Implementation of Bangsamoro Holds Lessons for Philippines as a Whole

As we prepare for the long-awaited March 27 signing in Manila between the Philippine government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) of the Comprehensive Agreement on the Bangsamoro, one of the striking things of the peace process as it stretches back over more than a decade is the extent to which both negotiating parties tried to learn from past mistakes in striving for peace and development in Mindanao.

Conflict in Mindanao

On March 27, the government of the Philippines and the MILF will sign the Comprehensive Agreement on the Bangsamoro which aims to bring to close a decades-old armed conflict in Mindanao. Photo/Karl Grobl

After the 1996 “Final Peace Agreement” with the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF), the MNLF moved directly and abruptly into positions of leadership in the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) and other institutions under the leadership of MNLF Founding Chairman Nur Misuari. MNLF members had little to no experience in government office and development practice, which many feel contributed to the “failure” of ARMM. In the MILF peace process institutions were put into place to already begin the transition even before the Comprehensive Agreement was completed. Thus, in 2003 the Bangsamoro Development Agency was created to “manage and implement reconstruction and development,” and has been doing so with funding from various agencies, in particular the Mindanao Trust Fund set up by several donors and managed by the World Bank. In 2005, the Bangsamoro Leadership and Management Institute was set up to help train those who will work after the agreement is finished.

This idea of getting ready beforehand has extended to one of the truly novel parts of the peace agreement, the setting up of a “ministerial” form of government for the Bangsamoro. In this parliamentary setting, voters will choose members of the regional assembly, and those members in turn will choose the chief minister to head the executive branch of the Bangsamoro. This is in contrast to the pattern throughout the rest of the Philippine government, from the national government down to provinces, cities, municipalities, and villages, where citizens vote directly for both branches of government – the executive (president, governor, mayor, barangay captain) and the legislature.

The issue of parliamentary governance has come up repeatedly in Philippine politics during periodic discussions of changes to the 1987 Constitution, but the average citizen is at best unenthusiastic and generally they reject the idea: they want to be able to vote directly for the president. However, two special “autonomous” regions are provided for in the constitution for areas “sharing common and distinctive historical and cultural heritage” and a parliamentary form of government was proposed in 1989 by the Cordillera Regional Consultative Commission (CRCC), set up to draft an Organic Act for the Cordillera Autonomous. The CRCC felt that a parliamentary system was more in consonance with the indigenous way of governing through the Council of Elders in each highland village. However, when the Philippine Congress took the CRCC draft and enacted it into law this provision was changed back to a “presidential separation of powers” system to be in line with all the other levels of government in the Philippines. (When the autonomy law was put to a plebiscite, it failed so there is no autonomous region for the Cordillera.) Similarly, the MNLF during negotiations for the 1996 Final Peace Agreement strove for a parliamentary form of government but was told that it was unconstitutional.

The current administration and its negotiating team certainly believe it is constitutional. The president’s instructions to the negotiating panel included exploring the flexibility of the current constitution, inasmuch as President Aquino has repeatedly stressed that he is against amending the constitution. The head of the negotiating panel when the ministerial form was included in the Framework Agreement on the Bangsamoro, Marvic Leonen, has since been elevated to the Supreme Court. While we can confidently predict that some will try to argue the unconstitutionality of the ministerial form of government, it seems unlikely that this provision would be sufficient to have the agreement declared invalid.

In the spirit of getting ready for the transition, there have been a number of different efforts to explore what having a ministerial form of government means in the Philippine context, particularly in conjunction with both elements of the MILF and with the Bangsamoro Transition Commission tasked (like the CRCC was) with drafting a law for consideration by Congress. Focusing on the system of elections in sessions with MILF cadre, Konrad Adenaur Stiftung laid out options and produced a paper that endorsed proportional representation as the best system for handling the various ethnic and religious minorities in the Bangsamoro. International Foundation for Election Systems undertook similar analysis, simulated the outcomes under different counting systems, and pointed out that a parallel system of voting both by district for members of the assembly and a proportional representation system for parties helps balance accountability to the citizenry with representation of minorities. Local organization, DemokraXXIa, similarly canvassed various electoral systems, and reviewed the experience of political parties in majority Muslim countries.

In the Philippines as a whole, political parties are notoriously weak, being largely vehicles cobbled together among disparate individuals for the purpose of contesting particular elections. For a ministerial form of government to work to adequately represent the citizenry in any form of proportional representation, parties must mean something. The Asia Foundation has published an assessment of parties for the Bangsamoro laying out what might be done to strengthen the ability of parties to serve citizen interests. Both DemokraXXIa and the Institute of Bangsamoro Studies worked with the MILF to develop an understanding of what is involved in setting up principled, disciplined parties – going to the main camp in Darapanan Maguindanao and to other camps to explore with MILF cadres a roadmap forward. As a result, the MILF plans to establish a party to contest the regional elections at the general elections in May 2016.

President Aquino’s ruling Liberal Party could clearly contest in 2016, as the current governor of the ARMM and all provincial governors are members of that party. Akbayan Citizens Party is also active in the area, and SIMCARRD explored the notion of establishing an Akbayan sister party for the Bangsamoro as a way both to ensure regional representation but also avoid excessive domination by a national-level political organization.

Considerable attention will be focused during the signing of the Comprehensive Agreement on the Bangsamoro on whether this effort will indeed “solve the Moro problem” and contribute to peace and development in Mindanao. But there are many other exciting details in the implementation of the Bangsamoro that may hold lessons for the Philippines as a whole, including how to reform the police as a new police force for the Bangsamoro is set up, what are the new roles for the Armed Forces of the Philippines as they turn over law enforcement functions and focus on national security and defense, and how to deal with private armies that exist throughout the country, not just in the Bangsamoro. Creation of the Bangsamoro offers opportunities to learn how to improve governance. Establishment of a ministerial form of government and the strengthening of political parties can be watched by all Filipino citizens, not just Moros, to see whether these innovations help promote good government.

Steven Rood is The Asia Foundation’s country representative in the Philippines and was research director of the Cordillera Studies Center before becoming country representative. He can be reached at [email protected]. The views and opinions expressed here are those of the individual author and not those of The Asia Foundation.

A Conversation with Thailand’s Ambassador to the U.S. Vijavat Isarabhakdi

Blog-Banner_60-60v2ThaiAmbassadorThe Asia Foundation’s director of Regional Cooperation Programs, John J. Brandon, speaks with Thailand’s Ambassador to the U.S. Vijavat Isarabhakdi, who served as a Congressional Fellow sponsored by The Asia Foundation.

As an accomplished diplomat for over two decades, looking back, what do you consider the highlight or most remarkable moment in your career in Thailand’s government?

The highlight of my diplomatic career so far must certainly be my appointment in 2013 as Ambassador of Thailand to the United States. This is one of the most important bilateral relationships for Thailand since relations between our two countries stretch back over 180 years and encompass virtually every area. There is therefore a great deal that we can achieve and cooperate on together. Personally, it is highly gratifying for me since much of my life has dealt with the United States, including studying in Boston on a Fulbright scholarship, being posted at the Royal Thai Embassy in the 1990s and serving as a Congressional Fellow on Capitol Hill.

In your view, what are the biggest challenges and opportunities that the future holds for Thailand?

A major challenge for Thailand at present is for all sides in the political arena to rise above their differences and join together for the greater good of the country. There is a need to eradicate the mistrust and lack of confidence that seem to prevail at present. Another challenge will be to chart a path toward sustainable development for the Thai people, leading to a higher quality of life, while also along a route that is in harmony with the environment.

The opportunities for Thailand are tremendous since the country is blessed with a strategic geographical location, a diverse and dynamic economy, a hard-working and capable workforce, and strong economic fundamentals. It is up to the country to make full use of its potential. Another opportunity is for Thailand to play a proactive and constructive role in the region and the international community at large. This is the path that Thailand has been heading toward and aspires to.

Based on your leadership experience, what advice would you give to young leaders in Thailand today?

I would tell them that much about leadership involves leading by example. Young leaders cannot expect to command the support of their followers if they do not lead the way through actions. Dedication and sacrifice are essential elements. Also, they should try to look beyond national interests and focus on the greater good of the region and the international community at large.

As a Congressional Fellow sponsored by The Asia Foundation, what are your recollections about that experience and how did it help shape your diplomatic career?

I recall that it was one of the most enjoyable and rewarding periods in my life. We were very well taken care of by The Asia Foundation and the American Political Science Association. The Fellows were a great mix of Americans with diverse backgrounds plus a number of foreigners such as myself. The experience was greatly edifying and helped me to understand more, not only about Congress, but also the American political system as a whole.

I recall being worried at first about having to compete for a position in the offices of the U.S. congress members and senators with other very well qualified Americans who were also seeking the same position. However, in the end, everything turned out fine and I was able to get jobs with Congressman Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) and Senator Hank Brown (R-Colorado). Both were very kind to me and taught me much about their work. I also had the pleasure of following Congressman Rohrabacher to his district and to see him in action with his constituents.

The experience played an important part in shaping my diplomatic career because I was subsequently posted to the Royal Thai Embassy in Washington, D.C., as First Secretary in the 1990s. As a political officer there, I was able to put into practice the things that I learned as a Congressional Fellow. The combination of serving as a Congressional Fellow and my experience at the Embassy probably had a significant role leading to my appointment as ambassador in Washington almost 20 years later.

As The Asia Foundation marks its 60th anniversary, what do you regard as the Foundation’s main contribution toward improving lives and expanding opportunities in Thailand, and what role might the Foundation play to best support Thailand’s progress going forward?

Over the past 60 years, The Asia Foundation has played a very important and highly commendable role in improving lives and expanding opportunities, not only in Thailand but throughout the region. The Foundation has funded a large number of educational programs and international exchanges that have created greater career opportunities for many Thais. The Foundation’s women’s empowerment programs have helped create greater opportunities for women in Thailand, while its economic development programs have also empowered entrepreneurs and improved business environments.

The Asia Foundation can continue to support Thailand’s progress and advancement in these same areas as well as in finding new fields of cooperation for Thailand to meet the new challenges of the 21st century. These might include, for example, areas such as the environment, climate change, water resource management, and disaster preparedness.

A Conversation with Nepali Journalist, Women’s Rights Advocate Jaya Luintel

Asia Foundation 60th anniversary seriesAsia Foundation Development Fellow Jaya LuintelAhead of International Women’s Day on March 8, In Asia editor Alma Freeman interviewed Nepali radio journalist and women’s rights advocate, Jaya Luintel, on women’s changing role in politics and society in Nepal, the country’s wide gender gap, and hopes of democratic momentum. Luintel, who was recently selected as one of 10 inaugural 2014 Asia Foundation Development Fellows, is the founder of the organization, The Story Kitchen, and last month organized the first ever national-level conference of women radio producers and broadcasters in Nepal, as part of World Radio Day.

Your career as a journalist began with Radio Sagarmatha in 1999, when you started the radio’s first show on gender equality and women’s rights. What motivated you to start this show?

One morning in early 2002, during our editorial meeting, the station manager came to the newsroom and told us that Oxfam in Nepal was interested in supporting Radio Sagarmatha to produce a radio show on gender issues. He asked if anyone was interested in leading the production team, and I was the only one to raise my hand. I knew very little about gender issues or Oxfam’s work, but spent a great deal of time researching gender issues, and was heavily influence by the book “Half the World Half a Chance,” by Julia C. Moose. Together with Oxfam, we came up with the name for the program “Saha-Astittwa,” which means “co-existence.”

Our first broadcast was on Saturday, Feb. 2, 2002, when we launched our hour-long weekly program. At that time there were very few radio programs focused on women’s rights. Most “women’s programs” focused on making pickles at home, cooking, knitting, and so on. Saha-Astittwa introduced the issues of gender equality, women’s rights, and co-existence, with a focus on social justice, women’s identity, and treatment of women in public.

This exposed me to hundreds of women’s stories. Every time I talked to women and girls, I asked them what their dream was. I later realized that we Nepali women were never taught to dream for our own future. As a daughter we followed our father’s dream, as a wife we fulfill our husband’s dream, and when we get old, we have to live up to our son’s dream. For me, having my own dream to help other women dream for their own future through radio programming was very challenging yet very exciting.

As a women’s rights advocate in Nepal, what are some of the biggest changes that you’ve noticed in the areas of gender equality and women’s participation in society?

The three biggest changes I’ve noticed in Nepali society for women over the last 20 years are: women are now capable of raising their voice, more girls are attending school, and women are becoming more independent economically.

According to the 2011 national census, the literacy rate for women is 57.4 percent, up from 42.8 percent in 2001. Similarly, the percentage of women’s ownership of fixed property (land and homes) has increased from 11.7 percent in 2001 to 19.7 percent in 2011. According to the World Bank, the maternal mortality ratio in last five years (per 100,000 live births) has reduced to 170 from 250. Though statistics show that more girls and women are becoming literate, there is still a high school drop-out rate for girls, and the quality of education they get compared to boys and men – even from the same family – is not equal. Deeply rooted patriarchal norms, beliefs, and values also create barriers for women to exercise their freedoms and rights in reality.

In the World Economic Forum’s latest Global Gender Gap report, Nepal ranks very low – 121st out of 136 countries in terms of gender gap overall. What are the major factors contributing to such a wide gender gap?

In 1956, the first formal development plan and policy was introduced in Nepal. In 1980, 10 years before the restoration of democracy, the sixth “Five-Year Plan” included women in the development efforts for the first time. After this move, development plans and policies in Nepal were increasingly geared toward addressing the issue of gender disparity. Later, the ninth and tenth plans were quite vocal to end gender disparity. A separate ministry for women in Nepal was established in 1995 right after Fourth World Conference of Women in Beijing.

There have been other positive changes both in laws and policies. Despite these changes at the legal and policy level, there are many obstacles in turning gender equality into a reality as gender biases have been firmly rooted in the legal, economic, cultural, and social framework of Nepali society. For example, the percentage of girls attending school is increasing, both at the primary and secondary level, but when it comes to tertiary (university or college) level, the number of female students is less than half that of men. In many cases, women are forced to leave school because daughters are seen as a burden for the family and they want to shift this burden to another family by marrying her off. Nepal has some of the highest child marriage rates in the world.

Meanwhile, Nepal has the highest women representation in parliament (33 percent) in South Asia.

It’s true that the representation of women in Nepal’s parliament is the highest in South Asia. But while the female-to-male ratio of women’s representation in parliament is 0.50, the female-to-male ratio in ministerial positions is 0.08. This shows that women are still not chosen for key leadership positions.

I just re-listened to an interview that I did back in 2006 with then Maoist leader Ms. Onsari Gharti who was recently elected as a vice-chair of the Constituent Assembly. That was her first radio interview after Nepal’s government and the Maoists signed the Comprehensive Peace Accord, and the Maoists began to come out from underground life. She was also one of the female Maoist combatants. I bring her up as an example of how women’s representation in parliament also represents women of diverse communities, political background, education, social status, caste, and ethnic groups.

Unfortunately, while the number of women in parliament has increased, they are still lacking in meaningful participation. The interim constitution of Nepal explicitly says that in every state body, women’s participation should be at least 33 percent. This was the case in the previous Constituent Assembly, but we don’t yet know the final percentage of women who will be in the newly elected CA.

For some, Nepal’s new prime minister raises hopes of democratic momentum for the country, long stalemated by political conflict. What do you see as the biggest priorities in terms of securing women’s rights in the coming decade?

Education, access to economic resources, and health are definitely major issues for women. In my opinion, by improving these areas, women’s lives will be enhanced but won’t be transformed. If the government is really willing to transform the lives of Nepali women, efforts to change our current social and political structure – which is patriarchal – is essential. While laws, policies, and programs that include women’s rights and equality are important, we also need more effective implementation and monitoring of these laws.

Nepal’s issue of citizenship carries a legacy of discrimination and marginalization of women. Nepal’s citizenship law does not recognize women as independent individuals. For example, a Nepali woman after reaching the age of 18 can get a citizenship certificate only if she gets recommended by her father (if not married) or by her husband (if married). The interim constitution of Nepal says that the recommendation of her mother is also valid, but this is not being implemented effectively. In many cases officials don’t take the document forward from a woman unless it was submitted by her father or her husband’s copy of citizenship certificate. So, if a father or husband is unhappy with his daughter or wife, he can simply deny his recommendation for citizenship. During one of the interviews that I conducted for The Story Kitchen, sociologist Dr. Meena Poudel said: “The new legal provision in the new constitution should allow the state, not a father, husband, or any other individual to recommend citizenship for both men and women in Nepal.” If this kind of legal provision could be formulated and implemented it would help women to establish their own autonomy, and increase their ability to participate more fully in society.