http://www.solidarityeconomy.net The Politics, Economics & Culture of Radical Change Sun, 05 Feb 2012 14:57:11 +0000 en hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/05/17/at-stake-in-the-may-14-elections/ http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/05/17/at-stake-in-the-may-14-elections/#comments Thu, 17 May 2007 06:00:12 +0000 Carol Pagaduan-Araullo http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/05/17/at-stake-in-the-may-14-elections/ by Carol Pagaduan-Araullo, Philippines It doesn’t take a political scientist to tell us that this mid-term elections for 12 senators, 275 congress persons and scores of local government officials epitomizes what is so rotten and undemocratic in our postcolonial electoral system. The signs and symptoms of a sick and dying traditional political order are everywhere; its inevitable moribund convulsions are threatening to wreak havoc before a new and truly democratic alternative can take its place. Ever since independence from US colonial rule in 1946, periodic elections in this country have been touted as the single, most visible proof that representative democracy is alive and well: the people of the Philippines could choose their leaders when the time came -- wisely or foolishly, for good or ill. There was the presumed sanctity of the ballot that withstood generally accepted levels of cheating and violence that accompanied any and all electoral exercises; in this country, anyway. In time it became clear that not much choice was ever given the electorate since the only ones who stood for office or could mount serious campaigns necessary to win were members of the same old socio-economic elite or their favored political parties and clans. After all, they were the only ones with the built-in advantages of money, private armies, social status and media visibility, more so if they also happen to be incumbent government officials or their anointed ones, particularly family members. Let us also not forget the time-tested political wisdom enunciated by no less than then President Diosdado Macapagal that no politician worth his salt, who aspires for a major national political office such as the presidency, could do without getting the nod of the former colonizer, and still the single most influential power in the economic and political landscape, the US of A. Notwithstanding a change in the faces of the traditional politicians taking power, Filipinos have become accustomed to the eventuality that no substantive change in terms of basic political and economic platforms would ensue after the elections. After all, didn’t they come from different factions of the same parasitic and reactionary elite, with veritably the same stakes in the status quo and ergo the same political mind sets? Even so-called non-traditional politicians or self-styled “men of the masses” who run for public office are themselves actually members or surrogates of the dominant classes in society. Come now these elections taking place in the midst of a festering crisis of the old order, one that involves the shrinking of the sources of commercial profit, of bureaucratic corruption and social privilege. Thus, we are witness to the mad scramble for the advantages of public office in monopolizing the shrinking social pie. The heightened violence, the desperation and the utter disregard for any semblance of principle and moral rectitude attending this year’s electoral contest is a sorry testament to this. Most significantly, the elections are also taking place in the wake of the unresolved political crisis of the increasingly isolated Macapagal-Arroyo administration. The latter has been rendered vulnerable to the challenge of a broad array of anti-GMA political forces from left to right working for an end to its rule. The GMA regime is hounded by legitimacy questions due to alleged massive fraud in the 2004 presidential elections. It is being called to account for unstopped extrajudicial killings and other gross human rights violations, not just domestically but by the international human rights community and international public opinion. Its economic policies, while lauded by the IMF-World Bank and admittedly good for foreign credit agencies, banks, investors and their local partners, are not so for the majority of the people who consider themselves hungrier, poorer and more miserable under Mrs. Arroyo. At stake is the survival of the regime in the immediate, the political future of GMA and her main allies after her term ends in 2010, as well as the Arroyo regime’s impunity for all its crimes against the people as well as crimes against humanity. It is no wonder that the Malacanang has pulled out all stops in the illegal use of government money and resources as well as commandeered the military and police forces and utilized government agencies such as the Commission on Elections, the Justice Department, the Department of Local Government, the Office of the Ombudsman and others in its single-minded drive to bulldoze all of its political enemies in these elections. At stake for the US is the survival of what is so far its favored faction of the ruling elite, one that has proven itself most servile to US dictates though not necessarily as effective in quelling social restiveness and political dissent. But precisely because it is fighting for its survival, the Arroyo regime is most willing to do anything for its foreign patrons. At stake for the entire ruling elite and foreign vested interests, is the preservation of the existing economic-political system, of which the elections is only a part, but the one most critical in providing the illusion of “democracy”. Thus the elections’ credibility as a democratic exercise must be upheld at all cost and a parallel effort undertaken by reactionary and conservative forces to make the elections appear fair and free. These are the reasons why the May 14 elections promise to be one of the dirtiest, deadliest and most rotten in the course of this country’s painful march towards democracy while under the thin cover of a seemingly fair and honest electoral process. How can the vast majority of Filipinos find their stake in this year’s farcical elections? Despite the inherent limitations of elections in an elite and foreign-dominated political system, the fact that such a system is in a state of unabated and worsening crisis is ironically providing the openings for a truly democratic and people-based movement to take initiative, to strengthen and expand real “people power”. Thus our people must be mobilized to vote for the candidates who have proven themselves true champions of the people’s basic interests and welfare. The people must be aroused, organized and be ready to act against the expected fraud and state-sponsored violence that the GMA regime will surely unleash on elections day and immediately thereafter. Most importantly, the people must stand ready to resist the desperate and brutal resort of the GMA regime to increased political repression after the elections, as its hold on power becomes ever more tenuous and the movement to oust it regains surprising momentum. Published in Business World 11-12 May 2007

email2friend ]]> by Carol Pagaduan-Araullo, Philippines It doesn’t take a political scientist to tell us that this mid-term elections for 12 senators, 275 congress persons and scores of local government officials epitomizes what is so rotten and undemocratic in our postcolonial electoral system. The signs and symptoms of a sick and dying traditional political order are everywhere; its inevitable moribund convulsions are threatening to wreak havoc before a new and truly democratic alternative can take its place. Ever since independence from US colonial rule in 1946, periodic elections in this country have been touted as the single, most visible proof that representative democracy is alive and well: the people of the Philippines could choose their leaders when the time came -- wisely or foolishly, for good or ill. There was the presumed sanctity of the ballot that withstood generally accepted levels of cheating and violence that accompanied any and all electoral exercises; in this country, anyway. In time it became clear that not much choice was ever given the electorate since the only ones who stood for office or could mount serious campaigns necessary to win were members of the same old socio-economic elite or their favored political parties and clans. After all, they were the only ones with the built-in advantages of money, private armies, social status and media visibility, more so if they also happen to be incumbent government officials or their anointed ones, particularly family members. Let us also not forget the time-tested political wisdom enunciated by no less than then President Diosdado Macapagal that no politician worth his salt, who aspires for a major national political office such as the presidency, could do without getting the nod of the former colonizer, and still the single most influential power in the economic and political landscape, the US of A. Notwithstanding a change in the faces of the traditional politicians taking power, Filipinos have become accustomed to the eventuality that no substantive change in terms of basic political and economic platforms would ensue after the elections. After all, didn’t they come from different factions of the same parasitic and reactionary elite, with veritably the same stakes in the status quo and ergo the same political mind sets? Even so-called non-traditional politicians or self-styled “men of the masses” who run for public office are themselves actually members or surrogates of the dominant classes in society. Come now these elections taking place in the midst of a festering crisis of the old order, one that involves the shrinking of the sources of commercial profit, of bureaucratic corruption and social privilege. Thus, we are witness to the mad scramble for the advantages of public office in monopolizing the shrinking social pie. The heightened violence, the desperation and the utter disregard for any semblance of principle and moral rectitude attending this year’s electoral contest is a sorry testament to this. Most significantly, the elections are also taking place in the wake of the unresolved political crisis of the increasingly isolated Macapagal-Arroyo administration. The latter has been rendered vulnerable to the challenge of a broad array of anti-GMA political forces from left to right working for an end to its rule. The GMA regime is hounded by legitimacy questions due to alleged massive fraud in the 2004 presidential elections. It is being called to account for unstopped extrajudicial killings and other gross human rights violations, not just domestically but by the international human rights community and international public opinion. Its economic policies, while lauded by the IMF-World Bank and admittedly good for foreign credit agencies, banks, investors and their local partners, are not so for the majority of the people who consider themselves hungrier, poorer and more miserable under Mrs. Arroyo. At stake is the survival of the regime in the immediate, the political future of GMA and her main allies after her term ends in 2010, as well as the Arroyo regime’s impunity for all its crimes against the people as well as crimes against humanity. It is no wonder that the Malacanang has pulled out all stops in the illegal use of government money and resources as well as commandeered the military and police forces and utilized government agencies such as the Commission on Elections, the Justice Department, the Department of Local Government, the Office of the Ombudsman and others in its single-minded drive to bulldoze all of its political enemies in these elections. At stake for the US is the survival of what is so far its favored faction of the ruling elite, one that has proven itself most servile to US dictates though not necessarily as effective in quelling social restiveness and political dissent. But precisely because it is fighting for its survival, the Arroyo regime is most willing to do anything for its foreign patrons. At stake for the entire ruling elite and foreign vested interests, is the preservation of the existing economic-political system, of which the elections is only a part, but the one most critical in providing the illusion of “democracy”. Thus the elections’ credibility as a democratic exercise must be upheld at all cost and a parallel effort undertaken by reactionary and conservative forces to make the elections appear fair and free. These are the reasons why the May 14 elections promise to be one of the dirtiest, deadliest and most rotten in the course of this country’s painful march towards democracy while under the thin cover of a seemingly fair and honest electoral process. How can the vast majority of Filipinos find their stake in this year’s farcical elections? Despite the inherent limitations of elections in an elite and foreign-dominated political system, the fact that such a system is in a state of unabated and worsening crisis is ironically providing the openings for a truly democratic and people-based movement to take initiative, to strengthen and expand real “people power”. Thus our people must be mobilized to vote for the candidates who have proven themselves true champions of the people’s basic interests and welfare. The people must be aroused, organized and be ready to act against the expected fraud and state-sponsored violence that the GMA regime will surely unleash on elections day and immediately thereafter. Most importantly, the people must stand ready to resist the desperate and brutal resort of the GMA regime to increased political repression after the elections, as its hold on power becomes ever more tenuous and the movement to oust it regains surprising momentum. Published in Business World 11-12 May 2007

email2friend ]]> http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/05/17/at-stake-in-the-may-14-elections/feed/ 0 http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/04/18/repeat-of-massive-fraud/ http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/04/18/repeat-of-massive-fraud/#comments Wed, 18 Apr 2007 06:00:11 +0000 Carol Pagaduan-Araullo http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/04/18/repeat-of-massive-fraud/ by Carol Pagaduan-Araullo, Philippines There will be massive cheating by the Arroyo administration in the upcoming May elections. The elements of this unfolding crime of monumental proportions are all present. The fact that there is still no hue and cry is a testament to how crime does pay in this country, most especially when the brains as well as the perpetrators, are cloaked with authority and wield the powers of high office. First of all, there is the motive. Despite the fact that the forthcoming elections is not about choosing a new president, everybody knows that the fate of the incumbent, de facto Chief Executive, Mrs. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, hinges on its outcome. The gelling of a protest vote against Mrs. Arroyo could very well translate into the trouncing of administration-backed candidates for both houses of Congress. This means the Opposition could win enough congressional seats to impeach Mrs. Arroyo as well as enough senators to convict her. Under such a scenario, not only can Mrs. Arroyo be removed from office through impeachment, a whole can of worms of her regime’s outstanding crimes against the people such as gross human rights violations, unprecedented graft and corruption and betrayal of the nation’s sovereignty, territorial integrity and patrimony, can be brought to light. Mrs. Arroyo can be made criminally accountable as well as civilly liable to return ill-gotten wealth as well as to pay damages to victims. Second, there are the wherewithals. Even without proof positive, it is obvious that administration-backed candidates have all the unfair advantages of the largesse of Malacanang’s political patronage – money, resources, political network and influence – not to mention the unofficial, even illegal, sources of campaign funds. The precedents are plenty: we have not forgotten the fertilizer fund scam, the Philhealth cards distributed before the elections nor the ubiquitous street sweepers with the name of the presidential candidate GMA emblazoned on their blue t-shirts and the government billboards announcing Mrs. Arroyo’s supposed achievements as incumbent. But even this was not enough to score victory against Mrs. Arroyo’s immensely popular rival, film actor Fernando Poe, Jr. A premeditated plan for massive and systematic electoral fraud was put in place to operate before, during and after the elections. In fact, the fraud continued long after Mrs. Arroyo’s was proclaimed President. According to the poll watchdog group Kontra Daya, “The electoral fraud perpetrated by the Arroyo administration to secure victory in the presidential and vice-presidential elections of 2004 consisted mainly of the following: * fabrication of voting results in election returns to favor Gloria Macapagal Arroyo over Fernando Poe, Jr., largely in the provinces of Pampanga, Cebu, Iloilo, and Bohol; * ‘dagdag-bawas’ operations, i.e., the manipulation of election results in the certificates of canvass, perpetrated in a number of provinces in Mindanao; * and a post-election ‘clean-up’ operation in which up to 10,000 election returns (ERs) were fabricated and switched for the authentic ERs kept at the Batasang Pambansa complex.” But more alarming and portentous is Kontra Daya’s assessment that the conditions for wholesale election fraud persists to this day. The citizen’s poll monitoring group highlighted four major alarming developments. COMELEC has failed to investigate and prosecute cases of electoral fraud in the May 2004 presidential election. Consequently, the “machinery for cheating’ used by the Arroyo administration in 2004 is intact and primed for “a repeat performance.” The group named a number of COMELEC personnel implicated in the massive dagdag-bawas operation in Mindanao in 2004 as revealed in the “Hello, Garci” recordings that have since been promoted, implying an increase in their capacity to “manipulate” the election results. COMELEC has failed to secure the production of election returns (ERs) and certificates of canvass (COCs) so much so that spurious election documents can still be manufactured using COMELEC-approved security paper with all the secret markings or security features of the COMELEC intact. This ensures that the faked documents -- whether pre-fabricated as revealed by the testimony of one former NBI hand-writing expert named Mr. Tabayoyong, or done after the fact to correct the discrepancy between COCs canvassed by Congress and unopened ERs as witnessed to by self-confessed vote-rigger, Arsenio Rasalan – can pass for the real thing. COMELEC has so far failed to fully implement legally-mandated safeguards against wholesale electoral fraud such as “dagdag-bawas.” Kontra Daya makes specific reference to Sections 31 to 43 of R.A. 9369 that introduce significant changes to the manner in which votes are counted at the precinct level and canvassed at the municipal and higher levels. Notable reforms include the requirement that the second copy of election returns and the third copy of certificates of canvass be posted for 48 hours on a wall within the premises of the precinct or canvassing center for the perusal of the public and the projection of COC results. COMELEC has shown gross negligence and unjustifiable diffidence in implementing said provisions. Finally, COMELEC has been shown to be “complicit with Malacañang in sabotaging the election for party-list.” Malacañang, it appears, has undertaken a special project to intervene in the party-list election in its favor. It has sustained and even stepped up its campaign of physical attacks, harassment and legal disqualification against militant party-list groups who are among the most vocal critics of the administration in order to prevent their predicted victory at the polls. At the same time, through its Office of External Affairs, Malacañang has fielded at least 22 party-list groups (based on information gathered by Kontra Daya) whose nominees are in one way or other connected with Malacañang. In so doing, the Palace seeks to do two things: one, gain control of more congressional seats via the party-list; two, with the sharp increase in the number of party-list groups in contention, make it more difficult for genuine party-lists to achieve the minimum number of votes required to gain a seat in Congress. For its part, the COMELEC has played along by accrediting a large number of party-list groups with dubious credentials and ill-disguised links to Malacañang. COMELEC’s refusal to disclose to the public the nominees of the party-lists it has accredited, especially the new and more suspect ones, effectively shields these “shady party-lists” from exposure and possible disqualification. COMELEC does this even as it diligently entertains unfounded petitions to disqualify progressive and militant party-list groups such as Bayan Muna, Anakpawis and Gabriela Women’s Party that have a well-established track record of legitimacy, performance and popular support. COMELEC is guilty as well of glaring inaction in the face of blatant electioneering by the Armed Forces of the Philippines against party-list groups such as Bayan Muna, whose leaders and members are subjected to harassment and intimidation by soldiers deployed in urban poor communities in Metro Manila and targeted for extrajudicial execution in the provinces apparently by government-sponsored death squads. All the hallmarks of a repeat of the massive electoral fraud that took place in 2004 are present. Will the Arroyo regime get away with it once more or will the people act to make the criminals pay for their repeated crimes?

email2friend ]]> by Carol Pagaduan-Araullo, Philippines There will be massive cheating by the Arroyo administration in the upcoming May elections. The elements of this unfolding crime of monumental proportions are all present. The fact that there is still no hue and cry is a testament to how crime does pay in this country, most especially when the brains as well as the perpetrators, are cloaked with authority and wield the powers of high office. First of all, there is the motive. Despite the fact that the forthcoming elections is not about choosing a new president, everybody knows that the fate of the incumbent, de facto Chief Executive, Mrs. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, hinges on its outcome. The gelling of a protest vote against Mrs. Arroyo could very well translate into the trouncing of administration-backed candidates for both houses of Congress. This means the Opposition could win enough congressional seats to impeach Mrs. Arroyo as well as enough senators to convict her. Under such a scenario, not only can Mrs. Arroyo be removed from office through impeachment, a whole can of worms of her regime’s outstanding crimes against the people such as gross human rights violations, unprecedented graft and corruption and betrayal of the nation’s sovereignty, territorial integrity and patrimony, can be brought to light. Mrs. Arroyo can be made criminally accountable as well as civilly liable to return ill-gotten wealth as well as to pay damages to victims. Second, there are the wherewithals. Even without proof positive, it is obvious that administration-backed candidates have all the unfair advantages of the largesse of Malacanang’s political patronage – money, resources, political network and influence – not to mention the unofficial, even illegal, sources of campaign funds. The precedents are plenty: we have not forgotten the fertilizer fund scam, the Philhealth cards distributed before the elections nor the ubiquitous street sweepers with the name of the presidential candidate GMA emblazoned on their blue t-shirts and the government billboards announcing Mrs. Arroyo’s supposed achievements as incumbent. But even this was not enough to score victory against Mrs. Arroyo’s immensely popular rival, film actor Fernando Poe, Jr. A premeditated plan for massive and systematic electoral fraud was put in place to operate before, during and after the elections. In fact, the fraud continued long after Mrs. Arroyo’s was proclaimed President. According to the poll watchdog group Kontra Daya, “The electoral fraud perpetrated by the Arroyo administration to secure victory in the presidential and vice-presidential elections of 2004 consisted mainly of the following: * fabrication of voting results in election returns to favor Gloria Macapagal Arroyo over Fernando Poe, Jr., largely in the provinces of Pampanga, Cebu, Iloilo, and Bohol; * ‘dagdag-bawas’ operations, i.e., the manipulation of election results in the certificates of canvass, perpetrated in a number of provinces in Mindanao; * and a post-election ‘clean-up’ operation in which up to 10,000 election returns (ERs) were fabricated and switched for the authentic ERs kept at the Batasang Pambansa complex.” But more alarming and portentous is Kontra Daya’s assessment that the conditions for wholesale election fraud persists to this day. The citizen’s poll monitoring group highlighted four major alarming developments. COMELEC has failed to investigate and prosecute cases of electoral fraud in the May 2004 presidential election. Consequently, the “machinery for cheating’ used by the Arroyo administration in 2004 is intact and primed for “a repeat performance.” The group named a number of COMELEC personnel implicated in the massive dagdag-bawas operation in Mindanao in 2004 as revealed in the “Hello, Garci” recordings that have since been promoted, implying an increase in their capacity to “manipulate” the election results. COMELEC has failed to secure the production of election returns (ERs) and certificates of canvass (COCs) so much so that spurious election documents can still be manufactured using COMELEC-approved security paper with all the secret markings or security features of the COMELEC intact. This ensures that the faked documents -- whether pre-fabricated as revealed by the testimony of one former NBI hand-writing expert named Mr. Tabayoyong, or done after the fact to correct the discrepancy between COCs canvassed by Congress and unopened ERs as witnessed to by self-confessed vote-rigger, Arsenio Rasalan – can pass for the real thing. COMELEC has so far failed to fully implement legally-mandated safeguards against wholesale electoral fraud such as “dagdag-bawas.” Kontra Daya makes specific reference to Sections 31 to 43 of R.A. 9369 that introduce significant changes to the manner in which votes are counted at the precinct level and canvassed at the municipal and higher levels. Notable reforms include the requirement that the second copy of election returns and the third copy of certificates of canvass be posted for 48 hours on a wall within the premises of the precinct or canvassing center for the perusal of the public and the projection of COC results. COMELEC has shown gross negligence and unjustifiable diffidence in implementing said provisions. Finally, COMELEC has been shown to be “complicit with Malacañang in sabotaging the election for party-list.” Malacañang, it appears, has undertaken a special project to intervene in the party-list election in its favor. It has sustained and even stepped up its campaign of physical attacks, harassment and legal disqualification against militant party-list groups who are among the most vocal critics of the administration in order to prevent their predicted victory at the polls. At the same time, through its Office of External Affairs, Malacañang has fielded at least 22 party-list groups (based on information gathered by Kontra Daya) whose nominees are in one way or other connected with Malacañang. In so doing, the Palace seeks to do two things: one, gain control of more congressional seats via the party-list; two, with the sharp increase in the number of party-list groups in contention, make it more difficult for genuine party-lists to achieve the minimum number of votes required to gain a seat in Congress. For its part, the COMELEC has played along by accrediting a large number of party-list groups with dubious credentials and ill-disguised links to Malacañang. COMELEC’s refusal to disclose to the public the nominees of the party-lists it has accredited, especially the new and more suspect ones, effectively shields these “shady party-lists” from exposure and possible disqualification. COMELEC does this even as it diligently entertains unfounded petitions to disqualify progressive and militant party-list groups such as Bayan Muna, Anakpawis and Gabriela Women’s Party that have a well-established track record of legitimacy, performance and popular support. COMELEC is guilty as well of glaring inaction in the face of blatant electioneering by the Armed Forces of the Philippines against party-list groups such as Bayan Muna, whose leaders and members are subjected to harassment and intimidation by soldiers deployed in urban poor communities in Metro Manila and targeted for extrajudicial execution in the provinces apparently by government-sponsored death squads. All the hallmarks of a repeat of the massive electoral fraud that took place in 2004 are present. Will the Arroyo regime get away with it once more or will the people act to make the criminals pay for their repeated crimes?

email2friend ]]> http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/04/18/repeat-of-massive-fraud/feed/ 1 http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/04/02/killings-as-state-policy/ http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/04/02/killings-as-state-policy/#comments Mon, 02 Apr 2007 06:00:26 +0000 Carol Pagaduan-Araullo http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/04/02/killings-as-state-policy/ by Carol Pagaduan-Araullo, Philippines The truth has a sure, if painfully slow, way of coming out in the open. In the past couple of weeks, two highly significant events in the international arena, taking place one after the other, have put the de facto government of Mrs. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo on the spot, with regard to the continuing problem of extrajudicial killings. The earlier one is the verdict of the Permanent People’s Tribunal (PPT), Second Session on the Philippines, held in the world’s capital on international law, The Hague, The Netherlands, last 25 March. The second is the interim report of the UN Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary killings in the Philippines delivered to the UN Human Rights Council, on 27 March, in Geneva, Switzerland. The PPT describes itself as “an international opinion tribunal, independent from any State authority (that)…examines cases regarding violations of human rights and rights of peoples.” Founded in June 1979, in Bologna, Italy by a broad spectrum of law experts, writers and other cultural and community leaders (including five Nobel Prize laureates) coming from 31 countries, the PPT is rooted in the historical experience of the Russell Tribunals on Vietnam (1966-67) and the dictatorships in Latin America (1974-76). From its founding to the present, the PPT has held 32 sessions, one of the earliest being the first session on the Philippines in 1980 that “found the Marcos regime guilty of political suppression and abuse of power in violation of the rights of the Filipino people.” It also “condemned the political, economic and military complicity with the US and other foreign powers.” The PPT is not conferred with any state or inter-state authority to enforce its judgments or verdicts against the accused. “The importance and strength of (its) decisions… rest on the moral weight of the causes and arguments to which they give credibility and their recognition in the UN Commission on Human Rights.” The PPT was presented with three charges principally against the defendants Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and the Philippine government as well as George Walker Bush and the US government: to wit, gross and systematic violations of the civil and political rights; of the economic, social and cultural rights; and of the right to national self-determination and liberation of the Filipino people. Contrary to wild accusations, primarily by the Arroyo regime and its apologists, the PPT is no “kangaroo court”. The request on a second session on the Philippines submitted by organizations of human rights victims, especially Hustisya! (Victims of the Arroyo Regime United for Justice), and the Bagong Alyansang Makabayan or BAYAN, a well-known leftist alliance of national and democratic people’s organizations, was thoroughly studied by the PPT Secretariat and President; specifically, the matter of the competence of the PPT on the contents of the accusation and the representativeness of the plaintiffs were ascertained. Once it was decided to hold the PPT second session of the Philippines, the two main accused parties – the Arroyo and Bush governments – were notified formally through their embassies in Rome and in The Hague and were invited to participate to exercise their right to defense. The public hearings were conducted for three full days while the jurors’ closed-door deliberations were held from the evening of the third day to the morning of the fifth and last day when the session was concluded with the reading of the verdict. The presentation of the testimonial and documentary evidence was conducted under rigorous and high legal standards such that the first part of the PPT verdict said: “The wealth and consistency of the oral and written documentation made available through witnesses and expert reports, has convinced the PPT that each and all three of the charges … are substantiated.” Moreover, the PPT concluded that the extent and systematic nature of the violations of the rights of the Filipino people constituted “crimes against humanity, with all the consequences for the persons responsible for them.” According to the 13-page verdict, “We need to see the worsening human rights crisis in the Philippines in the context of the United States’ strategies for global economic and military hegemony and the ensuing US-led so-called ‘war on terror’” which the Arroyo and Bush administration have “knowingly and willingly colluded with each other in implementing.” The tribunal identified Oplan Bantay Laya (Operation Freedom Watch), the current counterinsurgency program of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and the latest expression of the state’s “all-out war” policy, to be the underlying cause of the extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, torture, massacres and other gross violations of civil and political rights. Thus, the PPT said it “has found unequivocal evidences that the militaries have a central role in the greatest majority of the scenarios of human rights violations in the Philippines.” It also said, “The US, through Pentagon and Central Intelligence Agency, has been involved in conceptualization, planning, training of AFP personnel and execution of…[this] latest formulation of previous counterinsurgency plans.” According to the verdict, the Security Engagement Board Agreement of 2006 between the US and the Philippines created the Security Engagement Board—a joint committee of defense and military officials of the two countries tasked to “oversee the anti-terror campaign” in the Philippines. The tribunal concluded, “The reported killings, torture and forced disappearances fall under responsibility of the Philippine government and are by no way justified in terms of necessary measures against terrorism.” On the other hand, the interim report of the UN Rapporteur, Mr. Philip Alston, pointed to “two of the most important underlying causes of a great many of the killings.” The first is the government campaign of vilification or guilt by association accorded to groups in the left of the political spectrum who are labeled as “front organizations” of the Communist Party of the Philippines-New People’s Army (CPP-NPA). Subsequently, a wider range of groups “including human rights advocates, labor union organizers, journalists, teachers’ unions, women’s groups, indigenous organizations, religious groups, student groups, agrarian reform advocates, and others are classified as ‘fronts’ and then as ‘enemies of the state’ that are accordingly considered to be legitimate targets.” “The second cause is the extent to which aspects of the Government’s counter-insurgency strategy encourage or facilitate the extrajudicial killings of activists and other ‘enemies’ in certain circumstances.” Mr. Alston states emphatically that his recommendations “will make little difference unless there is a fundamental change of heart on the part of the military or the emergence of civilian resolve to compel the military to change its ways. Then, and only then, will it be possible to make real progress in ending the killings.” The truth is slowly but surely emerging that indeed the killings and other grievous human rights violations are part and parcel of state policy and that government officials up to the highest levels are responsible for their cover-up and the resulting climate of absolute impunity.

email2friend ]]> by Carol Pagaduan-Araullo, Philippines The truth has a sure, if painfully slow, way of coming out in the open. In the past couple of weeks, two highly significant events in the international arena, taking place one after the other, have put the de facto government of Mrs. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo on the spot, with regard to the continuing problem of extrajudicial killings. The earlier one is the verdict of the Permanent People’s Tribunal (PPT), Second Session on the Philippines, held in the world’s capital on international law, The Hague, The Netherlands, last 25 March. The second is the interim report of the UN Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary killings in the Philippines delivered to the UN Human Rights Council, on 27 March, in Geneva, Switzerland. The PPT describes itself as “an international opinion tribunal, independent from any State authority (that)…examines cases regarding violations of human rights and rights of peoples.” Founded in June 1979, in Bologna, Italy by a broad spectrum of law experts, writers and other cultural and community leaders (including five Nobel Prize laureates) coming from 31 countries, the PPT is rooted in the historical experience of the Russell Tribunals on Vietnam (1966-67) and the dictatorships in Latin America (1974-76). From its founding to the present, the PPT has held 32 sessions, one of the earliest being the first session on the Philippines in 1980 that “found the Marcos regime guilty of political suppression and abuse of power in violation of the rights of the Filipino people.” It also “condemned the political, economic and military complicity with the US and other foreign powers.” The PPT is not conferred with any state or inter-state authority to enforce its judgments or verdicts against the accused. “The importance and strength of (its) decisions… rest on the moral weight of the causes and arguments to which they give credibility and their recognition in the UN Commission on Human Rights.” The PPT was presented with three charges principally against the defendants Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and the Philippine government as well as George Walker Bush and the US government: to wit, gross and systematic violations of the civil and political rights; of the economic, social and cultural rights; and of the right to national self-determination and liberation of the Filipino people. Contrary to wild accusations, primarily by the Arroyo regime and its apologists, the PPT is no “kangaroo court”. The request on a second session on the Philippines submitted by organizations of human rights victims, especially Hustisya! (Victims of the Arroyo Regime United for Justice), and the Bagong Alyansang Makabayan or BAYAN, a well-known leftist alliance of national and democratic people’s organizations, was thoroughly studied by the PPT Secretariat and President; specifically, the matter of the competence of the PPT on the contents of the accusation and the representativeness of the plaintiffs were ascertained. Once it was decided to hold the PPT second session of the Philippines, the two main accused parties – the Arroyo and Bush governments – were notified formally through their embassies in Rome and in The Hague and were invited to participate to exercise their right to defense. The public hearings were conducted for three full days while the jurors’ closed-door deliberations were held from the evening of the third day to the morning of the fifth and last day when the session was concluded with the reading of the verdict. The presentation of the testimonial and documentary evidence was conducted under rigorous and high legal standards such that the first part of the PPT verdict said: “The wealth and consistency of the oral and written documentation made available through witnesses and expert reports, has convinced the PPT that each and all three of the charges … are substantiated.” Moreover, the PPT concluded that the extent and systematic nature of the violations of the rights of the Filipino people constituted “crimes against humanity, with all the consequences for the persons responsible for them.” According to the 13-page verdict, “We need to see the worsening human rights crisis in the Philippines in the context of the United States’ strategies for global economic and military hegemony and the ensuing US-led so-called ‘war on terror’” which the Arroyo and Bush administration have “knowingly and willingly colluded with each other in implementing.” The tribunal identified Oplan Bantay Laya (Operation Freedom Watch), the current counterinsurgency program of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and the latest expression of the state’s “all-out war” policy, to be the underlying cause of the extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, torture, massacres and other gross violations of civil and political rights. Thus, the PPT said it “has found unequivocal evidences that the militaries have a central role in the greatest majority of the scenarios of human rights violations in the Philippines.” It also said, “The US, through Pentagon and Central Intelligence Agency, has been involved in conceptualization, planning, training of AFP personnel and execution of…[this] latest formulation of previous counterinsurgency plans.” According to the verdict, the Security Engagement Board Agreement of 2006 between the US and the Philippines created the Security Engagement Board—a joint committee of defense and military officials of the two countries tasked to “oversee the anti-terror campaign” in the Philippines. The tribunal concluded, “The reported killings, torture and forced disappearances fall under responsibility of the Philippine government and are by no way justified in terms of necessary measures against terrorism.” On the other hand, the interim report of the UN Rapporteur, Mr. Philip Alston, pointed to “two of the most important underlying causes of a great many of the killings.” The first is the government campaign of vilification or guilt by association accorded to groups in the left of the political spectrum who are labeled as “front organizations” of the Communist Party of the Philippines-New People’s Army (CPP-NPA). Subsequently, a wider range of groups “including human rights advocates, labor union organizers, journalists, teachers’ unions, women’s groups, indigenous organizations, religious groups, student groups, agrarian reform advocates, and others are classified as ‘fronts’ and then as ‘enemies of the state’ that are accordingly considered to be legitimate targets.” “The second cause is the extent to which aspects of the Government’s counter-insurgency strategy encourage or facilitate the extrajudicial killings of activists and other ‘enemies’ in certain circumstances.” Mr. Alston states emphatically that his recommendations “will make little difference unless there is a fundamental change of heart on the part of the military or the emergence of civilian resolve to compel the military to change its ways. Then, and only then, will it be possible to make real progress in ending the killings.” The truth is slowly but surely emerging that indeed the killings and other grievous human rights violations are part and parcel of state policy and that government officials up to the highest levels are responsible for their cover-up and the resulting climate of absolute impunity.

email2friend ]]> http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/04/02/killings-as-state-policy/feed/ 1 http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/03/20/reign-of-terror/ http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/03/20/reign-of-terror/#comments Tue, 20 Mar 2007 06:00:08 +0000 Carol Pagaduan-Araullo http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/03/20/reign-of-terror/ by Carol Araullo, Philippines The vital flaw which undermines the utility of much of the (Philippine) judicial system is the problem of virtual impunity that prevails. This, in turn, is built upon the rampant problem of witness vulnerability. Thepresent message is that if you want to preserve your life expectancy, don't act as a witness in a criminal prosecution for killing… In a relatively poor society, in which there is heavy dependence on community and very limited real geographical mobility, witnesses are uniquely vulnerable when the forces accused of killings are all too often those, or are linked to those, who are charged with ensuring their security. -- UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial Killings, Philip Alston Siche Bustamante-Gandinao, a 56 year-old farmer, married with six children, daughter-in-law of slain Bayan Muna–Misamis Oriental provincial chairperson Dalmacio “Tatay Daki” Gandinao, herself a member of Bayan Muna and the Misamis Oriental Farmers Association, and a witness presented to UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial Killings Philip Alston last February, was shot dead on 12 March, by an unidentified assailant as she walked home after harvesting crops with her husband and children. The place of the incident was only 50 meters away from an army detachment; the assailant reportedly fled in its direction. The Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) spokesperson, Lt. Col. Bartolome Bacarro, was quick to blame the New People’s Army (NPA) as responsible for the assassination: he claimed that Mrs. Gandinao had been cooperating with the military and was thereby targeted by the NPA for liquidation. He did not elaborate nor offer any proof of this claim. The AFP has indeed made a habit of blaming any and all extrajudicial killings of activists on the communist-led guerilla army. Not only is the AFP “in denial”, as Mr. Alston pointed out, of any military/police involvement in the alarming spate of killings, Mrs. Arroyo’s generals have a ready culprit and so their response is only a press release away. How can the AFP spokesperson say that Mrs. Gandinao has been cooperating with the military when just weeks before she had lost her father-in-law to killers whom the family suspect to be members of military-directed death squads? She had testified, at great risk to her own life, in a closed-door hearing conducted by Mr. Alston during his visit to Cagayan de Oro. Mrs. Gandinao gave the names of the men who had been casing Tatay Daki’s house days before he was murdered. She also said her father-in-law had warned her that she was in the AFP “order of battle” together with her sister, Divina Bustamante-Tina, and that this meant the two of them were already on the military’s “hit list”. The kind of people who would malign a dead woman without batting an eyelash is the same kind who can kill without batting an eyelash. The callous disregard for the honor and dignity of a victim of extrajudicial killings, brazenly discarding the facts and turning the truth on its head, says it all for the AFP. That the Commander-in-Chief allows the military to repeat this outrageously fictitious line ad nauseam despite the clear findings of her own investigative body, the Melo commission, says it all for the Arroyo administration. The killing of yet another witness to the extrajudicial killing of activists underscores the extreme vulnerability of such courageous yet apparently foolhardy individuals. What immediately comes to mind is the case of Marcelino “Ka Marcing” Beltran, president of the Alyansa ng mga Magbubukid sa Tarlac and a survivor-witness of the Hacienda Luisita Massacre of November 2004 who was gunned down in his own home. As I wrote back then, when Ka Marcing testified before a fact finding mission three days before his cold-blooded murder, “(h)e was articulate, fearless, agitated, his words tumbling from his mouth as he narrated how he miraculously escaped the hail of bullets even as he helped carry the dying and the wounded to safety, away from the bloodthirsty police, military and private security forces who relentlessly pursued the fleeing strikers and rallyists with their guns, truncheons and boots.” No honest-to-goodness investigation was ever conducted by the authorities. Ka Marcing’s family decided to move away quietly and not pursue justice for their father. To this day, the police have no suspects and no charges have been filed: the killers have gotten away again scot free. According to Mr. Alston, “The Witness Protection Program is impressive on paper. In practice, however, it is deeply flawed and would seem only to be truly effective in a very limited number of cases. The result, as one expert suggested to me, is that 8 out of 10 strong cases, or 80% fail to move from the initial investigation to the actual prosecution stage.” Thus the recent announcement by the Supreme Court that it will set up special courts to try cases of extrajudicial killings of activists and journalists, loudly applauded by Malacanang, appears to have little relevance to bringing an end to the reign of impunity in this country. The military, the police, the justice department, the Melo Commission and Mrs. Arroyo herself all rue the alleged “lack of witnesses” as the main if not the only reason investigations into the killings do not prosper. They turn a blind eye to the well-founded distrust of government by the victims’ families who suspect the assassins to be men in uniform, the masterminds to be people in authority and the over-arching policy frame to be reflected in Oplan Bantay Laya, the government’s flawed counter-insurgency program. They gloss over the proven danger for anyone who dare testify, especially against agents of the state, not to mention the inaccessibility, if not absence of, government resources to support witnesses and their families. They keep quiet about the fact that no human rights violator has been punished in this country despite the fall of the Marcos dictatorship and the supposed restoration of democratic processes and the rule of law. Most of all, they do not acknowledge that the highest accolades and quick promotions rendered, together with the stubborn refusal to investigate, the likes of Gen. Jovito Palparan -- notorious for bringing about a reign of terror and a long list of extrajudicial killings and involuntary disappearances while dutifully implementing the government’s counter-insurgency program – is the true measure of the Arroyo regime’s unwillingness to stop the killings. Mrs. Arroyo can end the killings today, if she wanted to. *Published in Business World 16-17 March 2007

email2friend ]]> by Carol Araullo, Philippines The vital flaw which undermines the utility of much of the (Philippine) judicial system is the problem of virtual impunity that prevails. This, in turn, is built upon the rampant problem of witness vulnerability. Thepresent message is that if you want to preserve your life expectancy, don't act as a witness in a criminal prosecution for killing… In a relatively poor society, in which there is heavy dependence on community and very limited real geographical mobility, witnesses are uniquely vulnerable when the forces accused of killings are all too often those, or are linked to those, who are charged with ensuring their security. -- UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial Killings, Philip Alston Siche Bustamante-Gandinao, a 56 year-old farmer, married with six children, daughter-in-law of slain Bayan Muna–Misamis Oriental provincial chairperson Dalmacio “Tatay Daki” Gandinao, herself a member of Bayan Muna and the Misamis Oriental Farmers Association, and a witness presented to UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial Killings Philip Alston last February, was shot dead on 12 March, by an unidentified assailant as she walked home after harvesting crops with her husband and children. The place of the incident was only 50 meters away from an army detachment; the assailant reportedly fled in its direction. The Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) spokesperson, Lt. Col. Bartolome Bacarro, was quick to blame the New People’s Army (NPA) as responsible for the assassination: he claimed that Mrs. Gandinao had been cooperating with the military and was thereby targeted by the NPA for liquidation. He did not elaborate nor offer any proof of this claim. The AFP has indeed made a habit of blaming any and all extrajudicial killings of activists on the communist-led guerilla army. Not only is the AFP “in denial”, as Mr. Alston pointed out, of any military/police involvement in the alarming spate of killings, Mrs. Arroyo’s generals have a ready culprit and so their response is only a press release away. How can the AFP spokesperson say that Mrs. Gandinao has been cooperating with the military when just weeks before she had lost her father-in-law to killers whom the family suspect to be members of military-directed death squads? She had testified, at great risk to her own life, in a closed-door hearing conducted by Mr. Alston during his visit to Cagayan de Oro. Mrs. Gandinao gave the names of the men who had been casing Tatay Daki’s house days before he was murdered. She also said her father-in-law had warned her that she was in the AFP “order of battle” together with her sister, Divina Bustamante-Tina, and that this meant the two of them were already on the military’s “hit list”. The kind of people who would malign a dead woman without batting an eyelash is the same kind who can kill without batting an eyelash. The callous disregard for the honor and dignity of a victim of extrajudicial killings, brazenly discarding the facts and turning the truth on its head, says it all for the AFP. That the Commander-in-Chief allows the military to repeat this outrageously fictitious line ad nauseam despite the clear findings of her own investigative body, the Melo commission, says it all for the Arroyo administration. The killing of yet another witness to the extrajudicial killing of activists underscores the extreme vulnerability of such courageous yet apparently foolhardy individuals. What immediately comes to mind is the case of Marcelino “Ka Marcing” Beltran, president of the Alyansa ng mga Magbubukid sa Tarlac and a survivor-witness of the Hacienda Luisita Massacre of November 2004 who was gunned down in his own home. As I wrote back then, when Ka Marcing testified before a fact finding mission three days before his cold-blooded murder, “(h)e was articulate, fearless, agitated, his words tumbling from his mouth as he narrated how he miraculously escaped the hail of bullets even as he helped carry the dying and the wounded to safety, away from the bloodthirsty police, military and private security forces who relentlessly pursued the fleeing strikers and rallyists with their guns, truncheons and boots.” No honest-to-goodness investigation was ever conducted by the authorities. Ka Marcing’s family decided to move away quietly and not pursue justice for their father. To this day, the police have no suspects and no charges have been filed: the killers have gotten away again scot free. According to Mr. Alston, “The Witness Protection Program is impressive on paper. In practice, however, it is deeply flawed and would seem only to be truly effective in a very limited number of cases. The result, as one expert suggested to me, is that 8 out of 10 strong cases, or 80% fail to move from the initial investigation to the actual prosecution stage.” Thus the recent announcement by the Supreme Court that it will set up special courts to try cases of extrajudicial killings of activists and journalists, loudly applauded by Malacanang, appears to have little relevance to bringing an end to the reign of impunity in this country. The military, the police, the justice department, the Melo Commission and Mrs. Arroyo herself all rue the alleged “lack of witnesses” as the main if not the only reason investigations into the killings do not prosper. They turn a blind eye to the well-founded distrust of government by the victims’ families who suspect the assassins to be men in uniform, the masterminds to be people in authority and the over-arching policy frame to be reflected in Oplan Bantay Laya, the government’s flawed counter-insurgency program. They gloss over the proven danger for anyone who dare testify, especially against agents of the state, not to mention the inaccessibility, if not absence of, government resources to support witnesses and their families. They keep quiet about the fact that no human rights violator has been punished in this country despite the fall of the Marcos dictatorship and the supposed restoration of democratic processes and the rule of law. Most of all, they do not acknowledge that the highest accolades and quick promotions rendered, together with the stubborn refusal to investigate, the likes of Gen. Jovito Palparan -- notorious for bringing about a reign of terror and a long list of extrajudicial killings and involuntary disappearances while dutifully implementing the government’s counter-insurgency program – is the true measure of the Arroyo regime’s unwillingness to stop the killings. Mrs. Arroyo can end the killings today, if she wanted to. *Published in Business World 16-17 March 2007

email2friend ]]> http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/03/20/reign-of-terror/feed/ 0 http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/03/13/human-security-act-license-to-kill/ http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/03/13/human-security-act-license-to-kill/#comments Tue, 13 Mar 2007 06:00:33 +0000 Carol Pagaduan-Araullo http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/03/13/human-security-act-license-to-kill/ by Carol Araullo, Philippines How are we to believe de facto president Mrs. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo when she proclaims that the new anti-terrorism bill, euphemistically named the Human Security Act, will be used against supposed bombers and not protesters? On the contrary, such fascist legislation will certainly give further license to the Arroyo regime-sanctioned death squads responsible for the political killings that have triggered concern among international quarters including the European Union and the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial Killings. The new law will certainly embolden the military and police forces -- from the overbearing generals to the trigger-happy soldiers and truncheon-brandishing cops -- to ride roughshod on ordinary folks’ civil, political and basic human rights. It will whet the appetites of the right-wingers concentrated in the Cabinet Oversight Committee on Internal Security (COCIS) headed by Mrs. Arroyo to quicken the tempo of her regime’s much publicized “all-out war against the Left.” In a nutshell, this consists of: (1) funneling more and more government resources to the AFP and PNP and the Mrs. Arroyo’s unaudited “intelligence” funds; (2) sanctifying the “Palparan model” of civil-military operations which is essentially state terrorism at its terrifying worst; (3) providing official cover-up at the highest level for the horrendous practice of extra-judicial killings, abductions, massacres and torture not to mention wholesale displacement, arbitrary arrests, physical abuse and harassment of poor people in rural and urban communities; (4) practically scuttling peace negotiations as a means of addressing the long-running armed conflict between the government and the communist movement and its underlying socio-economic roots; and, not the least, (5) marching to the discredited baton of US President Bush’s administration in using the “terrorist” label to demonize and repress those who resist US-led wars of aggression, fight against state assaults on civil and political liberties and, in general, oppose the regime’s dangerously insane policies. The all-out campaign to eliminate the progressive party lists Bayan Muna, Anakpawis and Gabriela from the political arena is a special project of the COCIS orchestrated by the National Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales. An intense vilification campaign in the form of relentless red-baiting and an anti-communist witch hunt reminiscent of the 50s is being conducted by the loathsome troika of NSA Secretary Gonzales, AFP Chief Hermogenes Esperon and Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez with the implicit blessings of Mrs. Arroyo. For example, these not-so-honorable gentlemen try to get away with wild accusations that the three party lists are channeling their countryside development funds to the NPA without being able to produce an iota of evidence as proof. While poisonous words can be parried by truthful ones, the unabashed militarization of rural and urban areas nationwide that the regime has pinpointed to be the bailiwicks of these uncompromisingly oppositionist partylists are certainly causing harm to life and limb. Recently, the obtrusive presence of military men in full combat gear prowling the slums of Metro Manila, ferreting out and threatening Bayan Muna et al supporters as well as telling residents not to vote for these party lists has raised alarm bells among civil libertarians and the general public. The filing of trumped-up charges of rebellion and common crimes such as multiple murders against standard bearers Satur Ocampo, Liza Maza, Teddy Casino and Rafael Mariano and the concomitant disqualification petitions against the party lists themselves are meant to knock them out if not seriously incapacitate the front-running candidates from campaigning, and eventually, assuming office. It goes without saying that the most brutal but officially denied component of this campaign is the unabated killings, abductions, surveillance and harassment of the leaders, organizers and even ordinary members and supporters of these party lists. And yet what are these aforesaid party lists truly guilty of? They are being pilloried for standing on a political platform that calls for genuine land reform and national industrialization, for upholding and promoting fundamental human and democratic rights and institutionalizing people’s empowerment through vibrant grass-roots organizing, militant mass struggles against oppression and exploitation and using the ballot to elect genuine servant-leaders of the people. Of course, they sealed their doom by taking a leading role in pushing for the impeachment of Mrs. Arroyo and joining the call for her ouster through another massive demonstration of unarmed “people power”. Are not the political objectives, aspirations and actuations of the progressive party lists strikingly similar to that espoused by the armed revolutionary movement? Of course they are! And why not, they are unashamedly self-proclaimed to be on the Left of the political spectrum. Does this not then constitute prima facie evidence that they are mere “communist front organizations” as the loathsome troika Gonzales-Esperon-Gonzalez would have us believe? Not so. These organizations are politically legitimate and legally recognized. They operate openly, do not engage in armed struggle and are democratically organized with an expanding mass constituency that the Arroyo regime is trying hard to terrorize with the military’s guns and vicious psychological warfare. As a matter of fact, the countryside funds of Bayan Muna representatives are subject to the same accounting and audit requirements of other members of Congress and, even more so, the prying eyes of Messers. Gonzales et Gonzalez. Thus the latter’s much ballyhooed accusations about these funds being diverted to the NPA are just a lot of hogwash. It must be pointed out that part of the so-called “peace offensive” cum counter-insurgency measure of the Aquino and Ramos governments was to entice and co-opt the revolutionaries under the umbrella of the National Democratic Front (NDF) to join electoral politics. Now that the legal Left has successfully entered Congress while not relinquishing the autonomous Parliament of the Streets and without denouncing the right of the people to take up arms against an oppressive government, Arroyo’s hit men cry foul, raise the communist bogey and resort to the most underhanded of tactics to halt the legal Left’s fledgling inroads into an arena still very much dominated by reactionary and discredited politicians like themselves. While Mrs. Arroyo and her cabal of widely perceived liars, plunderers, blood-thirsty fascists and die-hard anti-communists insist that the deliberately mislabeled Human Security Act is geared to go against “terrorists” like the Abu Sayyaf/Jemah Islamiyah, we all know better. The people’s democratic movement is in for fearsome and trying times not unlike that of the Marcos martial law period. But it will surely persevere, gain further strength and win wider support from the Filipino people and the peoples of the world as it struggles to overcome another fascist dictatorship in the making. *Published in Business World  9 -10 March 2007

email2friend ]]> by Carol Araullo, Philippines How are we to believe de facto president Mrs. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo when she proclaims that the new anti-terrorism bill, euphemistically named the Human Security Act, will be used against supposed bombers and not protesters? On the contrary, such fascist legislation will certainly give further license to the Arroyo regime-sanctioned death squads responsible for the political killings that have triggered concern among international quarters including the European Union and the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial Killings. The new law will certainly embolden the military and police forces -- from the overbearing generals to the trigger-happy soldiers and truncheon-brandishing cops -- to ride roughshod on ordinary folks’ civil, political and basic human rights. It will whet the appetites of the right-wingers concentrated in the Cabinet Oversight Committee on Internal Security (COCIS) headed by Mrs. Arroyo to quicken the tempo of her regime’s much publicized “all-out war against the Left.” In a nutshell, this consists of: (1) funneling more and more government resources to the AFP and PNP and the Mrs. Arroyo’s unaudited “intelligence” funds; (2) sanctifying the “Palparan model” of civil-military operations which is essentially state terrorism at its terrifying worst; (3) providing official cover-up at the highest level for the horrendous practice of extra-judicial killings, abductions, massacres and torture not to mention wholesale displacement, arbitrary arrests, physical abuse and harassment of poor people in rural and urban communities; (4) practically scuttling peace negotiations as a means of addressing the long-running armed conflict between the government and the communist movement and its underlying socio-economic roots; and, not the least, (5) marching to the discredited baton of US President Bush’s administration in using the “terrorist” label to demonize and repress those who resist US-led wars of aggression, fight against state assaults on civil and political liberties and, in general, oppose the regime’s dangerously insane policies. The all-out campaign to eliminate the progressive party lists Bayan Muna, Anakpawis and Gabriela from the political arena is a special project of the COCIS orchestrated by the National Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales. An intense vilification campaign in the form of relentless red-baiting and an anti-communist witch hunt reminiscent of the 50s is being conducted by the loathsome troika of NSA Secretary Gonzales, AFP Chief Hermogenes Esperon and Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez with the implicit blessings of Mrs. Arroyo. For example, these not-so-honorable gentlemen try to get away with wild accusations that the three party lists are channeling their countryside development funds to the NPA without being able to produce an iota of evidence as proof. While poisonous words can be parried by truthful ones, the unabashed militarization of rural and urban areas nationwide that the regime has pinpointed to be the bailiwicks of these uncompromisingly oppositionist partylists are certainly causing harm to life and limb. Recently, the obtrusive presence of military men in full combat gear prowling the slums of Metro Manila, ferreting out and threatening Bayan Muna et al supporters as well as telling residents not to vote for these party lists has raised alarm bells among civil libertarians and the general public. The filing of trumped-up charges of rebellion and common crimes such as multiple murders against standard bearers Satur Ocampo, Liza Maza, Teddy Casino and Rafael Mariano and the concomitant disqualification petitions against the party lists themselves are meant to knock them out if not seriously incapacitate the front-running candidates from campaigning, and eventually, assuming office. It goes without saying that the most brutal but officially denied component of this campaign is the unabated killings, abductions, surveillance and harassment of the leaders, organizers and even ordinary members and supporters of these party lists. And yet what are these aforesaid party lists truly guilty of? They are being pilloried for standing on a political platform that calls for genuine land reform and national industrialization, for upholding and promoting fundamental human and democratic rights and institutionalizing people’s empowerment through vibrant grass-roots organizing, militant mass struggles against oppression and exploitation and using the ballot to elect genuine servant-leaders of the people. Of course, they sealed their doom by taking a leading role in pushing for the impeachment of Mrs. Arroyo and joining the call for her ouster through another massive demonstration of unarmed “people power”. Are not the political objectives, aspirations and actuations of the progressive party lists strikingly similar to that espoused by the armed revolutionary movement? Of course they are! And why not, they are unashamedly self-proclaimed to be on the Left of the political spectrum. Does this not then constitute prima facie evidence that they are mere “communist front organizations” as the loathsome troika Gonzales-Esperon-Gonzalez would have us believe? Not so. These organizations are politically legitimate and legally recognized. They operate openly, do not engage in armed struggle and are democratically organized with an expanding mass constituency that the Arroyo regime is trying hard to terrorize with the military’s guns and vicious psychological warfare. As a matter of fact, the countryside funds of Bayan Muna representatives are subject to the same accounting and audit requirements of other members of Congress and, even more so, the prying eyes of Messers. Gonzales et Gonzalez. Thus the latter’s much ballyhooed accusations about these funds being diverted to the NPA are just a lot of hogwash. It must be pointed out that part of the so-called “peace offensive” cum counter-insurgency measure of the Aquino and Ramos governments was to entice and co-opt the revolutionaries under the umbrella of the National Democratic Front (NDF) to join electoral politics. Now that the legal Left has successfully entered Congress while not relinquishing the autonomous Parliament of the Streets and without denouncing the right of the people to take up arms against an oppressive government, Arroyo’s hit men cry foul, raise the communist bogey and resort to the most underhanded of tactics to halt the legal Left’s fledgling inroads into an arena still very much dominated by reactionary and discredited politicians like themselves. While Mrs. Arroyo and her cabal of widely perceived liars, plunderers, blood-thirsty fascists and die-hard anti-communists insist that the deliberately mislabeled Human Security Act is geared to go against “terrorists” like the Abu Sayyaf/Jemah Islamiyah, we all know better. The people’s democratic movement is in for fearsome and trying times not unlike that of the Marcos martial law period. But it will surely persevere, gain further strength and win wider support from the Filipino people and the peoples of the world as it struggles to overcome another fascist dictatorship in the making. *Published in Business World  9 -10 March 2007

email2friend ]]> http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/03/13/human-security-act-license-to-kill/feed/ 0 http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/02/27/the-alston-report/ http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/02/27/the-alston-report/#comments Tue, 27 Feb 2007 06:00:15 +0000 Carol Pagaduan-Araullo http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/02/27/the-alston-report/ by Carol Pagaduan-Araullo, Philppines The initial report of UN rapporteur Philip Alston on his investigation into extrajudicial killings in the Philippines has vindicated the position of the victims’ families and zealous advocates of justice for the victims such as the human rights organization Karapatan, activist people’s organizations and a host of local and international faith-based, academic and professional groups and institutions that took up the cudgels for the victims. In sum, according to Mr. Alston, extrajudicial killings are a fact, they are significant in number and impact, and government is responsible for a “climate of virtual impunity” that allows the killers to get away with their crimes and for the killings to continue unimpeded. The UN report constitutes a stinging rebuke of the chorus of denials that have consistently been issued by the de facto President Mrs. Macapagal-Arroyo, the high Cabinet officials who compose the Cabinet Oversight Committee on Internal Security (COC-IS) as well as the heads of the armed forces and the police about the existence of the problem of extrajudicial killings and its underlying as well as proximate causes. Mr. Alston stressed, “The impact of even a limited number of killings of the type alleged is corrosive in many ways. It intimidates vast numbers of civil society actors, it sends a message of vulnerability to all but the most well connected, and it severely undermines the political discourse which is central to a resolution of the problems confronting this country.” Furthermore, Mr. Alston categorically rejected the explanations proffered by government that the killings are first, mere propaganda by the CPP-NPA and their “front organizations”; second, they are fabricated and thus overblown; third, they can be explained by “purges” among and within the communist movement; and fourth, the very few attributable to the AFP are undertaken by so-called “rogue elements” and thereby do not reflect on the entire military establishment. He clearly pointed the finger in the direction of the military establishment in so far as the perpetrators of a majority of these killings. He upbraided the inability of the judicial system to render justice due to government’s failure to undertake effective police investigations that lead to actual prosecution and punishment of the guilty parties. Apparently, Mr. Alston did not buy the line that the Arroyo government had been trying so hard to sell: that the existence of a tough and long-running communist insurgency with a sophisticated and extensive infrastructure of political support from its rural mass base to the urban centers including Congress itself necessitates a policy of constricting, if not totally eliminating, the “legitimate space for leftist political groups”. He correctly observed that while “neither the party-list system nor the repeal of the Anti-Subversion Act has been reversed by Congress…the executive branch, openly and enthusiastically aided by the military, has worked resolutely to circumvent the spirit of these legislative decisions by trying to impede the work of the party-list groups and to put in question their right to operate freely.” Mr. Alston concedes that while such moves may be “… non-violent in conception, there are cases in which it has, certainly at the local level, spilled over into decisions to extra judicially execute those who cannot be reached by legal process.” (Read: Because the government is hard put to file and pursue the appropriate legal cases against these unarmed, aboveground activists they are justified in resorting to extrajudicial killings to permanently eliminate the nagging problem of subversion and support for the revolutionary armed struggle.) Surprisingly, the Alston report already took note that “the increase in extrajudicial executions in recent years is attributable, at least in part, to a shift in counterinsurgency strategy…” Specifically, “in some areas, an appeal to hearts-and-minds is combined with an attempt to vilify left-leaning organizations and to intimidate leaders of such organizations. In some instances, such intimidation escalates into extrajudicial execution.” Having acknowledged the major positive points in the initial findings, we must however point out the glaring inconsistencies and contradictory assertions of the report. What stand out are the conclusions regarding the solitary culpability of the AFP together with the hasty and categorical absolution of the highest political authority in the Arroyo regime. According to Mr. Alston, "I do not believe that there is a clear policy at the top designed to, or which directs that these killings take place," he said. "I am clear on that." No proof that killings were given the go signal at the top? Wherefore the Oplan Bantay Laya I, the comprehensive counter-insurgency plan that has been in place since 2002, and the new OBL II that started last year? Mrs. Arroyo claims not only that she is President but that she is also the bonafide Commander-in-Chief. Mrs. Arroyo is not being held hostage by the military but is fully in agreement with and has sanctioned what Mr. Alston has so far only described as a “shift in counter-insurgency strategy” that has spawned extrajudicial killings. Impunity? Why does Mrs. Arroyo allow the military establishment to treat accusations of human rights violations so cavalierly? Why are there no serious investigations by the police but instead flat denials and covers-up? Why has Mrs. Arroyo given quick promotions to the likes of General Palparan, not to mention singling him out in the State-of the-Nation address, heaping him with praises and giving unqualified affirmation to his controversial counter-insurgency methods? The Task Force Usig and the Melo Commission were not so much a show of good faith on the part of Mrs. Arryo in responding to the allegations but belated moves in reaction to the growing denunciation of her government’s blackened human rights record. These were intended to help cover-up the Arroyo regime’s culpability in the political killings by engaging in the grand deception of setting up a so-called “independent and powerful investigative commission”. The Melo Commission never gained even a modicum of trust and confidence from the survivors of attempted killings and the murdered victims’ families. That the Melo Commission report would only be disclosed to the public after the European Union representative and the UN Rapporteur demanded it indicates that the most credible and dramatic parts of the report had been released earlier only for propaganda purposes. Recall that Mrs. Arroyo used the Palace’s press release about the Melo Commission report to repeat the canard that the extrajudicial killings were overstated and that the CPP-NPA were behind them. Mr. Alston chides the armed forces for “being in a state of almost total denial of its need to respond effectively and authentically to the significant number of killings which have been convincingly attributed to them.” What he misses is that it is the entire Arroyo regime, starting with Mrs. Arroyo herself, that has been in complete and absolute denial of the truth. Unfortunately, the Alston Report fails to strike at the heart of what causes the killings and thus, as one death squad survivor predicted, more killings are bound to ensue. It will be up to the Filipino people to finally put a stop to them by putting an end to the US-backed Arroyo regime that is the real brains behind the state policy of extrajudicial killings.

email2friend ]]> by Carol Pagaduan-Araullo, Philppines The initial report of UN rapporteur Philip Alston on his investigation into extrajudicial killings in the Philippines has vindicated the position of the victims’ families and zealous advocates of justice for the victims such as the human rights organization Karapatan, activist people’s organizations and a host of local and international faith-based, academic and professional groups and institutions that took up the cudgels for the victims. In sum, according to Mr. Alston, extrajudicial killings are a fact, they are significant in number and impact, and government is responsible for a “climate of virtual impunity” that allows the killers to get away with their crimes and for the killings to continue unimpeded. The UN report constitutes a stinging rebuke of the chorus of denials that have consistently been issued by the de facto President Mrs. Macapagal-Arroyo, the high Cabinet officials who compose the Cabinet Oversight Committee on Internal Security (COC-IS) as well as the heads of the armed forces and the police about the existence of the problem of extrajudicial killings and its underlying as well as proximate causes. Mr. Alston stressed, “The impact of even a limited number of killings of the type alleged is corrosive in many ways. It intimidates vast numbers of civil society actors, it sends a message of vulnerability to all but the most well connected, and it severely undermines the political discourse which is central to a resolution of the problems confronting this country.” Furthermore, Mr. Alston categorically rejected the explanations proffered by government that the killings are first, mere propaganda by the CPP-NPA and their “front organizations”; second, they are fabricated and thus overblown; third, they can be explained by “purges” among and within the communist movement; and fourth, the very few attributable to the AFP are undertaken by so-called “rogue elements” and thereby do not reflect on the entire military establishment. He clearly pointed the finger in the direction of the military establishment in so far as the perpetrators of a majority of these killings. He upbraided the inability of the judicial system to render justice due to government’s failure to undertake effective police investigations that lead to actual prosecution and punishment of the guilty parties. Apparently, Mr. Alston did not buy the line that the Arroyo government had been trying so hard to sell: that the existence of a tough and long-running communist insurgency with a sophisticated and extensive infrastructure of political support from its rural mass base to the urban centers including Congress itself necessitates a policy of constricting, if not totally eliminating, the “legitimate space for leftist political groups”. He correctly observed that while “neither the party-list system nor the repeal of the Anti-Subversion Act has been reversed by Congress…the executive branch, openly and enthusiastically aided by the military, has worked resolutely to circumvent the spirit of these legislative decisions by trying to impede the work of the party-list groups and to put in question their right to operate freely.” Mr. Alston concedes that while such moves may be “… non-violent in conception, there are cases in which it has, certainly at the local level, spilled over into decisions to extra judicially execute those who cannot be reached by legal process.” (Read: Because the government is hard put to file and pursue the appropriate legal cases against these unarmed, aboveground activists they are justified in resorting to extrajudicial killings to permanently eliminate the nagging problem of subversion and support for the revolutionary armed struggle.) Surprisingly, the Alston report already took note that “the increase in extrajudicial executions in recent years is attributable, at least in part, to a shift in counterinsurgency strategy…” Specifically, “in some areas, an appeal to hearts-and-minds is combined with an attempt to vilify left-leaning organizations and to intimidate leaders of such organizations. In some instances, such intimidation escalates into extrajudicial execution.” Having acknowledged the major positive points in the initial findings, we must however point out the glaring inconsistencies and contradictory assertions of the report. What stand out are the conclusions regarding the solitary culpability of the AFP together with the hasty and categorical absolution of the highest political authority in the Arroyo regime. According to Mr. Alston, "I do not believe that there is a clear policy at the top designed to, or which directs that these killings take place," he said. "I am clear on that." No proof that killings were given the go signal at the top? Wherefore the Oplan Bantay Laya I, the comprehensive counter-insurgency plan that has been in place since 2002, and the new OBL II that started last year? Mrs. Arroyo claims not only that she is President but that she is also the bonafide Commander-in-Chief. Mrs. Arroyo is not being held hostage by the military but is fully in agreement with and has sanctioned what Mr. Alston has so far only described as a “shift in counter-insurgency strategy” that has spawned extrajudicial killings. Impunity? Why does Mrs. Arroyo allow the military establishment to treat accusations of human rights violations so cavalierly? Why are there no serious investigations by the police but instead flat denials and covers-up? Why has Mrs. Arroyo given quick promotions to the likes of General Palparan, not to mention singling him out in the State-of the-Nation address, heaping him with praises and giving unqualified affirmation to his controversial counter-insurgency methods? The Task Force Usig and the Melo Commission were not so much a show of good faith on the part of Mrs. Arryo in responding to the allegations but belated moves in reaction to the growing denunciation of her government’s blackened human rights record. These were intended to help cover-up the Arroyo regime’s culpability in the political killings by engaging in the grand deception of setting up a so-called “independent and powerful investigative commission”. The Melo Commission never gained even a modicum of trust and confidence from the survivors of attempted killings and the murdered victims’ families. That the Melo Commission report would only be disclosed to the public after the European Union representative and the UN Rapporteur demanded it indicates that the most credible and dramatic parts of the report had been released earlier only for propaganda purposes. Recall that Mrs. Arroyo used the Palace’s press release about the Melo Commission report to repeat the canard that the extrajudicial killings were overstated and that the CPP-NPA were behind them. Mr. Alston chides the armed forces for “being in a state of almost total denial of its need to respond effectively and authentically to the significant number of killings which have been convincingly attributed to them.” What he misses is that it is the entire Arroyo regime, starting with Mrs. Arroyo herself, that has been in complete and absolute denial of the truth. Unfortunately, the Alston Report fails to strike at the heart of what causes the killings and thus, as one death squad survivor predicted, more killings are bound to ensue. It will be up to the Filipino people to finally put a stop to them by putting an end to the US-backed Arroyo regime that is the real brains behind the state policy of extrajudicial killings.

email2friend ]]> http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/02/27/the-alston-report/feed/ 0 http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/02/20/wolf-in-sheeps-clothing/ http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/02/20/wolf-in-sheeps-clothing/#comments Tue, 20 Feb 2007 06:00:28 +0000 Carol Pagaduan-Araullo http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/02/20/wolf-in-sheeps-clothing/ by Carol Pagaduan-Araullo, Philippines How ironic that while the rest of the world, including the people of the USA, are waking up to the Bush administration’s big fat lies about the “war on terror”, Filipinos continue to be fed with the same sort of lies by the Arroyo regime. In fact the latter is in the process of completing the railroading of a so-called Anti-Terrorism Bill (ATB) that is the result of high-profile lobbying as well as arm-twisting by high officials of the Bush government. A two-day special session of the Lower House of Congress has been called by Mrs. Arroyo to ratify the bill so that she can quickly sign it into law. The Bush administration, bent on establishing unchallenged US economic, political and military domination over the world, seized the horrific events of 9/11 to generate mass paranoia about “terrorism” (or what it labeled as “terrorism”) and blind support for what it trumpets is a “war on terror” but which is in fact an imperialist war of terror. In the process it has funneled hundreds of billions to favored contractors in the military-industrial complex, let loose the dogs of war in the unjust invasion, occupation and destruction of Afghanistan and Iraq, enacted repressive laws such as the US PATRIOT ACT (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism) and the Military Commissions Act of 2006 and caused the unprecedented flouting of international human rights and humanitarian law standards by allowing the use of torture and inhumane treatment on prisoners accused of “terrorism” and denying them basic legal rights to defend themselves in a court of law. Imposing a black or white, “either you are with us or against us” kind of politico-military alignment, the US has hoodwinked, inveigled and pretty much threatened the rest of the world to join or support its wars of aggression and intervention in the guise of fighting a borderless, indeterminate war against “terrorism”. It is in this true context that we are witnessing the enactment in our country of the “Human Security Act of 2007” or “An Act to Secure the State and Protect the People from Terrorism” that is meant to mislead and camouflage the inhuman character and object of the bill. While earlier versions of the bill were undisguised pieces of fascist legislation that were clearly an affront on the people’s civil, political and human rights, and thus could not stand muster in a senate that has a predominantly oppositionist make-up (not to mention a smattering of senators posturing as human rights defenders) this final bicameral bill is said to have been “defanged” to the point of being harmless. We vehemently disagree. The Anti-Terrorism Bill that House Speaker de Venecia is itching to pass under his leadership and Mrs. Arroyo is aching to sign (as she herself announced) is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Simply put, the proposed bill lays the legal basis for an undeclared martial rule or the return to a fascist dictatorship disguised as merely being part and parcel of the US-led “war on terror”. The claimed “safety nets” against abuse that erstwhile opponents have introduced are ineffectual and a sham. The US-backed Arroyo regime and its military and police minions can still use the ATB to outlaw and suppress all legal dissent and opposition by unilaterally declaring these as “terrorist” on the basis of manufactured intelligence reports and the claims of false witnesses. They also have the law to back them up when they interchangeably label “rebels” as “terrorists”. In one fell stroke they will have demonized the former and reduced a revolutionary armed movement with the undisputed history of fighting the Marcos fascist dictatorship and struggling for fundamental reforms into nothing but a bunch of heartless, despicable criminals. The bill pays lip service to "uphold(ing) the basic and fundamental rights of the people..." then proceeds to enumerate the ways in which those rights are to be undermined and attacked. Concretely, “terrorism” suspects will be denied due process and the presumption of innocence. A person can be deprived of his liberty, the right to travel and the right to communicate (even by means of a telephone) on the mere suspicion of terrorism and even where “evidence of guilt is not strong”. For example, Sec. 26 states: “In cases where evidence of guilt is not strong, and the person charged is …granted... bail, the court shall …limit the right of travel of the accused to within the municipality or city where he resides. He or she may also be placed under house arrest by order of the court… While under house arrest, he or she may not use telephones, cell phones, emails, computers, the internet or other means of communications with people outside his residence until otherwise ordered by the court.” Under Sec. 19, in the event of alleged “actual or imminent terrorist attack”, suspects may be detained for 48 hours without warrant. Municipal, city, provincial or regional human rights commission officials are authorized to order the detention of suspected terrorists beyond 48 hours. This is a clear violation of the Sec. 18, Article VII of the Constitution which provides that “During the suspension of the privilege of the writ, any person thus arrested or detained shall be judicially charged within three days, otherwise he shall be released.” With the evidence for an “imminent” terrorist attack easily concocted by the military or police, who have the nasty habit of giving false warnings about New People’s Army and/or Muslim rebels infiltrating rallies and demonstrations to sow terror, any person suspected of rebellion or insurrection, which are, by the way, considered terrorist acts under Sec. 3 of the Bill, may now be detained indefinitely upon orders of a municipal officer. Thus will the ATB be used additionally to the current jurisprudence on warrantless arrests of suspected rebels that has been abused for the longest time as in the celebrated case of Anakpawis representative Crispin Beltran. Human rights lawyers and civil libertarians have all pointed to many more reprehensible provisions of the anti-terror law including the dangerously vague and broad definition of “terrorism” virtually wiping out legitimate protest and demolishing the peace processes with the communist and Muslim separatist revolutionary movements; the illegalization of organizations declared as “terrorist” by an Anti-Terrorism Council headed by Mrs. Arroyo and packed by the most hard-line militarist and fascists in her Cabinet; an intensified and indiscriminate wiretapping that will do away with constitutional guarantees to privacy and will render government critics and opponents vulnerable to unfair prosecution and political persecution. Why all the rush to pass the bill before the elections? Apart from being a feather in the cap for the Arroyo-de Venecia clique, both eager to please their US backers as they face a problematic mid-term elections, we believe this fascist legislation is being readied for the expected backlash against the anticipated systematic and wholesale cheating by the Arroyo administration in the coming May polls.# *Published in Business World 16-17 February 2007

email2friend ]]> by Carol Pagaduan-Araullo, Philippines How ironic that while the rest of the world, including the people of the USA, are waking up to the Bush administration’s big fat lies about the “war on terror”, Filipinos continue to be fed with the same sort of lies by the Arroyo regime. In fact the latter is in the process of completing the railroading of a so-called Anti-Terrorism Bill (ATB) that is the result of high-profile lobbying as well as arm-twisting by high officials of the Bush government. A two-day special session of the Lower House of Congress has been called by Mrs. Arroyo to ratify the bill so that she can quickly sign it into law. The Bush administration, bent on establishing unchallenged US economic, political and military domination over the world, seized the horrific events of 9/11 to generate mass paranoia about “terrorism” (or what it labeled as “terrorism”) and blind support for what it trumpets is a “war on terror” but which is in fact an imperialist war of terror. In the process it has funneled hundreds of billions to favored contractors in the military-industrial complex, let loose the dogs of war in the unjust invasion, occupation and destruction of Afghanistan and Iraq, enacted repressive laws such as the US PATRIOT ACT (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism) and the Military Commissions Act of 2006 and caused the unprecedented flouting of international human rights and humanitarian law standards by allowing the use of torture and inhumane treatment on prisoners accused of “terrorism” and denying them basic legal rights to defend themselves in a court of law. Imposing a black or white, “either you are with us or against us” kind of politico-military alignment, the US has hoodwinked, inveigled and pretty much threatened the rest of the world to join or support its wars of aggression and intervention in the guise of fighting a borderless, indeterminate war against “terrorism”. It is in this true context that we are witnessing the enactment in our country of the “Human Security Act of 2007” or “An Act to Secure the State and Protect the People from Terrorism” that is meant to mislead and camouflage the inhuman character and object of the bill. While earlier versions of the bill were undisguised pieces of fascist legislation that were clearly an affront on the people’s civil, political and human rights, and thus could not stand muster in a senate that has a predominantly oppositionist make-up (not to mention a smattering of senators posturing as human rights defenders) this final bicameral bill is said to have been “defanged” to the point of being harmless. We vehemently disagree. The Anti-Terrorism Bill that House Speaker de Venecia is itching to pass under his leadership and Mrs. Arroyo is aching to sign (as she herself announced) is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Simply put, the proposed bill lays the legal basis for an undeclared martial rule or the return to a fascist dictatorship disguised as merely being part and parcel of the US-led “war on terror”. The claimed “safety nets” against abuse that erstwhile opponents have introduced are ineffectual and a sham. The US-backed Arroyo regime and its military and police minions can still use the ATB to outlaw and suppress all legal dissent and opposition by unilaterally declaring these as “terrorist” on the basis of manufactured intelligence reports and the claims of false witnesses. They also have the law to back them up when they interchangeably label “rebels” as “terrorists”. In one fell stroke they will have demonized the former and reduced a revolutionary armed movement with the undisputed history of fighting the Marcos fascist dictatorship and struggling for fundamental reforms into nothing but a bunch of heartless, despicable criminals. The bill pays lip service to "uphold(ing) the basic and fundamental rights of the people..." then proceeds to enumerate the ways in which those rights are to be undermined and attacked. Concretely, “terrorism” suspects will be denied due process and the presumption of innocence. A person can be deprived of his liberty, the right to travel and the right to communicate (even by means of a telephone) on the mere suspicion of terrorism and even where “evidence of guilt is not strong”. For example, Sec. 26 states: “In cases where evidence of guilt is not strong, and the person charged is …granted... bail, the court shall …limit the right of travel of the accused to within the municipality or city where he resides. He or she may also be placed under house arrest by order of the court… While under house arrest, he or she may not use telephones, cell phones, emails, computers, the internet or other means of communications with people outside his residence until otherwise ordered by the court.” Under Sec. 19, in the event of alleged “actual or imminent terrorist attack”, suspects may be detained for 48 hours without warrant. Municipal, city, provincial or regional human rights commission officials are authorized to order the detention of suspected terrorists beyond 48 hours. This is a clear violation of the Sec. 18, Article VII of the Constitution which provides that “During the suspension of the privilege of the writ, any person thus arrested or detained shall be judicially charged within three days, otherwise he shall be released.” With the evidence for an “imminent” terrorist attack easily concocted by the military or police, who have the nasty habit of giving false warnings about New People’s Army and/or Muslim rebels infiltrating rallies and demonstrations to sow terror, any person suspected of rebellion or insurrection, which are, by the way, considered terrorist acts under Sec. 3 of the Bill, may now be detained indefinitely upon orders of a municipal officer. Thus will the ATB be used additionally to the current jurisprudence on warrantless arrests of suspected rebels that has been abused for the longest time as in the celebrated case of Anakpawis representative Crispin Beltran. Human rights lawyers and civil libertarians have all pointed to many more reprehensible provisions of the anti-terror law including the dangerously vague and broad definition of “terrorism” virtually wiping out legitimate protest and demolishing the peace processes with the communist and Muslim separatist revolutionary movements; the illegalization of organizations declared as “terrorist” by an Anti-Terrorism Council headed by Mrs. Arroyo and packed by the most hard-line militarist and fascists in her Cabinet; an intensified and indiscriminate wiretapping that will do away with constitutional guarantees to privacy and will render government critics and opponents vulnerable to unfair prosecution and political persecution. Why all the rush to pass the bill before the elections? Apart from being a feather in the cap for the Arroyo-de Venecia clique, both eager to please their US backers as they face a problematic mid-term elections, we believe this fascist legislation is being readied for the expected backlash against the anticipated systematic and wholesale cheating by the Arroyo administration in the coming May polls.# *Published in Business World 16-17 February 2007

email2friend ]]> http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/02/20/wolf-in-sheeps-clothing/feed/ 0 http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/02/13/elections-a-critical-view/ http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/02/13/elections-a-critical-view/#comments Tue, 13 Feb 2007 06:00:45 +0000 Carol Pagaduan-Araullo http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/02/13/elections-a-critical-view/ by Carol Pagaduan-Araullo, Philippines Not a few friends and even fellow activists have asked whether the right thing to do in the coming May polls is simply to boycott the darned thing what with the numerous signs that bode ill for a honest, fair and clean elections that would give a fighting chance for the electoral Opposition to win a significant number of congressional and local government seats. The discredited head of the Commission on Elections refuses to relinquish the job while failing to undertake any major reforms such as the dismantling of the entrenched cheating mafia that has taken hold of the supposedly independent body. This “dagdag-bawas” machinery was allegedly run by the infamous Commissioner Garcellano who is said to have manufactured Mrs. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s spurious win in the 2004 presidential contest. For her part, Mrs. Arroyo has not heeded calls from the Catholic hierarchy, concerned citizens and its many critics that she, as a gesture of good will, appoint new commissioners to vacant positions who are above reproach and can restore the requisite modicum of impartiality and credibility to the Comelec. Mrs. Arroyo’s new Defense Secretary is widely perceived to have been involved in the “Hello Garci” high-level and wholesale cheating including its cover-up, with his latest appointment to a coveted post both a reward and political insurance for Mrs. Arroyo. He has, contrary to pronouncements by his predecessor, announced that the armed forces will continue to play its controversial role in “securing peace and order” during the electoral exercise. This is interpreted by many quarters as a flimsy cover for the rampant use of the military once more in favor of Mrs. Arroyo’s candidates. Some people have been turned off, to the point of giving up any hope in the electoral process, due to the facile switching of sides by supposed anti-GMA opposition figures, who have opportunistically hopped onto the administration’s senatorial wagon. Furthermore, they exclaim in exasperation, don’t Filipinos deserve a better choice than candidates of the pretender-president Gloria versus those anointed by the ousted president Erap? Many quarters are correct in asserting that the call for Mrs. Arroyo to resign or face ouster still rings true given the illegitimacy of its lying, cheating, stealing and, may we add, murderous and puppet presidency. But the fact that GMA is still in power shows that conditions are not ripe for her extra-constitutional removal given the remaining, formidable forces propping her up vis a vis the current strengths and weaknesses of the broad anti-GMA united front. A reckoning of GMA’s support would start with continued US backing for its pliant, eager-to-please puppet regime that is deathly afraid of being found wanting in serving the Superpower’s interests in the country and the region. On the other hand, the Bush administration is a lame duck government facing heightening resistance to its policies at home and abroad. The AFP/PNP, while wracked by dissension among its rank and file and young officer corps, remains loyal to Mrs. Arroyo who has found the right mix of higher budgets to feed the hungry maws of the extremely corrupt and wasteful military and police institutions, abetting illegal gambling and other criminal activities of the generals and senior officers and whipping up their appetite for a bloody counter-insurgency war disguised as part and parcel of the US-led “war against terrorism”. Big business is still torn between judging whether Mrs. Arroyo is good or bad for business with the former apparently having the upper hand. The Catholic Church hierarchy is still in the process of developing the moral courage and the political maturity to take on its appropriate role in leading its increasingly restive flock mired in poverty and an unrelenting political crisis. The traditional Opposition in the form of anti-GMA senators, congressmen and local government officials are shackled by their actual and perceived narrow and self-serving interests to be able to present an alternative center of leadership acceptable to the majority of our people and the broad spectrum of organized anti-GMA forces. The Left for its part has still not been able to muster the muscle of gigantic and paralyzing mass actions to compel the government to heed its calls for pro-people measures much more making Mrs. Arroyo step down from power. In a real sense this situation of the anti-GMA alliance of political forces serves as a passive prop despite an extremely weakened Arroyo regime. It is only right that those who are working hard for the genuine overhaul of oppressive and exploitative conditions in Philippine society should not contribute to the spread of illusions that electoral exercises bring the renewed promise of resolving the political crisis in this country nor ushering in genuine reforms. Thus any participation in the May polls must be attended by a critical viewpoint, always mindful of exposing the basically reactionary character of said electoral contests, even as the openings for using the exercise as a means of raising awareness, steeling the fighting will of the people, preparing them for the coming political battles with the US backed Arroyo regime and, wherever possible, scoring some electoral victories, is seriously attended to. For indeed, despite the odds stacked in favor of the incumbent’s candidates, what weighs in favor of the progressives and the anti-GMA candidates is that the regime is so isolated and deeply immersed in the muck of corruption, fraud and anomaly that it tends to commit blunders while desperately staving off criticism and scheming to maintain itself in power, e.g. the debacle in its bid to railroad Charter change. All sides are drawing road maps and war plans to get what they want in the coming electoral circus. The ruling GMA faction wants to win more seats in congress to remain in power and kill any new attempts to impeach it. The electoral Opposition wants to win enough seats to be able to impeach GMA and eventually take over the reins of government. Progressive party lists and their base of support among the masses and middle class are participating without illusions of becoming dominant and wielding power but to have a broader forum for reaching out to the people, exposing the real situation, and calling for participation in a democratic movement for genuine reforms. Other influential voices are calling for a boycott. In politics, while material resources and positions of power are important, they are not always the decisive factor in the outcome of particular engagements. The accuracy of the roadmap – that is, the correct reading of the situation in relation to one’s goals, whether one’s plan corresponds to reality or not -- will ultimately determine success or failure in achieving those avowed goals. Mrs. Arroyo and other reactionaries are bound to fail because they overestimate their own strength and underestimate the people's intelligence, determination and capacity to take destiny in their own hands.

email2friend ]]> by Carol Pagaduan-Araullo, Philippines Not a few friends and even fellow activists have asked whether the right thing to do in the coming May polls is simply to boycott the darned thing what with the numerous signs that bode ill for a honest, fair and clean elections that would give a fighting chance for the electoral Opposition to win a significant number of congressional and local government seats. The discredited head of the Commission on Elections refuses to relinquish the job while failing to undertake any major reforms such as the dismantling of the entrenched cheating mafia that has taken hold of the supposedly independent body. This “dagdag-bawas” machinery was allegedly run by the infamous Commissioner Garcellano who is said to have manufactured Mrs. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s spurious win in the 2004 presidential contest. For her part, Mrs. Arroyo has not heeded calls from the Catholic hierarchy, concerned citizens and its many critics that she, as a gesture of good will, appoint new commissioners to vacant positions who are above reproach and can restore the requisite modicum of impartiality and credibility to the Comelec. Mrs. Arroyo’s new Defense Secretary is widely perceived to have been involved in the “Hello Garci” high-level and wholesale cheating including its cover-up, with his latest appointment to a coveted post both a reward and political insurance for Mrs. Arroyo. He has, contrary to pronouncements by his predecessor, announced that the armed forces will continue to play its controversial role in “securing peace and order” during the electoral exercise. This is interpreted by many quarters as a flimsy cover for the rampant use of the military once more in favor of Mrs. Arroyo’s candidates. Some people have been turned off, to the point of giving up any hope in the electoral process, due to the facile switching of sides by supposed anti-GMA opposition figures, who have opportunistically hopped onto the administration’s senatorial wagon. Furthermore, they exclaim in exasperation, don’t Filipinos deserve a better choice than candidates of the pretender-president Gloria versus those anointed by the ousted president Erap? Many quarters are correct in asserting that the call for Mrs. Arroyo to resign or face ouster still rings true given the illegitimacy of its lying, cheating, stealing and, may we add, murderous and puppet presidency. But the fact that GMA is still in power shows that conditions are not ripe for her extra-constitutional removal given the remaining, formidable forces propping her up vis a vis the current strengths and weaknesses of the broad anti-GMA united front. A reckoning of GMA’s support would start with continued US backing for its pliant, eager-to-please puppet regime that is deathly afraid of being found wanting in serving the Superpower’s interests in the country and the region. On the other hand, the Bush administration is a lame duck government facing heightening resistance to its policies at home and abroad. The AFP/PNP, while wracked by dissension among its rank and file and young officer corps, remains loyal to Mrs. Arroyo who has found the right mix of higher budgets to feed the hungry maws of the extremely corrupt and wasteful military and police institutions, abetting illegal gambling and other criminal activities of the generals and senior officers and whipping up their appetite for a bloody counter-insurgency war disguised as part and parcel of the US-led “war against terrorism”. Big business is still torn between judging whether Mrs. Arroyo is good or bad for business with the former apparently having the upper hand. The Catholic Church hierarchy is still in the process of developing the moral courage and the political maturity to take on its appropriate role in leading its increasingly restive flock mired in poverty and an unrelenting political crisis. The traditional Opposition in the form of anti-GMA senators, congressmen and local government officials are shackled by their actual and perceived narrow and self-serving interests to be able to present an alternative center of leadership acceptable to the majority of our people and the broad spectrum of organized anti-GMA forces. The Left for its part has still not been able to muster the muscle of gigantic and paralyzing mass actions to compel the government to heed its calls for pro-people measures much more making Mrs. Arroyo step down from power. In a real sense this situation of the anti-GMA alliance of political forces serves as a passive prop despite an extremely weakened Arroyo regime. It is only right that those who are working hard for the genuine overhaul of oppressive and exploitative conditions in Philippine society should not contribute to the spread of illusions that electoral exercises bring the renewed promise of resolving the political crisis in this country nor ushering in genuine reforms. Thus any participation in the May polls must be attended by a critical viewpoint, always mindful of exposing the basically reactionary character of said electoral contests, even as the openings for using the exercise as a means of raising awareness, steeling the fighting will of the people, preparing them for the coming political battles with the US backed Arroyo regime and, wherever possible, scoring some electoral victories, is seriously attended to. For indeed, despite the odds stacked in favor of the incumbent’s candidates, what weighs in favor of the progressives and the anti-GMA candidates is that the regime is so isolated and deeply immersed in the muck of corruption, fraud and anomaly that it tends to commit blunders while desperately staving off criticism and scheming to maintain itself in power, e.g. the debacle in its bid to railroad Charter change. All sides are drawing road maps and war plans to get what they want in the coming electoral circus. The ruling GMA faction wants to win more seats in congress to remain in power and kill any new attempts to impeach it. The electoral Opposition wants to win enough seats to be able to impeach GMA and eventually take over the reins of government. Progressive party lists and their base of support among the masses and middle class are participating without illusions of becoming dominant and wielding power but to have a broader forum for reaching out to the people, exposing the real situation, and calling for participation in a democratic movement for genuine reforms. Other influential voices are calling for a boycott. In politics, while material resources and positions of power are important, they are not always the decisive factor in the outcome of particular engagements. The accuracy of the roadmap – that is, the correct reading of the situation in relation to one’s goals, whether one’s plan corresponds to reality or not -- will ultimately determine success or failure in achieving those avowed goals. Mrs. Arroyo and other reactionaries are bound to fail because they overestimate their own strength and underestimate the people's intelligence, determination and capacity to take destiny in their own hands.

email2friend ]]> http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/02/13/elections-a-critical-view/feed/ 0 http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/02/07/melo-commission-still-no-surprises/ http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/02/07/melo-commission-still-no-surprises/#comments Wed, 07 Feb 2007 06:00:22 +0000 Carol Pagaduan-Araullo http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/02/07/melo-commission-still-no-surprises/ by Carol Pagaduan-Araullo, Philippines The Melo Commission created by the Arroyo administration to address extrajudicial killings of activists and journalists has submitted its 89-page report to Mrs. Arroyo but she has so far refused to make it public. All we know about it are the initial, off-the-cuff comments by the commission’s chairman and a bishop-member to the media, subsequent Malacanang press releases and Mrs. Arroyo’s pretentious, if rather smug, statements to the diplomatic corps during the traditional vin d’honneur at the Presidential Palace. The refusal of Malacanang to release the report for the scrutiny of all interested parties, not least of all the aggrieved kin of victims of summary executions, attempted killings and enforced disappearances, is a telling indicator of Mrs. Arroyo’s sincerity and seriousness in her avowal to put an end to these human rights violations and punish those responsible. It is important to point out that while the Melo Commission report is kept under wraps, with only alleged parts of it revealed piecemeal as suits the purposes of Malacanang, there can not be any meaningful nor even worthwhile response to it except that of continuing caution, if not skepticism. What the human rights organizations, progressive and militant groups whose ranks are being decimated by the killings and abductions, as well as the general public have to go by, are what is already known about the Melo Commission‘s composition, powers, predilections and biases, and methods of investigation. On this basis, an informed opinion can be made about what the commission is capable of concluding and recommending in its final report to Mrs. Arroyo. The overwhelming perception, then and now, is that the commission has lacked the independence, credibility, powers and funding to come up with any significant report but that its findings would likely be used to further whitewash any government culpability. For example, much has been made of Mr. Melo’s revelation that a “majority of the victims were leftist-activist-militants” and that the suspected assailants belonged to the military. At the risk of sounding facetious, apart from journalists killed, wasn’t the Commission supposed to look precisely into the killings of this particular category of people? And how could it have concluded otherwise about the involvement of military men as assailants without appearing to be deaf, blind and dumb to the glaring facts and the clear pattern of said killings that can be gleaned even from newspaper reports. But Mr. Melo is quick to say, “We don’t want to tag the entire military establishment, only elements of the military who were allowed to do their thing without supervision from higher authorities.” So there it is, the built-in limitation of the so-called independent commission of inquiry that was implicit upon its creation: the premise that the extrajudicial killings cannot be part of state policy, that these have nothing to do with the Arroyo regime’s vow of “all-out war against the Left” and its latest counter-insurgency programs, Oplan Bantay Laya I and II, which speaks of “neutralizing” and “dismantling” the communist movement’s legal, political infrastructure with a clear plan to “target” specific key individuals, leaders and organizers of legal, militant mass organizations. Furthermore, without seeing the complete report, it is reasonable to conclude from Mr. Melo’s statements to the media, that the indictment of Gen. Jovito Palparan for “command responsibility” is the farthest the commission has gone in determining guilt for the killings. Why did the Melo Commission go this far in its findings and what are its implications? It would appear that 1) Mr. Palparan’s involvement is too glaring that the Melo Commission had no choice but to indict him to gain some credibility; 2) the Arroyo regime needs a credible and dramatic scapegoat; and 3) the crime of “command responsibility” is in fact a much lesser offense than directly ordering the perpetration of such fascist crimes. In fact, Mr. Palparan had already admitted to “inspiring” his men and some civilians to go after the communist rebels and their supporters. Reading between the lines, Mr. Palparan seems to be saying that those he “inspired” may have killed some people in their understandable overzealousness. But until concrete steps are taken by the Arroyo government to charge, prosecute and punish Mr. Palparan even for the lesser crime of command responsibility, this most sensational recommendation of the Melo Commission is merely grist for the Malacanang propaganda mill, eager to give the impression to the European Union and the international human rights community that Mrs. Arroyo is taking decisive measures to put an end to the killings and to curb the impunity of their perpetrators. Already, Mrs. Arroyo is using the Melo Commission report to repeat before the diplomatic corps the barefaced lie that her regime does not tolerate the killings, has the will to stop them and punish those responsible. She can also assert that that “99.99% of the military are good, hardworking and patriotic” and thus cannot be a party to such barbarity. The AFP Chief of Staff Gen. Esperon, while finally admitting that some military men are involved, is quick to point out to other, more likely, perpetrators, “the CPP/NPA and goons of politicians” and that, so far, only six soldiers had been charged with the majority of cases already dismissed. In other words, Mr. Esperon reminds us not to overblow this finding of the Melo Commission. The six orders issued by Mrs. Arroyo ring hollow. She instructs the Melo Commission to continue its work without informing the public about what exactly her hand-picked commission has achieved. She directs the Defense Department and the AFP to submit an “updated document on command responsibility” when the generals, as exemplified by Mr. Palparan all the way up to Mr. Esperon and even the Commander-in-Chief, Mrs. Arroyo herself, are the ones on the line and have every reason to find a way to escape or limit their accountabilities. Mrs. Arroyo’s directive to the Justice and Defense Departments to coordinate with the constitutionally independent but practically toothless Commission on Human Rights in forming a fact-finding body to “delve deeper into the matter of involvement of military personnel in unexplained killings…” makes a mockery of the pursuit of truth and justice. These government agencies put at the helm of further investigations have been proven to have a major interest and involvement in frustrating any honest-to-goodness investigation. One of the critical powers that should have been immediately given to the Melo Commission was that of giving protection to witnesses. Thus the belated order to the DOJ to expand its witness protection program to include those in extrajudicial killings is not just a case of “too little, too late” it has already been proven useless. In the murder cases filed by the families of human rights worker Eden Marcellana and Eddie Gumanoy versus Gen. Palparan, Sergeant Donald Caigas and several civilian assets, the witnesses received not an iota of protection from the DOJ and were exposed to tremendous pressure and continuing harassment from suspected military agents until the cases were dismissed. Lastly, the invitation to the EU to send investigators to assist in the Melo Commission’s work is nothing new. Mrs. Arroyo had issued a similar call after her shameful sojourn to Europe last year but nothing came of it since it appeared the government merely wanted the foreign investigators to grace the commission’s hearings and lend it credibility. Mrs. Arroyo, the Cabinet Oversight Committee for Internal Security and military and police generals think themselves clever in being able to evade, once more, responsibility for the killings, whether direct or indirect, given the Melo Commission’s damage control. Nonetheless, wittingly or unwittingly, the commission implicates Mrs. Arroyo herself in its indictment of Gen. Palparan, due to the generous rewards (i.e. rapid promotion to plum posts) and lavish praise heaped on him by Mrs. Arroyo. Meantime, despite flak about their refusal to cooperate with the Melo Commission, the victims, their families and advocates, have been proven correct in refusing to be a tool in the Arroyo regime’s deadly game of deception. They must seek justice elsewhere as well as work for the ouster of a regime that has its hands bloodied by repeated and unabated acts of murder and their most foul cover-up. *Published in Business World 2-3 February 2007

email2friend ]]> by Carol Pagaduan-Araullo, Philippines The Melo Commission created by the Arroyo administration to address extrajudicial killings of activists and journalists has submitted its 89-page report to Mrs. Arroyo but she has so far refused to make it public. All we know about it are the initial, off-the-cuff comments by the commission’s chairman and a bishop-member to the media, subsequent Malacanang press releases and Mrs. Arroyo’s pretentious, if rather smug, statements to the diplomatic corps during the traditional vin d’honneur at the Presidential Palace. The refusal of Malacanang to release the report for the scrutiny of all interested parties, not least of all the aggrieved kin of victims of summary executions, attempted killings and enforced disappearances, is a telling indicator of Mrs. Arroyo’s sincerity and seriousness in her avowal to put an end to these human rights violations and punish those responsible. It is important to point out that while the Melo Commission report is kept under wraps, with only alleged parts of it revealed piecemeal as suits the purposes of Malacanang, there can not be any meaningful nor even worthwhile response to it except that of continuing caution, if not skepticism. What the human rights organizations, progressive and militant groups whose ranks are being decimated by the killings and abductions, as well as the general public have to go by, are what is already known about the Melo Commission‘s composition, powers, predilections and biases, and methods of investigation. On this basis, an informed opinion can be made about what the commission is capable of concluding and recommending in its final report to Mrs. Arroyo. The overwhelming perception, then and now, is that the commission has lacked the independence, credibility, powers and funding to come up with any significant report but that its findings would likely be used to further whitewash any government culpability. For example, much has been made of Mr. Melo’s revelation that a “majority of the victims were leftist-activist-militants” and that the suspected assailants belonged to the military. At the risk of sounding facetious, apart from journalists killed, wasn’t the Commission supposed to look precisely into the killings of this particular category of people? And how could it have concluded otherwise about the involvement of military men as assailants without appearing to be deaf, blind and dumb to the glaring facts and the clear pattern of said killings that can be gleaned even from newspaper reports. But Mr. Melo is quick to say, “We don’t want to tag the entire military establishment, only elements of the military who were allowed to do their thing without supervision from higher authorities.” So there it is, the built-in limitation of the so-called independent commission of inquiry that was implicit upon its creation: the premise that the extrajudicial killings cannot be part of state policy, that these have nothing to do with the Arroyo regime’s vow of “all-out war against the Left” and its latest counter-insurgency programs, Oplan Bantay Laya I and II, which speaks of “neutralizing” and “dismantling” the communist movement’s legal, political infrastructure with a clear plan to “target” specific key individuals, leaders and organizers of legal, militant mass organizations. Furthermore, without seeing the complete report, it is reasonable to conclude from Mr. Melo’s statements to the media, that the indictment of Gen. Jovito Palparan for “command responsibility” is the farthest the commission has gone in determining guilt for the killings. Why did the Melo Commission go this far in its findings and what are its implications? It would appear that 1) Mr. Palparan’s involvement is too glaring that the Melo Commission had no choice but to indict him to gain some credibility; 2) the Arroyo regime needs a credible and dramatic scapegoat; and 3) the crime of “command responsibility” is in fact a much lesser offense than directly ordering the perpetration of such fascist crimes. In fact, Mr. Palparan had already admitted to “inspiring” his men and some civilians to go after the communist rebels and their supporters. Reading between the lines, Mr. Palparan seems to be saying that those he “inspired” may have killed some people in their understandable overzealousness. But until concrete steps are taken by the Arroyo government to charge, prosecute and punish Mr. Palparan even for the lesser crime of command responsibility, this most sensational recommendation of the Melo Commission is merely grist for the Malacanang propaganda mill, eager to give the impression to the European Union and the international human rights community that Mrs. Arroyo is taking decisive measures to put an end to the killings and to curb the impunity of their perpetrators. Already, Mrs. Arroyo is using the Melo Commission report to repeat before the diplomatic corps the barefaced lie that her regime does not tolerate the killings, has the will to stop them and punish those responsible. She can also assert that that “99.99% of the military are good, hardworking and patriotic” and thus cannot be a party to such barbarity. The AFP Chief of Staff Gen. Esperon, while finally admitting that some military men are involved, is quick to point out to other, more likely, perpetrators, “the CPP/NPA and goons of politicians” and that, so far, only six soldiers had been charged with the majority of cases already dismissed. In other words, Mr. Esperon reminds us not to overblow this finding of the Melo Commission. The six orders issued by Mrs. Arroyo ring hollow. She instructs the Melo Commission to continue its work without informing the public about what exactly her hand-picked commission has achieved. She directs the Defense Department and the AFP to submit an “updated document on command responsibility” when the generals, as exemplified by Mr. Palparan all the way up to Mr. Esperon and even the Commander-in-Chief, Mrs. Arroyo herself, are the ones on the line and have every reason to find a way to escape or limit their accountabilities. Mrs. Arroyo’s directive to the Justice and Defense Departments to coordinate with the constitutionally independent but practically toothless Commission on Human Rights in forming a fact-finding body to “delve deeper into the matter of involvement of military personnel in unexplained killings…” makes a mockery of the pursuit of truth and justice. These government agencies put at the helm of further investigations have been proven to have a major interest and involvement in frustrating any honest-to-goodness investigation. One of the critical powers that should have been immediately given to the Melo Commission was that of giving protection to witnesses. Thus the belated order to the DOJ to expand its witness protection program to include those in extrajudicial killings is not just a case of “too little, too late” it has already been proven useless. In the murder cases filed by the families of human rights worker Eden Marcellana and Eddie Gumanoy versus Gen. Palparan, Sergeant Donald Caigas and several civilian assets, the witnesses received not an iota of protection from the DOJ and were exposed to tremendous pressure and continuing harassment from suspected military agents until the cases were dismissed. Lastly, the invitation to the EU to send investigators to assist in the Melo Commission’s work is nothing new. Mrs. Arroyo had issued a similar call after her shameful sojourn to Europe last year but nothing came of it since it appeared the government merely wanted the foreign investigators to grace the commission’s hearings and lend it credibility. Mrs. Arroyo, the Cabinet Oversight Committee for Internal Security and military and police generals think themselves clever in being able to evade, once more, responsibility for the killings, whether direct or indirect, given the Melo Commission’s damage control. Nonetheless, wittingly or unwittingly, the commission implicates Mrs. Arroyo herself in its indictment of Gen. Palparan, due to the generous rewards (i.e. rapid promotion to plum posts) and lavish praise heaped on him by Mrs. Arroyo. Meantime, despite flak about their refusal to cooperate with the Melo Commission, the victims, their families and advocates, have been proven correct in refusing to be a tool in the Arroyo regime’s deadly game of deception. They must seek justice elsewhere as well as work for the ouster of a regime that has its hands bloodied by repeated and unabated acts of murder and their most foul cover-up. *Published in Business World 2-3 February 2007

email2friend ]]> http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/02/07/melo-commission-still-no-surprises/feed/ 0 http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/01/23/after-the-summitry-more-of-the-same/ http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/01/23/after-the-summitry-more-of-the-same/#comments Tue, 23 Jan 2007 06:00:56 +0000 Carol Pagaduan-Araullo http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/01/23/after-the-summitry-more-of-the-same/ by Carol Pagaduan-Araullo, Philippines As expected, de facto President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo lost no time in trying to parlay her claimed “success” at the 12th ASEAN Summit and the East Asian Summit into glowing predictions about the economy not just in the medium-term but within the year 2007. Understandably, Mrs. Arroyo is basking in the afterglow of two regional summits that turned out to be one grand production (incidentally, with a price tag of two billion pesos) in terms of the sprucing-up of the public infrastructure of Cebu; the elaborate table-settings and sumptuous food served at the official receptions; the pleasing song-and-dance numbers in the program and historical reenactment sideshows; and the spike in the military cum police forces-to-civilian ratio. There were plenty of nice photo-opportunities and good sound bytes for the expectant foreign and local media that had turned surly after the seemingly arbitrary change in the original schedule last December based on suspiciously manufactured grounds of a threatening tropical storm that turned out to be a brewing political one. But was there anything of substance, especially for the majority of Filipinos experiencing unprecedented joblessness and poverty? From news reports, the security agenda was the main course and the Convention on Counterterrorism the main output. The so-called legally-binding ASEAN charter, with mechanisms for bringing erring or uncooperative member countries in line, is just so much whipped cream at this point. While firming up of the trend towards bilateral trade agreements under the auspices of the WTO and the signpost of neoliberal globalization and pushing ASEAN countries into supporting the return to the Doha Round of the stalled WTO negotiations, there is the illusion being foisted that ASEAN has the makings of a regional economic block that can rival something like the European Union. To understand the outcome of the latest ASEAN pow-wow, there is a need to backtrack a little and revisit its brief and lackluster history. The ASEAN was formed in 1967 with the blessings of the US and initially included only five countries: Indonesia, Philippines, Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore. Its main thrust was to be a bulwark against the spread of communism, specifically, from the perceived threat of China, North Korea and Indochina. Over the decades its range of concerns has broadened from political and diplomatic concerns to also include economic issues and now, in the post-9/11 era, to overtly security matters. It also grew to include Brunei, Myanmar (Burma) and all three Indochinese countries by 1999. Its members vary widely in terms of economic development and political histories which factors combine to make it, so far, a loose and non-binding organization that, according to the policy studies group, Institute of Political Economy (IPE), has been “unable to deal, on its own, with sensitive and potentially divisive internal issues” as exemplified in the tepid ASEAN responses to the 1978 Vietnamese intervention in Cambodia, the East Timor crisis, and the long-standing Spratly Islands dispute. Moreover, IPE points out that the ASEAN is “unlike the European Union (EU) which, pooling economic and political resources to better challenge the US, has formal mechanisms for majority voting in major policy areas that obliges corresponding domestic economic policies. It also does not have ‘supranational’ institutions like the European Commission, European Courts and the European Parliament”. The same goes for efforts to achieve regional economic coordination. The ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA) in 1992 was a milestone for ASEAN in being its first real region-wide economic integration effort. In practice, however, it was a very limited deal that was even overtaken by aggressive unilateral liberalization moves by member countries. The AFTA merely gave the appearance of political cooperation on economic policy changes that were happening anyway. The IPE observes that “such weaknesses consequently limit the extent to which the organization can be used to advance region-wide agendas.” Nonetheless, the group recognizes that “recent global developments may be forcing a change in this (situation).” It is not difficult to see what these developments are, namely the renewed aggressive global political-military and economic offensive of the US at the onset of the 21st century. Since 9-11, this has been packaged as a US-led “war against terrorism” working hand-in-glove with the US drive for “free trade globalization”. It is no wonder that, despite the conspicuous absence of US government officials at the Cebu extravaganza (last December, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was rumored to grace the occasion), the US economic and politico-military agenda was more than adequately carried by the Philippine delegation, with Mrs. Arroyo more than eager to play the US drummer girl in the regional body. As a case in point, the ASEAN Convention on Counterterrorism falls in neatly with what the neoconservative cabal in the Bush administration dream of as a “New American Century” of US global hegemony conveniently wrapped in the rhetoric of the “global war on terror”. The IPE notes, “In 2000, then US Pacific Command Chief, Admiral Dennis Blair, declared that ‘current security arrangements are inadequate for handling the challenges of the 21st century’ and proposed a regional ‘security community’ for Asia. At the same time it was asserted that ‘U.S. bilateral treaties and security partnerships remain the framework for deterring aggression and promoting peaceful development in the region.’ ASEAN correspondingly began to expand its involvement on security issues and, at its 7th Summit in November 2001, issued the ASEAN Declaration on Joint Action to Counter Terrorism which signified ASEAN’s unequivocal alignment with the U.S.-led ‘war on terror’.” On the other hand, the recent declaration to accelerate the formation of the ASEAN Economic Community by 2015 instead of the original target of 2020, only underscored the ASEAN member countries’ current trend to be sucked into the vortex of the neoliberal doctrines of liberalization, deregulation and privatization peddled by the US- dominated WTO/IMF/World Bank combine. The ASEAN once more proved itself to be basically a grouping of neocolonial client states of the US or of governments, like those in Indochina, transitioning from their previously socialist moorings, and eager to become integrated into the world capitalist system. The heads of state that gathered at the 12th ASEAN Summit continue to represent their respective countries’ political and economic elites and not the majority of exploited and oppressed peoples in the region. The ASEAN is not about national economies coming together to strengthen themselves through such a regional formation and merely reflects consistent efforts to open up/liberalize such economies for imperialist plunder. At the end of the day, the “success” of the 12th ASEAN Summit bodes more of the same failed national policies and regional “cooperation” for facilitating imperialist domination and plunder aka “globalization” and “war on terror”.

email2friend ]]> by Carol Pagaduan-Araullo, Philippines As expected, de facto President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo lost no time in trying to parlay her claimed “success” at the 12th ASEAN Summit and the East Asian Summit into glowing predictions about the economy not just in the medium-term but within the year 2007. Understandably, Mrs. Arroyo is basking in the afterglow of two regional summits that turned out to be one grand production (incidentally, with a price tag of two billion pesos) in terms of the sprucing-up of the public infrastructure of Cebu; the elaborate table-settings and sumptuous food served at the official receptions; the pleasing song-and-dance numbers in the program and historical reenactment sideshows; and the spike in the military cum police forces-to-civilian ratio. There were plenty of nice photo-opportunities and good sound bytes for the expectant foreign and local media that had turned surly after the seemingly arbitrary change in the original schedule last December based on suspiciously manufactured grounds of a threatening tropical storm that turned out to be a brewing political one. But was there anything of substance, especially for the majority of Filipinos experiencing unprecedented joblessness and poverty? From news reports, the security agenda was the main course and the Convention on Counterterrorism the main output. The so-called legally-binding ASEAN charter, with mechanisms for bringing erring or uncooperative member countries in line, is just so much whipped cream at this point. While firming up of the trend towards bilateral trade agreements under the auspices of the WTO and the signpost of neoliberal globalization and pushing ASEAN countries into supporting the return to the Doha Round of the stalled WTO negotiations, there is the illusion being foisted that ASEAN has the makings of a regional economic block that can rival something like the European Union. To understand the outcome of the latest ASEAN pow-wow, there is a need to backtrack a little and revisit its brief and lackluster history. The ASEAN was formed in 1967 with the blessings of the US and initially included only five countries: Indonesia, Philippines, Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore. Its main thrust was to be a bulwark against the spread of communism, specifically, from the perceived threat of China, North Korea and Indochina. Over the decades its range of concerns has broadened from political and diplomatic concerns to also include economic issues and now, in the post-9/11 era, to overtly security matters. It also grew to include Brunei, Myanmar (Burma) and all three Indochinese countries by 1999. Its members vary widely in terms of economic development and political histories which factors combine to make it, so far, a loose and non-binding organization that, according to the policy studies group, Institute of Political Economy (IPE), has been “unable to deal, on its own, with sensitive and potentially divisive internal issues” as exemplified in the tepid ASEAN responses to the 1978 Vietnamese intervention in Cambodia, the East Timor crisis, and the long-standing Spratly Islands dispute. Moreover, IPE points out that the ASEAN is “unlike the European Union (EU) which, pooling economic and political resources to better challenge the US, has formal mechanisms for majority voting in major policy areas that obliges corresponding domestic economic policies. It also does not have ‘supranational’ institutions like the European Commission, European Courts and the European Parliament”. The same goes for efforts to achieve regional economic coordination. The ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA) in 1992 was a milestone for ASEAN in being its first real region-wide economic integration effort. In practice, however, it was a very limited deal that was even overtaken by aggressive unilateral liberalization moves by member countries. The AFTA merely gave the appearance of political cooperation on economic policy changes that were happening anyway. The IPE observes that “such weaknesses consequently limit the extent to which the organization can be used to advance region-wide agendas.” Nonetheless, the group recognizes that “recent global developments may be forcing a change in this (situation).” It is not difficult to see what these developments are, namely the renewed aggressive global political-military and economic offensive of the US at the onset of the 21st century. Since 9-11, this has been packaged as a US-led “war against terrorism” working hand-in-glove with the US drive for “free trade globalization”. It is no wonder that, despite the conspicuous absence of US government officials at the Cebu extravaganza (last December, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was rumored to grace the occasion), the US economic and politico-military agenda was more than adequately carried by the Philippine delegation, with Mrs. Arroyo more than eager to play the US drummer girl in the regional body. As a case in point, the ASEAN Convention on Counterterrorism falls in neatly with what the neoconservative cabal in the Bush administration dream of as a “New American Century” of US global hegemony conveniently wrapped in the rhetoric of the “global war on terror”. The IPE notes, “In 2000, then US Pacific Command Chief, Admiral Dennis Blair, declared that ‘current security arrangements are inadequate for handling the challenges of the 21st century’ and proposed a regional ‘security community’ for Asia. At the same time it was asserted that ‘U.S. bilateral treaties and security partnerships remain the framework for deterring aggression and promoting peaceful development in the region.’ ASEAN correspondingly began to expand its involvement on security issues and, at its 7th Summit in November 2001, issued the ASEAN Declaration on Joint Action to Counter Terrorism which signified ASEAN’s unequivocal alignment with the U.S.-led ‘war on terror’.” On the other hand, the recent declaration to accelerate the formation of the ASEAN Economic Community by 2015 instead of the original target of 2020, only underscored the ASEAN member countries’ current trend to be sucked into the vortex of the neoliberal doctrines of liberalization, deregulation and privatization peddled by the US- dominated WTO/IMF/World Bank combine. The ASEAN once more proved itself to be basically a grouping of neocolonial client states of the US or of governments, like those in Indochina, transitioning from their previously socialist moorings, and eager to become integrated into the world capitalist system. The heads of state that gathered at the 12th ASEAN Summit continue to represent their respective countries’ political and economic elites and not the majority of exploited and oppressed peoples in the region. The ASEAN is not about national economies coming together to strengthen themselves through such a regional formation and merely reflects consistent efforts to open up/liberalize such economies for imperialist plunder. At the end of the day, the “success” of the 12th ASEAN Summit bodes more of the same failed national policies and regional “cooperation” for facilitating imperialist domination and plunder aka “globalization” and “war on terror”.

email2friend ]]> http://www.solidarityeconomy.net/2007/01/23/after-the-summitry-more-of-the-same/feed/ 0