"ARMM GOVERNOR CLARIFIES USE OF P27B BANGSAMORO BLOCK FUND"

Friday, Jun 26 2015 | Written by Gandhi Kinjiyo

Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) Governor Mujiv Hataman on Wednesday clarified the claim made by Party-list Representative Gary Alejano that the proposed P27 billion Bangsamoro block grant might be used by the Moro Islamic Liberation Front for procuring firearms and weapons.

“The funds will go to the operation and programs of the new Bangsamoro government,” Hataman pointed out. He explained it is similar to the funds received by the ARMM at present.

The governor added that the block grant will help the proposed new Bangsamoro political entity in providing better public service to the people in the region.

Hataman described Alejano’s apprehension as deceptive and he urged those in the government to be mindful of their statements to the public.

The ARMM is one of the impoverished areas in the country. The region’s sluggish development can be attributed the decades of armed conflicts.

Once the proposed Bangsamoro Basic Law will be passed by Congress and approved through a plebiscite, the ARMM will be deemed abolished and the new Bangsamoro regional government will take over.

Speech of His Excellency Benigno S. Aquino III President of the Philippines At the ceremonial turnover of weapons and decommissioning of the MILF combatants

[Translation of the speech delivered at Sultan Kudarat, Maguindanao, on June 16, 2015]

Let me begin by sharing a few things I have been reflecting on over the past few years.

Back when I was younger, when violence was beginning to spread throughout this region, could it not be said that conflict was caused by a few people, often Christians, who took advantage of our countrymen here in Mindanao? The opportunists saw that those tilling the land were uneducated, which allowed them to have the lands titled under their own names. This was what prompted our Moro brothers to fight for what was justly theirs. My question: If abuse of the law was the root of the problem, is it not appropriate that the solution be a law that recognizes the rights and the culture of our Muslim brothers and sisters? It would have been more appropriate if the government’s response to our countrymen’s plea back then had been something akin to the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act, which we now have.

We know that this is not what transpired. The government sent in units from the Philippine Constabulary. When the tensions rose and the situation could not be managed further, they sent the Armed Forces. The result: Instead of achieving peace, the situation became even more complicated.

In addition: If you had been in the position of those whose lands were stolen from them back then, wouldn’t you have been discouraged when, after seeking recourse with all authorities, you were told that “Nothing can be done?” Think about it: Because of the disagreements on agrarian issues, which led to injustice, they were forced to bring matters into their own hands, and private armed groups became a growing presence.

My question is: If you were oppressed so much that you decided to abandon, and even go against, the system—because you could no longer believe in it, and because the support of the State was inadequate—would you have responded any differently? After decades of armed conflict, no less than our Armed Forces has stated: The solution here in Muslim Mindanao will not come solely from the AFP; what we need is a whole-of-government approach. We need legitimate responses to legitimate grievances; we need to help our brothers and sisters in the margins to achieve true justice.

When this became clear to me, I moved on to a new question. If the wounds caused by firefights and by vengeance had grown too deep, how could we foster trust? With due respect to Undersecretary Manny Bautista, I will use his family as an example. His father, General Teodulfo Bautista, was invited to Sulu for a dialogue for peace. But those who had invited him did not want peace and instead sought conflict. These were the kinds of incidents that worsened the suffering brought about by war for many Filipinos, which is why one cannot simply hope that trust will simply grow between both sides.

In such a situation, how will we reach an agreement acceptable to all when the negotiators themselves do not trust each other? I was even of the notion that a true dialogue would only be possible after multiple generations. In fact, one of the proposals was to have an exchange of students. There would be students from Mindanao who will study in Luzon and Visayas; and there would be students from Luzon and Visayas who would study in Mindanao. In this manner, the new generation could establish stronger relations, and when they hold the reins of power, they can speak to each other as friends, and not as enemies with litanies of grievances against one another. This is a long process, and it is likely that the results will not be witnessed by people my age.

This is why today is truly historic. Years ago, an armed group that had long been fighting with government laying down its arms was a pipe dream. We are not speaking of just one, two, or a dozen weapons. These are some of the highest grade weapons; these are not outmoded units. They are modern firearms. These can cause—and have truly already caused—extreme suffering.

Boss, I must point out: Our Moro brothers and sisters made a commitment, and before us is the concrete proof of their sincerity. Our brothers are voluntarily laying down their arms. They are fully aware of the threats to their own safety brought about by private armed groups, but they are doing this nonetheless; they are telling us: “Brother, this weapon that I used to defend myself, I no longer need it. I wholeheartedly entrust my safety to you. Brother, I lay these weapons down today, because I believe that, like me, you are determined to transform our society and our very lives.” Our brothers and sisters are undertaking this important step, even if the passage of the Bangsamoro Basic Law remains uncertain, and the Bangsamoro Transition Authority is yet to be established.

This is why I cannot say that we are gambling our country’s fate by talking peace with the MILF. Gambling is a matter left to chance, where one has no proof about the certainty of his fortunes. What we are witnessing today, instead, is a solid testament to the unreserved and honest participation of the MILF in our peace talks, and of their preparedness to abandon the path of violence. They are extending their hand to us, inviting us to greater trust and cooperation. It is unfortunate, then, that some of our esteemed lawmakers respond to this invitation by advocating for a halt to the BBL. Instead of asking: “How can I improve the BBL so that it may effectively address the grievances of our countrymen,” it appears they ask, “How can I stop or block the passage of this bill?”

In these moments, I cannot help but think that we are approaching the moment of truth, like in a wedding, or nearing Heart Break Hill of the Boston Marathon. As in a wedding, one is already before the altar, and is with the person one will marry—but is suddenly taken by unfounded suspicion: Will my spouse squeeze the toothpaste tube at the end or in the middle? Will my spouse put down the cover of the toilet seat? What is clear: You truly love the person that you are about to marry, all these speculations are but minor considerations—and yet there are still second thoughts. Like the situation in Heart Break Hill, we are now approaching the fulfillment of our partnership for peace; I ask you: Will we allow ourselves to be preoccupied with thoughts of not completing the marathon? Will we suddenly lose faith, when the finish line is truly within sight?

This is the truth: our brothers and sisters in Bangsamoro are not asking for something unreasonable; what they want—a decent and peaceful life—is what every Filipino desires. We also need to admit that we have had our own shortcomings. It is not written in our religion or laws that we should perpetuate the ills of the past. Today, we are given a new opportunity to right the wrongs, and I ask: Will we walk away now?

What I, as President, can tell you is this: I am personally investing my time and effort for the BBL. I actually had one meeting with members of Congress where, because of our desire to have a true “meeting of the minds” and to resolve any concerns, it took us until the next morning to eventually finish reviewing and scrutinizing the draft BBL. What we want is to truly refine this law.

The example displayed by our brothers on this day has already been written into our history. The same will take place for the response of the vast majority of Filipinos to what they have done. Our only question: If there are ten steps between us, steps we must take to become closer to one another, and they have already taken nine and a half steps—would you still deprive them of that last half-step? If you look at yourself in a mirror, would your conscience not haunt you? If, in obstructing the best solution, you arrive at the point in which your family is affected, would you be able to face them and say, “Sorry, this happened because I kept us from realizing peace”?

To those crafting the law, and to those who will vote, when the time comes, in the plebiscite on the BBL: Remember this day. We who did not do our duty by them, we who put forth the wrong solutions, we who failed to do our utmost to protest and put a stop to the abuses committed against them—are we also going to seize from them the chance to live dignified and peaceful lives? Are we going to cling to baseless fears? Do we want to fall back on solutions that have already failed to rectify the problem, and which instead gave rise to more divisions and deepened the wounds caused by a lack of trust?

Here, I remember the words of the German pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer, who was executed by the Nazis: “First they came for the communists, but I was not a communist so I did not speak out. Then they came for the socialists and the trade-unionists, but I was neither so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew, so I did not speak out. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.” Indeed: When you allow the rights of others to be abused, is it not true that you agree to the perpetuation of this cycle, until the day comes when you yourself may become a victim of it?

My Bosses, let me emphasize: What we once imagined would never happen is already happening today. Our brothers in the MILF have already taken this immense step, and this makes us think: now that they have done this, will they still have difficulty with the remaining steps? I believe that the process will only become easier from this point. Thus, I call on everyone: let us repay the trust they have shown us. Let us strive to reach the point in which we can say: We truly gave them every opportunity to change their lives and to reach their dreams. But I must also say: If you are planning to make it difficult to pass the law, it is as if you have willfully deprived them of what should be theirs—ensuring that they have no opportunity to uplift themselves; guaranteeing that they will never lay down their arms and leave conflict and struggle behind. That is the equivalent of opposing the BBL.

You cannot say that you are for peace, even as you make the passage of the BBL difficult. It is as if you are still not content with making the law pass through the eyes of nine needles, that you will add a tenth and an eleventh; it is as if you have no other goal than to ensure that there is no space for peace. Perhaps I can ask for your help: What can I answer to those who ask me, “Where is the conscience of those who only seem to draw out the process for us to realize peace?”

Hundreds of thousands have been injured and have fallen; the number of those who have lost their homes and whose communities have been destroyed can no longer be counted, because of four decades of conflict. If you will not side with peace, how many more will lose their loved ones? How many more communities will find themselves trapped in the crossfire, lacking security? How many who are already suffering will suffer even more? How long before conflict knocks on your door, and involves even your family?

We cannot deny: We have a debt to our brothers and sisters in the Bangsamoro. Now, we have the chance to right the narrative of suffering together. This is our time. This is what our fallen countrymen fought for. Let us show those who sacrificed their lives, our countrymen, and the entire world: Though we may come from different contexts and hold different beliefs, because we have been brought together by trust and by care for one another, there is no challenge that we cannot surpass as one nation.

Thank you, and good day.

Source: Official Gazette PH

"‘NO MORE TURNOVER OF FIREARMS BY MILF’: FERRER

Hindi available ang buod na ito. Mag-click dito para tingnan ang post.

Today we say to the whole world: if you want peace, prepare for peace."

"Frankly speaking, this decision is one of the most difficult decisions we have made so far in more than four decades of harsh struggle.

Whereas throughout the course of history, we have always armed ourselves in defense of our homeland, people, Islam, but today we have reversed the natural flow of that long narrative. 

We have agreed to undertake this symbolic decommissioning of our weapons and put them beyond use. 

We want to show to the world that the MILF will always comply with obligations set forth in signed peace agreements.

Today we say to the whole world: if you want peace, prepare for peace."

- Speech of Mohagher Iqbal during the turnover of weapons and decommissioning of MILF combtants.
June 16, 2015
Sultan Kudarat, Maguindanao

Salient deletions and amendments on BBL

On Salient Deletions and Amendments

Cong. Rufus B. Rodriguez

Sponsorship Speech (Excerpt)

Mr. Speaker, the Salient Deletions and Amendments to the Original House Bill 4994 to Conform to the Philippine Constitution are as follows:

Under the original provision of 4994, in the Preamble, it has a weak reference to the Constitution by merely stating, “in consonance with the Constitution.” That has been replaced by the Substitute Bill and we have placed the words under the Constitution, these are the words of the Constitution, and it says in the Preamble that the Bangsamoro Government shall be “Within the framework of the Constitution and national sovereignty as well as the national territorial integrity of the Republic of the Philippines.”

In Article I, the law was supposed to be called “Bangsamoro Basic Law.” That has now been changed and “This law shall be known and cited as the ‘Basic Law of the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region.’” This is not a basic law of the Nation of the Moros or the Bangsamoro. This is the basic law of a region, of an autonomous region. So, clearly under Article I we have already made clear that what we have is not just the Bangsamoro. What we have is a Bangsamoro Autonomous Region. It’s a mere region of our country, under one Republic, one flag, and one national government.

Under Section 2, on the name, the previous provision would state, “The name of the political entity under this Basic Law shall be the Bangsamoro.” Period.  This has been changed to state, “The name of the political entity under this Basic Law shall be the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region” to clearly emphasize that they are a region of the sovereignty of the Republic of the Philippines.

Article III has been changed. The title before was “Territory.” It has been changed by the Ad Hoc Committee, Mr. Speaker. To now read, “Article III Geographical Area of the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region.” Because under the Montevideo Convention on what is a state: a state has people, territory, government, and sovereignty. The Bangsamoro has no, no territory of its own. It will have its Bangsamoro geographical area.

On the contiguous territory, this is now the opt-in. Under the opt-in provision it was just clear that “upon petition of the registered voters approved by a majority of qualified votes cast in a plebiscite.” This has been amended to conform to the Constitution. So that the nearby contiguous provinces of Maguindanao, which are North Cotabato and Sultan Kudarat, and Lanao del Sur, the contiguous areas of North Cotabato and Lanao del Norte, including Iligan City, will not worry because we have amended this by stating that, “The inclusion of the local government unit or geographical area in the Bangsamoro shall be effective upon approval by a majority of the votes cast in the plebiscite of the political units directly affected.” And therefore, if the barangay is in a city, for example, the City of Iligan where six barangays are contiguous to Lanao del Sur not only the barangays will vote but the entire City of Iligan, which is 92% Christian so how can they be absorbed, the six barangays, to Lanao del Sur. The same is true in Sultan Kudarat and North Cotabato where if there are barangays are contiguous to Maguindanao, not only will the barangays will vote, but the entire province will vote because a barangay affects a municipality, a municipality affects the province. Because when a barangay is removed with its people and land it will affect the land area of the municipality and its population and it will also affect the entire province and the province will vote and there is no way, there is no chance that the Christian dominated provinces of Sultan Kudarat of 90% Christian and also North Cotabato will vote to join the Bangsamoro.

On General Principles, Mr. Speaker, there is a provision here under Article IV, “The Bangsamoro abides by the principle that the country renounces war as an instrument of national policy, adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land and adheres to the policy of peace, equality, justice, freedom, cooperation, and amity with all nations.” The second paragraph is completely deleted. Because renouncing war, stating that they abide by the generally accepted principles of international law, pertain to the national government of the Republic of the Philippines and no region can also state that they renounce war, that they would be adopting accepted principles of international law, completely deleted because these are characteristics of sovereignty and sovereignty pertains to the Republic of the Philippines.

Also in the Powers of Government, instead of having only nine powers retained by our central government, the national government, we have included “Banking.” Banking which has been given as an exclusive power, banking has been restored back to the national government so that there would be one rule of all banks from those in Manila with offices in the Bangsamoro. Banking is now back as reserved power of the national government. Secondly, we have likewise restored the “Powers of the Ombudsman.” While the BBL previous provision states, the primary disciplining authority for the Bangsamoro officials is the Bangsamoro Government, no more. It is now the Ombudsman that has primary responsibility to investigate Bangsamoro officials because we have restored the powers of the Ombudsman back to the reserved powers of the national government. And we have included also, which was not found in the proposed BBL, this particular statement so that all the powers will be with the national government. And that is why number 11 states, “All other powers not granted to the Bangsamoro Government by this Basic Law are reserved with the national government.”

Mr. Speaker, on Concurrent Powers, the Bangsamoro auditing body shall only now become, not the Bangsamoro Commission on Audit, in capital letters, but the Bangsamoro auditing office shall only be an internal auditing office responsible to have internal audit. But according to Section 2, under the substitute bill, this internal auditing body “shall be without prejudice to the power, authority, and duty of the  Commission on Audit to examine, audit, and settle all accounts pertaining to the revenues and the use of funds and property owned and held in trust by any government instrumentality, including government-owned corporations in the Bangsamoro.”

On the Civil Service, it was stated here, in capital letters, that there “There is hereby created a Bangsamoro Civil Service office.” No more. Under the amendment it is stated that “There is hereby created a Civil Service Office,” just an office, not a Commission, an office “for the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region that shall be under the power, authority, and duty of the national Civil Service Commission.” And on the statement in the old bill that “The Bangsamoro Government shall have primary disciplinary authority over its own officials and employees.” Mr. Speaker, the new substitute bill now provides, “The disciplining authority of the Bangsamoro Government over its own officials and employees is without prejudice to the Constitutional powers, duties, and authority of the Office of the Ombudsman to investigate any act or omission of any public official, employee, office, or agency.” Clearly, we have made the provisions on COA, the provisions on Civil Service, and the provisions on the Ombudsman already conform to the Constitution by making them either regional office and under the national constitutional bodies.

Also, we have added a definition to asymmetrical relation. Because asymmetrical relation has been questioned, that it may be like the associative relationship that was declared unconstitutional by the case of MOA-AD North Cotabato case. That’s why we have added a definition to be clear on what is a symmetrical, asymmetrical relationship. These additional words are quote by your Ad Hoc Committee in the substitute bill, “Asymmetric relationship refers to the relationship between the National Government and the Bangsa Government as an autonomous region wherein the autonomous regions are granted more powers and less intervention from the National Government compared, compared, to other territorial and political subdivisions” like the local government units, provinces, cities, municipalities, and barangays. That’s all there is to it, it has just more powers and lesser intervention than the LGUs.

On the Bangsamoro Government, here is another contentious provision, which we have amended to conform to the Constitution. Under the Bangsamoro Electoral Code, under the old provision it says, “There is hereby created a Bangsamoro Electoral Office that shall perform the functions of the COMELEC.” We have made it clear that in this particular case the Bangsamoro Electoral Office, it now states, under the new substitute bill, “There is hereby created a Bangsamoro Electoral Office which shall be the Regional Office of the Commission on Elections, and which shall perform the functions of the national Commission on Elections in the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region.” So it is now a mere regional office so that the national COMELEC and the COMELEC en banc shall govern even the affairs or political affairs in the autonomous region of the Bangsamoro.

And then because we believe that the third requirement of a state is sovereignty, we have removed Article VIII, all the four Sections on the Wali. The Wali has been deleted. Why? Because under the Section 1 it states, under the old provision, “There shall be a Wali who shall be the titular head of the Bangsamoro. As titular head, the Wali shall take on only ceremonial functions.” There can be no ceremonial leader, there can be no titular leader, for a mere region of our country. Our country where our President is called the head of government and the head of state, only the Presidet shall be the titular head of even of the region, because a region is a mere part of the national government. And so we have removed the Wali to make sure that there are no characteristics of sovereignty. Because these are characteristics of sovereignty. Territory, we have changed territory to Bangsamoro area. Wali, no more titular head. They are a mere region of our country and they remain as such. All the four Sections of the Wali have been deleted by the Ad Hoc Committee.

It is very clear also, that our, that in the case of Basic Rights, there has been a complaint from the indigenous peoples that this bill, the original bill, did not include the Republic Act, the IPRA. This is the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act. Your Committee made sure that all the rights of indigenous peoples shall be protected and recognized because the new version of the bill now states, “The Bangsamoro Government recognizes the rights of the non-Moro indigenous peoples in accordance with the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act” for the first time mentioned to assure our non-Moro indigenous peoples that they will be protected. And we have included more. We have also placed there, comma, “in accordance with the IPRA,” comma, “the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples” UNDRIP is likewise stated so that you will not diminish the Moro, non-Moro indigenous peoples rights. And furthermore, included that “The Bangsamoro Government shall recognize the rights of the non-Moro indigenous peoples” by including its shall always be also in accordance with “the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights.”

Also, Mr. Speaker, we have assured that Christian settlers are protected. They are protected in the lands. In our bill all the lands, occupied, possessed, and titled by the Christian settlers will not be disturbed, will not be taken away from them, and are respected. And that if there is a call for justice because Muslim brothers have been dispossessed, illegally, it will not be, they will not be returned to the Muslims, but there will be a Transitional Justice Commission where those displaced by the Christian settlers will not get back their lands, but they will be paid by the national government and the Bangsamoro to assure there is transitional justice but the Christian settlers are settled in their possession of the lands that they have presently possessed now. And that is why we have included, in the Ad Hoc Committee, this phrase “No person in the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region shall be subjected to any form of discrimination on account of creed, religion, ethnic origin, parentage, or sex.” Meaning, creed, religion, ethnic origin, Christian settlers, Mr. Speaker, are protected under this no discrimination clause. Christian settlers in the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region are very well protected under the no discrimination clause in the Bangsamoro Bill. Also, non-Moro indigenous peoples shall be protected. Those with ethnic origins different from our Muslim brothers or parentage will not be discriminated.

Also, Mr. Speaker, the Bangsamoro Human Rights Commission. Under the old provisions, this Bangsamoro Human Rights Commission shall be independent from the Commission on Human Rights. It was also given prosecutorial powers not even given to the national Commission on Human Rights. Mr. Speaker, your Ad Hoc Committee has changed this. And it now reads, that “The Bangsamoro Human Rights Commission shall be under the jurisdiction and supervision of the Commission on Human Rights in carrying out its mandate.” Likewise, we have removed the prosecutorial powers of the Regional Bangsamoro Human Rights Commission. Again, to make this provison conform to the Constitution.

How about the Public Order and Safety, about the police. Under the old provision, the Bangsamoro Government was given the primary responsibility so they will in control of the Bangsamoro Police because they have primary responsibility. That has been changed, Mr. Speaker. It now reads, under Article X Public Order and Safety,  “The Bangsamoro Government shall have joint responsibility with the National Government over public order.” It is now joint because when they are there, the national government shall likewise have that responsibility. And furthermore, while the old provision, creates a Bangsamoro Police that is created by the Bangsamoro Government, not anymore under the particular ammendment to the bill. Because now, it now reads, “Bangsamoro Police. There is hereby created a Bangsamoro Police which shall be organized, maintained, supervised, and utilized by, and be an integral part of the Philippine National Police.” Clearly, the Bangsamoro Police will be organized, staffed, maintained to be an integral part of the Philippine National Police. And therefore, the police is, the Bangsamoro Police is under the Chief PNP, under the Secretary of Interior and Local Government, and the Bangsamoro Police is under the President of the Republic of the Philippines.

We have likewise, in defense and security, before the statement in the previous law states that “The Central Government may create a Bangsamoro Command” and that has raised a lot of  questions on the Bangsamoro Command that may be separate from the Armed Forces. No more. This has been completely deleted, this Command. A new provision of the bill that you’re going to vote on, “The defense and security of the Bangsamoro shall be the responsibility of the National Government. The National Government may create a unit or units of the Armed Forces for the Bangsamoro, which shall be organized, maintained, and utilized in accordance with national laws.” No more Bangsamoro Command of the Armed Forces. What we’re going to have are unit or units to be established under the Armed Forces of the Philippines. So, the change from command to unit or units of the Armed Forces, which shall all be organized in accordance with our Armed Forces law.

On Fiscal Autonomy. Auditing, Section 2, “All public funds of the Bangsamoro are subject to auditing. For this purpose, a Bangsamoro Commission on Audit,” in capital letters again, stating that there will be a separate Bangsamoro Commission on Audit in capital letters. What is now the new provision again? Auditing, Article V, Fiscal Autonomy,  “There is hereby created an internal auditing body with procedures for accountability over revenues and other funds generated within or by the region from external sources.” An internal auditing body is provided by law, are created for departments, agencies, local government units, even by government agencies. What we have, what we have now is an internal auditing body. And to ensure it is an internal body that shall not be independent, the second sentence provides, Mr. Speaker, “This shall be without prejudice to the power, authority, and duty of the Commission on Audit to examine, audit, and settle all accounts pertaining to the revenues and the use of property in the Bangsamoro.” It is now very clear that there is no separate commission on audit.

Mr. Speaker, in the matter of loans, foreign loans and domestic loans. Before the Bangsamoro, in the original provision, (inaudible) foreign loans directly from foreign institutions and governments. Not anymore. In the new provision, having foreign loans from foreign constitutions and foreign governments is an act of sovereignty. Only the national government can do that. And therefore, it states now, “Subject to acceptable credit worthiness, such loans may be secured from domestic and foreign lending institutions, in accordance with the Constitution” and the Constitution requires approval by the Monetary Board whenever it is a loan of the foreign institutions and foreign governments. Clearly, it cannot go directly to foreign governments. It requires approval by the Monetary Board.  Because now it is written, beyond (inaudible) of duty, the words, “in accordance with the Constitution”

Also in ODA, the Overseas Development Assistance. Before the previous provision, Section 23, provides, “the Bangsamoro Government may avail directly from the Overseas Development ODA Assistance.” And then it says, “The Bangsamoro Parliament may enact legislation governing Overseas Development Assistance.” Now it has been completely amended. (inaudible) “In its efforts to achieve inclusive growth and poverty reduction, through the implementation of priority development projects, the Bangsamoro Government may avail of international assistance in accordance with the Overseas Development Assistance Law,” the national law which requires government to approve any request for foreign Overseas Development Assistance. And the sentence that “The Bangsamoro Parliament may enact legislation governing ODA” is completely deleted, Mr. Speaker.

As to economic agreements, before the Bangsamoro Government may have agreements, economic agreements, with foreign governments, an attribute of sovereignty. That has been deleted and removed. Because now, under economic agreements in the Ad Hoc Committee, “The Bangsamoro may enter into economic agreements and receive benefits and grants derived therefrom subject to the approval of the National Government.” In other words, the national government will get economic agreements and (inaudible) with foreign governments, Mr. Speaker.

And then in natural resources, Mr. Speaker. Before, the Bangsamoro “shall have the authority and power to explore all the natural resources, including rights to inland waters, coastal waters, and renewable and non-renewable resources in the Bangsamoro.” That has been completely amended. Now, Mr. Speaker, the natural resource provision state that “The Bangsamoro shall have authority to control and supervise mines and minerals.” There is an exemption, under the Regalian Doctrine, wherein this would remain with the national government. It says  “except for the strategic minerals such as uranium, petroleum, and other fossil fuels, mineral oils, and all sources of potential energy” remains with the national government under the Regalian Doctrine. So, Section 8 has a provision to ensure that these natural resources shall be completely held by the state, by the national government.

And so, therefore, Section 10 on restoration, development, and utilization of fossil fuels and uranium this is now a section giving this power to the Bangsamoro were completely deleted, all the four provisions, completely deleted. And the Regalian Doctrine prevail and therefore fossil fuel, mineral oil, sources of potential energy, petroleum, uranium remains with the national government in terms of exploration, development, and utilization.

Mr. Speaker, also on plebiscite. On the opt-in provision, once again. We have included two provisions, which were not present before.  There are now two requirements, the co-equal requirements, that are now included in the opt-in provision. First, they must be contiguous. Second, they must be found in the listed provinces and cities of the Tripoli Agreement. What does this mean? If you are not contiguous, you cannot be, by any stretch of imagination, be a part of the Bangsamoro. Zamboanga City, Zamboanga Sibugay, Zamboanga del Sur, Zamboanga del Norte can never be part of the opt-in provision even if they like to be a part. Why? Because they are not contiguous by land. Black’s law dictionary states that contiguity is touching of adjacent land. Oxford dictionary says contiguity is adjacent by border. Webster dictionary states that contiguity is being adjacent by land such that the (inaudible) How can they be contiguous? So, therefore, there is no contiguity. The only the areas that can now be possible (inaudible) is only North Cotabato and Sultan Kudarat. Only. Contiguous to Lanao del Sur is only Bukidnon and Lanao del Norte. But Bukidnon is out because Bukidnon has not been mentioned by the Tripoli Agreement. So, we are talking of only three provinces that its barangay (inaudible). Not Saranggani of our hero Manny Pacquiao. Not General Santos of Vice-Chairman, uhmm, (inaudible) And therefore, Palawan of Congressman Abueg can never be part of the opt-in provision because it has 40 nautical miles away from Sulu, Basilan and Tawi-tawi. (inaudible) North Cotabato, and then, let’s say, Sultan Kudarat, and Lanao del Norte, including Iligan City. Only three provinces. Can they possibly pass? These are provinces, which are Christian dominated of over 90%. If there is a 10% majority, 10% of the voters ask for plebiscite, it will not be the barangays in North Cotabato, Sultan Kudarat, Iligan City or Lanao del Norte that will put the vote for the barangays, which are Muslim dominated, which will decide the Bangsamoro. No. For Iligan City of Vart Belmonte, the six barangays which will have the 10% for the opt-in can never win in the entire City of Iligan, which is more than 90% Christian (inaudible). So with North Cotabato and Sultan Kudarat. (inaudible) It is only this fear, fear of the unknown. As President Roosevelt said, responding to fear with fear itself. And if you are fearful you are included, the law says you will not be included, how can you be included? Mr. Speaker, I think I made that clear. The opt-in provision has been completely changed. (inaudible)

And so Mr. Speaker, these are just some of the amendments…