If you intresting in sport buy steroids you find place where you can find information about steroids

What’s all the big fuss about the MoA-AD?

(After about three years of stormy courtship the wedding day has been set, invitations have been mailed out and families, friends, sponsors and guests of honor have booked their flights and made hotel reservations. But then a TRO was dropped on everyone like a bombshell. The wedding, the big celebration could not take place. A corny magistrate suspected the groom had promised so much in the prenuptial that he couldn’t deliver and could prejudice potential heirs. Perhaps, just perhaps, the groom could be playing footsy with the judge and so the bride, obviously feeling sorry for herself while fuming, has decided to provoke a gunfight with her runaway partner in the ok coral. Assured he won’t be TROed, the groom in turn threatened to blow his spurned bride to smithereens.

I thought the whole affair was worrisomely funny so I’ve tried to get a hold of the agreement to satisfy my curiosity. I’ve scribbled some lazy (but anyway serious) notes on it which I wish to share here with you who may be cheering or jeering the judge, the groom or the bride.)


__________

GRP-MILF draft pact on Bangsamoro homeland (from Philippine Daily Inquirer)

The Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP) and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) herein referred to as the “Parties” to this Agreement.

Terms of Reference

The context of referents follows:

The Agreement for General Cessation of Hostilities dated July 18, 1997 Between the GRP and the MILF, and its Implementing Administrative and Operational Guidelines;

The General Framework of Agreement of Intent Between the GRP and the MILF dated August 27, 1998;

The Agreement on the General Framework for the Resumption of Peace Talks Between the GRP and the MILF dated March 24, 2001;

The Tripoli Agreement on Peace Between the GRP and the MILF dated June 22, 2001;

The Tripoli Agreement Between the GRP and the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) dated December 23, 1976 and the Final Agreement on the Implementation of the 1976 Tripoli Agreement Between the GRP and the MNLF dated September 2, 1996;

Republic Act No. 6734, as amended by R.A. 9054, otherwise known as “An Act to Strengthen and Expand the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM)”;

ILO Convention No. 169, in correlation to the UN Declaration on the Rights of the Indigenous Peoples, and Republic Act No. 8371 otherwise known as the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997, the UN Charter; the UN Universal Declaration on Human Rights, International Humanitarian Law (IHL), and internationally recognized human rights instruments; and

Compact rights entrenchment emanating from the regime of dar-ul-mua’hada (or territory under compact) and dar-ul-sulh (or territory under peace agreement) that partakes the nature of a treaty device. For the purpose of this Agreement, a “treaty” is defined as any solemn agreement in writing that sets out understanding, obligations, and benefits for both parties which provides for a framework that elaborates the principles declared in the Agreement.

Have agreed and acknowledged as follows:

CONCEPTS AND PRINCIPLES

1. It is the birthright of all Moros and all Indigenous peoples of Mindanao to identify themselves and be accepted as “Bangsamoros”. The Bangsamoro people refers to those who are natives or original inhabitants of Mindanao and its adjacent islands including Palawan and the Sulu archipelago at the time of conquest or colonization of its descendants whether mixed or of full blood. Spouses and their descendants are classified as Bangsamoro. The freedom of choice of the Indigenous people shall be respected.

NOTES: Seems nothing here looks blatantly unconstitutional or arbitrary to justify the issuance of a TRO by the Supreme Court.

I also like the last sentence because it allows IPs other than Moros “freedom of choice” (or the self-determination to be assimilated in Bangsamoro or not?).

2. It is essential to lay the foundation of the Bangsamoro homeland in order to address the Bangsamoro people’s humanitarian and economic needs as well as their political aspirations. Such territorial jurisdictions and geographic areas being the natural wealth and patrimony represent the social, cultural and political identity and pride of all the Bangsamoro people. Ownership of the homeland is vested exclusively in them by virtue of their prior rights of occupation that had inhered in them as sizeable bodies of people, delimited by their ancestors since time immemorial, and being the first politically organized dominant occupants.

NOTES: Both historically and constitutionally defensible. In Carino v. Insular Government, a case of Philippine origin decided by the US Supreme Court in 1909, the Court, through Justice Holmes, unanimously has said:

“The acquisition of the Philippines was not like the settlement of the white race in the United States. Whatever consideration may have been shown to the North American Indians, the dominant purpose of the whites in America was to occupy land. It is obvious that, however stated, the reason for our taking over the Philippines was different. No one, we suppose, would deny that, so far as consistent with paramount necessities, our first object in the internal administration of the islands is to do justice to the natives, not to exploit their country for private gain. By the Organic Act of July 1, 1902, chapter 1369, section 12 (32 Statutes at Large, 691), all the property and rights acquired there by the United States are to be administered ‘for the benefit of the inhabitants thereof.’ It is reasonable to suppose that the attitude thus assumed by the United States with regard to what was unquestionably its own is also its attitude in deciding what it will claim for its own. The same statute made a bill of rights, embodying the safeguards of the Constitution, and, like the Constitution, extends those safeguards to all. It provides that ‘no law shall be enacted in said islands which shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, or deny to any person therein the equal protection of the laws.’ In the light of the declaration that we have quoted from section 12, it is hard to believe that the United States was ready to declare in the next breath that “any person” did not embrace the inhabitants of Benguet, or that it meant by “property” only that which had become such by ceremonies of which presumably a large part of the inhabitants never had heard, and that it proposed to treat as public land what they, by native custom and by long association,– of the profoundest factors in human thought,– regarded as their own.”

3. Both Parties acknowledge that ancestral domain does not form part of the public domain but encompasses ancestral, communal, and customary lands, maritime, fluvial and alluvial domains as well all natural resources therein that have inured or vested ancestral rights on the basis of native title. Ancestral domain and ancestral land refer to those held under claim of ownership, occupied or possessed, by themselves or through the ancestors of the Bangsamoro people, communally or individually since time immemorial continuously to the present, except when prevented by war, civil disturbance, force majeure, or other forms of possible usurpation or displacement by force, deceit, stealth, or as a consequence of government project or any other voluntary dealings entered into by the government and private individuals, corporate entities or institutions.

NOTES: This is constitutionally unassailable. It also conforms to opinion of now Chief Justice Puno in Cruz v. Sec. of Environment (December 2000) holding that “The right of ownership and possession of the ICCs/IPs to their ancestral domains is held under the indigenous concept of ownership. This concept maintains the view that ancestral domains are the ICCs/IPs private but community property. It is private simply because it is not part of the public domain.”

4. Both Parties acknowledge that the right to self-governance of the Bangsamoro people is rooted on ancestral territoriality exercised originally under the suzerain authority of their sultanates and the Pat a Pangampong ku Ranaw. The Moro sultanates were states or karajaan/kadatuan resembling a body politic endowed with all the elements of nation-state in the modern sense. As a domestic community distinct from the rest of the national communities, they have a definite historic homeland. They are the “First Nation” with defined territory and with a system of government having entered into treaties of amity and commerce with foreign nations.

The Parties concede that the ultimate objective of entrenching the Bangsamoro homeland as a territorial space is to secure their identity and posterity, to protect their property rights and resources as well as to establish a system of governance suitable and acceptable to them as distinct dominant people.

NOTES: The claim that the “Moro sultanates WERE states or karajaan/kadatuan resembling a body politic endowed with all the elements of nation-state in the modern sense” (uppercasing mine) has historical grounding. Also, the ultimate objective of “entrenching” the Bangsamoro homeland as a territorial space” does not appear to be constitutionally proscribed.

5. Both Parties affirm their commitment to mutually respect the right to one’s identity and the parity of esteem of everyone in the political community. The protection of civil rights and religious liberties of individuals underlie the basis of peace and justice of their totality of relationships.

NOTES: “Parity of esteem . . . in the political community” could be eye-catching but it does not follow something is constitutionally infirm about it.

Likewise, the Bill of Rights protect the civil rights and religious liberties of individuals, whether Christian, Muslims or non-believers.

6. Both Parties agree that the Bangsamoro Juridical Entity (BJE) shall have the authority and jurisdiction over the Ancestral Domain and Ancestral lands, including both alienable and non-alienable lands encompassed within their homeland and ancestral history, as well as the delineation of ancestral domain/lands of the Bangsamoro people located therein.

NOTES: Self-delineation by the IPs of ancestral domain within their territorial space is practical as long as it stays within that limit. But at this juncture, am wary about the lack of definition of the Bangsamoro Juridical Entity (BJE) and of its representativeness. It is politically problematic to me but it is also a “political question” that by our system of government is addressed to its political branch. The wisdom of the President to deal with MILF at this juncture (and not with ASG, for instance) is beyond the pale of judicial review.

7. Vested property rights upon the entrenchment of the BJE shall be recognized and respected subject to paragraph 9 of the strand on Resources.

NOTES: Recognition of the “vested rights” of third parties is always salutary.

TERRITORY

1. The Bangsamoro homeland and historic territory refer to the land mass as well as the maritime, terrestrial, fluvial and alluvial domains, and the aerial domain, the atmospheric space above it, embracing the Mindanao-Sulu-Palawan geographic region. However, delimitations are contained in the agreed Schedules (Categories).

NOTES: This cannot be intelligently commented on without me having access to a copy of the “Schedules” of delimitations.

2. Toward this end, the Parties entered into the following stipulations:

a. The Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP) and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) as the Parties to this Agreement commit themselves to the full and mutual implementation of this framework agreement on territory with the aim of resolving outstanding issues that emanate from the consensus points on Ancestral Domain.

NOTES: The vagueness of this provision which speaks only of “framework agreement on territory” is potentially pregnant with many and varied interpretations. It however acknowledges that there remain “outstanding issues that emanate from the consensus points on Ancestral Domain.”

b. The Parties confirm their understanding that the mutual goal of reaching an agreement on Bangsamoro territory specific to mapping the outlying borders and the boundaries affecting local government units will lead to consolidation of the agreed texts on the Ancestral Domain Strands.

NOTES: This provision only confirms that the Parties have yet to reach an agreement “on Bangsamoro territory specific to mapping the outlying borders and the boundaries affecting local government units” that “will lead to consolidation of the agreed texts on the Ancestral Domain Strands.”

c. The Parties affirm that the core of the BJE shall constitute the present geographic area of the ARMM, including the municipalities of Baloi, Munai, Nunungan, Pantar, Tagoloan and Tangkal in the province of Lanao del Norte that voted for inclusion in the ARMM during the 2001 plebiscite;

NOTES: This may require legislation but it is a fair commitment that’s deliverable on the part of GRP.

d. Without derogating from the requirements of prior agreements, the government stipulates to conduct and deliver, within six (6) months following the signing of the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain, a plebiscite covering the areas as enumerated in the list and depicted in the map as Category A attached herein (the “Annex”). The Annex constitutes an integral part of this framework agreement.

NOTES: This obviously means that the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain is not immediately executory but subject to a plebiscite covering the areas as defined therein. (No access to Category A)

e. The areas covered by Category B has already been reflected on a map and officially agreed by both Parties.

NOTES: No access to Category B. But again whatever agreement has been made is still subject to approval in the plebiscite.

f. Internal Waters:

The Bangsamoro Juridical Entity (BJE) shall have jurisdiction over the management, conservation, development, protection, utilization and disposition of all natural resources, living and non-living, within its internal waters extending fifteen (15) kilometers from the coastline of the BJE area.

g. Territorial Waters:

(1) The territorial waters of the BJE shall stretch beyond the BJE internal waters up to the Republic of the Philippines (RP) baselines south east and south west of mainland Mindanao. Beyond the fifteen (15) kilometers internal waters, the Central Government and the BJE shall exercise joint jurisdiction, authority and management over areas and [of] all natural resources, living and non-living contained therein. The details of such management of the Territorial Waters shall be provided in an agreement to be entered into by the Parties.

(2) The boundaries of the territorial waters shall stretch beyond the 15-km BJE internal waters up to the Central government’s baselines under existing laws. In the southern and eastern part of the BJE, it shall be demarcated by a line drawn from the Maguling Point, Palimbang, Province of Sultan Kudarat up to the straight baselines of the Philippines. On the northwestern part, it shall be demarcated by a line drawn from Little Sta. Cruz Island, Zamboanga City, up to Naris Point, Bataraza, Palawan. On the western part of Palawan, it shall be demarcated by a line drawn from the boundary of Bataraza and Rizal up to the straight baselines of the Philippines.

The final demarcation shall be determined by a joint technical body composed of duly-designated representatives of both Parties, in coordination with the appropriate Central Government agency in accordance with the above guidelines.

h. Sharing of Minerals on Territorial Waters:

Consistent with paragraphs 5 and 6 of the provisions on Resources, all potential sources of energy, petroleum in situ, hydrocarbon, natural gas and other minerals, including deposits or fields found within the territorial waters, shall be shared between the Central Government and the BJE in favor of the latter through production sharing agreement or economic cooperative agreement.

i. Activities Allowed on Territorial Waters:

(1) The Parties shall have authority to carry out the following activities within the territorial waters:

(a) Exploration and utilization of the natural resources, whether living or non-living within the territorial waters;

(b) Establishments and use of artificial islands, installations and structures;

(c) Marine scientific research;

(d) Protection and the preservation of the marine environment;

(e) Conservation of living resources;

(f) Regulation of shipping and fishing activities;

(g) Enforcement of police and safety measures, including interdiction of the entry and use of the waters by criminal elements and hot pursuit of suspected criminal elements;

(h) Regulation and control of contraband and illegal entry of prohibited materials and substances, including smuggling; and

(i) Such other measures as the Parties may otherwise mutually agree.

(2) Activities relating to exploration and utilization of non-living resources, as well as paragraphs (c) and (d) of the Authorized Activities will be carried out on a joint basis agreed by the Parties which may be in the form of production sharing agreements or joint development pacts.

j. Establishment of a Joint Commission:

(1) The Parties shall establish a Joint Commission, which shall elaborate the modalities for the implementation and the carrying out of the Authorized Activities and the measures adopted in cases of allegation of breach, and carry out any other functions which may be assigned to it by the Parties for the purpose of implementing the joint management of resources.

(2) The Joint Commission shall consist of one representative from each Party, who are assisted by advisers as may be needed. The conclusions of the Joint Commission shall be adopted by consensus and shall only be recommendatory in nature. Only when the conclusions of the Joint Commission are adopted by the Parties do they become binding on the Parties.

k. Demarcation and Status of Territorial Waters:

The demarcation and status of the BJE territorial waters shall be finally determined together with the demarcation and final status of Category B of the BJE.

3. From and after entrenchment of compact rights over the Bangsamoro homeland and the territorial jurisdictions for associative governance shall likewise embrace those under proclamation for agricultural and human settlements intended for the Bangsamoro people, all alienable and disposable land, pasture lands, timberlands together with all existing civil and military reservations, parks, old growth or natural forests declared as forest reserves, watersheds, mangroves, fishponds, wetlands, marshes, inland bodies of water and all bays, straits and channels found within the BJE.

4. All territorial and geographic areas in Mindanao and its adjacent islands including Palawan, and the Sulu archipelago that have been recognized, and/or delineated as ancestral domain and ancestral land of the Bangsamoro people as their geographic areas, inclusive of settlements and reservations, may be formed or constituted into political subdivisions of the Bangsamoro territorial jurisdictions subject to the principles of equality of peoples and mutual respect and to the protection of civil, political, economic, and cultural rights in their respective jurisdictions.

5. For purposes of territorial delimitation, the Parties have agreed to the joint determination of geographic areas encompassed within the territorial borders of the Bangsamoro homeland and territory based on the technical maps and data submitted by both sides as provided above.

RESOURCES

1. The Bangsamoro juridical entity is empowered with authority and responsibility for the land use, development, conservation and disposition of the natural resources within the homeland. Upon entrenchment of the Bangsamoro juridical entity, the land tenure and use of such resources and wealth must reinforce their economic self-sufficiency. Among the purposes or measures to make progress more rapid are:

a. Entry into joint development, utilization, and exploitation of natural resources designed as commons or shared resources, which is tied up to the full setting of appropriate institution, particularly affecting strategic minerals.

b. Stimulation of local economy by a range of mechanism, in particular the need to address unemployment and improvement of living conditions for the population in the Bangsamoro juridical entity;

c. Intensification of measures needed to uproot the cause of poverty in the Bangsamoro juridical entity through responsible harnessing and development of its natural resources; and

d. Undertaking program review of public services, industrial or trade-related and agrarian-related issues in situations of different sectors of the society in the Bangsamoro juridical entity, which acquire communal character deriving from the special nature of their industry.

2. The Bangsamoro People through their appropriate juridical entity shall, among others, exercise power or authority over the natural resources within its territorial jurisdiction:

a. To explore, exploit, use or utilize and develop their ancestral domain and ancestral lands within their territorial jurisdiction, inclusive of their right of occupation, possession, conservation, and exploitation of all natural resources found therein;

b. To conserve and protect the human and natural environment for their sustainable and beneficial enjoyment and their posterity;

c. To utilize, develop, and exploit its natural resources found in their ancestral domain or may enter into a joint development, utilization, and exploitation of natural resources, specifically on strategic minerals, designed as commons or shared resources, which is tied up to the final setting of appropriate institution.

d. To revoke or grant forest concessions, timber license, contracts or agreements in the utilization and exploitation of natural resources designated as commons or shared resources, mechanisms for economic cooperation with respect to strategic minerals, falling within the territorial jurisdiction of the Bangsamoro juridical entity;

e. To enact agrarian laws and programs suitable to the special circumstances of the Bangsamoro people prevailing in their ancestral lands within the established territorial boundaries of the Bangsamoro homeland and ancestral territory is within the competence of the Bangsamoro juridical entity; and

f. To use such natural resources and wealth to reinforce their economic self-sufficiency.

NOTES: The above provisions are not easy to digest at a glance. But there appear some similarities between certain terms in the MaO-AD and the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA). So, maybe, it would help to quote some pertinent portion of the opinion of then Justice Puno in Cruz v. Sec. of Environment (that I still need to have a better handle of myself) where IPRA has survived constitutional challenge:

“The IPRA recognizes the existence of the indigenous cultural communities or indigenous peoples (ICCs/IPs) as a distinct sector in Philippine society. It grants these people the ownership and possession of their ancestral domains and ancestral lands, and defines the extent of these lands and domains. The ownership given is the indigenous concept of ownership under customary law which traces its origin to native title.

Other rights are also granted the ICCs/IPs, and these are:

- the right to develop lands and natural resources;

- the right to stay in the territories;

- the right in case of displacement;

- the right to safe and clean air and water;

- the right to claim parts of reservations;

- the right to resolve conflict;

- the right to ancestral lands which include

a. the right to transfer land/property to/among members of the same ICCs/IPs, subject to customary laws and traditions of the community concerned;

b. the right to redemption for a period not exceeding 15 years from date of transfer, if the transfer is to a non-member of the ICC/IP and is tainted by vitiated consent of the ICC/IP, or if the transfer is for an unconscionable consideration.

Within their ancestral domains and ancestral lands, the ICCs/IPs are given the right to self-governance and empowerment, social justice and human rights, the right to preserve and protect their culture, traditions, institutions and community intellectual rights, and the right to develop their own sciences and technologies.

xxx xxx xxx

The Right of ICCs/IPs to Develop Lands and Natural Resources Within the Ancestral Domains Does Not Deprive the State of Ownership Over the Natural Resources and Control and Supervision in their Development and Exploitation.”

3. The Bangsamoro Juridical Entity, and the Central Government agree on wealth-sharing based on a mutually agreed percentage ratio in favor of the Bangsamoro juridical entity through an economic cooperation agreement or arrangement over the income and revenues that are derived from the exploration, exploitation, use and development of any resources for the benefit of the Bangsamoro people.

NOTES: “Wealth-sharing” is neither wrong, unlawful nor unconstitutional.

4. The Bangsamoro juridical entity is free to enter into any economic cooperation and trade relations with foreign countries: provided, however, that such relationships and understandings do not include aggression against the Government of the Republic of the Philippines; provided, further that it shall remain the duty and obligation of the Central Government to take charge of external defense. Without prejudice to the right of the Bangsamoro juridical entity to enter into agreement and environmental cooperation with any friendly country affecting its jurisdiction, it shall include:

a. the option to establish and open Bangsamoro trade missions in foreign countries with which it has economic cooperation agreements; and

b. the elements bearing in mind the mutual benefits derived from Philippine archipelagic status and security.

And, in furtherance thereto, the Central Government shall take necessary steps to ensure the Bangsamoro juridical entity’s participation in international meetings and events, e.g. ASEAN meetings and other specialized agencies of the United Nations. This shall entitle the said juridical entity participation in Philippine official missions and delegations that are engaged in the negotiation of border agreements or protocols for environmental protection, equitable sharing of incomes and revenues, in the areas of sea, seabed and inland seas or bodies of water adjacent to or between islands forming part of the ancestral domain, in addition to those of fishing rights.

NOTES: As far as my memory serves me, none of the above is expressly prohibited by the Constitution.

5. Jurisdiction and control over, and the right of exploring for, exploiting, producing and obtaining all potential sources of energy, petroleum, in situ, fossil fuel, mineral oil and natural gas, whether onshore or offshore, is vested in the Bangsamoro juridical entity as the party having control within its territorial jurisdiction, provided that in times of national emergency, when public interest so requires, the Central Government may, during the emergency, for a fixed period and under reasonable terms as may be agreed by both Parties, temporarily assume or direct the operations of such strategic resources.

NOTES: As long as the “resources” are within the contemplation of “ancestral domain,” jurisdiction and control over them are a necessary adjunct of ancestral domain ownership.

6. The Bangsamoro government-take or profit split from total production shall be shared with the Central Government on a percentage ratio of 75%/25% in favor of the Bangsamoro juridical entity. All royalties, bonuses, taxes, charges, custom duties or imposts on natural resources and mineral resources shall be shared by the Parties on a percentage ratio of 75%/25% in favor of the Bangsamoro juridical entity.

NOTES: Isn’t revenue sharing of the essence of ARMM’s autonomy?

7. The legitimate grievances of the Bangsamoro people arising from any unjust dispossession of their territorial and propriety rights, customary land tenures, or their marginalization shall be acknowledged. Whenever restoration is no longer possible, the GRP shall take effective measures of adequate reparation collectively beneficial to the Bangsamoro people, in such quality, quantity and status to be determined mutually by both Parties.

NOTES: I’m not sure why the GRP, as financially strapped as it is, has agreed to this item, but still it is not constitutionally infirm.

8. All proclamations, issuances, policies, rules and guidelines declaring old growth or natural forests and all watersheds within the BJE as forest reserves shall continue to remain in force until otherwise modified, revised or superseded by subsequent policies, rules and regulations issued by the competent Bangsamoro authority or juridical entity.

NOTES: No prob, no sweat.

9. Forest concessions, timber licenses, contracts or agreements, mining concessions, Mineral Production and Sharing Agreements (MPSA), Industrial Forest Management Agreements (IFMA), and other land tenure instruments of any kind or nature whatsoever granted by the Philippine Government including those issued by the present Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) shall continue to operate from the date of formal entrenchment of the Bangsamoro juridical entity unless otherwise expired, reviewed, modified and/or cancelled by the latter.

NOTES: No prob, no sweat.

10. The Parties recognized an immediate need to establish a five-member Bangsamoro economic-expert mission (the “Mission”) bearing in mind that the functioning of the economy and the operation of institutions involve financial and other resource management as well as parallel or complementary means, by which the Bangsamoro Development Agency will manage and administer resources acquired for the above purposes, especially in coordinating strategies and programs for cooperation in all fields.

NOTES: Isn’t this great for administrative efficiency?

11. The said Mission acts as a link in the conduct of Bangsamoro juridical entity’s associative parallel relationships and shall cooperate fully with all organizations involved in implementation of the peace settlement. It shall launch a plan and joint international appeal for the repatriation and development of the conflict affected areas in Mindanao. Persons appointed thereto must be familiar with the specific economic, political and legal characteristics in the Mindanao-Sulu-Palawan region and must possess recognized competence, integrity, and high moral standing.

12. Cognizant that the Bangsamoro economic-expert Mission will benefit from international expertise, both the Central Government and the BJE hereby join the Third Party facilitator in inviting international funding institutions or equivalent entities for reconstruction and development to appoint two members and to designate one as the Chairman. The BJE shall designate one member as Co-Chairman. The remaining two members shall each be designated by the Central Government and the BJE.

NOTES: Same notes as in 10 for 11 and 12.

GOVERNANCE

1. The recognition and peaceful resolution of the conflict must involve consultations with the Bangsamoro people free of any imposition in order to provide chances of success and open new formulas that permanently respond to the aspirations of the Bangsamoro people.

1. The ultimate objective of entrenching the Bangsamoro homeland as a territorial space is to secure their identity and posterity, to protect their property rights and resources as well as to establish a system of governance suitable and acceptable to them as a distinct dominant people. The parties respect the freedom of choice of the indigenous peoples.

NOTES: Super. Again, “respect for freedom of choice” of the IPs is commendable.

3. The Parties agree to invite a multinational third-party to observe and monitor the actual implementation of the comprehensive compact which will embody the details for the effective enforcement of this Agreement. The participation of the third-party shall not in any way affect the status of the relationship between the Central Government and the BJE.

NOTES: No prob, no sweat.

4. The relationship between the Central Government and the Bangsamoro juridical entity shall be associative characterized by shared authority and responsibility with a structure of governance based on executive, legislative, judicial and administrative institutions with defined powers and functions in the comprehensive compact. A period of transition shall be established in a comprehensive peace compact specifying the relationship between the Central Government and the BJE.

NOTES: “Associative” relationship between Central Government and Bangsamoro that is “characterized by shared authority” is suspect for an attempted federalism setup, but don’t the Imperial Manila and LGUs share many authorities like tax collection and peace and order maintenance?

5. The modalities for the governance intended to settle the outstanding negotiated political issues are deferred after the signing of the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain.

The establishment of institutions for governance in a comprehensive peace compact, together with its modalities during the transition period, shall be fully entrenched and established in the basic law of the Bangsamoro juridical entity. The Parties shall faithfully comply with their commitment to the associative arrangements upon entry into force of a comprehensive compact between the MILF and GRP.

NOTES: … which means that as to “modalities for the governance intended to settle the outstanding negotiated political issues,” the basic law and comprehensive compact are yet to be etched in stone (apparently through an enabling law to be enacted by Congress.)

7. The Parties agree that the mechanisms and modalities for the actual implementation of this MOA AD shall be spelt out in the comprehensive compact to mutually take such steps to enable it to occur effectively.

Any provisions of the MOA on Ancestral Domain requiring amendments to the existing legal framework shall come into force upon signing of a comprehensive compact and upon effecting the necessary changes to the legal framework with due regard to non derogation of prior agreements and within the stipulated timeframe to be contained in the comprehensive compact.

NOTES: Same comment as in the immediately preceding.

8. The parties agree that the BJE shall be empowered to build, develop and maintain its own institutions, inclusive of, civil service, electoral, financial and banking, education, legislation, legal, economic, and police and internal security force, judicial system and correctional institutions, necessary for developing a progressive Bangsamoro society the details of which shall be discussed in the negotiation of the comprehensive compact.

NOTES: Isn’t this of the essence of local autonomy under the present Constitution?

9. The Parties further agree to undertake activities which will enhance the capacity of the government institutions during the transition through technical assistance, information-sharing and human resource development.

NOTES: No prob, no sweat.

10. Matters concerning the details of the agreed consensus points on Governance not covered under this Agreement shall be deferred to, and discussed during, the negotiations of the comprehensive compact.

NOTES: The MoA on ancestral domain may be a “done deal,” yet it remains executory and subject to a comprehensive pact yet to be negotiated.

__________

So, what’s all the fuss about?

Peace, if the political will is there on the part of our political elites (like economic development where there is the will to develop on the part of the economic elites), will happen in our lifetime.

Popularity: 1% [?]

Comments

  1. DJB Rizalist says:

    One word rebuttal: APARTHEID

  2. DJB Rizalist says:

    Two word rebuttal: SHOTGUN WEDDING

  3. The brief of Prof. Margallo almost reads like guideposts for a Supreme Court finding in favor of the MoA-AD.

    If these will serve as the underpinning for the self-inflicted dismemberment of the Republic then the Philippines as we know it is in peril, indeed.

    Add to that the opening for charter change at this time including the lifting of term limits and other gravely onerous initiatives.

  4. DJB Rizalist says:

    Ding,
    The brief is just a rehash of the December 2000 case Cruz v. IPs which was decided in a 7-7 tie. But as Chief Justice Panganiban wrote in his Dissenting Opinion, the IPRA Law’s Constitutionality must await a real justiciable case for a definitive ruling. I doubt very much that the MOA-AD will pass muster. It seeks to expand ARMM, which is about autonomy, but the expansion is far more than geographical, it is designed to fail except to get the chacha choochoo on track. Every point raised by Abe from Puno’s ponencia was brilliantly riposted in Panganiban’s dissent, which, when seen in the light of recent events really hits the nail on the head. In fact even the Puno ponencia and the Main Decision strikes down significant portions of the IPRA’s IRR in regards natural resources.

    God Save the Constitution!

  5. DJB Rizalist says:

    Please note that the “Terms of Reference” of the MOA-AD does not include the Philippine Constitution. The Court, whose raison d’etre is to interpret and uphold that document won’t cotton to the relegation of the charter to a vague reference to “legal framework”, which could mean absolutely nothing. The MOA-AD already makes the MILF an independent state govt that even the Bangsamoro People have thrice rejected resoundingly in previous plebiscites.

    Sorry Abe, but chanting the mantra of “peace” is not going to be enough. For there is a virtue that takes philosophical priority over peace. It’s called “justice”.

    We must not forget that even Cruz v. IP and the IPRA law speaks of 110 separate “indigenous peoples” (minus of course all the Christians!) each with their own ancestral domains. There is however, no reference to “homelands” and certainly nothing about juridical entities that smack of chop-chop.

  6. Jamju Rivera says:

    The author, Mr. Margallo, has obviously already given his clear approval of the GRP-MILF MOA-AD as it is presented.

    Ok then… please point me to at least one of your personal private properties which has been claimed as an “ancestral land” lately?

    Since claims to the same are based on actual or prior possession “since time immemorial”, I am quite sure that neither you nor your claimant would have any problem in transferring the ownership of your residential lot, your house, and all that’s in it (throw in the cats and the dogs for good measure) to the claimant pronto, right?

    Indeed, this “ancestral land” may have been lost to the claimant’s forebears because the government (“as a cause of government project”) gave you a homestead grant, or heaven forbid, an actual Land Title!

    Or, well maybe, your great-grandfather bought it from his great-grandfather for a measly sum (“or any other voluntary dealings entered into”).

    So, you give it back… NO QUESTIONS ASKED.

    Bravo!

    We applaud your altruism… your civic mindedness… your understanding for the plight of the claimant, whose family may have suffered centuries of pirate raids, kidnappings, ambuscades, and life with these murderous wretches!

    We celebrate your sense of one-ness with the cause for Bangsamoro liberty from the shackles of oppression and marginalization (never mind the establishment of a Bangsamoro Republic)!

    I am Jamju Rivera. I was born and raised in Isabela City, Basilan, by the way. 4th generation. I still live here.

    Where, may I know, do you live again?

  7. that’s a rather powerful argument, right there.

  8. omni says:

    I don’t think giving out powers to the few same as that of the government will solve the eternal problem of the Mindanao…

    THIS WILL JUST WORSENED THE situation of the stupid/greedy-politicians driven country.

    For those politicians in the Mindanao…
    Do your very best to be an example of good leader…
    All of you should have done all the necessary efforts to tame and satisfy the Muslim people….

    In the first place its their land from the very start…

  9. omni says:

    My suggestion would be instead to give the baranggays to a mini-governing entity. Instead give out land titles to old and bonafide MUSLIM residence. Made those baranggays ruled only by MUSLIMS and not by a CHRISTIAN…

    (ban the Christian leaders there? A discrimination maybe but effective)

    PREVENTION is BETTER than CURE!

    If there will be a civil war out there(hope thats not a stage play, just like what happened in Basilan), and this incident will be recognized as legal and reasonable by the international organizations, then the Philippine has no other choice but to give them freedom and this would ignite the series separation of the Mindanao.

    TSK TSK TSK
    Purita el Filipinas
    (Wishing the Americans have stayed here and held our freedom until acts of greediness/selfishness [from the spanish colonial period] is totally erased from the youth and folks of the previous generation.

    A Filipino leader from the PAST said once:

    “I’d rather choose the Philippines ruled by Filipinos like HELL than ruled by Americans like Heaven”

    Oh Pop that’s very nice of you…
    thank you very much!

    Pwe!

  10. Apartheid (apartness or segregation based on race) is the exact opposite of self-determination. The origin of apartheid could be traceable to the tactics of the Nazis to maintain racial superiority.

    The apartheid system in South Africa has involved mandated population registration to classify people by race based on humiliatingly crude measures such as nose width, thickness of the lips, hair texture, skin tone, and ancestry. Race group mixture was illegal or criminalized and classified groups were forced to attend separate schools and participate in separate political systems. There were also legislations made to debase the educational content of the school system of nonwhite groups to “idiotize” them.

    Self-determination on the other hand is basically the freedom of the people or sub-groups of a given territory to determine their own political status and pursue their economic, social and cultural development. The American Revolution, the French Revolution and the Philippine Revolution were expressions of self-determination.

    The UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights also recognizes that everyone has the right to a nationality which he could not be deprived of arbitrarily or be denied to change.

    I do recognize that if we build “fences” among contiguous neighbors of different linguistic, ethnic, and cultural roots, self-determination could be problematic to the claim of territorial integrity of the dominant population, which is why mechanics like dual or shared sovereignty, federalism, devolution, local autonomy, constitutional secession or, on the extreme, absence of sovereignty are meaningful alternatives.

    But one thing is quite clear to me: while self-determination is empowerment, apartheid is disempowerment.

  11. voltz says:

    I don’t buy that “ancestral domain” and “no prob, no sweat” underpinning the BJE covered areas. Its a fatalistic view.

    The areas like North Cotabato and Sultan Kudarat are virgin forests during the 50′s and 60′s when settlers from Visayas and Luzon came to area upon encouragement by the government. My late grandparents were some of the settlers in those areas and they did not encounter a single Maguindanaoan when they cleared and cultivated the area given to them by the gov’t until the time the MNLF and MILF came. I would rather believe that in some of those areas there were B’laan or T’boli settler but none of Maguindanaoans.

    If the settlers knew that those areas in cotabato and sultan kudarat are claimed by maguindanaoans, they would have not settled there knowing that they will give it up later on.

  12. Philman says:

    J, I think in the present global scenario, moral per)suasion will not work.

    The extreme competition for earth’s limited resources plus the present multi-polarity (after the Cold War, rise of BRIC powers, etc), necessitates a re-thinking of RP’s approaches in its domestic and foreign policies, including the Muslim insurgency, i.e. go beyond the moral and legal arguments.

    We must be prepared to use power, i.e. realpolitik. I read somewhere in this blog that we can’t keep what we are not prepared to defend.

  13. Gentlemen, and Prof. Margallo,

    To hopefully balance the discussion, there’s a piece in the Inquirer by Atty. Ra ul Pangalangan:

    Passion For Reason : Sellout to MILF, or a setup for Charter change?

    http://opinion.inquirer.net/columnist/?colid=14

  14. DJB Rizalist says:

    Abe,
    IPRA recognizes 110 distinct indigenous peoples in the Philippines (there is a definite list of them in the body of the law).

    Do you support 110 separate homelands for them, totalling to one third of the territory (as estimated by Justice Art Panganiban) as part of “self-determination.”

    Or are the Bangsamoro supposed to be “special” because they have guns and bombs to enforce “self=determination”?

  15. cvj says:

    Abe, one of the givens is that the government believes that implementation of the agreement requires Charter Change. The question which i believe the Supreme Court should then answer is…

    Can the Executive branch of the government commit itself to an agreement that requires changing the charter without prior express agreement by the Legislative Branch or the consent of the People (in a plebiscite) as specified in Article XVII of the Philippine Constitution?

    An equivalent scenario would be if the government negotiated a new US Bases agreement subject to the condition that such an agreement would be contingent on the approval of an amendment of the nuclear-free provisions Philippine Constitution.

    Another example would be if the government negotiated a 100% Chinese-owned mining concession also subject to the condition that such an agreement would also be contingent on the approval of an amendment of the local resource ownership requirements of the Philippine Constitution.

    Does this then establish the principle that government is free to enter into unlawful and/or unconstitutional agreements that are contingent on the repeal of the laws and/or constitutional provisions that make such agreements unlawful or unconstitutional in the first place?

  16. DJB Rizalist says:

    cvj,
    You are so diplomatic. But the answer to your question is clearly NOT. All the actions you describe are ultra vires on their face. As of course the MOA-AD obviously is, since the MILF is clearly in rebellion and violating the law just by their mere existence. It is not some sovereign nation negotiating in good faith with the govt. Reductio ad absurdum is not necessary. The proposition is absurd on its face. If the answer were YES, GMA for example could declare martial law and proclaim herself president-for-life, or do any number of other plainly illegal and immoral things and then say the Congress can change the law and the Constitution be amended to accomodate it.

  17. cvj says:

    Thanks DJB, i had to look up ultra vires and i think you’re right. About the only way out that i can think of for the MOA to push thru is if the Supreme Court declares this matter a ‘political question’ (similar to how the Supreme Court declared Marcos’ snap election in 1986 as such). That would in effect allow them to sidestep the issue via self-emasculation.

  18. Ding, DBJ, cvj, Philman, voltz, Jamju, jester and the rest of the gang, my response to you guys is rather lengthy so I’ve decided to post a new piece here. Pls check it out.

  19. OHAIOWA says:

    GOD BLESS THE PHILIPPINES!!!!!

Trackbacks

  1. [...] argue Constitution with our distinguished colleague Abe Margallo. But I have to disagree with him- not as a lawyer but as a Filipino- that the agreement between the Arroyo regime and the Moro [...]

Speak Your Mind

*