I urge you to read again my statement above. AT least 3 times. You might undertand better the essence of what I am trying to drive at.

Thank you and more more power to you.

“authorising or encouraging any action which would
dismember or impair, totally or in part, the territorial
integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent
States conducting themselves in compliance with the
principle of equal rights and self-determination of
peoples … and thus possessed of a government
representing the whole people belonging to the territory
without distinction as to race, creed or colour.”

However, this U.N. resolution reiterating the territorial integrity of states is made contingent on the government being representative of the whole people and non-discriminatory.
There is substantial debate as to the scope of “a government
representing the whole people”. Hannun, for example, is for the “limited requirement of non-discrimination only on the grounds of race, creed or colour.” But Buchheit “sees it simply as a component of a larger theory based on the premise that oppression legitimizes secession.”

Other commentators, like Musgrave, interpreted Resolution No.
2625 as implying that “international law permits secession as a legal remedy in certain circumstances”. He also contends that secession is also permissible “by virtue of the ‘oppression theory’ when part of a population suffers gross oppression: in these circumstances secession is permitted primarily to prevent the abuse of human rights.” In Allen Buchanan’s remedial right theory of secession, separation would be
acceptable if there are systematic violations of human rights or unjust annexation of territories.

There are attempts to resolve the conflict between demands for selfdetermination and the principle of the territorial integrity of states. Hannun puts forward the idea of autonomy as a “less-than-sovereign self-determination.” However, Musgrave says: “Some jurists contend that autonomy is not a principle of international law but a matter which falls within the domestic jurisdiction of a state.” He opines that “autonomy within an independent state cannot be part of self determination
for the purposes of international law.”

Essentially, right to self-determination is a right of a people to
choose their political status, and decide on their economic, social and cultural development. That right includes the right of a people who hold the right to self-determination to choose, through democratic and participatory manner, to form their own separate state if that is essential to the expression of their right to self-determination. The right to secede, although not being encouraged, is not prohibited particularly in a situation where the minority suffers systematic violations of human rights and gross oppression.”

(Source: Understanding the Bangsamoro Right to Self-Determination, Prof. Abhoud Syed Lingga)

My thoughts: The 1996 Final Peace Agreement is bound within the constitutional framework and calls for autonomy and is thus a form of “less-than-sovereign self determination”. That is a lesson learned that should not be repeated.

The MOA-AD and its eventual Final Comprehensive Compact would use the gains of the 1996 FPA as springboard to situate self-determination somewhere less than total independence (to accommodate Philippine sovereignty) but more than full autonomy (to more accurately accommodate the Bangsamoro issue), as was being negotiated by the GRP-MILF Peace Panels before their unjust axing. The interpretation of the MOA-AD, therefore, should have been through international laws, not through the Constitution.

My point: The Bangsamoro homeland and its people became part of the Philippines because, bottom-line, it and its people were added to the Philippines without “public consultation”, without consent and against the people’s will (Dansalan Declaration, Zamboanga Declaration, etc.). All this despite the fact that it is older than the Malolos Republic of Aguinaldo. Much much older.

Imagine how the Filipinos would react if China would just up and declare to the whole world by virtue of some piece of document signed by several gray haired old men that the Philippines is part of its national territory and all Filipinos are Chinese citizens. All this without your knowledge, your consent, and against your will.

That is the precise point and issue the Bangsamoro people are asserting for. The Bangsamoro Homeland and the Bangsamoro people should never have been part of the Philippines in the very first place.

That exact point is what its two fronts, the MILF and MNLF, have been working for by way of armed struggle (because the government and politicians for years never gave it much respect and attention through the decades). The two fronts have been mandated by the Bangsamoro people to protect and uphold its right to self determination. That is what the Moro civil society sector, most of them at least, is working for by way of open, civil and nonviolent means.

Napaka insensitive naman ng systema ng Philippine government kung basta lang nang angkin ng lupaing hindi pala sa kanya. At walang paalam pa!

Authentic dialogues kuno. That’s a century too late! E bakit pa sinusunod pa ito ng mga mamamayan nya kung hindi rin nila plano baguhin ang bulok na systema ng gobyerno na yan? Bakit ang Bangsamoro ang pinag iinitan samantalang hindi sya ang naggulo in the first place? Kahit sino pang presidente ang nakaupo jan, the oppressive and suppressive system that incidentally is anti-moro/ anti-minority or what have you, will remain. Kaya nga ayaw na ng Moro na direct na pinamamahalaan ng unitarian Philippine Republic na yan, eh. At huwag nyo sabihing may ARMM. Its a structure that has not functioned according to the 1996 Final Peace Agreement since it began operations. Ginawang stamp pad lng ng Imperial Manila ang ARMM. Kung matindi ba naman ang nadeliver ng ARMM on RSD, Moro justice, Shari’ah Law and Islamic way of life, eh di wala na sanang MILF. Common sense lang yan.

And the phrase, “Andyan na yan, e. Hayaan mo na.” simply cannot do. It can never do.

The bangsa moro people is in grave peril, there is violence in the streets, hungers in the region-wide and poverty is everywhere

The moro region is far behind, in education, development and even in livelihood, because of massive corruption, thievery in the government, fragmentation of leaders, feuds in every barangay and lack of national representation’

Unless the moro do something, the ship of the moro will sink.

let us railroad the battle from ground to education, because knowledge is powerful than any killing weapons, Muhammad (pbuh) used knowledge in propagating islam, although there are battles between him and the desbelivers of islam, it is not the swords that convinced the non-muslims to embraced islam,
it was the kowledge of muhammad (pbuh) through dialogue that let the disbelievers to join the group of the prophet muhammad.

Let us try to be more united and support the brilliant moro
like the person of Atty. CB ( meaning crush ng bayan) adel tamano as our representative in nation building.

I am not a Filpino by choice. I am a Moro. By blood. By lineage. Not by a piece of paper following the dictates of a Republic’s constitution that is a mere baby compared to our “bangsa”. And I am damn proud to be a Moro.

More power to you.

Assalamu alaykum!

I appreciate your passionate blog about our fellow moros fighting for independence. And take note that I am not against this. However, as long as Mindanao is still known as one of the 3 major islands of the Philippines, technically, we are still Filipinos. Let’s not become antagonists againsts those who don’t share our vision. Most of the time, diplomacy is key in getting what you want.

Think about it – what nationality is written on your birth certificate?

Thanks.

Viva la Estado Nacional del Moroanos.!