Aside from their problem on lacking tenurial security over the lands they occupy, thecomplainants are also concerned about the adverse impacts of coal mining to the environment. Theytestified on their persistent efforts to call the attention of the respective government agencies, such asthe DOE, DENR, DOH, DOLE, the provincial and municipal government, among others. There wereinstances during the IAWG meetings that whenever the complainants would raise their observations onthese adverse impacts, the government agencies would cast doubt on the veracity of such testimonies,18

manifest lack of readily available information,19 or conveniently say that the matter falls under thejurisdiction of other agencies.20 Relative thereto, the complainants insist on the lack of transparency andaccountability in the governance mechanisms that are supposedly in place to regulate the conduct ofcoal mining in Semirara Island, and eventually ensure protection and promotion of human rights.

17 p.233, SMPC 2018 Integrated Annual Report http://www.semiraramining.com/uploads/documents/PDFs/2018%20Integrated%20Annual%20Report%20-%20Glossy.pdf (accessed 5 Nov. 2019)

18 Particular instances are: (a.) During the 2nd and 8th IAWG meetings, when DOE raised doubt on the testimony that teachers and students suffer respiratory problems due to coal dust; (b.) During the 7th IAWG meeting, when EMB wouldrequest from the complainants to document their claims by taking pictures;

19 Particular instances were evident: (a.) During the 6th IAWG meeting, when DOH said that they rely on the health records submitted by the hospital owned by SMPC; (b.) When the LMB manifested in a letter to CHR that Lots 900, 901, 902, 912 (Pls-428-D), 913 and 914 in Barangay Tinogboc, Semirara Island are not recorded in their lot index cards. Hence, LMB cannot ascertain whether or not these lots are covered by PP No. 649; (c.) During the 5th IAWG meeting, when the NCIP admits to lack of information on possession of Ips/ICCs of lands that could be titled as part of ancestral domains;

20 Particular instances include the following: (a.) During the 8th IAWG meeting, when MGB said that the provincial government should prevent illegal quarrying of limestone in Semirara Island, instead of MGB (b.); During the 4th IAWG meeting, when DOLE said that concerns on occupational safety and health falls under the jurisdiction of DOE, not of DOLE;

10

lease for the exploration, development, exploitation, or utilization of any of the natural resourcesshall be granted for a period exceeding twenty-five years, renewable for not more than twenty-fiveyears, except as to water rights for irrigation, water supply, fisheries, or industrial uses other than thedevelopment of water power, in which cases, beneficial use may be the measure and the limit of thegrant.” DOE categorically admitted that the initial period of COC No. 5 is for 32 years.

The timeline would show that there were interruptions of the period due to changes of thecontractor in 1980 and 1983. The DOE would not see anything unlawful if the government agreed, in1983, with the renewal of COC No. 5's term for twenty-nine (29) years from 1983 until 2012. The 1973Constitution is clear that a single concession, inclusive of the exploration phase, shall be for twenty-five (25) years at any given time (both for the initial and renewal stage), while in PD No. 972 itself theoriginal term is twenty (20) years subject to a renewal of “a series of three (3)-year periods notexceeding twelve (12) years.”

Still, it was not shown if the SMPC was the only one capable of mining coal in the islands ofSemirara, Caluya and Sibay. It was evident however that the government consistently granted theconcession to said company. Section 6 of PD No. 972 allows the DOE to adopt any of the followingalternative procedures:

By offering an area or areas for bids, specifying the minimum requirements and conditions inaccordance with said decree; or

By negotiating with a qualified party for a coal operating contract under the terms andconditions provided in PD No. 972.

By law, no person shall be entitled to more than fifteen (15) blocks (i.e., each block contains1,000 hectares, more or less) of coal lands in any one coal region. In 2013, the SMPC was also awardedcoal concessions in Bulalacao, Oriental Mindoro (7,000 hectares) and in Maitum and Kaimba, Provinceof Saranggani (5,000 hectares), which are parts of different coal regions.17

3. Governance mechanisms are deficient to ensure the protection and promotion of the complainants' human rights.

Aside from their problem on lacking tenurial security over the lands they occupy, thecomplainants are also concerned about the adverse impacts of coal mining to the environment. Theytestified on their persistent efforts to call the attention of the respective government agencies, such asthe DOE, DENR, DOH, DOLE, the provincial and municipal government, among others. There wereinstances during the IAWG meetings that whenever the complainants would raise their observations onthese adverse impacts, the government agencies would cast doubt on the veracity of such testimonies,18

manifest lack of readily available information,19 or conveniently say that the matter falls under thejurisdiction of other agencies.20 Relative thereto, the complainants insist on the lack of transparency andaccountability in the governance mechanisms that are supposedly in place to regulate the conduct ofcoal mining in Semirara Island, and eventually ensure protection and promotion of human rights.

17 p.233, SMPC 2018 Integrated Annual Report http://www.semiraramining.com/uploads/documents/PDFs/2018%20Integrated%20Annual%20Report%20-%20Glossy.pdf (accessed 5 Nov. 2019)

18 Particular instances are: (a.) During the 2nd and 8th IAWG meetings, when DOE raised doubt on the testimony that teachers and students suffer respiratory problems due to coal dust; (b.) During the 7th IAWG meeting, when EMB wouldrequest from the complainants to document their claims by taking pictures;

19 Particular instances were evident: (a.) During the 6th IAWG meeting, when DOH said that they rely on the health records submitted by the hospital owned by SMPC; (b.) When the LMB manifested in a letter to CHR that Lots 900, 901, 902, 912 (Pls-428-D), 913 and 914 in Barangay Tinogboc, Semirara Island are not recorded in their lot index cards. Hence, LMB cannot ascertain whether or not these lots are covered by PP No. 649; (c.) During the 5th IAWG meeting, when the NCIP admits to lack of information on possession of Ips/ICCs of lands that could be titled as part of ancestral domains;

20 Particular instances include the following: (a.) During the 8th IAWG meeting, when MGB said that the provincial government should prevent illegal quarrying of limestone in Semirara Island, instead of MGB (b.); During the 4th IAWG meeting, when DOLE said that concerns on occupational safety and health falls under the jurisdiction of DOE, not of DOLE;

10

At this point, the key findings of gaps in the applicable governance mechanisms are beingpresented, as follows:

3.A. The need for transparency on information, education and communication (IEC) pertaining toenvironmental impacts of coal mining in Semirara Island

According to the 10 May 2016 submission of the Mining Industry Coordinating Council(MICC) Secretariat to the IAWG, citing the 2nd Philippine Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative(PH-EITI), the SMPC accounted for about 96% of total coal production of the country from 2009-2015. It contributed an annual average of Php1.3 billion in tax revenue and government share from thesale of coal during the same period. Still, the MICC Secretariat manifested that such financial benefitsdo not take into consideration the environmental and social costs of the coal mining operations. Asreported by EMB during the 7th IAWG meeting, the project components, with plans for expansionbeing indicated, are as follows:

PROJECT COMPONENT EXISTING OPERATION PROPOSED EXPANSIONMine pits Panian Pit

Total pit area of 400hasUltimate pit depth of 300 meters below sea level (mbsl)

Narra Pit (East Panian)Total pit area of 400hasUltimate pit depth of 300mbsl

Molave Pit (West Panian)Total pit area of 400hasUltimate pit depth of 300mbsl

Coal Auxiliary Stockpile Existing Panian auxiliary stockpile can hold 1.2MMT to 1.3MMT clean coal with 16has area

Molave auxiliary stockpile with 8has area

Coal Conveyance System 6 km Belt Conveyor System (conveyor width is 1.2m)

Upgrade the existing 6 km Belt Conveyor System from 1.2m to 1.4m width

Install additional 5.2km conveyor line to connect the Molave auxiliary stockpile to the existing Panian stockpile

Loading Pier Dapdap Pier - 7has

East Dike Wharf - 10has

Construction of additional 2x2m shiplines with individualreclaimer and shiploader at Dapdap Pier

Coal Blending Stockpile(CBS)

Dapdap CBS with capacity of 100,000MT and area of 4has

Additional capacity of 40,000MT and additional area of 3has

11

At this point, the key findings of gaps in the applicable governance mechanisms are beingpresented, as follows:

3.A. The need for transparency on information, education and communication (IEC) pertaining toenvironmental impacts of coal mining in Semirara Island

According to the 10 May 2016 submission of the Mining Industry Coordinating Council(MICC) Secretariat to the IAWG, citing the 2nd Philippine Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative(PH-EITI), the SMPC accounted for about 96% of total coal production of the country from 2009-2015. It contributed an annual average of Php1.3 billion in tax revenue and government share from thesale of coal during the same period. Still, the MICC Secretariat manifested that such financial benefitsdo not take into consideration the environmental and social costs of the coal mining operations. Asreported by EMB during the 7th IAWG meeting, the project components, with plans for expansionbeing indicated, are as follows:

PROJECT COMPONENT EXISTING OPERATION PROPOSED EXPANSIONMine pits Panian Pit

Total pit area of 400hasUltimate pit depth of 300 meters below sea level (mbsl)

Narra Pit (East Panian)Total pit area of 400hasUltimate pit depth of 300mbsl

Molave Pit (West Panian)Total pit area of 400hasUltimate pit depth of 300mbsl

Coal Auxiliary Stockpile Existing Panian auxiliary stockpile can hold 1.2MMT to 1.3MMT clean coal with 16has area

Molave auxiliary stockpile with 8has area

Coal Conveyance System 6 km Belt Conveyor System (conveyor width is 1.2m)

Upgrade the existing 6 km Belt Conveyor System from 1.2m to 1.4m width

Install additional 5.2km conveyor line to connect the Molave auxiliary stockpile to the existing Panian stockpile

Loading Pier Dapdap Pier - 7has

East Dike Wharf - 10has

Construction of additional 2x2m shiplines with individualreclaimer and shiploader at Dapdap Pier

Coal Blending Stockpile(CBS)

Dapdap CBS with capacity of 100,000MT and area of 4has

Additional capacity of 40,000MT and additional area of 3has

11

The complainants testified that among the adverse impacts of the project include the destructionof mangroves area due to siltation and dumping of mine tailings. Coal dust scatters when coal is beingloaded at the shipyard. Also, in a community dialogue in Sitio Sabang on 25 May 2016, Mr. ArielMacabales, a resident, mentioned that the SMPC backfilled an area with corals. Related to this, theresidents complained that they were not consulted as to how said impacts should be addressed. Thus,they requested access to the Multipartite Monitoring Team (MMT)21 reports and to actively participatein its meetings because they believe that information is being deliberately withheld from them.

It could be gleaned as early as the 2nd IAWG meeting (13 April 2016) onwards that there werehealth-related impacts, particularly on the teachers and students in Semirara Island who displayedsymptoms of severe respiratory problems due to dust exposure. More so, Atty. Elizabeth Felasol ofDepEd said that reports submitted to their office indicated that the air was already polluted with dustand ash particles. The teachers asked for hazard pay to compensate them for their exposure to the riskscaused by mining activities. Atty. Felasol also added that the DOH was aware of the problem and sentmedical professionals to attend the meetings of the working group created to monitor the status of thestudents and teachers in the area. Significantly, the DOE has not exerted efforts to proactively reach outwith DepEd to verify this concern, and instead DOE would just cast doubt on its truth as shown by theremarks of DOE's Atty. Arthus Tenazas during the 8th IAWG meeting (21 June 2018). He said:

“We will not give any hindrance or whatever to prevent agencies from doingtheir mandate to protect the people in Semirara, for example the DOLE, DOJ, DOH,DSWD, if you need some help from the DOE to perform your mandate to give service tothe people there in the island, we are willing to provide assistance. That’s why I broughtup one issue kanina regarding the teachers that supposedly have health problems, I readthe report, medyo di naresolve kung tooto. This is serious issue if this is true. Yung DOHor DEPED and CHED should clarify kung totoo. Not only teachers pati narin ungstudents will be affected sa environmental problems if not addressed immediately. I thinkthe report should address conslusively what is really the facts dito sa particular issues. SaPage 21 po. Basahin ko po. “There have been anecdotal evidence during the publicinquiry that the mining activities in the island have caused detrimental effects on thehealth of the people. One such instance pertains to the health of teachers and students inSemirara Island who are said to be exposed to severe respiratory problems. ” It shouldhave been resolved a long time ago, because I think it was raised years ago. I hope thisproblem has been addressed already considering that the health aspect at stake ayganito.”

Suffice it to say that there is nothing that hinders the DOE to address factual assertions raisedduring the IAWG meetings and to take the proper remedies or courses of action. In fact, DOE has thepower to issue suspension orders on the SMPC as it may deem proper.22 Significantly, the 2009 and2015 Environmental Performance Report and Management Plans (EPRMPs)23 for the East Panian andWest Panian Expansion Projects, respectively, disclosed leading causes of morbidity in BarangaySemirara, and said that most of the cases with high number of incidents are related with respiratorytract illnesses (i.e., pneumonia, influenza, and acute respiratory infection). Particularly in 2014, 86% ofthe respondents in Barangay Semirara have at least one of their household members who got ill. Upperrespiratory illnesses are the most prevalent in the Barangay such as cough and asthma. The SMPC,EMB, and DOE are well aware that the principal health hazard associated with coal occurs during itsmining and transport. As further stated in SMPC's 2015 EPRMP, to wit:

21 MMT is an independent entity whose membership represents primarily the stakeholders/public that is intended to assist the DENR in monitoring environmental impacts and compliance with the Philippine Environmental Impact Statement system requirements and other environmental laws as a third party entity. The MMT scheme is intended to enhance participation and transparency at the post-ECC issuance stage of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Process. (DENR A.O. No. 2017-15, 2 May 2017)

22 Flores, A.M.S. (19 Nov. 2019). DOE slaps one-month suspension on Semirara. Manila Standard, Retrieved from https://manilastandard.net/business/power-technology/310459/doe-slaps-one-month-suspension-on-semirara.html

23 EPRMP is an Environmental Impact Assessment report type that is required to be submitted for ECC application for single projects that are already operating. It includes a documentation of the actual cumulative environmental impacts, areport on the effectiveness of measures that are currently being implemented and additional management measures to enhance the effectiveness of the current measures or address additional impacts from proposed expansion/modification of the project/undertaking as necessary. (DENR A.O. No. 2017-15, 2 May 2017)

12

The complainants testified that among the adverse impacts of the project include the destructionof mangroves area due to siltation and dumping of mine tailings. Coal dust scatters when coal is beingloaded at the shipyard. Also, in a community dialogue in Sitio Sabang on 25 May 2016, Mr. ArielMacabales, a resident, mentioned that the SMPC backfilled an area with corals. Related to this, theresidents complained that they were not consulted as to how said impacts should be addressed. Thus,they requested access to the Multipartite Monitoring Team (MMT)21 reports and to actively participatein its meetings because they believe that information is being deliberately withheld from them.

It could be gleaned as early as the 2nd IAWG meeting (13 April 2016) onwards that there werehealth-related impacts, particularly on the teachers and students in Semirara Island who displayedsymptoms of severe respiratory problems due to dust exposure. More so, Atty. Elizabeth Felasol ofDepEd said that reports submitted to their office indicated that the air was already polluted with dustand ash particles. The teachers asked for hazard pay to compensate them for their exposure to the riskscaused by mining activities. Atty. Felasol also added that the DOH was aware of the problem and sentmedical professionals to attend the meetings of the working group created to monitor the status of thestudents and teachers in the area. Significantly, the DOE has not exerted efforts to proactively reach outwith DepEd to verify this concern, and instead DOE would just cast doubt on its truth as shown by theremarks of DOE's Atty. Arthus Tenazas during the 8th IAWG meeting (21 June 2018). He said:

“We will not give any hindrance or whatever to prevent agencies from doingtheir mandate to protect the people in Semirara, for example the DOLE, DOJ, DOH,DSWD, if you need some help from the DOE to perform your mandate to give service tothe people there in the island, we are willing to provide assistance. That’s why I broughtup one issue kanina regarding the teachers that supposedly have health problems, I readthe report, medyo di naresolve kung tooto. This is serious issue if this is true. Yung DOHor DEPED and CHED should clarify kung totoo. Not only teachers pati narin ungstudents will be affected sa environmental problems if not addressed immediately. I thinkthe report should address conslusively what is really the facts dito sa particular issues. SaPage 21 po. Basahin ko po. “There have been anecdotal evidence during the publicinquiry that the mining activities in the island have caused detrimental effects on thehealth of the people. One such instance pertains to the health of teachers and students inSemirara Island who are said to be exposed to severe respiratory problems. ” It shouldhave been resolved a long time ago, because I think it was raised years ago. I hope thisproblem has been addressed already considering that the health aspect at stake ayganito.”

Suffice it to say that there is nothing that hinders the DOE to address factual assertions raisedduring the IAWG meetings and to take the proper remedies or courses of action. In fact, DOE has thepower to issue suspension orders on the SMPC as it may deem proper.22 Significantly, the 2009 and2015 Environmental Performance Report and Management Plans (EPRMPs)23 for the East Panian andWest Panian Expansion Projects, respectively, disclosed leading causes of morbidity in BarangaySemirara, and said that most of the cases with high number of incidents are related with respiratorytract illnesses (i.e., pneumonia, influenza, and acute respiratory infection). Particularly in 2014, 86% ofthe respondents in Barangay Semirara have at least one of their household members who got ill. Upperrespiratory illnesses are the most prevalent in the Barangay such as cough and asthma. The SMPC,EMB, and DOE are well aware that the principal health hazard associated with coal occurs during itsmining and transport. As further stated in SMPC's 2015 EPRMP, to wit:

21 MMT is an independent entity whose membership represents primarily the stakeholders/public that is intended to assist the DENR in monitoring environmental impacts and compliance with the Philippine Environmental Impact Statement system requirements and other environmental laws as a third party entity. The MMT scheme is intended to enhance participation and transparency at the post-ECC issuance stage of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Process. (DENR A.O. No. 2017-15, 2 May 2017)

22 Flores, A.M.S. (19 Nov. 2019). DOE slaps one-month suspension on Semirara. Manila Standard, Retrieved from https://manilastandard.net/business/power-technology/310459/doe-slaps-one-month-suspension-on-semirara.html

23 EPRMP is an Environmental Impact Assessment report type that is required to be submitted for ECC application for single projects that are already operating. It includes a documentation of the actual cumulative environmental impacts, areport on the effectiveness of measures that are currently being implemented and additional management measures to enhance the effectiveness of the current measures or address additional impacts from proposed expansion/modification of the project/undertaking as necessary. (DENR A.O. No. 2017-15, 2 May 2017)

12

“Coal workers’ pneumoconiosis (CWP) can occur in as little as 15 years ofexcessive inhalation of respirable coal dust. Respirable quartz particles and free silicamay be co-implicated. Coal dust is deposited in the lungs where its site of action is thelung parenchyma, lymph nodes and hila. The severity of the disease is directly related tothe amount of coal dust in the lungs. In the simple stages, the disease is detectable by x-rayas round, irregular "macules" of 1-5mm. This stage typically does not change lungfunction or shorten life. The chronic stage of CWP, however, involves massive pulmonaryfibrosis that does impair pulmonary function and shorten life. Chronic Bronchitis (lunginflammation, coughing attacks, difficult breathing, etc.) and emphysema can result fromexcessive coal dust inhalation. Rheumatoid arthritis can be exacerbated by pneumoniasleading to rapidly developing lung damage (Caplan’s Syndrome).

The fact that the project proponents of coal mining were required to secure EnvironmentalCompliance Certificate (ECC)24 already shows that the project is environmentally critical, and that theproponents must adopt and properly implement the necessary measures to remedy, mitigate, or preventsuch adverse impacts to air, water, land, and the people. Any person, corporation or partnership foundviolating the terms and conditions in the issuance of the ECC, or of the standards, rules and regulationsissued by the EMB shall be punished by the suspension or cancellation of the ECC, which meansstoppage of operations, and/or a fine in an amount not to exceed Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00) forevery violation thereof.25

According to EMB's presentation on the 7th IAWG meeting, there are three (3) ECCs issued forthe Semirara open-pit coal mining projects, as follows:

REFERENCE NUMBER PROJECT NAME DATE OF ISSUANCE9805-009-302 Panian Coal Mine Pit 12 August 1999

9805-009-302A East Panian Expansion Project 27 November 2009

1601-0005 Semirara Molave Coal Project 12 February 2016

Amendment of 1601-0005 Semirara Molave Coal Expansion Project

29 April 2016

The latest certificate, ECC-CO-1601-0005 (issued 12 February 2016 and amended on 29 April2016) for the Semirara Molave Coal Project requires the implementation of an intensive and effectiveinformation, education and communication (IEC) program to inform and educate all stakeholders,particularly as regards the direct impact on barangays, the project's mitigating measures embodied inthe EPRMP, and the conditions stipulated in the certificate for greater awareness, understanding, andsustained acceptance of the project. The proponent is expected to implement an annual detailed IECprogram in coordination with EMB Region VI. In response, the SMPC, during the 6th IAWG meeting(29 June 2016), alleged that they complied with the necessary IEC programs.26

24 ECC is a document that may be issued after thorough review of the Environmental Impact Assessment Report. It certifies that the proposed project has complied with the requirements of the Environmental Impact Statement System and that the proponent has committed to implement its approved Environmental Management Plan (EMP) to address the environmental impacts and to operate within the best environmental practice. (DENR A.O. No. 2017-15, 2 May 2017)

25 Sections 4 and 9, Presidential Decree No. 1586 – Establishing an Environmental Impact Statement System, including other environmental related measures and for other purposes

26 <Excerpt from the 6th IAWG Meeting>

13

“Coal workers’ pneumoconiosis (CWP) can occur in as little as 15 years ofexcessive inhalation of respirable coal dust. Respirable quartz particles and free silicamay be co-implicated. Coal dust is deposited in the lungs where its site of action is thelung parenchyma, lymph nodes and hila. The severity of the disease is directly related tothe amount of coal dust in the lungs. In the simple stages, the disease is detectable by x-rayas round, irregular "macules" of 1-5mm. This stage typically does not change lungfunction or shorten life. The chronic stage of CWP, however, involves massive pulmonaryfibrosis that does impair pulmonary function and shorten life. Chronic Bronchitis (lunginflammation, coughing attacks, difficult breathing, etc.) and emphysema can result fromexcessive coal dust inhalation. Rheumatoid arthritis can be exacerbated by pneumoniasleading to rapidly developing lung damage (Caplan’s Syndrome).

The fact that the project proponents of coal mining were required to secure EnvironmentalCompliance Certificate (ECC)24 already shows that the project is environmentally critical, and that theproponents must adopt and properly implement the necessary measures to remedy, mitigate, or preventsuch adverse impacts to air, water, land, and the people. Any person, corporation or partnership foundviolating the terms and conditions in the issuance of the ECC, or of the standards, rules and regulationsissued by the EMB shall be punished by the suspension or cancellation of the ECC, which meansstoppage of operations, and/or a fine in an amount not to exceed Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00) forevery violation thereof.25

According to EMB's presentation on the 7th IAWG meeting, there are three (3) ECCs issued forthe Semirara open-pit coal mining projects, as follows:

REFERENCE NUMBER PROJECT NAME DATE OF ISSUANCE9805-009-302 Panian Coal Mine Pit 12 August 1999

9805-009-302A East Panian Expansion Project 27 November 2009

1601-0005 Semirara Molave Coal Project 12 February 2016

Amendment of 1601-0005 Semirara Molave Coal Expansion Project

29 April 2016

The latest certificate, ECC-CO-1601-0005 (issued 12 February 2016 and amended on 29 April2016) for the Semirara Molave Coal Project requires the implementation of an intensive and effectiveinformation, education and communication (IEC) program to inform and educate all stakeholders,particularly as regards the direct impact on barangays, the project's mitigating measures embodied inthe EPRMP, and the conditions stipulated in the certificate for greater awareness, understanding, andsustained acceptance of the project. The proponent is expected to implement an annual detailed IECprogram in coordination with EMB Region VI. In response, the SMPC, during the 6th IAWG meeting(29 June 2016), alleged that they complied with the necessary IEC programs.26

24 ECC is a document that may be issued after thorough review of the Environmental Impact Assessment Report. It certifies that the proposed project has complied with the requirements of the Environmental Impact Statement System and that the proponent has committed to implement its approved Environmental Management Plan (EMP) to address the environmental impacts and to operate within the best environmental practice. (DENR A.O. No. 2017-15, 2 May 2017)

25 Sections 4 and 9, Presidential Decree No. 1586 – Establishing an Environmental Impact Statement System, including other environmental related measures and for other purposes

26 <Excerpt from the 6th IAWG Meeting>

13

However, it was during the 8th IAWG meeting (21 June 2018) when the SMPC discussed detailson the status or extent of its IEC programs. It appeared that IECs focused on SMPC's operations andhow it addressed its impacts on the environment, such as through a reforestation and mangrovesdevelopment program that started in 2014. The IEC was conducted in 2015 on the plans for the EastPanian Expansion Project, Semirara Molave Project, and the extension of the east dike in Panian thatwould directly affect the fisherfolks. An approach during the community consultations included askingthe stakeholders what was their way of living before the start of the mining activities and what theirvision would be in the next ten years from the current situation. The SMPC also highlighted theircontinuing engagement and coordination with the municipal and barangay officials of Caluya, Antique.Notably however, the presentation did not show that the complaining residents in Sitio Sabang, Brgy.Tinogboc, Semirara Island were informed about the dairy farm project and the relocation site in SitioPoocan of the same barangay. The latter was deemed a project of then Mayor Genevive Lim-Reyes.

Another instance when information on situations and activities in Semirara Island wereperceived differently was shown during the 7th IAWG meeting when EMB reported that, as a result ofthe IAWG's ocular inspection on 23-27 May 2016, they issued on 12 August 2016 a notice of adversefindings to the SMPC for non-compliance with ECC Condition No. 1-A, which provides:

“Implementation of good vegetative practices, proper land use, and sound soilmanagement such as: Proper stockpiling and disposal of the materials generated from theproject site, silt materials scooped-out from the settling ponds, and other solid wastes inpermanent, stabilized areas to avoid pollution of any water body and drainage systems,and maintaining them in safe and non-polluting conditions;”

This is to address the issue raised by a resident of Sitio Sabang during the ocular inspectionabout reclamation activities. The informant told the EMB that the construction was intended to connectwith the Unong Pit and would block fishermen's access to the sea. On the other hand, the SMPCdescribed it as construction of a dike near the coastline of Brgy. Semirara. The SMPC further allegedthat the dike was part of the mitigating measure to protect the coastline from siltation. The activity inthe northern portion of the panian pit was not reclamation but a measure to stabilize the pit fromhydrostatic force that may cause the pit to collapse. Still, the EMB found that the activity causessiltation in the coastal area in violation of ECC Condition No. 1-A. As such, the EMB conducted a“mine audit” in Semirara Island on 30-31 August 2016 as follow-through of their findings during the23-27 May 2016 IAWG's ocular inspection. The EMB has not submitted the report of its mine audit tothe CHR, albeit the SMPC uploaded a copy in their website and could be accessed viahttp://www.semiraramining.com/uploads/files/SEC%2017%20-%20C/2016%2009-19%20[Reports%20of%20DENR%20re%20Audit%20of%20Molave%20Expansion%20Project].pdf. At this point, theEMB report concluded that the SMPC is compliant with ECC Condition No. 1-A, which is inconsistentfrom its previous findings as reported during the 7th IAWG meeting.

The importance of generating and disseminating accurate information is fundamental forensuring that adverse effects of coal mining are addressed. In many instances, the sources ofinformation are primarily the SMPC and the Municipal Government of Caluya, Antique, who wouldreport on the positive impacts on the one hand, and the complainants who would relay mostly thenegative on the other. The DOE, EMB, and MGB, do not have offices in Semirara Island. They willconduct verification only if there are complaints or during the scheduled quarterly meetings of theMMT. SMPC has all the time to clean up the mess, if any.27

27 <Excerpt from the 7th IAWG Meeting>

14

However, it was during the 8th IAWG meeting (21 June 2018) when the SMPC discussed detailson the status or extent of its IEC programs. It appeared that IECs focused on SMPC's operations andhow it addressed its impacts on the environment, such as through a reforestation and mangrovesdevelopment program that started in 2014. The IEC was conducted in 2015 on the plans for the EastPanian Expansion Project, Semirara Molave Project, and the extension of the east dike in Panian thatwould directly affect the fisherfolks. An approach during the community consultations included askingthe stakeholders what was their way of living before the start of the mining activities and what theirvision would be in the next ten years from the current situation. The SMPC also highlighted theircontinuing engagement and coordination with the municipal and barangay officials of Caluya, Antique.Notably however, the presentation did not show that the complaining residents in Sitio Sabang, Brgy.Tinogboc, Semirara Island were informed about the dairy farm project and the relocation site in SitioPoocan of the same barangay. The latter was deemed a project of then Mayor Genevive Lim-Reyes.

Another instance when information on situations and activities in Semirara Island wereperceived differently was shown during the 7th IAWG meeting when EMB reported that, as a result ofthe IAWG's ocular inspection on 23-27 May 2016, they issued on 12 August 2016 a notice of adversefindings to the SMPC for non-compliance with ECC Condition No. 1-A, which provides:

“Implementation of good vegetative practices, proper land use, and sound soilmanagement such as: Proper stockpiling and disposal of the materials generated from theproject site, silt materials scooped-out from the settling ponds, and other solid wastes inpermanent, stabilized areas to avoid pollution of any water body and drainage systems,and maintaining them in safe and non-polluting conditions;”

This is to address the issue raised by a resident of Sitio Sabang during the ocular inspectionabout reclamation activities. The informant told the EMB that the construction was intended to connectwith the Unong Pit and would block fishermen's access to the sea. On the other hand, the SMPCdescribed it as construction of a dike near the coastline of Brgy. Semirara. The SMPC further allegedthat the dike was part of the mitigating measure to protect the coastline from siltation. The activity inthe northern portion of the panian pit was not reclamation but a measure to stabilize the pit fromhydrostatic force that may cause the pit to collapse. Still, the EMB found that the activity causessiltation in the coastal area in violation of ECC Condition No. 1-A. As such, the EMB conducted a“mine audit” in Semirara Island on 30-31 August 2016 as follow-through of their findings during the23-27 May 2016 IAWG's ocular inspection. The EMB has not submitted the report of its mine audit tothe CHR, albeit the SMPC uploaded a copy in their website and could be accessed viahttp://www.semiraramining.com/uploads/files/SEC%2017%20-%20C/2016%2009-19%20[Reports%20of%20DENR%20re%20Audit%20of%20Molave%20Expansion%20Project].pdf. At this point, theEMB report concluded that the SMPC is compliant with ECC Condition No. 1-A, which is inconsistentfrom its previous findings as reported during the 7th IAWG meeting.

The importance of generating and disseminating accurate information is fundamental forensuring that adverse effects of coal mining are addressed. In many instances, the sources ofinformation are primarily the SMPC and the Municipal Government of Caluya, Antique, who wouldreport on the positive impacts on the one hand, and the complainants who would relay mostly thenegative on the other. The DOE, EMB, and MGB, do not have offices in Semirara Island. They willconduct verification only if there are complaints or during the scheduled quarterly meetings of theMMT. SMPC has all the time to clean up the mess, if any.27

27 <Excerpt from the 7th IAWG Meeting>

14

Significantly, the SMPC has not joined the Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative (EITI) inthe Philippines, believing that such processes are not suitable for a company engaged in coal miningand that it does not issue a waiver of confidentiality on taxes paid to the Bureau of Internal Revenue.28

On the other hand, Bantay Kita pointed out that joining the EITI would in fact benefit the SMPC. TheEITI-Philippines (PH-EITI) is a government-led, multi-stakeholder initiative that implements globalstandard that promotes the transparent, accountable management, and good governance of oil, gas andmineral resources. PH-EITI was created on 26 November 2013 through Executive Order No. 147, s.2013. It is a government commitment as stated in Executive Order No. 79., s. 2012. The PH-EITI'sobjectives are the following:

Show direct and indirect contribution of extractives to the economy (through EITI process); Improve public understanding of the management of natural resources and availability of data; Strengthen national resource management / strengthen government systems; Create opportunities for dialogue and constructive engagement in natural resource management

in order to build trust and reduce conflict among stakeholders; and Pursue and strengthen the extractive sector's contribution to sustainable development.29

3.B. On the lack of complainants' involvement with MMT processes

The multipartite monitoring team (MMT) is conceptualized to be at the frontline of ensuringpublic participation at the community level to monitor and address the impacts of environmentallycritical projects (ECPs). Ideally, the MMT is an accountability mechanism in itself as shown in itsfunctions, to wit:30

Monitoring by Multi-partite Monitoring Team: MMTs are organized to encouragepublic participation, to promote greater stakeholder vigilance and to provide appropriatecheck and balance mechanisms in the monitoring of project implementation. The MMT isrecommendatory to EMB. MMTs have the primary responsibility of validation ofProponent’s environmental performance, with the following specific functions:

i. Validate project compliance with the conditions stipulated in the ECC and theEMP;

ii. Validate Proponent’s conduct of self-monitoring;

iii. Receive complaints, gather relevant information to facilitate determination ofvalidity of complaints or concerns about the project and timely transmit to theProponent and EMB recommended measures to address the complaint;

iv. Prepare, integrate and disseminate simplified validation reports to communitystakeholders;

v. Make regular and timely submission of MMT Reports based on the EMB-prescribed format.

28 <Excerpt from the 8th IAWG Meeting>29 See http://ph-eiti.dof.gov.ph/background.html (accessed 20 Oct 2019)30 Please see the Revised Procedural Manual for DENR Administrative Order No. 30, series of 2003 (DAO 03-30), i.e.,

the Implementing Rules and Regulations of Presidential Decree No. 1586, establishing the Philippine Environmental Impact Statement System.

15

Significantly, the SMPC has not joined the Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative (EITI) inthe Philippines, believing that such processes are not suitable for a company engaged in coal miningand that it does not issue a waiver of confidentiality on taxes paid to the Bureau of Internal Revenue.28

On the other hand, Bantay Kita pointed out that joining the EITI would in fact benefit the SMPC. TheEITI-Philippines (PH-EITI) is a government-led, multi-stakeholder initiative that implements globalstandard that promotes the transparent, accountable management, and good governance of oil, gas andmineral resources. PH-EITI was created on 26 November 2013 through Executive Order No. 147, s.2013. It is a government commitment as stated in Executive Order No. 79., s. 2012. The PH-EITI'sobjectives are the following:

Show direct and indirect contribution of extractives to the economy (through EITI process); Improve public understanding of the management of natural resources and availability of data; Strengthen national resource management / strengthen government systems; Create opportunities for dialogue and constructive engagement in natural resource management

in order to build trust and reduce conflict among stakeholders; and Pursue and strengthen the extractive sector's contribution to sustainable development.29

3.B. On the lack of complainants' involvement with MMT processes

The multipartite monitoring team (MMT) is conceptualized to be at the frontline of ensuringpublic participation at the community level to monitor and address the impacts of environmentallycritical projects (ECPs). Ideally, the MMT is an accountability mechanism in itself as shown in itsfunctions, to wit:30

Monitoring by Multi-partite Monitoring Team: MMTs are organized to encouragepublic participation, to promote greater stakeholder vigilance and to provide appropriatecheck and balance mechanisms in the monitoring of project implementation. The MMT isrecommendatory to EMB. MMTs have the primary responsibility of validation ofProponent’s environmental performance, with the following specific functions:

i. Validate project compliance with the conditions stipulated in the ECC and theEMP;

ii. Validate Proponent’s conduct of self-monitoring;

iii. Receive complaints, gather relevant information to facilitate determination ofvalidity of complaints or concerns about the project and timely transmit to theProponent and EMB recommended measures to address the complaint;

iv. Prepare, integrate and disseminate simplified validation reports to communitystakeholders;

v. Make regular and timely submission of MMT Reports based on the EMB-prescribed format.

28 <Excerpt from the 8th IAWG Meeting>29 See http://ph-eiti.dof.gov.ph/background.html (accessed 20 Oct 2019)30 Please see the Revised Procedural Manual for DENR Administrative Order No. 30, series of 2003 (DAO 03-30), i.e.,

the Implementing Rules and Regulations of Presidential Decree No. 1586, establishing the Philippine Environmental Impact Statement System.

15

Based on the 2003 Revised Manual, the MMT shall be composed of representatives of theproponent and of stakeholder groups, including representatives from concerned LGUs, locallyaccredited NGOs/POs, the community, concerned EMB Regional Office, relevant governmentagencies, and other sectors that have been identified during the EIA Study as potentially affected by thevarious phases of the project. Although mining activities are being done in Brgy. Semirara, it is notlegally prohibited for the stakeholders in Brgys. Tinogboc and Alegeria, particularly SAPOFFA andothers, to participate as MMT members.31 Similarly, the new DENR guidelines (i.e., DENR A.O. No.2017-15, 2 May 2017) has still the effect of hindering complainants' membership due to therequirement therein for non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to be accredited by the LGU.32 Thecomplainants, the concerned barangay officials of Tinogboc, and the Municipal Government of Caluya,Antique have long-standing strained relations, which is a scenario that was not particularly addressed inthe 2017 DENR guidelines. Even more prohibitive is the cap on the number of representatives fromLGU-accredited local NGOs and representatives from locally recognized community leaders who canrepresent vulnerable sectors in the MMT, pegged at 1 and 2, respectively.

Significantly, Section 16 of the 2017 DENR guidelines provided certain ways to rationalize aMMT's existence, composition and leadership, through the following policy changes:

MMTs shall only be for ECPs. All other MMTs including clustered MMTs shall be deemedautomatically dissolved. ECC condition on the creation of MMTs for Non-ECPs shall bedeemed invalid.

The project proponents and EMB-DENR shall no longer be members of the MMT. The EMB-DENR shall provide oversight guidance to the MMT and consider its reports andrecommendations in its impact and compliance evaluation. It shall conduct regularperformance audit of the MMTs. The project proponent shall provide funds for the MMTactivities based on the Annual work and Financial Plan approved by the EMB.

The composition of the MMT shall be rationalized to be representative of relevant stakeholdersgroups as identified based on Section 10 of the 2017 guidelines. For it to be truly independentthird party entity, the following shall compose the reconstituted MMT:

▪ LGU representatives 1 representative each from the Municipal/City Environment and Natural Resources

Officer MENRO/City ENRO (for projects whose DIA is limited to the City orMunicipality) and Provincial Government (PG) ENRO (for projects whose DIAcovers more than 2 municipalities). In cases where there is no PG-ENRO,MENRO/City ENRO, the Municipal/Provincial Planning and Development Officer(MPDO/PPDO) or the chairman of the environment committee of the SangguniangBayan may be designated as representative to the MMT

Rural Health Unit Chief (RHU) and concerned Barangay Captain

▪ 1 representative from the LGU-accredited local NGOs with mission/s specificallyrelated to environmental management and/or to the type and impacts of the proposedundertaking/project may be designated as representative to the MMT. In cases, wherethere is no such NGO, it shall be open to other NGOs.

▪ Maximum of 2 representatives from locally recognized community leaders who canrepresent vulnerable sectors including indigenous populations, women and seniorcitizens and representatives from the academe may be included as member of the MMTin addition to the LGU-accredited NGO.

▪ Maximum of 3 representatives from government agencies with related mandate on thetype of project and its impacts during the project implementation shall be included in

31 Section 16 of DAO 2017-15 provides that the MMT shall not exceed ten (10) members except in cases where the location of project facilities covers more than one (1) barangay. In such cases, the additional member shall come fromthe additional Barangay/s and MENRO.

32 <Excerpt from the 10th IAWG Meeting>

16

Based on the 2003 Revised Manual, the MMT shall be composed of representatives of theproponent and of stakeholder groups, including representatives from concerned LGUs, locallyaccredited NGOs/POs, the community, concerned EMB Regional Office, relevant governmentagencies, and other sectors that have been identified during the EIA Study as potentially affected by thevarious phases of the project. Although mining activities are being done in Brgy. Semirara, it is notlegally prohibited for the stakeholders in Brgys. Tinogboc and Alegeria, particularly SAPOFFA andothers, to participate as MMT members.31 Similarly, the new DENR guidelines (i.e., DENR A.O. No.2017-15, 2 May 2017) has still the effect of hindering complainants' membership due to therequirement therein for non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to be accredited by the LGU.32 Thecomplainants, the concerned barangay officials of Tinogboc, and the Municipal Government of Caluya,Antique have long-standing strained relations, which is a scenario that was not particularly addressed inthe 2017 DENR guidelines. Even more prohibitive is the cap on the number of representatives fromLGU-accredited local NGOs and representatives from locally recognized community leaders who canrepresent vulnerable sectors in the MMT, pegged at 1 and 2, respectively.

Significantly, Section 16 of the 2017 DENR guidelines provided certain ways to rationalize aMMT's existence, composition and leadership, through the following policy changes:

MMTs shall only be for ECPs. All other MMTs including clustered MMTs shall be deemedautomatically dissolved. ECC condition on the creation of MMTs for Non-ECPs shall bedeemed invalid.

The project proponents and EMB-DENR shall no longer be members of the MMT. The EMB-DENR shall provide oversight guidance to the MMT and consider its reports andrecommendations in its impact and compliance evaluation. It shall conduct regularperformance audit of the MMTs. The project proponent shall provide funds for the MMTactivities based on the Annual work and Financial Plan approved by the EMB.

The composition of the MMT shall be rationalized to be representative of relevant stakeholdersgroups as identified based on Section 10 of the 2017 guidelines. For it to be truly independentthird party entity, the following shall compose the reconstituted MMT:

▪ LGU representatives 1 representative each from the Municipal/City Environment and Natural Resources

Officer MENRO/City ENRO (for projects whose DIA is limited to the City orMunicipality) and Provincial Government (PG) ENRO (for projects whose DIAcovers more than 2 municipalities). In cases where there is no PG-ENRO,MENRO/City ENRO, the Municipal/Provincial Planning and Development Officer(MPDO/PPDO) or the chairman of the environment committee of the SangguniangBayan may be designated as representative to the MMT

Rural Health Unit Chief (RHU) and concerned Barangay Captain

▪ 1 representative from the LGU-accredited local NGOs with mission/s specificallyrelated to environmental management and/or to the type and impacts of the proposedundertaking/project may be designated as representative to the MMT. In cases, wherethere is no such NGO, it shall be open to other NGOs.

▪ Maximum of 2 representatives from locally recognized community leaders who canrepresent vulnerable sectors including indigenous populations, women and seniorcitizens and representatives from the academe may be included as member of the MMTin addition to the LGU-accredited NGO.

▪ Maximum of 3 representatives from government agencies with related mandate on thetype of project and its impacts during the project implementation shall be included in

31 Section 16 of DAO 2017-15 provides that the MMT shall not exceed ten (10) members except in cases where the location of project facilities covers more than one (1) barangay. In such cases, the additional member shall come fromthe additional Barangay/s and MENRO.

32 <Excerpt from the 10th IAWG Meeting>

16

the MMT membership, if not yet included. Examples of these government agencies areDOE for energy projects, MGB for mining projects, and PCG, BFAR, BMB or FMB,depending on the location. DENR participation/membership shall be limited only incases where there are specific concerns related function related to biodiversity andforestry as endorsed by the concerned bureau director.

As a general rule, the representative from the MENRO/City ENRO, the PG-ENRO or therepresentative from the lead government agency (e.g. DOE for energy projects, DOT fortourism projects) shall serve as the MMT Chair. In cases where the said representatives do notaccept the chairmanship, the members of the MMT shall elect among themselves and specifythe procedures in its Manual of Operations (MOO).

Notably earlier in 2016, a general condition in ECC-CO-1601-0005 has already expanded themembership of the MMT for the Semirara coal mining project to include DOE,33 but the EMB needs toexpound on the reason behind the belated membership of DOE in the MMT. Earlier ECCs did notinclude DOE's membership therein. More so, as per the 2017 guidelines, the SMPC should no longerbe a member of the MMT, albeit the guidelines required the project proponent, in this case, the SMPC,to provide funds for the MMT's activities based on plans approved by the EMB. At this point, it can bededuced that the EMB's approach to ensure an MMT's independence is to insulate it from the projectproponent's participation as member. It has not recognized any threat to an MMT's independence whenthe guidelines required the project proponent to provide the funds for the MMT activities.

3.C. On the situation of workers involved in Semirara coal mining

There were at least four reported incidents when workers were killed while at work in themining sites of the SMPC in Semirara Island. They occurred on the following dates: 13 February 2013,17 July 2015, 18 June 2016, and 20 May 2018, prior to the 21 June 2018 IAWG meeting.34 The CHRawaits for the written reports of DOLE, particularly on the 18 June 2016 incident. However, during the7th IAWG meeting DOE, while not providing complete details, stated that the person who died on 18June 2016 is not an employee of the SMPC. Evidently, the SMPC practices contracting/subcontracting,which the DOLE is expected to address pursuant to President Rodrigo Duterte's Executive Order No.51, Series of 2018 (01 May 2018).

During the 8th IAWG (21 June 2018) meeting, Atty. Abigail dela Rosa from the DOLE pointedout that it is not clear in existing state policies, laws, implementing rules and regulations who betweenthe DOE or DENR has the jurisdiction to enforce occupational safety and health standards (OSH)35

involving workers in coal mining projects. Admittedly, DOLE has jurisdiction on the enforcement oflabor standards. No proof was shown to the CHR on how the DOE and DOLE coordinated to ensureOSH of workers in the SMPC.

33 To quote ECC-CO-1601-0005: “The existing Multipartite Monitoring Team (MMT) shall be expanded to include a representative from the Department of Energy (DOE) and other concerned agencies, as deemed necessary. The existing Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) for the creation of the MMT and establishment of the Environmental Monitoring Fund, Environmental Guarantee Fund shall be amended based on DAO 30-003. The amended MOA shall be submitted to the EMB Central Office within sixty (60) days upon receipt of this Certificate for approval. Further, an MMT Manualof Operations (MOO) shall be prepared by the MMT and endorsed by the RO for approval by EMB CO.”

34 A recent incident occurred on 2 October 2019, when a certain Pepito Andapat, operator of a PS27 machinery, was hit bymudslide while conducting regular mining operations on a drainage canal at the Molave pit. See Orquiza, T.I. (6 Oct. 2019). Missing Semirara Employee Found Dead. The Daily Tribune. https://tribune.net.ph/index.php/2019/10/06/missing-semirara-employee-found-dead/

35 OSH is defined as the a) promotion and maintenance of the highest degree of physical, mental and social well-being of workers in all occupations; b) prevention among its workers of any departures from health caused by their working conditions; c) protection among workers in their employment from risks usually from factors adverse to health and d) placing and maintenance of the worker in an occupational environment adapted to his/her physiological ability. (See Rules and Regulations Implementing Executive Order No. 307, Establishing an Occupational Safety and Health Center in the Employees' Compensation Commission)

17

the MMT membership, if not yet included. Examples of these government agencies areDOE for energy projects, MGB for mining projects, and PCG, BFAR, BMB or FMB,depending on the location. DENR participation/membership shall be limited only incases where there are specific concerns related function related to biodiversity andforestry as endorsed by the concerned bureau director.

As a general rule, the representative from the MENRO/City ENRO, the PG-ENRO or therepresentative from the lead government agency (e.g. DOE for energy projects, DOT fortourism projects) shall serve as the MMT Chair. In cases where the said representatives do notaccept the chairmanship, the members of the MMT shall elect among themselves and specifythe procedures in its Manual of Operations (MOO).

Notably earlier in 2016, a general condition in ECC-CO-1601-0005 has already expanded themembership of the MMT for the Semirara coal mining project to include DOE,33 but the EMB needs toexpound on the reason behind the belated membership of DOE in the MMT. Earlier ECCs did notinclude DOE's membership therein. More so, as per the 2017 guidelines, the SMPC should no longerbe a member of the MMT, albeit the guidelines required the project proponent, in this case, the SMPC,to provide funds for the MMT's activities based on plans approved by the EMB. At this point, it can bededuced that the EMB's approach to ensure an MMT's independence is to insulate it from the projectproponent's participation as member. It has not recognized any threat to an MMT's independence whenthe guidelines required the project proponent to provide the funds for the MMT activities.

3.C. On the situation of workers involved in Semirara coal mining

There were at least four reported incidents when workers were killed while at work in themining sites of the SMPC in Semirara Island. They occurred on the following dates: 13 February 2013,17 July 2015, 18 June 2016, and 20 May 2018, prior to the 21 June 2018 IAWG meeting.34 The CHRawaits for the written reports of DOLE, particularly on the 18 June 2016 incident. However, during the7th IAWG meeting DOE, while not providing complete details, stated that the person who died on 18June 2016 is not an employee of the SMPC. Evidently, the SMPC practices contracting/subcontracting,which the DOLE is expected to address pursuant to President Rodrigo Duterte's Executive Order No.51, Series of 2018 (01 May 2018).

During the 8th IAWG (21 June 2018) meeting, Atty. Abigail dela Rosa from the DOLE pointedout that it is not clear in existing state policies, laws, implementing rules and regulations who betweenthe DOE or DENR has the jurisdiction to enforce occupational safety and health standards (OSH)35

involving workers in coal mining projects. Admittedly, DOLE has jurisdiction on the enforcement oflabor standards. No proof was shown to the CHR on how the DOE and DOLE coordinated to ensureOSH of workers in the SMPC.

33 To quote ECC-CO-1601-0005: “The existing Multipartite Monitoring Team (MMT) shall be expanded to include a representative from the Department of Energy (DOE) and other concerned agencies, as deemed necessary. The existing Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) for the creation of the MMT and establishment of the Environmental Monitoring Fund, Environmental Guarantee Fund shall be amended based on DAO 30-003. The amended MOA shall be submitted to the EMB Central Office within sixty (60) days upon receipt of this Certificate for approval. Further, an MMT Manualof Operations (MOO) shall be prepared by the MMT and endorsed by the RO for approval by EMB CO.”

34 A recent incident occurred on 2 October 2019, when a certain Pepito Andapat, operator of a PS27 machinery, was hit bymudslide while conducting regular mining operations on a drainage canal at the Molave pit. See Orquiza, T.I. (6 Oct. 2019). Missing Semirara Employee Found Dead. The Daily Tribune. https://tribune.net.ph/index.php/2019/10/06/missing-semirara-employee-found-dead/

35 OSH is defined as the a) promotion and maintenance of the highest degree of physical, mental and social well-being of workers in all occupations; b) prevention among its workers of any departures from health caused by their working conditions; c) protection among workers in their employment from risks usually from factors adverse to health and d) placing and maintenance of the worker in an occupational environment adapted to his/her physiological ability. (See Rules and Regulations Implementing Executive Order No. 307, Establishing an Occupational Safety and Health Center in the Employees' Compensation Commission)

17

Significantly, on 17 August 2018, R.A. No. 11058 took effect to strengthen compliance withOSH. The law applies to all establishments, projects, and sites and all other places where work is beingundertaken in all branches of economic activity, including industries such as mining, fishing,construction, agriculture and maritime.36 Said law mandated the Secretary of Labor and Employment orhis/her duly authorized representatives to enforce the mandatory OSH standards in all establishmentsand conduct an annual spot audit. Pursuant to this new law, implementation of OSH standards is clearlyplaced under the DOLE's jurisdiction.

Still, later on 01 March 2019, the DOE published at Business World and Daily Tribune itsDepartment Circular No. DC2018-12-0028, Series of 2018 on coal mine safety and health rules andregulations.37 The DOE cites as legal basis for its issuance Section 9, P.D. No. 972, which provides thatthe Government shall oversee the management of operation contemplated in the coal operating contract andin this connection, shall require the operator to:

“Operate the area on behalf of the Government in accordance with good coalmining practices using modern methods appropriate for the geological conditions of thearea to enable maximum economic production of coal, avoiding hazards to life, health andproperty, avoiding pollution of air, land and waters, and pursuant to an efficient andeconomic program of operation;”

Prior to the enactment of R.A. No. 11058, the apparent State policy is to subsume occupationalhealth and safety of the workers under the framework of the governing law on the utilization of naturalresources. The same approach is also demonstrated in the framework of R.A. No. 7942 (PhilippineMining Act of 1995), which incorporated Chapter XI (Safety and Environmental Protection, Secs. 63-71) and authorized the DENR Secretary to promulgate mine safety rules and regulations concerning thesafe and sanitary upkeep of the mining operations and achieve waste-free and efficient minedevelopment for strict compliance of all contractors and permittees. One practical reason for this policyis the need to set the specific OSH requirements in view of the highly technical nature of miningactivities. A theoretical reason would have its reference on the regalian doctrine, because thecontractors and permittees are mere agents of the State, and this is manifested by placing the tasksunder the agencies such as the DENR and DOE, instead of one with a primary mandate for the workers,i.e., DOLE.

During the 10th IAWG meeting (04 April 2019), DOLE Region 6 verbally manifested that atotal of 1,671 workers were regularized by the SMPC per their validation on 11 May 2018. Profile ofSMPC's employees thus consisted of 85.5% regular employees, 11.3% probationary, and the remaining3.2% were consultants. They still have two contractors, namely Integrated Workers Multi-PurposeCooperative and the DMC Construction and Resources Incorporated comprising a total of 3,389workers who are still engaged in the SMPC. The DOLE representative concluded that the SMPC andits contractors are compliant to general labor standards, occupational safety and health standards, albeitwithout discussing any further details.38 The DOLE has not reported about the workers who died on 13February 2013, 17 July 2015, 18 June 2016, and 20 May 2018.

36 Section 2, Department of Labor and Employment Order No. 198, Series of 2018 (took effect 25 January 2019), Implementing Rules and Regulations of R.A. No. 11058

37 See https://www.doe.gov.ph/energy-resources/department-circular-no-dc2018-12-0028-coal-mine-safety-and-health-rules-and

38 SMPC published its integrated annual reports that contain their efforts on OSH. See: http://www.semiraramining.com/company_disclosures

18

Significantly, on 17 August 2018, R.A. No. 11058 took effect to strengthen compliance withOSH. The law applies to all establishments, projects, and sites and all other places where work is beingundertaken in all branches of economic activity, including industries such as mining, fishing,construction, agriculture and maritime.36 Said law mandated the Secretary of Labor and Employment orhis/her duly authorized representatives to enforce the mandatory OSH standards in all establishmentsand conduct an annual spot audit. Pursuant to this new law, implementation of OSH standards is clearlyplaced under the DOLE's jurisdiction.

Still, later on 01 March 2019, the DOE published at Business World and Daily Tribune itsDepartment Circular No. DC2018-12-0028, Series of 2018 on coal mine safety and health rules andregulations.37 The DOE cites as legal basis for its issuance Section 9, P.D. No. 972, which provides thatthe Government shall oversee the management of operation contemplated in the coal operating contract andin this connection, shall require the operator to:

“Operate the area on behalf of the Government in accordance with good coalmining practices using modern methods appropriate for the geological conditions of thearea to enable maximum economic production of coal, avoiding hazards to life, health andproperty, avoiding pollution of air, land and waters, and pursuant to an efficient andeconomic program of operation;”

Prior to the enactment of R.A. No. 11058, the apparent State policy is to subsume occupationalhealth and safety of the workers under the framework of the governing law on the utilization of naturalresources. The same approach is also demonstrated in the framework of R.A. No. 7942 (PhilippineMining Act of 1995), which incorporated Chapter XI (Safety and Environmental Protection, Secs. 63-71) and authorized the DENR Secretary to promulgate mine safety rules and regulations concerning thesafe and sanitary upkeep of the mining operations and achieve waste-free and efficient minedevelopment for strict compliance of all contractors and permittees. One practical reason for this policyis the need to set the specific OSH requirements in view of the highly technical nature of miningactivities. A theoretical reason would have its reference on the regalian doctrine, because thecontractors and permittees are mere agents of the State, and this is manifested by placing the tasksunder the agencies such as the DENR and DOE, instead of one with a primary mandate for the workers,i.e., DOLE.

During the 10th IAWG meeting (04 April 2019), DOLE Region 6 verbally manifested that atotal of 1,671 workers were regularized by the SMPC per their validation on 11 May 2018. Profile ofSMPC's employees thus consisted of 85.5% regular employees, 11.3% probationary, and the remaining3.2% were consultants. They still have two contractors, namely Integrated Workers Multi-PurposeCooperative and the DMC Construction and Resources Incorporated comprising a total of 3,389workers who are still engaged in the SMPC. The DOLE representative concluded that the SMPC andits contractors are compliant to general labor standards, occupational safety and health standards, albeitwithout discussing any further details.38 The DOLE has not reported about the workers who died on 13February 2013, 17 July 2015, 18 June 2016, and 20 May 2018.

36 Section 2, Department of Labor and Employment Order No. 198, Series of 2018 (took effect 25 January 2019), Implementing Rules and Regulations of R.A. No. 11058

37 See https://www.doe.gov.ph/energy-resources/department-circular-no-dc2018-12-0028-coal-mine-safety-and-health-rules-and

38 SMPC published its integrated annual reports that contain their efforts on OSH. See: http://www.semiraramining.com/company_disclosures

18

3.D. On the status of limestone project in Semirara Island

The MGB confirmed that the proposed Semirara Limestone Quarry Project will be establishedat the middle of the southern section and at the northern section of Semirara Island, between Unong Pitand Bunlao Spring, with area of 3,807.06 hectares in Brgy. Tinogboc. However, the MGB said thatthere is no mining, quarrying, or other exploration activity at present since the expiration of SMPC'sExploration Permit No. 99-001 (VI) on 22 March 2012. While the SMPC applied for, and was granted,the permit to quarry limestone on 27 June 2016, which is valid until 26 June 2021, it has not compliedwith MGB requirement for the approval of mining feasibility, which is the payment of occupation feesfor the period of 2011-2012. This requirement involves payment in the form of taxes levied on theproponent for the use and exploration of the area.39

However, the complainants are concerned that illegal extraction of minerals, such as limestones,are being carried out in Semirara Island, and even aggravated by the fact that MGB does not have alocal presence to monitor the situation on real time. Layers of limestone are found on top of soil layerswith coal and are extracted in the course of SMPC's open pit coal mining. This is so despite the vagueassertion of the MGB to always point out the expiration of SMPC's exploration permit and non-compliance with the requirements for the declaration of mining feasibility.

The complainants have raised this as early as the 2nd IAWG meeting (13 April 2016). Still,during the 8th IAWG meeting,40 Gilbert Aquino, the representative from MGB, remains indecisive forhis agency to conduct an investigation on the complainants' assertions of illegal extraction of limestone,and said that the provincial government of Antique should be the one to address the matter. There wereno efforts from the MGB to even conduct a preliminary assessment on site and coordinate with theLGU.

3.E. On the need to protect and promote the rights of Indigenous peoples/indigenous culturalcommunities (IPs/ICCs) who reside in Semirara Island

It was mentioned during the 5th IAWG meeting that the NCIP conducted a validation activity inCaluya Island and found the presence of the Cuyunan or Cuyuy-on people, whose great ancestors camefrom Cuyo, Palawan. Mr. Rubite, likewise, positively confirmed IPs/ICCs' presence in Brgy. Imba. Heopined, however, that the land they occupied could not be considered an ancestral domain as defined inthe Indigenous Peoples Rights Act, because possession of the land must be reckoned since timeimmemorial. At present, it cannot be confirmed if there is ancestral domain or land in Caluya, Antique.This is without prejudice to an extensive study on the matter that the NCIP is expected to conduct.Even so, the NCIP must identify and recognize the so-called migrant indigenous peoples who reside inSemirara Island. Protection of the law should extend to all indigenous peoples, regardless of whether ornot they have ancestral domains, categorized as migrants or otherwise. Notably, in the course of theIAWG's meetings, the NCIP has not provided particular programs for the IPs/ICCs in Caluya, Antique.

39 <Excerpt from the 10th IAWG Meeting>40 <Excerpt from the 8th IAWG Meeting>

19

3.D. On the status of limestone project in Semirara Island

The MGB confirmed that the proposed Semirara Limestone Quarry Project will be establishedat the middle of the southern section and at the northern section of Semirara Island, between Unong Pitand Bunlao Spring, with area of 3,807.06 hectares in Brgy. Tinogboc. However, the MGB said thatthere is no mining, quarrying, or other exploration activity at present since the expiration of SMPC'sExploration Permit No. 99-001 (VI) on 22 March 2012. While the SMPC applied for, and was granted,the permit to quarry limestone on 27 June 2016, which is valid until 26 June 2021, it has not compliedwith MGB requirement for the approval of mining feasibility, which is the payment of occupation feesfor the period of 2011-2012. This requirement involves payment in the form of taxes levied on theproponent for the use and exploration of the area.39

However, the complainants are concerned that illegal extraction of minerals, such as limestones,are being carried out in Semirara Island, and even aggravated by the fact that MGB does not have alocal presence to monitor the situation on real time. Layers of limestone are found on top of soil layerswith coal and are extracted in the course of SMPC's open pit coal mining. This is so despite the vagueassertion of the MGB to always point out the expiration of SMPC's exploration permit and non-compliance with the requirements for the declaration of mining feasibility.

The complainants have raised this as early as the 2nd IAWG meeting (13 April 2016). Still,during the 8th IAWG meeting,40 Gilbert Aquino, the representative from MGB, remains indecisive forhis agency to conduct an investigation on the complainants' assertions of illegal extraction of limestone,and said that the provincial government of Antique should be the one to address the matter. There wereno efforts from the MGB to even conduct a preliminary assessment on site and coordinate with theLGU.

3.E. On the need to protect and promote the rights of Indigenous peoples/indigenous culturalcommunities (IPs/ICCs) who reside in Semirara Island

It was mentioned during the 5th IAWG meeting that the NCIP conducted a validation activity inCaluya Island and found the presence of the Cuyunan or Cuyuy-on people, whose great ancestors camefrom Cuyo, Palawan. Mr. Rubite, likewise, positively confirmed IPs/ICCs' presence in Brgy. Imba. Heopined, however, that the land they occupied could not be considered an ancestral domain as defined inthe Indigenous Peoples Rights Act, because possession of the land must be reckoned since timeimmemorial. At present, it cannot be confirmed if there is ancestral domain or land in Caluya, Antique.This is without prejudice to an extensive study on the matter that the NCIP is expected to conduct.Even so, the NCIP must identify and recognize the so-called migrant indigenous peoples who reside inSemirara Island. Protection of the law should extend to all indigenous peoples, regardless of whether ornot they have ancestral domains, categorized as migrants or otherwise. Notably, in the course of theIAWG's meetings, the NCIP has not provided particular programs for the IPs/ICCs in Caluya, Antique.

39 <Excerpt from the 10th IAWG Meeting>40 <Excerpt from the 8th IAWG Meeting>

19

3.F. On the violation of complainants' human rights

The above premises lead to the conclusion that the State has systemically violated the humanrights of complainants, as discussed hereunder:

First, the State, through the Municipality of Caluya and the SMPC as its agents, discriminated41

against the complainants in view of their status of not having tenurial security42 over the parcels of landthey occupy. They are being forcibly evicted, persuaded to move out against their will, or threatenedwith eviction due to such status, which runs contrary to the State's obligation to respect43 human rights.Here, the State is expected to refrain from interfering with the complainants' human right to adequatestandard of living, inclusive of the rights to housing, food, and water. More so, the Committee onEconomic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR, 1997) explained that owing to the interrelationship andinterdependency which exist among all human rights, forced evictions frequently violate other humanrights. Thus, while manifestly breaching the rights enshrined in the International Covenant onEconomic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), the practice of forced evictions also result inviolations of civil and political rights, such as the right to life, the right to security of the person, theright to non-interference with privacy, family and home and the right to the peaceful enjoyment ofpossessions.44

Discrimination constitutes any distinction, exclusion, restriction, preference, or otherdifferential treatment that is directly or indirectly based on the prohibited grounds of discrimination(i.e., race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property,birth or other status) and which has the intention or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition,enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights.45 Discrimination has two forms, asfollows:

Direct discrimination occurs when an individual is treated less favorably than another personin a similar situation for a reason related to a prohibited ground; e.g. where employment ineducational institutions or membership of a trade union is based on the political opinions ofapplicants or employees. Direct discrimination also includes detrimental acts or omissions onthe basis of prohibited grounds where there is no comparable similar situation. In this case, therequirement for LGU-accreditation of an NGO who intends to participate as member of theMMT directly discriminates complainants who have advocated contrary political opinion.

Indirect discrimination refers to laws, policies or practices which appear neutral at face value,

but have a disproportionate impact on the exercise of human rights as distinguished byprohibited grounds of discrimination. For instance, requiring a birth registration certificate forschool enrollment may discriminate against ethnic minorities or non-nationals who do notpossess, or have been denied, such certificates. In this case, PP No. 649, while appearingneutral, has a disproportionate impact on the exercise of complainants' right to adequatestandard of living, when the agencies of government would use it to hinder the complainants'efforts to obtain tenurial security over the lands they occupy. The discrimination becomes evenmore apparent due to the fact that the government in fact issued land titles, i.e., 565 lots inCaluya Island and 141 lots in Semirara Island are titled properties.

41 Article 26, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, provides: All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to the equal protection of the law. In this respect, the law shall prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any ground such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

42 One of the normative content of the right to adequate housing is security of tenure. Notwithstanding the type of tenure, all persons should possess a degree of security of tenure which guarantees legal protection against forced eviction, harassment and other threats. States parties should consequently take immediate measures aimed at conferring legal security of tenure upon those persons and households currently lacking such protection, in genuine consultation with affected persons and groups. (CESCR General Comment No. 4, 1991)

43 The State's obligation to respect means that it must refrain from interfering with the enjoyment of rights. 44 CESCR General Comment No. 7, 1997 – The Right to Adequate Housing (Article 11.1, ICESCR): Forced Evictions45 CESCR General Comment No. 20, 2009 – Non-discrimination in economic, social and cultural rights (Art. 2, para. 2,

ICESCR)

20

3.F. On the violation of complainants' human rights

The above premises lead to the conclusion that the State has systemically violated the humanrights of complainants, as discussed hereunder:

First, the State, through the Municipality of Caluya and the SMPC as its agents, discriminated41

against the complainants in view of their status of not having tenurial security42 over the parcels of landthey occupy. They are being forcibly evicted, persuaded to move out against their will, or threatenedwith eviction due to such status, which runs contrary to the State's obligation to respect43 human rights.Here, the State is expected to refrain from interfering with the complainants' human right to adequatestandard of living, inclusive of the rights to housing, food, and water. More so, the Committee onEconomic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR, 1997) explained that owing to the interrelationship andinterdependency which exist among all human rights, forced evictions frequently violate other humanrights. Thus, while manifestly breaching the rights enshrined in the International Covenant onEconomic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), the practice of forced evictions also result inviolations of civil and political rights, such as the right to life, the right to security of the person, theright to non-interference with privacy, family and home and the right to the peaceful enjoyment ofpossessions.44

Discrimination constitutes any distinction, exclusion, restriction, preference, or otherdifferential treatment that is directly or indirectly based on the prohibited grounds of discrimination(i.e., race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property,birth or other status) and which has the intention or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition,enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights.45 Discrimination has two forms, asfollows:

Direct discrimination occurs when an individual is treated less favorably than another personin a similar situation for a reason related to a prohibited ground; e.g. where employment ineducational institutions or membership of a trade union is based on the political opinions ofapplicants or employees. Direct discrimination also includes detrimental acts or omissions onthe basis of prohibited grounds where there is no comparable similar situation. In this case, therequirement for LGU-accreditation of an NGO who intends to participate as member of theMMT directly discriminates complainants who have advocated contrary political opinion.

Indirect discrimination refers to laws, policies or practices which appear neutral at face value,

but have a disproportionate impact on the exercise of human rights as distinguished byprohibited grounds of discrimination. For instance, requiring a birth registration certificate forschool enrollment may discriminate against ethnic minorities or non-nationals who do notpossess, or have been denied, such certificates. In this case, PP No. 649, while appearingneutral, has a disproportionate impact on the exercise of complainants' right to adequatestandard of living, when the agencies of government would use it to hinder the complainants'efforts to obtain tenurial security over the lands they occupy. The discrimination becomes evenmore apparent due to the fact that the government in fact issued land titles, i.e., 565 lots inCaluya Island and 141 lots in Semirara Island are titled properties.

41 Article 26, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, provides: All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to the equal protection of the law. In this respect, the law shall prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any ground such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

42 One of the normative content of the right to adequate housing is security of tenure. Notwithstanding the type of tenure, all persons should possess a degree of security of tenure which guarantees legal protection against forced eviction, harassment and other threats. States parties should consequently take immediate measures aimed at conferring legal security of tenure upon those persons and households currently lacking such protection, in genuine consultation with affected persons and groups. (CESCR General Comment No. 4, 1991)

43 The State's obligation to respect means that it must refrain from interfering with the enjoyment of rights. 44 CESCR General Comment No. 7, 1997 – The Right to Adequate Housing (Article 11.1, ICESCR): Forced Evictions45 CESCR General Comment No. 20, 2009 – Non-discrimination in economic, social and cultural rights (Art. 2, para. 2,

ICESCR)

20

The CESCR has regularly found that discrimination against some groups is pervasive andpersistent and deeply entrenched in social behavior and organization, often involving unchallenged orindirect discrimination. Such systemic discrimination can be understood as legal rules, policies,practices or predominant cultural attitudes in either the public or private sector which create relativedisadvantages for some groups, and privileges for other groups. Thus, eliminating discrimination inpractice requires paying sufficient attention to groups of individuals which suffer historical or persistentprejudice instead of merely comparing the formal treatment of individuals in similar situations.

Second, the State failed to protect46 the human rights of the complainants when it prioritized theconduct of coal mining in Semirara Island by virtue of PP No. 649 despite the fact that coal mining,inclusive of the legal framework governing its conduct, results to adverse impacts such as thecomplainants' forced eviction, health problems, and environmental degradation. This violation isfurther aggravated by the deficient mechanisms that are prohibitive to complainants' efforts to exercisetheir right to adequate standard of living and to take part in decision-making that concerns theenvironment and utilization of natural resources in Semirara Island. The legal and policy framework ofthe State for coal mining in Semirara Island does not accommodate alternatives from other People, letalone the impacted communities such as where the complainants belong, on how to utilize naturalresources, to identify and to address the impacts to the environment, should they decide to take part.Despite the documented adverse impacts, including death of workers in SMPC's mines, the State wouldsimply proceed with coal mining. While the State did suspend in some instances the operation of theSMPC, a slap on the wrist, it will still proceed with coal mining. More so, the State have evenexpressed support for the validity of PP No. 649 to the point of saying that titles issued for lands inSemirara Island in particular, and Caluya Municipality in general, are spurious, which eventually tendto deprive all residents therein of tenurial security.

With this, the whole nation has a legal interest on what is happening in Semirara Island. Thecomplainants are actually doing the nation a favor when they have decided to seek redress of theirgrievances not only for themselves but for others, and for generations yet unborn. After all, naturalresources, such as coal, limestone, and land, among others belong to the State, where the Peoplecomprises an indispensable element. In an attempt towards a paradigm shift, the unique case of Oposavs. Factoran (G.R. No. 101083, July 30, 1993) decided by the Supreme Court within the context oftimber license agreements, recognized the legal standing of all Filipinos to enforce rights or obligationsunder environmental laws, particularly those that relate to the conservation, development, preservation,protection and utilization of the environment and natural resources.

The same is true at the international level. A norm is recognized that States should ensure asafe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment in order to respect, protect and fulfill human rights.Conversely, States should respect, protect and fulfill human rights in order to ensure a safe, clean,healthy and sustainable environment.47 As explained by Knox (2018), human rights and environmentalprotection are interdependent. A safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment is necessary for thefull enjoyment of human rights, including the rights to life, to the highest attainable standard ofphysical and mental health, to an adequate standard of living, to adequate food, to safe drinking waterand sanitation, to housing, to participation in cultural life and to development, as well as the right to ahealthy environment itself, which is recognized in regional agreements and most national constitutions.At the same time, the exercise of human rights, including rights to freedom of expression andassociation, to education and information, and to participation and effective remedies, is vital to theprotection of the environment.

46 The obligation to protect means that it must prevent violations of rights by third parties such as private enterprises. 47 Knox, J.H. (2018) Framework Principles on Human Rights and the Environment: The main human rights obligations

relating to the enjoyment of safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment.

21

The CESCR has regularly found that discrimination against some groups is pervasive andpersistent and deeply entrenched in social behavior and organization, often involving unchallenged orindirect discrimination. Such systemic discrimination can be understood as legal rules, policies,practices or predominant cultural attitudes in either the public or private sector which create relativedisadvantages for some groups, and privileges for other groups. Thus, eliminating discrimination inpractice requires paying sufficient attention to groups of individuals which suffer historical or persistentprejudice instead of merely comparing the formal treatment of individuals in similar situations.

Second, the State failed to protect46 the human rights of the complainants when it prioritized theconduct of coal mining in Semirara Island by virtue of PP No. 649 despite the fact that coal mining,inclusive of the legal framework governing its conduct, results to adverse impacts such as thecomplainants' forced eviction, health problems, and environmental degradation. This violation isfurther aggravated by the deficient mechanisms that are prohibitive to complainants' efforts to exercisetheir right to adequate standard of living and to take part in decision-making that concerns theenvironment and utilization of natural resources in Semirara Island. The legal and policy framework ofthe State for coal mining in Semirara Island does not accommodate alternatives from other People, letalone the impacted communities such as where the complainants belong, on how to utilize naturalresources, to identify and to address the impacts to the environment, should they decide to take part.Despite the documented adverse impacts, including death of workers in SMPC's mines, the State wouldsimply proceed with coal mining. While the State did suspend in some instances the operation of theSMPC, a slap on the wrist, it will still proceed with coal mining. More so, the State have evenexpressed support for the validity of PP No. 649 to the point of saying that titles issued for lands inSemirara Island in particular, and Caluya Municipality in general, are spurious, which eventually tendto deprive all residents therein of tenurial security.

With this, the whole nation has a legal interest on what is happening in Semirara Island. Thecomplainants are actually doing the nation a favor when they have decided to seek redress of theirgrievances not only for themselves but for others, and for generations yet unborn. After all, naturalresources, such as coal, limestone, and land, among others belong to the State, where the Peoplecomprises an indispensable element. In an attempt towards a paradigm shift, the unique case of Oposavs. Factoran (G.R. No. 101083, July 30, 1993) decided by the Supreme Court within the context oftimber license agreements, recognized the legal standing of all Filipinos to enforce rights or obligationsunder environmental laws, particularly those that relate to the conservation, development, preservation,protection and utilization of the environment and natural resources.

The same is true at the international level. A norm is recognized that States should ensure asafe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment in order to respect, protect and fulfill human rights.Conversely, States should respect, protect and fulfill human rights in order to ensure a safe, clean,healthy and sustainable environment.47 As explained by Knox (2018), human rights and environmentalprotection are interdependent. A safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment is necessary for thefull enjoyment of human rights, including the rights to life, to the highest attainable standard ofphysical and mental health, to an adequate standard of living, to adequate food, to safe drinking waterand sanitation, to housing, to participation in cultural life and to development, as well as the right to ahealthy environment itself, which is recognized in regional agreements and most national constitutions.At the same time, the exercise of human rights, including rights to freedom of expression andassociation, to education and information, and to participation and effective remedies, is vital to theprotection of the environment.

46 The obligation to protect means that it must prevent violations of rights by third parties such as private enterprises. 47 Knox, J.H. (2018) Framework Principles on Human Rights and the Environment: The main human rights obligations

relating to the enjoyment of safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment.

21

Third, the State failed to fulfill48 the human rights of the complainants when it has notdeveloped and implemented any plan or program to resolve the Semirara Question.49 Significantly,even if the DAR mentioned the issuance of Executive Order No. 75 (15 February 2019)50 during the10th IAWG meeting, DAR exhibited uncertainty to include lands in Caluya, Antique, particularlySemirara Island, in view of PP No. 649.

As such, it is worthy to note that these findings were arrived at after the State was given ampleopportunity to address the Semirara Question. The CHR, during the 1st- 4th IAWG meetings, made apreliminary assessment of the situation, which lead to the conduct of the 5th meeting, field visit andcommunity-based dialogues at Caluya, Antique on 23-26 May 2016. A list of recommendations(attached herewith as Annex “A”) were presented to the duty-bearers during the debriefing in QuezonCity on 29 June 2016 (6th meeting) and 2 September 2016 (7th meeting). The duty-bearers are alreadyexpected to act on the recommendations, which efforts, if any, should have been reported during the 8th

(21 June 2018), 9th (14 August 2018) and 10th (04 April 2019) meetings.

This approach is anchored on the well-settled elements of obligation of conduct and obligationof result in human rights law. Obligations of conduct relate to the actions that the State is expected totake. To meet its obligation to fulfill, the State is expected to take action “reasonably calculated torealize” the enjoyment of a particular right. For example, the adoption and implementation of a plan ofaction to reduce cases of coal mine dust lung disease (CMDLD) is a type of action that can be taken tofulfill the right to health. Obligations of result relate to the outcomes that the State is expected toachieve, usually to decrease the rates of deprivation of a right or to increase the enjoyment of it. Takingagain the rights to housing or health as examples, the State would be expected to prioritize theachievement of minimum essential levels of enjoyment of the said rights universally, i.e., in the entiretyof the Municipality of Caluya, Antique in order to meet its obligation to fulfill.51

48 The obligation to fulfill means that the State must take appropriate legislative, administrative, budgetary, judicial and other action to realize rights.

49 Henceforth, the term “Semirara Question” is used in this report as inclusive of all the issues raised by the complainants and discussed during the IAWG meetings.

50 Directing all departments, bureaus, offices and instrumentalities of the government to identify lands owned by the government devoted to or suitable for agriculture for distribution to qualified beneficiaries

51 Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions and the Center for Economic and Social Rights (January 2015) Defending Dignity: A Manual for National Human Rights Institutions on Monitoring Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

22

Third, the State failed to fulfill48 the human rights of the complainants when it has notdeveloped and implemented any plan or program to resolve the Semirara Question.49 Significantly,even if the DAR mentioned the issuance of Executive Order No. 75 (15 February 2019)50 during the10th IAWG meeting, DAR exhibited uncertainty to include lands in Caluya, Antique, particularlySemirara Island, in view of PP No. 649.

As such, it is worthy to note that these findings were arrived at after the State was given ampleopportunity to address the Semirara Question. The CHR, during the 1st- 4th IAWG meetings, made apreliminary assessment of the situation, which lead to the conduct of the 5th meeting, field visit andcommunity-based dialogues at Caluya, Antique on 23-26 May 2016. A list of recommendations(attached herewith as Annex “A”) were presented to the duty-bearers during the debriefing in QuezonCity on 29 June 2016 (6th meeting) and 2 September 2016 (7th meeting). The duty-bearers are alreadyexpected to act on the recommendations, which efforts, if any, should have been reported during the 8th

(21 June 2018), 9th (14 August 2018) and 10th (04 April 2019) meetings.

This approach is anchored on the well-settled elements of obligation of conduct and obligationof result in human rights law. Obligations of conduct relate to the actions that the State is expected totake. To meet its obligation to fulfill, the State is expected to take action “reasonably calculated torealize” the enjoyment of a particular right. For example, the adoption and implementation of a plan ofaction to reduce cases of coal mine dust lung disease (CMDLD) is a type of action that can be taken tofulfill the right to health. Obligations of result relate to the outcomes that the State is expected toachieve, usually to decrease the rates of deprivation of a right or to increase the enjoyment of it. Takingagain the rights to housing or health as examples, the State would be expected to prioritize theachievement of minimum essential levels of enjoyment of the said rights universally, i.e., in the entiretyof the Municipality of Caluya, Antique in order to meet its obligation to fulfill.51

48 The obligation to fulfill means that the State must take appropriate legislative, administrative, budgetary, judicial and other action to realize rights.

49 Henceforth, the term “Semirara Question” is used in this report as inclusive of all the issues raised by the complainants and discussed during the IAWG meetings.

50 Directing all departments, bureaus, offices and instrumentalities of the government to identify lands owned by the government devoted to or suitable for agriculture for distribution to qualified beneficiaries

51 Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions and the Center for Economic and Social Rights (January 2015) Defending Dignity: A Manual for National Human Rights Institutions on Monitoring Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

22

IV. STANDARDS FOR MONITORING HUMAN RIGHTSCOMPLIANCE IN THE CONTEXT OF COAL MINING IN SEMIRARA ISLAND

Annex “A” remains to be an integral part of this report, in order to provide the baseline of whatare expected from the State in respecting, protecting and fulfilling the complainants' human rights. Inaddition, guiding principles are being presented as reference for the ensuing engagement between andamong the State, the complainants, and all stakeholders, including the SMPC, to finally resolve theSemirara Question. These guiding principles are as follows:

1.) Governance mechanisms, particularly the decision-making stage, on the conservation, development,preservation, protection and utilization of the environment and natural resources (e.g., land, water, coal,limestone, and aquatic resources) must incorporate a process to ensure the involvement not only of thecommunities directly affected, but also all Filipinos who would want to participate in the process. Civilsociety organizations have a role to play in supporting the communities to obtain accurate informationon environmental issues and to utilize them in decision-making. In particular, the participation ofconcerned rights-holders in developing and implementing government plans and programs on land use,housing projects, and relocation sites should be ensured.

2.) Accurate information is necessary to arrive at decisions to protect and promote human rights. Forinstance, while it is settled that PP No. 649 indirectly discriminates against the rights of thecomplainants in this case, more information must be gathered to determine its effects to otherstakeholders, who may or may not be similarly situated with the herein complainants. The LMB, incoordination with other agencies concerned (e.g., DOE, DAR, DA) are expected to immediatelydevelop and implement the appropriate program to address the overlapping land claims in SemiraraIsland and ensure the right to adequate standard of living of all rights-holders in Caluya, Antique. Thecomplainants must be included in the efforts to identify lands owned by the government devoted to orsuitable for agriculture for distribution to qualified beneficiaries, pursuant to Executive Order No. 75(15 February 2019).

3.) The State must encourage a non-judicial, non-State based grievance mechanism in the coal-miningindustry that adheres to the effectiveness criteria of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and HumanRights, as follows:

Legitimate: enabling trust from the stakeholder groups for whose use they are intended, and being accountable for the fair conduct of grievance processes;

Accessible: being known to all stakeholder groups for whose use they are intended, and providing adequate assistance for those who may face particular barriers to access;

Predictable: providing a clear and known procedure with an indicative time frame for each stage, and clarity on the types of process and outcome available and means of monitoring implementation;

Equitable: seeking to ensure that aggrieved parties have reasonable access to sources of information, advice and expertise necessary to engage in a grievance process on fair, informed and respectful terms;

Transparent: keeping parties to a grievance informed about its progress, and providing sufficient information about the mechanism’s performance to build confidence in its effectiveness and meet any public interest at stake;34

Rights-compatible: ensuring that outcomes and remedies accord with internationally recognized human rights;

A source of continuous learning: drawing on relevant measures to identify lessons for improving the mechanism and preventing future grievances and harms; Operational-level mechanisms should also be:

Based on engagement and dialogue: consulting the stakeholder groups for whose use they areintended on their design and performance, and focusing on dialogue as the means to address andresolve grievances.

23

IV. STANDARDS FOR MONITORING HUMAN RIGHTSCOMPLIANCE IN THE CONTEXT OF COAL MINING IN SEMIRARA ISLAND

Annex “A” remains to be an integral part of this report, in order to provide the baseline of whatare expected from the State in respecting, protecting and fulfilling the complainants' human rights. Inaddition, guiding principles are being presented as reference for the ensuing engagement between andamong the State, the complainants, and all stakeholders, including the SMPC, to finally resolve theSemirara Question. These guiding principles are as follows:

1.) Governance mechanisms, particularly the decision-making stage, on the conservation, development,preservation, protection and utilization of the environment and natural resources (e.g., land, water, coal,limestone, and aquatic resources) must incorporate a process to ensure the involvement not only of thecommunities directly affected, but also all Filipinos who would want to participate in the process. Civilsociety organizations have a role to play in supporting the communities to obtain accurate informationon environmental issues and to utilize them in decision-making. In particular, the participation ofconcerned rights-holders in developing and implementing government plans and programs on land use,housing projects, and relocation sites should be ensured.

2.) Accurate information is necessary to arrive at decisions to protect and promote human rights. Forinstance, while it is settled that PP No. 649 indirectly discriminates against the rights of thecomplainants in this case, more information must be gathered to determine its effects to otherstakeholders, who may or may not be similarly situated with the herein complainants. The LMB, incoordination with other agencies concerned (e.g., DOE, DAR, DA) are expected to immediatelydevelop and implement the appropriate program to address the overlapping land claims in SemiraraIsland and ensure the right to adequate standard of living of all rights-holders in Caluya, Antique. Thecomplainants must be included in the efforts to identify lands owned by the government devoted to orsuitable for agriculture for distribution to qualified beneficiaries, pursuant to Executive Order No. 75(15 February 2019).

3.) The State must encourage a non-judicial, non-State based grievance mechanism in the coal-miningindustry that adheres to the effectiveness criteria of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and HumanRights, as follows:

Legitimate: enabling trust from the stakeholder groups for whose use they are intended, and being accountable for the fair conduct of grievance processes;

Accessible: being known to all stakeholder groups for whose use they are intended, and providing adequate assistance for those who may face particular barriers to access;

Predictable: providing a clear and known procedure with an indicative time frame for each stage, and clarity on the types of process and outcome available and means of monitoring implementation;

Equitable: seeking to ensure that aggrieved parties have reasonable access to sources of information, advice and expertise necessary to engage in a grievance process on fair, informed and respectful terms;

Transparent: keeping parties to a grievance informed about its progress, and providing sufficient information about the mechanism’s performance to build confidence in its effectiveness and meet any public interest at stake;34

Rights-compatible: ensuring that outcomes and remedies accord with internationally recognized human rights;

A source of continuous learning: drawing on relevant measures to identify lessons for improving the mechanism and preventing future grievances and harms; Operational-level mechanisms should also be:

Based on engagement and dialogue: consulting the stakeholder groups for whose use they areintended on their design and performance, and focusing on dialogue as the means to address andresolve grievances.

23

This non-judicial, non-State based grievance mechanism should also serve to bridge the gap betweenthe Municipal Government of Caluya, Antique and the residents, particularly the complainants.

4.) In developing and implementing plans, programs and activities to respect, protect and fulfill humanrights in Caluya, Antique, the State should take into account the different situations of the rights-holders based on their gender, disability, age, indigeneity, and their specific vulnerabilities in order toadequately address their needs. Taking into account race, color, sex, language, religion, political orother opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status does not constitute discriminationwhen the intention is to fully recognize and allow the enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, ofhuman rights. For instance, disaster-preparedness programs should be implemented in Caluya, Antiqueto manifest the LGUs' effort to protect the right to life of its residents, with due regard to the differenttypes of vulnerabilities. As similarly observed in all economic, social and cultural rights, any inquiry onthe State's compliance with human rights standards must consider the following criteria of:

Availability: necessary goods or services must be available in sufficient quantities; Accessibility: necessary goods (such as food or medicine) or services (such as healthcare or

education) must be both physically and economically accessible to all, without discrimination,and the community must have information about them;

Acceptability and adaptability: necessary goods and services must be culturally and sociallyacceptable and adapted to the local context;

Adequate Quality: necessary goods and services must be appropriate and adequate in standardand safety.

5.) The State should provide a safe and enabling environment in which individuals, groups and organsof society that work on human rights or environmental issues can operate free from threats, harassment,intimidation and violence. More so, the State should respect and protect the rights to freedom ofexpression, association and peaceful assembly in relation to environmental matters.52

6.) A violation of human rights occurs when the State pursues, by action or omission, a policy orpractice which deliberately contravenes or ignores obligations based on human rights standards, or failsto achieve the required standard of conduct or result. Furthermore, any discrimination on grounds ofrace, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth orother status with the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the equal enjoyment or exercise ofhuman rights constitutes such violation. A portion of the Masstricht Guidelines on Violations ofEconomic, Social and Cultural Rights53 is further cited, which enumerates the particular acts andomissions that constitute violation of human rights, to wit:

Violations through acts of commission:

Violations of economic, social and cultural rights can occur through the direct action of Statesor other entities insufficiently regulated by States. Examples of such violations include:

The formal removal or suspension of legislation necessary for the continued enjoyment of aneconomic, social and cultural right that is currently enjoyed;

The active denial of such rights to particular individuals or groups, whether through legislatedor enforced discrimination;

The active support for measures adopted by third parties which are inconsistent with economic,social and cultural rights;

The adoption of legislation or policies which are manifestly incompatible with pre-existinglegal obligations relating to these rights, unless it is done with the purpose and effect ofincreasing equality and improving the realization of economic, social and cultural rights for themost vulnerable groups;

The adoption of any deliberately retrogressive measure that reduces the extent to which anysuch right is guaranteed;

52 Knox, J.H. (2018) Framework Principles on Human Rights and the Environment: The main human rights obligations relating to the enjoyment of safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment.

53 See http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/instree/Maastrichtguidelines_.html (accessed 21 Oct. 2019)

24

This non-judicial, non-State based grievance mechanism should also serve to bridge the gap betweenthe Municipal Government of Caluya, Antique and the residents, particularly the complainants.

4.) In developing and implementing plans, programs and activities to respect, protect and fulfill humanrights in Caluya, Antique, the State should take into account the different situations of the rights-holders based on their gender, disability, age, indigeneity, and their specific vulnerabilities in order toadequately address their needs. Taking into account race, color, sex, language, religion, political orother opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status does not constitute discriminationwhen the intention is to fully recognize and allow the enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, ofhuman rights. For instance, disaster-preparedness programs should be implemented in Caluya, Antiqueto manifest the LGUs' effort to protect the right to life of its residents, with due regard to the differenttypes of vulnerabilities. As similarly observed in all economic, social and cultural rights, any inquiry onthe State's compliance with human rights standards must consider the following criteria of:

Availability: necessary goods or services must be available in sufficient quantities; Accessibility: necessary goods (such as food or medicine) or services (such as healthcare or

education) must be both physically and economically accessible to all, without discrimination,and the community must have information about them;

Acceptability and adaptability: necessary goods and services must be culturally and sociallyacceptable and adapted to the local context;

Adequate Quality: necessary goods and services must be appropriate and adequate in standardand safety.

5.) The State should provide a safe and enabling environment in which individuals, groups and organsof society that work on human rights or environmental issues can operate free from threats, harassment,intimidation and violence. More so, the State should respect and protect the rights to freedom ofexpression, association and peaceful assembly in relation to environmental matters.52

6.) A violation of human rights occurs when the State pursues, by action or omission, a policy orpractice which deliberately contravenes or ignores obligations based on human rights standards, or failsto achieve the required standard of conduct or result. Furthermore, any discrimination on grounds ofrace, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth orother status with the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the equal enjoyment or exercise ofhuman rights constitutes such violation. A portion of the Masstricht Guidelines on Violations ofEconomic, Social and Cultural Rights53 is further cited, which enumerates the particular acts andomissions that constitute violation of human rights, to wit:

Violations through acts of commission:

Violations of economic, social and cultural rights can occur through the direct action of Statesor other entities insufficiently regulated by States. Examples of such violations include:

The formal removal or suspension of legislation necessary for the continued enjoyment of aneconomic, social and cultural right that is currently enjoyed;

The active denial of such rights to particular individuals or groups, whether through legislatedor enforced discrimination;

The active support for measures adopted by third parties which are inconsistent with economic,social and cultural rights;

The adoption of legislation or policies which are manifestly incompatible with pre-existinglegal obligations relating to these rights, unless it is done with the purpose and effect ofincreasing equality and improving the realization of economic, social and cultural rights for themost vulnerable groups;

The adoption of any deliberately retrogressive measure that reduces the extent to which anysuch right is guaranteed;

52 Knox, J.H. (2018) Framework Principles on Human Rights and the Environment: The main human rights obligations relating to the enjoyment of safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment.

53 See http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/instree/Maastrichtguidelines_.html (accessed 21 Oct. 2019)

24

The calculated obstruction of, or halt to, the progressive realization of a right protected by theCovenant, unless the State is acting within a limitation permitted by the Covenant or it does sodue to a lack of available resources or force majeure;

The reduction or diversion of specific public expenditure, when such reduction or diversionresults in the non-enjoyment of such rights and is not accompanied by adequate measures toensure minimum subsistence rights for everyone.

Violations through acts of omission:

Violations of economic, social, cultural rights can also occur through the omission or failure ofStates to take necessary measures stemming from legal obligations. Examples of such violationsinclude:

The failure to take appropriate steps as required under the Covenant; The failure to reform or repeal legislation which is manifestly inconsistent with an obligation of

the Covenant; The failure to enforce legislation or put into effect policies designed to implement provisions of

the Covenant; The failure to regulate activities of individuals or groups so as to prevent them from violating

economic, social and cultural rights; The failure to utilize the maximum of available resources towards the full realization of the

Covenant; The failure to monitor the realization of economic, social and cultural rights, including the

development and application of criteria and indicators for assessing compliance; The failure to remove promptly obstacles which it is under a duty to remove to permit the

immediate fulfillment of a right guaranteed by the Covenant; The failure to implement without delay a right which it is required by the Covenant to provide

immediately; The failure to meet a generally accepted international minimum standard of achievement, which

is within its powers to meet; The failure of a State to take into account its international legal obligations in the field of

economic, social and cultural rights when entering into bilateral or multilateral agreements withother States, international organizations or multinational corporations.

7.) In determining which actions or omissions amount to a violation of an economic, social or culturalright, it is important to distinguish the inability from the unwillingness of the State to comply with itstreaty obligations. The State has the burden of proof whenever it claims that it is unable to carry out itsobligation for reasons beyond its control. For instance, a temporary closure of an educational institutiondue to an earthquake would be a circumstance beyond the control of the State, while it is a blatantviolation if the State would refuse under normal circumstances to allocate adequate resources torenovate the school building that needs repairs.

V. SYNTHESIS

The instant case shows the State's absolute control of coal mining in Semirara Island. The Stateprioritizes the conduct of coal mining over the human right to adequate standard of living of thecomplainants, whose claims for tenurial security over the parcels of land they occupy were denied byvirtue of PP No. 649. As such, the State is liable for discriminating against the complainants, whichdiscrimination is further aggravated by the deficient mechanisms in place that are prohibitive tocomplainants' efforts of enjoying fully their right to adequate standard of living and to take part indecision-making that concerns the environment and utilization of natural resources in Semirara Island.As a consequence, the State must establish mechanisms to correct such violations, includingmonitoring investigation, prosecution, and remedies for victims.

ANNEX A

25

The calculated obstruction of, or halt to, the progressive realization of a right protected by theCovenant, unless the State is acting within a limitation permitted by the Covenant or it does sodue to a lack of available resources or force majeure;

The reduction or diversion of specific public expenditure, when such reduction or diversionresults in the non-enjoyment of such rights and is not accompanied by adequate measures toensure minimum subsistence rights for everyone.

Violations through acts of omission:

Violations of economic, social, cultural rights can also occur through the omission or failure ofStates to take necessary measures stemming from legal obligations. Examples of such violationsinclude:

The failure to take appropriate steps as required under the Covenant; The failure to reform or repeal legislation which is manifestly inconsistent with an obligation of

the Covenant; The failure to enforce legislation or put into effect policies designed to implement provisions of

the Covenant; The failure to regulate activities of individuals or groups so as to prevent them from violating

economic, social and cultural rights; The failure to utilize the maximum of available resources towards the full realization of the

Covenant; The failure to monitor the realization of economic, social and cultural rights, including the

development and application of criteria and indicators for assessing compliance; The failure to remove promptly obstacles which it is under a duty to remove to permit the

immediate fulfillment of a right guaranteed by the Covenant; The failure to implement without delay a right which it is required by the Covenant to provide

immediately; The failure to meet a generally accepted international minimum standard of achievement, which

is within its powers to meet; The failure of a State to take into account its international legal obligations in the field of

economic, social and cultural rights when entering into bilateral or multilateral agreements withother States, international organizations or multinational corporations.

7.) In determining which actions or omissions amount to a violation of an economic, social or culturalright, it is important to distinguish the inability from the unwillingness of the State to comply with itstreaty obligations. The State has the burden of proof whenever it claims that it is unable to carry out itsobligation for reasons beyond its control. For instance, a temporary closure of an educational institutiondue to an earthquake would be a circumstance beyond the control of the State, while it is a blatantviolation if the State would refuse under normal circumstances to allocate adequate resources torenovate the school building that needs repairs.

V. SYNTHESIS

The instant case shows the State's absolute control of coal mining in Semirara Island. The Stateprioritizes the conduct of coal mining over the human right to adequate standard of living of thecomplainants, whose claims for tenurial security over the parcels of land they occupy were denied byvirtue of PP No. 649. As such, the State is liable for discriminating against the complainants, whichdiscrimination is further aggravated by the deficient mechanisms in place that are prohibitive tocomplainants' efforts of enjoying fully their right to adequate standard of living and to take part indecision-making that concerns the environment and utilization of natural resources in Semirara Island.As a consequence, the State must establish mechanisms to correct such violations, includingmonitoring investigation, prosecution, and remedies for victims.

ANNEX A

25

LIST OF POST-FIELD VISIT RECOMMENDATIONS

1. For the Land Management Bureau (LMB)

Pursuant to Sec.91 of the Public Land Act, investigate the land titles covering areas inthe Municipality of Caluya, Antique alleged to be spurious, and provide a concretetimeline for the processes to be undertaken;

Verify from its records the existence of Proclamation 649, and the correspondingsurveys pursuant thereto (Sec. 86, Public Land Act);

Clarify the validity of LC Maps, and its significance (LC Maps 790 - Dec. 1, 1928 and2130 - Aug. 6, 1957);

Investigate the validity of issuance of Free Patent No. 467791 to Salvacion Vda. DeJavier, now represented by Leto Javier over Lot 573-A located in Brgy. Imba, Caluya,Antique that resulted to the issuance of OCT No. N-2081, and institute the properremedy such as reversion proceedings in coordination with the Office of the SolicitorGeneral; and

Conduct a new public land survey in Caluya, Antique, and clarify the reason for theconduct of a second survey resulting to LC Map 2130.

2. For the Department of Energy (DOE)

Provide data of the areas where there are titled parcels of land, and which have beenthe subjects of negotiation in Semirara Island, if any;

Develop a map indicating titled lands in Caluya, Antique, which will be useful inmonitoring and regulating SMPC activities/expansion, in close coordination with DENR(EMB, LMB, etc.);

Identify areas in Caluya, Semirara and Sibay that have been explored and yielded nocoal deposit, or not suitable for coal mining;

Ensure that operations of SMPC will not displace communities in Brgy. Tinogboc,Semirara Island, particularly in Sitio Sabang;

Verify from SMPC the sale between Vicente Cesar V. Malig; Leonardo M. Dalwampo,Agustin D. Gonzales, Melchor D. Borbon, and Edgardo S. Lagman, who are alleged tobe executives/key officers of SMPC or any of its subsidiaries/affiliates, and the heirs ofAntiquio Janairo involving Lots 900, 901, 902, 913 and 914 in Brgy. Tinogboc,Semirara Island, Caluya, Antique;

Provide official copy of its post-field visit report in re: Field Visit in Caluya, Antique(May 23-26, 2016); and

Provide report on the falling structure incident that occurred on June 18, 2016 ataround 10:49am at May Flower, Brgy. Semirara. Alleged casualties are: Erwin Macalili,19 y/o (Dead On Arrival), Jeros Eguillon, 28 yo, and Zong Xu Pong, 43 y/o.

Adopt a community-based impact assessment measure. MMT to serve as grievancemechanism for issues and concerns of Brgys. Semirara, Tinogboc and Alegria

3. Land Registration Authority (LRA)

Provide additional list of land titles from ROD-Antique covering the Municipality ofCaluya, particularly those in Semirara Island; and

Clarify the reason for the cancellation of some titles in the partial list.

4. National Anti-Poverty Commission (NAPC)

Consider initiatives for social preparation in coordination with the LGU; provide

26

LIST OF POST-FIELD VISIT RECOMMENDATIONS

1. For the Land Management Bureau (LMB)

Pursuant to Sec.91 of the Public Land Act, investigate the land titles covering areas inthe Municipality of Caluya, Antique alleged to be spurious, and provide a concretetimeline for the processes to be undertaken;

Verify from its records the existence of Proclamation 649, and the correspondingsurveys pursuant thereto (Sec. 86, Public Land Act);

Clarify the validity of LC Maps, and its significance (LC Maps 790 - Dec. 1, 1928 and2130 - Aug. 6, 1957);

Investigate the validity of issuance of Free Patent No. 467791 to Salvacion Vda. DeJavier, now represented by Leto Javier over Lot 573-A located in Brgy. Imba, Caluya,Antique that resulted to the issuance of OCT No. N-2081, and institute the properremedy such as reversion proceedings in coordination with the Office of the SolicitorGeneral; and

Conduct a new public land survey in Caluya, Antique, and clarify the reason for theconduct of a second survey resulting to LC Map 2130.

2. For the Department of Energy (DOE)

Provide data of the areas where there are titled parcels of land, and which have beenthe subjects of negotiation in Semirara Island, if any;

Develop a map indicating titled lands in Caluya, Antique, which will be useful inmonitoring and regulating SMPC activities/expansion, in close coordination with DENR(EMB, LMB, etc.);

Identify areas in Caluya, Semirara and Sibay that have been explored and yielded nocoal deposit, or not suitable for coal mining;

Ensure that operations of SMPC will not displace communities in Brgy. Tinogboc,Semirara Island, particularly in Sitio Sabang;

Verify from SMPC the sale between Vicente Cesar V. Malig; Leonardo M. Dalwampo,Agustin D. Gonzales, Melchor D. Borbon, and Edgardo S. Lagman, who are alleged tobe executives/key officers of SMPC or any of its subsidiaries/affiliates, and the heirs ofAntiquio Janairo involving Lots 900, 901, 902, 913 and 914 in Brgy. Tinogboc,Semirara Island, Caluya, Antique;

Provide official copy of its post-field visit report in re: Field Visit in Caluya, Antique(May 23-26, 2016); and

Provide report on the falling structure incident that occurred on June 18, 2016 ataround 10:49am at May Flower, Brgy. Semirara. Alleged casualties are: Erwin Macalili,19 y/o (Dead On Arrival), Jeros Eguillon, 28 yo, and Zong Xu Pong, 43 y/o.

Adopt a community-based impact assessment measure. MMT to serve as grievancemechanism for issues and concerns of Brgys. Semirara, Tinogboc and Alegria

3. Land Registration Authority (LRA)

Provide additional list of land titles from ROD-Antique covering the Municipality ofCaluya, particularly those in Semirara Island; and

Clarify the reason for the cancellation of some titles in the partial list.

4. National Anti-Poverty Commission (NAPC)

Consider initiatives for social preparation in coordination with the LGU; provide

26

livelihood projects. Provide official copy of its post-field visit report in re: Field Visit in Caluya, Antique

(May 23-26, 2016)

5. Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR)

Take and coordinate action on its recommendation to repeal or amend PP 649;thereafter, applicable agrarian laws can be applied, particularly there is a joint DAR-DENR Administrative Order No #3, Series of 2014 for untitled private agriculturallands. Significant portions of that island are still untitled. Therefore the said AO canstill be applied. There is also a need for the issuance of Implementing Rules andRegulations (IRR) for the full implementation of EO 448, Series of 1991

Provide reports about updates on efforts to cover parts of Semirara Island under theComprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP)

6. Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG)/MLGOO Antique

Create a human rights desk in the LGU Serve as focal point/liaison between national agencies and the LGU Implement and monitor a transparent consultation process in coordination with the

Municipal Government of Caluya

7. Municipal Government of Caluya, Antique (LGU-Antique)

Create a human rights desk in the LGU Submit new Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) of the municipality to the

IAWG/CHR Secretariat Institute a transparent process of consultation with residents of Brgys. Imba and

Tinogboc on issues of development projects, mining-related activities, housing,livelihood, and empowerment, among others

Provide an efficient transportation system for the residents of the islands Respect the choice of residents in Sitio Sabang to remain in their current occupation of

the land, and be in the front-line to respect the residents' possession of their lands Clarify the basis for security of tenure of relocatees in Sitio Poocan In coordination with other agencies and NGOs, provide for more industry or source of

livelihood for the community that would be alternative to coal mining

8. Department of Agriculture/National Dairy Authority (DA/NDA)

Ensure no displacement of residents in the event that the Dairy Farm Project would bepursued

Provide official copy of its post-field visit report in re: Field Visit in Caluya, Antique(May 23-26, 2016)

9. Environmental Management Bureau (EMB)

Review of the ECC provisions (determine whether the conditions and measuresindicated therein have been adequately complied with by SMPC, especially social andenvironmental considerations)

Adopt a community-based impact assessment measure. MMT to serve as grievancemechanism for issues and concerns of Brgys. Semirara, Tinogboc and Alegria

Include new members to the MMT coming from SAPOFFA, IFSA, and other relevantstakeholders

27

livelihood projects. Provide official copy of its post-field visit report in re: Field Visit in Caluya, Antique

(May 23-26, 2016)

5. Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR)

Take and coordinate action on its recommendation to repeal or amend PP 649;thereafter, applicable agrarian laws can be applied, particularly there is a joint DAR-DENR Administrative Order No #3, Series of 2014 for untitled private agriculturallands. Significant portions of that island are still untitled. Therefore the said AO canstill be applied. There is also a need for the issuance of Implementing Rules andRegulations (IRR) for the full implementation of EO 448, Series of 1991

Provide reports about updates on efforts to cover parts of Semirara Island under theComprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP)

6. Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG)/MLGOO Antique

Create a human rights desk in the LGU Serve as focal point/liaison between national agencies and the LGU Implement and monitor a transparent consultation process in coordination with the

Municipal Government of Caluya

7. Municipal Government of Caluya, Antique (LGU-Antique)

Create a human rights desk in the LGU Submit new Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) of the municipality to the

IAWG/CHR Secretariat Institute a transparent process of consultation with residents of Brgys. Imba and

Tinogboc on issues of development projects, mining-related activities, housing,livelihood, and empowerment, among others

Provide an efficient transportation system for the residents of the islands Respect the choice of residents in Sitio Sabang to remain in their current occupation of

the land, and be in the front-line to respect the residents' possession of their lands Clarify the basis for security of tenure of relocatees in Sitio Poocan In coordination with other agencies and NGOs, provide for more industry or source of

livelihood for the community that would be alternative to coal mining

8. Department of Agriculture/National Dairy Authority (DA/NDA)

Ensure no displacement of residents in the event that the Dairy Farm Project would bepursued

Provide official copy of its post-field visit report in re: Field Visit in Caluya, Antique(May 23-26, 2016)

9. Environmental Management Bureau (EMB)

Review of the ECC provisions (determine whether the conditions and measuresindicated therein have been adequately complied with by SMPC, especially social andenvironmental considerations)

Adopt a community-based impact assessment measure. MMT to serve as grievancemechanism for issues and concerns of Brgys. Semirara, Tinogboc and Alegria

Include new members to the MMT coming from SAPOFFA, IFSA, and other relevantstakeholders

27

Determine the impacts of mining activities in Semirara Island, e.g. in areas near thesea, known as “Overburden” as shown during the field visit

10. Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE)

Coordinate with DOE, on the incident that occurred last June 18, 2016 re: fallingstructure incident

Provide official copy of its post-field visit report in re: Field Visit in Caluya, Antique(May 23-26, 2016)

Suggest livelihood programs, such as those involving seaweed farming Apply existing DOE guidelines such as the Coal Mines Safety Operating Guidelines

(Bureau of Energy Development Circular No. 1 Series of 1978) and Guidelines for CoalOperations in the Philippines (Bureau of Energy Development Circular No. 81-11-10)

Coordinate with SMPC as regards the current policy of the government to end“illegitimate contractualization” or “ENDO”

Consistent with DOLE Department Orders 174-A and 183, and Executive Order 51,labor inspection must be done with the SMPC involving labor inspectors both from theDOLE and the employment sector as well as from labor. Such inspection must ensurecompliance with minimum labor standards, occupational safety and health, and respectfor the constitutional rights to self organizations, tenure and the right to collectivebargaining.”

Provide a written report to the IAWG on SMPC's employees, categorized as regular,temporary, or otherwise, and its contractors/subcontractors

11. Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB)

Clarify the applicable policy/regulation covering the situation when the miningcompany, such as SMPC, extracts limestone in the course of its operation for coalmining; discuss the interaction between DOE and MGB in this situation

Provide status of the Himalian Limestone Project in Semirara Island and conductregular monitoring activities in coordination with the local mining and regulatory board(PMRB) to ensure that there are no illegal quarrying of limestone in the area

Apply a community-based monitoring and engage the residents of Semirara Island

12. National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP)

Provide plans and programs for indigenous peoples in Caluya, Antique, whether or notthey are classified as migrant IPs or not, to protect and promote four bundles of IPrights, i.e., to ancestral domains and lands; to self-governance and empowerment; tosocial justice and human rights; and to cultural integrity, as may be applicable

Provide official copy of its post-field visit report in re: Field Visit in Caluya, Antique(May 23-26, 2016)

13. National Economic, Development Authority (NEDA)

Provide expert advice in evaluating realization of economic, social and cultural rights inCaluya, Antique given the complicated context on land classification, governance, andenvironmental concerns

14. Department of Education (DEPED)

Provide data on the health of school children in Sabang, and Semirara Island in general Provide updates on any efforts and requests, if any, from the Municipal Govt of Caluya,

28

Determine the impacts of mining activities in Semirara Island, e.g. in areas near thesea, known as “Overburden” as shown during the field visit

10. Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE)

Coordinate with DOE, on the incident that occurred last June 18, 2016 re: fallingstructure incident

Provide official copy of its post-field visit report in re: Field Visit in Caluya, Antique(May 23-26, 2016)

Suggest livelihood programs, such as those involving seaweed farming Apply existing DOE guidelines such as the Coal Mines Safety Operating Guidelines

(Bureau of Energy Development Circular No. 1 Series of 1978) and Guidelines for CoalOperations in the Philippines (Bureau of Energy Development Circular No. 81-11-10)

Coordinate with SMPC as regards the current policy of the government to end“illegitimate contractualization” or “ENDO”

Consistent with DOLE Department Orders 174-A and 183, and Executive Order 51,labor inspection must be done with the SMPC involving labor inspectors both from theDOLE and the employment sector as well as from labor. Such inspection must ensurecompliance with minimum labor standards, occupational safety and health, and respectfor the constitutional rights to self organizations, tenure and the right to collectivebargaining.”

Provide a written report to the IAWG on SMPC's employees, categorized as regular,temporary, or otherwise, and its contractors/subcontractors

11. Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB)

Clarify the applicable policy/regulation covering the situation when the miningcompany, such as SMPC, extracts limestone in the course of its operation for coalmining; discuss the interaction between DOE and MGB in this situation

Provide status of the Himalian Limestone Project in Semirara Island and conductregular monitoring activities in coordination with the local mining and regulatory board(PMRB) to ensure that there are no illegal quarrying of limestone in the area

Apply a community-based monitoring and engage the residents of Semirara Island

12. National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP)

Provide plans and programs for indigenous peoples in Caluya, Antique, whether or notthey are classified as migrant IPs or not, to protect and promote four bundles of IPrights, i.e., to ancestral domains and lands; to self-governance and empowerment; tosocial justice and human rights; and to cultural integrity, as may be applicable

Provide official copy of its post-field visit report in re: Field Visit in Caluya, Antique(May 23-26, 2016)

13. National Economic, Development Authority (NEDA)

Provide expert advice in evaluating realization of economic, social and cultural rights inCaluya, Antique given the complicated context on land classification, governance, andenvironmental concerns

14. Department of Education (DEPED)

Provide data on the health of school children in Sabang, and Semirara Island in general Provide updates on any efforts and requests, if any, from the Municipal Govt of Caluya,

28

SMPC, Janairo Family or some interested parties to relocate schools

15. Presidential Human Rights Committee Secretariat (PHRC)

Serve as focal point in the Executive Department to call for a review of PresidentialProclamation 649

16. Semirara Mining and Power (SMPC) Corporation

Disclose the plans to expand the mining and other related activities Engage the community and enhance trust, using human rights-based approaches

(HRBA) Adopt a no-displacement policy as part of its human rights commitment Provide information about Vicente Cesar V. Malig; Leonardo M. Dalwampo, Agustin D.

Gonzales, Melchor D. Borbon, and Edgardo S. Lagman, who are alleged to beexecutives/key officers of SMPC or any of its subsidiaries/affiliates, who bought Lots900, 901, 902, 913 and 914 in Brgy. Tinogboc, Caluya, Antique from the heirs ofAntiquio Janairo

Provide an efficient transportation system for the residents in coordination with theLGU

Provide livelihood programs to impacted communities, as part of CSR Respect the choice of residents in Sitio Sabang to remain in their current occupation of

the land Instruct its security guards to respect the rights of residents in the area Participate in the EITI process

17. Provincial Environment and Natural Resources Office – Antique / CommunityEnvironment and Natural Resources Office – Culasi (PENRO-Antique/ CENROCulasi)

Provide to the Inter-Agency Working Group Secretariat/CHR certified true copies of LCMap 790 dated Dec. 1, 1928 and LC Map 2130 dated Aug. 6, 1957

Provide dates of issuance of land patents in Caluya, Antique Provide official copy of its post-field visit report in re: Field Visit in Caluya, Antique

(May 23-26, 2016) Coordinate with LMB in the latter's conduct of investigation regarding the patents

issued after November 1940

18. Department of Environment and Natural Resources

To evaluate the effect of DAO 2017-15 in so far as it gives preference to themembership of LGU-accredited local NGOs to be part of the MMT, as this wouldeffectively exclude NGOs such as Sabang-Poocan Farmers, Fisherfolks Association, Inc.(SAPOFFA) and others similarly situated who have strained relations with the LGU

29

SMPC, Janairo Family or some interested parties to relocate schools

15. Presidential Human Rights Committee Secretariat (PHRC)

Serve as focal point in the Executive Department to call for a review of PresidentialProclamation 649

16. Semirara Mining and Power (SMPC) Corporation

Disclose the plans to expand the mining and other related activities Engage the community and enhance trust, using human rights-based approaches

(HRBA) Adopt a no-displacement policy as part of its human rights commitment Provide information about Vicente Cesar V. Malig; Leonardo M. Dalwampo, Agustin D.

Gonzales, Melchor D. Borbon, and Edgardo S. Lagman, who are alleged to beexecutives/key officers of SMPC or any of its subsidiaries/affiliates, who bought Lots900, 901, 902, 913 and 914 in Brgy. Tinogboc, Caluya, Antique from the heirs ofAntiquio Janairo

Provide an efficient transportation system for the residents in coordination with theLGU

Provide livelihood programs to impacted communities, as part of CSR Respect the choice of residents in Sitio Sabang to remain in their current occupation of

the land Instruct its security guards to respect the rights of residents in the area Participate in the EITI process

17. Provincial Environment and Natural Resources Office – Antique / CommunityEnvironment and Natural Resources Office – Culasi (PENRO-Antique/ CENROCulasi)

Provide to the Inter-Agency Working Group Secretariat/CHR certified true copies of LCMap 790 dated Dec. 1, 1928 and LC Map 2130 dated Aug. 6, 1957

Provide dates of issuance of land patents in Caluya, Antique Provide official copy of its post-field visit report in re: Field Visit in Caluya, Antique

(May 23-26, 2016) Coordinate with LMB in the latter's conduct of investigation regarding the patents

issued after November 1940

18. Department of Environment and Natural Resources

To evaluate the effect of DAO 2017-15 in so far as it gives preference to themembership of LGU-accredited local NGOs to be part of the MMT, as this wouldeffectively exclude NGOs such as Sabang-Poocan Farmers, Fisherfolks Association, Inc.(SAPOFFA) and others similarly situated who have strained relations with the LGU

29