PHILIPPINES: Why we must think again on mining
PHILIPPINES: Why we must think again on mining
Father Edwin Gariguez of Calapan vicariate headed Mangyan Mission, an NGO based in Calapan City, until appointed executive secretary of the National Secretariat for Social Action (NASSA) of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines recently. He told UCA News in an interview Feb. 28 that "responsible mining" is impossible under current laws and government.
How is your stand on mining connected with your work as NASSA executive secretary?
FATHER EDWIN GARIGUEZ: NASSA acts as a secretariat to the social action centers of the different dioceses all over the country. The network tries to serve the Church in its mission to be truly a "Church of the poor,"[1] implementing concrete programs and addressing pressing issues concerning the voiceless sectors and the less privileged.
My involvement in environment campaigns, and my long years of immersion among the farmers, fisherfolk and indigenous peoples prepared me to understand the socio-political landscape of the struggle, while simultaneously grappling to bring the issues in the light of the social teachings of the Church and to mobilize concrete responses rooted in faith.
How is mining connected to poverty?
I am working for the Mangyan Mission, a Church-based NGO promoting the rights of the indigenous communities, partnering with them in a number of development programs and initiatives.
Large-scale mining, specifically the proposed Mindoro Nickel Project of Intex Resources, threatens the very survival of the indigenous peoples because a big part of the mining tenement overlaps with the ancestral domains of the Alangan and Tadyawan tribes.
Mining within the ancestral domain constitutes outright land-grabbing of the transnational corporations under the guise of bringing in so-called development.
But this notion of development is suspiciously equated with corporate greed considering the lopsided inequity in benefit-sharing in extractive industry and the projected devastation of natural and cultural ecology.
This is the reason why I join the indigenous communities in opposing mining – for them land is life, and mining in watershed areas and in the ancestral lands will destroy life!
Why is your group advocating a total ban on mining?
There should be a total ban on mining in the Philippines because in the present context, our national policy heavily favors foreign corporations. It prioritizes the unbridled entry of investment while the protection of the environment, the rights and well-being of the affected communities and food security are being sacrificed.
Do you believe there can be responsible mining?
"Responsible mining" is an oxymoron. How can a destructive industry become "responsible?" It is very evident from communities’ experiences that the very minimum criteria for responsibility — safety, environmental protection, human rights — are not being observed and they are actually not achievable under the present system and structure of governance and pro-mining policies.
Supposedly, the established principle of "responsible mining" requires that mining companies should not encroach on watershed areas where social and environmental impacts are very high. The so-called "no go zones" for mining include areas considered as conservation priorities, zones of social conflict, ancestral domains of the indigenous peoples, biodiverse areas, typhoon and earthquake prone areas and others.
These criteria for "no go zones" and the requirements for "responsible mining" can be found in the World Bank-commissioned study, Extractive Industry Review, contained in the report, Striking a Better Balance [2].
Mindoro has all of the above features making it truly a critically threatened island ecosystem and therefore should be a "no go zone" if mining is to be really responsible.
How will we provide for building and other needs if we do not mine?
The mining industry should be pursued primarily to respond to the needs of the country and not only to meet the global demand. Mineral resources need to be managed properly to ensure that the next generation can still benefit from them. We need to identify what we truly need and respond accordingly using a national mineral development plan.
How can people and the environment get better protection?
We need more stringent regulations and an alternative legal framework ensuring participatory management of our mineral resources. We need to redefine the policy direction so that primary consideration will be for environmental integrity of the ecosystems, maximum benefits for the community, strict adherence to "no go zones", long-term planning on a national program for mining industry, promotion of common good and environmental justice.
It is for these reasons that we are strongly supporting the passage of the Alternative Mining Bill [3] which is now pending in Congress.
Will you continue to lead Calapan’s anti-mining campaign while serving with NASSA?
We are ready to proceed with the turn-over process of my workload and assignments. I am confident that we have been able to empower second liners in our campaign, and it will not be difficult to find qualified replacements for me.
I will assume my post as executive secretary of NASSA after Holy Week. I will be working directly under Bishop Broderick Pabillo, the NASSA National Director.
Our work is primarily concerned with coordinating programs of the social action network including support services, institutional capability building, and developing linkages with local and international partner organizations.
My work in NASSA demands a full-time commitment, but this is only for a certain term. So, this is not a permanent appointment and I will be back in Mindoro after some time.
Tension follows killing of anti-mining official [4]
Priest´s hunger strike claims initial victory [5]
Bishops Take Mining Issue To British Parliament [6]
March 1st, 2010
[UCAN]