Inclusion is crucial in Marawi rehab

In areas recovering from violent conflict, inclusion has been crucial in the process of reconstruction and rehabilitation. Inclusionary policies help ensure that civil society institutions and government mechanisms are installed to promote lasting peace.

For many, inclusion is understood as counting every sector or group in society as part of a population. Nothing special here — for a long time, our institutions have recognized this, especially on paper. Hallowed documents, like the Philippine Constitution of 1987, starts with a preamble that precedes with the inclusive sounding phrase—“We, the sovereign Filipino people…”

But, for peace and development advocates — theorists and practitioners alike — inclusion takes on a much deeper meaning than what it conveys on the surface. It not only means the representation of those in the margins; nor is it just a recognition that those in the fringes deserve to be counted as important parts of the whole. The principle of inclusion dictates that right at the start of any development project, the voices and capacities of those in the margins should be factored in.

Operationally, this means that no development initiative should happen without the active participation of those to be “developed” right at the start — in visioning, planning, identification of specific projects; of project outcomes and other important aspects of project implementation. This is referred to as “local ownership” of the project — it is needed to make those formerly excluded become an integral part in charting their own development course.

External development actors, even if they are the donors, should not dictate the nature of development nor of how it should take place. Local ownership of development projects enhances the creation of an environment that promotes lasting peace.

The flattened part of Marawi City — the most affected area (MAA) which is the consequence of incessant bombing of the city from May 23 to Oct. 17, 2017 — has once again become a contentious topic. For this, we have to thank no less than Secretary and former general Eduardo del Rosario, chair of Task Force Bangon Marawi (TFBM) for claiming that Marawi City is now experiencing a “business boom.” To this untruth is added a half-truth, coming from a local official, the city treasurer of Marawi, when he announced: “Business is booming in Marawi, there is an increase in the number of business permits…”

Local civil society leaders of the Moro Consensus Group, the #Letusgohome Movement, and the United Mothers of Marawi Inc. have repeatedly asserted their vision of how they want the MAA to be rehabilitated and reconstructed. In innumerable forums, they have expressed that even on their own, they could reconstruct their houses and business ventures — if they are only allowed to go back home to the MAA.

Until now, the MAA remains a ghost town, contrary to what many people believe after hearing the half-truths that TFBM and the Marawi City treasurer are peddling.

Through TFBM, the national government continues to find ways and means to impose their own vision of development for the MAA. Such a vision is not inclusive; neither is it grounded on the Maranaw’s sense of identity as a people. Instead, it glorifies crass materialism typical of a resort city — one that capitalizes on the natural and pristine beauty of Lake Lanao. This scenic lake is why the Maranaw are called “people of the lake.”

Some Maranaw officials have been “listened” to, to shape government decisions for Marawi’s rehabilitation. But they are among the least affected by the siege. Among them are sycophants of the Duterte administration and “trapo” politicians waiting for future favors from their patron in Malacañang.

Comments to rcguiam@gmail.com