The Armed Forces of the Philippines spend millions and millions of pesos for its intelligence gathering, but seeing the AFP propaganda machine at work, one cannot help but wonder: just how intelligent the military’s intelligence units are and how well spent such millions had been!
A stark illustration is what our members in Iloilo had just reported to us: that since 27 April 2004 the 3rd Civil Auxiliary Unit of the 3rd Infantry Battalion of the Philippine Army had been showing a film at the Shoemart shopping complex to convince people to vote for the ANAD in the party-list elections, while denouncing front organizations of the Communist Party of the Philippines, wherein the Alliance of Progressive Labor (APL) and the Labor Education and Research Network ( LEARN ) were included.
Had the said unit of the Philippine Army really done their job, they would have easily verified the fact that the APL and LEARN had never been, nor will it ever be, a front of the CPP-NPA-NDF, or any political party whatsoever, illegal or otherwise. Since the Army intelligence has failed (or does not want to) do its job, allow us then to enlighten the AFP and the general public as well.
The APL is an independent labor center formed, sustained and run by workers belonging to legitimate trade unions and workers’ organizations since 1996. The APL is duly recognized by, and represented by its leaders in, tripartite bodies such as the Tripartite Industrial Peace Council (TIPC), TESDA, industry training boards, regional wage boards, local industrial peace councils, and even the National Anti-Poverty Commission sectoral councils. APL affiliates are members, and its leaders are even officers of Global Union Federations.
What we can confirm to be true, is that the APL has been relentlessly fighting for what is best for all workers and for the country. It is also true that it has also been campaigning in the party-list elections for its political party, the AKBAYAN. It should be noted that the CPP-NPA had been attacking AKBAYAN’s for its stand against the CPP-NPA’s undemocratic collection of permit to campaign fees.
We reiterate our denial of, and deplore, the AFP’s unfounded claim, outright lie and fabricated story that it is spreading, against the APL and the LEARN , an NGO to which it is also affiliated. It is not only unconstitutional, but unethical, for an arm of the government entrusted with protecting and defending the democratic rights of citizens, majority of whom are workers and their families, to show and continue showing such untruthful propaganda.
We, therefore, demand that the 3rd CAU of the 3rd IB of the PA be ordered to cease its partisan activities, especially its campaigning for or against any partylist group, and to stop vilifying the APL and LEARN in particular and any other legitimate organization for that matter without any factual basis!
The Alliance of Progressive Labor (APL), is a national center of trade union federations, national unions, and other organizations combining more than 50,000 workers, both in the formal and informal sectors in various industries and regions in the country, formed in 1994 and formally founded in 1996 to protect and advance the interests and welfare, especially of Filipino workers.
------------------------------------------------
Related letter sent yesterday to Gen. Corpuz
May 5, 2004
BRIG. GEN. VICTOR N. CORPUZ
Commanding General, Civil Relations Service
Armed Forces of the Philippines
Camp Aguinaldo, Quezon City
Dear Gen. Victor Corpuz:
The Alliance of Progressive Labor (APL), is a national center of trade union federations, national unions, and other organizations combining more than 50,000 workers, both in the formal and informal sectors in various industries and regions in the country, formed in 1994 and formally founded in 1996 to protect and advance the interests and welfare, especially of Filipino workers.
Our members in Iloilo City had just reported to us that the 3rd Civil Auxiliary Unit of the 3rd IB of the Philippine Army had been showing a film at the Shoemart shopping complex there since 27 April 2004 to convince people to vote for the ANAD in the party-list elections, while denouncing front organizations of the Communist Party of the Philippines, wherein the APL and LEARN were included.
We would like to inform you, and hereby declare that the APL had never been and will never be a front of the CPP-NPA-NDF, or any political party whatsoever, illegal or otherwise. The APL is an independent labor center formed, sustained and run by workers belonging to legitimate trade unions and workers’ organizations. APL is in fact duly recognized by, and represented by its leaders in tripartite bodies such as the Tripartite Industrial Peace Council (TIPC), TESDA, industry training boards, regional wage boards, local industrial peace councils, and even the National Anti-Poverty Commission sectoral councils. Its affiliates are members and even officers of Global Union Federations.
What we can confirm to be true, is that the APL has been relentlessly fighting for what is best for all workers and for the country. It is also true that it has also been campaigning in the party-list elections for its political party, the AKBAYAN, against which the CPP-NPA had been attacking for AKBAYAN’s stand against the CPP-NPA’s undemocratic collection of permit to campaign fees.
We deplore the AFP’s unfounded claim, outright lie and fabricated story that is being spread, against the APL and LEARN, an NGO to which it is also affiliated. It is not only unconstitutional, but unethical, for an arm of the government entrusted with protecting and defending the democratic rights of citizens, majority of whom are workers and their families.
We, therefore, ask that the 3rd CAU of the 3rd ID of the PA be ordered to stop such black propaganda, against APL and LEARN in particular, and to cease its partisan activities, especially its campaigning for the ANAD for the partylist elections.
We look forward to your favorable action on these concerns.
Respectfully yours,
DANIEL L. EDRALIN
Chairperson
Showing posts with label Human Rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Human Rights. Show all posts
May 6, 2004
Feb 3, 2004
Resurrected Anti-Terrorism Bill threatens human rights in exchange for aid
There is no excuse for the employment of violence to deliver a political message. The Alliance of Progressive Labor (APL), together with AKBAYAN, stands in resolute opposition to any such acts that harm innocent civilians and non-combatants. APL and AKBAYAN believe that the power of ideas far outlives the damage and horror that bullets and bombs can inflict on people.
But the ideas embodied in House Bill 5923 are as pungent and detestable as any weapon of destruction. The proposed bill, up for plenary debates at the House of Representatives aims to stem what it calls the threat of terrorism as evidenced by the spate of admittedly horrendous attacks on the public in recent years. But this legislation is riddled with loopholes prone to abuse and misinterpretation.
First, it vaguely describes terrorism to include any act that is “threatening to cause serious interference with or actually causing disruption of a public transport or utility or an essential service, facility, or system, whether public or private, except in the furtherance of a legitimate protest, grievance or advocacy.”
But who defines what “a legitimate protest” is? If the National Labor Relations Council deems a strike as illegal, would this mean that a union which chooses to express its grievances fall prey to that onerous provision of the ATB? Would workers calling for decent wages and humane working conditions then be labeled as terrorists for merely expressing their basic human right?
The boundaries set by HB 5923 for what constitutes the commission of terrorism is dangerously intruding into the legitimate rights of the broad masses to express themselves. All it would take is an outsider to instigate panic an chaos in an assembly and it would be easy for the police to brand protestors as terrorists for “creating a common danger, terror, panic, or chaos to the public or a segment thereof.” Naturally in the absence of real targets, it would not be impossible for police and military to employ the ATB in its current form against progressive forces like APL and AKBAYAN which operates within the boundaries of the law. This is unacceptable.
The ATB is a long-dead measure now being resurrected at the expense of more important bills such as HB 4535 which indemnifies human rights violations victims of the Marcos Regime. The proposed measure is bound to take so much out of the legislature’s precious time which is better spent on other pressing matters.
The fact that the ATB is a requirement for the flow of more US aid into the country further makes its resurrection suspect. A requirement which is in line with the US-led war on terror which so far has not resulted in convincing results but our government seems intent to continue supporting.
The ATB would qualify the Philippines for more aid from the United States , which the people the ATB would affect will eventually have to pay for in the long run as debt. A myopic prescription for a problem with roots deeper and more wide-ranging than the government is willing to admit.
The assurance of security from a reformed and reliable police force is what the government should be going after. It should go after poverty, the real enemy of democracy and the real source of resentment and rebellion and ultimately the breeding ground of terrorists.
The ATB must be opposed and junked, not only as it infringes on human rights and workers’ rights in particular but also because it declares a state policy against an enemy which it does not even know, much less understand.
But the ideas embodied in House Bill 5923 are as pungent and detestable as any weapon of destruction. The proposed bill, up for plenary debates at the House of Representatives aims to stem what it calls the threat of terrorism as evidenced by the spate of admittedly horrendous attacks on the public in recent years. But this legislation is riddled with loopholes prone to abuse and misinterpretation.
First, it vaguely describes terrorism to include any act that is “threatening to cause serious interference with or actually causing disruption of a public transport or utility or an essential service, facility, or system, whether public or private, except in the furtherance of a legitimate protest, grievance or advocacy.”
But who defines what “a legitimate protest” is? If the National Labor Relations Council deems a strike as illegal, would this mean that a union which chooses to express its grievances fall prey to that onerous provision of the ATB? Would workers calling for decent wages and humane working conditions then be labeled as terrorists for merely expressing their basic human right?
The boundaries set by HB 5923 for what constitutes the commission of terrorism is dangerously intruding into the legitimate rights of the broad masses to express themselves. All it would take is an outsider to instigate panic an chaos in an assembly and it would be easy for the police to brand protestors as terrorists for “creating a common danger, terror, panic, or chaos to the public or a segment thereof.” Naturally in the absence of real targets, it would not be impossible for police and military to employ the ATB in its current form against progressive forces like APL and AKBAYAN which operates within the boundaries of the law. This is unacceptable.
The ATB is a long-dead measure now being resurrected at the expense of more important bills such as HB 4535 which indemnifies human rights violations victims of the Marcos Regime. The proposed measure is bound to take so much out of the legislature’s precious time which is better spent on other pressing matters.
The fact that the ATB is a requirement for the flow of more US aid into the country further makes its resurrection suspect. A requirement which is in line with the US-led war on terror which so far has not resulted in convincing results but our government seems intent to continue supporting.
The ATB would qualify the Philippines for more aid from the United States , which the people the ATB would affect will eventually have to pay for in the long run as debt. A myopic prescription for a problem with roots deeper and more wide-ranging than the government is willing to admit.
The assurance of security from a reformed and reliable police force is what the government should be going after. It should go after poverty, the real enemy of democracy and the real source of resentment and rebellion and ultimately the breeding ground of terrorists.
The ATB must be opposed and junked, not only as it infringes on human rights and workers’ rights in particular but also because it declares a state policy against an enemy which it does not even know, much less understand.
Oct 15, 2003
AKBAYAN Says Bush Visit Preparations “O.A.” Urged Solons to Wear Black During Bush Address
AKBAYAN Party-list leaders today criticized the Arroyo government’s “bending over backwards” to welcome US Pres. George W. Bush. “Parang walong oras lang na stopover, O.A. (overacting) naman ang paghahanda at expectations ng gobyerno natin,” Akbayan representative Mayong Aguja noted.
Referring to the interference of the US Secret Service on Congressional arrangements in preparation for President Bush’s arrival on October 18, Aguja cited the relocation of a cafeteria in the House as indicative of the unequal relations between the US and the Philippines. “If President Arroyo were to visit the US Capitol, would the American congressmen move any of their offices to accommodate her security retinue?,” Aguja said.
Peace advocate and AKBAYAN leader Risa Hontiveros-Baraquel lamented the demolition of squatter dwellings in front of the House of Representatives. “This is very Imeldific. The Arroyo administration is going the way of the Marcoses. This reminds us of the time when Mrs. Marcos built white walls to cover squatter colonies just to impress her foreign guests.” Hontiveros-Baraquel stressed.
AKBAYAN President Ronald Llamas questioned the value of the Bush stopover on the Philippine economic climate, as claimed by President Arroyo. “Kahit buong US cabinet pa ang dumating dito, kung mali ang economic strategy, hindi aangat ang ekonomiya natin,” Llamas said. He pointed out that other Asian countries such as Thailand and Malaysia had better economies without being subservient US allies.
Josua Mata of the Alliance of Progressive Labor explained that a number of countries in Asia had more effective anti-terrorism campaigns even if they did not allow US troops in their territory or blindly commit to the so-called US war on terrorism. “Our government’s subservience damages our international stature. Everyone knows that our government is an American stooge pretending to be independent. Nakakahiya,” Mata said.
Aguja urged members of the House of Representatives and the Senate to wear black during the Bush address to the joint session on October 18. “By wearing black, we stand in solidarity with the victims of US aggression around the globe. This is also a statement that expresses our mourning for the sorry state of Philippine sovereignty,” Aguja concluded.
Referring to the interference of the US Secret Service on Congressional arrangements in preparation for President Bush’s arrival on October 18, Aguja cited the relocation of a cafeteria in the House as indicative of the unequal relations between the US and the Philippines. “If President Arroyo were to visit the US Capitol, would the American congressmen move any of their offices to accommodate her security retinue?,” Aguja said.
Peace advocate and AKBAYAN leader Risa Hontiveros-Baraquel lamented the demolition of squatter dwellings in front of the House of Representatives. “This is very Imeldific. The Arroyo administration is going the way of the Marcoses. This reminds us of the time when Mrs. Marcos built white walls to cover squatter colonies just to impress her foreign guests.” Hontiveros-Baraquel stressed.
AKBAYAN President Ronald Llamas questioned the value of the Bush stopover on the Philippine economic climate, as claimed by President Arroyo. “Kahit buong US cabinet pa ang dumating dito, kung mali ang economic strategy, hindi aangat ang ekonomiya natin,” Llamas said. He pointed out that other Asian countries such as Thailand and Malaysia had better economies without being subservient US allies.
Josua Mata of the Alliance of Progressive Labor explained that a number of countries in Asia had more effective anti-terrorism campaigns even if they did not allow US troops in their territory or blindly commit to the so-called US war on terrorism. “Our government’s subservience damages our international stature. Everyone knows that our government is an American stooge pretending to be independent. Nakakahiya,” Mata said.
Aguja urged members of the House of Representatives and the Senate to wear black during the Bush address to the joint session on October 18. “By wearing black, we stand in solidarity with the victims of US aggression around the globe. This is also a statement that expresses our mourning for the sorry state of Philippine sovereignty,” Aguja concluded.
Oct 13, 2003
Visitation of the “God”
This coming October 18 the country shall be witness and a victim to the unwanted and insulting visit of US President George W. Bush, renowned butcher of Iraq, the leviathan white leader who lied to America about weapons of mass destruction (WMD), the granddaddy of terrorists and all-time warmonger and profiteer of the modern world. Quite expectedly, our very own Madame President together with her cohorts will welcome Bush like how a champion is greeted by his loyal subjects after a successful crusade against evil forces. Predictably, the Bush visit will be treated like the second coming of Christ himself, a profound visitation of “God” a miraculous rendezvous with our very own “divine-led” Ate Glo. They will talk for eight hours about nothing but increased global militarization and regimentation as a solution against “terrorism,” WTO troubleshooting through bilateral trade agreements and, of course, a tap in the back for Gloria, the United States’ leading cheerleader in Asia for her unwavering support of US policies and unilateral actions.
Meanwhile, the patriotic ranks of the working people will be guaranteed a taste of hell through possible and successive violent dispersals if they will not behave in the presence of the most powerful man in the world. The Arroyo Administration, together with the Philippine National Police (PNP), will deny our people the right to peacefully protest, assemble and register their collective sentiment but will give the Bush entourage and the US Secret Service all the freedom they need to make sure Mr. Dubya’s visit will be pleasant. Last week poor families living in shanties near Congress were forcibly demolished because the government consider them as an eyesore to the great white leader. To Gloria, this is efficient housekeeping. To the Arroyo government, this is “Filipino hospitality.” It is the act of welcoming the guest to our house while beating and evicting the residents.
To that the working people say: NO! NO WELCOME FOR GEORGE W.BUSH! NO TO GLORIA’S CURTAILMENT OF THE PEOPLES’ RIGHTS! The labor sector will not be denied of their right to protest!
Clearly, the 8-hour Bush visit will not benefit the working class in any particular way. The visit will not guarantee them more jobs, higher wages, food in the dining table, nor will it raise hopes for the many poor families living below poverty line. In fact, the visit will be highly detrimental to our interest. Bush will push for post-WTO bilateral agreements that will boost the liberalization of vital industries, trade and services that can lead to more job loss, increased contractualization and diminished wages.
Gloria kept on bragging the numerous lists of supposed benefits of furthering strong ties with the US government. However, contrary to her false claims, the relationship between the US and the Philippines historically has always been an exploitative one, with the Philippines as the perennial loser. We did not get anything from the deployment of US troops here in the Philippines or with the Powell visit. The promised 100,000 jobs for Filipinos in post-war Iraq are unfulfilled. Trade relations between US and Philippines are highly disadvantageous to our part.
Furthermore, why do we have to glorify Bush with our warm welcome if all around the globe and even in his own country the US President is scorned, ridiculed and hated for his unilateral and militarist actions? Why do we have to welcome the world’s greatest terrorist and butcher of Iraq and Afghanistan? Why do we have to give warm reception to the real coddler of the likes of Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and the Al-Qaeda group? Why do we have to roll the red carpet to the number one defender of WTO and capitalist globalization so raucously preached by Ate Glo?
The working people already have their hands full with the rubbish of Gloria. We do not need the filthy garbage truck that is George W. Bush. Now is the time to expose this false god for what he really is: A terrorist, a criminal, a murderer and lastly, a Goliath with “feet of clay”.
May 16, 2003
Joint Position Paper on the Anti-Terrorism Bills
WOmen, labor, peasant and other human rights groups condemn acts of terrorism, especially as it victimizes the poor, powerless, and marginalized of society. In the same breadth, we condemn Senate Bill No. 2540 and House Bill No. 5923 (the “Terror Bills”) which have two (2) fatal flaws: they are unnecessary and too open for abuse.
The proposed law is superfluous. While a grave threat to civil liberties and political rights of the Filipino people, who fought for decades for the restoration and guarantee of such fundamental human rights.
We express grave concern as House Bill No. 5923 and its counterpart version in the Senate is being rushed by the legislature, upon the prodding of the President and the strong lobby of the USAID. We express alarm as this comes in the wake of the passage of similar bills in Japan, Korea and the processing of the same in other parts of Asia. Of course, we already know of the US passing the Patriot Act and the Homeland Security Act, a few weeks after 9/11 and urging other nations to fight “terrorism.” The context by which the bill is being rushed is simple and clear – a US-led campaign on terrorism. By US standards, the campaign has targeted “irresponsible states” towards the “prevention of war,” classifying Iraq among the former. Within states, the campaign has targeted “terrorist individuals”, of Moslem background or of simply foreign origin – “suspicious neighbors”. The campaign has revitalized in their ugliest forms, racism and xenophobia.
The Terror Bills are Unnecessary
The Bills wrongly assume that manifestations of terrorism are not punished or covered by current laws. On the contrary, the abductions, deaths and destruction often cited by Congress as justification for the Terror Bills are all punished by current law. Even the act of giving assistance, financial or otherwise, to terrorists fall well within the present penal framework. Even following the Declaration on Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism, acts of terrorism are already covered by existing laws such as the Revised Penal Code (RPC): Crimes Against Public Order, Persons, Liberty and Personal Security, Property; as well as RA 6235 (Anti-Hijacking Law), PD 1727 (Declaring as Unlawful the Malicious Dissemination of False Information or the Willful Making of Any Threat Concerning Bombs, Explosives or Any Similar Device or Means of Destruction and Imposing Penalties Therefor), RA 8294 (Illegal Possession of Firearms).
In short, the Philippines does not lack of penal legislation. It does suffer, however, from a severe lack of law enforcement, especially in the aspects involving the investigation of terrorist acts, and the identification, location, and apprehension of terrorists. It is law enforcement, not the existence of laws, which has been the crucial element missing from the state campaign against terrorism.
For instance, in the case of the Abu Sayyaf, a group widely accepted as a terrorist organization, few will insist that the problem with the Abu Sayyaf is that there is no law punishing the abductions, murders, theft, and destruction perpetrated by the group. In fact, current law covers their acts and even allows for the death penalty to be imposed.
The Terror Bills, which Congress threatens to pass, miss this crucial point and assume that we need a new law defining and punishing “terrorism.” We submit that the Terror Bills are unnecessary; no new legislation is needed to address the problems caused by terrorist groups. What is needed is the strict and honest implementation of existing laws.
The Terror Bills are Too Open for Abuse
At the core of the defect of the Terror Bills is the definition of “Terrorism.” It is too broad and consequently infringes upon the citizen’s fundamental rights involving free speech, assembly and association, freedom against unreasonable searches and seizures and the right to privacy. Consider the following:
· The definition of “terrorism” can cover a broad range of act(s) which aim to influence government. This contravenes our democratic tradition where citizens have the duty to seek redress of their grievances and express their ideas to the government which merely represents them. Hence, under the Terror Bills, as drafted, popular actions cease to be peaceful expressions of people’s sentiment, and become acts of terrorism. Ultimately, the Terror Bills will curtail - not terrorism which is already punished by present law – but people’s actions to express themselves, especially when they take their government to account.
· To make matters worse, “terrorism” as defined by the Terror Bills not only covers consummated acts or those already manifested through overt acts, but also those which merely “threaten” terrorism. Given the already broad range of acts which are made to fall under “terrorism”, the inclusion of mere “threats” of such acts further widens the scope of acts punished even further. Applied to real life, not only are demonstrations by the people considered terrorist acts but the mere threat that such demonstrations will be conducted is considered as terrorism already. Nothing can stifle the exercise of freedom of expression more than such absurdly draconian measures.
· We note that the Terror Bills propose that terrorism as defined therein calls for the application of R.A. 9160 as amended (the Anti-Money Laundering Act), and R.A. 4200 (the Anti-Wire Tapping Act). This simply means that the funds, property, and communication of a person who is suspected of being a terrorist (under the Terror Bills’ broad definitions this can be anyone) can be subject of search and even seizure by law enforcement authorities. We oppose such unprecedented intrusion into people’s right to privacy. People will hardly feel more secure when the authority to conduct such a high degree of interference is entrusted to law enforcement agencies and the judiciary.
· We further note that the Terror Bills extend the inquest period for those accused of terrorism to fifteen (15) days. This means that suspected terrorists can be held without formal charge for more than two (2) weeks. We emphasize the importance of the right to a preliminary investigation or inquest as soon as possible after arrest, which has long protected those wrongly accused of unnecessary detention. There is nothing in the crime of terrorism which should erode this safeguard. On the contrary, given the broad and vague definition of terrorism as well as the government’s continuing penchant to accuse persons wrongly, the security provided by the right to preliminary investigation or inquest should be strengthened.
In conclusion
The national situation, beset as it is by threats and overt acts of terrorism, has to address squarely its problems of law enforcement and corruption in the military establishment. As it is, acts of terrorism (as already penalized in the RPC) are not investigated thoroughly, law enforcement operations are not transparent, and military operations such as that in Mindanao go overboard worsening distrust among groups of people struggling for self-determination.
The Terror Bills now pending in Congress and certified as urgent by President Arroyo miss the point that acts of terrorists are already punished by statute. What is worse, the Terror Bills erode the rights guaranteed by the Constitution as being indispensable to the maintenance of a democratic and free society. People should remain free to express themselves without fear of being tagged as terrorists and held for an extended period of time. People should continue to be able to influence government policy without fear that their communication will be tapped. If only the present laws are honestly enforced, and government agents are free from suspicion that they collude with terrorists, there will be no need to concoct a new crime called terrorism. By being unnecessary and too open for abuse, the Terror Bills should be junked.
Signed:
AKBAYAN! Citizens Action Party
Alliance of Progressive Labor (APL)
Amnesty International Philippines
Buklod ng Kababaihan - Olongapo
Coalition Against Trafficking in Women (CATW)
Center for Agrarian Reform Empowerment and Transformation (CARET)
Center for Migrants Advocacy – Philippines (CMA-Phils.)
Confederation of Independent Unions in the Public Sector (CIU)
Institute of Politics and Governance (IPG)
KAISAHAN
Labor Education and Research Network (LEARN)
Manggagawang Kababaihan Mithi ay Paglaya (MAKALAYA)
Mariners Association for Regional and International Networking Organization (MARINO)
Merchant Marine Overseas Association (MMOA)
National Union of Workers in Hotel Restaurant and Allied Industries (NUWHRAIN)
Pambansang Katipunan ng mga Samahan sa Kanayunan (PKSK)
Peoples’ Global Exchange (PGX)
Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocates (PAHRA)
Philippine Human Rights Information Center (PhilRights)
Pinag-isang Tinig at Lakas ng Anak Pawis (PIGLAS)
SARILAYA, Inc.
WomanHealth, Phils.
Women’s Education, Development and Productivity, Research and Advocacy Org. (WEDPRO)
The proposed law is superfluous. While a grave threat to civil liberties and political rights of the Filipino people, who fought for decades for the restoration and guarantee of such fundamental human rights.
We express grave concern as House Bill No. 5923 and its counterpart version in the Senate is being rushed by the legislature, upon the prodding of the President and the strong lobby of the USAID. We express alarm as this comes in the wake of the passage of similar bills in Japan, Korea and the processing of the same in other parts of Asia. Of course, we already know of the US passing the Patriot Act and the Homeland Security Act, a few weeks after 9/11 and urging other nations to fight “terrorism.” The context by which the bill is being rushed is simple and clear – a US-led campaign on terrorism. By US standards, the campaign has targeted “irresponsible states” towards the “prevention of war,” classifying Iraq among the former. Within states, the campaign has targeted “terrorist individuals”, of Moslem background or of simply foreign origin – “suspicious neighbors”. The campaign has revitalized in their ugliest forms, racism and xenophobia.
The Terror Bills are Unnecessary
The Bills wrongly assume that manifestations of terrorism are not punished or covered by current laws. On the contrary, the abductions, deaths and destruction often cited by Congress as justification for the Terror Bills are all punished by current law. Even the act of giving assistance, financial or otherwise, to terrorists fall well within the present penal framework. Even following the Declaration on Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism, acts of terrorism are already covered by existing laws such as the Revised Penal Code (RPC): Crimes Against Public Order, Persons, Liberty and Personal Security, Property; as well as RA 6235 (Anti-Hijacking Law), PD 1727 (Declaring as Unlawful the Malicious Dissemination of False Information or the Willful Making of Any Threat Concerning Bombs, Explosives or Any Similar Device or Means of Destruction and Imposing Penalties Therefor), RA 8294 (Illegal Possession of Firearms).
In short, the Philippines does not lack of penal legislation. It does suffer, however, from a severe lack of law enforcement, especially in the aspects involving the investigation of terrorist acts, and the identification, location, and apprehension of terrorists. It is law enforcement, not the existence of laws, which has been the crucial element missing from the state campaign against terrorism.
For instance, in the case of the Abu Sayyaf, a group widely accepted as a terrorist organization, few will insist that the problem with the Abu Sayyaf is that there is no law punishing the abductions, murders, theft, and destruction perpetrated by the group. In fact, current law covers their acts and even allows for the death penalty to be imposed.
The Terror Bills, which Congress threatens to pass, miss this crucial point and assume that we need a new law defining and punishing “terrorism.” We submit that the Terror Bills are unnecessary; no new legislation is needed to address the problems caused by terrorist groups. What is needed is the strict and honest implementation of existing laws.
The Terror Bills are Too Open for Abuse
At the core of the defect of the Terror Bills is the definition of “Terrorism.” It is too broad and consequently infringes upon the citizen’s fundamental rights involving free speech, assembly and association, freedom against unreasonable searches and seizures and the right to privacy. Consider the following:
· The definition of “terrorism” can cover a broad range of act(s) which aim to influence government. This contravenes our democratic tradition where citizens have the duty to seek redress of their grievances and express their ideas to the government which merely represents them. Hence, under the Terror Bills, as drafted, popular actions cease to be peaceful expressions of people’s sentiment, and become acts of terrorism. Ultimately, the Terror Bills will curtail - not terrorism which is already punished by present law – but people’s actions to express themselves, especially when they take their government to account.
· To make matters worse, “terrorism” as defined by the Terror Bills not only covers consummated acts or those already manifested through overt acts, but also those which merely “threaten” terrorism. Given the already broad range of acts which are made to fall under “terrorism”, the inclusion of mere “threats” of such acts further widens the scope of acts punished even further. Applied to real life, not only are demonstrations by the people considered terrorist acts but the mere threat that such demonstrations will be conducted is considered as terrorism already. Nothing can stifle the exercise of freedom of expression more than such absurdly draconian measures.
· We note that the Terror Bills propose that terrorism as defined therein calls for the application of R.A. 9160 as amended (the Anti-Money Laundering Act), and R.A. 4200 (the Anti-Wire Tapping Act). This simply means that the funds, property, and communication of a person who is suspected of being a terrorist (under the Terror Bills’ broad definitions this can be anyone) can be subject of search and even seizure by law enforcement authorities. We oppose such unprecedented intrusion into people’s right to privacy. People will hardly feel more secure when the authority to conduct such a high degree of interference is entrusted to law enforcement agencies and the judiciary.
· We further note that the Terror Bills extend the inquest period for those accused of terrorism to fifteen (15) days. This means that suspected terrorists can be held without formal charge for more than two (2) weeks. We emphasize the importance of the right to a preliminary investigation or inquest as soon as possible after arrest, which has long protected those wrongly accused of unnecessary detention. There is nothing in the crime of terrorism which should erode this safeguard. On the contrary, given the broad and vague definition of terrorism as well as the government’s continuing penchant to accuse persons wrongly, the security provided by the right to preliminary investigation or inquest should be strengthened.
In conclusion
The national situation, beset as it is by threats and overt acts of terrorism, has to address squarely its problems of law enforcement and corruption in the military establishment. As it is, acts of terrorism (as already penalized in the RPC) are not investigated thoroughly, law enforcement operations are not transparent, and military operations such as that in Mindanao go overboard worsening distrust among groups of people struggling for self-determination.
The Terror Bills now pending in Congress and certified as urgent by President Arroyo miss the point that acts of terrorists are already punished by statute. What is worse, the Terror Bills erode the rights guaranteed by the Constitution as being indispensable to the maintenance of a democratic and free society. People should remain free to express themselves without fear of being tagged as terrorists and held for an extended period of time. People should continue to be able to influence government policy without fear that their communication will be tapped. If only the present laws are honestly enforced, and government agents are free from suspicion that they collude with terrorists, there will be no need to concoct a new crime called terrorism. By being unnecessary and too open for abuse, the Terror Bills should be junked.
Signed:
AKBAYAN! Citizens Action Party
Alliance of Progressive Labor (APL)
Amnesty International Philippines
Buklod ng Kababaihan - Olongapo
Coalition Against Trafficking in Women (CATW)
Center for Agrarian Reform Empowerment and Transformation (CARET)
Center for Migrants Advocacy – Philippines (CMA-Phils.)
Confederation of Independent Unions in the Public Sector (CIU)
Institute of Politics and Governance (IPG)
KAISAHAN
Labor Education and Research Network (LEARN)
Manggagawang Kababaihan Mithi ay Paglaya (MAKALAYA)
Mariners Association for Regional and International Networking Organization (MARINO)
Merchant Marine Overseas Association (MMOA)
National Union of Workers in Hotel Restaurant and Allied Industries (NUWHRAIN)
Pambansang Katipunan ng mga Samahan sa Kanayunan (PKSK)
Peoples’ Global Exchange (PGX)
Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocates (PAHRA)
Philippine Human Rights Information Center (PhilRights)
Pinag-isang Tinig at Lakas ng Anak Pawis (PIGLAS)
SARILAYA, Inc.
WomanHealth, Phils.
Women’s Education, Development and Productivity, Research and Advocacy Org. (WEDPRO)
May 8, 2003
INTERNATIONAL DEMANDS REGARDING THE INVASION, OCCUPATION AND "RECONSTRUCTION" OF IRAQ To Endorse the Demands
The US-lead invasion and occupation of Iraq is illegal
In 1946, the Nuremberg Tribunal judged that "To initiate a war of aggression is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."
Consequently, we demand
An immediate end to the illegal occupation of Iraq by the United States and the United Kingdom and the immediate withdrawal and removal of all foreign troops, military advisers and representatives, military equipment and armaments.
We insist that
The Iraqi people have absolute and sovereign right to determine their own future and any decision about the need for international assistance rests solely with the Iraqis.
The United States' and United Kingdom's occupation of Iraq is illegal, as is any administrative authority or interim government established by the occupying forces. Therefore, any decisions made by the occupying forces or their representatives are not binding on the Iraqi people.
The UN-held escrow Iraqi oil account must not be used to foot the bill for reconstruction of the damage caused by the illegal war and UN sanctions. The funds must be held in trust for the Iraqi people until there is a legitimate and genuinely representative government elected by the people.
While we strongly support independent civil society assistance to and solidarity with the Iraqi people, the United Nations and its agencies, other governments and non-governmental organisations should not serve as a cover to legitimise, or profit from, the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq. Humanitarian aid must not be used to support or promote the military, political and economic objectives of the occupying forces.
The UN, other governments and NGOs should not use their own resources or public money to replace humanitarian assistance, aid, reconstruction or other development activities which are the legal and moral responsibility of the invading and occupying forces, nor should they characterise as "aid" that which is the entitlement of the Iraqi people.
The Iraqi people have sovereignty over all natural resources and utilities. The invading and occupying forces or their private sector proxies have no right to make any decisions about who controls or benefits from the exploitation of natural resources or the construction and delivery of basic services and utilities.
The full costs of all reconstruction, compensation and reparations for the physical, social, economic, psychological, ecological, cultural and heritage destruction caused by the US-lead invasion of Iraq must be borne by the aggressors.
Reparations for the physical, social, economic, psychological, ecological, cultural and heritage loss, damage and suffering caused by the UN Security Council mandated sanctions must be borne by the Permanent Members of the UN Security Council.
In addition, reparations must be paid to all persons who have suffered physical, economic and psychological loss and trauma resulting from twelve years of sanctions and the 2003 invasion based on individual and collective claims and dispensed by an independent compensation tribunal.
We call for
A Peoples War Tribunal based on the Geneva Conventions and Nuremberg Tribunal principles and precedents to investigate and prosecute the war crimes of, amongst others, George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell, Tommy Franks, Tony Blair, Jack Straw, and John Howard.
International sanctions on the aggressor nations for their illegal, preemptive attack on a sovereign nation.
The United States Government to desist from threats of force and use of force against all sovereign nations.
Focus on the Global South
8 May 2003
In 1946, the Nuremberg Tribunal judged that "To initiate a war of aggression is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."
Consequently, we demand
An immediate end to the illegal occupation of Iraq by the United States and the United Kingdom and the immediate withdrawal and removal of all foreign troops, military advisers and representatives, military equipment and armaments.
We insist that
The Iraqi people have absolute and sovereign right to determine their own future and any decision about the need for international assistance rests solely with the Iraqis.
The United States' and United Kingdom's occupation of Iraq is illegal, as is any administrative authority or interim government established by the occupying forces. Therefore, any decisions made by the occupying forces or their representatives are not binding on the Iraqi people.
The UN-held escrow Iraqi oil account must not be used to foot the bill for reconstruction of the damage caused by the illegal war and UN sanctions. The funds must be held in trust for the Iraqi people until there is a legitimate and genuinely representative government elected by the people.
While we strongly support independent civil society assistance to and solidarity with the Iraqi people, the United Nations and its agencies, other governments and non-governmental organisations should not serve as a cover to legitimise, or profit from, the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq. Humanitarian aid must not be used to support or promote the military, political and economic objectives of the occupying forces.
The UN, other governments and NGOs should not use their own resources or public money to replace humanitarian assistance, aid, reconstruction or other development activities which are the legal and moral responsibility of the invading and occupying forces, nor should they characterise as "aid" that which is the entitlement of the Iraqi people.
The Iraqi people have sovereignty over all natural resources and utilities. The invading and occupying forces or their private sector proxies have no right to make any decisions about who controls or benefits from the exploitation of natural resources or the construction and delivery of basic services and utilities.
The full costs of all reconstruction, compensation and reparations for the physical, social, economic, psychological, ecological, cultural and heritage destruction caused by the US-lead invasion of Iraq must be borne by the aggressors.
Reparations for the physical, social, economic, psychological, ecological, cultural and heritage loss, damage and suffering caused by the UN Security Council mandated sanctions must be borne by the Permanent Members of the UN Security Council.
In addition, reparations must be paid to all persons who have suffered physical, economic and psychological loss and trauma resulting from twelve years of sanctions and the 2003 invasion based on individual and collective claims and dispensed by an independent compensation tribunal.
We call for
A Peoples War Tribunal based on the Geneva Conventions and Nuremberg Tribunal principles and precedents to investigate and prosecute the war crimes of, amongst others, George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell, Tommy Franks, Tony Blair, Jack Straw, and John Howard.
International sanctions on the aggressor nations for their illegal, preemptive attack on a sovereign nation.
The United States Government to desist from threats of force and use of force against all sovereign nations.
Focus on the Global South
8 May 2003
Apr 24, 2003
The “Terror Bill” Being Concocted by Congress is Unconstitutional!
HB 5923 or the Anti-Terrorism Bill provides a very vague definition of terrorism or the acts that constitute terrorism. It is so vague that it leaves people guessing as to what it really means. As such, the bill violates the right to due process, enshrined in theConstitution, which prohibits the creation of vague laws. Such vagueness would provide government with unbridled discretion in carrying out its provisions and becomes an arbitrary flexing of its coercive power.
If passed into law, the “Terror Bill” can be abused by government to stifle legitimate dissent akin to what we have seen during the Martial Law years.
HB 5923 defines terrorism as:
“when any person or group of persons uses, or threatens to use violence principally directed against civilians or non-combatant persons, or causes damage or destruction against properties with the intent of creating a common danger, terror, panic or chaos to the public or a segment thereof” (Section 3).
The question is, what constitutes “violence” or “damage or destruction against properties”? What differentiates an act of terrorism from an ordinary crime? When is a murder considered as “terrorist murder” or a kidnapping a “terrorist kidnapping”? Worse, the bill does not provide the basis how one proves “intent of creating a common danger, terror, panic or chaos to the public or a segment thereof.” What evidences do you need to prove intent?
It is for this reason that workers remain suspicious about the real intent of the bill. Is it really being designed to fight terrorism or to stifle, even criminalize, legitimate dissent?
If passed into law, the “Terror Bill” can be abused by government to stifle legitimate dissent akin to what we have seen during the Martial Law years.
HB 5923 defines terrorism as:
“when any person or group of persons uses, or threatens to use violence principally directed against civilians or non-combatant persons, or causes damage or destruction against properties with the intent of creating a common danger, terror, panic or chaos to the public or a segment thereof” (Section 3).
The question is, what constitutes “violence” or “damage or destruction against properties”? What differentiates an act of terrorism from an ordinary crime? When is a murder considered as “terrorist murder” or a kidnapping a “terrorist kidnapping”? Worse, the bill does not provide the basis how one proves “intent of creating a common danger, terror, panic or chaos to the public or a segment thereof.” What evidences do you need to prove intent?
It is for this reason that workers remain suspicious about the real intent of the bill. Is it really being designed to fight terrorism or to stifle, even criminalize, legitimate dissent?
Apr 22, 2003
"No to Terrorism! No to the Terror Bill!"
At the onset, let us be very clear about one thing, we are against terrorism! But it is also for this reason that we are opposed to the "Terror Bills" now pending in Congress.
Under a climate of fear and with the absence of a healthy public debate on the matter, Congress is rushing the so-called Anti-Terrorism Bill which, despite President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo's claim, would not solve the problem of terrorism but would only undermine the working people's basic inalienable rights: union rights; and the right to dissent, the ability to disagree, to question our country's leaders and to criticize their actions.
In both versions of the bill (in the Senate and the House of Representatives), the definition of how terrorism is committed is too broad for comfort (Section 3 in both versions). If passed into law, the "Terror Bill" can be abused by government to stifle legitimate dissent akin to what we have seen during the Martial Law years.
But more importantly, government has yet to convince the public of the need for an Anti-Terrorism law, especially when there are already existing laws that penalizes almost all, if not all, overt acts of terrorism. Surely it is not the lack of laws that explains government's failure to crush criminal elements whose status was elevated by the United States as terrorist groups!
Thus the real intent of the bill is suspicious, to say the least. Is it really being designed to fight terrorism or to stifle, even criminalize, legitimate dissent? Perhaps it is not a coincidence that some of those pushing for this bill are those who were part of the Marcos dictatorship.
But if the Congress really wants to fight terrorism, then we are challenging Congress to focus its attention on addressing its root causes: the deplorable poverty and social injustice in the country; and President GMA's war in Mindanao and her irresponsible support for US military aggression which surely breeds terrorism!
No to Terrorism!
No to the Terror Bill!
Uphold Trade Union Rights!
Defend and Advance Civil and Political Rights!
Under a climate of fear and with the absence of a healthy public debate on the matter, Congress is rushing the so-called Anti-Terrorism Bill which, despite President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo's claim, would not solve the problem of terrorism but would only undermine the working people's basic inalienable rights: union rights; and the right to dissent, the ability to disagree, to question our country's leaders and to criticize their actions.
In both versions of the bill (in the Senate and the House of Representatives), the definition of how terrorism is committed is too broad for comfort (Section 3 in both versions). If passed into law, the "Terror Bill" can be abused by government to stifle legitimate dissent akin to what we have seen during the Martial Law years.
But more importantly, government has yet to convince the public of the need for an Anti-Terrorism law, especially when there are already existing laws that penalizes almost all, if not all, overt acts of terrorism. Surely it is not the lack of laws that explains government's failure to crush criminal elements whose status was elevated by the United States as terrorist groups!
Thus the real intent of the bill is suspicious, to say the least. Is it really being designed to fight terrorism or to stifle, even criminalize, legitimate dissent? Perhaps it is not a coincidence that some of those pushing for this bill are those who were part of the Marcos dictatorship.
But if the Congress really wants to fight terrorism, then we are challenging Congress to focus its attention on addressing its root causes: the deplorable poverty and social injustice in the country; and President GMA's war in Mindanao and her irresponsible support for US military aggression which surely breeds terrorism!
No to Terrorism!
No to the Terror Bill!
Uphold Trade Union Rights!
Defend and Advance Civil and Political Rights!
Apr 8, 2003
Martial Law Call?
When President Gloria Arroyo delivered her speech during the signing into law of the anti-money laundering act last March 7, she encouraged the legislature to help her enact a law on anti-terrorism.
Yes, the government and the military should do everything to arrest the perpetrators of these heinous crimes and punish them according to the parameters set by our laws.
However, all of the anti-terrorism bills filed in both houses of congress have one thing in common. All of these do not define what constitutes a terrorism act or a terrorist organization. In fact, the definitions are so broad that it will have hostile effects on our civil and political rights threatening even our legitimate right to peaceful assemble. Likewise, the bills give law enforces unbridled discretion in carrying out warrantless arrests and search and seizure orders without court approval while arrested person/s may be put to jail for 72 hours even without charges being filed in court (Sec 19, H.B. 4980 of Rep Joseph Durano). Certainly, these are illegitimate exercise of the State’s Police power: a willful violation of due process and protection of the people’s right enshrined in the Philippine Constitution.
For labor, this would mean severe violation of our trade union rights particularly the right to strike, e.g., in Section 4 of H.B. 4980, it was stated that any person or organization is engaged in terrorist activities when it is “causing or threatening to cause serious interference with or serious disruption of an essential service, facility or system, whether public or private, other than as a result of lawful advocacy, protest, dissent, or stoppage of work...” The problem with this provision is that it is not stipulated on who will determine these actions. Thus, the capitalist would just declare the legitimate action as an act of terrorism and the police would have a field day in arresting the leaders and members of the union and detained them without charges being filed in court.
In this regard, we would like to warn our legislators that enacting an anti-terrorism law is like resurrecting Martial law all over again when the police and the military were given the primary task to solve the country’s problems. Unfortunately, our experience would tell us that it only worsened rebellion and the people’s unrest. Now, once the bills are enacted, the same powers would be given to the police and the military and certainly, we would only lose all the gains that we have struggled for and won in the past. Once the bills are enacted, the legislators are actually giving the police and military a legitimacy in using the powers of the state rendering inutile other functions and branches of the state. Thus, a repeat of the dark years of Martial law is a big probability when the fundamentals of democracy have been utterly trampled, e.g., congress was padlocked in 1972.
In calling for the enactment of an anti-terrorism law, the president is obviously complying with the instigation of the US for allied countries to enact laws similar to its Patriot Act that seeks to end terrorism by sowing fear and terror among the people.
Certainly, no civil mind would justify and support any terrorist act in pursuit of a political agenda that would cause innocent bodies being mutilated and torn apart while others live as the carnage unfolds right before their very eyes; and terrorism done for selfish ends, e.g., for financial and material gains at the expense of people’s lives would definitely be even more despicable and loathsome.
However, the bills clearly intend to neutralize legitimate political dissent by institutionalizing state terrorism against civilians at its very core since we have enough laws criminalizing any action towards committing rebellion and other crimes against the state, e.g., gun running, money laundering, armed uprising, etc. that will easily incriminate a person or organization to any terrorist activity. We don’t need additional laws. What the government should do is to address the root cause of terrorism, which is the absence of food and justice among the people.
Yes, the government and the military should do everything to arrest the perpetrators of these heinous crimes and punish them according to the parameters set by our laws.
However, all of the anti-terrorism bills filed in both houses of congress have one thing in common. All of these do not define what constitutes a terrorism act or a terrorist organization. In fact, the definitions are so broad that it will have hostile effects on our civil and political rights threatening even our legitimate right to peaceful assemble. Likewise, the bills give law enforces unbridled discretion in carrying out warrantless arrests and search and seizure orders without court approval while arrested person/s may be put to jail for 72 hours even without charges being filed in court (Sec 19, H.B. 4980 of Rep Joseph Durano). Certainly, these are illegitimate exercise of the State’s Police power: a willful violation of due process and protection of the people’s right enshrined in the Philippine Constitution.
For labor, this would mean severe violation of our trade union rights particularly the right to strike, e.g., in Section 4 of H.B. 4980, it was stated that any person or organization is engaged in terrorist activities when it is “causing or threatening to cause serious interference with or serious disruption of an essential service, facility or system, whether public or private, other than as a result of lawful advocacy, protest, dissent, or stoppage of work...” The problem with this provision is that it is not stipulated on who will determine these actions. Thus, the capitalist would just declare the legitimate action as an act of terrorism and the police would have a field day in arresting the leaders and members of the union and detained them without charges being filed in court.
In this regard, we would like to warn our legislators that enacting an anti-terrorism law is like resurrecting Martial law all over again when the police and the military were given the primary task to solve the country’s problems. Unfortunately, our experience would tell us that it only worsened rebellion and the people’s unrest. Now, once the bills are enacted, the same powers would be given to the police and the military and certainly, we would only lose all the gains that we have struggled for and won in the past. Once the bills are enacted, the legislators are actually giving the police and military a legitimacy in using the powers of the state rendering inutile other functions and branches of the state. Thus, a repeat of the dark years of Martial law is a big probability when the fundamentals of democracy have been utterly trampled, e.g., congress was padlocked in 1972.
In calling for the enactment of an anti-terrorism law, the president is obviously complying with the instigation of the US for allied countries to enact laws similar to its Patriot Act that seeks to end terrorism by sowing fear and terror among the people.
Certainly, no civil mind would justify and support any terrorist act in pursuit of a political agenda that would cause innocent bodies being mutilated and torn apart while others live as the carnage unfolds right before their very eyes; and terrorism done for selfish ends, e.g., for financial and material gains at the expense of people’s lives would definitely be even more despicable and loathsome.
However, the bills clearly intend to neutralize legitimate political dissent by institutionalizing state terrorism against civilians at its very core since we have enough laws criminalizing any action towards committing rebellion and other crimes against the state, e.g., gun running, money laundering, armed uprising, etc. that will easily incriminate a person or organization to any terrorist activity. We don’t need additional laws. What the government should do is to address the root cause of terrorism, which is the absence of food and justice among the people.
Dec 10, 2002
poverty: worst kind of terrorism and human rights violation!
December 10 is human rights day. Its commemoration is celebrated all over the world. However, the rampant repression of our human rights and worsening terrorism clearly attests to the fact that we really have much to worry about the safety of our family and our future.
These days, we could easily point to terrorism as the worst kind of human rights violation. The Arroyo government has practically done everything to stop terrorism, though she denies some specifically those instigated by the US. From the blatant intrusion of the US armed forces through the series of Balikatan Excercises; filing of anti-terrorism bills which now has more than 12 versions in both houses of congress; and just recently, the signing of the Mutual Logistics Support Agreement (MLSA), which has given the US blanket authority to set up military facilities wherever they want in our soil.
On the labor sector, she warned those who “terrorize factories that provide jobs” that the government would not relent on tracking them down, too. However, if the President would wage war against those that “terrorize factories and provide jobs” then we might as well go after the people who are not nameless and faceless, but has been terrorizing the workers by giving them undue fear and panic through continuous retrenchment and lay-offs, closing down of factories, giving unjust wages, etc. For us, these people who own the factories and other business establishment but terrorize their workers through anti-worker policies and actions should be included in the list of terrorists that the government should go after with. In fact, most of them have used their money and influence to dictate the actions of some of our social institutions that should be the one protecting the rights of the people. Take the case of the Philippine Airlines workers where the Supreme Court upheld last January 2002 a 10-year moratorium on Collective Bargaining Agreement against the workers. Obviously, only Mr. Lucio Tan would rejoice on such decision just like Osama Bin Laden praising his god when the September 11 attacks occurred last year. Last March, Mrs. Arroyo herself suspended the Collective Negotiations Agreement against government employees and disallowed mass leaves, obviously to prevent them from holding strikes. We just don’t know on how she celebrated on what she did.
Terrorism, by its very nature, horrifies the people and is an utter disregard to human rights. Nonetheless, not only bombings kill people. This may not be at par with the seemingly gruesome effect of seeing dilapidated or mutilated bodies torn apart by a terrorist’s bomb, but its impact is more ruthless since more lives are bound to perish with its merciless attacks. At this point in time, what really terrifies the people and violate their human rights is the reality of a worsening poverty. The fear and terror of seeing your children hardly eat a decent meal for a day and not being able to send them to school, any more is certainly awesome. What is really gruesome is the fact that we have to survive a terminally ill economy borne out of irrational policies like those that fully uphold the free trade programs of foreign capitalists at the expense of the Filipino people and our local industries. Hope is getting thinner and thinner as millions continue to be out of job while the rest continue to lose theirs with only seasonal and contractual jobs available in the employment market. For the APL, the government should really go after the people who perpetrate this kind of terrorism because of its subtle and systematic approach in pursuing its economic ideology of neo-liberalism. Certainly, this terrorism is far more destructive and appalling knowing the genocidal effects that it will bring forth due to the annihilation of millions of people that will die of famine and other social costs.
Certainly, the government is not aiming on ending terrorism but to intensify the suppression of our basic human rights and make our country a haven of terrorists with their anti-social activities. The APL calls on the government to focus its anti-terrorism drive not on the result but on the causes of poverty. If the government would only be true in its effort of alleviating the plight of the poor and improve our economy by not submitting to the whims and caprices of the social elites and foreign capitalists, then we could hope to diminish if not totally end terrorism and for peace to finally reign in our land.
No to US and GMA’s war on terrorism!
No to anti-terrorism bills!
Uphold the peoples basic human rights!
No to globalization!
Long live the Social Movement Unionism!
Alliance of Progressive Labor · AKBAYAN
These days, we could easily point to terrorism as the worst kind of human rights violation. The Arroyo government has practically done everything to stop terrorism, though she denies some specifically those instigated by the US. From the blatant intrusion of the US armed forces through the series of Balikatan Excercises; filing of anti-terrorism bills which now has more than 12 versions in both houses of congress; and just recently, the signing of the Mutual Logistics Support Agreement (MLSA), which has given the US blanket authority to set up military facilities wherever they want in our soil.
On the labor sector, she warned those who “terrorize factories that provide jobs” that the government would not relent on tracking them down, too. However, if the President would wage war against those that “terrorize factories and provide jobs” then we might as well go after the people who are not nameless and faceless, but has been terrorizing the workers by giving them undue fear and panic through continuous retrenchment and lay-offs, closing down of factories, giving unjust wages, etc. For us, these people who own the factories and other business establishment but terrorize their workers through anti-worker policies and actions should be included in the list of terrorists that the government should go after with. In fact, most of them have used their money and influence to dictate the actions of some of our social institutions that should be the one protecting the rights of the people. Take the case of the Philippine Airlines workers where the Supreme Court upheld last January 2002 a 10-year moratorium on Collective Bargaining Agreement against the workers. Obviously, only Mr. Lucio Tan would rejoice on such decision just like Osama Bin Laden praising his god when the September 11 attacks occurred last year. Last March, Mrs. Arroyo herself suspended the Collective Negotiations Agreement against government employees and disallowed mass leaves, obviously to prevent them from holding strikes. We just don’t know on how she celebrated on what she did.
Terrorism, by its very nature, horrifies the people and is an utter disregard to human rights. Nonetheless, not only bombings kill people. This may not be at par with the seemingly gruesome effect of seeing dilapidated or mutilated bodies torn apart by a terrorist’s bomb, but its impact is more ruthless since more lives are bound to perish with its merciless attacks. At this point in time, what really terrifies the people and violate their human rights is the reality of a worsening poverty. The fear and terror of seeing your children hardly eat a decent meal for a day and not being able to send them to school, any more is certainly awesome. What is really gruesome is the fact that we have to survive a terminally ill economy borne out of irrational policies like those that fully uphold the free trade programs of foreign capitalists at the expense of the Filipino people and our local industries. Hope is getting thinner and thinner as millions continue to be out of job while the rest continue to lose theirs with only seasonal and contractual jobs available in the employment market. For the APL, the government should really go after the people who perpetrate this kind of terrorism because of its subtle and systematic approach in pursuing its economic ideology of neo-liberalism. Certainly, this terrorism is far more destructive and appalling knowing the genocidal effects that it will bring forth due to the annihilation of millions of people that will die of famine and other social costs.
Certainly, the government is not aiming on ending terrorism but to intensify the suppression of our basic human rights and make our country a haven of terrorists with their anti-social activities. The APL calls on the government to focus its anti-terrorism drive not on the result but on the causes of poverty. If the government would only be true in its effort of alleviating the plight of the poor and improve our economy by not submitting to the whims and caprices of the social elites and foreign capitalists, then we could hope to diminish if not totally end terrorism and for peace to finally reign in our land.
No to US and GMA’s war on terrorism!
No to anti-terrorism bills!
Uphold the peoples basic human rights!
No to globalization!
Long live the Social Movement Unionism!
Alliance of Progressive Labor · AKBAYAN
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)