IN OCTOBER this year, I wrote a piece in reaction to the Manila Bulletin headline that raised the question "how safe is Mindanao?", which was triggered by an update in the Australian Government's travel advisory about the Philippines but which in particular cited Mindanao.
I was pleasantly surprised to hear back from three readers who wrote to express their opinions. Public safety is obviously a matter of significant interest and elicits strong and diverse reactions.
Interestingly, two of the three who emailed their feedback were foreigners; the other one from Mindanao seemed to have already migrated.
Tony, an American who lived in Pagadian City, described the situation there as one where "people live with an elevated level of fear that I was never used to in the U.S. for a comparable population size of 186,000 people" and called me out, saying "your article is either leveling misplaced blame outside the island, or you are misinformed about the mindset of those living in Mindanao, or perhaps those in Zamboanga del Sur".
Peter, also a foreigner, pointed out that "over 70 people have been gunned down in the streets of Cotabato City and no one is prosecuted" and that "the reality of no justice and rule of law needs to be mentioned... How can that be improved?"
While Ramon, the third reader who sent in his feedback, was of the view that "generally speaking the entire of Mindanao is not safe", he nevertheless "encourage(d) people from broadcast and media to be more accurate and specific in reporting events, not to generalize a scenario of Mindanao as war-front or battle ground".
Allow me to point out that in that October piece I did not endorse the view that Mindanao was safe (that same article also tackled the bombing of a UCCP church in Pikit, Cotabato, and the murder of a Teduray leader in Upi, Maguindanao) or that responsibility for its state rests with outsiders. I did caution against the unfortunate media practice of "'rounding off" disturbances to the nearest urban capital or region", that we should not leave it to "media institutions that hold office in urban capitals to define how Mindanao will be perceived by the rest of the world", and that it "does not advance Mindanao and Mindanawon interests to paint Metro Manila and Luzon in a poor light. But it will not do either for Mindanao to be continuously portrayed as terra incognita, marked with the words 'here there be monsters'."
I was arguing for more nuanced "reportage" from mass and social media about violence in specific places in Mindanao, particularly at a time when big steps are being attempted via the Bangsamoro peace process to address the historic causes of one big aspect of violence in Southern Philippines.
These musings were triggered by the death of 11 victims and the wounding of 21 others by a bomb planted on a Rural Transit bus that exploded as it passed through Musuan, Maramag on December 9, 2014. The bombing victimized more than those who were onboard the bus. It also terrorized the Central Mindanao University (CMU) community of which a number of those who were in the bus were members, and public transport commuters.
Acts of violence prompt questions. The easiest ones to ask are "who did it?" and "why?" with the intention of exacting accountability from those responsible. After all, the victims, their families and communities, and the public deserve not only to know who did it and why, but more importantly they deserve justice. Knowing the identity of perpetrators and their motivations are also important in order to prevent future crimes; in a sense to better anticipate "when" and "where" the next bouts of violence might occur.
However, the speed with which fingers were pointed to the Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters (BIFF) as possible perpetrators was suspect, and in a sense unhelpful. In the absence of thorough investigations, the kneejerk identification of suspects can actually be harmful-it can lull government and public into complacence or whip up emotions with unproductive results; and it can affect the direction of investigations. With the very poor record Mindanao has in ensuring--to use the phrase of Peter--justice and rule of law, another real risk is that labeling without investigating would only consign cases to a category, unfortunately in this case it is one that says "unsolved crimes".
Carolyn O. Arguillas of Mindanews lamented that violent cases associated with bigger issues tend not to be pursued anymore as they get 'absorbed' by the more complicated problems. It would be interesting if the list of unsolved violence in Mindanao could be cross-referenced with other issues like those related to assertions of self-determination, revolution, or resource competition, and see what insights the analysis would yield.
I maintain that the most compelling question on Mindanao and safety is neither "how safe is Mindanao?" nor "how do we make Mindanao safe?" That line of questioning itself needs to be questioned because it assumes that the peace, order and safety situation in the entire Mindanao can be reduced to one characterization: unsafe, which is obviously inaccurate and not useful. (As a case in point even with his assessment of the elevated level of fear in Pagadian City, Tony the American said he went to market every Saturday and walked alone at night in their neighborhood.)
I think we need to periodically pursue a series of questions all oriented towards the overarching one, which to my mind is "under what conditions would more people in more areas in Mindanao feel more safe?".
We have to focus on understanding the conditions (such as poverty incidence, sense of injustice, rule of law, inclusion and geopolitics) rather than events (i.e., bombings) because these conditions underpin and shape the events. The emphasis in the long-term is on creating and reinforcing the conditions that foster public safety, and also in the process, eroding the conditions that produce violence, rather than just preventing specific acts in a particular period and place.
Guided by a grasp of these conditions, we can deal more effectively and comprehensively with the questions related to how, for whom, by whom, when, where and how much, which are all geared towards commitment and action.
This examination, this questioning needs to be done by Mindanao actors at different levels, and periodically. This underscores the importance of a planned approach to peace, order and public safety led by local government units with the support of the security sector, business, civil society and community groups, which needs to be done as a multi-year endeavor but reviewed and updated annually. From this view, recent efforts of the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) and civil society groups like INCITEGov to systematize local planning for peace, order and public safety are a welcome, although some would say overdue, development.
Ensuring safety for Mindanawons is not a one-level, one-time concern. It is one in which people in Mindanao of different circumstances and capacities are highly interested and invested. Why, even those who are not necessarily from or are in Mindanao take time to write and share their views.
And as we problematize and interrogate the complex and complicated discourse that is violence and safety, let us remember, be inspired by, and continue to seek justice for the fatalities of the December 9 Rural Transit bombing, and all those who have been victimized by bloodshed in Mindanao.
***
Email feedback to magszmaglana@gmail.com