Bangsamoro peace pact not rushed; it’s long overdue
IF THERE is anything that we could call premature and uncalled for, it was the public outrage following the Mamasapano incident last January.
It is understandable though that many of our people stood up for the 44 police commandos who lost their lives, some of them executed point blank. I myself was angry, but I did not let my anger cloud my judgment on the Bangsamoro Basic Law.
The Moro Islamic Liberation Front was severely faulted and its sincerity in its pursuit of peace was all the more questioned by its doubters and critics. Questions about the BBL were also raised, but the answers to these questions should be taken from the long history of the Moro struggle, answers that we should have learned a long time ago.
The BBL was drafted in line with the Comprehensive Agreement on the Bangsamoro, a collection of pacts reached over a long period, after strenuous and trying talks between the Philippine government and the MILF. Throughout the period of negotiation, a ceasefire was in effect and it greatly reduced the incidence of
violence in Mindanao.
Quoting Secretary Teresita Quintos Deles, the presidential adviser on the peace process: “For most of the decade, the death toll on both sides, including civilians and combatants, was pegged at 150,000. But other sources say it could be double that number. And that is speaking of the dead. The living must go on living even if it means being nearly forever on the run.” This peace pact is not being rushed, it is long overdue.
If there is anything that is premature with the peace process, it is our understanding of and judgments on the matter. I am hoping that we could rethink our positions on the BBL—beyond our personal, sociopolitical beliefs, and beyond the proposed law itself, and see the plight of our brothers and sisters in Mindanao caught in the middle of conflict for so long.
—PERRY R VALDEZ,
