Last Nov. 2007, the long-awaited Tripartite Meeting among the OIC, GRP and MNLF finally took place in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. My brother Sultan Firdausi Abbas was a member of the MNLF panel headed by our cousin, lawyer Bong Parcasio.
********* ******** ********** ********* *********
HIGHLIGHTS OF THE TRIPARTITE MEETING AMONG THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES ((GRP), THE MORO NATIONAL LIBERATION FRONT (MNLF) AND THE ORGANIZATION OF ISLAMIC CONFERENCE (OIC) IN JEDDAH, SAUDI ARABIA NOV 10-12, 2007
Nov. 10 2007:
OIC Sec-Gen Prof. Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu gave the welcome address followed by statements from GRP and MNLF. MNLF Chair Misuari’s statement was read by MNLF panelist Al Tillah.
The meeting was convened with the Committee of Eight, which has been renamed the OIC Peace Committee for Southern Philippines, chaired by Ambasador Rezlan I. Jenie of the Republic of Indonesia.
Undersecretary Nabil Tan, the head of the GRP delegation, emphasized that they were now in Phase II of the Peace Agreement, particularly RA 9054 and so discussion would be focused on Phase II matters.
Atty. Parcasio of the MNLF said that the MNLF rejects RA 9054 and that the discussion should review both Phase I and II, including the case of Chairman Misuari.
Tan said that it was not possible to discuss SPCPD and the CA. And, he added, Misuari’s case rests with Philippine courts and not the Tripartite Meeting.
Parcasio said that they were willing to discuss RA 9054 but the MNLF refuses to accept it.
Nov. 11, 2007:
Convened in the Plenary Hall. The Chair announced that the meeting will be held in a closed door session with only three delegates from each side.
Sultan Firdausi Abbas of the MNLF Panel remarked that the THEME of the meeting was Review of the 1996 Peace Agreement, NOT just the Phase II of the said agreement. He added that a peace process has many dimensions, and all should be looked at.
Abbas’s salient points:
– What is the nature of the Peace Accord? Is it international, local or municipal?
He pointed out that negotiations conducted outside the Philippines are always based on International Law and the participation of the OIC makes the Accord International.
However, once the agreement/accord is signed and brought within the jurisdiction of the GRP, the Philippine government treats it as municipal or local agreement.
– What is the nature of the procedure of implementation? Is it bilateral or unilateral?
Abbas also pointed out that negotiations, discussions and drafting of agreements are undertaken on a bilateral basis. Yet, once it is brought to the Philippines for implementation, everything is done on a unilateral basis.
Abbas cited the case of RA 9054 which the GRP wants the MNLF to accept. MNLF refuses to accept this law because it was enacted without its (MNLF’s) participation. Even the definition of the term Bangsa Moro, as written in RA 9054, is unacceptable to the MNLF.
GRP’s Tan answered that since MNLF is not a state, then it cannot be an international agreement.
MNLF’s Parcasio brought up another topic but Ambassador Ibrahim Abdullah of Malaysia took the thread of Abbas’s arguments and asked how could the parties agree if the GRP has one framework and the MNLF another?
After a brief recess, the meeting was reconvened. Some issues were discussed like the proposed Grievance Council. MNLF wanted to discuss the case of Chair Misuari but the GRP refused. The Committee Chair proposed that a smaller body will discuss Misuari’s case after the closed door meeting, which was then adjourned.
CASE OF MISUARI:
MNLF panel’s Al Tillah spoke of his futile efforts in obtaining a passport for Misuari as well as the concept of Trust.
Abbas cited the OIC Secretary General’s speech about the peace process being meaningless without considering several principles like correcting injustice. Abbas said that it is ironic if the OIC cannot correct the injustice against Misuari and farcical if his case could not even be discussed.
Abbas then argued that Philippine courts do not have jurisdiction over Misuari’s case and that he should be tried by an international tribunal.
The GRP panel did not rebut Abbas.
Meeting adjourned and reconvened in a smaller venue.
The MNLF panelists—Parcasio, Abbas and Tillah – requested that a fourth member, Hatimil Hassan, join them.
The parties agreed to look into certain issues : 1. Shari’ah and the Judiciary 2. Special Security Force 3. Natural Resources and Economic Development 4. Political System and Representation and 5. Education.
But Abbas spoke and called the above issues as superficial. He proposed to discuss and establish the following mechanisms:
- A mechanism to formulate and adopt a viable, justifiable and acceptable organic act or law to establish the new autonomous government
- A mechanism to enable the MNLF to participate in the faithful implementation of the law, to retain and continue the bilateral process and
- A mechanism which will create a grievance council beyond the jurisdiction of the GRP to enable the MNLF to seek redress for violations by the GRP.
Nov. 13, 2007
At 2 pm, the Tripartite Meeting concluded with statements from the three heads of delegation.
(SOURCE: Report on the Tripartite Meeting – GRP-MNLF-OIC – in Jeddah, KSA, Nov. 10-12, 2007 by Sultan Firdausi I.Y. Abbas, General Legal Counsel, MNLF and Chair, Bangsa Moro Party)