ALL QUIET ON THE SOUTHERN FRONT While the proposed Bangsamoro Basic Law faces delays and legal challenge in Congress and in the Supreme Court, combatants from both sides enjoy relative peace as a military transport passes a checkpoint set up by the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) in Sultan Kudarat, Maguindanao province. The MILF checkpoint is marked by an old tire (inset). JEOFFREY MAITEM / INQUIRER MINDANAO
Using unusually strong language, several individuals on Friday filed two petitions at the Supreme Court against the peace agreement that the Aquino government entered into last year with the separatist Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), assailing the pact as “repugnant,” invalid and a betrayal of Philippine sovereignty.
The petitioners said the Comprehensive Agreement on the Bangsamoro (CAB) by itself, as well as “all acts or issuances arising from” it, are unconstitutional.
In particular, the Philippine Constitution Association (Philconsa), led by Leyte Rep. Ferdinand Martin Romualdez, asked the high court to immediately stop government efforts to see the fruition of CAB and its precedent document, Framework Agreement on the Bangsamoro (FAB), particularly the release of funds “for any activities to pursue or implement” the peace agreement.
Tatad, et al.
Banding together in the Philconsa petition aside from Romualdez were former Sen. Francisco Tatad, former National Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales, Lipa Archbishop Ramon Arguelles, Davao Archbishop Emeritus Fernando Capalla and Zamboanga Archbishop Romulo de la Cruz.
The petitions were filed even as the proposed Bangsamoro Basic Law, the enabling legislation that will give legal standing to the autonomous “Bangsamoro” region envisioned in the peace agreement, is being fiercely debated in and out of Congress.
The CAB, touted as the road map to peace in Mindanao, was signed with much fanfare in Malacañang in March 2014. It provides for the creation of a new autonomous “Bangsamoro” region that will replace the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao.
‘Treacherous, unconstitutional’
The petitioners accused the government’s peace negotiators of treachery and of being far too accommodating of the MILF’s demands when they negotiated and signed the CAB and the FAB.
“Petition seeks to avert the destruction of the Republic of the Philippines, the dismemberment of its territory, the fragmentation of its people, the despoliation of its natural and human resources, and the wreckage of its tripartite system of government,” read the Philconsa petition, the first one to be filed yesterday.
The petitioners were vehement in expressing their opposition to the peace agreement, calling the FAB “unconstitutional and treacherous” and the CAB “equally void, flawed and polluted.”
Bottom line
“The provisions of the FAB and the CAB are all repugnant to the 1987 Constitution and existing laws. The Constitution is supreme. Any exercise of power beyond what is circumscribed by the Constitution is ultra vires (beyond one’s legal power) and a nullity,” the Philconsa said.
“An unconstitutional act, whether legislative or executive, is not a law, confers no right, imposes no duties, and affords no protection,” it said.
The crux of Philconsa’s argument is the unconstitutionality of creating another autonomous region, saying that under the Constitution, no other autonomous region may be created, beyond the two already existing.
This was because only the first Congress, elected within 18 months of the creation of the two legislative chambers upon the passage of the 1987 Constitution, was allowed to create autonomous regions, Philconsa said.
The petition cited commentary from Fr. Joaquin Bernas, one of the drafters of the 1987 Constitution, who said that “any other area which wishes to become an autonomous region should seek a constitutional amendment.”
Bangsamoro nonentity
According to the Philconsa, “Bangsamoro” is a political and legal nonentity without constitutional recognition.
“The newly coined/invented term ‘Bangsamoro Political Entity’ is an intruder and interloper in the 1987 Constitution. It is a nonentity. Its existence/creation requires prior amendments to the 1987 Constitution before it can be recognized as a political entity,” the petition read.
“Unless and until the 1987 Constitution is first amended ‘Bangsamoro’ is a shadow entity of no legal consequence. Constitutionally, it is nothing, but a band of amorphous rebels,” it said.
Usurpation of power
Named respondents were chief government negotiator Miriam Coronel-Ferrer for her role in drafting the CAB, her predecessor in the government peace panel, Supreme Court Associate Justice Marvic Leonen, for his role in the FAB, the “self-styled” MILF, Budget Secretary Florencio Abad and the Commission on Audit (COA).
READ: Petitions before Supreme Court challenge legality of 2 Bangsamoro agreements
Abad and the COA were impleaded because of the funds that have been committed and released to the Aquino government’s peace process project.
The petitioners asked the high court to compel the COA to “examine, audit and disallow the funds/expenses that were released and expended” by the government in the implementation of the peace agreement.
It further asked that money already disbursed and spent “to support and implement unconstitutional agreements or undertakings” be returned.
Illegal commitments
The petitioners accused Ferrer and Leonen of producing a pact that would require constitutional amendments to be legal.
They said that the government negotiators illegally committed to have the Constitution and existing laws conform to the FAB and the CAB, for the latter’s legitimization.
“This qualifies [panel chairs] Leonen and Ferrer for the charge of usurping a power they did not have,” the petition read.
MOA-AD revival
“Accordingly, the FAB and CAB are nothing but toxic intellectual contortions meant to delude and deceive the people into believing that they could take them as a panacea for their organic ills when they were actually designed to subvert them,” it said.
The petitioners likened the peace agreement to the 2008 Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain, saying the FAB and CAB “are the crafty and ingenious revival” of the earlier pact which the Supreme Court nullified.
The petition also assailed the government peace negotiators for committing “grave prejudice to the majority of Filipino people” for signing the FAB and CAB, which “grant humongous and unconscionable financial, social, economic and political benefits/advantage to the MILF.”
Exceeded powers
In a separate petition, former Negros Oriental congressman Jacinto Paras impleaded Ferrer and the government peace panel members—Senen Bacani, Yasmin Busran-Lao, Mehol Sadain and presidential adviser on the peace process Teresita Quintos-Deles—for their roles in bringing about the CAB.
The Paras petition also sought to stop the implementation of the peace agreement, saying officials of the executive branch had “exceeded” their powers in negotiating and concluding the agreement.
In particular, the CAB violates the Constitution’s provisions on territory and offends the basic law for proposing a parliamentary form of government, Paras said.
“The grant of concurrent and exclusive powers to the Bangsamoro government is not in accord with the Constitution,” Paras said in his petition.
In December 2012, lawyer and perennial nuisance candidate Ely Pamatong asked the high court to nullify the FAB on grounds of unconstitutionality, the first such challenge against the peace deal.
Just this March, he asked the Supreme Court to resolve his still pending petition.
RELATED STORIES
Solon threatens reporter with contempt over BBL bribery story
Duterte pitches federalism as alternative to BBL