I belong to the Iranun , one of the Moro ethnic tribe in the Southern Philippines.
I advocates: Peace & Justice
|
Patricio P. Diaz/MindaNews Saturday, 13 September 2008 GENERAL SANTOS CITY (MindaNews / September 12) - Recapitulation: In sum, people (Bangsamoro: Consensus 1), territory (Bangsamoro homeland: Consensus 2), resources (ancestral domain and ancestral lands: Consensus 3), governance (self-governance as Bangsamoro right: Consensus 4), and the authority and jurisdiction of the autonomous government (the Bangsamoro Juridical Entity: Consensus 5) contemplated in the “Concept and Principles” strand of the MOA-AD are all contained in Article X, Sections 15 to 21 of the 1987 Constitution. The only difference: Those elements of the Muslim autonomy are defined more comprehensively in “Concepts and Principles” than in Article X. Obviously, this comprehensiveness – spelled out in details in the next three strands — set off the alarm, opposition and protests on the issue of constitutionality. Pressured, President Arroyo rejected the MOA-AD.* *[The turn-around of the Arroyo government – rejecting its own baby, the MOA-AD, and changing its peace process policy – has created an issue of constitutionality vs. the peace process. We will take this up in our concluding discussions.] Territory The consensus on “Territory” covers (1) the core and expanded geographical areas of BJE (Consensus 1, 2.a-e, 5); (2) the inland waters, territorial waters and lands (Consensus 2.f-g, 3); (3) what to do with territorial waters (Consensus 2.h-k); political subdivisions (Consensus 4). Article I of the 1987 Constitution defines the “national territory” as “consisting of its terrestrial, fluvial, and aerial domains, including its territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the insular shelves, and other submarine areas”. And more:” The waters around, between, and connecting the islands of the archipelago, regardless of their breadth and dimensions, form part of the internal waters of the Consensus 1 of “Territory” states: “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 or maps of Category A and Category B geographical areas). (Italics supplied) Compare Article I with the italicized portions of Consensus I. This is the ground for critics and opponents of MOA-AD to charge the agreement of granting the MILF more than allowed by the Constitution. The following should be noted: First: While Consensus 1 copies Article I, Consensus 2.f-g draw the demarcation lines of the BJE internal and territorial waters. Neither R.A. 6734 nor R.A. 9054 defines the territory of the ARMM aside from the component provinces and cities; however, the ARMM map once displayed at the Office of the Governor showed demarcation lines. Second: As implied in R.A. 6371 (the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997), the right to ownership of land is limited to the land surface only. In the MOA-AD, the territorial rights granted the MILF exceeded the limits reserved for the state only. Third: Because of these, the MOA-AD is deemed unconstitutional. Those who are unaware of, or who disregard Map A and Map B, conclude that the MILF is claiming the entire Mindanao, Sulu and A relevant question is: If by the above the MOA-AD is unconstitutional, will the peace process justify measures to remedy the unconstitutionality? Core Area In Consensus 2.c, six municipalities of Lanao del Norte – Baloi, Munai, Nunungan, Pantar, Tagoloan and Tankal – are included in the ARMM as the core area of BJE because they “voted for inclusion in the ARMM during the 2001 plebiscite”. There has been no protest from Lanao del Norte. Yet, it should be asked: Is this unconstitutional? They should have been realigned with Lanao del Sur as part of the ARMM in 2001. The provided-clause of Article X, Section 18, Paragraph 2 states: “… provided that only provinces, cities and geographical areas voting favorably in such plebiscite shall be included in the autonomous region”. Perhaps, a few more barangays could have been included. (bold ours). However, Congress deliberately revised Section 18 in Article II, Section 1(1) of R.A. 6734: “There is hereby created the Autonomous Region in Muslim Compare the bold-faced texts in the two quoted provisions above: “geographical areas”, which could mean municipalities or barangays, has been omitted in Article II, Section 1(1) of R.A. 6734. The same has also been omitted in Article II, Section 1 of R.A. 9054 that amended R.A. 6734 according to the 1996 GRP-MNLF Final Peace Agreement. Has Congress the power to revise the Constitution in enacting laws? Are acts inconsistent with such laws but consistent with the original provision/s of the Constitution unconstitutional? Categories A and B Consensus 2.d proposes the inclusion of 735 barangays deemed contiguous with the ARMM through a plebiscite “within twelve (12) months following the signing of the MOA-AD. The proposal may have become academic but it has not lost its political interest; this or a similar proposal may be revived in pursuit of the peace process. So it is with Consensus 2.e. Any imputation of unconstitutionality on Consensus 2.d and Consensus 2.e is off the mark since the Category A and B geographical areas are to be asked in a plebiscite their option to join or not to join the BJE – those in Category A, 12 months, and those in Category B, 25 years after the signing of MOA-AD. The only question which is more of an enigma but not on constitutionality is the ambiguity of the MILF position. While in both consensus points “plebiscite” is provided, this position — by its language and statements outside of the MOA-AD — is unclear whether the MILF will accept unfavorable results of the plebiscite. A clearly stated position would calm down the doubts. There are two reactions from the concerned areas that enhance the tension. First, these areas voted NO in the 1989 and 2001 ARMM plebiscites, why ask them again to or not to join the BJE – a new name for the ARMM? Second, the geographical areas listed are – a significant number of them — not predominantly Muslim. These should not be a source of tension. Concerning the first, a NO in the past plebiscites is not certain to be NO in the next. Give those who may want to change the chance to. Regarding the second, each barangay should have been followed by statistical facts: population showing Muslim-Christian percentages; numbers of YES and NO in the 2001 plebiscite. Territorial Waters Relative to the territorial waters, as well as the internal waters, their impact on the peace process should be more important than constitutionality. The Constitution should be a tool of the peace process not an obstacle. As it was already pointed out, if constitutional amendment has been proposed to attract foreign investors, why not do the same for the peace process? One paramount question is this: If foreign investors are welcome to develop the country’s natural resources, why are the Muslims unwelcome to own portions of those resources and to cooperate with the state in developing them? Is their ability to carry out the activities enumerated in 2.i(1)(2) doubted? If so, help them develop their skills and with funds since they have expressed their intention to explore, utilize and do other activities to make productive their ancestral domain and lands. In their articles on “Ancestral Domain, Political Subdivisions Consensus 4 states: “All territorial and geographical areas … may be formed or constituted into political subdivisions of the Bangsamoro territorial jurisdictions…” Obviously, this very general provision is subject to more discussions as to how the subdivisions would be done. Section 2, Article VII of R.A. 6734 is more specific: “The Regional Assembly may create, divide, merge, abolish or substantially alter boundaries of any municipality or barangay in accordance with the criteria laid down by existing law subject to approval by a majority of the votes case in a plebiscite in the political units directly affected.” R.A. 9054 (Article VI, Section 19) lengthily amended this to include provinces and cities which inclusion the Supreme Court recently declared unconstitutional. This gives a clue on how constitutional or unconstitutional Consensus 4 would be even if the power to form and constitute, per se, is not unconstitutional. (To Be Continued) (”Comment” is Mr. Patricio P. Diaz’ column for MindaViews, the opinion section of September 13, 2008 As Vilma’s son-in-law, Mohalidin Unsi, also began to sob, the Bangsamoro Youth Leaders’ Forum, the organizers of the press conference, quickly turned off the Powerpoint Presentation of photographs and video footage of what happened here Monday morning of September 8. It took some time for Vilma and Mohalidin to regain composure, Vilma, especially, because since Monday, she has had to recount the tragedy of losing an entire family, before investigators, NGO representatives and relief workers, neighbors and the media. She had just visited her son, 13-year old Guiamaludin, who is recuperating from leg wounds. Immediately after the press conference, she was going to rush back to Datu Piang to breastfeed her newly-born, Fairudz, a survivor of war. Fairudz was 16 days old when she lost her father and five siblings. Vilma and Mohalidin stressed “there was no firefight” in Barangay Tee early that morning as the military alleged. “The planes just came and fired away.” “There was no encounter between government and MILF (Moro Islamic Liberation Front) forces. The planes suddenly arrived and bombed the pumpboat,” Vilma said in Maguindanao. ”There was no encounter. The planes just suddenly came,” Mohalidin said. He counted “three double-bodies (apparently referring to Layang or SF 260); two OV-10s and two helicopters.” In the rush to flee Barangay Tee, Vilma, who was carrying her baby, Fairudz, and Mohalidin, got separated from the rest of the family and boarded another “pumpboat” (actually a small motorized banca) towards this barangay, at least a kilometer from the highway). Their boats were at the tailend of a convoy. How many boats were in the convoy, neither Vilma nor Mohalidin could say. Vilma’s boat was 10 to 15 meters away from the boat carrying her husband, Daya Manunggal, and their six children – the pregnant Aida, Guiamaludin, Bailyn, Zukarudin, Adtayan and Faidza — when a bomb – or a rocket fired from the sky – exploded near the boat. Only Guiamaluddin survived from that boat. His eldest sister and three younger siblings died instantly. Another sister, Bailyn, died on the way to the hospital in Cotabato City, some 54 kilometers away. Daya’s body was recovered the next day. Mohalidin said Daya, apparently fearing the boat would capsize because of their number and because a sack of rice was also loaded on it, stopped at an “island” (a small land mass) with about two or three huts, and had just asked his children to disembark when the something exploded a few meters away. Mohalidin counted seven aircraft hovering when villagers rushed to their small motorized bancas, to flee Tee for “safer grounds” in Butilen, across the marshland. In the third week of August, the start of the renewed hostilities between government and the MILF, the Mandi-Manungal family had fled Sitio Dagaren in Barangay Tee for sanctuary in Barangay Butalo and returned home on September 1. Mohalidin doesn’t remember how many bombs exploded the morning they sought refuge from war. In his limited Pilipino, he said, “di ko kayang bilangin, basta marami” (I can’t count how many, but plenty) Zainar Mukalan, who lives close to the highway and Butalo bridge, told MindaNews there was no exchange of gunfire before the bombs were dropped. Military sources say the exchange of gunfire in a setting such as a vast marshland, can be heard from as far as five to seven kilometers away at daytime or 10 kilometers at nighttime. Zainar, in his 50s, says the planes came at around 9 a.m. but did not fire until around 10. He said he heard three explosions, one of which, he later learned, killed the children. The best vantage view was from the Butalo bridge, some 30 meters away from Zainar’s.house. Zainar said soldiers stationed at the bridge, who could clearly see who was approaching along the river and the marshland, were on ready-fire position. None of them managed to fire, however, as residents and the barangay captain of Tee told asked them hold their fire as the convoy of at least five boats carrying villagers from Barangay Tee, was approaching Butilen. Zainar was from Barangay Tee himself but during an evacuation five years ago, opted to live here close to the highway, the bridge and the barangay hall of Tee (the barangay hall was moved from Tee to Butilen about a decade ago as more residents of Tee evacuated to Butilen. As of August 1, 2007, the National Statistics and Coordination Board recorded Tee’s population at 1,724 out of Datu Piang’s 49,971). Musib Uy Tan, the mayor’s executive assistant told MindaNews that reports reaching them also indicated that residents heard no exchange of gunfire before the bombings. The government’s Information Coordination Center on September 9 reported that military authorities denied Air Force planes dropped bombs in Barangay Tee. “The government forces were continuing its limited operations against the forces of the rogue MILF leader Umbra Kato but were adopting an adjusted law enforcement operations in deference to Ramadhan. Col. Marlou Salazar, the 601st brigade commander, whose forces were involved in the military operations, said that the troops were in the barangay based on civilian reports that Wahid Tundok, Kato’s right hand man, and possibly Kato himself, were in the area. As the troops entered the barangay, they were met by gunfire from the MILF forces in the area. Heavy exchange of fires between the forces commenced at around 9:55 a.m,” the report said. The report noted that the “the helicopters, Layang (SF 260) planes and OV-10 planes were sent upon the request of the ground forces to assist them in their operations against the lawless MILF in the area. Their mission, the report said, was to conduct “persuasion” and “reconnaissance flights over the river and marsh areas “to assist the ground forces in locating and determining the involvement of the lawless MILF forces.” “According to Col. Robles, initially, the Air Force helicopters and planes did not find the MILF troops on the river, marsh area and the ground so they were ordered to return to base. However, on the way back, the Layang planes were fired upon by the MILF forces. Since the rules of engagement of the air forces is to retaliate if fired, upon, the planes fired back after verifying and confirming the location of the lawless MILF forces from the ground forces,” the report said. (Carolyn O. Arguillas/MindaNews) | |||||||||||
