PSNA

Philippine Solidarity Network of Aotearoa

Home

Kapatiran

Links

Contact Us

Archive


Issue Number 24, August 2004

Kapatiran Issue No. 24, August 2004

PEACE TALKS
A Long And Tortuous Road

There has been a civil war between whatever Philippine government has been in power and the New People's Army (NPA) of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) for 35 years. The political wing of the armed struggle is the National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP), a coalition of groups, led by the CPP. Peace talks between the Government and the NDFP have taken place, on and off, for nearly 20 years, dating back to the immediate aftermath of the 1986 overthrow of the dictator, the late Ferdinand Marcos, by People Power 1.

Kapatiran has been published since 1993. In all that time we have made only passing reference to these talks, never devoting an article to them. In this issue, there are references to them in the keynote speech by Joma Sison. Marie Hilao-Enriquez, whom we toured through NZ in October 2004, is the head of KARAPATAN, the main human rights group. We asked it for help in clarifying some of the references to various agreements arising from peace talks, mentioned in the article. The explanation sent to us was so comprehensive that we thought it deserved to be published as an article in its own right. Many thanks to the staff at KARAPATAN, Aya in particular. Ed.

History

The National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP) first entered into peace negotiations with the Corazon Aquino government in 1986. A 60-day ceasefire agreement was signed on November 27, 1986. However, these talks hardly progressed, as the Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP) refused to recognise the integrity of the revolutionary movement and refused to talk about how to address the roots of poverty in the country.

For the GRP, the talks were clearly just about negotiating the terms of surrender of the revolutionary forces. In 1987, the GRP insisted on using its 1987 Constitution as the framework of any political settlement. The so-called substantive agenda it proposed was about "amnesty and rehabilitation" rather than addressing the basic problems of the Filipino people.

According to the NDFP, it decided to leave the negotiating table with the series of events that proved the GRP's insincerity, the height of which was when police and military forces opened fire at unarmed farmers during a rally at Mendiola* on January 22, 1987, that killed 16 and wounded many others. * Mendiola is the name of the bridge outside the Malacanang Palace, a traditional place for rallies, and as close as the Government is prepared to let protesters get to the Presidential Palace. Ed.

The NDFP, however, said it did not close its doors to peace negotiations. After further exploratory talks with the 1986-92 Aquino government and later with the 1992-98 Ramos Administration, the formal round of negotiations began on September 1, 1992 in The Hague, The Netherlands. The NDFP engaged in subsequent rounds of talks in 1995, 1997 and 1998 with the Ramos regime, 1998 and 1999 with the 1998-2001 Joseph Estrada government and March 2001 with the Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo regime.

The negotiations are on again off again, characterised by the arbitrary withdrawal of the GRP. President Fidel Ramos suspended the JASIG (Joint Agreement on Safety and Immunity Guarantees), which resulted to the arrest and detention of certain consultants of the NDFP. The 2001-04 Macapagal-Arroyo government suspended the negotiations following the NPA's admission that in the process of serving the arrest warrant to Cagayan Representative, Rodolfo Aguinaldo, a known henchman of the Marcos dictatorship, the latter was killed because he resisted arrest. It also lobbied with and allowed the US to meddle in the talks by declaring the CPP-NPA-NDF and its political consultant, Professor Jose Maria Sison as terrorists. They had Sison and the CPP/NPA labeled by the US government and the European Union as terrorists. Meanwhile, back-channel talks were also pursued by the Macapagal-Arroyo regime.

Agreements Signed

There were a total of ten joint agreements and joint statements signed from September 1992 until April 2001. Significant among them are as follows:

The Hague Joint Declaration was adopted and separately approved by the two parties to the armed conflict on September 1, 1992. It defined in clear and explicit language the strategic goal of the peace talks as the attainment of a just and lasting peace and not merely the cessation of hostilities. It bound the two negotiating parties to the following framework of the peace process: the holding of the peace negotiations must be in accordance with mutually acceptable principles, including national sovereignty, democracy and social justice and no precondition shall be made to negate the inherent character and purpose of the peace negotiations" (Article 4). It also provides for goodwill and confidence-building measures to be undertaken by both parties to enhance the peace process. It outlined a mandatory process, substantive agenda and sequence in the formal talks, which is fair to both parties, appropriate to the conditions and ultimately beneficial to the Filipino people. The four substantive agenda items are as follows:

1. Human rights and International Humanitarian Law (HR/IHL)
2. Socio-economic reforms
3. Political and constitutional reforms to lay the social basis for genuine and lasting peace, and
4. End of hostilities and disposition of forces, upon implementation of the three prior agreements.

The Joint Agreement of Safety and Immunity Guarantees (JASIG) is the second important agreement entered into by the GRP and the NDFP during the exploratory stage of the talks. It was adopted and signed by the two panels headed by their respective Chairpersons on February 24, 1995 and subsequently approved by the principals - President Fidel Ramos of the GRP and Chairperson Mariano Orosa of the NDFP. It is a binding document effective and enforceable on both parties.

The JASIG is an important procedural agreement that paved the way for the resumption of talks and eventually, the holding of the formal talks. Its primary purposes are "to facilitate the negotiations, create a favourable atmosphere conducive to free discussion and free movement during the peace negotiations, and avert any incident that may jeopardise the peace negotiations". In sum, it seeks "to protect the rights of negotiators, consultants, staffers, security and other personnel who participate in the GRP-NDFP peace negotiations". The JASIG also prohibits forces of either party from undertaking surveillance, harassment, search, arrest, detention, prosecution and interrogation or any other similar punitive action against any duly accredited participant of either side in the peace process. The immunity guarantees shall cover all acts and utterances made in the course of and pursuant to the purposed of the peace negotiations.

The Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law (CARHRIHL) is a landmark agreement obligating the GRP and the NDFP to respect human rights and international humanitarian law. The agreement binds the parties to uphold, defend and promote human rights and to adhere to the principles and standards of international humanitarian law. Particularly, it aims to ensure the rights of civilians as well as of combatants in the armed conflict are respected.

The CARHRIHL contains concrete measures to address specific problem areas, e.g. providing for the indemnification of human rights violations victims during the Marcos dictatorship's 1972-86 martial law and for the repeal of repressive laws and decrees. The agreement also enumerates and affirms the basic rights of the basic sectors. Both parties adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and various United Nations Covenants of human rights as well as International Humanitarian Law (Geneva Conventions and the protocols thereto).

The NDFP and GRP, according to the agreement, assume "separate duties and responsibilities for upholding, protecting and promoting the principles of human rights and international humanitarian law".

Go to top