Install secular gov’t in the Bangsamoro
Calling the Bangsamoro government a secular government might be an oxymoron. Why? Bangsamoro, a relatively new term, refers to the original ethnic inhabitants of Mindanao. But it’s not just an ethnic identifier anymore; it is religious as well. To state the obvious, the word “Islamic” appears in the official names of both the Moro Islamic Liberation Front and the Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters. Right after launching an offensive in Cotabato, the BIFF, true to its name, reiterated its intention to found “an independent Islamic state.”
I lived in Cotabato and the Sulu islands in the ’90s as a seminarian. Religion aside, it was not hard to sympathize with our Bangsamoro brothers and sisters, who, I thought, genuinely have fought for decades for the right to live in their own land. When Nur Misuari and the Moro National Liberation Front made a peace deal with the Philippine government, he envisioned a modern and prosperous Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM), not some theocratic state like Afghanistan. (Although I noticed that labeling a region “Muslim Mindanao” seems by definition obviously countersecular.) For a time I thought Misuari was to become like Kemal Ataturk, Turkey’s secular champion. That is until Misuari, in November 2001, in a desperate grab for power, muddied himself with a sordid act of rebellion, which left 100 dead; an act that was repeated just last September when he organized an assault on Zamboanga City in protest over the MILF-GRP peace deal. This negation of the “peace deal” by Misuari, however, could not poison relations with the Philippine government. Misuari, a renowned UP professor, did not explicitly espouse a religious struggle. Building a secular government in the ARMM was obviously far from his mind.
When the MILF broke away from the MNLF, it did not help that that Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines brokered peace talks in 2003 between the MILF and the Arroyo administration. Archbishop Antonio Ledesma, in July 2008, said that “they should get some religious leaders and look at the peace process itself, because it’s the religious leaders who can provide the moral and spiritual underpinnings of the peace process.” Surely the archbishop must have realized at the time that the conflict in Mindanao was not about the lack of morality and spiritual insight. Christopher Hitchens famously said that “religion poisons everything.” We must well remember that in politics, religion is the problem, not the solution. This scenario has happened before in cities like Belfast, Belgrade, Bosnia, Berlin, Bethlehem, Bombay and Beirut where religious solutions to political problems were installed. This is a fact that the MILF, the current peace panel led by Miriam Coronel-Ferrer and even President Aquino realized. No wonder Catholic priest, Fr. Jun Mercado, principal founder of Kusog Mindanaw, to his consternation, is not the head of the current peace panel. Former party-list Rep. Patricia Sarenas in 2007 pointed out, “I guess we should consider the reasons why the MILF would not want a Catholic priest to head the GRP.” Even fellow priests cautioned that “the Church may be perceived to be on the government side rather than on the side of justice and peace and thus become ineffective as mediator. Clergy should be advocate and mediator, not negotiator.”
What’s crucial in the Framework Agreement on the Bangsamoro is the “right to freedom and expression of religion and beliefs.” Is it possible to be a Moro and respect the secular government? I may be asking too much. While the 1986 Philippine Constitution explicitly states the “principle of separation of church and state,” equally guilty is the Catholic Church which still exerts a powerful influence on state affairs. Marites Vitug in her essay “Are we truly a secular society?” (Rappler 5/3/2013) believes that secularism does not work in practice in the Philippines. “Like many others, I feel the omnipresence of the Catholic Church in government. It’s a layer that seems to permeate policy-making (remember 14 years of the RH bill), government buildings and offices, the way our public officials conduct themselves, and now, our elections.”
In order to build an effective and working secular government, the solution not only rests on whether Catholic and Islamic religious leaders will exercise restraint. The national government must encourage and enforce equal representation of all religions in public life, and start a national conversation on the benefits of a secular government.
—ALLAN ESPINOSA,
