THE Council of Leaders for Peace Initiatives (CLPI) expresses its utter disappointment that there has been no announcement of progress in the formal peace negotiations between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP) and the National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP).
It has been two years since the release of the Joint Statement between the two parties affirming their intention to return to the negotiating table. It is discouraging that there has been no significant advancement since.
A new Framework Agreement for this round of negotiations, during the administration of President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr, appears to be in limbo. Without it, formal peace negotiations cannot start in earnest.
The 1992 Hague Joint Declaration (THJD) was a milestone in the history of attaining a just and lasting peace in the Philippines. We humbly affirm that this document remains valid and workable as the framework of the negotiations between the two parties because it explicitly recognizes that the armed conflict has socioeconomic and political roots and that these root causes must be addressed to put an end to the hostilities.
The CLPI appeals to the two Parties to uphold the essential content of the THJD.
The CLPI also reiterates its position on upholding safety and immunity guarantees for participants in peace talks, as articulated in the Joint Agreement on Safety and Immunity Guarantees (JASIG).
The numerous cases of murdered and jailed peace consultants and personnel do not bode well and must therefore be addressed. The release of detained NDFP peace consultants in detention is necessary to the peace negotiations and has to be treated as part of confidence building measures.
Calls for the NDFP to lay down its arms prior to commencement of talks go against the view of the armed struggle as a product of highly inequitable socioeconomic and political structures. These demands, tantamount to a call for an open-ended ceasefire, only serve as barriers to the peace process.
The CLPI maintains that the peace talks remain a viable option while the anti-insurgency measures adopted by the current administration go against the spirit of attaining a just and lasting peace.
The “whole-of-nation approach” operationalized with the creation of the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-ELCAC), and subsequently elaborated upon and refined by the National Action Plan for Unity, Peace, and Development (NAP-UPD) opens the door to more cases of human rights and international humanitarian law violations that will victimize both revolutionaries and civilians, especially among peasant populations in the countryside, alongside reports of the anomalous use of public funds for questionable “localized peace efforts” in the form of barangay development programs.
Meanwhile, the existing socioeconomic policies have led to the further impoverishment of the Filipino people. The epic syndicated corruption being exposed in the past few months is just one of the many examples that demonstrate this unfortunate reality.
Public outrage should persuade the Marcos Jr administration to confront the fact that transactional changes in governance will not suffice; now is in fact the perfect opportunity for the Filipino people to discuss wide-ranging structural changes, as articulated in THJD and the initialed common draft of the Comprehensive Agreement on Social and Economic Reforms (CASER).
This deepening corruption crisis narrows the already fragile window for a meaningful peace settlement. As public trust erodes and resources meant for social services and conflict-affected communities are siphoned off by graft, the structural grievances fueling the armed struggle will only intensify.
Unless this crisis is confronted head-on, it will become even harder for both Parties to build the credibility and political will needed to advance the peace process.
Against this context, the CLPI reaffirms its reason for being as a peace stakeholder. It will remain vigilant in its role to keep the public well-informed of the progress or non-progress in the GRP-NDFP negotiations, judiciously weighing in on both parties to create and maintain a more favorable and conducive atmosphere for arriving at a just and lasting peace.