NUPL reiterates call to repeal anti-terror laws amid continuing dismissal of fabricated charges
The government’s ambition to exit the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) gray list or meet arbitrary prosecution quotas cannot, and must not, serve as a justification for the harassment and criminalization of activists and rights defenders. These are people who take the blows so that others may live with dignity. To brand them as terrorists is a grotesque distortion of truth.
September 5, 2024
NUPL
The National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers is a nationwide voluntary association of human rights lawyers in the Philippines, committed to the defense, protection, and promotion of human rights, especially of the poor and the oppressed.
Activists call for the dismissal of terrorism charges before the Malolos City Regional Trial Court

The National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers (NUPL) welcomes the Bulacan anti-terror court’s dismissal of the fabricated charges of terrorism against Nathanael Santiago, secretary general of Bayan Muna Party-List, and Anasusa San Gabriel, a lay worker of the Bulacan Ecumenical Forum, and 32 other activists. NUPL, as counsel for Santiago and San Gabriel, received the order of dismissal today from the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Malolos City, Branch 12, which found the charges as lacking probable cause. Among the accused were trade union organizers Rodrigo Esparago and Ed Cubello, peasant rights defender Servillano “Jun” Luna, Jr., and development worker Rosario Brenda Gonzalez.

The recent ruling from the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Malolos City, Branch 12, finds that the identification of the alleged terrorists simply could not hold water. How could the 84th Infantry Battalion accuse 34 individuals of terrorism when they could not even establish that these were the same people involved in the encounter they allegedly had with the New People’s Army (NPA)? The court further said that in charging the 34 accused with “serious and non-bailable charges” of terrorism, the active participation of each one in the commission of the terrorist acts “must be clear and supported by competent evidence.”

This dismissal is not an anomaly but part of a disturbing trend. To our knowledge, at least five anti-terrorism cases have collapsed in court due to the State’s inability to provide sufficient evidence to support their claims. All cases involved perjurious testimonies and false accusations from military elements and/or so-called rebel returnees.

The RTC of Malolos City, Branch 12, previously dismissed terrorism charges against Alliance of Concerned Teachers (ACT) coordinator Aurora Santiago. The RTC of Batangas City, Branch 7, dismissed charges of financing terrorism against Tanggol Quezon spokesperson Paul Tagle and Kabataan Partylist – Quezon coordinator Fritz Labiano, which stemmed from a July 2023 incident when the two delivered grocery items to political prisoners Rowena Dasig and Miguela Piniero. In another case, the same court also cleared Roel Alconera, vice-chairperson of the Unyon ng mga Panadero sa Gardenia Philippines-Olalia-KMU, of financing terrorism charges.

The government’s ambition to exit the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) gray list or meet arbitrary prosecution quotas cannot, and must not, serve as a justification for the harassment and criminalization of activists and rights defenders. These are people who take the blows so that others may live with dignity. To brand them as terrorists is a grotesque distortion of truth.

We reiterate our demand to repeal the Anti-Terrorism Act and the Terrorism Financing Prevention and Suppression Act. These laws have become blunt weapons wielded not to suppress but to sow terror, standing in the way of the very freedoms and liberties they purport to protect.#

#ActivismIsNotTerrorism
#DefendTheDefenders

References:

Atty. Ephraim B. Cortez
+639172092943

Atty. Josalee S. Deinla
+639174316396

Read more

On the criminal charges of grave threat against VP Sara Duterte

On the criminal charges of grave threat against VP Sara Duterte

The validity of Sara Duterte’s indictment for grave threat is being questioned in light of the Supreme Court ruling in Ombudsman v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 146486, March 4, 2005). According to the ruling, an “impeachable officer cannot be criminally prosecuted for the same offenses which constitute grounds for impeachment”. In applying such ruling in relation to the indictment of Sara Duterte, the following points should be considered:

TO ALL THOSE TAKING THE BAR EXAMINATIONS BEGINNING TODAY, we honor the long and difficult work that has brought you to this moment.

TO ALL THOSE TAKING THE BAR EXAMINATIONS BEGINNING TODAY, we honor the long and difficult work that has brought you to this moment.

Behind every examinee are years of study, sacrifice, doubt, discipline, and persistence. As you enter the examination rooms, we wish you the best of health, soundness of mind, steadiness under pressure, and resilience for the days ahead. May you find the clarity to draw upon what you have learned, the composure to meet each question as it comes, and the resolve to keep going through fatigue and uncertainty.

LUDICROUS!!!

LUDICROUS!!!

Using the perjured statements of military assets, the government alleged that the Cagayan Valley activists supplied rice to NPA rebels by burying the rice in the hinterlands of Cagayan. The military assets allegedly provided the information to locate the place where the rice were buried. These were excavated, and the rotten rice is being used as a basis to file the case for terrorist financing.

Share This