The DOJ, OPAPP, DILG, PNP, AFP, OP, CHR-RHRC and the CHR can pool resources to work out specific responses for violation of individual rights of the victims amid the worsening spate of killings among IP. The CHR can go a step further from investigation and recommendation for prosecution to inter-agency monitoring on follow-thru arrests and prosecution. This thematic working group can also study the possibility of disestablishment of government reservations in order to restore Ancestral Domains. Also, the value of the CHR being convenor of these partnerships is that recalcitrance or failure to perform official duties can be dealt with using the oversight function which includes Ombudsman complaints for public officers who fail to perform or is grossly negligent in the performance of duty. For private or non-State offenders, violations of the IPRA can give rise to DOJ criminal complaints under the penal provisions of the IPRA. The CHR, as independent Commission, can also offer mediation/voluntary arbitration services among State or Non-State offenders/ public or private persons and entities who have caused civil damages in IP communities. This emergency response mechanism is also envisioned for other emergencies arising from natural or man-made calamities such as drought or civil unrest documented in the 2017 IP Inquiry as well as previous Inquiries 38. But the primary emphasis and working arrangements with government agencies, civil society and IP communities, will be based on the sharing of data and pooling of efforts and resources to comply with State obligations to serve the IP beneficiaries in their self-empowerment efforts at asserting individual and collective rights. b) Adoption of a common M& E system with a built-in process for FPIC. The IP Human Rights Observatory will craft a Human Rights-based M&E system that the three (3) levels of partnerships 39 can commonly adopt. Upon adoption of a common M & E system, all government projects affecting IPs and using the three (3) layer partnerships as forum, can have an efficient process of electronic exchange of program/ project notes for comments of the representatives of the 3-level partnerships with the objective being to clarify the project sufficient for the exercise of free and informed prior consent by the IP. Changes on the project components may be made with all the input collated for a series of notes exchanges. If there are fundamental objections to the project, a round table discussion can be called. Needless to state, a rejection by the beneficiaries for irreconcilable and fundamental objections during the process must yield to withdrawal of the project for their respective areas. A separate discussion on site-specific and beneficiary-generated indicators for Monitoring and Evaluation will accompany the acceptance of the project by the IP. Thenceforth, all ongoing and planned gov’t projects will be required to undergo this process to secure free and informed prior consent. Policy 38 Haran Transcripts of Public hearing and Kidapawan Rally Resolutions of CHR 39 These three (3) layers of partnerships for the IP Human Rights Observatory (IP-HRO) will include: 1) the interagency partnership; 2) the civil society partnership and the 3) IP partnership convened by an independent Constitutional Commission (the CHR) Page | 27