Humanitarian Dialogue Event: Armed Violence Reduction Initiatives in Mindanao, Philippines

30 November 2007

Humanitarian Dialogue is involved in mediation processes in Timor-Leste since 2007 relating to Major Reinado’s and the petitioners’ case.

Ms Mireille Widmer presented the results of her visit to the island of Sulu, where she analysed the instability related to armed violence.

The point Ms Widmer made is that in Sulu, the problem to be tackled is not an armed conflict between different parties but armed violence as a social phenomenon.

Looking at the actors is key: there are more than a dozen armed groups as diverse as the armed forces, the police, known groups such as the Abu Sayyaf Group or Jemaah Islamyia, civilian militias and “vigilantes” that were originally self-defence groups, private armed groups used by clans and important political families, paramilitary and armed individuals (weapons are said to be very easily available).

Where to start in order to reduce violence in such a context? In order to identify the greatest human security threats, Ms Widmer looks at the number of weapons and men-strength as well as a the command structure and control of the different groups.

She finds that the groups most contributing to the instability are the so-called civilian voluntary organizations (CVOs) – that are moreover dressed and equipped like the armed forces - and armed individuals.

In this context, the governor’s initiative of a province-wide gun-ban is a positive step. However, it is difficult to conceive disarmament in a context where the perception of insecurity is deep-rooted and where the police force is not ready to take over the task of ensuring security.

Proliferation must hence be addressed with a supply and demand framework as well as with the analysis of the factors contributing to the perception of insecurity, such as the weak justice enforcement (only one judge comes to the island twice a month) , the cultural status symbol of owning a gun, governance issues (the private security of the influential clans), etc.

Based on these insights, Ms Widmer proposed a policy framework including:

1. Enforcement aspect (strengthen the gun-ban, find a security guarantor)
2. prosecution to be strengthened, witness protection to be established
3. weapons regulations (curbing trafficking, secure stockpiles, create gun-free zones)
4. incentives to comply with this initiative by proposing livelihood guarantees or reintegration programmes
5. increase public awareness
6. monitor and evaluate the process in order to ensure transparency and to provide the proof of progress to civil society, even if figures are difficult to evaluate and the policies are difficult to refine

As next steps, Ms Widmer identified the need to reduce the incidence of clan conflicts (option of a council of elders was mentioned). Thought needs to be given to the issues of weapon control and amnesty options. She added that baseline data would be most helpful in the mediation endeavours.

Regarding lessons learnt, we retain the bold initiative of a gun-ban by the province’s governor. As the disarmament, demobilization and reintegration programmes will have to target civilian militias and individuals, lessons could be learnt for the application in other regions.

Noelia Díaz