IN THE wake of the deadly Davao bombing last September 2, President Duterte has declared the whole of Mindanao in a state of lawlessness. There is yet no formal text from the palace detailing in black and white what this declaration means. In fact, there was some confusion if the order covered the whole of the country initially but it has since been clarified to be limited only to the island of Mindanao.
In concrete terms, as we have seen in the increase in the number of checkpoints and soldiers visible in the streets of Mindanao, the pronouncement made by the president essentially authorizes government to employ the Armed Forces to undertake police action, perhaps similar to when the National Guard in the US are called in to augment local police forces, which makes the declaration somewhat redundant if you ask me.
A state of lawlessness had always existed in the restive south judging by the de facto practice in these parts. There is nothing that prevents the military from undertaking their operations wherever they see fit. They can set up checkpoints and occupy public installations in the course of their counterinsurgency and counterterrorism functions with or without the declaration. What the announcement essentially does is the formalization and the provision of legal cover for a practice that has been well in place.
Beyond the constitutional ramifications of the declaration, there is also a host of sociological implications that follow its wake. For one, it confirms the usual impressions that people have of the restive southern island. “Lawlessness” is a state of affairs that the people of Mindanao have actually endured and flourished under for decades.
It is a sociological wonder how diverse communities in Mindanao have managed to survive in the context of long-drawn conflicts. Maybe precisely because these conflicts are protracted that is why people have devised practices of resilience to deal with its demands. The opening of the Davao night market anew, where two nights before a bomb exploded, is an example of this learned resilience. And the shrugs that Mindanaoans confront the added security measures as they continue with their daily activities is a testament to these adaptive mechanisms arrived at through years of war and conflict.
But there is a distinct difference to this new cycle of violence, the latest of which killed fourteen and injured sixty seven others in the blast at the Davao night market. It is supposedly retaliation to the ongoing massive military operations aimed at wiping out with finality the rogue Abu Sayyaf Group and the current president, in his characteristic bravado, has already warned of such incidents and will have none of it.
There is the impression that with Duterte at the helm, he can, just like his ongoing war on drugs, also put an end to the known terrorist group by bringing in nine thousand troops to the main island of Sulu. There is much hope that the formula he implemented in cleansing Davao will also do the same trick nationwide, that he could transform the state of national lawlessness under his firm and at times ruthless leadership. But the recent Davao bombing presents a formidable challenge to such prospects even if we wish the president well in his ambitious endeavors.
The problems of Mindanao are complex and deeply rooted and history has shown that no war campaign has been able to resolve these with finality. The unfortunate consequences of conflict leave an indelible mark not just for this generation but to succeeding generations as well.
For instance, the whole plethora of armed Moro groups that still exist to this day, whose actions are still felt at the present, were, in part, radicalized by the violent campaigns of pacification waged by government in the 1970s. Their communities were transformed into a howling wilderness, providing progeny to the term “no man’s land.” The recourse to terror has always been a feature of these asymmetrical wars and is nothing new to Mindanao and by the looks of it, are sure to recur unless the root causes of these conflicts are resolved.
Thus, the state of lawlessness recently declared is really more than a formal edict by the president. It is also a reflection of the social state of lawlessness that pervade Mindanao for decades. Poverty and landlessness lie at the center of these practices of terror and provides the context for breeding this destructive cyclical violence.
