The Sangguniang Panlalawigan on Tuesday adopted a resolution opposing the inclusion of the province of Palawan in a proposal seeking the declaration of independence of Mindanao.
The move was made after news broke in the last week of December 2025 about a resolution drafted by certain consultative bodies and individuals in Mindanao, which is set to be submitted to the United Nations Committee on Colonization.
Board Member Ryan Maminta, in his speech delivered on the floor, said that while the resolution for independence did not specifically state that Palawan is included, proposed plans, maps, and flags indicate that the province is part of it.
“Gusto kong linawin na hindi pumapayag at hindi rin kinonsulta ang lalawigan Palawan at mga opsiyales ng lalawigan,” he said in his privilege speech.
He also noted that proponents of the declaration are asking for three things to merit independence. First, to declare that Mindanao has the right to declare political independence from the Philippines. Second, to frame Mindanao as a colonized territory. Third, a declaration of belligerent status, a concept under international law that applies to areas experiencing armed conflict or civil war.
He, however, stated that as far as he can recall, there was no period when Palawan was under belligerent status and that the conflict in Mindanao had been addressed through peace talks, which resulted in the creation of the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao (ARMM), now known as the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (BARMM) under the Bangsamoro Organic Law.
He added that historically and administratively, Palawan has never been part of Mindanao.
“May sarili tayong kasaysayan bilang isang lalawigan. Kasama ang mga IPs at ang ating kultura – Tagbanua, Palaw’an, Batak, Tao’t-Bato at maging ang mga Cuyonon,” he said.
“Yes, there is a historically and cultural link sa Mindanao at Sulu lalo na sa trade and maritime routes pero cultural interaction is not political per se. At dito pumapasok ang MINSUPALA,” Maminta added.
He noted that while there may be historical and cultural links with Mindanao through trade and maritime routes, these are not political in nature.
This is where the idea of MINSUPALA, a region proposed in the 1976 Tripoli Agreement, comes in.
He said the MINSUPALA Region did not materialize after it was turned down by Palaweños at the time, reducing it to an academic and anthropological concept used by scholars to illustrate historical connections and trade routes.
“Hindi ito political region at hindi kailanman naging political region bilang parte ng Pilipinas. Hindi rin naging legal entity at hindi ito authority para magsalita o gumawa ng desisyon para sa Palawan,” he clarified.
Moreover, he said the UNCC can only act on the belligerent status of a territory under foreign rule and not on provinces or regions that are part of a sovereign country.
He further stated that while the grievances of people in Mindanao are legitimate, what is needed is change to improve people’s lives.
“Hindi natin dine-deny ang grievances ng Mindanao. Kailangan ng pagbabago at malakasang pagkilos para maitaas ang antas ng pamumuhay. Hindi rin natin minamaliit ang inequality at underdevelopment sa rehiyon na yan. Pero underdevelopment is not colonialism. At hindi solusyon ang paghahati ng bansa. Ang solusyon ay development accountability, autonomy within the constitution and not disintegration,” he said.
