Honor and peace

I thought that today would be a propitious time to tackle a constitutional law issue. On Jan. 31, 1801, the legendary John Marshall, author of the controversial power of judicial review as introduced in the seminal case of Marbury vs. Madison, was appointed Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court. On the same date 64 years later, the US Congress passed the 13th Amendment of the Constitution, abolishing slavery and submitting it to the various states for ratification.

As a nation, we are also at a crossroad as we debate the pros and cons of the Bangsamoro Basic Law (BBL). This column intended to focus on the constitutional issues. But given the Maguindanao massacre-part II last Sunday, the “legal” should wait.

Truly, the decision whether to grant greater autonomy to predominantly Muslim geographical areas is complicated as it encompasses economic, commercial, cultural, social, historical, religious and territorial/sovereignty issues. So we all need to look beyond the legal aspect and consider the bigger picture. We also have to keep an open mind and examine various alternatives as we seek to formulate an informed judgment on the matter.

And as if the issues were not complex enough, the Mamasapano debacle takes place. The blood of 44 members of the Philippine National Police special action force and their BIFF protagonists have been spilled in the jungles of Maguindanao. This not only serves as a major distraction but also casts a cloud of gloom in the work of the legislature and in the entire peace process. Both houses of Congress have already stopped the hearings on the BBL and have initiated inquiries in aid of legislation so much so that instead of focusing on the bill, they are dwelling on the killing. Until basic questions have been answered, some have called for a halt to the deliberations on the bills. On the other hand, others believe that the incident provides greater impetus for government to intensify its efforts to come up with an effective solution to establish a long-lasting peace in Mindanao. Indeed, the fatalities of the 45-year insurgency have reached 120,000 with over 2 million inhabitants displaced. It has also stunted the growth of resource-rich but underdeveloped Mindanao. The ball is on the court of the MILF to cooperate with duly constituted authorities and show good faith by producing the culprits. And we should suspend judgment until more established facts become available in the days to come.

Meanwhile, let us all mourn and honor the sacrifice of our SAF heroes. We should also extend assistance to their families. In as much as they died in the line of duty serving our country, their deaths should be also served with justice.

* * *

Price of peace: There were two eloquent paid advertisements related to the BBL and the Mamasapano massacre.

Fourteen out of the 18 surviving members (four were out of commission) of the 48-member 1986 Constitutional Commission came out with a statement in support of the BBL. To illustrate the point that the cause of peace has a price, it recalled the story of how the 1978 Israel-Egypt peace agreement that was signed by President Anwar Sadat and Prime Minister Menachem Begin despite its acknowledged shortcomings restored stability to its borders that lasts to this day. Apparently the talks had reached a stalemate and that the parties were about to depart without a peace accord. A discussion between Prime Minister Begin and US President Jimmy Carter about the type of world their grandchildren would grow up in led the former to reconsider the “non-negotiable” Israeli position of not returning certain annexed territories to Egypt. Our 1986 commissioners described this breakthrough as “peace-making without borders and self-limiting mental models.” They added: “But there is always a price to pay for any worthy vision as Sadat was assassinated by disgruntled members of the (Egyptian) military in 1981 but not before he and Begin were awarded the Nobel Piece Prize.”

But let us recall another peace treaty in the 20th century. In the mid 1930s, Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Germany was becoming increasingly aggressive and had forcibly occupied Austria. It then set its eyes on the Sudetenland region of Czechoslovakia. Still recovering from World War I and looking to avoid another war, British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain championed the “appeasement” strategy and signed the 1938 Munich Agreement with Hitler allowing Germany to take over Sudetenland. Chamberlain triumphantly returned to London declaring that “we have peace in our times.” As they say, the rest is history for a year later. Germany attacked Poland.

* * *

In a full-page manifesto entitled “Mamasapano: A challenge to stand for peace,” members of the Ateneo de Davao University community ask: “Why did we again take the path of guns and violence and covert secret action to solve any problem, when we had already chosen, we had already agreed, that we would take the path of negotiation, consultation and trust to solve problems? Why did we not respect what we agreed to in the Implementing Operational Guidelines of the 1997 GRP-MILF Agreement on the General Cessation of Hostilities: “Police and Military actions and administrative/logistic activities shall continue to be undertaken by the GRP throughout Mindanao and the entire country. In the pursuit thereof, confrontational situations between the GRP and the MILF forces shall be avoided by prior coordination with the latter.” (Article II)

Does this provision mean that our police will need to coordinate (notify?) with the MILF before they can perform their enforcement work within MILF-controlled areas? Is this not a violation of the nation’s territorial honor and sovereignty? If our police are pursuing a fugitive from justice during a covert mission, will not the obligation to “coordinate” potentially jeopardize the operation? A lasting peace is not only just, it must also be honorable and honored.

* * *

“It is not enough to win a war; it is more important to organize the peace.” – Aristotle

* * *

Email: [email protected]