ICLA1571-812310.1163/15718123-bja100662025_Lamcheckversionfulltext International Criminal Law ReviewArticleInt. Crim. Law Rev.1567-536X1571-8123BrillLeiden International Criminal Law Review 20210000000XX00128©Koninklijke Koninklijke Brill Brill NV NV, incorporates Leiden, 2021 the imprints Brill, Brill Hes & De Graaf, Brill Nijhoff, Brill Rodopi, (2021) 1-28 Brill Sense, Hotei Publishing, mentis Verlag, Verlag Ferdinand Schöningh and Wilhelm Fink Verlag. Dealing with the Past or Moving Forward? Transitional Justice, the Bangsamoro Peace Agreement and Federalism in the Philippines Jayson S. Lamchek College of Law, Australian National University, 5 Fellows Road, Acton ACT 2601, Canberra, Australia
[email protected] George B. Radics Department of Sociology, National University of Singapore, Block AS1, Level 3, 3 Arts Link, Singapore 117570
[email protected] Abstract In the Philippines, transitional justice is plagued by questions about whether and how to deal with the past as well as whether and what kind of justice is possible in the present. In 2014, the government ended its armed conflict with Muslim secessionists by enacting a peace deal with transitional justice provisions, but also proposed federalism as a more lasting solution to conflict. This article reads the agreement’s ‘dealing with the past’ framework as reflecting a conventional approach. It then highlights continuing Muslim experiences of land dispossession and human rights abuses. It shows how transitional justice can come with uncertainty about what it means to “move forward,” what “past” to overcome, and how the past is related to “justice.” Furthermore, it argues that as the country increasingly veers towards authoritarian rule, conventional applications of transitional justice are further impeded.