Mamasapano and the Peace Process

Summary of a forum held by forumZFD, Kaya Natin! Movement, Al Qalam Institute (Ateneo
de Davao), and Sociology and Anthropology Department, Ateneo de Manila on February 27,
2015 at Club Filipino, Metro Manila.

The already difficult task of forging peace in Mindanao was further complicated by the
Mamasapano tragedy of January 25, 2015. Recent discussions sparked by the tragedy have
been colored by grief, anger, belligerence and war-mongering, thus creating a new set of
challenges for the ongoing peace process.
With this in mind, forumZFD, Ateneo de Manila University's Sociology & Anthropology
Department, Ateneo de Davao University's Al Qalam Institute, and the Kaya Natin! Movement
for Good Governance came together to hold an informal forum in Club Filipino on February
27, 2015. The forum aimed to tackle the Mamasapano tragedy within a frame of peacebuilding, and create a safe space for alternative discussions and perspectives that have been
drowned out by more hostile language.
The forum was also an attempt to comprehend and address the anger surrounding the
tragedy, by fostering discussions between a diverse array of panelists and participants, who
each brought their unique perspective to the table. Discussions occurred in an inclusive and
supportive space, and no perspectives or areas of expertise were privileged over others. This
overall tone extends from the organizers' aim of building a support group for those who
desire a more cogent and less politicized discourse on the current crisis, and its implications
for the peace process.
The Mamasapano tragedy created a very real and pressing need for a refreshed, widened,
and deepened framework of discussions around the peace process. It is this need that the
forum and its organizers sought to anticipate and address.
The forum proper was comprised of three panels led by various discussion leaders. Each
panel gave way to participatory conversations with the rest of the forum's guests.

DISCUSSION ONE: MAPPING AND CONTEXTUALIZING MAMASAPANO

The first panel was led by Marian Pastor Roces and Teng Mangansakan, who took on the
task of mapping Mamasapano, a Maguindanao municipality neighboring the Ligawasan
Marsh. The map they drew went beyond mere geography, but rather, it located the region
within its broader historical, social, cultural and political contexts.
Author and curator Marian Pastor Roces framed the controversy surrounding Mamasapano
as a fight over narratives. Mindanao's very history is one such contested narrative, a point she
1

Mamasapano and the Peace Process

made by exploring some lesser-known events in the region's history. These events include the
voluntary donation of Moro-owned land to early settlers, the mass resettlement of Christians
into the region, and the anti-Moro violence and terror sown by the Ilaga. Another contested
narrative concerns the differing accounts between the parties involved in the Mamasapano
tragedy. Pastor Roces reminded us that the shaping of these narratives is a contentious
process, and that agreeing on a collective memory is an important step towards peace.
Pastor Roces also shared her dismay at the thin discussions
that have emerged in the wake of the tragedy. Much of the
discussions so far have been colored by unexamined anger, a
reliance on oversimplification, and an overall aversion to
complexity and nuance. According to her, this exposes the
peace process to opportunism, and the risk of spontaneous
combustion.
Watch Marian Pastor Roces panel talk here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSC0F_IzYvY
Independent filmmaker Teng Mangansakan shared some of the concerns over the ongoing
discussions, which he saw as rife with oversimplification, and fixated on group differences. He
expressed the need for these discussions to be part of a greater search, for knowledge of the
unknown and a deeper understanding of Bangsamoro and Mamasapano culture.
As first steps towards acquiring this understanding, Mangansakan recommended a deeper
look at the kinship that binds the residents of Mamasapano, within the context of Filipino
culture and kinship as a whole. He then stressed the importance of understanding how the
inhabitants of Mamasapano perceive reality, by first
understanding the space between their notions of the
physical and the metaphysical. Mangansakan believes
that much can be learned from understanding this space,
and how they perceive this space to have been invaded.
Watch Teng Mangansakans panel talk here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXbtMWvOnP8

Discussion among participants

These panels gave way to a conversation with the forum's guests, who echoed the panelists'
calls for nuanced understandings and unified narratives. Many guests expressed their
disappointment in the current state of these narratives in Manila. They observed that ongoing
discussions, on social media, in the mainstream media and within government, appear to be
colored by oversimplification, political opportunism and prejudice. Pastor Roces warned that
such discussions, which have become the prevalent narrative, could prove to be poisonous,
dangerous and deadly.
One gap in the prevalent narrative concerns Mamasapano itself. A guest took on the task of
mapping out the area for the rest of the forum. Mamasapano, he said, is part of the 280,000
2

Mamasapano and the Peace Process

hectares complex ecosystem of Ligawasan Marsh, with a population of about 20,000. He
dispelled prevalent notions of Mamasapano being primarily an MILF camp, and spoke of the
complex social ecosystem of the area's real residents, dubbed the children of the marsh.
The conversation also tackled the importance of reconciling these conflicting and problematic
narratives. Some guests emphasized the need for narrative-shapers, individuals and groups
to simply listen to each other, and hear the stories that might not be articulated in
mainstream discussions. A lawyer in the audience expanded on this, by citing flaws in the
current system of on-ground communications and coordination between government and
MILF forces. Attention was also focused on the mainstream media, its role in creating these
narratives, and ways to work with them. A college freshman, possibly the forum's youngest
attendee, expressed the youth's need for better information and wider participation.
The discussions ended with a word from Fr. Joel Tabora, S.J., president of the Ateneo de
Davao University. Tabora spoke of the narratives that Manila, the government and the church
have imposed upon Moros throughout history. He discussed the need to be conscious of
these narratives, and transcend their embedded notions of Filipino and nationalist superiority.
Tabora criticized those that faulted negotiators for continuing dialogue with armed Moro
groups, and stressed the need for our legislators to become statesmen.
Listen to Fr. Joel Taboras contribution here:
https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=817091991700750

DISCUSSION TWO: MAMASAPANO AND NOTIONS OF JUSTICE, THE PAST, AND THE FUTURE
The second panel was led by Congresswoman Sitti Djalia Turabin-Hataman and Atty. Ruben
Carranza, who attempted to disentangle complex and at times conflicting notions of justice.
The panel discussed justice in the context of the tragedy, but it also looked to the past,
towards victims of armed struggles and displacement in Mindanao, and to the future, towards
transitional justice and reconciliation.
Congresswoman Turabin-Hataman began by posing a question: when we speak of injustice,
whose injustice are we speaking of? She spoke at length on the many lesser-known injustices
and massacres experienced by the Moro people throughout history, at the hands of various
groups, colonial powers and iterations of the Philippine government. One injustice she finds
deeply troubling is how the ongoing peace talks, along with the well-being of the Moro people,
have been held hostage by the Mamasapano tragedy. She spoke of injustice in the forms of
discrimination and ignorance, which she has observed firsthand at congressional
deliberations. For the congresswoman, the greatest
injustice lies in how some legislators make decisions
with sweeping implications for the Moro people,
without truly understanding Moro culture.
Congw. Turabin-Hataman then turned her attention
to the SAF casualties of the Mamasapano tragedy.
She believes that the disintegration of this nation, as
a result of their deaths, would be a grave injustice to
3

Mamasapano and the Peace Process

the SAF 44. She concluded that at this point in time, its hard for me to define justice. But
after mentioning the different massacres in Mindanao prior to the Mamasapano tragedy, I
know what injustice means.
Watch Sitti Djalia Turabin-Hatamans panel talk here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmUUmIiZEvw
Atty. Ruben Carranza approached the Mamasapano tragedy from a perspective informed by
experience in peace-building and transitional justice. He expanded upon the injustices of war
raised by Congw. Turabin-Hataman, and shared first-hand observations from his tenure as
assistant secretary of national defense during the Estrada administration's all-out war. War is
one way of ending a conflict, but Carranza warned of its violence, destruction and costs. He
proposed an alternative, in the form of transitional justice, which has a proven potential for
achieving peace and unity.
Carranza shared five points, on important areas and notions of justice. The first point
concerns justice through the actual peace process, and its legal, formal and informal
dimensions. The second point concerns the importance of a settled narrative, involving the
acknowledgment of injustice and steps towards reparations. The
third point concerns accountability, and its need to go beyond just
criminal justice and persecution. The fourth point concerns reform
at the institutional level, such as in key areas of government. The
fifth and final point concerns access to justice and rights, beyond
just access to courts and the legal system. Carranza ended his
discussion by reiterating the importance of acknowledgment, as a
first step towards understanding and achieving justice.
Listen to Ruben Carranzas panel talk here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTwDfLi3hVs
Discussion among participants
The conversation that followed saw both guests and panelists expand on previouslydiscussed notions of justice and injustice. A university president observed that popular calls
for justice have had an undertone of revenge, while calls for true justice have been lacking
in resonance. He explained that true justice is a complex matter, and one that is not always
easy to define or understand. Carranza added to this, by explaining the importance of
disentangling the actual truth from mere forensic truth. Congw. Turabin-Hataman also shared
insights on Islamic justice, which values justice even for those one does not agree with.
The conversation also tackled matters of legislation, politics and armed conflict. One guest
empathized with Congw. Turabin-Hataman's experiences of discrimination in Congress, and
spoke of the need for legislators to be more knowledgeable when handling the issue. Congw.
Turabin-Hataman noted the tragedy's proximity to the next national election, and how it is
likely being used by some to elevate themselves and bring others down.
The guest also expressed dismay at past approaches to the conflict, which reduced the
problem to a military issue with military solutions. Congw. Turabin-Hataman added to this
discussion on armed conflict, by commenting on the harsh, on-ground realities of war. The
4

Mamasapano and the Peace Process

discussion was rounded out by a participant warning of the fleeting nature of superficial
justice, and how easily it can give way to further injustice.

DISCUSSION THREE: THE LANGUAGE OF A CONTINUING PEACE PROCESS

The third and final panel, led by Prof. Miriam Coronel-Ferrer, Atty. Benedicto Bacani, and Fr.
Albert Alejo, S.J., tackled the language of the peace process in the wake of the Mamasapano
tragedy. The discussion touched on the many forms language can take in the peace process:
the languages of peace and hate, of law and governance, and of communication and
compassion.
Prof. Miriam Coronel-Ferrer, chair of the government peace panel, began by emphasizing the
importance of alternative spaces for discussion, and their capacity to foster alternative
discourses on matters of peace and the Mamasapano tragedy. She then discussed the
complexity of the ongoing peace process, which requires specific infrastructures, mechanisms
and protocols, as well as coordination on different levels. These elements comprise the
language of the peace process, and Coronel-Ferrer credited the MILF for being proactive in
adopting this language.
She then turned her attention to the language of hate, which she described as the antithesis
of the language of peace. This language of hate is a form of unproductive typecasting that
reduces complex issues to oversimplified binaries, such as friends and enemies. She noted
how this language has colored everyday discussions on the tragedy, but warned that the
language exists on both sides. She recommended that even peace advocates be more
mindful of hate language, and their use of terms such as spoilers or enemies of peace.
Coronel-Ferrer instead advocated a search for spaces of
agreement and shared truths. Above all, she emphasized the
importance of compassion and compassionate language, as
prerequisites to compassionate justice, shared truths and
reconciliation.
Watch Miriam Coronel Ferrers panel talk here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRd5yDYsPF8

Atty. Benedicto Bacani, executive director of the Institute for Autonomy and Governance,
shared his thoughts on the ongoing peace talks. He noted President Aquino's willingness to
achieve peace in Mindanao, and likened his fast-tracked process to a bullet train. However,
he also noted that the train runs on old rails, in the form of existing legal and political
frameworks in need of reform. He described the peace process as one that occurs on two
such tracks, with the first being the formal negotiations, and the second being public
acceptance and support. He emphasized the need for the second track to exact
accountability on the first track, as opposed to serving as its mere extension. In light of this,
he stressed the importance of adding to the public's understanding of the peace process, and
harnessing their informed and principled acceptance.
5

Mamasapano and the Peace Process

Bacani worries that the Mamasapano tragedy may have affected the public's trust in the
peace process, and in the president's role as its primary driver. Bacani observed how the
Mamasapano tragedy disturbed the very foundation of the peace process, leading him to
wonder whether this could reopen the wounds of past division. He revisited the language of
hate, and observed parallels between current and pre-1987 discourses on peace in
Mindanao. He then added to earlier recommendations for peace advocates, to avoid their
own use of oversimplification and binaries.
In spite of all this, Bacani sees opportunities in the Mamasapano tragedy, for soul-searching,
reflection, and a more critical search for truth, knowledge and understanding. In light of this,
he called for all involved groups to take responsibility for their faults in the tragedy. While
Bacani did make recommendations, he reminded us that there are still no clear answers or
solutions to this issue, just points for reflection for moving forward.
Listen to Benny Bacanis panel talk here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rt5ksIqcP8s

The final panelist, Father Albert Alejo, sees potential in peace communication, as a possible
bridge between formal negotiations and public acceptance. Alejo believes that communication
is a necessary component of peace, as it can be inextricable from conflict. Violence can be a
form of communication, as an expression of pain, just as communication can be a form of
violence, in the form of hateful language. Alejo emphasized the need for sensitivity in
communication, citing how miscommunication can often lead to further conflict.
However, Alejo believes that peace communication can only be effective if it moves beyond
existing efforts, and into more reflective and inclusive dialogue. To this end, Alejo shares
lessons from the four P's of marketing, concerning product, publics, places and
promotion.
Alejo suggested that peace could be packaged in a key message or narrative, such as all-out
peace, and then marketed as a product. This would then be marketed to the diverse range
of groups, peoples and publics implicated in the issue, with a tailored communication
strategy for each. Similar to publics, the nation's many regions, provinces and places
would require context- and culture-specific communication strategies. Finally, Alejo rounded
out the four P's by outlining the broad range of mediums, settings, personalities and tactics
necessary towards the successful promotion of peace.
Listen to Fr. Alejos panel talk here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PuS6TPJGwh8

Discussion among participants

The floor was turned over to guests, who shared their own insights and perspectives on the
issue, and matters of language. One guest commented on the emotional response to the
Mamasapano tragedy, and observed that while Manila had no real connection to the Moro
people, it had a direct connection to the SAF 44 through notions of Filipino nationalism. He
6

Mamasapano and the Peace Process

echoed Fr. Alejo's calls for better communication, citing the Manila public, the media and the
mainstream educational system as important areas of attention.
A Sangguniang Kabataan alum weighed in on the issue, shared some of his experiences with
Moro youth leaders, and asked the forum about the youth's role in the peace process. Prof.
Coronel-Ferrer responded by suggesting the formation of a party list, as a potential avenue
towards expanded youth participation.
Prof. Coronel-Ferrer observed how prevalent narratives of the Mamasapano tragedy have
disadvantaged the other side of the story, noting the part that government spokespersons
played in this process. She agreed with the need for a communication strategy, but to this
end, she warned that it must be participative, as opposed to monolithic or centralized. Part of
this strategy should include discourse with and within Bangsamoro, which is in line with a
guest's earlier suggestion of tapping tribal and religious leaders as key spokespersons.
She then expanded on the topic of communication, noting the difficulty of promoting the
Bangsamoro Basic Law, as well as notions of Moro and Bangsamoro, to a majoritarian
society. She then contrasted this with the relative ease of promoting notions of peace,
development, or even hostile language. The issue, she added, is rife with nuances that need
to be elaborated through language, both symbolic and technical.
Prof. Coronel-Ferrer rounded out the conversation, by examining the state of public trust in
the peace process prior to the Mamasapano tragedy. She cited disagreements over the BBL,
a general mistrust for Moros and the MILF, and a culture of entitlement, as issues that existed
prior to, and were aggravated by, the Mamasapano tragedy. To this end, she called for more
responsibility and accountability in the first track of the peace process.

EMERGING THEMES
The conversation then gave way to closing remarks from Marian Pastor Roces, which serve
as a guideline for this summarys overview of emerging themes from the forum.
Complexity
It's complicated, Pastor Roces remarked, speaking of the many nuances of the issues
discussed. She commended the forum's willingness to tackle this complexity, which she sees
as a solution to the fundamentalism, shallowness and overall oversimplification that have
taken over the prevalent discourse.
Both guests and panelists expressed disappointment in the trend towards oversimplifying the
issue, and reducing it to black and white binaries. This had been observed in the media's
handling of the issue, within government and the legislative branch, in everyday discussions,
and in other settings and institutions. This trend towards oversimplification has been identified
as an extension of ignorance, which has limited the framing and understanding of the Moro
people, Bangsamoro, the peace process, and the tragedy. The search for deeper truth,
knowledge and understanding, one of the forum's more popular calls, was raised as a solution
to these issues.
7

Mamasapano and the Peace Process

Process
The effort towards peace in Mindanao is, above all else, a process. Pastor Roces described it
as a moving target that is difficult to address, precisely because its coordinates are always
changing.
Complexity marks practically every area of the peace process and the Mamasapano tragedy.
Congw. Turabin-Hataman discussed the process of congressional deliberations, which has
been made more complex by the Mamasapano tragedy. Atty. Carranza, in his discussion on
the process of justice, warned against the conflation of true justice with mere criminal justice
or revenge, and the conflation of truth with forensic truth.
Atty. Bacani and Prof. Coronel-Ferrer, in their discussions of the peace process, also
discussed the many mechanisms, institutions, and moving parts of the ongoing negotiations.
They spoke of its necessary technical, political and legal dimensions, and the complex
relationship between the formal and public tracks.
Symbols
Symbols are important components of the peace process. Symbols, such as collective
memories and histories of pain, should not stand in opposition to the peace process's more
technical aspects. Rather, they need to be recognized as a necessary dimension of the
process.
An inextricable symbolic element of Bangsamoro culture, and a prerequisite towards its
understanding, is spirituality. Teng Mangsanakan pointed to the space between the physical
and metaphysical as an excellent starting point towards understanding Mamasapano and its
people. Even justice is tied to symbols, as illustrated by Congw. Turabin-Hataman's brief
exploration of Islamic notions of justice.
Othering
For Pastor Roces, othering is the elephant in the room. She warned against the tendencies
of some to other people, in order to differentiate themselves and define their identities. She
observed a troubling historical trend towards othering Muslims, which other guests and
panelists have articulated in their own shared observations.
A number of guests and panelists were troubled by the extent of discrimination and ignorance
in key peace structures, such as the government, congress and the media. This othering
extends to other spheres as well, such as that of narratives and language. Other guests
described the Bangsamoro narrative as one that has been marginalized by the narrative of
Filipino nationalism.
Language and Narratives
Pastor Roces reminded us that we are in the middle of contests for stories and that the
words we choose carry both healthy and unhealthy potential. She pointed to language as the
road towards the mystery of truth, as truth is co-constructed by those involved in an issue.
8

Mamasapano and the Peace Process

This harkens back to discussions on the different narratives implicated in peace and the
Mamasapano tragedy, and the importance of working towards shared narratives and truths.
The narratives of the Bangsamoro, on one hand, and of Filipino nationalism and
Filipinoness, on the other, are two narratives that received particular attention during the
forum. Many panelists and guests expressed the need to understand how these narratives
interact with one another, in order to eventually reconcile them.
Couched within these conflicting narratives are the conflicting histories of Mindanao, which
the forum identified as an area in need for shared truths. Guests and panelists shared their
knowledge on events that have been relegated to the margins of history, despite their
importance towards deeper understandings of the region and its people.
The forum recognized the power of language, and its capacity to both facilitate and undermine
the peace process. Prof. Coronel-Ferrer brought up the language of hate, as an extension of
ignorance and othering, as one example of the unhealthy potential of language. She
contrasted this with the languages of peace and compassion, which illustrate the positive
potential of language, and how it can support the peace process.
The potential of language can be realized through a variety of mediums. Prior to the tragedy,
Mangansakan planned on setting one of his films in Mamasapano, in order to bring that
discourse to Manila. Guests from the worlds of art, creativity and culture spoke of the use of
other mediums, such as theater and animation, as other vehicles for the Bangsamoro
narrative. Fr. Alejo, in his proposed peace communication strategy, also saw value in the use
of multiple mediums, in order to carry the message of peace to diverse groups and settings.
Moving Forward
In Atty. Bacani's words, the Mamasapano tragedy has disrupted the landscape of the peace
process, and the very arena in which it plays out. While it complicated the task of peacebuilding, the forum was able to identify key areas and strategies for moving forward.
One of the most important steps moving forward is the creation of a more inclusive and
participatory discourse, with an emphasis on public participation and acceptance. The public
plays a key role in the peace process, and efforts must be taken to bring them deeper into the
fold. Some concrete steps were raised during the forum, and these include: more refined
communication strategies, broader youth participation, the use of alternative mediums, an
examination of language, and entering dialogue with the media. Another step towards this
discourse is the creation of safe spaces and support groups, in order to foster alternative and
inclusive discussions.
Alternative, participatory discourse can foster a willingness to tackle complexity, and oppose
the oversimplification, ignorance and unexamined anger that have colored past discussions. It
can also foster the search for deeper knowledge, truth and understanding, which are crucial
towards reconciling conflicts between narratives. Lastly, the forum drew attention to
accountability and acknowledgment, as crucial first steps in the path towards justice,
reconciliation, and peace.
9