We had tarried too long

Martial law was declared to bring contending parties to the negotiating table instead of killing each other.

First, a clarification. I was a victim of martial law but it was not in that sense. 

My quarrel was against one woman drunk with power who wanted to hide the sources of her and her husband’s graft and corruption. The issue was to stop me from writing the story behind the drive for wealth while in power. Did I have the freedom to write the story?

The Untold Story of Imelda Marcos became a cause celebre because I had confronted the most powerful woman in the country while she was cavorting with European and American hangers-on as one born with a silver spoon in her mouth.

 Today the martial law proclaimed in Mindanao is different. It is about saving lives and bringing peace to that part of our country. 

President Duterte has had to use military power to fight what has become a part of an international confrontation with ISIS helping local militants.  Those who have been in the scene report that they saw foreign looking combatants. There is a background to this that we must take into account.

It is not yet clear who instigated the violence in Mindanao but what is clear is the presence of foreign terrorists in Marawi City.  

“You can say that the ISIS is here already,” Duterte told soldiers in nearby Iligan City, referring to Islamic State.

“My message mainly to the terrorists on the other side is we can still solve this through dialogue. And if you cannot be convinced to stop fighting, so be it. Let’s just fight.”

 It is ironic that it is happening in Marawi City where the desire for federalism was widely supported.

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 in the Arroyo administration, 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.

So when the government panel said it was open to amending the Constitution to accommodate a comprehensive political settlement with the 12,000-strong MILF, I believe it was referring to the federalist option.

I can never forget just how enthusiastic our fellow citizens, the Muslims of Mindanao, met with members of the Constitutional Commission to discuss federalism. 

A former preacher, Manalao, also called Mustaqbal is well known as a charismatic speaker and able to captivate full packed halls. He said in so many words that less people forget he would remind them that “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.

I told them that this desire for federalism as a way out of ethnic conflict was not just in Mindanao but in many parts of the world. It is now seen as the response to bring about unity among diverse peoples as well as was to govern effectively especially huge populations in modern times. 

The essence of a federal system of government is simply the division of political power between a central or national authority and smaller, locally autonomous units such as provinces or states under the terms of a constitution. So the concept of a genuinely autonomous Muslim region in the Philippines was not a strange or merely local issue. The same federal principle is practiced in many countries such as Belgium, Switzerland and Canada or even a regional grouping such as the European Union.

During the Third International Conference on Federalism in Brussels, Speaker Jose de Venecia led the Philippine delegation from the Coalition for Charter Change Now and the Citizens Movement for Federal Philippines, as well as leaders from the three major political parties; Lakas-CMD, PDP-Laban and Liberal. He said Filipino advocates of federalism came to Brussels “to learn from the collective wisdom and experience of the leaders of well-established federal states.” 

At the Brussels conference, there was every reason to hope for a multi-party effort for Charter change since one of the most ardent supporters of federalism (by the way, he attended the Brussels meeting also) was Senator Aquilino Pimentel Jr., a leader of the Opposition. 

But we have dilly-dallied too long to bring about peaceful dialogue that could have been focused on the principle of federalism.  

That is one of the principal reasons of the trouble  in Marawi city today that made it necessary for Digong to declare martial law in Mindanao.