It is a truism that when people of various faiths live together, and not simply in the sense of cohabiting the same space, the question of dialogue does not arise.

When they work, study, struggle, celebrate, and mourn together and face the universal crises of injustice, graft and corruption, illness, and death as one, they don’t spend most of their time talking about theories and ideas. Their focus is on immediate concerns of survival, on taking care of the sick and needy, on communicating cherished values to new generations, on resolving problems and tensions in productive rather than in destructive ways, on reconciling after conflicts, on seeking to build more just, humane, and dignified societies.

When believers are actively cooperating in such activities, at certain rare but privileged moments, they also express what is deepest in their lives and hearts, that is, their respective faiths, which are the source of strength and inspiration that form the motive force which drives and guides all their activities.

It is important to keep in mind that the raw materials of dialogue is composed of the issues faced daily in concrete ways by Christians, Muslims and Indigenous Peoples who live in pluralistic societies. Such people are not professional theologians and have not engaged in formal dialogue situations, but grocers, housewives, manual laborers, nurses, students, clerks and secretaries who want to live conscientiously and with faith amid the challenges that arise in the context of religious and cultural pluralism.

These are new “platforms” that capture the dialogue and exchanges that people face as they eke their daily life. They are actual platforms for people to meet, pray and work together.

The famous late Dom Helder Camara of Recife, Brazil was a good example of this emerging platform. When he was once asked about his unsettling involvement with the poor and the cause of justice in the early 60s, he said that his Christian witness in this area was not the big fire that burns a forest but a lighted matchstick in the darkness of poverty and injustice.

These types of witnessing are new streams of refreshing water and hope in the world and in concrete neighborhoods, though small and seemingly insignificant, they may look. In reality, these are attempts to light the proverbial matchsticks. They are rays of hope and strength to many believers seeking to live their faith meaningfully in their daily lives.

They are lighted matchsticks that show the way in the search for new and emerging platforms as they forge ahead in interreligious and intercultural enterprise.

We recognize the wounds of the ethnic and religious divides that mar our relationship as people and communities. The wounds are, indeed, very deep and are closely familiar to us. The trauma and pains continue to exercise tyranny over our spirit on both sides of the divide.

This is one reason why the relations between and among peoples are, largely, shrouded in mutual suspicion and mistrust. There remains the challenge on either side to rise above the general ignorance and bias that have, for years, characterized the relationships between and among faith and ethnic communities and individuals.

I wonder if this is what the martyred President of Egypt Anwar Sadat expressed at the Knesset during his historic visit of the Holy City of Jerusalem on November 7, 1977.

“… Yet, there remains another wall. This wall continues and constitutes a psychological barrier between us, a barrier of suspicion, a barrier of rejection, a barrier of fear, of deception, a barrier of hallucination without any action, deeds or decision. A barrier of distorted and eroded interpretation of every event and statement. It is this official statement as constituting 70% of the whole process. Today, through my visit to you, I ask why don’t we stretch out our hands with faith and sincerity so that together we might destroy this barrier?”

Our life lived together has to give birth to a new relationship that heals and empowers. I affirm that our religious traditions have the power not only to manage conflictual relationships but also to transform them. Here, I echo what Fr. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, SJ said years ago:

“The age of nations is past. It remains for us now, if we do not wish to perish, to set aside the ancient prejudices and build the earth.”

We are living in a fascinating and dangerous age. This is the age of computers and the Internet. In a matter of seconds distances seem to disappear. People and communities are immediately interconnected via satellites. And it is just a matter of time before we find ourselves "hooked". Being "hooked" to a computer and the Internet is an expression of living in what is now popularly known as the global village. While this spells redaction of physical distances, on the one hand, yet on the other hand, people have become or becoming more distant and alienated as ever to one another. No doubt, computerization and the Internet have shaped a new culture. Whether we like it or not we are part of this computer age and culture.

The computer culture is making our life more complex, to say the least.

First there is the "temptation" to modernize our lives and ways. And to modernize means to be "in", that is, to use the latest hardware and software as well as to speak the language of computer and business. The world of computer and business has its own praxis and icons.

The second danger is our easy attitude in immediately consigning to "museum" what is considered as "out" of fashion. Here again, there is that fad to reject what is seen as ancient and Jurassic. Yet, people, yesterday, today and tomorrow, are not "tableau raps". No amount of cloning and robotics shall ever reduce people into mere machines.

More than ever, we have to affirm the fact that people are shaped not only of modern cultures that our present milieu engendered but also by the collective archetypes that are found in our national as well as individual subconscious. As a matter of fact, there is no way of "foregoing" with these archetypes. There can be no "cover up" or technology that will make us escape the reality that these archetypes do govern not only our desires and dream but our fears as well.

Perhaps the reason behind our common search for "rootedness" in education and formation of values is the fact that we are not truly home in the new culture of computer and technology. Often this search for "rootedness" finds expressions in simply "replicating" the values and praxis of our ancestors. No doubt, this effort is valid and legitimate as well as noteworthy. But valid and noteworthy it may be we have to soon realize that this is only one aspect of that complex reality of truly being rooted into our tradition.

Outright, there are two great obstacles to this quest. The first is our "forgetfulness" or in computer jargon - the lack of a bigger built-in ram or the stored memory capacity is "short."

There is the preponderance to look west for paradigms not only for the management of wordy affairs but also for values and praxis in communities. The look west is not only dictated by our "forgetfulness" but also by our fascination to be "in" as brought about by our "interconnectedness" in this computer age.

The second is the shallowness of our "return" movement to the values of our ancestors. Often, our so-called "return" movement does not include the culture that engendered, nurtured and sustained through time and place, such a given value. In short, it is a return movement that hardly touches the ethnos and ethos of both the people and the place where the value and belief are planted.

Then there is also the "hardening of our hearts" or the sheer stubbornness by ever deeply digging in our heels in our perceived "right/correct" praxis in modern life and community.

Fr. A. de Mello’s story best illustrates this phenomenon. A woman suddenly stops a man walking down the street and says: "Henry, I am so happy to see you after all these years! My, how you have changed. I remember you being as being tall and you seem so much shorter now. You used to have a pale complexion and it is really so ruddy now. Good grief how you have changed in five years!"

Finally, the man got a chance to interject: "But ma’am, my name is not Henry!" To which the persistent woman calmly responded: "Oh, so you changed your name too!"

It is often said that Filipinos, though displaying a western facade, is governed or deeply influenced by the more primitive in us. Scrape the thin veneer of that western culture, there appears stark naked the primitive values and mores. We are not Henry’s and we have not changed our names, too!

The recent controversy involving the ‘7 Pajero bishops’ has struck the nation with great embarrassment. The real issue is not whether the so-called gifts are ‘unlawful or anomalous or unconstitutional’.

The continued defensive actions and claims that followed clearly show how far off the mark the bishops are. They continue to miss the real issue in the controversy. No doubt, the SUVs are not for personal and private use; the PCSO gifts are for the social and charitable ministries of church; and the gifts are legal and constitutional.

The real tragedy in the said controversy is the fact, ‘wala get mo, sila’. Our ‘excellencies’ have remained, in the language of an Inquirer editorial, ‘clueless’.

'Receiving the fund from the PCSO is NOT the real issue, the crux of the matter is the fact that PCSO donations did not happen within a vacuum, as a happy case of happenstance, with no strings attached and no payback expected.'

Retired Archbishop Oscar Cruz is quoted to have said that it was 'impossible' for President Arroyo to accommodate the bishops without some quid pro quo. 'Kapag humingi ka sa gobyerno, nakatali ang kamay mo.'

The payback required was the silence of their 'excellencies'.

'When the nation needed the moral strength and clarity of the Church as the Arroyo administration lurched from one outrageous impropriety to the next,' there was SILENCE! The bishops’ silence was, indeed, deafening and the PCSO gifts of SUVs clearly come into real perspective. It was around this time, also, that the derisive sobriquet: the 'Malacañang Dioceses' came to existence.

Now, ‘get mo na’!

There is nothing illegal in the gifts. There is nothing unconstitutional about the gifts. And there is nothing unlawful about the gifts. But mind you, there is a PAYBACK time for the gifts! It is no free ride, Virginia!

Again in another editorial, St. Thomas More’s famous quote against his perjurer was artfully conjured… 'Ah! What profits a man to gain the whole world… but for pajeros, your Excellencies?'

But in a more worldly scale of power and gold, an SUV gift is, indeed, a real bargain for a price of silence and cooperation of a bishop. PGMA was noted for giving generous gifts and envelopes knowing full well that for each SUV and envelope, there is a payback!

It was a no mean feat that she survived her nine years of presidency notwithstanding the issues of legitimacy of succession; the Hello Garci scandal; NBN and Fertilizer scams; and that is simply to name a few. For 7 Pajeros? That is super cheap! ‘Kuha mo?’

The CBCP’s letter is a hodge-podge apology of two strands. The first strand consists of the first five paragraphs revealing that the writers have remained 'clueless' about the whole issue of SUVs. These are well-couched paragraphs, on the main, an apologia pro vita sua. The last paragraph is a stand-alone and it reveals that there is a saving grace notwithstanding the attempt to justify.

The last paragraph could have been THE letter: short and 'pointed' devoid of any pretense and finally addressing the real issue involved in the SUVs as it quotes Psalm 51: 'a humbled and contrite heart' as they stand before the Lord that in the secret of their hearts, they may be taught God’s wisdom. Finally, 'KUHA NA!'

There are people in Southern Philippines who have waited for so long for the ‘real macoy’ to happen since 1976. What they have been getting from the national government and from their regional leaders are crumbs or bits and pieces. They struggle for self-determination, and they get a bogus ‘autonomy’. They are given an autonomous government and a promise of reconstruction yet they get neither autonomy nor livelihood and much less the promised ‘reconstruction’ post conflict.

The people’s patience is, often, put to test by the seeming super slow movements both in terms of autonomy and prosperity in the Southern Philippines. The only consolation they hear is an old and overused Spanish adage that says: ‘la ciencia de la paz es la ciencia de paciencia.’ But how long can their patience hold?

During the debates over the synchronization of the ARMM Elections to the second Monday of May 2013, the things said in secret came out in the open. The ‘ARMM is a failed experiment.’ The rationale behind the move of postponement is the determination of the PNoy Government to effect genuine reforms in the ARMM.

The desire is very laudable. But the real question is whether there is the political will and enough ‘wherewithal’ to do the desired reforms in such a short time (barely 22 months). Without the singular determination of the Presidency and the much-needed ‘cash’, kiss the reforms good bye!

I am often asked if the reforms in the ARMM are possible within such a short period of time. My answer is of course guarded. But I believe that reform and development in the ARMM are possible provided that the national and regional leadership shall have the three necessary ingredients to do the reforms. Without these three ingredients, you may as well not begin all since any attempt at reform would simply lead to more frustrations.

The first ingredient is to undertake a total overhaul of the ARMM bureaucracy. There is a new of new faces at the helm of the ARMM bureaucracy. Rightly or wrongly, there is a wide spread malaise in the bureaucracy. People do not trust the familiar names and faces of the leaders and the bureaucracy anymore. The years of corruption, entitlements and ineptness in the system have all have contributed to the prevailing malaise and public perception of the ARMM. The single prayer of so many people is NOT to see re-cycled faces in the OICs.

The present caretakers in the ARMM have been working hard to refurbish the ARMM image following the now infamous Maguindanao Massacre that has become the powerful symbol to all and sundry what has gone wrong in the ARMM for years. They new administrators are caught in the bureaucratic mill and with no wherewithal; the efforts have not gone far enough before the debates on synchronization of elections have overtaken them.

This fact actually leads to the second ingredient necessary for real reform in the ARMM. Any radical reform in the ARMM can only be done in what is often talked about in the post conflict reconstruction as ‘the state of exception’. The reform in the ARMM including the appointments of OICs cannot be subjected to the regular bureaucratic mill. The mill is not only characterized by so many land mines aka political compromises but it also grinds slow!

The other proposal to subject the OICs to endless consultations and the reforms to endless meetings is also another formula for disaster. What is most needed this time is the sterling character of the OICs and that they also enjoy the full trust of the President. They are accountable to the President during this time of state of exception and NOT to the people of the ARMM. This time, the operative word is ‘TRUST” the President!

The third ingredient is the much-needed wherewithal. Genuine Reform like post conflict reconstruction is NEVER done piece meal. The needed reform and development in the ARMM has to be wholesale. This means the Presidency is willing to stake a good portion of the President’s Social Fund and he is willing to give budgetary allocation for the required development infrastructures and access to basic services.

All can do the talking when it comes to reforms. But the real test of the talk is the willingness of the national leadership to walk the talk in concrete terms of CASH or wherewithal. This time, what is needed is not merely to walk the talk but also to walk the walk meaning the Presidency has to take the personal initiative to accompany the regional OICs in walking the walk!

Reforming the ARMM sounds and looks quixotic! But it is possible if the national leadership will be bold enough to undertake the three ingredients for real reforms in the ARMM. The new law gives this rare opportunity to the President. This rare opportunity comes only under extraordinary times. I can only hope and pray that the President would never be lacking in courage to bring to completion what he has started by postponing the ARMM Elections.

In a similar vein, the President and his appointed OICs would need all the cooperation to make true this quixotic venture. For myself, I commit to do my utmost to match the President’s boldness in walking his talk to make that dream a reality in the coming months!

Cotabato City and the neighboring municipalities are under a state of calamity. Flooded rivers brought downstream tons of water hyacinth or water lilies that clogged the Rio Grande de Mindanao. Tens of kilometers of water hyacinths blocked the Cotabato Delta River spilling the flooded water on both banks submerging almost 36 barangays of Cotabato City and some areas in the municipality of Sultan Kudarat.

For almost a week now, the people are practically living in a ‘water world’ wading through a waist deep of water. Classes are suspended and people scamper to higher grounds.

The flooding in Central Mindanao has given rise to urgent calls to revisit and change policies and behavior that directly impact the fragile eco-system.

First, by its very name, Maguindanao, the place tells a story of water inundation every time the Rio Grande de Mindanao is swollen. This is an annual occurrence as far back as memory remembers.

Second is the fact that Cotabato Delta and all low-lying areas of Cotabato City and the neighboring municipalities are actually part of the great Cotabato Marsh consisting of three major subdivisions.

The upper Cotabato that constitutes an upper arc covering roughly the municipalities of Pikit, Pagalungan, Datu Montawal, Kabacan, Matalam, M'lang, Tulunan, Datu Paglas, Datu Paglat, Sultan sa Barongis, Rajah Buayan, Mamasapano, Datu Salibo and Datu Piang. This upper arc is also known as the Liguasan Marsh.

The middle Cotabato has its own body of water that borders the municipalities of Pigcauayan, Libungan, Midsayap, Upper Kabuntalan and Talayan. This middle portion is officially known as the Libungan Marsh.

The lower Cotabato covers the areas of Lower Kabuntalan, Dinaig, Sultan Kudarat and Cotabato City. It is officially known as the Ebpanan Marsh.

The three said marshes are the natural catchment for flooded waters when the major Cotabato rivers are swollen due to heavy rains. These rivers are (1) Rio Grande de Mindanao or Pulangi; (2) the Kabacan-Marbel River; (3) the Kabulnan River; (4) Allah River; and (5) Libungan River. From Datu Piang, all these great rivers form one mighty Pulangi which forks again at the upper Cotabato City into two rivers (Mindanao River and Tamontaka River) and empty their water to Illana Bay.

Once upon a time, before the ‘honorable’ men and women of the empire province of Cotabato altered their eco-system, the yearly water inundation was a normal occurrence and formed part of the cultures of the people of the flooded plains (Maguindanao).

The three Cotabato Marshes cover about 288,000 hectares. By design, they serve as natural filters and flood control for the plains of Cotabato. But due to heavy siltation and proliferation of water hyacinths, these three marshes no longer serve their natural ecological functions.

Things began to change when the forests of Cotabato were given as logging concessions to big families. They wantonly cut trees without provisions for reforestation - a complete violation of existing laws. With the logging concessionaires came the settlers and they gave the coup de grace to the rape of remaining forests by cutting the secondary growth for agriculture.

In time, the soil erosion becomes a phenomenon every heavy downpour. People suddenly wake up to behold the heavy siltation of all the major rivers. Since they all empty their waters into the Illana Bay, it, inevitably, condemns the Bucana lost, because of heavy siltation.

The second man-made major catastrophe was the so-called rechanneling of the combined water of Pulangi and Kabacan River to the Liguasan Marsh. The man-made channel in Tungol redirected the natural water flow of these two mighty rivers.

By redirecting the river to the Liguasan Marsh, the Liguasan ‘returns’ all the flooded waters to Mindanao River plus water hyacinths and the thick marsh grasses. The Liguasan will never be lacking of water hyacinths and grasses. There are thousands of cubic tons of these waiting to be washed away into the Mindanao River. And there is NO way of stopping them.

The Cotabato City flood has only short-term solutions that constitute only immediate relief from the menace of water hyacinths. The long-term solution would require not only a change of policies and behavior but also a gargantuan budget that the country cannot afford in the next 15 or 20 years.

It is for this reason that I passionately believe that the millions spent (more than P52 million) for the STUDY of the Cotabato River System to give a long and permanent solution to the Cotabato flooding is not only ill-advised but an utter waste of money.

The study, when completed, would end up in our collection of rare books that would remain in our bookshelves. The Task Force Mindanao River Basin has become the biggest joke in southern Philippines, particularly Central Mindanao.

The most that can be done is to give immediate relief to the flood victims by making sure that the water hyacinth and the marsh grass do not clog the Delta River and the Tamontaka River. This means a regular watch of these two rivers both via massive man-labor and water master to clear the clogging of the Delta River.

By setting our eyes on long-term solutions to the flooding of Cotabato City and its environs, we go for the impossible dreams and the unreachable stars.

With Congress passing the law cancelling the August 08, 2011 ARMM elections, the President of the Republic is given a very rare opportunity to appoint all the officialdom of the ARMM. This is a very rare occurrence in a society that has adopted a democratic process.

In recent memory, we have only two occasions. The first one is the takeover of absolute power by Ferdinand Marcos following the declaration of Martial Law in 1972. And the second one is during the early years under the Freedom Constitution following Cory Aquino’s victory during the EDSA Revolution in 1986.

By September 30, 2011, the President’s ‘elect’ will assume powers in the entire bureaucracy of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao. The President will appoint OICs from Governor, Vice Governor and Members of the Regional Legislative Assembly to all Cabinet Secretaries, Bureau Heads/Chief to all senior officials of the ARMM.

The President has articulated ad nauseam the need to reform the ARMM. The President’s men and women have never been lacking in echoing the same thing. It has almost become a mantra of PNoy’s administration that the ARMM in these past 21 years have been a ‘failed experiment’ in Moro self-governance.

The ARMM (1989) and its predecessor structures (1978) have been in place for nearly three decades. Sad to note, the Autonomous Structures have not enhanced real autonomy of the people and the region. On the contrary, the autonomous region has become more impoverished and dependent on the national government.

We can only hope and pray that the President will be rightly guided in his choice of people to undertake his desired reforms in the ARMM. The new mantra is ‘trust the President’!

The time has come when the President of the Republic of the Republic is given the unique privileged to appoint OICs who would manage the ARMM not only for 22 months. With the adoption by the House of the Senate version of the law, the OICs are not barred to run for elections in May 2013.

It is often said that with this rare opportunity is also attached an awesome responsibility. The President has spearheaded the cancellation of the ARMM Elections and he has assumed the power to appoint all officials of the ARMM. No doubt, he is NOW responsible for the rise or the final collapse of the ARMM. From this day forward, there will be no passing the buck for whatever happens in the ARMM. ARMM’s rise and fall is now intimately tied to PNoy’s.


To begin with, there is the urgent need to tell the people that the ARMM offices are NOT entitlements but sacred trust. This requires a new work ethics based on commitment to certain values and beliefs, specifically the empowerment and well-being of their constituencies.

There are aspects in the ARMM that PNoy’s chosen men and women need to face squarely as they draw the road map for ARMM Reform. The first one is to address the general malaise that ails the entire ARMM bureaucracy. Rightly or wrongly, people no longer trust the people and the institutions in the ARMM. The new stewards need to restore people’s trust and confidence in regional bureaucracy that has become, for three decades, personal entitlements.

The second one is to institute a work ethics based on commitment and devotion to the cause of autonomy and people empowerment. Reporting to office or going for a trip is not based on moods. Office hours are instituted to serve the convenience of the constituents who seek the attention and service of the office holders.

The third one is to re-energize and perhaps re-invent the delivery of basic services to the ARMM constituents, specifically in health, in basic education, agriculture and in other rural infrastructures.

No doubt, these three abovementioned aspects need to be undergirded by actual developments on the ground. But without restoring people’s trust in the officials and ARMM bureaucracy, all attempts at reforms would be vain!

The people in the ARMM have long been living in ‘darkness’. Will this rare opportunity of complete overhaul of the ARMM bureaucracy, finally, let the people see a light at the end of that long tunnel called ARMM?

The present debates on the cancellation of the August 8th, 2011 ARMM Elections have touched the very core issue at the heart of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao or ARMM.

The PNoy Administration is so quick in its judgment that the whole ARMM is a ‘failed experiment’. Rightly or wrongly, this ‘appreciation’ of the ARMM has become the basis for the desire to cancel the scheduled ARMM Polls under the guise of synchronization and to appoint Malacañan’s favored ‘anointees’ as OICs during the ‘interim’ period.

Sad to note, the present dispensation with their cheering squad develops a sort of ‘messianic’ complex believing that it can reform the ARMM in 22 months!

There is no doubt that the ARMM needs urgent reforms. But doing reform from the top (Malacañan), both in the short and long terms, is NOT sustainable.

Any ‘instant reforms’ become not only ‘suspects’ but also ‘whimsical’ given the complexity of the ARMM and the cultures involved therein coupled by two Moro liberation fronts (MNLF and MILF), . There are no ready ‘fixes’ for the ARMM nor an ‘instant’ solution to what presently ails the ARMM.

To begin with, the real reform in the ARMM must begin with the cessation of the national government’s direct interferences in their local affairs including the manner of choosing their leaders. In fact, the Organic Act (both RA 6734 and its successor RA 9054) has intentionally set apart the ARMM Elections (NOT synchronize with national elections) to give power to the Regional Assembly to legislate its own ways of choosing leaders according to their customs so long as it will NOT affect the national elections.

I thought that during the debates, Sen. Joker Arroyo’s wisdom in the Senate would have prevailed over the national’s, particularly Malacañan, appreciation of the ARMM by a simple understanding that ‘AUTONOMY means Malacañan keep off.’

In praxis, the ARMM is a real misnomer or better still it is an ‘oxymoron’. A more appropriate name for the region is CRMM or Controlled Region in Muslim Mindanao. The region that is given a Constitutional mandated autonomy and its own Basic Law or the Organic Act has turned out to be less autonomous and definitely much under budgeted region than any regions in the Republic except for the Cordillera Administrative Region or the CAR.

The first and paramount reform in the ARMM is for the National Government and Malacañan to stop thinking and believing that the ARMM is its own ‘attached’ agency. Malacañan continues to tinker with the ARMM, particularly in the electoral processes.

The phenomenon of captive constituency in the ARMM would never happen without the direct wish and order from the National Government, particularly Malacañan, including the COMELEC and the security sectors (AFP and the PNP).

A good start for a real reform is for Malacañan to ORDER free and clean elections in the ARMM and level the playing fields in the forthcoming electoral contest. All agencies of government particularly the COMELEC and the security sectors guarantee a level playing field by way of distancing themselves from candidates and political parties.

A controlled voting exercise, first and foremost, requires a controlled COMELEC and security sectors (AFP and PNP). Mayors and Governors control the voting ‘habits’ in their respective constituency, simply because the COMELEC and the security sector allow it to be so!

The second reform is the budgetary allocation for the ARMM. While corruption is always the cited reason for lack of development, the truth of the matter is that there is hardly any budget allocation for development and infrastructures in the ARMM. The lion’s share in the ARMM budget goes to PS or personal services (67%). The second item in the budget is the Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses or MOOE (20%). The third item is capital outlay (13 %) that includes among others development, infrastructure, investment funding, and payments and/or counterparts to all foreign assisted projects (WB- ARMM Social Fund, JBIC, IBRD).

By any configuration, a 67% PS budget tells a heavy bureaucracy. This fat bureaucracy is, in fact, the prime source of corruption through ‘ghost’ employees, ‘ghost’ teachers and ‘ghost’ other contractual workers.

The total budget for the ARMM in 2011 is P 11, 179, 638.000 or the equivalent of 0.67% of the national budget. Granted the argument that there is massive corruption in the ARMM government, we are actually speaking only of 0.67% of the national budget! The corruption in the ARMM would NOT even make a dent in the corruption in the national government.

Definitely, there is no real autonomy when Malacañan remains the ‘suzerain’ that has direct control not only over the ARMM budget but also over the behavior of all its ‘vassals’ in the said areas.

A good start at reform is NOT to cancel the remaining vestige of democracy in the place albeit how flawed it is. If the PNoy Presidency is true to its avowed ‘MATUWID NA DAAN’, he can begin by leveling the playing field in the forthcoming elections and for the first time NOT to anoint anyone and allow the people to vote their choices freely and with no fear!

By midnight of the 25th of May 2011 (the deadline for filing the Certificates of Candidacy for the August 8th, 2011 ARMM Elections), there are 14 people who filed their COCs for ARMM Governor and 16 for the position of Vice Governor. The prominent personalities competing for the Governorship and Vice Governorship are the PDP-Laban Tandem composed of Pax Mangudadatu and Tingting Cojuangco. The other equally prominent tandem is the still shaping LP-AKBAYAN and AMIN Tandem of Mujib Hataman and Hookie Adiong.

Sunday, the 22nd of May, the original deadline for filing the COCs saw Pax Mangudadatu’s long and festive motorcade from Isulan to Cotabato City passing through important Maguindanao towns along the way. In the afternoon of the said date, the PDP-Laban team – Pax and Tingting – with all their ‘Technicolor and amazing’ followers and admirers trooped to the ARMM COMELEC Office creating a festive event that was tantamount to a public declaration that the ARMM Elections will take place as scheduled on August 8th, 2011.

COMELEC responded favorably to the request of extending the filing of COCs to midnight of the 25th of May. By then other contenders came to the scene though subdued, because there seems to be NO official party endorsement. The PNoy Administration, though preparing for an election mode, is still hoping for a postponement of the said elections to May 13th, 2013.

The names in the rosters of candidates by midnight of the 24th reveal, though no official endorsement, that Mujib Hataman and Hookie Adiong would be the LP-AKBAYAN-AMIN Tandem. This is also the buzz in the grapevine as the temperature of the ARMM election fever continues to rise.

Many are beginning to surmise if the ARMM August 2011 Election will be a reprise of the May 2010 electoral battle between Jojo Binay of the PDP-Laban and Mar Roxas of LP-AKBAYAN. In the May 2010 Elections, the winning team in the ARMM was NoyBi or Noynoy and Binay.

The whole PDP-Laban with the Vice President Jojo Binay and former Senator Nene Pimentel are all out in their endorsement and support for the Pax and Tingting tandem.

There are few civil society organizations that question the candidacy of Tingting Cojuangco on the basis of her residency and her religion. Tingting directly responded to the objections. First, she said that she is a resident of Awang, Datu Odin Sinsuat Municipality and she has satisfied the residency requirement set by law. Moreover, her work, advocacy and passion for the ARMM since 1986 more than qualify her to speak and represent the ARMM in a Vice Governor capacity.

On the second objection that she is not a Muslim, the simple answer is the fact that the law does NOT make any religious or ethnic qualifications for the post of elective and appointive positions in the ARMM. Though the ARMM is Muslim dominated, there are Indigenous Peoples and Christians who reside in the five provinces and one city that constitute the ARMM. Though they are minority constituents of the ARMM, they have all the rights and privileges to contest any position in any election in a democratic society.

The ARMM as a region is governed by clan and family politics. Rightly or wrongly, the clans and families are linked to their specific ancestral domain in a sort of ‘fiefdom’. With the imminent ARMM elections, the whole region has become a formidable beehive as families and clans have begun to meet and decide on the formation of alliances.

In the ARMM, it is neither the civil society nor the liberation fronts that decide the outcome of elections. Prominent families and clans hold sway over the people and elections in their respective domains. These are the leaders both by blood (the ruling houses) and elections (the LGUs).

By tradition, the administration candidates win in the ARMM Elections. The simple logic is the fact that all resources of the national government, including the security sectors and COMELEC itself, are placed into the hands of the anointed candidates by the President of the Republic.

The only exception is the May 2010 elections when, for the first time, the opposition won the elections. This is explained by the simple fact that there was then a power vacuum in the ARMM. The second explanation was the clear indicator then that it would be Noynoy victory so the clans and families would NOT displease the would be paramount Lord along the Pasig River.

It is interesting to observe that the Senate deliberation on the postponement of the ARMM elections has been ‘mooted’ by the election fever. Though the Senate still has power to comply with the House to postpone the said elections, the whole issue is now seen as water under the bridge. All sundry within the ARMM with few exceptions are already in the elections mode. Why should the national government think otherwise…? The Senate might as well ‘archive’ the Drilon Bill and move on to more pressing legislative agenda.

The debate is heating up on the issue of postponement of the ARMM Elections due on the 8th of August 2011. The ball is now in the Senate and the people from both sides of the debate eagerly await the Senate verdict.

People who oppose postponement hope that the Senate would exercise more independence and wisdom in deciding on the issue that involves not only ARMM elections but also the very heart of autonomy and self-rule which in local parlance means ‘Malacañang, keep off’. The position lies on the principle of democracy and self-rule. The RA 9054 or the Organic Act or the Basic Law of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao guarantees self-rule including the manner of choosing their leaders so long that it would not affect national elections.

The Organic Act is not a simple piece of legislation. It was ratified by the people that now constitute the ARMM. Any amendment of the Organic Act has to be enacted by Congress with a 2/3 majority with both houses voting separately and the final arbiter for the said amendment being the ARMM voters who would ratify/reject the proposed amendments in a plebiscite called for the purpose.

On the other hand, the national government believes that there is an urgent need for reforms in the ARMM. To effect the said reforms, the government is proposing a cancellation of the August 8th, 2011 ARMM Elections and the president to appoint OICs who would initiate the ‘desired’ reforms in the ARMM.

There are actually barely 22 months between 30th September 2011 and May 13th, 2013 for the appointed OICs to set in the much needed reforms in the ARMM.

The debates between the two camps have been going on peacefully albeit some arm twisting of the LGUs. But on the main, I thought it is a real exercise of democracy as people express their views and takes on the holding of the August 8th ARMM Elections or postponing the same to May 13th, 2013.

I have learned to respect the pro postponement position and the reason for such advocacy notwithstanding my personal opposition to said idea.

I believe that the ARMM is in need of reforms. But I believe in a long and sustainable reform and NOT on an instant reforms to be accomplished in 22 months. To begin with, the reforms that the proponents of postponement speak of are rather ambiguous and generic. Coupled by a lack of concrete people that they can identify to effect such reforms, I thought the whole project amounts to romanticism, to say the least.

I thought that the democratic debates on the issue will provide the Senators for a conscience vote on the following issues:

First is the rule of law involving the treatment of RA 9054;

Second is the wisdom of the senators in dealing with self-rule or self-determination as guaranteed by RA 9054; and

Third is the very issue of doing away with elections – its morality in a democratic process albeit flawed.

Then comes the speculation on possible lawlessness in the ARMM that would warrant the postponement of ARMM Elections as scheduled.

I believe that the pro postponement people including government have the moral stature not to use instances of kidnapping like what occurred recently in North Upi to justify postponement. The prospect of widespread lawlessness in the ARMM is highly speculative and it has NO basis in fact. Kidnapping and terrorism form a separate and parallel tract. The Security Sector, LGUs and CSO should address the said issues apart from the issue of ARMM Elections.

I believe that government will abide by the Senate votes. And I am sure that government would defend the legality of any such law if it is questioned in the Supreme Court. Ultimately, the government would go by the decision of the Supreme Court on the issue.

This week, the Senate would debate the merit of the issue. Our senators, hopefully, would NOT give in to pressures but they should weigh the following:

1. What the Organic Law (RA 9054) says about elections and whether the said law gives continuous discretion to Congress to hold, cancel or postpone the ARMM Elections by simply passing an ordinary legislation; and

2. Congress cancel/ postpone elections and authorize the president to appoint OICs for 22 months in the name of reforms.

Let us keep the debates alive as we move towards the Senate votes on the issue. But above all, in the spirit of autonomy already granted to the ARMM, let the people of the ARMM in a referendum called for purpose decide on the issue. I believe and hold that the people of the ARMM should be the final arbiter on the cancellation of the scheduled elections on the 8th of August 2011.

This blog entry is meant to begin the discussion on issues of Islamic State, Islamic rule and the status of non-Muslims. Understanding of the concepts is important as we locate the discourse on governance applicable to Muslims and non-Muslims alike. To begin with, Islamic rule is understood as the complete implementation of the Shari’a on both individuals and society as well. An Islamic State is the one whose affairs are regulated by the Qur’an, Traditions and the Shari’a or Islamic Law.

The articulated position of the many and varied Islamist movements, including al-Qaeda and Jemah Islamiyyah, is the fact that they aim to establish an Islamic government. To them the Islamic rule will ensure that the citizens, Muslims and non-Muslims, enjoy freedom, justice, equality and democracy and their human rights as articulated in the Qur’an, the Traditions and the Shari’a.

In a very specific sense, the non-Muslims who are recognized as ‘people of the book’ (Jews, Christians and Sabaeans) will be treated as “protected people” (ahl-dhimma). But a simple reference to the historical concept of dhimma does not capture the essence of the concept and the praxis of the dhimma through the centuries.

This short brief attempts to open a discourse on the concept of dhimma as understood and practised through the centuries and codified in variety of caliphal decrees and legal texts that contribute to the present corpus on the concept and praxis of dhimma.

The concept of Dhimma evoked the idea of protection/covenant during the time of the prophet. The prophet took upon himself and the Islamic government the “protection” of the people of the book beginning with the Christians of Najran.

The people of the book (ahl - ad - kitab) are the Christians, Jews and Sabaeans. They are guaranteed life, liberty and, in a modified sense, property rights. They are called dhimmi (ahl - dhimma) or protected/covenant people.

In return for the “protection” accorded the people of the book, they have to accomplish the following:

1. Each adult sane male must pay a poll tax (djizya) or ‘head tax’.
2. Non-Muslims must distinguish themselves from believers by dress, not riding on horseback or carrying weapons.
3. Non-Muslims are not allowed to join the Islamic armies but they pay for the maintenance of Islamic armies.
4. They must always have a respectful attitude towards Muslims.
5. They are also under certain legal disabilities with regards to testimony in courts.

On the praxis of Dhimma, one can only go study the praxis during the times of the Caliphs and Sultans from the 7th century to the time of the Ottamans.

The 1st example of Dhimma praxis is handed over by “Umar ibn Khattab, the 2nd Caliph and companion of the prophet after Abu Bakr. The 7th Century Pact of Umar is still extant.

The 7th Century Pact of Umar outlined the following salient provisions:

• They must not build new monasteries, churches, convents, or monks’ cells. No repairs in the existing ones if they fall in ruins.
• There shall be no public manifestation of religion nor convert anyone to it.
• They must have always respect towards the Muslims and seats must be given to the Muslims.
• They shall not mount on horseback, nor they shall gird swords nor bear any kind of arms nor carry them on their persons.
• There shall be no selling of fermented drinks or forbidden food.
• There shall be no public display of crosses.

This pact was further refined in the 8th and 9th centuries as written in al-Shafi ‘ i ’s Kitab al Umm. Briefly the refinements are summarized in the following principles:

1. The non-Muslims shall be subject to the authority of Islam and to no contrary authority.
2. They shall not refuse to carry out any obligation that the Islamic State sees fit to impose upon them by virtue of this authority.
3. If anyone of them speaks improperly of Muhammad. My God bless and save him, the Book of God or of his religion, he forfeits the dhimma (note: This is the basis of the Blasphemy Law of Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan during the time of the Taliban and the Islamic Republic of Iran).

The status of Dhimma for the people of the book in Islamic State had remained the same until the coming of Modern Islamic political thought during the 18th and 19th centuries reform by the so-called “Young Turks” Revolution of 1908. The idea of freedom came into the scene in the 18th and early 19th century Ottoman Empire patently due to European influence.

In the expansion of the French Empire, General Napoleon Bonaparte upon his arrival in Egypt introduced the French understanding of freedom on the basis of French revolution’s slogan “Liberty, Equality and Fraternity”.

All these movements led to the reform edict of 1839, the 1st Ottoman Constitution in 1878 and the Young Turk Revolution of 1908. Freedom took roots during that period. This referred to individual as well as societal political, social, economic and religious freedom.

In the post World War II movements of decolonization, the people of the land, Muslims and non-Muslims, became co-citizens enjoying the same rights and privileges. Nationality became the basis of unity and nationhood. Practically the entire Muslim world adopted this model with few exceptions (Saudi Arabia and Pakistan and later the Islamic Republic of Iran post Khomeini Islamic Revolution).

The dhimma was totally rejected since its concept and praxis put the non-Muslims in inferior positions. As a matter of fact, the Dhimmis were never considered citizens.

The reform and the subsequent struggles for national freedom participated by all citizens (Muslims and non-Muslim alike) gave birth to new and independent nations of citizens on the basis constitution or charter. The Nasser’s experiment on Islamic Socialism, the Ba’ath Movement and the Green Book of Qaddafi in the Middle East and North Africa have been the prominent champions of equality of all citizens regardless of faith, ideology, culture and color.

On May 1st, the 2nd Sunday of Easter, Pope Benedict XVI presides at the Beatification of his predecessor, Karol Józef Wojtyła, also known as John Paul II since his October 1978 election to the papacy.

I was a young priest in the year 1978 when over the radio I heard the election of the first non-Italian pope since the Dutch Pope Adrian VI who died in 1523. I thought that it was a miracle to have a Pope from the area in Eastern Europe that was previously known as behind the ‘Iron Curtain’.

I had my studies in Rome and I had quite a number of Polish schoolmates and friends. My close associations with Poles made me look at the ‘miracle’ with a guarded welcome. The Polish students at the Gregorian University were noted for being ultra conservatives and anti anything that was of ‘red’ or even slightly red color. To make me really fearful, the man was a graduate of the next-door university, the Angelicum – the ‘bastion’ of Thomism in Rome.

Yet, Pope John Paul II also attracted me immensely to the chagrin of my many confreres. Personally, I found the man’s powerful attraction irresistible! He was like a magnet that drew people to him notwithstanding your disagreement with the man and his views.

I was in Rome for three periods of my life and the two periods belonged to the Pontificate of John Paul II. I was drawn to the services he publicly celebrated, particularly Christmas and Holy Week celebrations including the Station of the Cross at the Coliseum. The celebrations were like ‘magic’ and people remained glued to the magnet to the end of the ceremonies. This alone was a miracle, at least, for me that looked at long rituals in Rome with Federico Fellini’s eyes for the ‘hilarious’ the ‘irony’ and the ‘comedy’.

I was on my way home from classes riding in an overcrowded autobus no. 64 towards the Vatican when the news that Pope John Paul II was shot at St. Peter’s Square on the 13th May 1981 (the feast of Our lady of Fatima). The crowd was all over the streets and the sirens were howling no end as the pope was rushed to the hospital.

The people were stunned and speechless and the traffic stopped! I got out and walked towards St. Peter's Square where a good crowd was praying for the safety of the Pope. Then the crowd moved to the Gemelli Hospital where they stood in prayers and vigil while the doctors operated on the Pope. This was his second miracle. I had witnessed it and I believed!

There were many things that I had disagreed passionately with Pope John Paul II. But there were also many things that endeared him to me in a very special way.

The first was his contagious passion for inter-religious dialogue putting emphasis on prayers. In 1986, he invited all religious leaders to come to Assisi and pray for peace and harmony among the followers and leaders of world’s religions. I thought then that this initiative was either ‘Quixotic’ or ‘earthshaking’ since the call to dialogue and prayer was given in the context of growing fissures between and among religions and their followers.

Pope John Paul with no embarrassment and fear visited and prayed at the Western Wall in Jerusalem. His many visits to synagogues and mosques as well as Cathedrals and churches of Orthodox Christianity and other Christian communities not aligned with Rome showed the passion of the man for dialogue, peace and harmony.

Towards the end of his life, he visited Syria in 2001 where he went to the great Ummayyad Mosque and said: "For all the times that Muslims and Christians have offended one another, we need to seek forgiveness from the Almighty and to offer each other forgiveness." His dream was to see leaders of religions lead all believers, especially the youth, towards partnership in building a new humanity and a new world for all. For believers, he said: “peace is NOT an option but a duty”.

Pope John Paul II was also known for his moving social encyclicals (the ‘Catholic Church’s best kept secrets’).

His experiential knowledge of Marxism made him capture the contemporary understanding of human work. The encyclical, ‘Laborem Exercens’ (on Human Work) was issued as early as 1981 on the 90th anniversary of Pope Leo XIII’s Rerum Novarum (the 1st social encyclical that dealt on the relations of labor and capital and the rights of workers).

Then in 1987, he issued yet another social encyclical, Solicitudo Rei Socialis (on Social Concerns celebrating the 20th anniversary of Pope Paul VI’s Populorum Progressio expounding on the social concerns of the Church through SOLIDARITY among peoples and nations in forging new social order).

Then on Labor Day (May 1st) 1991, on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of Rerum Novarum, Pope John Paul II issued his 3rd social encyclical entitled Centesimus Annus (the hundredth year of celebrating labor, the rights of workers and their dignity as sons and daughters of God).

Many times, I was asked in Rome, why I was attracted to Pope John Paul II. I usually gave three answers: first was JP II’s passion for dialogue and peace among leaders of religions and all believers; 2nd, JP II’s appreciation and love for the poor and labor; and 3rd, for JP’s passion for the youth – the FUTURE of humankind.

Pope John Paul II began the World Youth Day in 1984. Though world youth day is celebrated annually, the ‘big bang’ happens every four years. This passion brought him to the Philippines for the second time.

In 1995, the Manila World Youth Day gathered a crowd of over five million people – by far the largest gathering of Christians in the World. The Pope danced, prayed and sang with millions in a festival of faith and love.

To many Filipinos, this singular event is, forever, etched in their minds and memory. In a very special way, for the millions of Filipino devotees, Pope JP II was ‘beatified’ on that day at the Luneta.

The 3rd period of my stay in Rome was when Pope John Paul II was aged and sick (2003-2006). The man was frail, sickly and slow in his speech. It was difficult to follow the man as he continued to keep his schedule. Yet, Pope JP II remained a magnet to the very end. His drawing power and the force of his will were undiminished notwithstanding the many ‘fumblings’ of the body and the tongue. He was, to the end, a towering witness of belief and trust in God.

The long vigils at St. Peter’s Square as the lamp burned in his private apartment while he waited for the final call was a moving testimony (not seen before) of people who believed in the man for who he was and for what he did. And when he breathed his last, the people also breathed with relief as the man of God returned to his maker.

May 1st, 2011, barely six years after his death, the Catholic Church, in a special ceremony at St. Peter’s, publicly acclaims Pope John Paul II BLESSED! MABUHAY!

I have been in turmoil questioning over and over again why the poor continue to suffer, not only of man-made disasters, but also natural ones. Why the poor are often the victims of endless calamities? In the Congo, Sudan, the Middle East, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, India, Latin America and in Japan post earthquakes and tsunami. The list is endless and the anguish and the cry of the poor DO NOT reach God!

In a mysterious way, this season of Holy Week, we are invited to turn to the reality of the CROSS. Isn’t the message of Holy Week, that is, Jesus Crucified is a disclosure that God is NOT the all powerful one that we were taught from catechism to the liturgies that we celebrate the whole year round.

The God revealed to us on the cross is so weak, so helpless and so poor. Except for a few women and a disciple, he was all alone, abandoned and betrayed by his friends. Yes, this is the message of the cross. Our God is not only so poor and weak but also a suffering one and dying on the cross.

This is a shock! Indeed, a real scandal! How can we reconcile this radical message of the cross with the history of power, victory (often military ones) and wealth that have been the dominant traditions from the time that Emperor Constantine claimed that by the sign of the cross he killed his opponents at the Battle of Ponte Milvio?

Purveyors of power and wealth both in the sacred and the profane world have since engaged in a big cover up of the real meaning of the Crucified Lord. Tragically, they go to the extent of crafting new myths and symbol including regal titles, throne complete with Triple Crown, miters and scepter for the Lord who died on the cross.

Jesus, the Son of God, and died in the Cross, revolutionized our understanding of God and upset the religious and political institutions. The Crucified Lord yesterday, today and forever, continues to hound us even today. Our God is NOT the all-powerful one! Much less is He the all TRANSCENDENT One. Definitely, God - revealed by Jesus in the Cross is NOT a sort of a SUPERNATURAL DEITY!

The message of the Crucified Lord tells us a different story line that the world is used to hear. In the mouth of Caiphas, the High Priest, the world’s story line is ‘redemptive violence’, that is, to kill one man to save the nation. The story line of the Crucified Christ is a ‘redemptive suffering’, that is, to offer one’ s life, suffer and die that others may live.

The story line of the cross is a radically different life from what the world tells us. It invites all believers to live a life of simplicity and at the service of the poor and all who were on the fringes of society. These so called unclean, unwanted, unacceptable people, the pagans, the sinners, the prisoners, and the lepers are now the number one in the roll call of Jesus of Golgotha. These were the people through whom God chooses to reveal Himself.

The Jesus of Golgotha was branded as a troublemaker, a blasphemer, a scandal to all. He had the audacity and the RAGE to question the entire teaching of established religion about God, the Temple and the Law. It is a revelation that has rocked the world ever since. This has been the uncomfortable truth that the experts and religious leaders want to deny, cover up and reject.

Yet, to find the deepest experience of God, we have to retrieve the real meaning of the cross that is at the heart of the mission and the following of Jesus.

For centuries, pilgrims, knights and ‘seekers’ have all been looking for the so-called ‘Holy Grail’. I never understood the real meaning of the ‘Holy Grail’ until I was confronted by the cruel killings of OMI Martyrs - Bishop Ben de Jesus in front of the Jolo Cathedral in 1997; Fr. Benjamin Inocencio at the back of the Cathedral in the year 2000; and Fr. Reynaldo Jesus Roda in his mission station in Tabawan, Tawi Tawi in 2008. Then I begin to surmise… Is not the cross the real ‘Holy Grail’ of human and divine encounter?

The martyrs like them give a name to the crucified peoples. Here we speak of the deaths of millions of people, especially of children, in what used to be called Third World countries, in the form of poverty, illnesses, exclusion, wars, massacres, particularly those of children, who are in no way to blame. What is happening is undeniable, but society and government do not even give these victims a name, let alone grant any sort of dignity to these deaths.

My uncle Johnny Mercado quoted in his latest Inquirer Column the Nobel laureate Elie Wiesel who was able to capture this ‘absence of God’ in his book “Night.” At Auschwitz, 14-year-old Wiesel and other Holocaust prisoners watched the Gestapo execute a child.

“‘Where is God?’ someone behind me asked,” Wiesel recalls. And I heard a voice within me, answer: “Here He is, hanging on this gallow.”

Though the cross remains the most powerful expression of the Christian story line. The story ends not on Good Friday! We do know that on the third day, God raises him up. And this Jesus whom they crucified is now RISEN from the dead and has become the LIGHT of the world. By his resurrection, he has conquered death and has restored the fullness of life. EASTER proclaims that ‘Jesus Christ, yesterday and today, the beginning and the end, the Alpha and the Omega, all the time belongs to him and all the ages, to him the glory and power through every age forever. Amen.’

There is the usual assumption that the elimination of economic inequality for certain ethnic group in multi-ethnic societies will, eventually, greatly reduce ethnic tensions. Our neighbors, Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia, give us differing examples of multi-ethnic societies with potential for social conflicts.

The simple economic explanations and cultural explanations, such as religious divide between the groups, do not fully account for the ethnic conflict. Instead, it is necessary to consider the internal relations within the ethnic groups in explaining conflict.

In Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia, the government’s capacity for group mediation in society, especially the way political leaders respond to challenges of politics of inclusion, affects the nature and outcome of conflict. Ethnic peace is, to a significant degree, dependent on government’s responsiveness to the root causes of the social cleavages in the community.

A responsive government creates an environment in which individuals enjoy mobility. People, regardless if they belong to the majority or the minority population, can obtain decent jobs, and they are able to meet their basic educational, medical and housing needs.

The state has an important role in changing discrimination and injustice that the minority population feels and perceives is perpetrated by members of the majority. Wherever the state responsiveness has been weak, segments of the majority group perceive the state as a tool of the few wealthy elite, leading to attempt to scapegoat and attack the minority group.

The countries in the region that have experienced the sharpest drops in growth are those with divided societies and weak institutions for managing conflicts. Conflicts have in recent years, been a major obstacle to development in Asia and the Pacific. Sad to note that the Philippines is now considered a classic case of divided society and weak institution notwithstanding the slogan of a “strong republic” and ‘matuwid na daan’.

In many respect, conflict is the result of poor governance. If all sections of society can participate in decision-making and development, and if institutions for such participation are in place, emergence of violent conflicts can be significantly reduced. It is true that the roots of conflict can be traced back to history during the formation of states, but the way various social and ethnic cleavages are managed, and the way natural resources are divided, spell the difference between manageable conflicts and explosive ones.

We need not re-invent the wheels in dealing with our social cleavages, particularly in Southern Philippines. There are well-established measures that respond well to societal cleavages. Tops on the list is good governance through improved accountability, predictability and transparency. These are key elements that empower the state to resolve differences in ways that are both fair and seen to be fair.

Second are the participatory processes that are important in building social cohesion. Definitely, there is a need to expand participation of all stakeholders not only in peace making but also in projects that promote constructive interfaces between public and private sector.

A classic example of non-participatory peace process is the on-going peace talks both in Southern Philippines and at the national level. While Government and MILF and GRP and NDF continue to debate on reneging commitments as embodied in the consensus points on ancestral domain and the Hague declaration, the stakeholders are practically blank on what are those consensus points.

Third is the urgent need to decentralize decision and policy making in the country. With the National Capital Region as “de facto” the Republic of the Philippines, the other regions are inevitably relegated to the margin. The operative words are “decentralization” and “subsidiarity”. We have a LONG way to go, because NCR and the highly centralized government do NOT surrender their perks and prerogatives without a struggle.

The usual culprits in the “unpeace” in the world are the three “evils” known as poverty, politics of exclusion and injustice – perceived or real. This conclusion has led not a few scholars to believe that economic causes explain the recurrence and even sustainability of internal conflict.

There are two interesting developments that invite a second look at religions. The first is the growing assertiveness of religions and ethnicity in their varying forms and degrees in public life. The second is the fact that the confessional and ethnic characters often describe contemporary conflicts and internal wars.

These two developments give credence to the assertion that “the nature of war determines the nature of peace. This means that the factors which produce and sustain the conflict will directly impact the ensuing peace settlement.” (Markus Kostner, et al. From Civil War to Civil Society, 1997).

The interesting development that directly impacts peace-building is the re-introduction” of religions in the public discourse. Religions are no longer considered a simple variable in the equation that goes up and down depending on the moods and tempers of the protagonists.

Today, there is a growing awareness that religions are considered neither simply a dimension in a conflict or peace building nor merely a mobilizing vehicle for national or ethnic passions. In fact, religious identity permeates groups and provides the well of assumptions that direct decisions and behavior. (Roy Hange. The Curtain of Fire: Religious Identity and Emerging Conflicts at MCC Web Site)

In many ways, this development has unsettled the “dominant” secular perspective dating back from the Renaissance that has relegated religions to the private domain of the citizen and individuals.

It also threatens the “accepted” doctrine of separation of state and religion. In most cases, this doctrine has now become a handicap, because it fails to understand the roles of religions in shaping not only civilizations and cultures but also the political aspirations of people who do profess religions rather than secularism.

In the mid 90s, the seminal work of Prof. Samuel Huntington, the Clash of Civilizations, points to the importance of religions in relationship between and among civilizations. According to this view, religions become crucial, because they form civilizations and they are the defining elements of culture.

His thesis contends that the fundamental source of conflict in the postmodern world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. He believes that the great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural. The new divisions in the world are defined not in terms of their political or economic systems or in terms of their level of economic development but rather in terms of their culture and civilization.

It is no accident that Religion as observed in practically all internal conflicts becomes either the “Bridge” or the “Wall” in social interaction, that is, both in war and peace.

This new focus on religion, particularly in peace making and post conflict reconstruction has led to faith-based peace advocacy, peace making and conflict transformation. It is the recognition that religion notwithstanding the discomfort of the “secular” person remains still the most potent and fascinating form of social capital.

Religions have proved to be the enduring and “stubborn” inheritance of humankind both to believers and secularized modern peoples. Notwithstanding the legacy of the Enlightenment, religion continues to assert its role in the public domain.

Despite the debates regarding religions’ public role, they shall continue to persist and often put in disarray the “secularized construct” of what is or should be in the peace equation. Religions provide the very basis and glue of any peacemaking and peace-building without which all attempts at peace are rendered incomplete or futile or doomed to fail.

Why? The answer is simple. Peacemaking and people’s basic rights are not simple liberal constructs in “Res Publica”. These values, too, constitute the religious and moral grammar of human interaction. And in a pluralistic society enriched by religious understanding (as in Islam and Christianity), we need a kind of religious “literacy”, and not a “bracketing” of religions, to be able to navigate the many metaphors, stories, myths and modes of telling them that dominate the relationships between our differing religious “families”.

Today, we continue to look for a story line, in the absence of which our peacemaking and peace-building, to say the last, will be the state of amorphous incoherence. There is no ready-made story to proffer to peacemakers and peace activists. But the path for our age is perhaps the need for a fresher look at our faith traditions, thereby finding the connect between our many texts and deeds to be able to weave the common story line for peace and unity.

Today, the education mill is being tasked to produce not only skilled manpower for the market place but also leaders in the political, social and industrial / commercial fields. Added to this task is the expectation that institutions of higher education should be producers of research and creative works essential for a nation’s socio-economic and political development.

This task and expectation becomes a big joke when investment in education by both government and private sector do not match the slogan.

Years back, the slogan, "Quality Education”, was painted in almost all roof tops and walls of public schools. But sad to note in roof tops and in walls, the slogan ended.

Good quality education naturally costs more than poor quality education. Quality depends on the quality and quantity of lab equipment, library and qualified and dedicated teachers. Definitely, they do not depend on simply adding two more lousy years in our educational system.

There is a crisis of education, no doubt. But fingers immediately point to the school system without examining the allocation and use of resources that maximize the rate of return to students and teachers.

The previous study on the crisis of the educational system pointed to four ‘key elements’ that had become the basis of the criticism.
- Poor quality
- Mismatch of schooling context and job requirements
- College unemployment and
- Inequality of access.

A lesson from Confucius, hundreds of years ago, would give a good paradigm in looking at education.

Some 400 years ago, Yi Yulgok, one of the most noted scholars – minister of the Choson dynasty made extensive policy recommendations.

He cited the example of Confucius on his visit to the dominion of Wei of which his disciples Jan Chi’u was the ruler. “Ah too many people” remarked the master. “What should be done when the land is populous?” pursued the eager – student ruler. “Make them rich”, replied the master. “What should be done when the people became rich?” pursued the eager-student governor. Well, then educate them, was the final answer.

Education should not only be a vehicle for making people rich, but also the vehicle for upright living.

In a distant past, the educational system was rather strong in character education. Shaping or forming the character of students and pupils was seen as equally important as giving access to wealth and fame.

Along the way, something went wrong in the educational system. Character formation was relegated into something of a private and personal affair. Skills, competence and the sciences took prominence, believing these are the keys to success and wealth.

But wealth and success without character and values simply lead to corruption, abuses and arrogance. In many instances, the pursuit of wealth without character removes the thin line that distinguishes what is wrong from what is moral and upright.

Given these two challenges, our tasks are the following:

1. First, make the students well informed, well equipped and open-minded so that they can cope with the challenge of the market place.
2. Second, form them to become sensitive and responsible citizens and workers who are able to meet the challenge of nation building.
3. Third, make them upright and compassionate human beings that are able to deal with the crisis of moral values.

The above three considerations must be the basis when we embark, again, at tinkering with our Education. Cuidate!