While expressing support to the Aquino administration, the group also urged the government to take a “second look” at the proposed Bangsamoro Basic Law.
Ernesto Alcanzare, lead organizer of the Yes for Peace-Bayanihan para sa Kapayapaan, Kaunlaran at Kasaganaan (Yes for Peace-Bayanihan KKK) called yesterday on Filipinos to “unite behind the peace policy of Pres. Aquino because we believe that the President is sincere in ending armed conflicts not only with Muslim rebel groups but also with the New People’s Army.”
“The spirit of EDSA will rekindle fresh hope in the country’s quest for long lasting peace and spare the nation from a culture of divisiveness,” he said.
He noted that “the peaceful EDSA People Power revolt against a dictatorial form of government in 1986 showed
that the will and sovereign Filipino people always reign supreme and that peace is possible if given the chance.”
“As we commemorate the 29th Anniversary of the 1986 EDSA revolution, let us rekindle the values of People Power in our hearts and work hand in hand in giving life to Pres. Aquino’s commitment to restore confidence
in a peace process that is transparent and participative not only with the MILF also but with the Communist Party of the Philippines-National Democratic Front- New People’s Army,” Alcanzare said.
Alcanzare called on the more or less 11 million Filipinos who supported the 1986 People Power revolution to “help in strengthening the peace policy in the country through an open and participatory process where all stakeholders should be involved and properly consulted.”
“As far back as the 1990’s, all protagonists in the armed conflicts have agreed on the principle that a comprehensive peace process cannot be defined by the government nor by the contending armed groups alone. It must be community-based and reflective of the will of the Filipino people,” Alcanzare explained.
He cited the “shaky” Bangsamoro Basic Law as “an example on how the peace process suffered glitches because some groups, even those ordinary citizens from Luzon and the Visayas, were ignored and left behind during its early discussions.”
“Curiously, despite protests from major stakeholders, the negotiations with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) and the drafting the BBL by fifteen-man Transition Commission were non-inclusive and did not include significant stakeholders, including the Moro National Liberation Front (MILF), Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters (BIFF) and even business groups and local government units,” Alcanzare said.
He also said that “as feared by concerned peace advocates, objectionable provisions were put in the draft and have remained intact even after several alleged public consultations by invitation conducted by the BBL Ad Hoc Committee of the House of Representatives in key cities in Mindanao and the rest of the country.”
“In fact, some sections of Article V, General Provisions and Policies, are confusing and may be used to campaign, against its ratification by the Bangsamoro people,” he said. Alcanzare cited Section 6 on “Promotion
of Rights” saying “the Bangsamoro shall adhere to the principle of enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong.”
He said a “second look raises several very disturbing questions, such as who would determine right from wrong.”
He also cited “Section 7 on “Social Justice” stating that “the Bangsamoro shall establish a government that ensures that every citizen in the Bangsamoro is provided the basic necessities and equal opportunities in life” and that “social Justice shall be promoted in all phases of development and facets of life within the Bangsamoro.”
“Again, these are very beautiful words. But can it be done? How can the government of their dreams guarantee that the needs of every man, woman and child will be provided?” Alcanzare asked.
