By Maulana "Bobby" Alonto
After it has jettisoned the previously initialed MILF-GRP Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) ostensibly in deference to the Supreme Court decision on its ‘unconstitutionality’ coupled with the national uproar generated by political and economic vested-interest groups opposed to a just political settlement of the Mindanao conflict, the Government of the Republic of the Philippines GRP) is now resorting to an anti-insurgency-driven policy.
One important component of this anti-insurgency-driven policy is cleverly mantled in the cloak of ‘Interfaith Dialogue’ to provide it an aura of ‘sanctity’. This would camouflage the real agenda that really animates the policy that the Arroyo regime is currently implementing to ‘resolve’ the Mindanao conflict.
For those who are not updated on recent developments vis-à-vis the Mindanao situation, the GRP has now shifted to a four-pronged program to deal with the Bangsamoro Problem: DDR (demobilization, disarmament and reintegration), ‘direct dialogue with communities’, interfaith dialogue, and militarization. DDR is particularly addressed to the MILF and given as a condition by the GRP for the resumption of the peace talks which the latter has unilaterally scuttled after abandoning the MOA-AD and disbanding its peace panel.
The GRP, nonetheless, openly admits to only three – DDR, ‘direct dialogue with communities’ (whatever this means) and interfaith dialogue. It is silent or evasive on militarization because this does not sit well with the international community which opposes military solutions to sovereignty-based conflicts such as the one that exists in the Bangsamoro Homeland. However, even if the GRP will not admit to the military component of its anti-insurgency-driven policy in Mindanao, the devastation that is resulting from the military operations (called police actions by the regime) being conducted by the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) against the MILF and the Bangsamoro people clearly speaks for itself; what the regime denies in words cannot be denied by deeds. The 500,000 plus refugees (and still counting) in the current fighting, the appalling damage to property, the loss of civilian lives including those of helpless women and children, and the surge of AFP presence in Moro territories are a testament to the Filipino government’s putting primacy on military solution as a means to end the Bangsamoro Problem.
For the purpose of this article, however, we will focus on interfaith dialogue.
The Arroyo regime’s interfaith dialogue program in Mindanao has one significant implication. The regime is making it appear that the conflict in Mindanao is a religious conflict: a conflict between Muslims and Christians. Hence, following this premise, interfaith dialogue is resorted to in order for Muslims and Christians to understand each other’s faith and then live happily ever after. This is according to the thinking of the regime which it hopes the international community will buy.
The Moros, who are predominantly Muslim, have nothing against interfaith dialogue. As a matter of fact, all Muslims welcome dialogues with people of other faiths because this is a commandment by Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala in the Qur’an. The essence of tableegh (literally spreading good words) and da’awah (propagation) is dialogue, for without dialogue it is not possible for Muslims to engage in tableegh and da’awah with people of other faiths. History will attest to the fact that Muslims spread the Message of Islam in many parts of the world through tableegh and da’awah – meaning through dialogue – and it is only when suppression, repression, oppression, aggression and tyranny became dominant that Muslims resorted to jihaad al qaatil or the jihaad with the sword (armed struggle).
To comprehend this better - and we have explained this in our previous discourses on the same subject - it is important to note that Islam is not a mere religion as how the West views and understands religion. Islam is a deen, an all-embracing system of life based on tawhid (Islamic concept of monotheism). For want of an appropriate term in English, Islam is an ideology. And it is from this high plane of understanding and perspective that lslam should be viewed.
As an ideology, Islam harbors no enmity for other religions or people of other faiths. This is why Muslims, as demonstrated in the past, have always been tolerant of other faiths and their adherents. When the Holy Prophet Muhammad (saw) established the Islamic State in Madina 1500 years ago, the Jews and the Christians were among its constituency. The Constitution of Madina included them and regarded them as protected citizens (dhimmis) enjoying the same political, economic, social and religious rights as the majority Muslims. They even enjoyed certain privileges not enjoyed by Muslims like exemption from being conscripted into the Islamic army. Justice for all its citizens was (and is) the hallmark of the Islamic State regardless of religious beliefs that during the rule of Hazrat Ali ibn Abu Talib (ra), the Fourth Khalifa-e-Rashidun, an ordinary Jewish citizen of the Islamic State won a case in the Islamic court of law against Khalifa Ali (ra) himself, the head of the Islamic State, and was promptly given what was due him by the Islamic government.
Would this be possible today under the justice system of the Philippine nation-state? If powerful congressmen and senators fail to even bring President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and her husband and their cronies in government to court in order to account for the reported shenanigans they have committed while in power, how much more for a poor and powerless Moro Muslim peasant whose family has been massacred and whose home has been destroyed by the war policy of this regime? Indeed, the Philippine Supreme Court could not even give justice to the Bangsamoro people; so how can it be an institution of justice to which the oppressed - Moro or Filipino - can turn? Let the facts speak for themselves.
Going back to the subject of this article, there was no forced conversion under Islamic rule because the Qur’an forbids compulsion in belief (Qur’an: Surah Baqarah, Ayat 256). It was only when the Jews conspired with the enemies of Islam who were in a state of war with the Muslims that they (the recalcitrant Jews) were expelled from Madina because they had become a clear and present danger then to the security of the Islamic State.
This just treatment of Islam for people of different creeds and races was observed down through the centuries especially when Muslims were on the upper hand. After the liberation of Al Quds (Jerusalem) from the European imperialist crusaders in October 1187 by the Islamic armies under Salahudin Yusuf ibn Ayyub (Saladin), the latter restored to the Christians their churches and the Jews their synagogues after having repaired or rebuilt them as they were destroyed during the war. Such magnanimity was hitherto unheard of in Christian Europe where religious non-conformists were burned at the stake as heretics. Lest it be forgotten, too, the Muslim Moro civilization of Andalus in Spain (711-1492) was renowned throughout the known world during the Dark Ages not only for of its scientific, scholarly, literary and artistic achievements and incomparable modern cities not found elsewhere in Europe at that period but also because Muslim Spain became a haven for people of different races, faiths and political views – Christians, Jews and even agnostics – who were fleeing persecution and oppression by the intolerant Church and the European feudal states at that time.
The point is that Islam as an ideology has no quarrel with other religions. Admittedly, differences do exist between Islam and other religious beliefs. In the Qur’an, Islam is critical of both Christianity and Judaism because of their deviations from the original monotheistic message of the earlier Prophets of Allah, notably Musa (Moses) and Isa (Jesus), peace be upon them. This criticism, however, is not to arouse religious enmity but to remind Christians, Jews and Muslims alike of the pristine concept of tawhid, the monotheistic belief-system which was taught and propagated by all the Prophets of Allah, peace be upon them, and which is the well-spring of justice – justice that should govern man-Allah and man-man relationships in accordance with the prescription of Allah. Comparatively, the Qur’an has harsher judgment and verdict for the munafiqeen - the hypocrites – who are fasiqun (wrong-doers, i.e. oppressors and tyrants) who claim to be Muslims in words but disbelievers in their hearts.
This being the case, the variance between Islam and other religions has never been a cause for armed conflict or for declaring war by Muslims. So called communal wars between Muslims and Hindus did occur in India before and after partition but these were fueled by deep-seated prejudices arising out of the peculiarly oppressive social make-up of undivided India at that time which existed in the form of the caste system. For example, many of the Muslims were former ‘untouchables’, or Harijans, the lowest rung in India’s social ladder, who embraced Islam to liberate themselves from a lifetime of oppression by the higher castes which did not consider the ‘untouchables’ human nor even part of the caste system. The ‘untouchables’ were non-entities and thus ‘outcasts’. But even after becoming Muslims, the Hindus still consider them ‘outcasts’ and worse, by converting to Islam, were deemed ‘traitors’ to Mother India.
Another factor is the resentment the Hindus long held for the Moguls, the Muslims who ruled for more than 300 years and united India in 1526-1858. Though the Moguls never forced their Hindu subjects to convert to Islam and tolerated in fact the polytheism of Hinduism though polytheism (shirk) is anathema to Islam, the Hindus harbored animosity toward the Moguls - and all Muslims for that matter - because they held the belief that the egalitarian message of Islam was a threat to the caste system perpetuated by Hinduism and thus the established traditional social order in India. British colonialism later on exploited this deep-seated resentment among the Hindus in order to divide and rule India. By pitting the Muslims and the Hindus against each other during the British raj (rule), the British were able to maintain their colonial rule over the Indian sub-continent. This antagonism did not end even after the Indian Sub-Continent was partitioned into India and Pakistan in 1947. Inside India itself, the Muslims who chose to remain there as minority are being subjected to persecution and oppression by the chauvinistic Hindu ruling classes which have since been in control of the Indian government after independence. It is not Islam, therefore, that caused the religious strife that today still hounds India’s national religious communities.
What is true, however, is that Islam is in conflict with other man-made ideologies that perpetuate oppression and other manifestations of injustice. Thus, Islam has always been at war with all forms of colonialism and imperialism. It has been at war ever since it arose in the Arabian Peninsula against the mighty hegemonic empires of the world and their modern-day client dictatorships regardless of whether they are monarchies or military juntas. It does not make any distinction between Muslims, Christians, Jews or Hindus who defend and serve the interests of colonialism, neo-colonialism and imperialism or who practice tyranny. In occupied Palestine, for instance, the Muslim Palestinians are not at war with Judaism. They are at war with Zionism, a political movement that propagates the racist idea that Palestine, which Zionists call ‘Israel’, should exclusively belong to the Jews. From the point of view of Islam, all those who practice oppression are enemies because they brazenly violate the Justice of Allah. This should explain, too, why revolutionary ideological Islamic movements in many Muslim nation-states today stand in opposition to puppet governments run by Muslim elites who genuflect to the hegemonic world powers.
Having stressed that point, let me now say that by employing interfaith dialogue to end the armed conflict in Mindanao, what the Arroyo regime is actually doing is to divest the Bangsamoro Problem of its political character and present it as a religious conflict between two ‘domestic religious communities’ of the Philippine nation-state. This is far from the truth for it ignores the historical antecedents that gave rise to the present conflict in Mindanao.
The Bangsamoro Problem is a political problem. It is a conflict that involves two distinct nations: the Filipino nation and the Bangsamoro nation.
As the successors-in-interest to foreign colonialism, the Filipinos believe that the Bangsamoro homeland is part and parcel of the Philippine nation-state. This belief is akin to what the French held onto vis-à-vis Algeria when the latter was a colony of France. The French, particularly those French colonists (colons) who settled in Algeria, fanatically clung to the illusion that Algeria (North Africa) was part of France (Europe) and therefore a legitimate territory of the latter. The same mindset today prevails in the Philippines, particularly among the Filipino elite, the so-called Filipino nationalists, and Filipino settlers or their present-day descendants who chose to ignore or are ignorant of the history of the conflict in Mindanao.
On the other hand, the Bangsamoro people, who had been an independent nation under the Moro sultanates even before the creation of the Philippine nation-state in 1935 and 1946, have been invariably asserting their historic rights over their homeland and their identity as a separate people and nation. They question their unjust incorporation into the Philippine nation-state in 1946 without their democratic consent. They question the diminution of their ancestral lands and the loss of their natural resources to encroaching Filipino settlers.
They question the loss of their right to govern what is left of their ancestral homeland and live a way of life in accordance with their Islamic ideology, faith and culture. They question the gerrymandering of their traditional territories at the expense of the indigenous inhabitants. They question the right of the Filipinos to impose upon them the Filipino identity derived and manufactured from the name of the Spanish king responsible for waging more than 300 years of debilitating colonialist wars against them. They question the right of the Filipinos to impose inept, corrupt and tyrannical local rulers on them. They question the laws which are made in Manila and then imposed upon them which contravene the values of justice and morality inculcated on them by their Islamic ideology and faith. They question the modern-day wars which have been unleashed on them from time to time at the horrendous cost of tens of thousands of Moro lives lost, massive displacement and devastation of communities, and loss of livelihood and property which have aggravated their poverty and marginalization under Filipino rule.
To sum it up, the Moros question the morality and thus the legitimacy of their oppressive colonial status in the Philippine nation-state. And it is this question left unanswered and unresolved that has driven the armed resistance struggle of the Bangsamoro people since the Philippine nation-state saw the light of day.
From what has been said so far, the real picture should now come into focus for everyone to understand. To simply state it, the Mindanao conflict boils down to the collision between two principles: the Philippine nation-state’s principle of national sovereignty and territorial integrity on one hand, and the principle of Bangsamoro right of self-determination on the other.
It is these two principles on a collision course that animate the conflict and which are at the core of the Bangsamoro Problem, and not the religious differences between the Muslims and the Christians. It is a political problem that necessitates a political solution.
Interfaith dialogue between Muslims and Christians, thus, may be good and useful and should certainly be continued between Muslims and Christian to fortify their understanding of each other’s faith. But to make it among the major policy thrusts of the GRP to solve what is clearly a political problem is a diversion and deviation from resolving the real political issue confronting us, which is the Bangsamoro Problem.
In this context, the primordial concern today should not be a dialogue between ‘domestic religious communities’ but a dialogue between two colliding nations: the Philippines and the Bangsamoro. This dialogue, as a matter of necessity, must come up with a just political settlement of the Bangsamoro Problem.
Unfortunately, however, the MOA-AD, which is a product of an eleven-year dialogue between the two nations and a compromise solution to the colliding principles adhered to by the parties to the conflict, has been thrown to the wastebasket by the GRP. The MOA-AD would have been a good start to end the conflict in Mindanao once and for all.
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Commentary: INCREASING MYSTERIOUS MASSACRES OF INNOCENT CIVILIANS
By Mike G. Kulat
The massacre that happened in Sitio Udsodan in Barangay Mudseng, Midsayap, North Cotabato on November 12, 2008 brings the total number into three attacks on innocent civilians aside from the victims of the ongoing military operation in different parts of Mindanao. It should be recalled that in early November a massacre in Magsayasay, Lanoa Del Norte happened that followed by another ambush in Pikit, Cotabato area.
In an interview conducted by the members of the Bangsamoro Center for Just Peace, a network organization of the Consortium of Bangsamoro Civil Society with the lone survivor, Noraisa Dimalulon, it was learned that they were on board a manually operated banca (boat) at around last November 12 at 10:00 a. m. towards their rice field. When they were nearing their farm, suddenly undetermined number of armed men wearing black masks opened fire at them using high caliber firearms. It was found out later that the culprits used M-14 and other high powered firearms as shown by the empty shells left in the crime scene.
Killed in the incident were Adtega Dimalulon 40, Ali Kansa 35 and Tungan Dimalulon 5. The bodies of the victims were only recovered the following day as their relatives were restricted by the military to go to the area pending their ascertaining the identity of the victims and assurance that they are not members of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF).
Noraisa narrated that at the first burst of the gunfire, she jumped out of the boat and swam away until she found a floating wooden block where she hid her head and that prevented her from being hit by bullets. After the firing ended she swam to farther to the bank and ran towards far-flung Barangay Nabalawag and finally found her way home at around 11:00 a. m. She revealed farther that her hand bag containing her mobile phone, earrings, cash and other valuables left in the boat were taken by the armed men.
These series of mysterious killings of civilians in the different parts of Mindanao were not given proper course by the duly constituted authorities or any legal actions to give justice to the victims. The incidences are also taking place at a time when there is much talk about the resurgence of the “ILAGA” movements in different parts of Mindanao. The movements are obviously, deliberately or not, being backed by the government through distribution of firearms to civilians that is spearheaded by Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) Secretary Ronaldo Puno.
The massacre that happened in Sitio Udsodan in Barangay Mudseng, Midsayap, North Cotabato on November 12, 2008 brings the total number into three attacks on innocent civilians aside from the victims of the ongoing military operation in different parts of Mindanao. It should be recalled that in early November a massacre in Magsayasay, Lanoa Del Norte happened that followed by another ambush in Pikit, Cotabato area.
In an interview conducted by the members of the Bangsamoro Center for Just Peace, a network organization of the Consortium of Bangsamoro Civil Society with the lone survivor, Noraisa Dimalulon, it was learned that they were on board a manually operated banca (boat) at around last November 12 at 10:00 a. m. towards their rice field. When they were nearing their farm, suddenly undetermined number of armed men wearing black masks opened fire at them using high caliber firearms. It was found out later that the culprits used M-14 and other high powered firearms as shown by the empty shells left in the crime scene.
Killed in the incident were Adtega Dimalulon 40, Ali Kansa 35 and Tungan Dimalulon 5. The bodies of the victims were only recovered the following day as their relatives were restricted by the military to go to the area pending their ascertaining the identity of the victims and assurance that they are not members of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF).
Noraisa narrated that at the first burst of the gunfire, she jumped out of the boat and swam away until she found a floating wooden block where she hid her head and that prevented her from being hit by bullets. After the firing ended she swam to farther to the bank and ran towards far-flung Barangay Nabalawag and finally found her way home at around 11:00 a. m. She revealed farther that her hand bag containing her mobile phone, earrings, cash and other valuables left in the boat were taken by the armed men.
These series of mysterious killings of civilians in the different parts of Mindanao were not given proper course by the duly constituted authorities or any legal actions to give justice to the victims. The incidences are also taking place at a time when there is much talk about the resurgence of the “ILAGA” movements in different parts of Mindanao. The movements are obviously, deliberately or not, being backed by the government through distribution of firearms to civilians that is spearheaded by Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) Secretary Ronaldo Puno.
Friday, November 28, 2008
News: Civilians continue to suffer from AFP air strikes
By Mike G. Kulat
Four more civilians, all women were victims of indiscriminate air strikes from the Armed Forces of the Philippines' OV-10 bombers in Maguindanao areas.
In an interview conducted by members of the Tiyakap Kalilintad of the Consortium of Bangsamoro Civil Society with the victims, it was learned that Hadja Sapia Samad together with seven other members of the family were inside their house in Barangay Liyab, Mamasapano in Maguindanao Province when two OV-10 bombers started to dropped bombs in their community. The first bomb dropped a few meters away from their house but did not explode at around 2:40 PM on November 18, 2008.
The immediate reaction of the family was to vacate their house fearing that the next bomb to be dropped will already hit their house. So the whole family members ran and hide under the coconut trees thinking they will be safe. The bomber planes were able to drop and explode around eight bombs in the area and to their surprise, the next bomb exploded a couple of meters away from where they were hiding. The bombing was followed by long burst of machine gun fires from same war planes.
As a result, Hadja Sapia Samad; Fatima Kamensa, 12 year old; Hadja Zahra Zangkala, 43 year old; Sarah Samad, 23 years old and 5-month pregnant all sustained wounds in different parts of their bodies from a bomb splinters. They were immediately brought to a Rural Clinic in Poblacion Datu Piang, Maguindanao for medication. The bombing also resulted to the evacuation of all the residents of Barangay Liyab that added to the continuously increasing number of internally displaced persons (IDPs) in different parts of the province.
On August 19, 2008 at between 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM, a group of men believed to be military men as manifested by their military uniforms arrived in the Rural Clinic and tried to convince the victims to be transferred and treated at Camp Siongco Military Hospital in Awang, Datu Odin Sinsuat, Shariff Kabunsuan.
The victims highly doubted on the intention to transfer them into a military hospital and so they refused the offer. On this, accordingly the military instead instructed the victims that when they are asked about their plight they should deny that they were hit by bombs instead claim to be victims of crossfire.
Tiyakap Kalilintad members who conducted the interviews also asked several residents if there were encounters occurred in the area on that date or the previous days but they denied any otherwise they could have vacated the area.
Four more civilians, all women were victims of indiscriminate air strikes from the Armed Forces of the Philippines' OV-10 bombers in Maguindanao areas.
In an interview conducted by members of the Tiyakap Kalilintad of the Consortium of Bangsamoro Civil Society with the victims, it was learned that Hadja Sapia Samad together with seven other members of the family were inside their house in Barangay Liyab, Mamasapano in Maguindanao Province when two OV-10 bombers started to dropped bombs in their community. The first bomb dropped a few meters away from their house but did not explode at around 2:40 PM on November 18, 2008.
The immediate reaction of the family was to vacate their house fearing that the next bomb to be dropped will already hit their house. So the whole family members ran and hide under the coconut trees thinking they will be safe. The bomber planes were able to drop and explode around eight bombs in the area and to their surprise, the next bomb exploded a couple of meters away from where they were hiding. The bombing was followed by long burst of machine gun fires from same war planes.
As a result, Hadja Sapia Samad; Fatima Kamensa, 12 year old; Hadja Zahra Zangkala, 43 year old; Sarah Samad, 23 years old and 5-month pregnant all sustained wounds in different parts of their bodies from a bomb splinters. They were immediately brought to a Rural Clinic in Poblacion Datu Piang, Maguindanao for medication. The bombing also resulted to the evacuation of all the residents of Barangay Liyab that added to the continuously increasing number of internally displaced persons (IDPs) in different parts of the province.
On August 19, 2008 at between 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM, a group of men believed to be military men as manifested by their military uniforms arrived in the Rural Clinic and tried to convince the victims to be transferred and treated at Camp Siongco Military Hospital in Awang, Datu Odin Sinsuat, Shariff Kabunsuan.
The victims highly doubted on the intention to transfer them into a military hospital and so they refused the offer. On this, accordingly the military instead instructed the victims that when they are asked about their plight they should deny that they were hit by bombs instead claim to be victims of crossfire.
Tiyakap Kalilintad members who conducted the interviews also asked several residents if there were encounters occurred in the area on that date or the previous days but they denied any otherwise they could have vacated the area.
Monday, November 17, 2008
News: Villar out, Enrile in, as Philippine Senate President
By Taher G. Solaiman
Senator Manuel Villar has resigned today from his post as President of the Philippine Senate.
Villar said he resigned from his post when learned that he no longer had the support of majority of his fellow senators.
Senator Juan Ponce Enrile replaced Villar as Senate President.
Villar lost the confidence of his fellow senators after he was implicated in the controversial C-5 road extension in Manila.
Senator Manuel Villar has resigned today from his post as President of the Philippine Senate.
Villar said he resigned from his post when learned that he no longer had the support of majority of his fellow senators.
Senator Juan Ponce Enrile replaced Villar as Senate President.
Villar lost the confidence of his fellow senators after he was implicated in the controversial C-5 road extension in Manila.
Reaction to "Thank you, Supreme Court of the Philippines"
We posted here last November 12 the article, Thank you, Supreme Court of the Philippines by Atty. Fatimah Bin Guerra. The same article was also posted in the www.luwaran.com last November 11.
Rahib L. Kudto, the national president of the United Youth for Peace and Development, Inc. (UNYPAD) and deputy secretary-general of the Mindanao People’s Caucus (MPC), sent us his reaction on the said article of Atty. Guerra. Here is Kudto’s reaction:
November 17, 2008
Dear Atty. Fatimah,
Assalamu Alaikum!
When I read your column in the Luwaran website, I could not pass this chance of personally thanking you for such a noble act on your part. I have so many reasons to thank you.
Thank you, Atty. Fatimah Bin Guerra, for the invincible spirit that you showed in speaking out your convictions. Your article shared a source of hope among us, Bangsamoro people, to continue our odyssey to find an enduring peace in our homeland. I can’t help but express my overwhelming admiration to how you waged this extraordinary fight through your writing. You effectively articulated our frustration over the government’s handling of the peace process. You powerfully stressed that the Mindanao conflict is not a business of the constitution but a political problem which requires a viable political settlement. You are worthy of our recognition since despite being a lawyer, you did not uphold the injustices of the Constitution and of the Philippine system but the more important cause of the marginalized and of the oppressed.
Cleary, those who supported and participated in the peace process with candor are not happy with the intervention of the Supreme Court.
Thank you, Atty. Fatimah Bin Guerra, for your honest principles. You fairly educated us on how the Mindanao problem should be treated under this government. We share the same disappointment. The unfortunate events resulted to the displacement of thousands of civilians in the conflict affected areas in Mindanao . These led to the failure of this administration to achieve a lasting peace that we envisioned for Mindanao .
Thank you, Atty. Fatimah Bin Guerra, for your brave disposition in exposing how the Supreme Court manipulated the decision-making process on the MOA-AD. When the SC justices junked the MOA-AD, they snatched away the hope from us that this administration is sincere in bringing back what is due us.
If MOA-AD is nothing but a piece of paper, as commented by Father Bernas, a constitutional law expert, why would the highest court substantially spent its time and resources in deciding the constitutionality of a document that is nothing but a mere scrap of paper? While they sealed the coffin of the MOA-AD, they failed to address the real issues in Mindanao . No one appears to have a viable plan while innocent civilians continue to suffer and die.
I hope and pray that many more Fatimah will come out to help us in our fight for the liberation of the Bangsamoro people who have been under tyranny for over 400 years now. I hope that your words will reverberate throughout Mindanao and inspire young Moros to continue our fight until the political solution for the century-old Moro problem will be finally achieved.
I also hope that your words would serve as enlightenment among politicians, justices and other leaders in charge for protecting their personal vested interests.
I pray that you will be showered with more blessings and rewards. I pray for your safety from all dangers as you advance our common struggle for justice and freedom.
You deserve the highest form of gratitude from the Bangsamoro people!
Sincerely,
Rahib L. Kudto
Rahib L. Kudto, the national president of the United Youth for Peace and Development, Inc. (UNYPAD) and deputy secretary-general of the Mindanao People’s Caucus (MPC), sent us his reaction on the said article of Atty. Guerra. Here is Kudto’s reaction:
November 17, 2008
Dear Atty. Fatimah,
Assalamu Alaikum!
When I read your column in the Luwaran website, I could not pass this chance of personally thanking you for such a noble act on your part. I have so many reasons to thank you.
Thank you, Atty. Fatimah Bin Guerra, for the invincible spirit that you showed in speaking out your convictions. Your article shared a source of hope among us, Bangsamoro people, to continue our odyssey to find an enduring peace in our homeland. I can’t help but express my overwhelming admiration to how you waged this extraordinary fight through your writing. You effectively articulated our frustration over the government’s handling of the peace process. You powerfully stressed that the Mindanao conflict is not a business of the constitution but a political problem which requires a viable political settlement. You are worthy of our recognition since despite being a lawyer, you did not uphold the injustices of the Constitution and of the Philippine system but the more important cause of the marginalized and of the oppressed.
Cleary, those who supported and participated in the peace process with candor are not happy with the intervention of the Supreme Court.
Thank you, Atty. Fatimah Bin Guerra, for your honest principles. You fairly educated us on how the Mindanao problem should be treated under this government. We share the same disappointment. The unfortunate events resulted to the displacement of thousands of civilians in the conflict affected areas in Mindanao . These led to the failure of this administration to achieve a lasting peace that we envisioned for Mindanao .
Thank you, Atty. Fatimah Bin Guerra, for your brave disposition in exposing how the Supreme Court manipulated the decision-making process on the MOA-AD. When the SC justices junked the MOA-AD, they snatched away the hope from us that this administration is sincere in bringing back what is due us.
If MOA-AD is nothing but a piece of paper, as commented by Father Bernas, a constitutional law expert, why would the highest court substantially spent its time and resources in deciding the constitutionality of a document that is nothing but a mere scrap of paper? While they sealed the coffin of the MOA-AD, they failed to address the real issues in Mindanao . No one appears to have a viable plan while innocent civilians continue to suffer and die.
I hope and pray that many more Fatimah will come out to help us in our fight for the liberation of the Bangsamoro people who have been under tyranny for over 400 years now. I hope that your words will reverberate throughout Mindanao and inspire young Moros to continue our fight until the political solution for the century-old Moro problem will be finally achieved.
I also hope that your words would serve as enlightenment among politicians, justices and other leaders in charge for protecting their personal vested interests.
I pray that you will be showered with more blessings and rewards. I pray for your safety from all dangers as you advance our common struggle for justice and freedom.
You deserve the highest form of gratitude from the Bangsamoro people!
Sincerely,
Rahib L. Kudto
Thursday, November 13, 2008
News: MILF welcomes OIC call, insists MOA-AD signing first before peace talks
By Taher G. Solaiman
Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) chief peace negotiator Mohagher Iqbal told reporters today that the call of Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, the Secretary General of the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) for the Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP) and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) to immediately return to the negotiating table was a “welcome development because the MILF has been for the negotiated political settlement of the problem in Mindanao.”
Iqbal, however, insisted that the MILF will not return to the negotiating table unless the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) is signed and that the government guarantees it will comply with the agreed negotiation process and all agreements between the two parties.
The MILF chief peace negotiator expressed pessimism that the peace negotiation will resume soon. This is because, according to him, Philippine government “has destroyed the procedure, the agenda of the talks.”
He also accused the Philippine government as “more responsible for the collapse of the peace talks.”
The MOA-AD was supposed to have been signed by the peace negotiating panels in Kuala Lumpur last August 5 but the signing was aborted by issuance of Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) by the Supreme Court granting the petition of the local government units of Cotabato Province and Zamboanga City which feared inclusion in a proposed Bangsamoro territory.
Then, the Supreme Court declared last October 14 the MOA-AD as “contrary to law and the Constitution.”
Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) chief peace negotiator Mohagher Iqbal told reporters today that the call of Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, the Secretary General of the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) for the Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP) and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) to immediately return to the negotiating table was a “welcome development because the MILF has been for the negotiated political settlement of the problem in Mindanao.”
Iqbal, however, insisted that the MILF will not return to the negotiating table unless the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) is signed and that the government guarantees it will comply with the agreed negotiation process and all agreements between the two parties.
The MILF chief peace negotiator expressed pessimism that the peace negotiation will resume soon. This is because, according to him, Philippine government “has destroyed the procedure, the agenda of the talks.”
He also accused the Philippine government as “more responsible for the collapse of the peace talks.”
The MOA-AD was supposed to have been signed by the peace negotiating panels in Kuala Lumpur last August 5 but the signing was aborted by issuance of Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) by the Supreme Court granting the petition of the local government units of Cotabato Province and Zamboanga City which feared inclusion in a proposed Bangsamoro territory.
Then, the Supreme Court declared last October 14 the MOA-AD as “contrary to law and the Constitution.”
News: OIC urges GRP, MILF to resume peace talks soon
By Taher G. Solaiman
Professor Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, the Secretary General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), in a statement released last November 10, warned that the deteriorating situation in Mindanao “empowers undisciplined elements who seek to abort the peace process and fuel extremist feelings” even as he urged “the government of the Philippines and President Maria Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo to rapidly return to the negotiating table in order to work out creative solutions matching agreements with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) and the requirements of the Supreme Constitutional Court, while continuing to work in the same positive spirit that led to the accomplishments made so far through negotiations and build upon these achievements in a bid to reach the just and durable peace desired by all.“
Ihsanoglu also expressed his deep concern about “the increasing deterioration of the situation in the southern Philippines due to continued military operations, severely affecting civilians.”
He also said that “the uninterrupted military operations have resulted in the displacement of more than half a million civilians who live in shelters in dire conditions” and that he “would deploy efforts to mobilize resources from the OIC affiliated institutions and organs to alleviate the suffering of the displaced population.”
Professor Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, the Secretary General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), in a statement released last November 10, warned that the deteriorating situation in Mindanao “empowers undisciplined elements who seek to abort the peace process and fuel extremist feelings” even as he urged “the government of the Philippines and President Maria Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo to rapidly return to the negotiating table in order to work out creative solutions matching agreements with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) and the requirements of the Supreme Constitutional Court, while continuing to work in the same positive spirit that led to the accomplishments made so far through negotiations and build upon these achievements in a bid to reach the just and durable peace desired by all.“
Ihsanoglu also expressed his deep concern about “the increasing deterioration of the situation in the southern Philippines due to continued military operations, severely affecting civilians.”
He also said that “the uninterrupted military operations have resulted in the displacement of more than half a million civilians who live in shelters in dire conditions” and that he “would deploy efforts to mobilize resources from the OIC affiliated institutions and organs to alleviate the suffering of the displaced population.”
Commentary: Are the Moros Filipinos?
By Mohd. Musib M. Buat
No. They are not ‘Filipinos’ but they are ‘Philippine Citizens’ by operation of law. And how did that happen? It’s a long story. But let me first narrate its historical antecedents before I will talk about the issue on ‘Citizenship’.
Historical Antecedents
The Moros were once free and independent people under the suzerainty of their sultanates with a definite territory or homeland as recognized under various treaties with foreign powers like Spain, Great Britain, Germany and the Netherlands. The Moro sultanates, kingdoms and principalities at the time were known as karajaan or kadatuan (negeri in Malay), endowed with all the elements of a nation-state in the modern legal sense. They conducted foreign trade and commerce and diplomatic relations and entered into treaties of peace and amity, trade and commercial relations with their Asian neighbors as well as various European powers.
The most significant of these treaties entered into by the Moro rulers or suzerains with Spain were the Sultan Qudarat-Lopez Treaty of 1645 and 1648, and the Rajah Bungso-Lopez Treaty of 1646, defining and demarcating the respective dominions of the sultanates of Maguindanao-Buayan and Sulu and the colonial possessions of Spain over the Visayas and Luzon. These treaties were honored by Spain until the last days of their colonial rule over the Visayas and Luzon. The so-called “Moro Wars” between the Moros and Spain were better known as ‘wars of supremacy’ between the two nations over the control and collection of tributes on the native inhabitants of the Islands of Visayas and Luzon, according to the Muslim historian Dr. Cesar Adib Majul (in Muslims in the Philippines, Quezon City, 1973).
The Royal Decree of July 30, 1860 decreed by Queen Isballa II of Spain and the Royal Decree of July 15, 1896 and the Maura law of 1893 that provided organization of municipal governments excluded the Moro territories of Mindanao, Sulu and Palawan. The latter Spanish decrees merely proposed for the establishment of politico-military governments in occupied territories of Mindanao, Sulu and Palawan, excepting the territorial dominions of the Sultanates of Mindanao and Sulu. The last significant treaty entered by the Spanish colonial government and the Sultanate of Sulu was the Sulu-Spain Treaty of 1878 which was more a treaty of peace and amity between Sulu and Spain and for the Sulu Sultan recognizing the protection of Spain against any foreign aggression. It was more of a protectorate relationship between Spain and Sulu, and not a territorial possession on the part of Spain over the dominions of Sulu.
The last agreement or treaty entered between the Sultanate of Maguindanao and Rajah Buayan realms with Spain in 1888 was the ‘Act of Conciliation between Spanish sovereign King Alfonso XIII and the Royal Houses of Maguindanao and Buayan,’ represented by Rajah Putri, Queen Regent of Maguindanao (Datu Utto’s wife) and by Datu Utto himself, representing Rajah Buayan, to end the war between Spain and Buayan. Like the Sulu-Spain Treaty of 1878, it was a treaty of peace and amity and not capitulation or surrender on the part Datu Uttu of Buayan and his Moro datu allies.
But how did the Moros lost their freedom and sovereign independence? They lost it through deceit and misrepresentation and not by conquest by any foreign power, nor by capitulation or surrender. Spain shamelessly and immorally included the Bangsamoro territories in the cession of the Philippine Islands under the Treaty of Paris of December 10, 1898 to the United States. US President William McKinley who had entertained serious doubts as to the sovereignty of Spain over the Sulu Sultanate had promptly directed that a formal agreement be made with the Sulu Sultan on the basis of the Sulu-Spain treaty of 1878. The agreement entered into between Sulu Sultan Jamal ul-Kiram II and US Brig. General Bates is known as the Kiram-Bates Treaty of August 20, 1889 that later became very controversial. The Sulu Sultan and his royal datus maintained that it was a treaty of peace and friendship, the former merely accepted and acknowledged the protection of the American flag while the United States military authorities claimed that it was a tacit recognition by the Sulu ruler and his datus the sovereignty of the United States over the Sulu dominions and dependencies.
No agreements were entered by the US authorities with the Moro suzerains and leaders of Mindanao. The Moro leaders in the mainland, except some of the datus and sultans of the Lake Lanao region (Ranaw) who viewed with suspicion the Americans as not different from their hated enemies – the Spaniards, relied on the promises of the American officials to honor and respect the Moro culture and tradition, Islam religion and their institutions did not find the necessity of entering into formal agreements with the American authorities. The American authorities who had recognized and acknowledged the distinct identity and culture of the Moros and other natives of Mindanao from the Christian Filipinos in the Visayas and Luzon, established a separate administrative structure to govern and administer the affairs of the Moros and other non-Islamized native inhabitants, known as the Moro Province in 1903. It was a transition type of administration to last up to 1913 preparatory to the transfer of authority to the Moros after they were prepared to govern themselves in the art of modern self-government and administration. It was extended from 1914 to 1920 under a new name known as the Department of Mindanao and Sulu.
When news went around on the plan of the United States to grant Philippine independence after the passage of the Jones Law in 1916 by the US Congress and immediately after the end of the Moro Province, the Moro people of Sulu signed and sent a petition dated June 9, 1921 addressed to the President of the United States, expressing their desire and preference that the Sulu archipelago be made part of American territory instead of being incorporated with the Philippine Islands. They cited litany of grievances against the abuses of the Philippine Constabulary and Filipino officials on the Sulu Moros. In other separate petitions, other Sulu Moros longed for the return to the Moro Province administered by American officials.
On February 1, 1924, Moro leaders and datus led by Sultan Mangigin of Maguindanao gathered in Zamboanga and signed a petition popularly known as the “Zamboanga Declaration” addressed to the Congress of the United States, proposing that in the event that the US Government will grant Philippine independence, the Islands of Mindanao, Sulu archipelago and Palawan instead be made an unorganized territory of the United States; and should this be not feasible, they further proposed that 50 years after the grant of Philippine independence, a plebiscite (or referendum) be held in the proposed unorganized territory to decide by vote whether the proposed territory will be incorporated in the government of the Islands of Luzon and Visayas, remain a territory, or become independent. In the event that the United States grant independence to the Philippine Islands without provision for the retention of the Moro territories under the American flag, the petitioners manifested their firm intention and resolve to declare themselves an independent sultanate to be known to the world as the “Moro Nation” (Bangsa Moro).
Congressman Roger Bacon and others filed and introduced bills before the US Congress proposing either to make Mindanao and Sulu a component state of the United States or remain as an unorganized territory in preparation for the granting of separate independence. These moves were blocked by the lobby of the Filipino nationalists led by Manuel Quezon and his colleagues. When Quezon became President of the Philippine Commonwealth, his first national policy was the colonization of Mindanao and Sulu by Filipino migrant-settlers from the Visayas and Luzon with government support and backing. This was followed by the passage of land confiscatory laws passed by Philippine Legislature dispossessing the Moros and other native inhabitants of their ancestral domains and ancestral lands, a policy that started during the early American regime.
The Bangsamoro people during the American period (1898-1946) did not relent in their quest for freedom and self-determination. On March 18, 1935, during the Philippine Commonwealth, Hadji Bogabong together with prominent Moro datus and leaders of Lanao signed a petition now known as the historic ‘Dansalan Declaration’ addressed to the President of the United States, expressing their grievances for the failure of the delegates in the 1935 Constitutional Convention to provide appropriate security and guarantee over the rights and interests of the Moros and the protection of their ancestral lands from being titled and occupied by Christian Filipino settlers. When this petition was not heeded by the US Government, Bogabong and his followers waged the famous ‘Cotta Wars’ (Moro Forts) in the Lake Lanao region which lasted shortly before the outbreak of the Pacific War in World War II.
After the Pacific War, the United States Government hastily granted Philippine independence on July 4, 1946, incorporating the Islands of Mindanao, Sulu archipelago and Palawan, particularly the geographic areas encompassed under the Moro Province and adjacent areas, without prior consultation or plebiscitary consent of the Bangsamoro people. America therefore reneged and betrayed her unfulfilled mandate in ‘Moroland’ to prepare and train the Moros in the art of modern self-government and administration as stated under former US President William McKinley’s Instructions to the Second Taft Commission and the US Congress on April 7, 1900 on the policy to be pursued by the US Government with respect to the Moros and other native inhabitants of the Philippine Islands. America is partly to blame of the present conflict in Mindanao and Sulu archipelago and Palawan, and adjacent islands, as ‘protector’ of the Bangsamoro people. America shall therefore be urged to fulfill its unfinished mandate to ‘decolonize’ the Bangsamoro country (or Moroland) from the neo-colonial regime of the Philippine government.
The 50-year period in the ‘Zamboanga Declaration’ reckoned from the date of the grant of Philippine independence on July 4, 1946 matured in 1996, the year that the Philippine Government (GRP) and the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) signed the Final Peace Agreement in September 1996. Finding the GRP-MNLF agreement inadequate for failure to adequately address the legitimate grievances and aspirations of the Bangsamoro people, the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) opted to continue the peace negotiations with the Philippine government in the hope of finding a just, peaceful and permanent solution to the Mindanao conflict through a negotiated political settlement.
I have reviewed the above historical antecedents to have a clear perspective on the question - why the Moros are not ‘Filipinos’. With respect to this particular issue, I find it convenient to just quote excerpts from my earlier paper which aptly discussed this subject.
“The Bangsamoro People are not Filipinos”
The question of allegiance by the Bangsamoros to the Philippine State, remain an unsettled issue up to this day. The Bangsamoro people have never regarded themselves as Filipinos but as “Philippine Citizens” by operation of law or for political convenience since they have always maintained their uniqueness as people or nation (bangsa) with separate and distinct identity on the basis of a “two-nation theory” within the Philippine nation-state entity which they believed they have an equal right to share a portion of the national territory as their separate national homeland and over which they have the right to govern themselves free from undue interference from the Central Government on the basis of the principle of “equality of peoples” under the law of nations. Regrettably, the present Philippine Constitution still reflects a highly centralized and unitary colonial system compared with other modern constitutions.
The present Spanish Constitution has categorically recognized the identity and the right to self-governance by its historic peoples or communities. The Basques, Catalans, Galicians and Andalusians of Spain are considered “historic nationalities or communities” which have retained their distinct ethnic identity and guaranteed their rights to self-government and practically independent from interference from the Spanish Central Government. The territories and regions of these historic communities are denominated under the Spanish Constitution as “Regional Autonomous States” within a central political structure. Indeed, a former colonial power such as Spain is more politically progressive and liberal than its former colony – the Philippines Islands.
As a matter of consolation in their realization that they have become part of an artificial and imaginary national community called Filipino not of their own choice or liking but by operation of law, the Bangsamoro people tried to cushion and mitigate that reality by affixing to Filipino the term Muslim or one who is a “Muslim Filipino” to maintain their separate and distinct identity from the Christian Filipinos. With the resurgence of Moro nationalism in the early 70’s, they restored their historical identity and added to the “Moro identity” the concept of a “Nation (Bangsa)”. Thus, their preferred ethnic identity is “Bangsa Moro”, meaning “Moro Nation”.
This is however not a new ethnic configuration for it has a long history dating as far back as the 17th century when the Moros started to consider themselves a “Nation” bound by Islamic culture and ideology despite their differences as domestic communities. There is a historical and legal basis for their assertion of a separate and distinct identity from the Christian Filipinos. In the first place, they were never the subject of the Spanish Catholic monarchy. They have remained a separate and independent people until they were unjustly incorporated under Philippine territory by the United States in the grant of Philippine independence on July 4, 1946. Secondly, based on legal and historical instruments they were neither considered Filipinos.
Under the Treaty of Paris of 1898, concluded between Spain and the United States, the Moros were not listed as Philippine Citizens. The Malolos Constitution of 1899 of the First Philippine Republic did not include the Moros under Article 6 thereof as Citizens of the Philippines. What appears is that President Emilio Aguinaldo in his letter of January 18, 1899 to the Sultan of Sulu recognized the independence of the Moro people and offered them “bonds of fraternal unity” and ‘solidarity on the bases of absolute respect for the beliefs and traditions of the Moros’. (See Peter Gowing). The Philippine Bill of 1902 passed by the U.S. Congress defines Philippine Citizens as ‘all inhabitants of the Philippine Islands who were subjects of Spain, their children and descendants’. The Moros were never subjects of Spain.
The Jones Law of 1916 passed by the U.S. Congress similarly defined Philippine Citizens as former subjects of Spain. It, however, contained a proviso which provides that, except by law the existence of Philippine Citizenship shall be provided by the Philippine Legislature which was a legal contingency. The 1935 Constitution may have extended Philippine Citizenship to the Moros in ambiguous terms when it provided that Philippine Citizenship covers: 1) Those who are citizens of the Philippine Islands at the time of the adoption of the Constitution; 2) Those born of foreign parents who before the adoption of this Constitution were elected to public office; 3) Those whose fathers and mothers are Citizens of the Philippines; and 4) by naturalization.
Although the Bangsamoro people may have been extended Philippine Citizenship, either by implication or by operation of law, the question of allegiance has remained disputed and unsettled because the Moros until the present have been asserting their separate national identity as Bangsa Moros and they could hardly accept being identified as Filipino for not having been the subject of the Spanish Catholic monarchy, nor Moroland a colony of Spain. One of the main general concept which the Peace Negotiating Parties have reached a consensus point was the MILF Position during the 7th Exploratory Talks held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia on April 18-20, 2005, is the general principle that:
“It is the birthright of all Moros and other indigenous peoples of Mindanao to identify themselves and be accepted as ‘Bangsa Moros’. The Bangsamoro people refers to those who have been designated as natives or are identified descendants of those original inhabitants of Mindanao and its adjacent islands including Palawan and the Sulu archipelago at the time of conquest or colonization whether mixed or of full native blood. Spouses and their descendants are classified as Bangsamoro.” ‘
Upon suggestion by the GRP Peace Panel which the MILF Peace Panel concurred, the Indigenous peoples are given the “freedom of choice” whether or not they wish to identify themselves as “Bangsamoros”. Except for a few, majority of the Indigenous peoples accept being identified as ‘Bangsamoros’. The Bangsamoro identity is the parallel of Malaysia’s “Bumiputra” which meant ‘children of the soil’, an ethnic configuration encompassing all Malays, Sabahans and Sarawakians as owners of all Federal lands of Malaysia, excluding the Chinese migrants. On top of this, the ‘Bumis’ are granted special privileges in both economic and political life, such as education, employment, medical services, housing, award of government contracts and business opportunities over those of the Chinese migrants and Indians.
The Bangsamoro identity is based on ethnic or cultural nationalism by a group of people seeking selfhood or nationhood which was usurped from them. They have now come of age and they now assert to restore that lost freedom via decolonization and through their collective right to self-determination under international law and norms, treaties and conventions. Indeed, the usurpation of the Bangsamoro political sovereignty and territorial integrity are the two major injustices and legitimate grievances that constitute the main root causes of the Mindanao conflict and of the Bangsamoro problem. The Moros who had successfully defended and preserved their freedom and independence from the aggression of various foreign powers, have become a ‘hostage nation’ to a post-world war fabricated neo-colonial regime – the Republic of the Philippines. (cf. Joseph Fallon).
The Bangsamoro dilemma is not without a formula or solution. “Ethnic nationalism” or the “politics of sub-nationalism” is a worldwide phenomenon of the post-world war era because former colonial powers realigned the historical borders of historic nations, peoples and communities making them ‘hostage nations’ by newly fabricated post-colonial states contrary to their own free will and consent. The United Nations came up with the lists of colonized peoples for ‘decolonization’ under the ‘trusteeship program’. However, many of these hostage nations, nationalities and peoples were unlisted for decolonization, among them are the Bangsamoro people of Mindanao, Sulu Archipelago and Palawan and adjacent islands.
Legal scholars and political authorities point out that “[Until] recently, most efforts to resolve sovereignty-based conflicts have faltered due to the limited legal and political tools available to policy makers. The two most applicable principles, sovereignty and self-determination have been reduced to little more than legal and political shields behind which states and sub-state entities justify their actions.” However, “[While] these two basic principles of international law may sometimes be reconciled to create a lasting settlement of a sovereignty-based conflict, more frequently they are a recipe for political gridlock and violence.” In view of this dilemma, recent state practice developed as ‘evidenced by a growing creativity among states and policy makers which has led to the emergence of a more elastic approach to resolving sovereignty-based conflicts…the seeds of which can be found in a number of recent peace proposals and peace agreements, can be termed ‘earned sovereignty’.” (cf. Paul R. Williams, et. al.).
For a group entitled to a right to collectively determine its political destiny, the Bangsamoro people appropriately falls within the UNESCO Experts’ definition of “people” ‘as individuals who relate to one another and not just on the level of individual association but also based upon a shared consciousness, and possibly with institutions that express their identity. The indicative characteristics in defining ‘people’ according to the UNESCO are: “(a) a common historical tradition; (b) religious or ethnic identity; (c) cultural homogeneity; (d) linguistic unity; (e) religious or ideological affinity; (f) territorial connection; and (g) common economic life.” (See Scharf). The Bangsamoro people possess sufficient or most if not all of the above distinctive identity or characteristics as a ‘people’ endowed with the collective right to self-determination.”
In order to reconcile the opposing principles of state sovereignty and the equally recognized principle of the right to self-determination, the government and the MILF Peace negotiating panels came up with a new and novel formula. And what is this new formula?
The MOA-AD is a New Formula in Conflict Resolution
The Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) is an elegant document and a new formula designed to resolve historical injustices, one of which is ‘injustice to the ‘Moro identity’. The Bangsamoro struggle for freedom and defense of homeland for more than 300 years against colonial Spain is not well recognized and acknowledged by the dominant Christian majority. The Moros equally deserve recognition of their separate and distinct identity as ‘Bangsamoro’, not that they wish to secede or establish a separate independent state. They equally fought for this land known as Philippine Islands. They are simply invoking a ‘two-nation’ theory which means two or more nations may co-exist in the same territory and as in other plural societies.
This is precisely, why the MOA-AD has contained the concept of ‘associative relations’ between the proposed Bangsamoro Juridical Entity (BJE) and the Central Government or akin to that of ‘federacy’ under a unitary system. The proposed BJE as a political entity is ‘in-between’ the range more advanced than ‘enhanced autonomy’ but short of being a full ‘free associated state’ as understood in current political theory and practice. At most, it has the status of a ‘sub-state’, (or a ‘conditional state’, or at least a ‘quasi-state’). It could later become a component federal state with residual powers, if ever the Philippines decides to amend or revise the Philippine Constitution and shifts to a federal form of government.
The ‘associative relationship’ between the proposed BJE and the Central government is a concept not the same as the ‘Free Associated State’ similar to those of Marshall Islands, Mariana and Pulau who are in ‘free association’ with the United States as the latter’s former trust territories. The BJE may be designed to have some features with that of Cook Island or even Puerto Rico but not exactly parallel and its final configuration or designation is still subject to further discussion during the formal negotiation of the Comprehensive Peace Compact, and may not be immediately fully implemented but will still undergo a transition period for capacity and institution building preparatory to its exercise of self-governance while being gradually devolved with ‘shared powers and authority ‘ from the parent state (Central government) under the concept of ‘shared sovereignty’.
On top of this, it is still further subject to any necessary changes in the legal framework to make it fully operational as a juridical entity. The objections to this concept are all speculative and unfounded for fear of the ‘unknown’ and an obvious manifestation of an ‘anti-Moro bias and prejudice’. If the Filipinos don’t like and care for the Moros, why not allow them to chart their own separate ways to become independent? But if, indeed, the dominant Filipino majority do care and love the Moros, give them what they deserve! With the declaration of the MOA-AD as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, the Bangsamoro people are compelled to seek redress from other international forums or revert to their original position of aspiring for independence by whatever means, including under international law and diplomacy.
No. They are not ‘Filipinos’ but they are ‘Philippine Citizens’ by operation of law. And how did that happen? It’s a long story. But let me first narrate its historical antecedents before I will talk about the issue on ‘Citizenship’.
Historical Antecedents
The Moros were once free and independent people under the suzerainty of their sultanates with a definite territory or homeland as recognized under various treaties with foreign powers like Spain, Great Britain, Germany and the Netherlands. The Moro sultanates, kingdoms and principalities at the time were known as karajaan or kadatuan (negeri in Malay), endowed with all the elements of a nation-state in the modern legal sense. They conducted foreign trade and commerce and diplomatic relations and entered into treaties of peace and amity, trade and commercial relations with their Asian neighbors as well as various European powers.
The most significant of these treaties entered into by the Moro rulers or suzerains with Spain were the Sultan Qudarat-Lopez Treaty of 1645 and 1648, and the Rajah Bungso-Lopez Treaty of 1646, defining and demarcating the respective dominions of the sultanates of Maguindanao-Buayan and Sulu and the colonial possessions of Spain over the Visayas and Luzon. These treaties were honored by Spain until the last days of their colonial rule over the Visayas and Luzon. The so-called “Moro Wars” between the Moros and Spain were better known as ‘wars of supremacy’ between the two nations over the control and collection of tributes on the native inhabitants of the Islands of Visayas and Luzon, according to the Muslim historian Dr. Cesar Adib Majul (in Muslims in the Philippines, Quezon City, 1973).
The Royal Decree of July 30, 1860 decreed by Queen Isballa II of Spain and the Royal Decree of July 15, 1896 and the Maura law of 1893 that provided organization of municipal governments excluded the Moro territories of Mindanao, Sulu and Palawan. The latter Spanish decrees merely proposed for the establishment of politico-military governments in occupied territories of Mindanao, Sulu and Palawan, excepting the territorial dominions of the Sultanates of Mindanao and Sulu. The last significant treaty entered by the Spanish colonial government and the Sultanate of Sulu was the Sulu-Spain Treaty of 1878 which was more a treaty of peace and amity between Sulu and Spain and for the Sulu Sultan recognizing the protection of Spain against any foreign aggression. It was more of a protectorate relationship between Spain and Sulu, and not a territorial possession on the part of Spain over the dominions of Sulu.
The last agreement or treaty entered between the Sultanate of Maguindanao and Rajah Buayan realms with Spain in 1888 was the ‘Act of Conciliation between Spanish sovereign King Alfonso XIII and the Royal Houses of Maguindanao and Buayan,’ represented by Rajah Putri, Queen Regent of Maguindanao (Datu Utto’s wife) and by Datu Utto himself, representing Rajah Buayan, to end the war between Spain and Buayan. Like the Sulu-Spain Treaty of 1878, it was a treaty of peace and amity and not capitulation or surrender on the part Datu Uttu of Buayan and his Moro datu allies.
But how did the Moros lost their freedom and sovereign independence? They lost it through deceit and misrepresentation and not by conquest by any foreign power, nor by capitulation or surrender. Spain shamelessly and immorally included the Bangsamoro territories in the cession of the Philippine Islands under the Treaty of Paris of December 10, 1898 to the United States. US President William McKinley who had entertained serious doubts as to the sovereignty of Spain over the Sulu Sultanate had promptly directed that a formal agreement be made with the Sulu Sultan on the basis of the Sulu-Spain treaty of 1878. The agreement entered into between Sulu Sultan Jamal ul-Kiram II and US Brig. General Bates is known as the Kiram-Bates Treaty of August 20, 1889 that later became very controversial. The Sulu Sultan and his royal datus maintained that it was a treaty of peace and friendship, the former merely accepted and acknowledged the protection of the American flag while the United States military authorities claimed that it was a tacit recognition by the Sulu ruler and his datus the sovereignty of the United States over the Sulu dominions and dependencies.
No agreements were entered by the US authorities with the Moro suzerains and leaders of Mindanao. The Moro leaders in the mainland, except some of the datus and sultans of the Lake Lanao region (Ranaw) who viewed with suspicion the Americans as not different from their hated enemies – the Spaniards, relied on the promises of the American officials to honor and respect the Moro culture and tradition, Islam religion and their institutions did not find the necessity of entering into formal agreements with the American authorities. The American authorities who had recognized and acknowledged the distinct identity and culture of the Moros and other natives of Mindanao from the Christian Filipinos in the Visayas and Luzon, established a separate administrative structure to govern and administer the affairs of the Moros and other non-Islamized native inhabitants, known as the Moro Province in 1903. It was a transition type of administration to last up to 1913 preparatory to the transfer of authority to the Moros after they were prepared to govern themselves in the art of modern self-government and administration. It was extended from 1914 to 1920 under a new name known as the Department of Mindanao and Sulu.
When news went around on the plan of the United States to grant Philippine independence after the passage of the Jones Law in 1916 by the US Congress and immediately after the end of the Moro Province, the Moro people of Sulu signed and sent a petition dated June 9, 1921 addressed to the President of the United States, expressing their desire and preference that the Sulu archipelago be made part of American territory instead of being incorporated with the Philippine Islands. They cited litany of grievances against the abuses of the Philippine Constabulary and Filipino officials on the Sulu Moros. In other separate petitions, other Sulu Moros longed for the return to the Moro Province administered by American officials.
On February 1, 1924, Moro leaders and datus led by Sultan Mangigin of Maguindanao gathered in Zamboanga and signed a petition popularly known as the “Zamboanga Declaration” addressed to the Congress of the United States, proposing that in the event that the US Government will grant Philippine independence, the Islands of Mindanao, Sulu archipelago and Palawan instead be made an unorganized territory of the United States; and should this be not feasible, they further proposed that 50 years after the grant of Philippine independence, a plebiscite (or referendum) be held in the proposed unorganized territory to decide by vote whether the proposed territory will be incorporated in the government of the Islands of Luzon and Visayas, remain a territory, or become independent. In the event that the United States grant independence to the Philippine Islands without provision for the retention of the Moro territories under the American flag, the petitioners manifested their firm intention and resolve to declare themselves an independent sultanate to be known to the world as the “Moro Nation” (Bangsa Moro).
Congressman Roger Bacon and others filed and introduced bills before the US Congress proposing either to make Mindanao and Sulu a component state of the United States or remain as an unorganized territory in preparation for the granting of separate independence. These moves were blocked by the lobby of the Filipino nationalists led by Manuel Quezon and his colleagues. When Quezon became President of the Philippine Commonwealth, his first national policy was the colonization of Mindanao and Sulu by Filipino migrant-settlers from the Visayas and Luzon with government support and backing. This was followed by the passage of land confiscatory laws passed by Philippine Legislature dispossessing the Moros and other native inhabitants of their ancestral domains and ancestral lands, a policy that started during the early American regime.
The Bangsamoro people during the American period (1898-1946) did not relent in their quest for freedom and self-determination. On March 18, 1935, during the Philippine Commonwealth, Hadji Bogabong together with prominent Moro datus and leaders of Lanao signed a petition now known as the historic ‘Dansalan Declaration’ addressed to the President of the United States, expressing their grievances for the failure of the delegates in the 1935 Constitutional Convention to provide appropriate security and guarantee over the rights and interests of the Moros and the protection of their ancestral lands from being titled and occupied by Christian Filipino settlers. When this petition was not heeded by the US Government, Bogabong and his followers waged the famous ‘Cotta Wars’ (Moro Forts) in the Lake Lanao region which lasted shortly before the outbreak of the Pacific War in World War II.
After the Pacific War, the United States Government hastily granted Philippine independence on July 4, 1946, incorporating the Islands of Mindanao, Sulu archipelago and Palawan, particularly the geographic areas encompassed under the Moro Province and adjacent areas, without prior consultation or plebiscitary consent of the Bangsamoro people. America therefore reneged and betrayed her unfulfilled mandate in ‘Moroland’ to prepare and train the Moros in the art of modern self-government and administration as stated under former US President William McKinley’s Instructions to the Second Taft Commission and the US Congress on April 7, 1900 on the policy to be pursued by the US Government with respect to the Moros and other native inhabitants of the Philippine Islands. America is partly to blame of the present conflict in Mindanao and Sulu archipelago and Palawan, and adjacent islands, as ‘protector’ of the Bangsamoro people. America shall therefore be urged to fulfill its unfinished mandate to ‘decolonize’ the Bangsamoro country (or Moroland) from the neo-colonial regime of the Philippine government.
The 50-year period in the ‘Zamboanga Declaration’ reckoned from the date of the grant of Philippine independence on July 4, 1946 matured in 1996, the year that the Philippine Government (GRP) and the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) signed the Final Peace Agreement in September 1996. Finding the GRP-MNLF agreement inadequate for failure to adequately address the legitimate grievances and aspirations of the Bangsamoro people, the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) opted to continue the peace negotiations with the Philippine government in the hope of finding a just, peaceful and permanent solution to the Mindanao conflict through a negotiated political settlement.
I have reviewed the above historical antecedents to have a clear perspective on the question - why the Moros are not ‘Filipinos’. With respect to this particular issue, I find it convenient to just quote excerpts from my earlier paper which aptly discussed this subject.
“The Bangsamoro People are not Filipinos”
The question of allegiance by the Bangsamoros to the Philippine State, remain an unsettled issue up to this day. The Bangsamoro people have never regarded themselves as Filipinos but as “Philippine Citizens” by operation of law or for political convenience since they have always maintained their uniqueness as people or nation (bangsa) with separate and distinct identity on the basis of a “two-nation theory” within the Philippine nation-state entity which they believed they have an equal right to share a portion of the national territory as their separate national homeland and over which they have the right to govern themselves free from undue interference from the Central Government on the basis of the principle of “equality of peoples” under the law of nations. Regrettably, the present Philippine Constitution still reflects a highly centralized and unitary colonial system compared with other modern constitutions.
The present Spanish Constitution has categorically recognized the identity and the right to self-governance by its historic peoples or communities. The Basques, Catalans, Galicians and Andalusians of Spain are considered “historic nationalities or communities” which have retained their distinct ethnic identity and guaranteed their rights to self-government and practically independent from interference from the Spanish Central Government. The territories and regions of these historic communities are denominated under the Spanish Constitution as “Regional Autonomous States” within a central political structure. Indeed, a former colonial power such as Spain is more politically progressive and liberal than its former colony – the Philippines Islands.
As a matter of consolation in their realization that they have become part of an artificial and imaginary national community called Filipino not of their own choice or liking but by operation of law, the Bangsamoro people tried to cushion and mitigate that reality by affixing to Filipino the term Muslim or one who is a “Muslim Filipino” to maintain their separate and distinct identity from the Christian Filipinos. With the resurgence of Moro nationalism in the early 70’s, they restored their historical identity and added to the “Moro identity” the concept of a “Nation (Bangsa)”. Thus, their preferred ethnic identity is “Bangsa Moro”, meaning “Moro Nation”.
This is however not a new ethnic configuration for it has a long history dating as far back as the 17th century when the Moros started to consider themselves a “Nation” bound by Islamic culture and ideology despite their differences as domestic communities. There is a historical and legal basis for their assertion of a separate and distinct identity from the Christian Filipinos. In the first place, they were never the subject of the Spanish Catholic monarchy. They have remained a separate and independent people until they were unjustly incorporated under Philippine territory by the United States in the grant of Philippine independence on July 4, 1946. Secondly, based on legal and historical instruments they were neither considered Filipinos.
Under the Treaty of Paris of 1898, concluded between Spain and the United States, the Moros were not listed as Philippine Citizens. The Malolos Constitution of 1899 of the First Philippine Republic did not include the Moros under Article 6 thereof as Citizens of the Philippines. What appears is that President Emilio Aguinaldo in his letter of January 18, 1899 to the Sultan of Sulu recognized the independence of the Moro people and offered them “bonds of fraternal unity” and ‘solidarity on the bases of absolute respect for the beliefs and traditions of the Moros’. (See Peter Gowing). The Philippine Bill of 1902 passed by the U.S. Congress defines Philippine Citizens as ‘all inhabitants of the Philippine Islands who were subjects of Spain, their children and descendants’. The Moros were never subjects of Spain.
The Jones Law of 1916 passed by the U.S. Congress similarly defined Philippine Citizens as former subjects of Spain. It, however, contained a proviso which provides that, except by law the existence of Philippine Citizenship shall be provided by the Philippine Legislature which was a legal contingency. The 1935 Constitution may have extended Philippine Citizenship to the Moros in ambiguous terms when it provided that Philippine Citizenship covers: 1) Those who are citizens of the Philippine Islands at the time of the adoption of the Constitution; 2) Those born of foreign parents who before the adoption of this Constitution were elected to public office; 3) Those whose fathers and mothers are Citizens of the Philippines; and 4) by naturalization.
Although the Bangsamoro people may have been extended Philippine Citizenship, either by implication or by operation of law, the question of allegiance has remained disputed and unsettled because the Moros until the present have been asserting their separate national identity as Bangsa Moros and they could hardly accept being identified as Filipino for not having been the subject of the Spanish Catholic monarchy, nor Moroland a colony of Spain. One of the main general concept which the Peace Negotiating Parties have reached a consensus point was the MILF Position during the 7th Exploratory Talks held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia on April 18-20, 2005, is the general principle that:
“It is the birthright of all Moros and other indigenous peoples of Mindanao to identify themselves and be accepted as ‘Bangsa Moros’. The Bangsamoro people refers to those who have been designated as natives or are identified descendants of those original inhabitants of Mindanao and its adjacent islands including Palawan and the Sulu archipelago at the time of conquest or colonization whether mixed or of full native blood. Spouses and their descendants are classified as Bangsamoro.” ‘
Upon suggestion by the GRP Peace Panel which the MILF Peace Panel concurred, the Indigenous peoples are given the “freedom of choice” whether or not they wish to identify themselves as “Bangsamoros”. Except for a few, majority of the Indigenous peoples accept being identified as ‘Bangsamoros’. The Bangsamoro identity is the parallel of Malaysia’s “Bumiputra” which meant ‘children of the soil’, an ethnic configuration encompassing all Malays, Sabahans and Sarawakians as owners of all Federal lands of Malaysia, excluding the Chinese migrants. On top of this, the ‘Bumis’ are granted special privileges in both economic and political life, such as education, employment, medical services, housing, award of government contracts and business opportunities over those of the Chinese migrants and Indians.
The Bangsamoro identity is based on ethnic or cultural nationalism by a group of people seeking selfhood or nationhood which was usurped from them. They have now come of age and they now assert to restore that lost freedom via decolonization and through their collective right to self-determination under international law and norms, treaties and conventions. Indeed, the usurpation of the Bangsamoro political sovereignty and territorial integrity are the two major injustices and legitimate grievances that constitute the main root causes of the Mindanao conflict and of the Bangsamoro problem. The Moros who had successfully defended and preserved their freedom and independence from the aggression of various foreign powers, have become a ‘hostage nation’ to a post-world war fabricated neo-colonial regime – the Republic of the Philippines. (cf. Joseph Fallon).
The Bangsamoro dilemma is not without a formula or solution. “Ethnic nationalism” or the “politics of sub-nationalism” is a worldwide phenomenon of the post-world war era because former colonial powers realigned the historical borders of historic nations, peoples and communities making them ‘hostage nations’ by newly fabricated post-colonial states contrary to their own free will and consent. The United Nations came up with the lists of colonized peoples for ‘decolonization’ under the ‘trusteeship program’. However, many of these hostage nations, nationalities and peoples were unlisted for decolonization, among them are the Bangsamoro people of Mindanao, Sulu Archipelago and Palawan and adjacent islands.
Legal scholars and political authorities point out that “[Until] recently, most efforts to resolve sovereignty-based conflicts have faltered due to the limited legal and political tools available to policy makers. The two most applicable principles, sovereignty and self-determination have been reduced to little more than legal and political shields behind which states and sub-state entities justify their actions.” However, “[While] these two basic principles of international law may sometimes be reconciled to create a lasting settlement of a sovereignty-based conflict, more frequently they are a recipe for political gridlock and violence.” In view of this dilemma, recent state practice developed as ‘evidenced by a growing creativity among states and policy makers which has led to the emergence of a more elastic approach to resolving sovereignty-based conflicts…the seeds of which can be found in a number of recent peace proposals and peace agreements, can be termed ‘earned sovereignty’.” (cf. Paul R. Williams, et. al.).
For a group entitled to a right to collectively determine its political destiny, the Bangsamoro people appropriately falls within the UNESCO Experts’ definition of “people” ‘as individuals who relate to one another and not just on the level of individual association but also based upon a shared consciousness, and possibly with institutions that express their identity. The indicative characteristics in defining ‘people’ according to the UNESCO are: “(a) a common historical tradition; (b) religious or ethnic identity; (c) cultural homogeneity; (d) linguistic unity; (e) religious or ideological affinity; (f) territorial connection; and (g) common economic life.” (See Scharf). The Bangsamoro people possess sufficient or most if not all of the above distinctive identity or characteristics as a ‘people’ endowed with the collective right to self-determination.”
In order to reconcile the opposing principles of state sovereignty and the equally recognized principle of the right to self-determination, the government and the MILF Peace negotiating panels came up with a new and novel formula. And what is this new formula?
The MOA-AD is a New Formula in Conflict Resolution
The Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) is an elegant document and a new formula designed to resolve historical injustices, one of which is ‘injustice to the ‘Moro identity’. The Bangsamoro struggle for freedom and defense of homeland for more than 300 years against colonial Spain is not well recognized and acknowledged by the dominant Christian majority. The Moros equally deserve recognition of their separate and distinct identity as ‘Bangsamoro’, not that they wish to secede or establish a separate independent state. They equally fought for this land known as Philippine Islands. They are simply invoking a ‘two-nation’ theory which means two or more nations may co-exist in the same territory and as in other plural societies.
This is precisely, why the MOA-AD has contained the concept of ‘associative relations’ between the proposed Bangsamoro Juridical Entity (BJE) and the Central Government or akin to that of ‘federacy’ under a unitary system. The proposed BJE as a political entity is ‘in-between’ the range more advanced than ‘enhanced autonomy’ but short of being a full ‘free associated state’ as understood in current political theory and practice. At most, it has the status of a ‘sub-state’, (or a ‘conditional state’, or at least a ‘quasi-state’). It could later become a component federal state with residual powers, if ever the Philippines decides to amend or revise the Philippine Constitution and shifts to a federal form of government.
The ‘associative relationship’ between the proposed BJE and the Central government is a concept not the same as the ‘Free Associated State’ similar to those of Marshall Islands, Mariana and Pulau who are in ‘free association’ with the United States as the latter’s former trust territories. The BJE may be designed to have some features with that of Cook Island or even Puerto Rico but not exactly parallel and its final configuration or designation is still subject to further discussion during the formal negotiation of the Comprehensive Peace Compact, and may not be immediately fully implemented but will still undergo a transition period for capacity and institution building preparatory to its exercise of self-governance while being gradually devolved with ‘shared powers and authority ‘ from the parent state (Central government) under the concept of ‘shared sovereignty’.
On top of this, it is still further subject to any necessary changes in the legal framework to make it fully operational as a juridical entity. The objections to this concept are all speculative and unfounded for fear of the ‘unknown’ and an obvious manifestation of an ‘anti-Moro bias and prejudice’. If the Filipinos don’t like and care for the Moros, why not allow them to chart their own separate ways to become independent? But if, indeed, the dominant Filipino majority do care and love the Moros, give them what they deserve! With the declaration of the MOA-AD as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, the Bangsamoro people are compelled to seek redress from other international forums or revert to their original position of aspiring for independence by whatever means, including under international law and diplomacy.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
UNYPAD writes Obama on Mindanao Conflict
The United Youth for Peace and Development, Inc. (UNYPAD) has just sent a letter to President-elect Barack Obama of the United States of America (USA) regarding the ongoing conflict in Mindanao, South of the Philippines.
We are quoting below the said letter:
In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful
UNITED YOUTH FOR PEACE AND DEVELOPMENT, INC. (UNYPAD)
Datu Liwa Candao St., Shariff Kabunsuan, RH-3, Cotabato City
S.E.C. Reg. No. CN 200428294
08 November 2008
His Excellency Barack Hussein Obama
President
United States of America
His Excellency,
We join the people in your country and around the world in congratulating you for your victory in the newly-concluded presidential elections held in your great country.
Indeed, your victory is a great moment in the history of the United States not only because it represents your people’s undying hope to prosper amid the beatings of the present global crisis but it also affirms that your people had already burned the corpse of a culture that disrupts the birthing of a new democratic America. Your victory has demonstrated that there is hope as long as we do not stop from dreaming to change our country and world into a better place to live in. We wish you strength and sustaining fortitude as you work to change America and the world.
We, the members of the United Youth for Peace and Development (UNYPAD), a broad coalition of peace advocates in Mindanao, note and applaud your commitment to supporting the cause of peace and security around the world. As you work for change in your country, we heartily behoove upon you to look at us with charity and mercy in Mindanao, an Island which has been soaked in blood and sufferings brought about by decades of ferments.
The Bangsamoro Struggle
The age-old struggle of the Bangsamoro people in Mindanao to fight for freedom from Filipino domination and for self-determination has been the second oldest internal conflict in the world, next to Sudan, and the largest movement in Southeast Asia.
This armed conflict is rooted from the Spanish colonial period when the Bangsamoro people had been deprived of their basic rights as a sovereign people. They were marginalized in their own homeland when the colonial government supported the influx of Christian settlers from Luzon and Visayas in Mindanao. This flared up the conflict between Muslims and Christians in Mindanao and resulted to centuries of open hostilities between the government and the Muslim rebels.
It is sad to note that this war had already claimed thousands of lives, devastated millions of properties, fostered hatred between and among tribes, and destroyed the stability of the national politics and economy.
How the Mindanao Conflict is Handled by the Current Administration
The administration of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo initiated the peace talks with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) as an attempt to forge a viable peace agreement that would address the legitimate grievances of the Bangsamoro people. This resulted to the forging of the Tripoli Peace Agreement in 2001 between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP) and the MILF revolving around three substantive agenda: security, rehabilitation and ancestral domain.
The peace talks between the GRP and the MILF suffered from various setbacks. The most recent obstacle happened on August 5, 2008 when the signing of the GRP-MILF Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) in Kuala Lumpur has been suspended by the Supreme Court. The MOA-AD could have been a breakthrough towards the attainment of the long-held aspirations of the Bangsamoro people for Freedom. This was however struck down by the Supreme Court in just a short period of three months, totally abandoning the long years of painstaking negotiations between the GRP and the MILF.
The Philippine government has dissolved its negotiating panel, withdrawn its commitment to sign a peace instrument, and shifted the paradigm of peace process within the context of disarmament, demobilization and rehabilitation (DDR).
Now, Mindanao has plunged further into a savage armed conflict. The fighting between the government and MILF forces has been intensified. Mindanao is carrying the heaviest cost of the armed conflict and is now suffering from a very serious humanitarian crisis that already displaced more than 500,000 civilians.
Our Appeal
We know that you are not alien to the nature of the war that is being waged in this Island for you had lived and worked in Asia, and, therefore, you are aware of the problems here. We know that you could do something to put an end to the armed conflict in Mindanao and usher this Island finally into the era of peace and prosperity.
We, then, heartily appeal to you to directly intervene to help us in our effort to convince the GRP and the MILF to go back to the negotiating table and eventually ink the MOA. The application of military solution in resolving the Mindanao conflict will only prolong the agony of the communities directly affected by war. Your direct intervention is also of significant value to help us influence the United Nations to send its peacekeeping forces in Mindanao to help us stabilize the situations on the ground.
We behoove upon you to hear the cries of our people.
Sincerely,
Sgd. RAHIB L. KUDTO
National President
Sgd. BADRUDIN T. ABAS
National Vice President for Internal Affairs
Sgd. ANWAR A. UPAHM
National Vice President for External Affairs
Sgd. SAMSODIN C. AMELLA
Executive Secretary General
Sgd. ANWAR Z. SALUWANG
Asst. Executive Secretary General for Finance
Sgd. TAHER G. SOLAIMAN
Asst. Executive Secretary General for Administration
We are quoting below the said letter:
In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful
UNITED YOUTH FOR PEACE AND DEVELOPMENT, INC. (UNYPAD)
Datu Liwa Candao St., Shariff Kabunsuan, RH-3, Cotabato City
S.E.C. Reg. No. CN 200428294
08 November 2008
His Excellency Barack Hussein Obama
President
United States of America
His Excellency,
We join the people in your country and around the world in congratulating you for your victory in the newly-concluded presidential elections held in your great country.
Indeed, your victory is a great moment in the history of the United States not only because it represents your people’s undying hope to prosper amid the beatings of the present global crisis but it also affirms that your people had already burned the corpse of a culture that disrupts the birthing of a new democratic America. Your victory has demonstrated that there is hope as long as we do not stop from dreaming to change our country and world into a better place to live in. We wish you strength and sustaining fortitude as you work to change America and the world.
We, the members of the United Youth for Peace and Development (UNYPAD), a broad coalition of peace advocates in Mindanao, note and applaud your commitment to supporting the cause of peace and security around the world. As you work for change in your country, we heartily behoove upon you to look at us with charity and mercy in Mindanao, an Island which has been soaked in blood and sufferings brought about by decades of ferments.
The Bangsamoro Struggle
The age-old struggle of the Bangsamoro people in Mindanao to fight for freedom from Filipino domination and for self-determination has been the second oldest internal conflict in the world, next to Sudan, and the largest movement in Southeast Asia.
This armed conflict is rooted from the Spanish colonial period when the Bangsamoro people had been deprived of their basic rights as a sovereign people. They were marginalized in their own homeland when the colonial government supported the influx of Christian settlers from Luzon and Visayas in Mindanao. This flared up the conflict between Muslims and Christians in Mindanao and resulted to centuries of open hostilities between the government and the Muslim rebels.
It is sad to note that this war had already claimed thousands of lives, devastated millions of properties, fostered hatred between and among tribes, and destroyed the stability of the national politics and economy.
How the Mindanao Conflict is Handled by the Current Administration
The administration of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo initiated the peace talks with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) as an attempt to forge a viable peace agreement that would address the legitimate grievances of the Bangsamoro people. This resulted to the forging of the Tripoli Peace Agreement in 2001 between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP) and the MILF revolving around three substantive agenda: security, rehabilitation and ancestral domain.
The peace talks between the GRP and the MILF suffered from various setbacks. The most recent obstacle happened on August 5, 2008 when the signing of the GRP-MILF Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) in Kuala Lumpur has been suspended by the Supreme Court. The MOA-AD could have been a breakthrough towards the attainment of the long-held aspirations of the Bangsamoro people for Freedom. This was however struck down by the Supreme Court in just a short period of three months, totally abandoning the long years of painstaking negotiations between the GRP and the MILF.
The Philippine government has dissolved its negotiating panel, withdrawn its commitment to sign a peace instrument, and shifted the paradigm of peace process within the context of disarmament, demobilization and rehabilitation (DDR).
Now, Mindanao has plunged further into a savage armed conflict. The fighting between the government and MILF forces has been intensified. Mindanao is carrying the heaviest cost of the armed conflict and is now suffering from a very serious humanitarian crisis that already displaced more than 500,000 civilians.
Our Appeal
We know that you are not alien to the nature of the war that is being waged in this Island for you had lived and worked in Asia, and, therefore, you are aware of the problems here. We know that you could do something to put an end to the armed conflict in Mindanao and usher this Island finally into the era of peace and prosperity.
We, then, heartily appeal to you to directly intervene to help us in our effort to convince the GRP and the MILF to go back to the negotiating table and eventually ink the MOA. The application of military solution in resolving the Mindanao conflict will only prolong the agony of the communities directly affected by war. Your direct intervention is also of significant value to help us influence the United Nations to send its peacekeeping forces in Mindanao to help us stabilize the situations on the ground.
We behoove upon you to hear the cries of our people.
Sincerely,
Sgd. RAHIB L. KUDTO
National President
Sgd. BADRUDIN T. ABAS
National Vice President for Internal Affairs
Sgd. ANWAR A. UPAHM
National Vice President for External Affairs
Sgd. SAMSODIN C. AMELLA
Executive Secretary General
Sgd. ANWAR Z. SALUWANG
Asst. Executive Secretary General for Finance
Sgd. TAHER G. SOLAIMAN
Asst. Executive Secretary General for Administration
COMMENTARY: Thank you, Supreme Court of the Philippines
By: Atty. Fatimah Bin Guerra
Thank you, Honorable Chief Justice and Associate Justices for showing us how justice works in this country. Thank you for issuing the TRO on the MOA-AD, for showing to the Filipino people how fast you can actually act upon cases filed by powerful politicians like Emmanuel Piñol and Celso Lobregat. Indeed, the speediness at which you have acted on this case was extraordinary and phenomenal. In 3 months time, you have struck down a document which took more than 10 years of painstaking negotiations to accomplish.
Thank you, too, for helping MILF base Commanders Ameril Ombra Kato and Bravo recruit more fighters and supporters. Your decision vindicated what they have always believed from the very beginning -- that this government will never be sincere in talking peace with the Bangsamoro people. Now we are faced with the world's longest running armed conflict that sees no resolution in sight. Thank you for condemning Mindanao as the next Afghanistan or Darfur in Asia.
As you said, you went farther to rule on the constitutionality of the MOA-AD as it involves a matter of transcendental importance. And for the guidance of everyone, you struck down the MOA as unconstitutional. Scouring on the voluminous pages of your decision including the separate, concurring and dissenting opinions, one could not help but ask, "where is the guidance?"
Thank you, Supreme Court for making us realize that we still have a lot to learn from the history of Mindanao. That we still have a long way to go in healing the wounds of the past, in correcting the historical wrong committed against the Bangsamoro and indigenous peoples. Thank you if you can agree that some of you could use a great deal of refresher in the History class of Prof. Rudy Rodil, a well respected historian and scholar who by the way is now a persona non grata in his own home city in Iligan. But that's not something new. Jesus Christ himself was also a persona non grata in Nazareth.
Hear ye, hear ye, Supreme Court of the Philippines, thank you for making us understand that the minority definitely has no place in this country. This was glaring in the series of Oral Arguments where you generously provided ample time to lawyers, politicians, mayors, senators and generals to argue against the MOA-AD. Yet, no single Moro soul has ever been allowed to speak about her own identity, the desecration of her culture, the militarization of her community and the blatant discrimination that she feels as a Muslim Filipino. Is this the kind of equality that the blind-folded lady of justice bears? What an ostentatious display of fair play, Honorable Justices!
Thank you also for reigniting the fire of animosity and hatred between Christians and Muslims. The resurgence of fanatical and anti-Muslim local vigilante called Ilaga came not as a surprise. Local politicians, exploiting your decision, unleashed this menace in order to curb the Bangsamoro's quest for justice. Thanks to the 10,000 shotguns the other Puno in the DILG distributed to arm the civilians, the theater of communal violence in the ‘70s is now showing again. Can Puno “TRO” the other Puno, too?
Thank you for helping these politicians secure their interests over vast tracts of lands they have grabbed from the Moro people. By the way, land grabbing was "legal" because it was in accordance with the Public Land Act which "legitimized" the dispossession of the non-Christian tribes from their ancestral lands. Never mind if it is not just, notwithstanding if it is not fair, for as long as it is legal and in accordance with the Constitution.
Thank you for making us understand why in the JPEPA case, you upheld the exercise of executive privilege by Malacañang while in the MOA-AD it simply cannot be. Vis-a vis the interests of superpowers like Japan and the US, it's okay to compromise sovereignty, we are their puppets anyway. But with regards to the Bangsamoro people, that's another story. Our business interest over their ancestral domain is of such transcendental importance to these Senators, Congressmen, Mayors, Generals, Lawyers, Vice Governors cum owners of mining, logging, banana, pineapple and jatropha plantations in Mindanao – they cannot be compromised.
Thank you for affirming that we are indeed one country, one people, one nation. As such, one cannot help but wonder why the military indiscriminately drop bombs over civilian communities in Mindanao akin to the carpet bombings in Iraq. If you stubbornly insist that the Bangsamoro people cannot be allowed to dismember from this Republic, you should at least treat them like they are members of this country in the first place.
But alas! Thanks that seven of you, Honorable Justices, will be retiring next year. Whether it is this court or next year’s full Arroyo court, it doesn’t matter to ordinary Moros, lumads and settlers anymore. There is no place for them in your court anyway.
In the meantime, there are more urgent tasks to do in Mindanao -- attending to the sick, burying the dead, consoling the orphans, securing our homes and communities. As children slowly die of hunger and diarrhea in congested evacuation centers, they ask? “Why is there war again”. May you take it in your conscience to explain to them how the constitution is far more important than the innocent lives of hundreds of thousands of people. They pay such a high price for your Constitution. You should thank them for that, Supreme Court of the Philippines.
(You may send your comments and reactions to fatimahbinguerra@yahoo.com.)
Thank you, Honorable Chief Justice and Associate Justices for showing us how justice works in this country. Thank you for issuing the TRO on the MOA-AD, for showing to the Filipino people how fast you can actually act upon cases filed by powerful politicians like Emmanuel Piñol and Celso Lobregat. Indeed, the speediness at which you have acted on this case was extraordinary and phenomenal. In 3 months time, you have struck down a document which took more than 10 years of painstaking negotiations to accomplish.
Thank you, too, for helping MILF base Commanders Ameril Ombra Kato and Bravo recruit more fighters and supporters. Your decision vindicated what they have always believed from the very beginning -- that this government will never be sincere in talking peace with the Bangsamoro people. Now we are faced with the world's longest running armed conflict that sees no resolution in sight. Thank you for condemning Mindanao as the next Afghanistan or Darfur in Asia.
As you said, you went farther to rule on the constitutionality of the MOA-AD as it involves a matter of transcendental importance. And for the guidance of everyone, you struck down the MOA as unconstitutional. Scouring on the voluminous pages of your decision including the separate, concurring and dissenting opinions, one could not help but ask, "where is the guidance?"
Thank you, Supreme Court for making us realize that we still have a lot to learn from the history of Mindanao. That we still have a long way to go in healing the wounds of the past, in correcting the historical wrong committed against the Bangsamoro and indigenous peoples. Thank you if you can agree that some of you could use a great deal of refresher in the History class of Prof. Rudy Rodil, a well respected historian and scholar who by the way is now a persona non grata in his own home city in Iligan. But that's not something new. Jesus Christ himself was also a persona non grata in Nazareth.
Hear ye, hear ye, Supreme Court of the Philippines, thank you for making us understand that the minority definitely has no place in this country. This was glaring in the series of Oral Arguments where you generously provided ample time to lawyers, politicians, mayors, senators and generals to argue against the MOA-AD. Yet, no single Moro soul has ever been allowed to speak about her own identity, the desecration of her culture, the militarization of her community and the blatant discrimination that she feels as a Muslim Filipino. Is this the kind of equality that the blind-folded lady of justice bears? What an ostentatious display of fair play, Honorable Justices!
Thank you also for reigniting the fire of animosity and hatred between Christians and Muslims. The resurgence of fanatical and anti-Muslim local vigilante called Ilaga came not as a surprise. Local politicians, exploiting your decision, unleashed this menace in order to curb the Bangsamoro's quest for justice. Thanks to the 10,000 shotguns the other Puno in the DILG distributed to arm the civilians, the theater of communal violence in the ‘70s is now showing again. Can Puno “TRO” the other Puno, too?
Thank you for helping these politicians secure their interests over vast tracts of lands they have grabbed from the Moro people. By the way, land grabbing was "legal" because it was in accordance with the Public Land Act which "legitimized" the dispossession of the non-Christian tribes from their ancestral lands. Never mind if it is not just, notwithstanding if it is not fair, for as long as it is legal and in accordance with the Constitution.
Thank you for making us understand why in the JPEPA case, you upheld the exercise of executive privilege by Malacañang while in the MOA-AD it simply cannot be. Vis-a vis the interests of superpowers like Japan and the US, it's okay to compromise sovereignty, we are their puppets anyway. But with regards to the Bangsamoro people, that's another story. Our business interest over their ancestral domain is of such transcendental importance to these Senators, Congressmen, Mayors, Generals, Lawyers, Vice Governors cum owners of mining, logging, banana, pineapple and jatropha plantations in Mindanao – they cannot be compromised.
Thank you for affirming that we are indeed one country, one people, one nation. As such, one cannot help but wonder why the military indiscriminately drop bombs over civilian communities in Mindanao akin to the carpet bombings in Iraq. If you stubbornly insist that the Bangsamoro people cannot be allowed to dismember from this Republic, you should at least treat them like they are members of this country in the first place.
But alas! Thanks that seven of you, Honorable Justices, will be retiring next year. Whether it is this court or next year’s full Arroyo court, it doesn’t matter to ordinary Moros, lumads and settlers anymore. There is no place for them in your court anyway.
In the meantime, there are more urgent tasks to do in Mindanao -- attending to the sick, burying the dead, consoling the orphans, securing our homes and communities. As children slowly die of hunger and diarrhea in congested evacuation centers, they ask? “Why is there war again”. May you take it in your conscience to explain to them how the constitution is far more important than the innocent lives of hundreds of thousands of people. They pay such a high price for your Constitution. You should thank them for that, Supreme Court of the Philippines.
(You may send your comments and reactions to fatimahbinguerra@yahoo.com.)
Saturday, November 8, 2008
NEWS: Peace advocates ask GMA, MILF to stop war
Peace advocates appeal to government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) to stop the armed hostilities in Mindanao after the Supreme Court junked the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) for being unconstitutional.
Alarmed over the gravity of humanitarian crisis and the deteriorating condition of these war-ravaged areas, members of the Mindanao Peaceweavers (MPW) wrote President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and MILF Chairman Al Haj Murad Ebrahim to stop the armed conflict of both parties and return to the negotiating table.
Hundreds of thousands of civilians were affected after the Arroyo government ordered the Philippine armed forces for punitive actions against so-called rogue elements of the MILF. Their appeal letter wrote: "there are now more than half a million internally displaced persons who are bearing the brunt of the ongoing armed conflict."
The advocates further wrote that the staggering figure does not count yet the casualties on both sides of the combatants. Also, this excludes the hidden and long-term effects of the violence on women, children and the youth.
Signatories of the letter asked President Arroyo what happened to her own declaration on the primacy of the peace process as contained in her Executive Order 2003. They appealed for her to immediately declare a suspension of military operations (SOMO) to sober up the situation and allow the mechanisms on the ceasefire agreement with the MILF to work again.
They likewise appealed to Chairman Murad to demonstrate his firm resolve and commitment to peaceful settlement of the Mindanao conflict by reining in all his forces and constituents and in finding a just resolution on alleged violations of the so-called
rogue elements.
The MPW told both Arroyo and Murad that violence committed by any parties in conflict cannot be resolved by another, if not increased form of violence and that such is a never-ending cycle that will only bring the country to the brink of destruction.
Hopeful of Arroyo's recent overtures for the resumption of the peace talks, the MPW said that unless this is accompanied by positive gestures of peace such as the immediate declaration of SOMO, they will be compelled to appeal for United Nations intervention to avert a worst humanitarian crisis in Mindanao.
For Murad, they proposed that MILF gives its share in creating an atmosphere for dialogue and the conditions to tread the tedious path to peace.
"War is not an option. As peace advocates we take it upon ourselves to face up to the challenge of building and uniting for peace, especially in light of the surfacing of biases and prejudices among and between peoples of Mindanao and the rest of the citizenry, following the MOA-AD debacle," the letter concluded.
MPW represents a network of peace constituency coming from non-government organizations, academe, religious, human rights groups, peoples organizations and grassroots communities which work for a peaceful resolution of the conflict in Mindanao. Among its members are the AGONG Network, Mindanao Peoples Caucus, Consortium of Bangsamoro Civil Society, Mindanao Peace Advocates Conference, Mindanao Peoples Peace Movement, Mindanao Solidarity Network and Peace Advocates Zamboanga, Initiatives for International Dialogue (IID), Saligan-Mindanaw and Catholic Relief Services (CRS).
Alarmed over the gravity of humanitarian crisis and the deteriorating condition of these war-ravaged areas, members of the Mindanao Peaceweavers (MPW) wrote President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and MILF Chairman Al Haj Murad Ebrahim to stop the armed conflict of both parties and return to the negotiating table.
Hundreds of thousands of civilians were affected after the Arroyo government ordered the Philippine armed forces for punitive actions against so-called rogue elements of the MILF. Their appeal letter wrote: "there are now more than half a million internally displaced persons who are bearing the brunt of the ongoing armed conflict."
The advocates further wrote that the staggering figure does not count yet the casualties on both sides of the combatants. Also, this excludes the hidden and long-term effects of the violence on women, children and the youth.
Signatories of the letter asked President Arroyo what happened to her own declaration on the primacy of the peace process as contained in her Executive Order 2003. They appealed for her to immediately declare a suspension of military operations (SOMO) to sober up the situation and allow the mechanisms on the ceasefire agreement with the MILF to work again.
They likewise appealed to Chairman Murad to demonstrate his firm resolve and commitment to peaceful settlement of the Mindanao conflict by reining in all his forces and constituents and in finding a just resolution on alleged violations of the so-called
rogue elements.
The MPW told both Arroyo and Murad that violence committed by any parties in conflict cannot be resolved by another, if not increased form of violence and that such is a never-ending cycle that will only bring the country to the brink of destruction.
Hopeful of Arroyo's recent overtures for the resumption of the peace talks, the MPW said that unless this is accompanied by positive gestures of peace such as the immediate declaration of SOMO, they will be compelled to appeal for United Nations intervention to avert a worst humanitarian crisis in Mindanao.
For Murad, they proposed that MILF gives its share in creating an atmosphere for dialogue and the conditions to tread the tedious path to peace.
"War is not an option. As peace advocates we take it upon ourselves to face up to the challenge of building and uniting for peace, especially in light of the surfacing of biases and prejudices among and between peoples of Mindanao and the rest of the citizenry, following the MOA-AD debacle," the letter concluded.
MPW represents a network of peace constituency coming from non-government organizations, academe, religious, human rights groups, peoples organizations and grassroots communities which work for a peaceful resolution of the conflict in Mindanao. Among its members are the AGONG Network, Mindanao Peoples Caucus, Consortium of Bangsamoro Civil Society, Mindanao Peace Advocates Conference, Mindanao Peoples Peace Movement, Mindanao Solidarity Network and Peace Advocates Zamboanga, Initiatives for International Dialogue (IID), Saligan-Mindanaw and Catholic Relief Services (CRS).
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
COMMENTARY: REVISITING MOA-AD: Mockery of the Century
By: Mike G. Kulat
The recent squabbles within the whole instrumentalities of the government and the deplorable conditions of over half a million civilians brought about by the aborted signing of the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) between the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) and the Government of Republic of the Philippines (GRP) scheduled on August 5, 2008 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia could be considered the greatest drama in the annals of history.
The whole drama intended to mock the centuries old Bangsamoro problem only exposed the rotten system and complete ignorance of those holding the reign of this government. This defect no doubt rendered it inept to manage a complex problem such as that of the Bangsamoro problem. The matter only justifies doubt and clamor of the people of decaying system in the past decades. People had long been restive of ever deteriorating political, economic and socio-cultural condition under different regimes. This social unrest consequently manifested by the ouster of the dictator Ferdinand Marcos, the unaccounted numbers of coup d’etat on the Aquino Administration, the ejection, conviction and imprisonment of Joseph Estrada of plunder case and the present shaky government of the Arroyo administration due to calls of anomalies ranging from illegitimacy, electoral fraud and human rights violations. On top of the above scenario, the problem in Mindanao surpassed all these regimes marred by sporadic peace and continuing war in Mindanao.
First, going back to the MOA-AD or that “piece of paper” as “nothing more than an elaborate collection of ‘wish-lists” as termed by veteran constitutionalist Fr. Joaquin Bernas and or “agreement of intent” as said by Archbishop Orlando Quevedo that shaked and brought about the exposure of ignorance and disorder that violated the doctrine of separation of powers among the three branches of the government – the Executive, Legislative and Judicial. Or the “MOA-AD: Build not Destroy” said Prof. Julkipli Wadi. But how all the mess started?
A brief review of how the branches of the government works under the principle of separation of powers and as taught to us by Fr. Joaquin Bernas is that: the MOA-AD is a “political question” which is under the prerogative and power of the Executive Branch. As quoted, the Supreme Court said in earlier case “that the doctrine of separation of powers calls for the departments (executive, legislative and judicial) being left alone to discharge their duties as they see it fit.”
After the Executive should have done an act or in the case of the MOA-AD should have been signed, the Legislative Branch should now intervene by formulating enabling laws to implement that act or deal entered into by the executive branch.
Only after the Executive and Legislative should have done the signing and formulated enabling laws respectively, should the Judicial Branch could interpose when “properly challenged in an appropriate legal proceeding.”
Recalling back the mess, it started when the Legislative Branch represented by Senators Mar Roxas and Franklin Drilon acting with their local political interest groups led by North Cotabato Vice Governor Emmanuel Pinol went on different media outlets raising hell of judgmental and irresponsible pronouncement on the unconstitutionality of the MOA-AD, a legislative action seen by laymen as overlying the function of executive and judicial departments.
Adding fuel to the fire of confusion and shocking to rightly guided intellectuals was when the Supreme Court issued the Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) on August 4, 2008 restraining the GRP Negotiating Panel from signing the MOA-AD – an act which was premature and pre-emption of a supposed separate duty of the executive branch. This happened despite the pronouncement of one of the justices in their oral arguments that “..the Supeme Court is not a trier of facts.” Is MOA-AD not considered as facts, since there was no act of signing yet nor a law passed related to it? The Supreme Court is interpreter of laws. And Solicitor General Agnes Devanadera in one of her TV interviews said, “How can the Supreme Court declare unconstitutional a matter which was not yet consummated?” Then what did they interpret in the MOA-AD?
Completing the muddle is that after the Supreme Court decided to continue its hearing and conclude its decision on the MOA-AD, the Executive Branch announced that whatever is the decision of the court, it doesn’t matter to them. They gave pronouncements that they will never pursue signing of the MOA-AD in its present form or any other form. This is an act of total disregard and disrespect of the executive branch on the highest court of the land. Good enough for after all the Supreme Court started all the mess by pre-empting the acts of executive and legislative branches.
To sum up, the sham that shows the real character of this regime, the shameful picture of the Philippine government had been revealed in the backyard of a respected and proud capital city of Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia. For it was done at a time when all the diplomats, dignitaries of other countries, the representatives of the Organization of Islamic Countries including the US Ambassador to the Philippines Kristie Kenny and many more were all set for witnessing a historic ending of centuries old problem of the Bangsamoro, only to be informed that no signing would take place.
In other words, this shameful mockery of the Bangsamoro is all thrown back to the Philippine government and witnessed by the international communities which could be considered a milestone of treachery of a rotten system.
The final consequence of the MOA-AD misfortune is to paraphrase a title of issue raised by Atty. Soliman Santos Jr. which says: “The MOA is dead! Long Live MOA!” Yes the MOA-AD for the government is already a dead issue. Nevertheless, the incident will forever leave as trade mark of disorder and weak government and a worse treachery of the Philippine government.
For the Bangsamoro, “Long Live MOA”, for it doesn’t matter whether it is signed or not, but what is definite is it already become a significant landmark in the centuries-old struggle for self determination of the Moro People. It will become a momentous rallying point in the continuance of their aspiration for recognition as unique and distinct people. The distressing event is a blessing in disguise for it gave the Bangsamoro a time to re-think and search for other options. It could also be a fresh opportunity to the MILF as armed revolutionary movement to choose another option if peaceful means is not possible or shift their struggle to higher pedestal since a solution within the ambit of Philippine context is seemingly impossible.
The recent squabbles within the whole instrumentalities of the government and the deplorable conditions of over half a million civilians brought about by the aborted signing of the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) between the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) and the Government of Republic of the Philippines (GRP) scheduled on August 5, 2008 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia could be considered the greatest drama in the annals of history.
The whole drama intended to mock the centuries old Bangsamoro problem only exposed the rotten system and complete ignorance of those holding the reign of this government. This defect no doubt rendered it inept to manage a complex problem such as that of the Bangsamoro problem. The matter only justifies doubt and clamor of the people of decaying system in the past decades. People had long been restive of ever deteriorating political, economic and socio-cultural condition under different regimes. This social unrest consequently manifested by the ouster of the dictator Ferdinand Marcos, the unaccounted numbers of coup d’etat on the Aquino Administration, the ejection, conviction and imprisonment of Joseph Estrada of plunder case and the present shaky government of the Arroyo administration due to calls of anomalies ranging from illegitimacy, electoral fraud and human rights violations. On top of the above scenario, the problem in Mindanao surpassed all these regimes marred by sporadic peace and continuing war in Mindanao.
First, going back to the MOA-AD or that “piece of paper” as “nothing more than an elaborate collection of ‘wish-lists” as termed by veteran constitutionalist Fr. Joaquin Bernas and or “agreement of intent” as said by Archbishop Orlando Quevedo that shaked and brought about the exposure of ignorance and disorder that violated the doctrine of separation of powers among the three branches of the government – the Executive, Legislative and Judicial. Or the “MOA-AD: Build not Destroy” said Prof. Julkipli Wadi. But how all the mess started?
A brief review of how the branches of the government works under the principle of separation of powers and as taught to us by Fr. Joaquin Bernas is that: the MOA-AD is a “political question” which is under the prerogative and power of the Executive Branch. As quoted, the Supreme Court said in earlier case “that the doctrine of separation of powers calls for the departments (executive, legislative and judicial) being left alone to discharge their duties as they see it fit.”
After the Executive should have done an act or in the case of the MOA-AD should have been signed, the Legislative Branch should now intervene by formulating enabling laws to implement that act or deal entered into by the executive branch.
Only after the Executive and Legislative should have done the signing and formulated enabling laws respectively, should the Judicial Branch could interpose when “properly challenged in an appropriate legal proceeding.”
Recalling back the mess, it started when the Legislative Branch represented by Senators Mar Roxas and Franklin Drilon acting with their local political interest groups led by North Cotabato Vice Governor Emmanuel Pinol went on different media outlets raising hell of judgmental and irresponsible pronouncement on the unconstitutionality of the MOA-AD, a legislative action seen by laymen as overlying the function of executive and judicial departments.
Adding fuel to the fire of confusion and shocking to rightly guided intellectuals was when the Supreme Court issued the Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) on August 4, 2008 restraining the GRP Negotiating Panel from signing the MOA-AD – an act which was premature and pre-emption of a supposed separate duty of the executive branch. This happened despite the pronouncement of one of the justices in their oral arguments that “..the Supeme Court is not a trier of facts.” Is MOA-AD not considered as facts, since there was no act of signing yet nor a law passed related to it? The Supreme Court is interpreter of laws. And Solicitor General Agnes Devanadera in one of her TV interviews said, “How can the Supreme Court declare unconstitutional a matter which was not yet consummated?” Then what did they interpret in the MOA-AD?
Completing the muddle is that after the Supreme Court decided to continue its hearing and conclude its decision on the MOA-AD, the Executive Branch announced that whatever is the decision of the court, it doesn’t matter to them. They gave pronouncements that they will never pursue signing of the MOA-AD in its present form or any other form. This is an act of total disregard and disrespect of the executive branch on the highest court of the land. Good enough for after all the Supreme Court started all the mess by pre-empting the acts of executive and legislative branches.
To sum up, the sham that shows the real character of this regime, the shameful picture of the Philippine government had been revealed in the backyard of a respected and proud capital city of Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia. For it was done at a time when all the diplomats, dignitaries of other countries, the representatives of the Organization of Islamic Countries including the US Ambassador to the Philippines Kristie Kenny and many more were all set for witnessing a historic ending of centuries old problem of the Bangsamoro, only to be informed that no signing would take place.
In other words, this shameful mockery of the Bangsamoro is all thrown back to the Philippine government and witnessed by the international communities which could be considered a milestone of treachery of a rotten system.
The final consequence of the MOA-AD misfortune is to paraphrase a title of issue raised by Atty. Soliman Santos Jr. which says: “The MOA is dead! Long Live MOA!” Yes the MOA-AD for the government is already a dead issue. Nevertheless, the incident will forever leave as trade mark of disorder and weak government and a worse treachery of the Philippine government.
For the Bangsamoro, “Long Live MOA”, for it doesn’t matter whether it is signed or not, but what is definite is it already become a significant landmark in the centuries-old struggle for self determination of the Moro People. It will become a momentous rallying point in the continuance of their aspiration for recognition as unique and distinct people. The distressing event is a blessing in disguise for it gave the Bangsamoro a time to re-think and search for other options. It could also be a fresh opportunity to the MILF as armed revolutionary movement to choose another option if peaceful means is not possible or shift their struggle to higher pedestal since a solution within the ambit of Philippine context is seemingly impossible.
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
NEWS: Army soldier injured in armed clash with NPA in Cotabato
By Taher G. Solaiman
An army soldier identified as Private First Class Ramil T. Flores was wounded in an armed encounter with New People’s Army (NPA) rebels last Sunday evening in Sitio (sub-village) Talahek, Barangay (village) Bacong, Tulunan, Cotabato, a military officer said today.
The soldiers from the 57th Infantry Battalion were conducting patrol when they chanced upon about 30 NPA rebels, said Army Major Randolph Cabangbang, spokesperson of the Eastern Mindanao Command.
Cabangbang said that the wounded soldier was already brought to an undisclosed hospital.
Then, the military conducted air strikes and mortar shelling, Cabangbang also said.
An army soldier identified as Private First Class Ramil T. Flores was wounded in an armed encounter with New People’s Army (NPA) rebels last Sunday evening in Sitio (sub-village) Talahek, Barangay (village) Bacong, Tulunan, Cotabato, a military officer said today.
The soldiers from the 57th Infantry Battalion were conducting patrol when they chanced upon about 30 NPA rebels, said Army Major Randolph Cabangbang, spokesperson of the Eastern Mindanao Command.
Cabangbang said that the wounded soldier was already brought to an undisclosed hospital.
Then, the military conducted air strikes and mortar shelling, Cabangbang also said.
Monday, November 3, 2008
COMMENTARY: Another Rejoinder to "The Philippines: The Impact of Exclusion on the Moro Peace Process"
By Amay Muamar
The best persons to explain why the Indigenous Peoples (IPs) are "shortchanged" in the MILF-GRP consensus points (MOA-AD) are no other than Ms. Paraguya and also Mr. Saliling. Did these two IP leaders read the MOA-AD? Did they have the feeling that the IPs will eventually lose 1 million hectares of their ancestral lands? Did the two IP leaders sell the rights of the IPs to the BJE? If yes, why did they not oppose it? I know Mr. Saliling will fight to the last drop of his holy blood to defend the rights of the IPs. And Ms. Paraguya, a very intelligent and articulate IP-woman leader will not also allow the IPs to lose their rights.
There may be something being brewed by "pro-IP" people to sow malicious intrigue between the Moro and IPs. The Moro had not taken the lands of the IPs. It is the other people who had and will continue to...
Lest you don't know, the Moro and the IPs are the victims and the other people will just be too happy to see the Moro (Abdul) and IPs (Saliling) fighting against each other. After all, ”Divide and Occupy” is still the best strategy ....
The best persons to explain why the Indigenous Peoples (IPs) are "shortchanged" in the MILF-GRP consensus points (MOA-AD) are no other than Ms. Paraguya and also Mr. Saliling. Did these two IP leaders read the MOA-AD? Did they have the feeling that the IPs will eventually lose 1 million hectares of their ancestral lands? Did the two IP leaders sell the rights of the IPs to the BJE? If yes, why did they not oppose it? I know Mr. Saliling will fight to the last drop of his holy blood to defend the rights of the IPs. And Ms. Paraguya, a very intelligent and articulate IP-woman leader will not also allow the IPs to lose their rights.
There may be something being brewed by "pro-IP" people to sow malicious intrigue between the Moro and IPs. The Moro had not taken the lands of the IPs. It is the other people who had and will continue to...
Lest you don't know, the Moro and the IPs are the victims and the other people will just be too happy to see the Moro (Abdul) and IPs (Saliling) fighting against each other. After all, ”Divide and Occupy” is still the best strategy ....
Sunday, November 2, 2008
COMMENTARY: A Rejoinder to "The Philippines: The Impact of Exclusion on the Moro Peace Process"
This summary is not available. Please
click here to view the post.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
NEWS: International guarantee first before peace talks resumption -- MILF
By Taher G. Solaiman
The Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) is willing to return to the negotiating table when there is "an international guarantee.”
This was the statement given to the media early this week by Ghazali Jaafar, MILF vice chair on political affairs.
“Any bilateral agreement between the government and the MILF should be made binding before the international community and should not be unilaterally disowned by one party,” Jaafar said referring to the aborted signing of the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) on August 5, 2008 that led to series of heavy fightings between government troops and MILF guerrillas in various parts of Mindanao.
Jaafar also expressed the willingness of the MILF to sign and honor a document stating that the MILF will not secede from the Philippines even as he asserted that the government should honor its commitment to give the Bangsamoro people their homeland as stipulated in the MOA-AD.
He identified the European Union (EU) as a possible guarantor in the resumption of the peace talks between the GRP and the MILF.
He also could not help but expressed his pessimism that the MILF cannot get domestic relief from this government.
The Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) is willing to return to the negotiating table when there is "an international guarantee.”
This was the statement given to the media early this week by Ghazali Jaafar, MILF vice chair on political affairs.
“Any bilateral agreement between the government and the MILF should be made binding before the international community and should not be unilaterally disowned by one party,” Jaafar said referring to the aborted signing of the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) on August 5, 2008 that led to series of heavy fightings between government troops and MILF guerrillas in various parts of Mindanao.
Jaafar also expressed the willingness of the MILF to sign and honor a document stating that the MILF will not secede from the Philippines even as he asserted that the government should honor its commitment to give the Bangsamoro people their homeland as stipulated in the MOA-AD.
He identified the European Union (EU) as a possible guarantor in the resumption of the peace talks between the GRP and the MILF.
He also could not help but expressed his pessimism that the MILF cannot get domestic relief from this government.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
NEWS: Moro groups lobby the UN Secretary General for Right to Self-Determination
This summary is not available. Please
click here to view the post.
YOUTH GROUP SEEKS UN INTERVENTION ON MINDANAO SITUATION
Believing that "the situation in Mindanao is now ripe for the direct interventions of the UN peace keeping force to stall the continuing carnage in this Island," the United Youth for Peace and Development, Inc. (UNYPAD) is now seeking the intervention and support of the UN. We are publishing here the letter of the UNYPAD to His Excellency Ban Ki-Moon, the UN Secretary General. Here is the text of the letter:
October 28, 2008
HIS EXCELLENCY BAN KI-MOON
UN Secretary General
The United Nations
Dear His Excellency:
The aborted signing of the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP) and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) on August 5, 2008 at Putrajaya, Malaysia, which a paradigm and framework for the negotiation of the GRP-MILF Comprehensive Agreement Compact, represents a collective people’s failure to seize an opportunity for a just, lasting and comprehensive political solution to the four decades old armed conflict and the Bangsamoro problem in the South of the Philippines. The MOA-AD could have been a breakthrough towards the attainment of the long-held aspirations of the Bangsamoro people for freedom and self-determination, which have longed eluded them as a free and sovereign people at the times of conquest and colonization.
Moreover, the MOA-AD suffered great setback when the Supreme Court, through the prodding of oligarchs and warlords particularly the local politicians representing various vested interests in Mindanao who opposed the MOA-AD based mainly on prejudice, hatred and bigotry against the Bangsamoro people issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) and consequently declared it unconstitutional, which contravened the commitment of the Parties (GRP-MILF) to open up “new formulas” in the search for a negotiated political solution to the armed conflict and the Bangsamoro problem. This aborted signing of the MOA-AD triggered a volatile tension in Mindanao that saw the escalation of a renewed armed conflict that very much threatened the peace process, security and stability since last August of this year
The high hopes on the peace process, of freeing Mindanao from the bondage of fratricidal war are virtually snatched away, as the aborted signing of the document has caused deep frustration among the MILF commanders who have waited for long for a positive result in the peace negotiations including the civilian populations who are embroidered in the conflict areas which have ever since yearned for peace in their communities. Sadly, the conflict in Mindanao has resulted to horizontal violence, killing and maiming of innocent civilians, the destruction of their properties, which include burning of their houses and the heavy displacement it has caused to them. The armed conflict has now displaced more than 500,000 civilians who are presently languishing in makeshift shelters, mostly made up of unfortified tents and burrows, in various evacuation centers. Mindanao is now suffering from a very serious humanitarian crisis and carrying the heaviest costs of the armed conflict.
At present, the military campaign being launched by the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP continued without let up with heavy use of air and ground firepower not only targeting the MILF Forces but it has pounded heavily on the Moro civilian communities in Lanao Norte, Lanao Sur, North Cotabato, Maguindanao, Shariff Kabunsuan and Sarangani provinces in Central Mindanao. Hence, it seriously destroyed the foundation of the peace and development, not to speak of foregone investments in the Mindanao, South of the Philippines. Thus, we, the members of United Youth for Peace and Development (UNYPAD), a broad coalition of peace and development advocates in the Philippines, are exerting all our efforts to call on the government to set aside its vested interests, resist any political pressures and continue to find a viable formula in order to come up with a negotiated political settlement that will finally address the centuries-old Mindanao armed conflict and the Bangsamoro problem.
UNYPAD believes that, through your influential and direct intervention in the Mindanao peace process, you could help us propel the peace process forward. It behooves upon you to listen to the plaints of widows and orphans and the cries of people longing for peace that they may fully celebrate their human security which is free from fears and dangers. It is on this note that we respectfully request your intervention and support as chief of the most coveted position of the United Nations. The situation in Mindanao is now ripe for the direct interventions of the UN peace keeping force to stall the continuing carnage in this Island. Knowing your uncompromising adherence to the universality of human rights, we are very confident that you will help us in our efforts to put an end to this seemingly genocidal war in Mindanao.
Thank you and more power to you and your peers.
Sincerely,
(Sgd.) RAHIB L. KUDTO
National President
(Sgd.) ANWAR A. UPAHM
Nat’l Vice President for External Affairs
(Sgd.) BADRUDIN T. ABAS
Nat’l Vice President for Internal Affairs
(Sgd.) MAHDIE C. AMELLA
Secretary General
(Sgd.) ANWAR Z. SALUWANG
Deputy Secretary General for Finance
(Sgd.) TAHER G. SOLAIMAN
Deputy Secretary General for Administration
October 28, 2008
HIS EXCELLENCY BAN KI-MOON
UN Secretary General
The United Nations
Dear His Excellency:
The aborted signing of the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP) and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) on August 5, 2008 at Putrajaya, Malaysia, which a paradigm and framework for the negotiation of the GRP-MILF Comprehensive Agreement Compact, represents a collective people’s failure to seize an opportunity for a just, lasting and comprehensive political solution to the four decades old armed conflict and the Bangsamoro problem in the South of the Philippines. The MOA-AD could have been a breakthrough towards the attainment of the long-held aspirations of the Bangsamoro people for freedom and self-determination, which have longed eluded them as a free and sovereign people at the times of conquest and colonization.
Moreover, the MOA-AD suffered great setback when the Supreme Court, through the prodding of oligarchs and warlords particularly the local politicians representing various vested interests in Mindanao who opposed the MOA-AD based mainly on prejudice, hatred and bigotry against the Bangsamoro people issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) and consequently declared it unconstitutional, which contravened the commitment of the Parties (GRP-MILF) to open up “new formulas” in the search for a negotiated political solution to the armed conflict and the Bangsamoro problem. This aborted signing of the MOA-AD triggered a volatile tension in Mindanao that saw the escalation of a renewed armed conflict that very much threatened the peace process, security and stability since last August of this year
The high hopes on the peace process, of freeing Mindanao from the bondage of fratricidal war are virtually snatched away, as the aborted signing of the document has caused deep frustration among the MILF commanders who have waited for long for a positive result in the peace negotiations including the civilian populations who are embroidered in the conflict areas which have ever since yearned for peace in their communities. Sadly, the conflict in Mindanao has resulted to horizontal violence, killing and maiming of innocent civilians, the destruction of their properties, which include burning of their houses and the heavy displacement it has caused to them. The armed conflict has now displaced more than 500,000 civilians who are presently languishing in makeshift shelters, mostly made up of unfortified tents and burrows, in various evacuation centers. Mindanao is now suffering from a very serious humanitarian crisis and carrying the heaviest costs of the armed conflict.
At present, the military campaign being launched by the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP continued without let up with heavy use of air and ground firepower not only targeting the MILF Forces but it has pounded heavily on the Moro civilian communities in Lanao Norte, Lanao Sur, North Cotabato, Maguindanao, Shariff Kabunsuan and Sarangani provinces in Central Mindanao. Hence, it seriously destroyed the foundation of the peace and development, not to speak of foregone investments in the Mindanao, South of the Philippines. Thus, we, the members of United Youth for Peace and Development (UNYPAD), a broad coalition of peace and development advocates in the Philippines, are exerting all our efforts to call on the government to set aside its vested interests, resist any political pressures and continue to find a viable formula in order to come up with a negotiated political settlement that will finally address the centuries-old Mindanao armed conflict and the Bangsamoro problem.
UNYPAD believes that, through your influential and direct intervention in the Mindanao peace process, you could help us propel the peace process forward. It behooves upon you to listen to the plaints of widows and orphans and the cries of people longing for peace that they may fully celebrate their human security which is free from fears and dangers. It is on this note that we respectfully request your intervention and support as chief of the most coveted position of the United Nations. The situation in Mindanao is now ripe for the direct interventions of the UN peace keeping force to stall the continuing carnage in this Island. Knowing your uncompromising adherence to the universality of human rights, we are very confident that you will help us in our efforts to put an end to this seemingly genocidal war in Mindanao.
Thank you and more power to you and your peers.
Sincerely,
(Sgd.) RAHIB L. KUDTO
National President
(Sgd.) ANWAR A. UPAHM
Nat’l Vice President for External Affairs
(Sgd.) BADRUDIN T. ABAS
Nat’l Vice President for Internal Affairs
(Sgd.) MAHDIE C. AMELLA
Secretary General
(Sgd.) ANWAR Z. SALUWANG
Deputy Secretary General for Finance
(Sgd.) TAHER G. SOLAIMAN
Deputy Secretary General for Administration
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
