Says communist group not a terror organization
A MANILA court has junked government’s petition seeking to declare the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) and its armed wing, the New People’s Army (NPA), as terrorist organizations.
Judge Marlo Magdoza-Malagar of the Manila Regional Trial Court Branch 19 said the CPP-NPA was not organized for the purpose of engaging or committing terrorism.
“While armed struggle’ with the violence’ that necessarily accompanies it, is indubitably the approved means’ to achieve the CPP-NPA’s purpose, means’ is not synonymous with purpose.’ Stated otherwise, armed struggle’ is only a means to achieve the CPP’s purpose; it is not the `purpose’ of the creation of the CPP,” read part of the 135-page ruling that was issued on September 21.
The proscription case was filed by the Department of Justice (DOJ) in February 2018 under the previous administration. It asked the court to declare the CPP-NPA as a terrorist organization under Republic Act 9372 or the Human Security Act (HSA) of 2007.
The 2007 HSA was replaced by the controversial Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) of 2020, the constitutionality of which was upheld by the Supreme Court despite fears of many sectors that some of its provisions are prone to abuse.
Under the ATA, the government designated the communist movement a terrorist organization.
Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla said the DOJ will file a motion for reconsideration.
“The State has to take care of itself when people are attacking the State,” he said.
Former senator Panfilo Lacson, principal sponsor and one of the authors of ATA 2020, said the Manila court’s dismissal of the proscription case “is pursuant to the Saving Clause provision under the Anti-Terrorism Act and should not in any way be interpreted as a setback for the law itself.”
“That being said, that is exactly the reason why proscription is designed to be the exclusive authority of the judiciary since it could involve possible detention of individuals and members of organizations suspected to be violating the Act, hence due process of law must be strictly observed. Unlike `designation’ which only involves preliminary freezing of bank accounts and assets of those involved in terrorist financing, and which the Anti Terrorism Council is given the authority to perform since it is merely an administrative act,” he said.
TERRORIST ACTS
In the ruling, the court said a perusal of the CPP’s 10-point program or plan of action “consisting of the lofty ideals readily shows that the CPP-NPA is organized or exists not for the purpose of engaging in terrorism.”
The court said while nine acts or incidents cited by the DOJ in its petition can be considered terrorism under the 2007 HSA, their authorship could not be traced with certainty to the communist movement.
Among the incidents cited by the DOJ in its bid to tag the CPP-NPA as terrorists, were killings and attempted killings and abductions from 2019 to 2020 in several provinces in Mindanao.
The court said prosecution witnesses have identified only the manner of clothing of the attackers, who were all in black, and the fact that they were carrying high-powered firearms.
“This identification leaves much to be desired. Certainly, it takes more than a certain manner or mode of dressing to establish that one is a member of the CPP-NPA,” the court said.
“In the absence of any evidence that the official uniform of the members of the CPP-NPA consist of an all-black outfit, this court cannot give credence to the witnesses’ identification,” the court added.
The court also said none of the nine incidents the DOJ cited in its petition caused “widespread and extraordinary fear and panic” among the population, but only “pocket and sporadic occurrences” in limited and scattered areas in the country, particularly in specific areas in Mindanao such as Surigao del Sur, Cagayan de Oro, Misamis Oriental, Bukidnon and Agusan del Sur.
“In other words, these incidents have not reached ‘widespread’ or ‘extraordinary’ proportions contemplated under Section 3 and 17 of the 2007 HSA,” the court said.
NO OFFICIAL DIRECTIVE
It said none of the alleged former NPA members presented by the DOJ as witnesses presented evidence showing that there is an official party directive from the CPP-NPA leadership for its units to commit atrocities or killings.
Further, the court held that guerrilla warfare, including hit-and-run attacks, practiced by the CPP-NPA against the much-superior government forces, is not synonymous with terrorism.
“Perhaps contributing to the low impact of the foregoing atrocities is the CPP-NPA’s chosen battle strategy which is guerrilla warfare within the context of a protracted people’s war,” it said, adding that the nine incidents fall in the category of small-time hit-and-run attacks and sporadic acts of violence “with no specified victims or targets.”
The DOJ, the court said, also failed to present evidence showing that the nine incidents were “meant to coerce the government to give in to perpetrator’s demand.”
There is also no evidence, the court said, to support the DOJ’s arguments that the said incidents are meant to force the government to engage in peace talks with the communist movement to prevent more bloodshed.
“Even if such demand is assumed to be an implicit motive of these disparate incidents, still, it can hardly be said that a demand for peace negotiation is an unlawful demand. A demand for peace negotiation or peace talk or cessation of hostilities, is on its face, a valid lawful demand,” the court added.
As to the “purging” incidents or the liquidation of its members who have turned their backs on the movement, the court said it does not constitute acts of terrorism, especially since these were carried out in secrecy, thereby precluding the likelihood of “widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among the populace” for them to be considered terrorist acts.
Regarding the DOJ’s arguments citing incidents such as the collection of revolutionary taxes, the 1971 Plaza Miranda bombing and other incidents, the court said these cannot be used against the CPP-NPA as these took place before the passage of the HSA 20O7 or ATA 2020.
“Classifying these acts as ‘terrorist acts’ that will in turn classify the CPP-NPA as terrorist organization would lead the Court to tread on constitutionally-infirm ground — that of applying provisions of a penal law to acts committed prior to the law’s enactment,” it said.
‘POLITICAL CRIMES’
The court said the acts attributed to the CPP-NPA should be considered “political crimes” treated with leniency.
“An NPA member engages in violence and employs force, not for violence’s sake but in pursuit of the higher ideals contained in the Constitution of the CPP,” it said, adding that political crimes are not terroristic acts.
These acts were targeted primarily at state agents, not civilians, the court said, adding it could only qualify as rebellion and not terrorism.
The court also warned of the danger of red-tagging and said it poses a risk to the safety and security of activists.
“To automatically lump activists, mostly members of the above ground organizations as members of the CPP-NPA invariably constitute red-tagging,” the court said, adding that when the petition was filed by the DOJ, it included a list of 649 individuals who the government wanted the court to declare as terrorists but who disavowed affiliation with the communist movement.
Most of them are activists and members of non-government organizations and civil society groups working on various issues such as human rights and land reform.
Four of those originally included in the list — National Democratic Front consultant Rafael Baylosis, United Nations Special Rapporteur Victoria Tauli-Corpuz, former Bayan Muna representative Satur Ocampo, and Jose Melencio Molintas — have cleared their names after the court junked the government’s case against them.
The number was later whittled down by the DOJ to around 20. But the court in 2019 further trimmed down the number to two individuals with “unassailable links” to the CPP-NPA, namely party chairman Jose Maria Sison and Antonio Cabanatan, secretary of the Mindanao Commission.
The court reminded the government that while the CPP-NPA’s ideology “calls for absolutes,” it can “only gain adherents for as long as the government remains insensitive to, and incompetent in addressing, the social realities of poverty and material inequality.”
“Efforts on the part of the present government to counter insurgency should include respect for the right to dissent, to due process and to the rule of law,” it said.
“Just as the respondent organizations are uncompromising in their ideals, so must the government be uncompromising in safeguarding the Constitution it is sworn to uphold,” it added.
ATROCITIES
The National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-ELCAC) said the CPP and the NPA are terrorist organizations based on atrocities they have committed over their more than 50 years of existence.
NTF-ELCAC executive director Emmanuel Salamat said the communist group has been engaged in “terrorism, violence and murder” since it was created.
“Their ultimate goal and purpose is always grounded on overthrowing the government, that is their overarching goal of the (CPP and NPA),” said Salamat.
He said the government will appeal the court decision. “We will have a legal battle… As far as we are concerned, we will appeal, we have to appeal,” he said.
Salamat also said the task force was surprised the court decided in favor of the CPP and the NPA.
Army spokesman Col. Xerxes Trinidad said soldiers will sustain the fight against the communist rebels with or without the court decision.
Trinidad said NPA rebels have been committing murder and have been threatening civilians in the countryside. “These are part of their terroristic actions,” he said.
“We will always protect the Filipino people against those threat groups. We will maintain our operations against the NPA to end the communist armed conflict,” said Trinidad.
‘FAIR’ RULING
CPP information officer Marco Valbuena, in a statement, said the decision “comes as pleasant surprise” amid “relentless efforts” of the military and the NTF-ELCAC “to stick the terrorist label against the CPP as well as other patriotic and democratic forces.”
“On initial reading, we found the 135-page decision penned by Judge Marlo Magdoza-Malagar reasonable and fair,” said Valbuena.
“We see that the judge took a historical point-of-view and situated the revolutionary movement from the perspective of the Filipino people’s struggle against oppression and exploitation,” he added.
Valbuena also said it was “gratifying” that Malagar took effort in reading the constitution and the program of the CPP, the provisions of which he declared as “reasonable aspirations of any civilized society.”
“We urge everyone, lawyers, judges, academics, teachers, students, journalists, workers, peasants and all other sectors to follow the example of Judge Malagar and read and study for yourselves the constitution and program of the CPP,” said Valbuena. — With Victor Reyes
