DXUP FM Balita - Alih S. Anso August 28, 2008- Lunes
Pikit, North Cotabato—Patuloy na nananatili at nakatunganga sa mga evacuation center ang mga nagsilikas na mga mamayan sanhi ng bakbakan ng Bangsamoro Islamic Armed Forces ng Moro Islamic Liberation Front (BIAF-MILF) at ng Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) nitong Agosto. Ang ibang mga nagsilikas ay nasa Buisan bodega, nasa tabing kalsada at sa Pikit Parish social center na lahat ay mula sa municipyo ng Pikit at Aleosan.
“Kagutem i di nami magaga, ka dala den supply,” (gutom ang di namin kaya, dahil wala ng supply) pahayag ni Samakon Abas, 50, isang residente ng Barangay Bualan.
Ngunit sinabi naman ng World Food Program na nakapagbigay na sila ng 25 kilos na bigas sa bawat pamilya.
“Samaya na dikena bo nakapila i kinambakwet nami, nalugat kay ren” (Di lang miminsan kaming nakabakwet, pagod na ako) dagdag ni Abas. Habang sinariwa nya ang paghihirap ng kanilang dinanas nong magbakwet sila noong 1971, 1973, 2000, at 2003.
“Iya nami bo kapangni na maka gemaw so kawagib no Bangsamoro, ka o makainggay na makalintad tano, Insha Allah” (hiling namin ang katarungan para sa Bangsamoro, upang umiral ang kapayapaan, Kong May Awa ang Diyos), pahayag naman ni Bonbolen Alilaya, 55, taga Barangay Ginatilan.
Nagsilikas ang mga mamayan dahil sa takot na tamaan ng pina puputok na mga 105 howitzer na kanyon mula sa Army at nagsasalimbayang bala mula sa ibat-ibang kalibre ng baril ng naglalabanang pwersa.
“Ang di namin namin kayang tiisin ay putok ng 105 mm howitzer na nagmumula sa Poblacion Pikit”, dagdag ni Alilaya.
Naunang naiulat na umabot na ang mga bakwet ng 22,000 , na ang 5,000 sa kanila ay mula sa Barangay Tapudok at Langayen sa bayan ng Aleosan . Ang ibang barangay ay Silik, Pamalian, Bualan, Kulambog, Katilacan Pagangan, Manaulanan, Lagundi, Nalapaan, Dalingawen at Kalakakan lahat sakop ng Pikit.
“Di kami pan makauli ka pangandam ta sa mga taw ni Pinol,” (Hindi kami makabalik dahil takot kami sa mga tagasunod ni Pinol), pagpapaliwanag ni Muna Guiama, 40 at Guiamalodin Sugagil, 35 na pawang taga Ginatilan. Ang kanyang tinutukoy ay si Cotabato Vice – Governor Emmanuel Pinol na kamakailan ay nanawagan sa pag-aarmas ng mga sibilyan.
Samantala nong August 28, sa may national highway ay namimigay ng mga relief ang DSWD volunteer na si Delia M. Angub dahil may mga bakwet din may sa Amanah Evacuation Center sa Inug ug na may bilang na 47 na pamilya mula sa barangay Kulambog, Pamalian, Manaulanan, Nalapaan, Manaulanan, Pagangen, Bagolibas at Balong na kanilang serbisyohan.
Ang mga bakwet ay nagpahayag na mananatili sa evacuation center hangga’t nagsasagawa ng military operation ang AFP at habang may mga armadong sibilyan na gumagala-gala sa kanilang barangay.
Umaasa ang mga bakwet na sa Buisan bodega at national highway na matuloy ang usapang pangkapayapaan ng MILF at goberno upang mapirmahan na ang kasunduan sa Ancestral Domain. Ang pagpirma sa Memorandum of Agreement-sa Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) sa Kuala Lumpur Malaysia ay di natuloy noong Agosto 5, dahil sa Temporary Restraining Order ng Korte Suprema ng Pilipinas.
Dear All,
We don’t have money to further enrich the national dailies with a whole page AD. So I do have to settle for alternative media prints “a la pobre”. But it has the benefit of global interconnectedness. Here’s my initial salvo to Frank’s ADS on MOA-AD. I will elaborate my commentary much later. For the sake of a broader debate, please help circulate this Open Letter on the MOA-AD.
Yours truly, Datu Michael O. Mastura
An Open Letter
24 August 2008
My reply email was interrupted by a brownout amidst my composing thoughts I wanted to convey to our readers at the Mindanews website besides Luwaran website. Hopefully someone from the editorial box of the national dailies (in particular PDI) will pick as news items warranting some space the legal views of lawyers (like me) who represent MILF as the real Party in interest across the GRP-MILF negotiating table.
The series of full page ADS in PDI 08/22/08 and PD 08/23/08 of former senate president Frank M. Drilon simplify and focus on perceived infringements to the 1987 Constitution. Those two Q & A pages make up powerful arguments for the continuing extension of what I call the “colonisibility status” of the Bangsamoro people, posing the matter of immediate infringement as a danger.
If we think rationally out of the maddening reactive anti-Moro sentiments generated by opinion-editorials and hardly balanced media coverage of the Government-MILF peace process, it makes me reflect the ‘triumph of diplomacy’ in our era of postmodern states. [N. B. this phrase is taken from the title of a book on how the Moro rulers of the Magindanaw sultanate and the Sulu sultanate had survived the era of treaty-making with Spain, an imperial power, and Holland, a commercial power, of the time and the United States up to 1916, when President Woodrow Wilson enunciated seminal ideas of the right to self determination.] Thus, there is no occasion to speak of Balkanization of this ungovernable part of the region.
Now the Country (el Pais)—Las Islas Filipinas—has just awakened to the depth of the Bangsamoro legitimate GRIEVANCES. Instead of killing the ideas—the CAUSE (or SABAB)—embodied in the MOA-AD, the representatives of Government must face up to the Agreed Text as STATECRAFT. It vindicates the JUSTNESS of the ORIGINAL POSITIONS to fix in constitutional construct. Traditional Moro negri (statehood) ‘earned sovereignty’ is encapsulated by the Republic in its present form and structure as an autonomous entity presently in existence before the family of nations since 1946.
Spokespersons for that Sovereign state called the Republic of the Philippines (GRP) configure their constituencies into a political community. Such an assumption neglects a number of contested constitutional issues before the negotiating table.
What is the “territorial integrity” of the Philippines? When reduced to geographic maps with proper technical coordinates, the fundamental question we formally raised at the GRP-MILF Talks are as follows:
1. Is the present national territorial delimitation based on the Treaty of Paris of 10 December 1898 as corrected by the Treaty of Washington of 7 November 1900 and the treaty between the United States and England on 2 January 1930? Or,
2. Is it the current technical description of the archipelagic doctrine based on R.A. 3046 of 1961, as amended by R.A 5446 of 1968 as a system of straight baselines, its negotiating position on boundary delimitations under the United Nations Law of the Sea Convention?
An act of statesmanship is to ‘write sovereignty’ in terms of the ‘associative ties’ envisaged in the MOA-AD. We cannot proceed with a serious debate as if the meaning of sovereignty were stable; for, in reality, not one but various forms of sovereign statehood exist. There’s no confusing justice with legitimacy for workable arrangements here. However, there’s a truncated understanding of sovereignty when 12 June 1898 was fixed by law as an episodic event, following the inauguration of Philippine independence on 4 July 1946. Article 1 of Title I of the Malolos Constitution succinctly reads: “The political association of all the Filipinos constitutes a nation, whose state is called the Philippine Republic”. At that point in time, the Bangsamoro homeland was not a part of the whole Country, for as a matter of historical narrative that Republic invited the Sultan of Sulu and the Sultan of Magindanaw to federate with it.
What matters for us present generation of patriots is that Driion’s half-a-million-worth of PDI ADS highlights the absolute necessity for a change in the first principles of the unitary system. How do we, then, fit inter-subjective understandings of ‘statehood’? Former senate president Drilon, at least, seriously confronts the arenas of debate over the MOA-AD, but why does he not concede to explore the course of constitutionalism beyond the status quo of the existing constitutional order? That is unfortunate, because, what is placed before the Supreme Court is a new “elegant formula” of negotiability to balance between state sovereign authority and the right to self determination.
We need to examine the MOA-AD on the foundation of the formal division of sovereignty that favors “state rights” that have inhered in the Bangsamoro people, whose ancestral homeland was “illegally and immorally annexed” to the Republic without their plebiscitary consent. Peace negotiations are said to be “the war after the war”. Here, too, there is a subtle but in-depth way of looking at what amount of central authority in point of fact is compatible with “what is worth dying for” in the eyes of the majority of Bangsamoros in the contemporary politics of identity.
This is what the MILF-GRP negotiation process is all about: to determine the extent and limits of each side’s commitments. Clearly the premise of peace with your Muslim brothers under the MOA-AD precisely does not endanger but entrench the Country’s sovereignty. The MOA-AD achieves, rather than contemplates the use of naked coercive force, the desirable levers of division, allocation and distribution of powers; in other words, shared and residuary authorities for the Bangsamoro people and the rest of the Filipino people. All I can advance for now as an explanatory note is that the “general welfare clause” of the Philippine Constitution matching the principle of maslaha wal mursalah in Islamic constitutionalism is a catch all framework to accommodate “a medley of associative ties and tiers”.
I will elaborate on these points in a separate commentary on specific provisions of the MOA on AD. If only a healthy environment for serious debate is not drowned out by the intrusion of the mass media into the negotiating process that now encourage the politics of fear at the Metro Manila capital while excessive use of force are applied to villages in Mindanao, we can peaceably settle the conflict in Mindanao.
All the best,
Datu Michael O. Mastura
Source: http://blog.wyzemoro.com/
(Script ni Kaka Alih August 25, 2008 para sa Programang “Udto na Adi” 11:00-12:00 Lunes-Biernes).
Hindi miminsan nating tinalakay kong sino ang Bangsamoro. Sino nga ba Sila? Sila ang mga kapatid natin na hindi sumuko sa mga Espaniol at lumalaban at naihambing nila sa mga nakalaban nila na mga taga Morocco na kaya nman tinawag nilang Moro ang ganoon din mga tao dito sa atin, at nito ng circa 70 ay umusbong ang katawagang Moro at nitong huli na ay nagiging palasak na sa tainga ang katawagang Bangsamoro, hindi lang dito sa atin kundi buong mundo na, kong gusto ninyong masubukan just type in the word Bangsamoro sa ano mang search engine sa mga website at tiyak makakakuha kayo ng libo-libong sagot. Try mo. (nag-try ako sa search engine na google in 3 seconds 193,000 ang resulta)
Moro sa una ang tawag, nitong mga huling panahon ay nadugtongan ng Bangsa na ang kahulugan sa sariling wika natin ng Bangsa ay angkan, kaya naging Bangsamoro na ngayon ang tawag. Nabibilang sa mga tinatawag ngayon na Bangsamoro ay ang tribong M’ranaw, Yakan, Maguindanaon, Iranon, T’duray, Suban’n, Tau Sug at marami pang iba, ang ibang manunulat, tulad ni Prof. Rudy Rodil ay hinati sa sa dalawang kategorya ang Moro, ang Islamized at hindi, o ang ibig sabihin ng Islamized ay tinanggap ang Islam bilang religion at pangalawang kategorya ay nanatili sa kanilang nakaugaliang pananampalataya.. Ito ang nagging katawagang sa kanilang lupain, ang Bangsamoro
Ang tinatawag naman Pilipino ay yaong mamayan na mga taga Pilipinas, na dinatnan dito ng Kastila, na sumunod sa mga kaugalian, relihiyon o iyong mga napilitang magpasakop sa kapangyarihan ng Kastila, dahil wala ng magawa kundi magpasakop dahil talo sila sa lakas at armas sa pakikipaglaban. Ang ilan sa Pilipino ay ang mga Taga-ilog o Tagalog na taga Bulakan at Maynila, mga Ilokano, Ilonggo, Cebuano at iba pang tribo.
Hindi ba ang magkapatid ay halos magkapareho ng mga kaugalian, paniniwala sa mga salita at iba pang bagay. Ganoon din ba ang Pilipino at Bangsamoro, saan sila magkapareho?
Ang kasagutan sa tanong, ay marami, ngunit magbibigay tayo ng ilang halimbawa; sa pagsasaya o merry making, paano nila ito ipinagdiriwang? pareho dito ang dalawa, sa mga Pilipino tuwing sumasapit ang Pasko o bagong taon, paputok ang common sa dalawa. Halos lahat na yata na pumuputok ay pinapuputok ng mga Pilipino, di baling gumasto ng kayaman pati buhay maipagdiwang lamang ang pasko o bagong taon ng may paputok.
Sa mga Bangsamoro na Muslim, tuwing sasapit ang Id o katapusan ng Ramadan o itong darating na Id’l Adha, ang mga Bangsamoro kahit ito ay sinasabi ng ng mga nakakaalam o ng mga Uztadz na wala ito sa katuruan ng Islam ang pagpapaputok sila ay patuloy pa rin sa namana nilang kaugalian,. Nagpapaputok tuwing sasapit ang araw ng Id, Di baling may madisgrasya basta maipagdiwang lamang ang isang bagay na may putukan.Ang sabi akin ng isang Lolo, iyan Teng ang namana natin sa mga Intsik, paputok, alalahanin natin na minsan na tayong dinayo ng mga Intsik sa larangan ng kalakalan.
Sa paghihiganti o vendetta ng isang kaanak na napatay, pareho sila dito, hindi mapalagay ang Pilipino at Bangsamoro na hindi maipaghiganti ang kapatid o kaanak na napatay o naapi, dito lamang sila medyo nagkakaiba, ang Bangsamoro, ay agad naisasakatuparan ang paghihiganti. Bakit? Dahil may armas na hawak hanggang sa ngayon, di tulad ng mga Pilipino na pinagbawalan ng mga Kastila o hanggang ngayon ng goberno na humawak ng sandatang nakakamatay. Samantala sa mga Bangsamoro, dahil sigoro sa hindi nagpasakop nanatiling hawak pa rin ang kanyang sandatang panglaban sa kalaban hanggang sa mga sandaling ito.
Sa mga salita, o wika marami silang similarity ng pagbanggit sa parehong kahulugan, halimbawa: bahay sa Tagalog, balay sa Bisaya at walay sa Bangsamoro at marami pa kong ating ilalahad lahat.
Kaya nararapat lamang na magmahalan, mag-unawan at magrespetuhan ang dalawang angkan na ito dahil malapit silang mag-anak, maliban pa sa iisa ang pinamulang ng lahat ng lahi ng tao mula kay Adan at Eba.
August 25, 2008
Al Haj Murad Ebrahim, Chairman of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF)
Central Committee, met the journalists in a highly-awaited press conference held August 23, 2008 at Camp Darapanan , Bangsamoro homeland. Senior members of the MILF Central Committee including Vice Chairman Ghazali Ghazali Jaafar for political affairs were also present. MILF Peace Negotiating Panel headed by Mohagher Iqbal with members Atty Datu Michael Mastura, Atty Lanang Ali, and Maulana Mohammad Alonto were also in attendance.
The press conference graced by international, national and local journalists lasted for three hours with discussions focused on the pressing issues confronting the currently “beleaguered” peace process between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP) and MILF
“The MILF conveys to our media friends its endless gratitude for acceding to our invitation for this press conference. We hope that through your efforts, the side of the MILF on so many issues and cases will be presented and understood. We took notice that for the past weeks, the side of MILF on various incidents and situation relative to the peace process, signing of the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain and the recent spate of clashes and hostilities in some part of Mindanao was not clearly presented,” Chairman Murad said.
The following are excerpts from the statements of Chairman Murad and other top officials of the MILF.
MILF position is firm
As we had said and manifested in the press and official statement I had earlier read, the MILF position is firm. “As far as we are concerned, the
Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA – AD) is a final document, a done deal.”
The MILF cannot allow renegotiation on the MOA – AD, which took both the MILF – GRP Peace Negotiating Panels four years and eight months to discuss and initialed through the superb facilitation of the Malaysian government.
The MOA –AD had been subjected by the government to review for many times. It was even subjected by the government to legal review by experts for almost four months. The MILF do not understand why it is only now they (government constituency) complaint about the document given the fact that the MOA – AD has been initialed by the two peace negotiating panels, Malaysian facilitator Datuk Othman Abdulradzak, and Secretary Hermogenes Esperon Jr of the Office of the Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process.
Apparently, the uproar is on the side of the government which led to the issuance of the Supreme Court to issue a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) for the scheduled signing of the MOA-AD last August 5, 2008 at the administrative capital of Malaysia in Selangor.
Consultations were done
As far as we know, years prior to the initialing and scheduled signing of the MOA – AD, the MILF and GRP peace negotiating Panels had agreed to conduct consultations and advocacy, separate and joint endeavors.
For the MILF, we had conducted series of consultations and advocacy with our constituencies, and we believe we had enough of such undertakings. In 2005, the MILF undertook a general consultation with the Bangsamoro people wherein more than two million people had attended. Our constituency had given us strong mandate in pursuing the peace process with the government and in forging a just and comprehensive negotiated political settlement that would finally resolved the Bangsamoro problem and conflict in Mindanao .
Apparently, however, there was a failure in consulting the constituency, to include the local government, armed forces and the cross-sections of the society of the Philippine government by our counterparts. That’s why there is now a strong uproar on their side. Although we believe there were consultations done by the government about the ancestral domain agenda but we do not know how they were conducted.
Negotiating with the government
The MILF maintains the conviction that we are negotiating with the government and not its executive branch alone. We believe that the negotiating panel of the government is cloth with full authorities and mandate being representative of the government.
This negotiation is a negotiation with the government. The MILF cannot negotiate first with the executive branch, then with the legislative and then the judiciary, so on and so forth.
MOA – AD is non-renegotiable
Asked to comment on the statement “the GRP cannot sign the MOA-AD in its present form,” and so what would be the MILF option, what will happen next?
The recent incidents of clashes and hostilities, particularly in North Cotabato , Lanao and Saranggani, are direct result or impact of the aborted signing of the MOA – AD.
We hope the GRP will make up her mind. What we are expecting is for her to stand by, defend the already initialed MOA – AD, and eventually sign it. This is the obligation of the government to the MOA –AD.
The peace process is in a state of dilemma now. The possibility for the peace process to collapse is already there if the government would again renege on its commitment and veer away from the peace track.
The MILF is totally committed to pursue the peace process. But if the government would abandon it, then there are a lot of options available but continuation of armed struggle is given.
The peace process is part and parcel of the Bagnsamoro struggle to achieve the legitimate aspiration of the Bangsamoro people for freedom, homeland, identity and self-governance and in achieving peace, justice, unity and progress in Mindanao . If the peace process will not succeed then rest assured that the MILF is determined to continue the struggle until the Bangsamoro objective is achieve.
Sad incidents
What had happened in Lanao del Norte and North Cotabato are very unfortunate. The MILF expressed sadness to what had happened. We do feel that it should not have happened in the first place. The incidents were triggered by the frustrations and outraged of our commanders on the peace process in the wake of the aborted signing of the MOA – AD.
Thorough and impartial investigation within the framework of the peace process must be conducted on these cases.
But the problem is that the government had already launched military offensives against alleged perpetrators without giving enough space for the mechanisms of the peace process to take their due course in addressing the situation.
Worst, the Armed Forces of the Philippines is already conducting indiscriminate actions employing excessive force against the main MILF forces and not just the alleged perpetrators. This had complicated the situation even further. Now hundreds of thousands of people, Muslims and Christians were already displaced.
The MILF believes the situation can be resolved through the mechanisms and parameters of the peace process. Any problem that occurs between the government and the MILF must be addressed thought the peace process.
Arming the civilians
We are seriously concern about the reported government gambit and overtures to arm the civilians. Anybody within the structure of the government that holds firearm is no longer a civilian but a combatant.
We gathered unverified information that some of those civilians who got killed in the Lanao del Norte incidents were actually armed and involved in a gun battle with the MILF forces. The other civilians were caught in the crossfire and not murdered by the MILF. That’s why the Joint MILF – GRP ceasefire committees and International Monitoring Team (IMT) must conduct as soon as possible an investigation to what had happened so that the measures and actions to be taken up will be prudent and justified.
Needless to say, arming civilians will not contribute to the noble efforts in finding a just, comprehensive and principled solution to the conflict in Mindanao .
Strict laws and regulations
As a revolutionary organization, the MILF has its own laws and regulations as well as strict policies. Attacking civilians, destroying properties and violating human rights are totally in violation of the MILF internal laws and policies. Whoever is guilty of violation will be dealt with accordingly. The MILF is not a terrorist organization but a liberation front with clear ideology and political agenda.
Opposition to the MOA – AD
We really do not know exactly the contentions to the opposition on the MOA – AD. We do not know which part or specific provisions of the document are being opposed.
If the opposition to it is purely on the basis that there was no enough consultations made then that is not much of concern because certainly there will be consultations with the people and even there will be necessary congressional actions and enactments and of course the conduct of the plebiscite wherein the document will be subjected to the people for final decision.
MOA-AD is just a framework agreement and not the final compact. But with all due respect, the media is also responsible to muddling the entire issue and in creating a very hostile situation especially on the ground and public discourse. There is minimal, if not, non at all positive write ups on the peace process and MOA – AD for the past weeks. We need to strike a balance and fairness in media reporting. There were so much inflammatory statements that only add more to injuries and fanning total break-up of the peace process. Sorry to say that the media apparently has become a propaganda outfit designed to scuttle the peace process wittingly or unwittingly in favor of selfish, unscrupulous, bigoted minds and interests.
| |
|
|
| Carolyn O. Arguillas/MindaNews | |
| Sunday, 24 August 2008 09:29 | |
| DARAPANAN, Sultan Kudarat, Shariff Kabunsuan (MindaNews/23 August) — The Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) through its chair Al Haj Murad Ebrahim, announced it wants to keep the peace process going but will not allow renegotiation of the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) stressing it is a “done deal.”
“Attempts to stop the signing of the agreed text of the MOA-AD through a petition for temporary restraining order are other forms of suppression of Bansamoros parallel to domestic political decisions,” Ebrahim said as he read from a two-page, 14 paragraph prepared statement to start what would turn out to be a two-and-half hour press conference.
The statement was titled “A Firm Statement Of Patriotism To Adhere To The MOA-AD: Honoring our Written Agreements.” Ebrahim, vice chair for military affairs and peace panel chair until he assumed the chairmanship of the Central Committee shortly after MILF chair Salamat Hashim passed away in July 2003, was onstage the camp’s multipurpose hall with 12 other members of the Central Committee and the MILF peace panel, including its chair, Mohagher Iqbal, some of whom he called to also answer the media’s questions. “All things considered, the negotiation of the MOA-AD is a done deal in accordance with modern treaty law practice,” thus, for the MILF side, “there is none to agree to any further as framework agreement except to honor the terms and stipulations in good faith,” he said. On July 27, the government and MILF initialed in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, the MOA-AD, the last on the three agenda items of the talks – apart from security, and relief and rehabilitation — prior to the discussion on the comprehensive compact or the consolidated peace agreement. Formal signing of the MOA-AD was scheduled on August 5 in Putrajaya, Malaysia but no signing was done because the Supreme Court issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) afternoon of August 4, preventing the executive department from signing the agreement. Oral arguments had been done on August 15, 22 and will continue on August 29. Mass actions welcomed the aborted signing of the MOA-AD as protesters – those who opposed the signing — many of them politicians, said government did not consult with the people in the areas listed for possible inclusion in the proposed Bangsamoro Juridical Entity (BJE) in Categories A and B. Under Category A, residents in the 735 mostly predominantly Moro areas contiguous to the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) will undergo a plebiscite within one year from the signing of the MOA, whether or not they want to be part of the BJE. Under Category B, residents in 1,459 villages which will fall under “special intervention areas” will go through a plebiscite “not earlier than 25 years” from the signing of the comprehensive compact. Malacanang has been issuing several statements on the controversy, initially defending its role in crafting the agreement with the MILF, including consulting constitutional experts and exercising “due diligence review” but the Palace, particularly after armed attacks on three Lanao del Norte towns and in Maasim, Sarangani, had been changing positions everyday. Datu Michael Mastura, lawyer and historian, and a senior member of the MILF peace panel, said he counted around “eight positions” of the government (MindaNews counted five) – including renegotiation, review, changing the negotiators, shifting the government’s peace policy from panels to communities and going through Disarmament, Demobilization and Rehabilitation (DDR) — prompting Ebrahim to say the MILF hopes the government would put the peace process as part of the “national agenda.” None of the “eight” different positions of government has been communicated formally to the MILF peace panel but through the media. Earlier, Mastura said the media has been “inflaming” the situation instead of enlightening the public. He noted most of the editorials and opinion pieces on the MOA-AD, a document the two panels view as “historic,” have been negative. The government and MILF peace panels are supposed to communicate through the Malaysian facilitator, Datuk Othman Abdul Razak. Ebrahim acknowledge in his two-page statement, that the proposed BJE is “an abstract idea that is hard for ordinary people to connect to.” He said it is “good to build public confidence around this conceptual framework at basic level, with a written instrument for the peaceful negotiated settlement of age-old Moro problem’ and armed conflict in Mindanao.” The MOA-AD, he said, has the ingredients of an “elegant formula,” fulfilling one of the objects of negotiation, “to put an idea before the public.” “It does on paper equations of ‘trade-offs’ instead of ‘sell-out.’ More importantly, it is a firm statement of patriotism on behalf of all the Bangsamoros who claim it a birthright right to assert their distinct identity. It makes a plausible public expression of what political moderates and peace advocates demand in common as well as human rights activities march about in mass,” he said. “None of us thinks the MOA-AD will end the life of the country but it lets the BangsaMoro feel a sense of purpose with new ‘associative ties’ to the rest of the Philippines, redefining the relationship between the Filipino people and Bangsamoro people,” he said. For the first time in the Philippines’ post-colonial history, the Philippine government under the MOA-AD, finally recognizes the Bangsamoro as a distinct people with a homeland where they can govern themselves, have jurisdiction and control of their resources and realize their aspirations for freedom, self-determination, self-governance. On the government’s stand to revisit or review or renegotiate the MOA-AD, Ebrahim said, “the position of the MILF is firm. The MOA is a final document, it is a done deal so we do not, we cannot allow renegotiations. This is a product of more than four years, specifically four years and eight months, between the GRP and MILF peace panels and was subjected to review many times by GRP… so I don’t know why they complain of flaws now.” Murad said they consulted their constituents on the agenda items of the peace negotiations and if there was a failure of consultation, “it is on the other side.” “Much of the uproar is coming from the other side. It is the obligation of the other party how they will be able to explain in a very comprehensive manner to their constituents” what the MOA-AD is all about. The MOA-AD, Murad stressed, is “just a framework agreement where we start working on the compact agreement… We can’t understand the uproar… They are not specific which provision of the MOA they oppose,” he said. A reporter asked how the peace process could move forward when there is stand-off in the negotiations with the Philippine government saying it will not sign the document in its present for and the MILF saying the MOA-AD is non-negotiable. Meanwhile, the recent skirmishes between their armed forces have displaced thousands of villagers. Ebrahim said the “tension going on now,” referring to the spate of attacks blamed on the Moro Islamic Liberation Front and the skirmishes going on between government and MILF forces, is “the result of the abortion of the signing of the MOA.” “We are now in a situation where we have to be firm in our positions… As far as government is concerned, they should make up their minds. It is their duty to defend the document. This is not a document prepared only by the MILF,” he said. He warned of the “possibility of the peace process to collapse” if the government “will not change its position.” If the peace process collapses, “the only option for the MILF is to return to armed struggle,” he said. “We have expressed our sadness over the situation (in Lanao del Norte). We do feel it should not have happened,” Ebrahim said, adding the attack was “triggered by the frustration and outrage by some of our commanders who became impatient over the peace process.” An internal investigation is currently being done, he said. But Ebrahim also added that they have elevated the matter to the International Monitoring Team (IMT) led by Malaysia, to facilitate a joint investigation by the government and MILF ceasefire committees, before the IMT’s tour of duty ends on August 31. Under the mechanisms set up by both panels, the joint ceasefire committee and the IMT are tasked to investigate the matter. Government has been reported as saying it will not talk peace with the MILF if the alleged erring commanders, Umbra Kato and Bravo are not surrendered to the Philippine government. Murad explained that as a revolutionary organization, they are not under the Philippine government and that they have mechanisms in the peace process to address the matter. The remaining IMT members from Malaysia, Libya and Brunei and the lone non-soldier form Japan, will return home on August 31, the day their tour of duty ends. The IMT’s stay can be extended only upon the request of both parties. (Carolyn O. Arguillas/MindaNews) |
|
|
| Archbishop Orlando B. Quevedo, OMI | |
| Tuesday, 19 August 2008 13:33 | |
| 1st of two parts
COTABATO CITY (MindaNews/19 August) — This is the first of two reflections on how to assess the MOA-AD between the GRP and the MILF in the light of our quest for lasting peace in Mindanao. Many people reject the MOA-AD because they say the document is giving away Philippine territory to the Moros. It is a dismembering the Philippine Republic. Other reasons for absolute rejection are:
One observes that most of the above reasons are external to the contents of the MOA-AD. The MOA-AD is not being judged on its own merits. The document is being rejected because of suspicions regarding possible circumstances surrounding it. For this reason may I tell a story. The master told his disciples this parable. Jane, a jeweler, saw a beautiful diamond in a shop. She admired and desired it. Unfortunately her competitor, Juan, owned the shop. Juan was reputed to be dishonest and always wanted to take advantage of his customers. But the more Jane looked at the diamond, the more she liked it. So she asked Juan, “How much is that diamond?” “750,000 pesos,” said Juan. Jane was shocked. “The price is too high for such a small diamond!” “Take it or leave it,” answered Juan. But Jane really liked the diamond. So she asked, “Is it genuine?” Another gentleman entered the conversation and said, “Oh, yes. I certify it is genuine. By the way my name is William. I shaped the diamond myself.” Really desiring the diamond, Jane said, “I know you, but can I have the diamond examined?” Both Juan and William agreed. So the next day, Jane brought her husband, Jose, who was an expert diamond examiner. Using his examining tools, Jose scrutinized the diamond from every angle for a whole hour, noting every facet of it. Then he took his wife aside and whispered to her, “You know how much I dislike Juan and suspect that fellow William. I must admit that the diamond is 100% genuine. There is no doubt. But I have noticed certain flaws in the shaping. So try to bring the price down, we can correct the flaws.” So Jane bargained. After a while, Juan and Jane agreed on 700,000 pesos. Both were happy and became good friends. The disciples asked, “Master, why did Jane buy the diamond from people she did not trust?” “Because the diamond, though imperfect, was genuine,” said the Master. (Cotabato Achbishop Orlando B. Quevedo earlier wrote a five-part series on the MOA-AD) Last of two parts COTABATO CITY (MindaNews/20 August) — Violence is breaking out once again in Southern Philippines. Doubly tragic because such violence could be prevented. The popular rejection of the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain has separated the positions of Moros and Christians quite clearly. Many Moros are now saying, “Christians will never recognize our fundamental right to self-determination as a people. We do not want an independent State. We simply want self-determination in our ancestral land.” On the other hand, Christian Filipinos are passionately affirming their stand, “We do not want to be driven away from our lands. We do not want any Philippine territory to be taken away. We do not want to be part of the Bangsamoro Juridical Entity.” The great tragedy for the country is that the MOA-AD is being rejected for reasons that can be resolved or may not even be in the MOA-AD. It is as though our fears and prejudices have become the measure for judging the Memorandum of Agreement. There is no substitute to actually reading and studying the document – in itself – to know what it says, to know what it does not say, and to realize the implications of all these. By rejecting the Memorandum of Agreement on the basis of misconception, prejudices and misinformation, we may be throwing out a “piece of paper” that could very well be a good working basis for lasting peace in Mindanao. Many Filipinos reject the MOA-AD mainly on the following bases: (1) It is dismembering the Republic of the Philippines;| (2) It has certain unacceptable or at least questionable provisions; (3) The Filipino people were not consulted; (4) The present government cannot be trusted; (5) President Arroyo wants the MOA-AD in order to extend her term; (6) The United States had a “hidden” hand in the MOA-AD because of its own interests. The first and second objections concern the content of the MOA-AD. The third objection is about process. The third, fourth, fifth and sixth objections are about circumstances external to the document. I believe that all of us should let the MOA-AD speak for itself. To do this may I suggest some points for reflection. On the concept of Bangsamoro self-determination:
On the Bangsamoro homeland or ancestral domain:
On Bangsamoro self-determination and exercise of sovereignty in relation to the national sovereignty and territorial integrity:
If the document has internal merits, surely the problems of lack of consultation can be worked out. Flaws in the concepts and content can be remedied. Suspicions about the hidden hand of the United States or the hidden intentions of the President Macapagal Arroyo behind charter change can be resolved in their own context. But these to my mind are basically extraneous to the internal validity of the MOA-AD. We can surely correct its faults. But to reject the MOA-AD completely on the basis of what it does not say could be a tragedy of incalculable proportion, possibly a death knell to lasting peace. The two panels have painstakingly worked out the peace documents for 11 long years. I would give them the benefit of the doubt that they have been conscientious in their work, looking out for the interests of their constituencies. It is my firm conviction that if only the MOA-AD is allowed to speak for itself or examined on its own merits, it can be a good working document for lasting peace in Mindanao. (Cotabato Achbishop Orlando B. Quevedo earlier wrote a five-part series on the MOA-AD) |
| |
|
|
| Carolyn O. Arguillas/MindaNews | |
|
Friday, 15 August 2008 10:22
|
|
|
DAVAO CITY (MindaNews/15 August) — Mindanao’s and Palawan’s governors, including North Cotabato’s Jesus Sacdalan, have appealed to the Supreme Court to “resolve the issues related to the MOA-AD (Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain) with dispatch to minimize misunderstanding and conflict among stakeholders and partners for peace.” The appeal was contained in a “Statement of Solidarity of the Caucus of Mindanao and Palawan Governors” titled “Working for a just and lasting peace,” issued Thursday at the Pryce Plaza in Cagayan de Oro City, the day before the High Court hears the oral arguments of the petitioners led by North Cotabato officials and the executive branch which was prevented from signing the MOA.
The Supreme Court issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) on August 4, stopping the August 5 morning signing of the MOA-AD in Putrajaya, Malaysia. The MOA was initialed on July 27 by government peace panel chair, Secretary Rodolfo Garcia and Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process Hermogenes Esperon, Jr., and MILF peace panel chair Mohagher Iqbal. The eight-point statement was agreed upon “unanimously” by 15 of 27 Mindanao governors and Palawan Governor Joel Reyes, after a closed-door caucus with Defense Secretary Gilberto Teodoro, Esperon, Garcia and former Presidential Adviser on Political Affaires Gabby Claudio. Sarangani Governor Miguel Dominguez, who was one of the signatories to the statement, told MindaNews they had “lengthy and heated discussion” with the government peace panel chair and the Cabinet secretaries. “All voiced their objections to the MOA-AD. We all agreed that we must move forward to prevent another Cotabato experience.” “Mistakes were committed because of lack of transparency and other shortcomings,” he said. To move forward, Dominguez cited the points they agreed on: “support quest for lasting peace; transparency in negotiations with GRP-MILF; wait for SC decision (implications of decisions we are preparing for to avoid further bloodshed).” In their statement, the governors agreed that aside from urging the Supreme Court to act on their appeal, they would: - regardless of party affiliations or religious persuasions, “remain united for peace and progress amidst the controversy arising from the proposed Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) prepared and initiated by the Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP) Peace Panel and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) which seeks to provide the preliminary parameters for the establishment of genuine and enduring peace in Mindanao.” - “fully support” the peace process and “the efforts of the GRP Peace Panel in pursuing measures that would finally put an end to more than 35 years of fratricidal conflict that have claimed the lives of so many people, destroyed billions worth of properties and brought untold sufferings to innocent civilians caught in the crossfire of the longest-running secessionist war.” They also called on the government peace panel to “adopt actions and decisions relative to the MOA-AD within the legal framework and the rule of law, and make them the foundation for subsequent agreements.” They also urged the government panel to “conduct wider and comprehensive consultations with local government units (LGUs) to help resolve issues that would affect the peace process in Mindanao.” The Mindanao leaders urged their colleagues, particularly “the leaders of the country at all levels, to exercise utmost restraint, prudence and statesmanship in their actions and statements pertaining to the present controversy considering that the MOA-AD is not the final Peace Agreement and will be always be (subject) to Congressional actions.” They called on the national government to “apply the full force of the law” against groups or individuals sowing violence or undermining the pursuit of peace “which tend to escalate the conflict and derail the Peace Process.” They also called on the National Government and the concerned local government units to “immediately provide all the needed assistance to the displaced and affected civilians in the areas of conflict.” Based on the copy e-mailed by the Office of the Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process, the Statement was issued by governors Mamintal Alonto Adiong of Lanao del Sur; Erlpe John M. Amante of Agusan del Norte; Jum M. Akbar of Basilan; Aurora Cerilles of Zamboanga del Sur; Douglas Cagas of Davao del Sur; Miguel Domiguez of Sarangani; George Hofer of Zamboanga Sibugay; .Oscar S. Moreno of Misamis Oriental; Loreto Leo S. Ocampos of Misamis Occidental; Maria Valentina Plaza of Agusan del Sur; Jurdin Jesus Romualdo of Camiguin; AbduSakur Tan of Sulu; Rolando Yebes of Zamboanga del Norte; Joel Reyes of Palawan; Vice Gov. Elvis dela Merced of Dinagat Island; Vice Gov. Norris C. Babiera of Misamis Oriental;17. Mohamad Khalid Dimaporo of Lanao del Norte; Rep.Bobby Dimaporo of Lanao del Norte and Jesus Sacdalan of North Cotabato. Sultan Kudarat Governor Teng Mangudadatu, whose province’s 11 of 11 towns are included in “Category A” was not in the meeting. He did not send a representative. Mangudadatu’s father, Pax, now a representative, was a member of the government peace panel from 2003 until his last term as governor ended last year. Category A is a list of 735 villages that are mostly predominantly Moro and contiguous to the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao provinces, and will go through a plebiscite within one year from the signing of the MOA-AD, whether or not they want to be part of the proposed Bangsamoro Juridical Entity (BJE). Category B is a list of 1,459 conflict-affected areas outside the BJE area that will be treated as “special intervention areas” and will still be “subject to further negotiations.” A plebiscite will be held in these areas “not earlier than 25 years from the signing of the Comprehensive Compact” if they want or do not want to be in the BJE. If the Compact is signed as scheduled by November 2009, the plebiscite will be held not earlier than 2034. Of Mindanao’s 27 provinces and 33 cities, the areas that are listed under Category A are four cities and six provinces; in Category B, 10 provinces and one city. The four cities under Category A are: 45 of 45 Isabela barangays; six of Zamboanga City’s 98 barangays; eight of Iligan’s 44 barangays; and 37 of 37 Cotabato City barangays. In Category B, Pagadian City’s 54 of 54 barangays and 40 more of Zamboanga City’s 98 barangays. Together, 46 of 98 Zamboanga City’s are listed in Categories A and B. The six provinces listed in Category A are Zamboanga del Sur, Zamboanga Sibugay and Bukidnon which has one town each listed in Category A and Lanao del Norte, North Cotabato and Sultan Kudarat which has several towns listed. The 10 provinces listed in Category B are Zamboanga del Sur, Zamboanga Sibugay, Lanao del Norte, North Cotabato, Sultan Kudarat, South Cotabato, Sarangani, Davao del Sur, Davao Oriental and Zamboanga del Norte. In Zamboanga del Sur, eight of 30 barangays of Dinas are listed in Category A. The province has 26 towns. In Category B, 14 of 26 towns are listed, including the remaining 22 of 30 barangays in Dinas. The 13 other towns are Aurora, Dimataling, Dumalinao, Kumalarang, Labangan, Lapuyan, Margosatubig, San Pablo, Tabina, Tukuran, Pitogo, Vicenzo A. Saguin and Guipos. In Zamboanga Sibugay, five of 18 barangays of Magsaysay are listed in Category A. the province has 16 towns. In Category B, all 16 towns of the province are listed, including the remaining 13 barangays of Magsaysay. In Bukidnon, one barangay out of 14 barangays in Kalilangan is listed in Category A. Bukidnon has 20 towns. There is no are in Bukidnon under Category B. In Lanao del Norte, six of its 22 towns that voted yes to inclusion in the 2001 plebiscite for an expanded Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) are part of the core of the proposed BJE, along with the ARMM’s six provinces (Lanao del Sur, Maguindanao, Shariff Kabunsuan, Basilan, SUlu, Tawi-tawi) and two cities (Marawi and Lamitan). The six towns that form part of the BJE’s core are Baloi, Munai, Nunungan, Pantar, Tagoloan and Tangcal. Listed in Category A are four of 16 barangays in Bacolod. In Category B, 193 of 260 barangays in 13 towns are listed, including 11 more barangays in Bacolod. In North Cotabato, 12 out of 17 towns are listed in Category A: Alamada’s six of 17 barangays; Aleosan’s seven of 19; Banisilan’s 18 of 20; Carmen’s 17 of 28; all 24 barangays of Kabacan; three of M’lang’s 37; 12 of 34 barangays in Matalam; 19 of 57 barangays in Midsayap; 20 of 40 in Pigkawayan; all 42 barangays of Pikit; one of 25 in President Roxas and seven of 29 in Tulunan or a total of 178 of 372 villages in 12 towns. In Category B, however, all 20 barangays of Libungan; all 38 of Makilala; and all 28 of Arakan are listed along with the remaining 11 barangays of Alamada; 17 more of 28 barangays in Carmen; remaining 22 of 34 barangays in Matalam; remaining 38 of 57 barangays in Midsayap; remaining 34 of 37 barangays of M’lang; remaining 24 of 40 barnagays in Pigkawayan; remaining 24 of 25 barangays in Pres. Roxas; remaining 2 of 20 barangays in Banisilan and the remaining 12 of 19 barangays in Aleosan. In Sultan Kudarat, 10 of its 11 towns are listed in Category A: Bagumbayan, Columbio, Esperanza, Kalamansig, Lambayong, Lebak, Lutayan, Palimbang, President Quirino and Senator Ninoy Aquino and three of 17 barangays in Isulan or a total of 214 of 228 villages in 11 towns. In Category B., the remaining 14 barangays of Isulan are listed. Also in Category B are three out of 10 towns of South Cotabato: Polomolok’s 23 of 23 barangays, Tampakan’s 13 of 13 barangays and Tupi’s 15 of 15 barangays The multinational company, Dole Philippines’ pineapple plantations are in Polomolok and Tupi towns while Tampakan is home to what is said to be gold-rich and has the “largest undeveloped copper deposit in Southeast Asia” Also in Category B are five of seven towns: Glan, Kiamba, Maasim, Maitum and Malapatan. Davao del Sur’s island town of Sarangani is listed in Category B. The province has 14 towns. Davao Oriental’s Tarragona town is also listed in Category B. The province has 10 towns. Compostela Valley’s Pantukan is also listed in Category B. The province has 11 towns. Outside Mindanao, Palawan is listed in both Categories A and B. Palawan has 23 towns. Of these, two towns are listed in Category A: Balabac’s 20 of 20 barangays and Bataraza’s 22 of 22 barangay. In Category B, two more towns are listed: Brooke’s Point’s 18 of 18 barangays and Rizal’s (Marcos) 11 of 11 barangays. (Carolyn O. Arguillas/MindaNews) (source:http://www.mindanews.com/) |
| MILF to Senators: Peace Talks is extra-constitutional right at the start | ||
|
||
The BJE under the MOA-AD is neither independent nor a full-fledged state. Given “shared authority and responsibility,” it may be safer to refer to it as a “semi-state” or “quasi-state.”
OPINION
Quezon City, 12 August 2008
Is the Bangsamoro Juridical Entity (BJE), proposed in the unsigned Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP)-Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD), a sovereign independent nation-state separate from the Philippine state? Will it mean the territorial dismemberment of the country? These are among the worst fears about the MOA-AD and its BJE splashed or aired over the Philippine media. Let us try to “tackle this issue in an intelligent and dispassionate manner,” guided by truth, reason and justice
Under the terms of the MOA-AD, the BJE is clearly not a sovereign independent nation-state separate from the Philippine state and, therefore, whatever territory pertains to it would not constitute dismemberment of the country. We shall deal more with statehood rather than territory here. It is not enough to recall the old political science or Philippine political law definitions of the state and its four essential elements of people, territory, government and sovereignty, then say that since the BJE seems to have all these, ergo it is a “state,” and then raise hell about it as if there were a declaration of war.
Other juridical entities (if I may also use the term), including my city of Naga and province of Camarines Sur, easily have elements of people, territory and government, so it is usually sovereignty or a certain level of it, that makes the difference between statehood and non-statehood. This refers to sovereignty that is independent of external control, that has absolute power to govern, unlimited power to make laws, as manifested by power to make and change the fundamental law, which usually resides in the people. Then also international recognition. Sovereignty at the country level has traditionally been deemed absolute and indivisible but this notion has changed over several centuries due to both external and internal entities that countries have to deal with.
Anyway, long before there was a Philippine state in the 20th Century, there were already in these islands sovereign independent nation-states that were the sultanates of Sulu and Maguindanao, beginning in the 15th and 17th Centuries, respectively. The relevance of this is indicated in the MOA-AD, “Concepts and Principles,” paragraph 4, with the Parties, to their credit, reaffirming certain historical truths: “Both Parties acknowledge that the right to self-governance of the Bangsamoro people is rooted on ancestral territoriality exercised under the suzerain authority of their sultanates and the Pat a Pangampong ku Ranaw. The Moro sultanates were states or karajaan/kadatuan resembling a body politic endowed with all the elements of nation-state in the modern sense.”
But that was of a time past. By the early 20th century, such historical sovereignty of the Moro sultanates was lost and since then never recovered, first under the American colonial regime and then under the newly independent Republic of the Philippines. The Moro liberal fronts of the past four decades have sought to regain that lost sovereignty for the Bangsamoro people, initially through armed struggle against the Philippine government. The negotiated political settlement of that armed conflict and its roots in sovereignty and related issues is what the peace negotiations are all about. The settlement reached with the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) since 1996, resulting in a new Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM), has proven to be inadequate. Thus, the subsequent and ongoing negotiations by/with the MILF for a higher and better form of self-governance or self-determination for which the GRP usually draws the line at independence or secession.
That the BJE under the MOA-AD is not independent and separate from the Philippines is perhaps best shown by the characterization of their proposed restructured relationship as “associative” in several provisions, notably those under “Governance:”
“4. The relationship between the Central Government and the BJE shall be associative characterized by shared authority and responsibility with a structure of governance based on executive, legislative, judicial and administrative institutions with defined powers and functions in a Comprehensive Compact. A period of transition shall be established in a Comprehensive Compact specifying the relationship between the Central Government and the BJE.” (italics and bold face mine)
“5. In the context of implementing prior and incremental agreements between the GRP and MILF, it is the joint understanding of the Parties that the term ‘entrenchment’ means, for the purposes of giving effect to this transitory provision, the creation of a process of institution building to exercise shared authority over territory and defined functions of associative character.” (italics and bold face mine)
Shared authority and responsibility connote “shared sovereignty.” If sovereignty is to be shared by the Central Government and the BJE, then they are necessarily not independent and separate from each other. The MOA-AD speaks of a transition, presumably to what would be the final political status of the BJE, but what this might be is still subject to negotiations of the Comprehensive Compact. Ordinarily, there are three general options for self-determination, or more precisely for a Non-Self Governing Territory to reach a full measure of self-government, indicated in UN General Assembly Resolution 1541 (XV) of 1960 (admittedly quite dated):
1. Emergence as a sovereign independent State;
2. Free association with an independent State;
3. Integration with an independent State.
In the MOA-AD at least, the choice for the BJE appears to be the “free association” option, not the “sovereign independent State” option. The “integration” option is basically what the Bangsamoro people have had under the Republic of the Philippines. Note how the autonomy (which is not only in the form of the ARMM) and federalism options are not mentioned here, which doesn’t mean these are not viable options. Both the GRP and MILF are well aware, in particular, of the federalism option but the concept they preferred to use for the BJE, at least for the period of transition, was an “associative relationship.” Apart from “shared authority and functions,” the specifics of this relationship have yet to be determined in the Comprehensive Compact.
Parenthetically, some have questioned the terminology “Central Government,” saying this is proper only for a federal set-up. But it was the terminology used in the1976 Tripoli Agreement, one of the terms of reference (TOR) for the MOA-AD. And the mention in that TOR of the 1976 Tripoli Agreement, 1996 GRP-MNLF Peace Agreement, Republic Acts Nos. 6734, 9054 and 8371 are in fact indications of a non-independence option in the MOA-AD. These legal instruments in turn make their own references to the Philippine Constitution (Attn: those looking for something along this line).
Aside from the provisions of the MOA-AD, UNGA Resolution 1541 contains these concepts or principles about free association, so that we might have some idea of this self-determination arrangement short of independence:
“(a) Free association should be the result of a free and voluntary choice by the peoples of the territory concerned expressed through informed and democratic processes. It should be one which respects the individuality and the cultural characteristics of the territory and its peoples, and retains for the peoples of the territory which is associated with an independent State the freedom to modify the status of that territory through the expression of their will by democratic means and through constitutional processes.”
“(b) The associated territory should have the right to determine its internal constitution without outside interference, in accordance with due constitutional processes and the freely expressed wishes of the people. This does not preclude consultations as appropriate or necessary under the terms of the free association agreed upon.” (italics mine)
So, much depends really on “the terms of the free association agreed upon.” This precisely is what the GRP and MILF are in the process of doing, with such terms to be found in the MOA-AD and more importantly for finality and detail, the Comprehensive Compact. We do not have any more space here to discuss examples of free association, and can only mention a few associated states of the U.S. which are of some familiarity to Filipinos: the Commonwealth of the Philippines from 1935-46; the Federated States of Micronesia, Palau, and the Marshall Islands; Puerto Rico and Northern Mariana Islands. Some of these later emerged as a sovereign independent State (notably the Philippines), others stayed as associated states of the U.S. All of them, even non-independent states like Puerto Rico, can participate as such in the Olympics, which is really the truer “United Nations.”
To sum up, the BJE under the MOA-AD is neither independent nor a full-fledged state. Given “shared authority and responsibility,” it may be safer to refer to it as a “semi-state” or “quasi-state.” Being sub-national in its territory, we might also call it a “sub-state.” This might jibe with the general notion that free associated states are usually smaller minor partners to larger major partners, e.g. an existing independent State or the former colonial power. But again, the terms of the free association agreed upon can provide for a more equitable relationship between peoples or nations which are ideally sovereign equals. The MOA-AD seems to be going in this direction, which is just as well for redressing historical grievances and imbalances. Perhaps, a best effort at an “associative relationship” should be made and be given a chance — before all concerned consider other options.
*Bicolano human rights lawyer, peace advocate, legal scholar; A.B. History cum laude (UP), LL.B. (UNC), LL.M. (Melb); author of The Moro Islamic Challenge: Constitutional Rethinking for the Mindanao Peace Process (UP Press, 2001), Peace Advocate (DLSU Press, 2002), Dynamics and Directions of the GRP-MILF Peace Negotiations (Alternate Forum for Research in Mindanao, 2005), and Peace Zones in the Philippines (Gaston Z. Ortigas Peace Institute, 2005); and co-author of Philippine Human Development Report 2005: Peace, Human Security and Human Development in the Philippines (Human Development Network, 2005).
GMANews.TV - Friday, August 15
MANILA, Philippines - A Muslim civil society group is set to march to the Supreme Court on Friday to hear the oral arguments on the controversial ancestral domain pact between the government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF).
| A |
A radio report said the Bangsamoro People Solidarity for Peace which is holding a picket rally at Palanca St. in Manila’s Quiapo district is intending to march to the Supreme Court compound where a hearing on the ancestral domain agreement has been scheduled.
Pendatun Disimban, the groups spokesperson, said the Supreme Court should lift the temporary restraining order on the signing of the memorandum of agreement (MOA) on ancestral domain, saying it is the key to peace in the Mindanao region.
The group likewise slammed the agreements critics, alleging that they have vested interests that they are trying to protect.
Si ( North Cotabato Vice Governor Emmanuel) Piñol ay tumututol dito, at ang kanyang mga kasamahan, dahil meron silang mga personal na interest. Si Mayor (Celso) Lobregat ng Zamboanga City, may mga lupa yan sa Lanao del Sur, sa Balabagan municipality, na kinuha nya mula sa mga Moro kaya ganon na lang ang kanyang pagtutol,” said Disimban.
The Supreme Court was scheduled to hear the oral arguments of the parties involved in the agreement at 9 a.m. Friday.
Shortly before 10 a.m., however, High Court magistrates went into an in-chamber hearing to discuss the governments motion to postpone the oral arguments. - Johanna Camille Sisante, GMANews.TV
|
|
|
| Carolyn O. Arguillas/MindaNews | |
| Friday, 15 August 2008 11:35 | |
|
DAVAO CITY (MindaNews/14 August) – While Mindanao’s governors had “lengthy and heated discussions” with four Cabinet secretaries behind closed doors on the controversial Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) between the Philippine government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front in one of the function rooms of the Pryce Plaza Hotel in Cagayan de Oro Thursday, Mindanao’s bishops met behind closed doors with the leadership of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) at the Arcbhishop’s Residence here. The meetings were held a day before the August 15 Supreme Court hearing on the temporary restraining order (TRO) it issued afternoon of August 4, preventing the government peace panel chair from signing the MOA-AD in the formal ceremonies scheduled August 5 morning at the Grand Putrajaya Ballroom 2 of the Marriott Hotel in Putrajaya, Malaysia.
The MOA-AD, containing the agreement on the last of the three agenda items of the peace talks (after security and relief and rehabilitation), was initialed by government peace panel chair Rodolfo Garcia and Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process Hermogenes Esperon, Jr., and MILF peace panel chair Mohagher Iqbal, on July 27 in Kuala Lumpur. The Davao meeting, the “first-ever peace dialogue between the Catholic Bishops of Mindanao and the MILF” concluded with the issuance of a one-page Joint Communique that called on “all sectors of the society for sobriety and calmness in confronting and resolving the issues besetting the forging of the GRP-MILF Memorandum of Agreement on the Ancestral Domain. A day earlier, Mindanao’s bishops met with Garcia, Esperon, Press Secretary Jesus Dureza and National Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales to discuss the controversial MOA at the Waterfront Insular Hotel in Davao City. The bishops, led by Davao Archbishop Fernando Capalla, co-convenor of the Mindanao Bishops-Ulama Conference and the MILF, led by peace panel chair Mohagher Iqbal, also appealed for an “immediate declaration of ceasefire to the ongoing armed clashes in some towns of North Cotabato, and immediate provision of relief assistance and rehabilitation programs for the affected communities by all concerned institutions, relative to the ongoing peace process in Mindanao.” The bishops and the MILF reiterated their “unwavering moral commitment to pursue the path of peace, solidarity, justice and development in Mindanao, and resolve and support to the continuation of the peace process between the MILF and the government until its successful conclusion is achieved.” Both parties agreed that “dialogue and educational programs must be intensified, particularly by the religious leaders and academic institutions, relative to the ongoing peace process in Mindanao.” The Joint Communique was signed by Capalla and Iqbal. The other Mindanao bishops who were present were Cotabato Archbishop Orlando Quevedo who has written an extensive five-part series on the MOA-AD, Cotabato Auxiliary Bishop Jose Colin Bagaforo, Malaybalay Bishop Honesto Pacana, Butuan Bishop Juan de Dios Pueblos, Surigao del Sur bishop Neri Ochimar, Marawi Bishop Edwin dela Pena and Surigao City Bishop Antonieto Cabahug. Capalla and Quevedo once served as president of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP), Quevedo serving two terms from 1999 to 2003 and Capalla from 2003 to 2005. The other MILF leaders with Iqbal were senior peace panel member Datu Michael Mastura; MILF Central Committee members Ustaz Mohammad Montasir and Ustaz Mohammad Abdullah; Atty. Abdul Dataya, chair of the MILF in the Ad Hoc Joint Action Group (AHJAG) with the GRP; MILF peace panel secretariat head Jun Mantawil; MILF peace panel secretariat member Mohajirin Ali and Rashid Ladiasan, head of the MILF secretariat in the Joint Coordinating Committee on the Cessation of Hostilities. (Carolyn O. Arguillas/MindaNews) |
1
IN THE NAME OF GODTHE BENEFICENT, THE MERCIFUL
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT ON THE ANCESTRAL DOMAIN ASPECT OF THE
GRP-MILF TRIPOLI AGREEMENT ON PEACE OF 2001
The Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP) and the Moro Islamic
Liberation Front (MILF) herein referred to as the “Parties” to this Agreement,
TERMS OF REFERENCE
The Agreement for General Cessation of Hostilities dated July 18, 1997 Between the
GRP and the MILF, and its Implementing Administrative and Operational Guidelines;
The General Framework of Agreement of Intent Between the GRP and the MILF dated
August 27, 1998;
The Agreement on the General Framework for the Resumption of Peace Talks Between
the GRP and the MILF dated March 24, 2001;
The Tripoli Agreement on Peace Between the GRP and the MILF dated June 22, 2001;
The Tripoli Agreement Between the GRP and the Moro National Liberation Front
(MNLF) dated December 23, 1976 and the Final Agreement on the Implementation of
the 1976 Tripoli Agreement Between the GRP and the MNLF dated September 2, 1996;
Republic Act No. 6734, as amended by R.A. 9054, otherwise known as “An Act to
Strengthen and Expand the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM)”;
ILO Convention No. 169, in correlation to the UN Declaration on the Rights of the
Indigenous Peoples, and Republic Act No. 8371 otherwise known as the Indigenous
Peoples Rights Act of 1997, the UN Charter, the UN Universal Declaration on Human
Rights, International Humanitarian Law (IHL), and internationally recognized human
rights instruments; and
Compact rights entrenchment emanating from the regime of dar-ul-mua’hada (or
territory under compact) and dar-ul-sulh (or territory under peace agreement) that
partakes the nature of a treaty device. For the purpose of this Agreement, a “treaty” is
defined as any solemn agreement in writing that sets out understandings, obligations,
and benefits for both parties which provides for a framework that elaborates the
principles declared in the Agreement.
HAVE AGREED AND ACKNOWLEDGED AS FOLLOWS:
2
CONCEPTS AND PRINCIPLES
1. It is the birthright of all Moros and all Indigenous peoples of Mindanao to identify
themselves and be accepted as “Bangsamoros”. The Bangsamoro people refers to
those who are natives or original inhabitants of Mindanao and its adjacent islands
including Palawan and the Sulu archipelago at the time of conquest or colonization
and their descendants whether mixed or of full native blood. Spouses and their
descendants are classified as Bangsamoro. The freedom of choice of the
Indigenous people shall be respected.
2. It is essential to lay the foundation of the Bangsamoro homeland in order to address
the Bangsamoro people’s humanitarian and economic needs as well as their political
aspirations. Such territorial jurisdictions and geographic areas being the natural
wealth and patrimony represent the social, cultural and political identity and pride of
all the Bangsamoro people. Ownership of the homeland is vested exclusively in
them by virtue of their prior rights of occupation that had inhered in them as sizeable
bodies of people, delimited by their ancestors since time immemorial, and being the
first politically organized dominant occupants.
3. Both Parties acknowledge that ancestral domain does not form part of the public
domain but encompasses ancestral, communal, and customary lands, maritime,
fluvial and alluvial domains as well as all natural resources therein that have inured
or vested ancestral rights on the basis of native title. Ancestral domain and ancestral
land refer to those held under claim of ownership, occupied or possessed, by
themselves or through the ancestors of the Bangsamoro people, communally or
individually since time immemorial continuously to the present, except when
prevented by war, civil disturbance, force majeure, or other forms of possible
usurpation or displacement by force, deceit, stealth, or as a consequence of
government project or any other voluntary dealings entered into by the government
and private individuals, corporate entities or institutions.
4. Both Parties acknowledge that the right to self-governance of the Bangsamoro
people is rooted on ancestral territoriality exercised originally under the suzerain
authority of their sultanates and the Pat a Pangampong ku Ranaw. The Moro
sultanates were states or karajaan/kadatuan resembling a body politic endowed with
all the elements of nation-state in the modern sense. As a domestic community
distinct from the rest of the national communities, they have a definite historic
homeland. They are the “First Nation” with defined territory and with a system of
government having entered into treaties of amity and commerce with foreign nations.
The Parties concede that the ultimate objective of entrenching the Bangsamoro
homeland as a territorial space is to secure their identity and posterity, to protect
their property rights and resources as well as to establish a system of governance
suitable and acceptable to them as a distinct dominant people.
3
5. Both Parties affirm their commitment to mutually respect the right to one’s identity
and the parity of esteem of everyone in the political community. The protection of
civil rights and religious liberties of individuals underlie the basis of peace and justice
of their totality of relationships.
6. Both Parties agree that the Bangsamoro Juridical Entity (BJE) shall have the
authority and jurisdiction over the Ancestral Domain and Ancestral lands, including
both alienable and non-alienable lands encompassed within their homeland and
ancestral territory, as well as the delineation of ancestral domain/lands of the
Bangsamoro people located therein.
7. Vested property rights upon the entrenchment of the BJE shall be recognized and
respected subject to paragraph 9 of the strand on Resources.
TERRITORY
1. The Bangsamoro homeland and historic territory refer to the land mass as well as
the maritime, terrestrial, fluvial and alluvial domains, and the aerial domain, the
atmospheric space above it, embracing the Mindanao-Sulu-Palawan geographic
region. However, delimitations are contained in the agreed Schedules (Categories).
2. Toward this end, the Parties enter into the following stipulations:
a. The GRP and MILF as the Parties to this Agreement commit themselves to the
full and mutual implementation of this framework agreement on territory with the
aim of resolving outstanding issues that emanate from the consensus points on
Ancestral Domain.
b. The Parties confirm their understanding that the mutual goal of reaching an
agreement on Bangsamoro territory specific to mapping the outlying borders and
the boundaries affecting local government units will lead to consolidation of the
agreed texts on the Ancestral Domain Strands.
c. The Parties affirm that the core of the BJE shall constitute the present
geographic area of the ARMM, including the municipalities of Baloi, Munai,
Nunungan, Pantar, Tagoloan and Tangkal in the province of Lanao del Norte that
voted for inclusion in the ARMM during the 2001 plebiscite.
d. Without derogating from the requirements of prior agreements, the Government
stipulates to conduct and deliver, using all possible legal measures, within twelve
(12) months following the signing of the MOA-AD, a plebiscite covering the areas
as enumerated in the list and depicted in the map as Category A attached herein
(the “Annex”). The Annex constitutes an integral part of this framework
agreement. Toward this end, the Parties shall endeavor to complete the
4
negotiations and resolve all outstanding issues on the Comprehensive Compact
within fifteen (15) months from the signing of the MOA-AD.
e. The areas covered by Category B are reflected on a map and list attached herein
as agreed to by the Parties. Category B (the “Special Intervention Areas”) refers
to conflict affected areas outside the BJE which shall be the subject of special
socio-economic and cultural affirmative action implemented by the Central
Government pending the conduct of a plebiscite not earlier than twenty-five (25)
years from the signing of the Comprehensive Compact to determine the question
of their accession to the BJE. The areas reflected are subject to further
negotiations by the Parties. The Annex constitutes an integral part of this
framework agreement.
f. Internal Waters:
The BJE shall have jurisdiction over the management, conservation,
development, protection, utilization and disposition of all natural resources, living
and non-living, within its internal waters extending fifteen (15) kilometers from the
coastline of the BJE area.
g. Territorial Waters:
(1) The territorial waters of the BJE shall stretch beyond the BJE internal
waters up to the Republic of the Philippines (RP) baselines south east and
south west of mainland Mindanao. Beyond the fifteen (15) kilometers
internal waters, the Central Government and the BJE shall exercise joint
jurisdiction, authority and management over areas and all natural resources,
living and non-living contained therein. The details of such management of
the Territorial Waters shall be provided in an agreement to be entered into
by the Parties.
(2) The boundaries of the territorial waters shall stretch beyond the 15-km.
BJE internal waters up to the Central Government’s baselines under
existing laws. In the southern and eastern part of the BJE, it shall be
demarcated by a line drawn from the Maguling Point, Palimbang, Province
of Sultan Kudarat up to the straight baselines of the Philippines. On the
northwestern part, it shall be demarcated by a line drawn from Little Sta.
Cruz Island, Zamboanga City, up to Naris Point, Bataraza, Palawan. On the
western part of Palawan, it shall be demarcated by a line drawn from the
boundary of Bataraza and Rizal up to the straight baselines of the
Philippines.
The final demarcation shall be determined by a joint technical body
composed of duly-designated representatives of both Parties, in
coordination with the appropriate Central Government agency in
accordance with the above guidelines.
5
h. Sharing of Minerals on Territorial Waters:
Consistent with paragraphs 5 and 6 of the provisions on Resources, all potential
sources of energy, petroleum in situ, hydrocarbon, natural gas and other
minerals, including deposits or fields found within the territorial waters, shall be
shared between the Central Government and the BJE in favor of the latter
through production sharing agreement or economic cooperation agreement.
i. Activities Allowed on Territorial Waters:
(1) The Parties shall have authority to carry out the following activities within
the territorial waters:
(a) Exploration and utilization of the natural resources, whether living or
non-living, within the territorial waters;
(b) Establishment and use of artificial islands, installations and structures;
(c) Marine scientific research;
(d) Protection and the preservation of the marine environment;
(e) Conservation of living resources;
(f) Regulation of shipping and fishing activities;
(g) Enforcement of police and safety measures, including interdiction of
the entry and use of the waters by criminal elements and hot pursuit of
suspected criminal elements;
(h) Regulation and control of contraband and illegal entry of prohibited
materials and substances, including smuggling; and
(i) Such other measures as the Parties may otherwise mutually agree.
(2) Activities relating to exploration and utilization of non-living resources, as
well as paragraphs (c) and (d) of the Authorized Activities will be carried
out on a joint basis agreed by the Parties which may be in the form of
production sharing agreements or joint development pacts.
j. Establishment of a Joint Commission:
(1) The Parties shall establish a Joint Commission, which shall elaborate the
modalities for the implementation and the carrying out of the Authorized
Activities and the measures adopted in cases of allegation of breach, and
carry out any other functions which may be assigned to it by the Parties
for the purpose of implementing the joint management of resources.
(2) The Joint Commission shall consist of one representative from each
Party, who are assisted by advisers as may be needed. The conclusions
of the Joint Commission shall be adopted by consensus and shall only be
recommendatory in nature. Only when the conclusions of the Joint
Commission are adopted by the Parties do they become binding on the
Parties.
6
k. Demarcation and Status of Territorial Waters:
The demarcation and status of the BJE territorial waters shall be finally
determined together with the demarcation and final status of Category B territory
of the BJE.
3. From and after entrenchment of compact rights over the Bangsamoro homeland and
the territorial jurisdictions for associative governance shall likewise embrace those
under proclamation for agricultural and human settlements intended for the
Bangsamoro people, all alienable and disposable lands, pasture lands, timberlands
together with all existing civil and military reservations, parks, old growth or natural
forests declared as forest reserves, watersheds, mangroves, fishponds, wetlands,
marshes, inland bodies of water; and all bays, straits and channels found within the
BJE.
4. All territorial and geographic areas in Mindanao and its adjacent islands including
Palawan, and the Sulu archipelago that have been declared recognized, and/or
delineated as ancestral domain and ancestral land of the Bangsamoro people as
their geographic areas, inclusive of settlements and reservations, may be formed or
constituted into political subdivisions of the Bangsamoro territorial jurisdictions
subject to the principles of equality of peoples and mutual respect and to the
protection of civil, political, economic, and cultural rights in their respective
jurisdictions.
5. For purposes of territorial delimitation, the Parties have agreed to the joint
determination of geographic areas encompassed within the territorial borders of the
Bangsamoro homeland and territory based on the technical maps and data
submitted by both sides as provided above.
RESOURCES
1. The BJE is empowered with authority and responsibility for the land use,
development, conservation and disposition of the natural resources within the
homeland. Upon entrenchment of the BJE, the land tenure and use of such
resources and wealth must reinforce their economic self-sufficiency. Among the
purposes or measures to make progress more rapid are:
a. Entry into joint development, utilization, and exploitation of natural resources
designed as commons or shared resources, which is tied up to the full setting of
appropriate institution, particularly affecting strategic minerals;
b. Stimulation of local economy by a range of mechanism, in particular the need to
address unemployment and improvement of living conditions for the population in
the BJE;
7
c. Intensification of measures needed to uproot the cause of poverty in the BJE
through responsible harnessing and development of its natural resources; and
d. Undertaking program review of public services, industrial or trade-related and
agrarian-related issues in situations of different sectors of the society in the BJE,
which acquire communal character deriving from the special nature of their
industry.
2. The Bangsamoro People through their appropriate juridical entity shall, among
others, exercise power or authority over the natural resources within its territorial
jurisdiction:
a. To explore, exploit, use or utilize and develop their ancestral domain and
ancestral lands within their territorial jurisdiction, inclusive of their right of
occupation, possession, conservation, and exploitation of all natural resources
found therein;
b. To conserve and protect the human and natural environment for their sustainable
and beneficial enjoyment and their posterity;
c. To utilize, develop, and exploit its natural resources found in their ancestral
domain or enter into a joint development, utilization, and exploitation of natural
resources, specifically on strategic minerals, designed as commons or shared
resources, which is tied up to the final setting of appropriate institution;
d. To revoke or grant forest concessions, timber license, contracts or agreements in
the utilization and exploitation of natural resources designated as commons or
shared resources, mechanisms for economic cooperation with respect to
strategic minerals, falling within the territorial jurisdiction of the BJE;
e. To enact agrarian laws and programs suitable to the special circumstances of the
Bangsamoro people prevailing in their ancestral lands within the established
territorial boundaries of the Bangsamoro homeland and ancestral territory within
the competence of the BJE; and
f. To use such natural resources and wealth to reinforce their economic selfsufficiency.
3. The BJE, and the Central Government agree on wealth-sharing based on a mutually
agreed percentage ratio in favor of the BJE through an economic cooperation
agreement or arrangement over the income and revenues that are derived from the
exploration, exploitation, use and development of any resources for the benefit of the
Bangsamoro people.
4. The BJE is free to enter into any economic cooperation and trade relations with
foreign countries: provided, however, that such relationships and understandings do
8
not include aggression against the Government of the Republic of the Philippines;
provided, further that it shall remain the duty and obligation of the Central
Government to take charge of external defense. Without prejudice to the right of the
Bangsamoro juridical entity to enter into agreement and environmental cooperation
with any friendly country affecting its jurisdiction, it shall include:
a. The option to establish and open Bangsamoro trade missions in foreign countries
with which it has economic cooperation agreements; and
b. The elements bearing in mind the mutual benefits derived from Philippine
archipelagic status and security.
And, in furtherance thereto, the Central Government shall take necessary steps to
ensure the BJE’s participation in international meetings and events, e.g. ASEAN
meetings and other specialized agencies of the United Nations. This shall entitle the
BJE’s participation in Philippine official missions and delegations that are engaged in
the negotiation of border agreements or protocols for environmental protection,
equitable sharing of incomes and revenues, in the areas of sea, seabed and inland
seas or bodies of water adjacent to or between islands forming part of the ancestral
domain, in addition to those of fishing rights.
5. Jurisdiction and control over, and the right of exploring for, exploiting, producing and
obtaining all potential sources of energy, petroleum, in situ, fossil fuel, mineral oil
and natural gas, whether onshore or offshore, is vested in the BJE as the party
having control within its territorial jurisdiction, provided that in times of national
emergency, when public interest so requires, the Central Government may, during
the emergency, for a fixed period and under reasonable terms as may be agreed by
both Parties, temporarily assume or direct the operations of such strategic
resources.
6. The BJE take or profit split from total production shall be shared with the Central
Government on a percentage ratio of 75:25 in favor of the BJE. All royalties,
bonuses, taxes, charges, custom duties or imposts on natural resources and mineral
resources shall be shared by the Parties on a percentage ratio of 75:25 in favor of
the BJE.
7. The legitimate grievances of the Bangsamoro people arising from any unjust
dispossession of their territorial and proprietary rights, customary land tenures, or
their marginalization shall be acknowledged. Whenever restoration is no longer
possible, the GRP shall take effective measures or adequate reparation collectively
beneficial to the Bangsamoro people, in such quality, quantity and status to be
determined mutually by both Parties.
8. All proclamations, issuances, policies, rules and guidelines declaring old growth or
natural forests and all watersheds within the BJE as forest reserves shall continue to
9
remain in force until otherwise modified, revised or superseded by subsequent
policies, rules and regulations issued by the competent authority under the BJE.
9. Forest concessions, timber licenses, contracts or agreements, mining concessions,
Mineral Production and Sharing Agreements (MPSA), Industrial Forest Management
Agreements (IFMA), and other land tenure instruments of any kind or nature
whatsoever granted by the Philippine Government including those issued by the
present ARMM shall continue to operate from the date of formal entrenchment of the
BJE unless otherwise expired, reviewed, modified and/or cancelled by the latter.
10. The Parties recognize an immediate need to establish a five-member BJE
economic-expert mission (the “Mission”) bearing in mind that the functioning of the
economy and the operation of institutions involve financial and other resource
management as well as parallel or complementary means, by which the
Bangsamoro Development Agency (BDA) will manage and administer resources
acquired for the above purposes, especially in coordinating strategies and programs
for cooperation in all fields.
11. The Mission acts as a link in the conduct of BJE’s associative parallel relationships
and shall cooperate fully with all organizations involved in implementation of the
peace settlement. It shall launch a plan and joint international appeal for the
reparation and development of the conflict affected areas in Mindanao. Persons
appointed thereto must be familiar with the specific economic, political and legal
characteristics in the Mindanao-Sulu-Palawan region and must possess recognized
competence, integrity, and high moral standing.
12. Cognizant that the Mission will benefit from international expertise, both the Central
Government and the BJE hereby join the Third Party facilitator in inviting
international funding institutions or equivalent entities for reconstruction and
development to appoint two members and to designate one as the Chairman. The
BJE shall designate one member as Co-Chairman. The remaining two members
shall each be designated by the Central Government and the BJE.
GOVERNANCE
1. The recognition and peaceful resolution of the conflict must involve consultations
with the Bangsamoro people free of any imposition in order to provide chances of
success and open new formulas that permanently respond to the aspirations of the
Bangsamoro people.
2. The ultimate objective of entrenching the Bangsamoro homeland as a territorial
space is to secure their identity and posterity, to protect their property rights and
resources as well as to establish a system of governance suitable and acceptable to
them as a distinct dominant people. The Parties respect the freedom of choice of the
indigenous peoples.
10
3. The Parties agree to invite a multinational third - party to observe and monitor the
actual implementation of the comprehensive compact which will embody the details
for the effective enforcement of this Agreement. The participation of the third – party
shall not in any way affect the status of the relationship between the Central
Government and the BJE.
4. The relationship between the Central Government and the BJE shall be associative
characterized by shared authority and responsibility with a structure of governance
based on executive, legislative, judicial and administrative institutions with defined
powers and functions in the Comprehensive Compact. A period of transition shall be
established in a Comprehensive Compact specifying the relationship between the
Central Government and the BJE.
5. In the context of implementing prior and incremental agreements between the GRP
and MILF, it is the joint understanding of the Parties that the term “entrenchment”
means, for the purposes of giving fect to this transitory provision, the creation of a
process of institution building to exercise shared authority over territory and defined
functions of associative character.
6. The modalities for the governance intended to settle the outstanding negotiated
political issues are deferred after the signing of the MOA-AD.
The establishment of institutions for governance in a Comprehensive Compact,
together with its modalities during the transition period, shall be fully entrenched and
established in the basic law of the BJE. The Parties shall faithfully comply with their
commitment to the associative arrangements upon entry into force of the
Comprehensive Compact.
7. The Parties agree that the mechanisms and modalities for the actual implementation
of this MOA-AD shall be spelt out in the Comprehensive Compact to mutually take
such steps to enable it to occur effectively.
Any provisions of the MOA-AD requiring amendments to the existing legal
framework shall come into force upon signing of a Comprehensive Compact and
upon effecting the necessary changes to the legal framework with due regard to non
derogation of prior agreements and within the stipulated timeframe to be contained
in the Comprehensive Compact.
8. The Parties agree that the BJE shall be empowered to build, develop and maintain
its own institutions, inclusive of, civil service, electoral, financial and banking,
education, legislation, legal, economic, and police and internal security force, judicial
system and correctional institutions, necessary for developing a progressive
Bangsamoro society, the details of which shall be discussed in the negotiation of the
Comprehensive Compact.
11
9. The Parties further agree to undertake activities which will enhance the capacity of
the government institutions during the transition through technical assistance,
information-sharing and human resource development.
10. Matters concerning the details of the agreed consensus points on Governance not
covered under this Agreement shall be deferred to, and discussed during, the
negotiations of the Comprehensive Compact.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, being the representatives of the Parties
hereby affix their signatures.
Done this 5th day of August, 2008 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
FOR THE GRP: FOR THE MILF:
RODOLFO C. GARCIA
Chairman
GRP Peace Negotiating Panel
MOHAGHER IQBAL
Chairman
MILF Peace Negotiating Panel
WITNESSED BY:
DATUK OTHMAN BIN ABD RAZAK
Special Adviser to the Prime Minister
ENDORSED BY:
AMBASSADOR SAYED ELMASRY
Adviser to Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) Secretary General
and Special Envoy for Peace Process in Southern Philippines
IN THE PRESENCE OF:
DR. ALBERTO G. ROMULO
Secretary of Foreign Affairs
Republic of the Philippines
DATO’ SERI UTAMA DR. RAIS
BIN YATIM
Minister of Foreign Affairs
Malaysia
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT ON THE ANCESTRAL DOMAIN ASPECT OF THE GRP – MILF TRIPOLI AGREEMENT ON PEACE OF 2001
The Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP) and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) herein referred to as the “Parties” to this Agreement.
Terms of Reference
The context of referents follows:
The Agreement for General Cessation of Hostilities dated July 18, 1997 Between the GRP and the MILF, and its Implementing Administrative and Operational Guidelines;
The General Framework of Agreement of Intent Between the GRP and the MILF dated August 27, 1998;
The Agreement on the General Framework for the Resumption of Peace Talks Between the GRP and the MILF dated March 24, 2001;
The Tripoli Agreement on Peace Between the GRP and the MILF dated June 22, 2001;
The Tripoli Agreement Between the GRP and the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) dated December 23, 1976 and the Final Agreement on the Implementation of the 1976 Tripoli Agreement Between the GRP and the MNLF dated September 2, 1996;
Republic Act No. 6734, as amended by R.A. 9054, otherwise known as “An Act to Strengthen and Expand the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM)”;
ILO Convention No. 169, in correlation to the UN Declaration on the Rights of the Indigenous Peoples, and Republic Act No. 8371 otherwise known as the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997, the UN Charter; the UN Universal Declaration on Human Rights, International Humanitarian Law (IHL), and internationally recognized human rights instruments; and
Compact rights entrenchment emanating from the regime of dar-ul-mua’hada (or territory under compact) and dar-ul-sulh (or territory under peace agreement) that partakes the nature of a treaty device. For the purpose of this Agreement, a “treaty” is defined as any solemn agreement in writing that sets out understanding, obligations, and benefits for both parties which provides for a framework that elaborates the principles declared in the Agreement.
Have agreed and acknowledged as follows:
CONCEPTS AND PRINCIPLES
1. It is the birthright of all Moros and all Indigenous peoples of Mindanao to identify themselves and be accepted as “Bangsamoros”. The Bangsamoro people refers to those who are natives or original inhabitants of Mindanao and its adjacent islands including Palawan and the Sulu archipelago at the time of conquest or colonization of its descendants whether mixed or of full blood. Spouses and their descendants are classified as Bangsamoro. The freedom of choice of the Indigenous people shall be respected.
2. It is essential to lay the foundation of the Bangsamoro homeland in order to address the Bangsamoro people’s humanitarian and economic needs as well as their political aspirations. Such territorial jurisdictions and geographic areas being the natural wealth and patrimony represent the social, cultural and political identity and pride of all the Bangsamoro people. Ownership of the homeland is vested exclusively in them by virtue of their prior rights of occupation that had inhered in them as sizeable bodies of people, delimited by their ancestors since time immemorial, and being the first politically organized dominant occupants.
3. Both Parties acknowledge that ancestral domain does not form part of the public domain but encompasses ancestral, communal, and customary lands, maritime, fluvial and alluvial domains as well all natural resources therein that have inured or vested ancestral rights on the basis of native title. Ancestral domain and ancestral land refer to those held under claim of ownership, occupied or possessed, by themselves or through the ancestors of the Bangsamoro people, communally or individually since time immemorial continuously to the present, except when prevented by war, civil disturbance, force majeure, or other forms of possible usurpation or displacement by force, deceit, stealth, or as a consequence of government project or any other voluntary dealings entered into by the government and private individuals, corporate entities or institutions.
4. Both Parties acknowledge that the right to self-governance of the Bangsamoro people is rooted on ancestral territoriality exercised originally under the suzerain authority of their sultanates and the Pat a Pangampong ku Ranaw. The Moro sultanates were states or karajaan/kadatuan resembling a body politic endowed with all the elements of nation-state in the modern sense. As a domestic community distinct from the rest of the national communities, they have a definite historic homeland. They are the “First Nation” with defined territory and with a system of government having entered into treaties of amity and commerce with foreign nations.
The Parties concede that the ultimate objective of entrenching the Bangsamoro homeland as a territorial space is to secure their identity and posterity, to protect their property rights and resources as well as to establish a system of governance suitable and acceptable to them as distinct dominant people.
5. Both Parties affirm their commitment to mutually respect the right to one’s identity and the parity of esteem of everyone in the political community. The protection of civil rights and religious liberties of individuals underlie the basis of peace and justice of their totality of relationships.
6. Both Parties agree that the Bangsamoro Juridical Entity (BJE) shall have the authority and jurisdiction over the Ancestral Domain and Ancestral lands, including both alienable and non-alienable lands encompassed within their homeland and ancestral history, as well as the delineation of ancestral domain/lands of the Bangsamoro people located therein.
7. Vested property rights upon the entrenchment of the BJE shall be recognized and respected subject to paragraph 9 of the strand on Resources.
TERRITORY
1. The Bangsamoro homeland and historic territory refer to the land mass as well as the maritime, terrestrial, fluvial and alluvial domains, and the aerial domain, the atmospheric space above it, embracing the Mindanao-Sulu-Palawan geographic region. However, delimitations are contained in the agreed Schedules (Categories).
2. Toward this end, the Parties entered into the following stipulations:
a. The Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP) and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) as the Parties to this Agreement commit themselves to the full and mutual implementation of this framework agreement on territory with the aim of resolving outstanding issues that emanate from the consensus points on Ancestral Domain.
b. The Parties confirm their understanding that the mutual goal of reaching an agreement on Bangsamoro territory specific to mapping the outlying borders and the boundaries affecting local government units will lead to consolidation of the agreed texts on the Ancestral Domain Strands.
c. The Parties affirm that the core of the BJE shall constitute the present geographic area of the ARMM, including the municipalities of Baloi, Munai, Nunungan, Pantar, Tagoloan and Tangkal in the province of Lanao del Norte that voted for inclusion in the ARMM during the 2001 plebiscite;
d. Without derogating from the requirements of prior agreements, the government stipulates to conduct and deliver, within six (6) months following the signing of the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain, a plebiscite covering the areas as enumerated in the list and depicted in the map as Category A attached herein (the “Annex”). The Annex constitutes an integral part of this framework agreement.
e. The areas covered by Category B has already been reflected on a map and officially agreed by both Parties.
f. Internal Waters: The Bangsamoro Juridical Entity (BJE) shall have jurisdiction over the management, conservation, development, protection, utilization and disposition of all natural resources, living and non-living, within its internal waters extending fifteen (15) kilometers from the coastline of the BJE area.
g. Territorial Waters: (1) The territorial waters of the BJE shall stretch beyond the BJE internal waters up to the Republic of the Philippines (RP) baselines south east and south west of mainland Mindanao. Beyond the fifteen (15) kilometers internal waters, the Central Government and the BJE shall exercise joint jurisdiction, authority and management over areas and [of] all natural resources, living and non-living contained therein. The details of such management of the Territorial Waters shall be provided in an agreement to be entered into by the Parties.
(2) The boundaries of the territorial waters shall stretch beyond the 15-km BJE internal waters up to the Central government’s baselines under existing laws. In the southern and eastern part of the BJE, it shall be demarcated by a line drawn from the Maguling Point, Palimbang, Province of Sultan Kudarat up to the straight baselines of the Philippines. On the northwestern part, it shall be demarcated by a line drawn from Little Sta. Cruz Island, Zamboanga City, up to Naris Point, Bataraza, Palawan. On the western part of Palawan, it shall be demarcated by a line drawn from the boundary of Bataraza and Rizal up to the straight baselines of the Philippines.
The final demarcation shall be determined by a joint technical body composed of duly-designated representatives of both Parties, in coordination with the appropriate Central Government agency in accordance with the above guidelines.
h. Sharing of Minerals on Territorial Waters:
Consistent with paragraphs 5 and 6 of the provisions on Resources, all potential sources of energy, petroleum in situ, hydrocarbon, natural gas and other minerals, including deposits or fields found within the territorial waters, shall be shared between the Central Government and the BJE in favor of the latter through production sharing agreement or economic cooperative agreement.
i. Activities Allowed on Territorial Waters:
(1) The Parties shall have authority to carry out the following activities within the territorial waters:
(a) Exploration and utilization of the natural resources, whether living or non-living within the territorial waters;
(b) Establishments and use of artificial islands, installations and structures;
(c) Marine scientific research;
(d) Protection and the preservation of the marine environment;
(e) Conservation of living resources;
(f) Regulation of shipping and fishing activities;
(g) Enforcement of police and safety measures, including interdiction of the entry and use of the waters by criminal elements and hot pursuit of suspected criminal elements;
(h) Regulation and control of contraband and illegal entry of prohibited materials and substances, including smuggling; and
(i) Such other measures as the Parties may otherwise mutually agree.
(2) Activities relating to exploration and utilization of non-living resources, as well as paragraphs (c) and (d) of the Authorized Activities will be carried out on a joint basis agreed by the Parties which may be in the form of production sharing agreements or joint development pacts.
j. Establishment of a Joint Commission:
(1) The Parties shall establish a Joint Commission, which shall elaborate the modalities for the implementation and the carrying out of the Authorized Activities and the measures adopted in cases of allegation of breach, and carry out any other functions which may be assigned to it by the Parties for the purpose of implementing the joint management of resources.
(2) The Joint Commission shall consist of one representative from each Party, who are assisted by advisers as may be needed. The conclusions of the Joint Commission shall be adopted by consensus and shall only be recommendatory in nature. Only when the conclusions of the Joint Commission are adopted by the Parties do they become binding on the Parties.
k. Demarcation and Status of Territorial Waters:
The demarcation and status of the BJE territorial waters shall be finally determined together with the demarcation and final status of Category B of the BJE.
3. From and after entrenchment of compact rights over the Bangsamoro homeland and the territorial jurisdictions for associative governance shall likewise embrace those under proclamation for agricultural and human settlements intended for the Bangsamoro people, all alienable and disposable land, pasture lands, timberlands together with all existing civil and military reservations, parks, old growth or natural forests declared as forest reserves, watersheds, mangroves, fishponds, wetlands, marshes, inland bodies of water and all bays, straits and channels found within the BJE.
4. All territorial and geographic areas in Mindanao and its adjacent islands including Palawan, and the Sulu archipelago that have been recognized, and/or delineated as ancestral domain and ancestral land of the Bangsamoro people as their geographic areas, inclusive of settlements and reservations, may be formed or constituted into political subdivisions of the Bangsamoro territorial jurisdictions subject to the principles of equality of peoples and mutual respect and to the protection of civil, political, economic, and cultural rights in their respective jurisdictions.
5. For purposes of territorial delimitation, the Parties have agreed to the joint determination of geographic areas encompassed within the territorial borders of the Bangsamoro homeland and territory based on the technical maps and data submitted by both sides as provided above.
RESOURCES
1. The Bangsamoro juridical entity is empowered with authority and responsibility for the land use, development, conservation and disposition of the natural resources within the homeland. Upon entrenchment of the Bangsamoro juridical entity, the land tenure and use of such resources and wealth must reinforce their economic self-sufficiency. Among the purposes or measures to make progress more rapid are:
a. Entry into joint development, utilization, and exploitation of natural resources designed as commons or shared resources, which is tied up to the full setting of appropriate institution, particularly affecting strategic minerals.
b. Stimulation of local economy by a range of mechanism, in particular the need to address unemployment and improvement of living conditions for the population in the Bangsamoro juridical entity;
c. Intensification of measures needed to uproot the cause of poverty in the Bangsamoro juridical entity through responsible harnessing and development of its natural resources; and
d. Undertaking program review of public services, industrial or trade-related and agrarian-related issues in situations of different sectors of the society in the Bangsamoro juridical entity, which acquire communal character deriving from the special nature of their industry.
2. The Bangsamoro People through their appropriate juridical entity shall, among others, exercise power or authority over the natural resources within its territorial jurisdiction:
a. To explore, exploit, use or utilize and develop their ancestral domain and ancestral lands within their territorial jurisdiction, inclusive of their right of occupation, possession, conservation, and exploitation of all natural resources found therein;
b. To conserve and protect the human and natural environment for their sustainable and beneficial enjoyment and their posterity;
c. To utilize, develop, and exploit its natural resources found in their ancestral domain or may enter into a joint development, utilization, and exploitation of natural resources, specifically on strategic minerals, designed as commons or shared resources, which is tied up to the final setting of appropriate institution.
d. To revoke or grant forest concessions, timber license, contracts or agreements in the utilization and exploitation of natural resources designated as commons or shared resources, mechanisms for economic cooperation with respect to strategic minerals, falling within the territorial jurisdiction of the Bangsamoro juridical entity;
e. To enact agrarian laws and programs suitable to the special circumstances of the Bangsamoro people prevailing in their ancestral lands within the established territorial boundaries of the Bangsamoro homeland and ancestral territory is within the competence of the Bangsamoro juridical entity; and
f. To use such natural resources and wealth to reinforce their economic self-sufficiency.
3. The Bangsamoro Juridical Entity, and the Central Government agree on wealth-sharing based on a mutually agreed percentage ratio in favor of the Bangsamoro juridical entity through an economic cooperation agreement or arrangement over the income and revenues that are derived from the exploration, exploitation, use and development of any resources for the benefit of the Bangsamoro people.
4. The Bangsamoro juridical entity is free to enter into any economic cooperation and trade relations with foreign countries: provided, however, that such relationships and understandings do not include aggression against the Government of the Republic of the Philippines; provided, further that it shall remain the duty and obligation of the Central Government to take charge of external defense. Without prejudice to the right of the Bangsamoro juridical entity to enter into agreement and environmental cooperation with any friendly country affecting its jurisdiction, it shall include:
a. the option to establish and open Bangsamoro trade missions in foreign countries with which it has economic cooperation agreements; and
b. the elements bearing in mind the mutual benefits derived from Philippine archipelagic status and security.
And, in furtherance thereto, the Central Government shall take necessary steps to ensure the Bangsamoro juridical entity’s participation in international meetings and events, e.g. ASEAN meetings and other specialized agencies of the United Nations. This shall entitle the said juridical entity participation in Philippine official missions and delegations that are engaged in the negotiation of border agreements or protocols for environmental protection, equitable sharing of incomes and revenues, in the areas of sea, seabed and inland seas or bodies of water adjacent to or between islands forming part of the ancestral domain, in addition to those of fishing rights.
5. Jurisdiction and control over, and the right of exploring for, exploiting, producing and obtaining all potential sources of energy, petroleum, in situ, fossil fuel, mineral oil and natural gas, whether onshore or offshore, is vested in the Bangsamoro juridical entity as the party having control within its territorial jurisdiction, provided that in times of national emergency, when public interest so requires, the Central Government may, during the emergency, for a fixed period and under reasonable terms as may be agreed by both Parties, temporarily assume or direct the operations of such strategic resources.
6. The Bangsamoro government-take or profit split from total production shall be shared with the Central Government on a percentage ratio of 75%/25% in favor of the Bangsamoro juridical entity. All royalties, bonuses, taxes, charges, custom duties or imposts on natural resources and mineral resources shall be shared by the Parties on a percentage ratio of 75%/25% in favor of the Bangsamoro juridical entity.
7. The legitimate grievances of the Bangsamoro people arising from any unjust dispossession of their territorial and propriety rights, customary land tenures, or their marginalization shall be acknowledged. Whenever restoration is no longer possible, the GRP shall take effective measures of adequate reparation collectively beneficial to the Bangsamoro people, in such quality, quantity and status to be determined mutually by both Parties.
8. All proclamations, issuances, policies, rules and guidelines declaring old growth or natural forests and all watersheds within the BJE as forest reserves shall continue to remain in force until otherwise modified, revised or superseded by subsequent policies, rules and regulations issued by the competent Bangsamoro authority or juridical entity.
9. Forest concessions, timber licenses, contracts or agreements, mining concessions, Mineral Production and Sharing Agreements (MPSA), Industrial Forest Management Agreements (IFMA), and other land tenure instruments of any kind or nature whatsoever granted by the Philippine Government including those issued by the present Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) shall continue to operate from the date of formal entrenchment of the Bangsamoro juridical entity unless otherwise expired, reviewed, modified and/or cancelled by the latter.
10. The Parties recognized an immediate need to establish a five-member Bangsamoro economic-expert mission (the “Mission”) bearing in mind that the functioning of the economy and the operation of institutions involve financial and other resource management as well as parallel or complementary means, by which the Bangsamoro Development Agency will manage and administer resources acquired for the above purposes, especially in coordinating strategies and programs for cooperation in all fields.
11. The said Mission acts as a link in the conduct of Bangsamoro juridical entity’s associative parallel relationships and shall cooperate fully with all organizations involved in implementation of the peace settlement. It shall launch a plan and joint international appeal for the repatriation and development of the conflict affected areas in Mindanao. Persons appointed thereto must be familiar with the specific economic, political and legal characteristics in the Mindanao-Sulu-Palawan region and must possess recognized competence, integrity, and high moral standing.
12. Cognizant that the Bangsamoro economic-expert Mission will benefit from international expertise, both the Central Government and the BJE hereby join the Third Party facilitator in inviting international funding institutions or equivalent entities for reconstruction and development to appoint two members and to designate one as the Chairman. The BJE shall designate one member as Co-Chairman. The remaining two members shall each be designated by the Central Government and the BJE.
GOVERNANCE
1. The recognition and peaceful resolution of the conflict must involve consultations with the Bangsamoro people free of any imposition in order to provide chances of success and open new formulas that permanently respond to the aspirations of the Bangsamoro people.
1. The ultimate objective of entrenching the Bangsamoro homeland as a territorial space is to secure their identity and posterity, to protect their property rights and resources as well as to establish a system of governance suitable and acceptable to them as a distinct dominant people. The parties respect the freedom of choice of the indigenous peoples.
3. The Parties agree to invite a multinational third-party to observe and monitor the actual implementation of the comprehensive compact which will embody the details for the effective enforcement of this Agreement. The participation of the third-party shall not in any way affect the status of the relationship between the Central Government and the BJE.
4. The relationship between the Central Government and the Bangsamoro juridical entity shall be associative characterized by shared authority and responsibility with a structure of governance based on executive, legislative, judicial and administrative institutions with defined powers and functions in the comprehensive compact. A period of transition shall be established in a comprehensive peace compact specifying the relationship between the Central Government and the BJE.
5. The modalities for the governance intended to settle the outstanding negotiated political issues are deferred after the signing of the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain.
The establishment of institutions for governance in a comprehensive peace compact, together with its modalities during the transition period, shall be fully entrenched and established in the basic law of the Bangsamoro juridical entity. The Parties shall faithfully comply with their commitment to the associative arrangements upon entry into force of a comprehensive compact between the MILF and GRP.
7. The Parties agree that the mechanisms and modalities for the actual implementation of this MOA AD shall be spelt out in the comprehensive compact to mutually take such steps to enable it to occur effectively.
Any provisions of the MOA on Ancestral Domain requiring amendments to the existing legal framework shall come into force upon signing of a comprehensive compact and upon effecting the necessary changes to the legal framework with due regard to non derogation of prior agreements and within the stipulated timeframe to be contained in the comprehensive compact.
8. The parties agree that the BJE shall be empowered to build, develop and maintain its own institutions, inclusive of, civil service, electoral, financial and banking, education, legislation, legal, economic, and police and internal security force, judicial system and correctional institutions, necessary for developing a progressive Bangsamoro society the details of which shall be discussed in the negotiation of the comprehensive compact.
9. The Parties further agree to undertake activities which will enhance the capacity of the government institutions during the transition through technical assistance, information-sharing and human resource development.
10. Matters concerning the details of the agreed consensus points on Governance not covered under this Agreement shall be deferred to, and discussed during, the negotiations of the comprehensive compact.
To seek constitutional change and reform (e.g. a shift to federalism) has not been usually treated as unconstitutional, except it seems when it has to do with the Moro question.
OPINION
A peace process may seek from the very start to eventually achieve constitutional reform, among other reforms, as is the case in the GRP-National Democratic Front (NDF) peace negotiations, per The Hague Joint Declaration of 1 September 1992. Or a peace process, esp. at the government end, may see the need for constitutional change only towards the later part of the process, when questions of implementation start to be grappled with. In the case of the GRP-MILF peace negotiations, it started in 1997 with the MILF’s single talking point: “To solve the Bangsamoro problem.” It was only 11 years later, in 2008, that the GRP side saw that the emerging ancestral domain aspect of a still to come “just, lasting and comprehensive solution to the Bangsamoro problem” would already entail changes in the existing legal, including constitutional, framework. And now, in the MOA-AD, the MILF in effect recognizes or acknowledges this “existing legal framework” albeit with a view to some key changes.
It is to the credit of the GRP side that it is now willing to effect constitutional change as needed as part for an overall solution to the Bangsamoro problem. After all, as a number of legal and scholarly studies have long pointed out, the Philippine Constitution 1935, 1973 and 1986 have all been part of the problem in so far these have framed the structural relationship between the Philippine state and the Bangsamoro people. This is a colonial-type structural relationship which does injustice (this word used by Cotabato Archbishop Orlando V. Quevedo) to the Bangsamoro identity, way of life and longing for self-rule. The framework and provisions of the 1986 Philippine Constitution, inc. its provisions for an Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM), and its overarching application to the 1996 GRP-Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) Final Peace Agreement (FPA), have been proven by 12 years of experience, to be inadequate in terms of effectively and qualitatively restructuring that relationship in a way that helps solve the problem. Thus, the effort in the GRP-MILF peace negotiations to frame a qualitatively better and higher degree of self-determination for the Bangsamoro people (not just the MILF) short of independence or secession (the last upper limit for the GRP). The MOA-AD is an important part of the process of this effort but it is not yet the Comprehensive Compact (final peace agreement).
These are peace negotiations, not surrender negotiations, between two sides which simply have different frameworks, if not world views. As the MILF and for that matter the NDF have often said, what point is there to these negotiations if their side will just accept the framework of the Philippine Constitution? This Constitution represents to them precisely the system that they are fighting to overthrow or separate from. It is the inherent character of peace negotiations of this sort to seek and find mutually acceptable common ground, usually somewhere in between the respective minimum and maximum positions of the parties. In the MOA-AD, the MILF (like the MNLF before), has clearly come down from a maximum position of independence for the whole of Mindanao, Sulu and
But if the Philippine Constitution is the definitive framework of the GRP side, how can the GRP Peace Panel agree to provisions, such as those in the MOA-AD, which go beyond the existing constitutional framework and provisions? The quick simple answer is that it is because the Constitution itself allows for a process of amendments or revisions, as among its constitutional processes. To illustrate this, we cite two examples, one each, from the peace negotiations with the NDF and with the MNLF. First, in the GRP-NDF Breukelen Joint Statement of 14 June 1994, there is this paragraph: “The GRP Panel reaffirms its position that the GRP commitment to Constitutional processes… does not mean it will cite the GRP Constitution as a basis for rejecting what otherwise would be just and valid proposals fore reforms in society. If it is shown in fact that certain provisions of the GRP Constitution hinder the attainment of genuine reforms, the GRP Panel is willing to recommend to GRP authorities amendments thereto. In this context, it is clear that the GRP’s adherence to constitutional processes does not constitute the imposition of the GRP Constitution as framework for the peace talks.”
But the peace talks with the MILF is another matter, with much indications that the negotiated political settlement this time must go beyond the framework of the Constitution, if it is to be a real and lasting solution to the Bangsamoro problem. The GRP Peace Panel, as an extension of the President and Chief Executive, must be given the necessary leeway and support – political, moral, technical, legislative and judicial – to negotiate this difficult terrain of effectively resolving an armed conflict of four decades already this year, counting from the 1968 Jabidah Massacre.-Quezon City, August 5, 2008
[1] Bicolano human rights lawyer, peace advocate, legal scholar; A.B. History cum laude (UP), LL.B. (UNC), LL.M (Melb); author of The Moro Islamic Challenge: Constitutional Rethinking for the Mindanao Peace Process (UP Press, 2001), Peace Advocate (DLSU Press, 2002), Dynamics and Directions of the GRP-MILF Peace Negotiations (Alternate Forum for Research in Mindanao, 2005), and Peace Zones in the Philippines (Gaston Z. Ortigas Peace Institute, 2005); and co-author of Philippine Human Development Report 2005: Peace, Human Security and Human Development in the Philippines (Human Development Network, 2005).