PURSUING
THE PEACE PROCESS
WITH
MUSLIM SEPARATIST REBELS
Executive
Summary
Part I: Defects and
Remedies re MOA-AD and FAB-CAB
1. They sought to foster co-existence between the Muslim and Christian communities by institutionalizing the religious differences between them. Rather than stress the religious differences, the parties should have brought forth instead the cultural communities.
2. They left out of the negotiation process the other major stakeholders, namely the Christian communities, the indigenous peoples, the Southern Sultanates, the local government units, and the MNLF. To ensure a solid peace agreement, the other major stakeholders should be allowed representation and participation.
3. The MOA-AD and the FAB-CAB embodied a one-sided agreement in favor of the MILF, disregarding the equally legitimate interests of the other major stakeholders. To enable the parties with equally legitimate grievances to move forward, all sides concerned must acknowledge that outside the criminal activities, there lies a conflict of equally legitimate rights and interests.
2. They left out of the negotiation process the other major stakeholders, namely the Christian communities, the indigenous peoples, the Southern Sultanates, the local government units, and the MNLF. To ensure a solid peace agreement, the other major stakeholders should be allowed representation and participation.
3. The MOA-AD and the FAB-CAB embodied a one-sided agreement in favor of the MILF, disregarding the equally legitimate interests of the other major stakeholders. To enable the parties with equally legitimate grievances to move forward, all sides concerned must acknowledge that outside the criminal activities, there lies a conflict of equally legitimate rights and interests.
4. The MOA-AD
adopted the false notion that the indigenous peoples were “Moros”
or Muslims. The classification of indigenous peoples as “Bangsamoros”
was unacceptable and non-negotiable.
5. The MOA-AD
distorted settled jurisprudence1
which acknowledged the “native title” of “indigenous peoples”
to their “ancestral lands,” and sought to apply the doctrine to
the “Bangsamoros.”
6. They
acknowledged baseless claims to territorial waters and aerial domain.
7. The MOA-AD
and the FAB-CAB were clear about how the proposed juridical entity
would derogate against the 1987 Constitution, but vague about the
parties' compliance with existing constitutional processes in
“effecting the necessary changes to the legal framework.”
Part II:
Proposed Consensus Points re New Peace Agreement
1.
Recognition of the homeland of the various ethnic groups (i.e.
Iranun, Maguindanao, Maranao, Samal, Tausug, Yakan, etc.) the
majority of whom has embraced Islam.
2. Establishment of integrated regional offices or chartered
regional authorities for the homeland of the various ethnic groups
(i.e. Iranun, Maguindanao, Maranao, Samal, Tausug, Yakan, etc.) the
majority of whom has embraced Islam.
3. Delegation of full executive powers and rule-making powers to the
regional government office or chartered regional authority.
4. Creation of special economic and cultural offices (de facto embassy) to promote
regional government interests.
5. Establishment of internal security forces under the regional
government office or chartered regional authority based in the
homeland of the various ethnic groups (i.e. Iranun, Maguindanao,
Maranao, Samal, Tausug, Yakan, etc.) the majority of whom has
embraced Islam.
6. Recognition of titles of royalty of the Southern Sultanates2.
7. Adoption of a new name for the country.
7. Adoption of a new name for the country.
Additional Proposed Consensus Points
1. The
exclusion of the recognized homeland from the application of all the
provisions of the 1987 Constitution which impose nationality
requirements for economic and social activities, and for property
holdings.
2. The
exclusion of the recognized homeland from the application of all or
substantially all national statutes which impose nationality
requirements for economic and social activities, and for property
holdings.
3. The creation
of a special economic and freeport zone covering either the entire
Sulu archipelago, consisting of the island groups of Basilan, Sulu
and Tawi-Tawi, or a portion or portions thereof.
4. The
exclusion of the recognized homeland from the application of the
minimum wage law.
5. The
exclusion of the recognized homeland from the application of the
provisions on retention limits, transfer restrictions, and compulsory
acquisition under the agrarian reform laws.
6. The
enactment of simple, reasonable but progressive taxation laws, that
covers everyone without exception, but with due regard to socialized
burden sharing, applicable to all income generated (i.e. income tax)
and transactions conducted (i.e. value added tax) in the homeland.
7. The
enactment of a new local government code applicable to the provinces,
cities, municipalities and barangays
of the homeland, that delineates national and local government
functions, consolidates local government powers in cities and
municipalities, consolidates legislative and executive powers in
local councils, and extends terms of local legislators and
executives.
Demosthenes B. Donato
General
Counsel, Tanggulang Demokrasya
Makati City, Philippines.04 September 2016.
1
Carino v. Insular Government of P.I., 41 Phil. 95. Aboag v.
Director of Lands, 45 Phil. 18.
2 1987
Constitution, Article VI, Section 31 which provides: “No law
granting a title of royalty or nobility shall be enacted.”
No comments:
Post a Comment