The Philippines is Not a Missile Range
The Philippines is not a testing ground for foreign weapons. It will not be a launchpad for war.
May 6, 2026
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.

Press Statement
6 May 2026

The National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers condemns the launch of a Tomahawk cruise missile by the United States military in the early hours of 5 May 2026 from its Typhon Mid-Range Capability system stationed at Tacloban Airport—a civilian facility. The missile traveled more than 630 kilometers across Philippine airspace before striking a target inside Fort Magsaysay in Laur, Nueva Ecija.

That the missile reportedly carried an inert payload does not lessen the gravity of the incident. The Typhon system is a fully operational weapons platform designed to launch Tomahawk cruise missiles—armed with up to 450 to 510 pounds of high explosives and capable of striking targets with precision. The only difference between this test and an actual attack is the payload. What was demonstrated was not only the system’s readiness and reach, but also a troubling precedent: that Philippine territory can be used to project foreign military power.

The legal consequences are equally grave. Under international humanitarian law, civilian objects are protected from attack unless—and for such time as—they are used in a way that effectively contributes to military action and their destruction offers a definite military advantage. The Marcos administration has placed a critical civilian infrastructure, and the people who depend on it, within the legal crosshairs of future targeting determinations in a region where armed conflict is neither unthinkable nor unprovoked. Should hostilities erupt, Tacloban Airport’s prior use as a missile launch platform would factor into targeting assessments under the laws of armed conflict, placing civilians at risk in a war they did not choose.

This incident stems directly from the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement — an executive arrangement that, as we have argued before the Supreme Court, stands in clear contradiction to the constitutional principles that the Philippines renounces war as an instrument of national policy and upholds an independent foreign policy grounded in sovereignty. The Filipino people alone, who were neither informed nor gave their consent, will bear the risks.

NUPL demands the immediate suspension of Balikatan 41-2026; full public disclosure of the legal basis for the deployment and operational use of the Typhon system; a Senate inquiry into the constitutional implications of this launch; and a comprehensive review of EDCA with a view to its abrogation.

The Philippines is not a testing ground for foreign weapons. It will not be a launchpad for war. ###

Reference:

Atty. Ephraim B. Cortez
NUPL President
+639172092943

Photo credit: Defense News

Read more

In the Service of the Filipino People

In the Service of the Filipino People

NUPL Vice President Atty. Angelo Karlo Guillen and Secretary General Atty. Josa Deinla with lawyers from the Kennedy Human Rights Center and Kerry Kennedy at the Capitol in Washington D.C.

Philippine Defeat in UN Security Council Bid Shows Human Rights Record Cannot Be Ignored

Philippine Defeat in UN Security Council Bid Shows Human Rights Record Cannot Be Ignored

The Philippine government finds paths only to new methods of repression and enforces the peace of the grave at home. Human rights monitors, including Karapatan, document a continuing pattern of violence: extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, arbitrary arrests, and widespread attacks on rural communities. On April 19, state forces killed 19 people in Toboso, Negros Occidental, including civilians standing in solidarity with farmers asserting their land rights.

On the Denial of the Petition Challenging the Terrorist Designation of Cordillera Peoples Alliance Leaders and the Constitutionality of the Anti-Terrorism Act

On the Denial of the Petition Challenging the Terrorist Designation of Cordillera Peoples Alliance Leaders and the Constitutionality of the Anti-Terrorism Act

The petitioners, all respected advocates for indigenous peoples’ rights and self-determination, sought judicial review of their designation as terrorists by the Anti-Terrorism Council (ATC) in 2023. Their petition constituted the first—and, to our knowledge, remains the only—as-applied constitutional challenge to the ATC’s power to designate individuals and organizations as terrorists under the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020.

Share This