Jurisdiction of The National Commission on Indigenous Peoples
The National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) shall have jurisdiction over claims and disputes involving rights of ICCs/IPs only when they arise between or among parties belonging to the same ICC/IP. (G.R. No. 181284, October 20, 2015).
Note that under Section 72 of the IPRA, any person who commits violation of any of the provisions of the IPRA may be punished either(1) in accordance. with the customary laws of the ICCs/IPs concerned, provided that the penalty shall not be a cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment, and that neither death penalty nor excessive fines shall be imposed; or (2) upon conviction, by imprisonment of not less than 9 months but not more than 12 years, or a fine of not less than ₱100,000.00 nor more than ₱500,000.00, or both such fine and imprisonment upon the discretion of the court.1a\^/phi1 Again, it would be contrary to the principles of fair play and due process for those parties who do not belong to the same ICC/IP group to be subjected to its separate and distinct customary laws, and to be punished in accordance therewith. The Court thus rules that the NCIP shall have primary jurisdiction over violations of IPRA provisions only when they arise between or among parties belonging to the same ICC/IP group. When the parties belong to different ICC/IP group or where one of the parties is a non-ICC/IP, jurisdiction over such violations shall fall under the proper Regional Trial Court.
On a final note, the Court restates that under Section 66 of the IPRA, the NCIP shall have limited jurisdiction over claims and disputes involving rights of IPs/ICCs only when they arise between or among parties belonging to the same ICC/IP group; but if such claims and disputes arise between or among parties who do not belong to the same ICC/IP group, the proper regular courts shall have jurisdiction. However, under Sections 52(h) and 53, in relation to Section 62 of the IPRA, as well as Section 54, the NCIP shall have primary jurisdiction over adverse claims and border disputes arising from the delineation of ancestral domains/lands, and cancellation of fraudulently-issued CADTs, regardless of whether the parties are non-ICCs/ IPs, or members of different ICCs/IPs groups, as well as violations of ICCs/IPs rights under Section 72 of the IPRA where both parties belong to the same ICC/IP group.
Note that under Section 72 of the IPRA, any person who commits violation of any of the provisions of the IPRA may be punished either(1) in accordance. with the customary laws of the ICCs/IPs concerned, provided that the penalty shall not be a cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment, and that neither death penalty nor excessive fines shall be imposed; or (2) upon conviction, by imprisonment of not less than 9 months but not more than 12 years, or a fine of not less than ₱100,000.00 nor more than ₱500,000.00, or both such fine and imprisonment upon the discretion of the court.1a\^/phi1 Again, it would be contrary to the principles of fair play and due process for those parties who do not belong to the same ICC/IP group to be subjected to its separate and distinct customary laws, and to be punished in accordance therewith. The Court thus rules that the NCIP shall have primary jurisdiction over violations of IPRA provisions only when they arise between or among parties belonging to the same ICC/IP group. When the parties belong to different ICC/IP group or where one of the parties is a non-ICC/IP, jurisdiction over such violations shall fall under the proper Regional Trial Court.
On a final note, the Court restates that under Section 66 of the IPRA, the NCIP shall have limited jurisdiction over claims and disputes involving rights of IPs/ICCs only when they arise between or among parties belonging to the same ICC/IP group; but if such claims and disputes arise between or among parties who do not belong to the same ICC/IP group, the proper regular courts shall have jurisdiction. However, under Sections 52(h) and 53, in relation to Section 62 of the IPRA, as well as Section 54, the NCIP shall have primary jurisdiction over adverse claims and border disputes arising from the delineation of ancestral domains/lands, and cancellation of fraudulently-issued CADTs, regardless of whether the parties are non-ICCs/ IPs, or members of different ICCs/IPs groups, as well as violations of ICCs/IPs rights under Section 72 of the IPRA where both parties belong to the same ICC/IP group.
