55 In Search of Credible Elections and Parties: The Philippine Paradox Table 3: Provinces with the Highest Number of Private Armed Groups (PAGs) as of April 2010. Province Maguindanao Basilan Sulu Estimated Members of Active PAGs 1,496 700 420 Lanao del Norte 180 Tawi-Tawi Lanao del Sur Abra Camarines Sur Samar Zamboanga Sibugay Cagayan Masbate 140 100 77 77 63 49 43 42 Iloilo 42 Palawan Nueva Ecija 40 39 PAG Leaders Ampatuan, Mangudadatu, Sumagka Akbar, Maturan, Kallahal, Hataman Tan, Loong, Abdurajak, Anni, Tulawie, Arbison, Daud Lantod, Mansueto, Macabangon, Alingan, Cabahug, Limbona, Palao Sahali, Ali, Lee,Masdal, Asmah, Gogo Salic Valera, Luna, Crisologo, Guzman Villafuerte, Alfelor Uy, Grey Jalosjos, Famor, Lagas Mamba, Fausto, Antiporda Seachon-Lanete, Kho, Bravo, Yuson, Bunan, Maristela, Abapo, Corpus Mosqueda, Alipao, Malaga, Cordero, Lopez Reyes Joson, Gamilla, Salonga Source: Adapted from Apendix F in A Journey Towards H.O.P.E. (The Independent Commission Against Private Armies, Report to the President, 2010 [the Zeñarosa Commission] Another disturbing fact emerges from the commission data: PAGs continue to exist even in richer provinces with high human development rankings. However, political clans in these richer provinces have more varied resources other than the use of guns and brute power to pursue their electoral goals. The following provinces in the top 20 ranking for HDI in 2006 (human development indicators) had the following number of active members of PAGs: (see Table 4). Table 4: High HDI-Ranked (Human Development Index) Provinces with Private Armed Groups as of April 2010. Province Cavite La Union Bulacan Iloilo Pangasinan Number of Active Members of PAGs 34 18 20 42 35 HDI Rank (2006) 3 10 11 12 20 Source: Adapted from the Zeñarosa Commission (2010) and the Philippine Human Development Report 2008/2009.