Civilian protection will be done by “new entrants into the IMT”

DAVAO CITY (MindaNews/29 October) – Civilian protection monitoring will be an added mandate for the International Monitoring Team (IMT) but it will be done by “new entrants into the IMT, including international and local NGOs,” government peace panel spokesperson Camilo Montesa said. Montesa, also Peace Process Undersecretary, told MindaNews that while civilian protection monitoring has been added to the IMT’s ceasefire monitoring and development monitoring roles, “the civilian protection monitoring will be done by new entrants into the IMT.”

Peace groups welcomed the October 27 agreement but doubts were expressed about its implementation, with only eight months left to the end of the Arroyo administration.

Amirah Lidasan of Suara Bangsamoro said the agreement is “okay.”
“Inshallah, it will help protect the civilians. This is just a reiteration of the UNDHR (United Nations Declaration of Human Rights), Geneva protocols and the GRP-NDF’s Comprehensive Agreement on Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law (CAHRIHL).”

“As Human Rights defenders, aside from pushing government to implement the agreement, we should also push for the GRP-AFP (Government of the Republic of the Philippines-Armed Forces of the Philippines) to answer for the human rights violations committed during the conduct of the war in the previous years,” she said.

“GRP has signed so many agreements to protect civilian rights, and yet we still have a high number of cases of human rights violations and no one from government has answered for their atrocities against the people,” she added.

The Mindanao Peoples’ Caucus (MPC) and its allied women’s organizations in a press statement said they were “highly dismayed” in that civilian protection “to be simply delegated as an added function of the International Monitoring Team tends to create the false impression that it is simply an afterthought – an adjunct to the ceasefire monitoring mandate of the IMT which at this point in time it has not even fulfilled for a reason which is not of its own fault” (see separate story).

“We did our part,” MILF peace panel chair Mohagher Iqbal told MindaNews, adding, “negotiation is a two-way process.”

Montesa said there is “no reason to be dismayed” as the agreement is “win-win for everyone.”

He explained that MPC itself or its Bantay Ceasefire, women’s groups can be part of the new entrants into the IMT that would be dealing with civilian protection monitoring.

Iqbal said MPC and other applicants for civilian protection monitoring can, indeed, be among the new entrants into the IMT based on the agreement.

But MPC secretary-general Mary Ann Arnado said Montesa “misses the point.”

“MPC/Bantay Ceasefire is dismayed not because we wanted to be part of the mechanism itself but because of the apparent weakness and loopholes in the agreed framework that the peace panels have managed to achieve in their Oct27 exploratory meetings. MPC has proposed for the establishment of an International Mission for the Protection of Civilians in Mindanao (IMPCM) which, like the IMT, can also be international in character -- but very much focused on ensuring that human rights and international humanitarian law are observed and civilians are spared and protected in the conduct of the war in Mindanao. This is a very important survival issue for millions of innocent civilians in the conflict-affected areas thus the need for a separate, effective, influential international protection mission which the United Nations -- with or without the Philippine government and the MILF, can within its powers, do anyway under the principle of the Right to Protect.”


In its July 29, 2009 Joint Statement in Kuala Lumpur, the first after a year-long impasse, the government and MILF agreed on four points including working “for a framework agreement on the establishment of a mechanism on the protection of non-combatants in armed conflict” and on the setting up of an International Contact Group.

The framework agreement on the ICG was done on September 15, also in Kuala Lumpur.

The October 27 agreement on the protection of civilians provides that the IMT “shall monitor, verify and report non-compliance by the Parties to their basic undertaking to protect civilian communities.”

The agreement also provides that when the IMT ceases to operate, “the civilian protection component shall remain in place and continue to perform such function.”

“The Parties shall designate humanitarian organizations and non-governmental organizations, both international and national, with proven track record for impartiality, neutrality and independence, to carry out the civilian protection function.”

Montesa said this is important because even if the IMT ceases to operate, the civilian protection component will continue to function.

Iqbal said the two parties’ next meeting will be the review of the terms of reference of the IMT.

Both parties are also expected to immediately request the reactivation of the IMT.

The IMT started operations in 2004, with a mandate renewed annually upon request of both parties. The Malaysian-led IMT’s tour of duty ended on November 30 last year and had not been renewed as the talks collapsed in August last year following the aborted signing of the already initialed Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) and the government peace panel, disbanded on September 3, was reconstituted only in December.

The IMT was composed initially of military contingents from Malaysia, Brunei and Libya and later, a development expert from Japan.

The October 27 agreement came just as thousands of internally displaced persons (IDPs) continued to remain in evacuation sites or with their relatives.

In its last press statement dated October 22, the Bureau of Pubic Information of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) reported that based on the records of its Regional Disaster Coordinating Council (RDCC), “as of October 15, 2009, out of the total 70,135 affected families in 196 conflict-affected barangays in the ARMM, 36,770 are still in evacuation centers and 12,423 are staying outside evacuation centers while 16,405 families have already returned to their homes.”

The ARMM statement did not say where the remaining 4,137 families are since the total number of families in the evacuation centers and outside as well as those who have returned home, according to its press statement, is 65,998 families. The latter represents some 330,000 residents.

The National Disaster Coordinating Council (NDCC) in its last report on the issue of IDPs said a total of 115,434 families or 745,763 persons were served from August 10, 2008 to July 7, 2009 and that as of July 7, 2009, there were still 51,326 families served inside evacuation centers and home-based, or 254,119 persons.

Thousands of IDPs, dubbed “enemy reserve force” by 6th ID spokesperson Lt. Col. Jonathan Ponce, took to the streets on July 23 demanding ceasefire and the resumption of the peace talks so they could return home.

Malacanang that afternoon issued a suspension of offensive military operations (SOMO) while the MILF reciprocated two days later with a suspension of military action.”

For Prof. Abhoud Syed Lingga, executive director of the Institute of Bangsamoro Studies, making civilian protection monitoring a component of the IMT “reduces the number of structures of the peace process.”

Lingga was referring to the other structures in the peace process like the Coordinating Committees on the Cessation of Hostilities, and International Contact Group.

Gus Miclat, executive director of the Initiatives for International Dialogue said the agreement is “attuned to UNSC (United Nations Security Council) Res. 1474 on protecting civilians in armed conflict. Also r2p (right to protect) doctrine plus UNSC 1325 and UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (UNGPID). IID and allied networks commit to help ensure this. Kudos to both panels.”

Amina Rasul, convenor of the Philippine Council for Islam and Democracy (PCID) said, “since I have no expectations that any substantive agreement can be reached under Mrs. Arroyo, this agreement is a good step. It does not provide full protection of civilians or respond to the needs of the displaced, but since I have low expectations, I am happy. My problem lies in implementation of any agreement.” (Carolyn O. Arguillas/MindaNews)