Framework Agreement on the Formation of the International Contact Group for the GRP-MILF Peace Process

Export agreement:

Export agreement coding (PDF)

Country/entity: Philippines
Mindanao
Region: Asia and Pacific
Agreement name: Framework Agreement on the Formation of the International Contact Group for the GRP-MILF Peace Process
Date: 15 Sep 2009
Agreement status: Multiparty signed/agreed
Interim arrangement: Yes
Agreement/conflict level: Intrastate/intrastate conflict
Philippine Insurgencies (1968 - )
The Maoist Insurgencies (1968 - )

Philippines-NDF

The Philippines have been defined by a series of center-periphery and often ideologically Maoist, separatist insurgencies. The Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP), began its war against the central Philippine government in 1968 through their armed wing – the New People’s Army (NPA). Further legitimacy was gained through the establishment of the National Democratic Front (NDF) in 1973. Grievances were predominantly opposed to the corruption and repression under the authoritarian Marcos regime.

Philippines-Cordillera

With the overthrow of Marcos’ regime in 1986, the CPP factionalized further to take on more localized characteristics. The Cordillera Peoples Liberation Army (CPLA) broke away from the NDF in 1986 to focus on the protection of the Cordilleran people and land in northern Luzon. Hostilities were formally ended in July 2011, with an agreement signed between the central government, the CPLA and the Cordillera Bodong Administration (CBA) that allowed for the absorption of CPLA fighters into the Philippine Army and the re-working of the CBA-CPLA into a socio-development organisation.

Philippines-RPM-P

Meanwhile, purge among the CPP in the early 1990s, encouraged the formation of a parallel party, the Revolutionary Workers Party (RPM-P). Their armed wing, the Alex Boncayao Brigade (ABB) which had carried out a number of assassinations during the 1980s at the bequest of the CPP, followed suit and allied themselves with the RPM-P in 1997 forming the (RPM-P-RPA-ABB). Severely weakened by the split with the CPP and with the arrest of several key figures, the RPM-P-RPA-ABB signed a peace agreement in December 2000, which encouraged the RPM-P’s branch in Mindanao to break away in 2001.

The CPP-NPA has only participated in intermittent talks with the government. Talks halted in 2004 when Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s administration sought closer ties with the U.S. in the war on terror and added the CPP-NPA to the list of terrorist organisations, renewing violence. Following the launch of a counter-insurgency by the Philippine government, negotiations have been further delayed due to suspected internal differences between the CPP ‘old guard’ and younger members.

The Moro Insurgency (1968 - )

Philippines-Mindanao

The Moro Insurgency began in 1968, in Mindanao and the Sulu archipelago after the killing of Moro Commandos, the so-called Jabidah Massacre, by the Philippine Army following a plot to invade Sabah province in Malaysia. The Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) captured a swath of territory in the mid-1970s. In an attempt to stem the violence, the constitution was reformed and Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) was created 1990 granting a devolution of power to the provinces of Lanao del Sur, Maguindanao, Sulu and Tawi-Tawi. Following the establishment of the ARMM, the MNLF splintered into a range of smaller groups including Islamic factions such as the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) and the Abu Sayef Goup (ASG). The Comprehensive Agreement on the Bangsamoro was signed in 2014.
Stage: Implementation/renegotiation
Conflict nature: Government/territory
Peace process: Philippines - Mindanao process
Parties: Rafael E. Seguis, Panel Chairman for the Government of the Republic of the Philippines
Mohagher Iqbal, Panel Chairman for the Moro Islamic Liberation Front
Third parties: Datuk Othman Bin Abdul Razak, Representative of Malaysia [Facilitator]
Description: Agreement in entirety establishes the International Contact Group to engage with the GFP-MILF peace process, providing for the composition, functions and relations between all involved Parties and partners, as well as measures for safety, security, and future revision of the mandate.

Agreement document: PH_090915_Agreement on Formation ICG.pdf (opens in new tab) | Download PDF

Groups

Children/youth: No specific mention.
Disabled persons: No specific mention.
Elderly/age: No specific mention.
Migrant workers: No specific mention.
Racial/ethnic/national group: No specific mention.
Religious groups: No specific mention.
Indigenous people: No specific mention.
Other groups: No specific mention.
Refugees/displaced persons: No specific mention.
Social class: No specific mention.

Gender

Women, girls and gender: No specific mention.
Men and boys: No specific mention.
LGBTI: No specific mention.
Family: No specific mention.

State definition

Nature of state (general): No specific mention.
State configuration: No specific mention.
Self determination: No specific mention.
Referendum: No specific mention.
State symbols: No specific mention.
Independence/secession: No specific mention.
Accession/unification: No specific mention.
Border delimitation: No specific mention.
Cross-border provision: No specific mention.

Governance

Political institutions (new or reformed): No specific mention.
Elections: No specific mention.
Electoral commission: No specific mention.
Political parties reform: No specific mention.
Civil society: Page 1, Untitled Preamble
The Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP) and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) (hereafter referred to as "The Parties") [...] Recognizing the role that interested countries and international non-government organization (INGO) can play in supporting the success of the GFP-MILF peace process hereby adopt this Framework on the Formation of the International Contact Group (ICG) for the GRP-MILF Peace Process (hereafter referred to as the "Framework")

Page 1, Section 2. Composition
The ICG will consist of interested countries accompanying the peace process preferably drawn from the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) and the European Union (EU) as well as accredited INGO to be invited by the Parties in consultation with the Third Party Facilitator.

Page 2, Section 5. Participation of INGO
Mindful of the interests of the stakeholders to benefit from and expect significant peace dividends from the ICG mission, the Parties will designate INGO that will be accredited along with their named locl NGO partners. In relation to the functions of the ICG, the INGO will perform the following roles:
5.1. To engage and act as a bridge between the Parties, ICG, Facilitator, and their local partners and civil society in support of the peace process;
5.2. To exchange view, provide research inputs, give feedback and advice to the Parties in coordination with the Facilitator;
5.3. To establish communication channels in furtherance of peace process advocacy.
Traditional/religious leaders: No specific mention.
Public administration: No specific mention.
Constitution: No specific mention.

Power sharing

Political power sharing: No specific mention.
Territorial power sharing: No specific mention.
Economic power sharing: No specific mention.
Military power sharing: No specific mention.

Human rights and equality

Human rights/RoL general: No specific mention.
Bill of rights/similar: No specific mention.
Treaty incorporation: No specific mention.
Civil and political rights: No specific mention.
Socio-economic rights: No specific mention.

Rights related issues

Citizenship: No specific mention.
Democracy: No specific mention.
Detention procedures: No specific mention.
Media and communication: No specific mention.
Mobility/access: No specific mention.
Protection measures: No specific mention.
Other: No specific mention.

Rights institutions

NHRI: No specific mention.
Regional or international human rights institutions: No specific mention.

Justice sector reform

Criminal justice and emergency law: No specific mention.
State of emergency provisions: No specific mention.
Judiciary and courts: No specific mention.
Prisons and detention: No specific mention.
Traditional Laws: No specific mention.

Socio-economic reconstruction

Development or socio-economic reconstruction: No specific mention.
National economic plan: No specific mention.
Natural resources: No specific mention.
International funds: No specific mention.
Business: No specific mention.
Taxation: No specific mention.
Banks: No specific mention.

Land, property and environment

Land reform/rights: No specific mention.
Pastoralist/nomadism rights: No specific mention.
Cultural heritage: No specific mention.
Environment: No specific mention.
Water or riparian rights or access: No specific mention.

Security sector

Security Guarantees: Page 1, Section 1. Mandate of the ICG
The ICG is ad-hoc in nature and issue-specific in its engagement consistent with an international dimension in aid of the consensus that will effectively enable them to exert proper leverage and to sustain the interest of the Parties as well as maintain a level of comfort that restores mutual trust. The ICG draws its mandate from both Negotiating Peace Panels and the Third Party Facilitation:
1.1. To implement the mutually-agreed approaches during the negotiation on a regular and consistent basis, taking into consideration the mission-specific strategies and security arrangements in cooperation with both Parties; [...]

Page 2, Section 8. Safety and Security Guarantees
The Parties hereby agree to extend the applicability of the GRP-MILF Agreement on Safety and Security Guarantees dated March 9, 2000 to the ICG herein set up.
Ceasefire: No specific mention.
Police: No specific mention.
Armed forces: No specific mention.
DDR: No specific mention.
Intelligence services: No specific mention.
Parastatal/rebel and opposition group forces: No specific mention.
Withdrawal of foreign forces: No specific mention.
Corruption: No specific mention.
Crime/organised crime: No specific mention.
Drugs: No specific mention.
Terrorism: No specific mention.

Transitional justice

Transitional justice general: No specific mention.
Amnesty/pardon: No specific mention.
Courts: No specific mention.
Mechanism: No specific mention.
Prisoner release: No specific mention.
Vetting: No specific mention.
Victims: No specific mention.
Missing persons: No specific mention.
Reparations: No specific mention.
Reconciliation: No specific mention.

Implementation

UN signatory: No specific mention.
Other international signatory: Datuk Othman Bin Abdul Razak, Malaysia Facilitator
Referendum for agreement: No specific mention.
International mission/force/similar: No specific mention.
Enforcement mechanism: Page 1, Section 1. Mandate of the ICG
The ICG is ad-hoc in nature and issue-specific in its engagement consistent with an international dimension in aid of the consensus that will effectively enable them to exert proper leverage and to sustain the interest of the Parties as well as maintain a level of comfort that restores mutual trust. The ICG draws its mandate from both Negotiating Peace Panels and the Third Party Facilitation:
1.1. To implement the mutually-agreed approaches during the negotiation on a regular and consistent basis, taking into consideration the mission-specific strategies and security arrangements in cooperation with both Parties; [...]

Page 1, Section 2. Composition
The ICG will consist of interested countries accompanying the peace process preferably drawn from the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) and the European Union (EU) as well as accredited INGO to be invited by the Parties in consultation with the Third Party Facilitator.

Page 1, Section 3. Function
The Parties have signed this Framework to engage the function of the ICG in the context herein state. In connection with its mandate, the ICG will perform the following functions:
3.1. To attend and observe the face-to-face negotiations upon invitation by the Parties with the concurrence of the Facilitator;
3.2. To conduct visits, exchange views, and give advice on discreet basis in coordination with the Parties and the Facilitator;
3.3. To seek out the assistance of recognized experts, resource persons or groups on specific issues in order to support the Parties;
3.4. To meet upon request by any of the Parties at various levels to help resolve substantive issues base don agreed agenda.

Page 2, Section 8. Safety and Security Guarantees
The Parties hereby agree to extend the applicability of the GRP-MILF Agreement on Safety and Security Guarantees dated March 9, 2000 to the ICG herein set up.

Page 2, Section 9. Special Provision
This Framework shall be subject to revision upon signing of the Comprehensive Compact to extend the function and role of the ICG in the implementation phase.
Related cases: No specific mention.
Source: UN Peacemaker http://peacemaker.un.org/philippines-agreement-ICG2009

FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT ON THE FORMATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL CONTACT GROUP FOR THE GRP-MILF PEACE PROCESS

The Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP) and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) (hereafter referred to as "the Parties")

Committed to ending conflict in Mindanao through peaceful negotiations;

Dedicated to the successful outcome of the GRP-MILF Peace Process;

Recognizing the role that interested countries and international non-government organizations (TNGO) can play in supporting the success of the GRP-MILF peace process

hereby adopt this Framework on the Formation of the International Contact Group (ICG) for the GRP-MILF Peace Process (hereafter referred to as the "Framework"):

Section 1.

Mandate of the ICG. -

The ICG is ad-hoc in nature and issue-specific in its engagement consistent with an international dimension in aid of the consensus that will effectively enable them to exert proper leverage and to sustain the interest of the Parties as well as maintain a level of comfort that restores mutual trust.

The ICG draws its mandate from both Negotiating Peace Panels and the Third Party facilitation:

1.1. To implement the mutual ly-agreed approaches during the negotiation on a regular and consistent basis, taking into consideration the mission-specific strategies and security arrangements in cooperation with both Parties;

1.2. To determine their mode of operation, including funding, as well as the adoption of their own internal rules consistent with its mandate, function and role;

and

1.3. To continue its role and function in ensuring the successful implementation of signed agreements.

Section 2.

Composition. -

The lCG will consist of interested countries accompanying the peace process preferably drawn from the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) and the European Union (EU) as well as accredited INGO to be invited by the Parties in consultation with the Third Party Facilitator.

Section 3.

Functions. -

The Parties have signed this Framework to engage the function of the ICG in the context herein stated.

In connection with its mandate, the lCG will perform the following functions:

3.1. To attend and observe the face-to-face negotiations upon invitation by the Parties with the concurrence of the Facilitator;

3.2. To conduct visits, exchange views, and give advice on di screet bas is in coordination with the Parties and the Facilitator;

3.3. To seek out the assistance of recognized experts, resource persons or groups on specific issues in order to support the Parties;

and

3.4. To meet upon request by any of the Parties at various levels to help resolve substantive issues based on agreed agenda.

Section 4.

Participation of the OIC, EU and Eminent Persons.- The ICG shall invite and engage the OIC, the EU and eminent persons to participate in its activities.

Section 5.

Participation of INGO. -

Mindful of the interests of the stakeholders to benefit from and expect significant peace dividends from the ICG mission, the Parties will designate INGO that will be accredited along with their named local NGO partners.

In relation to the functions of the ICG, the INGO will perform the following roles:

5.1. To engage and act as a bridge between the Parties, JCG, Facilitator and their local partners and civil society in support of the peace process;

5.2. To exchange views, provide research inputs, give feedback and advice to the Parties in coordination with the Facilitator;

and

5.3. To establish communication channels in furtherance of peace process advocacy.

Section 6.

Relationship with the Facilitator. -

The ICG shall coordinate and work closely with the Facilitator.

The coordination between the JCG and the Facil itator will be catTied out by the representative designated by the former.

Section 7.

Confidentiality. -

All information, data or opinion generated or exchanged in connection with the work of the TCG shall be strictly privileged and confidential.

Section 8.

Safety and Security Guarantees. -

The Parties hereby agree to extend the applicability of the GRP-MILF Agreement on Safety and Security Guarantees dated March 9, 2000 to the JCG herein set up.

Section 9.

Special Provision. -

This Framework shall be subject to revision upon signing of the Comprehensive Compact to extend the function and role of the ICG in the implementation phase.

Section I 0.

Effectivity.

-This Framework shall come into force on the date of its signature.

Done this 15th of September 2009 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.