Vol 10, No.

1 January 2010

COPENHAGEN - HISTORIC FAILURE

The most progressive US president in
a generation comes to the most
important international meeting since
the Second World War and delivers a
speech so devoid of substance that he
might as well have made it on speaker-
phone from a beach in Hawaii. His aides
argue in private that he had no choice,
such is the opposition on Capitol Hill
to any action that could challenge the
dominance of fossil fuels in American
life. And so the nation that put a man
on the Moon can’t summon the
collective will to protect men and
women back here on Earth from the
consequences of an economic model
and lifestyle choice that has taken on
the mantle of a religion.
Then a Chinese premier who is in the
process of converting his Communist
nation to that new faith (high-carbon
consumer capitalism) takes such
umbrage at Barack Obama’s speech
that he refuses to meet – sulking in his
hotel room, as if this were a teenager’s
house party instad of a final effort to
stave off the breakdown of our
biosphere.
Late in the evening, the two men meet
and cobble together a collection of
paragraphs that they call a “deal”,
By Joss Garman
although in reality it has all the meaning
and authority of a bus ticket, not that
it stops them signing it with great
solemnity.
Obama’s team then briefs the travelling
White House press pack – most of
whom, it seems, understand about as
much about global-climate politics as
our own lobby hacks know about
baseball. Before we know it, The New
York Times and CNN are declaring the
birth of a “meaningful” accord.
Meanwhile, a friend on an African
delegation emails to say that he and
many fellow members of the G77 bloc
of developing countries are streaming
into the corridors after a long
discussion about the perilous state of
the talks, only to see Obama on the
television announcing that the world
has a deal.
It’s the first they’ve heard about it, and
a few minutes later, as they examine
the text, they realise very quickly that
it effectively condemns their continent
to a century of devastating
temperature rises.
By now, the European leaders – who
know this thing is a farce but have to
present it to their publics as progress –
have their aides phoning the directors
of civil society organisations spinning
that the talks have been a success.
A success? This deal crosses so many
of the red lines laid out by Europe
before this summit started that there
are scarlet skid marks across the Bella
Centre, and one honest European
diplomat tells us this is a “shitty, shitty
deal”. Quite so.
This “deal” is beyond bad. It contains
no legally binding targets and no
indication of when or how they will
come about. There is not even a
declaration that the world will aim to
keep global temperature rises below C.
Instead, leaders merely recognise the
science behind that vital threshold, as
if that were enough to prevent us
crossing it.
The only part of this deal that anyone
sane came close to welcoming was the
$100bn global climate fund, but it’s
now apparent that even this is largely
made up of existing budgets, with no
indication of how new money will be
raised and distributed so that poorer
countries can go green and adapt to
continued next page

STATEMENT
PALESTINE: A TURNING
POINT? ................. One day before the first
anniversary of the barbaric Israeli assault on Gaza
that massacred 1434 Palestinians, the Israeli armed
forces killed six Palestinians in two separate incidents
in Gaza and the West Bank ..............................P.3
ARTICLES
CRUDE OIL POLITICS IN OCCUPIED IRAQ
By Zafar Bangash ...................................... page 4
SWISS MINARET BAN VIOLATES BASIC HUMAN
RIGHTS
By International Progress Organization ......... page 4
T HE M AGUINDANAO M ASSACRE , THE
B ANGSAMORO P ROBLEM AND THE P EACE
PROCESS
By Soliman M. Santos, Jr. ............................. page 5
BREAKING THE GREAT AUSTRALIAN SILENCE PART 2
By John Pilger ........................................... page 9

I N T E R N AT I O N A L MOVEMENT
continued from page 1
climate change.
I know our politicians feel they have
to smile and claim success; they feel
that’s the only way to keep this train
on the tracks. But we’ve passed that
point – we need to go back to first
principles now. We have to admit to
ourselves the scale of the problem and
recognise that at its core this carbon
crisis is, in fact, a political crisis.
Until politicians recognise that, they’re
kidding themselves, and, more than
that, they’re kidding us too.
Not all of our politicians deserve the
opprobrium of a dismayed world. Our
own Ed Miliband fought hard, on no
sleep, for a better outcome; while
Brazil’s President Luiz Inacio Lula da
Silva offered to financially assist other
developing countries to cope with
climate change, and put a relatively bold
carbon target on the table. But the EU
didn’t move on its own commitment
(one so weak we’d actually have to
work hard not to meet it), while the
WHAT WAS AGREED AT COPENHAGEN: AND WHAT WAS LEFT OUT
National leaders and sleep-deprived
negotiators thrashed out a text late last
night that could determine the balance
of power in the world and possibly the
future of our species. The list below
gives a breakdown of the key points:
Temperature
“The increase in global temperature
should be below two degrees.”
This will disappoint the 100-plus
nations who wanted a lower maximum
of 1.5C, including many small island
states who fear that even at this level
their homes may be submerged.
Peak date for carbon emissions
“We should co-operate in achieving the
peaking of global and national
emissions as soon as possible,
recognising that the time frame for
peaking will be longer in developing
countries …” This vague phrase is a
disappointment to those who want
nations to set a date for emissions to
fall, but will please developing
FOR A JUST WORLD
United States offered nothing and China
stood firm.
Before the talks began, I was of the
opinion that we would know
Copenhagen was a success only when
plans for new coal-fired power stations
across the developed world were
dropped. If the giant utilities saw in the
outcome of Copenhagen an
unmistakable sign that governments
were now determined to act, and that
coal plants this century would be too
expensive to run under the regime
agreed at this meeting, then this summit
would have succeeded.
Instead, as details of the agreement
emerged last night, we received
reports of Japanese opposition MPs
popping champagne corks as they
savoured the possible collapse of their
new government’s carbon targets.
It’s not just that we didn’t get to where
we needed to be, we’ve actually ceded
huge amounts of ground. There is
nothing in this deal – nothing – that
would persuade an energy utility that
By Jonathan Watts
countries who want to put the economy
first.
Emissions cuts
“Parties commit to implement
individually or jointly the quantified
economy-wide emissions targets for
2020 as listed in appendix 1 before 1
February 2010.”
This phrase commits developed nations
to start work almost immediately on
reaching their mid-term targets. For the
US, this is a weak 14-17% reduction
on 2005 levels; for the EU, a still-to-
be-determined goal of 20-30% on 1990
levels; for Japan, 25% and Russia 15-
25% on 1990 levels. The accord makes
no mention of 2050 targets, which
dropped out of the text over the course
of the day.
Forests
“Substantial finance to prevent
deforestation; adaptation, technology
development and transfer and
capacity.”
2
MAIN ARTICLES
the era of dirty coal is over. And the
implications for humanity of that simple
fact are profound.
I know we Greens are partial to
hyperbole. We use language as a
bludgeon to direct attention to the crisis
we are facing, and you will hear much
more of it in the coming days and
weeks. But, really, it is no exaggeration
to describe the outcome of
Copenhagen as a historic failure that
will live in infamy.
In a single day, in a single space, a
spectacle was played out in front of a
disbelieving audience of people who
have read and understood the stark
warnings of humanity’s greatest
scientific minds. And what they
witnessed was nothing less than the
very worst instincts of our species
articulated by the most powerful men
who ever lived.
20 December 2009
Joss Garman is a Greenpeace activist and co-
founder of Plane Stupid.
Source: The Independent(UK), reproduced in
www.countercurrents.org/garman191209.htm
This is crucial because more than 15%
of emissions are attributed to the
clearing of forests. Conservation
groups are concerned that this phrase
lacks safeguards.
Money
“The collective commitment by
developed countries is to provide new
and additional resources amounting to
$30bn for 2010-12 … Developed
countries set a goal of mobilising jointly
$100bn a year by 2020 to address needs
of developing countries.”
This is the cash that oils the deal. The
first section is a quick financial injection
from rich nations to support developing
countries’ efforts. Longer term, a far
larger sum of money will be committed
to a Copenhagen Green Climate Fund.
But the agreement leaves open the
questions of where the money will
come from, and how it will be used.
Key elements of earlier drafts dropped
continued next page

I N T E R N AT I O N A L MOVEMENT
continued from page 2
during yesterday’s negotiations:
An attempt to replace Kyoto
“Affirming our firm resolve to adopt
one or more legal instruments …”
This preamble, killed off during the
day, was the biggest obstacle for
negotiators. It left open the question
of whether to continue a twin-track
process that maintains Kyoto, or
FOR A JUST WORLD
whether to adopt a single agreement.
Europe, Japan, Australia and Canada
are desperate to move to a one-track
approach, but developing nations
refused to kill off the protocol.
Deadline for a treaty
“… as soon as possible and no later
than COP16 …”
This appeared in the morning draft and
disappeared during the day; it set a
3
S TA T E M E N T
December 2010 date for the conclusion
of a legally binding treaty.
The final text drops this date, but small
print suggests it will still be next year.
19 December 2009
Jonathan Watts is The Guardian's Asia
environment correspondent.
Source: The Guardian, reproduced in
www.countercurrents.org/
garman191209.htm

PALESTINE: A TURNING POINT?
One day before the first anniversary of
the barbaric Israeli assault on Gaza that
massacred 1434 Palestinians, the Israeli
armed forces killed six Palestinians in two
separate incidents in Gaza and the West
Bank.
The 1.5 million people of Gaza continue
to be under one of the most inhuman,
unjust sieges in recent times — a siege
that began eighteen months before the
assault on Gaza on 27 December 2008.
From all accounts, everyday is a struggle
to survive; the most basic necessities of
life are not readily available to the vast
majority of the populace.
This Israeli imposed blockade will now
be tightened through the construction of
a bombproof steel wall by the Egyptian
authorities along the Gaza border. The
wall, demanded by Israel, is being built
with the assistance of US money and the
US Army Corps of Engineers.
The situation in the West Bank is also
grim. The multitude of checkpoints
remains. For all intents and purposes,
Israeli settlements are expanding and the
Wall that attempts to separate Israeli
settlements and West Bank aquifers from
the Palestinians is as formidable as ever.
To make matters worse, Fatah, in charge
of the West Bank, and Hamas, dominant
over Gaza, are still at loggerheads.
If there is a silver lining, it comes in the
form of the systematic expose of Israeli
inhumanity and the injustices perpetrated
against the Palestinians contained in two
highly regarded reports presented to the
UN in the course of the last nine months.
In March 2009, Richard Falk, the UN’s
Special Rapporteur for the Occupied
STATEMENT
Palestinian Territories described Israel’s Israeli goods. This is part of the
Gaza assault as “ a war crime of the international Boycott, Divestment and
greatest magnitude under international Sanctions campaign directed at forcing
law,” in a report to the UN Human Rights Israel to end the occupation of Palestine.
Council. Richard Goldstone who headed It is the first time that a student body in
a UN fact-finding mission to Gaza Britain has made such a move.
criticized Israel’s collective punishment
Even in Israel, groups like Physicians for
of the people of Gaza during the 22-day
Human Rights and Breaking the Silence,
assault in his September report.
comprising veteran Israeli soldiers, have
accused their government of violating
Though the UN General Assembly
international law and transgressing the
endorsed the Goldstone Report, there has
Geneva Conventions in the Gaza assault.
been no action against Israel at the
international level. The reason is
However, the most significant citizens’
obvious. The United States government
initiatives since Gaza have come from the
and its European allies are determined to
Gaza Freedom March (GFM) and the Viva
ensure that the Israeli government will
Palestina convoy to Gaza. The first
never be in the dock. Other powers with
comprising 1400 individuals from more
some clout, obsessed as they are with
than 40 countries plans to march to the
their own interests, are not prepared to
Erez border-crossing between Israel and
stick their neck out for the Palestinian
Gaza to demand an end to the siege. The
cause. Most Arab and Muslim
second made up of 220 vehicles hopes to
governments — rhetoric and UN votes
deliver ambulances, food, medicines and
aside— are afraid to antagonize the US
other supplies to the people of Gaza. Two
partly because they are so dependent
brave, young Malaysians, Juana Jaafar
upon the latter for their political survival
and Ram Kathigesu, are part of the
or their economic well-being.
convoy. In both instances, the Egyptian
government is proving to be a hurdle.
This is why at the end of the day we have
to rely upon elements within global
Whether the two initiatives succeed or
citizenry to carry the Palestinian cause
not, they may emerge as a critical turning
forward. After Gaza, groups such as the
point in the Palestinian struggle for
International Committee of the Red Cross
liberation. They may set into motion an
(ICRC), Oxfam and Amnesty International
array of other moves aimed at mobilizing
have become much more vocal in their
and galvanizing the people of the world
condemnation of Israel’s ruthless
behind one of the noblest causes of our
behavior in occupied Palestine.
time.
Individual journalists have also adopted
Dr. Chandra Muzaffar,
a principled position in articulating the
President,
rights of the Palestinians. Malaysia’s
International Movement for a Just
Shahanaaz Habib is one such journalist.
World (JUST),
In Britain, the Sussex University Malaysia.
Students’ Union has voted to boycott 28 December 2009.

I N T E R N AT I O N A L MOVEMENT
CRUDE OIL POLITICS
The theft of Iraq’s oil by the West has
picked up speed. In typical colonial
style, the great robbery is being
facilitated by former officials of the
Bush administration that had served in
Iraq. These include Jay Garner, first
head of the US occupation
administration in Iraq following the
invasion. He is advisor to the Canadian
company Vast Exploration, which has
a 37% stake in an oilfield in the Kurdish
north. Peter Galbraith, US foreign
policy advisor close to Vice President
Joe Biden and Senator John Kerry,
advised the Kurds about their rights
when the Iraqi constitution was being
drafted. He pushed through provisions
that granted Kurds exclusive rights over
oil and gas, of which he is now the
principal beneficiary.
Galbraith received exploration rights to
one of Kurdistan’s major oil fields in
the Dohuk region in early 2004 after
he negotiated a contract allowing the
Norwegian oil company DNO to drill
for oil there. These explosive
revelations were made in the
Norwegian newspaper Dagens
Naeringsliv that discovered documents
linking Galbraith to DNO. The paper
wrote that when drillers struck oil in a
rich new Tawke field in December
2005, no one but a handful of
government and business officials and
members of Galbraith’s inner circle
knew that the constitutional provisions
he had pushed through only months
earlier could enrich him so
handsomely. His potential earnings
could top $100 million or more.
Galbraith is not alone in this great theft.
Zalmay Khalilzad, former US
ambassador to Afghanistan, Iraq and
the UN, has established his own
SWISS MINARET BAN VIOLATES BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS
By International Progress Organization (I.P.O.)
In a statement issued yesterday, the
President of the International Progress
Organization (I.P.O.), Dr. Hans
Köchler, strongly condemned the
amendment to the Constitution of the
Swiss Confederation, which bans the
FOR A JUST WORLD
IN OCCUPIED IRAQ
By Zafar Bangash
corporate consultancy firm in the
Kurdish city of Irbil. Obviously, he is
also looking for rich pickings.
Former US Vice President Dick Cheney
is an oil man; as are his cohorts. In
early 2003, he stated unabashedly that
Iraq has “our oil under their soil.” Now
they are going after it. On November
5, Iraq awarded development rights
over the huge West Qurna oilfield in
southern Iraq to Exxon-Mobil and
Royal Dutch Shell. The “fruits” of the
Iraq war at the expense of 1.3 million
Iraqi lives and some $2 trillion in costs,
are now being picked by Western,
primarily US multinational companies,
by gaining control of some of the
largest oilfields in the world.
West Qurna’s proven oil reserves are
8.7 billion barrels compared to Iraq’s
total reserves of 115 billion barrels.
Before the March 2003 US invasion,
the Iraqi regime of Saddam Husain had
awarded this contract to Lukoil,
Russia’s major oil company. The US-
installed puppet regime in Baghdad tore
up all such agreements and has signed
new ones with Western multinationals
under the watchful gaze of their
American masters.
Exxon-Mobil is the first US-based oil
giant to sign a 20-year contract that
together with Dutch company Shell
plans to boost daily production at West
Qurna from 300,000 barrels to 2.3
million barrels per day over the next
six years. The Iraqi regime has agreed
to compensate the companies for the
cost of upgrading the field; it may run
as high as $50 billion. Further, they will
be paid $1.90 for each barrel
extracted. Happy days are here again
for Western multinationals. The spilling
building of minarets.
The provision of Art. 72, Par. 3 of the
amended Federal Constitution – “Der
Bau von Minaretten ist verboten” / “The
building of minarets is prohibited” –
4
A R T I C L E S
of Iraqi blood is clearly cheaper than
oil.
The Exxon-Mobil/Shell contract
followed a similar deal signed with
British Petroleum (BP) and China
National Petroleum Corp (CNPC), on
November 3 giving them development
rights to the massive Rumaila field and
its reserves of 17 billion barrels. The
deals are classified as “service”
agreements enabling the regime to
bypass parliament that may not have
approved such deals.
Other deals are in the pipeline, reversing
nearly four decades of struggle to claw
back control of the Middle East’s only
and most precious commodity — oil
— from rapacious multinational
corporations. Iraq nationalised its oil
industry in 1975 following a trend set
up by Iran as early as 1953 that
unfortunately led to its government
being overthrown by a CIA-British led
coup. A consortium made up of the US-
based Occidental, Italy’s Eni and South
Korea’s Kogas has signed a tentative
agreement for the Zubair oilfield with
reserves of 4 billion barrels. Japanese
Nippon Oil, Eni and Spanish company
Repsol are bidding for a field in
Nasiriyah, which has similar-sized
reserves. In Kirkuk (Iraqi Kurdistan),
Royal Dutch Shell is negotiating a
contract to develop untapped areas of
a major oilfield, thought to have as
much as 10 billion barrels in reserves
despite being in production since 1934.
Western multinationals are about to be
awash in windfall oil profits.
December 2009
Zafar Bangash is a Muslim thinker and
activist living in Canada
Source: Crecent International Dec. ‘09 issue.
constitutes a clear and open violation
of Switzerland’s legal obligations as a
State Party to the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
(to which Switzerland acceded on 18
continued next page

I N T E R N AT I O N A L MOVEMENT
continued from page 4
June 1992) and of the European
Convention for the Protection of
Human Rights and Fundamental
Freedoms (which Switzerland ratified
on 28 November 1974).
Art. 18 of the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights, adopted
by the United Nations General
Assembly on 16 December 1966,
provides that everyone shall have the
“freedom, either individually or in
community with others and in public
or private, to manifest his religion or
belief in worship, observance, practice
and teaching.” Art. 9 of the European
Human Rights Convention contains an
identical provision; Art. 14 of that
Convention furthermore prohibits
discrimination on the ground of
religion.
Because the minaret ban has been
enacted by means of an amendment to
the Federal Constitution – through
Federal Popular Initiative and
Referendum –, a judicial review within
the Swiss constitutional system
appears unlikely. The Swiss citizens
have to be reminded, however, that
even they – as the “sovereign people”
and supreme political authority under
the country’s Constitution – cannot
abrogate basic human rights norms,
which (a) form part of jus cogens and
(b) are international treaty obligations
of the Swiss Confederation. It makes
no difference whether decisions have
been made by way of direct or
representative democracy: the principle
of pacta sunt servanda applies in all
circumstances.
THE MAGUINDANAO MASSACRE, THE BANGSAMORO PROBLEM
THE PEACE PROCESS
As a peace advocate who has
considered Muslim Mindanao as my
second region (after Bicol), I join so
many others in their shock at and
condemnation of what is now called
the Maguindanao Massacre of 23
November 2009, likewise in expressing
sympathies for the close relatives and
friends of those who were killed,
FOR A JUST WORLD
The President of the International
Progress Organization appealed to the
UN Human Rights Council to address,
on the basis of its mandate as
subsidiary organ of the United Nations
General Assembly, the situation
resulting from Switzerland’s violation
of the right to freedom of religion.
Dr. Köchler further stated that, by
virtue of Art. 33 of the European
Human Rights Convention, any State
Party to the Convention may refer
Switzerland’s breach of her obligations
under Arts. 9 and 14 of the Convention
to the European Court of Human
Rights in Strasbourg. Irrespective of
individual applications by Swiss
citizens whose rights have been
violated by the ban, it is to be hoped
that at least one Member State of the
Council of Europe will raise the issue
before the Court.
He further said that the minaret ban
has seriously damaged Switzerland’s
reputation as host country of United
Nations human rights bodies and as
depositary State of the Geneva
Conventions. Switzerland must not
engage in a policy of double standards,
preaching respect of human rights
By Soliman M. Santos, Jr.
especially two fellow human rights
lawyers, and calling for speedy justice
and other necessary measures of
redress and reform. There will never
be enough words to describe this
almost unbelievably depraved and
inhuman incident.
A Philippine Problem
5
A R T I C L E S
abroad and violating one of the most
basic rights at home.
The President of the International
Progress Organization also condemned
the incitement to hatred and the anti-
Islamic campaign that preceded the
referendum in Switzerland. The blatant
and discriminatory interference by the
Swiss electorate into the Muslim
community’s exercise of religious
freedom not only threatens inter-
religious peace in Switzerland and
Europe, but seriously undermines
efforts at a better understanding
between Christians and Muslims
worldwide. Regrettably, the Swiss
electorate’s decision has further
emboldened anti-Islamic groups and
politicians, and has strengthened racist
and anti-foreigner sentiments
everywhere in Europe.
Domestic peace and political stability
in the larger Europe will depend on
how the peoples of the continent will
deal with the multicultural realities of
our time. Religious discrimination and
double standards in the application of
human rights may bring Europe one
step closer to a “clash of civilizations”
that will endanger the continent’s
future, the President of the I.P.O.
concluded.
3 December 2009
Source: International Progress Organization.
Enquiries: info@i-p-o.org This e-mail address
is being protected from spambots. You need
JavaScript enabled to view it , phone +43-1-
5332877, fax +43-1-5332962, postal address:
A-1010 Vienna, Kohlmarkt 4, Austria
AND
The Maguindanao Massacre has been
rightly explained as the tragic, though
rather extreme, consequence of the
Philippine central government’s or the
Arroyo administration’s well-known
deliberate cultivation and patronage of
the Ampatuan political warlord clan and
dynasty as its main instrument for
continued next page

I N T E R N AT I O N A L MOVEMENT
continued from page 5
political control in Maguindanao
province, if not also the rest of the
Autonomous Region in Muslim
Mindanao (ARMM). Political control
vis-à-vis political rivals or opponents
of the Arroyo administration, and also
vis-à-vis the main Moro rebel groups,
notably the Moro Islamic Liberation
Front (MILF) whose main provincial
and ethnic base is Maguindanao. Thus,
the characterization by some analysts
of the Ampatuan clan as “political
entrepreneurs” who have become
“Malacanang’s monster (or
Frankenstein).” This has been a
symbiotic central-local axis of power,
with mutual benefits also extending to
wealth. The analysts have situated
such local warlordism, apparently
becoming more voracious and brazen
in its arrogance of power, in the context
of a conversely ever-weakening
Philippine state.
The Maguindanao Massacre has again
brought to fore, but more shockingly,
the weaknesses of Philippine
governance in the ungovernable “Wild,
Wild West” of Muslim Mindanao.
Among these weaknesses are
“structural inequities in our political
system, including control by an elite
minority, traditional politicians and
political dynasties, and enforcement of
such control through private armies” –
this itself already identified by the
National Unification Commission
(NUC) Consultations in 1992-93 as one
of the root causes of the internal armed
conflicts in the country. The NUC then
had specific recommendations to
address these root causes, including for
establishing a regime of good
governance, upholding respect for
people’s rights and improving the
administration of justice, and
establishment of a pluralistic political
society. But the ruling system has
proven to be intractable and incorrigible
to various on-and-off reform efforts.
And so, the heinous crime of political
violence which is the Maguindanao
FOR A JUST WORLD
Massacre is just the latest, though the
most shocking, indictment of the
Philippine political, electoral, security
and justice system. The most
immediate call or challenge is for
justice and against impunity. Crime,
esp. heinous crime, must be punished,
but not necessarily with the restoration
of the equally heinous death penalty.
A criminal justice system deals properly
not only with the offended and the
offending parties but also with the
witnesses – without whom there is no
case, no due process, no establishment
of guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The
willingness and safety of witnesses in
the Maguindanao area in turn depend
on a degree of protection, presumably
mainly by the police, against threats to
their lives from the private armies of
the implicated political warlord clan
there. Not only these private armies
but also the Maguindanao police and
their official auxiliaries (Civilian
Volunteer Organizations or CVOs) as
well as those of the military (Special
CAFGU Active Auxiliaries or SCAAs)
are part of the problem. Their
dismantling and disarming (and not
only those of the currently
predominant Ampatuan clan) have
become necessary to serve the ends
not only of criminal justice and human
security but also of the integrity of the
coming 2010 electoral process – i.e.
“ensuring free, orderly, honest,
peaceful, and credible elections,” as
constitutionally mandated.
But deputization of law enforcement
agencies and instrumentalities for
election duties will not be enough for
the reform of the political and electoral
system. It again bears noting that the
6
A R T I C L E S
second of three principles of the
comprehensive peace process, as
formulated out of the NUC
Consultations, is that “It seeks to
establish a genuinely pluralistic society,
where all individuals and groups are
free to engage in peaceful competition
for predominance of their political
programs without fear, through the
exercise of rights and liberties
guaranteed by the Constitution, and
where they may compete for political
power through an electoral system that
is free, fair and honest.” In addition,
as far as the Philippine National Police
(PNP) and the Armed Forces of the
Philippines (AFP) to be deputized are
concerned, there is also a great need
for security sector reform. In short,
the jolt that has come with the
Maguindanao Massacre might as well
be taken as an impetus not only for
more effective immediate and short-
term measures but also for a more
thorough-going strategic process of
reform, if not overhaul, of nothing less
than the whole state of Philippine
politics and governance.
A Bangsamoro Problem
Thus far, we have dealt with only one
level, which we might call the
Philippine problem. Because the
Maguindanao Massacre happened in
Muslim Mindanao mainly between two
Moro political clans, there is also the
level of the Bangsamoro Problem –
which the Mindanao Peace Process is
supposed to solve. This peace process,
in grappling with the solution to the
Bangsamoro Problem, should now
consider local political warlordism of
the Moro variety (which has its specific
characteristics compared to the
mainstream Filipino Christian variety)
as part of that problem. To put it more
clearly or concretely, will it be any
different or better under a future
negotiated entity of Bangsamoro self-
determination and self-governance?
What will be the internal political
continued next page

I N T E R N AT I O N A L MOVEMENT
continued from page 6
system in “a system of life and
governance suitable and acceptable to
the Bangsamoro people,” as “the end
in view” sought by the MILF in the
peace talks? To the extent that the
Government of the Republic of the
Philippines (GRP) considers the
Bangsamoro people as part of the
Filipino people, that “internal political
system” is a valid concern of the GRP
which is constitutionally mandated to
look after the welfare of its people.
Stated otherwise, why turn over
partial sovereignty if this will mean
throwing its people to the wolves?
So far, the main or key documents of
the Mindanao Peace Process have not
dealt specifically or concretely with
Moro political warlordism, their
private armies, intra-Moro political
violence, clan grudge feuds called
rido, and the “culture of the gun,” even
though there have already been many
incidents of intertwining or
entanglement between the former and
AFP-MILF armed hostilities. In the
initialed but unsigned and aborted
Memorandum of Agreement on
Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD), the
closest reference might be the
provision empowering the
Bangsamoro Juridical Entity (BJE) to
build, develop and maintain its own
institutions — inclusive of electoral,
police and internal security force, legal
and judicial system — necessary for
developing a progressive Bangsamoro
society, the details of which are
supposed to be discussed in the
negotiation of the Comprehensive
Compact.
This Comprehensive Compact is of
course supposed to deal mainly with
forging a better (because more just)
structural relationship between the
Philippine republic and the
Bangsamoro people currently within
this republic. But this should not mean
waiting for this to be achieved first –
whether in the form of higher (than
ARMM) autonomy, federalism, or
FOR A JUST WORLD
associative relationship – before being
clear enough (at least having a
blueprint) about the key internal affairs
of whatever Bangsamoro self-
determinative entity. It may in fact
have to be the other way around, i.e.
for all concerned (starting with the
Bangsamoro people) to be fairly clear
first about what we are getting into
before getting into it. One question
is, can this unfinished peace process
be a source of hope for the sort of
problem manifested by the
Maguindanao Massacre?
The finished 1996 Final Peace
Agreement (FPA) between the GRP
and the Moro National Liberation
Front (MNLF), and for that matter the
supposedly implementing Organic Act
for the ARMM, Republic Act No.
9054, likewise do not deal specifically
or concretely enough with the afore-
mentioned problems related to Moro
political warlordism. Their respective
relevant provisions on the Special
Regional Security Forces (SRSF) for
the ARMM, presumably for the
maintenance of public order and
security there, have been a perennial
bone of contention between the GRP
and MNLF up to the currently ongoing
tripartite review process regarding the
FPA implementation. But perhaps even
more telling than the provisions is the
practice as far as the helmsmanship
of the ARMM is concerned.
Three successive extended terms of
MNLF governorship (first no less
than MNLF Chairman Prof. Nur
Misuari, then his former foreign
minister Dr. Parouk Hussin) over the
ARMM has been characterized, among
others, as a failure of leadership for
autonomy, peace and development
(without absolving the culpability of
the central government which
established a low-intensity autonomy
in the first place with the 1987
Constitution). And then this extended
MNLF governorship could not prevent
the eventual ascension of the
traditional Moro political clan of the
7
A R T I C L E S
Ampatuans to the helm of the ARMM,
but of course with the indispensible help
of their friends in the Arroyo
administration. The ARMM has since
become the Ampatuan Regime in
Muslim Mindanao. This kind of
traditional Moro political leadership
(just like the mainstream Filipino
traditional politicians or “trapos”) and,
sad to say, the failed MNLF leadership,
do not at all inspire confidence as
sources of hope for new and better
politics and governance in Muslim
Mindanao.
Yet, they somehow have to be part of
the solution to the Bangsamoro
problem. Asec. Camilo Montesa of the
Office of the Presidential Adviser on
the Peace Process (OPAPP) has a good
sense of this which he calls “1
Bangsamoro Challenge” (note rather
than problem). He says “We, in the
Philippine government, are slowly
moving towards the direction of a
closer, integrated response to this
single, yet multi-faceted, 1 Bangsamoro
Challenge. We cannot continue to deal
with the MILF peace process, the
MNLF peace process, the challenge to
make ARMM work, and the threats
posed by extremist groups like the JI
and Abu Sayyaf as if they are separate
and unrelated…. While we engage
these groups differently, we want to
engage them in view of all our other
efforts across the other tables. In the
end, we are talking about the same
people, the same aspirations, the same
problems and probably the same
solutions.”
continued next page

I N T E R N AT I O N A L MOVEMENT
continued from page 7
Some Problems for the Peace Process
Assuming that the Philippine
government or side, ever fractious
especially with the coming “big bang”
elections, can semi-miraculously get its
act together, the other side of the coin
which needs this, perhaps even more
miraculously, is the Bangsamoro side.
The dynamics of division between the
MNLF and MILF has not helped their
presumably common cause for better
self-determination for the Bangsamoro
people. On top of that, they have both
been often opposed by the traditional
Moro political leadership in the different
provinces of the ARMM, not to
mention the Christian majority
provinces in the vicinity. It is really
more for the Bangsamoro side, rather
than the Philippine government, to
work on at least a critical level of intra-
Moro unity. Perhaps, independent
Bangsamoro civil society organizations
and the ulama can help this unity
process, as they have already been
helping the peace process.
The Maguindanao Massacre and the
central government response to it,
some of which has been asked for and
lauded by certain Moro quarters, might
also have some longer-term negative
implications for Bangsamoro self-
determination and the peace process.
The conceivable and possible end of
Ampatuan dominance may be of only
short-term benefit, especially for its
political rivals – the Mangudadatu clan
(already anointed by the Lakas-Kampi-
CMD ruling party for the governorship
of Maguindanao, but not yet the
ARMM), and the MILF. The central
government’s coming in strongly,
though a bit delayed, with a political,
military and prosecutorial show of
force to take control of the volatile
Maguindanao situation was/is
necessary in the immediate term from
the point of view of preventing further
lawless violence and asserting
Philippine governance and some rule
of law. What in the recent past has
FOR A JUST WORLD
been treated by the local people as
militarization by AFP occupation forces
is now probably seen by some of them
as a welcome assurance of deterrence
or protection against being caught in
the crossfire of a dreaded all-out rido
(if there was none before between the
long-time allied Ampatuan and
Mangudadatu clans, there certainly is
basis for one now).
In the longer-term, what are the
implications of all these for
Bangsamoro self-determination and the
peace process? One is that it will
probably take longer not just because
of current attention to and tension in
the political clan situation in the
Maguindanao area, also with the
election period still to come in 2010.
But also because of the more compelling
need to tie together the various strands
of the “1 Bangsamoro Challenge.” It
is now in the context of this larger
challenge that a different interpretation
or application should perhaps be made
of recent visitor U.S. Secretary of
State Hillary Clinton’s advice to “strike
while the iron is hot.”
Another longer-term negative
implication of the Maguindanao
Massacre and the central government’s
necessary immediate taking control of
the situation there is the question it
raises about the merits of Bangsamoro
self-determination and self-
governance. The political violence was
essentially between two traditional
Moro political clans, thus something
intra-Moro, but which has had to take
the central government to restore some
law and order into the situation. For
some, even on the Bangsamoro side, it
8
A R T I C L E S
seems that what is needed is stronger
central government control – the anti-
thesis of Bangsamoro self-
determination. And if the central
government can actually serve justice
for the victims, which even the MILF
is asking for, then this would be seen
as a great service by the government
to the Bangsamoro people. Why then
not stick with this system of justice if
it redeems itself in the Maguindanao
Massacre case?
The Maguindanao Massacre can only
reinforce the centuries-old anti-Moro
bias of the mainstream Filipino
Christian majority, which bias has
consistently been behind their often
knee-jerk opposition to any better
Bangsamoro self-determination. The
majority will see mainly the two
antagonist Moro clans of the
Ampatuans and the Mangudadatus, as
well as the many Christian journalist
victims. They will not see who has
long protected the Ampatuans and the
other warlords, who has armed them,
who has tolerated their abuses, and
who has imposed them on the
Bangsamoro people. Not only the
“Satanic” Ampatuans but the entire
Bangsamoro people, those “terrible
Moros,” will be demonized by the
Filipino majority and the aggrieved
media. Only Moros can counter-act
whatever unfair image of them, and it
will have to be by deeds more than by
words. One Moro friend has said,
“The best the Moro can do is to face
the consequence of this heinous political
crime.”
These are times that call for
Bangsamoro statesmanship as they
also call for Filipino statesmanship.
The latter is definitely not shown by
those Filipino candidates for high office
(from Senator up) who immediately
opportunistically took advantage of the
Maguindanao Massacre to project their
political party (clue: they were among
the most vocal against the MOA-AD).
The MILF for its part took the
continued next page

I N T E R N AT I O N A L MOVEMENT
continued from page 8
opportunity to somewhat awkwardly
call attention to the actually more
heinous massacres of thousands of
Moros by Philippine state forces like
the Palimbang, Patikul, Pata, Manili,
Kauswagan and Magsaysay Massacres
for which justice has not been served
to this day. So, perhaps one critical
question in all these is, who can better
serve justice?
The MILF may not be in a position to
serve justice in the Maguindanao
Massacre case where the main
protagonists are not under its
“jurisdiction.” But the MILF certainly
BREAKING
Rupert Murdoch set the media war
agenda shortly before the invasion of
Iraq when he said, “There’s going to
be collateral damage. And if you really
want to be brutal about it, better get it
done now.”
More than a million people have been
killed in Iraq as a result of that invasion
- “an episode”, according to one study,
“more deadly than the Rwandan
genocide”. In our name. Are we aware
of this in Australia?
I once walked along Mutanabi Street
in Baghdad. The atmosphere was
wonderful. People sat in cafes, reading.
Musicians played. Poets recited.
Painters painted. This was the cultural
heart of Mesopotania, the great
civilisation to which we in the West
owe a great deal, including the written
word. The people I spoke to were both
Sunni and Shia, but they called
themselves Iraqis. They were cultured
and proud.
Today, they are fled or dead. Mutanabi
Street has been blown to bits. In
Baghdad, the great museums and
libraries are looted. The universities are
sacked. And people who once took
coffee with each other, and married
each other, have been turned into
enemies. “Building democracy”, said
FOR A JUST WORLD
has several recent cases under its
jurisdiction, particularly its 102nd, 103rd
and 105th base commanders whom it
had acknowledged to have committed
unsanctioned indignation attacks
against Christian civilian communities
in Central Mindanao in August 2008,
and more recently its 113 th base
commander being implicated in the
kidnapping of Irish priest Fr. Michael
Sinnott last October. The MILF has
yet to show convincingly,
transparently and accountably that its
own criminal or military justice
system has served justice or even
military discipline in these cases.
When we often speak of “peace based
THE GREAT AUSTRALIAN SILENCE
By John Pilger
PART 2
Howard and Bush and Blair.
One of my favourite Harold Pinter
plays is Party Time. It’s set in an
apartment in a city like Sydney. A
party is in progress. People are
drinking good wine and eating
canapés. They seem happy. They are
chatting and affirming and smiling.
They are stylish and very self aware.
But something is happening outside in
the street, something terrible and
oppressive and unjust, for which the
people at the party share responsibility.
There’s a fleeting sense of
discomfort, a silence, before the
chatting and laughing resumes.
How many of us live in that
apartment?
Let me put it another way. I know a
very fine Israeli journalist called Amira
Hass. She went to live in and report
from Gaza. I asked her why she did
that. She explained how her mother,
Hannah, was being marched from a
cattle train to the Nazi concentration
camp at Bergen-Belsen when she saw
a group of German women looking at
the prisoners, just looking, saying
nothing, silent. Her mother never
forgot what she called this despicable
9
A R T I C L E S
on justice,” this could very well be one
concrete application of this principle.
The side that can and does act with
justice, in both the criminal and political
realms, must be the source of hope.
30 November 2009
Soliman M. Santos, Jr. is a Bicolano human
rights and IHL lawyer; a peace advocate,
researcher and writer; and the co-author of a
forthcoming early 2010 book Primed and
Purposeful: Armed Groups and Human
Security Efforts in the Philippines to be co-
published by his South-South Network (SSN)
for Non-State Armed Group Engagement
(www.southsouthnetwork.com).
“looking from the side”.
I believe that if we apply justice and
courage to human affairs, we begin to
make sense of our world. Then, and
only then, can we make progress.
However, if we apply justice in Australia,
it’s tricky, isn’t it? Because we are then
obliged to break our greatest silence –
to no longer “look from the side” in our
own country.
In the 1960s, when I first went to South
Africa to report apartheid, I was
welcomed by decent, liberal people
whose complicit silence was the
underpinning of that tyranny. They told
me that Australians and white South
Africans had much in common, and
they were right. The good people of
Johannesburg could live within a few
kilometres of a community called
Alexandra, which lacked the most basic
services, the children stricken with
disease. But they looked from the side
and did nothing.
In Australia, our indifference is
different. We have become highly
competent at divide and rule: at
promoting those black Australians who
tell us what we want to hear. At
professional conferences their keynote
continued next page

I N T E R N AT I O N A L MOVEMENT
continued from page 9
speeches are applauded, especially
when they blame their own people and
provide the excuses we need. We
create boards and commissions on
which sit nice, decent liberal people like
the prime minister’s wife. And nothing
changes.
We certainly don’t like comparisons
with apartheid South Africa. That
breaks the Australian silence.
Near the end of apartheid, black South
Africans were being jailed at the rate
of 851 per 100,000 of population.
Today, black Australians are being jailed
at a national rate that is more than five
times higher. Western Australia jails
Aboriginal men at eight times the
apartheid figure.
In 1983, Eddie Murray was killed in a
police cell in Wee Waa in New South
Wales by “a person or persons
unknown”. That’s how the coroner
described it. Eddie was a rising rugby
league star. But he was black and had
to be cut down to size. Eddie’s parents,
Arthur and Leila Murray, launched one
of the most tenacious and courageous
campaigns for justice I’ve known
anywhere. They stood up to authority.
They showed grace and patience and
knowledge. And they never gave in.
When Leila died in 2003, I wrote a
tribute for her funeral. I described her
as an Australian hero. Arthur is still
fighting for justice. He’s in his sixties.
He’s a respected elder, a hero. A few
months ago, the police in Narrabri
offered Arthur a lift home and instead
took him for a violent ride in their
bullwagon. He ended up in hospital,
bruised and battered. That is how
Australian heroes are treated.
In the same week the police did this -
as they do to black Australians, almost
every day - Kevin Rudd said that his
government, and I quote, “doesn’t have
a clear idea of what’s happening on the
ground” in Aboriginal Australia.
How much information does the prime
minister need? How many ideas? How
many reports? How many royal
commissions? How many inquests?
FOR A JUST WORLD
How many funerals? Is he not aware
that Australia appears on an
international “shame list” for having
failed to eradicate trachoma, a
preventable disease of poverty that
blinds Aboriginal children?
In August this year, the United Nations
once again distinguished Australia with
the kind of shaming once associated
with South Africa. We discriminate on
the basis of race. That’s it in a nutshell.
This time the UN blew a whistle on
the so-called “intervention”, which
began with the Howard government
smearing Aboriginal communities in the
Northern Territory with allegations of
sex slavery and paedophile rings in
“unthinkable numbers”, according to
the minister for indigenous affairs.
In May last year, official figures were
released and barely reported.
Out of 7433 Aboriginal children
examined by doctors, 39 had been
referred to the authorities for suspected
abuse. Of those, a maximum of four
possible cases were identified. So much
for the “unthinkable numbers”. Of
course, child abuse does exist, in black
Australia and white Australia. The
difference is that no soldiers invaded
the North Shore; no white parents were
swept aside; no white welfare has been
“quarantined”. What the doctors found
they already knew: that Aboriginal
children are at risk - from the effects
of extreme poverty and the denial of
resources in one of the world’s richest
countries.
Billions of dollars have been spent –
not on paving roads and building
houses, but on a war of legal attrition
waged against black communities. I
interviewed an Aboriginal leader called
Puggy Hunter. He carried a bulging
brief case and he sat in the West
Australian heat with his head in his
hands.
I said, “You’re exhausted.”
He replied, “Look, I spend most of my
life in meetings, fighting lawyers,
pleading for our birthright. I’m just
tired to death, mate.” He died soon
afterwards, in his forties.
10
A R T I C L E S
Kevin Rudd has made a formal apology
to the First Australians. He spoke fine
words. For many Aboriginal people,
who value healing, the apology was
very important. However, the Sydney
Morning Herald published a
remarkably honest editorial. It
described the apology as “a piece of
political wreckage” that “the Rudd
government has moved quickly to clear
away... in a way that responds to some
of its supporters’ emotional needs”.
Since the apology, Aboriginal poverty
has got worse. The promised housing
programme is a grim joke. No gap has
even begun to be bridged. Instead, the
federal government has threatened
communities in the Northern Territory
that if they don’t hand over their
precious freehold leases, they will be
denied the basic services that we, in
white Australia, take for granted.
In the 1970s, Aboriginal communities
were granted comprehensive land
rights in the Northern Territory, and
John Howard set about clawing back
these rights with bribery and bullying.
The Labour government is doing the
same. You see, there are deals to be
done. The Territory contains
extraordinary mineral wealth, especially
uranium. And Aboriginal land is wanted
as a radioactive waste dump. This is
very big business, and foreign
companies want a piece of the action.
It is a continuation of the darkest side
of our colonial history: a land grab.
Where are the influential voices raised
against this? Where are the peak legal
bodies? Where are those in the media
who tell us endlessly how fair-minded
we are? Silence.
continued next page

I N T E R N AT I O N A L MOVEMENT
continued from page 10
But let us not listen to their silence. Let
us pay tribute to those Australians who
are not silent, who don’t look from the
side – those like Barbara Shaw and
Larissa Behrendt, and the Mutitjulu
community leaders and their tenacious
lawyer George Newhouse, and Chris
Graham, the fearless editor of the
National Indigenous Times. And
Michael Mansell, Lyle Munro, Gary
Foley, Vince Forrester and Pat Dodson,
and Arthur Murray.
And let us celebrate Australia’s historian
of courage and truth, Henry Reynolds,
who stood against white supremacists
posing as academics and journalists.
And the young people who closed
down Woomera detention camp, then
stood up to the political thugs who took
over Sydney during Apec two years
ago. And good for Ian Thorpe, the great
swimmer, whose voice raised against
the intervention has yet to find an echo
among the pampered sporting heroes
in a country where the gap between
white and black sporting facilities and
opportunity has closed hardly at all.
Silences can be broken, if we will it.
In one of the greatest poems of the
English language, Percy Shelley wrote
this:
Rise like lions after slumber
In unvanquishable number
Shake your chains to earth like dew
Which in sleep has fallen on you
Ye are many – they are few
But we need to make haste. An historic
shift is taking place. The major western
democracies are moving towards a
corporatism. Democracy has become
a business plan, with a bottom line for
every human activity, every dream,
every decency, every hope. The main
parliamentary parties are now devoted
to the same economic policies -
socialism for the rich, capitalism for
the poor - and the same foreign policy
of servility to endless war.
This is not democracy. It is to politics
what McDonalds is to food.
How do we change this? We start by
looking beyond the stereotypes and
FOR A JUST WORLD
clichés that are fed to us as news. Tom
Paine warned long ago that if we were
denied critical knowledge, we should
storm what he called the Bastille of
words. Tom Paine did not have the
internet, but the internet on its own is
not enough.
We need an Australian glasnost, the
Russian word from the Gorbachev
era, which broadly means awakening,
transparency, diversity, justice,
disobedience. It was Edmund Burke
who spoke of the press as a Fourth
Estate. I propose a people’s Fifth Estate
that monitors, deconstructs and
counters the official news. In every
news room, in every media college,
teachers of journalism and journalists
themselves need to be challenged about
the part they play in the bloodshed,
inequity and silence that is so often
presented as normal.
The public are not the problem. It’s
true some people don’t give a damn –
but millions do, as I know from the
responses to my own films. What
people want is to be engaged – a sense
that things matter, that nothing is
immutable, that unemployment among
the young and poverty among the old
are both uncivilised and wrong. What
terrifies the agents of power is the
awakening of people: of public
consciousness.
This is already happening in countries
in Latin America where ordinary people
have discovered a confidence in
themselves they did not know existed.
We should join them before our own
freedom of speech is quietly
withdrawn and real dissent is outlawed
as the powers of the police are
expanded.
“The struggle of people against power,
“wrote Milan Kundera, “is the struggle
of memory against forgetting.”
In Australia, we have much to be proud
of – if only we knew about it and
celebrated it. Since Francis McCarty
and Mary Palmer landed here, we’ve
progressed only because people have
spoken out, only because the
suffragettes stood up, only because the
miners of Broken Hill won the world’s
11
A R T I C L E S
first 35-hour week, only because
pensions and a basic wage and child
endowment were pioneered in New
South Wales.
There is no mystery
about what has to be
done. The first step is a
treaty that guarantees
universal land rights and
a proper share of the
resources of this
country.
In my lifetime, we have become one
of the most culturally diverse places
on earth, and it has happened
peacefully, by and large. That is a
remarkable achievement – until we look
for those whose Australian civilisation
has seldom been acknowledged, whose
genius for survival and generosity and
forgiving have rarely been a source of
pride. And yet, they remain, as Henry
Reynolds wrote, the whispering in our
hearts. For they are what is unique
about us.
I believe the key to our self respect -
and our legacy to the next generation -
is the inclusion and reparation of the
First Australians. In other words,
justice. There is no mystery about what
has to be done. The first step is a treaty
that guarantees universal land rights
and a proper share of the resources of
this country.
Only then can we solve, together, issues
of health, poverty, housing, education,
employment. Only then can we feel a
pride that comes not from flags and
war. Only then can we become a truly
independent nation able to speak out
for sanity and justice in the world, and
be heard.
5 November 2009
John Pilger is a world renowned journalist
and documentary film maker.
Source: http://www.johnpilger.com/
page.asp?partid=555
You can read Part 1 of this article in the
December `09 issue of the JUST
Commentary

No. WP 1385
Malaysia
Kuala Lumpur
Pejabat Pos Besar
Postage Paid
Bayaran Pos Jelas TERBITAN BERKALA
About the International Movement for a
Just World (JUST)
The International Movement for a Just World is
a nonprofit international citizens’ organisation
which seeks to create public awareness about
injustices within the existing global system.
It also attempts to develop a deeper
understanding of the struggle for social justice
and human dignity at the global level, guided by
universal spiritual and moral values.
In furtherance of these objectives, JUST has
undertaken a number of activities including
conducting research, publishing books and
monographs, organising conferences and
seminars, networking with groups and
individuals and participating in public campaigns.
JUST has friends and supporters in more than
130 countries and cooperates actively with
other organisations which are committed to
similar objectives in different parts of the world.
www.just-international.org
MALAYSIA
Selangor Darul Ehsan
46730 Petaling Jaya
Jalan Sultan
P.O BOX 288
FOR A JUST WORLD (JUST)
INTERNATIONAL MOVEMENT
It would be much appreciated if you
could share this copy of the JUST Com-
mentary with a friend or relative. Bet-
ter still invite him/her to write to JUST
so that we can put his/her name on our
Commentary mailing list.
Please donate to JUST by Postal Order or Cheque
addressed to:
International Movement for a Just World
P.O. Box 288, Jalan Sultan, 46730, Petaling Jaya,
Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia
or direct to our bank account:
Account No. 5141 9633 1748
Malayan Banking Berhad, Damansara Utama Branch,
62-66 Jalan SS 21/35, Damansara Utama, 47400,
Petaling Jaya, Selangor Darul Ehsan,
MALAYSIA
Malaysian Tax Exemption no.
LHDN.01/35/42/51/179-6.5755
Donations from outside Malaysia should be made
by Telegraphic Transfer or Bank Draft in USD$