NAGA CITY (MindaNews / 28 October) – “Chinese-Tausug native” lawyer Ancheta K. Tan proposes two Bangsamoro autonomous regions, one of which would be anchored on Sulu province and the Tausug tribe. He thus concurs with the Supreme Court Decision in Province of Sulu vs. Medialdea ruling that “The Province of Sulu shall not be part of the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region.” He argues that “the formula for a united Bangsamoro homeland was profoundly flawed from the beginning.” He makes reference to the 1987 Constitution’s Article X, Section 15 that “There shall be created autonomous regions in Muslim Mindanao and in the Cordilleras…”
But long before that, as he himself notes, “the remnants of the centuries-old Sulu Sultanate that in the distant past bannered the idea of a Moro nation… bounded together by Islam with their brothers and sisters in central Mindanao.” Fast forward to contemporary history post-Jabidah Massacre 1968, credit the founders of the Moro National Liberation Front hailing from the three major tribes (Tausug, Maguindanao, and Maranaw), with imagining the Moro nation (Bangsa Moro) out of the 13 Islamized ethnolinguistic tribes. There is no need to reinvent the wheel of history, as he does, by wishing “One day a charismatic leader, like the Count of Cavour who unified Italy, will rise from Muslim Mindanao who will merge the two regions and bring about one genuinely united Bangsamoro nation.”
The ARMM and then the BARMM were already continuing steps in that direction. Why undo that and in effect undermine the unification of the Bangsamoro? This process of unification is not simply “legislative compulsion,” as he says. In what is “the historical context which has been concisely articulated by the esteemed ponente” Senior Associate Justice Leonen, “The struggle of the Bangsamoro people for self-determination can be traced as far back as the early days of imperialism.” Unfortunately, the SC Decision’s exclusion of Sulu from BARMM sets back that continuing struggle practically like the classic colonial “divide and rule” tactic of conquest And more unfortunately, the parochialism (and to be candid, the political ambitions and vested interests) of some quarters in Sulu are playing into that tactic.
Valid aspirations for “Bangsa Sug” self-determination should not be at the expense of hard-earned Bangsamoro identity (recognized now in both law like RA No. 11054 and in jurisprudence like the SC Decision) and unity. The “Bangsa Sug” identity can and should be (better) accommodated within the BARMM framework. As the SC Decision states, “Bangsamoro identity is not imposed… Individuals also retain the right to preserve their distinct indigenous ethnic identity in addition to their Bangsamoro political identity. This right must be upheld and respected.” There is also a lesson learned here for the admittedly heavily Maguindanao-based MILF leadership of the BARMM. They too need help in rectifying errors and rebuilding the Bangsamoro unity with Sulu/ the Tausug tribe.
The late eminent Bikolano 1987 Constitution framer Fr. Joaquin G. Bernas, S.J. has written that “… a prerequisite for the creation of autonomous regions is a certain distinctive regional commonality of ‘historical and cultural heritage, economic and social structures, and other relevant characteristics.’ Such commonality is found in Muslim Mindanao and in the Cordilleras. As to the areas between these two, they are not characterized by distinctive characteristics but are practically a homogenous culture. Hence, they all come under one category and are not allowed to form an autonomous region…. only two autonomous regions were being authorized by the Constitution and that a constitutional amendment would be needed to create a third or a fourth autonomous region.”
Also, the 1990 SC Decision in Ordillo vs. Comelec ruled that an autonomous region cannot consist of just one province like Ifugao which alone voted for a Cordillera Autonomous Region. Sulu voted 74% “Yes” to ARMM in 1989 and 87% “Yes” to ARMM 2 in 2001, and 46% “Yes” to BARMM in 2019. This does not look like a track record of “Sulexit.”
(SOLIMAN M. SANTOS, JR. is retired RTC Judge of Naga City; a long-time human rights and international humanitarian lawyer; legislative consultant and legal scholar; peace advocate, researcher and writer on both the Communist and Moro fronts of war and peace; author of a number of books, including: The Moro Islamic Challenge: Constitutional Rethinking for the Mindanao Peace Process (UP Press, 2001, 2nd printing 2009); Dynamics and Directions of the GRP-MILF Peace Negotiations (Alternate Forum for Research in Mindanao 2005); Referendum on Political Options: Study Papers on the Legal and Historical Basis (Mindanao Peoples’ Peace Movement, 2010); In Defense of and Thinking Beyond the GRP-MILF MOA-AD: A Peace Advocate’s Essays on the Controversial Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (AFRIM, 2011); and Federalism and Cha-Cha for Peace: Critical Papers on Federalism and Charter Change for the Mindanao Peace Process (Institute of Autonomy and Governance, 2016).
