When justice is beyond reach
The deaths of two indigenous farmers in Alabel, Sarangani, should trouble us for more than the tragic loss of two lives. They should force us to ask why a land dispute, unresolved through barangay-level efforts, could end in an underwater ordeal that claimed the lives of both disputants.
On Oct. 16, 2026, Tonny Bulanon Mansag, 69, and Gaspar Tusan Palasanon, 49, surrounded by members of their tribe, submerged themselves in the Glamang River in Barangay Datal Anggas to settle a disagreement over land. Reports said they remained underwater for about 12 minutes. Neither survived. Authorities are investigating the circumstances surrounding the deaths. Reports have differed on whether the participants belonged to the B’laan or Tagakaulo community.
The immediate temptation is to condemn the practice and move on. That would be inadequate. The deeper question is why people facing a consequential dispute over land—a source of livelihood, security, and family identity—could not find an accessible and acceptable way to resolve it without risking their lives.
We should be careful not to confuse this tragedy with indigenous customary justice as a whole. Sarangani itself offers a contrasting example. In 2022, the Provincial Information Office documented a sadyandi settlement in Malapatan involving tribal elders and two families whose conflict had escalated to gunfire. The process included kasfala, a deliberation led by a knowledgeable elder, and symbolic acts intended to end the conflict and restore peace.
Here is the distinction we must recognize: indigenous communities possess knowledge, institutions, and practices for reconciling differences. Some can be strengthened and adapted to protect life while preserving cultural identity. The task is not to replace indigenous authority with government bureaucracy. It is to help communities expand their choices and strengthen their capacity to help themselves.
But who will help them do so? Indigenous communities often face formidable barriers: distance from legal services, language differences, limited financial resources, unfamiliarity with formal procedures, and unequal access to institutions that can clarify land rights. A barangay settlement that fails should not leave disputants with nowhere meaningful to turn. There should be a clear, affordable pathway to further mediation, technical assistance, legal advice, or adjudication by the institution competent to handle the dispute.
The government must help establish that pathway. The National Commission on Indigenous Peoples, the Office for Alternative Dispute Resolution, local governments, and barangay institutions should work with customary leaders to identify dangerous practices, strengthen safe alternatives, and clarify referrals. Republic Act No. 8371, the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act, recognizes customary laws and indigenous systems of self-governance. Respect for these institutions must go hand-in-hand with protecting human life and ensuring that people can seek appropriate remedies.
Universities can make an especially valuable contribution. State colleges and universities, local colleges, and private higher education institutions are spread across the country. Their law schools, extension programs, and departments of public administration, development studies, social work, and anthropology could help communities document their own dispute-resolution practices, train local mediators, explain legal options in accessible languages, and provide supervised legal assistance. Research partnerships could establish which approaches produce fairer, safer, and more durable settlements.
Civil society, professional associations, legal-aid organizations, and responsible media also have roles to play. The “Doon Po Sa Amin” citizen video community documentation program promoted by Leo Martinez and the dap-ayan revival advocacy of Kidlat Tahimik are timely, relevant initiatives.
Public awareness should not sensationalize indigenous traditions or portray entire communities as backward. It should illuminate both the dangers that require urgent attention and the constructive practices that deserve recognition and support.
Most importantly, reform must involve indigenous people themselves—elders, women, young people, customary authorities, and those whose voices may be overlooked within their own communities. External assistance should enlarge their agency, not take it away. Voluntary participation, informed consent, procedural fairness, and access to formal remedies must remain essential safeguards.
The United Nations sustainable development goal 16 calls for peaceful and inclusive societies and access to justice for all. The two farmers cannot be brought back. But their deaths need not become another fleeting headline. They can become a reason to build bridges between customary justice and public institutions, so that communities are not abandoned when their existing methods fail.
Justice should be culturally grounded, accessible, and safe. Helping indigenous communities achieve that is not a favor to the marginalized. It is a public responsibility—and a measure of whether our commitment to inclusive development reaches those who need it most.
—————-
******
Get real-time news updates: inqnews.net/inqviber
