March L. Fianza
Prior to becoming part of the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao, the waters surrounding the island province of Basilan was teeming with hundreds of species of fish.
A fisherman interviewed by a television crew last month when the black coral smuggling racket was on the headlines confirmed this, saying that before autonomy, fishermen followed the unwritten rules on proper fishing.
“Basilan fishermen and the national coastguard protected the seas so that there was enough fish for everybody. Anybody can even buy a Pawikan egg for breakfast without worrying that the population of the giant sea turtles would dwindle,” he said.
The situation is no longer the same. Fishermen say that a few years after its inclusion in the ARMM, the volume of fish caught in Basilan’s seas diminished. Don’t get me wrong. It’s not because the fishes were against autonomy in Mindanao, but because destruction of corrals and fish sanctuaries became rampant. Due to the destruction underneath the water surface, there were no more fishes to catch.
Commercial fishing in the name of “development” was allowed while expensive black corrals were stolen and sold to unscrupulous smugglers. What was worst was that the wild Pawikan were caught, preserved in chemicals, smuggled out and sold as souvenir in tourist hubs around the world.
Protection by the national guards was now focused on nearby seas because the powers that be in the region said they were autonomous and that they can “protect their own natural resources.”
Principles attached to traditional fishing practices deteriorated in exchange for money.
That is why the academe, some politicians and leaders in the private sector in Mindanao say that some reasons for autonomy in the region were wrong.
Apparently, officials and residents have interpreted the word “autonomy” to mean “to have control over their natural resources” which in turn was interpreted literally.
Be vigilant. That is not the kind of autonomy we want for Cordillera, even if that is what some of our political leaders in the region want to do in their province, once autonomy is attained.
At this early stage of the campaign for autonomy, their slip is already showing. You guessed it; they want control over logging and mining, primarily for environmental protection and secondarily for “progress and development.”
But in a region that survives out of the wealth of its mountains, how long will the situation last until it is reversed?
***
Twenty-four years ago and after a series of peace talks prior, PNoy’s mother, then President Cory, signed EO 220 that united the Cordillera Administrative Region consisting of the provinces of Abra, Benguet, Ifugao, Mountain Province, Baguio City and Kalinga-Apayao that were yet to be separated on February 14, 1997.
Also created under EO 220 were the three regional bodies namely, the Cordillera Regional Assembly (CRA); the Cordillera Executive Board (CEB), and the Cordillera Bodong Administration (CBAd).
The following purposes for which they were created were to administer the affairs of government in the region; accelerate the economic and social growth and development of the units of the region; and prepare for the establishment of an autonomous region in the Cordilleras.
As Cordillera celebrates what it has gained for the past 24 years, if any, I think it is but proper to first give credit to who credit was due.
EO 220 was recognized as the work of the CPLA, but wait. Before we forget, the reason for drafting EO 220 was because of the provision in the 1987 Philippine Constitution that the Cordillera Peoples Alliance (CPA) fought for in Manila – the inclusion in the provision for the creation of an autonomous region for the Cordillera.
Despite CPLA’s attempts to besmirch the image of the CPA through their friends in the media when they went their separate ways, the framers of the 1987 Constitution still listened to the CPA and wrote Section 1, Article X which provided for the “creation of an autonomous region in Muslim Mindanao and the Cordillera.”
But prior to the lobbying of both the rightists and leftists for a distinct region, there were already moves in 1976 by the governors of the four Cordillera provinces who forwarded a resolution to President Marcos asking for a separate region for the old Mountain Province. Their request was denied.
Again, sometime between 1984 and 1986, the Assemblymen Jess Paredes of Ifugao and Honorato Aquino of Baguio respectively filed separate bills in the Batasan for a separate Mountain Province Region. The bills did not prosper.
But prior to that, somewhere between 1983 and 1984, Benguet Gov. Ben Palispis launched efforts to promote the use of iodized salt in the Cordillera, especially among households in vegetable farms, alongside a clamor to put under one region the mountain provinces.
The weeklong fanfare called “Iodize and Regionalize” opened with a country-western mini concert at the Benguet Capitol, and motorcycle races atop Sitio Atol, Pico, La Trinidad. The effort was not sustained as it was overtaken by events after the assassination of Senator Ninoy Aquino in the same year.
***
Now, 24 years later and aside from the bickering involving the Cordillera bodies, people still have to see substantial gains from what they have finished, after two popularly rejected organic laws - RA 6766 in 1990 and RA 8438 in 1997.
“Regionalization” was a popular clamor by a wide section of Cordillera society. So that there was legitimate reason for certain sectors from the academe, the left and political leaders from the provinces and Baguio to criticize a provision of the Third Autonomy Draft that “warned” that the Cordillera region would be dismembered with parts reverting to regions I and II if their proposed Third Autonomy Act is not passed.
The CPA said, “… such threatening scenario is nothing but blackmail and is irresponsible,” which to me is true. However, going back to the draft, I saw that the controversial provision was deleted.
Certainly, an organic act should not allow provisions that would “disunite what was already united” by efforts in the past. The proponents should always bear in mind that lives were sacrificed before the Cordillera was lumped under a common region.
Wait again. Before people rush to judgment and say that autonomy critics are against autonomy, they must think twice because the reason might be that they are critical of autonomy because they are for genuine autonomy.
Maybe they do not want an autonomous region composed of only two or three provinces, as stressed by Ifugao Congressman Teddy Baguilat, because they want all the Cordillera provinces to be inside the future autonomous region.
This way, the essence of Cordillera autonomy and real spirit is there, haan nga agin-agin autonomy that satisfies the agenda of only few.
That however is hard to attain but it justifies the need for a long and continuing grassroots consultation. If possible, everyone must be consulted, not just the barangay officials and the mayors and councilors.
Some quarters even say that it is enough that the provinces are now under one Cordillera Administrative Region. Thanks to the CPA for the Constitutional provision, and the CPLA for EO220.
But what happens to the clamor for autonomy? I say it should be continuing. And as we go about tramping all over beloved Cordillera, we come to distinguish perspectives in the fight for autonomy.
Some say they want decentralization and devolution of powers which is the autonomy perspective by traditional politicians. This includes positions, infrastructures and money allocations.
Others say they want more in addition to infrastructure development. They are for autonomy that carries with it solutions that could answer the urgent problems and issues that we presently face – land, forest proclamations, mining, logging, water, peace and order, etc.
In short, critics want more specific provisions in the proposed organic law that is why they say that grassroots consultations must continue, hoping that in such manner, all provinces will go for autonomy. What I know is that the provinces will go for autonomy as long as what they want will be placed in the draft.
There is a mindset that i-Benguets do not like autonomy. As an I-benguet, I say they are wrong. Instead, they must look at the fact that people in Benguet are very consistent in what they want. They don’t want to be lorded over especially in their own land. They want to manage their own affairs… now isn’t that autonomy?
In Baguio, a legitimate ancestral land claimant said the issue on squatters applying for TSAs over Ibaloi ancestral lands should be looked into. In fact, squatting, ancestral lands claims and TSA should be considered in the clamor for autonomy, in relation to RA 8371, the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997.
***
According to a paper presented by former CRCC Commissioner Fernando Bahatan, there is still something to be happy about with EO220 because despite its drawbacks in its implementation, it had the following gains: It created the Cordillera Administrative Region. Politicians asked for a separate region for the provinces under the old Mountain Province but their efforts did not succeed.
It established various regional offices of the national departments that employed thousands of Cordillerans, many of whom were appointed to high positions which were quite difficult for a native Cordilleran to get when the Cordillera provinces were either with Region 1 or with Region 2, and brought about a better climate of peace and security in the region.
Most of all, it pushed forward a Cordillera wider consciousness or identity and enhancing the feeling among Cordillerans as one people or one nation, Bahatan noted.
On the other hand, the CPA says, EO 220 should now be scrapped and replaced with another executive order, for the continuance of the Cordillera Administrative Region as a regular region, but without the folly associated with it.
Whatever, what I see is that we are not against autonomy but we are all for genuine regional autonomy. Happy EO220 Day! – marchfianza777@yahoo..com
No comments:
Post a Comment