MANILA – The government’s anti-communist task force on Saturday said the complaint filed by militant human rights group Karapatan against four government officials for red-tagging is only a diversionary tactic to manipulate the well-supported cases filed by the government against them.
“These charges do not deserve the serious consideration of the Ombudsman, much less do they warrant a court trial,” the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF ELCAC) Legal Cooperation Cluster said in a statement.
It said the unmeritorious and unfounded case of violation of Republic Act 9851 or the "Philippine Act on Crimes Against International Humanitarian Law (IHL)” filed against National Security Adviser Hermogenes Esperon, Jr., Lt. Gen. Antonio Parlade, Jr., Undersecretary Lorraine Badoy, and Undersecretary Mocha Uson on December 4 should be dismissed outright because the Ombudsman is not an arm specifically designated by the law to prosecute/ investigate cases of IHL violation.
“At the outset, we must note that RA 9851, excludes the Office of the Ombudsman as part of prosecuting agencies,” it said, citing Section 18 (Philippine Court, Prosecutors, and Investigators) that states, “The Regional Trial Court of the Philippines shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction over the crimes punishable under this Act. Their judgments may be appealed or elevated to the Court of Appeals and to the Supreme Court as provided by law.”
Based on the law, the statement said, it is the Supreme Court that shall designate special courts to try cases involving crimes punishable under RA 9851; and that for these cases, the Commission on Human Rights, the Department of Justice, the Philippine National Police or other concerned law enforcement agencies shall designate prosecutors or investigators, as the case may be.
The Karapatan complaint stemmed from the four government officials alleged “red-tagging” of left-leaning public officials and groups, claimed to be in violation of Section 6(h) of the law that punishes the “[p]ersecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender, sexual orientation or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime defined in this Act.”
“Persecution, as the law defines it, means “the international and severe deprivation of fundamental rights contrary to international law by reason of the identity of the group or collectivity,” NTF ELCAC said.
It added that even if the Ombudsman were to assume the prosecution of these cases, any reasonable interpretation of these provisions should compel it to reject the charges and dismiss them for being baseless.
“It is simply too far a stretch to equate “red-tagging” with persecution under R.A. 9851, it said, adding that this is not the first time Karapatan has sought the liability of these public officers for alleged “red-tagging.”
Not too long ago, NTF ELCAC said, Karapatan, Gabriela, and Rural Missionaries of the Philippines implicated no less than President Rodrigo Duterte, Parlade, and Badoy, among others, in a petition for writs of Amparo and Habeas Data.
The Court of Appeals (CA) dismissed their petition filed in May 2019, finding no actual threat to their lives and liberty because of “red-tagging.”
“[T]he supposed inclusion of petitioners’ names in the gallery of activists and communist rebels fails to demonstrate an actual threat to their life, liberty and security,” the CA was quoted in its ruling.
The NTF ELCAC said it is confident that this desperate and repeated attempt from Karapatan to find culpability where there is none shall meet the same fate.
“It is easy for their attempt at mangling legal definitions to serve their purpose. It is easy to see when someone is trying to square the circle,” it said. (PNA)
