Here we go again

MILF’s statement that ”Charter change as an important part of the Philippine government’s effort to reach a peace settlement with the Moro rebel group” cannot be understood without some background.

The way I understand it, Muslims in Mindanao desire an enclave of land in which they can govern their communities under the tenets of their religion. The Bangsa Moro, they argue is a fact of history. When the Philippines was granted independence by the US in 1946, it included this Muslim enclave of sultanates that did not accept imperialist conquest. On the other hand the Northern Christians did. Today they are aggrieved that having fought hard for independence, they find themselves discriminated against in the distribution of government funding and resources for the region. Indeed some of the poorest provinces in the country are in Muslim Mindanao.

Some of them believe that the only way for redress is to secede from the Philippine nation-state. They would rather be on their own. But most of them are realistic enough to admit this is an extreme position that has not pushed their cause for self-determination. Neither does it have the support of the 57-nation Organization of Islamic Conference. The Moro wars have already cost thousands of lives. A formula that could meet the demand for an independent state within the ambit of Philippine government had to found. That formula was federalism. Some Muslim friends at first rejected the federalist concept but with no other alternative they have moved from outright rejection to considering federalism as an acceptable starting point for negotiations.

* * *

In discussions on federalism in the constitutional commission, I was among those who defended the concept as a tool for achieving peace in the Muslim south. Federalism, like democracy, can be interpreted widely both in theory and practice. It certainly does not mean secession. Indeed a federated state within the Philippine nation was the antidote against secession.

As a concept it is a useful tool in negotiating peace in ethnic and religious conflicts. It may be difficult and tortuous but at least it offers a compromise on how to achieve unity in diversity for the Philippines.

So it is understandable that the negotiators in the peace panel should inch, albeit reluctantly, away from extreme and unattainable secession to negotiate by using the federalist option. This would inevitably mean Charter change.

The question remains: is it possible to gain greater autonomy through the federalist option? I believe that it is around this question that the notion of Charter change as necessary to achieve peace should be interpreted.

Muslim Mindanao is not alone in wanting greater local autonomy, if for different reasons. So does the Bicol Region, so does Cebu. I attended several meetings of The Bicol Movement for Greater Autonomy and they too, asked why is Bicol so poor when it is rich with resources? Cebu has gone far in developing a progressive local economy but its residents believe that more could be done with less constraints from national government. There is an organization called Solfed that has been pushing for greater autonomy in education and culture because they fear that regional heritage, language, and customs are fast disappearing. Charter change is necessary to push these advocacies for greater local autonomy forward.

* * *

Discussions on federalism like discussions on democracy have been going on for years. There are innumerable approaches to both ideas, indeed any idea for that matter. But theory is different from practice. So when it is announced by the government panel that it is open to amending the Constitution to accommodate a comprehensive political settlement with the 12,000-strong MILF, I believe it is referring to the federalist option.

While greater autonomy powers will be given to Muslim Mindanao, it remains within the Philippine state. It will take years, even generations for the federal principle to develop effectively, but if it is the only solution for the two irreconcilable positions then it must begin the process to save lives and win the peace.

I can never forget just how enthusiastic our fellow citizens, the Muslims of Mindanao, met with members of the Constitutional Commission to discuss federalism. Maybe we should just dig up the record of the meeting that was held in the University of Marawi. That was in 2006 so it cannot be said that it is being sprung on the public.

After the forum in a crowded hall I wrote the column “Standing Ovation for Cha-Cha in Marawi City”. That was May 12, 2006 and excerpt it again for those who care to read.

“I am glad I came here otherwise I would never have overcome my fear of Muslim land in our country. Inured as I was in tales of its terrorism and grief it was with some trepidation that I ventured in what has been made out to be danger zone. It was a lovely ride breezing through zigzagging mountain roads on one side and the calm waters of Lake Lanao on the other. The ride itself was a little over two hours but it was well worth it for its beauty alone. But more was coming.

Here was a different world and a different culture. The temper of the symposium held in the Lanao Provincial Social Hall was quickly set after the Invocation by Aleem Luqman Alawi of the Ulama League of the Philippines. Governor Aleem Bashier Manalao, a charismatic speaker captivated the crowd in a single phrase. “it was here that the advocacy for federalism in the Philippines was born”. Yes, he said we are for Charter change if it will mean we will be able to live according to our Muslim culture and tenets.”