E/CN.4/2003/90/Add.3 page 9 settlement, town sites, roads, and the agricultural lands. A presidential decree issued in 1976 declared the ancestral lands of National Cultural Communities as alienable and disposable, to be identified and subdivided into family-sized private plots. 10. The Aquino Government signified a shift from the policy of integration to one of pluralism. President Aquino created the Office of Muslim Affairs, the Office for Northern Cultural Communities and the Office for Southern Cultural Communities. The 1987 Constitution “recognizes and promotes the rights of indigenous cultural communities within the framework of national unity and development” (art. II, sect. 22). It also protects “the rights of indigenous cultural communities to their ancestral lands to ensure their economic, social and cultural well-being” (art. XII, sect. 5), and recognizes, respects and protects “the rights of indigenous cultural communities to preserve and develop their cultures, traditions and institutions” (art. XIV, sect. 17). III. 1997 INDIGENOUS PEOPLES RIGHTS ACT: A NEW BEGINNING A. Codification of indigenous peoples’ rights 11. Based on the Constitution, the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA)5 was enacted by the Congress in 1997. This Act codifies a wide range of indigenous peoples’ rights, including the right to ancestral domains, the right to self-governance and self-determination, the right to cultural integrity and the right to free, prior and informed consent. It further includes social justice and human rights for indigenous peoples, particularly the principle of non-discrimination, the right to equal opportunity and treatment, the rights of indigenous peoples during armed conflict, the provision of basic services, and the special protection of the rights of indigenous women, children and youth.6 The enactment of this Act is an important step taken by the Government of the Philippines towards the full realization of the rights of indigenous peoples. IPRA now constitutes, along with the Constitution, the principal framework in which indigenous rights must be considered. 12. Shortly after being enacted, IPRA was challenged in court on several legal grounds. The Supreme Court, however, confirmed its constitutionality in December 2000, marking the beginning of a new era for indigenous rights. The Special Rapporteur hopes that primary attention may now be given by the Government, as well as by the judiciary, to the progressive application of the Constitution and IPRA in the promotion and protection of the human rights of indigenous peoples. Nevertheless, some analysts have pointed to weaknesses in the law, which may lead to contradictory or ambiguous interpretations that do not fully favour indigenous rights. Indeed, the major concern seems to be not so much the text of the law itself as the difficulties of its implementation, despite the adoption of the Implementing Rules and Regulations, and a series of executive orders issued by NCIP. This appears to be a challenge that must be addressed squarely by Government agencies and the judiciary as well as by Philippine society in general if the objectives of the Act are to be truly achieved.7 B. NCIP and its role in the implementation of IPRA 13. Implementation depends not only on political will, but also on the institutional effectiveness of the government agencies that are responsible for it. The Special Rapporteur