TABUK CITY, Kalinga – The Kalinga intelligentsia is proposing two major changes in the peace and order provisions of the Pagta, the model laws of the bodong, to pull the native Kalinga peace institution abreast with the times.
The bodong is the bilateral peace pact system practiced by Kalinga tribes which aim to maintain peace and order and brotherly relations between the two tribes.
The Pagta is a product of several Kalinga Bodong Congresses composed of bodong holders, representatives from the religious sector, the Armed Forces of the Philippines, the Philippine National Police, the academe starting in the 80s codified the provisions of the bilateral pagtas and standardized the penalties for all bodong-practicing tribes in the province.
Lawyer Arthur Kub-ao proposed an amendment to the Pagta completely outlawing the practice of vengeance during the December 9, 2016 bodong summit sponsored by the provincial government to gather proposed amendments to the code.
Section 5, Article II of the Pagta outlaws revenge but allows it in instances when the bodong is severed following the procedures provided under Section 5, Article VI of the code and the “retaliation by the aggrieved party shall solely rest on the person of the offender.”
Kub-ao said that at the time the Pagta was passed by the Kalinga Bodong Congress in 1998, generally speaking, vengeance was still a part of the Kalinga culture.
“It was alright for us to revenge if justified by circumstances specifically when an unjustified killing could not be settled through the bodong. The time was not yet ripe for the absolute outlawing of vengeance then,” Kub-ao explained.
He recalled that during that period, the practice of tribal war was prevalent in Kalinga which not only resulted in deaths and injuries but likewise to the halting of normal activities of the combatant tribes as students and employees studying and working outside tribal strongholds sought refuge.
“We were supposed to be Christians. We have priests, nuns, lawyers and judges. We have other highly educated members. But when blood was shed, we forgot our religion and education. During that period, members of tribes who belonged to the uniformed services actively supported the war efforts of their tribes by lending their service firearms and at times, actually participating in the fighting,” Kub-ao said.
He said that this was still the prevailing mindset when the Kalinga Bodong Congress convened in 2002 thus the provision was left untouched.
He observed that in the intervening years, Kalingas have somewhat mellowed so much so that tribal wars are now far between as even the fierce tribes who used to automatically revenge when a member has been killed or injured by a member of another tribe now could accept the resolution of the case through the bodong or the courts.
Kub-ao said that the rationale of his proposal is not just the unlawfulness of taking life but the prevention of the spread of the conflict.
“With the killing of one person, the clans of his mother and father will also demand retaliation and so on,” Kub-ao, a retired prosecutor, said.
Lawyer Francis Calsiyao also see in the call for proposed amendments to the Pagta the opportune chance to bring to fruition the move initiated by the local chapter of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) to reconcile the bodong with national laws to attain the purposes of both systems four years ago.
During the recent bodong summit, Calsiyao proposed the introduction of a provision in the Pagta limiting the jurisdiction of the bodong to less grave offenses and criminal negligence both of which the laws permit to be settled out of court.
Under the proposed new provision of the Pagta, the bodong could only deal with the civil aspect of grave crimes leaving the criminal aspect to the courts, Calsiyao said.
He said that it is a general observation that under the amicable system, criminals do not feel the rehabilitative and corrective power of the law so much so that they tend to repeat their violations to the disadvantage of society.
The bodong partakes of the nature of the areglo or amicable settlement practice.
According to Calsiyao, the three purposes of the penalty under the law are the following: serves to reform the offender so that he would stop committing crimes; to protect society from criminals; and deter criminals and other people from committing crimes.
“Under the amicable settlement practice, offenders do not feel the effects of the law so they are emboldened to do more crimes. We are aware that as a system of administering justice, amicable settlement has its advantages such as the lesser cost and the ease of collecting damages but it is disadvantageous to society as a whole. We must balance the interest of the individual and that of the society,” Calsiyao told the ZigZag Weekly.
Calsiyao expects that once the civil aspect has been settled under the bodong, the private complainants will no longer pursue the cases but in the case of public offenses, peace officers can still file the case if they have sufficient evidence.
Presently in Kalinga, the bodong and the areglo system handle criminal and civil cases from the simplest to the heinous.
Kub-ao said that the proposed amendments will be deliberated when the Kalinga Bodong Congress will convene anew sometime this summer.
Way back in 2006, the Matagoan Bodong Consultative Council (MBCC), the office of the Tabuk LGU mandated to settle disputes and to unify the multi-ethnic Tabuk community, came up with the “no gopas” policy which in effect, outlawed tribal wars.
“Gopas” is the severance provision in the bodong which when consummated, puts the two tribes party to the pact in war footing.
Community Affairs Officer Heriberto Barila said that under the policy, if a dispute could not be settled under the bodong, the case will be brought to the court with the bodong holders of both tribes acting as witnesses against the offender.
He further said that the idea is to protect the Matagoan or Peace Zone Declaration covering the city.
Barila revealed that for the most part, the policy was respected by the tribes but that in one instance, it was violated by a notorious tribe which took the MBCC for granted.** Estanislao Albano Jr.
