‘Red-tagging is just plain, flat out lazy. If these government officials and their partisans truly believe that certain groups and individuals are involved in nefarious activities, shouldn’t they be moving to file actionable court cases?’
THE crime of reckless imprudence under Article 365 of the Revised Penal Code is defined as “reckless imprudence consists in voluntary, but without malice, doing or falling to do an act from which material damage results by reason of inexcusable lack of precaution on the part of the person performing or failing to perform such act, taking into consideration his employment or occupation, degree of intelligence, physical condition and other circumstances regarding persons, time and place.”
Simply put, reckless imprudence happens when the act of one, done out of negligence but without ill motive, results in damage to another person or the latter’s property. This particular offense came to mind as I was reading a news article about Senate Minority Leader Frank Drilon’s push for the passage of the Anti-Red Tagging Bill, and apparently the Department of Justice under Secretary Menardo Guevarra endorsed the proposed measure.
I put on my law student hat to find out whether the act of red tagging can be captured by any of the existing offenses under the Revised Penal Code. While libel might seem as a close option, the crime of libel does not, to my mind, completely capture the danger an individual is placed in when he or she is red-tagged by state agents. Reckless imprudence resulting in physical injury or homicide, on the other hand, necessitates that harm has already been done, and does not carry any preventive element to protect persons who have been red-tagged but has not encountered harm. It is about time that this form of reckless endangerment is properly defined and penalized as its own unique crime.
In short, the passage of the anti-red tagging bill into law will provide protection to persons (and their families) who have been put into a vulnerable position even before harm can come to them, and effectively punish those who are ever-so cavalier with their unfounded accusations. This can also give pause to those who may think of raising their public profile or currying favor from the powers-that-be in whatever institution by starting these provocations via mass media. (“Oh look at me, I am useful and not irrelevant!”) Someone (or something) must put a stop to this reckless practice of irresponsible government officials hurling accusations against people they don’t like.
Red-tagging is just plain, flat out lazy. If these government officials and their partisans truly believe that certain groups and individuals are involved in nefarious activities, shouldn’t they be moving to file actionable court cases? Intelligence gathering, case building, good old investigative work? Or is it simply a case described by the old saying “empty cans make the loudest noise.” Noise just meant to distract, deflect, and redirect anger from one subject to another. If you can’t convince them, wear them out until they tune out and stop caring about what is happening.
Hopefully Senator Drilon’s proposed measure will gather more support in the Senate, though one cannot be overly optimistic when it comes to gaining bipartisan support in this regard.
