17 July, 2008 21:06
One of my primary functions is to keep the public informed about the company’s position on various issues that impact on its business and stakeholders. Among the issues TVIRD deals with quite often is misinformation from sectors who are opposed to mineral resource development.
Last July 13, an otherwise good article entitled “Evaluating RP’s asset reform” appeared in the Philippine Daily Inquirer, which, while it did not mention the TVIRD’s name, repeated erroneous accusations against it. The article can be read through this link: http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/talkofthetown/view/20080713-148121/Evaluating-RPs-asset-reform
I was compelled to respond to both the author, Mr. Joel Pagsanghan of the Philippine Partnership for the Development of Human Resources in Rural Areas, and the editor, Mr. Juan Sarmiento, in the hope that the letter will help straighten the misleading statements in the article. Mr. Sarmiento has acknowledged receipt of the letter and committed to forward it to the Inquirer’s Opinion Section editor.
My response letter below:
MR. JUAN V.
SARMIENTO, JR.
Editor, “Talk of the Town”
Philippine Daily Inquirer
Chino Roces Ave. corner Yague and Mascardo Sts.
Makati City
Dear Mr. Sarmiento:
TVI Resource Development (Phils.), Inc. (TVIRD), operating a copper-gold mining
project in Canatuan, Siocon, Zamboanga del Norte, applauds the intent and
direction of the Mr. Joel Pagsanghan’s article, which appeared in the
Philippine Daily Inquirer last Sunday, July 13. We agree that empowerment of
people and communities as asset-holders (ancestral lands, fishing rights,
agriculture) is and should be an important element in the national strategy to
alleviate poverty. As a mining company we are making a significant
contribution to the economic, social and sustainable development of the indigenous
community, who are our partners in a mining project being operated on their
ancestral domain.
We must protest, however, at a couple of the statements in the article, namely
that “the tribe did not permit this mining operation” and that people “look on
helplessly as a mining company tears up the sacred land of (their)
forefathers.”
This is quite far from the truth.
The majority representatives of the Subanon tribal council approved the project
in a Memorandum of Understanding with TVIRD in 2001, before the Subanons
received their Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title. They re-approved
the project through a Memorandum of Agreement in 2003 once the ancestral domain
had been proclaimed. The vast majority of the tribal council today, as well as
the mass of the indigenous population in the ancestral domain, overwhelmingly
support the project. It has provided extensive social benefits in the
form of education, health, infrastructure and livelihood (including employment
as well as projects in agro-forestry). And it has provided a royalty to the
community of nearly P34 million pesos.
The National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) has already declared that
TVIRD was not required to secure Free Prior and Informed Consent from the
Subanons. This issue is already resolved.
An archaeological assessment conducted by the Archaelogical, Cultural,
Environmental Consultancy, Inc. on behalf of the National
Museum of the Philippines revealed that the areas affected by
TVIRD’s mining operations are devoid of any Subanon archaeological or cultural
materials; there was no evidence found of any historic or prehistoric religious
practice, ever, at Mount
Canatuan. The site was
being actively mined, prior to our company’s arrival, by a host of small-scale
miners including some Subanons, and to the benefit of a number of individuals,
including those who, today, protest that the mountain was sacred. Some of
those individuals were collecting unofficial royalties from such mining,
without any mention or concern for its supposed sacredness. Qualitative
research and interviews have established that even within the broader Subanon
community, the claim that Canatuan is sacred is not shared by the majority.
The qualifications as “chieftain” or “leader” of some of those who are today
protesting, are challenged by many in the community, as well as by preliminary
genealogical research conducted by the NCIP. TVIRD has attempted on many
occasions to heal the rift in the leadership of the community and support, for
example, the re-entry to the community of Mr. Jose Anoy, whom Mr. Pagsanghan
cites. We know Mr. Anoy would welcome it, but the plain fact is that the
some of the NGOs who are supporting him are financing continuing conflict
rather than resolution because of their need for a basis on which to fight
against the government’s mining program of which they disapprove.
As with everyone we encounter, we invite you to come to the mine site to see
for yourself, and talk to the real people of the community, not just the minority
and not just the political campaigners NGOs. Our slogan is “Our Doors Are
Open”. Hundreds of people have taken up our invitation and seen for themselves,
the most recent of which is the Provincial Board of South Cotabato
investigating the truth of modern environmental management in open pit mining.
Please feel free to visit our web site at www.tviphilippines.com for a
review of all these issues.
The clear misconceptions of Mr. Pagsanghan are part of old issues that have
been adequately addressed by the company in many national and international
fora spanning a number of years. The truth is the company and the community
have a solid relationship in making sustainable community development a
possibility through responsible mining.
Sincerely yours,
(Signed) ROCKY G. DIMACULANGAN
