Home Blog Page 16

Vice President Kamala Harris’ Visit Puts the Philippines in a Tight Spot With China

0

Chad de Guzman, Tue, November 22, 2022, Time Magazine

Vice President Kamala Harris departs Puerto Princesa, as she leaves the Philippines on her way to Japan, Nov. 22, 2022. Credit – Haiyun Jiang—AFP/Pool via Getty Images

American leaders have made numerous visits to the Philippines, a long-standing military ally in Southeast Asia. But Vice President Kamala Harris’ stop on Tuesday in the country’s archipelagic province of Palawan represents something new. She is the first U.S. official to go there, in what observers say is meant more as a message to China than one to the Philippines.

Read More: What Kamala Harris Brings to the White House

Harris toured a coast guard vessel and spoke to Philippine officials in Palawan to underscore America’s values and hopes for the region: “respect for sovereignty and international integrity, unimpeded lawful commerce, the peaceful resolution of disputes, and freedom of navigation.”

The Vice President’s visit, along with talks in Manila on Monday about increased joint defense projects, leaves the Philippines in a precarious position—straddling the line between the interests of its colonizer-turned-ally in the U.S. and its largest trade partner in China. Across the region, countries have been put in a similar tight spot, increasingly forced to choose a side where they might prefer to stay above the fray in the competition for global influence between the U.S. and China.

U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris meets with Philippines President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. at Malacanang Palace in Manila on Nov. 21, 2022.<span class="copyright">Haiyun Jiang—Pool/Getty Images</span>
U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris meets with Philippines President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. at Malacanang Palace in Manila on Nov. 21, 2022.Haiyun Jiang—Pool/Getty Images

Ferdinand Marcos Jr., who was elected president of the Philippines in May, said in July that, like many of his regional counterparts, he would pursue “a friend to all, an enemy to none” foreign policy. But this aim has become more untenable as differences between the world’s two superpowers grow over issues concerning human rights, economic policy, and the rule of law.

Read More: The West Will Work With the Philippines’ Next President, Even If He Is a Dictator’s Son

It’s no coincidence Harris visited Palawan. Just off its west coast is the South China Sea: a waterway that has become a regional flashpoint after Beijing lay claim to virtually all of it and its encompassing islands, citing historic maps. China is not the only claimant—the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, and Taiwan have also staked claims to overlapping maritime territories. But China has bolstered its presence in recent years, building artificial islands from the sea’s obscure reefs and sandbars and arming them with missile systems. A U.N.-backed tribunal in The Hague, Netherlands, invalidated most of China’s sweeping claims in 2016, but Beijing ignores the ruling and continues to militarize the region.

Read More: Just Where Exactly Did China Get the South China Sea Nine-Dash Line From?

Local tensions in the South China Sea eased some after the Philippines, which lodged the complaint against China to The Hague, under former President Rodrigo Duterte did not enforce the tribunal’s ruling. Duterte was keen on pivoting the Philippines away from its deference to the U.S.. As Duterte was reluctant to hold Beijing to account to smooth diplomatic relations, Chinese incursions in the contested waterway increased.

Since Marcos Jr. succeeded Duterte, he has sought to restore the Philippines’ relationship with the U.S., whose military still actively challenges China’s claims in the South China Sea. At the same time, Marcos Jr. insists that Harris’ visit will not strain Manila-Beijing ties. “I don’t think it will cause problems,” he told Philippine reporters last week. But Lucio Pitlo, a research fellow from Manila-based think tank Asia Pacific Pathways to Progress Foundation, says China will definitely be keeping an eye on the visit and will “surely express serious concern about” the U.S.’s increasing military footprint in the country.

Resetting the relationship with the U.S.

Several key treaties over past decades form the bedrock of the partnership between the U.S. and the Philippines. A 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty states that both nations will provide support to each other in the event of an external attack. This has been reaffirmed by a 1998 Visiting Forces Agreement and a 2014 Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement, allowing the U.S. military to access bases in the Southeast Asian nation and store defense equipment there. The two militaries also regularly hold joint exercises.

By virtue of its geography, the Philippines has strategic value for the U.S. in its competition with China. Besides having the South China Sea to its west, the major island of Luzon—which contains the country’s capital Manila—is only 360 km south of Taiwan.

Read More: The U.S. Risks Catastrophe If It Doesn’t Clarify Its Taiwan Strategy

Derek Grossman, a senior defense analyst at the global policy think tank RAND Corporation, says the reinvigorated U.S.-Philippines alliance under Philippine leader Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has “real security implications for China in the South China Sea.”

Gregory Poling, director of the Southeast Asia Program and Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, said the Philippines will find it “very difficult to stay neutral” if conflict arises in Taiwan and the U.S. becomes involved. Some 150,000 Filipinos residing in Taiwan would be at risk, and the Philippines may “deal with a refugee crisis along with other externalities,” he adds.

In a September interview with Japanese outlet Nikkei Asia, the Philippine envoy to the U.S. Jose Manuel Romualdez—a cousin of Marcos Jr.—said Manila would let Washington use its bases in the event of a Taiwan conflict, “if it’s important for us, for our own security.” It’s a tonal shift from when Duterte, who wanted to boot U.S. forces out of the archipelago, was in charge. In a 2016 trip to Beijing, Duterte proclaimed that it was “time to say goodbye to Washington.”

Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte and Chinese Premier Li Keqiang speak to each other during their meeting at the Great Hall of the People, in Beijing, China, on Aug. 30, 2019.<span class="copyright">How Hwee Young—Pool/Getty Images</span>
Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte and Chinese Premier Li Keqiang speak to each other during their meeting at the Great Hall of the People, in Beijing, China, on Aug. 30, 2019.How Hwee Young—Pool/Getty Images

Read More: Beijing’s Adroit Diplomacy Is Isolating the U.S. in Asia

But while Marcos Jr. has taken a different tack than his predecessor, he is cautious not to alienate China as he pursues revamping ties with Washington. He met with China’s Xi Jinping on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Summit in Bangkok, Thailand, last week shortly before Harris’ visit, promising an improvement of the Manila-Beijing relations.

Marcos wants to avoid a repeat of the past. After a Philippine vessel squared off with Chinese boats within the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone back in 2012, China imposed trade barriers on bananas from the Philippines. Banana exports to China fell by around 27% to 473,000 metric tons in 2012 from 650,000 tons the year prior. The fruit is one of the country’s major agriculture exports, and its growers believed the dispute was to blame for their economic losses.

Treading a fine line with China

China’s foreign ministry issued a statement after the meeting in Bangkok last week saying it must work together with the Philippines against “bullying” in the South China Sea—something Beijing and Washington each accuse the other of doing with their military movements in the region. Marcos Jr., for his part, clarified that his foreign policy doctrine has always been to engage with all parties, especially concerning the maritime dispute. “Let’s not allow anyone to dictate what we should do,” he told reporters last week.

In a briefing in Palawan, Harris reiterated America’s support for the 2016 ruling from The Hague on the South China Sea dispute, adding that the U.S. “will continue to rally our allies and partners against unlawful and irresponsible behavior” in the region. Washington also promised to give Manila $7.5 million worth of assistance to its maritime law enforcement agencies.

Beijing has yet to react to Harris’ statement, although its response is expected to be much more muted than the response to Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan in August. The Philippines is not disputed territory. The day before Harris’ trip, China’s foreign ministry said it is not against the U.S. interacting with other states in the region—but it should be for “peace and stability and not damaging to other countries’ interests.”

Read More: Pelosi Leaves Taiwan With the Island—and World—in a More Precarious Position

Richard Heydarian, a Manila-based political scientist and senior lecturer of international affairs at the University of the Philippines, says Philippine-China ties won’t break down over the South China Sea territorial row. But it’s Washington’s increasing military investments on the archipelago that Beijing will be wary of, particularly when it comes to potential future conflict over Taiwan. “Both the South China Sea and the Taiwan crisis are nudging the United States and Philippines to fortify their alliances,” he says.

To reap the benefits of amicable relations with both China and the U.S., as the Philippines and many of its counterparts across Southeast Asia seek to do, says Anna Malindog-Uy, a geopolitical analyst at the Asian Century Philippines Strategic Studies Institute in Manila, the Philippines must “prevent at all costs the possibility of becoming a pawn of any superpower to encircle another superpower.”

Marcos party boots former ES Vic Rodriguez over ‘disloyalty’, appointments

0

Xave Gregorio – Philstar.com

November 22, 2022 | 5:04pm

MANILA, Philippines — Disgruntled over several appointments to government allegedly made through the intervention of former Executive Secretary Vic Rodriguez, the fringe party chaired by President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. expelled the erstwhile top Malacañang official who resigned in September.

Rodriguez announced his resignation as executive secretary after being dragged into controversy. He said he would take on the role of the president’s chief of staff — a post that did not exist at the time — but said in October that he was out of the Marcos administration.  

Partido Federal ng Pilipinas kicked out Rodriguez earlier this month as member and executive vice president due to him being an “incompetent and notoriously undesirable public servant,” his supposed betrayal of the party and of Marcos’ trust and confidence, “abandonment, disloyalty and many other acts inimical to the party.”

“PFP’s ties with respondent must be cut off immediately like a gangrene to prevent his further poisoning of the PFP body politic. [Rodriguez] must perforce be expelled from the party straightaway for its own good,” the party’s executive committee said in a resolution dated November 11 but published in full by News5 on Tuesday.

Rodriguez’ expulsion from PFP stemmed from a complaint from party officials in the Bangsamoro region alleging that the “highly questionable” appointment of Christopher Pastarana as Philippine Ports Authority general manager was traced to the former executive secretary.

The complaint — which heavily relied on blogs by broadcaster Anthony Taberna and hyperpartisan social media personality RJ Nieto, or more popularly known as Thinking Pinoy — claimed that Pastrana is one of the owners of Archipelago Philippines Ferries Corp. which supposedly owes P132 million to the Department of Transportation.

No appointments for party members?

But the party’s executive committee took offense over more appointments, particularly as “no PFP member … was ever appointed” to any government position.

“There had been reports both among PFP members and non-members that [Rodriguez] treated with extreme discrimination and blocked all applications for appointment that PFP members submitted to his office,” the executive committee said in its 11-page resolution.

The panel said it was able to confirm these reports and added that “PFP members helplessly observed, mostly in silence and submission” as other people who were supposedly less qualified, corrupt or were supporters of former Vice President Leni Robredo got appointed instead of them.

“[Rodriguez,] as the Executive Vice President of the PFP was supposed to be our champion in the appointments process … Unfortunately, [he] put the PFP down,” the committee said.

“In truth, [Rodriguez] became PFP’s tormentor. Our names did not make the president’s ‘short list’ thanks to [him.] He is like a bad dream to PFP, and to others of us even a nightmare,” it added.

Aside from not getting its share of appointments, the party also took issue with the various controversies Rodriguez figured in, including his order vacating several positions in the executive department, his creation of a new office following his resignation as executive secretary and the botched importation of sugar without Marcos’ approval.

“[Rodriguez] started his tenure in government as Lancelot (the greatest Knight in King Arthur’s Round Table), accumulated vast powers and transfigured into Lucifer (the fallen angel of God) in less than three months,” the panel said.

The party was also rubbed the wrong way when its top leaders were supposedly not invited to Marcos’ first State of the Nation Address, while hyperpartisan vlogger Maharlika was.

“After assuming office as Executive Secretary, no communication to the PFP ever came from [Rodriguez,]” the committee said. “After he secured his holy grail, the position and high title of Executive Secretary or ‘Little President,’ now treated the party like a leper.”

‘PFP has self-respect’

Top officials of PFP, including Marcos, are part of the executive committee that ousted Rodriguez. The president did not take part in the process but also did not object, the panel said.

Replacing Rodriguez as PFP’s executive vice president is Special Assistant to the President Anton Lagdameo, who until his appointment to the position served as the party’s national treasurer. Antonio Marfori replaces Lagdameo as national treasurer.

Supporters of former President Rodrigo Duterte advocating for a shift to a federal form of government formed PFP in 2018.

In the 2022 elections, it nominated Marcos as its standard-bearer who then became its chairperson. 

PFP entered into an alliance with Lakas – Christian Muslim Democrats, Hugpong ng Pagbabago and Partido ng Masang Pilipino to support Marcos and his running mate, then Davao City Mayor Sara Duterte.

READ: Political clans form coalition to support Bongbong-Sara tandem

Despite having Marcos as its chairperson, PFP is still relatively small compared to other parties as it only has two members elected to Congress. The president’s party historically sees a surge in membership in the run-up to polls and soon after election victory.

In its resolution ousting Rodriguez, the party acknowledged its small size, saying: “The PFP … is bigger than any one member, no matter how important or exalted he feels he is. The PFP, no matter how small or unknown it is, has self-respect.”

ANYARE?: Uncovering the secrets of confidential, intel funds

0

Philstar.com

November 22, 2022 | 4:28pm

MANILA, Philippines — We have a secret to tell you.

Did you know that there is around P9.28 billion in the proposed 2023 budget that we would never know how it would be spent?

That is because they are confidential and intelligence funds — lump sum allocations to civilian and security agencies for sensitive operations like surveillance and intelligence gathering.

What exactly are these funds? And how did they become so huge?

Join Xave Gregorio as he explains what confidential and intelligence funds are and what could be done about them, together with Senate Minority Leader Aquilino Pimentel III and budget expert Zy-Za Suzara.

Marcos’ last will did not state that his wealth would be used for nat’l programs

0

Nov 22, 2022, Rappler.com

The late dictator’s last will and testament does not provide for the use of his wealth for programs and national infrastructure projects for the Filipino people

The claim: Former president Ferdinand E. Marcos’ last will and testament stipulated that his wealth would be used to fund programs and national infrastructure projects for Filipinos.

The video, posted by YouTube channel Kaalam PH, claims that the late dictator’s will states that his wealth would be used for livelihood programs, scholarship programs, healthcare programs, disability/retirement/pension programs, national infrastructure programs, agriculture programs, mining programs, and industrial and other economic matters. 

Rating: FALSE

Why we fact-checked this: The video with the claim was posted by a channel with 904,000 subscribers. The video has 4,900 likes, 117,000 views, and 368 comments as of writing. 

What the will states: Marcos’ Last Will and Testament, which was signed on June 23, 1988, did not state that his wealth would go to any of the aforementioned programs. In fact, his will stated that all of his estate “of every nature and kind,” would be bequeathed to his wife and four children. One-half of his estate would be bequeathed to his wife Imelda, while the other half would go to his children.

Fact checks by VERA Files and Rappler have stated that Marcos’ wealth would not be distributed to Filipinos. The “will” that is being read in the video, which makes mention of funds that will be distributed for different programs and projects, has been debunked by VERA Files as being a fake version of Marcos’ will. – Katarina Ruflo/Rappler.com

After 5 years, court convicts cop for torture of teens Carl Arnaiz, De Guzman

0

Nov 23, 2022, Jairo Bolledo

MANILA, Philippines – A Caloocan court has convicted Patrolman Jefrey Perez for torture and planting of evidence in relation to the cases of drug war victims Carl Angelo Arnaiz and Reynaldo “Kulot” de Guzman.

“WHEREFORE, premises considered the accused, PO1 JEFREY S. PEREZ is hereby found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt for all the crimes charged against him,” Caloocan City Regional Trial Court Branch 122 Presiding Judge Rodrigo Pascua Jr. said in a 36-page decision dated November 10.

In the Arnaiz case, the court meted the following sentences to Perez:

  • Violation of sections 4 and 14 of Republic Act No. 9745 or Anti-Torture Act of 2009: Penalty of six months of arresto mayor as minimum, to four years and two months of prision correccional medium as maximum
  • Planting of evidence under section 29 of Republic Act No. 9165 or Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002: Penalty of two terms of life imprisonment, in addition to absolute perpetual disqualification from any public office
  • Planting of evidence under section 38 of Republic Act No. 10591 or Comprehensive Firearms and Ammunition Regulation Act: Penalty of reclusion perpetua

In the De Guzman case, the court meted the penalty of reclusion perpetua to Perez for violation of sections 4 and 14 of the Anti-Torture act, in relation to section 5(a) of Republic Act No. 8369 or Family Courts Act of 1997.

The Caloocan court also ordered the cop to pay the Arnaiz and De Guzman families P1 million each for moral damages, and another P1 million each for exemplary damages. The rate of 6% per annum is also imposed on the monetary reward from the decision’s date until fully paid.

“Moreover, pursuant to Section 18 of Republic Act No. 9745, the victim’s heirs, are likewise entitled to claim for compensation as provided under Republic Act No. 7309 for an amount to be determine by the government agency concerned,” the court added.

The other accused, Patrolman Rocky Arquilita died of suspected hepatitis in 2019, while in jail. The court issued the warrant of arrest against Perez and Arqulita.

Since Arquilita died during the trial, the cases against him were dismissible, the court said: “At the outset, the death of PO1 Arquilita during the pendency of the trial renders dismissible the criminal cases against him.”

The decision

In explaining the decision, the court said they relied on the accounts of witness Arnold Perlada and other circumstantial evidence from the prosecution. The court said Perlada’s narrations proved that the crimes were committed by the accused. 

“The Court holds that the foregoing narrations lead to a reasonable hypothesis that the evidence of physical torture sustained by the victims, were perpetrated by no other persons than the accused in this case,” the decision read. 

On the torture of Arnaiz, the court said although the witness said he did not see the accused punching or hitting Arnaiz, torture was still present because the torture is usually done in a concealed location. 

“As pointed out by the prosecution, torture is perpetrated under clandestine conditions, and is done away from the public eye. Considering that the accused are Caloocan police and were in fact on board the Caloocan police mobile patrol car, by no stretch of imagination could they have taken custody of the herein victims, elsewhere,” the court said.

The court said the cops committed the crime of planting illegal drugs and ammunition to make it appear that there was a shootout with Arnaiz.

“The circumstances above-mentioned appreciated in its totality constitute an unbroken chain that impel this Court to arrive into a fair and reasonable conclusion that herein accused committed the crime of planting of evidence to incriminate Carl in the violation of RA 9165, and the planting of firearm with ammunitions near the body of Carl, to make it appear that he engaged in a shootout during a hot pursuit operation, in an attempt to cover up the intended killing,” the decision said.

Even though Arquilita had died, the charges against Perez remained because of the presence of conspiracy. According to the court, the idea of conspiracy was there when the two cops committed the crimes.

“Clearly, the foregoing acts of the accused are indicative of unity of criminal design, joint purpose, concerted action, and concurrence of sentiments as in conspiracy,” the court said.

Teen deaths in Duterte’s drug war

Arnaiz was killed in what the Philippine National Police (PNP) initially claimed as a shoout supposedly started by the 19-year-old. Police claimed that cops were trying to arrest him for supposedly robbing a cab driver on August 18, and that the teen supposedly fired first. They also alleged that they found drugs on him.

The Public Attorneys Office’s autopsy painted a different picture: Arnaiz was handcuffed, beaten up, and then killed. The taxi driver who allegedly got robbed by Arnaiz also later said that he was forced to provide a false affidavit against Arnaiz.

A PNP Internal Affairs Service investigation into the controversial case corroborated the PAO findings, that the two Caloocan cops “intentionally killed” Arnaiz.

The 14-year-old De Guzman, who has last seen with Arnaiz in Cainta, Rizal, was found dead over 100 kilometers away, in a creek in Barangay San Roque, Gapan City, Nueva Ecija, weeks after Arnaiz’s death. De Guzman had 30 stab wounds.

The Arnaiz and De Guzman murder cases are still pending before a Navotas court.

This is the latest conviction of high-profile cases in the bloody drug war, after the Kian delos Santos case. In 2018, a Caloocan court convicted three cops for Delos Santos’ killing. – Rappler.com

Atom Araullo and mom Carol share their activism journeys in first joint interview

0

By MARISSE PANALIGAN, GMA News

Published February 9, 2021

Award-winning journalist Atom Araullo has always been a proud son of Dr. Carol Pagaduan Araullo, an activist who fought against the dictatorship of President Ferdinand Marcos.

advertisement

The two share similar backgrounds as graduates of the University of the Philippines, and they both eventually became student activists during their time in Diliman.

In their first-ever joint interview as mother and son, Atom and Carol told Noel Ferrer of “Level Up Exclusive” on Radyo Katipunan their similar but separate journeys into activism.

“People keep asking me how [was] it like growing up in a quote-unquote activist household,” Atom said. “I wouldn’t even consider our household an activist household, I guess, in a stereotypical sense.”

He said he knew his mom is an activist growing up, but she never actually raised him to follow in her footsteps.

“He came to it on his own. I mean, that’s really the only way you can do that,” Carol said.

“It’s a personal journey. It can’t be anything less than a personal journey kasi otherwise it’s not gonna stick,” Atom added.

Both mother and son attended UP at a time of political turmoil in the country — Carol came of age during martial law; Atom during the protests against President Joseph Estrada.

Carol’s path to activism started at the Diliman Commune of 1971. As a young student, she initially did not discriminate between the violence inflicted by the police and protesters. She condemned both, but witnessing the shooting of Pastor Mesina as students barricaded the University Avenue became a turning point for her.

“That was my baptism of fire ‘ika nga. That radicalized me. I realized that it is the State, the government, that has a monopoly on sanctioned violence,” she said.

From then on, she continued attending demonstrations without telling her parents. They found out eventually, but she knew how to take care of herself and did not get hurt in the protests. It was only when martial law was declared that they became really worried for her safety.

Carol went underground before the Marcos dictatorship was established. Several days later, she met up with her parents at an uncle’s house, where they tried to dissuade her from her decision.

“They asked me to go home and for the first time, my dad cried,” she said. “He said, ‘You know, if you don’t… if you leave the house and you don’t agree to come back, you’re on your own.’ And then I said, ‘Well, I guess that’s how it has to be because kung hindi ako kikilos, laban sa martial law, sino ang kikilos? Kung hindi ngayon kelan, pa?’”

Atom, meanwhile, had a “parallel experience” as a freshman in UP at the height of the ouster campaign against Estrada.

While on his way to the campus one day, he chanced upon a demonstration on Commonwealth Avenue during the State of the Nation Address. The situation descended into violence — there was bludgeoning and hurling of rocks — and he became curious about what was happening.

“I wouldn’t say I was radicalized at that moment, pero parang if I learned anything from my family is not to be afraid of those kinds of incidences, mga protests,” he said.

“I can imagine that you can react to it two ways,” he said. “One is you become fascinated about it, [you] want to learn about it and another is matakot ka and just say na ‘Ay, ayokong ma-involve diyan, basta ako mag-aaral lang ako.’  I went the other way ‘no, kasi hindi ako takot sa aktibismo kasi alam ko nanay ko aktibista e.”

Atom eventually became an activist in his college days. He would not confer that label to himself now out of respect to the many sacrifices of full-time activists, but he said that activism did change him as a person. He believes it even saved him from himself.

“I would have been insufferable kung hindi ako naging aktibista. I would’ve been too self-involved, feeling ko masyado akong na-in love sa sarili ko to an extent,” he said.

Atom admitted that activism first appealed to him as an intellectual exercise; what interested him at the beginning was the social analysis and thinking about the big picture.

Eventually, he realized that for all his smarts, he did not know anything after all and learned to listen to the farmers, the urban poor, and other disadvantaged groups.

While both mother and son became activists while they were in UP, the two said activism is not at all the dominant culture in the university.

“Being a UP student ha, tingin ko dominant na kaisipan sa UP is still being one of conversative ha. It’s a misnomer na ang mga lahat ng taga-UP ay aktibista,” Atom said.

Atom said he knows many people from other schools who show more civic-mindedness than some UP alumni, expressing their concern about social issues and asking what they can do to help.

“Magugulat ka. ‘Yung ibang mga taga-UP na dating mga miyembro ng student council halimbawa, sila pa ‘yung mas, ‘Hay naku bahala kayo sa buhay n’yo basta sa ‘kin eto na ‘yung gagawin ko.’ Cynical, oo,” he said.

Carol said it was the same even during her time in UP.

“Ang UP, siguro ang dominant stream diyan is liberalism. Hindi radicalism e. ‘Yung student activism, radical student activism is actually a counterculture,” she said.

She said, however, that because the counterculture has existed for a long time, even those who did not like activism during their student days have imbibed the tradition as they grew older.

“Pinagmamalaki na rin nila ‘yon kasi parang ‘yung pagiging nationalist, ‘yung pagiging activist, ‘yung pagiging proactive, etc, parang inangkin din na nila,” she said. “But that is far from saying that the minute you step into UP you become radical. No way.”

Carol said some students become activists precisely because they are still young and free from duties and responsibilities unlike adults.

“Talagang mas natural e na ‘dun ka maging aktibista kasi ‘yung idealism is at a high point,” she said. “Walang kang iniisip pa na hanapbuhay, mga pinapalaking anak, etc. So mas libre kang mag-isip at tsaka gumawa ng desisyon na hindi makasarili.”

She also said it’s the social, political, and economic conditions which breed activists, but people respond to situations differently.

“Kung anak ka ng mahirap, minsan mas madali, nararamdaman mo, kinagisnan mo,” she said. “Pero minsan dahil sa pagnanais mong makaalpas dun sa ganong klaseng sitwasyon, one-tracked mind ka ‘no, you want to get ahead. You want to be able to lead a life where you can support your parents so ayaw mong makialam sa ibang mga bagay.”

Carol said sometimes students whose families are well-off have more leisure to engage in activism, but it all boils down to their value system.

“Kung ‘yung anak mo ay nag-iisip at lumaki na may empathy at tsaka may sense of justice, ‘yung ganon, ‘yung hindi makatiis sa situation of injustice, activism will find them wherever they are,” she said.

Atom agreed. More than his mother’s background, he said the value system he formed from both of his parents was the key to finding his way as an active student leader in UP. He credits his father especially for passing onto him empathy, sensitivity, and hard work.

“Hindi naman naituturo ‘yon, you just live by example, you just observe it in the people that surround you, in my case, my parents,” he said. “That is the foundation where everything was built up and you know by the time I became a college student, formed na ‘yon.”

While some parents do not want to send their children to UP in order to avoid activism, Carol and Atom said activism is really just about becoming passionate about issues close to your heart — be it climate change, environmentalism, human rights, national sovereignty, democracy, and others.

“You have a cause. You are not a rebel without a cause. You have a cause,” Carol said. “And usually, it’s to change things, it’s for change.” — LA, GMA News

Bayan slams gov’t report on human rights to UN

0

By: Krixia Subingsubing – Reporter / @KrixiasINQ ,Philippine Daily Inquirer /November 14, 2022

The government has cited opposing views among civil society groups on what constitutes human rights in its report to the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), causing concern in progressive group Bayan that this approach may be used to escape accountability for continued violations in the country.

In the 23-page advanced, unedited national report submitted by its Presidential Human Rights Committee Secretariat to the UN Universal Periodic Review (UPR) working group, the Philippine government noted an “emerging trend whereby conflicts arise in human rights discussions as a result of nongovernment and civil society organizations having opposing … positions.”

One of the “hotly contested issues,” it said, was of human rights as a form of defense but only for “those who do not advocate or resort to violent extremism to reform society.”

Bayan secretary general Renato Reyes, who is in Geneva as part of a Philippine delegation taking part in the fifth UPR cycle, said the government might be citing the competing views to “justify the rights violations committed in the drug war and counter-insurgency drive [as] necessary to ‘protect’ the public from illegal drugs and terrorism or at least say that there is a gray area involving human rights.”

“Does the PH government subscribe to the thinking that those accused of “violent extremism” and “terrorism” are not entitled to human rights? Is this why it engages in indiscriminate bombings of communities suspected of supporting rebels? Is this why many revolutionaries have been summarily executed instead of being taken as prisoners of war and hors de combat?” he asked.

Reyes urged the public to remain vigilant and critical of the government’s report, particularly on Nov. 14, the start of the fifth UPR cycle which reviews the rights record of UN member states every four and a half years.

No specifics

The Philippines also told the UNHRC that it had already “fully implemented” at least 103 recommendations but “noted or rejected” 33 others made following the fourth UPR cycle in 2017.

The government, however, did not clearly indicate which recommendations it had merely noted or rejected. Nevertheless it promised to continue implementing the UN Joint Programme (UNJP) and to “sustain its human rights advocacy in a democratic system of governance.”

“Under the new administration of President Ferdinand R. Marcos, who won the May 2022 presidential elections by an overwhelming majority of 55.8 percent, or 31 million votes out of the 55.5 million who voted, inroads in socioeconomic development anchored on social justice are enriching the human rights environment in our country,” the report said.

“In the same manner that the President won on a platform that called for a United Team, or Uniteam, so shall human rights in this new chapter of Philippine history be pursued—a government working in unity with the people,” it added.

Subdued scale

According to the report, the government, under President Marcos, was already “pursuing a human rights-based approach to drug control” with the support of the UNJP providing technical support and capacity-building to the country.

Mr. Marcos earlier promised to continue the drug war albeit on a more subdued scale compared to his predecessor Rodrigo Duterte’s take no prisoners approach, which led to the country being investigated by the International Criminal Court for alleged crimes against humanity.

The Philippines, in its report, also stood by the passage of the antiterrorism law, despite a recent UN Human Rights Committee report asking the government to review its provisions for overbreadth.

The government maintained that the 2020 law was crafted “to ensure [the country’s] adherence to and respect for human rights as found in the Philippine Constitution and international human rights standards, and that it shall not be subject to abuse or misinterpretation.”

It also affirmed its commitment to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change by, among others, reexamining current mining practices and reinforcing the implementation of air, water and waste management laws and policies. INQ

UN rights panel tells Philippines to amend Anti-Terrorism Act

0

Xave Gregorio – Philstar.com, November 5, 2022

UN rights panel tells Philippines to amend Anti-Terrorism Act

MANILA, Philippines — The UN Human Rights Committee is asking the Philippines to amend portions of the controversial Anti-Terrorism Act to comply with an international treaty on civil and political rights.

In a recent 13-page unedited report, the panel of human rights experts said the country should review and amend the law “with a view to bringing it into full compliance with the covenant and the principles of legal certainty, predictability and proportionality.”

The covenant being referred to is the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which the Philippines is a party.

“In doing so, it should ensure participatory consultations process with relevant stakeholders, including the Commission on Human Rights and civil society organizations,” the body said.

In particular, the panel said the Philippines should amend Sections 25 and 29 of the Anti-Terrorism Act which respectively provide grounds for the designation of people or groups as terrorists and allow for warrantless detentions.

The Anti-Terrorism Act, which is also sometimes called the anti-terror law, had passed the scrutiny of the Supreme Court which kept most of its provisions intact, save for parts of Section 4 and a method of designation provided for under Section 25.

The SC in a 12-3 vote nullified a proviso on protests and other mass actions that cannot be considered terrorism “for being overbroad and violative of freedom of expression.”

In a separate 9-6 vote, the SC struck down a provision that allowed the Anti-Terrorism Council to adopt requests for designation by other jurisdictions or supranational jurisdictions for being unconstitutional.

Still, the UN body flagged certain provisions of the law which the SC kept. Among these are the “overbroad and vague definitions of terrorism,” warrantless arrests and detention for up to 24 days without charge, and the “excessive powers” granted to the Anti-Terrorism Council for surveillance and gathering of personal data.

It also said it is concerned over the use of the law to “legitimize the targeting of government critics, human rights defenders and journalists, including through ‘red-tagging,’ and consequent chilling effects on freedoms of expression, peaceful assembly and association.”

The body also expressed concern with the threats and attacks against members of the judiciary, lawyers, human rights defenders and journalists.

The UN Human Rights Committee also urged the Philippines to cooperate in the investigation that may be conducted by the International Criminal Court on the alleged crimes against humanity committed during the course of the previous administration’s “war on drugs.”

In its 13-page advanced unedited report, the UN body composed of human rights experts said the Philippines should “strengthen its cooperation with the international human rights mechanisms as well as the ongoing investigation by the International Criminal Court.”

The panel noted that the Philippines continues to refuse to cooperate with international human rights mechanisms and the ICC probe, which has been suspended since last year at Manila’s request.

ICC prosecutor Karim Khan has since pushed for the resumption of the investigation as he argued that the Philippine government has failed to demonstrate that it has sufficiently investigated killings in police operations.

The Philippines, however, has asked the ICC’s pre-trial chamber to reject Khan’s request as it argued that the court lacked jurisdiction and that the alleged crimes committed were not grave enough to warrant its attention. Khan maintained that “none of those arguments have merit.”

Manila’s officials have also insisted that the complaints filed before the ICC are already being investigated by local agencies, which they said meant that the country “is neither unwilling nor unable to carry out these domestic proceedings.”

But the UN human rights panel is not convinced either, with it raising concerns over reports that authorities continued to fail to promptly, effectively and independently investigate extrajudicial killings and to bring the perpetrators to justice.

It also expressed concern over reports of “incitement to violence against and extrajudicial killings of suspected drug offenders by high-level officials, including the former president,” referring to Rodrigo Duterte.

Among the recommendations made by the UN committee is for the Philippines to “redouble its efforts to promptly, independently and thoroughly investigate all allegations of extrajudicial killings, bring perpetrators, including law enforcement officials, to justice.”

It also recommended that high-level Philippine officials refrain from inciting violence and extrajudicial killings.