Peace and the Peace Process

This is just a pit-stop; the race is not yet won

by: Dr. Renato Mabunga

The landmark signing of an initial peace agreement between the Philippine government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) has reinvigorated hopes of a peaceful resolution of the decades-long conflict in Mindanao.

The framework peace deal lays the foundations for a “just peace” that should be guided by human values and international standards of good governance, human rights and the dignity of peoples and communities.

The peace deal is supposed to aim at the full development of a nation, nay of a community, guaranteed by the supreme sovereignty of the people.

What can be observed in the “framework agreement” signed by government and rebel peace negotiators this month is the truthful reference to the pains and aspirations of the people of Mindanao and its adjacent islands.

Unfortunately, only well-intentioned individuals, the wounded and those who empathize with the people of Mindanao can fully appreciate, without equivocation, the agreement. It comes out devoid of pretension and political subtlety.

People in Mindanao (and even outsiders), however, should understand that peace is not a political compromise between conflicting parties. Political compromises connote the satisfaction of vested interests of opposing camps.

Peace is a resolution of tensions perpetrated by warring parties. Negotiations should only serve a higher unifying goal. The warring groups stole peace and owe it to the people of Mindanao. Payback time should be now.

The peace process that the MILF and the government went through was a courageous show of rising above human frailties. It was an act of acceptance of the parties’ failures to the masses.

We all should also be reminded that the “framework agreement” is only a legal manifestation of intent. It is not yet “the peace agreement.”

What makes peace is making details work according to agreed principles, and the satisfaction of all requisites in restoring people to a collective dignified existence.

The peace question in Mindanao is a product of inequality. It is therefore a foremost consideration to allow the development of all people, rather than of only a particular sector, in a final peace deal.

Peace is universal. It is for all. The sufferings of the past need total healing, and to do so requires genuine empowerment of peoples and communities as active agents of society.

Autonomy for the Moro people is not enough. They need to be informed, to speak and be heard. It is not enough to grant Moro fighters an end to hostilities and relief.

What needs to be provided is a conducive, effective and lasting environment for people to self-actualize and realize their economic, social, cultural and collective rights.

The signing of the “framework agreement” is only a pit stop in a winding process of achieving peace. Continuous vigilance, peoples’ engagement and active monitoring of the progress of its implementation are demanded to ward of the devils in the details of the peace process.

(This article was first posted at UCA News website.)

Photo Source: http://opapp.gov.ph

(PHILIPPINES) Civil Society Report on the Implementation of the ICCPR (Replies to the List of Issues CCPR/C/PHL/Q/4)

REVIEW OF THE FOURTH PERIODIC REPORT OF PHILIPPINES (CCPR/C/PHL/Q/4)
106st session of the Human Rights Committee, Geneva – October 2012

please access the following link:

http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrc/docs/ngos/NGOCoalition_CCPR_Philippines106.pdf

File Photo: Action Network Human Rights Philippines

Peace is possible if people work for it (Greed of the few endangers happiness of the many)

By: Dr. Renato Mabunga

The world marked the International Day of Peace last week, on September 21, the same day the Philippines marked the 40th anniversary of the declaration of martial law.

This year, the United Nations called on countries around the world to work for “sustainable peace for a sustainable future.” The UN statement highlighted the use and abuse of land and natural resources in instigating conflict situations.

The UN urged member states to initiate “ceasefires” and stop the wanton destruction of the environment and the bloody massacres of people out to defend their ancestral domains.

Early this month, gunmen ambushed a Subanen tribal leader in the southern Philippines. Timuay Locenio Magda survived but his 11-year-old son Jason did not.

The incident allegedly arose from a dispute over ancestral domain claims among mining interests in the area. The attack on Magda was the 36th documented incident in the area in the past two years.

In South Korea, villagers of Gangjeong have been protesting the construction of a naval base on Jeju Island. The island has been dubbed the “Island of Peace” by the government but peaceful protests were met with force and violence.

In Cambodia, the government’s abuse of law and misuse of the courts have led to the displacement of the Boeung Kak and Borei Keila communities in Phnom Penh. Activists and human rights defenders like Yorm Bopha and Tim Sakmony, who were arrested on September 4 and 5, respectively, are also persecuted.

In Myanmar, Wai Lu was arrested in early September for helping farmers win back their land from a copper mining company in Latpadaung mountain range.

Attacks against communities underscore the connection of peace, human rights and the aggressive promotion of “progress” that displace people. And as conditions of people worsen, governments create “illusions” to cover up their violations and obligations.

Governments speak of peace and draw a future that is far removed from the aspirations of their people. Peace has been corrupted by political and economic individualism and greed, yet it remains a symbol of resistance and a source of courage for the afflicted.

Peace and sustainable future describes the legitimacy of the continuing struggle of indigenous peoples, communities and environmental activists in protecting ancestral land, their life, culture and future against corporations and armed groups.

Peace provides reason for the assertion of communities and peoples who debunk the idea of peace as a mere construct. These communities assert that peace is an action fueled by inspirations and sacrifices of peoples and nations searching for a sustainable future.

As the world celebrates the “International Day of Peace,” peoples around the world continue to clamor for it, act on it and die for it.

In the same manner, Filipinos remember the 20 years of martial law to remind themselves that tyrants can be overthrown, people have the power, and peace is a possibility.

As dark days continue to linger in many parts of the world, especially in Asia, it is apt to consolidate the lessons of history, muster the courage to block the horrors of the past and lay down a solid foundation for peace that is mindful of the universal dignity of all and for all.

40th Year Commemoration of Martial Law

A Father’s Plea: Medical Attention for Ericson Acosta

A Father’s Plea: Medical Attention for Ericson Acosta

by Free Ericson Acosta on Tuesday, July 31, 2012 at 5:26pm ·

DEAR FRIENDS,

Political prisoner Ericson Acosta is in need of medical attention. Please forward, blog, tweet and share this letter of appeal from the Acosta family. We also encourage everybody to write to the Department of Justice (DOJ) to request the resolution of the Ericson Acosta case review which has been pending for almost a year. You may also address appeals to concerned government officials to drop trumped-up charges against Ericson and effect his immediate release.

 

Photo Credit: http://freeacosta.blogspot.com/

Defeating ‘twisted culture’ of torture Ending practice requires ‘open declaration of war’ on perpetrators

by: Renato Mabunga, Ph.D.

On Tuesday, the United Nations marked the “International Day in Support of Torture Victims.” It was a significant day filled with simple and substantial ironies.

In Manila, about 600 human rights advocates, military and police personnel “tortured” motorists who were stranded on a major thoroughfare while a procession demonstrating against torture passed.

A more significant irony was the declaration of the country’s police and military headquarters as “torture-free zones” even as detainees claimed the contrary.

Freedom from torture is neither a palliative nor a piece of legislation that a government brags about to hide its non-compliance. Freedom from torture is supposed to be a product of an organizational culture deeply imbedded in the practice of good policing and security service.

This is not the case in the Philippines.

Peasant leader Franklin Barrera from Atimonan in Quezon province was abducted, hit by a butt of a rifle on the nape, and made to swallow three spoonfuls of salt after failing to identify persons on a photograph shown to him by soldiers.

The duality between action and the pronouncements of security forces in the Philippines makes one doubt the sincerity of state agents.

Torture seems to have become a source of power for security personnel. It has defined the ground to make an acceptable standard that governs their behavior. The practice is so entrenched in the system that no amount of pronouncements can ban it as a “standard practice.”

A sincere reorganization, reformation and retooling of law enforcement and security apparatus must be done. Freedom from torture must first transform attitudes and organizational culture that are owned and shared by agents of government.

The Philippines has been a state-party to the UN Convention Against Torture since 1987. After 22 years, an anti-torture law was enacted in the Philippines. In April this year, the Philippines became the 63rd state-party to the Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture. In May, the Philippines reported to the UN Human Rights Council Universal Periodic Review a decrease in reported cases of torture.

Human rights groups, however, disagreed. They said incidents of torture, including extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances, have increased since 2010.

The UN council recommended the absolute prohibition of torture and ill-treatment, the establishment of mechanisms to address cases and victims, and the immediate arrest of human rights violators like former Army major general Jovito Palparan, former governor Joel Reyes and the perpetrators of the infamous Maguindanao massacre that killed 58 people including 54 journalists.

Statements against torture in the Philippines abound. Unfortunately words have failed to provide a framework for collective leadership to encourage common norms toward the achievement of a torture-free society.

The gap proves government resistance to change by security forces. They have become adamant to renege power and seem to have found satisfaction in tormenting “perceived enemies” with impunity. New norms will make them lose their “immunity” and make them vulnerable to justice.

Torture has become an organizational culture in the Philippine armed forces and the national police. The country’s security forces have adopted a misdirected collective understanding and interpretation of service and basic assumptions of responsibility.

The move toward a torture-free society is therefore an open declaration of war against perpetrators and the system that protects them. Who will stand up to challenge a twisted culture?

Renato Mabunga is the chairperson of the Human Rights Defenders-Pilipinas, a lobbyist at the UN Human Rights Council and a regional educator on human rights.