Friday, August 22, 2008 Government’s withdrawal from homeland deal doubted
PETITIONERS opposing the memorandum of agreement on ancestral domain (MOA-AD) with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) are not buying the government's line that it will no longer pursue the signing of the controversial agreement in its present form to moot the suits they filed with the Supreme Court (SC).
In a joint opposition, former Senate President Franklin Drilon, Senator Manuel “Mar” Roxas II, and United Opposition spokesman Adel Tamano asked the SC to deny the motion and manifestation of the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), which sought the dismissal of all petitions on the suit on the ground that government is reviewing its stance on the MOA-AD with the secessionist group in the wake of atrocities they committed in several villages in Mindanao.
The three, who joined the original petitioners in the case as interveners, said there is no legal basis for the dismissal of the consolidated petitions, adding that the OSG's motion does not detract from the fact that the respondent government peace panel already committed grave abuse of discretion and violated the Constitution.
They said the high court should rule on the constitutional issues to avoid a repeat of these violations in the future.
“If the Consolidated Petitions are summarily dismissed on the strength thereof, there will be no complete determination of Respondents’ grave abuse of discretion and unconstitutional actions in excess of or without jurisdiction in agreeing to bind the Government to provisions constituting grave constitutional violations,” they stated.
SC spokesman Jose Midas Marquez said the government should categorically state its position during the oral arguments to convince the SC and the petitioners.
He said the motion of the OSG did not make mention of suspension of the signing of the MOA-AD, only of reviewing the government's stance.
"There must be a formal manifestation of that intention of the government. Perhaps that will be mentioned by the OSG. So far there has been no categorical statement in the motion. The OSG will have to convince the court and the petitioners that is really the intent of the government," he said.
Marquez said the SC will wait until all petitioners have submitted their comments on the OSG’s motion, and they will address the issues that they raised one by one.
He noted that the tribunal may issue a ruling even if the case has been rendered moot; but in some cases, it decides to rule on the issues raised to set the jurisprudence or for guidance of the court should similar cases arise.
Malacañang earlier decided to withdraw from the signing of the MOA following the spate of attacks of "lost commands" of the MILF in Mindanao. The attacks started after the high court issued a temporary restraining order last August 4 enjoining the government from signing the MOA-AD with the MILF panel last August 5 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
There are five petitions questioning the MOA-AD that were filed by the provinces of North Cotabato and Zamboanga del Norte, Zamboanga City, Iligal City, and the group of former senator Ernesto Maceda, Makati Mayor Jejomar Binay and Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III.
Intervenors are composed of the group of Drilon, Roxas and Tamano; the Muslim Sectoral Movement for Peace and Development; Muslim Legal Assistance Foundation, Inc.; Indigenous People of Mindanao not belonging to the MILF; the Sultan Kudarat Provincial Government represented by Governor Suharto Mangudadatu; the Linamon Municipal Government of Lanao del Norte Province; and individuals Carlo Gomez, Gerardo Dilig, Nesario Awat, Joselito Alisuag and Richalex Jagmis. (ECV/Sunnex)
