A Sacred Agreement

The ink color that was used by GPH peace panel Chair Marvic Leonen to sign the Framework Agreement was red – much like a reference to historic blood compacts of our ancestors.  For the Muslims, too, contracts are sacred. Thus, the event ushers us to a new era of peace – so full of hope. That peace loving Filipinos want to see a renaissance in the centuries old Bangsamoro homeland was so palpable in the outpouring of support and ownership of the peace deal. 

What has gone before? Let’s look back in time.

Historically, the Moro sultanates (a governance structure having all the elements of a state) in Mindanao are older than the Philippine Republic by about five centuries.

Independence movement in Muslim parts of Mindanao emerges in 1967, achieving autonomy for Muslims in five provinces & a city in Mindanao after an Organic Act was enacted by the Philippine legislature. This autonomous area is called the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao. In 1977, in an attempt to appease Muslim separatists, a Code of Muslim Personal Laws was enacted as a presidential decree during the martial law regime of former President Ferdinand Marcos.  The enactment was also in keeping with the 1976 Tripoli agreement between the Philippines & the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) which provided, among others, that Muslims should have courts to hear Shari’a law cases. This was also about the time that Moro became a popular word to denote Muslim Filipinos & Bangsamoro to mean a nation or a community of people espousing the right to self determination. 

Twenty years after the 1976 Tripoli agreement, a 1996 Final Peace Agreement between the Philippine government and the MNLF was forged.  In spite of the 1996 peace agreement, war erupted with another MNLF splinter group called the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) and government peace talks were initiated anew.

A failed 2008 agreement between the Philippine government & the MILF outlined geographical areas which are beyond the current ARMM.  This Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) was decreed by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional. Now, after two years on the negotiating table, a framework agreement has been signed.

The mechanism of plebiscite is the track to ultimately determine the areas of autonomy.

The Organic Act (Republic Act No. 9054) which created the ARMM already provided that the Regional Legislative Assembly of the Autonomous Region In Muslim Mindanao (ARMM), “in consultation with the Supreme Court and consistent with the Constitution may formulate a Shari’a legal system including criminal cases which shall be applicable in the region, only to Muslims or those who profess the Islamic faith.”  And as Islam is a complete code of life for the Muslims, it is expected that Sharia law will inform the basic law for the new Bangsamoro political entity.

The population of Mindanao as of the 2010 government census   by the National Statistics Office is 21,582, 540 & Mindanao is home to about 6.5 million Muslims, which is approximately 30% of the total population of Mindanao.

Many of the poorest provinces in the Philippines are found in Mindanao. All the provinces in the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) are among the poorest provinces. As expected, this situation is more difficult for Muslim women. 

The Mindanao conflict was one of the longest running problems in the world.  Which was why, calls and proposals for new political configurations and political projects have come and go and the right to self determination was always at the heart of the discourse. 

Meeting of  Sharia women judges & lawyers in a PILIPINA Legal Resources Center workshop  

Bangsamoro

Nobody wants war. It will be for all our benefit if there is peace & as we have always said, the way to peace is peace. So, after two years hard work, we have a frame & method to peace for Mindanao. This peace deal or framework to be called a comprehensive agreement & to be signed soon by the government of the Philippines (GPH) & the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) is a political document which writes the mechanism & paves the way for the creation of legal instruments for its implementation.

What are the issues or problems that our government is trying to address? What is wrong with the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARRM)? Over the years, the ARMM which was enacted as an entity in 1990 (during the President Cory administration) has not been the answer to the historical marginalization of our Bangsamoro in all spheres: political, economic & social. So, the method towards this new structure & function of the Bangsamoro political entity is spelled out in this political agreement between the GPH & MILF.

Autonomous regions as political subdivisions are written in our constitution. The current enabling law for the ARMM is an Organic Act passed by Congress. As any law can be repealed or amended, this peace deal proposes to replace ARMM with a new political entity called Bangsamoro through a new law still to be passed by Congress. According to GPH peace panel Chair Marvic Leonen, the political commitments of the peace deal ensures a process under the auspices of a Transition Commission which will be created by the President of the Philippines through an executive order; the transition commission of 15 members to be appointed by PNoy will take charge of drafting & engaging with all stakeholders towards the passage of a new law (Bangsamoro Basic Law) for the Bangsamoro political entity. The administration of PNoy will shepherd the passage of the proposed Bangsamoro Basic Law by certifying the bill as urgent. Once passed, this Basic law will be ratified by the qualified voters within the territory. When ratified, the created Bangsamoro Transition Authority (BTA) takes the place of ARMM.

In turn, the peace deal maintains that the central government retains the powers of “defense & external security, foreign policy, common market & global trade….coinage & monetary policy, citizenship & naturalization, & postal service.”

The peace panel says that this peace deal builds on the old Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA- AD) during the Arroyo administration which was struck down by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional. Some of the lessons of that entire process leading to the non signing of the MOA-AD were a deficiency in tactical planning; the MOA-AD as a peace instrument should have been forged as an iconic event and putting as conditions the eventual passage of the legal and constitutional requirements, at some point. Anyway, one of the contentious issues then in the MOA-AD was territory which was deemed expanded. This time, the framework agreement lists the core territory as the current ARMM areas (five province & two cities) plus the areas which voted for inclusion in the autonomous region in the plebiscite of 2001. These areas are 6 towns of Lanao del Norte, towns of North Cotabato, Cotabato City & Isabela City.

What is the proposed governance structure for the Bangsamoro political entity? First, all vested rights of political subdivisions & officials covered by the Local Government Code (RA 7160) will be in effect even after the Bangsamoro law is passed for as long as RA 1760 is not repealed. This means all functions of all governors of all provinces, all mayors & barangay captains of all LGUs under the autonomous region will still be in effect. The peace deal proposes a ministerial form of government for the Bangsamoro. Already, there is a debate now whether the proposed political entity requires charter change. Atty. Marvic Leonen, head of the government peace panel says there is nothing in the article on local government in our Constitution that prohibits a ministerial form of government for the Bangsamoro entity & that anyway, any group of citizens can pursue amendments to the constitution. Still, even if charter amendments are not necessary, one of the functions of the transition commission as written in the peace deal is to be ready to “work on proposals to amend the Phil. Constitution....whenever necessary….”

Who is a Bangsamoro by identity? The framework agreement says all those descendants of the original inhabitants of Mindanao & all those who “identify themselves as Bangsamoro by ascription or self ascription….(but) that the freedom of choice of indigenous peoples shall be respected.”  

One of the important powers listed in the framework agreement pertains to judicial institutions. While the framework agreement recognizes parallel justice institutions such as alternative dispute resolution systems & civil courts, the peace deal writes the “supremacy of the Shari’ah & (that) its application shall only be to Muslims.”  

Bangsamoro women & fellows from PILIPINA Legal Resources Center during a workshop on Gender & Development ( GAD) Programs in the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM): A skills building workshop 

.

E- Crime & Anti – Internet Freedom of Speech Law

The Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 ( R.A. 10175) has been criticized as the electronic- martial law in this day and age conjuring images of suppression of basic freedoms. The media & netizens were waiting with bated breath for the passage of the Freedom of Information bill but what we got is a Cybercrime Prevention Act that, according to sworn petitions to the Supreme Court, violates our basic freedom of speech or of expression.

It seems that our legislators many of whom were born before the electronic age or age of computers could not appreciate freedoms in cyberspace. Perhaps, there is a need to define vividly in legal parlance how cyber identity theft and fraud can be committed in this electronic age. Still, freedom of expression is a right shared by a community of nations in this planet. Cyber identity theft & cyber fraud are the only two good things worth saving under the cybercrime prevention law. The meaning of pornography in the cybercrime law must be nuanced with freedom of expression & the offense of sexual predation because for many feminists, the freedom of expression also includes the freedom of sexual expression. Since time immemorial, the community of civilized nations has developed standards to test obscenity such as a jurisprudence (Miller v. California) which says that a  “publication is obscene if  taken as whole, it is not literary, artistic, political nor does not have a scientific value as defined by the community” or an existing policy. In this day and age, that community includes the millions of netizens. Are our legislators or representatives who are our agents not connected to us, the  community of netizens?

The Philippines is a signatory to the United Nations International Covenant on Civil & Political Rights (ICCPR) since 1986 & the UN Human Rights Committee (now UN Human Rights Council)  has promulgated a “View” that libel in our archaic Revised Penal Code already violates our existing obligations under article 19 of the UN ICCPR.

But, instead of decriminalizing libel which is the trend in the civilized community of nations, our Philippine legislators & our President of the Philippines further brought the crime of libel to cyberspace. But, not only that, this cybercrime prevention law increases the penalty for libel in cyberspace. And worst, all the crimes listed in the archaic Philippine Revised Penal Code are covered under the cybercrime law & the penalty is one degree higher.

By passing the cybercrime law, the Philippines is guilty of continuing violation of state obligations under the UN ICCPR as stated in sworn petitions to the Supreme Court.

By passing the cybercrime law, our country wants to regulate & limit our freedom of expression. As in most jurisdictions, the right to information is guaranteed right, & the cybercrime prevention act is deemed unconstitutional by thousands & thousands of netizens because our Philippine Constitution says, “No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.”

What is then the remedy for libel & defamation in cyberspace?  One trend is decriminalization & to revisit our law on libel. Libel which has a publication element & which could very well be committed in cyber space can be reformulated as a civil offense instead of a crime. Note that the penalty now for libel in the cybercrime law could be twelve (12) years and so it is very harsh that one needs to consult a lawyer for publishing a report against wrongdoings & erring public servants.

Is there a cultural lag between technology and cyber offenses? Are our material cyber practices and ways of doing things not at pace with information technology and communication? Yes, we must build rules in cyberspace and information technology. Yes, there is so much catching up to do in terms of laws, policies to protect the lives of journalists in the frontlines of communication & our netizens who are writing & blogging “to petition government for redress of grievances.” Yes, we must catch up with civil sanctions for violations of privacy, privileged communication and state security. But, all these must be interfaced and balanced with our basic  freedoms  of speech or of expression and our right to information.


Image credit : Showbiz Government 
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Aquino-Benigno-III-Simeon-Cojuangco-Broadcasting-NetworkGovernment/136875469685310