12.16.2009
By Adriel M. Paglinawan
Business World
THE GOVERNMENT and Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) peace panels will hold the second round of talks in January, officials from both sides said early this week.
In last week’s initial round of talks more than a year after negotiations bogged down, both panels agreed in Kuala Lumpur -- Malaysia being the third-party negotiator -- to revive the International Monitoring Team which oversees the 1997 ceasefire pact, and the Ad Hoc Action Group, a body that would address organized crime within or near identified MILF areas.
"Next round of talks is tentatively set in January," MILF chief negotiator Mohagher Iqbal said in a phone interview.
The talks will focus on the comprehensive peace pact, he said, adding they are hoping to agree on a peace deal before President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo steps down in June 2010.
"The most difficult aspect of the talk is finding a just and lasting solution to the problems in Mindanao," Mr. Iqbal said, referring to the peace pact.
In a separate interview, Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process Anabelle T. Abaya said peace negotiations with the MILF will resume after the Christmas season.
Although the government peace negotiating panel is looking at forging a possible peace deal within the administration’s term, Ms. Abaya said, imposing a deadline may be misinterpreted as imposing "undue pressure" on both panels.
Ms. Abaya said the state’s draft proposal is guided by two principles: "no fractionalizing of the country" and "all agreements must be within the bounds of the Constitution."
"We will be enlarging consultations to include local government units and the military," she said, noting that the Office of the Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process has concluded its consultations with the academe and civil society groups on the comprehensive peace agreement.
Formal talks collapsed last year after the proposed territorial deal which sought to give broader administrative powers to the Moros in an expanded Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) hit a constitutional snag in October.
The MILF, which split from the larger Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF), has been fighting for a separate state in Southern Mindanao since 1978.
The MNLF signed a peace pact with the government in 1996 paving the way for the creation of the ARMM which the MILF rejected.
The ARMM groups the provinces of Basilan, Maguindanao, Lanao del Sur, Sulu and Tawi-Tawi.
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Toast Remarks by US President Barack Obama at the 2009 Nobel Banquet
The Grand Hotel, Oslo, Norway
December 10, 2009
Thank you very much. Your Majesties, Your Excellencies, Your Royal Highnesses -- to all my friends, my family. This is obviously an extraordinary evening, and I must say -- I was telling the committee members that, having entirely exhausted myself with the speech this afternoon -- (laughter and applause) -- I have -- I spoke for a very long time. (Laughter.) I have only a very few words to say.
First of all, I would like to thank the committee once again for the extraordinary confidence that they placed in me and this great honor that I have received tonight. As I indicated before, no one was more surprised than me. (Laughter.) And I have to say that when the chairman spoke introducing me, I told him afterwards that I thought it was an excellent speech and that I was almost convinced that I deserved it. (Laughter and applause.)
I also wanted to pick up on a theme in both our speeches, and that is the extraordinary power that this prize has in lifting up those who otherwise would be forgotten; in magnifying the cause of justice when it's confronting great resistance. In 1964, when Dr. King received this prize, the course of the civil rights movement was still uncertain. How that would play itself out was not yet entirely known. And for a Baptist preacher from the South to be lifted up on the international stage, to highlight the fact that this was not simply a parochial struggle but was rather a struggle for the ages, a struggle for the hearts and minds not just of the American people but of the world, and how we thought about each other and how we thought about minorities in countries everywhere -- what extraordinary power that had. And as a consequence, I think it's fair to say that it helped to put the wind behind the sails of a movement that is largely responsible for both Michelle and my presence here tonight.
You know, it's obviously one of life's great ironies that Alfred Nobel, the man responsible for inventing dynamite -- (laughter) -- helped to establish this extraordinary moral force in the world. He bequeathed his largest share of fortune to the Nobel prizes and the roster of Nobel laureates has grown to include not only the finest minds in science and literature and economics, but I think what captivates people most is the giants of peace that it has acknowledged.
When Alfred Nobel signed his last will and testament on November 27, 1895, it's not entirely clear that he could have foreseen the impact that his prizes would have. But he did know this truth: that our destinies are what we make of them, and that each of us in our own lives can do our part in order to make a more just and lasting peace and forge the kind of world that we want to bequeath to our children and our grandchildren.
That has been the mission of the committee. It has carried out over these 108 years this charge with extraordinary diligence, creativity, and as I indicated today at lunch, great moral imagination. And so, for that, I am grateful not only to the current committee, but past committee members who I know are here. The world thanks you for the work that you do. And as a consequence, what I'd like to do is to propose a toast -- once I get some wine. (Laughter.)
I'd like to propose -- actually, if you will bear with me, in Washington, in the Senate or the House, this is called a point of personal privilege. I don't want to make her cry, but I do want to say my sister is here tonight, and it was in one of the earlier toasts discussed a passage in my book that talks about my mother and the values that she instilled in me. And I do think that it's worth noting that, to the extent I am deserving of this esteemed prize, either now or in the future, it will be largely because of her and the largeness of her heart. (Applause.)
So, to Alfred Nobel -- Skål. Cheers. Thank you. Thank you very much. (Applause.)
December 10, 2009
Thank you very much. Your Majesties, Your Excellencies, Your Royal Highnesses -- to all my friends, my family. This is obviously an extraordinary evening, and I must say -- I was telling the committee members that, having entirely exhausted myself with the speech this afternoon -- (laughter and applause) -- I have -- I spoke for a very long time. (Laughter.) I have only a very few words to say.
First of all, I would like to thank the committee once again for the extraordinary confidence that they placed in me and this great honor that I have received tonight. As I indicated before, no one was more surprised than me. (Laughter.) And I have to say that when the chairman spoke introducing me, I told him afterwards that I thought it was an excellent speech and that I was almost convinced that I deserved it. (Laughter and applause.)
I also wanted to pick up on a theme in both our speeches, and that is the extraordinary power that this prize has in lifting up those who otherwise would be forgotten; in magnifying the cause of justice when it's confronting great resistance. In 1964, when Dr. King received this prize, the course of the civil rights movement was still uncertain. How that would play itself out was not yet entirely known. And for a Baptist preacher from the South to be lifted up on the international stage, to highlight the fact that this was not simply a parochial struggle but was rather a struggle for the ages, a struggle for the hearts and minds not just of the American people but of the world, and how we thought about each other and how we thought about minorities in countries everywhere -- what extraordinary power that had. And as a consequence, I think it's fair to say that it helped to put the wind behind the sails of a movement that is largely responsible for both Michelle and my presence here tonight.
You know, it's obviously one of life's great ironies that Alfred Nobel, the man responsible for inventing dynamite -- (laughter) -- helped to establish this extraordinary moral force in the world. He bequeathed his largest share of fortune to the Nobel prizes and the roster of Nobel laureates has grown to include not only the finest minds in science and literature and economics, but I think what captivates people most is the giants of peace that it has acknowledged.
When Alfred Nobel signed his last will and testament on November 27, 1895, it's not entirely clear that he could have foreseen the impact that his prizes would have. But he did know this truth: that our destinies are what we make of them, and that each of us in our own lives can do our part in order to make a more just and lasting peace and forge the kind of world that we want to bequeath to our children and our grandchildren.
That has been the mission of the committee. It has carried out over these 108 years this charge with extraordinary diligence, creativity, and as I indicated today at lunch, great moral imagination. And so, for that, I am grateful not only to the current committee, but past committee members who I know are here. The world thanks you for the work that you do. And as a consequence, what I'd like to do is to propose a toast -- once I get some wine. (Laughter.)
I'd like to propose -- actually, if you will bear with me, in Washington, in the Senate or the House, this is called a point of personal privilege. I don't want to make her cry, but I do want to say my sister is here tonight, and it was in one of the earlier toasts discussed a passage in my book that talks about my mother and the values that she instilled in me. And I do think that it's worth noting that, to the extent I am deserving of this esteemed prize, either now or in the future, it will be largely because of her and the largeness of her heart. (Applause.)
So, to Alfred Nobel -- Skål. Cheers. Thank you. Thank you very much. (Applause.)
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Text of US President Barack Obama's Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech
Text of US President Barack Obama's Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech delivered in Oslo, Norway on 10 December 2009.
Your Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses, distinguished members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, citizens of America, and citizens of the world:
I receive this honor with deep gratitude and great humility. It is an award that speaks to our highest aspirations -- that for all the cruelty and hardship of our world, we are not mere prisoners of fate. Our actions matter, and can bend history in the direction of justice.
And yet I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the considerable controversy that your generous decision has generated. (Laughter.) In part, this is because I am at the beginning, and not the end, of my labors on the world stage. Compared to some of the giants of history who've received this prize -- Schweitzer and King; Marshall and Mandela -- my accomplishments are slight. And then there are the men and women around the world who have been jailed and beaten in the pursuit of justice; those who toil in humanitarian organizations to relieve suffering; the unrecognized millions whose quiet acts of courage and compassion inspire even the most hardened cynics. I cannot argue with those who find these men and women -- some known, some obscure to all but those they help -- to be far more deserving of this honor than I.
But perhaps the most profound issue surrounding my receipt of this prize is the fact that I am the Commander-in-Chief of the military of a nation in the midst of two wars. One of these wars is winding down. The other is a conflict that America did not seek; one in which we are joined by 42 other countries -- including Norway -- in an effort to defend ourselves and all nations from further attacks.
Still, we are at war, and I'm responsible for the deployment of thousands of young Americans to battle in a distant land. Some will kill, and some will be killed. And so I come here with an acute sense of the costs of armed conflict -- filled with difficult questions about the relationship between war and peace, and our effort to replace one with the other.
Now these questions are not new. War, in one form or another, appeared with the first man. At the dawn of history, its morality was not questioned; it was simply a fact, like drought or disease -- the manner in which tribes and then civilizations sought power and settled their differences.
And over time, as codes of law sought to control violence within groups, so did philosophers and clerics and statesmen seek to regulate the destructive power of war. The concept of a "just war" emerged, suggesting that war is justified only when certain conditions were met: if it is waged as a last resort or in self-defense; if the force used is proportional; and if, whenever possible, civilians are spared from violence.
Of course, we know that for most of history, this concept of "just war" was rarely observed. The capacity of human beings to think up new ways to kill one another proved inexhaustible, as did our capacity to exempt from mercy those who look different or pray to a different God. Wars between armies gave way to wars between nations -- total wars in which the distinction between combatant and civilian became blurred. In the span of 30 years, such carnage would twice engulf this continent. And while it's hard to conceive of a cause more just than the defeat of the Third Reich and the Axis powers, World War II was a conflict in which the total number of civilians who died exceeded the number of soldiers who perished.
In the wake of such destruction, and with the advent of the nuclear age, it became clear to victor and vanquished alike that the world needed institutions to prevent another world war. And so, a quarter century after the United States Senate rejected the League of Nations -- an idea for which Woodrow Wilson received this prize -- America led the world in constructing an architecture to keep the peace: a Marshall Plan and a United Nations, mechanisms to govern the waging of war, treaties to protect human rights, prevent genocide, restrict the most dangerous weapons.
In many ways, these efforts succeeded. Yes, terrible wars have been fought, and atrocities committed. But there has been no Third World War. The Cold War ended with jubilant crowds dismantling a wall. Commerce has stitched much of the world together. Billions have been lifted from poverty. The ideals of liberty and self-determination, equality and the rule of law have haltingly advanced. We are the heirs of the fortitude and foresight of generations past, and it is a legacy for which my own country is rightfully proud.
And yet, a decade into a new century, this old architecture is buckling under the weight of new threats. The world may no longer shudder at the prospect of war between two nuclear superpowers, but proliferation may increase the risk of catastrophe. Terrorism has long been a tactic, but modern technology allows a few small men with outsized rage to murder innocents on a horrific scale.
Moreover, wars between nations have increasingly given way to wars within nations. The resurgence of ethnic or sectarian conflicts; the growth of secessionist movements, insurgencies, and failed states -- all these things have increasingly trapped civilians in unending chaos. In today's wars, many more civilians are killed than soldiers; the seeds of future conflict are sown, economies are wrecked, civil societies torn asunder, refugees amassed, children scarred.
I do not bring with me today a definitive solution to the problems of war. What I do know is that meeting these challenges will require the same vision, hard work, and persistence of those men and women who acted so boldly decades ago. And it will require us to think in new ways about the notions of just war and the imperatives of a just peace.
We must begin by acknowledging the hard truth: We will not eradicate violent conflict in our lifetimes. There will be times when nations -- acting individually or in concert -- will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified.
I make this statement mindful of what Martin Luther King Jr. said in this same ceremony years ago: "Violence never brings permanent peace. It solves no social problem: it merely creates new and more complicated ones." As someone who stands here as a direct consequence of Dr. King's life work, I am living testimony to the moral force of non-violence. I know there's nothing weak -- nothing passive -- nothing naïve -- in the creed and lives of Gandhi and King.
But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their examples alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda's leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force may sometimes be necessary is not a call to cynicism -- it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason.
I raise this point, I begin with this point because in many countries there is a deep ambivalence about military action today, no matter what the cause. And at times, this is joined by a reflexive suspicion of America, the world's sole military superpower.
But the world must remember that it was not simply international institutions -- not just treaties and declarations -- that brought stability to a post-World War II world. Whatever mistakes we have made, the plain fact is this: The United States of America has helped underwrite global security for more than six decades with the blood of our citizens and the strength of our arms. The service and sacrifice of our men and women in uniform has promoted peace and prosperity from Germany to Korea, and enabled democracy to take hold in places like the Balkans. We have borne this burden not because we seek to impose our will. We have done so out of enlightened self-interest -- because we seek a better future for our children and grandchildren, and we believe that their lives will be better if others' children and grandchildren can live in freedom and prosperity.
So yes, the instruments of war do have a role to play in preserving the peace. And yet this truth must coexist with another -- that no matter how justified, war promises human tragedy. The soldier's courage and sacrifice is full of glory, expressing devotion to country, to cause, to comrades in arms. But war itself is never glorious, and we must never trumpet it as such.
So part of our challenge is reconciling these two seemingly inreconcilable truths -- that war is sometimes necessary, and war at some level is an expression of human folly. Concretely, we must direct our effort to the task that President Kennedy called for long ago. "Let us focus," he said, "on a more practical, more attainable peace, based not on a sudden revolution in human nature but on a gradual evolution in human institutions." A gradual evolution of human institutions.
What might this evolution look like? What might these practical steps be?
To begin with, I believe that all nations -- strong and weak alike -- must adhere to standards that govern the use of force. I -- like any head of state -- reserve the right to act unilaterally if necessary to defend my nation. Nevertheless, I am convinced that adhering to standards, international standards, strengthens those who do, and isolates and weakens those who don't.
The world rallied around America after the 9/11 attacks, and continues to support our efforts in Afghanistan, because of the horror of those senseless attacks and the recognized principle of self-defense. Likewise, the world recognized the need to confront Saddam Hussein when he invaded Kuwait -- a consensus that sent a clear message to all about the cost of aggression.
Furthermore, America -- in fact, no nation -- can insist that others follow the rules of the road if we refuse to follow them ourselves. For when we don't, our actions appear arbitrary and undercut the legitimacy of future interventions, no matter how justified.
And this becomes particularly important when the purpose of military action extends beyond self-defense or the defense of one nation against an aggressor. More and more, we all confront difficult questions about how to prevent the slaughter of civilians by their own government, or to stop a civil war whose violence and suffering can engulf an entire region.
I believe that force can be justified on humanitarian grounds, as it was in the Balkans, or in other places that have been scarred by war. Inaction tears at our conscience and can lead to more costly intervention later. That's why all responsible nations must embrace the role that militaries with a clear mandate can play to keep the peace.
America's commitment to global security will never waver. But in a world in which threats are more diffuse, and missions more complex, America cannot act alone. America alone cannot secure the peace. This is true in Afghanistan. This is true in failed states like Somalia, where terrorism and piracy is joined by famine and human suffering. And sadly, it will continue to be true in unstable regions for years to come.
The leaders and soldiers of NATO countries, and other friends and allies, demonstrate this truth through the capacity and courage they've shown in Afghanistan. But in many countries, there is a disconnect between the efforts of those who serve and the ambivalence of the broader public. I understand why war is not popular, but I also know this: The belief that peace is desirable is rarely enough to achieve it. Peace requires responsibility. Peace entails sacrifice. That's why NATO continues to be indispensable. That's why we must strengthen U.N. and regional peacekeeping, and not leave the task to a few countries. That's why we honor those who return home from peacekeeping and training abroad to Oslo and Rome; to Ottawa and Sydney; to Dhaka and Kigali -- we honor them not as makers of war, but of wagers -- but as wagers of peace.
Let me make one final point about the use of force. Even as we make difficult decisions about going to war, we must also think clearly about how we fight it. The Nobel Committee recognized this truth in awarding its first prize for peace to Henry Dunant -- the founder of the Red Cross, and a driving force behind the Geneva Conventions.
Where force is necessary, we have a moral and strategic interest in binding ourselves to certain rules of conduct. And even as we confront a vicious adversary that abides by no rules, I believe the United States of America must remain a standard bearer in the conduct of war. That is what makes us different from those whom we fight. That is a source of our strength. That is why I prohibited torture. That is why I ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed. And that is why I have reaffirmed America's commitment to abide by the Geneva Conventions. We lose ourselves when we compromise the very ideals that we fight to defend. (Applause.) And we honor -- we honor those ideals by upholding them not when it's easy, but when it is hard.
I have spoken at some length to the question that must weigh on our minds and our hearts as we choose to wage war. But let me now turn to our effort to avoid such tragic choices, and speak of three ways that we can build a just and lasting peace.
First, in dealing with those nations that break rules and laws, I believe that we must develop alternatives to violence that are tough enough to actually change behavior -- for if we want a lasting peace, then the words of the international community must mean something. Those regimes that break the rules must be held accountable. Sanctions must exact a real price. Intransigence must be met with increased pressure -- and such pressure exists only when the world stands together as one.
One urgent example is the effort to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, and to seek a world without them. In the middle of the last century, nations agreed to be bound by a treaty whose bargain is clear: All will have access to peaceful nuclear power; those without nuclear weapons will forsake them; and those with nuclear weapons will work towards disarmament. I am committed to upholding this treaty. It is a centerpiece of my foreign policy. And I'm working with President Medvedev to reduce America and Russia's nuclear stockpiles.
But it is also incumbent upon all of us to insist that nations like Iran and North Korea do not game the system. Those who claim to respect international law cannot avert their eyes when those laws are flouted. Those who care for their own security cannot ignore the danger of an arms race in the Middle East or East Asia. Those who seek peace cannot stand idly by as nations arm themselves for nuclear war.
The same principle applies to those who violate international laws by brutalizing their own people. When there is genocide in Darfur, systematic rape in Congo, repression in Burma -- there must be consequences. Yes, there will be engagement; yes, there will be diplomacy -- but there must be consequences when those things fail. And the closer we stand together, the less likely we will be faced with the choice between armed intervention and complicity in oppression.
This brings me to a second point -- the nature of the peace that we seek. For peace is not merely the absence of visible conflict. Only a just peace based on the inherent rights and dignity of every individual can truly be lasting.
It was this insight that drove drafters of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights after the Second World War. In the wake of devastation, they recognized that if human rights are not protected, peace is a hollow promise.
And yet too often, these words are ignored. For some countries, the failure to uphold human rights is excused by the false suggestion that these are somehow Western principles, foreign to local cultures or stages of a nation's development. And within America, there has long been a tension between those who describe themselves as realists or idealists -- a tension that suggests a stark choice between the narrow pursuit of interests or an endless campaign to impose our values around the world.
I reject these choices. I believe that peace is unstable where citizens are denied the right to speak freely or worship as they please; choose their own leaders or assemble without fear. Pent-up grievances fester, and the suppression of tribal and religious identity can lead to violence. We also know that the opposite is true. Only when Europe became free did it finally find peace. America has never fought a war against a democracy, and our closest friends are governments that protect the rights of their citizens. No matter how callously defined, neither America's interests -- nor the world's -- are served by the denial of human aspirations.
So even as we respect the unique culture and traditions of different countries, America will always be a voice for those aspirations that are universal. We will bear witness to the quiet dignity of reformers like Aung Sang Suu Kyi; to the bravery of Zimbabweans who cast their ballots in the face of beatings; to the hundreds of thousands who have marched silently through the streets of Iran. It is telling that the leaders of these governments fear the aspirations of their own people more than the power of any other nation. And it is the responsibility of all free people and free nations to make clear that these movements -- these movements of hope and history -- they have us on their side.
Let me also say this: The promotion of human rights cannot be about exhortation alone. At times, it must be coupled with painstaking diplomacy. I know that engagement with repressive regimes lacks the satisfying purity of indignation. But I also know that sanctions without outreach -- condemnation without discussion -- can carry forward only a crippling status quo. No repressive regime can move down a new path unless it has the choice of an open door.
In light of the Cultural Revolution's horrors, Nixon's meeting with Mao appeared inexcusable -- and yet it surely helped set China on a path where millions of its citizens have been lifted from poverty and connected to open societies. Pope John Paul's engagement with Poland created space not just for the Catholic Church, but for labor leaders like Lech Walesa. Ronald Reagan's efforts on arms control and embrace of perestroika not only improved relations with the Soviet Union, but empowered dissidents throughout Eastern Europe. There's no simple formula here. But we must try as best we can to balance isolation and engagement, pressure and incentives, so that human rights and dignity are advanced over time.
Third, a just peace includes not only civil and political rights -- it must encompass economic security and opportunity. For true peace is not just freedom from fear, but freedom from want.
It is undoubtedly true that development rarely takes root without security; it is also true that security does not exist where human beings do not have access to enough food, or clean water, or the medicine and shelter they need to survive. It does not exist where children can't aspire to a decent education or a job that supports a family. The absence of hope can rot a society from within.
And that's why helping farmers feed their own people -- or nations educate their children and care for the sick -- is not mere charity. It's also why the world must come together to confront climate change. There is little scientific dispute that if we do nothing, we will face more drought, more famine, more mass displacement -- all of which will fuel more conflict for decades. For this reason, it is not merely scientists and environmental activists who call for swift and forceful action -- it's military leaders in my own country and others who understand our common security hangs in the balance.
Agreements among nations. Strong institutions. Support for human rights. Investments in development. All these are vital ingredients in bringing about the evolution that President Kennedy spoke about. And yet, I do not believe that we will have the will, the determination, the staying power, to complete this work without something more -- and that's the continued expansion of our moral imagination; an insistence that there's something irreducible that we all share.
As the world grows smaller, you might think it would be easier for human beings to recognize how similar we are; to understand that we're all basically seeking the same things; that we all hope for the chance to live out our lives with some measure of happiness and fulfillment for ourselves and our families.
And yet somehow, given the dizzying pace of globalization, the cultural leveling of modernity, it perhaps comes as no surprise that people fear the loss of what they cherish in their particular identities -- their race, their tribe, and perhaps most powerfully their religion. In some places, this fear has led to conflict. At times, it even feels like we're moving backwards. We see it in the Middle East, as the conflict between Arabs and Jews seems to harden. We see it in nations that are torn asunder by tribal lines.
And most dangerously, we see it in the way that religion is used to justify the murder of innocents by those who have distorted and defiled the great religion of Islam, and who attacked my country from Afghanistan. These extremists are not the first to kill in the name of God; the cruelties of the Crusades are amply recorded. But they remind us that no Holy War can ever be a just war. For if you truly believe that you are carrying out divine will, then there is no need for restraint -- no need to spare the pregnant mother, or the medic, or the Red Cross worker, or even a person of one's own faith. Such a warped view of religion is not just incompatible with the concept of peace, but I believe it's incompatible with the very purpose of faith -- for the one rule that lies at the heart of every major religion is that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us.
Adhering to this law of love has always been the core struggle of human nature. For we are fallible. We make mistakes, and fall victim to the temptations of pride, and power, and sometimes evil. Even those of us with the best of intentions will at times fail to right the wrongs before us.
But we do not have to think that human nature is perfect for us to still believe that the human condition can be perfected. We do not have to live in an idealized world to still reach for those ideals that will make it a better place. The non-violence practiced by men like Gandhi and King may not have been practical or possible in every circumstance, but the love that they preached -- their fundamental faith in human progress -- that must always be the North Star that guides us on our journey.
For if we lose that faith -- if we dismiss it as silly or naïve; if we divorce it from the decisions that we make on issues of war and peace -- then we lose what's best about humanity. We lose our sense of possibility. We lose our moral compass.
Like generations have before us, we must reject that future. As Dr. King said at this occasion so many years ago, "I refuse to accept despair as the final response to the ambiguities of history. I refuse to accept the idea that the 'isness' of man's present condition makes him morally incapable of reaching up for the eternal 'oughtness' that forever confronts him."
Let us reach for the world that ought to be -- that spark of the divine that still stirs within each of our souls. (Applause.)
Somewhere today, in the here and now, in the world as it is, a soldier sees he's outgunned, but stands firm to keep the peace. Somewhere today, in this world, a young protestor awaits the brutality of her government, but has the courage to march on. Somewhere today, a mother facing punishing poverty still takes the time to teach her child, scrapes together what few coins she has to send that child to school -- because she believes that a cruel world still has a place for that child's dreams.
Let us live by their example. We can acknowledge that oppression will always be with us, and still strive for justice. We can admit the intractability of depravation, and still strive for dignity. Clear-eyed, we can understand that there will be war, and still strive for peace. We can do that -- for that is the story of human progress; that's the hope of all the world; and at this moment of challenge, that must be our work here on Earth.
Thank you very much. (Applause.)
Your Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses, distinguished members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, citizens of America, and citizens of the world:
I receive this honor with deep gratitude and great humility. It is an award that speaks to our highest aspirations -- that for all the cruelty and hardship of our world, we are not mere prisoners of fate. Our actions matter, and can bend history in the direction of justice.
And yet I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the considerable controversy that your generous decision has generated. (Laughter.) In part, this is because I am at the beginning, and not the end, of my labors on the world stage. Compared to some of the giants of history who've received this prize -- Schweitzer and King; Marshall and Mandela -- my accomplishments are slight. And then there are the men and women around the world who have been jailed and beaten in the pursuit of justice; those who toil in humanitarian organizations to relieve suffering; the unrecognized millions whose quiet acts of courage and compassion inspire even the most hardened cynics. I cannot argue with those who find these men and women -- some known, some obscure to all but those they help -- to be far more deserving of this honor than I.
But perhaps the most profound issue surrounding my receipt of this prize is the fact that I am the Commander-in-Chief of the military of a nation in the midst of two wars. One of these wars is winding down. The other is a conflict that America did not seek; one in which we are joined by 42 other countries -- including Norway -- in an effort to defend ourselves and all nations from further attacks.
Still, we are at war, and I'm responsible for the deployment of thousands of young Americans to battle in a distant land. Some will kill, and some will be killed. And so I come here with an acute sense of the costs of armed conflict -- filled with difficult questions about the relationship between war and peace, and our effort to replace one with the other.
Now these questions are not new. War, in one form or another, appeared with the first man. At the dawn of history, its morality was not questioned; it was simply a fact, like drought or disease -- the manner in which tribes and then civilizations sought power and settled their differences.
And over time, as codes of law sought to control violence within groups, so did philosophers and clerics and statesmen seek to regulate the destructive power of war. The concept of a "just war" emerged, suggesting that war is justified only when certain conditions were met: if it is waged as a last resort or in self-defense; if the force used is proportional; and if, whenever possible, civilians are spared from violence.
Of course, we know that for most of history, this concept of "just war" was rarely observed. The capacity of human beings to think up new ways to kill one another proved inexhaustible, as did our capacity to exempt from mercy those who look different or pray to a different God. Wars between armies gave way to wars between nations -- total wars in which the distinction between combatant and civilian became blurred. In the span of 30 years, such carnage would twice engulf this continent. And while it's hard to conceive of a cause more just than the defeat of the Third Reich and the Axis powers, World War II was a conflict in which the total number of civilians who died exceeded the number of soldiers who perished.
In the wake of such destruction, and with the advent of the nuclear age, it became clear to victor and vanquished alike that the world needed institutions to prevent another world war. And so, a quarter century after the United States Senate rejected the League of Nations -- an idea for which Woodrow Wilson received this prize -- America led the world in constructing an architecture to keep the peace: a Marshall Plan and a United Nations, mechanisms to govern the waging of war, treaties to protect human rights, prevent genocide, restrict the most dangerous weapons.
In many ways, these efforts succeeded. Yes, terrible wars have been fought, and atrocities committed. But there has been no Third World War. The Cold War ended with jubilant crowds dismantling a wall. Commerce has stitched much of the world together. Billions have been lifted from poverty. The ideals of liberty and self-determination, equality and the rule of law have haltingly advanced. We are the heirs of the fortitude and foresight of generations past, and it is a legacy for which my own country is rightfully proud.
And yet, a decade into a new century, this old architecture is buckling under the weight of new threats. The world may no longer shudder at the prospect of war between two nuclear superpowers, but proliferation may increase the risk of catastrophe. Terrorism has long been a tactic, but modern technology allows a few small men with outsized rage to murder innocents on a horrific scale.
Moreover, wars between nations have increasingly given way to wars within nations. The resurgence of ethnic or sectarian conflicts; the growth of secessionist movements, insurgencies, and failed states -- all these things have increasingly trapped civilians in unending chaos. In today's wars, many more civilians are killed than soldiers; the seeds of future conflict are sown, economies are wrecked, civil societies torn asunder, refugees amassed, children scarred.
I do not bring with me today a definitive solution to the problems of war. What I do know is that meeting these challenges will require the same vision, hard work, and persistence of those men and women who acted so boldly decades ago. And it will require us to think in new ways about the notions of just war and the imperatives of a just peace.
We must begin by acknowledging the hard truth: We will not eradicate violent conflict in our lifetimes. There will be times when nations -- acting individually or in concert -- will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified.
I make this statement mindful of what Martin Luther King Jr. said in this same ceremony years ago: "Violence never brings permanent peace. It solves no social problem: it merely creates new and more complicated ones." As someone who stands here as a direct consequence of Dr. King's life work, I am living testimony to the moral force of non-violence. I know there's nothing weak -- nothing passive -- nothing naïve -- in the creed and lives of Gandhi and King.
But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their examples alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda's leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force may sometimes be necessary is not a call to cynicism -- it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason.
I raise this point, I begin with this point because in many countries there is a deep ambivalence about military action today, no matter what the cause. And at times, this is joined by a reflexive suspicion of America, the world's sole military superpower.
But the world must remember that it was not simply international institutions -- not just treaties and declarations -- that brought stability to a post-World War II world. Whatever mistakes we have made, the plain fact is this: The United States of America has helped underwrite global security for more than six decades with the blood of our citizens and the strength of our arms. The service and sacrifice of our men and women in uniform has promoted peace and prosperity from Germany to Korea, and enabled democracy to take hold in places like the Balkans. We have borne this burden not because we seek to impose our will. We have done so out of enlightened self-interest -- because we seek a better future for our children and grandchildren, and we believe that their lives will be better if others' children and grandchildren can live in freedom and prosperity.
So yes, the instruments of war do have a role to play in preserving the peace. And yet this truth must coexist with another -- that no matter how justified, war promises human tragedy. The soldier's courage and sacrifice is full of glory, expressing devotion to country, to cause, to comrades in arms. But war itself is never glorious, and we must never trumpet it as such.
So part of our challenge is reconciling these two seemingly inreconcilable truths -- that war is sometimes necessary, and war at some level is an expression of human folly. Concretely, we must direct our effort to the task that President Kennedy called for long ago. "Let us focus," he said, "on a more practical, more attainable peace, based not on a sudden revolution in human nature but on a gradual evolution in human institutions." A gradual evolution of human institutions.
What might this evolution look like? What might these practical steps be?
To begin with, I believe that all nations -- strong and weak alike -- must adhere to standards that govern the use of force. I -- like any head of state -- reserve the right to act unilaterally if necessary to defend my nation. Nevertheless, I am convinced that adhering to standards, international standards, strengthens those who do, and isolates and weakens those who don't.
The world rallied around America after the 9/11 attacks, and continues to support our efforts in Afghanistan, because of the horror of those senseless attacks and the recognized principle of self-defense. Likewise, the world recognized the need to confront Saddam Hussein when he invaded Kuwait -- a consensus that sent a clear message to all about the cost of aggression.
Furthermore, America -- in fact, no nation -- can insist that others follow the rules of the road if we refuse to follow them ourselves. For when we don't, our actions appear arbitrary and undercut the legitimacy of future interventions, no matter how justified.
And this becomes particularly important when the purpose of military action extends beyond self-defense or the defense of one nation against an aggressor. More and more, we all confront difficult questions about how to prevent the slaughter of civilians by their own government, or to stop a civil war whose violence and suffering can engulf an entire region.
I believe that force can be justified on humanitarian grounds, as it was in the Balkans, or in other places that have been scarred by war. Inaction tears at our conscience and can lead to more costly intervention later. That's why all responsible nations must embrace the role that militaries with a clear mandate can play to keep the peace.
America's commitment to global security will never waver. But in a world in which threats are more diffuse, and missions more complex, America cannot act alone. America alone cannot secure the peace. This is true in Afghanistan. This is true in failed states like Somalia, where terrorism and piracy is joined by famine and human suffering. And sadly, it will continue to be true in unstable regions for years to come.
The leaders and soldiers of NATO countries, and other friends and allies, demonstrate this truth through the capacity and courage they've shown in Afghanistan. But in many countries, there is a disconnect between the efforts of those who serve and the ambivalence of the broader public. I understand why war is not popular, but I also know this: The belief that peace is desirable is rarely enough to achieve it. Peace requires responsibility. Peace entails sacrifice. That's why NATO continues to be indispensable. That's why we must strengthen U.N. and regional peacekeeping, and not leave the task to a few countries. That's why we honor those who return home from peacekeeping and training abroad to Oslo and Rome; to Ottawa and Sydney; to Dhaka and Kigali -- we honor them not as makers of war, but of wagers -- but as wagers of peace.
Let me make one final point about the use of force. Even as we make difficult decisions about going to war, we must also think clearly about how we fight it. The Nobel Committee recognized this truth in awarding its first prize for peace to Henry Dunant -- the founder of the Red Cross, and a driving force behind the Geneva Conventions.
Where force is necessary, we have a moral and strategic interest in binding ourselves to certain rules of conduct. And even as we confront a vicious adversary that abides by no rules, I believe the United States of America must remain a standard bearer in the conduct of war. That is what makes us different from those whom we fight. That is a source of our strength. That is why I prohibited torture. That is why I ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed. And that is why I have reaffirmed America's commitment to abide by the Geneva Conventions. We lose ourselves when we compromise the very ideals that we fight to defend. (Applause.) And we honor -- we honor those ideals by upholding them not when it's easy, but when it is hard.
I have spoken at some length to the question that must weigh on our minds and our hearts as we choose to wage war. But let me now turn to our effort to avoid such tragic choices, and speak of three ways that we can build a just and lasting peace.
First, in dealing with those nations that break rules and laws, I believe that we must develop alternatives to violence that are tough enough to actually change behavior -- for if we want a lasting peace, then the words of the international community must mean something. Those regimes that break the rules must be held accountable. Sanctions must exact a real price. Intransigence must be met with increased pressure -- and such pressure exists only when the world stands together as one.
One urgent example is the effort to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, and to seek a world without them. In the middle of the last century, nations agreed to be bound by a treaty whose bargain is clear: All will have access to peaceful nuclear power; those without nuclear weapons will forsake them; and those with nuclear weapons will work towards disarmament. I am committed to upholding this treaty. It is a centerpiece of my foreign policy. And I'm working with President Medvedev to reduce America and Russia's nuclear stockpiles.
But it is also incumbent upon all of us to insist that nations like Iran and North Korea do not game the system. Those who claim to respect international law cannot avert their eyes when those laws are flouted. Those who care for their own security cannot ignore the danger of an arms race in the Middle East or East Asia. Those who seek peace cannot stand idly by as nations arm themselves for nuclear war.
The same principle applies to those who violate international laws by brutalizing their own people. When there is genocide in Darfur, systematic rape in Congo, repression in Burma -- there must be consequences. Yes, there will be engagement; yes, there will be diplomacy -- but there must be consequences when those things fail. And the closer we stand together, the less likely we will be faced with the choice between armed intervention and complicity in oppression.
This brings me to a second point -- the nature of the peace that we seek. For peace is not merely the absence of visible conflict. Only a just peace based on the inherent rights and dignity of every individual can truly be lasting.
It was this insight that drove drafters of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights after the Second World War. In the wake of devastation, they recognized that if human rights are not protected, peace is a hollow promise.
And yet too often, these words are ignored. For some countries, the failure to uphold human rights is excused by the false suggestion that these are somehow Western principles, foreign to local cultures or stages of a nation's development. And within America, there has long been a tension between those who describe themselves as realists or idealists -- a tension that suggests a stark choice between the narrow pursuit of interests or an endless campaign to impose our values around the world.
I reject these choices. I believe that peace is unstable where citizens are denied the right to speak freely or worship as they please; choose their own leaders or assemble without fear. Pent-up grievances fester, and the suppression of tribal and religious identity can lead to violence. We also know that the opposite is true. Only when Europe became free did it finally find peace. America has never fought a war against a democracy, and our closest friends are governments that protect the rights of their citizens. No matter how callously defined, neither America's interests -- nor the world's -- are served by the denial of human aspirations.
So even as we respect the unique culture and traditions of different countries, America will always be a voice for those aspirations that are universal. We will bear witness to the quiet dignity of reformers like Aung Sang Suu Kyi; to the bravery of Zimbabweans who cast their ballots in the face of beatings; to the hundreds of thousands who have marched silently through the streets of Iran. It is telling that the leaders of these governments fear the aspirations of their own people more than the power of any other nation. And it is the responsibility of all free people and free nations to make clear that these movements -- these movements of hope and history -- they have us on their side.
Let me also say this: The promotion of human rights cannot be about exhortation alone. At times, it must be coupled with painstaking diplomacy. I know that engagement with repressive regimes lacks the satisfying purity of indignation. But I also know that sanctions without outreach -- condemnation without discussion -- can carry forward only a crippling status quo. No repressive regime can move down a new path unless it has the choice of an open door.
In light of the Cultural Revolution's horrors, Nixon's meeting with Mao appeared inexcusable -- and yet it surely helped set China on a path where millions of its citizens have been lifted from poverty and connected to open societies. Pope John Paul's engagement with Poland created space not just for the Catholic Church, but for labor leaders like Lech Walesa. Ronald Reagan's efforts on arms control and embrace of perestroika not only improved relations with the Soviet Union, but empowered dissidents throughout Eastern Europe. There's no simple formula here. But we must try as best we can to balance isolation and engagement, pressure and incentives, so that human rights and dignity are advanced over time.
Third, a just peace includes not only civil and political rights -- it must encompass economic security and opportunity. For true peace is not just freedom from fear, but freedom from want.
It is undoubtedly true that development rarely takes root without security; it is also true that security does not exist where human beings do not have access to enough food, or clean water, or the medicine and shelter they need to survive. It does not exist where children can't aspire to a decent education or a job that supports a family. The absence of hope can rot a society from within.
And that's why helping farmers feed their own people -- or nations educate their children and care for the sick -- is not mere charity. It's also why the world must come together to confront climate change. There is little scientific dispute that if we do nothing, we will face more drought, more famine, more mass displacement -- all of which will fuel more conflict for decades. For this reason, it is not merely scientists and environmental activists who call for swift and forceful action -- it's military leaders in my own country and others who understand our common security hangs in the balance.
Agreements among nations. Strong institutions. Support for human rights. Investments in development. All these are vital ingredients in bringing about the evolution that President Kennedy spoke about. And yet, I do not believe that we will have the will, the determination, the staying power, to complete this work without something more -- and that's the continued expansion of our moral imagination; an insistence that there's something irreducible that we all share.
As the world grows smaller, you might think it would be easier for human beings to recognize how similar we are; to understand that we're all basically seeking the same things; that we all hope for the chance to live out our lives with some measure of happiness and fulfillment for ourselves and our families.
And yet somehow, given the dizzying pace of globalization, the cultural leveling of modernity, it perhaps comes as no surprise that people fear the loss of what they cherish in their particular identities -- their race, their tribe, and perhaps most powerfully their religion. In some places, this fear has led to conflict. At times, it even feels like we're moving backwards. We see it in the Middle East, as the conflict between Arabs and Jews seems to harden. We see it in nations that are torn asunder by tribal lines.
And most dangerously, we see it in the way that religion is used to justify the murder of innocents by those who have distorted and defiled the great religion of Islam, and who attacked my country from Afghanistan. These extremists are not the first to kill in the name of God; the cruelties of the Crusades are amply recorded. But they remind us that no Holy War can ever be a just war. For if you truly believe that you are carrying out divine will, then there is no need for restraint -- no need to spare the pregnant mother, or the medic, or the Red Cross worker, or even a person of one's own faith. Such a warped view of religion is not just incompatible with the concept of peace, but I believe it's incompatible with the very purpose of faith -- for the one rule that lies at the heart of every major religion is that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us.
Adhering to this law of love has always been the core struggle of human nature. For we are fallible. We make mistakes, and fall victim to the temptations of pride, and power, and sometimes evil. Even those of us with the best of intentions will at times fail to right the wrongs before us.
But we do not have to think that human nature is perfect for us to still believe that the human condition can be perfected. We do not have to live in an idealized world to still reach for those ideals that will make it a better place. The non-violence practiced by men like Gandhi and King may not have been practical or possible in every circumstance, but the love that they preached -- their fundamental faith in human progress -- that must always be the North Star that guides us on our journey.
For if we lose that faith -- if we dismiss it as silly or naïve; if we divorce it from the decisions that we make on issues of war and peace -- then we lose what's best about humanity. We lose our sense of possibility. We lose our moral compass.
Like generations have before us, we must reject that future. As Dr. King said at this occasion so many years ago, "I refuse to accept despair as the final response to the ambiguities of history. I refuse to accept the idea that the 'isness' of man's present condition makes him morally incapable of reaching up for the eternal 'oughtness' that forever confronts him."
Let us reach for the world that ought to be -- that spark of the divine that still stirs within each of our souls. (Applause.)
Somewhere today, in the here and now, in the world as it is, a soldier sees he's outgunned, but stands firm to keep the peace. Somewhere today, in this world, a young protestor awaits the brutality of her government, but has the courage to march on. Somewhere today, a mother facing punishing poverty still takes the time to teach her child, scrapes together what few coins she has to send that child to school -- because she believes that a cruel world still has a place for that child's dreams.
Let us live by their example. We can acknowledge that oppression will always be with us, and still strive for justice. We can admit the intractability of depravation, and still strive for dignity. Clear-eyed, we can understand that there will be war, and still strive for peace. We can do that -- for that is the story of human progress; that's the hope of all the world; and at this moment of challenge, that must be our work here on Earth.
Thank you very much. (Applause.)
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Human Rights monitoring group launched in Cotabato City
This summary is not available. Please
click here to view the post.
Saturday, December 12, 2009
POSITION PAPER ON THE EID’L FITR INCIDENT
Affected and distressed by the military operations and aerial bombardment of the forces of the Philippine Marines in Sitio Talibang, Buansa, Indanan, Sulu, on the day of the Eid’l Fitr celebration of September 20, 2009, as well as the impact brought about by said operations to thousands of residents in Sulu, particularly in the municipalities of Indanan and Panamao;
Cognizant of the fact that, in addition to: 1) the Ei’dl Fitr Incident, 2) the State of Emergency that was previously placed on the entire province of Sulu due to the kidnapping of three ICRC (International Committee of the Red Cross) volunteers early this year, and 3) the most recent explosion within the premises of the Jolo Municipal Hall, the situation in the province has remained fluid, volatile and explosive;
Aware that public pronouncements made by government agencies and entities have come out to be contrary to the unpublished or unpublicized pronouncements made by other sectors and stakeholders involved in, or affected by, the said Eid’l Fitr incident;
and
Concerned that tension among the people of Sulu will continue to remain high because of perceived continuation of occurrences of human rights abuses and violations made by those in authority;
We, the undersigned leaders and representatives of Moro civil society organizations in Mindanao and Sulu, have decided to conduct a series of data gathering activities and dialogues with the various sectors and stakeholders of the province of Sulu from October 31 to December 9, 2009 to acquire, glean and collate information, insights, perspectives and recommendations from: 1) the community leaders of Panamao and Indanan, 2) the LGU leaders of Panamao and Indanan, 3) the local civil society organizations of Sulu, 4) the local MNLF leadership, 5) the provincial PNP and 6) the Philippine Marines assigned in Sulu in an attempt to find ways to bring to public light the stories of all sides concerned about what had happened in Indanan, Sulu on September 20, 2009.
In light of the aforesaid situation and initiative, as well as based on the information gathered, we hereby make the following assertions:
Having made all the afore-mentioned assertions, we make the following calls:
Signed this 11th day of December, 2009 at Cecille’s Convention Center, Tumaga Porcentro, Zamboanga City.
(sgd.) SAMMY P. MAULANA
Secretary-General
Consortium of Bangsamoro Civil Society
(CBCS)
(sgd.) FATMAWATI SALAPUDDIN
Secretary-General
Bangsamoro Women Solidarity Forum
(BWSF)
(sgd.) EDMUND GUMBAHALI
Lead Convenor
Concerned Citizens of Sulu
(sgd.) VANDRAZEL BIROWA
Chairman
Ittihadus Sabab, Inc.
(sgd.) MUNIB A. KAHAL
President
DAWAT
(sgd.) SHARIF ALUNAN HAIRAL
President
Halaqatul Qur’an Foundation
(sgd.) FARIDA HADJULANI
Chairwoman
Tanjuh Sulu, Inc.
(sgd.) JUMDA SABAANI
Executive Director
MURID, Inc.
(sgd.) SALIHA KALI
President
PAKAPASUG
(sgd.) JOCELYN BASALUDDIN
President
Jaga Kasulutan
(sgd.) ZURAIDA GUMBAHALI
Coordinator
Jaga Lupah Sug
Cognizant of the fact that, in addition to: 1) the Ei’dl Fitr Incident, 2) the State of Emergency that was previously placed on the entire province of Sulu due to the kidnapping of three ICRC (International Committee of the Red Cross) volunteers early this year, and 3) the most recent explosion within the premises of the Jolo Municipal Hall, the situation in the province has remained fluid, volatile and explosive;
Aware that public pronouncements made by government agencies and entities have come out to be contrary to the unpublished or unpublicized pronouncements made by other sectors and stakeholders involved in, or affected by, the said Eid’l Fitr incident;
and
Concerned that tension among the people of Sulu will continue to remain high because of perceived continuation of occurrences of human rights abuses and violations made by those in authority;
We, the undersigned leaders and representatives of Moro civil society organizations in Mindanao and Sulu, have decided to conduct a series of data gathering activities and dialogues with the various sectors and stakeholders of the province of Sulu from October 31 to December 9, 2009 to acquire, glean and collate information, insights, perspectives and recommendations from: 1) the community leaders of Panamao and Indanan, 2) the LGU leaders of Panamao and Indanan, 3) the local civil society organizations of Sulu, 4) the local MNLF leadership, 5) the provincial PNP and 6) the Philippine Marines assigned in Sulu in an attempt to find ways to bring to public light the stories of all sides concerned about what had happened in Indanan, Sulu on September 20, 2009.
In light of the aforesaid situation and initiative, as well as based on the information gathered, we hereby make the following assertions:
- That, although it was claimed by the Philippine Marines that it was the alleged convergence of Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG) elements that was being targeted by their military operations and bombardment, the community leaders of Indanan and Panamao, the LGU leaders of Indanan and Panamao and the MNLF leaders based in Camp Marang unanimously asserted that it was not the ASG but the MNLF camp and communities that were hit by said military operations.
- That said operations are regarded as a sacrilege to Islam. It is also seen as a clear proof of discrimination and an utter disrespect to the dignity of the Tausug people, particularly by those who had really given the orders for the military operations to commence to the Muslim Ummah of Sulu because it was done during the day of Eid’l Fitr and because those who were directly and adversely affected were not the converged ASG groups but the MNLF and the civilian populace of Indanan and Panamao who were not only deprived and prevented from performing their religious obligations, but also were forced to evacuate.
- The LGUs of Sulu are constrained from stopping military operations in their respective areas. They have no say on government decision. Instead, they are asked to comply with the usual call of the provincial government to support the military operations by way of organizing the para-military force multipliers in order to augment military troops dispatched in the area.
- That civilian residents from the areas where the military operations were done on September 20, 2009 remain in their present evacuation sites because the Philippine Marines still occupying these areas. These civilians are fearful that another series of encounter with between the Marines and the AFP will recur. They are also consequently prevented from returning to their lands to revive their largely agricultural means of livelihood.
- That said incident is an apparent sign that the national government has reduced the level of importance and value of the 1996 Final Peace Agreement and the still ongoing peace process with the MNLF.
- That, only if this issue between the MNLF and the Marines in Sulu will be resolved and cleared, will the lawless elements in Sulu be identified and apprehended.
- That the general populace of Sulu is outraged by the acts and effects of the Eid’l Fitr Incident.
- That in the entire story after the Eid’l Fitr Incident, not once did the ASG figure in any movement or encounter. Rather, all recorded encounters were between the Philippine Marines and the MNLF local forces and/or enraged local civilians.
- That the media ban in Sulu has prevented the press from acquiring accurate and timely information about what is happening within the province.
Having made all the afore-mentioned assertions, we make the following calls:
- That those really responsible for ordering the military operations that caused the Eid’l Fitr Incident be made accountable for their actions and penalized. A public apology is not enough.
- That the Philippine Marines and their superiors first weigh the situation and sincerely and honestly take into consideration the safety and plight of the civilians before they conduct such operations in the future.
- That the Philippine Marines observe and exercise high standards of precision, efficiency, discernment and sense of humanity before conducting such operation in the future.
- That freedom of religion be observed and promoted by those in government, not only in words or on paper, but also by actual deeds.
- That the Philippine Marines occupying the lands of the displaced civilians of Indanan and Panamao vacate these areas immediately in order for the people to return and be allowed to recoup what little they could salvage from their agricultural means of livelihood.
- That the United Nations and the entire international community condemn such actions and pressure national government to make fully accountable and culpable those who had conceptualized, designed, ordered and implemented said military operations.
- That the national government and the MNLF leadership sit down and focus on the root causes of the chronic armed conflicts in Sulu and incorporate the events of the Eid’l Fitr Incident into the ongoing Tripartite Review.
- That the media ban in Sulu be lifted to prevent future potentials for human rights violations and acts of impunity therein.
Signed this 11th day of December, 2009 at Cecille’s Convention Center, Tumaga Porcentro, Zamboanga City.
(sgd.) SAMMY P. MAULANA
Secretary-General
Consortium of Bangsamoro Civil Society
(CBCS)
(sgd.) FATMAWATI SALAPUDDIN
Secretary-General
Bangsamoro Women Solidarity Forum
(BWSF)
(sgd.) EDMUND GUMBAHALI
Lead Convenor
Concerned Citizens of Sulu
(sgd.) VANDRAZEL BIROWA
Chairman
Ittihadus Sabab, Inc.
(sgd.) MUNIB A. KAHAL
President
DAWAT
(sgd.) SHARIF ALUNAN HAIRAL
President
Halaqatul Qur’an Foundation
(sgd.) FARIDA HADJULANI
Chairwoman
Tanjuh Sulu, Inc.
(sgd.) JUMDA SABAANI
Executive Director
MURID, Inc.
(sgd.) SALIHA KALI
President
PAKAPASUG
(sgd.) JOCELYN BASALUDDIN
President
Jaga Kasulutan
(sgd.) ZURAIDA GUMBAHALI
Coordinator
Jaga Lupah Sug
Sunday, December 6, 2009
PRESS STATEMENT of Mindanao Peaceweavers
The Mindanao Peaceweavers (MPW) expresses alarm on the declaration of Martial Law in Maguindanao purportedly to enable government to move freely and get the witnesses and gather evidence without fear in relation to the massacre of 60 civilians, mostly women, in the Ampatuan stronghold last November 23.
The declaration, contained in Proclamation 1959, also suspended the writ of habeas corpus in the province. The declaration was prompted by reports of “armed groups in the province of Maguindanao” establishing positions “to resist government troops, thereby depriving the Executive of its powers and prerogatives to enforce the laws of the land and to maintain public order and safety” and of the “deteriorating condition of peace and order to the extent that the local judicial system and other government mechanisms in the province are not functioning, thus endangering public safety.”
Malacanang said armed groups, “numbering 40, 100, 300, and 400” are spread out in the province to prevent the arrests of the Ampatuans.
MPW believes that the declaration of Martial Law is a manifestation of the failure of governance in the country. There is no need to declare Martial Law for government to uphold the protection of the public and ensure the rule of law.
The culture of impunity traces itself back to Malacanang which has allowed local officials to convert their private armed groups into legal entities as civilian volunteer organizations (CVOs) despite the constitutional provision which bans private armed groups. This executive order should instead be immediately revoked. It is not only the Ampatuans who have built their own virtual private army. Tragedies like the Ampatuan massacre are waiting to happen if other "warlords" and local officials all over the country are allowed to maintain their own "armies". Already, we take note of a build up of these kinds of armed entities in Sulu, Visayas and Luzon.
While we call on the immediate abrogation of Martial Law in Maguindanao, MPW meanwhile calls on the "peace general", Lt. Gen Raymundo Ferrer, chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) Eastern Mindanao Command who is tasked to take administrative control of Maguindanao to continue to be circumspect, transparent and ensure the strict observance of human rights by his soldiers. (30)
The declaration, contained in Proclamation 1959, also suspended the writ of habeas corpus in the province. The declaration was prompted by reports of “armed groups in the province of Maguindanao” establishing positions “to resist government troops, thereby depriving the Executive of its powers and prerogatives to enforce the laws of the land and to maintain public order and safety” and of the “deteriorating condition of peace and order to the extent that the local judicial system and other government mechanisms in the province are not functioning, thus endangering public safety.”
Malacanang said armed groups, “numbering 40, 100, 300, and 400” are spread out in the province to prevent the arrests of the Ampatuans.
MPW believes that the declaration of Martial Law is a manifestation of the failure of governance in the country. There is no need to declare Martial Law for government to uphold the protection of the public and ensure the rule of law.
The culture of impunity traces itself back to Malacanang which has allowed local officials to convert their private armed groups into legal entities as civilian volunteer organizations (CVOs) despite the constitutional provision which bans private armed groups. This executive order should instead be immediately revoked. It is not only the Ampatuans who have built their own virtual private army. Tragedies like the Ampatuan massacre are waiting to happen if other "warlords" and local officials all over the country are allowed to maintain their own "armies". Already, we take note of a build up of these kinds of armed entities in Sulu, Visayas and Luzon.
While we call on the immediate abrogation of Martial Law in Maguindanao, MPW meanwhile calls on the "peace general", Lt. Gen Raymundo Ferrer, chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) Eastern Mindanao Command who is tasked to take administrative control of Maguindanao to continue to be circumspect, transparent and ensure the strict observance of human rights by his soldiers. (30)
Full text: Arroyo's declaration of martial law in Maguindanao
(Text of martial law declaration as read by Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita at 7 a.m. Saturday morning in Malacanang. President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo signed the proclamation on Friday evening.)
Proclamation 1959: Proclaiming a State of Martial Law and suspending the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in the province of Maguindanao except for certain areas.
Whereas, Proclamation No. 1946 was issued on 24 November 2009 declaring a state of emergency in the provinces of Maguindanao, Sultan Kudarat and the City of Cotabato for the purpose of preventing and suppressing lawless violence in the aforesaid areas.
Whereas, Sec. 18 Art. VII of the Constitution provides that “in case of invasion or rebellion, when public safety requires it, the President may, for a period not exceeding 60 days, suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or place the Philippines or any part thereof under martial law."
Whereas, Republic Act 6986 provides that “the crime of rebellion or insurrection is committed by rising publicly and taking arms against the government for the purpose of depriving the Chief Executive or the Legislature, wholly or partially, of any of their powers or prerogatives."
Whereas, heavily armed groups in the province of Maguindanao have established positions to resist government troops thereby depriving the Executive of its powers and prerogatives to enforce the laws of the land to maintain public order and safety.
Whereas, the condition of peace and order in the province of Maguindanao has deteriorated to the extent that local judicial system and other government mechanisms in the province are not functioning; thus, endangering public safety.
Whereas, the implementing operational guidelines of the GRP-MILF agreement on the General Cessation of Hostilities dated 14 Nov. 1997 provides that the following is considered a prohibited hostile act: “establishment of checkpoints except those necessary for the GRP’s enforcement and maintenance of peace and order and for the defense and security of the MILF in their identified areas as jointly determined by GRP and MILF."
Now, therefore I, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, President of the Republic of the Philippines, by virtue of the powers vested in me by the Constitution and by law, do hereby proclaim as follows:
Sec. 1: There is hereby declared a state of martial law in the province of Maguindanao except for the identified areas of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front as referred to in the implementing operational guidelines of the GRP-MILF agreement on the General Cessation of Hostilities.
Sec. 2: The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall likewise be suspended in the aforesaid area for the duration of the state of martial law.
Done in the City of Manila this 4th day of December in the Year of Our Lord, Two Thousand and Nine.
(Originally Signed)
Gloria M. Arroyo
By the President:
(Originally Signed)
Eduardo Ermita
Executive Secretary
Proclamation 1959: Proclaiming a State of Martial Law and suspending the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in the province of Maguindanao except for certain areas.
Whereas, Proclamation No. 1946 was issued on 24 November 2009 declaring a state of emergency in the provinces of Maguindanao, Sultan Kudarat and the City of Cotabato for the purpose of preventing and suppressing lawless violence in the aforesaid areas.
Whereas, Sec. 18 Art. VII of the Constitution provides that “in case of invasion or rebellion, when public safety requires it, the President may, for a period not exceeding 60 days, suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or place the Philippines or any part thereof under martial law."
Whereas, Republic Act 6986 provides that “the crime of rebellion or insurrection is committed by rising publicly and taking arms against the government for the purpose of depriving the Chief Executive or the Legislature, wholly or partially, of any of their powers or prerogatives."
Whereas, heavily armed groups in the province of Maguindanao have established positions to resist government troops thereby depriving the Executive of its powers and prerogatives to enforce the laws of the land to maintain public order and safety.
Whereas, the condition of peace and order in the province of Maguindanao has deteriorated to the extent that local judicial system and other government mechanisms in the province are not functioning; thus, endangering public safety.
Whereas, the implementing operational guidelines of the GRP-MILF agreement on the General Cessation of Hostilities dated 14 Nov. 1997 provides that the following is considered a prohibited hostile act: “establishment of checkpoints except those necessary for the GRP’s enforcement and maintenance of peace and order and for the defense and security of the MILF in their identified areas as jointly determined by GRP and MILF."
Now, therefore I, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, President of the Republic of the Philippines, by virtue of the powers vested in me by the Constitution and by law, do hereby proclaim as follows:
Sec. 1: There is hereby declared a state of martial law in the province of Maguindanao except for the identified areas of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front as referred to in the implementing operational guidelines of the GRP-MILF agreement on the General Cessation of Hostilities.
Sec. 2: The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall likewise be suspended in the aforesaid area for the duration of the state of martial law.
Done in the City of Manila this 4th day of December in the Year of Our Lord, Two Thousand and Nine.
(Originally Signed)
Gloria M. Arroyo
By the President:
(Originally Signed)
Eduardo Ermita
Executive Secretary
Friday, December 4, 2009
Arroyo orders martial law in Maguindanao
abs-cbnNEWS.com | 12/04/2009 7:51 PM
MANILA-(3rd UPDATE)-President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo has ordered a state of martial law in Maguindanao province, which could pave the way for the swift arrests of other suspects who have been linked to the November 23 massacre which killed 57 innocent civilians.
Government sources, who declined to be named, said martial law will take effect Saturday in Maguindanao. The sources said law enforcement teams were mobilized at 11 p.m. Friday to implement the order.
President Arroyo, who is also commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, reportedly approved the order Thursday night.
While martial law is in effect, Lt. Gen. Raymundo Ferrer, AFP Eastern Mindanao commander, will take over from Maguindanao Gov. Andal Ampatuan Sr., one of the suspects in the massacre, as the provincial military governor.
Asked for comment, EastMinCom spokesman Maj. Randolph Cabangbang said their unit "has not received any order for implementation."
Armed Forces spokesman Lt. Col. Romeo Brawner said the report was not true while Presidential Adviser on Mindanao Affairs Jesus Dureza said he will get back with the media "if there's definite word."
"Usually, martial law declaration is not announced until action starts on the ground. Otherwise, the purpose and objective is lost," he said in a text message.
Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile said he will await the report of the President to Congress, which is required by the Constitution.
Col. Leo Cresente Ferrer, acting commander of the 601st Brigade, said it was the first time he had heard news of a martial law declaration in Maguindanao. He added that he did not see the need for it since the military has everything under control.
Congress may not be able to convene
When previously asked about martial law in the south, House Speaker Prospero Nograles, said last Monday (not Friday as we earlier reported): "This issue must be recommended by the National Security cluster group and the military on the ground to enable the president to correctly assess the situation."
Nograles said Congress may find it hard to convene and assess the declaration of martial law.
Under the Constitution, "Congress, voting jointly, by a vote of at least a majority of all its Members in regular or special session, may revoke such proclamation or suspension, which revocation shall not be set aside by the President."
On the president's initiative, Congress may also "extend such proclamation or suspension for a period to be determined by the Congress, if the invasion or rebellion shall persist and public safety requires it."
Nograles said: "Martial law can be impractical at this time as it requires the approval of Congress, which will most likely have difficulty mustering a quorum due to the holidays and the election season. Even if we have a quorum, I don't think our senators and congressmen will favor this because it will certainly cause public uproar which can endanger their reelection bid."
"A limited state of emergency in Maguindanao and nearby provinces is sufficient to address the problem related to the Maguindanao massacre," he added.
5 other Ampatuans
On Friday, Justice Secretary Agnes Devanadera said they will issue subpoenas to Ampatuan Sr. and four other members of his clan for a preliminary investigation into their possible involvement in the massacre.
Devanadera said the other clan members who will be summoned to appear in the preliminary investigations are Datu Ulo Ampatuan, Mamasapano town Mayor Bahnarin Ampatuan, and vice-mayors Kanor Ampatuan and Tony Kenis Ampatuan.
Only Ampatuan Sr.'s son and namesake, Datu Unsay town Mayor Andal Ampatuan Jr., has been arrested and detained at the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) headquarters in Manila.
Ampatuan Jr. has been charged with 25 counts of murder.
Martial law under 1987 Charter
Under the 1987 Constitution, the declaration of martial law will suspend the writ of habeas corpus, which means some citizens may be arrested without warrants.
Section 18 of the Charter states: "The President shall be the Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces of the Philippines and whenever it becomes necessary, he may call out such armed forces to prevent or suppress lawless violence, invasion or rebellion. In case of invasion or rebellion, when the public safety requires it, he may, for a period not exceeding sixty days, suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or place the Philippines or any part thereof under martial law."
However, the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus only applies to persons charged for "rebellion" or offenses connected with an invasion.
"The suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall apply only to persons judicially charged for rebellion or offenses inherent in, or directly connected with, invasion," the Constitution also says.
It also adds: "During the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, any person thus arrested or detained shall be judicially charged within three days, otherwise he shall be released."
as of 12/05/2009 1:14 AM
Source: http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/12/04/09/arroyo-orders-martial-law-maguindanao
MANILA-(3rd UPDATE)-President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo has ordered a state of martial law in Maguindanao province, which could pave the way for the swift arrests of other suspects who have been linked to the November 23 massacre which killed 57 innocent civilians.
Government sources, who declined to be named, said martial law will take effect Saturday in Maguindanao. The sources said law enforcement teams were mobilized at 11 p.m. Friday to implement the order.
President Arroyo, who is also commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, reportedly approved the order Thursday night.
While martial law is in effect, Lt. Gen. Raymundo Ferrer, AFP Eastern Mindanao commander, will take over from Maguindanao Gov. Andal Ampatuan Sr., one of the suspects in the massacre, as the provincial military governor.
Asked for comment, EastMinCom spokesman Maj. Randolph Cabangbang said their unit "has not received any order for implementation."
Armed Forces spokesman Lt. Col. Romeo Brawner said the report was not true while Presidential Adviser on Mindanao Affairs Jesus Dureza said he will get back with the media "if there's definite word."
"Usually, martial law declaration is not announced until action starts on the ground. Otherwise, the purpose and objective is lost," he said in a text message.
Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile said he will await the report of the President to Congress, which is required by the Constitution.
Col. Leo Cresente Ferrer, acting commander of the 601st Brigade, said it was the first time he had heard news of a martial law declaration in Maguindanao. He added that he did not see the need for it since the military has everything under control.
Congress may not be able to convene
When previously asked about martial law in the south, House Speaker Prospero Nograles, said last Monday (not Friday as we earlier reported): "This issue must be recommended by the National Security cluster group and the military on the ground to enable the president to correctly assess the situation."
Nograles said Congress may find it hard to convene and assess the declaration of martial law.
Under the Constitution, "Congress, voting jointly, by a vote of at least a majority of all its Members in regular or special session, may revoke such proclamation or suspension, which revocation shall not be set aside by the President."
On the president's initiative, Congress may also "extend such proclamation or suspension for a period to be determined by the Congress, if the invasion or rebellion shall persist and public safety requires it."
Nograles said: "Martial law can be impractical at this time as it requires the approval of Congress, which will most likely have difficulty mustering a quorum due to the holidays and the election season. Even if we have a quorum, I don't think our senators and congressmen will favor this because it will certainly cause public uproar which can endanger their reelection bid."
"A limited state of emergency in Maguindanao and nearby provinces is sufficient to address the problem related to the Maguindanao massacre," he added.
5 other Ampatuans
On Friday, Justice Secretary Agnes Devanadera said they will issue subpoenas to Ampatuan Sr. and four other members of his clan for a preliminary investigation into their possible involvement in the massacre.
Devanadera said the other clan members who will be summoned to appear in the preliminary investigations are Datu Ulo Ampatuan, Mamasapano town Mayor Bahnarin Ampatuan, and vice-mayors Kanor Ampatuan and Tony Kenis Ampatuan.
Only Ampatuan Sr.'s son and namesake, Datu Unsay town Mayor Andal Ampatuan Jr., has been arrested and detained at the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) headquarters in Manila.
Ampatuan Jr. has been charged with 25 counts of murder.
Martial law under 1987 Charter
Under the 1987 Constitution, the declaration of martial law will suspend the writ of habeas corpus, which means some citizens may be arrested without warrants.
Section 18 of the Charter states: "The President shall be the Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces of the Philippines and whenever it becomes necessary, he may call out such armed forces to prevent or suppress lawless violence, invasion or rebellion. In case of invasion or rebellion, when the public safety requires it, he may, for a period not exceeding sixty days, suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or place the Philippines or any part thereof under martial law."
However, the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus only applies to persons charged for "rebellion" or offenses connected with an invasion.
"The suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall apply only to persons judicially charged for rebellion or offenses inherent in, or directly connected with, invasion," the Constitution also says.
It also adds: "During the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, any person thus arrested or detained shall be judicially charged within three days, otherwise he shall be released."
as of 12/05/2009 1:14 AM
Source: http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/12/04/09/arroyo-orders-martial-law-maguindanao
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Moro civil society groups craft Bangsamoro agenda
MORO civil society organization (CSO) members gathered for a two-day crafting of a Comprehensive Bangsamoro Development Agenda (CBDA) at Regency Inn, Saturday.
A written agenda will be crafted containing the unified hope of the Moro people in the country. This document is planned to be included in the matters to be discussed in the forthcoming peace talks between the government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), Consortium of Bangsamoro Civil Society chair Guiamel Alim said.
The Congress dubbed “Renewed Consensus and Solidarity Towards the Attainment of the Bangsamoro’s Self-Determinaton” would collect from 100 CSO representatives in the country.
Alim said the CBDA consists of 13 themes comprising issues the Moro people want covered by the peace negotiations. The issues include women and children, social services and health, land tenure, environment, economic development, education, youth, peace and security, relationship with non-Moros, human rights, culture, and political system, Alim said.
Alim also said that the Moro CSO wants to be part of the peace talks, which will define what is the future of the Moro government.
“Alam ho namin na ang (MILF) ay ginagawa na nila yung mga paraan para magkasundo sa gobyerno upang ma-define ang political status ng Bangsamoro. Whether ito man ay autonomy or federal yan po ay ipipresent na,” Alim said.
After constituting the CBDA, Alim said the CSO will lobby it to the government. “I-aadvocate ito ng Congress for constituent building. This document will serve as a political agreement na it will serve the purpose of everyone.”
“Alam ko po na may mga reaction na naririnig lang ang ‘Bangsamoro’ eh natatakot na. yan ho ay hindi po dapat mangyari. Ang Bangsamoro po ay katulad rin ng bawat Pilipino. At sila po ay magiging tunay na Pilipino kung sila ay mabibigyan ng maayos na karapatan,” Alim said.
“The right to self-determination does not only cover the right of the people to determine their political status, but also the right to freely pursue their economic, social, and cultural development,” Alim said in vernacular.
He said Bangsamoro people also ask the peace panel to reconsider the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) which the Supreme Court discarded in October last year for purportedly being unconstitutional.
Another aspiration is that they opt for the MOA-AD to establish a Bangsamoro Juridical Entity as an alternative to an independent Islamic State for the Bangsamoro People, Alim said.
Mindanao State University of Marawi City professor Dr. Sukarno Tanggol said in a discussion that the Moro does not know where to turn to in case of judiciary matters.
“Hindi natin alam saan lalapit. Wala tayong sistema. Kaya naiisip ko na kailangan nating gumawa ng paraan para ang mga anak natin hindi na mahihirapan,” he said. (JCZ)
Published in the Sun.Star Davao newspaper on August 17, 2009.
A written agenda will be crafted containing the unified hope of the Moro people in the country. This document is planned to be included in the matters to be discussed in the forthcoming peace talks between the government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), Consortium of Bangsamoro Civil Society chair Guiamel Alim said.
The Congress dubbed “Renewed Consensus and Solidarity Towards the Attainment of the Bangsamoro’s Self-Determinaton” would collect from 100 CSO representatives in the country.
Alim said the CBDA consists of 13 themes comprising issues the Moro people want covered by the peace negotiations. The issues include women and children, social services and health, land tenure, environment, economic development, education, youth, peace and security, relationship with non-Moros, human rights, culture, and political system, Alim said.
Alim also said that the Moro CSO wants to be part of the peace talks, which will define what is the future of the Moro government.
“Alam ho namin na ang (MILF) ay ginagawa na nila yung mga paraan para magkasundo sa gobyerno upang ma-define ang political status ng Bangsamoro. Whether ito man ay autonomy or federal yan po ay ipipresent na,” Alim said.
After constituting the CBDA, Alim said the CSO will lobby it to the government. “I-aadvocate ito ng Congress for constituent building. This document will serve as a political agreement na it will serve the purpose of everyone.”
“Alam ko po na may mga reaction na naririnig lang ang ‘Bangsamoro’ eh natatakot na. yan ho ay hindi po dapat mangyari. Ang Bangsamoro po ay katulad rin ng bawat Pilipino. At sila po ay magiging tunay na Pilipino kung sila ay mabibigyan ng maayos na karapatan,” Alim said.
“The right to self-determination does not only cover the right of the people to determine their political status, but also the right to freely pursue their economic, social, and cultural development,” Alim said in vernacular.
He said Bangsamoro people also ask the peace panel to reconsider the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) which the Supreme Court discarded in October last year for purportedly being unconstitutional.
Another aspiration is that they opt for the MOA-AD to establish a Bangsamoro Juridical Entity as an alternative to an independent Islamic State for the Bangsamoro People, Alim said.
Mindanao State University of Marawi City professor Dr. Sukarno Tanggol said in a discussion that the Moro does not know where to turn to in case of judiciary matters.
“Hindi natin alam saan lalapit. Wala tayong sistema. Kaya naiisip ko na kailangan nating gumawa ng paraan para ang mga anak natin hindi na mahihirapan,” he said. (JCZ)
Published in the Sun.Star Davao newspaper on August 17, 2009.
Monday, November 30, 2009
STATEMENT FROM UNYPHIL –WOMEN ON THE MAGUINDANAO MASSACRE
We at UnYPhil –Women condemn and denounce in the strongest possible terms the massacre of at least 57 innocent civilians in Ampatuan, Maguindanao last 23 November 2009. We deplore such inhumane and senseless act of aggression and cruelty that did not even spare unarmed innocent men and women. The fact that such a plan was even hatched at all speaks only of a shamelessness that one could actually get away with such flagrant, brazen and wanton defiance of the law and with such utter disregard for the sanctity of human lives.
We sincerely sympathise and we express our heartfelt condolences to the families of the victims. Though no words of appeasement and comfort could ever take away your anguish, we stand with you now and offer you our steadfast support as you carry on with your crusade and relentless search for justice. We will be by your side as we see the tragedy not as a tragedy of one person, one family, but rather a tragedy for all peace-loving peoples.
Now that investigations are under way, we urge all sectors to do their respective civic and moral duty to ensure that the perpetrators of this most heinous crime be brought to justice.
We call on the government to act with haste and without delay in effectively mobilizing all its resources to uncover the truth and then to promptly carry out a just punishment on the violators of the law. The government has already given the impression of treating this massacre of epic proportions inappropriately to say the least. It should now work to obliterate such impression and thus restore the people’s faith and belief that the justice system in this country may still be working and can still work.
We call on the perpetrators of this dastardly crime to come out in the open and finally admit their culpability. The scale of the massacre warrants that the people will no longer take this in stride even in light of the culture of impunity that has now taken over our land. Thus, we appeal to the guilty parties to, unimaginable it may be, listen to their inner voice, to be guided by their conscience and to come out so to prevent further bloodshed.
We call on everyone, especially those in the conflict-affected areas, to continue exercising vigilance not only to prevent a similar tragedy from happening again but to ensure that this will not go the way previous tragedies have gone, in the deep recesses of our memories. That unspeakable and atrocious incident spilled too much precious blood to be simply forgotten eventually.
One week on, we still continue to struggle with what truly happened. The vulnerability of peace-loving peoples against armed groups, never been so brazenly exhibited, has once again been magnified. But amidst such a violent environment, we remain committed to patiently and tirelessly work to achieve the peace and security that have so far proven to be quite elusive. Peace and non-violence will ultimately prevail.
We sincerely sympathise and we express our heartfelt condolences to the families of the victims. Though no words of appeasement and comfort could ever take away your anguish, we stand with you now and offer you our steadfast support as you carry on with your crusade and relentless search for justice. We will be by your side as we see the tragedy not as a tragedy of one person, one family, but rather a tragedy for all peace-loving peoples.
Now that investigations are under way, we urge all sectors to do their respective civic and moral duty to ensure that the perpetrators of this most heinous crime be brought to justice.
We call on the government to act with haste and without delay in effectively mobilizing all its resources to uncover the truth and then to promptly carry out a just punishment on the violators of the law. The government has already given the impression of treating this massacre of epic proportions inappropriately to say the least. It should now work to obliterate such impression and thus restore the people’s faith and belief that the justice system in this country may still be working and can still work.
We call on the perpetrators of this dastardly crime to come out in the open and finally admit their culpability. The scale of the massacre warrants that the people will no longer take this in stride even in light of the culture of impunity that has now taken over our land. Thus, we appeal to the guilty parties to, unimaginable it may be, listen to their inner voice, to be guided by their conscience and to come out so to prevent further bloodshed.
We call on everyone, especially those in the conflict-affected areas, to continue exercising vigilance not only to prevent a similar tragedy from happening again but to ensure that this will not go the way previous tragedies have gone, in the deep recesses of our memories. That unspeakable and atrocious incident spilled too much precious blood to be simply forgotten eventually.
One week on, we still continue to struggle with what truly happened. The vulnerability of peace-loving peoples against armed groups, never been so brazenly exhibited, has once again been magnified. But amidst such a violent environment, we remain committed to patiently and tirelessly work to achieve the peace and security that have so far proven to be quite elusive. Peace and non-violence will ultimately prevail.
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
2007 Mindanews Special Report: It's still all in the family
12,395 Mindanawons vie for 4,930 posts
1st of a series
DAVAO CITY (MindaNews/03 May 2007) – Twelve thousand three hundred ninety five Mindanawons are vying for a total of 4,930 posts across Mindanao’s 27 provinces and 27 cities, many of them bearing the same family or middle names.
Two new provinces were created in Mindanao as of December 2006: Dinagat Islands, carved out of seven towns of Surigao del Norte and Shariff Kabunsuan, carved out of Maguindanao.
Of 56 seats for Mindanao in the House of Representatives, six are new – one each for the new provinces of Dinagat and Shariff, and additional one each for Sultan Kudarat, Zamboanga Sibugay, Cagayan de Oro City and Zamboanga City.
Lawyer and provincial board member Solema Jubilan, who died from accidental gunfire on April 28 was substituted by her younger sister Zaida Jubilan-Rinsulat, the provincial social welfare and development officer.
Mindanao’s candidates are vying for 56 congressional seats; 27 city mayors; 27 vice mayors; 27 governors; 27 vice governors; 422 municipal mayors; 422 vice mayors; 256 provincial board members; 300 city councilors, 3,366 municipal councilors.
Seventy-nine candidates are running for the 27 city mayoral seats while 69 candidates are running for the 27 gubernatorial seats.
In Agusan del Norte, the Amantes versus the Plazas dominate the political scene with the Amante patriarch, Edelmiro and Plaza matriarch, Valentina, running for governor.
Incumbent Governor Erlpe John Amante is running for representative while Angelica Rosedell Amante, former governor and incumbent representative, is running for Butuan City mayor against incumbent mayor Democrito Plaza II.
In Agusan del Sur, Governor Adolph Edward Plaza is seeking a third term while brother Rodolfo Rodrigo is also seeking a third term in the lone congressional district.
In Basilan, three-term governor Wahab Akbar is running for congressman while his 1st wife Jum is running for mayor against three-term Basilan Representative and former governor Gerry Salapuddin. Akbar's 2nd wife, Nur-in is running for mayor of Lamitan while 3rd wife Cherry Lyn Santos is running for mayor of Isabela City.
Akbar’s two nephews, Waluso Mayor Sakib Salajin and Lantawan Mayor Tahira Ismail are running for reelection. Also, a new municipality has been added to Basilan’s seven – Akbar, carved out of Tipo-tipo and Tuburan towns.
In Bukidnon, it’s Zubiri vs Acosta with Zubiri patriarch Jose seeking reelection as governor against Rep. Nereus Acosta who is completing his third term in Congress.
Zubiri’s son, Juan Miguel is running for senator while another son, Jose III, is running for the congressional seat his brother Miguel is vacating. Nephew Ignacio is seeking reelection as Malaybalay City vice mayor.
Acosta’s sister, Malou, is running for the seat he is vacating while his mother, Socorro, a former three-term representative, is seeking reelection as mayor of Manolo Fortich. Malou is facing the controversial former Comelec commissioner Virgilio “Hello Garci” Garcillano.
In Camiguin, the Romualdos are still lording it over but the patriarch, former Camiguin Governor Pedro Romualdo, who is running for Congress is now facing his own son, Mambajao Mayor Noordin Efigenio "Gogo" Romualdo, as opponent.
Gogo is allied with former governor Antonieto Gallardo who is making a comeback against three-term Rep. Jurdin Jesus, Gogo’s brother.
In Compostela Valley, three-term governor Jose Caballero is running for the 2nd congressional district seat against Rommel Amatong, son of former Davao del Norte governor and Compostela Valley Rep. Prospero Amatong.
Caballero’s daughter, Kristina Mae, a provincial board member, is running for governor.
In Davao del Norte, it would have been an uncle versus nephew race had not the family intervened. Three-term Rep. Antonio Floirendo, Jr., backed out of an earlier plan to run for governor in favor of his uncle, Rodolfo del Rosario, a former governor and congressman. Taking over Floirendo’s congressional seat is Anton Floirendo Lagdameo, whose wife is actress Dawn Zulueta.
In Davao del Sur, it’s still the Bautistas versus the Cagas family with Rep. Douglas Cagas, a former governor, eyeing that seat again against Rep. Claude Bautista.
Governor Benjamin Bautista, Jr. is running for the 2nd congressional district while Cagas’s son, Mark is running for the 1st congressional district.
In Davao Oriental, Governor Elena Palma Gil (Lakas-CMD) is seeking reelection against Rep. Corazon Malanyaon (Kampi).
Former three-term representative Thelma Almario is staging a comeback in Congress while her son Mayo, who is completing his third term in Congress, is running for vice governor.
In Lanao del Norte, it’s the Dimaporo family, still.
Governor Imelda Quibranza-Dimaporo, who is completing her third term, is running for 1st district representative while husband Abdullah (Bobby), also a former governor, is running for 2nd district representative.
Their eldest son, Khalid, is running for governor.
The elder Dimaporo’s brother, Marcos Abdulrahman, is also running for the 2nd congressional seat.
Three-term representative Cirilo Alipio Badelles (1st district), and son of the late congressman Mariano Badelles, fielded his daughter-lawyer Angelique Badelles-Bacareza to run for the seat he is vacating. Badelles’ daughter is facing Imelda Dimaporo who is finishing her gubernatorial term on June 30. (Carolyn O. Arguillas with reports from Violeta M. Gloria and Walter Balane/MindaNews)
Source: http://www.mindanews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2315&Itemid=222
More political dynasties
2nd of a series
DAVAO CITY (MindaNews/04 May 2007) – Years ago in Mindanao, political dynasties were mostly associated with the Moro. These days, they’re more associated with the non-Moro.
In the past, they ruled in succession -- e.g. father first then the eldest son. These days, they rule altogether - husbands and wifves, fathers and sons, fathers and daughters, mothers and daughters, mothers and sons, brothers, sisters, uncles and nephews.
Here’s a continuation of the list of candidates in Mindanao, many of them bearing the same family names.
In Lanao del Sur, Gov. Aleem Basher Manalao is running for reelection against three-term Rep. Benasing Macarambon, Jr.; three-term Marawi City mayor Omar Solitario Ali and Mamintal Adiong, Jr.
In the first congressional district, it’s a choice between reelectionist Faisah Dumarpa and Hamid Barra. The second district is contested by lawyer Pangalian Balindong, Macabangkit Lanto, Aleem Abdulmalik Laguindab and laweyr Saduddin Alauya.
In Maguindanao, Governor Andal Ampatuan and 21 of his 22 town mayors are running unopposed. Only the town of Pagalungan is contested.
But the congressional race in the first district is another story. Didagen Dilangalen wants to return to his former seat while his wife, the incumbent Rep. Bai Sendig Dilangalen, is running for Cotabato City mayor against Muslimin Sema, whose wife, Bai Sandra, Didagen Dilangalen is facing at the polls.
In Misamis Occidental, Governor Leo Loreto Ocampos is running unopposed.
In Misamis Oriental, Governor Oscar Moreno (Lakas CMD Coaltion) is eyeing a second term against three-term Rep. Augusto Baculio Jr., (Kampi/2nd district).
In the 1st congressional district, it’s Rep. Danilo Lagas (Lakas) against Kampi’s Michael Angelo Paderanga.
Vice governor Julio Uy (PMP) is running for 2nd District representative against Tagoloan town mayor Yevgeny "Bambi" Emano (Lakas CMD), son of Cagayan de Oro City’s mayor Vicente Emano, Paul Andy Calingin, son of The elder Emano is running for vice mayor. The son of former governor Antonio Calingin,
Kampi's Rex Baculio, son of Augusto Baculio Jr., is also running for 2nd district representative along with Paul Andy Calingin (NPC), son of former Misamis Oriental Governor Antonio "Bong" Calingin. The elder Calingin is running for mayor of Cagayan de Oro City.
In North Cotabato, three-term governor Emmanuel Pinol is running for vice governor against three-term 2nd district Rep. Gregorio Ipong. Pinol’s younger brother, Bernardo, Jr., the provincial administrator, is running for Congress in the 2nd district against former Rep. Gregorio Andolana, Evaristo Gana and substitute-candidate Zaida Jubilan-Rinsulat, provincial social welfare officer.
Another brother, Efren is running for reelection as mayor of Magpet while yet another brother, Joselito, incumbent vice mayor of M’lang town, is running for mayor.
Three-term Carmen Mayor Rogelio Talino is running for governor against Pinol’s outgoing vice governor, Jesus Sacdalan. Four others are running against them. Talino’s wife, Noemi, is running for Carmen mayor while daughter, Emmylou Talino-Santos-Mendoza, is seeking a third term as representative of the 1st district, against three-term Kabacan mayor Luzviminda Tan.
In Sarangani, Governor Rene Miguel Dominguez (Sarro-Kampi) is seeking reelection against Francis Martinez, who listed “NGO-practitioner” as his profession.
Vice Governor Bridget Chiongbian-Huang (Lakas) is seeking reelection against his cousin, Steve Chiongbian Solon (Kampi).
Bridget’s father, Erwin Chiongbian is seeking reelection against former governor Miguel Escobar.
Solon is supported by Bridget’s father, Erwin. Bridget fell from grace after asking someone to withdraw her certificate of candidacy for vice governor in favor of governor. The shift of candidacy did not push through.
In Shariff Kabunsuan, OIC Governor Bimbo Sinsuat, former Maguindanao vice governor before Shariff was carved out of Maguindanao, is running for governor against three-term Sultan Kudarat town mayor Tocao Mastura and Zacaria Candao, former governor of Maguindanao and the first governor of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao.
In South Cotabato, Governor Daisy Avance-Fuentes also doesn’t need to campaign as she is sure to win against fellow South Cotabatenos, Nane Rotone Neulid alias “Power Neuli” and Ephraim Paradao Defino, Jr.
In the congressional race in the second district, Rep. Arthur Pingoy Jr. is facing former three-term governor Hilario de Pedro III while Rep. Darlene Antonino-Custodio who is seeking a third term is facing international boxing champion Manny Pacquiao.
In Sultan Kudarat, three-term governor Pax Mangudadatu (Kampi) is running for congressman in the first district against former Rep. Angelo Montilla (NPC) while Mangudadatu’s son, Rep. Suharto Mangudadatu, is running for governor.
In Sulu, Governor Benjamin Loong is running for a second term against former governor Sakur Tan and detained Moro leader Nur Misuari. Councilor Cocoy Tulawie, a member of the Consortium of Bangsamoro Civil Society, is running for congressman against former governors Tupay Loong and Yusoph Jikiri.
In Surigao del Norte, the potential Barbers versus Ecleo clash has been avoided with the creation of Dinagat Islands for the Ecleos’ turf. Geraldine Ecleo Villaroman, daughter of Rep. Glenda Ecleo who was appointed OIC Governor is running for governor.
Surigao del Norte Governor Robert Lyndon Barbers is seeking reelection. He will be facing former governor Francisco Matugas whose brother, Ernesto is running for Surigao City mayor. Barbers’ brother, Robert Ace is seeking reelection as representative.
In Surigao del Sur, Governor Vicente Pimentel is facing a relatively unknown opponent while his brother Alexander, mayor of Tandag town, is running unopposed.
Rep. Prospero Pichay is running for senator while his brother Philip is running for the post he is vacating, against Dr. Greg Murillo, son of the late governor Gregorio Murillo, Sr. and brother of former Governor Primo Murillo, and human rights lawyer Antonio Azarcon, whose streamer reads: “dili garboso, dili kawatan.”
In the other congressional district, Jesnar Falcon is running for reelection against Mar Alvizo, Enciong Garay and Alejandro Asis. Falcon’s son, Jed, is running for mayor of Bislig City.
In Tawi-tawi, Governor Sadikul Sahali is facing former governor Rashidin Matba while in the lone congressional district, Rep. Nur Jaafar; Hajji Annuar Abubakar, lone district representative who was removed a few months ago after an electoral protest showed he actually lost to Jaafar; and former ARMM regional speaker Pocholo Abubakar. The two Abubakars are not related.
Governor Sahali’s daughter, Ruby, former ARMM Social Welfare Secretary, is running for vice governor against Itin Usman.
In Zamboanga del Norte Gov. Rolando Yebes is running against Dipolog City Mayor Roberto Uy of Lakas (whose wife Evelyn is running for Dipolog City mayor) and an independent bet named Roberto Yang Uy.
But the Jalosjos presence is still felt despite the detention of Romeo Jalosjos. His sister Celia Jalosjos-Carreon is seeking reelection in the 1st congressional district while brother Cesar is seeking reelection in the 3rd. Another brother, Dominador, is seeking reelection as mayor of Dapitan City.
Another Jalosjos, Seth Frederick Pal Bullet, is running for provincial board member in the first district.
In Zamboanga del Sur, Governor Aurora Cerilles (Kampi) is seeking reelection against Tirsendo Calamba Poloyapoy. The governor’s husband, Antonio (NPC), a former governor, is seeking reelection as representative of the second district against Filomena San Juan. In the first district, former governor Isidoro Real is seeking reelection against three opponents.
In Zamboanga Sibugay, Governor George Hofer (Kampi) is seeking reelection against Alfredo Chu. The governor’s daughter, Dr. Dulce Ann K. Hofer, is running for Congress 2nd district against incumbent Belma Cabilao. Cabilao was a three-term representative of the 3rd district of Zamboanga del Sur before it was carved out of Zamboanga del Sur. [Last part tomorrow: the city mayors] (Carolyn O. Arguillas with reports from Allen V. Estabillo and Violeta M. Gloria/MindaNews)
Source: http://www.mindanews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2316
Not only in the countryside but in the cities, too
Last of three parts
DAVAO CITY (MindaNews/05 May 2007) – It’s not just in the countryside but in the cities, too, these families lording it over the political landscape in Mindanao, with Davao City as the latest entrant – a father and daughter team in the executive and a father and son team at the legislative.
Mayor Rodrigo Duterte is running for a third term as mayor, his sixth actually since 1988, with a three-year term as Davao City representative of the first district between. His daughter Sara, 28, single, also a lawyer like him, makes a first bid at politics as his running mate.
Sara does not think they’re building a political dynasty. "The people have a choice whether they will vote for us. That is why we cannot impose ourselves upon them," she earlier told MindaNews.
"We are in a democracy where the people are assured of choosing their candidates," she said.
Sara’s grandfather, Vicente, the father of Rodrigo, was governor of the undivided Davao province.
In the first congressional district, Representative (1st district) and Deputy Majority Floorleader Prospero Nograles is running for a third term while his son, Karlo, a laywer and his chief of staff, is running for Congress, too, via a party-list group believed to be backed by Malacanang, Kalahi.
In Bislig, Rep. Jed Falcon is running for mayor against Mayor Alberto Tan. Jed is the son of Jesnar who wants to return to Congress, having served there from 1995 to 2004.
In Butuan, it’s still Amante versus Plaza with Democrito Plaza II running against former Agusan del Norte and former Rep. Angel Amante. Plaza’s mother Valentina, and Angel’s father, Edelmiro are running for governor of Agusan del Norte.
In Cagayan de Oro City, three-term Mayor Vicente Emano is running for vice mayor. Former mayor Pablo Magtajas (PDP-Laban/ UNO) is running against three-term Rep. Constantino Jaraula (Lakas CMD), former Misamis Oriental governor Antonio Calingin, and independent candidates Felix Borres and Rhona Canoy. Rhona is the daughter of former Cagayan de Oro mayor Reuben Canoy who is running as an independent candidate for the city’s 1st congressional district, against vice mayor Michelle Tagarda-Spiers, Antonio Soriano, Annie Daba, Camilo Miguel Montesa and Henry Bacal.
Emano’s son Yevgeny, Tagoloan mayor, is running for congressman in the 2nd district of Misamis Oriental against Calingin’s son, Paul Andy; Misamis Oriental Vice Gov. Julio Uy and Rex Baculio, son of Rep. Agusto Baculio, Jr.
Cotabato Mayor Muslimin Sema is running against Rep. Bai Sendig Dilangalen, wife of Didagen Dilangalen who wants to reclaim his former seat in Congress; Estrellita Juliano, who filed a protest against Sema’s proclamation in 2004; former city fire marshal Samad Candao, Banginda Sapi and Habib Ibrahim.
In Dapitan, it’s a toss-up between James Adasa and Dominador Garcia Jalosjos, Jr. for mayor. Jalosjos is seeking reelection. His brother Cesar is running for 3rd district representative of Zamboanga del Norte while sister Cecilia Jalosjos-Carreon is running for 1st district reprersentative.
In Digos City, it’s Mayor Arsenio Latasa (NPC) versus Toto Ymalay.
Dipolog’s three-term Rep. Roseller Barinaga wants to return to the city as mayor against Evelyn Tang Uy, wife of three-term mayor Robert Uy.
In General Santos, Mayor Pedro Acharon is running against former mayor Rosalita Nunez and Shirlyn Banas.
In Gingoog, Mayor Ruthie de lara Guingona is facing former mayor Romulo Rodriguez and Ernesto Rodriguez, who is facing a petition for disqualification for allegedly being a nuisance candidate.
Guingona is the wife of former Vice President Teofisto Guingona and mother to Bukidnon 2nd district Rep. Teofisto Guingona III.
In Iligan, it’s a return bout between Mayor Lawrence Cruz (NPC) and former mayor Franklin Quijano (Lakas).
In Isabela City, Cherry Santos-Akbar, third wife of three-term governor Wahab Akbar, is running for mayor against Mayor Rodolfo Tan, who ran and won the vice mayoralty in 2004 but assumed the post of mayor of Isabela after Mayor Luis R. Biel II was killed in March last year. Number one councilor Luis R. Biel VI, assumed the post of vice mayor.
In the Island Garden City of Samal, three-term mayor Rogelio Antalan is not running for any post but his brother, Aniano, a former mayor of Kaputian town, is running for mayor.
In Kidapawan, Mayor Rodolfo Gantuangco (Kampi) is facing four opponents: Rosalio Bombeo (Lakas), Marilou Mahinay (Ind), Efren Lapore (Ind), and Alfredo Purugganan (Ind).
Koronadal Mayor Fernando Miguel (Kampi) is running against Atty. Jose Ledda, Jr., last-termer vice mayor.
In Malaybalay, Mayor Florencio Flores, Jr., is running against a political unknown.
In Marawi, three-term mayor Omar Solitario Ali is running for governor of Lanao del Sur. Running for city mayor are his cousin, Sultan Fahad “Pre” Salic (some identify him to be a brother of Omar); Vice Mayor Yusoph Khosbari “YK” Salic, cousin of the mayor; former mayor Abbas Basman, and Engr. Nata Pangarungan.
Oroquieta City mayor Jorge Almonte is seeking reelection against vice mayor Lemuel Acosta.
In Ozamiz City, Mayor Reynaldo Parojinog is running unopposed.
Pagadian mayor Samuel Co is seeking reelection against former Rep. Sandy Urro.
Panabo Mayor Rey Gavina is completing his third term. Running for city mayor are vice mayor Ruperto Cagape and councilor Joe Silvosa.
Surigao mayor Alfonso Casurra is running against Ernesto Matugas, brother of former governor Francisco Matugas who is running against Governor Robert Lyndón Barbers.
In Tacurong, Mayor Lino Montilla of NPC is running against Jonald Lagon of Kampi and Ralen Bernardo of Lakas. Mayor Montilla’s brother, Angelo, is running for 1st district congressman of Sultan Kudarat province, against outgoing governor Pax Mangudadatu. Mangudadatu’s son, Suharto is running for governor.
In Tagum, Mayor Rey Uy is running against Davao del Norte board member Meliton Lemos.
Tangub Mayor Jennifer Wee-Tan is running against board member Morpheus Agot
In Valencia, Mayor Jose M. Galario, Jr. is running against former mayor and former representative Berthobal Anceta.and former vice mayor Leandro Jose Catarata, son of a former mayor while Valencia was still a municipality.
In Zamboanga City, Mayor Celso Lobregat is facing a priest in the elections: Msgr Crisanto dela Cruz. (Carolyn O. Arguillas with reports from Violeta M. Gloria, Samira A. Gutoc, Williamor A. Magbanua, Walter I. Balane and Allen V. Estabillo/MindaNews)
Source: http://www.mindanews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2325
1st of a series
DAVAO CITY (MindaNews/03 May 2007) – Twelve thousand three hundred ninety five Mindanawons are vying for a total of 4,930 posts across Mindanao’s 27 provinces and 27 cities, many of them bearing the same family or middle names.
Two new provinces were created in Mindanao as of December 2006: Dinagat Islands, carved out of seven towns of Surigao del Norte and Shariff Kabunsuan, carved out of Maguindanao.
Of 56 seats for Mindanao in the House of Representatives, six are new – one each for the new provinces of Dinagat and Shariff, and additional one each for Sultan Kudarat, Zamboanga Sibugay, Cagayan de Oro City and Zamboanga City.
Lawyer and provincial board member Solema Jubilan, who died from accidental gunfire on April 28 was substituted by her younger sister Zaida Jubilan-Rinsulat, the provincial social welfare and development officer.
Mindanao’s candidates are vying for 56 congressional seats; 27 city mayors; 27 vice mayors; 27 governors; 27 vice governors; 422 municipal mayors; 422 vice mayors; 256 provincial board members; 300 city councilors, 3,366 municipal councilors.
Seventy-nine candidates are running for the 27 city mayoral seats while 69 candidates are running for the 27 gubernatorial seats.
In Agusan del Norte, the Amantes versus the Plazas dominate the political scene with the Amante patriarch, Edelmiro and Plaza matriarch, Valentina, running for governor.
Incumbent Governor Erlpe John Amante is running for representative while Angelica Rosedell Amante, former governor and incumbent representative, is running for Butuan City mayor against incumbent mayor Democrito Plaza II.
In Agusan del Sur, Governor Adolph Edward Plaza is seeking a third term while brother Rodolfo Rodrigo is also seeking a third term in the lone congressional district.
In Basilan, three-term governor Wahab Akbar is running for congressman while his 1st wife Jum is running for mayor against three-term Basilan Representative and former governor Gerry Salapuddin. Akbar's 2nd wife, Nur-in is running for mayor of Lamitan while 3rd wife Cherry Lyn Santos is running for mayor of Isabela City.
Akbar’s two nephews, Waluso Mayor Sakib Salajin and Lantawan Mayor Tahira Ismail are running for reelection. Also, a new municipality has been added to Basilan’s seven – Akbar, carved out of Tipo-tipo and Tuburan towns.
In Bukidnon, it’s Zubiri vs Acosta with Zubiri patriarch Jose seeking reelection as governor against Rep. Nereus Acosta who is completing his third term in Congress.
Zubiri’s son, Juan Miguel is running for senator while another son, Jose III, is running for the congressional seat his brother Miguel is vacating. Nephew Ignacio is seeking reelection as Malaybalay City vice mayor.
Acosta’s sister, Malou, is running for the seat he is vacating while his mother, Socorro, a former three-term representative, is seeking reelection as mayor of Manolo Fortich. Malou is facing the controversial former Comelec commissioner Virgilio “Hello Garci” Garcillano.
In Camiguin, the Romualdos are still lording it over but the patriarch, former Camiguin Governor Pedro Romualdo, who is running for Congress is now facing his own son, Mambajao Mayor Noordin Efigenio "Gogo" Romualdo, as opponent.
Gogo is allied with former governor Antonieto Gallardo who is making a comeback against three-term Rep. Jurdin Jesus, Gogo’s brother.
In Compostela Valley, three-term governor Jose Caballero is running for the 2nd congressional district seat against Rommel Amatong, son of former Davao del Norte governor and Compostela Valley Rep. Prospero Amatong.
Caballero’s daughter, Kristina Mae, a provincial board member, is running for governor.
In Davao del Norte, it would have been an uncle versus nephew race had not the family intervened. Three-term Rep. Antonio Floirendo, Jr., backed out of an earlier plan to run for governor in favor of his uncle, Rodolfo del Rosario, a former governor and congressman. Taking over Floirendo’s congressional seat is Anton Floirendo Lagdameo, whose wife is actress Dawn Zulueta.
In Davao del Sur, it’s still the Bautistas versus the Cagas family with Rep. Douglas Cagas, a former governor, eyeing that seat again against Rep. Claude Bautista.
Governor Benjamin Bautista, Jr. is running for the 2nd congressional district while Cagas’s son, Mark is running for the 1st congressional district.
In Davao Oriental, Governor Elena Palma Gil (Lakas-CMD) is seeking reelection against Rep. Corazon Malanyaon (Kampi).
Former three-term representative Thelma Almario is staging a comeback in Congress while her son Mayo, who is completing his third term in Congress, is running for vice governor.
In Lanao del Norte, it’s the Dimaporo family, still.
Governor Imelda Quibranza-Dimaporo, who is completing her third term, is running for 1st district representative while husband Abdullah (Bobby), also a former governor, is running for 2nd district representative.
Their eldest son, Khalid, is running for governor.
The elder Dimaporo’s brother, Marcos Abdulrahman, is also running for the 2nd congressional seat.
Three-term representative Cirilo Alipio Badelles (1st district), and son of the late congressman Mariano Badelles, fielded his daughter-lawyer Angelique Badelles-Bacareza to run for the seat he is vacating. Badelles’ daughter is facing Imelda Dimaporo who is finishing her gubernatorial term on June 30. (Carolyn O. Arguillas with reports from Violeta M. Gloria and Walter Balane/MindaNews)
Source: http://www.mindanews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2315&Itemid=222
More political dynasties
2nd of a series
DAVAO CITY (MindaNews/04 May 2007) – Years ago in Mindanao, political dynasties were mostly associated with the Moro. These days, they’re more associated with the non-Moro.
In the past, they ruled in succession -- e.g. father first then the eldest son. These days, they rule altogether - husbands and wifves, fathers and sons, fathers and daughters, mothers and daughters, mothers and sons, brothers, sisters, uncles and nephews.
Here’s a continuation of the list of candidates in Mindanao, many of them bearing the same family names.
In Lanao del Sur, Gov. Aleem Basher Manalao is running for reelection against three-term Rep. Benasing Macarambon, Jr.; three-term Marawi City mayor Omar Solitario Ali and Mamintal Adiong, Jr.
In the first congressional district, it’s a choice between reelectionist Faisah Dumarpa and Hamid Barra. The second district is contested by lawyer Pangalian Balindong, Macabangkit Lanto, Aleem Abdulmalik Laguindab and laweyr Saduddin Alauya.
In Maguindanao, Governor Andal Ampatuan and 21 of his 22 town mayors are running unopposed. Only the town of Pagalungan is contested.
But the congressional race in the first district is another story. Didagen Dilangalen wants to return to his former seat while his wife, the incumbent Rep. Bai Sendig Dilangalen, is running for Cotabato City mayor against Muslimin Sema, whose wife, Bai Sandra, Didagen Dilangalen is facing at the polls.
In Misamis Occidental, Governor Leo Loreto Ocampos is running unopposed.
In Misamis Oriental, Governor Oscar Moreno (Lakas CMD Coaltion) is eyeing a second term against three-term Rep. Augusto Baculio Jr., (Kampi/2nd district).
In the 1st congressional district, it’s Rep. Danilo Lagas (Lakas) against Kampi’s Michael Angelo Paderanga.
Vice governor Julio Uy (PMP) is running for 2nd District representative against Tagoloan town mayor Yevgeny "Bambi" Emano (Lakas CMD), son of Cagayan de Oro City’s mayor Vicente Emano, Paul Andy Calingin, son of The elder Emano is running for vice mayor. The son of former governor Antonio Calingin,
Kampi's Rex Baculio, son of Augusto Baculio Jr., is also running for 2nd district representative along with Paul Andy Calingin (NPC), son of former Misamis Oriental Governor Antonio "Bong" Calingin. The elder Calingin is running for mayor of Cagayan de Oro City.
In North Cotabato, three-term governor Emmanuel Pinol is running for vice governor against three-term 2nd district Rep. Gregorio Ipong. Pinol’s younger brother, Bernardo, Jr., the provincial administrator, is running for Congress in the 2nd district against former Rep. Gregorio Andolana, Evaristo Gana and substitute-candidate Zaida Jubilan-Rinsulat, provincial social welfare officer.
Another brother, Efren is running for reelection as mayor of Magpet while yet another brother, Joselito, incumbent vice mayor of M’lang town, is running for mayor.
Three-term Carmen Mayor Rogelio Talino is running for governor against Pinol’s outgoing vice governor, Jesus Sacdalan. Four others are running against them. Talino’s wife, Noemi, is running for Carmen mayor while daughter, Emmylou Talino-Santos-Mendoza, is seeking a third term as representative of the 1st district, against three-term Kabacan mayor Luzviminda Tan.
In Sarangani, Governor Rene Miguel Dominguez (Sarro-Kampi) is seeking reelection against Francis Martinez, who listed “NGO-practitioner” as his profession.
Vice Governor Bridget Chiongbian-Huang (Lakas) is seeking reelection against his cousin, Steve Chiongbian Solon (Kampi).
Bridget’s father, Erwin Chiongbian is seeking reelection against former governor Miguel Escobar.
Solon is supported by Bridget’s father, Erwin. Bridget fell from grace after asking someone to withdraw her certificate of candidacy for vice governor in favor of governor. The shift of candidacy did not push through.
In Shariff Kabunsuan, OIC Governor Bimbo Sinsuat, former Maguindanao vice governor before Shariff was carved out of Maguindanao, is running for governor against three-term Sultan Kudarat town mayor Tocao Mastura and Zacaria Candao, former governor of Maguindanao and the first governor of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao.
In South Cotabato, Governor Daisy Avance-Fuentes also doesn’t need to campaign as she is sure to win against fellow South Cotabatenos, Nane Rotone Neulid alias “Power Neuli” and Ephraim Paradao Defino, Jr.
In the congressional race in the second district, Rep. Arthur Pingoy Jr. is facing former three-term governor Hilario de Pedro III while Rep. Darlene Antonino-Custodio who is seeking a third term is facing international boxing champion Manny Pacquiao.
In Sultan Kudarat, three-term governor Pax Mangudadatu (Kampi) is running for congressman in the first district against former Rep. Angelo Montilla (NPC) while Mangudadatu’s son, Rep. Suharto Mangudadatu, is running for governor.
In Sulu, Governor Benjamin Loong is running for a second term against former governor Sakur Tan and detained Moro leader Nur Misuari. Councilor Cocoy Tulawie, a member of the Consortium of Bangsamoro Civil Society, is running for congressman against former governors Tupay Loong and Yusoph Jikiri.
In Surigao del Norte, the potential Barbers versus Ecleo clash has been avoided with the creation of Dinagat Islands for the Ecleos’ turf. Geraldine Ecleo Villaroman, daughter of Rep. Glenda Ecleo who was appointed OIC Governor is running for governor.
Surigao del Norte Governor Robert Lyndon Barbers is seeking reelection. He will be facing former governor Francisco Matugas whose brother, Ernesto is running for Surigao City mayor. Barbers’ brother, Robert Ace is seeking reelection as representative.
In Surigao del Sur, Governor Vicente Pimentel is facing a relatively unknown opponent while his brother Alexander, mayor of Tandag town, is running unopposed.
Rep. Prospero Pichay is running for senator while his brother Philip is running for the post he is vacating, against Dr. Greg Murillo, son of the late governor Gregorio Murillo, Sr. and brother of former Governor Primo Murillo, and human rights lawyer Antonio Azarcon, whose streamer reads: “dili garboso, dili kawatan.”
In the other congressional district, Jesnar Falcon is running for reelection against Mar Alvizo, Enciong Garay and Alejandro Asis. Falcon’s son, Jed, is running for mayor of Bislig City.
In Tawi-tawi, Governor Sadikul Sahali is facing former governor Rashidin Matba while in the lone congressional district, Rep. Nur Jaafar; Hajji Annuar Abubakar, lone district representative who was removed a few months ago after an electoral protest showed he actually lost to Jaafar; and former ARMM regional speaker Pocholo Abubakar. The two Abubakars are not related.
Governor Sahali’s daughter, Ruby, former ARMM Social Welfare Secretary, is running for vice governor against Itin Usman.
In Zamboanga del Norte Gov. Rolando Yebes is running against Dipolog City Mayor Roberto Uy of Lakas (whose wife Evelyn is running for Dipolog City mayor) and an independent bet named Roberto Yang Uy.
But the Jalosjos presence is still felt despite the detention of Romeo Jalosjos. His sister Celia Jalosjos-Carreon is seeking reelection in the 1st congressional district while brother Cesar is seeking reelection in the 3rd. Another brother, Dominador, is seeking reelection as mayor of Dapitan City.
Another Jalosjos, Seth Frederick Pal Bullet, is running for provincial board member in the first district.
In Zamboanga del Sur, Governor Aurora Cerilles (Kampi) is seeking reelection against Tirsendo Calamba Poloyapoy. The governor’s husband, Antonio (NPC), a former governor, is seeking reelection as representative of the second district against Filomena San Juan. In the first district, former governor Isidoro Real is seeking reelection against three opponents.
In Zamboanga Sibugay, Governor George Hofer (Kampi) is seeking reelection against Alfredo Chu. The governor’s daughter, Dr. Dulce Ann K. Hofer, is running for Congress 2nd district against incumbent Belma Cabilao. Cabilao was a three-term representative of the 3rd district of Zamboanga del Sur before it was carved out of Zamboanga del Sur. [Last part tomorrow: the city mayors] (Carolyn O. Arguillas with reports from Allen V. Estabillo and Violeta M. Gloria/MindaNews)
Source: http://www.mindanews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2316
Not only in the countryside but in the cities, too
Last of three parts
DAVAO CITY (MindaNews/05 May 2007) – It’s not just in the countryside but in the cities, too, these families lording it over the political landscape in Mindanao, with Davao City as the latest entrant – a father and daughter team in the executive and a father and son team at the legislative.
Mayor Rodrigo Duterte is running for a third term as mayor, his sixth actually since 1988, with a three-year term as Davao City representative of the first district between. His daughter Sara, 28, single, also a lawyer like him, makes a first bid at politics as his running mate.
Sara does not think they’re building a political dynasty. "The people have a choice whether they will vote for us. That is why we cannot impose ourselves upon them," she earlier told MindaNews.
"We are in a democracy where the people are assured of choosing their candidates," she said.
Sara’s grandfather, Vicente, the father of Rodrigo, was governor of the undivided Davao province.
In the first congressional district, Representative (1st district) and Deputy Majority Floorleader Prospero Nograles is running for a third term while his son, Karlo, a laywer and his chief of staff, is running for Congress, too, via a party-list group believed to be backed by Malacanang, Kalahi.
In Bislig, Rep. Jed Falcon is running for mayor against Mayor Alberto Tan. Jed is the son of Jesnar who wants to return to Congress, having served there from 1995 to 2004.
In Butuan, it’s still Amante versus Plaza with Democrito Plaza II running against former Agusan del Norte and former Rep. Angel Amante. Plaza’s mother Valentina, and Angel’s father, Edelmiro are running for governor of Agusan del Norte.
In Cagayan de Oro City, three-term Mayor Vicente Emano is running for vice mayor. Former mayor Pablo Magtajas (PDP-Laban/ UNO) is running against three-term Rep. Constantino Jaraula (Lakas CMD), former Misamis Oriental governor Antonio Calingin, and independent candidates Felix Borres and Rhona Canoy. Rhona is the daughter of former Cagayan de Oro mayor Reuben Canoy who is running as an independent candidate for the city’s 1st congressional district, against vice mayor Michelle Tagarda-Spiers, Antonio Soriano, Annie Daba, Camilo Miguel Montesa and Henry Bacal.
Emano’s son Yevgeny, Tagoloan mayor, is running for congressman in the 2nd district of Misamis Oriental against Calingin’s son, Paul Andy; Misamis Oriental Vice Gov. Julio Uy and Rex Baculio, son of Rep. Agusto Baculio, Jr.
Cotabato Mayor Muslimin Sema is running against Rep. Bai Sendig Dilangalen, wife of Didagen Dilangalen who wants to reclaim his former seat in Congress; Estrellita Juliano, who filed a protest against Sema’s proclamation in 2004; former city fire marshal Samad Candao, Banginda Sapi and Habib Ibrahim.
In Dapitan, it’s a toss-up between James Adasa and Dominador Garcia Jalosjos, Jr. for mayor. Jalosjos is seeking reelection. His brother Cesar is running for 3rd district representative of Zamboanga del Norte while sister Cecilia Jalosjos-Carreon is running for 1st district reprersentative.
In Digos City, it’s Mayor Arsenio Latasa (NPC) versus Toto Ymalay.
Dipolog’s three-term Rep. Roseller Barinaga wants to return to the city as mayor against Evelyn Tang Uy, wife of three-term mayor Robert Uy.
In General Santos, Mayor Pedro Acharon is running against former mayor Rosalita Nunez and Shirlyn Banas.
In Gingoog, Mayor Ruthie de lara Guingona is facing former mayor Romulo Rodriguez and Ernesto Rodriguez, who is facing a petition for disqualification for allegedly being a nuisance candidate.
Guingona is the wife of former Vice President Teofisto Guingona and mother to Bukidnon 2nd district Rep. Teofisto Guingona III.
In Iligan, it’s a return bout between Mayor Lawrence Cruz (NPC) and former mayor Franklin Quijano (Lakas).
In Isabela City, Cherry Santos-Akbar, third wife of three-term governor Wahab Akbar, is running for mayor against Mayor Rodolfo Tan, who ran and won the vice mayoralty in 2004 but assumed the post of mayor of Isabela after Mayor Luis R. Biel II was killed in March last year. Number one councilor Luis R. Biel VI, assumed the post of vice mayor.
In the Island Garden City of Samal, three-term mayor Rogelio Antalan is not running for any post but his brother, Aniano, a former mayor of Kaputian town, is running for mayor.
In Kidapawan, Mayor Rodolfo Gantuangco (Kampi) is facing four opponents: Rosalio Bombeo (Lakas), Marilou Mahinay (Ind), Efren Lapore (Ind), and Alfredo Purugganan (Ind).
Koronadal Mayor Fernando Miguel (Kampi) is running against Atty. Jose Ledda, Jr., last-termer vice mayor.
In Malaybalay, Mayor Florencio Flores, Jr., is running against a political unknown.
In Marawi, three-term mayor Omar Solitario Ali is running for governor of Lanao del Sur. Running for city mayor are his cousin, Sultan Fahad “Pre” Salic (some identify him to be a brother of Omar); Vice Mayor Yusoph Khosbari “YK” Salic, cousin of the mayor; former mayor Abbas Basman, and Engr. Nata Pangarungan.
Oroquieta City mayor Jorge Almonte is seeking reelection against vice mayor Lemuel Acosta.
In Ozamiz City, Mayor Reynaldo Parojinog is running unopposed.
Pagadian mayor Samuel Co is seeking reelection against former Rep. Sandy Urro.
Panabo Mayor Rey Gavina is completing his third term. Running for city mayor are vice mayor Ruperto Cagape and councilor Joe Silvosa.
Surigao mayor Alfonso Casurra is running against Ernesto Matugas, brother of former governor Francisco Matugas who is running against Governor Robert Lyndón Barbers.
In Tacurong, Mayor Lino Montilla of NPC is running against Jonald Lagon of Kampi and Ralen Bernardo of Lakas. Mayor Montilla’s brother, Angelo, is running for 1st district congressman of Sultan Kudarat province, against outgoing governor Pax Mangudadatu. Mangudadatu’s son, Suharto is running for governor.
In Tagum, Mayor Rey Uy is running against Davao del Norte board member Meliton Lemos.
Tangub Mayor Jennifer Wee-Tan is running against board member Morpheus Agot
In Valencia, Mayor Jose M. Galario, Jr. is running against former mayor and former representative Berthobal Anceta.and former vice mayor Leandro Jose Catarata, son of a former mayor while Valencia was still a municipality.
In Zamboanga City, Mayor Celso Lobregat is facing a priest in the elections: Msgr Crisanto dela Cruz. (Carolyn O. Arguillas with reports from Violeta M. Gloria, Samira A. Gutoc, Williamor A. Magbanua, Walter I. Balane and Allen V. Estabillo/MindaNews)
Source: http://www.mindanews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2325
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Philippines: Massacre Shows Arroyo’s Failure to Address Impunity
Independent Investigation and Full Prosecution Crucial
Human Rights Watch
November 24, 2009
(New York) - The massacre of at least 47 people in Maguindanao in the southern Philippines tragically shows the failure of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's administration to hold accountable perpetrators of extrajudicial killings, Human Rights Watch said today.
Given allegations of involvement by members of the security forces and local militias, Human Rights Watch urged the government to initiate a fully independent investigation led by the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI).
"Far too many people have been gunned down in the Philippines while President Arroyo has sat on her hands," said Elaine Pearson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "The possible involvement of state forces in the Maguindanao massacre means that security personnel shouldn't be allowed to interfere in an independent investigation."
On November 23, 2009, a dozen family members of Vice Mayor Ishmael Mangudadatu of Buluan and about 40 others travelled to the government Commission on Elections office in Maguindanao, in the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao, to file Mangudadatu's candidacy for governor in the May 2010 elections. Witnesses told the media that before 10 a.m., approximately 100 armed men stopped the group's convoy on a remote section of highway near the town of Ampatuan. The armed men abducted the group, which included at least 12 Mangudadatu family members, 12 journalists and two lawyers.
The authorities reported finding 47 bodies, including Mangudadatu's wife and two sisters. The bodies, bearing gunshot wounds, were found in the victims' vehicles and buried in shallow graves.
Mangudadatu told the media that because he had been receiving threats, he had sent his wife and other female family members to file his certificate of candidacy because he felt they would be safe. According to local media, he said, "I was expecting they will not harm them because they were all women." No security escorts were sent to accompany them as I trusted the police and military could protect them."
There are reports that the women were raped before they were killed. Police Chief Superintendent Felicisimo Khu told the Philippine Daily Inquirer that "all the women had their pants unzipped."
There are indications that the killings were politically motivated. A military spokesman, Lt. Col. Romeo Brawner, was quoted in news reports as having said, "The suspects are bodyguards of [Maguindanao Governor Andal] Ampatuan, local police aides, and certain lawless elements."
Gov. Ampatuan, patriarch of the powerful Ampatuan family, cannot run for re-election in the May 2010 elections because of a three-term limit. His son Andal Ampatuan Jr. is expected to run in his place. The governor has a paramilitary force that is estimated to number 500.
Philippine National Police Chief Jesus Verzosa ordered that the deputy provincial police chief of Maguindanao, Chief Inspector Sukarno Dicay, be relieved of his duties while the killings are investigated after witnesses reported seeing him with the armed men during the abduction. Concerns have also been raised about the slow response by the police and military to the abductions.
Arroyo condemned the killings in the "strongest terms" and vowed that "no effort will be spared to bring justice to the victims." However, today the presidential adviser on Mindanao affairs, Jesus Dureza, met with members of the Ampatuan family and told the media that, "They have assured us that they will cooperate fully in the investigation."
Human Rights Watch expressed deep concern that the administration's personal relationships with the Ampatuan family were likely to hinder rather than aid an impartial investigation into all those responsible for the killings.
"Ampatuan family members should be questioned by the National Bureau of Investigation, not having chats with senior presidential advisors," Pearson said. "President Arroyo's words on justice will ring hollow so long as the perpetrators of this terrible massacre remain unpunished."
Arroyo declared a state of emergency today in Maguindanao, Sultan Kudarat, and Cotabato City, giving greater powers to the armed forces, which have been implicated in numerous extrajudicial killings. Human Rights Watch called on the Arroyo administration to ensure that the armed forces uphold and protect human rights in securing these areas.
"Extrajudicial killings will continue to be a serious problem in the Philippines until they are competently, transparently, and impartially investigated, and perpetrators including members of security forces are fully prosecuted," Pearson said. "The history of election-related violence in the Philippines makes the lead up to the May 2010 elections a period of special concern."
Background on extrajudicial killings in the Philippines
Since 2001, when President Arroyo took office, hundreds of left-wing political party members, human rights activists, journalists, and outspoken clergy have been killed or forcibly disappeared, but only six cases have been successfully prosecuted. Although the military has been implicated in many of the crimes, none of the 11 persons convicted in these cases were active military personnel at the time of the killing. The killings surged after Arroyo's declaration in June 2006 of an "all-out war" against the communist New People's Army insurgency.
The Arroyo administration has not sufficiently investigated numerous extrajudicial killings in which the military has been implicated. It has yet to take strong action against local government-backed "death squads" in Davao City and elsewhere, and has tolerated unnecessary delays in investigations into these killings.
http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/11/24/philippines-massacre-shows-arroyo-s-failure-address-impunity
Human Rights Watch
November 24, 2009
(New York) - The massacre of at least 47 people in Maguindanao in the southern Philippines tragically shows the failure of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's administration to hold accountable perpetrators of extrajudicial killings, Human Rights Watch said today.
Given allegations of involvement by members of the security forces and local militias, Human Rights Watch urged the government to initiate a fully independent investigation led by the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI).
"Far too many people have been gunned down in the Philippines while President Arroyo has sat on her hands," said Elaine Pearson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "The possible involvement of state forces in the Maguindanao massacre means that security personnel shouldn't be allowed to interfere in an independent investigation."
On November 23, 2009, a dozen family members of Vice Mayor Ishmael Mangudadatu of Buluan and about 40 others travelled to the government Commission on Elections office in Maguindanao, in the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao, to file Mangudadatu's candidacy for governor in the May 2010 elections. Witnesses told the media that before 10 a.m., approximately 100 armed men stopped the group's convoy on a remote section of highway near the town of Ampatuan. The armed men abducted the group, which included at least 12 Mangudadatu family members, 12 journalists and two lawyers.
The authorities reported finding 47 bodies, including Mangudadatu's wife and two sisters. The bodies, bearing gunshot wounds, were found in the victims' vehicles and buried in shallow graves.
Mangudadatu told the media that because he had been receiving threats, he had sent his wife and other female family members to file his certificate of candidacy because he felt they would be safe. According to local media, he said, "I was expecting they will not harm them because they were all women." No security escorts were sent to accompany them as I trusted the police and military could protect them."
There are reports that the women were raped before they were killed. Police Chief Superintendent Felicisimo Khu told the Philippine Daily Inquirer that "all the women had their pants unzipped."
There are indications that the killings were politically motivated. A military spokesman, Lt. Col. Romeo Brawner, was quoted in news reports as having said, "The suspects are bodyguards of [Maguindanao Governor Andal] Ampatuan, local police aides, and certain lawless elements."
Gov. Ampatuan, patriarch of the powerful Ampatuan family, cannot run for re-election in the May 2010 elections because of a three-term limit. His son Andal Ampatuan Jr. is expected to run in his place. The governor has a paramilitary force that is estimated to number 500.
Philippine National Police Chief Jesus Verzosa ordered that the deputy provincial police chief of Maguindanao, Chief Inspector Sukarno Dicay, be relieved of his duties while the killings are investigated after witnesses reported seeing him with the armed men during the abduction. Concerns have also been raised about the slow response by the police and military to the abductions.
Arroyo condemned the killings in the "strongest terms" and vowed that "no effort will be spared to bring justice to the victims." However, today the presidential adviser on Mindanao affairs, Jesus Dureza, met with members of the Ampatuan family and told the media that, "They have assured us that they will cooperate fully in the investigation."
Human Rights Watch expressed deep concern that the administration's personal relationships with the Ampatuan family were likely to hinder rather than aid an impartial investigation into all those responsible for the killings.
"Ampatuan family members should be questioned by the National Bureau of Investigation, not having chats with senior presidential advisors," Pearson said. "President Arroyo's words on justice will ring hollow so long as the perpetrators of this terrible massacre remain unpunished."
Arroyo declared a state of emergency today in Maguindanao, Sultan Kudarat, and Cotabato City, giving greater powers to the armed forces, which have been implicated in numerous extrajudicial killings. Human Rights Watch called on the Arroyo administration to ensure that the armed forces uphold and protect human rights in securing these areas.
"Extrajudicial killings will continue to be a serious problem in the Philippines until they are competently, transparently, and impartially investigated, and perpetrators including members of security forces are fully prosecuted," Pearson said. "The history of election-related violence in the Philippines makes the lead up to the May 2010 elections a period of special concern."
Background on extrajudicial killings in the Philippines
Since 2001, when President Arroyo took office, hundreds of left-wing political party members, human rights activists, journalists, and outspoken clergy have been killed or forcibly disappeared, but only six cases have been successfully prosecuted. Although the military has been implicated in many of the crimes, none of the 11 persons convicted in these cases were active military personnel at the time of the killing. The killings surged after Arroyo's declaration in June 2006 of an "all-out war" against the communist New People's Army insurgency.
The Arroyo administration has not sufficiently investigated numerous extrajudicial killings in which the military has been implicated. It has yet to take strong action against local government-backed "death squads" in Davao City and elsewhere, and has tolerated unnecessary delays in investigations into these killings.
http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/11/24/philippines-massacre-shows-arroyo-s-failure-address-impunity
Philippines: Abduction and killings of journalists and politicians must be investigated
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL
PRESS RELEASE
November 23rd 2009
Amnesty International condemns the killings of at least 21 civilians, including journalists and members of a politician’s family, in the southern Philippines province of Maguindanao, the first reported killings linked to national elections to be held in May 2010.
A group of about 45 people were ambushed and abducted by about 100 armed men, according to reports. The military recovered the bodies of 13 women and eight men—some of them mutilated.
“These killings underline the danger facing civilians in the run up to the national elections. The authorities must immediately launch an independent and effective investigation into these murders and ensure that they do all they can to prevent killings and other violence,” said Donna Guest, Deputy Asia Pacific Director, Amnesty International.
The sister and the wife of Esmael Mangudadatu, vice mayor of Buluan town, were on their way to file his certificate of candidacy as provincial governor when they were attacked.
The province of Maguindanao witnessed widespread election violence during previous polls.
Amnesty International has been told that at least 12 journalists were part of the group who were targeted. It is not known how many journalists were killed.
Private armies, often employed by rich and politically influential families in Mindanao, have committed abuses with impunity.
“The government must prohibit and disband private armies and paramilitary forces immediately. The authorities should also establish clear standards on human rights protection and ensure their implementation, particularly during the election period when politically-motivated killings could increase.” said Donna Guest.
http://www.amnesty.org.ph/news.php?item=news&id=120
PRESS RELEASE
November 23rd 2009
Amnesty International condemns the killings of at least 21 civilians, including journalists and members of a politician’s family, in the southern Philippines province of Maguindanao, the first reported killings linked to national elections to be held in May 2010.
A group of about 45 people were ambushed and abducted by about 100 armed men, according to reports. The military recovered the bodies of 13 women and eight men—some of them mutilated.
“These killings underline the danger facing civilians in the run up to the national elections. The authorities must immediately launch an independent and effective investigation into these murders and ensure that they do all they can to prevent killings and other violence,” said Donna Guest, Deputy Asia Pacific Director, Amnesty International.
The sister and the wife of Esmael Mangudadatu, vice mayor of Buluan town, were on their way to file his certificate of candidacy as provincial governor when they were attacked.
The province of Maguindanao witnessed widespread election violence during previous polls.
Amnesty International has been told that at least 12 journalists were part of the group who were targeted. It is not known how many journalists were killed.
Private armies, often employed by rich and politically influential families in Mindanao, have committed abuses with impunity.
“The government must prohibit and disband private armies and paramilitary forces immediately. The authorities should also establish clear standards on human rights protection and ensure their implementation, particularly during the election period when politically-motivated killings could increase.” said Donna Guest.
http://www.amnesty.org.ph/news.php?item=news&id=120
Monday, November 23, 2009
Konsult Mindanaw presents findings to MILF; MILF says “we want agreement acceptable to all”
SIMUAY, Sultan Kudarat, Maguindanao -- A team from Konsult Mindanaw presented Sunday afternoon to the Moro Islamic Liberation Front the results of its year-long community consultations on peace in Mindanao.
Fr. Albert Alejo, SJ, project director of Konsult Mindanaw, presented the findings to MILF vice chair for political affairs Ghazali Jaafar, inside the pink room of a nearly finished building inside Jaafar’s compound, from 1:35 p.m. to 3:55 p.m. Even before Alejo could finish his presentation, Jaafar said, “hindi kami opposed na alamin kung ano ang gusto nila. Baka makatulong pa yun sa pagkaroon ng mapayapaang solusyon. Kami, gusto rin naming solusyon na mapagkasunduan, gusto naming hindi lamang acceptable ng majority of Bangsamoro people kundi acceptable din ito sa mga migrants” (we are not opposed to find out what they want. That may just help us find a peaceful solution. We also want the agreement reached to be acceptable not only to the majority but also to the migrants).
Jesuit priest Albert Alejo (left) explains a point to MILF vice chair for political affairs Ghazali Jaafar Sunday afternoon. MindaNews photo by Froilan Gallardo
Jaafar acknowledged that an acceptable agreement provides an assurance of a smooth implementation.
Vision of Peace
Alejo represents a team from the academe in Mindanao which was commissioned by the Bishops-Ulama Conference (BUC) to conduct community consultations. The BUC was earlier tapped by President Arroyo to take a more active role in the peace process following the controversy over the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) in August last year and the shift at that time, in government’s strategy from negotiating with armed rebels to “authentic community dialogues” and disarmament, demobilization and reintegration.”
The results of the study were first presented to President Arroyo in Davao City on October 29.
The results of the consultations show that between war and peace talks, Mindanawons go for the latter.
“One of the important results of the region-wide consultations and dialogues is that the process, which involved more than 5,000 respondents in eight regional centers, has caused the emergence of a collective consciousness on the part of the large number of Mindanawons,” Davao Archbishop Fernando Capalla said in a statement.
In his Powerpoint presentation, Alejo said a total of 4,916 participants from the Catholic, Muslim, Protestant and Lumad sectors in 311 focus group discussions (FGDs) were asked four questions: “What is your vision of peace? What are your recommendations on the peace talks between the GRP and the MILF? What can you recommend on the broader peace process? What can you personally contribute – or even sacrifice – for peace in Mindanao?”
Findings on GRP-MILF
The findings pertaining specifically to the GRP-MILF peace process, are:
Although many participants express their lack of sufficient information on the MOA-AD, the peace talks between the government and the armed groups are very much alive in the mind of the people.
People want the peace talks to continue and to be in Mindanao.
Peace panels should be seen as really concerned with the plight of those affected by the conflict.
People are confused on the diverging views and actions of offices of the government in dealing with conflict and rebellion. Peace panels take an approach, military has another track, and only to be junked by the higher authority.
On the same note, people get confused on the position of the different Moro groups and their supporters. People are not clear on the positions of the MNLF (Moro National Liberation Front), MILF, and other groups and personalities.
People are searching for sincerity as expressed in consistency and coherence of actions from all parties.
The government-MILF peace talks used to be based in Mindanao but then President Joseph Estrada waged an “all-out war” in March 2000, leading eventually to the collapse of the talks. When the talks resumed the following year under the Aquino administration, the panels sought a third party facilitator, Malaysia, and talks had been done there since 2001.
Internal problem
On the confusion over the different Moro groups MNLF and MILF, Jaafar said, “There is an internal problem between and among us leaders of the Bangsamoro – Moro National Liberation front and Moro Islamic Liberation Front, including Bangsamoro leaders working with the government.”
Now, with respect to the MNLF-MILF, we are addressing this. We have been conducting continuous dialogue since 2000.”
“Very minimal ang trouble between and against sa ground; noon konting bagay lang problema sa ground (“the trouble between and against us on the ground is very minimal. Before a tiny spark could cause a problem on the ground.”
On the issue of sincerity, Jaafar said, sincerity is a “very important ingredient of the acceptability of the agreement… hindi katulad nung nangyari sa MOA-AD na atras-abante ang gobyerno (unlike what happened to the MOA-AD where government was moving backward-forward).
Alejo explained how his team designed the study. Jaafar asked if the team had asked retired General Fortunato Abat. “Maganda yung mga idea niya sa peace” (He has good ideas on peace), said Jaafar.
Abat was chief of the government peace panel when Jaafar was chief of the MILF peace panel, in the 1990s.
Consultations
Jaafar related that both peace panels had earlier agreed to conduct consultations with their constituents and that the MILF did its part.
“We realized we had shortcomings. We relied too much on government to reach out to the non-Moro. We had to rectify our shortcomings and commissioned several groups to reach out to brothers and sisters among the Tedurays, Manobo, Arumanen, B’laaan. We’re reaching now as far as Agusan and Davao del Sur,” he said.
He said they now have a Department of Mindanao Migrants to focus on the non-Moro issues.
Jaafar also acknowledged the existing term of office of people in government in the Moro areas, and cited the need for a transition period.
In the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindano (ARMM) which is supposed to be the core of the future Bangsamoro Juridical Entity (BJE), elective officials have a three-year term of office. Incumbents elected last year have until September 30, 2011.
Loose firearms
Jaafar spoke about rampant kidnapping and other criminal activities and blamed this on the “more than one million loose firearms in the entire country.”
More than one million loose firearms in the entire country. He said a million may be “very modest” a number given that there are some areas in Maguindanao where you will not find a family without an armalite.
But he also cited the firearms of non-Moro politicians in neighboring areas.
Jaafar also said the MILF is “not opposed to development on condition that development must not be the cause of conflict or displacement of native inhabitants.”
Jaafar reiterated that an “early resolution of the conflict in Mindanao is for the betterment of Mindanao and the entire country.”
He found the findings “good,” such as the finding that people do not understand much the conflict. “Let us double the information campaign.”
He said the findings will serve as “guide sa peace process.”
“Kund hindi tanggapin ng GRP, kami sa side ng MILF (tatanggapin)” [If GRP does not accept, on the side of the MILF we will (accept)] (Carolyn O. Arguillas/MindaNews)
Fr. Albert Alejo, SJ, project director of Konsult Mindanaw, presented the findings to MILF vice chair for political affairs Ghazali Jaafar, inside the pink room of a nearly finished building inside Jaafar’s compound, from 1:35 p.m. to 3:55 p.m. Even before Alejo could finish his presentation, Jaafar said, “hindi kami opposed na alamin kung ano ang gusto nila. Baka makatulong pa yun sa pagkaroon ng mapayapaang solusyon. Kami, gusto rin naming solusyon na mapagkasunduan, gusto naming hindi lamang acceptable ng majority of Bangsamoro people kundi acceptable din ito sa mga migrants” (we are not opposed to find out what they want. That may just help us find a peaceful solution. We also want the agreement reached to be acceptable not only to the majority but also to the migrants).
Jesuit priest Albert Alejo (left) explains a point to MILF vice chair for political affairs Ghazali Jaafar Sunday afternoon. MindaNews photo by Froilan Gallardo
Jaafar acknowledged that an acceptable agreement provides an assurance of a smooth implementation.
Vision of Peace
Alejo represents a team from the academe in Mindanao which was commissioned by the Bishops-Ulama Conference (BUC) to conduct community consultations. The BUC was earlier tapped by President Arroyo to take a more active role in the peace process following the controversy over the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) in August last year and the shift at that time, in government’s strategy from negotiating with armed rebels to “authentic community dialogues” and disarmament, demobilization and reintegration.”
The results of the study were first presented to President Arroyo in Davao City on October 29.
The results of the consultations show that between war and peace talks, Mindanawons go for the latter.
“One of the important results of the region-wide consultations and dialogues is that the process, which involved more than 5,000 respondents in eight regional centers, has caused the emergence of a collective consciousness on the part of the large number of Mindanawons,” Davao Archbishop Fernando Capalla said in a statement.
In his Powerpoint presentation, Alejo said a total of 4,916 participants from the Catholic, Muslim, Protestant and Lumad sectors in 311 focus group discussions (FGDs) were asked four questions: “What is your vision of peace? What are your recommendations on the peace talks between the GRP and the MILF? What can you recommend on the broader peace process? What can you personally contribute – or even sacrifice – for peace in Mindanao?”
Findings on GRP-MILF
The findings pertaining specifically to the GRP-MILF peace process, are:
Although many participants express their lack of sufficient information on the MOA-AD, the peace talks between the government and the armed groups are very much alive in the mind of the people.
People want the peace talks to continue and to be in Mindanao.
Peace panels should be seen as really concerned with the plight of those affected by the conflict.
People are confused on the diverging views and actions of offices of the government in dealing with conflict and rebellion. Peace panels take an approach, military has another track, and only to be junked by the higher authority.
On the same note, people get confused on the position of the different Moro groups and their supporters. People are not clear on the positions of the MNLF (Moro National Liberation Front), MILF, and other groups and personalities.
People are searching for sincerity as expressed in consistency and coherence of actions from all parties.
The government-MILF peace talks used to be based in Mindanao but then President Joseph Estrada waged an “all-out war” in March 2000, leading eventually to the collapse of the talks. When the talks resumed the following year under the Aquino administration, the panels sought a third party facilitator, Malaysia, and talks had been done there since 2001.
Internal problem
On the confusion over the different Moro groups MNLF and MILF, Jaafar said, “There is an internal problem between and among us leaders of the Bangsamoro – Moro National Liberation front and Moro Islamic Liberation Front, including Bangsamoro leaders working with the government.”
Now, with respect to the MNLF-MILF, we are addressing this. We have been conducting continuous dialogue since 2000.”
“Very minimal ang trouble between and against sa ground; noon konting bagay lang problema sa ground (“the trouble between and against us on the ground is very minimal. Before a tiny spark could cause a problem on the ground.”
On the issue of sincerity, Jaafar said, sincerity is a “very important ingredient of the acceptability of the agreement… hindi katulad nung nangyari sa MOA-AD na atras-abante ang gobyerno (unlike what happened to the MOA-AD where government was moving backward-forward).
Alejo explained how his team designed the study. Jaafar asked if the team had asked retired General Fortunato Abat. “Maganda yung mga idea niya sa peace” (He has good ideas on peace), said Jaafar.
Abat was chief of the government peace panel when Jaafar was chief of the MILF peace panel, in the 1990s.
Consultations
Jaafar related that both peace panels had earlier agreed to conduct consultations with their constituents and that the MILF did its part.
“We realized we had shortcomings. We relied too much on government to reach out to the non-Moro. We had to rectify our shortcomings and commissioned several groups to reach out to brothers and sisters among the Tedurays, Manobo, Arumanen, B’laaan. We’re reaching now as far as Agusan and Davao del Sur,” he said.
He said they now have a Department of Mindanao Migrants to focus on the non-Moro issues.
Jaafar also acknowledged the existing term of office of people in government in the Moro areas, and cited the need for a transition period.
In the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindano (ARMM) which is supposed to be the core of the future Bangsamoro Juridical Entity (BJE), elective officials have a three-year term of office. Incumbents elected last year have until September 30, 2011.
Loose firearms
Jaafar spoke about rampant kidnapping and other criminal activities and blamed this on the “more than one million loose firearms in the entire country.”
More than one million loose firearms in the entire country. He said a million may be “very modest” a number given that there are some areas in Maguindanao where you will not find a family without an armalite.
But he also cited the firearms of non-Moro politicians in neighboring areas.
Jaafar also said the MILF is “not opposed to development on condition that development must not be the cause of conflict or displacement of native inhabitants.”
Jaafar reiterated that an “early resolution of the conflict in Mindanao is for the betterment of Mindanao and the entire country.”
He found the findings “good,” such as the finding that people do not understand much the conflict. “Let us double the information campaign.”
He said the findings will serve as “guide sa peace process.”
“Kund hindi tanggapin ng GRP, kami sa side ng MILF (tatanggapin)” [If GRP does not accept, on the side of the MILF we will (accept)] (Carolyn O. Arguillas/MindaNews)
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
A Letter to Mr. Montesa
By Patricio P. Diaz
GENERAL SANTOS CITY (MindaNews/18 November) -- This letter is addressed to Peace Process Assistant Secretary Camilo “Bong” Montesa. However, since it is of general concern, it is open to all the readers of MindaNews to read and comment.
Dear Mr. Montesa,
From your speech at the conference of the Mindanao Working Group last November 12, it feels upbeat to know that “exciting things are happening inside the GRP-MILF peace process” in “the past four months” – as published in MindaNews last November 15.
No one can disagree with your analogical comparison in general of the peace process to the computer as an “operating system”. However, your discussions of specific “bugs” and their remedies elicit some questions.
May I proceed according to the sequence in your speech?
The MOA-AD “crash”:
You stated: “The MOA-AD (TRO) triggered attacks by a few MILF commanders on unarmed civilian communities and the subsequent military offensives to pursue and arrest these commanders brought war, once again, to Mindanao.”
Correct. But an unstated fact is crucial: There were provocations. The commanders were provoked by the TRO. Cotabato Vice Gov. Emmanuel Piñol, even before he filed
a petition for a TRO with the Supreme Court on July 23, 2008, had threatened “war” and the resurrection of the “Ilaga” because of the MOA-AD. The dual threats were not only against the MILF but the Muslims and were provocative.
Ignoring the provocations is only to half-state the “crash”. How can you fully solve the problem? Letting loose hell on the provoked but not minding the provokers is only to half-solve the problem, if not to worsen it.
*** *** ***
You identified three problems or “bugs” that caused the “crash”: “first, the lack of support and control; second, spoilers; and third, the need to protect civilians.” Let’s examine the “bugs” one by one.
Of the First:
You said: “While the panels were about to sign a significant agreement, they failed to rally their respective constituencies around it (MOA-AD)” – blaming the GRP and MILF peace panels for the “lack of support and control”, for the “fragile and weak … support for the peace process.”
Do you really mean that? Is the peace process not a team-play with the panels tasked to negotiate and the “support and control” provided by others -- in the case of the GRP, starting from the President? Does EO 3 not specifically assign to the PAPP the task to undertake the public “consultation process” to generate support for the agreement?
So far as it was reported in the media, the MILF did some consultations. Obviously, the government did not?
*** *** ***
In matters of “support and control”, should the President not take direct hand when it becomes necessary? President Fidel V. Ramos did that in the GRP-MNLF Jakarta peace talks. Why did President Arroyo not do the same?
President Ramos reined in the military when it wanted to launch an all-out operation after the raid of Ipil – the burning, looting and massacre – on April 4, 1995. Ramos, as the commander-in-chief, stopped what could have derailed the GRP-MNLF peace talk.
In contrast, what did President Arroyo do? She did not stop the military from launching the February 11, 2003 Pikit war and the post-MOA-AD war in August 2008. Could she have? Should she have to support the peace process? But she supported the two wars instead.
In June, July and August of 1996, the GRP-MILF agreement hit the same stone wall as the MOA-AD did – opposition from national and local Christian political leaders with violence and a case in the Supreme Court in prospect. President Ramos took a direct hand. He asked the Senate to conduct a nationwide consultation; he commissioned his executive secretary to talk to Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) Chairman Nur Misuari.
Could President Arroyo not have saved the MOA-AD had she done what President Ramos did to save the 1996 GRP-MNLF Final Peace Agreement? The Presidency has persuasive power that Congress, the Court and the local governments could not ignore.
She could have preempted the Supreme Court TRO; and, consequently avoided the international embarrassment in Kuala Lumpur on August 5, 2008, prevented the post-MOA-AD war and kept on course the peace process.
Note Very Well: Piñol filed his TRO case on July 23, five days before President Arroyo, in her State of the Nation Address on July 28, hailed the just initialed agreement as the “breakthrough” that would lead to a final agreement by the end of her term. Did she, in her euphoria, not know that a case had been filed to abort the MOA-AD? Or, was the case filed so secretly?
It was unbelievable that she did not know. Five days was so much time to persuade Piñol to withdraw his petition. If emissaries could not have prevailed on Piñol, she could have called him for a téte-á-téte in Malacañang.
At the Supreme Court, she abandoned the MOA-AD instead of defending it. She issued a new peace policy and disbanded the GRP peace panel to appease the opponents of the MOA-AD. The original policy and the GRP panel members became the scapegoats. That brought to mind a popular joke: “If you can’t solve a problem, revise it.”
It is inaccurate to attribute the “lack of support and control” to the failure of the peace panels “to rally their respective constituencies around it (MOA-AD”. In the first place, the panels had no constituencies. It is wrong to blame them for not doing what others – the President among them – ought to have done.
*** *** ***
Are you advocating that a peace agreement must be signed within the last seven and a half months of the Arroyo administration because with the change of the administration on June 30, 2010, there is no assurance (1) the support and control under the Arroyo administration will be continued; and, (2) the previous agreements will be honored?
What assurance really is there under President Arroyo? At that critical month of August 2008 and the following months the MOA-AD was denied “support and control” and was not “honored” as it so deserved – being the breakthrough in the long peace process as the President herself ecstatically proclaimed in her SONA 2008.
Of the Second:
You identified the “spoilers” and said: “The MOA-AD episode revealed how a few but determined and well-resourced ‘spoilers’ can derail and scuttle a process meant to benefit the many.”
Do you really mean that – the “spoilers” more determined than President Arroyo and better resourced than the Presidency? What a testimony to a weak Presidency! Could this be a significant reason for the peace process fiasco in her 9-year rule?
Of the Third:
What you said about the IDPs and the civilians is very true but that “there must be a mechanism to protect them” – meaning, there was no such mechanism – is fallacious.
What about the AFP as mandated in Article II, Section 3 of the 1987 Constitution: “… The Armed Forces of the Philippines is the protector of the people ….” The irony was: The IDPs were punished by the military as assets of the MILF. They were not “people”.
What about the “Implementing Guidelines on the Security Aspect of the GRP-MILF Agreement of Peace of 2001” reiterating the “GRP-MILF Agreement for General Cessation of Hostilities of 1997” and other agreements and enhancing them? This “Agreement” has implementing rules and mechanisms.
If the civilians were not protected under this “Agreement”, it was for the lack of sincerity to abide and the will to implement – not for the lack of mechanisms. Will GRP and the MILF have the sincerity and the will to honor other mechanisms?
All the “hostile prohibited acts” against the IDPs are enumerated in the “Agreement” – for instance, “burning of houses, places of worship and educational institutions, destruction of properties, and abuses of civilians” in Article II(3.1.2).
Remedies for hostile such acts are also mandated. For instance, in Article III(2): “The Parties agree to implement all necessary measures to normalize the situation in the conflict-affected areas, to pave the way for, and ensure successful rehabilitation and development of said areas.”
The atrocities suffered by the IDPs could have been avoided had Article III(11) been followed: “In cases of alleged violations of this agreement, the Parties shall refrain from taking offensives or punitive military actions of any type against each other without prior investigations by the CCCH of both Parties in coordination with the OIC Monitoring Team (IMT).”
There are more provisions in the “Agreement” to show that a must-mechanism has long been in place. However, the “Agreement” may be complemented or supplemented by other mechanisms.
Upgrading the System:
Upgrading the peace process may now be necessary after the MOA-AD was allowed to “crash”, the peace policy was revised and a new negotiating panel was constituted. May the solutions to the three “bugs” work!
The same hope goes with the (1) One Bangsamoro Challenge; (2) One Government Response; and (3) Task force HELP: Central Mindanao. The first two are the ideal – what should be. They are still in the “we want” stage. How doable are they?
The third was specifically created for the IDPs in Maguindanao, parts of Lanao del Sur, Sultan Kudarat and South Cotabato (Inquirer.net, July 13, 2009, citing Montesa). And, Philippine News Agency reported on July16, 2009 the President’s order to release P10 million for HELP’s projects and operating expenses. That was four months ago. From reports about Maguindanao IDPs, it is obvious they have not received HELP’s help.
What happened to the P10 million? You said, “The Mindanao Working Group should work closely with this Task Force. In what ways?
Your reasons to get excited are our reasons to raise questions Thank you. [“Comment" is Mr. Patricio P. Diaz' column for MindaViews, the opinion section of MindaNews. Mr. Diaz is the recipient of a “Lifetime Achievement Award” from the Titus Brandsma for his "commitment to education and public information to Mindanawons as Journalist, Educator and Peace Advocate." You may e-mail your comments to patpdiaz@mindanews.com]
GENERAL SANTOS CITY (MindaNews/18 November) -- This letter is addressed to Peace Process Assistant Secretary Camilo “Bong” Montesa. However, since it is of general concern, it is open to all the readers of MindaNews to read and comment.
Dear Mr. Montesa,
From your speech at the conference of the Mindanao Working Group last November 12, it feels upbeat to know that “exciting things are happening inside the GRP-MILF peace process” in “the past four months” – as published in MindaNews last November 15.
No one can disagree with your analogical comparison in general of the peace process to the computer as an “operating system”. However, your discussions of specific “bugs” and their remedies elicit some questions.
May I proceed according to the sequence in your speech?
The MOA-AD “crash”:
You stated: “The MOA-AD (TRO) triggered attacks by a few MILF commanders on unarmed civilian communities and the subsequent military offensives to pursue and arrest these commanders brought war, once again, to Mindanao.”
Correct. But an unstated fact is crucial: There were provocations. The commanders were provoked by the TRO. Cotabato Vice Gov. Emmanuel Piñol, even before he filed
a petition for a TRO with the Supreme Court on July 23, 2008, had threatened “war” and the resurrection of the “Ilaga” because of the MOA-AD. The dual threats were not only against the MILF but the Muslims and were provocative.
Ignoring the provocations is only to half-state the “crash”. How can you fully solve the problem? Letting loose hell on the provoked but not minding the provokers is only to half-solve the problem, if not to worsen it.
*** *** ***
You identified three problems or “bugs” that caused the “crash”: “first, the lack of support and control; second, spoilers; and third, the need to protect civilians.” Let’s examine the “bugs” one by one.
Of the First:
You said: “While the panels were about to sign a significant agreement, they failed to rally their respective constituencies around it (MOA-AD)” – blaming the GRP and MILF peace panels for the “lack of support and control”, for the “fragile and weak … support for the peace process.”
Do you really mean that? Is the peace process not a team-play with the panels tasked to negotiate and the “support and control” provided by others -- in the case of the GRP, starting from the President? Does EO 3 not specifically assign to the PAPP the task to undertake the public “consultation process” to generate support for the agreement?
So far as it was reported in the media, the MILF did some consultations. Obviously, the government did not?
*** *** ***
In matters of “support and control”, should the President not take direct hand when it becomes necessary? President Fidel V. Ramos did that in the GRP-MNLF Jakarta peace talks. Why did President Arroyo not do the same?
President Ramos reined in the military when it wanted to launch an all-out operation after the raid of Ipil – the burning, looting and massacre – on April 4, 1995. Ramos, as the commander-in-chief, stopped what could have derailed the GRP-MNLF peace talk.
In contrast, what did President Arroyo do? She did not stop the military from launching the February 11, 2003 Pikit war and the post-MOA-AD war in August 2008. Could she have? Should she have to support the peace process? But she supported the two wars instead.
In June, July and August of 1996, the GRP-MILF agreement hit the same stone wall as the MOA-AD did – opposition from national and local Christian political leaders with violence and a case in the Supreme Court in prospect. President Ramos took a direct hand. He asked the Senate to conduct a nationwide consultation; he commissioned his executive secretary to talk to Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) Chairman Nur Misuari.
Could President Arroyo not have saved the MOA-AD had she done what President Ramos did to save the 1996 GRP-MNLF Final Peace Agreement? The Presidency has persuasive power that Congress, the Court and the local governments could not ignore.
She could have preempted the Supreme Court TRO; and, consequently avoided the international embarrassment in Kuala Lumpur on August 5, 2008, prevented the post-MOA-AD war and kept on course the peace process.
Note Very Well: Piñol filed his TRO case on July 23, five days before President Arroyo, in her State of the Nation Address on July 28, hailed the just initialed agreement as the “breakthrough” that would lead to a final agreement by the end of her term. Did she, in her euphoria, not know that a case had been filed to abort the MOA-AD? Or, was the case filed so secretly?
It was unbelievable that she did not know. Five days was so much time to persuade Piñol to withdraw his petition. If emissaries could not have prevailed on Piñol, she could have called him for a téte-á-téte in Malacañang.
At the Supreme Court, she abandoned the MOA-AD instead of defending it. She issued a new peace policy and disbanded the GRP peace panel to appease the opponents of the MOA-AD. The original policy and the GRP panel members became the scapegoats. That brought to mind a popular joke: “If you can’t solve a problem, revise it.”
It is inaccurate to attribute the “lack of support and control” to the failure of the peace panels “to rally their respective constituencies around it (MOA-AD”. In the first place, the panels had no constituencies. It is wrong to blame them for not doing what others – the President among them – ought to have done.
*** *** ***
Are you advocating that a peace agreement must be signed within the last seven and a half months of the Arroyo administration because with the change of the administration on June 30, 2010, there is no assurance (1) the support and control under the Arroyo administration will be continued; and, (2) the previous agreements will be honored?
What assurance really is there under President Arroyo? At that critical month of August 2008 and the following months the MOA-AD was denied “support and control” and was not “honored” as it so deserved – being the breakthrough in the long peace process as the President herself ecstatically proclaimed in her SONA 2008.
Of the Second:
You identified the “spoilers” and said: “The MOA-AD episode revealed how a few but determined and well-resourced ‘spoilers’ can derail and scuttle a process meant to benefit the many.”
Do you really mean that – the “spoilers” more determined than President Arroyo and better resourced than the Presidency? What a testimony to a weak Presidency! Could this be a significant reason for the peace process fiasco in her 9-year rule?
Of the Third:
What you said about the IDPs and the civilians is very true but that “there must be a mechanism to protect them” – meaning, there was no such mechanism – is fallacious.
What about the AFP as mandated in Article II, Section 3 of the 1987 Constitution: “… The Armed Forces of the Philippines is the protector of the people ….” The irony was: The IDPs were punished by the military as assets of the MILF. They were not “people”.
What about the “Implementing Guidelines on the Security Aspect of the GRP-MILF Agreement of Peace of 2001” reiterating the “GRP-MILF Agreement for General Cessation of Hostilities of 1997” and other agreements and enhancing them? This “Agreement” has implementing rules and mechanisms.
If the civilians were not protected under this “Agreement”, it was for the lack of sincerity to abide and the will to implement – not for the lack of mechanisms. Will GRP and the MILF have the sincerity and the will to honor other mechanisms?
All the “hostile prohibited acts” against the IDPs are enumerated in the “Agreement” – for instance, “burning of houses, places of worship and educational institutions, destruction of properties, and abuses of civilians” in Article II(3.1.2).
Remedies for hostile such acts are also mandated. For instance, in Article III(2): “The Parties agree to implement all necessary measures to normalize the situation in the conflict-affected areas, to pave the way for, and ensure successful rehabilitation and development of said areas.”
The atrocities suffered by the IDPs could have been avoided had Article III(11) been followed: “In cases of alleged violations of this agreement, the Parties shall refrain from taking offensives or punitive military actions of any type against each other without prior investigations by the CCCH of both Parties in coordination with the OIC Monitoring Team (IMT).”
There are more provisions in the “Agreement” to show that a must-mechanism has long been in place. However, the “Agreement” may be complemented or supplemented by other mechanisms.
Upgrading the System:
Upgrading the peace process may now be necessary after the MOA-AD was allowed to “crash”, the peace policy was revised and a new negotiating panel was constituted. May the solutions to the three “bugs” work!
The same hope goes with the (1) One Bangsamoro Challenge; (2) One Government Response; and (3) Task force HELP: Central Mindanao. The first two are the ideal – what should be. They are still in the “we want” stage. How doable are they?
The third was specifically created for the IDPs in Maguindanao, parts of Lanao del Sur, Sultan Kudarat and South Cotabato (Inquirer.net, July 13, 2009, citing Montesa). And, Philippine News Agency reported on July16, 2009 the President’s order to release P10 million for HELP’s projects and operating expenses. That was four months ago. From reports about Maguindanao IDPs, it is obvious they have not received HELP’s help.
What happened to the P10 million? You said, “The Mindanao Working Group should work closely with this Task Force. In what ways?
Your reasons to get excited are our reasons to raise questions Thank you. [“Comment" is Mr. Patricio P. Diaz' column for MindaViews, the opinion section of MindaNews. Mr. Diaz is the recipient of a “Lifetime Achievement Award” from the Titus Brandsma for his "commitment to education and public information to Mindanawons as Journalist, Educator and Peace Advocate." You may e-mail your comments to patpdiaz@mindanews.com]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
