“We support the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain believing that this is a most viable step towards peace in Mindanao. However, we oppose the malicious use of the Moro People’s legitimate struggle for Self-Determination for this administration’s Charter Change agenda and the opposition’s cashing in on the issue to attack the administration and push for their own political interest,” Rep. Hataman of the Anak Mindanao party list group said.

            Hataman led a no less than 1000 crowd of Muslim and non-Muslim groups in a mass action yesterday, August 15, 2008 in time for the oral arguments held in the Supreme Court.

            Hataman noted that the provisions under the said Memorandum of Agreement do not require Constitutional Amendments. “The MOA is clear in saying that ‘the parties agree that the mechanisms and modalities for the actual implementation of this MOA-AD shall be spelt out in the Comprehensive Compact to mutually take such steps to enable it to occur effectively.’ This means that what are laid down in the MOA are only General Concepts and Principles, nothing in it is final and executory. The modalities or terms of implementation will still be discussed, therefore the door is open to mechanisms which may not necessarily require Charter Change,” Hataman argued.

            The said provision Hataman added, further states that, “Any provisions of the MOA-AD requiring amendments to the existing legal framework shall come into force upon signing of a Comprehensive Compact and upon effecting the necessary changes to the legal framework with due regard to non derogation of prior agreements and within the stipulated timeframe to be contained in the Comprehensive Compact.” 

            “We understood this provision to mean that it is the Comprehensive Compact which may be the subject of amendments to any existing legal framework, and not the MOA-AD. And based on the MOA itself, this Comprehensive Compact shall contain a timeframe by which the necessary changes are to be effected. The amendments therefore may be discussed after 2010, not necessarily during the term of the current administration. We therefore do not see the immediate need for Charter Change for purposes of the MOA-AD” the solon said.

            On the issue of the non-inclusion of the Philippine Constitution as reference of the said MOA-AD, Hataman countered that the other party to the Agreement, the Moro Islamic Liberation Front, is a liberation movement that does not recognize the Philippine Constitution. “Raising this question only manifests their utmost ignorance of the Bangsamoro struggle. It is a pity and a shame especially for diplomats like them to be ignorant of internationally-established principles such as Right to Self-Determination.”

            Hataman however pointed out that though there is no mention of the Constitution in the Agreement, one of its Terms of Reference is the Constitutionally-mandated Republic Act No. 6734, as amended by RA 9054 or the ARMM Law. “As term of reference, the MOA-AD considers RA 9054 as a legal framework, and one cannot uphold RA 9054 without upholding the Constitution,” Hataman said.  

            “And let us not dismiss the fact that the Constitution serves to guard our democracy and the highest form of democracy is the people’s exercise of their sovereignty. This is what the MOA-AD provided for, a plebiscite to ensure that it is not the politicians, not even the peace advocates, but the people who will have the last and final say,” Hataman ended.